The Project Gutenberg EBook of The Story of My Life, by Egerton Ryerson
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or
re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
Title: The Story of My Life
Being Reminiscences of Sixty Years' Public Service in Canada
Author: Egerton Ryerson
Editor: J. George Hodgins
Release Date: February 12, 2008 [EBook #24586]
Language: English
*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE STORY OF MY LIFE ***
Produced by Stacy Brown, Jason Isbell and the Online
Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This
file was produced from images generously made available
by The Internet Archive/Canadian Libraries)
[Illustration]
"THE STORY OF MY LIFE."
BY THE LATE
REV. EGERTON RYERSON, D.D., LLD.,
(Being Reminiscences of Sixty Years' Public Service in Canada.)
PREPARED UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF HIS LITERARY TRUSTEES:
THE REV. S.S. NELLES, D.D., LL.D.,
THE REV. JOHN POTTS. D.D.,
AND J. GEORGE HODGINS, ESQ., LL.D.
EDITED BY
J. GEORGE HODGINS, Esq., LL.D.
"His life was gentle; and the elements
So mix't in him, that Nature might stand up,
And say to all the world, This was a Man!"
--Shakespeare. _Julius Cæsar_, Act v., sc. 5.
Justum et tenacem propositi virum
Non civium ardor prava jubentium,
Non vultus instantis tyranni
Mente quatit solida--
--Horace. _Odes_, iii. 3.
WITH PORTRAIT AND ENGRAVINGS.
TORONTO:
WILLIAM BRIGGS, 78 and 80 KING STREET EAST.
1884.
Entered, according to the Act of the Parliament of Canada, in the year
one thousand eight hundred and eighty-three, by Mary Ryerson and Charles
Egerton Ryerson, in the Office of the Minister of Agriculture, Ottawa.
CONTENTS.
Page
Preface ix
Estimate of Rev. Dr. Ryerson's Character and Labours 17
CHAPTER I.--1803-1825.
Sketch of Early Life 23
CHAPTER II.--1824-1825.
Extracts from Dr. Ryerson's Diary of 1824 and 1825 32
CHAPTER III.--1825-1826.
First Year of Ministry and First Controversy 47
CHAPTER IV.--1826-1827.
Missionary to the River Credit Indians 58
CHAPTER V.--1826-1827.
Diary of Labours among Indians 64
CHAPTER VI.--1827-1828.
Labours and Trials.--Civil Rights Controversy 80
CHAPTER VII.--1828-1829.
Ryanite Schism.--M. E. Church of Canada organized 87
CHAPTER VIII.--1829-1832.
Establishment of the _Christian Guardian_.--Church
Claims resisted 93
CHAPTER IX.--1831-1832.
Methodist Affairs in Upper Canada.--Proposed Union with the
British Conference 107
CHAPTER X.--1833.
Union between the British and Canadian Conferences 114
CHAPTER XI.--1833-1834.
"Impressions of England" and their effects 121
CHAPTER XII.--1834.
Events following the Union.--Division and Strife 141
CHAPTER XIII.--1834-1835.
Second Retirement from the _Guardian_ Editorship 144
CHAPTER XIV.--1835-1836.
Second Mission to England.--Upper Canada Academy 152
CHAPTER XV.--1835-1836.
The "Grievance" Report; Its Object and Failure 155
CHAPTER XVI.--1836-1837.
Dr. Ryerson's Diary of his Second Mission to England 158
CHAPTER XVII.--1836.
Publication of the Hume and Roebuck Letters 167
CHAPTER XVIII.--1836-1837.
Important Events transpiring in England 170
CHAPTER XIX.--1837-1839.
Return to Canada.--The Chapel Property Cases 172
CHAPTER XX.--1837.
The Coming Crisis.--Rebellion of 1837 175
CHAPTER XXI.--1837-1838.
Sir F. B. Head and the Upper Canada Academy 179
CHAPTER XXII.--1838.
Victims of the Rebellion.--State of the Country 182
CHAPTER XXIII.--1795-1861.
Sketch of Mr. William Lyon Mackenzie 185
CHAPTER XXIV.--1838.
Defence of the Hon. Marshall Spring Bidwell 188
CHAPTER XXV.--1838.
Return to the Editorship of the _Guardian_ 199
CHAPTER XXVI.--1838-1840.
Enemies and Friends Within and Without 205
CHAPTER XXVII.--1778-1867.
The Honourable and Right Reverend Bishop Strachan 213
CHAPTER XXVIII.--1791-1836.
The Clergy Reserves and Rectories Questions 218
CHAPTER XXIX.--1838.
The Clergy Reserve Controversy Renewed 225
CHAPTER XXX.--1838-1839.
The Ruling Party and the Reserves.--"Divide et Impera" 236
CHAPTER XXXI.--1839.
Strategy in the Clergy Reserve Controversy 245
CHAPTER XXXII.--1839.
Sir G. Arthur's Partizanship.--State of the Province 250
CHAPTER XXXIII.--1838-1840.
The New Era.--Lord Durham and Lord Sydenham 257
CHAPTER XXXIV.--1840.
Proposal to leave Canada.--Dr. Ryerson's Visit to England 269
CHAPTER XXXV.--1840-1841.
Last Pastoral Charge.--Lord Sydenham's Death 282
CHAPTER XXXVI.--1841.
Dr. Ryerson's Attitude toward the Church of England 291
CHAPTER XXXVII.--1841-1842.
Victoria College.--Hon. W. H. Draper.--Sir Charles Bagot 301
CHAPTER XXXVIII.--1843.
Episode in the case of Hon. Marshall S. Bidwell 308
CHAPTER XXXIX.--1844.
Events preceding the Defence of Lord Metcalfe 312
CHAPTER XL.--1844.
Preliminary Correspondence on the Metcalfe Crisis 319
CHAPTER XLI.--1844.
Sir Charles Metcalfe Defended against his Councillors 328
CHAPTER XLII.--1844-1845.
After the Contest.--Reaction and Reconstruction 337
CHAPTER XLIII.--1841-1844.
Dr. Ryerson appointed Superintendent of Education 342
CHAPTER XLIV.--1844-1846.
Dr. Ryerson's First Educational Tour in Europe 352
CHAPTER XLV.--1844-1857.
Episode in Dr. Ryerson's European Travels.--Pope Pius IX 365
CHAPTER XLVI.--1844-1876.
Ontario School System.--Retirement of Dr. Ryerson 368
CHAPTER XLVII.--1845-1846.
Illness and Final Retirement of Lord Metcalfe 375
CHAPTER XLVIII.--1843-1844.
Clergy Reserve Question Re-Opened.--Disappointments 378
CHAPTER XLIX.--1846-1848.
Re-Union of the British and Canadian Conferences 383
CHAPTER L.--1846-1853.
Miscellaneous Events and Incidents of 1846-1853 410
CHAPTER LI.--1849.
The Bible in the Ontario Public Schools 423
CHAPTER LII.--1850-1853.
The Clergy Reserve Question Transferred to Canada 433
CHAPTER LIII.--1851.
Personal Episode in the Clergy Reserve Question 454
CHAPTER LIV.--1854-1855.
Resignation on the Class-Meeting Question.--Discussion 470
CHAPTER LV.--1855.
Dr. Ryerson resumes his Position in the Conference 491
CHAPTER LVI.--1855-1856.
Personal Episode in the Class-Meeting Discussion 499
CHAPTER LVII.--1855-1856.
Dr. Ryerson's Third Educational Tour in Europe 514
CHAPTER LVIII.--1859-1862.
Denominational Colleges and the University Controversy 518
CHAPTER LIX.--1861-1866.
Personal Incidents.--Dr. Ryerson's Visits to Norfolk County 534
CHAPTER LX.--1867.
Last Educational Visit to Europe.--Rev. Dr. Punshon 539
CHAPTER LXI.--1867.
Dr. Ryerson's Address on the New Dominion of Canada 547
CHAPTER LXII.--1868-1869.
Correspondence with Hon. Geo. Brown--Dr. Punshon 554
CHAPTER LXIII.--1870-1875.
Miscellaneous Closing Events and Correspondence 559
CHAPTER LXIV.--1875-1876.
Correspondence with Rev. J. Ryerson, Dr. Punshon, etc. 573
CHAPTER LXV.--1877-1882.
Closing Years of Dr. Ryerson's Life Labours 585
CHAPTER LXVI.--1882.
The Funeral Ceremonies 593
Tributes to Dr. Ryerson's Memory and Estimates of his
Character and Work 598
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS.
Page
Portrait of Rev. Dr. Ryerson Frontispiece
Indian Village at River Credit, in 1837 59
John Jones' House at the Credit, where Dr. Ryerson Resided 65
Old Credit Mission, 1837 73
Old Adelaide Street Methodist Church 283
Victoria College, Cobourg 302
Ontario Educational Department and Normal School 421, 422
Educational Exhibit at Philadelphia 584, 585
Metropolitan Church 564
Dr. Ryerson's Residence in Toronto 587
PREFATORY NOTE.
Twelve months ago, I began to collect the necessary material for the
completion of "The Story of My Life," which my venerated and beloved
friend, Dr. Ryerson, had only left in partial outline. These materials,
in the shape of letters, papers, and documents, were fortunately most
abundant. The difficulty that I experienced was to select from such a
miscellaneous collection a sufficient quantity of suitable matter, which
I could afterwards arrange and group into appropriate chapters. This was
not easily done, so as to form a connected record of the life and
labours of a singularly gifted man, whose name was intimately connected
with every public question which was discussed, and every prominent
event which took place in Upper Canada from 1825 to 1875-78.
Public men of the present day looked upon Dr. Ryerson practically as one
of their own contemporaries--noted for his zeal and energy in the
successful management of a great Public Department, and as the founder
of a system of Popular Education which, in his hands, became the pride
and glory of Canadians, and was to those beyond the Dominion, an ideal
system--the leading features of which they would gladly see incorporated
in their own. In this estimate of Dr. Ryerson's labours they were quite
correct. And in their appreciation of the statesmanlike qualities of
mind, which devised and developed such a system in the midst of
difficulties which would have appalled less resolute hearts, they were
equally correct.
But, after all, how immeasurably does this partial view of his character
and labours fall short of a true estimate of that character and of those
labours!
As a matter of fact, Dr. Ryerson's great struggle for the civil and
religious freedom which we now enjoy, was almost over when he assumed
the position of Chief Director of our Educational System. No one can
read the record of his labours from 1825 to 1845, as detailed in the
following pages, without being impressed with the fact that, had he done
no more for his native country than that which is therein recorded, he
would have accomplished a great work, and have earned the gratitude of
his fellow-countrymen.
It was my good fortune to enjoy Dr. Ryerson's warm, personal friendship
since 1841. It has also been my distinguished privilege to be associated
with him in the accomplishment of his great educational work since 1844.
I have been able, therefore, to turn my own personal knowledge of most
of the events outlined in this volume to account in its preparation. In
regard to what transpired before 1841, I have frequently heard many
narratives in varied forms from Dr. Ryerson's lips.
My own intimate relations with Dr. Ryerson, and the character of our
close personal friendship are sufficiently indicated in his private
letters to me, published in various parts of the book, but especially in
Chapter liii. And yet they fail to convey the depth and sincerity of his
personal attachment, and the feeling of entire trust and confidence
which existed between us.
I am glad to say that I was not alone in this respect. Dr. Ryerson had
the faculty, so rare in official life, of attaching his assistants and
subordinates of every grade to himself personally. He always had a
pleasant word for them, and made them feel that their interests were
safe in his hands. They therefore respected and trusted him fully, and
he never failed to acknowledge their fidelity and devotion in the public
service.
I had, for some time before he ceased to be the Head of the Education
Department, looked forward with pain and anxiety to that inevitable
event. Pain, that he and I were at length to be separated in the
carrying forward of the great work of our lives, in which it had been my
pride and pleasure to be his principal assistant. Anxiety at what, from
my knowledge of him, I feared would be the effect of release from the
work on fully accomplishing which he had so earnestly set his heart. Nor
were my fears groundless. To a man of his application and ardent
temperament, the feeling that his work was done sensibly affected him.
He lost a good deal of his elasticity, and during the last few years of
his life, very perceptibly failed.
The day on which he took official leave of the Department was indeed a
memorable one. As he bade farewell to each of his assistants in the
office, he and they were deeply moved. He could not, however, bring
himself to utter a word to me at our official parting, but as soon as he
reached home he wrote to me the following tender and loving note:--
171 Victoria Street, Toronto,
Monday Evening, February 21st, 1876.
My Dear Hodgins,--I felt too deeply to-day when parting with you in
the Office to be able to say a word. I was quite overcome with the
thought of severing our official connection, which has existed
between us for thirty-two years, during the whole of which time,
without interruption, we have laboured as one mind and heart in two
bodies, and I believe with a single eye to promote the best
interests of our country, irrespective of religious sect or
political party--to devise, develop, and mature a system of
instruction which embraces and provides for every child in the land
a good education; good teachers to teach; good inspectors to
oversee the Schools; good maps, globes, and text-books; good books
to read; and every provision whereby Municipal Councils and
Trustees can provide suitable accommodation, teachers, and
facilities for imparting education and knowledge to the rising
generation of the land.
While I devoted the year 1845 to visiting educating countries and
investigating their system of instruction, in order to devise one
for our country, you devoted the same time in Dublin in mastering,
under the special auspices of the Board of Education there, the
several different branches of their Education Office, in
administering the system of National Education in Ireland, so that
in the details of our Education Office here, as well as in our
general school system, we have been enabled to build up the most
extensive establishment in the country, leaving nothing, as far as
I know, to be devised in the completeness of its arrangements, and
in the good character and efficiency of its officers. Whatever
credit or satisfaction may attach to the accomplishment of this
work, I feel that you are entitled to share equally with myself.
Could I have believed that I might have been of any service to you,
or to others with whom I have laboured so cordially, or that I
could have advanced the school system, I would not have voluntarily
retired from office. But all circumstances considered, and entering
within a few days upon my 74th year, I have felt that this was the
time for me to commit to other hands the reins of the government of
the public school system, and labour during the last hours of my
day and life, in a more retired sphere.
But my heart is, and ever will be, with you in its sympathies and
prayers, and neither you nor yours will more truly rejoice in your
success and happiness, than
Your old life-long Friend
And Fellow-labourer,
E. Ryerson.
Dr. Ryerson was confessedly a man of great intellectual resources. Those
who read what he has written on the question--perilous to any writer in
the early days of the history of this Province--of equal civil and
religious rights for the people of Upper Canada, will be impressed with
the fact that he had thoroughly mastered the great principles of civil
and religious liberty, and expounded them not only with courage, but
with clearness and force. His papers on the clergy reserve question, and
the rights of the Canadian Parliament in the matter, were statesmanlike
and exhaustive.
His exposition of a proposed system of education for his native country
was both philosophical and eminently practical. As a Christian Minister,
he was possessed of rare gifts, both in the pulpit and on the platform;
while his warm sympathies and his deep religious experience, made him
not only a "son of consolation," but a beloved and welcome visitor in
the homes of the sorrowing and the afflicted. Among his brethren he
exercised great personal influence; and in the counsels of the
Conference he occupied a trusted and foremost place.
Thus we see that Dr. Ryerson's character was a many-sided one; while his
talents were remarkably versatile. He was an able writer on public
affairs; a noted Wesleyan Minister, and a successful and skilful leader
among his brethren. But his fame in the future will mainly rest upon the
fact that he was a distinguished Canadian Educationist, and the Founder
of a great system of Public Education for Upper Canada. What makes this
widely conceded excellence in his case the more marked, was the fact
that the soil on which he had to labour was unprepared, and the social
condition of the country was unpropitious. English ideas of schools for
the poor, supported by subscriptions and voluntary offerings, prevailed
in Upper Canada; free schools were unknown; the very principle on which
they rest--that is, that the rateable property of the country is
responsible for the education of the youth of the land--was denounced as
communistic, and an invasion of the rights of property; while
"compulsory education"--the proper and necessary complement of free
schools--was equally denounced as the essence of "Prussian despotism,"
and an impertinent and unjustifiable interference with "the rights of
British subjects."
It was a reasonable boast at the time that only systems of popular
education, based upon the principle of free schools, were possible in
the republican American States, where the wide diffusion of education
was regarded as a prime necessity for the stability and success of
republican institutions, and, therefore, was fostered with unceasing
care. It was the theme on which the popular orator loved to dilate to a
people on whose sympathies with the subject he could always confidently
reckon. The practical mind of Dr. Ryerson, however, at once saw that the
American idea of free schools was the true one. He moreover perceived
that by giving his countrymen facilities for freely discussing the
question among the ratepayers once a year, they would educate themselves
into the idea, without any interference from the State. These facilities
were provided in 1850; and for twenty-one years the question of
free-schools _versus_ rate-bill schools (lees, &c.) was discussed every
January in from 3,000 to 5,000 school sections, until free schools
became voluntarily the rule, and rate-bill schools the exception. In
1871, by common consent, the free school principle was incorporated into
our school system by the Legislature, and has ever since been the
universal practice. In the adoption of this principle, and in the
successful administration of the Education Department, Dr. Ryerson at
length demonstrated that a popular (or, as it had been held in the
United States, the democratic) system of public schools was admirably
adapted to our monarchical institutions. In point of fact, leading
American educationists have often pointed out that the Canadian system
of public education was more efficient in all of its details and more
practically successful in its results, than was the ordinary American
school system in any one of the States of the Union. Thus it is that the
fame of Dr. Ryerson as a successful founder of our educational system,
rests upon a solid basis. What has been done by him will not be undone;
and the ground gone over by him will not require to be traversed again.
In the "Story of My Life," not much has been said upon the subject with
which Dr. Ryerson's name has been most associated. It was distinctively
the period of his public life, and its record will be found in the
official literature of his Department. The personal reminiscences left
by him are scanty, and of themselves would present an utterly inadequate
picture of his educational work. Such a history may one day be written
as would do it justice, but I feel that in such a work as the present it
is better not to attempt a task, the proper performance of which would
make demands upon the space and time at my disposal that could not be
easily met.
There was one _rôle_ in which Dr. Ryerson pre-eminently excelled--that
of a controversialist. There was nothing spasmodic in his method of
controversy, although there might be in the times and occasions of his
indulging in it. He was a well-read man and an accurate thinker. His
habit, when he meditated a descent upon a foe, was to thoroughly master
the subject in dispute; to collect and arrange his materials, and then
calmly and deliberately study the whole subject--especially the weak
points in his adversary's case, and the strong points of his own. His
habits of study in early life contributed to his after success in this
matter. He was an indefatigable student; and so thoroughly did he in
early life ground himself in English subjects--grammar, logic,
rhetoric--and the classics, and that, too, under the most adverse
circumstances, that, in his subsequent active career as a writer and
controversialist, he evinced a power and readiness with his tongue and
pen, that often astonished those who were unacquainted with the
laborious thoroughness of his previous mental preparation.
It was marvellous with what wonderful effect he used the material at
hand. Like a skilful general defending a position--and his study was
always to act on the defensive--he masked his batteries, and was careful
not to exhaust his ammunition in the first encounter. He never offered
battle without having a sufficient force in reserve to overwhelm his
opponent. He never exposed a weak point, nor espoused a worthless cause.
He always fought for great principles, which to him were sacred, and he
defended them to the utmost of his ability, when they were attacked. In
such cases, Dr. Ryerson was careful not to rush into print until he had
fully mastered the subject in dispute. This statement may be questioned,
and apparent examples to the contrary adduced; but the writer knows
better, for he knows the facts. In most cases Dr. Ryerson scented the
battle from afar. Many a skirmish was improvised, and many a battle was
privately fought out before the Chief advanced to repel an attack, or to
fire the first shot in defence of his position.
A word as to the character of this work. It may be objected that I have
dealt largely with subjects of no practical interest now--with dead
issues, and with controversies for great principles, which, although
important, acrimonious, and spirited at the time, have long since lost
their interest. Let such critics reflect that the "Story" of such a
"Life" as that of Dr. Ryerson cannot be told without a statement of the
toils and difficulties which he encountered, and the triumphs which he
achieved? For this reason I have written as I have done, recounting them
as briefly as the subjects would permit.
* * * * *
In the preparation of this work I am indebted to the co-operation of my
co-trustees the Rev. Dr. Potts and Rev. Dr. Nelles, whose long and
intimate acquaintance with Dr. Ryerson (quite apart from their
acknowledged ability) rendered their counsels of great value.
* * * * *
And now my filial task is done,--imperfectly, very imperfectly I admit.
While engaged in the latter part of the work a deep dark shadow
fell--suddenly fell--upon my peaceful, happy home. This great sorrow has
almost paralyzed my energies, and has rendered it very difficult for me
to concentrate my thoughts on the loving task which twelve months ago I
had so cheerfully begun. Under these circumstances, I can but crave the
indulgence of the readers of these memorial pages of my revered and
honoured Friend, the Rev. Dr. Ryerson--the foremost Canadian of his
time.
Toronto, 17th May, 1883.
* * * * *
On the accompanying page, I give a _fac-simile_ of the well-known
hand-writing of Dr. Ryerson, one of the many notes which I received from
him.
[Transcriber's Note: This is a transcription of a handwritten letter.]
Portland
Monday Morning
Aug 3 1863
My dear Hodgins,
Your letter to the Provincial Secretary is as good as could be--better
than I could write.
I have written this evening the accompanying draft of circular such as
you suggested. You can alter, add to, or abridge it as you shall think
best, before printing & sending it out.
I remain, as ever,
Yours most affectionately
E Ryerson
ESTIMATE OF THE REV. DR. RYERSON'S CHARACTER AND LABOURS.
By the Rev. William Ormiston, D.D., LL.D.
New York, Oct. 6th, 1882.
My Dear Dr. Hodgins,--It affords me the sincerest pleasure, tinged with
sadness, to record, at your request, the strong feelings of devoted
personal affection which I long cherished for our mutual _father_ and
friend, Rev. Dr. Ryerson; and the high estimate, which, during an
intimacy of nearly forty years, I had been led to form of his lofty
intellectual endowments, his great moral worth, and his pervading
spiritual power. He was very dear to me while he lived, and now his
memory is to me a precious, peculiar treasure.
In the autumn of 1843, I went to Victoria College, doubting much whether
I was prepared to matriculate as a freshman. Though my attainments in
some of the subjects prescribed for examination were far in advance of
the requirements, in other subjects, I knew I was sadly deficient. On
the evening of my arrival, while my mind was burdened with the
importance of the step I had taken, and by no means free from anxiety
about the issue, Dr. Ryerson, at that time Principal of the College,
visited me in my room. I shall never forget that interview. He took me
by the hand; and few men could express as much by a mere hand-shake as
he. It was a welcome, an encouragement, an inspiration, and an earnest
of future fellowship and friendship. It lessened the timid awe I
naturally felt towards one in such an elevated position,--I had never
before seen a Principal of a College,--it dissipated all boyish
awkwardness, and awakened filial confidence. He spoke of Scotland, my
native land, and of her noble sons, distinguished in every branch of
philosophy and literature; specially of the number, the diligence, the
frugality, self-denial, and success of her college students. In this
way, he soon led me to tell him of my parentage, past life and efforts,
present hopes and aspirations. His manner was so gracious and
paternal--his sympathy so quick and genuine--his counsel so ready and
cheering--his assurances so grateful and inspiriting, that not only was
my heart _his_ from that hour, but my future career seemed brighter and
more certain than it had ever appeared before.
Many times in after years, have I been instructed, and guided, and
delighted with his conversation, always replete with interest and
information; but that first interview I can never forget: it is as fresh
and clear to me to-day as it was on the morning after it took place. It
has exerted a profound, enduring, moulding influence on my whole life.
For what, under God, I am, and have been enabled to achieve, I owe more
to that noble, unselfish, kind-hearted man than to any one else.
Dr. Ryerson was, at that time, in the prime of a magnificent manhood.
His well-developed, finely-proportioned, firmly-knit frame; his broad,
lofty brow; his keen, penetrating eye, and his genial, benignant face,
all proclaimed him every inch a man. His mental powers vigorous and
well-disciplined, his attainments in literature varied and extensive,
his experience extended and diversified, his fame as a preacher of great
pathos and power widely-spread, his claims as a doughty, dauntless
champion of the rights of the people to civil and religious liberty
generally acknowledged, his powers of expression marvellous in
readiness, richness, and beauty, his manners affable and winning, his
presence magnetic and impressive,--he stood in the eye of the youthful,
ardent, aspiring student, a tower of strength, a centre of healthy,
helpful influences--a man to be admired and honoured, loved and feared,
imitated and followed. And I may add that frequent intercourse for
nearly forty years, and close official relations for more than ten, only
deepened and confirmed the impressions first made. A more familiar
acquaintance with his domestic, social, and religious life, a more
thorough knowledge of his mind and heart, constantly increased my
appreciation of his worth, my esteem for his character, and my affection
for his person.
Not a few misunderstood, undervalued, or misrepresented his public
conduct, but it will be found that those who knew him best, loved him
most, and that many who were constrained to differ from him, in his
management of public affairs, did full justice to the purity and
generosity of his motives, to the nobility, loftiness, and ultimate
success of his aims, and to the disinterestedness and value of his
varied and manifold labours for the country, and for the Church of
Christ.
As a _teacher_, he was earnest and efficient, eloquent and inspiring,
but he expected and exacted rather too much work from the average
student. His own ready and affluent mind sympathized keenly with the
apt, bright scholar, to whom his praise was warmly given, but he
scarcely made sufficient allowance for the dullness or lack of previous
preparation which failed to keep pace with him in his long and rapid
strides; hence his censures were occasionally severe. His methods of
examination furnished the very best kind of mental discipline, fitted
alike to cultivate the memory and to strengthen the judgment. All the
students revered him, but the best of the class appreciated him most.
His counsels were faithful and judicious; his admonitions paternal and
discriminating; his rebukes seldom administered, but scathingly severe.
No student ever left his presence, without resolving to do better, to
aim higher, and to win his approval.
His acceptance of the office of Chief Superintendent of Education, while
offering to him the sphere of his life's work, and giving to the country
the very service it needed--_the man for the place_--was a severe trial
to the still struggling College, and a bitter disappointment to some
young, ambitious hearts.
Into this new arena he entered with a resolute determination to succeed,
and he spared no pains, effort, or sacrifice to fit himself thoroughly
for the onerous duties of the office to which he had been appointed. Of
its nature, importance, and far-reaching results, he had a distinct,
vivid perception, and clearly realized and fully felt the
responsibilities it imposed. He steadfastly prosecuted his work with a
firm, inflexible will, unrelaxing tenacity of purpose, an amazing
fertility of expedient, an exhaustless amount of information, a most
wonderful skill in adaptation, a matchless ability in unfolding and
vindicating his plans, a rare adroitness in meeting and removing
difficulties--great moderation in success, and indomitable perseverance
under discouragement, calm patience when misapprehended, unflinching
courage when opposed,--until he achieved the consummation of his wishes,
the establishment of a system of public education second to none in its
efficiency and adaptation to the condition and circumstances of the
people. The system is a noble monument to the singleness of purpose, the
unwavering devotion, the tireless energy, the eminent ability, and the
administrative powers of Dr. Ryerson, and it will render his name a
familiar word for many generations in Canadian schools and homes; and
place him high in the list of the great men of other lands,
distinguished in the same field of labour. His entire administration of
the Department of Public Instruction was patient and prudent, vigorous
and vigilant, sagacious and successful.
He repeatedly visited Europe, not for mere recreation or personal
advantage, but for the advancement of the interests of religion and
education in the Province. During these tours, there were opened to him
the most extended fields of observation and enquiry, from which he
gathered ample stores of information which he speedily rendered
available for the perfecting, as far as practicable, the entire system
of Public Instruction.
A prominent figure in Canadian history for three score years, actively
and ceaselessly engaged in almost every department of patriotic and
philanthropic, Christian and literary, enterprise, Dr. Ryerson was a
strong tower in support or defence of every good cause, and no such
cause failed to secure the powerful aid of his advocacy by voice and
pen. His was truly a catholic and charitable spirit. Nothing human was
alien to him. A friend of all good men, he enjoyed the confidence and
esteem of all, even of those whose opinions or policy on public
questions he felt constrained to refute or oppose. He commanded the
respect, and secured the friendship of men of every rank, and creed, and
party. None could better appreciate his ability and magnanimity than
those who encountered him as an opponent, or were compelled to
acknowledge him as victor. His convictions were strong, his principles
firm, his purposes resolute, and he could, and did maintain them, with
chivalrous daring, against any and every assault.
In the heat of controversy, while repelling unworthy insinuations, his
indignation was sometimes roused, and his language not unfrequently was
fervid, and forcible, and scathingly severe, but seldom, if ever,
personally rancorous or bitter. When violently or vilely assailed his
sensitive nature keenly felt the wound, but though he earned many a
scar, he bore no malice.
_His intellectual powers_, of a high order, admirably balanced, and
invigorated by long and severe discipline, found their expression in
word and work, by pulpit, press, and platform, in the achievements of
self-denying, indefatigable industry, and in wise and lofty
statesmanship.
_His moral nature_ was elevated and pure. He was generous, sympathetic,
benevolent, faithful, trusting, and trustworthy. He rejoiced sincerely
in the weal, and deeply felt the woes of others, and his ready hand
obeyed the dictates of his loving, liberal heart.
_His religious life_ was marked by humility, consistency, and
cheerfulness. The simplicity of his faith in advanced life was
childlike, and sublime. His trust in God never faltered, and, at the end
of his course, his hopes of eternal life, through Jesus Christ our Lord,
were radiant and triumphant.
Dr. Ryerson was truly a great man, endowed with grand qualities of mind
and heart, which he consecrated to high and holy aims; and though, in
early life, and in his public career, beset with many difficulties, he
heroically achieved for himself, among his own people, a most enviable
renown. His work and his worth universally appreciated, his influence
widely acknowledged, his services highly valued, his name a household
word throughout the Dominion, and his memory a legacy and an
inspiration to future generations.
And while Canada owes more to him than any other of her sons, his fame
is not confined to the land of his birth, which he loved so well, and
served so faithfully, but in Britain and in the United States of America
his name is well known, and is classed with their own deserving
worthies.
Whatever judgment may be formed of some parts of his eventful and
distinguished career as a public man, there can be but one opinion as to
the eminent and valuable services he has rendered to his country, as a
laborious, celebrated pioneer preacher, an able ecclesiastical leader, a
valiant and veteran advocate of civil and religious liberty--as the
founder and administrator of a system of public education second to that
of no other land--as the President and life-long patron of Victoria
University, _whose oldest living alumnus_ will hold his memory dear to
life's close, when severed friends will be reunited; and whose
successive classes will revere as the first President and firm friend of
their Alma Mater, as the promoter of popular education, the ally of all
teachers, and an example to all young men.
I lay this simple wreath on the memorial of one, whom I found able and
helpful as _a teacher_ in my youth--wise and prudent as _an adviser_ in
after life--generous and considerate as _a superior officer_--tender and
true as a _friend_. He loved me, and was beloved by me. He doubtless had
his faults, but I cannot recall them; and very few, I venture to think,
will ever seek to mention them. The green turf which rests on his grave
covers them. His memory will live as one of the purest, kindest, best of
men. A patriot, a scholar, a Christian--the servant of God, the friend
of man.
"Amicum perdere est damnorum maximum."
Yours, very faithfully, in bonds of truest friendship,
W. Ormiston.
To J. George Hodgins, Esq., LL.D., Toronto
THE STORY OF MY LIFE.
CHAPTER I.
1803-1825.
Sketch of Early Life.
I have several times been importuned to furnish a sketch of my life for
books of biography of public men, published both in Canada and the
United States; but I have uniformly declined, assigning as a reason a
wish to have nothing of the kind published during my lifetime. Finding,
however, that some circumstances connected with my early history have
been misapprehended and misrepresented by adversaries, and that my
friends are anxious that I should furnish some information on the
subject, and being now in the seventieth year of my age, I sit down in
this my Long Point Island Cottage, retired from the busy world, to give
some account of my early life, on this blessed Sabbath day, indebted to
the God of the Sabbath for all that I am,--morally, intellectually, and
as a public man, as well as for all my hopes of a future life.
I was born on the 24th of March, 1803, in the Township of
Charlotteville, near the Village of Vittoria, in the then London
District, now the County of Norfolk. My Father had been an officer in
the British Army during the American Revolution, being a volunteer in
the Prince of Wales' Regiment of New Jersey, of which place he was a
native. His forefathers were from Holland, and his more remote ancestors
were from Denmark.
At the close of the American Revolutionary War, he, with many others of
the same class, went to New Brunswick, where he married my Mother, whose
maiden name was Stickney, a descendant of one of the early Massachusetts
Puritan settlers.
Near the close of the last century my Father, with his family, followed
an elder brother to Canada,[1] where he drew some 2,500 acres of land
from the Government, for his services in the army, besides his pension.
My Father settled on 600 acres of land lying about half-way between the
present Village of Vittoria and Port Ryerse, where my uncle Samuel
settled, and where he built the first mill in the County of Norfolk.
On the organization of the London District in 1800, for legal purposes,
my uncle was the Lieutenant of the County, issuing commissions in his
own name to militia officers; he was also Chairman of the Quarter
Sessions. My Father was appointed High Sheriff in 1800, but held the
office only six years, when he resigned it in behalf of the late Colonel
John Bostwick (then a surveyor), who subsequently married my eldest
sister, and who owned what is now Port Stanley, and was at one time a
Member of Parliament for the County of Middlesex.
My Father devoted himself exclusively to agriculture, and I learned to
do all kinds of farm-work. The district grammar-school was then kept
within half-a-mile of my Father's residence, by Mr. James Mitchell
(afterwards Judge Mitchell), an excellent classical scholar; he came
from Scotland with the late Rt. Rev. Dr. Strachan, first Bishop of
Toronto. Mr. Mitchell married my youngest sister. He treated me with
much kindness. When I recited to him my lessons in English grammar he
often said that he had never studied the English grammar himself, that
he wrote and spoke English by the Latin grammar. At the age of fourteen
I had the opportunity of attending a course of instruction in the
English language given by two professors, the one an Englishman, and the
other an American, who taught nothing but English grammar. They
professed in one course of instruction, by lectures, to enable a
diligent pupil to parse any sentence in the English language. I was sent
to attend these lectures, the only boarding abroad for school
instruction I ever enjoyed. My previous knowledge of the _letter_ of the
grammar was of great service to me, and gave me an advantage over other
pupils, so that before the end of the course I was generally called up
to give visitors an illustration of the success of the system, which was
certainly the most effective I have ever since witnessed, having charts,
etc., to illustrate the agreement and government of words.
This whole course of instruction by two able men, who did nothing but
teach grammar from one week's end to another had to me all the
attraction of a charm and a new discovery. It gratified both curiosity
and ambition, and I pursued it with absorbing interest, until I had gone
through Murray's two volumes of "Expositions and Exercises," Lord Kames'
"Elements of Criticism," and Blair's "Lectures on Rhetoric," of which I
still have the notes which I then made. The same professors obtained
sufficient encouragement to give a second course of instruction and
lectures at Vittoria, and one of them becoming ill, the other solicited
my Father to allow me to assist him, as it would be useful to me, while
it would enable him to fulfil his engagements. Thus, before I was
sixteen, I was inducted as a teacher, by lecturing on my native
language. This course of instruction, and exercises in English, have
proved of the greatest advantage to me, not less in enabling me to study
foreign languages than in using my own.
But that to which I am principally indebted for any studious habits,
mental energy, or even capacity or decision of character, is religious
instruction, poured into my mind in my childhood by a Mother's counsels,
and infused into my heart by a Mother's prayers and tears. When very
small, under six years of age, having done something naughty, my Mother
took me into her bedroom, told me how bad and wicked what I had done
was, and what pain it caused her, kneeled down, clasped me to her bosom,
and prayed for me. Her tears, falling upon my head, seemed to penetrate
to my very heart. This was my first religious impression, and was never
effaced. Though thoughtless, and full of playful mischief, I never
afterwards knowingly grieved my Mother, or gave her other than
respectful and kind words.
At the close of the American War, in 1815, when I was twelve years of
age, my three elder brothers, George, William, and John, became deeply
religious, and I imbibed the same spirit. My consciousness of guilt and
sinfulness was humbling, oppressive, and distressing; and my experience
of relief, after lengthened fastings, watchings, and prayers, was clear,
refreshing, and joyous. In the end I simply trusted in Christ, and
looked to Him for a present salvation; and, as I looked up in my bed,
the light appeared to my mind, and, as I thought, to my bodily eye also,
in the form of One, white-robed, who approached the bedside with a
smile, and with more of the expression of the countenance of Titian's
Christ than of any person whom I have ever seen. I turned, rose to my
knees, bowed my head, and covered my face, rejoiced with trembling,
saying to a brother who was lying beside me, that the Saviour was now
near us. The change within was more marked than anything without and,
perhaps, the inward change may have suggested what appeared an outward
manifestation. I henceforth had new views, new feelings, new joys, and
new strength. I truly delighted in the law of the Lord, after the inward
man, and--
"Jesus, all the day long, was my joy and my song."
From that time I became a diligent student, and new quickness and
strength seemed to be imparted to my understanding and memory. While
working on the farm I did more than ordinary day's work, that it might
show how industrious, instead of lazy, as some said, religion made a
person. I studied between three and six o'clock in the morning, carried
a book in my pocket during the day to improve odd moments by reading or
learning, and then reviewed my studies of the day aloud while walking
out in the evening.
To the Methodist way of religion my Father was, at that time, extremely
opposed, and refused me every facility for acquiring knowledge while I
continued to go amongst them. I did not, however, formally join them, in
order to avoid his extreme displeasure. A kind friend offered to give me
any book that I would commit to memory, and submit to his examination of
the same. In this way I obtained my first Latin grammar, "Watts on the
Mind," and "Watts' Logic."
My eldest brother, George, after the war, went to Union College, U.S.,
where he finished his collegiate studies. He was a fellow-student with
the late Dr. Wayland, and afterwards succeeded my brother-in-law as
Master of the London District Grammar School. His counsels,
examinations, and ever kind assistance were a great encouragement and of
immense service to me; and though he and I have since differed in
religious opinions, no other than most affectionate brotherly feeling
has ever existed between us to this day.[2]
When I had attained the age of eighteen, the Methodist minister in
charge of the circuit which embraced our neighbourhood, thought it not
compatible with the rules of the Church to allow, as had been done for
several years, the privileges of a member without my becoming one. I
then gave in my name for membership. Information of this was soon
communicated to my Father, who, in the course of a few days, said to me:
"Egerton, I understand you have joined the Methodists; you must either
leave them or leave my house." He said no more, and I well knew that the
decree was final; but I had formed my decision in view of all possible
consequences, and I had the aid of a Mother's prayers, and a Mother's
tenderness, and a conscious Divine strength according to my need. The
next day I left home and became usher in the London District Grammar
School, applying myself to my new work with much diligence and
earnestness, so that I soon succeeded in gaining the good-will of
parents and pupils, and they were quite satisfied with my
services,--leaving the head master to his favourite pursuits of
gardening and building!
During two years I was thus teacher and student, advancing considerably
in classical studies. I took great delight in "Locke on the Human
Understanding," Paley's "Moral and Political Philosophy," and
"Blackstone's Commentaries," especially the sections of the latter on
the Prerogatives of the Crown, the Rights of the Subject, and the
Province of Parliament.
As my Father complained that the Methodists had robbed him of his son,
and of the fruits of that son's labours, I wished to remove that ground
of complaint as far as possible by hiring an English farm-labourer, then
just arrived in Canada, in my place, and paid him out of the proceeds of
my own labour for two years. But although the farmer was the best hired
man my Father had ever had, the result of his farm-productions during
these two years did not equal those of the two years that I had been the
chief labourer on the farm, and my Father came to me one day uttering
the single sentence, "Egerton, you must come home," and then walked
away. My first promptings would have led me to say, "Father, you have
expelled me from your house for being a Methodist; I am so still. I have
employed a man for you in my place for two years, during which time I
have been a student and a teacher, and unaccustomed to work on a farm, I
cannot now resume it." But I had left home for the honour of religion,
and I thought the honour of religion would be promoted by my returning
home, and showing still that the religion so much spoken against would
enable me to leave the school for the plough and the harvest-field, as
it had enabled me to leave home without knowing at the moment whether I
should be a teacher or a farm-labourer.
I relinquished my engagement as teacher within a few days, engaging
again on the farm with such determination and purpose that I ploughed
every acre of ground for the season, cradled every stalk of wheat, rye,
and oats, and mowed every spear of grass, pitched the whole, first on a
waggon, and then from the waggon on the hay-mow or stack. While the
neighbours were astonished at the possibility of one man doing so much
work, I neither felt fatigue nor depression, for "the joy of the Lord
was my strength," both of body and mind, and I made nearly, if not
quite, as much progress in my studies as I had done while teaching
school. My Father then became changed in regard both to myself and the
religion I professed, desiring me to remain at home; but, having been
enabled to maintain a good conscience in the sight of God, and a good
report before men, in regard to my filial duty during my minority, I
felt that my life's work lay in another direction. I had refused,
indeed, the advice of senior Methodist ministers to enter into the
ministerial work, feeling myself as yet unqualified for it, and still
doubting whether I should ever engage in it, or in another profession.
I felt a strong desire to pursue further my classical studies, and
determined, with the kind counsel and aid of my eldest brother, to
proceed to Hamilton, and place myself for a year under the tuition of a
man of high reputation both as a scholar and a teacher, the late John
Law, Esq., then head master of the Gore District Grammar School. I
applied myself with such ardour, and prepared such an amount of work in
both Latin and Greek, that Mr. Law said it was impossible for him to
give the time and hear me read all that I had prepared, and that he
would, therefore, examine me on the translation and construction of the
more difficult passages, remarking more than once that it was impossible
for any human mind to sustain long the strain that I was imposing upon
mine. In the course of some six months his apprehensions were realized,
as I was seized with a brain fever, and on partially recovering took
cold, which resulted in inflammation of the lungs by which I was so
reduced that my physician, the late Dr. James Graham, of Norfolk,
pronounced my case hopeless, and my death was hourly expected.
In that extremity, while I felt even a desire to depart and be with
Christ, I was oppressed with the consciousness that I should have
yielded to the counsels of the chief ministers of my Church, as I could
have made nearly as much progress in my classical studies, and at the
same time been doing some good to the souls of men, instead of refusing
to speak in public as I had done. I then and there vowed that if I
should be restored to life and health, I would not follow my own
counsels, but would yield to the openings and calls which might be made
in the Church by its chief ministers. That very moment the cloud was
removed; the light of the glory of God shone into my mind and heart with
a splendour and power that I had never before experienced. My Mother,
entering the room a few moments after, exclaimed: "Egerton, your
countenance is changed, you are getting better!" My bodily recovery was
rapid; but the recovery of my mind from the shock which it had
experienced was slower, and for some weeks I could not even read, much
less study. While thus recovering, I exercised myself as I best could in
writing down my meditations.
My Father so earnestly solicited me to return, that he offered me a deed
of his farm if I would do so and live with him; but I declined acceding
to his request under any circumstances, expressing my conviction that
even could I do so, I thought it unwise and wrong for any parent to
place himself in a position of dependence upon any of his children for
support, so long as he could avoid doing so. One day, entering my room
and seeing a manuscript lying on the bed, he asked me what I had been
writing, and wished me to read it. I had written a meditation on part of
the last verse of the 73rd Psalm: "it is good for me to draw near to
God." When I read to him what I had written my Father rose with a sigh,
remarking: "Egerton, I don't think you will ever return home again," and
he never afterwards mooted the subject, except in a general way.
On recovering, I returned to Hamilton and resumed my studies; shortly
after which I went on a Saturday to a quarterly meeting, held about
twelve miles from Hamilton, at "The Fifty," a neighborhood two or three
miles west of Grimsby, where I expected to meet my brother William, who
was one of the ministers on the circuit, which was then called the
Niagara Circuit--embracing the whole Niagara Peninsula, from five miles
east of Hamilton, and across to the west of Fort Erie. But my brother
did not attend, and I learned that he had been laid aside from his
ministerial work by bleeding of the lungs. Between love-feast and
preaching on Sunday morning, the presiding elder, the Rev. Thomas
Madden, the late Hugh Willson, and the late Smith Griffin (grandfather
of the Rev. W. S. Griffin), circuit stewards, called me aside and asked
if I had any engagements that would prevent me from coming on the
circuit to supply the place of my brother William, who might be unable
to resume his work for, perhaps, a year or more.
I felt that the vows of God were upon me, and I was for some moments
speechless from emotion. On recovering, I said I had no engagements
beyond my own plans and purposes; but I was yet weak in body from severe
illness, and I had no means for anything else than pursuing my studies,
for which aid had been provided.
One of the stewards replied that he would give me a horse, and the other
that he would provide me with a saddle and bridle. I then felt that I
had no choice but to fulfill the vow which I had made, on what was
supposed to my deathbed. I returned to Hamilton, settled with my
instructor and for my lodgings, and made my first attempt at preaching
at or near Beamsville, on Easter Sunday, 1825, in the morning, from the
5th verse of the 126th Psalm: "They that sow in tears shall reap in
joy;" and in the afternoon at "The Fifty," on "The Resurrection of
Christ."--Acts ii. 24.
Toronto, Nov. 11th, 1880.
Such was the sketch of my life which I wrote on Sabbath in my Long Point
Island Cottage, on the 24th of March, 1873, the 70th anniversary of my
birthday. I know not that I can add anything to the foregoing story of
my early life that would be worth writing or reading.
* * * * *
[In his cottage at Long Point, on his seventy-fifth birthday, Dr.
Ryerson wrote the following paper, which Dr. Potts read on the occasion
of his funeral discourse. It will be read with profoundest interest, as
one of the noblest of those Christian experiences which are the rich
heritage of the Church.--J. G. H.]
Long Point Island Cottage, March 24th, 1878.
I am this day seventy-five years of age, and this day fifty-three years
ago, after resisting many solicitations to enter the ministry, and after
long and painful struggles, I decided to devote my life and all to the
ministry of the Methodist Church.
The predominant feeling of my heart is that of gratitude and
humiliation; gratitude for God's unbounded mercy, patience, and
compassion, in the bestowment of almost uninterrupted health, and
innumerable personal, domestic, and social blessings for more than fifty
years of a public life of great labour and many dangers; and humiliation
under a deep-felt consciousness of personal unfaithfulness, of many
defects, errors, and neglects in public duties. Many tell me that I have
been useful to the Church and the country; but my own consciousness
tells me that I have learned little, experienced little, done little in
comparison of what I might and ought to have known and done. By the
grace of God I am spared; by His grace I am what I am; all my trust for
salvation is in the efficacy of Jesus' atoning blood. I know whom I have
trusted, and "am persuaded that He is able to keep that which I have
committed unto Him against that day." I have no melancholy feelings or
fears. The joy of the Lord is my strength. I feel that I am now on the
bright side of seventy-five. As the evening twilight of my earthly life
advances, my spiritual sun shines with increased splendour. This has
been my experience for the last year. With an increased sense of my own
sinfulness, unworthiness, and helplessness, I have an increased sense of
the blessedness of pardon, the indwelling of the Comforter, and the
communion of saints.
Here, on bended knees, I give myself, and all I have and am, afresh to
Him whom I have endeavoured to serve, but very imperfectly, for more
than threescore years. All helpless, myself, I most humbly and devoutly
pray that Divine strength may be perfected in my weakness, and that my
last days on earth may be my best days--best days of implicit faith and
unreserved consecration, best days of simple scriptural ministrations
and public usefulness, best days of change from glory to glory, and of
becoming meet for the inheritance of the saints in light, until my Lord
shall dismiss me from the service of warfare and the weariness of toil
to the glories of victory and the repose of rest.
E. Ryerson.
FOOTNOTES:
[1] My father's eldest brother Samuel was known as Samuel Ryerse, in
consequence of the manner in which his name was spelled in his Army
Commission which he held; but the original family name was Ryerson.
[2] This brother of Dr. Ryerson's passed quietly away on the 19th of
December, 1882, aged 92. Dr. Ryerson died on the 19th of February of the
same year, aged 79. Their father, Col. Ryerson, died at the age of
94.--J. G. H.
CHAPTER II.
1824-1825.
Extracts from my diary of 1824 and 1825.
The foregoing sketch of my early life may be properly followed by
extracts from my diary; pourtraying my mental and spiritual exercises
and labours during a few months before and after I commenced the work of
an itinerant Methodist Preacher.
The extracts are as follow, and are very brief in comparison to the
entire diary, which extends over eight years from 1824, to 1832, after
which time I ceased to write a daily diary, and wrote in a journal the
principal occurrences and doings in which I was concerned.[3]
_Hamilton, August 12th, 1824._--I arrived here the day after I left
home. Mr. John Law (with whom I am to study) received me with all
the affection and kindness of a sincere and disinterested friend.
Even, without expecting it, he told me that his library was at my
service; that he did not wish me to join any class, but to read by
myself, that he might pay every attention, and give me every
assistance in his power. Indeed he answered my highest expectation.
I am stopping with Mr. John Aikman. He is one of the most
respectable men in this vicinity. I shall be altogether retired. At
the Court of Assize, the Chief-Justice and the Attorney-General
will stop here, which will make a very agreeable change for a few
days. To pursue my studies with indefatigable industry, and ardent
zeal, will be my set purpose, so that I may never have to mourn the
loss of my precious time.
_Aug. 16th._--This day I commenced my studies by reading Latin and
Greek with Mr. Law. I began the duties of the day in imploring the
assistance of God; for without Him I cannot do anything. God has
been pleased to open my understanding, to enlighten my mind, and to
show me the necessity and blessedness of an unreserved and habitual
devotion to his heavenly will. I have heard Bishop Hedding preach,
also Rev. Nathan Bangs. I am resolved to improve my time more
diligently, and to give myself wholly to God. Oh, may his
long-suffering mercy bear with me, his wisdom guide, his power
support and defend me, and may his mercy bring me off triumphant in
the dying day!
_Aug. 17th._--I have been reading Virgil's Georgics. I find them
very difficult, and have only read seventy lines. In my spiritual
concerns I have been greatly blessed; and felt more anxiously
concerned for my soul's salvation, have prayed more than usual, and
experienced a firmer confidence in the blessed promises of the
Gospel. I have enjoyed sweet intercourse with my Saviour, my soul
resting on his divine word, with a prayerful acquiescence in his
dispensations. But alas! what evil have I done, how much time have
I lost, how many idle words have I spoken; how should these
considerations lead me to watch my thoughts, to husband my time
with judgment, and govern my tongue as with a bridle! Oh, Lord
bless me and prosper me in all my ways and labours, and keep me to
thyself!
_Aug. 18th._--The Lord has abundantly blessed me this day both in
my spiritual and classical pursuits. I have been able to pursue my
studies with facility, and have felt his Holy Spirit graciously
enlightening my mind, showing me the necessity of separating myself
from the world, and being given up entirely to his service.
_Aug. 19th._--I have this day proved that, with every temptation,
the Lord makes a way for my escape. I have enjoyed much peace. Oh,
Lord, help me to improve my precious time, so as to overcome the
assaults and escape the snares of the adversary!
_Aug. 20th._--In all the vicissitudes of life, how clearly is the
mysterious providence and superintending care of Jehovah
manifested! how strikingly can I observe the divine interposition
of my heavenly Father, and how sensibly do I realize his
benevolence, kindness, and mercy in the whole moral and blessed
economy of his equitable and infinitely wise government! On no
object do I cast my eyes without observing an affecting instance of
a benevolent and overruling power; and, while in mental
contemplations my mind is absorbed, my admiration rises still
higher to the exalted purposes and designs of Almighty God. I
behold in the soul noble faculties, superior powers of imagination,
and capacious desires, unfilled by anything terrestrial, and wishes
unsatisfied by the widest grasp of human ambition. What is this but
immortality? Oh, that my soul may feed on food immortal!
Another week is gone, eternally gone! What account can I give to my
Almighty Judge for my conduct and opportunities? Has my improvement
kept pace with the panting steeds of unretarded time? Must I give
an account of every idle word, thought, and deed? Oh, merciful God!
if the most righteous, devoted, and holy scarcely are saved, where
stall I appear? How do my vain thoughts, and unprofitable
conversation, swell heaven's register? Where is my watchfulness!
Where are my humility, purity, and hatred of sin? Where is my zeal?
Alas! alas! they are things unpractised, unfelt, almost unknown to
me. How little do I share in the toils, the labours, or the sorrows
of the righteous, and consequently how little do I participate in
their confidence, their joys, their heavenly prospects? Oh, may
these awful considerations drive me closer to God, and incite to a
more diligent improvement of my precious time, so that I may bear
the mark of a real follower of Christ!
_Aug. 22nd.--Sabbath._--When I arose this morning I endeavoured to
dedicate myself afresh to God in prayer, with a full determination
to improve the day to his glory, and to spend it in his service.
Accordingly, I spent the morning in prayer, reading, and
meditation; but when I came to mingle with the worldly-minded, my
devotions and meditations were dampened and distracted, my thoughts
unprofitable and vain. I attended a Methodist Class-meeting where I
felt myself forcibly convinced of my shortcomings. Sure I am that
unless I am more vigilant, zealous, and watchful, I shall never
reach the Paradise of God. I must be willing to bear reproach for
Christ's sake, confess him before men, or I never can be owned by
him in the presence of his Father, and the holy angels.
Merciful God! forbid that I should barter away my heavenly
inheritance for a transient gleam of momentary joy, and the empty
round of worldly pleasure:
"Help me to watch and pray,
And on thyself rely,
Assured if I my trust betray,
I shall forever die."
_Aug. 23rd._--I have been abundantly prospered in my studies
to-day; and have been enabled to maintain an outward conformity in
my conduct. But alas! how blind to my own interest, to deprive
myself of the highest blessings and exalted honours the Almighty
has to bestow. Oh, Lord! help me henceforth to be wise unto
salvation. May I be sober and watch unto prayer! Amen.
_Aug. 24th._--Through the mercy of God I have been enabled in a
good degree to overcome my besetments, and have this day maintained
more consistency in conversation and conduct. Still I feel too much
deterred by the fear of man, and thirst too ardently for the
honours of the world. Merciful God! give me more grace, wisdom, and
strength, that I may triumphantly overcome and escape to heaven at
last!
I shall finish the first book of the Georgics to-day, which is the
seventh day since I commenced them. I expect to finish them in four
weeks from this time. My mind improves, and I feel much encouraged.
My labour is uniform and constant, from the dawn of day till near
eleven at night. I have not a moment to play on the flute.
_Aug. 25th._--There is nothing like implicit trust in the Almighty
for assistance, protection, and assurance! His past dispensations
and dealings with me leave not the least suspicion of his
inviolable veracity, and his efficacious promises cheer the
sadness, calm the fears of every soul that practically reposes in
and seeks after him. The truth of this, blessed be God, I have in
some measure experienced to-day. Help me, O Lord, with increasing
grace to attain still more sublime enjoyments and triumphant
prospects!
_Aug. 26th._--I feel a growing indifference to worldly pleasures,
and increasing love to God, to holiness, and heaven. Entire
confidence in a superintending Providence heals the wounded heart
of even the disconsolate widow, and gives the oil of joy for
sorrow, and the garment of praise for the spirit of heaviness.
_Aug. 27th._--This day I attended a funeral; those connected with
it were very ignorant; how strikingly this showed to me the
advantages of a good education. God forbid that I should idle away
my golden moments. Help me to choose the better part, and honour
God in all things!
_Aug. 28th._--The labours of another week are ended; during it I
have enjoyed much of the presence of God; surely the religion of
Christ dazzles all the magnificence of human glory; were I only to
regard the happiness of this life, I would embrace its doctrines,
practice its laws, and exert my influence for its extension.
_Aug. 29th.--Sabbath._--The blessings of the Lord have abundantly
surrounded me this day, and my heart has been enlarged.
_Aug. 30th._--In observing my actions and words this day, I find I
have done many things that are culpable; and yet, blessed be God,
his goodness to me is profuse. Help me to watch and pray that I
enter not into temptation.
_Aug. 31st._--How many youths around me do I see trifling away the
greatest part of their time, and profaning their Maker's name? My
soul magnifies His name that I have decided to be on the Lord's
side; how many evils have I escaped; how many blessings obtained;
what praise enjoyed, through the influence of this religion. To God
be all the glory!
_September 1st._--In no subject can we employ our thoughts more
profitably than on the atonement of Christ, and justification
through his merits. With wonder we gaze on the love of Deity; with
profound awe we behold a God descending from heaven to earth.
Unbounded love! Unmeasured grace! And while in deep silence his
death wraps all nature; while his yielding breath rends the temple
and shakes earth's deep foundations; may my redeemed soul in silent
rapture tune her grateful song aloft; and fired by this
blood-bought theme, may I mend my pace towards my heavenly
inheritance!
I generally close up the labours of the day by writing a short
essay or theme on some religious subject. In doing this I have two
objects in view: the improvement of my mind and heart. And what
could be more appropriate than to close the day by reflection upon
God, and heaven, and time, and eternity? No private employment,
except that of prayer, have I found more pleasing and profitable
than this. Youth is the seed-time of the life that now is, as well
as of that which is to come. Youthful piety is the germ of true
honour, lawful prosperity, and everlasting blessedness. One day of
humble, devotional piety in youth will add more to our happiness at
the last end of life than a year of repentance and humiliation in
old age. I have no intention of entering the ministry, and yet I
prefer religious topics. To-day I have chosen the atonement of our
Lord, and have written a few thoughts on it.
_Sept. 2nd._--Implicit trust in a superintending Providence is a
constant source of comfort and support to me.
_Sept. 3rd._--God has blessed me to-day in my studies. I have also
felt the efficacy of Divine aid. Help me still, most merciful God!
_Sept. 4th._--In the course of the past week I have experienced
various feelings, especially with respect to the dealings of Divine
Providence with me; but in all I have had this consolation, that
whatever happens, "the will of the Lord be done." It is my duty to
perform and obey.
_Sept. 5th._--This morning I attended church and heard a sermon on
Ezekiel xviii. 27. When we consider the importance of repentance,
its connection with our eternal happiness, surely every feeling
heart, and ministers especially, should exhibit with burning zeal
the conditions of salvation, the slavery of vice, the heinousness
of sin, the vanity of human glory, and the uncertainty of life.
_Sept. 6th._--When I laid aside my studies to commit my evening
thoughts to paper, my mind wandered on various subjects, until much
time was lost; the best antidote against this is, not to put off to
the next moment what can be done in this. We should be firm and
decided in all our pursuits, and whatever our minds "find to do, do
it with all our might."
_Sept. 7th._--The mutual dependence of men cements society, and
their social intercourse communicates pleasure. If we are called to
endure the pains and inconveniences of poverty, possessing this we
forget all; and in the pleasant walks of wealth, it adds to every
elegance a charm. Friendship associated with religion, elevates all
the ties of Christian love and mutual pleasure.
_Sept. 8th._--I have found myself too much mingled with the common
crowd, and like others, too indifferent to the subject of all
others the chief.
_Sept. 9th._--We "cannot serve God and Mammon." May I be firm in my
attachment to the Saviour, remembering that "godliness has the
promise of the life that now is, and of that which is to come."
_Sept. 12th._--I heard a practical sermon on making our "calling
and election sure," which closed with these words, "He that calleth
upon the name of the Lord shall be saved." I felt condemned on
account of my negligence, and resolved, by God's help, to gain
victory over my tendency to inconsistencies of life and conduct.
_Sept. 14th._--I observe men embarked on the stream of time, and
carried forward with irresistible force to that universal port
which shall receive the whole human family. Amongst this passing
crowd, how few are there who reflect upon the design and end of
their voyage; surfeited with pleasure, involved in life's busy
concerns, the future, with its awful realities, is forgotten and
time, not eternity, is placed in the foreground.
_Sept, 15th._--In a letter to my brother George, to-day, I
said:--It would be superfluous for me to tell you that the letter I
received from you gave me unspeakable pleasure. Your fears with
respect to my injuring my health are groundless, for I must confess
I don't possess half that application and burning zeal in these
all-important pursuits that I ought to have. For who can estimate
the value of a liberal education? Who can sufficiently prize that
in which all the powers of the human mind can expand to their
utmost and astonishing extent? What industry can outstretch the
worth of that knowledge, by which we can travel back to the
remotest ages, and live the lives of all antiquity? Nay, who can
set bounds to the value of those attainments, by which we can, as
it were, fly from world to world, and gaze on all the glories of
creation; by which we can glide down the stream of time, and
penetrate the unorganized regions of uncreated futurity? My heart
burns while I write. Although literature presents the highest
objects of ambition to the most refined mind, yet I consider
health, in comparison with other temporal enjoyments, the most
bountiful, and highest gift of heaven.
I have read three books of the Georgics, and three odes of Horace,
but this last week I have read scarcely any, as I have had a great
deal of company, and there has been no school. But I commence again
to-day with all my might. The Attorney-General stops at Mr.
Aikman's during Court. I find him very agreeable. He conversed with
me more than an hour last night, in the most sociable, open manner
possible.
_Sept. 16th._--There is nothing of greater importance than to
commence early to form our characters and regulate our conduct.
Observation daily proves that man's condition in this world is
generally the result of his own conduct. When we come to maturity,
we perceive there is a right and a wrong in the actions of men;
many who possess the same hereditary advantages, are not equally
prosperous in life; some by virtuous conduct rise to
respectability, honour, and happiness; while others by mean and
vicious actions, forfeit the advantages of their birth, and sink
into ignominy and disgrace. How necessary that in early life useful
habits should be formed, and turbulent passions restrained, so that
when manhood and old age come, the mind be not enervated by the
follies and vices of youth, but, supported and strengthened by the
Divine Being, be enabled to say, "O God, thou hast taught me from
my youth, and now when I am old and grey-headed, O God, thou wilt
not forsake me!"
_Sept. 21st._--I have just parted with an old and faithful friend,
who has left for another kingdom. How often has he kindly reproved
me, and how oft have we gone to the house of God together! We may
never meet again on earth, but what a mercy to have a good hope of
meeting in the better land!
_Sept. 23rd._--When I reflect on the millions of the human family
who know nothing of Christ, my soul feels intensely for their
deliverance. What a vast uncultivated field in my own country for
ministers to employ their whole time and talents in exalting a
crucified Saviour. Has God designed this sacred task for me? If it
be Thy will, may all obstacles be removed, my heart be sanctified
and my hands made pure.
_Sept. 26th._--I have been much oppressed with a man-fearing
spirit, but what have I to fear if God be for me? Oh, Lord, enable
me to become a bold witness for Jesus Christ!
_Sept. 28th._--In all the various walks of life, I find
obstructions and labours, surrounded with foes, powerful as well
as subtle; although I have all the promises of the Gospel to
comfort and support me, yet find exertion on my own part absolutely
necessary. When heaven proclaims victory, it is only that which
succeeds labour. I consider it a divine requisition that my whole
course of conduct, both in political and social life, should be
governed by the infallible precepts of revelation; hypocrisy is
inexcusable, even in the most trifling circumstances.
_Sept. 29th._--I find difficulties to overcome in my literary
pursuits, I had never anticipated; and it is only by the most
indefatigable labour I can succeed. I am much oppressed by the
labours of this day. I need Divine aid in this as well as in
spiritual pursuits.
_Sept. 30th._--I have been enabled to study with considerable
facility. Prayer I find the most profitable employment, practice
the best instructor, and thanksgiving the sweetest recreation. May
this be my experience every day!
_October, 2nd._--I am another week nearer my eternal destiny! Am I
nearer heaven, and better prepared for death than at its
commencement? Do I view sin with greater abhorence? Are my views of
the Deity more enlarged? Is it my meat and drink to do his holy
will? Oh, my God, how much otherwise!
_From the 3rd to the 9th Oct._--During this period the afflicting
hand of God has been upon me; thank God, when distressed with
bodily pain, I have felt a firm assurance of Divine favour, so that
all fear of death has been taken away. My soul is too unholy to
meet a holy God, and mingle with the society of the blest. Oh, God,
save me from the deceitfulness of my own heart!
_Oct. 10th, Sabbath._--I am rapidly recovering health and strength.
The Lord is my refuge and comfort. Surrounded by temptations, the
applause of men is often too fascinating, and my treacherous heart
dresses things in false colours. But, bless God, in his goodness
and mercy he recalls my wandering steps, and invites me to dwell in
safety under the shadow of his wing.
_Oct. 11th._--No graces are of more importance than patience and
perseverance. They give consistency and dignity to character. We
may possess the most sparkling talents and the most interesting
qualities, but without these graces, the former lose their lustre,
and the latter their charms. In religion their influence is more
important, as they form the character, by enabling us to surmount
difficulties and remove obstacles. I am far from thinking them
constitutional virtues, with a little additional cultivation, but I
consider them the gift of heaven, less common than is generally
imagined, though sometimes faintly counterfeited. They differ from
natural or moral excellence in this being the proper and consistent
exercise of those virtues.
_Oct. 12th._--It is two weeks to-day since I first wrote home. A
week ago I received a kind letter from my brother George, but was
too ill with fever to read it, or to write in reply until to-day. I
said: "I feel truly thankful to you for the tender concern and warm
interest which you express in your letter. Tell my dear Mother that
I share with her her afflictions, and that I am daily more forcibly
convinced that every earthly comfort and advantage is transient and
unsatisfactory, that this is not our home, but that our highest
happiness amidst these fluctuating scenes, is to insure the favour
and protection of him who alone can raise us above afflictions and
calamities."
_November 20th._--More than a month has elapsed since I recorded my
religious feelings and enjoyments on paper. During this period, I
have sometimes realized all the pleasures of health; at other
times, borne down with pain and sickness, the spirit would be cast
down. At such seasons of depression, religion would come in as my
only comfort, and with the Psalmist I would exclaim, "Hope thou in
God, for I shall yet praise him who is the light of my countenance,
and my God." Thus I find from blessed experience, that in every
state and condition, union and intercourse with God brings true
peace, joy, trust, and praise. If there be any honour, here it is.
If there be any wealth, this is it. "I would rather be a
door-keeper in the house of my God than dwell in the tents of
wickedness." O Lord, give me more of the mind of Christ!
_Nov. 25th._--In entering on the field of life, I find my mind much
perplexed with the variety of objects presented to my view. The
comforts and tranquility of domestic happiness attract my
attention, and excite warm desires in my heart. Am I not to taste
the pleasures which two hearts reciprocally united in one, mutually
communicate? or must I give up the home of domestic enjoyment to
the calls of duty, and the salvation of men? Has heaven designed
that I should spend my days in seeking the lost sheep of the House
of Israel? May divine wisdom direct me, and suffer me not to follow
the dictates of my own will!
_Nov. 26th._--By taking a retrospective view of what is past, we
learn to ask more wisely in the time to come. The cool dictates of
reason, assisted by that inward monitor, conscience, placed within
the breast of every individual, strongly condemns every deviation
from propriety, justice, or morality. By mingling with society we
learn human nature, and the scenes of public resort afford us a
field for useful observation, yet retirement is the place to
acquire the most important knowledge--_the knowledge of ourselves_.
What would it avail us to dive into the mysteries of science, or
entertain the world with new discoveries, to acquaint ourselves
with the principles of morality, or learn the whole catalogue of
Christian doctrines, if we are unacquainted with our own hearts,
and strangers to the business of self-government?
_February 12th, 1825._--During the long period since I last penned
my religious meditations, my feelings, hopes, and prospects have
been extremely varied. While I was promising myself health and many
temporal pleasures, God saw fit to show me the uncertainty of
earthly things, and the necessity and wisdom of submission to his
will, by the rod of affliction. During my sickness I have derived
much pleasure and profit from the visits of pious friends, so that
I have felt it is good to be afflicted.[4]
_Feb. 13th._--I am resolved, by God's assisting grace, to keep the
following resolutions:--(1) Endeavour to fix my first waking
thoughts on God; (2) By rising early to attend to my devotions, and
reading the Scriptures; (3)By praying oftener each day, and
maintaining a more devotional frame of mind; (4) By being more
circumspect in my conduct and conversation; (5) By improving my
time more diligently in reading useful books, and study; (6) By
watching over my thoughts, and keeping my desires within proper
bounds; (7) By examining myself more closely by the scripture rule;
(8) By leaving myself and all that concerns me to God's disposal;
(9) By reviewing every evening the actions of the day, and
especially every Sabbath, examining wherein I have come short, or
have kept God's precepts.
_Feb. 16th._--I have lately been closely employed in reading Bishop
Burnet's History of the Reformation. How sad to reflect on the
cruelties that were then practised against the professors of true
religion! What a reason for thankfulness that the sway of papal
authority can no longer inflict papal obligations on the
consciences of men! But after careful research into this highly
authentic history, I find but few vestiges of that apostolic purity
which churchmen so boastfully attribute to that memorable period of
Christian history. Great allowance, is, however, to be made when
we consider that they were just emerging out of the superstitions
of popery. That doctrines, discipline, and ceremonies, cannot be
established without the royal assent, even when they are approved
both by ecclesiastical and legislative authority, is a practice so
different from anything that the Primitive Church authorizes, it
seems to me to originate from quite a different source; that a
whole nation should be bound in their religious opinions by a
single individual, savours so much of popery, I think it may
properly be called its offspring. Pretentions to regal supremacy in
church affairs were never made till a late period, although this
interference of papal authority in matters entirely spiritual, does
not annul any ecclesiastical power, or prove its doctrines to be
corrupt, or its ordinations illegal. It may be justly ranked among
the invasions of modern corruption.
_Feb. 17th._--Since I drew up, four days since, several resolutions
for amendment, I bless God I have reason to believe I have made
some improvement. I have applied myself more closely to study,
prayed oftener, and governed my thoughts with more rigour.
_Feb. 27th._--I am now emerging into life, surrounded by blessings
and opportunities for usefulness and improvement; but, alas! where
is my gratitude, my love to God, my zeal for his cause, and for the
salvation of those who are ignorant of the great truths of the
Gospel? If, O God, thou hast designed this awfully important work
for me, qualify me for it; increase and enlarge my desires for the
salvation of immortal souls!
_March 15th._--This day I have recommenced my studies with Mr. John
Law, at Hamilton. How necessary that I should be very careful in my
conduct for the credit of religion and Methodism!
_March 24th._--I have this day finished twenty-two years of my
life. I have decided this day to travel in the Methodist Connexion
and preach Jesus to the lost sons of men. Oh, the awful importance
of this work! How utterly unfit I am for the undertaking! How
little wisdom, experience, and, above all, grace do I possess for
the labours of the ministry! Blessed Jesus, fountain of wisdom, God
of power, I give myself to thee, and to the Church, to do with me
according to thy will. Instruct and sanctify me, that whether I
live, it may be to the Lord, and when I die it may be to the Lord!
_April 3rd.--Easter Sunday._--I this day commenced my ministerial
labours. Bless the Lord, he has given me a heart to feel. He hears
my prayer. Oh, my soul, hang all thy hopes upon the Lord! Forbid I
should seek the praise of men, but may I seek their good and God's
glory.
In the morning I endeavoured to speak from Ps. cxxvi. 5, and in the
evening from Acts ii. 24--a subject suitable for the day; bless the
Lord, I felt something of the power of my Saviour's resurrection
resting on my soul.
_April 8th._--The Lord being my helper, my little knowledge and
feeble talents shall be unreservedly devoted to his service. I do
not yet regret giving up my worldly pursuits for the welfare of
souls. I want Christ to be all in all.
_April 10th.--Sabbath._--I endeavoured this morning to show the
abundant provisions, the efficacy, and the triumphs of the Gospel
from Isaiah xxv. 6, 7, 8, and in the afternoon I described the
righteous man and his end from Prov. xiv. 32. I felt much of the
presence of the Lord, and I do bless the Lord he has converted one
soul in this place to-day. I feel encouraged to go on.
_April 13th._--I have been depressed in spirit on account of having
no abode for domestic retirement, and becoming exposed to all the
besetments of public life.
_April 15th._--So bowed down with temptation to-day, I almost
resolved to return to my native place. But, in God's strength, I
will try to do my best during the time I have engaged to supply my
brother William's place.
_April 16th._--In reading Rollin's account of the conquest of
Babylon, I conceive more exalted ideas of the truth of the Word of
God, whose predictions were so exactly fulfilled in the destruction
of that city.
_April 17th.--Sabbath._--My labours this day have been excessive,
having delivered three discourses. In the morning my mind was dull
and heavy, in the afternoon warm and pathetic, in the evening clear
and fertile. I feel encouraged to continue on.
_April 23rd._--I feel nothing but condemnation in reviewing the
actions of the past week. Would it not be better for me to return
home until I gain better government over myself. Oh, Lord, I throw
myself upon thy mercy! "Take not thy Holy Spirit from me! Restore
unto me the joy of thy salvation!"
_April 25th and 26th._--And thus I go on, depressed and refreshed;
almost discouraged because of the way, and then cheered by the kind
and fatherly conversation of Rev. Thomas Madden.
_April 29th._--In travelling to-day a tree fell across the road
four or five rods before me, and another not far behind, but I
escaped unhurt. My heart glowed with gratitude; I felt that the
Lord was indeed my protector. But whilst so narrowly escaping
myself, two persons, a woman and her son, who were travelling a
short distance behind me, were suddenly killed by the falling of a
tree, and thus in an instant hurried into eternity.
_May 4th._--I watched to-day a large concourse of people assembled
to witness horse-racing. I stood at a distance that I might observe
an illustration of human nature. Curiosity and excitement were
depicted in every countenance. What is to become of this
thoughtless multitude? Is there no mercy for them? Surely there is.
Why will they not be saved? Because they will not come to Him.
_May 5th._--During the day I preached once, to a listening but
wicked assembly. In the afternoon I heard my brother William. I was
affected by the force of his reasoning, and the power of his
eloquence. I hope the Lord will help me to imitate his piety and
zeal.
_May 7th._--A camp-meeting was commenced this afternoon on Yonge
Street, near the town of York. Rev. Thomas Madden preached from,
"Lord help me!" Every countenance indicated interest, and every
heart appeared willing to receive the word. In the evening a pious,
aged man spoke (Mr. D. Y.) His discourse was full of God. Several
were converted and made very happy.
_May 8th._--The people rose at 5 a.m. After prayers and breakfast,
there was a prayer meeting, daring which God was especially
present. At 8 a.m. I preached from Hosea xiii. 3. This was followed
by two exhortations; then Rev. Rowley Heyland preached from, "Buy
the truth, and sell it not." About two o'clock the people were
again assembled to hear the Rev. James Richardson (formerly a
lieutenant in the British Navy) from the words, "Be ye reconciled
to God." His style was plain but unadorned, his reasoning clear,
and his arguments forcible. The services concluded with the
celebration of the Lord's Supper. About three hundred communicated,
sixty-two professed to have obtained the pardon of their sins, and
forty-two gave their names as desirous of becoming members of the
Methodist Society. After this, a concluding address was delivered
by the Rev. Wm. Ryerson, in which he gave particular directions to
the Methodists as subjects under the civil constitution, as members
of the Church of Christ, as parents, as children, as individuals.
He animadverted on the groundless and disingenuous aspersions that
had been thrown out through the press against Methodism, on account
of the suspected loyalty of its constitutional principles. He
warmly insisted on a vigorous observance, support, and respect for
the Civil Government, both from the beneficence of its laws and the
equity of its administration, as well as from the authority of God.
The concluding ceremony was the most affecting I ever witnessed,
especially in the affection which the people showed for their
ministers.
_May 12th._--I have this day ridden nearly thirty miles, preached
three times, and met two classes. I felt very much fatigued, yet
the Lord has given me "strength equal to my day."
_May 19th._--I have been much blessed in the society of pious
friends. A part of the week I felt very sick, but was greatly
comforted by the conversation and affectionate treatment of my
kindest friend, Mrs. Smith. Since I commenced labouring for my
Master I have found fathers and mothers, brothers and sisters, all
ready to supply my every want.
_May 24th._--A Camp-meeting commenced at Mount Pleasant. The
presence of both Mississauga and Mohawk Indians added greatly to
the interest of the meeting. Peter Jones addressed his people in
their own tongue; although I did not understand, I was much
affected by his fervency and pathos. He spoke in English in a
manner that astonished all present.
Another Indian Chief addressed his brethren in the Mohawk tongue. I
could not understand a word of it, but was carried away with his
pathos and energy. These Indians thanked the white people for
sending them the Gospel. He said that upwards of sixty Indians had
been converted, and could testify that God had power to forgive
sin. He, _i.e._, a young Chippewa said that the most earnest desire
and prayer of the Christian Indians was that God would drive the
horrid whiskey from their nation. It was truly affecting to see
this young man arise and testify in the presence of God and this
large assembly, that "he had the witness in his own soul, that God
for Christ's sake had forgiven all his sins." The congregation was
much moved, and prayers and praises were heard in every part of the
assembly. At the close of the exercises, on the following day, the
Mohawk Chief said, "They considered that they belonged to the
Methodist Church, as they had done all for them."
_May 29th._--For many days I have been cast down by a weight of
care. My Father is exceedingly anxious that I should return home,
and remain with him during his lifetime. A position in the Church
of England has presented itself, and other advantageous attractions
with regard to this world, offer themselves.[5] It makes my heart
bleed to see the anxiety of my parents. But is it duty? If they
were in want I would return to them without hesitation, but when I
consider they have everything necessary, can it be my duty to
gratify them at the expense of the cause of God? Surely if a man
may leave father and mother to join himself to a wife, how much
more reasonable _to leave all_ to join himself to the Christian
ministry. My parents are dear to me, but my duty to God is dearer
still. One thing do I desire, that I may live in the House of the
Lord for ever!
And shall I leave a Church through whose faithful instructions I
have been brought to know God, for any advantages that the entrance
to another might afford me? No, far be it from me; as I received
the Lord Jesus, so I will walk in him. Earthly distinctions will be
but short; but the favour of God will last forever. Besides, is it
a sacrifice to do my duty? Is it not rather a cause of gratitude
that I know my duty, and am allowed to perform it? My heart is
united with the Methodists, my soul is one with theirs; my labours
are acceptable, and they are anxious that I should continue with
them. I believe in their Articles, I approve of their Constitution,
and I believe them to be of the Church of Christ.
_Saltfleet, May 30th._--[Amongst Dr. Ryerson's papers I find the two
following letters. The first addressed from Saltfleet, on this day, to
his brother George; the second to his Mother on the following day.--J.
G. H.]
[To his brother, Rev. George Ryerson, he said: I suppose your first
inquiry is to know my spiritual condition and prospects. As to my
religious enjoyments, I think that I have reason to believe I am daily
blessed with the divine presence to enlighten, to instruct, and to
assist me in my researches and meditations, and in the other arduous
duties I have to discharge. Never did I so sensibly feel the importance
of the work in which I am now engaged, as I have these few days past. I
feel that I am altogether inadequate to it; but God has in a very
special manner, at different times, been my wisdom and strength. I do
not feel sorry that I have commenced travelling as a preacher. I think I
feel more deeply the worth of souls at heart. I feel willing to spend my
all, and be spent in the cause of God, if I may become the unworthy
instrument in doing some good to the souls of men. The greatest
assistance I receive in my public labours, is that which results from a
firm dependence on God for light, life, and power. When I forget this I
am visited with that barrenness of mind, and hardness of heart which are
always the companions of those who live at a distance from God. In
discharging every public duty, my prayer to God is, to renew my
commission afresh, and give me wisdom and energy, and I do not find him
slack concerning his promise. I am striving to pursue my studies with
unabating ardour. My general practice is to retire at ten o'clock, or
before, and rise at five. When I am travelling, I strive to converse no
more than is necessary and useful, endeavouring at all times to keep in
mind the remark of Dr. Clarke, that a preacher's whole business is to
save souls, and that that preacher is the most useful who is the most in
his closet. On my leisure days I read from ten to twenty verses of Greek
a day, besides reading history, the Scriptures, and the best works on
practical divinity, among which Chalmers' has decidedly the preference
in my mind, both for piety and depth of thought. These two last studies
employ the greatest part of my time. My preaching is altogether
original. I endeavour to collect as many ideas from every source as I
can; but I do not copy the expression of any one. For I do detest seeing
blooming flowers in dead men's hands. I think it my duty, and I try to
get a general knowledge, and view of any subject that I discuss
before-hand; but not unfrequently I have tried to preach with only a few
minutes previous reflection. Remember me to my dear Mother, and give her
this letter to read, and tell her that I will write soon.]
_Saltfleet, May 31st._--[To his Mother he writes: My dear Mother, I am
thankful to say that I am well, and am trying in a weak way to serve the
Lord, and persuading as many others to do so as I can. I feel that I am
almost destitute of every necessary qualification for so important a
work. The Lord has blessed me in a very special manner at many different
times. Our prospects are very favourable in some places. Our
congregations are generally large, and still increasing. We have
twenty-four appointments in four weeks. I have formed some very useful
and pious acquaintances since I left home. The Lord seems to be with me,
and renders my feeble efforts acceptable in general. My acquaintance
seems to be sought by all classes, and I try to improve such advantages
in spreading, by my example and conversation, the blessed religion of
Christ among all ranks. I have many temptations to contend with, and
many trials to weigh me down at times. Some of these arise from a sense
of the injustice which I have done to important subjects, on account of
my ignorance, which drives me to a throne of grace, and a closer
application to my studies. My situation is truly a state of trial, and
none but God could support and direct me. And I do feel the comforting
and refreshing influence of his divine power at times very sensibly. I
am determined, by his assistance, never to rest contented until he not
only becomes my wisdom, but my sanctification, and my full redemption.
And blessed be the Lord, my dear Mother, I do feel a hope, and a
confidence that the same divine power and goodness which supports and
comforts you in your ill state of health, and which gives you victory
over your trials, and consolation in your distress, will conduct me,
too, through this stormy maze, and we shall yet have the blessedness of
meeting at our Father's table in Heaven. And God being my helper, my
dear Mother, when you have gone home to rest with God, I am determined
to pursue the same path, which you have strewn with prayers, with tears,
and living faith, until I reach the same blessed port. I hope that you
will pray that the Lord would help and save me forever! If I had no
other inducement to serve God, and walk in the path of religion, but
your comfort, I would try and devote my life to it while I live; but
when Heaven's transcendant glory beams forth in prospective view, my
soul burns to possess the kingdom, and my heart is enlarged for the
salvation of others. I wish you would get George to write immediately,
and let me know the state of your mind, and your opinion about my
returning home, also his own opinion on that subject.--J. G. H.]
_July 2nd._--This week has been a season of trial. I have left my
Father's house once more, and arrived on my Circuit.
_July 3rd.--Sabbath._--I have preached twice to-day in Niagara for
the first time; felt very embarrassed, but my trust was in God, and
my prayer to Him for assistance.
_July 4th._--This evening I have been distressed in mind on account
of leaving my parents. My heart melts within me when I think of my
Father's faltering voice, when lying on his bed he said, "Good-bye,
Egerton," and reached forth his trembling hand, saying by his
countenance that he never expected to see his son a resident in his
house again. He laid himself back in his bed in apparent despair,
no more to enjoy the society of the child he loved. Oh, my God! is
it not too much for humanity? Nature sinks beneath the weight. It
is only God that can sustain. May I endure manfully to the end!
_July 6th and 7th._--I have been much interested in reading Dr.
Coke's discourses, also Wesley's sermons on "The Kingdom of God."
_July 9th._--I have crossed the river to the United States to-day
for the first time. The manners of the people are not pleasant to
me.
_July 10th--Sabbath._--The Lord has greatly blessed me this day. I
have preached three times. My heart overflowed with love for
immortal souls. Many wept, and God's people seemed stirred up to
engage afresh in His service. In the evening, I preached to very a
wicked congregation, from Matt. xvi. 24. My mind was clear,
particularly in argument, but they seemed to be unaffected.
_July 14th._--I have been afflicted with illness, but the Lord has
comforted me. Again had to mourn over light conversation, still I
think I have gained some victory. I am determined to watch and pray
until I obtain a triumph over this trying besetment.
_July 17th._--I felt so ill this morning that I could not attend my
appointment, but recovered so as to preach feebly in the afternoon.
The Word seemed to rest with power on the people.
_July 21st._--For several days I have been much interested in
reading Fletcher's "Portrait of St. Paul." When I compare my
actions and feelings with the standard there laid down, I blush on
account of my ignorance in the duties and labours connected with my
calling. Did the ministers of the Gospel obtain and possess a
deeper communion with God? Did they cultivate primitive piety in
their lives, and Gospel simplicity in their preaching, surely the
power of darkness could not stand before them! How many learned
discourses are entirely lost in the wisdom of words, whereas plain
and simple sermons, delivered with power and demonstration of the
Spirit, have been attended with astonishing success.
_July 27th._--I have been considerably agitated in my mind for the
last two days, having lost my horse. The fatigue in searching for
her has been considerable. Thank God she is found!
_July 31st--Sabbath._--Greatly blessed in attending a Quarterly
meeting in Hamilton; also in hearing an interesting account of the
Indians receiving their presents at York. Peter Jones had written
to Col. Givens to enquire just what time they must be there,
stating that as many of them had become Christianized and
industrious, they did not want to lose time. The Colonel was
surprised at the news, and replied, giving the necessary
information. Peter Jones' letter was shown to Rev. Dr. Strachan and
His Excellency the Governor. It excited great curiosity. When the
Indians arrived, the Colonel had, as usual, brought liquor to treat
them, but as Peter Jones informed him the Christian Indians would
not drink, he very wisely said "the others should not have it
either," and sent it back. How the Lord honours those who honour
Him. Rev. Dr. Strachan and several ladies and gentlemen assembled
to see the distribution of presents. The Christian Indians were
requested to separate from the others, that they might read and
sing. The company was much pleased, and Dr. Strachan prayed with
them. On the following Sabbath, the Dr. visited the Credit
settlement, and attended one of the meetings which was addressed by
Peter Jones. Dr. Strachan proposed their coming under the
superintendence of the Church of England; but after holding a
council, they declined, deciding to remain under the direction of
the Methodists. May the Lord greatly prosper his work amongst them,
preserve them from every delusive snare, and may their happy souls
be kept blameless unto the day of Jesus Christ!
_August 1st._--This day I have been admitted into the Methodist
Connexion, licensed as a Local Preacher, and recommended tn the
Annual Conference to be received on trial. How awful the
responsibility! How dreadful my condition if I violate my charge or
deal deceitfully with souls! Oh, God, assist me to declare Thy
whole counsel! and help me to instruct by example as well as
precept. How swiftly am I gliding down time's rapid stream! I am
daily reminded of the uncertainty and shortness of life. I went
to-day to visit a friend, and (as usual) smilingly came to the
door, when behold! all was mourning and sorrow! An infant son had
just taken its everlasting flight to the arms of Jesus. He was a
fine boy, active and promising, but he had suddenly gone to return
no more! The father's philosophy forsakes him now; parental feeling
has uncontrolled sway. I recommended religion as the only
sufficient support and comfort. I touched on the mysterious
government of God; that truly "Clouds and darkness are round about
him." yet "righteousness and judgment are the habitation of his
throne." I pointed out the happiness of the beloved babe, which
should lead us to devote our all to His service, that we might
eventually share in the unspeakable blessedness to which the lovely
infant is now raised.
_Aug. 10th._--My soul rejoices at the news I have heard from home,
that my eldest brother (George) has resolved to join the
Methodists, and become a missionary among the Indians. How
encouraging and comforting the thought that four of us are now
united in the same Church, and pursue the same glorious calling. My
Father has become reconciled, and my Mother is willing to part with
her sons for the sake of the Church of Christ.
_Aug. 14th--Sabbath._--Never did I feel my pride more mortified in
the discharge of public duty. I was desirous of delivering a
discourse, in Niagara, which would meet the approbation of all,
after carefully adjusting the subject, by the assistance of a
variety of authors; but through fatigue (having rode twelve miles),
and embarrassment, I was scarcely able to finish. My heart felt
hard and my mind barren, conscience reproached me that I had not
acted with a single eye to the glory of God. In the afternoon, I
threw myself on the mercy of God; my tongue was loosened and my
heart warmed. Surely, "They that trust in the Lord shall not be
confounded."
_Aug. 17th._--This morning a lady died with whom I had considerable
conversation on the subject of Methodism, and on the propriety of
her daughters joining the society contrary to her wish. She
appeared to be satisfied with my account of the principles and
nature of Methodism, but did not like to acknowledge the propriety
of her daughters' proceedings, although her judgment seemed
convinced as I adverted to the principles of her own church. I am
informed that yesterday she said, "The girls are right and I am
wrong." How comforting this must be to her daughters, who have
entirely overcome her opposition by their kindness, affection, and
gospel simplicity.
_Aug. 22nd._--Yesterday I delivered a discourse on the subject of
Missions, for the purpose of forming a Missionary Society in this
place (Niagara).
_September 3rd, 1825._--I took tea this afternoon at Youngstown,
U.S., for the first time.
_Sept. 6th._--Had the pleasure of meeting my brother to-day, whom I
have not seen for a year. How comforting to meet with those who are
not only near by the ties of nature, but much more by the changing
power of divine grace.
_Sept. 9th._--Have been greatly benefitted to-day by hearing Bishop
Hedding preach from Rev. iii. 5.
_Sept. 16th._--I bless God for what mine eyes hath seen, and mine
ears have heard to-day, being the first anniversary of the Canadian
Missionary Society. The Hon. John Willson, M.P.P., was requested to
take the chair. Several Indians, who had been brought to a
knowledge of the truth, through the efforts of this Society, were
present and spoke. How delightful to see the warlike Mohawk, and
the degraded Mississauga, exchanging the heathen war-whoop for the
sublime praise of the God of love! This is the commencement of
greater things which the Lord will do for the aboriginies of
Canada.
_Sept. 23rd._--I have this day received my appointment for York and
Yonge street. Never did I feel more sensibly the necessity of
Divine help. Help me, O God, to go forth in Thy strength, and
contend manfully under the banner of Christ! Amen.
FOOTNOTES:
[3] These voluminous diaries and journals are full of detail, chiefly of
Dr. Ryerson's religious experience. They are rich in illustration of the
severe mental and spiritual disciplinary process--self-imposed--through
which he passed during these eventful years of his earlier life. They
are singularly severe in their personal reflections upon his religious
shortcomings, and want of watchfulness. They are tinged with an
asceticism which largely characterized the religious experience of many
of the early Methodist preachers of Mr. Wesley's time--an asceticism
which strongly marked the Methodist biography and writings, which were
almost the only religious reading accessible to the devoted Methodist
pioneers of this country,--J. G. H.
[4] In a previous and subsequent chapter Dr. Ryerson refers more
particularly to this illness (pp. 28, 39, and elsewhere). It was a
turning point in his life, and decided him to enter the ministry on his
twenty-second birthday.--J. G. H.
[5] Dr. Ryerson refers in another chapter to the overtures which were
made to him at this time to enter the ministry of the Church of
England.--J. G. H.
CHAPTER III.
1825-1826.
First Year of my Ministry and First Controversy.
My first appointment after my admission on trial was to the (what was
then called the York and Yonge Street Circuit), which then embraced the
Town of York (now the City of Toronto) Weston, the Townships of Vaughan,
King, West Gwillimbury, North Gwillimbury, East Gwillimbury, Whitchurch,
Markham, Pickering, Scarboro', and York, over which we travelled, and
preached from twenty-five to thirty-five sermons in four weeks,
preaching generally three times on Sabbath and attending three class
meetings, besides preaching and attending class meetings on week days.
The roads were (if in any place they could be called roads) bad beyond
description; could only be travelled on horse-back, and on foot; the
labours hard, and the accommodations of the most primitive kind; but we
were received as angels of God by the people, our ministrations being
almost the only supply of religious instruction to them; and nothing
they valued more than to have the preacher partake of their humble and
best hospitality.
It was during the latter part of this the first year of my itinerant
ministry (April and May, 1826) that I was drawn and forced into the
controversy on the Clergy Reserves and equal civil and religious rights
and privileges among all religious persuasions in Upper Canada.[6] There
had been some controversy between the leaders of the Churches of England
and Scotland on their comparative standing as established churches in
Upper Canada. In my earliest years, I had read and studied Blackstone's
Commentaries on the laws of England, especially the rights of the Crown,
and Parliament and Subject, Paley's Moral and Political Philosophy; and
when I read and observed the character of the policy, and state of
things in Canada, I felt that it was not according to the principles of
British liberty, or of the British Constitution; but I had not the
slightest idea of writing anything on the subject.
At this juncture, (April, 1826,) a publication appeared, entitled
"Sermon Preached and Published by the Venerable Archdeacon of York, in
May, 1826, on the Death of the Late Bishop of Quebec," containing a
sketch of the rise and progress of the Church of England in these
provinces, and an appeal on behalf of that Church to the British
Government and Parliament. In stating the obstacles which impeded the
progress of the Church of England in Upper Canada, the memorable Author
of the able discourse attacked the character of the religious
persuasions not connected with the Church of England, especially the
Methodists, whose ministers were represented as American in their origin
and feelings, ignorant, forsaking their proper employments to preach
what they did not understand, and which, from their pride, they
disdained to learn; and were spreading disaffection to the civil and
religious institutions of Great Britain. In this sermon, not only was
the status of the Church of England claimed as the Established Church of
the Empire, and exclusively entitled to the Clergy Reserves, or one
seventh of the lands of Upper Canada, but an appeal was made to the
Imperial Government and Parliament for a grant of £300,000 per annum, to
enable the Church of England in Upper Canada, to maintain the loyalty of
Upper Canada to England. And these statements and appeals were made ten
years after the close of the war of 1812-1815, by the United States
against Britain, with the express view of conquering Canada and annexing
it to the United States; and during which war both Methodist preachers
and people were conspicuous for their loyalty and zeal in defence of the
country.
The Methodists in York (now Toronto) at that time (1826) numbered about
fifty persons, young and old; the two preachers arranged to meet once in
four weeks on their return from their country tours, when a social
meeting of the leading members of the society was held for conversation,
consultation, and prayer. One of the members of this company obtained
and brought to the meeting a copy of the Archdeacon's sermon, and read
the parts of it which related to the attacks upon the Methodists, and
the proposed method of exterminating them. The reading of those extracts
produced a thrilling sensation of indignation and alarm, and all agreed
that something must be written and done to defend the character and
rights of Methodists and others assailed, against such attacks and such
a policy. The voice of the meeting pointed to me to undertake this work.
I was then designated as "The Boy Preacher," from my youthful
appearance, and as the youngest minister in the Church. I objected on
account of my youth and incompetence; but my objections were overruled,
when I proposed as a compromise, that during our next country tour the
Superintendent of the Circuit (Rev. James Richardson), and myself should
each write on the subject, and from what we should both write,
something might be compiled to meet the case. This was agreed to, and
at our next social monthly meeting in the town, inquiry was made as to
what had been written in defence of the Methodists and others, against
the attacks and policy of the Archdeacon of York. It was found that the
Superintendent of the Circuit had written nothing; and on my being
questioned, I said I had endeavoured to obey the instructions of my
senior brethren. It was then insisted that I must read what I had
written. I at length yielded, and read my answer to the attacks made on
us. The reading of my paper was attended with alternate laughter and
tears on the part of those present, all of whom insisted that it should
be printed, I objecting that I had never written anything for the press,
and was not competent to such a task, and advanced to throw my
manuscript into the fire, when one of the elder members caught me by the
arms, and another wrenched the manuscript out of my hands, saying he
would take it to the printer. Finding my efforts vain to recover it, I
said if it were restored I would not destroy it but rewrite it and
return it to the brethren to do what they pleased with it. I did so. Two
of the senior brethren took the manuscript to the printer, and its
publication produced a sensation scarcely less violent and general than
a Fenian invasion. It is said that before every house in Toronto might
be seen groups reading and discussing the paper on the evening of its
publication in June; and the excitement spread throughout the country.
It was the first defiant defence of the Methodists, and of the equal and
civil rights of all religious persuasions; the first protest and
argument on legal and British constitutional grounds, against the
erection of a dominant church establishment supported by the state in
Upper Canada.
It was the Loyalists of America, and their descendants, in Upper Canada
who first lifted up the voice of remonstrance against ecclesiastical
despotism in the province, and unfurled the flag of equal religious
rights and liberty for all religious persuasions.
The sermon of the Archdeacon of York was the third formal attack made by
the Church of England clergy upon the characters of their unoffending
Methodist brethren and those of other religious persuasions; but no
defence of the assailed parties had as yet been written. In a subsequent
discussion on another topic, referring to this matter, I said:
"Up to this time not a word had been written respecting the clergy
of the Church of England, or the Clergy Reserve question, by any
minister or member of the Methodist Church. At that time the
Methodists had no law to secure a foot of land, on which to build
parsonages, Chapels, and in which to bury their dead; their
ministers were not allowed to solemnize matrimony; and some of
them had been the objects of cruel and illegal persecution on the
part of magistrates and others in authority. And now they were the
butt of unprovoked and unfounded aspersions from two heads of
Episcopal Clergy, while pursuing the 'noiseless tenor of their
way,' through trackless forests and bridgeless rivers and streams,
to preach among the scattered inhabitants the unsearchable riches
of Christ."[7]
_The Review_, in defence of the Methodists and others against such
gratuitous and unjust imputations, consisted of about thirty octavo
pages, appeared over the signature of "A Methodist Preacher;" it was
commenced near Newmarket, in a cottage owned by the late Mr. Elias
Smith, whose wife was a sister of the Lounts--a woman of great
excellence. It was written piecemeal in the humble residences of the
early settlers, in the course of eight days, during which time I rode on
horseback nearly a hundred miles and preached seven sermons. On its
publication I pursued my country tour of preaching, &c., little
conscious of the storm that was brewing; but on my return to town, at
the end of two weeks, I received newspapers containing four replies to
my _Review_--three of them written by clergymen, and one by a scholarly
layman of the Church of England. In those replies to the then unknown
author of the _Review_, I was assailed by all sorts of contemptuous and
criminating epithets--all denying that the author of such a publication
could be "a Methodist Preacher,"--but was "an American," "a rebel," "a
traitor,"--and that the _Review_ was the "prodigious effort of a party."
My agitation was extreme; finding myself, against my own intention and
will, in the very tempest of a discussion for which I felt myself poorly
prepared, I had little appetite or sleep. At length roused to a sense of
my position, I felt that I must either flee or fight. I decided upon the
latter, strengthened by the consciousness that my principles were those
of the British Constitution and in defence of British rights. I devoted
a day to fasting and prayer, and then went at my adversaries in good
earnest. In less than four years after the commencement of this
controversy, laws were passed authorising the different religious
denominations to hold land for churches, parsonages, and burying
grounds, and their Ministers to solemnize matrimony; while the
Legislative Assembly passed, by large majorities, resolutions, and
addresses to the Crown against the exclusive pretensions of the Church
of England to the Clergy Reserves and being the exclusive established
Church of Upper Canada, though the Clergy Reserve question itself
continued to be discussed, and was not finally settled until more than
ten years afterwards.
Several months after the commencement of this controversy I paid my
first annual visit to my parents, and for the first two days the burden
of my Father's conversation was this controversy which was agitating the
country. At length, while walking in the orchard, my Father turned
short, and in a stern tone, said, "Egerton, they say that you are the
author of these papers which are convulsing the whole country. I want to
know whether you are or not?" I was compelled to acknowledge that I was
the writer of these papers, when my Father lifted up his hands, in an
agony of feeling, and exclaimed, "My God! we are all ruined!"
The state of my own mind and the character of my labours during this
first year of my ministry, may be inferred from the following brief
extracts from my diary:--
_October 4th_,--I have this evening arrived on my Circuit at York.
I feel the change to be awfully important, and entirely inadequate
to give proper instruction to so intelligent a people. The Lord
give me his assisting grace. I am resolved to devote my time, my
heart, my all, to God without reserve. I do feel determined, by
God's assistance, to rise early, spend no more time than is
absolutely necessary, pray oftener, and more fervently, to be
modest and solemn in the discharge of my public duties--to improve
every leisure moment by reading or meditation, and to depend upon
the assistance of Almighty God for the performance of every duty.
Oh, Lord, assist an ignorant youth to declare thy great salvation!
_Oct. 9th._--Commenced my labours this day. In the morning, the
Lord was very near to help me, giving me a tongue to speak, and a
heart to feel. But in the evening, after I got through my
introduction, recollection failed and my mind was entirely blank.
For nearly five minutes I could scarcely speak a word; after this
my thoughts returned. This seemed to be the hand of God, to show me
my entire weakness.
_Oct. 16th--Sabbath._--Oh, God, water the efforts of this day with
thy grace! If I am the means of persuading only one soul to embrace
the Lord Jesus, I shall be amply rewarded. "Paul planted, Apollos
watered, but God gave the increase." I Cor. iii. 6.
_Oct. 20th._--Once more, my Saviour, I renew my covenant and give
myself away; 'tis all that I can do.
_Oct. 27th._--For several days past the Lord has been very gracious
to my soul, and has greatly helped me in declaring His glorious
counsels. But to-day, my heart felt very hard while preaching to a
company of graceless sinners. It was in a tavern, and I doubt the
propriety of preaching in such places.
_Oct. 31st._--I am one month nearer my end; am I so much nearer God
and heaven? There are many precious hours I can give no favourable
account of. Had I been more faithful, I might have led some poor
wanderer into the way of truth. Oh, God, enter not into judgment
with me! Spare the barren fig-tree a little longer.
_November 4th--Friday (Fast Day.)_--One reason why my labours are
not more blessed, is because I feel and know so little of spiritual
things myself. There is too much of self about me.
"When, gracious Lord, when shall it be,
That I shall find my all in Thee;
The fulness of Thy promise prove,
The seal of Thine eternal love."
_Nov. 6th._--I felt greatly blessed while addressing a large
Sabbath-school of more than a hundred scholars.
_Nov. 7th._--[On this day, the following letter was written from York by
Dr. Ryerson to his Father. He said: On leaving the old home lately, I
promised to write to you, my dear Father, and let you know how I am
getting on. I arrived here a few days after I left home. I have received
a letter from brother William, who told me that his prospects are
encouraging. I received a letter also from brother John. He reached
Perth about a fortnight after he left home, and was cordially received
by all classes. He preached the Sabbath after he got there to large and
respectable congregations. He was very much pleased with his
appointment, and his prospects are very favourable. On the first evening
of his preaching, one professed to experience justification by faith,
and several were deeply convicted. He thinks, from several
circumstances, that his appointment is of God. I am very well pleased
with my appointment. I travel with a person who is deeply pious, a true
and disinterested friend, and a very respectable preacher. I travel
about two hundred miles in four weeks, and preach twenty-five times,
besides funerals. I spend two Sabbaths in York, and two in the country.
Our prospects on the circuit are encouraging. In York we have most
flattering prospects. We have some increase almost every week. Our
morning congregations fill the chapel, which was never the case before;
and in the evening the chapel will not contain but little more than
three-quarters of the people. Last evening several members of Parliament
were present. I never addressed so large an audience before, and I never
was so assisted from heaven in preaching as at this place. I have spent
the last two Sabbaths in York, and I go to-day into the country. I was
requested yesterday to address the Union Sunday-school, which contains
about 150 or 200 children. It was a public examination of the School. I
never heard children recite so correctly, and so perfectly before, as
they did. There was quite a large congregation present, as it was
designed to make a contribution for the support of the School. I first
addressed a short discourse to the children, and then addressed the
assembly. It was the most precious season that I ever experienced. It
is, my dear Father, the most delightful employment I ever engaged in, to
proclaim the name of Jesus to lost sinners. I feel more firmly attached
to the cause than ever. The Lord has comforted, blessed, and prospered
me beyond my expectations. I am resolved to devote all that I have and
am, to his service. Get George to write shortly all the news of the day.
Remember me to my dear Mother.--H.]
[After writing to his Father, he wrote on the same day to his brother
George, as follows:--
I have just heard the Governor's Speech to the two Houses of the
Legislature. In the latter part of his address he hinted at a certain
communication, which, by the permission of His Majesty, he would make by
Message, to remove apprehensions that affected the civil rights of a
very considerable part of the community. As to my religious enjoyments,
I think that Christ has been more precious to me than ever. When I came
into this Circuit, I began to fast and pray more than ever I had done
before, and the Lord has greatly blessed me. I have scarcely had a
barren time in preaching. I feel more strongly attached to the cause
than ever. While the Lord will help, I am resolved to go forward. Rev.
James Richardson is a man of good sense, and deep piety, and a very
acceptable and useful preacher.--H.]
_Nov. 10th._--Travelled twenty-two miles and preached twice. My
views of Scripture of late have been obscure; I can recall the
truths to my mind, but they don't make that impression they have
hitherto done. Is this change of feeling inherent, or the effect of
neglect of duty, and want of watchfulness? I will examine this
point more fully. I know it is my privilege to enjoy peace with
God, but whether it be my privilege at all times to possess equal
feeling, I am not certain.
_Nov. 23rd._--I think Mr. Wesley's advice indispensably necessary,
"to rise as soon as we wake." I am resolved to be more punctual in
rising for the time to come.
_Nov. 29th._--How painful does my experience prove the truth of the
Apostle, that "when I would do good evil is present with me." I
have thought sometimes it would be impossible to forget God, or to
be lukewarm in His cause; but alas I am prone to evil continually.
_December 14th._--The Lord has greatly delivered my soul from the
burden of guilt and fear with which I have been so painfully bowed
down for several days past; and, blessed be the name of the Lord,
He begins to revive His work on the circuit. Five more have been
added to the Church this week. Glory to God for His mercy and love!
_Dec. 30th._--A part of the day I spent in the Legislature. The
first three months of last year I was in bad health, confined to my
bed part of the time. The last nine months I have spent in trying
to seek the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
_York, January 1st, 1826._--How faithful is the Saviour to that
promise, "Lo, I am with thee, even to the end of the world." Though
weak in body I have had to preach three times a day, and travel
many miles. Jesus has been very precious to my soul.
_February 3rd._--I have travelled to-day in an Irish settlement,
and preached twice to them. My life is a scene of toil and pain, I
am far from well, and far from parents and relatives. While others
enjoy all the advantages of domestic life, I am doomed to deny
myself. Oh, my soul, behold the example the Saviour has set. "He
had not where to lay his head." Is the servant above his Lord?
_Feb. 11th._--For several days I have been visiting my friends. I
think they are improving in religious knowledge. What an
unspeakable blessing to see them showing a desire to walk in the
narrow way that leads to life eternal.
_Feb. 18th._--I have just returned to my Circuit. This is the first
time I ever dropped appointments for the gratification of seeing my
friends. It has taught me the lesson, that labouring in the
vineyard of the Lord is more blessed than any personal
gratification.
_Feb. 28th._--This month presents the most mournful portrait I have
ever beheld in retrospect of my past time since I began to travel.
Since I visited my friends everything has gone against me. The
season of recreation was not improved as it ought to have been; I
lost the unction of the Holy One, and returned to my Circuit
depressed in mind. Shall I sink down in despair? No, I will return
unto the Lord. He has smitten, He will heal. I will go to the
fountain open for sin and uncleanness. I will renew my covenant,
and offer my poor all to him once more.
_March 23rd._--This day closes my twenty-third year and the first
of my ministry. How mysterious was the providence which induced me
to enter the itinerant ministry. It was the Lord's doing, and it is
marvellous in my eyes. Since I have devoted myself to Him in a
perpetual covenant, how great has been His paternal care over me. I
have felt the rod of affliction, but, He has sanctified it. I have
been assailed by temptation, but He has delivered me. I have been
caressed and flattered, but the Lord, in great mercy, has saved me
from the dangerous rocks of vanity and pride. My soul has at times
been overspread with clouds and darkness, but the "Sun of
Righteousness has again risen" with brightness on his wings. I have
oft been cast down, but blessed be the Lord who has given me the
"oil of joy for mourning, and the garment of praise for the spirit
of heaviness." My mind at times has been filled with doubts and
fears, and I have been tempted to say, "I have cleansed my heart in
vain, and washed my hands in innocency," but the Lord has saved my
feet from slipping, and established my goings upon a firm
foundation. He has put a new song into my mouth, and enabled me to
say, "What time I am afraid I will trust in Thee."
_April 17th._--This day, for the first time, I have declared to the
aborigines of the country that "Jesus is precious to those who
believe." My heart rejoiced in God, who is claiming the heathen for
His inheritance.
_April 19th._--[On this day Dr. Ryerson wrote from Saltfleet to his
Mother. He said:--
As you, my dear Mother, were always anxious about my health, I write
to-day to assure you that since I left home it has been extremely good.
I think I am making some small progress in those attainments which are
only acquired by prayer, and holy devotedness to God. I find the work I
have undertaken is an all-important one. I have many things to learn,
and many things to unlearn. I have had some severe trials, and some
mortifying scenes. At other times I have been unspeakably blessed, and I
have been greatly encouraged at some favourable prospects. Several times
my views have been greatly enlarged, and my mind enlightened, while,
with a warm and full heart, I have been trying to address a large and
much affected congregation. It is not my endeavour to shine, or to
please, but to speak to the heart and the conscience. And with a view to
this, I have aimed at the root of injurious prejudices, and notions that
I have found prevalent in different places. I find, by experience, that
a firm reliance on the power and grace of Christ is everything. I hope
that you, my dear Mother, will pray for me that the Lord will give me
grace, power, and wisdom to do my whole duty.
I am very sorry to hear of your ill-health. I hope and pray that the
Father of all mercies will continue to support, comfort, and deliver
you, in the midst of your afflictions and sorrows. Blessed be the Lord,
dear Mother, the day is not far distant when you can rest your weary
spirit in the arms of Jesus; and should I survive you, while you are
pursuing the blessed, triumphant theme of redeeming love, in strains the
most exalted, I will endeavour in my feeble way to follow you to the
same blessed kingdom.
Brother William received a letter from John last week. His health is
very bad. His excessive labour has overcome him. He has forty
appointments in four weeks. He is now stationed in Kingston.--H.]
_April 25th._--For several days past I have been altogether engaged
in writing a controversial pamphlet, and have attended little to
the duty of self-examination.
_April 28th._--I have been much blessed in reading the Journal of
John Nelson. When I compare the unwearied labours, and severe
sufferings of that brave soldier of the Cross, with my little
efforts and sufferings, I blush for my lukewarmness, and am ashamed
of my fearfulness.
_May 10th._--[In these early days, the Methodist ministers had but
little time for study before commencing their ministerial labours, and,
as Dr. Ryerson often told me, they had to resort to many expedients to
secure the necessary time for reading and study. This had often to be
done on horseback. Dr. Ryerson's eldest brother, George, who had
attended Union College, N.Y., turned his advantages in this respect to a
good account. He sought to stimulate his younger brothers to devote
every spare moment to suitable preparation for their work. In reply to a
letter on this subject, from Rev. George Ryerson to his brother William,
he said:--
I thank you for your kind advice respecting composition, and shall
endeavour to follow it, although my necessary duties leave but very
little time for literary improvement. Since I saw you, I have been
principally engaged in Biblical studies which I find both
profitable and interesting. I am now engaged in reading the Bible
through in course with Dr. Adam Clarke's notes, also Paley's books.
I received a letter from brother John a few days since. He had
received a number into the Society, and there were a number more
who appeared to be seriously awakened. Elder Madden, who was at
York last week, says that Egerton is well, and that the cause of
religion is prospering in York, and on the Yonge Street Circuit. We
have had but very little increase in Niagara since I saw you,
although our congregation is very large and attentive.--H.]
_May 18th._--[In writing to-day to his brother George, Dr. Ryerson
mentioned that he and Elder Case had visited the Credit Indians. Elder
Case, he said, had come up to get Mrs. Wm. Kerr (_née_ Brant) to correct
the translation of one of the Gospels, and some hymns, in order to have
them printed. He also wished Peter Jones to go down and preach to the
Indians on the Bay of Quinte (Tyendinaga). It was there, he said, that
the work of religion had begun to spread among them. About twelve had
experienced religion, and others are under awakening. They do not, he
said, understand enough English to receive religious instruction in that
language; and, therefore, he wished Peter Jones to go down for two or
three weeks.
In this letter Dr. Ryerson said: I think the cause of religion is
prospering in different parts of the Circuit. Upwards of thirty have
been added to us in this town (York) since Conference, and our present
prospects are equally encouraging. My colleague is a man who is wholly
devoted to the work of saving souls. I hope that God will give us an
abundant harvest.
I am employing all my leisure time in the prosecution of my studies. I
also practice composition. I am reading Rollin's Ancient History, Greek,
and miscellaneous works. Are Father, and Mother, and all the family
well? How are their minds disposed towards God and heaven?
We have formed a Missionary Society in this place. I think we shall
collect $40 or $50. I hope that period is not remote when the whole
colony will be brought into a state of salvation!--H.]
_June 7th._--My mind has been much afflicted with care and anxiety,
for some days, on account of the controversy in which I am engaged.
I feel it to be the cause of God; and I am resolved to follow truth
and the Holy Scriptures in whatever channel they will lead me. Oh,
Lord, I commend my feeble efforts to thy blessings! Grant me wisdom
from above; and take the cause into thy own hands, for thy name's
sake!
_June 25th._--I have spent some days in visiting my friends, and
also attending a Camp-meeting. The weather has been very
unfavourable; but the showers that watered the earth are now past,
and showers of Divine blessing are descending. The song of praise
is ascending, and sinners are crying for mercy. Oh, Lord, carry on
the glorious work!
_July 7th._--The enemy gained victory over me to-day, by tempting
me to neglect Class for other employments. But I was defeated.
Company coming in, I was hindered from doing what I desired.
Conscience condemned, and darkness and distress followed. Oh, Lord,
henceforth help me _to do my duty_!
_July 9th.--Sabbath._--I was called this evening to a drunken,
dying man. He was entirely ignorant both of his bodily and
spiritual danger. What a scene! An immortal soul just plunging into
hell, and yet hoping for heaven! How awful is the state of one whom
God gives over to believe a lie! His life is ended, his family
destitute, and his soul lost!
_July 19th._--Surely nothing can afford more pleasure to an
enquiring mind bent on historical researches, than the perusal of
documents relating to the ancient chosen people of God. That a
people who could, according to their legitimate records, number
more than eight hundred thousand fighting men, should slip from the
records of men, hide themselves from human observation, and inhabit
limits beyond geographical research, is a phenomenon unprecedented
in the world's history; and that they should remain in this state
more than two thousand years, among the vast discoveries which
travellers have made, is still more surprising. Such is the
wonderful government of Him whose ways are past finding out. I
trust the day is not far distant when the lost will be found, and
the dead be alive!
_July 26th._--For several days I have been holding meetings and
conferences with the Indians. Their hearts are open to receive
instruction, and their hands extended to receive the bread of life.
If the Lord will open the way, I will try to acquire a knowledge of
their language. My soul longs to bring them to the Word of Truth.
_July 30th._--A day or two since I had the pleasure of seeing a
brother whose ecclesiastical duties have separated us for nearly a
year. How many tender recollections of God's care and merciful
dealings, since our last meeting rushed upon our minds. But while
enabled to rejoice together, we were called upon to mourn the loss
of one brother, taken away to the world of spirits.
_August 17th._--Scarcely a day passes without beholding new
openings to extend my ministerial labours. To-day, in an affecting
manner, I witnessed the hands of suffering humanity stretched forth
to receive the word of life. More than five hundred aborigines of
the country were assembled in one place. In a moral point of view,
they may be said to be "sitting in the valley of the shadow of
death." "The day star from on high" has not yet dawned upon them.
Alas! are they to perish for lack of knowledge? Can not the dry
bones live? Oh, thou who art able to raise up children unto
Abraham! speak the word, devise the means, and these long lost
prodigals shall return to their father's house! I noticed activity,
both in body and mind, superior skill in curious workmanship;
genius flashed in their countenances; and yet shall these noble
powers be bound fast in the cruel chains of ignorance, and these
immortal spirits go from a rayless night to midnight tomb? Oh, Thou
Light of the World, shine upon them! One of their nation whom God
has plucked as a brand from the burning, attempted to explain the
Christian religion to them. They listened and bowed assent, saying
"ha, ha." Oh, Lord, if Thou wilt qualify me and send me to dispense
to them the Bread of Life, I will throw myself upon Thy mercy, and
submit to Thy will.
_August 20th._--Amongst all the authors with whom I am acquainted,
who treat on Church Government, the Rev. Dr. Campbell is the most
clear and satisfactory. With a great deal of talent, penetration,
and research, he exhibits the Church in all her various forms, till
her power made empires tremble, and her riches bid defiance to
poverty. His excellent lectures have enlarged my mind on the
subject of ecclesiastical polity, and rendered my feelings more
liberal. I am convinced that form of government is best which most
secures order and union in society.
_August 20th--Sabbath._--To-day closes my ministerial labours at
York, where I have been stationed for two years. Many precious
seasons have I enjoyed; and, blessed be the Lord, He has set His
seal to my labours, and I think I can call God to witness that I
have not failed in my feeble way to declare the whole counsel of
God. Oh, Lord, seal it with Thy Spirit's power!
FOOTNOTES:
[6] A fuller reference to this subject will be found in Chapters vi. and
viii.--H.
[7] Letters to the Hon. W. H. Draper on "_The Clergy Reserve Question;
as a Matter of History, a Question of Law, and a Subject of
Legislation_." Toronto, 1839, pp. 11, 12.
CHAPTER IV.
1826-1827.
Missionary to the River Credit Indians.
At the Conference of 1826, I was appointed Missionary to the Indians at
the Credit, but was required to continue the second year as preacher,
two Sundays out of four, in the Town of York, of which my elder brother,
William, was superintendent, including in his charge several other
townships. He was aided by a colleague, who preached in the country, but
not in the town.
The Chippewa tribe of Indians had a tract of land on the Credit River,
on which the Government proposed to build a village of some twenty or
thirty cottages, with the intention of building a church for them and
inducing them to join the Church of England, upon the pretext that the
Methodist preachers were Yankees. As my Father had been a British
officer, and fought seven years during the American Rebellion for the
unity of the Empire, was the first High Sheriff in the London District
(having been appointed in 1808); and had, with his sons, fought in
defence of the country in the war of the United States with Great
Britain, in 1812-1815, and my father's elder brother having been the
organizer of the Militia and Courts of the London District, the name
Ryerson became a sort of synonym for loyalist throughout the official
circles of the province; and my appointment, therefore, as the first
stationed Missionary among the Indians, and from thence to other tribes,
was a veritable and standing proof that the imputation of disloyalty
against the Methodist Missionaries was groundless.
When I commenced my labours among these poor Credit Indians (about two
hundred in number) they had not entered into the cottages which the
Government had built for them on the high ground, but still lived in
their bark-covered wigwams on the flats beside the bank of the River
Credit. One of them, made larger than the others, was used for a place
of worship. In one of these bark-covered and brush-enclosed wigwams, I
ate and slept for some weeks; my bed consisting of a plank, a mat, and
a blanket, and a blanket also for my covering; yet I was never more
comfortable and happy:--God, the Lord, was the strength of my heart,
and--
"Jesus, all the day long, was my joy and my song."
[Illustration: Indian Village at the River Credit in 1827--Winter.]
Maintaining my dignity as a minister, I showed the Indians that I could
work and live as they worked and lived.
Having learned that it was intended by the advisers of the
Lieutenant-Governor, on the completion of the cottages, to erect an
Episcopal Church of England for the absorption of the Indian converts
from the Methodists into that Church, I resolved to be before them, and
called the Indians together on the Monday morning after the first
Sunday's worship with them, and using the head of a barrel for a desk,
commenced a subscription among them to build a house for the double
purpose of the worship of God and the teaching of their children. Never
did the Israelites, when assembled and called upon by King David, (as
recorded in the 29th chapter of the first book of Chronicles) to
subscribe for the erection of the Temple, respond with more cordiality
and liberality, in proportion to their means, than did these converted
children of the forest come forward and present their humble offerings
for the erection of a house in which to worship God, and teach their
children. The squaws came forward to subscribe from shillings to
dollars, the proceeds of what they might earn and sell in baskets, mats,
moccasins, &c., and the men subscribed with corresponding heartiness and
liberality of the salmon that they should catch--which were then
abundant in the river, and which, I think, sold for about twelve and a
half cents each.
On the same day, a plan of the house was prepared, and I engaged on my
own individual responsibility, a carpenter-mason, by the name of
Priestman (who had been employed by the Government to build the Indian
cottages), to build and finish the house for the double purpose of
worship and school, and then mounted my horse and visited my old friends
in York, on Yonge Street, Hamilton, and Niagara Circuits, and begged
money to pay for all, and at the end of six weeks the house was built
and paid for, while our "swell" friends of the Government and of the
Church of England were consulting and talking about the matter. It was
thus that the Church-standing of these Indian converts was maintained,
and they were enabled to walk in the Lord Jesus as they had found Him.
My labours this season were very varied and severe. I had to travel to
York (eighteen miles) on horseback, often through very bad roads, and
preach two Sundays out of four (my second year in town). After having
collected the means necessary to build the house of worship and
school-house, I showed the Indians how to enclose and make gates for
their gardens, having some knowledge and skill in mechanics.[8]
Between daylight and sunrise, I called out four of the Indians in
succession, and showed them how, and worked with them, to clear and
fence in, and plow and plant their first wheat and corn fields. In the
afternoon, I called out the school-boys to go with me, and cut and pile,
and burn the underbrush in and around the village. The little fellows
worked with great glee, as long as I worked with them, but soon began to
play when I left them.
In addition to my other work, I had to maintain a heavy controversy
with several clergymen of the Church of England on Apostolic Ordination
and Succession, and the equal civil rights and privileges of different
religious denominations.[9]
A few months after my appointment to the Credit Indian Mission, the
Government made the annual distribution of presents to the Georgian Bay
and Lake Simcoe Indians--all of whom were assembled at the Holland
Landing, on the banks of the Holland River, at the southwest extremity
of Lake Simcoe. They consisted chiefly of the Snake tribe, the
Yellowhead tribe (Yellowhead was the head Chief), and the John Aissance
tribe. Peter Jones and I, with John Sunday, had visited this tribe at
Newmarket, the year before, and preached to them and held meetings with
them, when they embraced the Christian religion, and remained true and
faithful. Peter Jones and myself attended the great annual meeting of
the Indians, and opened the Gospel Mission among them. In my first
address, which was interpreted by Peter Jones, I explained to the
assembled Indians the cause of their poverty, misery, and wretchedness,
as resulting from their having offended the Great Being who created
them, but who still loved them so much as to send His Son to save them,
and to give them new hearts, that they might forsake their bad ways, be
sober and industrious; not quarrel, but love one another, &c. I
contrasted the superiority of the religion we brought to them over that
of those who used images. This gave great offence to the French Roman
Catholic Indian traders, who said they would kill me, and beat Peter
Jones. On hearing this, Col. Givens, the Chief Indian Superintendent,
called them together and told them that the Missionary Ryerson's father
was a good man for the King, and had fought for him in two wars--in the
last of which his sons had fought with him--and that if they hurt one of
these sons, they would offend their great father the King; that Peter
Jones' father had surveyed Government lands on which many of the Indians
lived. This representative of the Government, a man of noble feelings
and generous impulses, threw over us the shield of Royal protection.
After the issuing of the goods to the Indians, Peter Jones remained with
the Huron and Georgian Bay Indians, and preached to them with great
power; while I went on board a schooner, with the Yellowhead Indians,
for the Narrows, on the northern shore of Lake Simcoe, near Orillia,
where the Indians owned Yellowhead (now Chief) Island, and which I
examined with a view of selecting a place for worship, and for
establishing a school. A Mission-school was established on this island.
It was afterwards removed by Rev. S. (now Dr.) Rose and others to the
mainland at Orillia, and was faithfully taught by the late William Law
(1827) and by the Rev. S. Rose (1831).
An amusing incident occurred during this little voyage on the schooner,
which was managed by the French traders who had threatened my life two
days before. The wind was light, and the sailors amused themselves with
music--one of them playing on a fife. He was attempting to play a tune
which he had not properly learned. I was walking the deck, and told him
to give me the fife, when I played the tune. The Frenchmen gathered
around my feet, and looked with astonishment and delight. From that hour
they were my warm friends, and offered to paddle me in their canoes
among the islands and along the shore wherever I wished to go.
By the advice of some of my brethren, I called on the
Lieutenant-Governor, Sir Peregrine Maitland, after I arrived in Toronto,
for the purpose of giving him a general account of the progress of the
Christian religion amongst the Indian tribes I said to him:--
"The object I have in view is the amelioration of the condition of
the Indians in this Province. The importance of this, both to the
happiness of the Indian tribes, and the honour of the government
under which they live, has been deeply felt by the parent state, so
forcibly that a church was built and the Protestant religion
introduced amongst the Six-Nations at the Grand River, about the
beginning of the century. This effort of Christian benevolence has
been so far successful as to induce some hundreds of them to
receive the ordinances of the Christian religion. But the Chippewa
tribes have hitherto been overlooked, till about four years ago,
when the Methodists introduced the Christian religion amongst them.
In a short time about one hundred embraced the religion of Christ,
exhibiting every mark of a sound conversion. Their number soon
increased, and a whole tribe of Mississaugas renounced their former
superstitions and vices, and became sober, quiet Christians. They
then felt anxious to become domesticated; their desire being
favourably regarded, a village was established at the Credit, and
houses built for them.
They have this season planted about forty acres of corn and
potatoes, which promise an abundant harvest. About forty children
attend the common school, nearly twenty can write intelligibly, and
read the Holy Scriptures and the English Reader.
At Belleville a change especially interesting has been effected.
The work was commenced there about two years ago, and now in their
whole tribe, numbering about two hundred, there is not one
drunkard! They are also becoming domesticated and are building a
village on one of their islands in the Bay of Quinte, which they
had squandered away in their drunken revels, but which is now
repurchased for them by some benevolent individuals. A Day and
Sunday School are established in which upwards of fifty children
are taught.
From the Belleville Indians the Gospel spread to the tribes which
inhabit the country adjacent to Rice Lake. Here also may be seen a
wonderful display of the "power of God unto Salvation to every one
that believeth." In less than a year, the whole of this body, whose
census is 300, renounced their idolatrous ceremonies and
destructive habits, for the principles, laws and blessings of that
kingdom which is righteousness, peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost.
They are all, save a few, converted and changed in their hearts and
lives, and earnestly desire a settled life.
The uniform language of all, so soon as they embrace the Christian
religion is, "Let us have houses, that we may live together in one
place, learn to till the ground, hear the word of the Great Spirit,
and have our children taught to read the good book." Another field
of Christian labour is already ripe amongst the Lake Simcoe
Indians, who number about 600 souls. About two months ago an
opportunity opened for introducing the Christian religion to them,
and such was their readiness to hear and believe the words of
salvation, that more than 100 have already professed the Christian
faith, and are entirely reformed. A school is established in which
forty are taught by a young man named William Law, lately from
England.
This extensive reformation, has been effected and continued, by
means, which, to all human appearance, are altogether inadequate to
the accomplishment of such a work. A school at the Grand River
containing thirty scholars, one at the Credit forty, another at
Belleville upwards of thirty, and one lately established at Lake
Simcoe containing forty, and the missionaries who have been
employed amongst the Indians, together with the boarding of a
number of Indian boys, have only amounted to a little more than
£150 per annum. It is of the last importance to perpetuate and
extend the impressions which have already been made on the minds of
these Indians. The schools and religious instruction must be
continued; and the Gospel must be sent to tribes still in a heathen
state. But in doing this our energies are weakened, and the
progress of Christian labour much impeded by serious difficulties
which it is in the power of the government to remove. These
obstacles are principally confined to the Lake Simcoe Indians, the
most serious of which is occasioned by the traders, who are Roman
Catholic Frenchmen, employed to accompany the Indians in their
hunting for the purpose of procuring their furs, and who are
violently opposed to the reformation of the Indians. These traders
are about eighty in number, and have long been accustomed to
defraud and abuse the Indians in the most inhuman manner; they have
even laid violent hands on some of the converted Indians, and tried
to pour whiskey down their throats; but, thank God, have failed,
the Indians successfully resisted them. To shake the faith of some,
and deter others from reforming, they have threatened to strip them
naked in the winter, when they were at a distance of 100 miles from
the white settlement, and there leave them to freeze to death.
Col. Givens, when he was up issuing their presents about a month
ago, threatened the traders severely if they disturbed the Indians
in their devotions, or did any violence to their teachers. He also
suggested the idea of your Excellency issuing a proclamation to
prevent any further abuses. Sir Peregrine replied:
"When the Legislature meets, I shall see if something can be done
to relieve them more effectively, but I do not think that I can do
anything by the way of proclamation. If, upon deliberation, I find
that I can do something for them, I shall certainly do it." I
observed: The civil authority would be an ample security, while the
Indians are among the white inhabitants; but these abuses are
practised when they are one or two hundred miles from the white
settlements. The traders follow them to their hunting grounds, get
them intoxicated, and then get their furs for one fourth of their
value, nay, sometimes take them by force. These Frenchmen are
able-bodied men, and have abused the Indians so much they are
afraid of them; and, therefore, have not courage, if they had
strength to defend themselves. Under these circumstances your
Excellency will perceive the Indians have no means of obtaining
justice, and from their remote situation the power of civil
authority is merely nominal in regard to them. His Excellency
observed, "I am very much obliged to you for this information; I
shall do all in my power for them."
FOOTNOTES:
[8] When about fourteen years of age, an abridged "Life of Benjamin
Franklin" fell into my hands, and I read it with great eagerness. I was
especially attracted by the account of his mechanical education and of
its uses to him in after years, during and after the American
Revolution, when he became Statesman, Ambassador, and Philosopher. My
father was then building a new house, and I prevailed on him to let me
work with the carpenter for six months. I did so, agreeing to pay the
old carpenter a York shilling a day for teaching me. During that time, I
learned to plane boards, shingle, and clapboard the house, make window
frames and log floors. The little knowledge and skill I then acquired,
was of great service when I was labouring among the Indians, as well as
my early training as a farmer. I became head carpenter, head farmer, as
well as missionary, among these interesting people, during the first
year of their civilized life.
[9] See note on p. 85; also Chapters vi. and viii.--H.
CHAPTER V.
1826-1827.
Diary of my Labours Among the Indians.
The following extracts from my diary contain a detailed account of my
mental and spiritual exercises and labours at this time, as well as many
interesting particulars respecting the Indians, not mentioned in the
foregoing chapter:--
_Credit, September 16th, 1826._--I have now arrived at my charge
among the Indians. I feel an inexpressible joy in taking up my
abode amongst them. I must now acquire a new language, to teach a
new people.
_Sept. 17th._--This day I commenced my labours amongst my Indian
brethren. My heart feels one with them, as they seemed to be
tenderly alive to their eternal interests. May I possess every
necessary gift to suffer labour, and teach the truth as it is in
Jesus.
_Sept. 23rd._--Greatly distressed to-night on account of a sad
circumstance. Three or four of the Indians have been intoxicated;
and one of them, in a fit of anguish, shot himself! This was caused
by a wicked white man, who persuaded them to drink cider in which
he mixed whiskey. [See letter below.]
_Sept. 24th.--Sabbath._--I tried to improve the mournful
circumstance that occurred yesterday, as the Indians seemed much
affected on account of the awful death of their brother.
_Sept. 25th._--We have resolved upon building a house, which is to
answer the double purpose of a school-house, and a place for divine
worship. In less than an hour these poor Indians subscribed one
hundred dollars, forty of which was paid at once. What a contrast,
a short time ago they would sell the last thing they had for
whiskey; now they economize to save something to build a Temple for
the true God!
_Sept. 26th._--To-day I buried two Indians, one the man who
committed suicide, the other a new-born babe.
_Oct. 8th._--For many days I have been employed in an unpleasant
controversy, for our civil and religious rights, which has taken
much of my time and attention.
_Oct. 9th._--One of my brethren has been suddenly called from his
labours, to his eternal home. Alas! my beloved Edward Hyland is no
more. He entered the field after me, but he has gone before me!
_Oct. 14th._--I have been employed the whole week in raising
subscriptions for the Indian Church; we have now enough subscribed.
_Oct. 19th._--[In a letter, to-day, to his brother George, who wished to
hear something about the Indian work, Dr. Ryerson said: I have to
attend to various things previous to settling myself permanently at the
Credit. I preached there to the Indians the two succeeding Sabbaths
after I left home, and have been employed since that time in building a
chapel for them at the Credit. The Indians in general, appear to be
steadfast in their religious profession. They are faithful in their
religious duties, and exemplary in their lives. One unhappy circumstance
occurred there. [See entry in Diary of 23rd September.] I preached a
solemn discourse on the subject of guarding against temptation and
intemperance the same day, illustrating it throughout by this lamentable
example. The Indians appeared to be much affected; and, I think, through
the mercy of God, it has, and will prove a salutary warning to them. The
Indians were very spirited in building their chapel. They made up more
than a hundred dollars towards it, and are willing to do more, if
necessary. By going in different parts of the country, I have got about
enough subscribed and paid to finish it. I have now permanently resided
at the Credit Mission not quite a fortnight. I board with John Jones;
have a bed-room, but no fire-place, except what is used by the family. I
can speak a little Mississauga, and understand it pretty well. As to my
enjoyments in religion, I have lately had the severest conflicts I ever
experienced; but at times the rich consolations of religion have flowed
sweetly to my heart and God has abundantly blessed me, especially in my
pulpit ministrations. It is the language of my heart to my blessed
Saviour, Thy will, not mine, be done. Our prospects in little York are
favourable. The chapel is enlarged, and the congregation greatly
increased, some having lately joined.--H.]
_Nov. 9th._--This evening in visiting a sick Indian man, I
endeavoured, through an interpreter, to explain to him the causes
of our afflictions, the sympathy of Jesus, and the use of them to
Christians. We afterwards had prayer, many flocked into the room.
The sick man was filled with peace in believing, insomuch that he
clapped his hands for joy.
[Illustration: John Jones' House at the Credit, where Dr. Ryerson
resided.]
_Nov. 26th.--Sabbath._--This has been an important day. We opened
our Indian Chapel by holding a love-feast, and celebrating the
Lord's supper. The Indians with much solemnity and feeling
expressed what God had done for them. Rev. Wm. Case addressed them.
In the evening he gave them most important instruction, as to
domestic economy and Christian duties. After this a short time was
spent in teaching them the Ten Commandments, the Indian speaker
repeating them audibly sentence by sentence, which was responded to
by the whole congregation. At the close, eight persons, seven
adults and one infant were baptized. Three years ago they were
without suitable clothes, home, morality, or God. Now they are
decently clothed, sheltered from the storm by comfortable
dwellings, and many of them rejoicing in the hope of a glorious
immortality.
_Nov. 29th._--Last evening, in addressing a few of the Indians, who
were collected on account of the death of one of them, (John
Muskrat) I felt a degree of light spring up in my mind. This Indian
was converted about a year ago, and has ever since maintained a
godly walk and holy conversation. Thus missionary labour has not
been in vain. This is the third that has left an encouraging
testimony behind of a glorious resurrection.
_Nov. 30th._--I have this day divided the Indian society into
classes, selected a leader for each, from the most pious and
intelligent. I meet these leaders once a week separately, to
instruct them in their duty.
_Dec. 7th._--I have been often quite unwell, owing to change of
living, being out at night; my fare, as to food _is very plain_,
but wholesome, and I generally lie on boards with one or two
blankets intervening.[10]
_Dec. 8th._--I am feeling encouraged in the prosecution of the
Indian language, and in the spirit of my mission. There is a
tenderness in the disposition of many of the Indians, especially of
the women, which endears them to the admirers of natural
excellence. One of them kindly presented me with a handsome basket,
which is designed to keep my books in. This afternoon I collected
about a dozen of the boys, to go with me to the woods, in order to
cut and carry wood for the chapel. Their exertions and activity
were astonishing.
_Dec. 16th._--I have this week been trying to procure for the
Indians the exclusive right of their salmon fishery, which I trust
will be granted by the Legislature.[11] I have attended one of
their Councils, when everything was conducted in the most orderly
manner. After all the business was adjusted, they wished to give me
an Indian name. The old Chief arose, and approached the table where
I was sitting, and in his own tongue addressed me in the following
manner: "Brother, as we are brothers, we will give you a name. My
departed brother was named Cheehock; thou shalt be called
Cheehock."[12] I returned him thanks in his own tongue, and so
became initiated among them.
_Dec. 22nd._--My brother John, writing from Grimsby, thus
acknowledges the kind advice of brother George: I thank you for
your kind advice, and I can assure you I have felt of late, more
than ever, the importance of preaching Christ, and Christ alone. It
is my aim and constant prayer to live in that way, so that I can
always adopt the language of the Apostle, Romans xiv. 7, 8. I wish
you to write as often as convenient. Any advice or instruction that
you may have at any time to give, will be thankfully received.
_January 4th, 1827._--After the absence of more than a week, I
again return to my Indians, who welcome me with the tenderest marks
of kindness. Watch-night on New Year's Eve was a season of great
rejoicing among them. About 12 o'clock, while their speaker was
addressing them, the glory of the Lord filled the house, and about
twenty fell to the floor. They all expressed a determination to
commence the New Year with fresh zeal. My soul was abundantly
blessed at the commencement of the year, while speaking at the
close of the Watchnight services in York.
My engagement in controversial writing savours too much of dry
historical criticism to be spiritual, and often causes leanness of
soul; but it seems to be necessary in the present state of matters
in this Colony, and it is the opinion of my most judicious friends,
that I should continue it till it comes to a successful
termination.
_Jan. 10th._--[Having received a letter of enquiry from his brother
George, Dr. Ryerson replied at this date, and said:--
I have been unwell for nearly two months with a continuance of violent
colds, occasioned by frequent changes from a cold house and a
thinly-clad bed at the Credit, to warm rooms in York. My indisposition
of body has generally induced a depression of spirits, which has often
unfitted me for a proper discharge of duties, or proficiency in study.
However, in the midst of bodily indisposition, the blessings of the Holy
Spirit have been at times abundantly poured into my soul, insomuch that
I could glory in tribulation, and rejoice that I am counted worthy to
labour and suffer among the most unprofitable and worthless of the
labourers in my Saviour's vineyard. The Indians are firm in their
Christian profession, and some of them are making considerable
improvement in the knowledge of doctrine and duties of religion, and of
things in general. They are affectionate and tractable.
I am very unpleasantly situated at the Credit, during the cold weather,
as there are nearly a dozen in the family, and only one fire-place. I
have lived at different houses among the Indians, and thereby learned
some of their wants, and the proper remedies for them. Having no place
for retirement, and living in the midst of bustle and noise, I have
forgotten a good deal of my Greek and Latin, and have made but little
progress in other things. My desire and aim is, to live solely for the
glory of God and the good of men.
By the advice of Mr. M. S. Bidwell and others, I am induced to continue
the Strachan controversy, till it is brought to a favourable
termination. I shall be heartily glad when it is concluded.--H.]
_Jan. 16th._--One of the Indians (Wm. Sunegoo) has been tempted to
drink. I visited him as soon as he returned to the village. I
entreated him to tell me the whole truth, which he did. After
showing him his sin and ingratitude to God and his friends, he wept
aloud, almost despairing of mercy. I pointed him to the Saviour of
penitent sinners. He fell on his knees, and we spent some time in
prayer. After evening service he confessed his sin publicly, asked
forgiveness of his brethren, and promised in the strength of God to
be more watchful. Thus have we restored our brother in the spirit
of meekness.
_Jan. 26th._--Last Sunday we held our quarterly meeting at York.
About thirty of the Indian brethren were present; their
cleanliness, modesty, and devout piety were the subject of general
admiration.
_Feb. 4th._--To-day I preached to the Indians. Peter Jacobs, an
intelligent youth of 18, interpreted, and afterwards spake with all
the simplicity and eloquence of nature.
A scene never to be forgotten was witnessed by me in visiting an
Indian woman this evening; after months of severe suffering, she
sweetly yielded up the ghost in the triumphs of faith. She embraced
the Christian religion about eight months ago, and was baptized by
Rev. T. Madden. Notwithstanding her many infirmities, she went to
the house of God as long as her emaciated frame, with the
assistance of friends, could be supported. A few days previous to
her decease, she gave (to use her own words) "her whole heart into
the hands of Jesus, and felt no more sorry now, but wanted to be
with Jesus." While addressing a number assembled in her room, who
were weeping around her bed, her happy spirit took its triumphant
flight to the arms of the Saviour she loved so much.
How would the hearts of a Wesley and Fletcher burst forth in
rapture, could they have seen their spiritual posterity gathering
the wandering tribes of the American forest into the fold of
Christ, and heard the wigwam of the dying Indian resound with the
praises of Jehovah!
_Feb. 10th._--A blessed quarterly meeting--Elder Case preached in
the morning, and my brother George in the evening. The singing was
delightful, and the white people present were extremely interested.
At the close a collection of $26.75 was taken up, principally from
the Indians! Peter Jacobs was one of the speakers.
_Feb. 16th._--The importance of fostering our school among the
Indians, and of encouraging the teacher in this discouraging and
very difficult task, cannot be overestimated. Rev. Wm. Case,
thinking that I had some aptitude for teaching, wrote me a day or
two ago, as follows:--
Do you think the multitude of care, and burden of the school does
sometimes mar the patience of the teacher? If so, you would do well
to kindly offer to assist him occasionally, when he is present, and
so by example, as well as by occasional kind remarks, help him to
correct any inadvertencies of taste. I know the burden of a teacher
in a large school, and a perpetual sameness in the same employment,
especially in this business, is a tiresome task. I consider this
school of vast importance, on several accounts, and especially
considering the hopes to be entertained of several interesting
youths there.
_Feb. 27th._--I have written from fifteen to sixteen hours to-day
in vindicating the cause of dissenters against the anathemas of
high churchmen.
_March 5th, 1827._--To-day I am on my way to see my parents. My
Father is becoming serious, and my younger brother Edwy has joined
the Methodist Society. I thank God for this blessed change.
_York, March 8th._--[As an interesting bit of personal history,
descriptive of Dr. Ryerson's manner of life among the Credit Indians, I
give the following extract from a letter written by Rev. William to Rev.
George Ryerson. William says:--
I visited Egerton's Mission at the Credit last week, and was highly
delighted to see the improvement they are making both in religious
knowledge and industry. I preached to them while there, and had a large
meeting and an interesting time. The next morning we visited their
schools. They have about forty pupils on the list, but there were only
thirty present. The rest were absent, making sugar. I am very certain I
never saw the same order and attention to study in any school before.
Their progress in spelling, reading, and writing is astonishing, but
especially in writing, which certainly exceeds anything I ever saw. They
are getting quite forward with their work. When I was there they were
fencing the lots in the village in a very neat, substantial manner. On
my arrival at the Mission I found Egerton, about half a mile from the
village, stripped to the shirt and pantaloons, clearing land with
between twelve and twenty of the little Indian boys, who were all
engaged in chopping and picking up the brush. It was an interesting
sight. Indeed he told me that he spent an hour or more every morning and
evening in this way, for the benefit of his own health, and the
improvement of the Indian children. He is almost worshipped by his
people, and I believe, under God, will be a great blessing to them.--H.]
_March 14th._--After several pleasant days absence I return again
to my Indian brethren. Have been much profited by reading the lives
of Cranmer, Latimer, Burnet, Watts, Doddridge, and especially that
of Philip Skelton, an Irish Prelate. The piety, knowledge, love,
zeal, and unbounded charity, are almost beyond credit; except on
the principle that he that is _spiritual_, can do all things.
_March 19th._--An Indian who has lately come to this place, and has
embraced the religion of Christ, came to Peter Jones, and asked
him, what he should do with his implements of witchcraft, whether
throw them in the fire, or river, as he did not want anything more
to do with them. What a proof of his sincerity! Nothing but
Christianity can make them renounce witchcraft, and many of them
are afraid of it long after their conversion.
_March 20th._--Busy to-day selecting suitable places for planting,
and employed the school boys in clearing some land for pasture.
_March 24th._--I am this day twenty-four years old. During the past
year my principal attention has been called to controversial
labours. If the Lord will, may this cup pass by in my future life.
_March 25th--Sabbath._--This day is the second anniversary of my
ministerial labours. My soul has been refreshed, my tongue
loosened, and my heart warmed.
_April 1st, 1827--Sabbath._--In speaking to my Indian brethren, the
word seemed deeply to affect their hearts.
_April 2nd._--In meeting Class this evening, I spoke for the first
time in Indian. My mind was much affected. The Indians broke forth
in exclamations of joy to hear a white man talk about God and
religion in their own tongue.
_April 6th._--My dear brother William and Dr. T. D. Morrison have
spent a night here, and greatly refreshed me by their converse.
_April 9th._--Another lesson of mortality in the death of Brother
John Jones' only child. I have been trying to comfort the parents,
who seem to bear their trial with Christian fortitude.
_York, April 15th._--[In a letter to his brother George at this date,
Dr. Ryerson thus speaks of the work under his care:--
We are all well, and are blessed in our labours at this place, and at
the Credit. I think the Indians are growing in knowledge and in grace.
They are getting on pretty well with their spring work. But in some
respects they are Indians, though they have become Christians.
I came from Long Point with a full determination to live wholly for God
and His Church. Through the blessing of God I have received greater
manifestations of grace than I had felt before during the year. I have
lately read "_Law's Serious Call to a Devout and Holy Life_," which has
been very beneficial to me. My greatest grief of late is, that my love
to God and His people is not more humble, more fervent, and more
importunate. O could I feel as Jesus felt when he said, "My meat and
drink is to do the will of him that sent me." How much more happy and
useful I would be! I pray that I may.
John and Peter Jones seem to thirst after holiness, and are growing in
grace. The Society in this place (York) appears to be increasing in
grace and in number. I was abundantly assisted by heavenly aid to-day,
while preaching. The congregation seemed to be deeply affected this
evening. I hope the word has not gone forth in vain. The Sunday-schools
are prospering in this place. I proposed the new method of increasing
the Sunday-schools, by giving a reward ticket to every scholar who would
procure another that had not attended any other school. In two Sabbaths
between twenty and thirty new scholars were procured in one school.--H.]
_April 16th._--The last part of last week I was powerfully assailed
by the devil, and became greatly dejected. Alas! I fear I was more
disturbed on account of my own reputation than for the cause of
Jesus. While preaching on Sabbath evening, heavenly light broke in
on my soul, and all was peace.
I am now among the dear objects of my care. My heart leaped for joy
as I came in sight of the village, and received such a hearty
welcome. Much refreshed with meeting them in Class, and
particularly in private conversation with Peter Jones, about the
dispensations of God towards us in the increase of our graces and
gifts. We had about thirty boys out at work this evening clearing
land. They are very apt in learning to work.
_April 18th._--I was impressed to-day with the fact that the
untutored Indian can display all the noble feelings of gratitude,
love, and benevolence. An Indian, who has lately come to this place
and embraced the Christian religion, has ever since shown great
attachment to me. He has, without my knowledge, watered, fed, and
taken care of my horse, saying he lived closer to the stable than I
did. Yesterday I got out of hay, and could not get any till this
afternoon. When I came to the stable I found grass in the manger;
the Indian was there, and had just fed him. I said I was very glad,
for he must be very hungry, but the Indian replied, "No, he not
very hungry. I took him down where grass grow, and let him eat
plenty." Oh, God, thought I, do such principles dwell in the people
whom the white man despises? Is not this as noble and pure as it is
simple? Though the circumstance is small in itself, it involves a
moral principle to which many mighty men are strangers. He gave the
widow's mite. Enfeebled by sickness, he exposed himself; touched by
compassion, he relieved the sufferer. A few weeks ago, a heathen
from the forest, he now performs an act that might make many
Christians blush. How many professing Christians consider it a
condescension to attend upon the servant of Christ and his beast,
but this wild man of the woods esteems it a privilege to wash His
disciple's feet. "Many that are first shall be last, and the last
shall be first."
_April 25th._--Last Sunday, four Indians came from Lake Simcoe,
over fifty miles, to hear the words of eternal life, while many
professors will scarcely go a mile. Does not this fulfil prophecy,
"Many shall come from the east, and the west, and sit down in the
kingdom of God, while the children of the kingdom are thrust out?"
Last summer they heard Peter Jones, at Lake Simcoe, tell the story
of the Saviour's love. They then determined to renounce ardent
spirits, and pray to the Great Spirit. With this little
preparation, they had been enabled to totter along in the path of
morality from that time till now. The old man (Wm. Snake) seems
under deep convictions, weeps much, and expresses much sorrow for
his former bad doings. They have gone back, determined to get as
many of their tribe as possible to return by the first of June.
Surely this is "hungering and thirsting after righteousness."
_April 29th--Sabbath._--In our Class-meetings, one of the Indian
Leaders expressed himself thus:--"I am happy to-day. It is not with
my life alone I love Jesus, but I love Him right here (pressing his
hand upon his heart.) If I did not serve Him, what would I tell Him
when He came? Would I tell Him a lie? No, my brothers, I will tell
Him no story. I will serve Him with my whole heart. When I hear any
of my brothers or my sisters praying in the daytime alone,[13] it
makes my heart feel so glad. The tears run out of my two eyes, I
feel so happy. I love Jesus more and more. Pray for me, that I may
hold on to the end; and when Jesus comes, I may go with Him and all
of you up to heaven." Another one said, "Three of us have been two
or three days in the bush, but we prayed, three poor souls of us,
three times a day, and Jesus did make our souls so happy."
_April 30th._--According to announcement, we assembled in the
Chapel to examine into the cases of several who had acted
disorderly. We were compelled to expel two from the Society. Many
were deeply affected, and groans, and sighs might be heard in the
different parts of the house. After a long and wise address from
the old Chief, Joseph Sawyer, I said, "We must turn them out of the
Society. What do you think about sending them away from the
village? Tell us." Several spoke, and it was at last decided, by
holding up the right hand, that they must go. I then said, "I am
sorry to hear one or two have been drinking." I asked one if this
was true. He confessed that he drank some beer, being coaxed by a
white man. He felt very sorry, as he wished to be a good Christian.
I then reproved with considerable severity, and showed him it was
as bad to get drunk on cider or beer as whiskey. The devil often
cheats us in this way, but we are exhorted not to "touch, taste, or
handle" the accursed thing. This talk was explained to them in
Indian by Peter Jones, and their opinions requested. Several spoke,
but Brother William Herkimer, with a pathos that affected us all,
said, "Brothers, the white man can't pour it down your throat, if
you will not drink. When white man ask me to drink, I tell him, 'I
am a Christian, I love Jesus,' and they go right away and look
ashamed." He then concluded with a most pathetic prayer: "Oh,
Jesus, let us poor, weak creatures be faithful, and serve Thee as
long as we live." Having adjusted these matters, I next observed,
"Our God has given us another commandment which was, 'To keep holy
the Sabbath day.' Now, brothers, if a man gave you six dollars, and
kept only one for himself, would you not think it very bad to rob
him of that one? Oh, yes, you will say. Well the Lord has done more
for us. He has given us our lives, our clothes, our health, nay,
everything we have, and six days too, to do all our work in; but He
has kept out one day for Himself. Let us not rob God of this day,
but let us keep it holy. I am sorry to hear that one of you went to
York on Sunday." I turned to the guilty Indian, and told him I
wanted him to tell us why he had done so. He stated he had got out
of provisions, and he was afraid the wind would rise on Monday, and
unthinkingly he started on Sunday afternoon. He promised to do so
no more. I then spoke a few words from Gal. vi. 1, and Peter Jones
closed with an affecting exhortation and prayer.
_May 2nd._--Yesterday I was almost in despair, and I was really
devising means to relinquish my present work; when in the height of
agitation I took down a package of tracts, and providentially
(surely not by chance) cast my eyes upon one entitled,
"Disobedience Punished, Repented of, and Pardoned." This was no
other than the history of Jonah; and was made the means of reviving
my expiring faith, and showing me how God alone could give me
victory over myself. I cried to Him like Jonah, and He delivered me
out of my distress.
[Illustration: School and Council House. Church. Peter Jones'
Study.
OLD CREDIT MISSION. (_From a sketch by Mrs. E. Carey._)]
_May 3rd._--To-day I have felt peace with God and good will towards
men. Several Indian women have arrived from Scugog Lake. They
report that the Indians there have all stood firm, daily meeting
for prayer to the Great Spirit, and that there has only been one
case of intoxication since Peter Jones was there last autumn. This
unhappy circumstance was caused by one (Carr) an old Methodist
back-slider (a fit emissary of the devil), who took his barrel of
whiskey, in order to trade with the Indians. He tried in vain to
persuade them to taste, till at length he made some of the whiskey
into bitters, which he called medicine, and prevailed on one unwary
man to take for his health. This he repeated several times, till at
length the poor fellow got to relish it, and becoming overpowered
he fell into the water! The Indians immediately assembled for
prayer, and through the mercy of God, he is now restored to his
former steadfastness. They then ordered Carr to take his whiskey
away, or they would destroy it. He took it on the ice, on the lake,
no doubt hoping that it would tempt some of them to drink. But in
this the devil was disappointed, the ice thawed, and the barrel
floated on the water. What an instance of human depravity, does
this man's conduct exhibit, and what a picture of the power of
Divine grace is seen in the inflexible firmness of the Indians!
May we not sing in the language of Paradise Regained--
"The tempter foiled
In all his wiles, defeated, and repuls'd,
And Eden raised in the waste wilderness."
The Indian woman who related the above, gave another proof of the
amiable and benevolent character of her race, especially when
sanctified by grace. In token of their esteem for Peter Jones, who
had been the means of opening their eyes to immortality and eternal
life, they brought him several pounds of maple sugar, which one of
them presented in a wooden bowl. No doubt this sugar, which they
had carried sixty miles, was nearly their all. Is not this a
feeling of gratitude and love to the disciple for the master's
sake? Oh! that I may learn lessons of simplicity and contentment
from these children of the forest, for they are taught of God only.
Oh! that I may have Mary's lot in time and in eternity.
_May 6th--Sunday._--A number of white people being present this
morning I addressed them on the subject of the barren fig-tree. In
the evening we had a precious time; the Indians were enraptured,
and we all, as it were, with one heart, dedicated ourselves afresh
to God. In the class meeting we all wept tears of joy and holy
triumph. Several of them said, "Jesus is the best master I ever
served." "I love Jesus better than anything else."
_May 8th._--I witnessed an affecting instance of how pleasant a
thing it is for brethren to dwell together in unity, in the
departure of two Indians who had paid us a few days' visit from
Belleville. Nearly the whole village, according to Apostolic
custom, collected to bid them farewell in John Crane's house, when
an Indian arose (in the absence of the chief) inviting any of the
Belleville Indians who might like to come and settle amongst them.
Others rose and spoke on Christian love, pointing them forward to
that period when they should meet to part no more. How does the
spirit of primitive Christianity lead to the adoption of the same
customs which were practised by the first followers of our Lord,
when the multitudes of them that believed were of one heart and
soul. We then sang a few verses and all knelt down, commending our
dear brothers to the care of Him who never leaves nor forsakes his
children. After this one of the Indians from Belleville delivered a
pathetic parting address; they then all shook hands, exhorting one
another to cleave to Jesus. This Indian appeared to me to be one of
the most heavenly minded men I ever saw, not an able speaker but
with a peculiar nervousness in his words, spoken with energy and
pathos that deeply affected us all.
_May 13th--Sunday._--I spent the last week in assisting the Indians
in their agricultural pursuits. They are teachable, willing, and
apt to learn. This constant change of employment debars me from
literary and theological improvement, and leaves me less qualified
to expound Scripture to refined assemblies. Thus I am perplexed to
know what is best for me to do. The Lord direct me in this
momentous matter!
_May 14th._--The temporal and spiritual interests of the Indians
bring upon me much care, and weigh me down. I experienced some
comfort in the class meeting. Spoke in Indian, and for the first
time repeated the Lord's prayer in Chippewa. Many of my dear
brethren praised the Lord.
_June 9th--Sabbath._--This day we held quarterly meeting at
York--about twenty Indians present. I am informed that some of the
Indians on Lake Simcoe are hungering for the bread of life, and
that twelve of them were at worship at Newmarket, and expressed a
desire to become Christians. Sixteen Indian children attend a
Sabbath-school established there whose parents encamp near, for
that purpose. Several of these children learnt the alphabet in four
hours. This awakening arose through four of the Rice Lake Indians
influenced by the divine love, traversing in their canoe the back
lakes to tell their benighted brethren about Jesus, and exhorting
them to become Christians.
_June 7th._--The first quarterly conference ever held amongst
Indians in British America was held to-day. After deliberating on
several subjects, that of sending some of their pious and
experienced men on a missionary tour to Lake Simcoe, and the Thames
was proposed for consideration. Four of them soon volunteered their
services. Their hearts seemed fired at the thought of carrying the
news of salvation to their benighted brethren. At their own
suggestion $12 was soon taken up to help pay expenses.
_June 10th._-About fifty converted Indians from Rice Lake, Scugog
Lake, Mud Lake, and the Credit, assembled in York to-day for the
purpose of worshipping God. The Rice Lake Indians have come to see
the Governor about building them a village, and deduct the money
due them from the lands their fathers have ceded to the British
Government, and likewise for getting boundaries of their
hunting-grounds established. The other Indians have come for the
purpose of attending the approaching camp-meeting, as they have
never had but three days' instruction from Peter Jones last autumn.
As soon as any of them experience the love of Jesus in their own
souls, they begin to feel for others, and, like the ancient
Christians, go wherever they can preaching the Lord Jesus. Here is
a whole tribe converted to God, with the external aid of only three
days' instruction, except what they communicate to one another, and
who for six months have proved the reality of their Christian
experience by blameless and holy lives. Surely "this is the Lord's
doing, and marvellous in our eyes."
Elder Case told me that on his way from Cobourg to York, he saw an
Indian sitting by the road-side, he asked him where his brothers
and sisters were, he replied, encamped in the woods. Elder Case
told him to call them, as he wanted to talk some good words to
them. They soon came together to hear the _me-ko-to-wik_, or black
coat man. They pitched a little Bethel of logs, about breast high,
over-topped with bushes, for the purpose of worshipping
_Keshamunedo_ (God.) After kneeling down to implore God's blessing,
they took their seats. As soon as Elder Case commenced to speak,
their hearts seemed to melt like wax. So much for the Scugog and
Mud Lake Indians. The Rice Lake Indians appear to be more
intelligent, and are the handsomest company of men I have seen.
Potash, their chief, is very majestic in appearance, possesses a
commanding voice, and speaks with great animation.
_June 12th._--My brother William, who came from Newmarket
yesterday, informs me that he preached to more than fifty of these
bewildered enquirers after truth on Sunday--none of them could
interpret, but some could understand English, and they told others
what the good man said. An Indian woman came to a little white boy,
holding out her book (as most of them have bought books) and said,
"boy, boy," showing great anxiety that the boy would teach her, but
the little fellow was afraid, and slipped off. Then a little Indian
boy about his age, held out his book that he might teach him, the
white boy complied, and by the time he had showed him three or four
letters, he was unable to contain his grateful feelings, clasped
the white boy round his neck, and began to hug and kiss him.
_June 15th._--A camp-meeting commenced this afternoon on Yonge
street, about twelve miles from York. A large number of white
people have assembled, and about seventy-five Indians. About a
dozen of these embraced Christianity about six months ago, the rest
are heathens from the forest. How interesting a sight that they
should travel forty miles to hear about the Great Spirit, and what
he would have them do. As soon as they arrived they commenced
building their tents. Our Saviour said to His disciples, "Go ye
into all the world, &c." but we here see heathens coming to the
disciples of Jesus and asking for the Gospel. The services were
commenced by Rev. James Richardson, followed by the Rev. Thaddeus
Osgood, who is a great lover of Sunday-schools, Peter Jones
interpreted, when they were directed to Jesus, who came to save the
Indian as well as the white man, they were melted to tears.
_June 16th._--Rev. D. Yeomans preached this morning, also the Rev.
Thaddeus Osgood, first to the children, then to the Indians, which
was interpreted by Peter Jones. A lame boy, fourteen years old,
seemed to have his whole soul broken under the hammer of the word.
The Ten Commandments were recited in their own tongue, and they
repeated them sentence by sentence. It was a very impressive
exercise, giving great solemnity to the sacred decalogue.
_June 17th, Sunday._--The first sermon this morning was delivered
by Rev. John Ryerson, on the sufferings of Christ, followed by Rev.
James Richardson. By this time the concourse of people was
immense--when the Rev. William Ryerson preached from Gen. vii. 1, a
most able and affecting discourse, interpreted by Peter Jones, who
afterwards addressed the white people, telling of the former
degradation of his people, their present happy condition, the
feeble instruments God had made use of to accomplish this glorious
work; he thanked the white people for their kindness, and earnestly
entreated them to pray on, that the good work might go on and
prosper--he concluded by saying, "My dear brethren, if you go
forward the work will prosper, till the missionary from the western
tribes, shall meet with the missionary from the east, and both will
shake hands together."
_June 18th._--About mid-day the Camp-meeting was brought to a
close, it was very solemn and refreshing, three hundred and
thirteen whites partook of the Communion, and about forty Indians.
Thirty-five Indians, men, women, and children were baptized; with
others it was deferred till further instructed.
_July 3rd._--Peter Jones has just returned from Lake Simcoe,
bringing a glorious account of the steadfastness and exceeding joy
of the Indians there. Thirty more are added to their number; a
school is established, taught by Bro. Wm. Law, in a temporary
building, put up by themselves. The traders are showing great
opposition, threatening to beat the Indians and burn their camps if
they will attend the meetings; their craft is in danger. They that
trust in the Lord need not fear.
_July 5th._--Rev. Wm. Ryerson, under this date, writes from Lake
Simcoe: If Yellowhead, the Head Chief, embraces religion, his
influence will counteract the opposition of the traders, which is
very strong. I think if Peter Jones can come and remain with them
awhile, as soon as possible, they will embrace Christianity.
_July 15th._--Peter Jones and I arrived at Lake Simcoe this
evening, for the purpose of being present during the distribution
of Indian goods. The change in their appearance since a year ago is
most striking. The traders are still very hostile.
_July 16th._--In the morning I gave the Indians a long talk. I
showed them the superiority of the Christian religion over that of
those who worshipped images. At this remark, the French traders
present looked very angry, muttering, but making no disturbance.
Peter Jones then spoke at length, answering and correcting
statements the traders had made. Colonel Givens soon arrived and
the meeting closed.
_July 17th._--Collected the Indians again, and preached from Matt.
xi. 28. Peter Jones expounded the Lord's Prayer. The Frenchmen were
much displeased at his remarks on the subject of forgiving sins.
They afterwards tried to force some of the Christians to drink, but
failed. The Lord have mercy on these wicked men, and open their
eyes before it is too late! When the presents were to be given out,
the men were seated by themselves, and also the women; the boys
and girls according to their ages. The chiefs then requested all
who were Christians, or wished to be, to sit together, and about
150 rose and did so. The difference in their countenances, as well
as their appearance and manners, was most marked. They looked
healthy, clean, and happy, whereas many of the others were almost
naked; some with bruised heads, and black faces, and almost burnt
up with liquor. When the distribution of presents ended, an Indian
Council was held at Phelps' Inn, at which I was invited to be
present. Chief Yellowhead spoke first, saying "The desire of his
heart was that their Great Father would grant them a place where
they might all settle down together. His people wished to throw
away their bad ways, and worship the Great Spirit." Many others
spoke, particularly requesting the Indian Agent to do what he could
to quiet the rage of the French traders. We have reason to thank
God for the kind friendly influence the Indian agents exert,
especially in closing the mouths of the traders. Oh, Lord, I will
praise Thee!
_July 20th._--I left the Holland Landing this morning for the
purpose of visiting the islands north-east of Lake Simcoe, to
ascertain their desirability for a settlement. I find the situation
very pleasant. The chief has a comfortable house containing four
rooms, with everything decent and convenient. This island contains
about four hundred acres of beautiful basswood, beech, and maple.
The chief told me that the Mohawks once had a village there,
probably a century ago; as there is a navigable creek running to
the mouth of the river, there was every attraction for a convenient
settlement. The chief also offers any one who will come and teach
the children, two rooms in his house for that purpose, and the
Indians will support him. Such is the field of philanthropic and
Christian labour in this place, and which demand most vigorous
cultivation.
_July 22nd._--I assembled the Indians this morning, and gave them
my parting advice; after which the Chief (Wahwahsinno) spoke with
great power. He is the most interesting, intelligent Indian I ever
saw. He warned them to beware of the evil spirit which was lurking
around them on every side; to be honest and cheat nobody; not to
get drunk, but buy food and clothing for their children. You know,
he said, how our fathers, grandfathers, and great-grandfathers have
been killed by liquor--now, don't do as they have done. We are
thankful to our Great Father, over the waters, for the clothes he
has given us, and to our good brother for the good things he has
taught us. We then embraced each other and bade farewell.
_July 23rd._--Arrived again at the Narrows, and found the Indians
firmly established in the faith. I have now spent eight days among
these long-neglected and injured people, and happy are my eyes that
have seen these glorious things.
[The missionary efforts of these times were in Upper Canada chiefly
directed toward the Indians. Of this abundant evidence is given in the
preceding pages. That these efforts were also put forth by the Church of
England, may be gathered from the fact that at a public meeting held in
York, on the 29th of October, 1830, a Society was formed, under the
presidency of the Bishop of Quebec, "for the converting and civilizing
of the Indians of Upper Canada." In his address, on that occasion, the
Bishop stated that the Rev. G. Archbold, with true missionary zeal, had
resided among the Indians on the north side of Lake Huron during the
greater part of the summer, and at his departure had left them in care
of Mr. James W. Cameron. Mr. Cameron was, in 1832 succeeded by Mr. (now
Archdeacon) McMurray at Sault Ste. Marie. Funds for the support of this
Indian Mission were collected in England, by the Bishop in 1831, and
also by Rev. A. N. (subsequently Bishop) Bethune. The scope of this
Society was soon enlarged to "Propagating the Gospel among Destitute
Settlers." The missionaries employed in 1831 were Rev. J. O'Brian (St.
Clair), Rev. Salteen Givens (Bay of Quinte), and Mr. James W. Cameron
(La Cloche, Saulte Ste. Marie, etc.)
That this interest was not confined to spiritual matters is evident from
many letters and other references to the domestic and material
improvement in the condition of the Indians, which I find in Dr.
Ryerson's papers. I select the following, which touch upon many
different matters relating to the temporal and spiritual interests of
the Indians:--
In a letter written by Rev. William Case, from Hallowell, to Dr.
Ryerson, he thus speaks of the success of a school established by the
Conference among the Indians. He says:
Last evening (10th March) was exhibited the improvement of the
Indian School, at Grape Island, one boy, whose time at school
amounted to but about six months, read well in the Testament.
Several new tunes were well sung and had a fine effect. The whole
performance was excellent. More than twenty names were given in to
furnish provisions for the children of the school. These
exhibitions have a good effect. It animates the children and the
teachers, and affords a most gratifying opportunity to the friends
of the Missions to witness that their benevolence is not in
vain.--H.]
[Shortly after this letter was written, Elder Case went to New York, to
solicit aid on behalf of the Indian Schools. He was accompanied by John
Sunday and one or two other Indians. Writing from there, on the 19th
April, to Dr. Ryerson, then at Cobourg, he says:
We have attended meetings frequently, and visited a great number of
schools and other institutions, both literary and religious. This
has a fine effect on our Indian brethren. The aid we are obtaining
will assist us for the improvement of our Indian Schools. We have
an especial view to the Indians of Rice Lake. Please look well to
the school there, and to the comfort of the teacher. The Indians
should be encouraged to cultivate their islands. The most that we
can do is to keep them at school, &c., and instruct them in their
worldly concerns.
The managers of the Missionary Society in New York, as well as in
Philadelphia, are very friendly. In case we shall be set off as a
Conference, they will continue to afford us assistance in the
Mission cause. You will judge something of the feeling of the
people here, when I inform you that a niece of the unfortunate Miss
McCrae, who was killed by the Indians in the revolutionary war, has
given us $10 towards the Indian schools, and two sets of very fine
diaper cloths for the communion table. We shall bring with us an
Indian book, containing the decalogue, the creed, hymns, and our
Lord's Sermon on the Mount. This will stimulate our schools, as
well as afford instruction to the Indian converts. I wish you to
encourage the Indian sisters to make a quantity of fancy trinkets,
we could sell them to advantage here. They should be well made. We
have been introduced to Mr. Francis Hall, of the New York
_Spectator_, and about forty ladies, who are engaged in preparing
bedding, clothing, &c., for our missions and schools. We gave them
a short address on the happy effects of the gospel on the mind and
condition of Indian female converts. John Sunday's address to them
in Indian was responded to with sobs through the room. Brother
Bangs addressed those present on behalf of the Indians exhorting
them to diligence and faithfulness. He said that we would always
find in the Christian females true encouragement and aid.--H.]
[Elder Case was anxious to re-open the school for Indian girls at Grape
Island. In writing from the Credit, he says:
"When we gave up the female school it was designed to revive it,
and we had in view to employ one of the Miss Rolphs. If she can be
obtained we shall be much gratified. We wish everything done that
can be done to bring forward the children in every necessary
improvement, especially at the most important stations, and the
Credit is one of the most important. Can you afford any assistance
to Peter Jacobs? We are very solicitous to see some talent in
composition among some of our most promising scholars.
We are authorised by the Dorcas Society, of New York, to draw for
$20 to purchase a cow for the use of the mission family at the
Credit, and you are at liberty to get one now, or defer it till the
Spring. As probably the $20 will purchase a cow, and pay for her
keeping through the winter.
Our way this far has been prosperous. I never saw the pulse of
Missionary ardour beat higher. Tickets of admission at the
anniversaries might be sold by hundreds for a dollar each. But they
were distributed gratis. The collection at the female anniversary
was $217, and a handful of gold rings (about 20). The
superintendent is truly missionary; rejoicing in the plan of our
aiding them in the conversion of the Indians on this side of the
lines. Bros. Doxtadors and Hess' visit is well received, and a good
work commenced at the Oneida."--H.]
[In a letter written to Dr. Ryerson, by the Rev. James Richardson, on
the 2nd Oct., 1829, referring to the privilege granted to the Indians of
taking salmon (as mentioned on p. 66), he said:
As I came home, I stopped at James Gages', and found that he was
much displeased with the Indians for holding their fish so high. He
says his son could obtain them for less than 1/3d. currency (25c.).
Some of them were not worth half that. He remarked that Wm. Kerr
and others expressed great dissatisfaction with the Indians for
taking advantage of the privilege granted to them, and also for
haughtiness in their manner of dealing with their old friends. I am
afraid that unless they be moderate and civil, a prejudice will be
excited against them, which may prove detrimental to the missionary
cause. The respectable part of the inhabitants would be pleased to
have the Indians supported in this privilege, if they could
purchase fish of them at a moderate price.--H.]
[Elder Case, who was greatly interested in the success of the Indian
Schools, and who--with a view to demonstrate the usefulness of the
schools--proposed to take two of the Credit Indian boys to the
Missionary Meetings in January, 1830, says:--
I should be glad to have something interesting at the York
Anniversary. Perhaps we may have a couple of promising boys from
this Station. Henry Steinheur will accompany me to Lake Simcoe, and
perhaps Allen Salt[14] will come up as far as York. They are both
fine boys, and excellent singers.]
[A providential opening having occurred for getting the Scriptures
translated into the Indian language, Rev. Wm. Ryerson, in a letter to
Dr. Ryerson, dated York, 24th February, 1830, says:--
I lately received a letter from the Rev. Mr. West, one of the
agents for the British and Foreign Bible Society, expressing the
anxiety he felt that the Scriptures should be translated into the
Chippewa language. He said that if proper application were made, he
would take great pleasure in laying it before the Committee of the
Parent Society, and use his influence to obtain any assistance that
might be wanted. Viewing this as a providential opening, I think
that steps should be taken to have the translation made. From your
residence among the Indians, and knowledge of their manners and
customs, and your acquaintance with those natives that are the best
advanced in religious knowledge and experience, do you not think
that the Joneses are the best qualified to translate the
Scriptures?--H.]
Note.--[The reply was in the affirmative, and Peter Jones was entrusted
by the U. C. Bible Society with the work.[15]--H.]
_April 7th_, 1829.--[Writing to Dr. Ryerson, from Philadelphia, at this
date, Elder Case says:
There is a fine feeling here in favour of the Canada Church and the
Mission cause. Peter Jones and J. Hess are in New York overlooking the
printing of the gospels, etc. We hope to bring back with us the Gospel
of Mark, with other portions contained in the Book of Common Prayer, the
Spelling-book and a Hymn book in Mohawk, and a Hymn-book in Chippewa.
They are all in the press, and will be ready by 5th May, when we leave
to return.--H.]
FOOTNOTES:
[10] My home was mostly at John Jones', brother of Peter Jones;
sometimes at Wm. Herkimer's, a noble Indian convert, with a noble little
wife.
[11] See page 78.
[12] _Cheehock_, "A bird on the wing," referring to my going about
constantly among them.
[13] They often retire to the woods for private prayer, and sometimes
their souls are so blessed, they praise God aloud, and can be heard at a
considerable distance.
[14] These Indian boys subsequently became noted for their piety and
missionary zeal on behalf of their red brethren.--H.
[15] An unexpected delay occurred in getting the translation made by
Rev. Peter Jones printed, as explained in a letter from Rev. George
Ryerson to Dr. Ryerson, dated Bristol, August 6th, 1831. He says:--
Peter Jones, after his return from London, experienced several weeks'
delay in getting his translation prepared for the press, in consequence
of a letter from the Committee on the Translations of the U. C. Bible
Society--Drs. Harris, Baldwin, and Wenham--stating that the translation
was imperfect. He had, in consequence, to go over the whole translation
with Mr. Greenfield, the Editor of the Bible Society Translations. Mr.
Greenfield is a very clever man, and has an extensive knowledge of
languages. He very soon acquired the idiom of the Chippewa language so
that he became better able to judge of the faithfulness of the
translation. Mr. Greenfield went cheerfully through every sentence with
Mr. Jones, and made some unimportant alterations, expressed himself much
pleased with the translation, and thinks it the most literal of any
published by the Bible Society. It is now passing through the press, and
will soon be sent to Canada.
CHAPTER VI.
1827-1828.
Labours and Trials--Civil Rights Controversy.
At the Conference of 1827 I was appointed to the Cobourg Circuit,
extending from Bowmanville village to the Trent, including Port Hope,
Cobourg, Haldimand, Colborne, Brighton, and the whole country south of
Rice Lake, with the townships of Seymour and Murray. On this extensive
and labourious Circuit I am not aware that I missed a single
appointment, notwithstanding my controversial engagements[16] and visits
to the Indians of Rice Lake and Mud Lake. I largely composed on
horseback sermons and replies to my ecclesiastical adversaries. My diary
of those days gives the following particulars:--
_Hope, Newcastle District, Sept. 23rd, 1827._--I have now commenced
my ministerial labours amongst strangers. Religion is at a low ebb
among the people; but there are some who still hold fast their
integrity, and are "asking the way to Zion with their faces
thitherwards." I have preached twice to-day and been greatly
assisted from above.
_Sept. 25th._--I have laboured with much heaviness to-day. I spent
part of the day in visiting the Rice Lake Indians. They seem very
healthy, and are happy in the Lord. We have selected a place for
building a school house. With gratitude and joy they offer to
assist in the building.
_Sept. 30th._--Another month gone! I review the past with mingled
feelings of gratitude and regret.
_October 2nd._--Yesterday and to-day I have laboured under severe
affliction of mind. I am as one tempest driven, without pilot,
chart, or compass.
_Oct. 4th._--This evening at the prayer-meeting, how delightful was
it to hear two children pour out their melting supplications at the
throne of grace. "Out of the mouths of babes and sucklings thou
hast perfected praise."
_Oct. 9th._--I began my labours last Sunday, weak and sick, but my
strength increased with my labour, and I was stronger in body and
happier in soul at night than in the morning.
_Oct. 10th._--I have now finished my first journey round the
circuit. My health has not been good. Two persons have joined the
society to-night, and several more in class expressed a
determination never to rest till they found peace with God through
Jesus Christ.
_Oct. 17th._--I have been employed in controversial writing, and
sorely tempted to desist from preaching.
_Oct. 20th._--I have been greatly interested and strengthened in
reading the "Life of Dr. Coke." The trials with which he was
assailed, and the spirit in which he encountered them, afforded
encouragement to me. His meeting with the venerable Asbury, in the
Church built in the vast forest, is one of the most affecting
scenes I ever read.
_Oct. 21st._--To-day we held our first quarterly meeting on the
circuit, and, bless the Lord, it was a reviving time.
_Oct. 27th._--[Archdeacon's Strachan's Ecclesiastical Chart had so
excited the righteous indignation of Elder Case, that he wrote to Dr.
Ryerson, at this date, from Cobourg, in regard to it. I insert his
letter, as it expresses (though in strong language) the general feeling
of those outside of the Church of England in regard to this Chart.[17]
He said:--
Notice the providence which has brought to light the mis-statements of
the Ecclesiastical Chart. This is one instance out of many in which
false representations have gone Home in regard to the character of the
people and the state of religion.
As such a spirit of intolerance is altogether averse to the mild spirit
of the gospel, so it is also a most dangerous and daring assumption of
power over the rights of conscience. Against this high-handed and
domineering spirit, God himself has ever set his face. Let the Doctor be
reminded of the case of Haman and the despised dissenting Jew, who
refused to bow down to the courtiers of the king. The Doctor's wrath is
kindled against those whom he calls "dissenters," and who refuse to
submit to his Church rule. We have said, "whom the Doctor calls
'dissenters.'" I aver that the term is not at all applicable to the
religious denominations in this country. From what Church have they
dissented? Indeed most of the first inhabitants of this country never
belonged to the Church of England at all. They were from the first
attached to the denominations. Some to the Presbyterian, some to the
Baptist, some to the Methodist, and only a small portion to the Church
of England. Nor had they any apprehensions, while supporting the rights
of the Crown, that an ecclesiastical establishment of ministers of whom
they have never heard, was to be imposed, upon them, as a reward for
their loyalty! Indeed, they had the faith of the Government pledged,
that they should enjoy the rights of conscience. And in view of this was
the charter of the Province formed, to secure liberty of conscience and
freedom of thought. The blow at a loyal portion of Her Majesty's
subjects was aimed at them in the dark, 4,000 miles away, and without an
opportunity of defending themselves. An act so ungenerous, and in a
manner so impious too, cannot be endured. We must defend ourselves
against the unjust slanders of the Doctor.--H.]
_Nov. 19th._--I have been blessed with more comfort this evening in
preaching from Matt. xxii. 11-13, to a congregation composed
principally of drunkards and swearers. My heart was warmed, my
tongue loosened, and my understanding enlarged.
_Nov. 20th._--I have been to the Rice Lake Mission: found them
still growing in grace. The children are clean--many of them
handsome. The school teacher is happy in his work.
_Dec. 12th._--My mind has been greatly afflicted this evening in
settling a difference between two brethren.
_Dec. 25th._--Last night we had a service in this place (Presque
Isle) to celebrate the incarnation of our blessed Saviour. Seven
souls professed to experience the pardoning love of Christ. Many
who came mourning went home rejoicing.
_January 1st, 1828._--I am now brought to the close of another
year, and the commencement of a new era of existence. The first
part of the year I spent principally amongst the Indians, and have
reason to believe the Lord blest my labours amongst those needy and
loving people, but my own soul was oft in heaviness. The latter
part of the year I have been on a Circuit, and have found my
enjoyments and improvement increased. The Societies are growing in
piety, my bodily wants have been all supplied, and I have
experienced the fulfilment of the promise, If ye forsake father and
mother, the Lord will take thee up. May I ever rest on it!
_Jan. 2nd._--[The following letter was written at this date to Dr.
Ryerson by his Mother. She says:--
My not writing to you, I understand from your letter to Father, has
given you much uneasiness; but I can assure you I have felt much
concerned about it myself, for fear that you should entertain the
thought of its proceeding from unkindness or neglect: but let the
feelings of affection of a Mother suffice and answer it all. Be
convinced that her happiness depends upon your welfare, and that her
daily prayers will ever be offered up to the throne of grace in yours
and the rest of her children's behalf. O that the Lord may keep you
humble and faithful, looking unto him for grace and strength to enable
you to work in His blessed cause, to proclaim the glad tidings of
salvation through a dear Redeemer to lost and perishing souls! This is a
great comfort to me, and more than I deserve. None other compensates for
all my trials and afflictions here, as that God, of His goodness, should
have inclined the hearts of many of my dear children to seek His face
and to testify to the ways of God being the ways of pleasantness and
peace. At so much goodness my soul doth bless and praise my God and
Redeemer. My dear boy, you must not forget to pray for your poor
unworthy Mother, that she may be daily renewed in the inner man, and so
kept by the grace of God, as to be able to endure unto the end, and at
last to be received among those that are made perfect, to praise Him
that hath redeemed us for ever and ever. Your kind and anxious enquiries
about home, I shall endeavour to answer. Your dear Father has returned,
and is as well as usual, but still suffers much at times. Your heavenly
Father has been pleased to lay His hand of affliction once more upon
your sister, Mrs. Mitchell, by taking away her youngest boy in November
last. Edwy, I am happy to say, appears to persevere in serving God,
which, with the blessing of God, may he continue to do. Your brother
George has left for England. He desires that all your letters be sent to
him in England, which contain anything interesting about the Indians, or
of the work of religion. The state of religion in this part, I think, is
rather on the rise, that is to say, they attend better to public
worship, and receive their preacher in a more friendly manner than
before. Write as often as you can to let us know how you are, and how
the work of religion is progressing.--H.]
_Jan. 3rd._--I have this day visited the Indians at Rice Lake: all
prosperity here. I have been much refreshed this evening in meeting
my beloved brother and fellow-labourer in the Gospel, Peter Jones.
These pleasing interviews bring to mind many refreshing seasons we
have enjoyed together, when seeking the lost sheep of the house of
Israel. This year thus far, has been attended with peculiar trials;
my health has not been good; I have had conflicts without, and
fears within.
_Jan. 30th._--Visited a poor woman to-day in the last stage of
consumption, she gives evidence that her peace is made with God. I
find it a heavy cross to visit the sick. Help me, Lord, to search
out the mourner, bind up broken hearts, and comfort the sorrowful.
_February 22nd_--[A Central Committee at York having, of behalf of the
various non-Episcopal denominations, deputed Rev. George Ryerson to
proceed to England to present petitions to the Imperial Parliament
against the claims of the Church of England in this Province,[18] the
Rev. William Ryerson was requested to write to his brother George on the
subject. In his letter he gave the following explanation of the sources
of information from which Archdeacon Strachan's Ecclesiastical Chart was
compiled. He said:--
It may be proper to apprise you that the Church of England has been
making an enquiry into the religious state of the Province, the result
of which they have sent home to the Imperial Parliament. And in order to
swell their numbers as much as possible, they have sent persons through
almost every part of the Province, who, when they come into a house,
enquire of the head of the family as to what Church he belongs. If he
says, to the Methodist, or any other body of dissenters, they next
enquire if their children belong to the same Church. If they say no,
they set the children as members of the Church of England! If they say
that neither themselves nor their children belong to any particular
Church, they set them all down as members of the Church of England! So
that should they make a parade of their numbers you can tell how they
got them.
The Report of the Society for the Promotion of Christian Knowledge, for
1821, gives the number of communicants in the Church of England here as
between 4,000 and 5,000. In the Chart, the Methodist communicants only
have been returned, which is about 9,000. The number of those who call
themselves Methodists, is, at least, four times that number, or 36,000.
This is the way in which almost all the other bodies estimate their
numbers, the Baptists excepted.
_Cobourg, Feb. 27th._--Dr. Ryerson's youngest brother, Edwy, who
remained at home, wrote from there on the 20th, in regard to his
Father's health and religious life. He says:--
I think there is no doubt but that he will, in a short time be able,
with the care and the mercy of Almighty God, to enjoy himself again at
the family altar. He says that, by the grace of God, the remainder of
his days shall be devoted to the service of God. He feels that he has
acceptance with God; that God condescends to receive him--blessed be
God! My dear Egerton, although we have had great difficulties and many
trials to contend with, yet the Lord has stood by us, and by His
goodness and mercy He has kept us from sinking under them, by pointing
out ways and means for our escape, and He has brought our aged Father to
the knowledge of Jesus Christ, our Lord. Oh, my dear brother, let us
praise the name of God forever, who hath dealt so bountifully with us.
Mother is much better than when you were here. Father and Mother send
their love to you. May the Lord give you good speed, and crown your
labours with success in the saving of souls.
_April 3rd._--With a view to throw an incidental light upon the personal
influence which prompted Dr. Ryerson to controvert certain statements
made by Archdeacon Strachan,[19] I quote a letter which Dr. Ryerson's
brother William wrote to him from York, on the 1st, as follows:--
I send you a pamphlet containing Dr. Strachan's defence before the
Legislative Council. If I had time I would write a reply, at least to a
part of it. I think you had better write a full answer to it. You will
perceive that the Doctor's defence consists in telling what he told
certain gentlemen in England and what they told him. The misstatements
and contradictions with which he has been charged, he has not noticed.
Such as that "the Church is rapidly increasing, and spreading over the
whole country, and that the tendency of the population is towards the
Church of England, and that the instructions of dissenters are rendering
people hostile to our institutions, civil and religious." He says: "It
is said I have offended the Methodists." Who told him so? I presume it
must have been his own conscience. If you write a full answer would it
not be better to do it in the form of letters, addressed to the doctor,
and signed by your real name? Write in a candid, mild, and kindly style,
and it will have a much more powerful effect upon the mind of the
public. Do not cramp yourself, but write fully, seriously, and
effectually.
Dr. Ryerson's reflections upon the peculiar difficulties of his
itinerant life at this time are recorded in his diary, under date of
April 13th, as follows:--
No situation of life is without its inconveniences; but, perhaps,
the Methodist itinerant Preacher is more exposed to privations than
most others. His home is everywhere, and amongst persons of every
description; and if he needs retirement or books, where can he find
a retreat to hide himself, or a secret place where he can, like
Jacob, wrestle till the dawn of day? He is a target to be shot at
by every one; his weaknesses and failings tried every way; and,
after his youth, his health, his life, his all are spent, he too
often dies an enfeebled and impoverished man. But, bless the Lord,
all does not end here. We have "a building of God, eternal in the
heavens;" and we have a home "where the wicked cease from
troubling, and the weary are at rest."
Dr. Ryerson resumes his diary on the 9th of May. He says:
My time has of late been much taken up with provincial affairs. I
have felt a hardness towards those who I think are injuring the
interests of the country, and with whom it has fallen to my lot to
be much engaged in controversy. Necessity seems at present to be
laid upon me, from which I cannot free myself.
_May 10th--Sunday._--To-day I delivered a discourse on Missions. I
had intended much, this being a favourite topic with me, but I made
out nothing, and I felt truly humbled.
_Aug. 1st._--For months past I have been greatly tried. My
controversial labours have occupied too much of my time and
attention. I thank God, the day of deliverance seems to be dawning.
The invisible hand of the infinitely wise Being is clearly at work,
and I have no doubt the result will be to His glory.
Dr. Ryerson then continues the narrative of his life. He says:--
A change in my domestic and public life now commenced, which involved
my marriage, and my appointment to the Hamilton and Ancaster Circuits.
In my diary I say:--
_Aug. 24th._--I soon expect to alter my situation in life. What an
important step! How much depends upon it in respect to my comfort,
my literary and religious improvement, and my usefulness in the
Church? I have kept up a correspondence with a lady since and
before I was an itinerant preacher; but postponed marriage since I
became a minister, thinking that I should be more useful as a
single man. My ministerial friends all advise me now to marry, as
every obstacle seems moved out of the way and I have now travelled
three years.
_Ancaster, Oct. 31st._--I have passed through a variety of scenes
since I last noted the dealings of the Lord with me. On the 10th of
September, 1828, I entered into the married state with Miss Hannah
Aikman, of Hamilton. Through the tender mercy of God, I have got a
companion who, I believe, will be truly a help-meet to me, in
spiritual as well as temporal things.[20]
The Hamilton and Ancaster Circuit reached from Stoney Creek, east of
Hamilton, to within five miles of Brantford, including the township of
Glandford; thence including the Jersey settlement, Dundas Street, and
Nelson, to ten miles north of Dundas Street, embracing Trafalgar, the
mountain beyond the town of Milton, Credit, and back to Stoney Creek.
The death of the Rev. Wm. Slater, my colleague and Superintendent, about
the middle of the year, was a great loss and affliction to me, as I had
to take his place. Brother Slater had been the colleague of my brother
John for two years, and he was now mine for the second year. He was a
true Englishman, a true friend, and a faithful and cheerful minister.
About the middle of this year (1828) were held the Ryan Conventions at
Copetown, in West Flamboro', and Picton, Prince Edward District, of
which I have given an account in "The Epochs of Canadian Methodism," pp.
247-269.
FOOTNOTES:
[16] The first of these controversial engagements extended from the
spring of 1826 until the spring of 1827; the second from the spring of
1828 until near midsummer of the same year.--H.
[17] The nature and purpose of this Chart are fully explained and
discussed by Dr. Ryerson in his "Epochs of Canadian Methodism," pp.
165-220.
[18] See "Epochs of Canadian Methodism," p. 222.
[19] "Letters from the Reverend Egerton Ryerson to the Honourable and
Reverend Dr. Strachan. Published originally in the _Upper Canada
Herald_, Kingston, U.C., 1828. Pp. 42--In his "advertisement" or
preface, Dr. Ryerson illustrates the pressing nature of his engagements
at the time when he was engaged in the controversy with Archdeacon
Strachan. He also referred to the unusual difficulties with which he had
to contend in writing these "Letters" to the Archdeacon. Of many
important and most forcible arguments against establishments, especially
those derived from the Holy Scriptures, the author has not availed
himself, nor has he referred to so many historical authorities as might
have been adduced, * * * as he has had to travel nearly two hundred
miles, and preach from twenty to thirty sermons a month." See note on p.
80 and also Chapter viii.--H.
[20] This union was of comparatively short duration. Mrs. Ryerson died
on the 31st of January, 1832, at the early age of 28. (See the latter
part of Chapter ix.)
CHAPTER VII.
1828-1829.
Ryanite Schism--M. E. Church of Canada Organized.
There is a break in Dr. Ryerson's "Story" at this point; no record of
any of the events of his life, from August, 1828, to September, 1829,
was found among the MSS. left by him. The Editor, therefore, avails
himself of the numerous letters preserved by the venerable author, from
which he is enabled to continue a narrative, at least in part, of the
principal events in his then active life.--H.
_Hamilton, 6th Nov._--Writing at this date, from Cobourg, to Dr.
Ryerson, on the expediency of petitioning the Legislature to give the
Methodist Ministry the right to perform the marriage ceremony amongst
their own people, Elder Case, says:--
Should not the petition include all "dissenters," and the prayer be for
authority to perform the marriage rite for members of our congregations?
I would rather not have any law in our favour, but that which gives the
privilege to the Calvinists. If the Church of England is not the
established religion of this province (and who believes it is?)
"dissenters" at least, have an equal right with the Church. If numbers
and priority are to determine the right, the "dissenters" have a
superior right, for they were first here, and they are more numerous. We
cannot but feel a pious indignation at the idea, that all should not
enjoy the same privilege, in regard to marriage; and can this be the
fact when one denomination, in any sense whatever, has a control over
the marriage ceremony of another denomination?
The Ryanite Schism, which commenced in 1824, is fully described by Dr.
Ryerson in his "Epochs of Canadian Methodism," pp. 247-269. In a letter
from his brother John, dated River Thames, January 28th, 1824, the
strife caused by this schism is thus referred to. Mr. Ryerson also
describes the state of the Societies in the London District during this
crisis. He said:--
I am happy to hear that Mr. Ryan's plans are defeated, and that the
measures you have adopted to frustrate his machinations against Elder
Case, have proved successful. I hope you will continue to assist and
support Elder Case, especially in this affair, and on many other
accounts he is deserving of much esteem; his disinterested exertions in
behalf of the Missionary interest in Canada, are deserving of the
highest praise.
The work is prospering in the different parts of this District. Niagara
and Ancaster Circuits are rising. There is a good work in Oxford, on the
Long Point Circuit, as also on the London and Westminster Circuits. The
Indian Mission, on the Grand River, is progressing finely. At the Salt
Springs, about thirty have been added to the Society, among whom are
some of the most respectable chiefs of the Mohawk and Tuscarora nations.
Visiting them, from wigwam to wigwam, they in general appear to be
thankful.--H.]
The Ryanite controversy turned chiefly on the refusal at first of the
American General Conference to separate the Canada work from its
jurisdiction. Rev. John Ryerson, in a letter from Pittsburg, Pa., dated
May, 1828, gave Dr. Ryerson the particulars of the reversal of that
decision. He says:--
A Committee of five persons has been appointed on the Canada Question.
Dr. Bangs is the chairman. The Committee reported last Thursday
pointedly against the separation; declaring it, in their opinion, to be
unconstitutional. Dr. Bangs brought the report before the Conference,
and made a long speech against the separation. William and myself
replied to him pointedly, and at length, and were supported by the Rev.
Drs. Fisk and Luckey. Dr. Bangs was supported by Rev. Messrs. Henings,
Lindsey, and others. The matter was debated with astonishing ability and
deep-felt interest on both sides, for two days, when the question being
put, there were 105 in favour of the separation, and 43 against--a
majority on our side of 62. Our kind friends were much delighted, and
highly gratified at our singular and remarkable triumph; and those who
opposed us, met us with a great deal of respect and affection. You will,
doubtless, be surprised on hearing of Dr. Bangs' opposing us as he has
done, but you are not more surprised and astonished than we were; and we
had no knowledge of his opposition to the separation until the morning
of the debate, when he got up and commenced his speech in Conference.
But, blessed be God for ever, amidst the painful and trying scenes
through which we have passed in the Conference business, the God of
David has stood by us, and has given us a decided victory.
_Nov. 22nd._--Elder Case, in a letter from Cobourg, gives a detailed
account of the efforts put forth by Rev. Henry Ryan to foment discord
among the societies. He says:
As in the west so in the east, Elder Ryan had induced several members to
attend as delegates at his convention in Hallowell. At Matilda, George
Brouse; at Kingston, Bro. Burchel and Henry Benson have been elected to
go. Mr. Case then urges that a circular be issued to the societies
setting forth "that the Conference, so far as they have had evidence,
has laboured in every instance to do justice to Mr. Ryan, and even to
afford him greater lenity, on account of former standing, than, perhaps
the discipline of the Church would justify."
In a subsequent letter, dated Prescott, 27th November, Elder Case thus
describes the proceedings of Mr. Ryan. He says:
On my way down, I spent a few hours at Kingston, one day at Brockville,
and one here. I have learned all the circumstances of Mr. Ryan's
proceedings. At one place he would declare in the most positive manner
that he would "head no division," that he "would even be the first to
oppose any such work," he "would esteem it the happiest day in his life
if, by their assistance, he could regain his standing in the Church,"
and that "the measures which he was now professing would prevent a
division." But when he thought he had gained the confidence of his
listeners, and they had entered fully into his views, he would throw off
his disguise, and openly declare, as he did at Matilda, "Now, we will
pull down the tyrannical spirit of the Conference. There will, there
must be a split," &c. Brother, there is one very material obstacle in
the way of effecting a "split," in our societies, and raising a "fog" of
any considerable duration, _i.e._, the authors of this work may, by
their strong and positive statements, make a people mad for a
"division." But, when there is a sense of religion in the mind, they
will become good natured--they can't be kept mad long. Our people in
these parts are becoming quite good natured, and now perceive their arch
friend has made a fool of them.
To show how deeply the Ryanite schism had affected the Societies, and
how widely the agitation had spread, we give a few extracts from a
letter written from London (U.C.), to Dr. Ryerson, by his brother John,
dated 2nd January. He says:--
The day I left you I rode to Oxford (52 miles), and after preaching, I
gave an explanation of Ryan's case, an hour and a half long. My dear
brother, this is a desperate struggle. I am using every possible
exertion to defeat Ryan. I go from house to house to see the friends I
don't see at the meetings. Could you not go to Burford and see Mr.
Matthews, as he has a great deal of influence in Burford and the
Governor's Road? Egerton, by all means, try and go, even if you have to
neglect appointments. Though I know it is hard for you, I am sure the
approbation of your conscience, and the approbation of the Church, will
afford you an ample reward. It will also be necessary for you to keep a
look out about Ancaster. Write to Rev. James Richardson, and tell him
to look out, and also write to Rev. S. Belton, and Rev. A. Green. Don't
fail to go to Burford and, if you can, to Long Point also, and hold
public meetings on the subject.[21]
_Nov. 26th._--At the Conference held this year (1828), at Switzer's
Chapel, Ernestown, Bishop Hedding presiding, resolutions were adopted
organizing the Canada Conference into an "independent Methodist
Episcopal Church in Canada." Subsequently, Rev. Wilbur Fisk, A.M.,
Principal of the Wilbraham Academy, U.S., was elected General
Superintendent, or Bishop, of the newly organized Church. Dr. Ryerson
was deputed to convey the announcement of this election to Mr. Fisk,
which he did on this day, as follows:--
The Canada Conference of the M.E. Church have taken the liberty of
nominating you for our General Superintendent, agreeably to the
resolutions of the General Conference. I take the liberty, and have the
pleasure of observing that the nomination was warm and unanimous; and I
hope and pray, that while our wants excite your compassion, our
measures, in this respect, will meet your cordial approbation and
receive your pious compliance. Although writing to a person whom I have
never seen, yet the pleasure and profit I have derived in perusing your
successful apologies in favour of the pure Gospel of Christ against the
invasions of modern libertinism, remind me that I am not writing to an
entire stranger; and your able and affectionate appeal to the late
General Conference in behalf of Canada--of which my brothers gave a most
interesting account--emboldens me to speak to you "as a man speaketh
with his friend." Rev. Dr. Fisk's reply to this letter is as follows:--
The deep solicitude I have felt, to weigh the subject well, to watch the
openings of divine providence, and decide in the best light, have
induced me to deliberate until this time [April]. All my deliberations
upon this subject have resulted in a confirmation of my earliest
impressions in relation to it--that it will not be prudent for me to
accept of the affectionate and flattering invitation of the Canada
Conference. I feel, however, the influence of contrary emotions. My high
sense of the honour you have done me, is enhanced by the consideration
that "the nomination was unanimous and warm." I highly appreciate, and
cordially reciprocate those warm and concurrent expressions of
confidence and affection. The information I have of the character of the
Conference, joined with my personal acquaintance with some of its
members, convinces me, that whoever superintends the Canada Church,
will have a charge that will cheer his heart, and hold up his hands in
his official labours. Equally encouraging and inviting, are the growing
prospects of your country and your Church, and especially of your
missionary stations. These to a man of missionary enterprise, who loves
to bear the banner of the cross, and push its victories more and more
upon the territories of darkness and sin, are motives of high and almost
irresistible influence. And they have so affected my mind, that although
my local attachments to the land of my fathers, and for that branch of
the Church where I was, and have been nurtured, are strong; although my
aged parents lean upon me to support their trembling steps, as they
descend to the tomb; although I might justly fear the influence of your
climate upon an infirm constitution; yet these considerations,
strengthened as they are by a consciousness of my own inability, and by
the almost unanimous dissuasives of my friends, would hardly of
themselves have induced me to decline your invitation, were it not that
I am connected with a literary institution that promises much advantage
to the Church and to the public, but which, as yet, will require close
and unremitting attention and care on my part for some time to come, to
give it that direction and permanency which will secure its
usefulness.[22]
_Nov. 28th, 1828._--Mr. H. C. Thompson, of Kingston, who had charge of
the re-printing in pamphlet form of Dr. Ryerson's recent letters on
Archdeacon Strachan's sermon, writes to him to say:--It lingers in the
press, merely for the want of workmen, who cannot be procured in this
place.[23] He adds:--The changes which have recently taken place in the
two provinces cannot fail to gratify every lover of his country, though
the party in power will no doubt hang their heads in sullen silence. I
am highly pleased with the Methodist Ministers' Address to the Governor,
and the reply thereto,--Strachanism must seek a more congenial climate.
_March 19th, 1829._--Dr. Ryerson had, at this time, met with an
accident, but his life was providentially spared. Elder Case, writing
from New York, at this date, speaking of it, says:
Thank the Lord that your life was preserved. The enemies of our Zion
would have triumphed in your death. May God preserve you to see the
opponents of religious liberty, and the abettors of faction frustrated
in all their selfish designs and hair-brained hopes!
I have seen a letter from the Rev. Richard Reece, dated London, 19th
January, to Mr. Francis Hall, of the New York _Commercial Advertiser_
and the _Spectator_, in which he says:
I am of opinion that the English Conference can do very little good in
Upper Canada. Had our preachers been continued they might have raised
the standard of primitive English Methodism, which would have had
extensive and beneficial influence upon the work in that province, but
having ceded by convention the whole of it to your Church, I hope we
shall not interfere to disturb the people. They must, as you say,
struggle for a while, and your bishops must visit them, and ordain their
ministers, till they can do without them. He speaks of being highly
gratified at the conversion of the Indians in Canada.
FOOTNOTES:
[21] Rev. Henry Ryan was born 1776 entered the ministry in 1800, and
died at his residence, in Gainsborough, on the 2nd September, 1833, aged
57 years.--H.
[22] The post-office endorsement on this letter was as follows:--Paid to
Lewistown, N.Y., 25c. postage; ferryage to Niagara, 2d.; from Niagara to
Hamilton, 4-1/2d.; total, 36 cents postage, for what in 1882 costs only
one-twelfth of that amount.--H.
[23] The title of this pamphlet (in possession of the Editor) is: Claims
of Churchmen and Dissenters of Upper Canada brought to the test in a
Controversy between several Members of the Church of England and a
Methodist Preacher. Kingston, 1828. pp. 232. (See note on page 80, and
also Chapter viii.)
Rev. Dr. Green, in his _Life and Times_, thus speaks of the effect of
the publication of these letters upon Rev. Franklin Metcalf and
himself:--The sermon was ably reviewed in the columns of the _Colonial
Advocate_, in a communication over the signature of "A Methodist
Preacher." Mr. Metcalf and I took the paper into a field, where we sat
down on the grass to read. As we read, we admired; and as we admired, we
rejoiced; then thanked God, and speculated as to its author, little
suspecting that it was a young man who had been received on trial at the
late Conference (1825). We read again, and then devoutly thanked God for
having put it into the heart of some one to defend the Church publicly
against such mischievous statements, and give the world the benefit of
the facts of the case. The "Reviewer" proved to be Mr. Egerton Ryerson,
then on the Yonge Street Circuit. This was the commencement of the war
for religious liberty, pp. 83, 84. (See also page 143 of Dr. Ryerson's
"Epochs of Canadian Methodism.")--H.
For specimens of Dr. Ryerson's controversial style in this his first
encounter, see the extracts which he has given from the pamphlet itself
on pages 146--149, etc., of "Epochs of Canadian Methodism."--H.
CHAPTER VIII.
1829-1832.
Establishment of the "Christian Guardian"--Church claims resisted.
Dr. Ryerson takes up the Story of his Life at the period of the
Conference of 1829. He says that;--
At this Conference it was determined to establish the _Christian
Guardian_ newspaper. The Conference elected me as Editor, with
instructions to go to New York to procure the types and apparatus
necessary for its establishment.[24] In this I was greatly assisted by
the late Rev. Dr. Bangs, and the Rev. Mr. Collard, of the New York
Methodist Book Concern.
The hardships and difficulties of establishing and conducting the
_Christian Guardian_ for the first year, without a clerk, in the midst
of our poverty, can hardly be realized and need not be detailed. The
first number was issued on the 22nd November, 1829. The list of
subscribers at the commencement was less than 500. Three years
afterwards (in 1832), when the first Editor was appointed as the
representative of the Canadian Conference to England, the subscription
list was reported as nearly 3,000.
The characteristics of the _Christian Guardian_ during these three
eventful years (it being then regarded as the leading newspaper of Upper
Canada) were defence of Methodist institutions and character, civil
rights, temperance principles, educational progress, and missionary
operations. It was during this period that the Methodist and other
denominations obtained the right to hold land for places of worship, and
for the burial of their dead, and the right of their ministers to
solemnize matrimony, as also their rights to equal civil and religious
liberty, against a dominant church establishment in Upper Canada, as I
have detailed in the "Epochs of Canadian Methodism," pp. 129-246.
The foregoing is the only reference to this period of his life which Dr.
Ryerson has left. I have, therefore, availed myself of his letters and
papers to continue the narrative.
_June--August, 1830._--With a view to correct the misstatements made in
regard to the Methodists in Canada, and to set forth their just rights,
Dr. Ryerson devoted a considerable space in the _Christian Guardian_ of
the 26th June; and 3rd, 10th, 24th, and 31st July, and 14th August,
1830, to a concise history of that body in this country, in which he
maintained its right to the privileges proposed to be granted to it
under the Religious Societies Relief Bill of that time.[25] He pointed
out, as he expressed it, that--
His Majesty's Royal assent would have been given to that bill had it not
unfortunately fallen in company with some ruthless vagrant (in the shape
of a secret communication from our enemies in Canada) who had slandered,
abused, and tomahawked it at the foot of the throne.
_Oct. 11th._--Being desirous of availing himself of his brother George's
educational advantages and ability in his editorial labours, Dr.
Ryerson, under this date, wrote to him in his new charge at the Grand
River. He said:--
I am glad to hear that you enjoy peace of mind, and feel an increasing
attachment to your charge. It is more than I do as Editor. I am scarcely
free from interruption long enough to settle my mind on any one thing,
and sometimes I am almost distracted. On questions of right, and
liberty, as well as on other subjects, I am resolved to pursue a most
decided course. Your retired situation will afford you a good
opportunity for writing useful articles on various subjects. I hope you
will write often and freely.
_Nov. 1st._--Another reason, which apparently prompted Dr. Ryerson to
appeal to his brother George for editorial help, was the fear that the
increasing efforts of the influential leaders of the Church of England
to secure a recognition of her claims to be an established church in
Upper Canada might be crowned with success. He, therefore, at this date
wrote to him again on the subject, and said.--
The posture of affairs in England appears, upon the whole, more
favourable to reform than in Upper Canada. We are resolved to double our
diligence; to have general petitions in favour of the abolition of every
kind of religious domination, circulated throughout the Province,
addressed to the Provincial and Imperial Parliaments, and take up the
whole question--decidedly, fully, and warmly. We must be up and doing
while it is called to-day. It is the right time. There is a new and Whig
Parliament in England, and I am sure our own House of Assembly dare not
deny the petitions of the people on this subject.
Nature of the Struggle for Religious Equality.
During this and many succeeding years the chief efforts of Dr. Ryerson
and those who acted with him were directed, as intimated before, against
the efforts put forth to establish a "dominant church" in Upper Canada.
A brief _resumé_ of the question will put the reader in possession of
the facts of the case:--
The late Bishop Strachan, in his speech delivered in the Legislative
Council, March 6th, 1828, devoted several pages of that speech (as
printed) to prove that "the Church of England is by law the Established
Church of this Province." This statement in some form he put forth in
every discussion on the subject.
The grounds upon which this claim was founded were also fully stated by
Rev. Wm Betteridge, B.D. (of Woodstock), who was sent to England to
represent the claims of the Church of England in this controversy. These
claims he put forward in his "Brief History of the Church in Upper
Canada," published in England in 1838. He rests those claims upon what
he considers to have been the intention of the Imperial Parliament in
passing the Clergy Reserve sections of the Act (31 Geo III., c. 31) in
1791, and also on the "King's Instructions" to the Lieutenant-Governor
of Upper Canada in 1818. He further contended that the "Extinction of
the Tithes Act," passed by the Upper Canada Legislature in 1823,
inferentially recognized the dominancy of the Church of England in
Canada as a Church of the Empire. Beyond this alleged inferential right
to be an Established Church in Upper Canada, none in reality existed. It
was, therefore, to prevent this inference,--which was insisted upon as
perfectly clear and irresistible,--from receiving Imperial or Provincial
recognition as an admitted or legal fact, that the persistent efforts of
Dr. Ryerson and others were unceasingly directed during all of those
years.
Few in the present day can realize the magnitude of the task thus
undertaken. Nor do we sufficiently estimate the significance of the
issues involved in that contest--a contest waged for the recognition of
equal denominational rights and the supremacy of religious liberty. All
of these questions are now happily settled "upon the best and surest
foundation." But it might have been far otherwise had not such men as
Dr. Ryerson stepped into the breach at a critical time in our early
history; and if the battle had not been fought and won before the
distasteful yoke of an "establishment" had been imposed upon this young
country, and burdensome vested interests been thereby created, which it
would have taken years of serious and protracted strife to extinguish.
As the fruits of that protracted struggle for religious equality have
been long quietly enjoyed in this province, there is a disposition in
many quarters to undervalue the importance of the contest itself, and
even to question the propriety of reviving the recollection of such
early conflicts. In so far as we may adopt such views we must
necessarily fail to do justice to the heroism and self-sacrifice of
those who, like Dr. Ryerson, encountered the prolonged and determined
opposition, as well as the contemptuous scorn of the dominant party
while battling for the rights which he and others ultimately secured for
us. Those amongst us who would seek to depreciate the importance of that
struggle for civil and religious freedom, must fail also to realize the
importance of the real issues of that contest.
To those who have given any attention to this subject, it is well known
that the maintenance of the views put forth by Dr. Ryerson in this
controversy involved personal odium and the certainty of social
ostracism. It also involved, what is often more fatal to a man's courage
and constancy, the sneer and the personal animosity, as well as
ridicule, of a powerful party whose right to supremacy is questioned,
and whose monopoly of what is common property is in danger of being
destroyed. Although Dr. Ryerson was a gentleman by birth, and the son of
a British officer and U. E. Loyalist, yet the fact that, as one of the
"despised sect" of Methodists, he dared to question the right of "the
Church" to superiority over the "Sectaries," subjected him to a system
of petty and bitter persecution which few men of less nerve and
fortitude could have borne. As it was, there were times when the tender
sensibilities of his noble nature were so deeply wounded by this
injustice, and the scorn and contumely of his opponents, that were it
not that his intrepid courage was of the finest type, and without the
alloy of rancour or bravado in it, it would have failed him. But he
never flinched. And when the odds seemed to be most against him, he
would, with humble dependence upon Divine help, put forth even greater
effort; and, with his courage thus reanimated, would unexpectedly turn
the flank of his enemy; or, by concentrating all his forces on the
vulnerable points of his adversary's case, completely neutralize the
force of his attack.
It must not be understood from this that Dr. Ryerson cherished any
personal animosity to the Church of England as a Divine and Spiritual
power in the land. Far from it. In his first "campaign" against the
Venerable Archdeacon of York (Dr. Strachan), he took care to point out
the difference between the principles maintained by the aggressors in
that contest and the principles of the Church itself. He said:--
Whatever remarks the Doctor's discourse may require me to make, I
wish it to be distinctly understood that I mean no reflection on
the doctrines, liturgy, or discipline of the Church of which he has
the honour to be a minister. Be assured I mean no such thing. I
firmly believe in her doctrines, I admire her liturgy, and I
heartily rejoice in the success of those principles which are
therein continued, and it is for the prosperity of the truths which
they unfold that I shall ever pray and contend. And, with respect
to Church government, I heartily adopt the sentiments of the pious
and the learned Bishop Burnet, that "that form of Church government
is the best which is most suitable to the customs and circumstances
of the people among whom it is established."[26]
Such was Dr. Ryerson's tribute to the Church of England in, 1826. His
disclaimer of personal hostility to that Church (near the close of the
protracted denominational contest in regard to the Clergy Reserves),
will be found in an interesting personal correspondence, in a subsequent
part of this book, with John Kent, Esq., Editor of _The Church_
newspaper in 1841-2.
With a view to enable Canadians of the present day more clearly to
understand the pressing nature of the difficulties with which Dr.
Ryerson had to contend, almost single-handed, fifty years ago, I shall
briefly enumerate the principal ones:--
1. The whole of the official community of those days, which had grown up
as a united and powerful class, were bound together by more than
official ties, and hence, as a "family compact," they were enabled to
act together as one man. This class, with few exceptions, were members
of the Church of England. They regarded her--apart from her inimitable
liturgy and scriptural standards of faith--with the respect and love
which her historical prestige and assured status naturally inspired
them. They maintained, without question, the traditional right of the
Church of England to supremacy everywhere in the Empire. They,
therefore, instinctively repelled all attempts to deprive that Church of
what they believed to be her inalienable right to dominancy in this
Province.
2. Those who had the courage, and who ventured to oppose the Church
claims put forth by the clerical and other leaders of the dominant
party of that time, were sure to be singled out for personal attack.
They were also made to feel the chilling effects of social
exclusiveness. The cry against them was that of ignorance, irreverence,
irreligion, republicanism, disloyalty, etc. These charges were repeated
in every form; and that, too, by a section both of the official and
religious press, a portion of which was edited with singular ability; a
press which prided itself on its intelligence, its unquestioned
churchmanship and exalted respect for sacred things, its firm devotion
to the principle of "Church and State"--the maintenance of which was
held to be the only safeguard for society, if not its invincible
bulwark. An illustration of the profession of this exclusive loyalty is
given by Dr. Ryerson in these pages. He mentions the fact that the plea
to the British Government put forth by the leaders of the dominant
party, as a reason why the Church of England in this Province should be
made supreme and be subsidized, was that she might then be enabled "to
preserve the principles of loyalty to England from being overwhelmed and
destroyed" by the "Yankee Methodists," as represented by the Ryersons
and their friends!
3. The two branches of the Legislature were divided on this subject. The
House of Assembly represented the popular side, as advocated by Dr.
Ryerson and other denominational leaders. The Legislative Council (of
which the Ven. Archdeacon Strachan was an influential member,)
maintained the clerical views so ably put forth by this reverend leader
on the other side.
4. Except by personal visits to England--where grievances could alone be
fully redressed in those days--little hope was entertained by the
non-Episcopal party that their side of the question would (if stated
through official channels), be fairly or fully represented. Even were
their case presented through these channels they were not sure but that
(as strikingly and quaintly put by Dr. Ryerson, on page 94).
In company with some ruthless vagrant--in the shape of a secret
communication from enemies in Canada--it would be slandered,
abused, and tomahawked at the foot of the throne.
As an illustration also of the spirit of the Chief Executive in Upper
Canada in dealing with the questions in dispute, I quote the following
extract from the reply of Sir John Colborne to an address from the
Methodist Conference in 1831.[27] He said:
Your dislike to any church establishment, or to the particular form
of Christianity which is denominated the Church, of England, may be
the natural consequence of the constant success of your own
efficacious and organized system. The small number of our
Church[28] is to be regretted, as well as that the organization of
its ministry is not adapted to supply the present wants of the
dispersed population in this new country; but you will readily
admit that the sober-minded of the province are disgusted with the
accounts of the disgraceful dissensions of the Episcopal Methodist
Church and its separatists, recriminating memorials, and the
warfare of one Church with another. The utility of an Establishment
depends entirely on the piety, assiduity, and devoted zeal of its
ministers, and on their abstaining from a secular interference
which may involve them in political disputes.
The labours of the clergy of established churches in defence of
moral and religious truth will always be remembered by you, who
have access to their writings, and benefit by them in common with
other Christian Societies. You will allow, I have no doubt, on
reflection that it would indeed be imprudent to admit the right of
societies to dictate, on account of their present numerical
strength, in what way the lands set apart as a provision for the
clergy shall be disposed of.
The system of [University] Education which has produced the best
and ablest men in the United Kingdom will not be abandoned here to
suit the limited views of the leaders of Societies who, perhaps,
have neither experience nor judgment to appreciate the value or
advantages of a liberal education....
Such was the spirit in which the Governor in those days replied to the
respectful address of a large and influential body of Christians. He
even went further in another part of his reply, and referred to "the
absurd advice offered by your missionaries to the Indians, and their
officious interference."[29] Such language from the lips of Her
Majesty's Representative, if at all possible in these days, would
provoke a burst of indignation from those to whom it might be addressed,
but it had to be endured fifty years ago, when to question the
prerogative of the Crown, or the policy of the Executive, was taken as
_prima facie_ evidence of disloyalty, and republicanism.
5. Into the discussion of the claims of the Church of England in Upper
Canada, two questions entered, which were important factors in the case.
Both sides thoroughly understood the significance of either question as
an issue in the discussion; and both sides were, therefore, equally on
the alert--the one to maintain the affirmative, and the other the
negative, side of these questions. The first was the claim that it was
the inherent right of the Church of England to be an established church
in every part of the empire, and, therefore, in Upper Canada. Both sides
knew that the admission of such a claim, would be to admit the exclusive
right of that Church to the Clergy Reserves as her heritage. It was
argued, as an unquestionable fact, that the exclusive right of the
Church of England in Upper Canada to such reserves must have been
uppermost in the mind of the royal donor of these lands, when the grant
was first made. The second point was, that the admission of this
inherent right of the Church of England to be an established church in
Upper Canada, would extinguish the right of each one of the
nonconformist bodies to the status of a Church. It can well be
understood that in a contest which involved vital questions like these
(that is, of the exclusive endowment of one Church, and its consequent
superior status as a dominant Church), the struggle would be a
protracted and bitter one. And so it proved to be. But justice and right
at length prevailed. A portion of the Reserves was impartially
distributed, on a common basis among the denominations which desired to
share in them, and the long-contested claims of the Church of England to
the exclusive status of an established church were at length
emphatically repudiated by the Legislature; and, in 1854, the last
semblance of a union between Church and State vanished from our Statute
Book.[30]--J. G. H.
_Dec. 18th, 1830._--In the _Guardian_ of this day, Dr. Ryerson published
a petition to the Imperial Parliament, prepared by a large Committee, of
which he was a member, and of which Dr. W. W. Baldwin was Chairman. In
that petition the writer referred to the historical fact, that, had the
inhabitants of this Province been dependent upon the Church of England
or of Scotland for religious instruction, they would have remained
destitute of it for some years, and also that the pioneer non-Episcopal
ministers were not dissenters, because of the priority of their
existence and labours in Upper Canada. The petition, having pointed out
that there were only five Episcopal clergy in Canada during the war of
1812, and that only one Presbyterian minister was settled in the
Province in 1818, declared that:
The ministers of several other denominations accompanied the first
influx of emigration into Upper Canada, (1783-1790,) and have
shared the hardships, privations, and sufferings incident to
missionaries in a new country. And it is through their unwearied
labours, that the mass of the population have been mainly supplied
with religious instruction. They, therefore, do not stand in the
relation, of Dissenters from either the Church of England or of
Scotland, but are the ministers of distinct and independent
Churches, who had numerous congregations in various parts of the
Province, before the ministerial labours of any ecclesiastical
establishment were, to any considerable extent, known or felt.
_Jan. 20th, 1831._--As an evidence that the views put forth by Dr.
Ryerson, in the _Guardian_, against an established Church in Upper
Canada, were acceptable outside of his own denomination, I give the
following letter, addressed to him at this date from Perth, by the Rev.
Wm. Bell, Presbyterian:
Though differing from you in many particulars, yet in some we
agree. Your endeavours to advance the cause of civil and religious
liberty have generally met my approbation. Some of your writings
that I have seen discover both good sense and Christian feeling.
The liberality, too, you have discovered, both in regard to myself
and in regard of my brethren, has not escaped my observation. Be
not discouraged by the malice of the enemies of religion. Your
_Guardian_ I have seldom seen, but from this time I intend to take
it regularly. Consider me one of your "constant readers." The
matters in which we differ are nothing in comparison of those in
which we agree.
_Feb. 9th._--Some members of the Church of England in the Province
evinced a good deal of hostility to the Methodists of this period,
chiefly from the fact that they had been connected with the Methodist
Episcopal Church in the United States, and that the Canada Conference
had formed one of the Annual Conferences of that Church, presided over
by an American Bishop. As an evidence of this hostility, Dr. Ryerson
stated in the _Guardian_ of this date, that Donald Bethune, Esq., and
others, of Kingston, had petitioned the House of Assembly:--
To prohibit any exercise of the functions of a priest, or exhorter,
or elder of any denomination in the Province except by British
subjects; 2nd, to prevent any religious society connected with any
foreign religious body to assemble in Conference; 3rd, to prevent
the raising of money by any religious person or body for objects
which are not strictly British, etc.
The Legislature appointed a Committee on the subject, and Dr. Ryerson,
as representing the Methodists, Rev. Mr Harris the Presbyterians, and
Rev. Mr. Stewart the Baptists, were summoned to attend this Committee
with a view to give evidence on the subject. This Dr. Ryerson did at
length, (as did also these gentlemen). Dr. Ryerson traced the history of
the Methodist body in Canada, and showed that, three years before this
time, the Canada Conference had taken steps to sever its connection with
the American General Conference, and had done so in a friendly
manner.[31]
The petition was aimed at the Methodists, as they alone answered the
description of the parties referred to by the petitioners. The petition
was also a covert re-statement of the often disproved charge of
disloyalty, etc., on the part of the Methodists. The House very properly
came to the conclusion--
"That it was inconsistent with the benign and tolerant principles
of the British Constitution to restrain by penal enactment any
denomination of Christians, whether subjects or foreigners," etc.
This, however, was a sample of the favourite mode of attack, and the
system of persecution to which the early Methodists were exposed in this
Province. At the same session of Parliament in 1831, the Marriage Bill,
which had been before the House each year for six successive years, was
finally passed. This Bill gave to the Methodists and to other
non-Episcopal ministers the right for the first time to solemnize
matrimony in Upper Canada.
_Feb. 19th._--Sir John Colborne, the Lieutenant-Governor, having
nominated an Episcopal chaplain to the House of Assembly, the question,
"Is the Church of England an established church in Upper Canada?" was
again debated in the House of Assembly and discussed in the newspapers.
With a view to a calm, dispassionate, and historical refutation of the
claims set up by the Episcopal Church on the subject, Dr. Ryerson
reprinted in the _Guardian_ of this day, the sixth of a series of
letters which he had addressed from Cobourg to Archdeacon Strachan, in
May and June, 1828. It covered the whole ground in dispute.[32]
_Nov. 6th, 1832._--Archdeacon Strachan, in his sermon, preached at the
visitation of the Bishop of Quebec at York, on the 5th of September,
speaking of the Methodists, said that he would--
Speak of them with praise, notwithstanding their departure from the
Apostolic ordinance, and the hostility long manifested against us
by some of their leading members.
In reply to this statement, Dr. Ryerson wrote from St. Catharines to the
Editor of the _Guardian_. He pointed out that:--
It was not until after Archdeacon Strachan's sermon on the death of the
former Bishop of Quebec was published, in 1826, that a single word was
written, and then to refute his slanders. In that sermon, when
accounting for the few who attend the Church of England, the Archdeacon
said that their attendance discouraged the minister, and that--
His influence is frequently broken or injured by numbers of
uneducated, itinerant preachers, who, leaving their steady
employment, betake themselves to preaching the Gospel from
idleness, or a zeal without knowledge ... and to teach what they do
not know, and which from their pride they disdain to learn.[33]
Again, in May, 1827, Archdeacon Strachan sent an "Ecclesiastical Chart"
to the Colonial Office, and in the letter accompanying it stated that:--
The Methodist teachers are subject to the orders of the United
States of America, and it is manifest that the Colonial Government
neither has, nor can have any other control over them, or prevent
them from gradually rendering a large portion of the population, by
their influence and instructions, hostile to our institutions,
civil and religious, than by increasing the number of the
Established Clergy.
Who then [Dr. Ryerson asked] was the author of contention? Who was the
aggressor? Who provoked hostilities? The slanders in the Chart were
published in Canada, and in England, by Dr. Strachan before a single
effort was made by a member of any denomination to counteract his
hostile measures, or a single word was said on the subject.
* * * * *
_Nov. 19th, 1834._--In connection with this subject I insert here the
following reply (containing several historical facts) to a singularly
pretentious letter which Dr. Ryerson had inserted in the _Guardian_ of
this date, denouncing the opposition of a certain "sect called
Methodists" to the claims of the Church of England as an established
church in the Colony. The reply was inserted in order to afford
strangers and new settlers in Upper Canada correct information on the
subject, and to disprove the statement of the writer of the letter, Dr.
Ryerson mentioned the following facts:--
The pretensions of the Episcopal clergy began to be disputed by the
clergy of the Church of Scotland as soon as it was known that the former
had got themselves erected into a corporation. This was, I believe, in
1820.[34] The subject was brought before the House of Assembly in 1824,
and the House in 1824, '25, '26, '27, passed resolutions remonstrating
against the exclusive claims of the Episcopal clergy. From 1822 to 1827
several pamphlets were published on both sides of the question, and much
was said in the House of Assembly; but during this period not one word
was written by any minister or member of the Methodist Church, nor did
the Methodists take any part in it, though their ministers were not even
allowed to solemnize matrimony--a privilege then enjoyed by Calvinistic
ministers--and though individual ministers had been most maliciously and
cruelly persecuted, under the sanction of judicial authority.... But in
the statements drawn up for the Imperial Government by the Episcopal
clergy during the years mentioned, the extirpation of the Methodists was
made one principal ground of appeal by the Episcopal clergy for the
exclusive countenance and patronage of His Majesty's Government. Some of
these documents at length came before the Canadian public; and in 1827 a
defence of the Methodists and other religious denominations was put
forth by the writer of these remarks in the form of a "Review of a
Sermon preached by the Archdeacon of York." Up to this time not one word
was said on "the church question" by the Methodists. But it was so
warmly agitated by others, that in the early part of 1827 Archdeacon
Strachan, an executive and legislative councillor, was sent to London to
support the claims of the Episcopal clergy at the Colonial Office. His
ecclesiastical chart and other communications were printed by order of
the Government, and soon found their way into the provincial newspapers,
and gave rise to such a discussion, and excited such a feeling
throughout the Province as was never before witnessed. The shameful
attack upon the character of the Methodist ministry, whose unparalleled
labours and sufferings, usefulness, and unimpeachable loyalty were known
and appreciated in the Province, and the appeal to the King's
Government to aid in exterminating them from the country excited strong
feelings of indignation and sympathy in the public mind. The House of
Assembly investigated the whole affair, examined fifty-two witnesses,
adopted an elaborate report, and sent home an address to the King
condemning the statements of the agent of the Episcopal clergy, and
remonstrating against the establishment of a dominant church in the
Province.[35] The determination to uproot the Methodists was carried so
far in those by-gone days of civil and ecclesiastical despotism, that
the Indians were told by executive sanction that unless they would
become members of the Church of England, the Government would do nothing
for them! In further support of my statement, I quoted four Episcopal
addresses and sermons, sufficient to show who were the first and real
aggressors in this matter--certainly not the Methodists.
* * * * *
As a sample of Dr. Ryerson's controversial style in 1826, when he wrote
the Review of Archdeacon Strachan's sermon (to which he refers above) I
quote a paragraph from it. In replying to the Archdeacon's "remarks on
the qualifications, motives, and conduct of the Methodist itinerant
preachers," which Dr. Ryerson considered "ungenerous and unfounded," he
proceeded:--
The Methodist preachers do not value themselves upon the wealth,
virtues, or grandeur, of their ancestry; nor do they consider their
former occupation an argument against their present employment or
usefulness. They have learned that the Apostles were once
fishermen; that a Milner could once throw the shuttle; that a
Newton once watched his mother's flock.... They are likewise
charged with "preaching the Gospel out of idleness." Does the
Archdeacon claim the attribute of omniscience? Does he know what is
in man? How does he know that they preach "the Gospel out of
idleness?" ... What does he call idleness?--the reading of one or
two dry discourses every Sabbath ... to one congregation, with an
annual income of £200 or £300?... No; this is hard labour; this is
indefatigable industry!... Who are they then that preach the Gospel
out of idleness?--those indolent, covetous men who travel from two
to three hundred miles, and preach from twenty-five to forty times
every month?--who, in addition to this, visit from house to house,
and teach young and old repentance towards God, and faith in our
Lord Jesus Christ?--those who continue this labour year after year
... at the enormous salary of £25 or £50 per annum?--these are the
men who "preach the Gospel out of idleness!" O bigotry! thou
parent of persecution; O envy! thou fountain of slander; O
covetousness! thou god of injustice! would to heaven ye were
banished from the earth![36]
* * * * *
_Jan. 22nd, 1831._--In the _Guardian_ of this day Dr. Ryerson publishes
a letter from the Rev. Richard Watson to the trustees of the Wesleyan
University, in Connecticut, declining the appointment of Professor of
_Belles Lettres_ and Moral Philosophy. He says:--
To _Belles Lettres_ I have no pretensions; Moral Philosophy I have
studied, and think it a most important department, when kept upon
its true principles, both theological and philosophic. Being,
however, fifty years old, and having a feeble constitution, I do
not think it would be prudent in me to accept.
During this year (1831) Dr. Ryerson engaged in a friendly controversy
with Vicar-General Macdonnell, Editor of the _Catholic_, published in
Kingston. This controversy included six letters from Dr. Ryerson, and
five from the Vicar-General, published in the _Christian Guardian_. It
touched upon the leading questions at issue between Roman Catholics and
Protestants. The correspondence was broken off by the Vicar-General.
FOOTNOTES:
[24] The following is a copy of the document under the authority of
which Dr. Ryerson was deputed to go to New York to procure presses and
types for the proposed _Christian Guardian_ newspaper:--
This is to certify that the Bearer, Rev. Egerton Ryerson, is appointed
agent for procuring a printing establishment for the Canada Conference,
and is hereby commended to the Christian confidence of all on whom he
may have occasion to call for advice and assistance for the above
purpose.
(Signed) William Case, _Superintendent_.
James Richardson, _Secretary_.
Ancaster, Upper Canada,
Sept. 4th, 1829.
[25] These seven papers, taken together, were the first attempt to put
into a connected form the history of the Methodist Church in Canada down
to 1830.--H.
[26] "Claims of Churchmen and Dissenters," &c., 1826, p. 27. (See p.
80.)
[27] For various reasons (apparently prudential at the time) this reply
was never published in the _Christian Guardian_, as were other replies
of the Governor.--H.
[28] This expression, "our Church," illustrates the fact which I have
indicated in first paragraph on page 97.
[29] This charge, preferred by such high authority, was taken up boldly
by the Methodist authorities. Rev. James (afterwards Bishop) Richardson,
Presiding Elder, was commissioned to inquire into its truthfulness. He
made an exhaustive report, proving the entire incorrectness of the
statement, and that the whole difficulty arose from the persistent
efforts of a Mr. Alley (an employé of the Indian Department) to promote
his own interest at the expense of that of the Indians, and to remove
out of the way the only obstacle to the accomplishment of his
purpose--the Methodist Missionary. Dr. Ryerson having pointed out these
facts in the _Guardian_, Capt. Anderson, Superintendent of Indian
affairs at Coldwater, questioned his conclusion "that the advice given
to the Indians was both prudent and loudly called for, and perfectly
respectful to His Excellency." Dr. Ryerson then examined the whole of
the evidence in the Case, and (See _Guardian_, vol. iii., p. 76) came to
the following conclusion:--1. That sometimes the local agents of the
Indian Department are men who have availed themselves of the most public
occasions to procure ardent spirits, and entice the Indians to
drunkenness, and other acts of immorality; being apparently aware that
with the introduction of virtue and knowledge among these people will be
the departure of gain which arises from abuse, fraud, and debauchery. 2.
That these agents are not always men who respect the Sabbath. 3. That
the Missionary's "absurd advice" was in effect that the Indians should
apply to their Great Father to remove such agents from among them. 4.
That their "craft being endangered," the agents and parties concerned,
"with studied design, sought to injure the missionary in the estimation
of His Excellency, and to destroy all harmony in their operations, in
order, if possible, to compel the Missionary to abandon the Mission
Station." The effect of this controversy was very salutary. His
Excellency, having reconsidered the Case, "gave merited reproof and
suitable instructions to the officers of the Indian Department in regard
to their treatment of the Methodist Missionary." Dr. Ryerson adds:--We
had no trouble thereafter on the subject.
[30] Another disturbing element entered subsequently into this
controversy. And this was especially embarrassing to Dr. Ryerson, as it
proceeded from ministers in the same ecclesiastical fold as himself. I
refer to the adverse views on church establishments, put forth by
members of the British Conference in this country and especially in
England (to which reference is made subsequently in this book). Dr.
Ryerson was, as a matter of course, taunted with maintaining opinions
which had been expressly repudiated by his Methodist "superiors" in
England. He had, therefore, to wage a double warfare. He was assailed
from within as well as from without. Besides, he had to bear the charge
of putting forth heretical views in church politics, even from a
Methodist standpoint. He, however, triumphed over both parties--those
within as well as those without. And his victory over the former was the
more easily won, as the views of the "British Methodists," on this
question were almost unanimously repudiated by the Methodists of Canada.
See "Epochs of Canadian Methodism," pp. 330-353.--H.
[31] See pages 63, 64 of the _Christian Guardian_ for 1831; also page
90, _ante_.
[32] See _Christian Guardian_ of Feb. 19th, 1831, and also the pamphlet
containing the whole of this series of eight letters, entitled: "Letters
from the Reverend Egerton Ryerson to the Honourable and Reverend Doctor
Strachan, published originally in the _Upper Canada Herald_; Kingston,
1828," pp. 42, double columns. See page 80.--H.
[33] For reply to this statement see extract from Review given on p.
105.--H.
[34] In "a Pastoral Letter from the Clergy of the Church of Scotland in
the Canadas to their Presbyterian Brethren" issued in 1828, they
say:--"We did, in the year 1820, petition His Majesty's Government for
protection and support to our Church, and claimed, by what we believe to
be our constitutional rights, a participation in the Clergy Reserves."
Montreal, 1828, p. 2. This Pastoral Letter gave rise to a protracted
discussion for and against the Presbyterian side of the question.--H.
[35] The Report was adopted by a vote of 22 to 8. It stated:--The
ministry and instructions [of the Methodist Clergymen] have been
conducive--in a degree which cannot be easily estimated--to the
reformation of their hearers, and to the diffusion of correct
morals--the foundation of all sound loyalty and social order.... No one
doubts that the Methodists are as loyal as any other of His Majesty's
subjects, etc. Full particulars of this controversy will be found in Dr.
Ryerson's "Epochs of Canadian Methodism," pp. 165-218.--H.
[36] In "An Apology for the Church of England in Canada, by a Protestant
of the Established Church of England," the writer thus refers to this
controversy:--"Our Methodist brethren have disturbed the peace of their
maternal Church by the clamour of enthusiasm and the madness of
resentment; but they are the wayward children of passion, and we hope
that yet the chastening hand of reason will sober down the wildness of
that ferment," etc. Kingston, U.C., 1826, p. 3.--H.
CHAPTER IX.
1831-1832.
Methodist Affairs in Upper Canada--Proposed Union with the British
Conference.
Of the events transpiring in Upper Canada during 1831 and 1832, in which
Dr. Ryerson was an actor, he has left no record in his "Story." His
letters and papers, however, show that during this period he retired
from the editorship of the _Christian Guardian_, and that plans were
discussed and matured which led to his going to England, in 1833, to
negotiate a union between the British and Upper Canadian Conferences.
His brother George had gone on a second visit to England in March, 1831.
This second visit was for a twofold purpose, viz., to collect money with
the Rev. Peter Jones, for the Indian Missions, and also to present
petitions to the Imperial Parliament on behalf of the non-episcopalians
of the Province. I give extracts from his letters to Dr. Ryerson,
relating his experiences of, and reflections on, Wesleyan matters in
England at that period. Writing from Bristol, on the 6th of August,
1831, Rev. George Ryerson said:--
In my address to the Wesleyan Conference here I stated that we
stood in precisely the same relation to our brethren of the
Methodist Conference in the United States as we do to our brethren
of the Wesleyan Conference in England--independent of
either--agreeing in faith, in religious discipline, in name and
doctrine, and the unity of spirit,--but differing in some
ecclesiastical arrangements, rendered necessary from local
circumstances. I also expressed my firm conviction that the
situation in which we stand is decidedly the best calculated to
spread Methodism and vital religion in Canada. This statement did
not, I think, give so much satisfaction to the Conference as the
others, for what Pope said of Churchmen:
"Is he a Churchman? then he's fond of power,"
may also be literally applied to Wesleyan ministers, and, I may
add, to Englishmen generally. I have reason to know that they would
gladly govern us. I was, therefore, very pointed and explicit on
this subject. I rejoice that our country lies beyond the Atlantic,
and is surrounded by an atmosphere of freedom. A few months'
residence in this country would lead you to value this circumstance
in a degree that you can scarcely conceive of; and you would, with
unknown energy, address this exhortation to the Methodists and to
the people of Canada: "Stand fast, therefore, in the liberty
wherewith God's providence hath made you free, and in this abound
more and more." I also assured them of our respect and love for
them as our fathers and elder brethren, and mentioned my reasons
for giving this information to prevent future collision and
misunderstanding.
The Conference or Missionary Society have, however, not given up
their intention of establishing an Indian Mission in Upper Canada,
but, in consequence of my remonstrances, have delayed it. Brother
James Richardson's letter to the Missionary Committee, which I
submitted, and was told by Rev. Dr. Townley, one of the
Secretaries, that they would by no means withdraw their missionary
at Kingston, as it was still their intention to establish a mission
to the Indians in Upper Canada, and this station would be very
necessary to them. I see that they are a little vexed that
emigrants from their Societies should augment our membership.
The whole morning service of the Church of England is now read in
most of the Wesleyan Chapels, and with as much formality as in the
Church. Many of the members, when they become wealthy and rise in
the world, join the Church, and their wealth and influence are lost
to the Society. Organs are also introduced into many of their
Chapels.
In a letter dated London, Feb. 6th, 1832, Rev. Geo. Ryerson writes again
to Dr. Ryerson, and says that he and Peter Jones:
By request, met the Rev. Richard Watson, and some others of the
Missionary Committee. They wished to consult us respecting the
resolutions forwarded to them from your Missionary Committee. They
profess that they will not occupy any station where there is a
mission, as Grand River, Penetanguishene, etc., except St. Clair.
But they declare that as it regards the white population, the
agreement with the American Conference ceased when we became a
separate connexion. I opposed their views, as I have invariably
done, in very strong and plain terms, and explained to them the
character and object of the persons who were alluring them to
commence this schism. They proposed that we should give up the
missions to them. I told them we could no more do so, than they
give up theirs. They finally acquiesced, and voted the £300 as Rev.
Dr. Townley wrote. At the Conference, at Bristol, I explained that
a union of the two Conferences would be inexpedient and
unprofitable, any further than a union of brotherly love and
friendship.
In another letter to Dr. Ryerson from his brother George, dated London,
April 6th, 1832, he says:--
I have been detained so long on expenses, and continually advancing
money for the Central Committee at York, that I hope it will be
repaid to Peter Jones. I was a long time attending to the business
of my mission to bring it to the only practicable arrangement, that
is, having it submitted to the Legislature of Upper Canada, with
such recommendations and instructions as would give satisfaction to
the country by consulting the wishes and interests of all parties.
I have never before in my life been shut up to walk in all things
by simple faith more than I have for some months past; yet I was
never kept in greater steadfastness and peace of mind, nor had such
openings of the Spirit and life of Jesus in my soul. The judgments
of God are spreading apace--the cholera is more deadly in London,
and it has now broken out in Ireland, and in the centre of Paris,
where it is said to be very destructive. You need no other evidence
of its being a work of God, than to be informed that it is made the
public mock of the infidel population of this city; a state of
feeling and conduct in regard to this pestilence that never,
perhaps, was witnessed from any country, and that would make a
heathen or Mahommedan ashamed. I have seen gangs of men traversing
the streets and singing songs in ridicule of the cholera, and have
seen caricatures of it in the windows.
_August 29th, 1832._--To-day, in a valedictory editorial, Dr. Ryerson
took leave of the readers of the _Christian Guardian_, having been its
first editor for nearly three years. In that valedictory Dr. Ryerson
said (p. 116):--
I first appeared before the public as a writer, at the age of two and
twenty years. My first feeble effort was a vindication of the
Methodists, and several other Christian denominations against the
uncalled-for attack made upon their principles and character. It also
contained a remonstrance against the introduction into this country of
an endowed political Church, as alike opposed to the statute law of the
Province, political and religious expedience, public rights and
liberties. I believe this was the first article of the kind ever
published in Upper Canada, and, while from that time to this a powerful
combination of talent, learning, indignation, and interest has been
arrayed in the vain attempt to support by the weapons of reason,
Scripture, and argument, a union between the Church and the
world--between earth and heaven; talents, truth, reason, and justice
have alike been arrayed in the defence of insulted and infringed rights,
and the maintenance of a system of public, religious, and educational
instruction, accordant with public rights and interests, the principles
of sound policy, the economy of Providence, and the institutions and
usages of the New Testament.
Dr. Ryerson also published in this number of the _Guardian_ the general
outline of the arrangements proposed at Hallowell (Picton) on behalf of
the Canada Conference to the English Conference, and designed to form
the basis of articles for the proposed union between the two bodies.
Rev. Robert Alder was present at the Conference, and was a consenting
party to the basis of union.
_December 7th, 1832._--The prospects of Union with the British
Conference were not encouraging in various parts of the Connexion, and
chiefly for the reasons mentioned by Rev. George Ryerson in his letters
from England (see pp. 107, 8). Rev. John Ryerson, writing to Dr. Ryerson
from Cobourg, also says:--
The subject of the Union appears to be less and less palatable to
our friends in these parts, so much so, that I think it will not be
safe for you to come to any permanent arrangements with the British
Conference, even should they accede to our proposals. I am of the
opinion that, except we give ourselves entirely into their hands in
some way or another, no Union will take place. I tell the
preachers, and they and I tell the people, that, Union or no Union,
it is very important that you should go home; that you will
endeavour, in every way you can, to convince the British Conference
of the manifest injustice and wickedness of sending missionaries to
this country.
_November 21st, 1832._--The proposed union with the British Conference
excited a good deal of discussion at this time in various parts of Upper
Canada. Dr. Ryerson, therefore, addressed a note on the subject to Rev.
Robert Alder, the English Conference representative. I make a few
extracts:--
At the Hallowell Conference (1832) the question of the union was
principally sustained by my brothers, and was concurred in by the vote
of a large majority of the Conference.... But in some parts of the
country, where Presidential visits have been made, certain local
preachers have found out that the Societies ought to have been
consulted; that they have been sold ("by the Ryersons,") without
consent; that no Canadian will henceforth be admitted into the
Conference; that our whole economy will be changed by arbitrary power,
and all revivals of religion will be stopped, etc. The first of the
objections is the most popular, but they have all failed to produce the
intended effect, to an extent desired by the disaffected few. The object
contemplated is, to produce an excitement that will prevent me going to
England, and induce the Conference to retrace its steps. The merit or
demerit of the measure has been mainly ascribed to me; and on its
result, should I cross the Atlantic, my standing, in a great measure,
depends. If our proposals should meet with a conciliatory reception, and
your Committee would recommend measures, rather than require
concessions, in the future proceedings of our Conference, everything can
be accomplished without difficulty or embarrassment. You know that I am
willing, as an individual, to adopt your whole British economy, _ex
animo_. You also know that my brothers are of the same mind, and that a
majority of the Conference will readily concur. May the Lord direct
aright!
Dr. Alder's reply to Dr. Ryerson in February, 1833, was that:
You must look at the great principles and results involved in this
most important affair, and not shrink from the duties imposed on
you, to avoid a few present unpleasant consequences. It is not for
me to prescribe rules of conduct to be observed by you, but I must
say, that I am surprised that any circumstance should cause you to
waver for a moment in reference to your visit to Europe. If you
were to decline coming, would not the many on the other side, who
are strictly watching your movements, at once say that the whole
arrangements are deceptive, and merely designed to make an
impression on me for a certain purpose. You know they would. Of
course you will act as you please. I neither advise nor persuade,
but say: Be not too soon nor too much alarmed. There are no
jealousies, no evil surmisings, no ambitious designs in the matter,
but a sincere desire to promote the interests of Methodism and the
cause of religion in Upper Canada; and nothing will be desired
from, or recommended to, you, but for this purpose.
It is a noble object that we have in view. Rev. Richard Watson
takes a statesmanlike view of the whole case, and will, I am
persuaded, as will all concerned here, meet you with the utmost
ingenuousness and liberality, and, if they be met in a similar
manner, all will end well. If you can agree to the following
recommendation, I think everything else will easily be settled,
viz., to constitute two or three districts, to meet annually, as
District Conferences, and to hold a Triennial Conference, to be
composed of all the preachers in the Provinces, under a President,
to be appointed in the way mentioned in the plan of agreement
proposed by your last Conference. Several of your preachers wish
it; Bro. Green, the presiding Elder, is in favour of it.
_January 10th, 1833._--It being necessary to collect funds to defray Dr.
Ryerson's expenses to England, his brother, William, wrote to him from
Brockville at this date, giving an account of his success there as a
collector. He said:--
After the holidays I commenced operations, and having besieged the
doors of several of our gentry, most of whom contributed without
much resistance, on most honourable terms, of course, such as
paying from $3 to $6, with a great many wishes, and hearty ones
too, for your success. More than two-thirds of the sum collected
are given by the gentlemen of the village, most of whom expressed
and appeared to feel a pleasure in giving, and who have never been
known to give anything to the Methodists before on any occasion
whatever. Our congregation has greatly increased, so that we now
have about five hundred, some say more, in the evening. A majority
of the first families in the village attend our chapel. Among many
others, Mr. Jonas Jones, and several of the families in the same
connection; Mr. Sherwood, the High Sheriff, and several others,
most of whom have never been known to attend a Methodist meeting
before. You will be surprised to hear that Mrs. James Sherwood has
become my warm friend, treating me with the greatest attention and
kindness; and also on various occasions speaking most kindly and
respectfully of me and all our family, especially yourself.
* * * * *
_January 31st, 1833._--Under this date, Dr. Ryerson has recorded in his
diary the following tribute to his first wife:--
A year ago this morning, at half-past five o'clock, the wife of my
youth fell asleep in Jesus, leaving a son and daughter (John and
Lucilla Hannah), the former two years and a half old, and the
latter fourteen days. Hannah Aikman (her maiden name) was the
daughter of John and Hannah Aikman, and was the youngest of eleven
children. Hannah was born in Barton, Gore District, on the 4th of
August, 1804. Her natural disposition was most amiable, and her
education was better than is usually afforded to farmer's daughters
in this country. At the age of sixteen she was awakened, converted,
and joined the Methodist Church, of which she remained an exemplary
member until her death. I became intimately acquainted with her in
1824, when she was twenty years of age, and after taking the advice
of an elder brother, who had travelled the circuit on which they
lived, at the strong solicitation of my parents, and the impulse of
my own inclinations, I made her proposals of marriage, which were
accepted. This was before I had any intention of becoming a
preacher in the Methodist Church, either travelling or local.
About this time the Lord laid his afflicting hand upon me;[37] I
was brought to the gate of death, and in that state became
convinced by evidence as satisfactory as that of my existence, that
in disregarding the dictates of my own conscience, and the
important advice of many members of the Church, both preachers and
lay, in regard to labouring in the itinerant field, I had resisted
the Spirit of God; and on that sick, and in the estimation of my
family, dying bed, I vowed to the Lord my God, that if He should
see fit to raise me up and open the way, I would no more disobey
the voice of His Providence and servants. From that hour I began
visibly to recover, and, though the exercises of my mind were
unknown to any but myself and the Searcher of hearts, before I had
sufficiently recovered to walk two miles, I was called upon by the
Presiding Elder, and several official members, and solicited to go
on the Niagara Circuit, which was then partly destitute through the
failure in health of one of the preachers. I could not but view
this unexpected call us the voice of God, and, after a few days'
deliberation and preparation, I obeyed, on the 24th of March, 1825,
the day on which I was twenty-two years of age.
This unanticipated change in the course of my life, while it
involved the sacrifice of pecuniary interests and some very
flattering offers and promises, presented my contemplated marriage
in a somewhat different light; though the possibility of such a
change was mentioned as a condition in my proposals and our
engagement. And I will here record it to the honour of the dead
that she who afterwards became my wife, wrote to me a short time
after I commenced travelling, that if a union between us was in any
respect opposed to my views of duty, or if I thought it would
militate against my usefulness, I was perfectly exonerated by her
from all obligations to such a union; that, whatever her own
feelings might be, she begged that they would not influence
me,--that God would give her grace to subdue them,--that she
shuddered at the thought of standing in the way of my duty and
usefulness.
Knowing, as I did, that her fondness for me was extravagant, I
could not wound the heart which was the seat of such elevated
feelings, or help appreciating more highly than ever the principles
of mind which could give rise to such noble sentiments, and such
martyr-like disinterestedness of soul. In subsequent interviews, we
mutually agreed--should Providence permit--and (at her suggestion)
should neither of us change our minds, we would get married in
three or four years. During this interval, I had at times
agitations of mind as to the advantages of such a step, in regard
to my ministerial labours, but determined to rely on the Divine
promise, "Blessed is the man that sweareth to his own hurt, and
changeth not." This promise has been abundantly fulfilled in me. We
were married on the 10th of September, 1828. A more affectionate
and prudent wife never lived. She was beloved and respected by all
that knew her. I never saw her angry, nor do I recollect that an
angry or unkind word ever passed between us. Her disposition was
sweet, her spirit uniformly kind and cheerful, sociable, and meek.
Her professions were never high, nor her joys rapturous. But in
everything she was invariably faithful, and ready for every good
word and work. In her confidence, peace, and conduct, as far as I
could discover, without intermission, the poet's words were clearly
illustrated:--
"Her soul was ever bright as noon, and calm as summer evenings be."
Though her piety for years excited my respect, and in many
instances my admiration, it was nevertheless greatly quickened and
deepened about six months before her death, during the Conference
held at York. From that time I believe she enjoyed the perfect love
of God. At least, as far as I can judge, the fruits of it were
manifest in her whole life.
Several days previous to her death, when her illness assumed a
mortal aspect, and she became sensible that her earthly pilgrimage
was closing, her usual unruffled confidence rose to the riches of
the full assurance of understanding, faith and hope, and she
expressed herself with a boldness of language, a rapture of hope,
and triumph of faith that I never before witnessed. Passages of
Scripture, and verses of hymns, expressive of the dying Christian's
victories, triumphs, and hopes, were repeated by her with a joy and
energetic fervency that deeply affected all present. Her deathbed
conversations and dying counsels were a rich repast and a valuable
lesson of instruction to many of her Christian friends. The night
before she took her departure, she called me to her and consulted
me about disposing of the family and all her own things, with as
much coolness and judgment as if she had been in perfect health,
and was about leaving home on a few days' visit to her friends. A
little before midnight she requested the babe to be brought to
her--kissed it--blessed it, and returned it. She then called for
the little boy (John), and, embracing and kissing him, bequeathed
to him also the legacy of a pious mother's dying prayer and
blessing. Afterwards she embraced me, and said, "My dear Egerton,
preach the Word; be instant in season and out of season, and God
will take care of you, and give you the victory." She then bid an
affectionate farewell individually to all. She continued in the
perfect possession of her reason, triumphing in the Rock of her
salvation, until the messenger arrived and her spirit took its
departure with the words, "Come, Lord Jesus," lingering upon her
lips. Thus lived and died one of the excellent of the earth,--a
woman of good, plain sense, a guileless heart, and a sanctified
spirit and life. Such is the testimony respecting her, of one who
knew her best.
In his deep sorrow and affliction, at that time, Dr. Ryerson received
many sympathizing letters. I give an extract of one from his brother
George, dated London, Eng., 29th March, 1832. He says:--
I deeply sympathize with you in your affliction. I know how to feel
for you, and you as yet know but a very small part of your trials.
Years will not heal the wound. I am, even now, often quite
overwhelmed when I allow myself to dwell upon the past. I need not
suggest to you the commonplace topics of comfort and resignation,
but I have no doubt you will see the hand of God so manifestly in
it, that you will say "It was well done." I will further add that
the saying of St. Paul was at no time so applicable as at the
present (1 Cor. vii. 29, etc.).
* * * * *
The years 1830-1832 were noted in the history of the Methodist Church in
Upper Canada for two things: 1st. The establishment of the Upper Canada
Academy--the radiating centre of intellectual life in the Connexion.
2nd. The erection of the Adelaide St. Chapel, which for many years was
the seat and source of Church life in the Societies. At the Conference
of 1830 it was agreed to establish the Upper Canada Academy. In the
_Guardian_ of the 23rd of April, 1831, Dr. Ryerson gave an account of
the new institution and made a strong appeal in its favour. On the 7th
June, 1832, the foundation stone of the Academy was laid at Cobourg. On
the 16th June, 1833, the new brick church on Newgate (Adelaide) St. was
opened for Divine Service. In the _Guardian_ of June 19th, Dr. Ryerson
says: "For its size--being 75 by 55 feet--it is judged to be inferior to
very few Methodist Chapels in America." P. 126.
FOOTNOTES:
[37] See note on page 86 and page 28.
CHAPTER X.
1833
Union between the British and Canadian Conferences
I undertook the mission to England to negotiate a Union between the
British and Canadian Conferences with great reluctance. I determined in
the course of the year, from various circumstances, to abandon it; but
was persuaded by letters from Rev. Robert Alder, the London Missionary
Secretary (one of which is given on page 110), and the advice of my
brother John, to resume it.
The account of my voyage and proceedings in England are given in the
following extracts from my journals:--
_March 4th, 1833._--This morning at 6 a.m. I left York _via_
Cobourg, Kingston, and New York, on my first important mission to
England, an undertaking for which I feel myself utterly
incompetent; and in prosecution of which I rely wholly on the
guidance of heavenly wisdom, imploring the special blessing of the
Most High.
_Kingston, March 11th._--I find that considerable excitement, and
in some instances, strong dissatisfaction, exists on the question
of Union, by misrepresentation of the proceedings and intentions of
our Conference respecting it. Full explanations have in every
instance restored confidence, and acquiescence. A correction of
these misrepresentations, and the reply of the Wesleyan Missionary
Committee to the proposals of our Conference have given universal
satisfaction, and elicited a general and strong desire for the
accomplishment of this all-important measure. My interviews with my
brothers (William and John) have been interesting and profitable to
me.
_Watertown, N.Y., March 12._--Came from Kingston here to-day,
twenty-eight miles. This Black River country is very level, and
appears to be fertile, but the people generally do not seem to be
thriving.
_Utica, March 13th._--This is a flourishing town of about 10,000
inhabitants, beautifully situated on the south side of the Mohawk
river. I travelled through a settlement and village called Renson,
consisting principally of Welsh, where the Welsh language is
universally spoken; there is a _Whitefield_ Methodist chapel, but I
was told they retained more of the name, than of the genuine spirit
of their founder. "Because of swearing the land mourneth."
_Hartford, March 16th._--The southern part of Massachusetts and the
northern part of this State, are mountainous and rocky and barren.
The inhabitants are supported by manufactures, grazing and dairies.
They appear to be rather poor but intelligent. In my conversation
to-day with a professed infidel I felt sensibly the importance of
being skilled in wielding any weapon with which theology, history,
science, so abundantly furnishes the believer in the Christian
revelation; and never before did I see and feel the lofty
superiority of the foundation on which natural and revealed truth
is established, over the cob-web and ill-shaped edifice of
infidelity.
_Hartford, March 17th._--I have attended service three times
to-day, and preached twice. Religion seems to be at a low ebb. Yet
I have not heard religion spoken of, or any body of religious
people referred to, in any other way than that of respect.
_New York, March 20th._--I am now about to embark for England, the
reason of my long journey from Canada to New York is the slow
travel by stage, before any railroads, and the Hudson river not
navigable so early.
_New York, March 21st._--[Just on the eve of sailing for England, Dr.
Ryerson wrote from New York to his brother John, at Hallowell. He
said:--
I stayed with the Rev. Dr. Fisk all night and part of two days. I was
much gratified and benefited, and have received from him many valuable
suggestions respecting my mission to England and agency for the Upper
Canada Academy. He was unreserved in his communications, and is in
favour of my Mission, as were Brother Waugh, Drs. Bangs, Durbin[38] and
others. They all seem to approve fully of the proceedings of our
Conference in the affair.--H.]
_New York, March 22nd._--[On the day on which Dr. Ryerson sailed for
England, Mr. Francis Hall, of the New York _Commercial Advertiser_, sent
him a note in which he said:--
I have just received from a friend in Montreal the following
information which I wish you would give to the Rev. Richard Reece,
of London:--The Lord has blessed us abundantly in Montreal. Upwards
of four hundred conversions have taken place in our chapel since
last summer. It is now necessary for us to have a chapel in the St.
Lawrence suburbs, and another in the Quebec suburbs immediately.
This (said Mr. Hall) for those who know Montreal, is great news
indeed. It is equal to an increase of as many thousands in the city
of New York; the whole population being only a little more than
thirty thousand, a great portion of which are Roman Catholics.--H.]
Dr. Ryerson's journal then proceeds:--
_At Sea, April 10th._--On the 22nd ult., I embarked on the sailing
ship "York," Capt. Uree, New York. I was sick for fourteen days,
ate nothing, thought little, and enjoyed nothing. Feeling better, I
was able to read a little.
_April 12th._--After twenty days' sail we landed at Portsmouth.
Thanks be to the God of heaven, earth, and sea for His protection,
blessing, and prosperity! I was greatly struck with the extensive
fortifications, and vast dockyards, together with the wonderful
machinery in this place; such indications of national wealth, and
specimens of human genius and industry.
_April 13th._--This morning I arrived in London, and was cordially
received by the Secretary of the Wesleyan Missionary Society, and
kindly invited to take up my lodgings at the Mission House.
_April 14th--Sabbath._--Heard the Rev. G. Marsden preach. In the
afternoon this holy man addressed about four hundred Sunday-school
children, after which I spoke a few words to them. We then attended
a prayer-meeting, where many found peace with God. In the evening I
heard the Rev. Theophilus Lessey preach a superior sermon, and I
felt blessed.
_April 16th._--This evening I preached my first sermon in England,
in City Road Chapel, from John iii. 8. This is called Mr. Wesley's
Chapel, having been built by him, and left under peculiar
regulations. Alongside is Mr. Wesley's dwelling-house, and in the
rear of it rest his bones, also those of Rev. Dr. Adam Clarke and
Rev. Richard Watson; three of the greatest men the world ever saw.
In the front of this chapel, on the opposite side of the street,
are the celebrated Bunhill Field's burying ground, among whose
memorable dead rests the dust of the venerable Isaac Watts, John
Wesley's mother, John Bunyan, Daniel Defoe, etc.
_April 21st--Sunday._--To-day I went to hear the celebrated Edward
Irving. His preaching, for the most part, I considered commonplace;
his manner, eccentric; his pretensions to revelations, authority,
and prophetic indications, overweening. I was disappointed in his
talents, and surprised at the apparent want of feeling manifested
throughout his whole discourse.
_April 20th._--This morning I attended the funeral of the great and
eminently pious Rev. Rowland Hill, who died in the 89th year of his
age. Lord Hill, his nephew, was chief mourner. There was a large
attendance of ministers of all denominations, and a great concourse
of people. Rev. Wm. Jay, of Bath, preached an admirable sermon from
Zech. ii. 2. "Howl fir tree, for the cedar hath fallen." The
venerable remains were interred beneath the pulpit.
_April 26th._--To-day I heard Rev. Richard Winter Hamilton, of
Leeds, an Independent, preach a missionary sermon for the Wesleyan
Society. His text was Col. i. 16. It was the most splendid sermon I
ever heard.
_April 28th._--Heard the Rev. Robert Newton in the morning. In the
afternoon I preached a missionary sermon in Westminster Chapel, and
in the evening another at Chelsea.
_April 29th._--This day was held the Annual Meeting of the Wesleyan
Missionary Society, in Exeter Hall, Lord Morpeth in the chair. He
is a young man, serious and dignified in his manners. The speeches
generally were able and to the point. Collection was £231.
_May 1st._--The Annual Meeting of the British and Foreign Bible
Society was held in Exeter Hall. Lord Bexley presided. The Bishops
of Winchester and Chester, brothers, addressed the meeting. They
are eloquent speakers, but the Hon. and Rev. Baptist Noel was the
speaker of the day.
_May 3rd._--This morning I attended the Annual Breakfast Meeting of
the preachers' children, at the City Road Morning Chapel; nearly
200 preachers and their families were present. Rev. Joseph
Entwistle spoke, as did Mr. James Wood, of Bristol, myself and one
or two others.
_May 5th., Exeter._--Left London at 5 a.m. and arrived here at 10
p.m., within a minute of the time specified by the coachman. We
passed over the scene of that inimitable tract, "The Shepherd of
Salisbury Plain." We were shown the tree under which the shepherd
was sheltered.
_May 6th._--Rev. Wm. Naylor preached this morning in Exeter, and I
preached in the evening.
_Taunton, May 7th._--At a Missionary Tea Meeting to-day, deep
interest was excited in the cause of the British North American
Missions. Taunton is a very ancient town. It existed in the time of
the Romans. It was in this town that King Ina held the first
Legislative Assembly or Parliament ever held in Britain. It
consisted of ecclesiastics and noblemen and enacted certain laws
for the better government of the Heptarchy. It was near this town
King Alfred concealed himself, and was discovered in the capacity
of a cook. Here also stands the Church of St. Mary, a most splendid
and ancient gothic building, where that venerable and holy man of
God, Joseph Alleine, author of the "Alarm to the Unconverted,"
preached.
In a letter to a friend in Upper Canada, Dr. Ryerson at this date
writes:--
_Nottingham, May 29th._--I this morning called upon Mrs. Watson,
mother of the late distinguished Richard Watson. She is nearly
eighty years of age, and in rather humble circumstances. She is in
the possession of a naturally strong and unimpaired intellect, and
has apparently not the least vanity on account of the unrivalled
talents, high attainments, and great popularity of her son. In
conversation she stated the following particulars: That her husband
was a saddler, that he formerly lived and followed his business in
Boston-on-the-Humber in Lincolnshire, where Richard was born; that
her husband was the only Methodist in the town, and was the means
of introducing Methodism into that town; that his business was
taken from him, and he was obliged to leave and remove to another
place on account of it; that Richard was very weakly, and so poorly
that she carried him when a child on a pillow in her arms; that
when he began to talk and run about he was unusually stupid and
sleepy, would drop asleep anywhere; that he was very tall of his
age, and made such advancement in learning, that he read the Latin
Testament at five years of age, and had read a considerable part of
it before his parents knew that he had been put to the study of
Latin; the clergyman, his tutor, thought him older, from his size
and mind, or, as he said, he would not have put him to Latin so
young; that Richard had a very great taste for reading; when he was
a very small boy, he read the History of England (when not eight
years of age), and recollected and related with the utmost
correctness all its leading facts; that he would frequently remain
at school after school hours, doing difficult questions in
arithmetic for older boys; that he was bound out, according to his
request, to the trade of a house-joiner; that he was most diligent
and faithful at his work, and made such rapid advancement in
learning the trade, that at the end of two years, his master told
his father that he had already learned as much as he could teach
him, and that he was willing to give him up if he desired--the best
hand in his shop; that Richard began to go out and exhort when he
was fourteen years of age, and that he preached when he was
fifteen, and was received on trial by the Conference as a
travelling preacher about a month after he was sixteen; that he was
frequently pelted with eggs, and even trodden under foot; that his
own uncle on one occasion encouraged it, saying, "My kinsman does
it pretty well, give him a few more eggs, lad" (addressing one of
the mob), and that Richard came home frequently with his clothes
completely besmeared with eggs and dirt.
I attended the Wesleyan Missionary meeting here and spoke at it.
The meeting was highly interesting. It was addressed by Rev. Mr.
Edwards, (Baptist) and by the Messrs. Bunting, Atherton, and
Bakewell. In this town the noted Kilham made his first Methodist
division, and here suddenly ended his life. Here Bramwell got the
ground for a chapel in answer to prayer. Near the town runs the
River Trent. From Nottingham I went fourteen miles to Mansfield and
attended a missionary meeting. I was in the house which was the
birth-place of the great Chesterfield, and passed through Mansfield
forest, the scene of Robin Hood's predatory exploits.
In his journal Dr. Ryerson says:--
_London, June 24th._--I had an interview with Rt. Hon. Edward
Ellice, on Canadian affairs; a man of noble spirit, liberal mind,
and benevolent heart. He condemned Dr. Strachan's measures, and
manifested an earnest, desire to promote the welfare of Upper
Canada. I gave him an account of the political and religious
affairs in Upper Canada with which he expressed himself pleased,
and gave me £50 for the Upper Canada Academy.
_June 16th._--This day was dedicated, by Rev. Wm. Ryerson, the new
brick chapel on Newgate (Adelaide) Street, Toronto. (See subsequent
chapter.)
_June 24th._--Writing to-day to a valued friend in Upper Canada in
regard to his mission in London, Dr. Ryerson told him that he had no
doubt of its advantageous results in promoting harmony and peace. He
then said:--
I apprehend that Mr. Stanley's appointment to the Secretaryship of
the Colonies will not be very beneficial to us. The reason of Lord
Goderich and Lord Howick (Earl Grey's son) retiring from that
office was that they would not bring any other Bill on slavery into
Parliament, but one for its immediate and entire abolition. I
understand that Lords Goderich and Howick are sadly annoyed at Mr.
Stanley's course.
It will only be for the friends of good government to pray for the
re-appointment of Lord Goderich, or insist upon a change in the
Colonial policy towards Upper Canada. This part, however, belongs
to political men. But I am afraid it may have an unfavourable
bearing upon our religious rights and interests.
In Rev. J. Richardson's letter to me, he mentions that the
petitions were sent in the care of Mr. Joseph Hume. He is not the
person to present a petition to His Majesty on religious liberty in
the Colonies, and especially after the part he has taken in
opposing the Bill for emancipating the slaves in the West Indies.
It has incensed the religious part of the nation against him. He is
connected with the West India interest by his wife, and his
abandoning all his principles of liberty in such a heart-stirring
question, destroys confidence in the disinterestedness of his
general conduct, and his sincere regard for the great interests of
religion. I leave London this afternoon for Ireland. My return here
depends upon whether I can do anything in this petition
business.[39]
It is difficult to get a moment for retirement, excepting very
early in the morning, or after twelve at night. It is not the way
for me to live I had, however, a very profitable and good day
yesterday. I preached, and superintended a love-feast in City Road
Chapel last evening. It was a very good one, only the people were a
little bashful in speaking at first, like some of our York friends
who are always so very timid, such as Dr. Morrison, Mr. Howard, and
others.
In his journal Dr. Ryerson says:--
_June 26th._--According to appointment, I called upon the Earl of
Ripon, and was most kindly received. I wished to enquire about the
medal promised by His Majesty, William IV., to Peter Jones, and to
solicit a donation towards our Academy at Cobourg. His Lordship
gave me £5. He expressed his disapprobation of Sir John Colborne's
reply to the Methodist Conference in 1831, (see page 98). He stated
that he was anxious for the Union between the British and Canadian
Conferences, and was gratified at the prospect of its success.[40]
His Lordship stated that, while in the Colonial Department, he had
only received Mr. W. L. Mackenzie as a private individual, and had
done no more than justice to him.
_June 28th._--I called at the Colonial office, and laid before Mr.
Stanley statements and documents relative to the Clergy Reserve
Question. Mr. Stanley was very courteous, but equally cautious. I
stated that the House of Assembly of Upper Canada had nearly every
year since 1825, by very large majorities, decided against the
erection of any Church Establishment in that Province, and in
favour of the appropriation of the Clergy Reserves to the purposes
of General Education; that this might be taken to be the fair and
deliberate sense of the people of Upper Canada; that this question
was distinct from any question or questions of political reform;
that parties and parliaments who differed on other questions of
public policy, agreed nearly unanimously in this. He expressed his
opinion that the Colonial Legislature had a right to legislate on
it, and asked me why our House of Assembly had not done it. I told
him it had, but the Legislative Council had rejected the Bill
passed by the Assembly on the subject.
_July 13th._--In a letter at this date to a friend in Upper Canada, Dr.
Ryerson further refers to this and a subsequent interview as follows:--
I have had two interviews with Mr. Secretary Stanley, on the subject of
the House of Assembly's Address on the Clergy Reserves, and have drawn
up a statement of the grounds on which the House of Assembly and the
great body of the people in Upper Canada resist the pretensions and
claims of the Episcopal clergy. Mr. Solicitor-General Hagerman has been
directed to do the same on behalf of the Episcopal clergy. I confess
that I was a little surprised to find that the Colonial Secretary was
fully impressed at first that Methodist preachers in Canada were
generally Americans (Yankees);--that the cause of the great prosperity
of Methodism there was the ample support it received from the United
States;--that the missionaries in Upper Canada were actually under the
United States Conference, and at its disposal. The Colonial Secretary
manifested a little surprise also, when I turned to the Journals of the
Upper Canada House of Assembly, and produced proof of the reverse,
which he pronounced "perfectly conclusive and satisfactory."
_August 8th._--Dr. Ryerson received a touching note at this date from
Mrs. Marsden, with explanation of her reluctance to let Rev. Geo.
Marsden, her husband, go to Canada as President of the Conference. She
says:--
At length my rebellious heart is subdued by reason and by grace. I
am made willing to give up my excellent husband to what is supposed
to be a great work. I am led to hope that, as a new class of
feelings are brought into exercise, perhaps some new graces may be
elicited in my own character, as well as that of my dear husband;
at any rate it is a sacrifice to God, which I trust will be
accepted, and, both in a private and a public view, be overruled
for the glory of God. I am sure, notwithstanding some repeated
attempts to reconcile me to this affair, I must have appeared very
unamiable to you; but the fact was simply this, I could not see you
or converse with you, without so much emotion as quite unnerved me,
therefore I studiously avoided you; but did you know the happiness
which dear Mr. Marsden and I have enjoyed in each other's society
for so many years, you would not be surprised that I should be
unwilling to give up so many months as will be required for this
service; but to God and His Church I bow in submission.
This estimable lady did not long survive. She died in six months--just
after her husband had returned from America. In a letter from Rev. E.
Grindrod, dated March, 1834, he says, Mrs. Marsden died, after a short
illness, on 22nd February. She was one of the most amiable and pious of
women. Her lite was a bright pattern of every Christian virtue. Her end
was delightfully triumphant.
* * * * *
The following is an extract from Dr. Ryerson's diary of this year:--
After many earnest prayers, mature deliberation, and the advice of
an elder brother, I have decided within the last few months to
enter again into the married state. The lady I have selected, and
who has consented to become my second wife, is one whom I have
every reason to believe possesses all the natural and Christian
excellencies of my late wife. She is the eldest daughter of a pious
and wealthy merchant, Mr. James Rogers Armstrong. For her my late
wife also entertained a very particular esteem and affection, and,
from her good sense, sound judgment, humble piety, and affectionate
disposition, I doubt not but that she will make me a most
interesting and valuable companion, a judicious house-wife, and an
affectionate mother to my two children. Truly I love her with a
pure heart fervently I receive her, and hope ever to treat and
value her as the special token of my Heavenly Father's kindness
after a season of His chastisement. If thou, Lord, see fit to spare
us, may our union promote Thy glory and the salvation of sinners!
Dr. Ryerson's marriage with Miss Mary Armstrong, took place at Toronto,
on the 8th of November 1833.
FOOTNOTES:
[38] While in England, Dr. Ryerson received the following note from Rev.
Dr. J. P. Durbin, in which he said: After I parted with you at my house,
I felt a strong inclination to engage your correspondence for our paper,
at least once a week, if possible, for the benefit of our people and
country, through the Church. Can you not write us by every packet?
Information in regard to English Methodism will be particularly
interesting, especially their financial arrangements. Do inquire
diligently of them, and write us minutely for the good of our Zion.--H.
[39] In Epochs of Canadian Methodism, Dr. Ryerson says:--When the writer
of these Essays was appointed a representative of the Canadian
Conference to negotiate a union between the two Conferences in 1833, he
carried a Petition to the King, signed by upwards of 20,000 inhabitants,
against the Clergy Reserve Monopoly and the Establishment of a Dominant
Church in Upper Canada. This petition was presented through Lord
Stanley, the Colonial Secretary. Page 221.--H.
[40] Dr. Ryerson has left no record in his "Story" of the negotiations
for this Union. His report, however, on the subject will be found on
pages 193, 194, Vol. iv. of the _Guardian_ for October 16th, 1833, from
which I take the following extracts: On the 5th June, Rev. Messrs.
Bunting, Beecham, Alder, and myself, examined the whole question in
detail, and prepared an outline of the resolutions to be submitted to
the British Conference, and recommended that a grant of £1,000 be
appropriated the first year to the promotion of Canadian Missions. On
the 2nd August these resolutions were introduced by Rev. John Beecham
(Missionary Secretary). They were supported by Rev. Jabez Bunting, Rev.
Jas. Wood (now in his 83rd year), and Rev. Robert Newton. A Committee
was appointed to consider and report on the whole matter consisting of
the President, Secretary, and seven ex-Presidents, the Irish
representatives (Messrs. Waugh, Stewart, and Doolittle), and fifteen
other ministers. This Committee considered and reported these
resolutions, which were adopted and forms the basis of the Articles of
Union. Hereafter, the name of our Church will be changed from "The
Methodist Episcopal Church in Canada," to "The Wesleyan Methodist Church
in British North America."--H.
CHAPTER XI.
1833-1834.
"Impressions" of England and their Effects.
On my return to Canada, after having negotiated the Union of 1833 with
the English Conference, accompanied by Rev. George Marsden, as first
President of the Canadian Conference, I was re-elected editor of the
_Christian Guardian_, and continued as such until 1835, when I refused
re-election, and was appointed to Kingston; but in November of the same
year, the President of the Conference appointed from England (Rev.
William Lord) insisted upon my going to England to arrange pecuniary
difficulties, which had arisen between him and the London Wesleyan
Missionary Committee.
Except the foregoing paragraph, Dr. Ryerson has left no particulars of
the events which transpired in his history from the period of his return
to Canada in September, 1833, until some time in 1835. I have,
therefore, selected what follows in this chapter, from his letters and
papers, to illustrate this busy and eventful portion of his active life.
The principal circumstance which occurred at this time was the
publication of his somewhat famous "Impressions" of public men and
parties in England. This event marked an important epoch in his life, if
not in the history of the country.
The publication of these "Impressions" during this year created quite a
sensation. Dr. Ryerson was immediately assailed with a storm of
invective by the chief leaders of the ultra section of politicians with
whom he had generally acted. By the more moderate section and by the
public generally he was hailed as the champion, if not the deliverer, of
those who were really alarmed at the rapid strides towards disloyalty
and revolution, to which these extreme men were impelling the people.
This feature of the unlooked for and bitter controversy, which followed
the publication of these "impressions," will be developed further on.
_October 2d, 1833._--On this day the Upper Canada Conference ratified
the articles of union between it and the British Conference, which were
agreed upon at the Manchester Conference on the 7th of August. (See
note on page 119.)[41] At the Conference held this year in York
(Toronto), Dr. Ryerson was again elected editor of the _Guardian_. He
entered on the duties of that office on the 16th October.
_October 30th._--In reply to the many questions put to Dr. Ryerson on
his return to Canada, such as: "What do you think of England?" "What is
your opinion of her public men, her institutions?" etc., etc., he
published in the _Guardian_ of this day the first part of "Impressions
made by my late visit to England," in regard to public men, religious
bodies, and the general state of the nation. He said:--
There are three great political parties in England--Tories, Whigs, and
Radicals, and two descriptions of characters constituting each party. Of
the first, there is the moderate and the ultra tory. An English ultra
tory is what we believe has usually been meant and understood in Canada
by the unqualified term tory; that is, a lordling in power, a tyrant in
politics, and a bigot in religion. This description of partizans, we
believe, is headed by the Duke of Cumberland, and is followed not "afar
off" by that powerful party, which presents such a formidable array of
numbers, rank, wealth, talent, science, and literature, headed by the
hero of Waterloo. This shade of the tory party appears to be headed in
the House of Commons by Sir Robert Inglis, member for the Oxford
University, and is supported, on most questions, by that most subtle and
ingenious politician and fascinating speaker, Sir Robert Peel, with his
numerous train of followers and admirers. Among those who support the
distinguishing measures of this party are men of the highest Christian
virtue and piety; and, our decided impression is, that it embraces the
major part of the talent, and wealth, and learning of the British
Nation. The acknowledged and leading organs of this party are
_Blackwood's Magazine_ and the _London Quarterly Review_.
The other branch of this great political party is what is called the
moderate tory. In political theory he agrees with his high-toned
neighbour; but he acts from religious principle, and this governs his
private as well as his public life. To this class belongs a considerable
portion of the Evangelical Clergy, and, we think, a majority of the
Wesleyan Methodists. It evidently includes the great body of the piety,
Christian enterprise, and sterling virtue of the nation. It is, in time
of party excitement, alike hated and denounced by the ultra Tory, the
crabbed Whig, and the Radical leveller. Such was our impression of the
true character of what, by the periodical press in England, is termed a
moderate Tory. From his theories we in some respects dissent; but his
integrity, his honesty, his consistency, his genuine liberality, and
religious beneficence, claim respect and imitation.
The second great political and now ruling party in England are the
Whigs--a term synonymous with whey, applied, it is said, to this
political school, from the sour and peevish temper manifested by its
first disciples--though it is now rather popular than otherwise in
England. The Whig appears to differ in theory from the Tory in this,
that he interprets the constitution, obedience to it, and all measures
in regard to its administration, upon the principles of expediency; and
is, therefore, always pliant in his professions, and is even ready to
suit his measures to "the times"; an indefinite term, that also
designates the most extensively circulated daily paper in England, or in
the world, which is the leading organ of the Whig party, backed by the
formidable power and lofty periods of the _Edinburgh Review_. The
leaders of this party in the House of Lords are Earl Grey and the Lord
Chancellor Brougham; at the head of the list in the House of Commons
stands the names of Mr. Stanley, Lord Althorp, Lord John Russell, and
Mr. T. B. Macaulay. In this class are also included many of the most
learned and popular ministers of Dissenting congregations.
The third political sect is called Radicals, apparently headed by
Messrs. Joseph Hume and Thomas Attwood; the former of whom, though
acute, indefatigable, persevering, popular on financial questions, and
always to the point, and heard with respect and attention in the House
of Commons, has no influence as a religious man; has never been known to
promote any religious measure or object as such, and has opposed every
measure for the better observance of the Sabbath, and even introduced a
motion to defeat the bill for the abolition of colonial slavery; and Mr.
Attwood, the head of the celebrated Birmingham political Union, is a
conceited, boisterous, hollow-headed declaimer.
Radicalism in England appeared to me to be but another word for
Republicanism, with the name of King instead of President. The notorious
infidel character of the majority of the political leaders and
periodical publications of their party, deterred the virtuous part of
the nation from associating with them, though some of the brightest
ornaments of the English pulpit and nation have leaned to their leading
doctrines in theory. It is not a little remarkable that that very
description of the public press, which in England advocates the lowest
radicalism, is the foremost in opposing and slandering the Methodists in
this Province. Hence the fact that some of these editors have been
amongst the lowest of the English radicals previous to their egress from
the mother country.
Upon the whole, our impressions of the religious and moral character,
and influence, of the several political parties into which the British
nation is unhappily divided, were materially different in some respects,
from personal observation, from what they had been by hear-say and
reading.
On the very evening of the day in which the foregoing appeared, Mr. W.
L. Mackenzie (in the _Colonial Advocate_ of Oct. 30th), denounced the
writer of these "Impressions" in no measured terms. His denunciation
proved that he clearly perceived what would be the effect on the public
mind of Dr. Ryerson's candid and outspoken criticisms on men and things
in England--especially his adverse opinion of the English idols of (what
subsequently proved to be) the disloyal section of the public men of the
day in Upper Canada and their followers.
Mr. Mackenzie's vehement attack upon the writer of these "Impressions"
had its effect at the time. In some minds a belief in the truth of that
attack lingered long afterwards--but not in the minds of those who could
distinguish between honest conviction, based upon actual knowledge, and
pre-conceived opinions, based upon hearsay and a superficial
acquaintance with men and things.
As the troubled period of 1837 approached, hundreds had reason to be
thankful to Dr. Ryerson that the publication of his "Impressions" had,
without design on his part, led to the disruption of a party which was
being hurried to the brink of a precipice, over which so many well
meaning, but misguided, men fell in the winter of 1837, never to rise
again.
It was a proud boast of Dr. Ryerson (as he states in the "Epochs of
Canadian Methodism," page 385), that in these disastrous times not a
single member of the Methodist Church was implicated in the disloyal
rebellion of 1837-8. He attributed this gratifying state of things to
the fact that he had uttered the notes of warning in sufficient time to
enable the readers of the _Guardian_ to pause and think; and that, with
a just appreciation of their danger, members of the Society had
separated themselves from all connection with projects and opinions
which logically would have placed them in a position of defiant
hostility to the Queen and constitution.
But, to return. The outburst of Mr. Mackenzie's wrath, which immediately
followed (on the evening of the same day) the publication of Dr.
Ryerson's "Impressions," was as follows:--
The _Christian Guardian_, under the management of Egerton Ryerson,
has gone over to the enemy,--press, types, and all,--and hoisted
the colours of a cruel, vindictive, Tory priesthood.... The
contents of the _Guardian_ of to-night tells us in language too
plain, too intelligible to be misunderstood, that a deadly blow has
been struck in England at the liberties of the people of Upper
Canada, by as subtle and ungrateful an adversary, in the guise of
an old and familiar friend, as ever crossed the Atlantic.
In his "Almanac," issued on the same day, Mr. Mackenzie also used
similar language. He said:--
The arch-apostate Egerton, alias _Arnold_, Ryerson, and the
_Christian Guardian_ goes over to Strachan and the Tories.
_Nov. 6th._--In the _Guardian_ of this day Dr. Ryerson inserted an
extended reply to Mr. Mackenzie, and, in calm and dignified language,
gave the reasons which induced him to publish his "Impressions." He
said:--
We did so,--1st, As a subject of useful information; 2nd, To correct an
erroneous impression that had been industriously created, that we were
identified in our feelings and purposes with some one political party;
3rd, To furnish an instructive moral to the Christian reader, not to be
a passive or active tool, or the blind, thorough-going follower of any
political party as such. We considered this called for at the present
time on both religious and patriotic grounds. We designed this
expression of our sentiments, and this means of removing groundless
prejudice and hostility in the least objectionable and offensive way,
and without coming in contact with any political party in Canada, or
giving offence to any, except those who had shown an inveterate and
unprincipled hostility to Methodism. We therefore associated the
Canadian _ultra_ tory with the English radical, because we were
convinced of their identity in moral essence, and that the only
essential difference between them is, that the one is top and the other
bottom. We therefore said, "that very description of the public press
which in England advocates the lowest radicalism, is the foremost in
opposing and slandering the Methodists in this Province."
That our Christian brethren throughout the Province, and every sincere
friend to Methodism, do not wish us to be an organized political party,
we are fully assured--that it is inconsistent with our profession and
duty to become such. Out of scores of expressions to the same effect we
might quote quite abundantly from the _Guardian_, but our readers are
aware of them.
That the decided part we have felt it our duty to take in obtaining and
securing our rights in regard of the Clergy Reserve Question, has had a
remote or indirect tendency to promote Mr. Mackenzie's political
measures, we readily admit; but that we have ever supported a measure,
or given publicity to any documents from Mr. Mackenzie, or any other
political man in Canada, on any other grounds than this, we totally
deny.
Mr. Mackenzie's attack rests on four grounds: 1. That our language was
so explicit as to remove every doubt and hope of our encouraging a
"thick and thin" partizanship with him, or any man or set of men in
Canada; or, 2. That we did not speak in opprobrious, but rather
favourable terms, of His Excellency the Lieutenant-Governor; or, 3. That
we expressed our approbation of the principles and colonial policy of
Lord Goderich (now Earl Ripon), and those who agree with him; or 4. That
we alluded to Mr. Hume in terms not sufficiently complimentary. If Mr.
Mackenzie's wishes are crossed and his wrath inflamed, because we have
not entered our protest against His Excellency the Lieutenant-Governor,
we could not do so after we had learned the views of His Majesty's
Government, in a reply of His Excellency to an address of our Conference
about two years ago,[42] when every unfavourable impression had been
removed, and when good-will was expressed towards the Methodists as a
people; we have not so learned to forgive injuries--we have not so
learned to "honour and obey magistrates,"--we have not so learned our
duty as a minister, and as a Christian. We, as a religious body, and as
the organ of a religious body, have only to do with Sir John Colborne's
administration, as far as it concerns our character and rights as
British subjects; His Excellency's measures and administration in merely
secular matters lie within the peculiar province of the political
journalists and politicians of the day. If our offering a tribute of
grateful respect to Lord Goderich, who had declared in his despatches to
Canada his earnest desire to remove every bishop and priest from our
Legislature, to secure the right of petitioning the King to the meanest
subject in the realm, to extend the blessings of full religious liberty
and the advantages of education to every class of British subjects in
Canada, without distinction or partiality, and in every way to advance
the interests of the Province;--if honouring such men and such
principles be "hoisting the colours (as Mr. Mackenzie says), of a cruel,
vindictive, Tory priesthood," then has Mr. Mackenzie the merit of a new
discovery of vindictive cruelty, and with his own definition of liberty,
and his own example of liberality, will he adopt his own honourable
means to attain it, and breathe out death and destruction against all
who do not incorporate themselves into a strait-jacket battalion under
his political sword, and vow allegiance and responsibility to everything
done by his "press, types, and all?"
Mr. Mackenzie did not reply to Dr. Ryerson in the spirit of his
rejoinder. He was a master of personal invective, and he indulged in it
in this instance, rather than discuss the questions raised on their
merits. He, therefore, turned on Dr. Ryerson, and, over his shoulders,
struck a blow at his venerable Father and his eldest Brother. He said:--
The Father of the Editor of the _Guardian_ lifted his sword against
the throats of his own countrymen struggling for freedom from
established churches, stamp acts, military domination, Scotch
governors, and Irish government; and his brother George figured on
the frontier in the war of 1812, and got wounded and pensioned for
fighting to preserve crown and clergy reserves, and all the other
strongholds of corruption, in the hands of the locusts who infest
and disturb this Province.
Dr. Ryerson's simple rejoinder to this attack on his Father and Brother
was as follows:--
The man who could hold up the brave defenders of our homes and firesides
to the scorn and contempt of their countrymen, must be lost to all
patriotic and loyal feelings of humanity for those who took their lives
in their hands in perilous times.
_Nov. 14th._--As to the effect of the "impressions" upon the country
generally, the following letter from Hallowell (Picton) written to Dr.
Ryerson by his brother John, may be safely taken as an example of the
feeling which they at first evoked. It is characterized by strong and
vigorous language, indicative of the state of public opinion at the
time. It is valuable from the fact that while it is outspoken in its
criticism of Dr. Ryerson's views, it touches upon the point to which I
have already referred, viz: the separation into two sections of the
powerful party which was then noted as the champion of popular rights.
Mr. Ryerson says:--
Your article on the Political Parties of England has created much
excitement throughout these parts. The only good that can result
from it is, the breaking up of the union which has hitherto existed
between us and the radicals. Were it not for this, I should much
regret its appearance. But we had got so closely linked with those
extreme men, in one way or another, that we cannot expect to get
rid of them without feeling the shock, and, perhaps, it may as well
come now as anytime. It is our duty and interest to support the
Government. Although there may be some abuses which have crept in,
yet, I believe that we enjoy as many political and religious
advantages as any people. Our public affairs are as well managed as
in any other country. As it respects the Reformers, so called, take
Baldwin, Bidwell, Rolph, and such men from their ranks, and there
is scarcely one man of character or honour among them. I am sorry
to say it, but it is so. The best way for the present is for us to
have nothing to say about politics, but treat the Government with
respect. Radcliffe, of the Cobourg _Reformer_, and Dr. Barker, of
the Kingston _Whig_, have come out in their true character.
Radcliffe is preparing a heavy charge against you. But let them
come; fear them not! I hope they will show themselves _now_. I
thought that you, in your reply to W. L. Mackenzie, did not speak
in a sufficiently decided manner. You say you have not changed
your views; but I hope you have in some respects. Although you
never were a Radical, yet have not we all leaned too much towards
them, and will we not now smart for it a little? But, the sooner it
comes on, the sooner it will be over.
Rev. John Ryerson then gives the first intimation of the existence of
that germ of hostility to the recently consummated Union on the part of
the British Wesleyan Missionaries in this country--a hostility which
became at length so deep and widespread as to destroy the Union
itself--a union which was not fully restored until 1847. Mr. Ryerson
points out the political animus of the movement, and proceeds:--
You see that the Missionaries are making great efforts to have
Kingston and York made exceptions to the general arrangements.
Should the English Committee listen to them, confidence will be
entirely destroyed. Their object is to make the British Conference
believe that we have supported Radical politics to an unlimited
extent, and that, therefore, the people will not submit to the
Union with such people; they (the Missionaries) are, however, the
authors of the whole trouble. Rev. Mr. Hetherington told me that
they were getting the back numbers of the _Guardian_ to prove that
we had been political intimidators! They say that Mr. Marsden, the
President, told the members at Kingston that it they could make it
appear that we had done this, they should be exempted from the
Union, and be supplied with Missionaries from home.
In a subsequent letter from Rev. John Ryerson, he discusses his
brother's "Impressions of Public Men in England," and utters a word of
warning to the Methodist people who have allied themselves too closely
with the disloyal party. He says:
What will be the result of your remarks in the _Guardian_ on
Political Parties in England, I cannot say. They will occasion much
speculation, some jealousy, and bad feeling. I have sometimes
thought you had better not have written them, particularly at this
time, yet I have long been of the opinion (both with regard to
measures and men) that we leaned too much towards Radicalism, and
that it would be absolutely necessary to disengage ourselves from
them entirely. You can see plainly that it is not Reform, but
Revolution they are after. We should fare sumptuously, should we
not, with W. L. Mackenzie, of Toronto, and Radcliffe, of Cobourg,
for our rulers! I have also felt very unpleasant in noticing the
endeavours of these men (aided by some of our members) to introduce
their republican leaven into our Ecclesiastical polity. Is it not a
little remarkable that not one of our members, who have entered
into their politics, but has become a furious leveller in matters
of Church Government, and these very men are the most regardless of
our reputation, and the most ready to impugn our motives, and
defame our character, when we, in any way, cross their path. There
are some things in your remarks I don't like; but, on the whole, I
am glad of their appearance, and I hope, whenever you have occasion
to speak of the Government, you will do it in terms of respect. I
am anxious that we should obtain the confidence of the Government,
and entirely disconnect ourselves from that tribe of levellers,
with whom we have been too intimate, and who are, at any time,
ready to turn around and sell us when we fail to please them.
_Nov. 20th._--In another letter to Dr. Ryerson from his brother John, at
this date, he says:--
I deeply feel for you in the present state of agitation and trial.
My own heart aches and sickens within me at times; I have no doubt,
however much of a philosopher you may be, that you at times
participate in the same feelings; but, pursuing a conscientious
course, I hope you will at times be able to say:
"Courage, my soul! thou need'st not fear,
Thy great Provider still is near."
The following sympathetic letter from Dr. Ryerson's friend, Mr. E. C.
Griffin, of Waterdown, written at the same time, gives another proof of
the unreasoning prejudice of those whose knowledge of the outer world
was circumscribed and superficial. In England, Dr. Ryerson saw things as
they were. He was, therefore, not prepared for the burst of wrath that
followed the plain recital of his "impressions" of men and things in
England. Mr. Griffin writes:--
The respect I have for you and yours should at all times deter me
from bearing evil tidings, yet the same consideration would make it
a duty under peculiar circumstances. You have already learned that
the public mind has been much agitated in consequence of your
remarks in the _Guardian_ on Mr. Joseph Hume, M.P., and Mr. Thomas
Attwood, M.P. (see page 123). On this Circuit it is truly
alarming--some of our most respectable Methodists are threatening
to leave the Church. The general impression has obtained (however
unjustly) that you have "turned downright Tory," which, in this
country, whether moderate or ultra, seems to have but one meaning
among the bulk of Reformers, and that is, as being an enemy to all
reform and the correction of acknowledged abuses. This general
impression among the people has created a feverish discontent among
the Methodists. The excitement is so high that your subsequent
explanation has seemed to be without its desired effect. I should
be glad if you would state distinctly in the _Guardian_ what you
meant in your correspondence with the Colonial Secretary, when you
said you had no desire to interfere with the present emoluments of
the Church clergy (or words to that effect); and also of the term
"equal protection to the different denominations." You are,
doubtless, aware of the use made of these expressions by some of
the journals, and, I am sorry to say, with too much effect. These
remarks, taken in connection with those against Mr. Hume, is the
pivot on which everything is turned against you, against the
_Guardian_, and against the Methodists.
A few days later Dr. Ryerson received another letter from Mr. Griffin,
in which he truthfully says:--
Perhaps there have not been many instances in which sophistry has
been applied more effectually to injure an individual, or a body of
Christians, as in the present instance. Whigs, tories, and radicals
have all united to crush, I may say at a blow, the Methodists, and
none have tried to do so more effectually than Mr. W. L. Mackenzie.
He persisted in it so as to make his friends generally believe that
the cause of reform was ruined by you. His abuse of you and your
friends, and the Methodists, is more than I can stand. He has
certainly manifested a great want of discernment, or he has acted
from design. I see that the Hamilton _Free Press_ has called in the
aid of Mr. F. Collins, of the _Canadian Freeman_, to assist in
abusing you and your whole family.
From Augusta, Rev. Anson Green wrote about the same time, and in a
similar strain, but not so sympathetically. He says:--
I fear your impressions are bad ones. Our people are all in an
uproar about them.
_Nov. 22nd._--Rev. William Ryerson writing from Kingston at this time,
reports the state of feeling there. He says:--
As to the _Guardian_, I am sorry to inform you that it is becoming
less popular than formerly. If your English "impressions" are not
more acceptable and useful in other parts than they are here, it
will add little to your credit, or to the usefulness of your paper
to publish any more of them. I know that you have been shamefully
abused, and treated in a most base manner, and by no one so much so
as by Mr. Radcliffe of the Cobourg _Reformer_. I hope you will
expose the statements and figures of the _Reformer_ to our friends.
It is rather unfortunate that if you did intend, as is said, to
conciliate the Tory party in this country, you should have
expressed yourself in such a way as to be so much misunderstood.
_Nov. 23rd._--Rev. Alvah A. Adams, writing from Prescott, says:--
There are a few disturbances in our Zion. Some are bent on making
mischief. You need not be surprised that the Grenville _Gazette_
speaks so contemptuously of you and the cause in which you have
been, and are still, engaged. There are reasons why you need not
marvel at the great torrent of scurrilous invectives with which his
useless columns have of late abounded.
_Nov. 23rd._--Although not so intended by Dr. Ryerson, yet the
publication of his "impressions," had the effect of developing the plans
of Mr. W. L. Mackenzie, and those who acted with him, much more rapidly
and fully than they could have anticipated. In the second supplement to
his _Colonial Advocate_, published November 23rd, Mr. Mackenzie used
this unmistakeable language:--
The local authorities have no means to protect themselves against
an injured people, if they persist in their unconstitutional
career.... There are not military enough to uphold a bad government
for an hour, if the Rubicon has been passed; and well does Sir John
Colborne know that although he may hire regiments of priests here,
he may expect no more red-coats from Europe in those days of
economy.... He also knows that if we are to take examples from the
Mother Country, the arbitrary proceedings of the officers of his
government _are such_ as would warrant the people to an open and
_armed resistance_.
_Dec. 6th._--Dr. Ryerson having received a protest from five of his
ministerial brethren in the Niagara District,[43] against his
"impressions" he wrote a remonstrance to each of them, but this did not
appease them. Rev. David Wright said:--
As an individual I am not at all satisfied either with the course
you have taken or the explanation given. Could you witness the
confused state of our Church on Stamford Circuit; the insults we
receive, both from many of our members and others of good standing,
you would at once see the propriety of the steps we have taken for
our defence. Hardly a tea-party or meeting of any kind, but the
_Guardian_ is the topic of conversation, and the conversion of its
editor and all the preachers to Toryism. The Ranters and the
Ryanites are very busy, and are doing us much harm. I am more and
more convinced of the imprudence of the course you have taken,
especially at this trying time in our Church. In Queenston,
Drummondville, Chippewa, Erie, St. Davids, the Lane, and Lyons'
Creek the preachers are hooted at as they ride by. This is rather
trying. I assure you.
Rev. James Evans said:--
You request me not to solicit any to continue the _Guardian_ who
are dissatisfied, and who wish to discontinue. This is worse than
all beside. And do you suppose that, in opposition to the wish of
the Conference, and interest of the Church, I shall pay attention
to your request? No, my brother, I cannot; I will not. It shall be
my endeavour to obtain and continue subscribers by allaying as far
as practicable, their fears, rather than by telling them that they
may discontinue and you will abide the consequences. I am
astonished! I can only account for your strange and, I am sure,
un-Ryersonian conduct and advice on one principle--that there is
something ahead which you, through your superior political
spyglass, have discovered and thus shape your course, while we
land-lubbers, short-sighted as we are, have not even heard of it.
Dr. Ryerson, therefore, challenged these five ministers to proceed
against him as provided by the Discipline of the Church. In his reply to
them, he lays down some important principles in regard to the rights of
an editor, and the duty of his ministerial accusers. He said:--
I beg to say that I cannot publish the criminating declaration of which
you speak. You will therefore act your pleasure in publishing it
elsewhere. The charges against me are either true or false. If they are
true, are you proceeding in the disciplinary way against me? Though I am
editor for the Conference, yet I have individual rights as well as you;
and the increased responsibility of my situation should, under those
rights, if possible, be still more sacred. And if our Conference will
place a watchman upon the wall of our Zion, and then allow its members
to plunge their swords into him whenever they think he has departed from
his duty, without even giving him a court-martial trial, then they are a
different description of men from what I think they are. If, as you say,
I have been guilty of imprudent conduct, or even "misrepresented my
brethren," make your complaint to my Presiding Elder, according to
discipline, and then may the decision of the Committee be published in
the _Guardian_, or anywhere else that they may say. So much for the
disciplinary course. Again, if "the clamour," as you call it, against
the _Guardian_ be well founded, are you helping the _Guardian_ by
corroborating the statement of that clamour? Can Brother James Evans
consistently or conscientiously ask an individual to take, or continue
to take the _Guardian_, when he or you publish to the world the belief
that its principles are changed? Will this quiet the "clamour?" Will
this reconcile the members? Will this unite the preachers? Will this
promote the harmony of the Church? Will it not be a fire-brand rather
than the "seeds of commotion?" One or two others here got a meeting of
the male members of the York Society, and proposed resolutions similar
in substance to yours, which were opposed and reprobated by brother
Richardson, on the very disciplinary and prudential ground of which I
speak, and rejected by the Society. In your declaration you say (not on
account of "clamour," or accusations of editors or others, but on
account of editorial remarks in the _Guardian_), "you express your
sentiments to save your character from aspersion." In this you imply
that the editor of the _Guardian_ has misrepresented your sentiments,
and aspersed your character; and, if so, has he not changed his
principles? And, if he has changed his principles, is he not guilty of
falsehood, since he has positively declared to the reverse? You
therefore virtually charge him with inconsistency, misrepresentation,
and deliberate falsehood. Is this the fruit of brotherly love? Again,
you say that "our political sentiments are the same as before the visit
of the editor of the _Guardian_ to England." Is not this equal to
asserting that the editor's sentiments are not the same? You therefore
say that you love me; that you desire the peace of the Church, and the
interests of the _Guardian_, yet you propose a course which will confirm
the slanders of my enemies--to implicate me with inconsistency and
falsehood--to injure the _Guardian_, and deprive yourselves of the
power, as men of honour and truth, to recommend it--to kindle and
sanction dissatisfaction among our Church members--to arm preacher
against preacher--and to criminate a brother before the public, without
a disciplinary trial. You say "our friends are looking out for it." Is
this the way, my brother, that you have quieted their minds, by telling
them that you also were going to criminate the editor? If this be so, I
am not surprised that there is dissatisfaction on your circuit. Brother
Evans said that nothing but a denial of having changed my opinions, and
an explicit statement of them, would satisfy our friends. I did so, and
did so plainly and conscientiously. Yet you do not even allude to this
expression of my sentiments, but still insist upon doing what is far
more than taking my life--stabbing my principles and integrity. I ask
if this is my reward for endangering my life and enduring unparalleled
labours, to save the Societies heretofore from being rent to the very
centre, and enduring ceaseless storms of slander and persecution for
years past in defending the abused character of my brethren? Are they
the first to lift up their heel against me? Will they join in the hue
and cry against me, rather than endure a "hoot," when I am unjustly
treated and basely slandered? I hope I have not fallen into such hands.
Dr. Ryerson received at this time a candid and kindly characteristic
letter from his youngest brother, Edwy, at Stamford, which indicated
that a reaction was taking place in regard to the much discussed
"impressions." He says:--
The present agitated state of the Societies, partly from the Union,
and, in a greater degree, from your "impressions" (which would have
been a blessing to our Societies, had they never been published)
make it very unpleasant to ask even for subscriptions to the
_Guardian_. We are here in a state of commotion; politics run high,
and religion low. "The _Guardian_ has turned Tory," is the hue and
cry, and many appear to be under greater concern about it, than
they ever were about the salvation of their souls. Many again, have
got wonderfully wise, and pretend to reveal (as a friend, but in
reality as an enemy) the secrets of your policy. Under these
unpleasant circumstances, the Ranters have availed themselves of
the opportunity of planting themselves at nearly all our posts, and
sowing tares in our Societies.
You have received a protest, signed by several preachers, and my
name among them. Those were my impressions at the time. Therefore I
thought it my duty, in connection with my brethren, to make my
protest. I have, however (since seeing the _Guardian_), been led to
believe you had not changed from what you were. Many of the
preachers are rejoiced that you were put in the editorial chair,
and feel strongly disposed to exert their influence that you may
not be displaced.
_Dec. 2nd._--On this day Dr. Ryerson received a kind word of
encouragement from Mr. Alex. Davidson, a literary friend in Port Hope,
afterwards of Niagara. He said:--
I have had an opportunity of seeing most of the provincial papers.
They exhibit a miserable picture of the state of the press. The
conduct of the editors ought, I think, to be exposed. I have been
afraid that from such unmerited abuse, you would quit the
_Guardian_ in disgust, and I am glad to see that, though your mind
may be as sensitive as that of any other person, you remain firm.
Another indication of the reaction in regard to the "impressions" is
mentioned in a note received from Rev. Ephraim Evans, Trafalgar. He
says:--
Mr. Thos. Cartwright, of Streetsville, who had given up the
_Guardian_, has ordered it to be sent to him again so that he may
not seem to countenance the clamour that has been raised against
you. Mr. Evans adds: "I am happy to find that the agitation
produced by the unwarrantable conduct of the press generally, is
rapidly subsiding; and, I trust, nay, am certain, that the late
avowal of your sentiments, will be perfectly satisfactory to every
sensible and ingenuous mind. I am, upon the whole, led to believe
that Methodism will weather out this storm also, and lose not a
spar."
_Dec. 6th._--Among the many letters of sympathy received by Dr. Ryerson
at this time, was one from his Father, in which he says:--
I perceive by the papers that you have met with tempestuous
weather. I devoutly hope that the Great Pilot will conduct you
safely through the rocks and quicksands on either side.
_Jan. 6th, 1834._--In a letter from Rev. Anson Green, at Augusta, it was
apparent that the tide of popular opinion against Dr. Ryerson had
turned. He said:--
I have been very much pleased indeed with the _Guardian_ during the
last few months. There is a very great improvement in it. In this
opinion I am not alone. Your remarks on the Clergy Reserve question
were very timely and highly satisfactory. A number of our brethren
have wished me to express to you the pleasure they feel in the
course which you have pursued as editor. There has been very great
prejudice against you in these parts, among preachers and people,
but I think they are dying out and will, I trust, shortly entirely
disappear. I hope we shall soon see "eye to eye."
_March 5th._--In the _Guardian_ of this day, Dr. Ryerson intimated
that:--
Among many schemes resorted to by the abbettors of Mr. Mackenzie to
injure me, was the circulation of all kinds of rumours against my
character and standing as a minister. For proof, it was represented that
I was denied access to the Wesleyan pulpit in this town. When these
statements were made early in the year, the stewards and leaders of the
York Society met on the 11th of last January, and passed a resolution to
the effect
That being anxious, lest, under exciting circumstances, you might
be tempted to withhold your ministrations from the York
congregation, they desire their Secretary to inform you that it is
their wish, and they believe it a duty you owe to the Church of
Christ, to favour it with your views on His unsearchable riches as
often as an opportunity may present itself.
As these rumours have now been revived, I published this resolution in
the _Guardian_ of to-day.
The capital offence charged against Dr. Ryerson in publishing his
"impressions" was his exposure of Joseph Hume, M.P., the friend and
patron of Mr. Mackenzie. (See pages 118 and 123.) In the _Guardian_ of
December 11th, Dr. Ryerson fully met that charge. Among other things he
pointed out:--
1st. That, having voted for a Church establishment in India, Mr. Hume
was the last man who should have been entrusted with petitions from
Upper Canada, against a Church establishment in Upper Canada. 2nd. That
Methodists emigrating to this country, when they learn that Mr. Hume is
regarded as a sort of representative of the principles of the Methodists
in Upper Canada, immediately imbibe strong prejudices against them,
refusing to unite with them, and even strongly opposing them, saying
that such Methodists are Radicals--a term which, in England, conveys
precisely the same idea that the term Republican does in this Province.
Thus the prejudices which exist between a portion of the Canadian and
British Methodists here, are heightened, and the breach widened. 3rd.
That even adherents of the Church of England here who were Reformers in
England join the ranks of those opposed to us when they know that Mr.
Hume is a chosen representative of our views in England; for the
personal animosity between the Whigs and Reformers and Radicals in
England is more bitter, if possible, than between the Radicals and
Tories, and far more rancorous than between the Whigs and Tories. There
is just as much difference between an English Reformer and an avowed
English Radical as there is between a Canadian Reformer and an avowed
Canadian Republican. In the interests of the Methodists, therefore,
religiously and politically, the allusion to Mr. Hume was justifiable
and necessary. Dr. Ryerson continues:--
I may mention that so strongly impressed was I with these views, that in
an interview which I had with Mr. Secretary Stanley, a few days before
the Clergy Reserve petitions were presented by Mr. Hume, I remarked that
the people of Upper Canada, not being acquainted with public men in
England, had sent them to the care of a gentleman of influence in the
financial affairs of Great Britain, but that I was apprehensive that he
was not the best qualified to advocate a purely legal and religious
question. Mr. Secretary Stanley smilingly interrupted me by asking "Is
it Hume?" I replied, "It is, but I hope this circumstance will not have
the least influence upon your mind, Mr. Secretary Stanley, in giving the
subject that important and full consideration which its great importance
demands." Mr. Stanley replied: "No, Mr. Ryerson, be assured that the
subject will not be in the least prejudiced in my mind by any
circumstance of that kind; but I shall give it the most important and
grave consideration."
_May 24th._--Within three months after Dr. Ryerson had stated these
facts in regard to Mr. Hume, overwhelming evidence of the correctness of
his statement that Mr. Hume was unfit to act as a representative, in the
British Parliament, of the people of Upper Canada, was given by Mr. Hume
himself in a letter addressed to Mr. W. L. Mackenzie, dated 29th March,
1834. In that letter Mr. Hume stated that Mr. Mackenzie's
Election to, and subsequent ejection from the Legislature, must
hasten that crisis which is fast approaching in the affairs of the
Canadas, and which will terminate in independence and freedom from
the baneful domination of the mother country.
He also advised that
The proceedings between 1772 and 1782 in America ought not to be
forgotten; and to the honour of the Americans, for the interests of
the civilized world, let their conduct and the result be ever in
view.
Dr. Ryerson added: There is no mistaking the revolutionary and
treasonable character of this advice given to Canadians through Mr. W.
L. Mackenzie. Yet I have been denounced for exposing the designs of such
revolutionary advisers!
The following is an extract from Mr. W. L. Mackenzie's remarks in the
_Colonial Advocate_ on Mr. Hume's letter:--
The indignant feeling of the honest old Reformer (Hume), when he
became acquainted with the heartless slanders of the unprincipled
ingrate Ryerson, may be easily conceived from the tone of his
letter.... Mr. Mackenzie will be prepared to hand the original
letter to the Methodist Conference.
_June 4th._--In the _Guardian_ of this date, Dr. Ryerson replied at
length to Mr. Hume's letter, pointing out how utterly and totally false
were Mr. Hume's statements in regard to himself. He, in June, 1832,
expressed his opinion of Mr. Hume (pages 118 and 123). He then said:--
That was my opinion of Mr. Hume, even before I advocated the Clergy
Reserve petition in England,--such it was after I conversed with him
personally, and witnessed his proceedings,--such it is now,--and such
must be the opinion of every British subject, after reading Mr. Hume's
revolutionary letter, in which he rejoices in the approach of a crisis
in the affairs of the Canadas, "which will terminate in independence and
freedom from the baneful domination of the mother country!" I stated to
Mr. Mackenzie more than once, when he called upon me in London, that I
could not associate myself with his political measures. But
notwithstanding all my caution, I, in fact, got into bad company, for
which I have now paid a pretty fair price.... I cannot but regard it as
a blessing and happiness to the Methodist connexion at large, that they
also, by the admission of all parties, stand so completely distinct from
Messrs. Hume and Mackenzie, as to be involved in no responsibility and
disgrace, by this premature announcement of their revolutionary
purposes.
_Oct. 25th._--As to the final result of the agitation in regard to the
"Impressions," Rev. John Ryerson, writing from Hallowell (Picton), at
this date, says:--
The work of schism has been pretty extensive in some parts of this
District. There have as the result of it left, or have been
expelled, on the Waterloo Circuit, 150; on the Bay of Quinte, 40;
in Belleville, 47; Sidney, 50; Cobourg, 32; making in all 320.
There have been received on these circuits since Conference 170,
which leaves a balance against us of 150.
Remarks on the Result of the "Impressions."
The result (on the membership of the Societies) of this
politico-religious agitation was more or less the same in other parts of
the Connexion. The publication of the "impressions" was (to those who
had for years been in a state of chronic war with the powers that be)
like the falling of the thunderbolt of Jove out of a cloudless sky. It
unexpectedly precipitated a crisis in provincial affairs. It brought men
face to face with a new issue. An issue too which they had not thought
of; or, if it had presented itself to their minds, was regarded as a
remote, if possible, contingency. Their experience of the working of
"British institutions" (as the parody on them in Upper Canada was
called), had so excited their hostility and embittered their feelings,
that when they at first heard Dr. Ryerson speak in terms of eulogy of
the working of these institutions in the mother country, they could not,
or would not, distinguish between such institutions in England and their
professed counterpart in Upper Canada. Nor could they believe that the
great champion of their cause, who in the past had exposed the
pernicious and oppressive workings of the so-called British institutions
in Upper Canada, was sincere in his exposition of the principles and the
promulgation of doctrines in regard to men and things in Britain, which
were now declared by Mr. W. L. Mackenzie to be heretical as well as
entirely opposed to views and opinions which he (Dr. Ryerson) had
hitherto held on these important questions. The novelty of the
"impressions" themselves, and the bitterness with which they were at
once assailed, confused the public mind and embarrassed many of Dr.
Ryerson's friends.
In these days of ocean telegraphy and almost daily intercourse by steam
with Britain, we can scarcely realize how far separated Canada was from
England fifty years ago. Besides this, the channels through which that
intercourse was carried on were few, and often of a partizan character.
"Downing Street [Colonial Office] influence," and "Downing Street
interference with Canadian rights," were popular and favourite topics of
declamation and appeal with the leaders of a large section of the
community. Not that there did not exist, in many instances, serious
grounds for the accusations against the Colonial Office; but they, in
most cases, arose in that office from ignorance rather than from design.
However the causes of complaint were often greatly exaggerated, and very
often designedly so by interested parties on both sides of the Atlantic.
This, Dr. Ryerson soon discovered on his first visit to England, in
1833, and in his personal intercourse with the Colonial Secretaries and
other public men in London. The manly generosity of his nature recoiled
from being a party to the misrepresentation and injustice which was
current in Canada, when he had satisfied himself of the true state of
the case. He, therefore, on his return to the Province, gave the public
the benefit of his observation and experience in England.
In the light of to-day what he wrote appears fair and reasonable. It was
the natural expression of pleased surprise that men and things in
England were not so bad as had been represented; and that there was no
just cause for either alarm or ill feeling. His comparisons of parties
in England and in Canada were by extreme political leaders in Canada
considered odious. Hence the storm of invective which his observations
raised.
He showed incidentally that the real enemies to Canada were not those
who ruled at Downing Street, but those who set themselves up--within the
walls of Parliament in England and their prompters in Canada--as the
exponents of the views and feelings of the Canadian people.
The result of such a proceeding on Dr. Ryerson's part can easily be
imagined. Mr. Hume in England, and Mr. W. L. Mackenzie in Canada, took
the alarm. They very properly reasoned that if Dr. Ryerson's views
prevailed, their occupation as agitators and fomenters of discontent
would be gone. Hence the extraordinary vehemence which characterized
their denunciations of the writer who had so clearly exposed (as he did
more fully at a later period of the controversy), the disloyalty of
their aims, and the revolutionary character of their schemes.
This assault on Dr. Ryerson was entirely disproportionate to the cause
of offence. Were it not that the moral effect of what he wrote--more
than what he actually said--was feared, because addressed to a people
who had always listened to his words with deep attention and great
respect, it is likely that his words would have passed unchallenged and
unheeded.
* * * * *
I have given more than usual prominence to this period of Dr. Ryerson's
history--although he has left no record of it in the "Story" which he
had written. But I have done so in justice to himself, and from the fact
that it marked an important epoch in his life and in the history of the
Province. It was an event in which the native nobility of his character
asserted itself. The generous impulse which moved him to defend Mr.
Bidwell, when maligned and misrepresented, and Sir Charles Metcalfe,
whom he looked upon as unjustly treated and as a martyr, prompted him to
do full justice to English institutions, and to parties and leaders
there, even at the expense of his own pre-conceived notions on the
subject.
By doing so he refused to be of those who would perpetuate an imposition
upon the credulity of his countrymen, and especially of those who had
trusted him and had looked up to him as a leader of men, and as an
exponent of sound principles of government and public policy. And he
refused the more when that imposition was practised for the benefit of
those in whom he had no confidence, and to the injury of those for whose
welfare he had laboured for years.
Dr. Ryerson preferred to risk the odium of interested partisans, rather
than fail to tell his countrymen truly and frankly the real state of the
case--who and what were the men and parties with whom they had to do in
England--either as persons in official life, or as members of
Parliament, or writers for the press. He felt it to be his duty to warn
those who would heed his warning of the danger which they incurred in
following the unchallenged leadership of men whose aim he felt to be
revolution, and whose spirit was disloyalty itself, if not a thinly
disguised treason.
After the storm of reproach and calumny had passed away, there were
thousands in Upper Canada who had reason to cherish with respect and
love the name of one who, at a critical time, had so faithfully warned
them of impending danger, and saved them from political and social ruin.
Such gratitude was Dr. Ryerson's sole reward.
* * * * *
It would be impossible, within the compass of this "Story," to include
any details of the speeches, editorials, or other writings of Dr.
Ryerson during the many years of contest for civil and religious rights
in Upper Canada. The _Guardian_, the newspaper press (chiefly that
opposed to Dr. Ryerson), and the records of the House of Assembly
contain ample proof of the severity of the protracted struggle which
finally issued in the establishment on a secure foundation of the
religious and denominational privileges and freedom which we now enjoy.
To the Presbyterians, Congregationalists, Baptists, etc., who joined
heartily with the Methodist leaders in the prolonged struggle, the
gratitude of the country must always be due.--J. G. H.
* * * * *
_March 7th._--In the midst of his perplexing duties as editor, and the
storm of personal attack which his "impressions" had evoked, Dr. Ryerson
received a letter from his Mother. It must have been to him like "good
news from a far country." Full of love and gratitude to God, it would
be to him like waters of refreshment to a weary soul. His Mother said:--
With emotions of gratitude to God, I now write to you, to let you know
that the state of my health is as good as usual. Surely the Lord is
good, and doeth good, and His tender mercies are over me as a part of
the work of His hands. I find that my affections are daily deadening to
the things of earth, and my desires for any earthly good decreasing. I
have an increase of my desire for holiness of heart, and conformity to
all the will of God. I can say with the poet,
"Come life, come death, or come what will,
His footsteps I will follow still."
I long to say, "I live, yet not I, but Christ liveth in me." Besiege the
throne of grace, dear Egerton, in my behalf. Pray that the Lord would
finish his work, and cut it short in righteousness, and make my heart a
fit temple for the Holy Ghost to dwell in. Oh, my son, be continually on
your guard. You have need to believe firmly, to pray fervently, to work
abundantly. Live a holy life, die daily; watch your heart; guide your
senses; redeem your time; love Christ, and long for glory. Give my love
to your wife, and to all whom who may enquire for me, and accept a share
yourself, from your affection-mother,
Mehetabel Ryerson.
Charlotteville, March 4th, 1834.
* * * * *
After his return from England, Dr. Ryerson received a letter from Rev.
Wm. Lord, dated Manchester, 25th March, 1834, in which he referred to an
incident of Dr. Ryerson's visit to his house while in England. He
says:--
Your company, I am thankful to say, was very useful to several
members of my family. The last time you prayed with us, an
influence was received by one or two, the effects of which have
remained to this day. I now allude more particularly to ----, who,
more than twenty times since, has met me at the door, saying, "Have
you a letter from Mr. Ryerson?"
FOOTNOTES:
[41] As an example of the manner in which the Union was hailed in some
parts of the Province, a gentleman, writing from Merrickville on the
11th December, mentions a gratifying incident in regard to it. He
says:--At one Quarterly Conference Love Feast, when the presiding Elder
told the assembled multitude that they were for the first time about to
partake of bread and water as a token of love under the name of British
Wesleyan Methodists, a general burst of approbation proceeded from
preachers, leaders, and members, and such a feeling seemed to pervade
the whole assembly, as it would be difficult to describe.--H.
[42] See page 98.
[43] Rev. Messrs. David Wright, James Evans, William Griffis, jun.,
Henry Wilkinson and Edwy Ryerson. The protest was as follows: We, the
undersigned ministers of the W. M. Church, desirous to avert the evils
which may probably result to our Zion from "impressions" made by certain
political remarks in the editorial department of the _Guardian_, take
this opportunity of expressing our sentiments for your satisfaction, and
to save our characters from aspersion. First. We have considered, and
are still of the same opinion, that the clergy of the Episcopal Church
ought to be deprived of every emolument derived from Governmental aid,
and what are called the Clergy Reserves. Secondly. That our political
views are decidedly the same which they were previous to the visit of
the editor of the _Guardian_ to England, and we believe that the views
of our brethren in the ministry are unchanged.
CHAPTER XII.
1834.
Events following the Union.--Division and Strife.
Dr. Ryerson has left nothing in his "Story" to illustrate this period of
his personal history, nor the strife and division which followed the
consummation of the union of the British and Canadian Conferences. These
untoward events are, however, fully described in the "Epochs of Canadian
Methodism," pages 247-311: They arose chiefly out of the differences
which disturbed the British and Canadian Methodist Societies in Kingston
and other places, and the separation in the Societies generally, caused
by the establishment of the Methodist Episcopal Church in 1834.
I have already given, in chapter xi., page 128, an extract of a letter
to Dr. Ryerson, from his brother John, indicating the causes of strife
between the British and Canadian Societies. I give the following letter,
also from the same gentleman, written from Hallowell early in November,
1833, in which he said:--
Brother William and I called on the Rev. Mr. Hetherington at
Kingston. He said:--That there could be no union; that we were
Radicals; that they would not be united with us; that the District
Meetings of Lower Canada, Halifax, etc., intended to make common
cause with them; especially they intended to remonstrate against
giving up York and Kingston. They also intended to appeal to the
British Conference, and if they were not heard by it they would
appeal to the British people. If the British Conference will allow
its members to throw firebrands, arrows, and death around in this
way, and reciprocate their proceedings after this manner with
impunity, they are very different men from what I have taken them
to be.
_Nov. 20th._--In a subsequent letter to Dr. Ryerson, his brother John
says:--
I fear much for the Union from the English Missionary party. Should
they, from any consideration, undertake to retain Kingston and
York, our cause there will be ruined. In case of such an event, I
will retire immediately, and bid farewell to the strife and toil in
which we have been engaged ever since we have been travelling
preachers. Let me know who have thrown up the _Guardian_. You will
have seen the Cobourg _Reformer's_ attacks. It is of much more
importance for you to expose Mr. Radcliffe, the editor, than any
one else, and point out that, in his present enmity to Methodist
principles, this is not the first time he has endeavoured to break
the Methodist ranks, and to sow the seeds of discord among her
friends. I would take good care not to lean a hairsbreadth towards
radicalism. One reason of their making this onslaught is to scare
you, and induce you to say something which will excite the jealousy
of the Government, and the disapprobation of our British brethren,
and thereby destroy us with them as they seek to do with other
parties.
_Nov. 22nd._--What is thus stated by his brother John was corroborated
by his brother William, who was stationed at Kingston, and who, in a
letter to Dr. Ryerson, said:--
I need not say what my feelings were when I arrived at this place,
and found that arrangements had been made by Mr. Marsden, in
violation of the understanding with the Conference, and in defiance
of the opinions and wishes of every one of our friends in the town
and country, whose feelings have not only been wounded and grieved,
but have rendered the prospects of a union in this place more than
ever entirely hopeless. I have not been considered fit (probably
for want of ability) to act as Superintendent of such an important
station; I have no authority to receive or expel a member, or even
to preside in a meeting of Stewards and Leaders; while my
Superintendent is in Montreal or Quebec; whether or not he will so
stoop as to visit us at all, we cannot say. Besides being shut out
of the British Wesleyan Chapel, every possible means is being used
to prevent a single individual of their Society from attending our
Chapel; and my field of labour is not only greatly circumscribed,
but the prospect of usefulness is nearly destroyed. What my
feelings must be, under such circumstances, you can easily judge. I
can only say that as soon as I can see a way opened, and can do so
consistently, I will not labour as a travelling preacher one day
longer.
_January 8th, 1834._--His brother John, in another letter to Dr. Ryerson
from Hallowell, said:--
Whoever may be the agents in making alterations in our economy, I
will not be one. With "improvements," alterations, unions, and
disunions, we have been agitated long enough. I am done with such
business, henceforth and forever. At our last Conference it was
understood, and expressly stated that no alterations would
hereafter be attempted; and so we have assured the people. But
behold, before they receive that assurance, some alterations are
mooted. Do away with the Presiding Elders, lessen the Districts,
etc., and a dozen other things which will necessarily follow. The
reason urged for these changes is worse than the things
themselves--namely: If we don't, the British Missionaries will
write to the Superintendents and raise such a storm in England,
etc., etc. If this is the way we are to be governed, and if this is
the state of the Connexion at home, the Resolutions on Union, on
parchment or paper, are a miserable farce. The more I think on this
subject, the worse I like it.
In a letter from Kingston to Dr. Ryerson on this subject, Rev. Joseph
Stinson says:--
I have done my utmost to promote the union of the two Societies in
this town. If things are carried with too high a hand, we shall
lose our Kingston Chapel and congregation altogether; and, should
the Kingston people shut their Chapel against us, it will be
impossible to keep things quiet in Lower Canada. I do not think it
necessary to sacrifice the Union to Kingston, nor is it necessary
to sacrifice Kingston, because a number of disaffected radicals in
the Bay of Quinte like to make the state of things here an excuse
for their anti-methodistical proceedings. If there were no Kingston
in existence, these men would never cordially love the Union.
_April_, 1834.--Dr. Ryerson received a letter from the new President of
the Canada Conference (Rev. Edmund Grindrod) dated London, England, in
which the latter said:--
One object of my visit will be to allay the hostility of our
Societies in the Lower Province to their union with us.
Mr. Alder (said Mr. Grindrod) was to have accompanied him, but at Mr.
Bunting's suggestion this plan was abandoned in the hope that--
The friends in Lower Canada, when they have had time to reflect,
would return to better views and feelings.
_Dec. 3rd._--Writing to Dr. Ryerson from Kingston, at this date, Rev.
John C. Davidson[44] says:--
I have been told by the most influential members of the Leaders'
Meeting here that pledges to the following effect have been most
solemnly given to them by Mr. Alder and Mr. Grindrod, viz:--That
the members of the British Society here did not, and were never to
make a part of the Societies governed by the Canada Conference;
that they were to remain as they always were; that their numbers
were to be returned to the home Conference; that our Society was to
be merged in theirs; and Kingston become the head of the Missionary
establishment in Canada,--always to be the residence of the
Superintendent, who was to control and regulate the Kingston
Societies; and that the Presiding Elder was to have nothing to do
with the town; that a large chapel was to be forthwith built,--to
be deeded to the British Conference; and that the minister in
charge of Kingston was always to be an Englishman.
* * * * *
Towards the close of this year, the Methodist Episcopal Church in Canada
was organized. Full details of this division are given by Dr. Ryerson in
the "Epochs of Canadian Methodism," pages 270-288. Happily this
separated branch of the great Methodist family is being re-united to the
parent stock in 1883. Further reference to the subject is, therefore,
unnecessary in this "Story." Nevertheless it should be remembered that
in the discussion and controversy which for years followed this event,
Dr. Ryerson occupied a foremost place as the champion on the Wesleyan
Methodist side.
* * * * *
FOOTNOTES:
[44] This gentleman entered the Methodist Church in 1827, joined the
Church of England in 1854, and was for many years a minister of a
congregation in the Province of Quebec. He died in 1881.
CHAPTER XIII.
1834-1835.
Second Retirement from the "Guardian" Editorship.
As already intimated in Chapter xi., the publication of Dr. Ryerson's
"Impressions" of England, etc., in the _Guardian_ of 1833, excited quite
a political and social sensation. Public men of all shades of opinion
had their feelings at once enlisted for or against the Editor of that
paper, and condemned or commended his course accordingly.
Such a result did not cause much immediate concern to Dr. Ryerson. He,
as Editor, claimed from the first, and his opponents outside of the
Connexion admitted, that in battling for religious equality and
denominational rights, he should be left untrammelled. In other words,
that as Editor of a leading paper like the _Guardian_, he should be left
free to counsel, to advise and warn, and, if necessary, to take strong
ground on all questions involving purely civil rights, and the
constitutional exercise of the prerogative on the part of the Executive.
This was the more necessary, as civil and religious freedom were largely
identical in those days of undefined prerogative, irresponsible
government, and inchoate institutions.
All parties, therefore, tacitly conceded what the Editor of the
_Guardian_ claimed--a wide latitude and a reasonable discretion in
discussing questions of the day which involved either civil rights or
religious freedom. This wise discretion was the more necessary from the
fact that the _Guardian_ was unquestionably the leading newspaper during
these years, and was edited with more than ordinary ability and
power.[45]
Besides, there were many thoughtful men who took little part in
politics, and yet who looked with alarm on the claims and encroachments
of the Family Compact,--a powerful and influential party, and dominant
alike in church and state. Many of the able public men of the day, who
were moderate in their views, were nevertheless the champions of popular
rights. These men were Messrs. Bidwell, Baldwin, Dunn, and others. Their
influence was strongly felt in the House of Assembly, and was sustained
by their great moral worth and high social position. To such men the
powerful aid of the _Guardian_, in advocating the principles of equal
justice to all parties alike, was indispensable; and from its support
they derived much strength, and were greatly aided in maintaining their
position in the House and in the country.
It was under these circumstances, and amid the peculiar exigencies of
the times, that the _Christian Guardian_ became the great organ of
public opinion on the liberal side in Upper Canada. It can, therefore,
be well understood how at such a time, when the supremacy of party was
the question of the hour, the publication of Dr. Ryerson's
"impressions"--candid and moderate as they were--fell like a bombshell
amongst those in Canada who had set up as political idols such men as
Hume and Roebuck in England. To dethrone such idols was of itself bad
enough; but that was not the head and front of Dr. Ryerson's offending.
What gave such mortal offence was that Dr. Ryerson saw any good whatever
in the moderate English Conservative (though he saw none in the English
Tory). And worse still, that he saw many undesirable things in the
English Whigs, and nothing good in the English Radicals. To give special
point to these criticisms and comparisons Dr. Ryerson stated that:--
Radicalism in England appeared to me to be another word for
Republicanism, with the name of King instead of President ... and
that the very description of the public press, which in England
advocates the lowest Radicalism, is the foremost in opposing and
slandering the Methodists in this Province. Hence the fact that
some of these editors have been amongst the lowest of the English
Radicals, previous to their egress from the mother country.
The point of this criticism struck home; and, on the very day on which
it appeared, the cap was fitted upon the head of the leading radical of
the province. In fact, he placed it there himself, and thenceforth
proclaimed war to the knife against the Editor of the _Guardian_. (See
page 125.)
With singular ability and zeal did Mr. W. L. Mackenzie carry on this
warfare. He at once saw what would be the effect of the new departure.
And so promptly and energetically did he denounce the "arch-apostate
Egerton, _alias_ Arnold, Ryerson" as a deserter, that he secured with
little difficulty an impromptu verdict from the public against him. This
he the more readily accomplished, by the aid of at least half a dozen
editors of newspapers in various parts of the province, while Dr.
Ryerson was single-handed. Not only did these editors join with great
vigour in the hue and cry against Dr. Ryerson (for they had many scores
of their own to settle with their powerful rival), but many of Dr.
Ryerson's own brethren were carried away by the sudden outburst of
passion against him. Hundreds of the supporters of the _Guardian_ turned
from him, as a deserter, and many gave up the paper.
It is true that the tide soon turned; and those who had refused at first
to heed, or even to listen to, the words of warning uttered by Dr.
Ryerson in this crisis, were afterwards glad to profit by them, and thus
saved themselves in time from the direful consequences which followed
during the sad events of 1837-38.
The effect, however, of that severe and unexpected encounter with
irrational prejudice (joined to the hostility of those whose plans were
prematurely disclosed and frustrated) was too much for one who, as a
Christian minister and a lover of his country, was filled with higher
aims than those of a mere politician.
In the course of the discussion which followed, Dr. Ryerson came into
contact with some of the more unreasoning of his brethren. (See pages
130-133.) The question was raised as to how far the _Guardian_ should be
involved in conflicts like the present, which from their very nature
introduced an apple of discord into the Connexion, as they partook more
of a political than of a religious character. This question was pressed
upon members of the Conference by the British Missionaries, whose
national prejudices and political sensibilities were, as they alleged,
wounded by the adverse strictures of the Editor of the _Guardian_ on
Church Establishments, the Clergy Reserve question, and kindred topics.
Knowing the impossibility of reconciling views so opposite as those
expressed by the British Missionaries and those of the great majority of
Canadian Methodists (as represented by the _Guardian_), Dr. Ryerson
resolved to retire from the editorship. This, by a vote of his brethren
in the Conference of 1834, he was not permitted to do. But, like a wise
and prudent counsellor amongst men of differing views, he determined to
take the initiative in settling, on a satisfactory basis, the future
course of the _Guardian_ as to the discussion of political and social
questions. At that Conference, therefore, he prepared and submitted a
series of resolutions to the following effect:--
1. That the _Christian Guardian_, as the organ of the Conference,
shall be properly and truly a religious and literary journal, to
explain our doctrines and institutions, and, in the spirit of
meekness, defend them when necessary; to vindicate our character,
if expedient, when misrepresented; to maintain our religious
privileges, etc. 2. To publish general news, etc. 3. That the
_Christian Guardian_ shall not be the medium of discussing
political questions, nor the merits of political parties; as it is
injurious to the interests of religion, and derogatory to our
character as a religious body, to have our Church amalgamated or
identified with any political party.
These resolutions were cordially adopted by the Conference.
_October 4th, 1834._--In a letter received by Dr. Ryerson from Rev. G.
Marsden, Liverpool, the latter referred to this subject and said:--
Your continuance in office, as editor, is of very high importance;
indeed, in some respects it is essential to the consolidation of
the Union. Loyalty to our Sovereign, and firm attachment to the
British Constitution will be supported by it. You will also be able
to defend, and to support sound Wesleyan Methodism; and the
foundation being now laid, you will be able to guard it well.
Rev. E. Grindrod, also writing from England, said:--
From the _Christian Guardian_, I perceive that you have had a hard
battle to fight, but you have proved victorious; and at a future
day, I have no doubt, you will rejoice that the Lord counted you
worthy to suffer in the achievement of an object which will
probably result in immense benefit to a whole Province for
generations to come.
_January 28th, 1835._--About this time Dr. Ryerson received a
remonstrance on the subject from his brother John, who said:--
The more I think of your leaving the office, the more unfavourably
I think of it. There is a tremendous opposition to it in these
parts (Hallowell), among both preachers and people. I think it will
do the paper a great wrong; you had better remain undisturbed until
next Conference.
_Feby. 20th._--Rev. William Ryerson, in a kind letter from St.
Catharines, said:--
The spirit and feeling displayed in your most interesting letter
has made the deepest impression on my mind. I know that you have
your own difficulties and troubles, yet they do not appear to
prevent the outflow of your sympathy for others. How sincerely do I
pray that the God of mercy and truth may graciously support you
under all your trials and difficulties, and in His good time bring
you out of them, purified as gold. I am exceedingly fearful that we
shall have more, and great difficulties, at our next Conference.
Every article and word in the _Guardian_ is criticised and noted,
and made the subject of a large and constant correspondence,
especially with the local preachers, in different parts of the
Province. We shall be much embarrassed about the editorship of the
_Guardian_. Perhaps Providence will point out some suitable person
should you retire.
_May 27th._--In the _Guardian_ of this date, Dr. Ryerson again gave
expression to his long-cherished desire to retire from the editorial
management of that paper. He did so for reasons already given--
Besides (he said) it was the understanding entered into with the
Conference of 1834, when I consented to undertake the duty of
editor for one year. It is gratifying to notice that the
vituperation of party interest and malevolence are nearly, if not
quite, spent. I have, in this and the last two numbers of the
_Guardian_, endeavoured to leave nothing for my successor to settle
on that score. My editorial career in the past has been during an
eventful and agitated period of our Provincial history. I have
steadily endeavoured to keep one object in view--the promotion of
Christianity and the prosperity of the country. In severing my
connection with a large portion of the reading public, I am moved
with feelings not easily expressed. My interest in the cause which
I have advocated, and in the general welfare of my native Province
(which has been intense for years past), will not be less so in any
future fields of labour.
When it was found that Dr. Ryerson had finally decided to retire from
the editorship of the _Guardian_, various suggestions were made to him
as to his future field of labour. The Connexion in Lower Canada were
anxious to secure him as a minister there. The question came up at an
official meeting in Quebec, and Rev. William Lord, who presided, wrote
to Dr. Ryerson on the subject, in May, 1835, as follows:--
Respecting your future appointment to this Province, I may mention
that several of the brethren objected to your leaving the Upper
Province, lest it should be thought you were sent away in disgrace.
I think, however, that I can obtain a station that will be deemed
honourable to yourself, and, I think, quite agreeable, affording a
fine field of usefulness. I am now sitting in the Quarterly
Meeting, and when the question of preachers for the next year came
on, I mentioned that I had conversed with you respecting taking a
circuit, in this Province. They unanimously requested that Brother
Wm. Squire and Brother Egerton Ryerson might be appointed to them
next year. I shall soon be in York, when I will endeavour to obtain
the consent of the friends there, and I think you will be pleased
with the place.
As an indication amongst others of the appreciation in which Dr.
Ryerson's services were held, Rev. R. Heyland, in a letter to him from
Adolphustown, said:--
The people in these parts are very desirous of seeing and hearing
the champion who has written so much in defence of Methodism, and
rescued the character of our Church from the odium which its
unprincipled enemies have been endeavouring to heap upon it for
years past. Be so good as to gratify them this once, and come and
dedicate our new chapel here.
_June 17th._--On this day, for the second time, Dr. Ryerson took leave
of the readers of the _Guardian_--having been relieved by the Conference
of the duties of Editor, at his own request. He said:--
I was, however, elected Secretary of the Conference, and was
stationed at Kingston. In addition, I was appointed, with Rev.
William Lord, President of our Conference, a delegate to the
American General Conference.
In his valedictory he said:--
In relinquishing my present position my thoughts are spontaneously led
back to the period--ten years since--when I first commenced public life.
At that time the Methodists were an obscure, a despised, an ill-treated
people; nor had their church the security of law for a single chapel,
parsonage, or acre of land.... Now the political condition and relations
of the Methodist connexion are pleasingly changed. Ten years ago there
were 41 ministers and 6,875 church members; now there are 93 ministers
and 15,106 church members. We may well thank God, therefore, and take
courage.
I have no ill-will towards any human being. I freely and heartily
forgive the many false and wicked things said of me, publicly and
privately. I have written what I thought best for the cause of religion,
the cause of Methodism, and the civil interests of the country. I have
never received one acre of land, nor one farthing from Government, nor
of any public money. I have never written one line at the request of any
person connected with the Government. I count it to be the highest
honour to which I can aspire to be a Methodist preacher; and in this
relation to the Church and to the world I shall count it my highest joy
to finish my earthly course.
* * * * *
Dr. Ryerson's wish having been fully gratified, and the Conference of
1835 having relieved him of the editorship, he was stationed at
Kingston. This place, of all others, had been the scene of strife and
division between the British and Canadian branches of the Church, and
was the key to the position held by the British Missionaries in Upper
Canada. (See pages 128 and 141). Dr. Ryerson's arrival there and his
reception by the people at Kingston are described in a letter which he
wrote to his friend, Mr. S. S. Junkin, of the _Guardian_ office, dated
July 15th:
We have just arrived, and are for the present staying at the house of
Mr. Cassidy, the lawyer, where we receive every possible kindness and
attention. (See Chapter xxiii.)
I have been very kindly received by the members here. Strong prejudices
have existed in the minds of individuals against me. But they are not
only broken down, but in the principal cases are turned into warm
friendship already. Some who were as bitter as gall, and croaking from
day to day that "the glory has departed," are now like new-born babes in
Christ; are happy in their own souls, praying for sinners, and doing all
they can to build up the cause. I can scarcely account for it. I never
felt more deeply humbled than since I came here. I have indeed resolved
to give my whole soul, body and spirit, to God and to His Church anew,
but I have had scarcely a tolerable time in preaching. Yet the Divine
blessing has specially accompanied the Word. On Wednesday night last the
fallow ground of the hearts of professors seemed to be completely broken
up. On Thursday night I was in the country, but was told the
prayer-meeting was the largest that had been held for two years. On
Sunday evening we had prayer-meeting after preaching. Several came to
the altar, two or three of whom found peace. I closed it at nine
o'clock, but some stayed and others came in, and it was kept up until
near one o'clock in the morning. On Monday night the altar was
surrounded with penitents, and the meeting, I was told (for I was not
there), was better than any former one, and was kept up until after
midnight. At our preachers and leaders' meeting last night there was a
good time. We have preaching and prayer-meeting again to-night. We have
formed the leaders' meeting of both chapels into one, to the
satisfaction of the brethren on both sides. I now begin to hope for
better times. My soul was bowed down like a bulrush for some days after
I came here. But I thank God I have a hold upon the salvation of Christ
that I had not felt for a long time before; and I do believe the Lord
our God will help us and bless us. I have preached at Waterloo twice
since I came down. The last time, several penitents came to the altar;
two professed to find peace, but it was upon the whole a dry time to me.
They are hard cases there. I attended a very blessed quarterly meeting
on the Isle of Tanti, on Thursday last. It was the best day to my own
soul that I have experienced for years.
I feel like a man liberated from prison; but I have reason to believe
that the people are in general amazingly disappointed in my pulpit
exercises. They expected great things--things gaudy, stately, and
speculative,--and I gave them the simplest and most practical things I
can find in the Bible, and that in the plainest way. You would be amused
at the sayings of some of the plain Methodist people; they think that it
is the "real pure Gospel, but they did not expect it so, from that
quarter." I am told that Dr. Barker has said in his _Whig_, that my
"pulpit talents are nothing." I am very glad to have this impression go
abroad; it will relieve me from distressing embarrassments, and enable
me to do much more good in a plain way; for I know the utmost I can
attain in the pulpit is to make things plain, and sometimes forcible.
We had a very blessed prayer-meeting last night, after preaching. A
considerable number of penitents came to the altar, and some found
peace. The work seems to be deepening among the Society. I think we
shall have a comfortable and prosperous year.
_September 24th._ In a subsequent letter to Mr. Junkin, Dr. Ryerson
speaks of a sudden and severe bereavement which had overtaken him. He
said:--
My poor little son John[46] has been removed to the other and
better country. He continued to walk about until within ten
minutes before his death, on the 22nd inst. After attempting to
take a spoonful of milk, he leaned back his head and expired in my
arms, without the slightest visible struggle. He has suffered much,
but expressed a desire that he might live, so that he could see his
little sister. He told me a few days before he died, that he hoped
to go to Heaven, because Jesus had died for him, and loved him. I
feel as a broken vessel in this bereavement of the subject of so
many anxious cares and fond hopes. But this I do know, that I love
God, and supremely desire to advance His glory, and that He does
all things for the best. I will therefore magnify His name when
clouds and darkness envelope His ways, as well as when the smiles
of His providence gladden the heart of man. O may He make me and
mine more entirely and exclusively His, than ever!
In a letter to Mr. Junkin, dated November 14th, Dr. Ryerson says:--
We all go into one chapel to-morrow, which will complete the Union.
Thank the Lord for it! Every one of our members of the "American"
Society (so called heretofore) has already taken sittings in the newly
enlarged chapel, and all things appear to be harmonious and encouraging.
Every pew in the body of the chapel has already been taken by our
brethren and intimate friends; and, notwithstanding the new chapel will
hold more than both the old ones, we are not likely to have enough
sittings to meet the applications that are likely to be made, when it is
known out of the Society, though the whole chapel above and below
(except one tier around the gallery) is pewed.
I have learned that I shall have to take another trip to England. We had
just got comfortably settled here in Kingston; had become acquainted
with the people on all sides, and are happy in our souls, and in our
work. Nothing but the alternative, as Rev. William Lord deeply feels, of
the sinking or success of the Upper Canada Academy, could have induced
me this year to have undertaken such a task. But my motto is--"the cause
of God, not private considerations."
FOOTNOTES:
[45] The amount of postage paid by newspapers would be a fair indication
of their circulation. For instance, in 1830-1, the postage on the
_Christian Guardian_ was £228 sterling ($1,140), which exceeded by £6
the aggregate postage paid by the thirteen following newspapers in Upper
Canada at that time, viz.:--Mackenzie's _Colonial Advocate_, £57; _The
Courier_, £45; _Watchman_, £24; _Brockville Recorder_, £16; _Brockville
Gazette_, £6; _Niagara Gleaner and Herald_, £17; _Hamilton Free Press_,
£11; _Kingston Herald_, £11; _Kingston Chronicle_, £10; _Perth
Examiner_, £10; _Patriot_, £6, _St. Catharines Journal_, £6; _York
Observer_, £3. Total £222, as against £228 paid by the _Guardian_
alone.--H.
[46] John William, aged six years, one month, and eleven days. (See
pages 111 and 113.)--H.
CHAPTER XIV.
1835-1836.
Second Mission to England.--Upper Canada Academy.
Scarcely had Dr. Ryerson been settled at Kingston in the enjoyment of
the freedom and pleasure of his new life as a pastor, than the
exigencies of the Upper Canada Academy called him a second time to
England. The causes of this sudden call upon his time and energies, on
behalf of the Academy, were many and pressing. They were caused chiefly
by the miscalculations, if not indiscreet zeal, of Rev. William Lord,
who, as President of the Conference and Chairman of the Trustee Board of
the Academy, had, by inconsiderate expenditure, plunged the Board into
hopeless embarrassment. (See page 166.)
Mr. Lord was sanguine that what he did in Canada, on behalf of the
Academy, would, if properly represented, be cordially endorsed by the
brethren and friends in England. He, felt that although he himself might
not be able to realize these hopes by a personal appeal, yet he was
certain that the presence in England of Dr. Ryerson on such a mission
would be highly successful. He, therefore, as President of the Canada
Conference, called upon him to undertake this task. He furnished Dr.
Ryerson with such letters and appeals to influential friends as he hoped
would ensure success. Dr. Ryerson, acting on his motto, that "the cause
of God, not private considerations," should influence him, obeyed the
call, and set out for England on this difficult, and, as it proved,
arduous and protracted mission, on the 20th November, 1835.
The nature and extent of the embarrassments of the Academy are stated in
the letters written to Dr. Ryerson after he had left for England. His
brother John said:--
While you are travelling in England making collections for the
Academy, there are, I can assure you, a great many heartfelt
prayers and fervent supplications being offered in this country for
your success. The whole concern is in an extremely embarrassed
state. If Rev. William Lord had not urged us to expenditure, it
would have been at least £1,000 better for us, although what he did
at the time, he doubtless did for the best. Mr. Lord was the means
of inducing the building committee to make an unnecessarily
expensive fence, out-houses, furniture, &c., saying at the time
that money would be forthcoming, and that John Bull never failed to
respond to such calls. We have applied to the Legislature for
assistance, but I think with but little prospect of success. Should
we not get anything there, and you raise no more than £2,000, we
must go down, and the concern be sold. It will require £4,000 or
£5,000 to get us out of debt. If you should collect no more than
£2,000 before you return home, don't fail to make some arrangements
for borrowing two or three thousand more.
Rev. Mr. Lord, writing to Dr. Ryerson, said:--
By the delay in finishing the buildings, and the excitement caused
by the falsehood of the ultra-Radicals, confidence was gone, money
could not be raised, either by begging or borrowing; and if
something had not been done, the consequence would have been
ruinous. I expect that you will have me greatly blamed for not
considering before I drew bills on England for the debt, but there
was no time. The mischief would have been done before we could have
heard. The man would have been arrested immediately,--our character
ruined,--societies divided,--and subscriptions would have been
withheld. Our difficulties are great, and we must make a desperate
effort to extricate ourselves. Everything depends upon your making
a good case, which you can do.
In another letter to Dr. Ryerson, from Canada, Mr. Lord said:--
Let me urge you to lose no time in obtaining a Charter and grant
from Government. I expect our Radical friends will be using their
influence through their friends to prevent your success. Be
diligent in procuring subscriptions. You possess great advantages
now, by the introductions with which you have been favoured. Mr.
Alder tells me that my bills will be dishonoured. If so, in
addition to the loss of character, there will be a waste of
property in fines, &c. We are all distressed, our drafts are coming
due and the Banks have ceased to discount, in consequence of the
stagnation of trade, through "stopping the supplies." We have
agreed upon a temporary mode of relief, by drawing upon you for
about £500. It has given me great surprise and sorrow to ascertain
that upwards of £5,000 are wanted to relieve us from our
difficulties. What an unfathomable depth this building has reached.
You must stay in England until the money is got. Use every effort,
harden your face to flint, and give eloquence to your tongue. This
is your calling. Excel in it! Be not discouraged with a dozen of
refusals in succession. The money must be had, and it must be
begged. My dear Brother, work for your life, and I pray God to give
you success. Do not borrow, if possible. _Beg, beg, beg_ it all. It
must be done!
Such were the circumstances under which this important mission was
undertaken by Dr. Ryerson. As a set off to these disheartening letters,
Dr. Ryerson received the following from some of his brethren in Canada.
Rev. Ephraim Evans said:--
I have become a consenting party to your being solicited, at
considerable sacrifice of feeling, to undertake a tedious journey
at the most untoward season of the year, for the good of the common
cause, and I sincerely tender, in common with my Brother James, my
best thanks for your kind compliance, and my hearty wishes for your
complete success. Indeed I feel most deeply that upon your success
depends, under God, the prosperity or downfall of the Upper Canada
Academy. Be assured that my most fervent prayers will be daily
offered up for your health and safety, for a happy issue to attend
your generous endeavours again to promote the interests of the
Church of our mutual affection.
I entertain not the slightest hope of being able to procure such a
Charter as we would be justifiable in accepting, or any support to
the institution from our own Legislature.
Rev. John Ryerson, writing from Hallowell, said:--
Your friends in Kingston (and all the Methodists there seem to be
such) spoke much about you and your successful labours there.
Brothers Counter, Jenkins, and others, say they are resolved to
have you for their preacher next year, on your return from England.
I hope and pray that good luck will attend your efforts. Everything
depends on the issue of your mission. May the Lord give you favour
in the eyes of the people, and good success in your vastly
important work.
Rev. Joseph Stinson, writing from Kingston, said:--
We all feel very strange now that you are gone, but be of good
cheer; we follow you with our sympathy and prayers. We doubt not
but God--that God in whose cause you are making this additional
sacrifice, will succeed your labour, and cause all things to work
together for your good.
In a letter from London, England, Dr. Ryerson says:--
Mr. Lunn and other friends have arrived from Quebec, and have given
me Canadian news, among other items the stations of various
ministers: Rev. James Richardson and Rev. J. S. Atwood withdraw
from the Conference, and Rev. Mr. Irvine goes to the States. The
President and I remain at Kingston. I have been appointed, by a
unanimous vote, the representative to the British Conference, and I
am to present to Lord Glenelg an Address from the Conference to the
King. On the 18th of June, 1836, the Upper Canada Academy was
opened, and the Principal (Rev. M. Richey) inaugurated.
Dr. Ryerson added:--
I am to stay in Birmingham, at the house of a worthy and wealthy
Quaker, by the name of Joseph Sturge.
At the general meeting of the Missionary Committee, held recently
the resolutions of the Committee relative to the withdrawal of the
Government grant for the work in Upper Canada were read. Dr.
Bunting rose and mentioned its restoration, and kindly and
cordially mentioned me as the means of getting it restored. He gave
a flattering account of my proceedings in the affair. I thanked him
afterwards for his great kindness in the matter.
The labours and result of this, Dr. Ryerson's second mission to England,
are given in Chapter xvi., pages 158-166.
CHAPTER XV.
1835-1836.
The "Grievance" Report; its Object and Failure.
Amongst the Committees of the House of Assembly at this time was a
useful one called the "Committee on Grievances." To this Committee was
referred all complaints made to the House, and all projects of reform,
etc. At the close of the Session of 1835, Mr. W. L. Mackenzie, as
Chairman, brought in an elaborate Report which, without being read, was
ordered to be printed. In that Report, Mr. Mackenzie endeavoured to
create a diversion in his favour by showing that while Dr. Ryerson
professed to be opposed to Government grants to religious bodies, yet he
was willing to receive one for the Wesleyan Conference. The Report
stated that:--
The "British Wesleyan Methodist Conference," formerly the M.E.
Church, received £1,000 in 1833, and £611 in 1834, to be applied
... "to the erection, or repairing of chapels and school-houses,
and defraying the general expenses of the various missions."
This appropriation to the Methodists, as an Ecclesiastical
Establishment, is very singular. In the year 1826 ... Dr. Strachan
informed the Colonial Minister that the Methodist ministers
acquired their education and formed their principles in the United
States.... They appealed to the House of Assembly, which inquired
into and reported on the matter in 1828.
Upon another occasion they received a rebuke from Sir John Colborne
... in answer to the Address of the Conference requesting him to
transmit to His Majesty their Address on the Clergy Reserves.
Since, however, a share of public money has been extended to and
received by them, there seems to have been established a mutual
good understanding.
To this Report, Dr. Ryerson replied to the effect--
That the grant was made to the British Conference in England (over
which we had no control) and not to the Canada Conference; that the
grant in question was made by Lord Goderich, as part of a general
scheme agreed upon in 1832, to aid Missionaries in the West Indies,
Western, and Southern Africa, New South Wales, and Canada, "to
erect chapels and school-houses in the needy and destitute
settlements;" that the Rev. R. Alder had come from England, in
1833, to establish separate and distinct missions from those under
the Canada Conference with a view to absorb this grant; that when
the Union was formed, in 1833, the missions in charge of the Canada
Conference became the missions of the British Conference, and were
managed by their own Superintendent; that the Canadian Missionary
Society from that time became a mere auxiliary to the parent
Society in England; that the Canada Conference assumed no
responsibility in regard to the funds necessary to support these
missions; and that, in point of fact, they had cost the British
Methodists thousands of dollars over and above any grant received
from Lord Goderich as part of the general scheme for the support of
missionaries in the extended British Colonies.
Dr. Ryerson, in concluding these explanations, adds:--
We trust that every reader clearly perceives the unparalleled
parliamentary imposition that has been practised upon the public by
the "Grievance Committee," and their gross insinuations and
slanders against the Methodist ministers.
In 1836, the Report of the Grievance Committee came up in the House
again. On this subject Rev. John Ryerson wrote in March, 1836, to Dr.
Ryerson, in London, as follows:--
The altercations and quarrels which have taken place in the
Assembly this session on the part of Peter Perry and W. L.
Mackenzie, especially about the "Grievance Report," have raised you
much in the estimation of the people. The correctness of your views
and statements are now universally acknowledged, and your defamers
deserted by all candid men. Political things are looking very
favourable at the present time. The extremer of the Radical party
are going down headlong. May a gracious Providence speed them on
their journey!
To Mr. Perry, Dr. Ryerson replied fully and explicitly. He said:
Mr. Perry has charged me with departing from my former ground in
regard to an ecclesiastical establishment in Upper Canada. My
editorials and correspondence with Her Majesty's Government will be
considered conclusive evidence of the falsity of the charge, and
will again defeat the attempts of the enemies of Methodism to
destroy me and overthrow the Conference. Another cause of attack by
Mr. Perry is, that amongst several other suggestions which I took
the liberty to offer to Lord Glenelg, Colonial Secretary, was the
appointment of a certain gentleman of known popularity to the
Executive Council. Mr. Perry seemed to consider himself as a sort
of king in Lennox and Addington, and appears to regard it as an
infringement upon his sovereign prerogatives that I should be
stationed so near the borders of his empire as Kingston. But many
of his constituents can bear record whether the object of my
ministry was to dethrone Peter Perry, or to break down the power
and influence of a much more formidable and important
personage--the power of him that ruleth in the hearts of the
children of disobedience.[47]
_March 30th, London._--During his stay in England, Dr. Ryerson had been
able to look upon public affairs in Upper Canada with more calmness, and
more impartiality, than when he was there in the midst of them as an
actor. In that spirit he, at this date, addressed a letter to the
_Guardian_ on what he regarded as an approaching crisis of the highest
importance to the Province. He said:--
It is not a mere ephemeral strife of partizanship; it is a
deliberate and bold attempt to change the leading features of the
Constitution--a Constitution to which allegiance has been sworn,
and to which firm attachment has been over and over again expressed
in addresses to the Governor up to 1834. Such being the case, it
becomes every man who fears God and loves his country to pause, to
think, to decide. I have told the Colonial Secretary, that whilst
the Methodist Church asked for nothing but "equal and impartial
protection," yet I believed the attachment to the Constitution of
the country and to the British Crown, expressed in petitions and
addresses from the Methodist Conference and people of Canada, to be
sincere, and that they would prove to be so in their future
conduct. They had been falsely charged as being Republicans, but
they had always repudiated this charge as a calumny. Nor would they
be found among those who, like Messrs. Peter Perry and W. L.
Mackenzie, had recently avowed their intention to establish
republican elective institutions in the Province.
As to the charges of the "Grievance Committee" party, I can truly
say that I have never received one farthing of public money from
any quarter, and my humble support to my King and country is
unsought, unsolicited, and spontaneous.
_May 21st--London._--At this date Dr. Ryerson wrote:--
During my exile here in England I have more and more longed for news
from Canada, and cooling water to the panting hart could not be more
refreshing than late intelligence from my dear native land has been to
me. I can now listen with an interest and sympathy that I never did
before, to the patriotic effusions of the warm-hearted and eloquent
Irishmen, whom I have recently heard, respecting "the first flower of
the earth, the first gem of the sea."
The news from Canada presents to my mind strange contrasts. A few years
ago efforts were made to prove that the Methodist ministers were the
"salaried hirelings" of a foreign republican power. Now efforts are
being made to persuade the Canadian public that the same ministers are
the salaried hirelings of British power, because they refuse to be
identified with men and measures which are revolutionary in their
tendencies. Our motto is "fear God and honour the King," and "meddle not
with them that are given to change." Many who were influenced to take
part in the former crusade have long since given proof of a better
spirit; so it will be, I trust, with those who have now been hurried on
into the present shameless and malignant opposition, against a cause
which has confessedly been of the highest spiritual and eternal
advantage to thousands in Upper Canada. I venture to predict that not a
few of our partizan adversaries will ere long lament their madness of
political idolatry and religious hostility. In the former case,
Methodism survived, triumphed, and prospered; in the present case, if we
are true to our principles and faithful to our God, He will again "Cause
the wrath of man to praise Him, and restrain the remainder of that
wrath."
FOOTNOTES:
[47] Dr. Ryerson's reply to Mr. Perry was afterwards reprinted as an
election flysheet, headed "Peter Perry Picked to Pieces by Egerton
Ryerson," and circulated broadcast in the counties. It resulted in Mr.
Perry being rejected as M.P.P. for Lennox and Addington in the elections
of 1836. (See Chapter xxiii.)
CHAPTER XVI.
1836-1837.
Dr. Ryerson's Diary of his Second Mission to England
The following is from Dr. Ryerson's diary (which is incomplete) giving
the result of his experiences and labours in England, during his second
mission there.
_London, January 1st, 1836._--I am again in the great metropolis of
the Christian world. My wife and I left our native land, and
affectionate pastoral charge, on the 20th of November, 1835, and
arrived here the 30th of December, after a voyage of tempest and
sea-sickness. But to the Ruler of the winds, and the Father of our
spirits, we present our grateful acknowledgments for the
preservation of our lives. To our Heavenly Father have I, with my
dear wife, presented ourselves at the commencement of this new
year. O, may we through grace keep our vows, and henceforth abound
in every Christian grace and comfort, every good word and work!
We have been most kindly received by the Missionary Secretaries and
other brethren; the prospects appear encouraging for the success of
our mission: another ground of thankfulness, increased zeal, and
faithfulness.
_Jan. 2nd._--Called at the Colonial Office to present my note of
introduction from Sir John Colborne to Lord Glenelg. We were
admitted to an interview with Mr. (afterwards Sir James) Stephen,
Assistant Colonial Secretary, who promised to present Sir John
Colborne's letter to Lord Glenelg, and inform me when he would
receive me. To-day I received a call from my kind and excellent
friend, Rev. John Hannah, a thorough scholar, a profound divine, an
affectionate, able, and popular preacher. He heartily welcomed us
to the country.
_Jan. 3rd--Sabbath._--It being the first Sabbath in the year, I
attended that most solemn and important service--the renewal of the
covenant. It was conducted by Rev. Dr. Bunting, in a manner the
most impressive and affecting I ever witnessed. There were but few
dry eyes in the chapel. He spoke of the primary design of Methodism
as not to oppose anything but sin--not to subvert existing forms of
faith, but to infuse the vital spirit of primitive Christianity
into them. Dr. Bunting said that the renewal of the covenant was a
service peculiar to Methodism, and expatiated on the importance of
its being entered upon advisedly, and in humble dependence upon
Divine grace. After singing, the whole congregation knelt down,
remaining some time in silent prayer. After Dr. Bunting, as their
mouthpiece, read the covenant, all then rose and sang "The covenant
we this moment make," etc. The Lord's Supper was administered to
several hundred persons, and the services concluded with singing
and prayer.
_Jan. 4th._--I spent the evening at Rev. Mr. Alder's, in company
with Dr. Bunting, Rev. John Bowers, and Rev. P. L. Turner. In
conversation, the religious and general interests of the Methodist
Connexion were introduced. I was no less edified than delighted
with the remarks of Dr. Bunting, especially those which related to
the former distinction between, and the present confounding of,
supernumerary and superannuated preachers, and the desirableness of
restoring the ancient distinction. He spoke of the experience
requisite to, and evils of general legislation in, Church
affairs--introducing matters of legislation into Quarterly
Meetings, etc. Dr. Bunting's prayer at parting was deeply
spiritual.
_Jan. 5th._--Spent the day in writing an article for the
_Watchman_, on the present state of the Canadas; and in drawing up
some papers on the Upper Canada Academy. Had a pleasant visit from
Rev. John Beecham, one of the Missionary Secretaries.
_Jan. 6th._--Met at the Mission House with Rev. Richard Reece,
President of the Conference. He is, I believe, the oldest preacher
who has filled the presidential chair since the days of Wesley.
_Jan. 10th, Sunday._--In the morning heard Rev. Mr. Cubitt, and in
the evening endeavoured to preach for him.
_Jan. 13th._--Received a note from Lord Glenelg fixing the time
when he would receive me.
_Jan. 14th._--Spent a delightful evening in company with Rev. John
Hannah and wife, Dr. Sandwich (Editor of the _Watchman_) and wife,
and several others. The conversation principally turned upon the
learning of the ancients, and the writings of the early Protestant
Reformers and their successors. Dr. Sandwich is a very literary
man, Mr. Hannah an excellent general scholar.
_Jan. 15th._--Spent the evening with Rev. William Jenkins, an old
superannuated minister, in company with several friends. Mr. and
Mrs. Jenkins are a venerable couple about 80 years of age.
_Jan. 17th--Sabbath._--Heard the Hon. and Rev. Baptist Noel. The
Church was plain, the congregation large, and very attentive and
solemn. A large number of school children were present; the little
girls all dressed alike; they all had prayer and hymn books; they
read the responses and sung with the utmost correctness. In the
afternoon we went to that splendid monument of art and wealth--St.
Paul's. The sermon was more evangelical than I expected. In the
evening I preached to a very large congregation in St. George's
Chapel, Commercial Road. A gracious influence seemed to rest on the
congregation.
_Jan. 24th--Sabbath._--Preached in the Hinde-street Chapel. In
Surrey Chapel I heard Rev. James Parsons, of York, one of the first
preachers of the day. Surrey Chapel is the place of the celebrated
Rowland Hill's protracted ministry. Its shape is octagon, and it
will seat 3,000 persons. The church service was read well by a
person of strong, sonorous voice. At the conclusion of the church
service Mr. Parsons ascended the pulpit. His prayer was simple,
unaffected, and scriptural. His text was Luke xi. 47-48. His manner
was by no means pleasing; he stood nearly motionless, and appeared
to be reading his sermon. Yet attention was riveted; the current of
thought soon began to rise, and continued to swell, until he came
to a pause. Then there was a general burst of coughing; after which
the preacher proceeded in an ascending scale of argument, until he
had his audience entranced, when he would burst forth upon his
captives with the combined authority and tenderness of a conqueror
and deliverer, and press them into the refuge city of Gospel
salvation.
_Jan. 25th._--Attended a Missionary-meeting in Southwark Chapel.
Mr. Thomas Farmer, presided. Several spake: one a New Zealander,
whose wit and oddities amused all, but profited none.
_Jan. 26th._--Had an interview with Lord Glenelg, on the subject of
my mission. We can get a charter for the Upper Canada Academy, but
assistance is uncertain. His Lordship was very courteous and
communicative. He thanked me for the information I gave him
concerning the Colonies.
_Jan. 31st, Sunday._--Preached twice to-day (in City Road and
Wilderness Row). The Lord was with me, and I believe I did not
labour in vain.
_Feb. 13th._--Had an interview with the Rt. Hon. Edward Ellice; was
received with great kindness; he promised to use his utmost
influence to promote the object of my mission at the Colonial
office.
_Feb. 18th._--Called at the residences of several of the nobility;
found none at home, but Lord Ashburton, who gave me £5.
_Feb. 20th._--Made no progress in the way of collecting; much
ceremony is necessary. Have obtained some useful information, and
written to Sir Robert Peel on the object of my mission.
_Feb. 21st, Sunday._--Heard the Rev. Peter McOwan preach. It was
the best sermon I have heard from a Methodist pulpit since my
arrival in England. I preached in Great Queen-street Chapel in the
evening, on the new birth. I think the Lord was present to apply
the word.
_Feb. 22nd._--Called upon Lord Kenyon. I was very courteously
received; but His Lordship declined subscribing on account of the
many objects to which he contributed in connection with America. He
expressed his good wishes. I next called upon the Earl of
Aberdeen--Colonial Secretary under Sir Robert Peel's government. He
expressed himself satisfied with my letters from Upper Canada, but
said that he would enquire of Mr. Hay, late under Colonial
Secretary, and directed me to call again. I was also received by
Dr. Blomfield, Lord Bishop of London. Dr. Blomfield is a handsome
and very courteous man. He declined subscribing on account of its
not having been recommended by the Bishop of the Diocese; was not
unfriendly to my object; said he had a high respect for the
Wesleyan body, and considered they had done much good; he had
expressed this opinion in print.
_Feb. 23rd._--Addressed a letter to Lord Glenelg requesting an
early answer to our application, stating our pressing
circumstances. Called upon Thomas Baring, Esq., M.P., who gave me
£5. I find it very hard and very slow work to get money.
_Feb. 24th._--Received an answer from Sir Robert Peel in the
negative. His reason is non-connection with Upper Canada! A
gentleman of the house of Thomas Wilson & Co. gave utterance to a
sentiment which singularly contrasted with the selfishness of Sir
Robert Peel. He said: Education was the same thing throughout the
world, and that was the light in which this institution should be
viewed. His house gave me ten guineas, and have kindly engaged to
furnish me with names of other gentlemen.
_Feb. 25th._--Obtained £21 for the Academy. The sentiments
expressed by two of the gentlemen on whom I called deserve to be
recorded. Mr. A. Gillespie, jun., who is connected with Lower
Canada, after subscribing £10 and furnishing me with a list of
names of merchants engaged in trade with the Canadas, said:--"I am
a member of the Church of Scotland, but I have a high respect for
John Wesley and Dr. Bunting. I admire the principles of John
Wesley, and hope you will abide by them, and that they will be
taught in this institution. Above all things keep out Socinianism."
I then called on a Mr. Brooking, who said:--"I feel happy in the
opportunity of contributing to such an object. I have been in the
North American provinces and know that nothing is wanted more than
good institutions for the education of youth, and especially under
the superintendence of the Methodists. From what I have seen I
believe they have done more good in the colonies than any other
Church. Though I am a member of the Church of England, I feel it my
duty as a Protestant, and a friend to religion, to give my utmost
mite to the labours of your ministers in the colonies. I believe in
those new countries the Methodists are the bulwark of Protestantism
against popery and infidelity, and I am glad you are establishing
such an institution."
_Feb. 27th._--Received the greatest kindness from Mr. E. H.
Chapman, who was in Upper Canada last summer, and had seen the
institution at Cobourg. He expressed himself happy in the
opportunity to subscribe, and said he had travelled two days with
Sir John Colborne. Mr. Chapman considered, of all people, the
Methodists the most active and successful in imparting religious
instruction to the Colonists.
_Feb. 28th--Sabbath._--Preached at Islington; then dined with a Mr.
Brunskill, who was well versed in the history of Methodism.
From this date until the close of July there is no record in Dr.
Ryerson's diary. From letters written by him to Canada, I therefore
continue the narrative:--
_Birmingham, April 11th._--During a delightful visit here at the
missionary anniversaries I had an opportunity of hearing and
conversing with two of the most remarkable men of the present day:
William (or, as he is called, Billy) Dawson, the Yorkshire farmer,
and the venerable Gideon Ousley, the patriarchal Irish missionary.
Mr. Dawson excelled in his own characteristic way any man I ever
heard. His great strength lies in a matchless power of graphic
description, dramatic imitation, and hallowed unction from the Holy
One. He is a man of an age. At the missionary breakfast I sat
beside the venerable Ousley, and told him of some of his spiritual
children in Canada that I knew. He gave God the praise, and desired
me to deliver this message to his old friends and spiritual
children in Canada: "I am now in my 75th year, labouring as hard as
ever; am well, and strong. Be faithful unto death. I will meet you
in Heaven."
_London, June 8th._--To-day my brethren are assembling in Annual
Conference at Belleville. It is the first conference in the
proceedings of which, I have not been permitted to take a part
since I entered the ministry. A considerable part of the day I
spent in imploring the divine blessing upon the deliberations of my
brethren. After reckoning the difference of time, I retired at the
hour when I knew they would be engaged in the conference
prayer-meeting in order to unite with them at the throne of the
Heavenly grace; and truly, I found it refreshing indeed to be
present in spirit with them in beseeching the continual direction
of the Divine Pilot to guide the Wesleyan ship over the tempestuous
sea. I long to be with my fellow-labourers in Canada in their toils
as well as joys. "If I forget thee," O thou Spiritual Jerusalem of
my native land, "let my right hand forget its cunning, and my
tongue cleave to the roof of my mouth. Peace be within thy walls,
and prosperity within thy palaces!"
_June 12th._--Although I find that collecting for the Upper Canada
Academy is a wearisome work, yet I must not slacken my exertions so
long as our friends in Upper Canada are in such straits for funds.
Brother John has written me an urgent letter from Hallowell, in
which he says:--I hope the Lord will give you good success in
collecting for our Seminary. Everything depends on the success of
your exertions. £4,000 is the least that will answer. O, how
awfully we have got involved in this painful and protracted
business! O, if you can help us out of this mire, the Lord reward
you! I am greatly at a loss what to do. I had concluded to leave,
and go to the States; but thought I had better wait your return and
take counsel with you. I hope the Lord may direct me!
_Dublin, July 2nd._--I have just come over here to the Irish
Conference, and was affectionately received by the Irish preachers.
While in Dublin I stayed with a very intelligent and kind family. I
attended the Irish Conference, which was held in Whitefriar's
Street Chapel--a building rented for a preaching-place by the
venerable Wesley himself. Here in the midst of the sallies of Irish
wit and humour, mingled with evident piety and kindness, I sat down
and wrote a letter to the dear friends in Canada.
From this letter I make an extract:--
The preachers are warm-hearted, pious men, some of them very
clever; warm in their discussions, abounding in wit; talk much in
doing their business; several are sometimes up at a time. They are
certainly a body of excellent men. In their financial reports it
appears that many of them are really examples of self-denial,
suffering, and devotion.
The following are extracts from Dr. Ryerson's diary:--
_July 26th._--Attended the Conference at Birmingham. When Dr. Fisk
was introduced, the address of the American General Conference was
read. Silence and attention were marked until the words "negro
slavery" were mentioned, when there was a general cry of "hear,
hear," and "no, no, no."
During the Conference a Mr. Robinson was called upon to explain his
reason for preaching to a secret society called "Odd Fellows." Dr.
Bunting and Dr. Newton had always refused to preach to such
societies. Dr. Fisk made some remarks on Masonry in the United
States, and the evil of the Methodist preachers being connected
with, or countenancing, such societies.
_Sept. 2nd._--Presented to Lord Glenelg the Address, to the King,
of the Canadian Conference. He read it carefully, and expressed
himself pleased with it. He enquired as to the charges against Sir
Francis Head, and the appointment of those persons only to office
who are truly attached to the British Constitution. I answered his
lordship on each of these points mentioned, and assured him of the
loyal British feelings of the inhabitants of Upper Canada. I
pressed upon him the importance of an early settlement of the
Clergy Reserve question. His lordship thanked me for the
communications which I had from time to time made to him on
Canadian affairs. He requested me to write to him on any matter,
relative to the Canadas, I thought proper.
_Sept. 4th--Sunday._--Attended the Hon. and Rev. Baptist Noel's
Church at 8 a.m., when he administered the Lord's Supper to such as
could not attend at any other hour. I communed for the first time
in the Established Church. I heard this evangelical minister preach
at 11 a.m. Preached myself in Spitalfields in the evening.
_Sept. 6th._--Came here (Birmingham) from London on a collecting
tour. Have been kindly received by my Quaker friends, the Sturges.
In commemoration of the first Wesleyan Conference being held in
Birmingham, gold medals were presented to Dr. Bunting and Dr.
Newton, and silver medals to representatives of other
Conferences--the Irish and American. My name as representative not
having been received in time for a presentation at Conference, a
medal was subsequently presented to me as Canadian representative,
and to Rev. Richard Reece, ex-President, by the ladies of the
Society in Birmingham. The addresses on the occasion were made by
the President and Secretary--that to Mr. Reece in a few choice
words by Dr. Bunting; and to me, in a kindly manner, by Dr. Newton.
In reply I acknowledged the unexpected compliment, not as paid to
me, but to the country and connexion which I represented.
_Sept. 7th._--Have been kindly received by the preachers in
Birmingham. Spent a pleasant evening at Mr. Oldham's (son-in-law of
Rev. John Ryland), where I met no less than six clergymen of the
Established Church; the conversation was wholly of a religious
character, perfectly free and social. I was informed that all the
clergymen in Birmingham, except one, were truly evangelical. Mr.
Ryland told me that Rev. J. A. James had expressed his conviction
that there is decidedly more piety amongst the mass of the
Established Clergy than among the Dissenting Clergy. It was
altogether the most unaffectedly genteel, and truly religious party
I have met with in England.
_Sept. 9th._--Busy and successful. Very kindly received by the
following Church of England ministers, viz., Rev. Mr. Mosely,
Rector, Rev. Dr. Jeune [afterwards Master of Pembroke College], and
Rev. William Marsh, who is frequently called the model of the
Apostle John, on account of the depth and sweetness of his piety,
the purity of his life, and the heavenly expression of his
countenance. [His daughter is a noted evangelist and writer, 1883.]
_Sept. 10th._--Took tea with Mr. Meredith, a Swedenborgian, upwards
of 80, perfectly sincere in his belief, and sweet in his spirit.
Also met the celebrated Dr. Philip, of South Africa, and the more
celebrated John Angel James, of Birmingham. The conversation of the
evening was principally turned upon the means by which the great
measure of emancipation was carried--the conduct of Mr. Stanley and
Mr. Buxton. I was struck with Mr. Sturge's remark, that he
"believed such men as Sir A. Agnew, Sir Harry Inglis, and Lord
Ashley [now, in 1883, Lord Shaftesbury], were the most honest men
in the House of Commons."
_Sheffield, Sept. 17th._--Here I met with my old friends, Revs.
Messrs. Marsden, Grindrod, and Moss.
_Sept. 18th--Sunday._--Preached in Craven street Chapel in the
morning, and at Brunswick Chapel in the evening.
_Sept. 20th._--Attended the Financial District Meeting. It was
stated that 900 persons had seceded in Sheffield in the Kilhamite
schism, and yet the finances were better at the end of the quarter
than they had been the preceding one. Kind references were made to
myself, and the object of my mission.
Dr. Ryerson's Diary ends here. From his letters to Canada I make the
following extracts:--
_Sheffield, Oct. 5th._--I was in Barnsley on Friday and Saturday;
went to Wakefield on Saturday, and preached there on Sunday.
Addressed about 40 circulars to gentlemen in Wakefield on Monday
morning. Returned to Sheffield and spoke at the Missionary Meeting;
begged yesterday; spoke at the adjourned meeting last evening; have
been begging to-day. Spent Friday and Saturday in Wakefield; go to
Leeds on Saturday evening, and so on. The preachers and friends
shew me all possible kindness and attention. The Yorkshire people
are very warm-hearted and social. Methodism there presents an
aspect different in several respects from that which it presents in
London, or in any other part of England I have visited; more warm,
energetic, and unaffected--something like Hallowell Methodism in
Upper Canada. Oh! I long to get home to my circuit work. Amidst all
the kindness and interest that it is possible for piety,
intelligence, Yorkshire generosity and wit to impart, I feel like
an exiled captive here in England.
_Bradford, Oct. 10th._--The time I am here appears very dreary, as
I am from morning until midnight in public labours or society of
some kind. I have collected £83 last week, and for much of it I
have begged very hard--though some think that I do not beg hard
enough. It is, however, only one who has been a stranger and had to
beg, that can fully appreciate the feelings and embarrassments of a
stranger in such circumstances. This work and sacrifice have not
been of my own seeking--but against my seeking. I was comfortably
settled amongst kind friends in Kingston, but am now cast forth in
this distant land, and engaged in the most disagreeable of all
employments,--and for what? Oh! it is for the sake of Him to whose
cause and glory I have consecrated my life and all. I shall love,
honour, and value my pastoral labours more than ever. I hope that
they may be more useful. During the past week I have been enabled
more fully than for a year past to adopt the language of St. Paul.
Gal. ii. 20.
_Oct. 11th._--While here I was truly gratified to receive a letter
from Miss Clarissa Izard, of Boulogne (France), in which she
says:--I trust you will pardon me, sir, for this expression of my
gratitude. If it had not been for a sermon preached by you on the
21st of February last, I might have been where hope never cometh;
but, blessed be God, now I have a hope--a hope which lifts me above
this world, and which, I trust, I shall retain until I obtain the
crown of righteousness which fadeth not away.
Among the many pleasing incidents in Dr. Ryerson's otherwise unpleasant
duty of collecting funds for the Upper Canada Academy, was the note
written from Kensington Palace by command of Her Royal Highness the
Duchess of Kent. It was as follows:--
I am commanded by the Duchess of Kent to acknowledge the receipt of
your letter of the 22nd inst., and accompanying statement of "The
Upper Canada Academy, for the education of Canadian youth, and the
most promising youth of converted Indian tribes--to prepare them
for school-masters." Her Royal Highness is most happy in
patronizing, as you request, so useful and benevolent an
Institution, and calculated especially to promote the best
interests of the native population, the British emigrants, and the
aboriginal tribes of that valuable and important British Province.
Her Royal Highness desires that her name be placed on the
subscription list for £10.
Referring to the great importance of the Upper Canada Academy, and to
the services rendered by Dr. Ryerson in connection with its
establishment, Rev. William Lord said:--
There have been many circumstances and occurrences connected with
this institution which, to my mind, are indicative of Providential
interference. The bitterness manifested against it by the enemies
of Methodism and of the peace of the country; the difficulties
which stood in the way of its completion; the distressing,
overwhelming, and unforseen embarrassments of its funds, which
forced the Committee to send you to this country to seek relief,
just at a time when the affairs of the Province had arrived at a
crisis, and at a time when you could render special service, by
communicating with the Home Government--service, allow me to say,
greater than any other man could render, or than you could have
rendered at any other time or place--the favourable turn which
public affairs have recently taken, and, I know, in some degree
through your instrumentality; the perplexing and most painful
disappointments experienced in obtaining suitable teachers, now
happily overcome; the share of public favour which the Academy has
obtained on the commencement of its operations; and, lastly, the
great services you have rendered the Missionary Society, in the
advantage you have secured to our Indian Missionaries by your
representations and applications to the Government, are to me
reasons for believing God is in this business. You may, I think,
take courage, and go on in the name of the Lord. I can sympathize
with you; I have also suffered in this cause. I would not endure
the anxiety and mental agony I have experienced on account of this
institution for any earthly consideration. But if it flourish, I
have my reward. And now the reflection that, at much personal risk,
I have more than once saved innocent and deserving men from
imprisonment, and Methodism from indelible reproach, is cheering
and consoling. I will still stand by your side and share in your
difficulties. My honour in this matter is united with yours, and
the ruin of this institution will be mine.
In a letter from London, dated 21st July, 1836, Dr. Ryerson narrates the
difficulties which he had encountered in obtaining a Charter for the
Upper Canada Academy. The correspondence with the Colonial Office
embraced twenty-nine letters, and extended over a period of six months.
In conducting it, Dr. Ryerson states:--I found those in the Colonial
Office, and those who retired from it (during that time) equally
favourable to the object of my mission, and equally desirous of
promoting the best interests of the Colonies. In his report of the
negotiations for the Charter, Dr. Ryerson says:--
The Attorney-General assured me that not only Lord Glenelg, but
every member of His Majesty's Government was anxious to accede to
my application--that the difficulties were purely legal--that
though the doctrines and rules of the Methodist body in Canada were
doubtless very sacred, yet they were unknown in law, (in England.)
I, therefore, laid before the Crown officers[48] a copy of the
statutes of Upper Canada (which I had borrowed from the Colonial
office), and showed the grounds on which we professed to be
invested with the clerical character by the statutes of the
Province, as well as by the formularies of our connexion, and were
recognized as ministers by the Courts of Quarter Sessions; that we
might be defined as ministers (for the purposes of the Charter) as
in the Marriage Statute of U.C., which would be the same thing as
being defined according to the Rules of our Discipline. Placing the
question before the Crown officers in this simple light, their
scruples were at once removed, and they cordially acceded to my
proposition to recognize our ministerial character. As I was
required to name in the Charter the first trustees and visitors,
and as I had no list of those who had been appointed by the
Conference, I was obliged to furnish names myself. I was also
required to name in the Charter the time and place of the next
Annual Meeting (Conference) of Ministers. I inserted the second
Wednesday of June as the time of meeting; Cobourg, or Toronto, as
the place of meeting.
With the aid of a professional gentleman (whom I could only get for
a small portion of each day) the draft of Charter was prepared
after a delay of five weeks. This draft was approved, with the
exception of the words: Wesleyan Methodist _Church_, for which the
Solicitor-General had substituted the words: Wesleyan Methodist
_Connexion_, as the designation of the Body on whose behalf a
Charter was to be granted. In a letter to Sir George Grey I stated
my reasons why the word _Church_ should be retained, as the
Wesleyan ministers, under whose superintendence the Academy is to
be placed, had been licensed (under the Provincial Statute referred
to in the Charter) as Ministers of the Wesleyan Methodist Church in
Canada. To these reasons the Crown Officers yielded, and thus the
Charter was completed.
I then renewed my application for receiving aid from the Casual and
Territorial Revenue of Upper Canada. In reply, I was assured that
the Lieutenant-Governor would be directed to bring the claims of
the Academy before the notice of the Provincial Legislature.
Dr. Ryerson concludes:--
Thus terminated this protracted correspondence of more than six
months, during the whole of which time I was enabled to cleave to
and maintain my original purpose; though I had to encounter
successive, discouraging, and almost insurmountable difficulties.
Not having been able to effect any loan from private individuals,
on account of the agitated state of the Canadas--being in suspense
as to the result of my application to the Government, I was
several months pressed down with anxiety and fear by this suspense,
and by reason of the failure of my efforts to obtain relief. In
this anxiety and fear my own unassisted resolution and fortitude
could not sustain me. I had to rely upon the unfailing support of
the Lord, my God.
In my negotiations for the Charter, I was uniformly treated with
courtesy and kindness in the Colonial office, and by the several
members of His Majesty's Government. Praise God!
In a letter written to Dr. Alder, after Dr. Ryerson had returned from
England, the latter said:--
We have not yet received a farthing of the Government grant to our
Academy. The Governor's reply still is, there is no money in the
treasury; but he has given us his written promise, and offered his
word to any of the banks, that it shall be paid out of the first
money which had not been previously appropriated. But, strange to
say, there is not a bank or banker in Upper Canada that will take
the Governor's promise for £100. Mr. Receiver-General Dunn kindly
lent, out of his own pocket, to my brother John, about £1,200 for
the Academy, upon my brother's receipt, remarking at the same time
that he did it upon his credit, and out of respect to the
Methodists, but that he could place no dependence upon the word of
Sir Francis in the matter. We are thus pressed to beg or borrow in
relation to the Academy as much as ever, or even worse, for several
of us are individually responsible for £2,200, besides Mr. Farmer's
loan of £800. At our recent Academy Board Meeting, the damages of
Mr. Lord's protested bills came under consideration. The
circumstances of the case are briefly as follows:--Mr. Lord's
sincere desire and zeal to promote the interests of the Institution
and Connexion generally, were admitted and appreciated by all the
brethren; but it appears, 1. That a large portion of the debts were
incurred in compliance with the advice of Mr. Lord, and in
consequence of his influence as the representative of the British
Connexion. He assured the Sub-Committee at Cobourg that money
should be forthcoming, and if necessary he would go to England and
beg it, that John Bull never stopped when he commenced a thing,
etc.; that Mr. Lord did that contrary to the recommendation of the
Conference Committee, and against the advice and even remonstrance
of the Chairman of the District (John Ryerson), who had been
appointed by the Conference to see that the Sub-Committee should
not exceed the appropriations of the Conference, as they had done
in former years. 2. The premises were mortgaged to Mr. Lord as
security for the sum of £2500, some of which has not been advanced,
and the payments of which he did advance were provided for (with
the exception of two or three hundred pounds) by the brethren in
this Province. 3. After Mr. Lord received information from the
Committee in London that his bills would not be honoured, he called
a meeting of the Board--stated his difficulties--got individuals to
allow him to draw upon them to meet the bills on their return, and
sent me to England. 4. Mr. Lord assured our Conference at
Belleville, June, 1836, that the brethren here would never be
called upon to pay a farthing of the damages for non-payment of his
bills. I believe that no man could feel more earnestly desirous to
promote the interests of the Canadian Connexion in every respect
than he did. It is also the full conviction of our leading brethren
that had I attended the American General Conference, instead of
being in England, such an arrangement would have been made as to
have secured to our Connexion what was due us from the New York
Book Concern--which amounts to more than I obtained in England,
besides the mortification and mental suffering which I experienced
in my most unpleasant engagements, notwithstanding the sympathy and
never-to-be-forgotten kindness of many of my fathers and brethren
of the parent Connexion.
FOOTNOTES:
[48] Sir J. Campbell, afterwards Chief Justice, and Sir R. M. Rolfe,
afterwards a Baron of the Exchequer.
CHAPTER XVII.
1836.
Publication of The Hume and Roebuck Letters.
In a letter from London, dated 29th April, 1836, Dr. Ryerson said:--
This day week I went to the House of Commons to hear the debates on the
motions relative to the Canadas, of which Messrs. Roebuck and Hume had
given notice. As Mr. Roebuck was about to bring forward his motion, the
House of 202 members thinned to 50 or 60 members. Under these
circumstances he postponed it for a week, in the hope that a sufficient
number of members would give him an opportunity to make a speech in
return for the £1,100 a year paid to him as Agent of "the poor and
oppressed Canadians." When Mr. Hume brought forward his motion there
were only 43 members present. I thought how much Canada was benefitted
by such men who could only command the attention of 50 out of the 658
members of the House of Commons! I know not a man more disliked and
despised by all parties in the House than is Mr. Roebuck--a man who has
been employed to establish (as he says in one of his letters to Mr.
Papineau) a "pure democracy in the Canadas." One of the serious
drawbacks to the credit and interests of our country, amongst public and
business men of all parties in England, is their supposed connection
with such a restless political cynic as Mr. Roebuck, and such an
acknowledged and avowed colonial separationist as Mr. Hume.
In regard to these proceedings of Messrs. Hume and Roebuck, Dr. Ryerson
writes, in this part of the Story of his Life, as follows:--
It was during the early part of 1836 that I was accosted by almost every
gentleman to whom I was introduced in England with words, "You in Canada
are going to separate from England, and set up a republic for
yourselves!" I denied that there was any such feeling among the people
of Canada, who desired certain reforms, and redress of grievances, but
were as loyal as any people in England.
After the Canadian elections of 1836, Dr. Charles Duncombe (afterwards
leader of the rebels in the County of Oxford) came to England, the
bearer of petitions got up by Mr. W. L. Mackenzie and his partizans and
crammed Mr. Hume to make a formidable assault upon the British Canadian
Government. In presenting the Canadian petition Mr. Hume made an
elaborate speech, full of exaggerations and mis-statements from
beginning to end. I was requested to take a seat under the gallery, and,
while Mr. Hume was speaking as the mouth-piece of Dr. C. Duncombe, I
furnished Lord Sandon and Mr. W. E. Gladstone with the materials for
answers to Mr. Hume's mis-statements. Mr. Gladstone's quick perception,
with Lord Sandon's promptings, kept the House in a roar of laughter at
Mr. Hume's expense for more than an hour; the wonder being how Mr.
Gladstone was so thoroughly informed on Canadian affairs. No member of
the House of Commons seemed to be more astonished and confounded than
Mr. Hume himself. He made no reply, and, as far as I know, never after
spoke on Canadian affairs; and Mr. Roebuck soon ceased to be Agent for
the Lower Canada House of Assembly. He has since become an ultra
Conservative!
In a letter from London, dated 1st June, Dr. Ryerson says:--
Before Dr. Duncombe arrived in England, and seeing how much injury was
being done to the reputation and influence of Canada by these
representations, I commenced a series of letters in the London _Times_,
designed to expose the machinations and mis-statements of Messrs. Hume
and Roebuck in England, in regard to matters in Upper Canada, showing
from their own letters to Messrs. Papineau and Mackenzie that they were
the first prompters of the project.[49] To-day I also addressed a letter
to Sir George Grey, Under-Secretary for the Colonies, on the political
crisis in that Province. After discussing several matters relating to
the recent election of a new House of Assembly, I concluded as
follows:--As the affairs of the Province will now be taken into
consideration by His Majesty's Government, there are three subjects on
which I would respectfully request an interview with Lord Glenelg,
yourself, and Mr. [Sir James] Stephen. 1. The Clergy Reserve question--a
plan to meet the circumstances of the Province, and yet not deprive the
clergy of the Church of England of an adequate support. 2. The
Legislative Council--how it may be rendered more influential and
popular, without rendering it elective, or infringing (but rather
strengthening) the prerogatives of the Crown. 3. The Executive--how its
just authority, influence and popularity may be promoted and
established, so as to prevent the occurrence of that embarrassment in
which it is now involved, not from improper acts, but from an actual
deficiency of the requisite operative means to secure the Royal
Prerogative from insult and invasion. I am aware that each of these
subjects is surrounded with difficulty, and that no plan proposed will
be entirely free from objection, but I should like to state the views
which my acquaintance with the Province has impressed on my own mind,
and which I have not seen suggested in any official document or public
journal, but which have been favourably thought of by two or three
respectable gentlemen connected with Canada, to whom I have stated them.
In reply, Lord Glenelg appointed the following Monday for the desired
interview. I afterwards embodied the substance of my views in a letter
to Sir George Grey.
No further reference is made to this interview by Dr. Ryerson. But in a
letter from him, dated 21st July, he says:--
I was applied to, and did, in my individual capacity, communicate
to the Colonial Secretary frequently, and in one or two instances
at great length, on the posture of Canadian affairs; and the
parties and principal questions which have divided and agitated the
Canadian public. I repeatedly received the thanks of the Secretary
of State for the Colonies, for the pains which I had taken in these
matters; but what influence my communications may have had, or may
have, on the policy of His Majesty's Government towards the Canadas
is not for me to say, as I desired Lord Glenelg not to assume,
_prima facie_, as correct, any of my representations, but to
examine my authorities--to weigh my arguments--to hear what could
be said by others--as I had no friends to recommend to office, and
no personal interests to promote, only the religious and general
peace and prosperity of the Canadas, and the maintenance of a firm
and mutually beneficial connection between these Colonies and the
parent State.
I think I have good reason to believe that much more correct and
decided views are entertained by His Majesty's ministers and many
public men in England, in respect to the interests and government
of the Canadas, than were possessed by them six months ago; and
that all of those inhabitants of the Colonies, who patriotically
maintain their Christian and constitutional allegiance, will ensure
the respect, equal and firm protection, and parental regard of
their Sovereign and his government, by whatever party it may be
administered.
In a letter from London, dated 26th July (page 154), Dr. Ryerson
says:--Mr. William Lunn, of Montreal, has just arrived from Quebec. He
informs me that--
My letters to the London _Times_, on Hume and Roebuck, have
produced the most amazing effect upon the public mind of the
Province, of anything that I ever wrote. To the Lord be all the
praise for his great goodness, after all our toil and suffering.
There is nothing like integrity of principle and faithfulness in
duty, in humble dependence upon the Lord, and with an eye to His
glory!
FOOTNOTES:
[49] The British North American Association of Merchants had these
letters reprinted from _The Times_ newspaper, and a copy sent to each
member of Parliament, both of the Lords and Commons. They were signed,
"A Canadian."
CHAPTER XVIII.
1836-1837.
Important Events Transpiring in Upper Canada.
Dr. Ryerson was absent in England from 20th November, 1835, to 12th
June, 1837. On the 15th of January, 1836, Sir John Colborne, by order in
Council, endowed fifty-seven Rectories in Upper Canada out of the Clergy
Reserve Lands. On the 23rd of that month Sir F. B. Head, the new
Governor, arrived in Toronto. On the 14th of January following, he
opened the Session of the Legislature. What followed was reported to Dr.
Ryerson by his friend, Mr. S. S. Junkin, in a letter, dated, Toronto,
1st May:--
Our Parliament was prorogued on the 20th April, after such a
session as was never before known in Upper Canada. You will form
some idea of the state of affairs when I tell you that it "stopped
the supplies," and the Governor reserved all of the money bills,
(twelve)--including that for the contingences of the House,--for
the King's pleasure.
The immediate cause of the rupture between the new Governor (Sir F. B.
Head) and the House of Assembly--
Arose out of the resignation of the Executive Council. On the 20th
February, the Governor (as directed by Lord Glenelg) added three
Reformers to his Council, viz.: Messrs. Robert Baldwin, John Rolph,
and John Henry Dunn. On the 4th March, these gentlemen and the
Conservative members, (Messrs. Peter Robinson, George H. Markland,
and Joseph Wells) resigned. They complained that they were held
responsible for measures which they never advised, and for a policy
to which they were strangers. In reply the Governor stated in
substance that he alone was responsible for the acts of his
government, and was at liberty to have resource to their advice
only when he required it; but that to consult them on all questions
would be "utterly impossible." This answer was referred to a
Committee of the House of Assembly, which brought in a report
censuring the Governor in the strongest terms. On the 14th March,
Sir F. B. Head appointed Messrs. R. B. Sullivan, William Allan,
Augustus Baldwin, and John Elmsley, as his new Executive Council.
On the 17th the House declared its entire want of confidence in the
new Council, and stated that in retaining them the Governor
violated the instructions of the Colonial Secretary to the
Governor, to appoint Councillors who possessed the confidence of
the people. Much recrimination followed; at length Sir F. B. Head
dissolved the House, and directed that a new election be held.
In regard to this election, Dr. Ryerson, in the "Epochs of Canadian
Methodism" (page 226) says:--
Sir F. B. Head adroitly turned the issue, not on the question of
the Clergy Reserves, or of other practical questions, but on the
question of connection with the mother country, and of
Republicanism vs. Monarchy, as had been recommended by Messrs. Hume
and Roebuck, and advocated by Messrs. Mackenzie and Papineau. This
was successful, inasmuch as those Reformers who would not disavow
their connection with Messrs. Mackenzie, Hume and Roebuck, lost
their election; for though not more than half a dozen had any
sympathy with the sentiments of Messrs. Hume, Roebuck, Papineau,
and Mackenzie, they did not wish to break the unity of the Reform
party by repudiating them, and suffered defeat in consequence at
the elections. The successful candidates, generally, while they
repudiated Republican separation from the mother country, promised
fidelity to the oft-expressed and well-known wishes of the people
in the settlement of the Clergy Reserve question, which, however,
they failed to fulfil.
In a letter to Dr. Ryerson, from Hallowell, his brother William said:--
Our loyal address, a very moderate one, to the Governor, was
carried unanimously--all the young Preachers on trial being allowed
to vote on that occasion. This is equally gratifying and surprising
to all the friends of British supremacy. A gentleman from Montreal,
who was present, was so surprised, and I may say, delighted, that
he could hardly contain himself. I did not know for a short time,
but he would be constrained from the violence of his feeling to
jump up and shout. The Conference also adopted a very good address
to the King. (See page 162.)
We are on the eve of a new election. The excitement through the
country at large exceeds anything I have ever known. There would be
very little cause for doubt or fear as to the results, were it not
for one of the last acts of Sir John Colborne's administration, in
establishing and endowing nearly sixty Rectories. Knowing, as I do,
that the public mind is strongly opposed to any measure of that
sort, or any step towards legalizing a church establishment, yet I
could not believe the feeling was so strong as it actually is. If
the elections should turn out disastrously to the best interest of
the country, the result can only be attributed to that unjust and
most unpolitic act. We are willing to do all that we consistently
can, but everywhere the rectory question meets us. While I am
compelled to believe that a vast majority are devotedly loyal to
our gracious Sovereign, yet the best and most affectionate subjects
of the King would almost prefer revolution to the establishment of
a dominant Church thus sought to be imposed on us.
In a letter to Dr. Ryerson, from Toronto, his brother John says:--
The late elections agitated the Societies very much in some places,
but they are now settling down to "quietness and assurance." I hope
that the worst of the storm is over. The Governor is a talented
man, but very little magisterial dignity about him. He takes good
care to let every one know that _he_ esteems every day alike,
travelling on Sabbaths the same as other days. Indeed he seems to
have no idea of religion at all, but is purely a man of pleasure.
His popularity will soon be upon the wane if he does not mend in
these respects.
The friends in Kingston are very anxiously looking for your return,
and are becoming quite discontented and out of patience. They
complained bitterly to me of your long absence, and were anxious to
have me stay with them until you return.
CHAPTER XIX.
1837-1839.
Return to Canada.--The Chapel Property Cases.
In this part of the "Story" of his life, Dr. Ryerson has only left the
following sentence:--At the Conference held after my return to Canada,
in June, I declined re-election as Editor of the _Christian Guardian_,
having promised my Kingston brethren, from whom I had been suddenly
removed in November, 1835, that I would remain with them at least one
year on my return from England.
After Conference, Dr. Ryerson (with Rev. E. Healy) attended as a
deputation to the Black River Conference. He said:--
The Conference was presided over by Bishop Hedding, who, in strong
and affecting language, expressed his feelings of respect and love
for our Connexion in Canada. In reply, I reiterated the expression
of our profound respect and affection for our honoured friend and
father in the Gospel; by the imposition of whose hands, I, and
several other brethren in Canada, have been set apart to the Holy
Ministry. After my return to Kingston, brother Healy and I received
from the Black River Conference a complimentary resolution in
regard to our visit. In enclosing it to me, Rev. Jesse T. Peck, the
Secretary [afterwards Bishop], said:--Allow me humbly, but
earnestly, to beg a continuance of that friendship with you, which
in its commencement has afforded me so much pleasure.
In August of this year, 1837, the celebrated trial of the Waterloo
Chapel case[50] took place before Mr. Justice Macaulay, at the Kingston
Assizes, and a verdict was given against the Wesleyan Methodists. It was
subsequently appealed to the Court of King's Bench, at Toronto. Three
elaborate judgments were delivered on the case. Rev. John Ryerson was a
good deal exercised as to the ill effects, upon the connexional church
property, of Judge Macaulay's adverse decision. In a letter to Dr.
Ryerson, he said:--
We are much troubled and perplexed, here in Toronto, about the
Waterloo Chapel case. I saw the Attorney-General on the subject
to-day. When Judge Macaulay's judgment is published, I hope you
will carefully review the whole matter, and lay the thing before
the public in such a way as to produce conviction. Everybody is
inquiring whether or not you will take up the subject.
An appeal was made to the King's Bench at Toronto. This Court--
Set aside the verdict of the lower Court, and ordered a new
trial.... At this second trial, as also that respecting the
Belleville Church property case, [November, 1837], ... the whole
matter was "ventilated," and the result was that the legal decision
of the highest judicial tribunal of the land confirmed the Wesleyan
Methodist Church as the rightful owner of the Church property, it
being the true representative and successor of the original
Methodist Episcopal Church in Canada. These litigations extended
over more than two years, and the friends of Zion and of peace
greatly rejoiced when they were brought to a just and final
settlement. (Epochs of Canadian Methodism, pages 278, 279.)
In regard to these three judgments on the case, Dr. Ryerson said:--
During the latter part of this month I have devoted such time as I
could spare to a lengthened review for the _Guardian_, of the
elaborate judgments of Chief Justice Robinson, and Justices
Macaulay and Sherwood, on the Waterloo Chapel case.[51] The opinion
of the Chief Justice displays profound research, acute
discrimination, and sound judgment. The opinion of Mr. Justice
Macaulay indicates great labour and strict religious scrupulosity.
The opinion of Mr. Justice Sherwood betrays great want of
acquaintance with the discipline, usages, and general history of
Methodism. To the Methodist Connexion the conflict of opinion and
confusion of reasoning of these learned judges are most prejudicial
and disastrous. I have therefore sought, in the "review," to set
forth the true facts of this abstruse case--facts connected with
the history of Methodism--facts, with the most material of which I
am personally acquainted, and in the progress of which I have been
called to act a conspicuous part.
In regard to this "review," Rev. E. Healy wrote to Dr. Ryerson, from
Brockville, and said:--
I have read your review of the opinion of the judges, and am happy
to see it. What the judges will do with you, I do not know. You are
considered, I believe, by some in this part of the country, as part
man and part demon. This is one reason, doubtless, why I am also so
bad a man, as I have said so much in your favour.
Rev. Hannibal Mulkins,[52] writing from Whitby on this subject, said:--
The agitation which was anticipated by some of the preachers at the
last Conference, and which has existed in some degree has happily
subsided, notwithstanding the most vigorous efforts have been made,
and all the arts of calumny and misrepresentation, employed to
harrass, to worry, and devour.
I was very glad to see your "review" of the opinions of the Judges
in the Chapel case. I have read it with much satisfaction. On this
circuit, notwithstanding the prejudices of some individuals, it has
been perused with general delight, and to our friends in particular
it has been highly satisfactory.
Dr. Ryerson, in a letter from New York, dated November, 1837, says:--
I have just returned from an extended tour of about 500 miles in
the Middle and Southern States, in order to obtain information and
evidence relative to the organization of the Methodist Church in
America, the character of its Episcopacy, and the powers of the
General Conference--points which involve the issue of our chapel
property case. From the mass of testimony and information I have
been able to collect, by seeing every preacher in this continent
who was in the work in 1784, relative to the character of Methodist
Episcopacy, and the powers of the General Conference, I feel no
doubt as to the result.[53]
Rev. Joseph Stinson, in making his report on the same subject, said:--
I spent a whole day with Bishop Hedding, and had much conversation
with him about our affairs generally. He told me that the American
Methodist Church had never regarded Episcopacy as a Divine
ordinance--nor as an essential doctrine of the Church--but as an
expedient form of ecclesiastical government, which could be
modified by the General Conference, or even dispensed with without
violating the great principles of Methodism. The Bishop is of the
opinion, however, that if our Courts decide against us, we shall
have to return to Episcopacy, and that the first Bishop should be
ordained by the Bishops of the American Church.
Dr. Ryerson, in the same November letter, says:--
I have also accompanied Mr. Stinson to render him what assistance I
could, in examining Manual Labour Schools, with a view to
establishing one for the benefit of our Indian youth--an object of
the very greatest importance, both to the religious and civil
interests of our aboriginal fellow countrymen. Also to get from the
New York Missionary Board a sum of money for the Indian work which
was expected from them before our Union with the English
Conference.
In a letter to Dr. Alder, written from New York in the same month, Dr.
Ryerson said:--
The concern of our preachers and friends on the Chapel case is deep
and truly affecting. As I took so responsible a part in the Union,
I cannot describe my feelings on this question. At the request of
our brethren I have undertaken to do what I could to secure our
Church property from the party claiming it. I have travelled nearly
500 miles this week for that purpose. But it is cheering amidst all
our difficulties, and the commotions of the political elements,
that our preachers, I believe, without exception, are of one
heart--that our societies are in peace--that the work of our
blessed Lord is reviving in many of the circuits, although the
cause in Kingston suffers, and my dear brethren there complain, in
consequence of my connexional engagements and absence from them.
FOOTNOTES:
[50] Between the Episcopal and Wesleyan Methodists for the possession of
the Church property. Waterloo was four miles north of Kingston.
[51] The Review is inserted in the _Guardian_, vol. viii., pages
169-178. The Belleville case was published in pamphlet form.
[52] This gentleman entered the Wesleyan ministry in 1835, but joined
the Church of England in 1840. He was for many years Chaplain to the
Penitentiary, at Kingston, and always retained a warm regard for Dr.
Ryerson. He died in 1877, aged 65 years.
[53] The particulars here referred to are given in detail in the "Epochs
of Canadian Methodism," pages 279-281.
CHAPTER XX.
1837.
The Coming Crisis.--Rebellion of 1837.
As Dr. Ryerson had anticipated, the combined effects of the publication
of his "impressions," in 1833; his letters exposing the designs of
Messrs. Hume, Roebuck, and Mackenzie in 1837; the secession of a section
of the Methodist Church, and the disputes consequent thereon
(culminating in the Waterloo and Belleville Chapel suits)--in which he
took a leading part--provoked the parties concerned to active hostility
against him. He had, however, many warm friends, especially among his
ministerial brethren. One of these was Rev. John Black, in the Bay of
Quinte District,--a quaint, but true and warm-hearted man. In inviting
him to take part in the Quarterly Meeting services, at Napanee, Mr.
Black indulges in a little playful satire, as follows:--
It appears that there are some amongst us here whom we dare not
number amongst your friends, and who prophesied that you would
never return from England--that you dare not, etc. Now we wish to
afford them living proof of their vanity in prophesying, by your
presence amongst them. Besides, on the other hand, the good-hearted
brethren amongst us greatly rejoiced on hearing of your successful
mission to England, and they wish to see and hear you once more.
Somewhat in Rev. John Black's spirit of kindly raillery, Rev. John C.
Davidson, of Hallowell, in inviting Dr. Ryerson to take part in a
Camp-meeting (and after mentioning several inducements), said:--
I would mention another inducement for you to come, viz.: the
multiplicity of warm friends and virulent enemies you have on this
circuit. Your presence and preaching will afford pleasure and
profit to your friends, and will very much tend, in my opinion, to
disarm the groundless prejudice entertained by many others against
you.
In a more serious letter to Dr. Ryerson, dated Cobourg, 16th November,
1837, Rev. Anson Green gives expression to a general feeling of
uneasiness and distrust which prevailed everywhere in the country at
that time:--
I pity you most sincerely. You have a storm about your ears that
you must bear, if you do not bow before it. In these perilous times
a man scarcely knows what to advise. I fear that destruction
awaits us on either hand. With the Radicals we are Tories; and with
the Tories we are Rebels. It is said by the Rebels here that they
have money enough, and men enough, and guns enough, and that the
plans are so laid that there can be no mistake. The Government
appears to be in possession of these facts. Thus far the
proceedings of the Rebels do not show much wisdom, or skill, in
laying plans, or in executing them. I am mistaken if they stop
short of a civil war.
I very much regret that you should be under the necessity of coming
in contact with Governor Head in any one thing. I could not be a
rebel; my conscience and religion forbid it; and, on the other
hand, I could not fight for the Rectories and Church domination. I
think them both to be great evils, and I have resolved to choose
neither. I believe that in Haldimand and Cramahe townships there
are twenty rebels to one sincere loyalist. Brother Wilson, (son of
old Father Wilson), says that his life has been threatened for
circulating the petition which you sent down, and others are in a
similar condition. What will be the effect of all this I cannot
say, but I have thought from the beginning that either the
Rectories must be abolished, and a suitable disposition made of the
Reserves, or a change of Government will ensue. And if the Church
party have it all in their own hands to make peace, by allowing
other Churches to enjoy equal privileges with themselves, and do
not do so, they must bear the responsibility of all the bloodshed
and carnage that may ensue. I fear that they are so perfectly
infatuated that they will suffer utter destruction, and choose it
rather than equal and impartial justice.
On the 5th December, 1837, Dr. Ryerson reached Cobourg on his way to
Toronto. When he arrived there, Elders Case and Green, and other
friends, thought that as his life had been threatened it would be unsafe
for him to proceed to Toronto.[54] He, therefore, waited there for
further news, and, in the meantime, wrote to a friend in Kingston, on
the 6th, as follows:--
You will recollect my mentioning that I pressed upon Sir Francis the
propriety and importance of making some prudent provision for the
defence of the city, in case any party should be urged on in the madness
of rebellion so far as to attack it. He is much blamed here on account
of his overweening confidence, and foolish and culpable negligence in
this respect. There was great excitement in this town and neighbourhood
last night. To-day all is anxiety and hurry. The militia is called out
to put down the rebellion of the very man whose seditious paper many of
them have supported, and whom they have countenanced.
The precepts of the Bible and the example of the early Christians, leave
me no occasion for second thoughts as to my duty, namely, to pray for
and support the "powers that be," whether I admire them or not, and to
implore the defeat of "fiery conspiracy and rebellion." And I doubt not
that the sequel will in this, as in other cases, show that the path of
duty is that of wisdom, if not of safety. I am aware that my head would
be regarded as something of a prize by the rebels; but I feel not in the
least degree agitated. I trust implicitly in that God whom I have
endeavoured--though imperfectly and unfaithfully--to serve; being
assured nothing will harm us, but that all things, whether life or
death, will work together for our good if we be followers of that which
is good. Let us trust in the Lord, and do good, and He will never leave
nor forsake us!
About 700 armed men have left this district to-day for Toronto, in order
to put down the rebels. There is an unanimity and determination among
the people to quash rebellion and support the law that I hardly
expected. The country is safe, but it is a "gone day with the rebel
party."
In a graphic letter to Dr. Ryerson, written on the 5th December, by his
brother William, at Toronto, the scenes at the _emeute_ in that city are
thus described:--
Last night, about 12 or 1 o'clock, the bells rang with great
violence; we all thought it was an alarm of fire, but being unable
to see any light, we thought it was a false alarm, and we remained
quiet until this morning, when, on visiting the market-place, I
found a large number of persons serving out arms to others as fast
as they possibly could. Among many others we saw the
Lieutenant-Governor, in his every-day suit, with one
double-barrelled gun in his hand, another leaning against his
breast, and a brace of pistols in his leather belt. Also, Chief
Justice Robinson, Judges Macaulay, Jones, and McLean, the
Attorney-General, and Solicitor-General, with their muskets,
cartridge boxes and bayonets, all standing in the ranks as private
soldiers, under the command of Colonel Fitzgibbon. I assure you it
is impossible for me to describe my feelings. I enquired of Judge
McLean, who informed me that an express had arrived at the
Government House late last night, giving intelligence that the
Radicals had assembled in great force at Montgomery's, on Yonge
Street, and were in full march for the city; that the Governor had
sent out two persons, Mr. A. McDonell and Ald. J. Powell, to obtain
information (both of whom had been made prisoners, but escaped).
Dr. Horne's house is now in flames. I feel very calm and composed
in my own mind. Brother John thinks it will not be wise for you to
come through all the way from Kingston. You would not be safe in
visiting this wretched part of the country at the present. You know
the feelings that are entertained against you. Your life would
doubtless be industriously sought. My dear brother, farewell. May
God mercifully bless and keep you from all the difficulties and
dangers we are in!
Rev. William Ryerson further writes, on the 8th December:
About 10 o'clock to-day about 2,000 men, headed by the
Lieut.-Governor, with Judge Jones, the Attorney-General and Capt.
Halkett, as his aides-de-camp, and commanded by Cols. Fitzgibbon
and Allan N. Macnab, Speaker of the House, left the city to attack
the rebels at Montgomery's. After a little skirmishing in which we
had three men wounded but none killed, the main body commenced a
very spirited attack on their headquarters at Montgomery's large
house. After a few shots from two six-pounders, and a few volleys
of musketry, the most of the party fled and made their escape. The
rest of them were taken prisoners. There were also three or four
killed and several wounded. After which His Excellency ordered the
buildings to be burnt to the ground, and the whole force returned
to the city. All the leaders succeeded in making their escape. A
royal proclamation has just been issued offering £1,000 for the
apprehension of Mackenzie, and £500 for that of Samuel Lount, David
Gibson, Silas Fletcher, and Jesse Lloyd; so that now, through the
mercy of God, we have peace, and feel safe again, for which we
desire to feel sincerely thankful.
Dr. Ryerson, having reached Toronto safely, and knowing how anxious his
parents would be to know something definite as to the state of affairs,
wrote a letter to his Father on the 18th December, as follows:--
I have been trying to get time to make you and Mother a visit of at
least one night; but I find it quite out of my power to secure the
enjoyment of so precious a privilege.
It is remarkable that every man, with very few exceptions, who has left
our Church and joined in the unprincipled crusade which has been made
against us, has either been an active promoter of this plot, or so far
connected with it as to be ruined in his character and prospects by the
timely discovery and defeat of it! I have been deeply affected at
hearing of some unhappy examples, among old acquaintances, of this
description. I feel thankful that I have been enabled to do my duty from
the beginning in this matter. Four years ago, I perceived and began to
warn the public of the revolutionary tendency and spirit of Mackenzie's
proceedings. Perhaps you may recollect that in a long article in the
_Guardian_, four years ago this winter, headed "Revolutionary Symptoms,"
I pointed out, to the great displeasure of even some of my friends, what
has come to pass.
It is also a matter of thankfulness that every one of our family and
marriage connections, near and remote, is on the side of law, reason,
and religion in this affair. Such indications of the Divine goodness are
a fresh encouragement to me to renew my covenant engagement with my
gracious Redeemer, to serve Him and His cause with greater zeal and
faithfulness.
I hope, my dear Father, you are employing your last days in preparing
for your approaching change, and for standing before the bar of God. My
poor prayers are daily offered up in your behalf. Much travelling and
other engagements have hitherto prevented me from writing to you as I
would; but, hereafter, the first Monday in each month shall be
considered as belonging to my dear aged Parents, in praying for or
writing to them. My dutiful respects and love to my dear Mother. I would
esteem it a great favour and privilege to receive a few lines from you
or her.
FOOTNOTES:
[54] Dr. Ryerson in his "Epochs of Canadian Methodism," page 314,
says:--It had been agreed by W. L. Mackenzie and his fellow rebels, in
1837, to hang Egerton Ryerson on the first tree they met with, could
they apprehend him.
CHAPTER XXI.
1837-1838.
Sir F. B. Head and the Upper Canada Academy.
Lord Glenelg, as agreed, when Dr. Ryerson was in England, (page 165,)
directed Lieutenant-Governor Sir F. B. Head to bring the pecuniary
claims of the Upper Canada Academy before the Legislature. This he did
in February, 1837. A committee (of which Hon. W. H. Draper was
chairman)[55] brought in an excellent report on the subject. The House
of Assembly by a vote of 31 to 10 agreed to advance $16,400 to the
Academy. The Legislative Council, on motion of Hon. J. Elmsley, made
such onerous conditions as virtually defeated the bill, and no relief
was granted.[56] Dr. Ryerson, then in England, pressed the matter most
urgently upon Lord Glenelg, who in April 1837, sent directions to Sir F.
B. Head to advance the money without delay. This, on various pretexts,
he refused to do; but when the Legislature opened in January, 1838, he
sent a message to the House, which Dr. Ryerson, then in Toronto, thus
describes, in a letter to a friend at Kingston, dated February 3rd,
1838. He said:--
Instead of giving us the promised money for the Upper Canada
Academy, Sir Francis Head has sent a part of the correspondence
with Lord Glenelg and with me down to the House of Assembly, with a
message in which he implicates me, as also a letter to Lord
Glenelg, written a few weeks after my return from England, in which
he impeaches me. I have, in consequence, drawn up a petition to the
House, filling six large sheets, exposing the whole of his conduct
towards us, vindicating myself from the charges contained in his
despatches, and proposing to establish every fact which I have
stated before a select Committee of the House of Assembly. My
petition was presented this morning. According to rule, a petition
has to lie on the table for twenty-four hours before it is read.
But a motion was made and agreed to, to dispense with the rule, and
read my petition. It was then read, and created a great sensation.
It was then moved that 200 copies of it be printed, together with
all the documents sent down by the Governor, to which the petition
referred. After discussion the motion was carried by a vote of 33
to 4. This was, of course, very gratifying to my feelings, as it
must be extremely mortifying to the Governor. This is the first
petition that has been ordered to be printed by the present--Sir
Francis' own--Parliament. The dispensing with the rule, and giving
such a petition the preference, was the highest mark of respect
which the House could have shown me. I have not felt so much
agitated with anything for years, as with this matter. I am now
greatly relieved. I feel as if the Lord God of Hosts was on our
side. The Governor clearly thought that as he was so greatly lauded
and had become so famous a conqueror, we would not dare to come out
against him before the public, or meet him face to face before the
Assembly.
On the 16th, Dr. Ryerson again writes to Kingston:--
This Academy business is a most painful one to me. The Legislative
Council and the House of Assembly have each appointed a select
Committee on the subject. But I am afraid we will get nothing until
we hear from Lord Glenelg.
My mind has been, and is, in a great degree depressed beyond
expression, in regard to our circumstances. My only trust is in Him
who has thus far brought us through, and turned the designs of our
enemies to our account. For the last two days I have been as low as
I was at my lowest in London.
In addition to Dr. Ryerson's petition to both Houses, he made a separate
Appeal to members of the Assembly. In it he stated in substance that Sir
Francis Head--
Had already issued his warrant for $8,200; that he was informed in
December, 1837, not merely verbally, but in writing, by Hon. J. H.
Dunn, Receiver-General, that he had funds with which to pay the
balance ($8,200), yet the Governor refused to issue the requisite
warrant for it, on the plea of much business; but said that Mr.
Dunn had all the warrant that was necessary. In January he again
declined to issue the warrant, and excused himself by saying that
Mr. Dunn required no further authority. When, later in the month,
Dr. Ryerson had not only removed every variety of objection and
excuse, but sent a note from Mr. Dunn saying that he had the
necessary funds, Sir F. B. Head stated that he "must see one or two
of his councillors." After he had done so, he wrote a note to Dr.
Ryerson to say that he had misled him, as to the advance being a
grant instead of a loan, etc.
On 21st February, the House of Assembly recommended that the
balance be paid over at once. It pointed out that Dr. Ryerson had
become personally liable to the banks for $3,400, and Revs. John
Ryerson and E. Evans for $2,000 of the balance due; that although
grants were constantly being made by the House, yet there was no
precedent for a loan; and that as to whether the advance was to be
a grant or a loan they would abstain from offering an opinion. This
report had the desired effect. The money was paid.
On the 22nd February, Dr. Ryerson was, therefore, enabled to write to
his friend in Kingston, to say that
The prayer of my petition has been this day complied with by a
unanimous vote of the House of Assembly; and the Hon. Mr. Draper
told Brother Evans that His Excellency would issue his warrant for
the money as soon as the Address of the Assembly is presented. Not
a man in the Assembly would risk his reputation in defence of the
conduct of the Governor in this affair. The Report of the Committee
was received, and the Address passed two readings last night and
one this morning, and without one word from any member of the
Assembly in the way of comment or remark. The Committee of the
Legislative Council has actually declined entering into the
investigation of the subject at all, as had been desired by His
Excellency. Thus has Sir Francis Head not only disgraced himself,
but helped us.
I thank the Lord for His blessing thus far. We will still trust in
Him, and not be afraid. Tories, Radicals, and the Governor, have
each had their turn at us. I hope we may now be allowed to live in
peace. The result of this affair has in some measure compensated me
for the anxiety of mind I have endured.
After this unpleasant controversy with Sir F. B. Head was over, Rev.
Anson Green wrote to Dr. Ryerson as follows:--
How do you feel after your brush with Sir Francis? You need not
feel very downcast, having attained so triumphant a victory. I
doubt not but Sir Francis would willingly pay double the amount
claimed by us, if he could have prevented the result which has
happened. It is too late, however, to recall it now. I hope he will
learn wisdom from the past, and not be so self-willed and
headstrong in future. No one seems pleased with him but those whose
praise is a reproach.
Rev. W. H. Harvard, in a letter from Kingston, said:--
I am truly pained at the conduct of the Lieutenant-Governor, and
sympathize with you in thus being brought into such an unavoidable
collision with him. I am more than grieved that he should use us so
ungenerously.
I am glad that you are the warrior, for you will combine caution
and courage, and will come off more than conqueror. You are at
present the centre of our solicitude. I pray that your heart may be
comforted and controlled from above. We are the Lord's covenanted,
consecrated servants. In His work we are employed. By His Holy
Spirit may we ever be actuated and aided!
FOOTNOTES:
[55] At the Conference of this year resolutions of thanks were passed to
Mr. Draper, and were sent to him by Dr. Ryerson, the Secretary. Mr.
Draper's reply was as follows:--
I feel deeply indebted to the Conference of the Wesleyan Methodist
Church for the honour conferred upon me in deeming my humble exertions
in the cause of Christian education worthy of their approbation, and I
trust I shall never forget their good opinion. I cannot, at the same
time, pass by the opportunity of thanking you for the terms in which you
have communicated that resolution to me, and of expressing my
satisfaction that I have in any degree contributed to the success of
your unwearied exertions in behalf of the Upper Canada Academy in
England. I sincerely rejoice that you were enabled to obtain that aid
for its completion, which was so necessary and so well deserved.
[56] In a letter to Dr. Ryerson, his brother William thus accounts for
the failure to get the grant: To the miserable Missionary grant of £900
to the English Conference we are chiefly indebted for the loss of the
Bill for the relief of the Upper Canada Academy, as we are positively
informed by our best friends in the House of Assembly. It has also been
the means of depriving many of the preachers of a considerable part of
their small salary, and in one or two instances, of the whole of it. It
has, and still does more to weaken our hands, and to embarrass our
labours, and also to strengthen the hands and to increase the number of
our enemies, than almost any or all other causes put together.
CHAPTER XXII.
1838.
Victims of the Rebellion.--State of the Country.
Early in 1838 the trials for treason took place. Messrs. Lount and
Matthews were found guilty and sentenced to death. Other parties were
also tried: among them was Dr. Thomas D. Morrison, a prominent Methodist
in Toronto.[57] In a letter to Dr. Ryerson, at Kingston, his brother
John mentions that Dr. Morrison was triumphantly acquitted. He also
mentions (as an amusing incident at the trial) the success of the two
counsel for Dr. Morrison, in showing that statements entirely
contradictory to each other could be fully proved from Sir F. B. Head's
own speeches and dispatches. He said:--
Mr. Macdonald, of St. Catharines, stated that Sir Francis had
declared in his speech at the opening of the Parliament, that he
knew of the rebellion long before it occurred, and that he was the
cause of it. Mr. Boswell, of Cobourg, admitted that Sir Francis had
said he knew a good deal. But the Governor was very fond of a fine
style; he liked rounded periods, or, as Lord Melbourne had
expressed it, "epigrammic" flights, so well, that he could hardly
make his pen write the words of truth and soberness on such
occasions. Mr. Boswell read several extracts from Sir Francis'
despatches to Lord Glenelg, which were in direct opposition to the
extracts read by Mr. Macdonald. A gentleman whispered to me that
anything (no matter what) could be proved from Sir Francis'
writings and sayings. In reply to the Attorney-General, Mr.
Macdonald said:--That if the suspicion of treasonable motives and
doings in others, and not informing or using prompt measures to
correct or prevent what might follow, was treason, then Sir Francis
was the greatest traitor in the country, for he said he knew all
about the proposed outbreak. Mr. Boswell said, that after Sir
Francis had seen the "Declaration," and had taken the advice of the
Attorney-General, he had sent a despatch to the Colonial Secretary
declaring that there was nothing treasonable in the country; that
everything was as it should be! To demonstrate this, he had sent
away all the troops. Thus, you see, the two lawyers made poor Sir
Francis prove everything.
The jury returned with a verdict of "not guilty," which caused
great cheering, and which could not be suppressed for some time.
Several of the jury were warm Tories, but they acquitted the
Doctor.
In another letter to Dr. Ryerson, his brother John gives an account of
the efforts made to induce Sir George Arthur, the new Governor, to
commute the sentence of Lount and Mathews. He says:--
I have signed a petition for the mitigation of Lount and Mathews'
punishment, as did Brother William. I have just seen Rev. James
Richardson, who has been with Lount and Mathews. Mathews professed
to have found peace. Lount is earnestly seeking. A good deal of
feeling has been excited respecting the execution of these
unfortunate men. A petition signed by 4,000 persons in their behalf
was presented to His Excellency. It was agreed that Rev. Mr. Brough
(Church of England minister from Newmarket) and I should go and
present the Toronto petition, and that we should seek a private
interview with him. Instead of having a private interview, we were
called into the Council Chamber in the presence of the Executive
Council. This was rather embarrassing to me, as I did not wish to
say what I had intended to say in the presence of Sir Francis' old
Executive Council. After presenting the petition, Mr. Brough
introduced the conversation and referred Sir George to me. I told
him that I was extensively acquainted with the country,--that I had
travelled lately through the Niagara, Gore, Home, Newcastle, Prince
Edward, and part of the Midland Districts,--had conversed with a
great many persons, many of whom, even persons of high
respectability, and were strongly attached to the interests of His
Majesty's Government, and the pervading feeling was that the severe
penalty of the law should not be executed on those victims of
deception and sin. I also read an extract of your last letter to
His Excellency [p. 188]--relating to the inexpediency of inflicting
severe punishment "in opposition to public sentiment and policy,
for political offences," etc. After having listened to me very
attentively, His Excellency said, that after the fullest
consultation with his Executive, and the most serious and prayerful
consideration of this painful matter, he had come to the conclusion
that Lount and Mathews must be executed.
I also mentioned to the Governor that you and Rev. J. Stinson had
waited on Sir Francis about four weeks previous to the
insurrection,--that you informed him of insurrectionary movements
about Lloydtown and other places, which you had learned from
me,--that you had strongly urged Sir Francis to raise volunteers,
and put the city and other places in a state of defence,--that you
and I had waited on the Attorney-General next day, and that we had
urged these things on him in a similar manner;--but that these
statements and advice had been disregarded, if not disbelieved.
In a subsequent letter he thus related the closing scene:--
At eight o'clock to-day, Thursday, 12th April, Lount and Mathews
were executed. The general feeling is in total opposition to the
execution of those men. Sheriff Jarvis burst into tears when he
entered the room to prepare them for execution. They said to him
very calmly, "Mr. Jarvis, do your duty; we are prepared to meet
death and our Judge." They then, both of them, put their arms
around his neck and kissed him. They were then prepared for
execution. They walked to the gallows with entire composure and
firmness of step. Rev. J. Richardson walked alongside of Lount, and
Rev. J. Beatty alongside of Mathews. They ascended the scaffold
and knelt down on the drop. The ropes were adjusted while they were
on their knees. Mr. Richardson engaged in prayer; and when he came
to that part of the Lord's Prayer, "Forgive us our trespasses, as
we forgive those that trespass against us," the drop fell!
In a letter written to Dr. Ryerson the next day, his brother John
mentioned a sad incident connected with Lount's trial:
Lount's daughter, a young woman, was present when her father was
condemned. It had such an effect on her, that she went home and
died almost immediately afterwards. These are indeed melancholy
times!
The evil effects upon the country of the arbitrary conduct of Sir F. B.
Head, are thus described in a letter to Dr. Ryerson from his brother
William, dated Toronto, 22nd April:--
The very painful excitement caused by the execution of Lount and
Matthews has in some degree subsided, but dissatisfaction with the
state of things is, I fear, increasing from day to day. Emigration
to the States is the fear of the hour. It is indeed going on to an
extent truly alarming and astonishing. A deputation has been sent
from this city to Washington to negotiate with the American
Government for a tract of land on which to form a settlement or
colony. They have returned, and say that they met with a most
gracious reception, encouragement and success beyond their most
sanguine expectations. An emigration society has been formed,
embracing some of the leading citizens. Its object is to commence a
colony in the Iowa Territory, on the Mississippi River.[58] A very
large class are becoming uneasy, and many of the best inhabitants
of the country, as to industry and enterprise, are preparing to
leave. My own spirit is almost broken down. I feel, I assure you,
like leaving Canada too, and I am not alone in those feelings; some
of our friends whom you would not suspect, often feel quite as much
down in the throat as I do. If ever I felt the need of faith, and
wisdom, and patience, it is at the present. I have just returned
from visiting the prisoners. After all, we know but little of the
calamities and miseries with which our once happy land is now
afflicted, and yet Sir Francis, the most guilty author of this
misery, escapes without punishment; yes, with honour and praise!
How mysterious are the ways of Providence--how dark, crooked, and
perverse the ways of man.
FOOTNOTES:
[57] Dr. Morrison had been a clerk in the Surveyor-General's
office,--had, indeed, while there, collected materials for Dr.
Strachan's Ecclesiastical Chart,--but, without any charge, or the
slightest deficiency in faithfulness and efficiency, was dismissed, for
the simple reason that he had become a Methodist! He then devoted
himself to the medical profession. He was once elected to the House of
Assembly for York, defeating the Attorney-General. He was also once
elected Mayor of Toronto. He was the writer's [and the editor's]
physician during life; died in great peace, strong in faith, giving
glory to God.--"Epochs of Canadian Methodism," pages 188, 189.--H.
[58] This disposition to remove from Upper Canada to Iowa was not
confined to Toronto and its vicinity. In the following chapter the case
of a Mr. John Campbell, M.P.P. for Frontenac county, is mentioned. He
was on his way to Iowa when he saw and read Dr. Ryerson's defence of Mr.
Bidwell. The reading of that defence changed his plans, and he remained
in Canada. (See page 192.)
CHAPTER XXIII.
1795-1861.
Sketch of Mr. William Lyon Mackenzie.
The story of Dr. Ryerson's life would scarcely be complete without
giving some information in regard to the chief opponents whom he
encountered in the earlier part of his career--men well known at the
time, but whose names and memories are now passing away.
With the exception of Bishop Strachan, no man came so immediately in
contact with Dr. Ryerson in the first years of his public life as did
Mr. W. L. Mackenzie.
Mr. Mackenzie was born in Scotland, in March, 1795. He died in Toronto,
on the 28th August, 1861, in the 67th year of his age. He came to Canada
in 1820, and until 1824 was engaged in mercantile pursuits. In May of
that year he entered public life, and commenced the publication of the
_Colonial Advocate_ at Queenston. From that time until near the close of
his life, he maintained his connection, more or less, with the press;
but he was always on the stormy sea of politics, even when not a
journalist. The reasons which induced him to enter public life are thus
given in Mr. Charles Lindsey's "Life and Times of Mackenzie," page 40.
They are in Mr. Mackenzie's own words, and were written some time after
the rebellion of 1837-8:--
I had long seen the country in the hands of a few shrewd, crafty,
covetous men, under whose management one of the most lovely,
desirable sections of America remained a comparative desert. The
most obvious public improvements were stayed; dissension was
created among classes; citizens were banished and imprisoned
[Gourley, Beardsley, etc.] in defiance of all law; the people had
been forbidden, under severe pains and penalties, from meeting
anywhere to petition for justice; large estates were wrested from
their owners in utter contempt of even the forms of the courts; the
Church of England, the adherents of which were few, monopolized as
much of the lands of the Colony as all the religious houses and
dignitaries of the Roman Catholic Church had had the control of in
Scotland at the era of the Reformation. Other sects were treated
with contempt, and scarcely tolerated; a sordid band of
land-jobbers grasped the soil as their patrimony, and with a few
leading officials, who divided the public revenue among themselves,
formed "the family compact," and were the avowed enemies of common
schools, of civil and religious liberty, of all legislative or
other checks to their own will. Other men had opposed and been
converted by them. At nine-and-twenty I might have united with
them, but chose rather to join the oppressed; nor have I ever
regretted that choice, or wavered from the object of my early
pursuit. So far as I, or any other professed reformer, was
concerned in inviting citizens of [the United States] to interfere
in Canadian affairs, there was culpable error. So far as any of us,
at any time, may have supposed that the cause of freedom would be
advanced by adding the Canadas to [that] confederation, we were
under the merest delusion. Mr. Lindsey adds:--In some respects the
condition of the Province was worse than Mr. Mackenzie described
it. He dealt only with its political condition.
With a Scotchman's idea of justice and freedom, he felt a longing desire
to right the wrongs which he saw everywhere around him. This, therefore,
constituted, as he believed, his mission as a public man in Canada, and
it furnishes the key to his life and character.
Mr. Mackenzie was a political pessimist. He looked upon every abuse
which he attacked, with a somewhat severe, if not a jaundiced, eye.
Every evil which he discovered was, in his estimation, truly an evil;
and all evils were about of equal magnitude. Besides, in attacking an
evil or an abuse, he did not fail to attack the perpetrator or upholder
of it also, and that, too, with a strength of invective, or of cutting
sarcasm, which brought every foible, and weakness of his, and even those
of his father before him, vividly into view. This was the baleful secret
of his strength as an assailant; but this, too, caused him to be
regarded by his victims with intense dislike, bordering on hatred. This
style of attack, on the part of Mr. Mackenzie, did not necessarily arise
from anything like vindictiveness, but rather from a keen sense of
dislike to what he conceived to be wrong in the thing he was attacking.
In 1849 (12 years after the rebellion), Mr. Mackenzie, in a letter to
Earl Grey, used the following remarkable language:--
A course of careful observation during the last eleven years has
fully satisfied me that, had the violent movements in which I and
many others were engaged on both sides of the Niagara proved
successful, that success would have deeply injured the people of
Canada, whom I then believed I was serving at great risks.... I
have long been sensible of the errors committed during that
period.... No punishment that power could inflict or nature
sustain, would have equalled the regrets I have felt on account of
much that I did, said, wrote, and published; but the past cannot be
recalled.... There is not a living man on the continent who more
sincerely desires that British Government in Canada may long
continue, etc. Page 291, 292.
No man was more unselfish than Mr. Mackenzie. He would rather suffer
extreme hardship than accept a doubtful favour. Even in regard to kindly
and reasonable offers of help, he was morbidly sensitive (as mentioned
on page 298 of his "Life and Times"); and yet, looking at the conduct of
many men in like circumstances, he deserved commendation rather than
censure for his extreme conscientiousness.
Mr. Mackenzie did the State good service in many things. His
investigations into the affairs of the Welland Canal were highly
valuable to the country, greatly aided as he was by Mr. (now, Sir)
Francis Hincks as chief accountant. His inquiries in regard to the Post
Office and Prison management were also useful. Besides, he advocated
many important reforms which were afterwards carried out. Mr. Mackenzie
was the first Mayor of Toronto.
Towards the close of his life he and Dr. Ryerson were not on unfriendly
terms; and when in 1852, as a member of the Legislature he instituted an
inquiry into the management of the Educational Depository, he expressed
himself satisfied with its usefulness.[59] At a later period when Mr.
John C. Geikie[60]--then a bookseller in Toronto--commenced his attack
upon the Depository in 1858, Mr. Mackenzie thus rebuked him in his
_Weekly Message_ of April 9th, of that year:--
At one time we thought with the redoubtable Geikie that Dr.
Ryerson's book concern was a monopoly, but a more thorough inquiry
induced us to change that opinion. We found that great benefits
were obtained for the townships, the country schools, and general
education through Dr. Ryerson's plan which could in no other way be
conferred upon them, etc.
Dr. Ryerson, on his part, felt kindly towards Mr. Mackenzie. He
mentioned to the Editor of this book near the close of the year 1860,
that on the ensuing New Year's day he (Dr. Ryerson) would call upon and
shake hands with his old antagonist, and wish him a "Happy New Year."
FOOTNOTES:
[59] Mr. Mackenzie frequently visited the Educational Depository to make
inquiries, etc. The Editor of this book had frequent conversations with
him on the subject, and explained to him the details of management. He
was pleased to know that through the agency of the Depository thousands
of volumes of good books were being yearly sent out to the schools.
[60] Now the Rev. Dr. Cunningham Geikie, of England, and author of the
"Life and Words of Christ," and other valuable books. He declined the
use of the title of reverend in his controversy with Dr. Ryerson.
CHAPTER XXIV.
1838.
Defence of the Hon. Marshall Spring Bidwell.
From various papers and letters left by Dr. Ryerson, I have compiled the
following statement in regard to his memorable defence of the Hon. M. S.
Bidwell, in 1838. I have used Dr. Ryerson's own words throughout, only
varying them when the sense, or the construction, or condensation of a
sentence, required it. He said:--
On Dr. Duncombe's return to Canada, I believe the conspiracy was
commenced by him, Mr. Wm. Lyon Mackenzie, and others, sought to
accomplish their objects by rebellion; but in this the great body of
Reformers took no part except to surpress it. I had warned them that Mr.
Mackenzie's proceedings would result in rebellion. I afterwards received
the thanks of great numbers of Reformers for having by my warnings and
counsels saved them and their families from being involved in the
consequences of the rebellion. I was so odious to Mr. Mackenzie and his
fellow rebels, that they determined to hang me on the first tree could
they get hold of me. Of this, I had proof from one of themselves; yet I
afterwards succeeded by my representations and appeals, to get several
of them out of prison. My brother John, who was then in Toronto,
presented to Governor Arthur and advocated a largely signed petition
against the execution of Lount and Matthews. He also read a letter from
me (then a stationed minister in Kingston) against their execution, and
on the impolicy of capital punishment for political offences.
After the suppression of the rebellion--in the putting down of which the
great body of the Reformers joined--the leaders of the dominant party
sought, nevertheless, to hold the entire party of the Reformers
responsible for that rebellion, and to proscribe and put them down
accordingly. The first step in this process of proscription was the
ostracism of Mr. M. S. Bidwell, an able and prudent politician, and a
gentleman who took a high place in the legal profession.[61] and
completed them in the office of Mr. Daniel Hagerman, of Ernestown. He
was admitted as a barrister-at-law in April, 1821.
Mr. Bidwell was first elected to the House of Assembly in 1824;
re-elected and chosen Speaker in 1828. On the death of George IV., in
1830, a new general election took place, when the Reform party were
reduced to a minority, and Mr. Bidwell was not re-elected Speaker; but
he greatly distinguished himself in the debates of the House. In 1834, a
new general election took place; a large majority of Reformers were
returned, and Mr. Bidwell was again elected Speaker. In May, 1836, Sir
F. B. Head dissolved the House of Assembly, and Mr. Bidwell and his
colleague, the late Peter Perry, were defeated in the united counties of
Lennox and Addington, which Mr. Bidwell had represented in Parliament
during twelve years. From that time (May, 1836) Mr. Bidwell never
attended a political meeting, or took any part in politics.
During my stay in England, from December, 1835, to April, 1837, I had
many conversations with Lord Glenelg, Sir George Grey, and Sir James
Stephen (Under Secretaries), on the Government of Canada, shewing them
that the foundation of our Government was too narrow, like an inverted
pyramid, conferring the appointments to all offices, civil, military,
judicial, to one party--excluding all others, however respectable and
competent, as if they were enemies, and even aliens. I mentioned that
not one member of the Reform party, (which had commanded for years a
majority in the House of Assembly) had ever been appointed to the Bench,
though there were several of them able lawyers, such as Bidwell, Rolph,
etc. (Page 169.)
Lord Glenelg, in a despatch, directed Sir F. B. Head to appoint Mr.
Bidwell to a judgeship on the first vacancy. Sir F. Head refused to do
so, for which he was recalled, and Sir George Arthur was appointed in
his place. In the meantime the House of Assembly was dissolved by Sir
Francis, and a general election ordered. I had warned the public against
Mr. Mackenzie's doings in converting constitutional reform into
republican revolution, in consequence of which he attacked me furiously.
Peter Perry, in the parliamentary session of 1836, attacked me also, and
defended Mr. Mackenzie in a long speech. This speech reached me in
England. I sat down and wrote a letter in reply, which reached Canada,
and was published there on the eve of the elections, of which I then
knew nothing. The constitutional party in Lennox and Addington had my
letter printed by thousands, in the form of a large hand-bill headed:
"Peter Perry Picked to Pieces by Egerton Ryerson." Although Mr. Bidwell
took no part in the controversy, he was on the same electoral ticket
with Mr. Perry, and both were defeated.[62]
The Radical party being defeated at the polls, its leaders: Mr. Wm. L.
Mackenzie, Dr. Charles Duncombe, and many others, sought to accomplish
by force of arms what they had failed to accomplish by popular
elections; the rebellion of 1836-7 was the result. As Mr. Bidwell was
known to be the intimate friend of Dr. Rolph, and as Dr. Rolph was
thought to be implicated in the rebellion, it was assumed by Sir F. Head
that Mr. Bidwell was concerned in it also. But this was perfectly
untrue. Besides, Mr. Bidwell entertained the strongest views that not a
drop of blood should be shed to obtain the civil freedom of a
country--that only moral suasion and public opinion should be employed
for such purposes.
Sir F. Head thought that now was the opportunity to revenge himself
alike upon Lord Glenelg and the Whig Government, which had ordered him
to appoint Mr. Bidwell to a judgeship, and also upon Mr. Bidwell as a
former leader of the Reform party who had opposed him. Mr. Bidwell's
letters having reached the Governor, he sent for that gentleman. What
transpired is thus related by Mr. Bidwell, in a letter written to me
some time afterwards:--
Sir Francis assured me that the letters had been sent to him
without his orders, and that he never would allow my letters to be
opened. I asked him to open them, as I did not wish to have any
suspicions about them indulged afterwards; but he refused to do it,
and said he had too much respect for me to allow it. Indeed, on the
Wednesday previously, I expressly informed the Attorney-General of
my own anxiety, (and that I was willing) to undergo the most full
and unreserved examination, and to let all my papers be examined.
The terms of my note of the 8th December--the evening of the day of
the interview--were dictated, or at least, suggested to me by Sir
Francis, and referred particularly to his expressions of personal
regard. The object of drawing such a note from me is now
apparent--but I was not then aware that he had received orders from
Lord Glenelg to make me a Judge.
Before leaving Toronto (as he intimates), and after his arrival at
Lewiston, Mr. Bidwell wrote to Sir F. Head (December 11th, 1837),
protesting his innocence and against the injustice of the means used to
compel him to leave his country.
The conclusion of Mr. Bidwell's note from Toronto is as follows:
I am confident ... that the investigations, which will now of
course be made, will fully remove those suspicions from the mind of
your Excellency, and will prove that I had also no knowledge or
expectation that any such attempt [_i.e._ insurrectionary movement]
was in contemplation.
To accomplish his revengeful purpose, however, Sir F. Head wrote or
inspired an editorial to the Toronto _Patriot_ newspaper (then the organ
of his Government) stating that as Mr. Bidwell had left the country,
under circumstances that proved his consciousness of guilt, it was
therefore the duty of the Benchers of the Law Society to erase his name
from their rolls.
I was then stationed at Kingston. When I saw the editorial in the
_Patriot_, I at once recognized Sir F. Head's hand in it, and was
horror-struck at the idea of a man being exiled from his country, and
then deprived of his professional character and privileges without a
trial! I passed a sleepless night.
The late Mr. Henry Cassidy was then mayor of Kingston; a staunch
Churchman and Conservative. His wife was a relative of mine, so a sort
of family intimacy existed between us. Mr. Cassidy had been a student in
Mr. Bidwell's law-office and was now his law agent. Mr. Bidwell enclosed
to Mr. Cassidy the correspondence which had taken place between himself
and Sir F. Head and Attorney-General Hagerman, and Mr. Cassidy had shown
it to me. The morning after I saw the article in the _Patriot_,
proposing the erasure of Mr. Bidwell's name from the books of the Law
Society, I went to Mr. Cassidy, saying that I had not closed my eyes all
night, in consequence of Sir F. Head's article in the _Patriot_; that I
was the only person besides himself who knew the facts of the case, and
though I had been assailed by the newspapers of the party with which Mr.
Bidwell had been connected, I felt it in my heart to prevent a gross act
of injustice and cruelty being inflicted upon a man, in his absence and
helplessness, who had introduced and carried through our Legislature the
laws by which the different religious denominations held their Church
property, and their ministers solemnized matrimony. I asked Mr. Cassidy
if he would allow me the use of the letters which Mr. Bidwell had
enclosed to him, justifying his own innocence, and showing the injustice
done him by the misstatements of Sir F. Head. After some hours of
deliberation, Mr. Cassidy consented. I sat down, and over the signature
of "A United Empire Loyalist," I detailed the case, introducing as
proofs of Mr. Bidwell's innocence the injustice proposed to be inflicted
upon him, referring to Mr. Attorney-General Hagerman's own letter, and
appealing to the Law Society, and the country at large, against such
injustice and against such violation of the rights of a British subject.
I got a friend to copy my communication, so as not to excite
suspicion.[63] It was the first article that had appeared in the public
press after the rebellion, breathing the spirit of freedom, and
advocating British constitutional rights against illegal oppression.[64]
The effect of this article upon the public mind was very remarkable. As
an example, Mr. John Campbell, member of the Legislative Assembly for
the County of Frontenac, despairing of the liberties of the country
under the "tory" oppression of the day, determined to sell his property
for whatever it might bring, and remove to the States. He was on a
steamboat on Lake Ontario, on his way to the Territory of Iowa to buy
land and settle there, when the newspaper containing my communication
fell into his hands; he read it, rose up and said that as long as there
was a man in Canada who could write in that way there was hope for the
country. He returned home, resumed his business, and lived and died in
Canada.
The Attorney-General was annoyed at the publication of his letter to Mr.
Bidwell, and attempted a justification of his conduct. At the conclusion
of a letter to me, he said that I had concealed my name for fear of the
legal consequences of my seditious paper. I at once sat down and wrote
the most argumentative paper that I ever penned (and for the recovery
of which I afterwards offered five pounds, but without success),
reducing the questions to a series of mathematical propositions, and
demonstrating in each case from the Attorney-General's own data, that my
conclusions were true, and his absurd. I concluded by defying his legal
threat of prosecution, and signed my name to the letter.
The effect of my reply to Mr. Attorney-General Hagerman was marvellous
in weakening the influence of the first law adviser of the Crown, and in
reviving the confidence of the friends of liberal constitutional
government.[65]
Subsequently, (in June, 1838), I received a letter from Mr. Hagerman, in
which he stated that in my observations on Mr. Bidwell's case I had made
assertions that impeached his character, and desired me to inform him on
what evidence I had based my statements. He said:--
The first assertion is that I was the author of certain remarks
published under the editorial head of the _Patriot_ newspaper of
this city, injurious to the reputation of Mr. Bidwell.... The
second statement is that I desired to procure his expulsion from
the Province, because he had been preferred to me for the office of
judge.
My reply to Mr. Hagerman was brief and to the point:
I beg to say, in reply to your letter, that I am not conscious of
having made either of the assertions which you have been pleased to
attribute to me.
I think it only just to the late Mr. Hagerman to add, that the sharp
discussions between him and me did not chill the friendliness, and even
pleasantness, of our personal intercourse afterwards; and I believe few
men would have more heartily welcomed Mr. Bidwell's return to Canada
than Mr. Justice Hagerman himself. Mr. Hagerman was a man of generous
impulses. He was a variable speaker, but at times his every gesture was
eloquent, his intonations of voice were truly musical, and almost every
sentence was a gem of beauty.
The discussion ended there; but no proposal was ever made to, much less
entertained by, the Law Society to erase Mr. Bidwell's name from its
rolls.
Mr. Bidwell's case did not, however, end here. In 1842, on the
recommendation of Hon. Robert Baldwin, any promise given by Mr. Bidwell
not to return to Canada--of which no record was found in any of the
Government offices--was revoked, in 1843, by the Governor-General (Lord
Metcalfe). Mr. Bidwell was also strongly urged to come back, and a
promise was given to him by the authority of the Governor-General that
all of his former rights and privileges would be restored to him, with a
view to his elevation to the Bench. He, however, declined to return.
Again, some years afterwards, when Sir W. B. Richards was
Attorney-General, he was authorized to offer Mr. Bidwell the position of
Commissioner to revise our Statute Law. He declined that offer also.
In conversation, in 1872, with Sir John Macdonald in relation to Mr.
Bidwell's early life, Sir John informed me that some years before, he
himself had, while in New York, solicited Mr. Bidwell to return to
Canada, but without success. Sir John said that he had done so, not
merely on his own account (as he had always loved Mr. Bidwell, and did
not believe that he had any connection whatever with the rebellion), but
because he believed that he represented the wishes of his political
friends, as well as those of the people of Canada generally.
Mr. Bidwell was an earnest Christian. He was also a charming companion.
A few weeks before his lamented decease, he visited his relatives and
friends in Canada, spent a Sabbath in Toronto, occupying a seat in my
pew in the Metropolitan Church. While here he presented me with a
beautiful likeness of himself on ivory. I have placed it in the Canadian
room of our Departmental Museum. I little thought it was my last meeting
with him, as I had long anticipated and often intended to visit him in
New York, where he promised to narrate to me many incidents of men and
things in the Canada of former years, which had not come to my
knowledge, or which I had forgotten. A suitable monument would be an
appropriate tribute to his memory by our Legislature and country.
* * * * *
The following are extracts of letters written to Dr. Ryerson, by Mr.
Bidwell, at the dates mentioned:
_May 21st, 1828--Kingston._--I admire and fully approved of your
plan (as I advised Mr. H. C. Thompson) of striking off a large
number of copies, in pamphlet form, of your Review of Archdeacon
Strachan's Sermon. (See page 68.) I have no doubt it will be really
a great service to the country to do so. Indeed, I sincerely think
that you could not in any other way be instrumental in promoting so
much the cause of Christ, as in the labours which you have
undertaken. The concerns of this Colony, as you see in the
newspapers, are attracting the attention of the British Parliament;
and the decided expression of public opinion here at present will
outweigh all that Dr. Strachan and his junto can say and do. My
father and I will shortly give the subject of Church Establishment
in this Province, contended for by Dr. Strachan, a full and careful
examination, and communicate to you the result.
_January 19th, 1829--York._--I rejoice once more to receive a
letter from you.... I sincerely thank you for your congratulations
on my elevation to the Speakership. I am sensible how much I need
the prayers and counsels of my friends in discharging the duties of
my station. I wish Christians would reflect what important
consequences may follow from every step taken by those in public
life, and especially in the Legislature.... I send you a copy of
Wilbur's Reference Bible, which I beg you will accept as a
testimony of my respect and friendship.
_March 10th, 1829--York._--The Marriage Bill has been passed, with
amendments made by the Legislative Council. The House is about
equally divided on trying questions, so that we often forbear
attempting measures which we would wish to pass. This unpleasant
state of things produces anxiety, uncertainty, and (worst of all)
violent party spirit. I can with great truth declare that I have
received but little satisfaction in my public life.
To you and your brother the Province owes a large debt of
gratitude. For one, I feel it sensibly, and wish most sincerely
that we could have the benefit of your counsel in our House. Two or
three such men would be a comfort, a relief, a support, and an
assistance, beyond what you have any idea of.
_April 6th, 1831--Kingston._--I am very glad to see your
commendations of the Attorney-General.[A] I think they are just.
They are certainly politic and seasonable. Indeed, I had thought of
hinting to you the propriety of some such notice of his liberality,
etc. I was afraid otherwise the coldness of the courtiers towards
him might make him repent of such liberality. But I think that your
remarks have come at the right time, and are exactly of the right
sort.[66]
_June 14th, 1833--York._--We have heard with pleasure of your safe
arrival in England: and pleasing indeed this has been to your many
friends in the Province, whose prayers, good wishes, and friendly
recollections, have accompanied you across the Atlantic.... Mr.
John Willson, M.P.P., of Saltfleet, has, within a day or two,
obtained from the Receiver-General, on the warrant of the
Lieutenant-Governor, £600 of the public money, to aid in building
chapels, I suppose, for the Ryanites. (See page 87). The fact was
mentioned to me privately this morning, but I deem it so important
as to justify and require me to inform you confidentially of it,
leaving it to your judgment to use the intelligence in the most
discreet manner that may be consistent with the duty you owe to
liberty and religion.
It excites surprise, pain, mortification, indignation, and
contempt, to see the Executive Government here making unjust and
invidious distinctions between His Majesty's subjects in the
appropriations of the Clergy Reserves, thereby endeavouring to
secure an unconstitutional and corrupt influence, especially after
Lord Goderich's declaration in his despatch (which he directed to
be published), that if any preference was shown to one denomination
of Christians more than another, it was contrary to the policy of
His Majesty's Government, and against repeated instructions sent to
the Government here.
As a Presbyterian I lament the grant to the Presbytery, and will do
all I can to get it repealed, for I am convinced it will do injury
to liberty and religion, and to the very persons who may wish, or
wicked enough, to receive it. I suppose the Province is indebted to
Sir John Colborne for these grants. If it is the Government at
home, it ought to be known: if it is not, they ought not only to
remove Sir John, but also reform this abuse. Have the Government
ever given your Society sixpence, or even a foot of land for your
chapels?--although it is the oldest and most numerous body of the
kind in the Province; is not wealthy, and has rendered the most
valuable services, and at a time when no other Church evinced the
least interest for the religious instruction or the welfare of the
people.
_April 12th, 1838--New York._--Your letter of the 23rd ult. and its
enclosure [the defence], I need not say, have effected me deeply,
too much, indeed, for me to describe my feelings. I thank you from
the bottom of my heart for this instance of your kindness; not less
valued, certainly, because it was unexpected, not to say
undeserved. If my misfortunes shall be the means of recovering a
friendship which I formerly enjoyed and always prized, I shall feel
not a little reconciled.[67]
I took the precaution some time ago, to send to England a plain,
distinct statement of all that had occurred between Sir Francis
Head and myself. This was transmitted to a friend to show to Lord
Glenelg. My only object was the vindication of my character. I have
never had the least expectation of obtaining justice or redress
from the Colonial office. There seems in that department utter
incapacity. The very persons they select for the Government of
Upper Canada are enough to prove this. And yet I believe that Lord
Glenelg is an able, as well as amiable, devout, good man.
_May 15th, 1838--New York._--I have received a letter from the
gentleman in England, to whom I had written. He had seen Lord
Durham, and shown him my letter. He expressed no opinion; but the
gentleman thinks that the matter stands favourably before him. He
has not yet seen Lord Glenelg.
_August 10th, 1839--New York._--Mr. Christopher Dunkin[68] is very
anxious to have the honour of an introduction to you. I am very
happy to be the means of gratifying him. Mr. Dunkin was editor of
the Montreal _Courier_, in the latter part of 1837, and beginning
of 1838. He was afterwards appointed by Lord Durham on the
Commission relating to education, and has latterly resided in the
United States.
About the time of Mr. Bidwell's defence, Dr. Ryerson also wrote an
explanatory letter to the Colonial Office in regard to his excellent
friend, Hon. John H. Dunn, the Receiver-General, whose generous conduct
towards the Upper Canada Academy is mentioned on page 166[69]. In a
letter of acknowledgment from Mr. Dunn to Dr. Ryerson, he said:--
I am very glad to learn from your letter that you have written to
Lord Glenelg. It is but just to put His Lordship in possession of
facts which may counteract the influence of misrepresentation, and
enable His Lordship to exercise his own humane disposition in
putting matters right, which have been so wrong and arbitrary
towards the individual Mr. Bidwell, whom you have taken the
interest in, and trouble, to restore to his position and his
country.
I feel exceedingly obliged for the kind feeling which you entertain
towards me. Believe me, that you have only done me justice by
mentioning my name to Lord Glenelg. I have laboured hard since I
have been in the Province to discharge my duty to my God and my
Government. I have entertained different opinions at times of the
"Powers here," but they have been the dictates of an honest heart.
I cannot guide my opinions to the service of any party. Whatever
they may be, I shall lament if they should result in any other than
for the best interests and welfare of the Province of Upper Canada.
You were so good as to read me your letter to Lord Glenelg, on the
subject of the late execution of Lount and Matthews. Your version
too, of the real meaning of the representation which caused Sir
Francis Head to compel us to retire from the Executive Council, is
so correct, that I cannot suggest any amendment; besides, I am
bound by my oath not to divulge any transaction arising at the
Council Board. I shall be very happy to see the letter published.
(See page 170.)
You have seen my name kindly mentioned in the public prints. What
has been said has been the spontaneous expressions of other
persons, quite unknown to me. I am grateful to those persons who
have vindicated me against a party, eager to destroy me, and my
family. I leave them to a Judge who knows the secrets of all
hearts, and before whom we all shall soon appear. I have had my
share of afflictions and troubles in this world, and to which I
feel little or no attachment whatever. When the heart is sick, the
whole body is faint.
Dr. Ryerson (in the _Guardian_ of 22nd January, 1840) thus referred to
Mr. Dunn as one of the speakers in the Legislative Council on the
popular side of the clergy reserve question:--
I was glad to hear Mr. Dunn speak so well and so
forcibly,--universally and affectionately esteemed as he is beyond
any other public functionary in Upper Canada.
* * * * *
Some months after the exile of Mr. Bidwell, Mr. James S. Howard was
dismissed by Sir F. B. Head from the office of Postmaster of Toronto.
The alleged ground of dismissal was that he was a Radical, and had not
taken up arms in defence of the country. Dr. Ryerson, with his usual
generous sympathy for persons who in those days were made the victims of
Governor Head's caprice, at once espoused Mr. Howard's cause. In his
first letter in the Defence of Sir Charles Metcalfe, he said:--
After the insurrection of 1837-8, unfavourable impressions were
made far and wide against the late Postmaster of Toronto, and Mr.
Bidwell. But subsequent investigations corrected these impressions.
The former has been appointed to office, and Sir F. B. Head's
proceedings against the latter have been cancelled by Sir Charles
Metcalfe. (Page 16.)
Again, in the "Prefatory Address" to the Metcalfe Defence, he said:--
While God gives me a heart to feel, a head to think, and a pen to
write, I will not passively see honourable integrity murdered by
grasping faction.... I would not do so in 1838, when an attempt was
made to degrade and proscribe, and drive out of the country all
naturalized subjects from the United States, and to stigmatize all
Reformers with the brand of rebellion.... I relieved the name of an
injured James S. Howard from the obloquy that hung over it, and
rescued the character and rights of an exiled Bidwell from ruthless
invasion, and the still further effort to cover him with perpetual
infamy by expelling him from the Law Society. (Page 7.)
FOOTNOTES:
[61] According to the books of the Law Society, Mr. Bidwell commenced
his legal studies in Kingston, the 14th March, 1816, in the office of
Mr. Daniel Washburn, and completed them in the office of Mr. Daniel
Hagerman, of Ernestown. He was admitted as a barrister-at-law in April,
1821.
Mr. Bidwell was first elected to the House of Assembly in 1824;
re-elected and chosen Speaker in 1828. On the death of George IV., in
1830, a new general election took place, when the Reform party were
reduced to a minority, and Mr. Bidwell was not re-elected Speaker; but
he greatly distinguished himself in the debates of the House. In 1834, a
new general election took place; a large majority of Reformers were
returned, and Mr. Bidwell was again elected Speaker. In May, 1836, Sir
F. B. Head dissolved the House of Assembly, and Mr. Bidwell and his
colleague, the late Peter Perry, were defeated in the united counties of
Lennox and Addington, which Mr. Bidwell had represented in Parliament
during twelve years. From that time (May, 1836) Mr. Bidwell never
attended a political meeting, or took any part in politics.
[62] As stated by Dr. Ryerson, in the above note, Mr. Bidwell took no
part in politics after his political defeat in May, 1836. In a note to
Mr. W. L. Mackenzie, dated August 3rd, 1837, Mr. Bidwell said: Having
learned from the _Constitution_ of yesterday that I was chosen as a
delegate to a Provincial Convention, I think it right without delay to
inform you ... that I must be excused from undertaking the duties of
that appointment.... I cannot but regret that my name should have been
used without my consent, or previous knowledge, by which I am driven to
the disagreeable necessity of thus publicly declining [the] appointment,
etc. In the _Guardian_ of 27th September, where this letter appears, it
is stated that Mr. Mackenzie did not publish it in the _Constitution_
until the 20th September--six weeks after he had received it.
In a letter from Mr. Bidwell, dated, the 30th April, 1837, to Dr.
O'Callaghan, of Montreal, he said: Retired from public life, probably
for ever; I still look with the deepest sympathy on the efforts of those
who are actively contending for the great principles of liberty, and
good government, etc.--"_Political History of Canada_, 1840-1855, by Sir
Francis Hincks, 1877, page 7."
[63] Sir Alexander Campbell, now Minister of Justice, in a note to the
Editor, thus explains this circumstance:--In the winter of 1837-38, I
was a student-at-law, and a resident of Kingston. Dr. Ryerson was then
the Methodist minister in charge of the only congregation of that body
in town. The rebellion of 1837-8, had led to excited, and very bitter
feelings--arrests had been frequent; and it was not prudent for any one
to try to palliate the deeds of the rebels, or to seek to lessen the
odium which covered their real, or even supposed allies and friends. Dr.
Ryerson, however, desired to bring out the facts connected with Mr.
Bidwell's banishment, and to change the current of public feeling on the
subject--but it was not wise to send letters to the press in his own
handwriting, or in any other way suffer it to become known that he was
the author of the letters in defence of Mr. Bidwell. Under these
circumstances he asked me to copy them, and take them to the _Herald_
office--then the most liberal paper in Upper Canada. I was proud of the
confidence placed in me, and copied the several letters, and went with
them to the publisher. The letters were signed in words which I have not
since seen, but which remain impressed upon my memory, and which were as
follows:--
"I am Sir, by parental instruction and example, by personal feeling and
exertion,
A United Empire Loyalist"
The letters constituted an eloquent defence of Mr. Bidwell, who
certainly took no part in the counsels of those who were afterwards
engaged in the rebellion, when it became evident that they intended to
push matters to extremes.
The incident made a great impression on me at the time, and was the
beginning of a friendship with which Dr. Ryerson honoured me, and which
ended only with his life.
A. Campbell.
Ottawa, 29th December, 1882.
[64] The defence was afterwards reprinted in a pamphlet on the 10th of
May, 1838, with the following title: "The Cause and Circumstances of Mr.
Bidwell's Banishment by Sir F. B. Head, correctly stated and proved by A
United Empire Loyalist." Kingston, 1838, pp. 16.
[65] Some time after Sir George Arthur's arrival as Governor, he sent
for me, and stated that his object in doing so was to request me, for
the sake of the Government and the country, to withdraw the letter I had
written in answer to Attorney-General Hagerman; that it greatly weakened
the Government; that my power of argumentation was prodigious, but he
believed I was mistaken; that Mr. Bidwell had called to pay his respects
to him at Albany, on his way to Canada; and that he (Sir George)
believed Mr. Bidwell was guilty, as far as a man of his caution and
knowledge could be concerned in the rebellion; and though my argument on
his behalf seemed to be irresistible, he believed I was wrong, and that
the withdrawal of my letter would be a great help to the Government. I
replied that my weekly editorials in the _Christian Guardian_ (of which
I had consented to be re-elected Editor) showed that I was anxious to
suppress the factious and party hatreds of the day, and to place the
Government upon a broad foundation of loyalty and justice; that what I
had written in the case of Mr. Bidwell had been written by me as an
individual and not as the editor of the organ of a religious body, and
had been written from the firm conviction of Mr. Bidwell's innocence,
and that his case involved the fundamental and essential rights of every
British subject; and that, however anxious I was to meet His
Excellency's wishes, I could not withdraw my letter. I then bowed myself
out from the presence of Sir George, who, from that hour became my
enemy, and afterwards warned Lord Sydenham against me as "a dangerous
man," as Lord Sydenham laughingly told me the last evening I spent with
him in Montreal, at his request, and before his lamented death.
[66] These remarks will be found on page 83 of the _Guardian_ of 2nd
April.
[67] This loss of friendship with Dr. Ryerson may be explained by the
following reference to Mr. Bidwell, in a letter from Dr. Ryerson, to his
brother John, dated, Kingston, 29th May, 1838:--From an intimate
religious friend of Mr. Bidwell, I learn that during the last few years
he had acted more after a worldly policy, common to politicians, and
had, therefore, partly laid himself open to the censure which he has
received. I am also sensible of his prejudices against me of late years,
and of the great injury which I have thereby sustained. I had some
difficulty to overcome my own feelings in the first instance. But as far
as individual feelings and interests are concerned, "it is the glory of
man to pass over a transgression," generous as well as just, as we have
received help from Bidwell himself when we could not help ourselves, and
were trampled upon by a desperate party. If others had seen the letters
from Bidwell to Mr. Cassidy, which I have been permitted to read, I am
sure the noble generosity of their hearts would be excited in all its
sympathies. I do not think, however, that he will ever return to this
Province to reside. That appears to be altogether out of the question
with him; but that does not alter the nature of the case.
I have replied to Mr. Hagerman with calmness, but with deep feeling. My
reply will occupy about eight columns in to-morrow's _Herald_.
[68] Mr. Dunkin afterwards became a noted politician, and member of the
Parliament of United Canada, from 1857, until Confederation. He was the
promoter of the "Dunkin Act." He was one of the contributors to the
_Monthly Review_, established by Lord Sydenham in 1841. He was
subsequently appointed to the Bench, and died a few years since.
[69] The Hon. John Henry Dunn was a native of England. He came to Canada
in 1820, having been appointed Receiver-General of Upper Canada, and a
member of the Executive and Legislative Council. He held the office of
Receiver-General until the union of the Provinces in 1841, when the
political exigencies of the times compelled him to resign it. He and
Hon. Isaac Buchanan contested the city of Toronto, in the Reform
interest, in 1841, and were returned. Mr. Dunn received no compensation
for the loss of his office, and soon afterwards returned to England,
where he died in 1854. He was a most estimable public officer. His son,
Col. Dunn, greatly distinguished himself during the Crimean war, and, on
his visiting Canada soon afterwards, was received with great enthusiasm,
and a handsome sword was presented to him.--H.
CHAPTER XXV.
1838.
Return to the Editorship of the "Guardian."
The Rebellion of 1837-38 was suppressed by the inherent and spontaneous
loyalty of all classes of the Canadian people. Yet, after it was over,
the seeds of strife engendered by the effort to prove that one section
of the community was more loyal than the other, and that that other
section was chiefly responsible for the outbreak, bore bitter fruit in
the way of controversy. Dr. Ryerson took little part in such
recriminatory warfare. It was too superficial. He felt that it did not
touch the underlying points at issue between the dominant, or ruling,
party and those who were engaged in a contest for equal civil and
religious rights. He, and the other leaders who influenced and moulded
public opinion, clearly saw that this recriminatory war was carried on
by the dominant party as a mask to cover their ulterior designs--designs
which were afterwards developed in the more serious struggle for
religious supremacy which that party waged for years afterwards, and
which at length issued in the complete triumph of the principles of
civil and religious freedom for which Dr. Ryerson and the
representatives of other religious bodies had so long and so earnestly
contended. (See page 452.)
Besides, Dr. Ryerson was anxious to fulfil the engagement made with the
Kingston Society that he would resume his pastoral charge there, after
his return from England in June, 1837. He was, however, repeatedly
pressed by his friends to write for the _Guardian_, or other newspaper,
on the vital questions of the day. In reply to his brother John, who had
urged him in the matter, he wrote (March, 1838) saying that he was so
happily engaged in his pastoral duties at Kingston that he could not
then devote the necessary time to the discussion of public questions.
His brother, in remonstrating with him on the subject, said:--
Your letter affords me great satisfaction, accompanied with sorrow.
I am afflicted to think of the state the Province is in. Never did
high-churchism take such rapid strides towards undisputed
domination in this country as it is now taking. Never were the
prospects of the friends of civil and religious liberty so gloomy
and desperate as they are now. You say that you have not time to
write on these subjects. I will say, if you had, it would not now,
I fear, accomplish much. Indeed, it would, require the undeviating
course and the whole weight of the _Guardian_ to accomplish
anything at this time, so completely is all moral power in the
country enervated and liberty prostrated.
It is a great blessing that Mackenzie and radicalism are down, but
we are in imminent danger of being brought under the domination of
a military and high-church oligarchy, which would be equally bad,
if not infinitely worse. Under the blessing of Providence there is
one remedy, and only one; and that is, for you to take the
editorship of the _Guardian_ again. Several preachers have spoken
to me on this subject lately. One of them said to me (and he could
think of nothing else) that that alone would save us and the
country from utter ruin, and urged the necessity of the Conference
electing you, whether you would consent to serve or not. The truth
is, it is absolutely necessary for the sake of the Church and the
country that you reside in Toronto, and have direction of affairs
here. I wish all of our proceedings to be calm and moderate, but
that we be firm, and that the great principles of religious freedom
and equality should be uncompromisingly maintained.
In a subsequent letter to Dr. Ryerson his brother John said:
In fact there is no way of escape out of our troubles but for you
to take the _Guardian_. The feeling of dissatisfaction at the
present state of things is becoming exceedingly strong among the
preachers and people. I participate in their feelings.
Dr. Ryerson yielded to these appeals, and did write for the _Guardian_.
In a letter, dated Kingston, April 4th, he said:--
I have recently written at considerable length to Lord Glenelg
respecting the Academy and other local matters. What you say in
regard to myself, and my appointment next year, I feel to be a
delicate and difficult matter for me to speak on. In regard to
myself I have many conflicting thoughts. My feelings, and private
interests, are in favour of my remaining where I am, if I remain in
the Province. I have been very much cast down, and my mind has been
much agitated on the subject. For the present I am somewhat
relieved by the conclusion to which I have come, in accordance with
Dr. Clarke's "Advice to a Young Preacher," not to choose my own
appointment, but after making known any circumstances, which I may
feel it necessary to explain, to leave myself in the hands of God
and my brethren, as I have done during the former years of my
ministry. If the Lord, therefore, will give me grace, I am resolved
to stand on the old Methodistic ground in the matter of appointment
to the _Guardian_.
I thank you for Chief Justice Robinson's address at the trial of
the prisoners. It is good. My own views are in favour of lenity to
these prisoners. Punishments for political offences can never be
beneficial, when they are inflicted in opposition to public
sentiment and sympathy. In such a case it will defeat the object it
is intended to accomplish. It matters not whether that sentiment
and sympathy are right or wrong in the abstract; the effect of
doing violence to it will be the same. But I would not pander to
that feeling, how carefully soever one may be disposed to observe
its operations. The fact, however, is, that Sir Francis Head
deserves impeachment, just as much as Samuel Lount deserves
execution. Morally speaking, I cannot but regard Sir Francis as the
more guilty culprit of the two.
I admire, as a whole, Sir George Arthur's reply to the address of
the "Constitutional Reformers." There is good in it. They will see
the folly of continuing the former party designations, and
pretended grounds of complaint. I think, however, that their
address will do good, from the large number of names attached to
it. I was surprised, and it has created quite a sensation here,
that there are so many as 772 in Toronto, who still have the moral
courage to designate themselves "Constitutional Reformers." It
will teach the other party that they are not so strong, and so
absolute in the voice of the country, as they thought themselves to
be.
I am satisfied that there never was such a time as from the
termination of the trial of the prisoners to the next session of
Parliament, for us to stamp upon the public mind at large, our own
constitutional, and Scriptural, political, and religious doctrines;
and to give the tone to the future Government and Legislation of
the Province, and to enlarge vastly a sphere of usefulness. I shall
write some papers for the _Guardian_ with this view.
In a letter from Brockville, Rev. William Scott said:--
My humble opinion is, that in order to our safety as a Church--our
preservation from high church influence--you must be at Toronto. I
assure you that is the opinion of our influential men in this
quarter, who understand the state of the province, and the position
of Methodism. Permit me to add that the one hour's conversation
which I had with you amply repaid me for all the furious battles
which I have fought on this circuit in your defence.
Rev. Joseph Stinson, in a letter to Rev. John Ryerson, said:
I am quite of your opinion that your brother Egerton ought to take
the _Guardian_ next year. There is a crisis approaching in our
affairs which will require a vigorous hand to wield the defensive
weapon of our Conference. There can be no two opinions as to whom
we should give that weapon. We now stand on fair ground to maintain
our own against the encroachments of the oligarchy, and we must do
it, or sink into a comparatively uninfluential body--this must not
be.
As urged by these letters from his brethren, Dr. Ryerson, early in May,
1838, prepared several articles for the _Guardian_. His brother John,
who was a member of the Book Committee, thus speaks of the series of
articles sent to that paper:--
I cannot express to you how much I am gratified and pleased with
your article on "Christian Loyalty." It will, no doubt, do immense
good. We have had a regular campaign in our Book Committee, in
reading and discussing your articles. The one on "Christian
Loyalty" occupied nearly the whole time. Your article on "The
Church" is one of the most admirable papers I ever read. Not a word
of that is to be altered. Your communication on "Indian Affairs," I
cannot speak so highly of. I hope you will pardon me for leaving
out some of the severe remarks on Sir Francis. I am afraid they
will do harm with the present Government.
At the Conference of 1838, Dr. Ryerson was re-elected Editor of the
_Christian Guardian_. In his first editorial, dated 11th July 1838, he
said:--
Notwithstanding the almost incredible calumny which has in past
years been heaped upon me by antipodes-party-presses, I still
adhere to the principles and views upon which I set out in 1826. I
believe the endowment of the priesthood of any Church in the
Province to be an evil to that Church.... I believe that the
appropriation of the proceeds of the clergy reserves to general
educational purposes, will be the most satisfactory and
advantageous disposal of them that can be made. In nothing is this
Province so defective as in the requisite available provisions for,
and an efficient system of, general education. Let the distinctive
character of that system be the union of public and private
effort.... To Government influence will be spontaneously added the
various and combined religious influence of the country in the
noble, statesmanlike, and divine work of raising up an elevated,
intelligent, and moral population.[70]
In combatting the idea that his editorial opinions in the _Guardian_
were necessarily "the opinions of the Methodists" as a body, and that
they were responsible for them, Dr. Ryerson, in the _Guardian_ of August
15th, thus defines the rights of an editor:--To be the mere scribe of
the opinions of others, and not to write what we think ourselves, is a
greater degradation of intellectual and moral character than slavery
itself.... In doctrines and opinions we write what we believe to be the
truth, leaving to others the exercise of a judgment equally unbiassed
and free.
* * * * *
In the exuberance of loyal zeal, and yet in a kindly spirit which was
characteristic of him, Rev. W. M. Harvard, President of the Canada
Conference, issued a pastoral on the 17th April, 1838, to the ministers
of the Church, enjoining them not to recognize as members of the Society
those whose loyalty could be impeached. The directions which he gave
were:--
Should there be a single individual for whose Christian loyalty the
preacher cannot conscientiously answer for to his brethren, in the
first place such individual should not be included in the return of
membership, and in the second place such individual should be dealt
with kindly and compassionately, but firmly, according to the
provisions of the Discipline.
No man who is not disposed to be a good subject can be admissible
to the Sacraments of the Church....
Should any person apply hereafter for admission into our Church,
who may be ill-affected to the Crown ... tell him kindly, but
firmly, ... that he has applied at the wrong door.
As soon as this extraordinary pastoral had appeared, Dr. Ryerson
addressed a letter of some length to the _Guardian_, objecting in very
temperate, but yet in very strong language to the doctrine laid down in
it by the President of the Conference. Before publication, however, he
sent it to Mr. Harvard for his information and perusal. He showed from
the writings of John Wesley, Richard Watson, and others, and from
examples which he cited (John Nelson, "the apostolic fellow-labourer of
John Wesley," etc.) that such a doctrine savoured of despotism, and was
harsh and inquisitorial in its effects. He concluded thus:--
None of the various political opinions which men hold, and their
respectful and constitutional expression of them, is any just cause
of excluding from the Lord's Table any human being, provided his
religious character is unexceptional. The only condition of
membership in our Church is "a desire to flee from the wrath to
come,"[71] and none of the opinions mentioned is inconsistent with
the fruits by which that desire is evidenced. The Discipline of the
Church, or the Scripture itself, does not authorize me to become
the judge of another man's political opinions--the Church is not a
political association--any man has as good a right, religiously and
politically, to his opinions of public matters as I have to
mine--and laymen frequently know much more, and are better judges,
than ministers in civil and secular affairs.
It can be well understood what would be the effect of the Pastoral, and
not less so of Dr. Ryerson's clear and dispassionate disclaimer of the
doctrines which it officially laid down.
It required courage and firmness, in the loyal outburst and reaction of
those days, to question the propriety or expediency of any reasonable
means by which the unimpeachable loyalty of members of the Church could
be ascertained. What added to the embarrassment of Dr. Ryerson in
discussing such a question was the fact that the Methodists were being
constantly taunted with being disloyal. Knowing this, and sensitive as
to the disgrace of such a stigma being cast upon the Church, the
President felt constrained to take some decisive, and yet, as he
thought, kindly and satisfactory means of ridding the Church of members
who were the cause, in his estimation, of such a disgrace and reproach
to that Church.
Among many other strong letters of commendations of his reply to Mr.
Harvard, which Dr. Ryerson received, were two,--one from a
representative minister of the Canadian section of the Church, and the
other from an equally excellent representative of the British
missionaries. Thus:
Rev. Anson Green, writing from Picton, said:--
I was sorry, though not surprised, to hear that you were very much
perplexed. I could easily understand your feelings, and quite
sympathize with you. Your recent efforts for the peace and
prosperity of the Church have very much endeared you to my heart. I
am fully prepared to believe the assertion which you made while in
England, "that you love Jerusalem above your chief joy." This you
have fully proved by your untiring efforts on behalf of the
Academy, the Chapels, and on the Church question; but in nothing
more, allow me to say, than in the firm, manly, and Christian
spirit, in which you have come out, publicly, in defence of the
membership of the Church, and of sound principles. I had resolved
when Rev. Mr. Harvard wrote to me to carry out the principles of
his instructions and Pastoral in this district, to write him a
letter respectfully and yet firmly declining to do so. But when I
saw the storm gathering in every quarter, I could only exclaim in
the despondency of my soul:--When will our brethren cease to
destroy us, and when will the Church again have rest from internal
commotion and strife! And just at this crisis (a memorable crisis
to thousands of our Canadian friends) your excellent rejoinder to
Mr. Harvard's Pastoral came out in the _Guardian_. It was a balm to
the afflicted heart. It was a precious cordial poured forth. Your
letter was sent from house to house, from cottage to cottage, and
met with unequivical applause from all. The lowering sky began to
clear up, and we are encouraged once more to hope for clear
sunshine. You have had the courage to speak the truth in opposition
to men in high authority. Your letter was in every respect just
what it should have been, and thousands do most sincerely thank you
for it.
Rev. Joseph Stinson, writing from Simcoe, said:--
As far as I can ascertain, your appointment as Editor of the
_Guardian_ next year will give general satisfaction. The
President's Pastoral and your reply are producing quite a
sensation. Most people give Mr. Harvard credit for purity of
intention, but regret that the subject of politics has been
adverted to by him in such a form. Your remarks on the Pastoral
have hushed the fears of many who were greatly disturbed; but some
think that your statement of abstract right is carried too far, and
may at a future day be appealed to in support of measures which you
would utterly condemn.
Some of your old tory friends think that there is design in all you
write on these questions, and do not hesitate to designate you by
the amiable title of a "jesuit," etc. You can bear all this and
much more in carrying out your design, to show them that their
tactics are understood, and their proceedings are closely watched,
so as to prevent them from obtaining those objects which would be
alike unjust to us as a Church, and ungenerous to themselves. It is
well that in all of the "burnings which your fingers" have had, you
have not yet lost your nails; for I expect that you will need them
before long. The high church party have the will, if they can
muster the courage, to make a renewed and desperate attack upon
you. Fear not; while you advocate the truth, you can defy their
rage.
The public mind seems to me to be in a state of painful suspense.
The people hate and dread rebellion. They are not satisfied with
the present leading political party. They hope to see a new man
rise up with sufficient talent and influence to collect around him
a respectable party to act as a balance between oppression and
destruction. Some talk of a new election; some talk of leaving the
country; all seem to think that something must be done; none know
what to do. How ought we in this awful crisis (for an awful crisis
it is), to pray for the Divine interposition in behalf of our
distracted province.... I saw your venerable father last night. He
very much wishes you to write to him.
On the 7th of November, 1838, the first number of the 10th volume of the
_Guardian_ was issued. In it there is an elaborate article signed by Dr.
Ryerson (although he was then Editor), on the state of public affairs in
Upper Canada. In his introductory remarks he said:--
From the part I have usually taken in questions which affect the
foundations of our Government, and our relations with the Mother
Country,--and from the position I at present occupy in respect to
public affairs, and in relation to the Province generally, it will
be expected that I should take a more than passing notice of the
eventful crisis at which we have arrived. In conclusion, he says:
Having faithfully laid before the Government and the country the
present posture of affairs, and the causes of our present
dissatisfaction and dangers, I advert to the remedies: (1. Military
defence.) 2. Let the Government be administered as much in
accordance with the general wishes of this country, as it is in
England. 3. Abolish high-church domination, and provide perfect
religious and political equality. 4. Let them be at equal fidelity
to obey the authorities when called upon.... He who does most to
bring about this happy state of things in the Province will be the
greatest benefactor of his country.
FOOTNOTES:
[70] Even at this early date, Dr. Ryerson indicated the comprehensive
character of the system of education which he was afterwards destined to
found in Upper Canada.
[71] These words as to membership are identical with those which Dr.
Ryerson uttered fifteen years afterwards in his discussion on the
Class-meeting question.
CHAPTER XXVI.
1838-1840.
Enemies and Friends Within and Without.
Any controversialist, whose honest belief in his own doctrines
makes him terribly in earnest, may count on a life embittered by
the anger of those on whom he has forced the disagreeable task of
reconsidering their own assumptions.--Canon Farrar.
All through his public career, Dr. Ryerson had many bitter enemies and
many warm and devoted friends. This was not to be wondered at. No man
with such strongly marked individuality of will and purpose, and with
such an instinctive dislike to injustice and oppression, could fail to
come in contact with those whose views and proceedings were opposed to
his sense of right. The enmity which he excited in discussing public
questions was rarely disarmed (except in the case of men of generous
impulses or noble natures) by the fact that he and those who acted with
him were battling for great principles--those of truth, and justice, and
freedom.
When these principles could not be successfully assailed, the usual plan
was to attack the character, and wound the tender sensibilities of their
chief defender. This was a mistake; but it was the common error with
most of Dr. Ryerson's assailants. And yet those who did so in his
presence, and in the arena of debate, rarely repeated the mistake. With
all his kindness of heart and warmth of friendship, there was, when
aroused, much of the lion in his nature. Few who assailed him in
Conference, or made a personal attack upon him in other places of public
discussion, could stand before the glitter of his eye when that
lion-nature was aroused; and fewer still would care to endure the effect
of its fire a second time.
Most of the personal attacks made upon Dr. Ryerson were in writing, and
often anonymously. He had, therefore, to defend himself chiefly with his
pen. This he rarely failed to do, and with good effect.[72] On such
occasions he used strong and vigorous language, of which he was an
acknowledged master. Very many of these attacks were ephemeral, and not
worthy of note. Others were more serious and affected character, and
these were more or less bitter and violent. They, of course, called
forth a good deal of feeling at the time, but are only referred to now
as part of the story of a life, then singularly active and stormy.
* * * * *
The Editor of the Toronto _Patriot_ having published extracts from a
pamphlet issued in the Newcastle District (County of Northumberland), in
1832, in which attacks were made upon Dr. Ryerson's character, he
replied to them in the columns of that paper. In 1828, his circuit was
in the Newcastle district, and the person who made these attacks resided
in Haldimand, about eight miles east of Cobourg. Among other things,
this man said that Dr. Ryerson "read seditious newspapers at his house,
on the Sabbath day!" In reply, Dr. Ryerson said:--
As my plan of labour prevented me from reaching this person's
locality until Sunday evening, and then preach in the Church there,
it would be impossible for me to do as he has alleged. Were I to
have done so, I would be unworthy of the society of Christian men.
But the author of this libel, which was published by him four years
after the alleged circumstance took place, was defeated as a
candidate for the House of Assembly, on account of a personal
attack which he made upon me at the hustings! _Hinc illæ lucrymæ._
This person also said that I "hoped yet to see the walls of the
Church of England levelled to the dust." In my reply to this I
said:--I solemnly declare that I never uttered such a sentiment,
nor have I cherished any hostility to the Church of England. Some
of my friends desired me to take orders in the Church of England
[see page 41]; and a gentleman (now an Episcopal clergyman) was
authorized by the late Bishop of Quebec to request me to make an
appointment to see him on his then contemplated tour through the
Niagara District, where I was travelling. After mature, and I
trust, prayerful deliberation, I replied by letter declining the
proposals made, at the same time appreciating the kindness and
partiality of my friends. A short time afterwards, I met the friend
who had been the medium of this communication from the late Dr.
Stewart. He was deeply affected at my decision. When I assigned my
religious obligation to the Methodists as a reason for declining
the offer, he replied that all of his own religious feelings had
also been derived from them, but he thought the Church required our
labours.
Some person having written, professedly from Kingston, a diatribe
against Dr. Ryerson, in the London (Eng.) _Standard_, Rev. Robert Alder
replied to it, and apprised him of the fact:--
An attack having been made on you in a letter from Kingston, and
inserted in the _Standard_, I have been stirred up to write in your
defence. I expect also to have a battle to fight with Sir Francis
Head, for "I guess" he knows something of your Kingston friend.
From Mr. Alder's reply, I make the following extracts:--
There is no man, either in the Canadas or at home, better
acquainted with the former and present state of these fine
provinces than Mr. Ryerson, as his letters in the _Times_, signed
"A Canadian," testify. Even his Kingston slanderer admits that the
facts stated in these letters were, in the main exceedingly
correct, indisputably true, and for the publication of which he is
entitled to the grateful thanks of every loyal subject throughout
British North America. But the malice of an adversary is too often
swifter than the gratitude of those who have derived benefit from
our services. This is proved in the case of Mr. Ryerson; for while
every radical and republican journal in the province has teemed
with communications vilifying his character and motives in the
strongest terms, a stinted meed of praise has been doled out to
him....
No wonder that persons in this country deeply interested in Canada
frequently consulted him; no wonder that the British North American
Land Company re-published his letters from the _Times_ at their own
expense. And it is to the honour of the noble lord at the head of
the Colonial Department, that he did obtain from so intelligent and
influential an individual as Mr. Ryerson, information respecting
the state of parties in a country so well-known to him. If his
information and advice, and that of another "Methodist Parson" in
Canada, had been received and acted upon elsewhere, there is reason
to believe that Mackenzie and his traitorous associates would not
have been permitted to unfurl the standard of rebellion in the
midst of a peaceful and loyal people. (See pages 176 and 183.)
The inspired truth that "A man's foes shall be they of his own
household" received many a painful illustration in Dr. Ryerson's
history. In 1838, it was reduced to a system. The assailant was often "A
Wesleyan," or, "A True Wesleyan," and under the friendly _ægis_ of four
or five papers, which were usually hostile to Methodism itself, the
attack would be made. From numerous examples noted in the _Guardian_, I
select a specimen:--
The rebellious _Guardian_ is shut against us; its cry is war,
havoc, and bloodshed, with Wesley on the lips, but implacable
hatred to him in the heart of its editor and his friends.... One of
two things remain for us, either to expel the Ryerson family and
their friends from our Society, who are the root of all our
misfortunes, or ... for all true Wesleyans to withdraw from them
and their wicked adherents, as the Israelites did from Egypt, or a
leper.
In Dr. Ryerson's effort to protect individuals who were oppressed, and
who had no means of defence, except in the columns of the _Guardian_, he
was often virulently assailed, and even his life threatened. On the 22nd
December, 1838, he received a letter of this kind from an influential
gentleman in Toronto, who threatened legal proceedings unless the name
of a writer in the _Guardian_ was given to him. He said:--
In reply to your letter of last evening, I have to say that the
writer of the communication in the _Guardian_, to which you refer,
is one of the "peaceable members of the Methodist Society," whose
character had been gratuitously and basely assailed by the Editor
of the _Patriot_ and his associate. He is a poor man, whose living
depends upon his daily industry. Were he a rich man, I might
consult with him on the subject of your letter; but being in those
circumstances of life which disable him from sustaining himself
against your wealth, and relentless persecution, I at once
determine to shield him from your power. I will not, therefore,
furnish you with his name.
In the published paragraph of his communication, the writer has
asserted that certain things were published some time since in the
_Patriot_, respecting the associate of its Editor, and an attempt
was made to blast the character and prospects of several
unoffending members of the Methodist Society--men, the daily bread
for whose families must be taken out of their mouths, if the
political or private character of their protectors is, in times
like the present, believed to be what this associate has
represented it to be. These men do not, like you, get rich upon
"wars and rumours of wars;" their high church zeal would not, like
yours, treble their business, and bring them into possession of a
tolerable fortune in a few years. It is to blunt the assassinating
dagger of a marked, and hitherto privileged slanderer, against the
character of such men that I admitted the paragraph in question
into the _Guardian_. If you are not the associate of the city
Editor in this "crusade against the character of peaceable members
of the Methodist Society," then you are exonerated from the remarks
in the letters, and the columns of the _Guardian_ are open to you
for any reparation you can desire. Notwithstanding your attacks
upon both my public and private character for years past;
notwithstanding your late unprovoked attack upon my private
character in a city newspaper; notwithstanding your late indirect
threats upon my life, and the _Guardian_ office in the event of an
invasion; notwithstanding all this, and much more, I am still ready
to open the columns of the _Guardian_ to you, if you think that any
kind of injustice has been done you. The letter to which you refer,
mentions no name, but adverts to an already published portrait of a
certain character who is, upon good grounds, believed to be
figuring behind the scenes in this high church warfare against
Methodists and others, and who is known to be indiscriminately
scattering "firebrands, arrows and death," amongst all of Her
Majesty's subjects who will not contribute to the profits of his
newspaper craft in crying up his golden idol of a dominant church.
It is amusing to see you, sir, who have availed yourself so
lavishly, in all time past, of the freedom of the press to assail
others, so sensitive at the mere suspicion of a mere report against
causeless attacks upon private individuals, having been intended
for yourself.
Dr. Ryerson concluded in the following vigorous language:--
Sir,--After having exhausted the resources of a free, I may add a
licentious press to destroy me, with a view of extinguishing the
principles of civil and religious liberty which I advocate, you and your
party now seek to have recourse to the "glorious uncertainty of the law"
to accomplish what you cannot effect by free discussion before an
intelligent public; but I am not concerned at your threats. I know the
malice of the party of which you are a convenient, active, and useful
tool; I know its resources; I know its power; but I also know the ground
on which I stand. I know the country for whose welfare I am labouring;
above all, I rely upon the wisdom and efficiency of that Providence,
whose administration, I believe, if I can judge of the signs of the
times, has better things in store for the inhabitants of Upper Canada
(my native land) than the despotism of a dominant oligarchy, upheld and
promoted by the persecuting, the anti-British, and anti-patriotic spirit
of such partizans as yourself.
Rev. Matthew Richey wrote to Dr. Ryerson from Cobourg, in January, 1839,
stating that some of the leading Methodists in Montreal were inducing
subscribers to give up the _Guardian_, on the alleged ground of some
disloyal sentiments contained in that paper of the 12th December.[73]
Mr. Richey adds:--
I have written to a leading friend in Montreal, earnestly
expostulating with him upon the precipitancy of such a course. I
have not failed to apprise him of the bitter hostility of the
_Kingston Chronicle_, the _Toronto Patriot_, the _Cobourg Star_,
and _The Church_, to Methodism, and to say that, did they read
these papers, they would not be surprised at the pungency with
which you express yourself on the questions at issue between the
arrayed parties of the Province.
To intimate that the faithful discharge of your duty may expose you
to gaol or gibbet ... is not very complimentary to the freedom of
the Government under whose protection you are placed. Situated as
you are in the burning centre of excitement, and aware of the high
hopes, as well as high-handed measures of your opponents, you have
great need of patience, and forbearance.
The leading Methodists in Montreal to whom Rev. Matthew Richey refers in
the foregoing letter, having written to Dr. Ryerson on the subject of
their complaint, he replied to them, on the 7th January, as follows:--
Your letter of the 24th ult. being rather unusual, both in matter
and form, seems to demand more than a silent acknowledgment. I
shall have much pleasure in complying with your request; but I
should despise myself, were I capable of making any reply to the
allegation contained in your letter.
Not a few of you impugned both my motives and principles in former
years, I have lived to furnish a practical commentary on your
candour and justice, by being the first to excite in the Colonial
Office in England a determination to protect British interests in
Lower Canada against French ambition and prejudice. I may yet have
an opportunity of furnishing a second similar commentary upon your
second similar imputation.
It is true that I am not of the high church school of politics, nor
of the Montreal _Herald_ school of bloodshed and French
extermination; but I, nevertheless, think there still remains
another basis of Scripture, justice, and humanity, on which may
rest the principles of a loyalty that will sacrifice life itself
in the maintenance of British supremacy, in perfect harmony with a
vigorous support of the constitutional rights of the
subject,--unmoved at one time by the fierce denunciations of
revolutionists, and unshaken at another time by the imputations of
ultra-sycophantic partizanship.
Twice have the leading members of the Methodist Society in Montreal
had the opportunity of insulting (and if their influence could have
done it, of injuring) me--and twice have they improved it,--in May,
1834 [see page 148], when I was in Montreal; and in December,
1838--a juncture when a stain might be inflicted upon the character
and reputation of any vulnerable minister of the Church that would
tarnish his very grave. It is a pleasing as well as singular
circumstance, and one that will be engraved upon the tablet of my
heart while memory holds her seat, that when in 1834 I was insulted
in Montreal, I was invited to preach in Quebec; and now that I am
honoured from Montreal a second time in a similar way, I have this
day received from Quebec a second token of "respect for my
character and love to Methodism" of ten new subscribers to the
_Guardian_, with a promise "ere long of from ten to twenty
more."[74]
On the other hand, Dr. Ryerson, in the _Guardian_ of October 17th, 1838,
exposes the kind of warfare which was carried on against him by the high
church party:--
I have been informed, upon the authority of creditable eye
witnesses, that the number of the _Patriot_ which contained four or
five columns of attacks on the Editor of the _Guardian_ in his
private and public relations, has been carried from house to house
for the edification of Methodists; that in one instance the wife of
a rector had carried and read the _Patriot_ to members of the
Methodist Church and friends of the Editor, and then asked if they
could be led by such a man as Egerton Ryerson?
In the _Guardian_ of the 31st October, Dr. Ryerson says:--
Another example of this vicious and disgraceful mode of warfare is
contained in a pamphlet published at the _Kingston Chronicle_
office, with a view of preventing the soldiers from deserting to
the United States.... I copy the following infamous passages,
purporting to be written by a deserter [name and regiment not
given]:--Well, I deserted. Ryerson never rested till he worked me
up to the deed. I was like a child in his hands--he led me as he
pleased.... It was only to get clear off, and then the road to all
that I ever wished for was open before me--so said Ryerson, etc....
Ryerson has two or three more on hand, etc.
Dr. Ryerson adds:--
I had marked other passages of a like character, from the
_Patriot_, the _Cobourg Star_, and the _Statesman_.... Such are the
barbarous weapons used to pull down the religious liberties of the
people of this Province, and to establish a church domination.
While Dr. Ryerson was at the Conference at Hamilton, in 1839, Rev. D.
McMullen, of Hillier, in a letter to him, said:--
I have read the _Guardian_ with some attention during the past
year. I believe the general principles of political, civil, and
ecclesiastical policy advocated in it are such as must be supported
and ultimately prevail, or our country will be ruined. Yet, while I
admire the talent displayed by you, it is still a question with me
whether you, as a Methodist minister, in conducting a religious
journal, are justifiable in going the lengths you do in discussions
of a political character. I know that your ability and your
intimate acquaintance with the state of things in the country, with
parties, and all the questions at issue, etc., render you a very
competent person (perhaps the most so of any other in the country)
to write on these subjects; nor do I think that you ought to bury
this talent, but that through some other medium than the
_Guardian_, you should employ it for the country's good, and in a
way that would occasion less dissatisfaction among our people, and
excite and stir up less bad feeling against us and you from
without.
At the same Conference, Dr. Ryerson received a strong letter of approval
and encouragement from Mr. Hugh Moore, a highly respected and active
member of the Church in Dundas. Mr. Moore said:--
I came to Hamilton this morning (13th June) to see you and to
strengthen your hands in the course that you have taken, and are
taking, in the _Guardian_. I could not get an opportunity of seeing
you, so I take this way of assuring you of our hearty approbation
and support,--as it is deemed necessary at this time to speak out.
Go on; you speak the language of our hearts. I should have seen you
at Toronto on my way from Montreal, and have told you of the
opinion and feelings of our community here, but time would not
permit. It is worthy of note that the people are determined to
support you. May God aid and direct you and all that are with you!
Equally hearty was a letter which Dr. Ryerson received from Rev. John
McIntyre, in September, 1839,[75] inviting him to come and preach for
him in Perth. In urging him to comply with the request, Mr. McIntyre
said:--
If the day is favourable, the people will assemble from all
quarters. I know myself of persons who intend to come about 20
miles to hear you. You can have no idea of your popularity in this
district, although principally a military settlement. Methodists,
Presbyterians, Roman Catholics, and moderate Churchmen, consider
you, as some Presbyterians were pleased some time ago to style you,
"The Saviour of Upper Canada." Now, to disappoint their just
expectation would be almost unpardonable. The people entertain so
high an opinion of your abilities, that (as some have lately said)
you could speak with five minutes' notice on any subject. I should
be extremely sorry that they should ever hold any other opinion;
but, at your departure from Perth, the people may say, as the Queen
of Sheba did on her visit to Solomon, "It was a true report we
heard of his acts, and of his wisdom, and behold the half was not
told us."
Rev. G. R. Sanderson, also writing to Dr. Ryerson, said:--
I greatly regret these constant attacks upon you, who have laboured
so arduously and struggled so perseveringly for the good of our
country, and the settlement of the Clergy Reserves. I am sure,
however, that you will have the warmest thanks of all true friends
of their country; and that posterity will not withhold that praise
which is due you for your indefatigable exertions.
I have already, on page 101, inserted a kindly letter to Dr. Ryerson
from Rev. William Bell, Presbyterian minister, expressive of his
sympathy with the course pursued by the _Guardian_ on the Clergy Reserve
and other questions. The following letters of the same character were
from parties outside of Dr. Ryerson's own Church. Thus in 1839, the
Congregational Association of Upper Canada passed resolutions approving
of Dr. Ryerson's course--the last one of which was as follows:--
We express to the Rev. Egerton Ryerson our thanks for his able and
persevering exertions to effect a settlement of the Clergy Reserve
question, and our determination to afford him any and every support
in his endeavours that it may be in our power to render.
Rev. James Noll in enclosing the resolutions said:--
I feel myself happy, Sir, to be the medium of communicating to you
the sentiments and feelings of my brethren at a time when you are
insulted and abused as a public disturber, a rebel, and a political
demagogue, by those who are willing to sacrifice the peace, and
even risk the safety of the Colony.... Allow me to assure you of my
admiration of the fair, spirited, and able manner in which you have
conducted this important and painful controversy.... The cause you
are advocating is closely identified with the cause of God. Your
object is not only the temporal but spiritual welfare of your
country, and your friends are the great bulk of its loyal and
well-disposed inhabitants.
Rev. John Roaf (Congregational), of Toronto, in a letter to Dr. Ryerson,
dated December, 1838, said:--
I am desirous of not omitting one of my duties in relation to the
"Church question," and looking to you as the Leader of the
non-established parties, am anxious to understand your views upon
the rectory question. Should you also think of any other measure by
which I and my immediate brethren can support the cause which you
are so zealously and efficiently promoting, or can assist in
weakening the opposition to which you are subject, I shall be happy
in attending to your suggestions.
Mr. William Greig (Baptist), Bookseller, Montreal, in a letter to Dr.
Ryerson, dated June, 1839, says:--
As an ardent friend to civil and religious liberty, and an admirer
of the course pursued by yourself as Editor of the _Christian
Guardian_, I cannot but express my regret at seeing you assailed on
all sides, and especially by those for whose good you have been
exerting yourself. As a native of Great Britain, I am fondly
attached to her civil institutions, and will yield in loyalty to no
one. I cannot, therefore, but approve of any lawful and fair
measures which will tend to bring all denominations to that level,
that every one provide for itself. I therefore say, go on in your
present course; keep up the fire, brisk and hot on the enemy, till
they are routed. As I see several are withdrawing their
subscriptions to the _Guardian_, the friends of civil and religious
liberty, of whatever denomination, ought to come in and take their
places. Although not a Methodist, please put me down as a
subscriber to the _Guardian_.
FOOTNOTES:
[72] Dr. Ryerson, early in his controversial career, adopted Lord
Macaulay's motto: No misrepresentation should be suffered to pass
unrefuted. We must remember that misstatements constantly reiterated,
and seldom answered, will assuredly be believed.
[73] The article in the _Guardian_ to which reference is made, is the
reply of Dr. Ryerson to several Methodists in Toronto who had signed the
Address of the British Missionary party to the Governor; and who, in a
letter to him, had repudiated the construction put upon the Address by
the _Patriot_. Among other things the Editor said: The manly firmness
with which the signers of this Address have resisted the cunning wiles
of Egerton Ryerson, is a solemn pledge of their love and veneration for
the glorious institution of the Empire.... Thus ever thought we of
British Wesleyans; and thus thinking was our impelling motive for
persevering for the first three years of our editorial career, in one
incessant battering of the pernicious, seditious principles of Egerton
Ryerson; the very first number of whose paper betrayed him to us,
_flagrante delicto_, a pestilent and dangerous demagogue.... If his
ambition were as legitimate and praiseworthy as his talents are
commanding, he would be a far more valuable member of society than he
can ever hope to be while hankering to return to the flesh pots of
Yankee Episcopal Methodism, etc.
Dr. Ryerson's reply was an elaborate defence of his opposition to the
efforts of the _Patriot_ party to create a dominant Church, the
application of the reserves to high church uses, and the establishment
of the fifty-seven rectories.
[74] In a letter to Dr. Ryerson, dated Montreal, 1st February, 1836,
Rev. William Lord said:--Rev. Anson Green was here last week and
preached. An Upper Canada Presiding Elder preaching with acceptance in
Montreal! Who would have thought of such a thing when brother Egerton
Ryerson and even brother Joseph Stinson were denied the pulpit!
[75] This gentlemen entered the Methodist ministry in 1835, and joined
the Church of England in 1841. He died some years since.
CHAPTER XXVII.
1778-1867.
The Honourable and Right Reverend Bishop Strachan.
The Venerable John Strachan, D.D., LL.D., Archdeacon of York, and
subsequently (1839-1867) first Bishop of Toronto, was the chief clerical
opponent which Dr. Ryerson encountered in the contest for religious
freedom and denominational equality during nearly twenty years.
Dr. Strachan was born in Scotland, in April, 1778, and died at Toronto,
in November 1867, in the 90th year of his age.
It was a singular coincidence that Dr. Strachan entered the ministry of
the Church of England in May, 1803, just two months after Dr. Ryerson
was born. Who could then have foreseen the respective careers of these
two remarkable men! The one, the virtual founder and administrative head
of the Church of England in Upper Canada for upwards of 60 years; and
the other, although not the founder, yet the controlling head and leader
of the Methodist Church in the Province for nearly the same period.
Dr. Strachan was an uncompromising high churchman. His exclusive views
on the "priestly authority, and the catholic and apostolic character of
the Church of England," were those of a church optimist, but they were
not based upon any profound study of the subject, as his own statement
will attest.[76]
It is interesting to note the causes which led Dr. Strachan to cling so
tenaciously to the idea of "Church and State"--a union which he regarded
as sacred, and ordained of God for the maintenance of His cause and
Church on the earth. It is no less interesting to understand the reason
why Dr. Ryerson as strenuously repudiated and resisted the practical
application of the same idea to Canada. The reason in each case may be
stated in a few words.
The one from early associations regarded the idea of Scottish parish
churches and parochial schools, supported by the State, as eminently
Scriptural, if not divinely enjoined from the earliest Jewish times. The
other was brought up in a land where such a state of things had never
existed, and where the pure gospel had been preached from the earliest
times without the aid of a state endowment. He lived in a land, too,
where the command to the Christian Church was felt to be fitly expressed
by John Wesley, to take the "world as a parish" and preach the Gospel to
every creature. The manner in which this command was to be obeyed was
indicated by our Lord's example, when He sent forth His disciples with
this injunction:--
Provide neither gold, nor silver, nor brass in your purses ... for
the workman is worthy of his meat. Matt. x. 9, 10.
Members of the Conference, in Dr. Ryerson's early days, unhesitatingly
obeyed the directions of the Conference--many regarding it as the voice
of God in the Church--and went forth, without scrip or purse,
everywhere, even to the remotest corner of the land, bearing the good
tidings, not considering their pecuniary interests,[77] or even their
lives dear unto them, so that they might win souls for the Master.[78]
Dr. Strachan's views on the question of State aid to churches were
clearly, on the other hand, the result of his observations, in Scotland.
They are prominently brought out in his memorable speech, delivered in
the Legislative Council, on the 6th of March, 1828. He says:--
Have not the Methodists in this Province ... ever shown themselves
the enemies of the Established Church? Are they not at this moment
labouring to separate religion from the State, with which it ought
to be firmly united?... Has it not been the primary object of all
enemies to regular government ... to pull down religious
establishments?... If they tell me the Ecclesiastical
establishments are great evils, I bid them look to England and
Scotland, each of which has a religious establishment, and to these
establishments are they mainly indebted for their vast superiority
to other nations. To what but her Established Church, and the
Parochial Schools under her direction, does Scotland owe her high
reputation for moral improvement. (Pages 27 and 28.)
Again, in a remarkable letter to his friend (Rev. Dr. Thomas Chalmers,
of Edinburgh[79]), written in 1832, on the Life and Character of Bishop
Hobart of New York, Dr. Strachan relates a conversation with that Bishop
in which he took him severely to task for extolling the voluntary system
of the American Episcopal Church as compared with the endowed State
Church of England. I make a few extracts:--
Let us look at the Episcopal Church of the United States, and see
what moral effect it can have on the population, as a source of
religious instruction.... The influence of the two Churches as
confined to England and New York (alone) is as one to seventy....
Such influence on the manners and habits of the people [in that
state] is next to nothing, and yet you extol your Church above that
of England, and exclaim against establishment! Add to this, the
dependence of your clergy upon the people for support--a state of
things which is attended with most pernicious consequences ... but
in general, the clergy of all denominations in the United States,
are miserably dependent upon their congregations.... It is the duty
of Christian nations to constitute, within their boundaries,
ecclesiastical establishments.... For it is incumbent upon nations
as upon individuals, to honour the Lord with their substance.
(Pages 41-47.)
Bishop Strachan's early and later writings abound in expressions of
similar views. It was not to be wondered at, therefore, that a man of
his strong convictions would seek to give practical effect to them in
dealing, as opportunity offered, with questions of church establishment
and the clergy reserves.
It is true that by his persuasive words and strong personal
influence--when the object was the financial benefit of the
Church--Bishop Strachan rallied around him many of the leading members
of the Church of England in Upper Canada who aided him in his plans for
endowing the Church out of the public domain. Yet it is also true that
many equally sound churchmen were opposed to these schemes, and saw in
them the germ of a fatal canker, which in time would be sure to destroy
the Church's missionary zeal, and paralyze all of those noble and
generous impulses which characterize a living Church in the promotion of
Christian effort in the various departments of Church work.[80]
As time has passed on the little band of loyal churchmen, who incurred
the Bishop's unmerited censure for opposing his exclusive schemes of
Church aggrandisement, has increased to thousands in our day. They
deeply regret the success of those schemes, and deprecate the existence
of clergy reserves and rectory endowments as in themselves fatal to the
healthy development of Church work as an active and aggressive force in
the Christian life.
It is not necessary to refer here to Bishop Strachan's views in regard
to ecclesiastical polity. They are well known. On this matter also many
sound churchmen differed widely (and still differ) from his views. Yet
Bishop Strachan, while holding such strong and exclusive views, was
kindly disposed towards "Sectaries" individually, and lived on terms of
personal friendship with many of those whose opinions were opposed to
his on church questions. In his Legislative Council speech, already
quoted, he says:--
I have been charged with being hostile to the Scotch Church, and
with being an apostate from that communion.... My hostility to the
Kirk of Scotland consists in being on the most intimate terms with
the late Mr. Bethune and Dr. Spark.... To both these excellent men
I willingly ... pay a tribute of respect.... Nor have I ever missed
an opportunity, when in my power, of being useful to the clergy of
the Church of Scotland, or of treating them with respect, kindness,
and hospitality. (Page 22.)
Again, in his sermon on "Church Fellowship," preached in 1832, Dr.
Strachan says:--
Widely as we differ from the Roman Catholics in many religious
points of the greatest importance, we have always lived with them
in the kindest intercourse, and in the cordial exchange of the
charities of social life. The worthy prelate, by whom they are at
present spiritually governed, has been my friend for nearly thirty
years. With the members of the Church of Scotland we associate in
the same manner....[81] The merits of our sister Church cannot be
unknown to you, my brethren. To me they are familiar, and connected
with many of my cherished and early associations.... Of that
popular and increasing class of Christians [the Methodists], who
call themselves a branch of our Church, both at home and abroad, I
would speak with praise. (Pages 23-25.)
As to his relations with Dr. Ryerson, I here insert two notes from the
Bishop to him. The first is dated February 7th, 1838, as follows:--
The Archdeacon of York presents his compliments to the Rev. E.
Ryerson, and begs to acknowledge with satisfaction his courtesy in
sending him a copy of his excellent sermon on the Recent
Conspiracy, which the Archdeacon has read with much pleasure and
profit. Such doctrines, if generally diffused among our people,
cannot fail of producing the most beneficial effects, both
spiritual and temporal.
The second related to the calamity which had befallen the Church of
England congregation of St. James, in the destruction of its church
building by fire early in January, 1839. Dr. Ryerson at once wrote to
the Archdeacon offering him the use of the Newgate (Adelaide Street)
Church. On the 6th January, Dr. Strachan replied as follows:--
I thank you most sincerely for the kind sympathy you express in the
sad calamity that has befallen us, and for your generous offer of
accommodation. Before your note reached me, I had made arrangements
with the Mayor, for the Town Hall, which we can occupy at our
accustomed hours of worship, without disturbing any other
congregation. I and my people are not the less grateful for your
kind offer, which we shall keep in brotherly remembrance.
In his Charge to the Clergy in 1853, and again in 1856, he pays a
personal tribute to Dr. Ryerson. In the later Charge, speaking of the
School system, he says:--
So far as Dr. Ryerson is concerned, I am one of those who
appreciate very highly his exertions, his unwearied assiduity, and
his administrative capacity.
Dr. Ryerson's last reference to the Bishop is contained in the "Epochs
of Canadian Methodism," written in 1880, as follows:
Upwards of fifty years have passed away since my criticisms on Dr.
Strachan's "Sermon on the death of the Bishop of Quebec" were
written. On the re-perusal of them, after the lapse of so long a
time, the impression on my own mind is that Dr. Strachan was honest
in his statements and opinions.... He was more moderate and liberal
in his views and feelings in his later years, and became the
personal friend of his old antagonist, "The Reviewer," who, he
said, had "fought fair." (Page 145.)
FOOTNOTES:
[76] My mother (he said) belonged to the Relief denomination.... My
father was attached to the Non-Jurants; and although he went
occasionally with my mother, he was a frequent hearer of Bishop Skinner,
to whose church he was in the habit of carrying me. He died when I was
very young, but not before my mind was impressed in favour of
Episcopacy.... I readily confess, that in respect to Church Government,
my principles were sufficiently vague and unformed; for to this
important subject my attention was never particularly drawn till I came
to this country, when my venerated friend, the late Dr. Stewart, of
Kingston, urged me to enter the Church, and as I had never yet
communicated, that excellent person, whom I loved as a father, admitted
me to the altar a little before I went to Quebec to take holy orders, in
1803. Before I had determined to enter the Church of England, I was
induced by the advice of another friend (the late Mr. Cartwright) ... to
make some inquiries respecting the Presbyterian Church of Montreal, then
vacant. (Dr. Strachan's Speech in the Legislative Council, March 6th,
1828, pages 25, 26.)
[77] The stipends of Methodist ministers in those days were very small.
Rev. Dr. John Carroll tells me that the "quarterage" payable to an
unmarried Methodist minister in America, at first, was only $60 per
annum; then it was increased to $80, at which rate it remained until
1816, when the General Conference fixed it at $100, at which it remained
until 1854. The rule for a married minister was double that for a single
man, and $16 for each child. Besides quarterage, there was an allowance
for travelling and table expenses. Two hundred dollars was the sum for
salary, besides travelling and aid expenses, allowed to a minister up to
1854, and even then this sum was rarely ever paid in full.--H.
[78] Rev. H. Wilkinson in a note to Dr. Ryerson, in 1837, thus describes
the kind of places to which some ministers had to be sent, and their
duties and qualifications when there. He said: I require a man for a
mission which lies about 200 miles from Bytown, up the Grand River
(Ottawa), and which will be difficult of access in the winter. A
suitable person could make his way northwards with some of the rude
lumbermen, who now and then go up in companies. The brother would need
to be strong in mind and body, and fervent in spirit. He would need to
go on foot, and paddle a canoe, or row a boat, as the case might be, and
thus reach his appointments in the best way he can.
[79] While in the vicinity of St. Andrews I contracted several important
friendships, amongst others, with Thomas Duncan, afterwards Professor of
Mathematics, and also with Dr. Chalmers, since then so deservedly
renowned. We were all three very nearly of the same age, and our
friendship only terminated with death, being kept alive by a constant
correspondence during more than sixty years. (Bishop Strachan's Charge
to his Clergy, June, 1860; page 10.)
[80] Speaking of the passage of a Clergy Reserve Bill in 1840, to which
the Bishop of Toronto was strongly opposed, Dr. Ryerson says: A
considerable majority of the members of the Church of England in both
Houses of the Legislature voted for the Bill, and were afterwards
charged by the Bishop with "defection and treachery" for doing so. On
this point, Lord Sydenham, in a despatch to Lord John Russell, dated,
5th February, 1840, said: It is notorious to every one here, that of
twenty-two members (being communicants of the Church of England) who
voted upon this bill, only eight recorded their opinion in favour of the
views expressed by the Right Reverend Prelate, whilst, in the
Legislative Council the majority was still greater; and amongst those
who gave it their warmest support, are to be found many gentlemen of the
highest character for independence, and for attachment to the Church,
and whose views on general politics differ from those of Her Majesty's
Government. (Dr. Ryerson's Criticism on Bishop Strachan's letter to Lord
John Russell, dated, February 20th, 1851.)
[81] These kindly words the Bishop repeated in substance to the Editor
some years since, when talking with him on the subject.--H.
CHAPTER XXVIII.
1791-1836.
The Clergy Reserves and Rectories Questions.
The discussion of the Clergy Reserve Question enters so largely into the
Story of Dr. Ryerson's Life, that I give in this chapter a short,
condensed sketch of its origin and history down to 1837-38. The
remainder of the sketch will be developed in an account of the contest
preceding the settlement of the question in subsequent chapters.
After the conquest of Canada, in 1760, the right of the Roman Catholic
inhabitants to enjoy their religion was guaranteed to them in the Treaty
of Paris, Feb. 10th, 1763. In 1774, an Act was passed by the British
Parliament (14 Geo. III., ch. 83) by which the right to their accustomed
dues and tithes was secured to the clergy of the Church of Rome in the
then Province of Quebec (including what was afterwards Upper and Lower
Canada). The same Act provided for the encouragement of the Protestant
religion, and, for the support of a Protestant clergy, by other tithes
and dues.[82]
In 1791, the Province of Quebec was divided into Upper and Lower Canada,
and, in an Act introduced into the British Parliament by Mr. Pitt,
provision was made for their government. Sections 35-42 of that Act
dealt with the maintenance and support of a Protestant Clergy, and this
provision (1) allotted one-seventh of all lands which might be hereafter
granted by the King for settlement; and (2) gave authority for the
erection of "parsonages or rectories, according to the establishment of
the Church of England," to be endowed out of the lands so allotted, etc.
(Sec. 38).
The alleged reasons which induced George III. to make provision for the
support of religion in the North American Colonies, are set forth, so
far as they related to the Protestant religion, by the late Bishop
Strachan in a pamphlet which he published in England in 1827.[83] He
mentions the fact that Great Britain, of all European nations, had
hitherto made no provision for religious instruction in her colonies. He
further states that:--
The effect of this was that emigrants belonging to the Established
Church who settled in America, not having access to their own
religious ministrations, became frequently dissenters; and when the
Colonies (now the United States) rebelled, there was not, among a
population of nearly 3,000,000, a single prelate, and but very few
Episcopal clergymen.
The folly of this policy was shown in the strongest light during
the rebellion; almost all of the Episcopal clergy and their
congregations remained faithful to the King, demonstrating by their
conduct, that had proper care been taken to promote a religious
establishment in connection with that of England, the revolution
would not have taken place.[84]
Aware of the pernicious effects of this narrow and unchristian
policy, and sensible that the colonial ought to be attached to the
parent state by religious, as well as by political feelings, the
great Mr. Pitt determined (in forming a constitution for the
Canadas) to provide for the religious instruction of the people,
and to lay the foundation of an Ecclesiastical Establishment which
should increase with the settlement.
To accomplish this noble purpose, Mr. Pitt advised that one-seventh
of the lands should be set apart for the maintenance of a
Protestant Clergy. In Upper Canada this appropriation comprises
one-seventh of the whole province: but in Lower Canada, one-seventh
of those parts only which have been granted since 1791 (pages 2,
3).[85]
In a pamphlet published at Kingston, U.C., during the previous year, the
substance of Mr. Pitt's remarks on that part of the Bill which
authorized the setting apart of these lands, is given as follows:--
Mr. Pitt (House of Commons, 12th May, 1791), said that he gave the
Colonial Government and Council power, under the instructions of
His Majesty, to distribute out of a sum arising from the tithes for
land or possessions, and set apart for the maintenance and support
of a Protestant clergy. Another clause (he said) provided, for the
permanent support of the Protestant clergy, a seventh portion of
the lands to be granted in future. He declared that the meaning of
the Act was to enable the Governor to endow and to present the
Protestant clergy of the established church to such parsonage or
rectory as might be constituted or erected within every township or
parish, which now was, or might be formed; and to give to such
Protestant clergyman of the established church, a part, or the
whole, as the Governor thought proper, of the lands appropriated by
the Act. He further explained that this was done to encourage the
established church; and that possibly hereafter it might be
proposed to send a Bishop of the established church to sit in the
Legislative Council. (Parl. Reg., vol. 29, pp. 414, 415.)[86]
Mr. Fox was entirely opposed to these arrangements. He said: By the
Protestant clergy, he supposed to be understood not only the clergy
of the Church of England, but all descriptions of Protestants....
That the clergy should have one-seventh of all grants, he must
confess, appeared to him an absurd doctrine. If they were all of
the Church of England, this would not reconcile him to the measure.
The greater part of these Protestant clergy were not of the Church
of England; they were chiefly Protestant dissenters.... We were, by
this Bill, making a sort of provision for the Protestant clergy of
Canada [of one-seventh of the land] which was unknown to them in
every part of Europe; a provision, in his apprehension, which would
rather tend to corrupt than to benefit them. (Hansard, vol. 29,
1791, page 108.)
I have carefully gone through the whole of the debate on this subject,
but I cannot find one word in it which would indicate that Mr. Pitt, Mr.
Fox, or Mr. Burke (the chief speakers), entertained the idea that
endowing the clergy had any political significance as a precautionary
measure for ensuring the loyalty of the inhabitants. The opinion was
expressed that setting apart these lands was the most feasible way (as
Mr. Pitt said) of providing "for the permanent support of the Protestant
clergy," and of giving "them a competent income."[87]
In a letter to Dr. Moore, Archbishop of Canterbury, dated December,
1790, Col. J. Graves Simcoe said:--
I am decidedly of opinion that a regular Episcopal establishment
... is absolutely necessary in any extensive colony which England
means to preserve, etc. The neglect of this principle of
overturning republicanism in former periods, by giving support and
assistance to those causes which are perpetually offering
themselves to affect so necessary an object, is much to be
lamented; but it is my duty to be as solicitous as possible, that
they may now have their due influence, etc.
In a "Memoir" written by Governor Simcoe in 1791, he said:
In regard to the Episcopal establishment ... I firmly believe the
present to be a critical moment, in which that system, so
interwoven and connected with the monarchical foundation of our
government, may be productive of the most permanent and extensive
benefits, in preserving the connection between Great Britain and
her Colonies.
From various sources I gather the following particulars:--
From 1791 to 1819, the Clergy Reserves were in the hands of the
Government, and managed by it alone. For years they yielded
scarcely enough to defray the expenses of management. In 1817 the
House of Assembly objected to such an appropriation for the clergy,
as "beyond all precedent lavish," and complained that the
reservations were an obstacle to improvement and settlement. In
1819, lands were taxed for the construction of roads, and it was
contended that the reservations on the public roads should also be
taxed.
In 1819, the question was first mooted, as to the right of
Presbyterians to share in the reserves. In March, of that year,
thirty-seven Presbyterians of the town of Niagara, petitioned Sir
Peregrine Maitland, to grant to the Presbyterian congregation
there, the annual sum of £100 in aid, out of the clergy reserves,
or out of any other fund at the Governor's disposal. In
transmitting this petition to the Colonial Secretary for
instructions, Sir P. Maitland mentioned that "the actual product of
the clergy reserves is about £700 per annum." In May, 1820, a reply
was received from Lord Bathurst, stating that, in the opinion of
the Crown officers, the provisions of the Act of 1791, "for the
support of the Protestant clergy, are not confined solely to the
clergy of the Church of England, but may be extended also to the
clergy of the Church of Scotland," but not to dissenting ministers.
In 1819, on the application of Bishop Mountain, of Quebec, the
clergy in each province were incorporated for the purpose of
leasing and managing the reserves--the proceeds, however, to be
paid over to the Government. On the appearance of a notice to this
effect in the Quebec _Gazette_, dated, 13th June, 1820, the clergy
of the Church of Scotland memorialized the King for a share in
these reserves.
In 1823, the House of Assembly, on motion of Hon. William Morris,
concurred in a series of resolutions, asserting the right of the
Church of Scotland in Canada to a share in the reserves. These
resolutions were rejected by the Legislative Council, by a vote of
6 to 5.
In April, 1824, Dr. Strachan was deputed by the Bishop of Quebec
and Sir P. Maitland, to go to England and get authority from Lord
Bathurst to sell portions of the reserves. In the meantime, the
Canada (Land) Company proposed to purchase all the Crown and Clergy
Reserve Lands at a valuation to be agreed on. The clergy
corporation having desired a voice in this valuation, the Bishop of
Quebec deputed Archdeacon Mountain to press this view on Lord
Bathurst. Some misunderstanding having arisen between Lord Bathurst
and Archdeacon Strachan, and the Canada Land Company, Dr. Strachan
went to England in April, 1826, and was deputed by Lord Bathurst to
arrange the differences with Mr. John Galt, Commissioner of the
Company. This they did by changing the original plan. The clergy
lands were exchanged for 1,000,000 acres in the Huron tract. Out of
the moneys received from the Canada Company the Home Government
appropriated £700 a year to the Church of Scotland clergy,[88] and
the same amount to the clergy of the Church of Rome in Upper
Canada.
In June, 1826, the Home Government, on the memorial of the Church
of Scotland General Assembly, and an address from the House of
Assembly, founded on the resolutions of 1823 (which, as introduced,
had been rejected by the Legislative Council), acknowledged the
rights of the Church of Scotland clergy to a share of the reserves.
In January, 1826, the House of Assembly memorialized the King to
distribute the proceeds of the reserves for the benefit of all
denominations, or failing that to the purposes of education and the
general improvement of the Province. The reply to this memorial was
so unsatisfactory that the House of Assembly (December 22nd, 1826),
adopted a series of eleven resolutions, deprecating the action of
the Home Government in appropriating the clergy reserves to
individuals connected with the Church of England "to the exclusion
of other denominations"--that church bearing "a very small
proportion to the number of other Christians in the province." The
Assembly prayed that the proceeds of the reserves be applied to the
support of district and common schools, a Provincial seminary, and
in aid of erecting places of worship for all denominations of
Christians. These resolutions passed by majorities of from 25 to
30; the nays being 2 and 3 only. The bill founded on these
resolutions was negatived in the Legislative Council (January,
1827). In the year 1826, Dr. Strachan obtained a royal charter for
King's College, with an endowment of 225,000 acres of land, and a
grant of £1,000 for sixteen years. This charter was wholly in
favour of the Church of England, and its obnoxious clauses remained
unchanged until 1835.
In March, 1827, Hon. R. W. Horton introduced a Bill into Parliament
to provide for the sale of the clergy lands, as asked for by the
Bishop of Quebec. This led to a protracted discussion between the
friends in the House of the English and Scotch Churches, and
requests were made for information on the state of these Churches
in Upper Canada. Archdeacon Strachan, then in England, furnished
this information in his famous letter and Chart, dated, May 16th,
1827. Objection to giving the clergy corporation power to sell
these lands having been made, Mr. Horton withdrew his original
bill, and in a new one, which was passed, confined the exercise of
this power to the Executive Government.
In March, 1828, the House of Assembly memorialized the King to
place the proceeds of the reserves at the disposal of the House for
the purposes of education and internal improvement. Mr. Morris'
motion to strike out "internal improvement" was lost. In this year
a committee of the House of Commons reported against continuing the
reservation in mortmain of the clergy lands, as it imposed serious
obstacles to the improvement of the colony.
In 1829, two despatches on the clergy reserve question were sent to
the Colonial Secretary by Sir John Colborne. In one, dated 11th
April, Sir John says: If a more ardent zeal be not shown by the
Established Church, and a very different kind of minister than that
which is generally to be found in this Province sent out from
England, it is obvious that the members of the Established Church
will be inconsiderable, and that it will continue to lose ground.
The Methodists, apparently, exceed the number of the Churches of
England and Scotland.... If the Wesleyan Methodists in England
could be prevailed on to supply this Province with preachers, the
Methodists of this country would become, as a political body, of
less importance than they are at present.
In this year the House of Assembly passed a bill similar to that of
1828. It was rejected, as in the previous year, by the Legislative
Council. In 1830, the same proceedings were repeated with like
result.
In December, 1830 (see page 101), a monster petition was agreed to, and
afterwards signed by 10,000 persons and sent to England, praying that
steps be taken to leave the ministers of all denominations to be
supported by the people among whom they labour and the voluntary
contributions of benevolent Societies in Canada and Great Britain--to do
away with all political distinctions on account of religious faith--to
remove all ministers of religion from seats and places of political
power in the Provincial Government--to grant to the clergy of all
denominations the enjoyment of equal rights and privileges in everything
that appertains to them as British subjects and as ministers of the
Gospel, particularly the right of solemnizing matrimony--to modify the
charter of King's College, so as to exclude all sectarian tests and
preferences--and to appropriate the proceeds of the sale of the lands,
heretofore set apart for the support of a Protestant Clergy, to the
purposes of general education and various internal improvements.
Such was the comprehensive character of the reforms prayed for in this
province upwards of fifty years ago. All of these reforms have been long
since granted; but the enumeration of them shows how far off the mass of
the people and their ministers were then from the enjoyment of the civil
and religious privileges which are now the birthright of every British
subject in Canada.
This "programme of reforms" will also show what were the principles for
which Dr. Ryerson, and other pioneers of religious freedom in Upper
Canada, had to contend half a century ago. Nor was the victory easily
won which they achieved. The struggle was a long and arduous one. Each
step was contested by the dominant party, and every reform was resisted
with a determination worthy of a better cause.
In March 1831, the first attempt was made (on motion of Mr. Hagerman) to
deprive the Canadian Legislature of the power to deal with the clergy
reserve question. His motion was to revest the reserves in the crown for
religious purposes, but it was negatived by a vote of 30 to 7. Although
defeated now, the same proposition was frequently made afterwards, and
at length with success. In 1839 a provision of that kind was passed, but
it failed on technical grounds to receive the royal assent. See chapter
xxxi.
In 1831 and 1832, addresses to the King were adopted by the House of
Assembly praying, as before, that the reserves be applied to educational
purposes. In this year a satisfactory reply from the Home Government, in
regard to the clergy reserve question, was communicated to the
Legislature, and it was invited to consider the desirability of
exercising its power to "vary or repeal" certain provisions for the
support of a Protestant Clergy. In 1832 and in 1833, bills to revest the
clergy reserve lands in the Crown were read a second time, and, in 1834,
one to that effect was finally passed, but was rejected by the
Legislative Council. A bill for the sale of the reserves and the
application of the proceeds to educational purposes, was passed in 1835,
by a vote of 40 to 4, but was again rejected by the Legislative Council.
This body in the same year proposed that both Houses should abdicate
their functions in regard to the reserves (as they were unable to concur
in any measure on the subject), and request the Imperial Parliament to
legislate on the subject! The House of Assembly peremptorily refused, by
a vote of two to one, to concur in such a proposition, and read a
dignified lecture to the Council on its refusal to pass their measures,
or to originate one of its own. The members of the Assembly felt that
the influence of the Governor and the members of the Council would be so
potent in England, that by it the wishes of the people of Upper Canada,
as repeatedly expressed by that House, would be frustrated.[89] In 1836,
the bill of the previous year was passed by the Assembly by a majority
of 35 to 5. The Legislative Council amended it so as to leave the matter
as before with the British Parliament. This amendment was defeated by
the House of Assembly by a vote of 27 to 1, and so the matter ended. In
1837-38 the rebellion took place, leaving the clergy reserve question in
abeyance for some time.
On the 15th January, 1836, Sir John Colborne, by order in council,
established fifty-seven rectories in Upper Canada, and endowed them out
of the clergy reserve lands. This was done at the last moment, and while
the successor of Sir John Colborne (Sir F. B. Head) was on his way from
New York to Toronto. So great was the haste in which this act was done,
that only 44 out of the 57 patents were signed by the retiring Governor;
so that only that number of rectories were actually endowed. There is no
doubt but that the Constitutional Act of 1791 authorized not only the
setting apart of the clergy reserves, but also the erection of
"parsonages and rectories according to the establishment of the Church
of England," to be endowed out of the lands so allotted. (Sec. 38). But,
in Lord Glenelg's opinion, the subject was never submitted for the
signification of the King's pleasure thereon. Certain ambiguous words,
in Lord Ripon's reply to a private communication from Sir John Colborne,
was the authority relied upon for the hasty and unpopular act of the
retiring Governor. The legality of the act was frequently questioned,
but it was finally affirmed by the Court of Chancery in Upper Canada in
1856. The judgment in the case of the Attorney-General _vs._ Grasett was
that--
Under the statute 31, Geo. III., ch. 31, and the Royal Commission,
Sir John Colborne, the Lieutenant-Governor of Upper Canada, had
authority to create and endow rectories without further
instructions.
FOOTNOTES:
[82] These tithes continued to be collected for the support of a
Protestant Clergy until February, 1823, when a declaratory Act, passed
by the Legislature of Upper Canada in 1821, was sanctioned by the King
to the effect that hereafter "no tithes shall be claimed, demanded, or
received by any ecclesiastical parson, rector or vicar, of the
Protestant Church within this Province."
[83] Observations on the Provision made for the Maintenance of a
Protestant Clergy in the Provinces of Upper and Lower Canada, under the
31st Geo. III., cap. 31. By John Strachan, D.D., Archdeacon of York,
Upper Canada, pp. 44. London, 1827.
[84] In a letter written by Dr. Ryerson in 1851, he criticised a similar
statement then made by Bishop Strachan. He pointed out that Washington
and other leaders of the revolution were staunch churchmen.
[85] In no part of Mr. Pitt's remarks on the Bill setting apart land for
the Protestant Clergy do I find any intimation of the kind mentioned by
Bishop Strachan. Governor Simcoe, however, held these views, which by
mistake the Bishop may have attributed to Mr. Pitt. (See next page.)--H.
[86] An Apology for the Church of England in the Canadas, etc. By a
Protestant of the Established Church of England. Kingston, U.C., 1826,
page 11.
[87] It was in the discussion on this Bill that the long personal
friendship which had existed between Fox and Burke was brought to an
abrupt termination.--H.
[88] In 1830, Presbyterian ministers not of the Church of Scotland,
were, on petition to that effect (signed by Rev. W. Smart, Moderator,
and Rev. W. Bell, Presbytery Clerk), placed on the same footing as the
ministers of the Kirk.--H.
[89] This was abundantly proved afterwards. In the following Parliament
an amended bill was carried, by a majority of one vote, in the House of
Assembly to place the proceeds of the reserves at the disposal of the
British Parliament. Petitions were at once sent to the Queen to induce
her to assent to this bill, and the Bishop went to England to present
them. Sir George Arthur also lent his aid for the same object. The
scheme failed, however, on technical grounds, but was successfully
revived the next year. (See _Guardian_ 1st January, 1840, and page
249.)--H.
CHAPTER XXIX.
1838.
The Clergy Reserve Controversy Renewed.
The question at issue, when the House of Assembly was elected in 1836
for the parliamentary term ending in 1839, was adroitly narrowed by Sir
F. B. Head to the simple one of loyalty to the Crown, or--as Dr.
Ryerson, in a letter to Hon. W. H. Draper (September, 1838), expressed
it--"Whether or not ... this Province would remain an integral part of
the British Empire." Lord Durham pointed out that Sir F. B. Head led the
people to believe "that they were called upon to decide the question of
separation [from Great Britain] by their votes."
Under such circumstances the clergy reserve question was subordinated to
those of graver moment. Besides, even if pledges had been given by
members before the election on the subject, they were not felt, as the
event proved, to be very sacred. Speaking of this Parliament, Dr.
Ryerson, in his letter to Mr. Draper, (already mentioned), said:--
The present Assembly at its first session adopted a resolution in
favour of appropriating the reserves for "the religious and moral
instruction of the Province." But its proceedings during the second
session were so vacillating that it is now difficult to say what
the opinions of the members are.
One explanation of this state of feeling was, that the political views
of a majority of the members were in harmony with those of the ruling
party in the country, and yet were at variance with the views of their
constituents on the clergy reserve question. Advantage was taken of the
existence of this political sympathy by the leaders of the dominant
party, with a view to secure the removal of the clergy reserve question
from the hostile arena of the Upper Canada Legislature to the friendly
atmosphere of the English House of Commons, and the still more friendly
tribunal of the House of Lords--where the bench of bishops would be sure
to defend the claims of the Church to this royal patrimony.[90]
Accordingly, at the third session of this Parliament, Mr. Cartwright, of
Kingston, introduced a bill "to revest the Clergy Reserves in Her
Majesty"--the first reading of which was carried by a vote of 24 to 5,
and passed through Committee of the whole by a vote of 29 to 12. As soon
as Dr. Ryerson, then in Kingston, got a copy of this bill he wrote the
following letter, on the 13th January, 1838, to the _Guardian_:--
The professed object of this bill is described by its title, but the
real object, and the necessary effect of it, from the very nature of its
provisions, is to apply the reserves to those exclusive and partial
purposes against which the great majority of the inhabitants of this
province, both by petition and through their representatives, have
protested in every variety of language during the last twelve years--and
that without any variation or the shadow of change. The bill even
proposes to transfer future legislation on this subject from the
Provincial to the Imperial Parliament! The authors of this bill are, it
seems, afraid to trust the inhabitants of Upper Canada to legislate on a
subject in which they themselves are solely concerned; nay, they will
environ themselves and the interests they wish to promote behind the
Imperial Parliament! The measure itself, containing the provisions it
does, is a shameful deception upon the Canadian public--is a wanton
betrayal of Canadian rights--is a disgraceful sacrifice of Canadian, to
selfish party interests--is a covert assassination of a vital principle
of Canadian constitutional and free government--is a base political and
religious fraud which ought to excite the deep concern and rouse the
indignant and vigorous exertion of every friend of justice, and freedom,
and good government in the country.
My language may be strong; but strong as it is, it halts far behind the
emotions of my mind. Such a measure, I boldly affirm, is not what the
people of Upper Canada expected from the members of the present Assembly
when they elected them as their representatives; it is not such a
measure as, I have reason to believe, a majority of the present members
of the Assembly gave their constituents to understand they would vote
for when they solicited their suffrages. Honourable gentlemen, if I can
be heard by them, ought to remember that they have a character to
sustain, more important than the attainment of a particular object;
they ought to remember that they act in a delegated capacity; and if
they cannot clear their consciences and maintain the views and interests
of their constituents, they ought, as many an honest English gentleman
has done, to resign their seats in the legislature; they ought to
remember to whom and under what expectations they owe their present
elevation; above all, they ought to remember what the equal and
impartial interests of their whole constituency require at their hands.
If, however, every pledge or honourable understanding should be
violated; if every reasonable hope should be disappointed; and if the
loyal and deserving inhabitants of Upper Canada should be deceived, and
disappointed, and wronged by the passage of this bill into a law,
petitions ought to be circulated in every part of the province to Her
Majesty the Queen to withhold the royal assent from the bill; and I
hereby pledge £50 (if I have to sell my library to obtain the amount)
for the promotion of that object. Such an act, under the present
circumstances of the country, would be worse than a former alien bill,
and ought to be deprecated, resisted, and execrated by every enlightened
friend of the peace, happiness, and prosperity of the Province.
In reply to a letter from Rev. Joseph Stinson, urging him to come to
Toronto and oppose this bill, Dr. Ryerson said:--
For me to leave Kingston, under present circumstances, and go to
Toronto would ruin my ministerial influence and usefulness here and
blast all our present hopes of prosperity. You know that by my
continued and repeated absence, I have already lost fifty per cent.
in the confiding hopes of the people, and consequently in very
power of doing them good. You know, likewise, that the financial
interests of the Society have so lamentably declined that we are
already largely in arrears. I cannot, therefore, leave, unless I am
positively required to do so by the Book Committee.
A more serious aspect of the matter, however, was presented to Dr.
Ryerson in the extraordinary silence of the Conference organ on the
subject. In the same letter he said:--
I cannot but feel deeply grieved at not only the tameness but the
profound silence of the _Guardian_ on this bill. Silence on such a
measure, and at such a time, and after the course we have pursued
hitherto, is acquiescence in it to all intents and purposes, and
may be fairly and legitimately construed so by both friends and
enemies. Oh, is it so? Can it be so, that the Editor of the
_Guardian_ has got so completely into the leading strings of that
churchism which is as poisonous in its feelings towards us, and its
plans respecting us, as the simoon blast; that he will see measures
going forward, which he must know are calculated, nay, intended, to
trample us in the dust, and not even say one word, except in praise
(as often as possible), of the very men who he sees from day to day
plotting our overthrow!
I have also observed, in Dr. Strachan's letters to Hon. Wm. Morris,
an attack upon Lord Glenelg, the Colonial Secretary--such a one as
would enable us to turn to our account on the clergy reserve
question (and against Dr. Strachan's exclusive system) the entire
influence of Her Majesty's Government, which would have great
weight both in and out of the House of Assembly. How I have heard
Dr. Bunting, Mr. Beecham, and other members of the Committee at
home, say that Lord Glenelg is one of the best and ablest men of
the present day. At all events, after what we have obtained through
his Lordship's instrumentality, I think that silence on our part is
disgraceful--apart from considerations of local interests in this
battle for right and justice.
Two able and moderate advocates of the settlement of the clergy reserve
question were sent to England in 1837 to confer with Lord Glenelg on the
subject, viz.: Hon. William Morris on behalf of the Church of Scotland,
and Hon. W. H. Draper on behalf of the Church of England. In November of
that year Dr. Ryerson was requested to draw up a paper embodying the
opinions of the leading members of the Conference. This was done, and an
elaborate paper on the subject was published in the _Guardian_ of
January 17th, 1838.[91] Shortly afterwards Dr. Ryerson addressed a
letter to Lord Glenelg on the subject. I only insert the narrative part
of it, as follows:--
I was favoured with a conversation on the clergy reserve question
with Mr. [Sir James] Stephen, in accordance with your Lordship's
suggestion, the day before I left London for Canada (27th April,
1837). After my arrival in this Province it was unanimously agreed
to support the plan for the adjustment of that important and long
agitated question, which had been mentioned by Mr. Stephen, in the
interview referred to.
Sir F. B. Head set his face against it from the beginning, and did
not wish me to say anything about it publicly. The Attorney-General
acknowledged it was equitable, and did not make any serious
objection to it.[92]
Recently a meeting of our principal ministers took place in
Toronto, in order to consult upon the measures which it was
desirable to adopt in order to promote the settlement of the
question at the next session of Parliament. At the request of the
meeting, another gentleman and myself waited upon the Hon. Mr.
Draper (who had taken the most official part in previous sessions),
and showed him the resolutions agreed to. We stated that if it
would embarrass him in promoting the earliest settlement of the
question, we would desist from publishing anything on the subject.
He expressed himself as highly gratified at our frankness,
courtesy, and general views, and said that if his high-church
friends had treated him with the same liberality and courtesy he
would have been saved from much difficulty and embarrassment, which
he had experienced in his previous exertions; but that he thought
there could be no objection to our publishing at large our views on
the subject. The preparation of the document was assigned to me.
When published, it appeared to meet the views of all parties,
except the ultra shade of one party, who want the whole of the
reserves; and it is now the most popular plan throughout the
Province of settling the question, except that of appropriating the
reserves to educational purposes exclusively.
A day or two before the publication of this document, the House of
Assembly went into Committee on a Bill to revest the reserves in
the Imperial Parliament! Going to Toronto at this time, I did what
I could to bring the subject again before the House, and
accordingly addressed a letter through the press to Speaker MacNab,
of the Assembly, on the importance of an immediate settlement of
the question, and also urging the adoption of the plan which had
been recently proposed.[93] These papers appeared to create a
considerable sensation among the members of the Assembly; it was
agreed on all sides that the question ought to be settled
forthwith. But the reluctance of the Crown Officers to take up the
subject soon became manifest; and it was not for some weeks after,
that the subject could be forced upon them.[94] Then all (with very
few exceptions) professed that the subject ought not to be
postponed any longer. But the Crown Officers had no measure
prepared, and differed in opinion on the subject--the
Attorney-General consenting to the revesting of the reserves in the
Crown, the Solicitor-General contending that they should be divided
among four denominations (Episcopalians, Presbyterians, Methodists,
and Roman Catholics, according to their relative numbers in Great
Britain and Ireland!) This proposition had but three or four
advocates in the House, including the author of it. Mr. Boulton,
seconded by Mr. Cartwright, moved, in substance, that the clergy
reserve provision was made for the clergy of the Church of
England;--that it does not provide for more than a competent
support for them;--that to appropriate it for them would give most
satisfaction to the country. This resolution had five votes in
favour of it. All these amendments, and several others, having been
lost in Committee, the original resolution moved by Mr. Cartwright,
to revest the clergy reserves in Her Majesty, for "the support of
the Christian religion in this Province," was adopted by a
majority of three or four. A bill was then brought in and read a
first time, and ordered to a second reading next day, but was never
afterwards taken up--the exclusive church party being anxious to
keep it out of sight. Thus the question is laid over for another
year, to the great disappointment and dissatisfaction of thousands
who have promptly come forward to the support of the Government of
the country.
As an indication of the determination of the party then in power in
Upper Canada to carry their scheme for the re-investment of the Reserves
in the Crown, before the close of this friendly Parliament, I quote the
following extract from a despatch from Sir George Arthur to Lord
Glenelg, dated 11th July, 1838:--
At the first meeting of the Legislature, I propose to cause a bill
to be introduced for re-investing the lands reserved for the clergy
in the Crown, to be applied for religious purposes, and I have
reason to think that it will be carried by a considerable majority.
In June, 1838, Dr. Ryerson became Editor of the _Christian Guardian_. It
was, as I have shown, at a most critical period in our provincial
history. He was called to that post by the unanimous voice of his
brethren. That call, too, was emphasized by the fact that the object of
the dominant party in decrying the loyalty of their opponents was now
clearly seen; and that, therefore, none but a man of undaunted courage,
unimpeachable loyalty, as well as unquestioned ability, could
successfully cope with the powerful combination of talent and influence
which the ruling party possessed.
Nor should it be forgotten, that in the unfortunate crisis through which
the Province had just passed, the prestige of the party which had always
claimed the whole of the reserves as the patrimony of the Church of
England, had, from political causes, immensely increased. This gave them
a double advantage; while, on the other hand, the prestige of the party
which for years had firmly and consistently resisted these claims, had,
for the same political reasons, as sensibly and as seriously declined.
These facts were well known to every one in Upper Canada at the time.
They imposed a double burthen upon those who had the courage (or, it
might be said, audacity) to question the righteousness of claims,
which--not to speak of the invaluable services and inviolable loyalty of
the claimants themselves in the crisis of the rebellion--were by words
of the statute, as interpreted by the law officers of the Crown, so
clearly given to those claimants.
Such was the position of parties, and the condition of affairs in Upper
Canada, when Dr. Ryerson was called to the editorial chair of the
leading newspaper in the Province. That he was possessed of the
requisite ability and firmness to maintain the rights of a discouraged
minority, and resist the then almost unquestioned will of a powerful
majority, few doubted. The bold defence of the supposed exiled rebel,
Bidwell, proved that neither courage nor talent was wanting. The bitter
hatred of the revolutionary party, as expressed in the threat that,
should they succeed, their first victim would be Egerton Ryerson, showed
that in the new crusade he would have no help (if not covert opposition)
from that extreme section of his former friends. Nor, as events proved,
could he reckon on any support from the British missionary section of
the Methodist community. Indeed, they were hostile to his views, as will
be seen in a subsequent chapter.
In entering into this contest, therefore, Dr. Ryerson found that he
would have to encounter a threefold enemy--each section of it able,
resolute and influential, especially that one practically in possession
of the reserves--fighting, as it was, for its very existence, and acting
entirely on the defensive.
Soon after Dr. Ryerson entered on his editorial duties he published in
the _Guardian_ an elaborate series of letters on "The Clergy Reserve
Question, as a matter of History, a Question of Law, and a Subject of
Legislation," addressed to Hon. W. H. Draper, Solicitor-General. After
reviewing the proceedings of the Government and Legislature on the
subject down to the end of the session of 1838, he summed up the leading
facts which he had established, in the following words:--
I have stated that the Government has been administered for
fourteen years in utter contempt of the wishes of the inhabitants,
constitutionally, continuously, and almost unanimously expressed
through their representatives and otherwise, on a subject which
concerns their highest and best interests, and which, as the
history of Great Britain amply shows, has always more deeply
interested British subjects than any other. Sir, on the unspeakably
important subjects of religion and education our constitutional
right of legislation has, by the arbitrary exercise and influence
of Executive power, been made a mockery, and our constitutional
liberties a deception; and it is to the influence over the public
mind of the high religious feelings and principles of those classes
of the population who have been so shamefully calumniated by the
Episcopal clergy and their party scribes, that the inhabitants of
Upper Canada are not doing in 1838, what Englishmen did do in 1688,
when their feelings were outraged and their constitutional
liberties infringed, and the privileges of Parliament trampled
upon, in order to force upon the nation a system of religious
domination which the great majority of the people did not desire.
As the session of the Legislature of 1839 approached, a vigorous effort
was made by _The Church_ newspaper (the clerical organ), and the
_Patriot_ (the lay organ) of the church party to influence public
opinion in favour of a re-investment of the clergy reserves in the Crown
(for the reasons given on page 225.)
It was well known that Dr. Ryerson had strenuously opposed any
reference of the questions to the British Parliament as a pusillanimous,
and yet an interested, party abnegation of Canadian rights. He,
therefore, prepared and circulated extensively a petition to the House
of Assembly on this and kindred subjects. This proceeding called forth a
counter petition, urging the Legislature to recognize the principle of
an established church, etc. Dr. Ryerson, therefore, lost no time in
inserting in the _Guardian_ of 24th October, a stirring appeal, in which
he urged the Methodist ministers and members throughout the country to
sign the petition which he had prepared without delay. He insisted upon
the abolition of the rectories surreptitiously established by Sir John
Colborne, on the ground that, although authorized by the Act of 1791,
yet that their establishment was not in harmony with the terms of the
despatch of Lord Ripon, dated November 8th, 1832, which stated that--
His Majesty has studiously abstained from the exercise of his
undoubted prerogative of founding and endowing literary or
religious corporations, until he should obtain the advice of the
representatives of the people in that respect.
He concluded the appeal with these words:--It becomes every man who
properly appreciates his civil and religious rights and privileges, and
those of posterity after him, to give his name, his influence, and
exertions, in the final effort to place those rights and privileges upon
the broad foundation of equal justice to all classes of the inhabitants.
In a subsequent appeal, issued in November, he said:--Let every man who
has a head to think, a foot to walk, and a hand to write, do all in his
power to circulate the petitions for the entire abolition of high church
domination, and the perfect religious and political equality of all
denominations of Christians.... The majority of the people of England
are willing to have glebes, rectories, tithes, church rates, etc.; but
the majority of the people of this Province want nothing of the kind....
The right of the inhabitants of this Province to judge, and to have
their wishes granted on everything connected with the disposition of the
clergy reserves, and the proceeds of them, has been formally recognized
in gracious despatches from the Throne.
Few in the present day can realize the storm which these petitions and
appeals provoked. Every effort was made (as will be seen) to silence the
voice and stay the hand of Dr. Ryerson, the chief promoter of the
petitions, and the able opponent of the establishment of church
ascendancy in Upper Canada. Thus matters reached a crisis in the latter
part of the year 1838. So intense was the feeling evoked by the ruling
party against Dr. Ryerson's proceeding, that in many places the
promoters of the petitions were threatened with personal violence, and
even with death, as may be seen by letters published in the _Guardian_
at this time. The publication of these letters at the present time would
excite feelings of amazement that such a state of things was ever
possible in a free country like Canada.
Not only was this policy of intimidation pursued in the rural parts of
the country, but the newspapers in Toronto and the larger towns,
controlled by his opponents, made a combined assault upon Dr. Ryerson,
as the central figure in this movement. On the 19th December, 1838, he
inserted an able defence of himself. He said:--
The question of the Clergy Reserves, or in other words, of a
dominant ecclesiastical establishment in this Province, embracing
one or more Churches, has been a topic of public discussion for
nearly twenty years. For thirty years after the creation of Upper
Canada (in 1783) there was no ecclesiastical establishment in the
country, except in the letter of an Act of Parliament. During that
time there was no weakening of the hands of Government by
discussing the question of a dominant church.... But from the time
that the Episcopal clergy commenced the enterprise of
ecclesiastical supremacy in the Province, there has been civil and
religious discord. The calumnious and persecuting measures they
have pursued from time to time to accomplish their purpose, I need
not enumerate. For twelve years I have sought to restore peace to
the Province, by putting down their pretensions. I have varied in
the means I have employed, but never in the end I have had in view,
as I have always avowed to them and their partizans, and to the
Colonial and Imperial Governments, on every suitable occasion.
It was a favourite weapon of attack to denounce as rebels and
republicans all those who opposed the exclusive claims of the then
representatives of the Church of England. And this stigma was, in 1838,
a personal and social one which every person to whom it was applied
resented. But the more such persons resented the charge of disloyalty
the more was the charge reiterated, and they were harassed and denounced
as "radicals" and "republicans."
In repelling this unfounded charge, Dr. Ryerson did not descend to
vindication or explanation. He became in turn the assailant, and began
to "carry the war into Africa." With scorn and invective he replied to
the charge, and showed that his opponents, with all their boasting and
professions of loyalty, had failed to render the necessary aid in time
of need. Thus: It has been said that I prevented the militia from
turning out when first called upon.... It is true that I did not exhort
any one to volunteer.... One reason ... was that I desired to have the
country furnished with a practical illustration of high-church
patriotism and loyalty in the hour of need. The _Church_ and the
_Patriot_ had boasted of their multitudes; but those multitudes
shrivelled into a Falstaff's company in an hour which detected the
difference between the loyalty of the lip and the heart.... The
elongated countenances in certain quarters for a few days [in December,
1837], will never be forgotten! From the Government House to the poorest
cottage the omnipotent power of the _Guardian_ was proclaimed as
producing this alarming state of things! Indeed, I received a verbal
message from His Excellency on the subject. At this juncture ... the
heads of the Presbyterian and Methodist Churches formally addressed
[their adherents] exhorting them to rally to the standard of their
country, and from that hour we have heard nothing but congratulations
and boasts in regard to the readiness ... with which the militia came
forward in all parts of the Province at the call of the Government. It
has been insinuated that I attacked the local Government.... The charge
is unfounded. When the local Government was attacked for having pursued
a different course from that of Lord Durham towards the political
prisoners, I reconciled the course of the two administrations. Several
numbers of the _Guardian_ containing that dissertation were requested
for the Government House, and ... were sent to England.... But when both
my position and myself stand virtually ... impugned by proclamation, I
am neither the sycophant nor the renegade to crouch down under unmerited
imputations, come from whence they may, even though I should suffer
imprisonment and ruin for my temerity.
I am at length exhorted to silence, but not my opponents.... A royal
answer was returned to an address of the Episcopal Clergy a few weeks
since.[95] Nor is silence imposed upon me until the entire weight of the
Chief Magistracy is thrown into the Episcopal scale. If the injunction
had been given to _all_ parties ... then we might have felt ourselves in
some degree equally protected.... But at the moment when the Province is
turned into a camp--when freedom of opinion may be said to exist, but
scarcely to live--when unprecedented power is wielded by the Executive,
and the Habeas Corpus Act is suspended, for one party in the Province to
have free range of denunciation, intimidation, etc., against Methodists
and others ... and then for silence to be enjoined on me and those who
agree with me ... does excite, I confess, my anxious concern, as the
object of it in regard to myself and a large portion of the country
cannot be mistaken.
The despatches of Lord Ripon (Nov. 8th, 1832) and Lord Glenelg (Dec.
15th, 1835) recommended a "comprehensive liberality" in every
department, and in all the acts of the Government, they conceded in full
the popular demands on the clergy reserve question, and deprecated the
establishment of any religious corporations until the advice of the
local Legislature had been obtained--these very despatches Sir F. B.
Head promised to carry out.... But has that pledge been redeemed by him?
Has it not been grossly violated?... In his appointments and dismissals
from office, and in the whole tone and spirit of his government, did not
Sir F. B. Head become the head of a party instead of the Governor of the
Province?... The result of his new system of government already is
derangement of the currency--insurrection--bloodshed--loss of
property--demoralization, by calling large bodies of men from rural to
military employments--decrease of population--cessation of
immigration--decrease of credit--decrease of revenue--increase of the
public debt--decrease of the value of property--increase of popular
dissatisfaction--vast military expenditures from the taxes of an
overburthened British population--insecurity of person and property, and
general distrust. Under these "Church and King" counsels, for two years
more, and this province will be a Paradise!... We have laboured hard to
obtain and secure many blessings for our native land, but certainly not
such blessings as these!
In connection with this discussion, a Kingston paper stated that Dr.
Ryerson was moved by ambitious motives. In reply Dr. Ryerson said:--As
to my motives of ambition, etc., my enemies will probably concede to me
two or three things. 1. That long before Sir F. B. Head came to Upper
Canada I had been honoured by as large a share of popular favour in this
province as any individual could reasonably expect or desire.... 2. That
the path to royal favour has been opened as widely to me as it is
possible for it to be opened to any clerical individual who has laid it
down as a rule, and stated it to Ministers of the Crown and Governors,
that he never could knowingly receive a farthing from any quarter, or in
any way, which was not pointed out and authorized by the discipline of
his Church. But as a love of popular favour has not obliterated from my
recollection the rightful prerogatives of the Crown, I cannot see why I
should thereby be disqualified from a disinterested maintenance of
constitutional rights, especially when many more are immediately
concerned in the latter than in the former.
FOOTNOTES:
[90] In his despatch to Lord Glenelg, giving an extract of his speech at
the opening of the ensuing session of the Legislature, Sir George Arthur
puts this idea in an official form. He says:--That such "a tribunal is
free from those local influences and excitement which operate too
powerfully here." In his seventh letter to Hon. W. H. Draper on the
clergy reserve question, dated January, 26th, 1839, Dr. Ryerson argues
the whole question of the re-investment of the reserves at length. He
also shows that so far from the "tribunal" here spoken of by Sir George
Arthur being a desirable one to adjudicate on this question, it would be
the very reverse.
It should be remembered that in more than one despatch the Colonial
Secretary held that the question was one to be settled by the
Provincial, rather than by the Imperial Parliament, and declined to
interfere with the rights of the Canadian Legislature in the matter.
This will be clearly shown in a subsequent chapter. Lord Glenelg's
utterances on this question are very emphatic, especially in his
despatch dated 5th December, 1835.
[91] The paper was signed by Rev. Messrs. Harvard, Case, Stinson, J.
Ryerson, W. Ryerson, E. Ryerson, Green, Evans, Jones, Wilkinson, Beatty,
and Wright. See also _Guardian_ of October 10th, 1838.
[92] In the _Guardian_ of September 12th, 1838, page 180, Dr. Ryerson
makes a fuller reference to this matter. Speaking of the Hume and
Roebuck letters (page 167), he says: I was indeed--what I never thought
of in London--applauded to satiety by the constitutional press of Upper
Canada [for these letters], and by many individuals, several of whom, on
my landing in Canada last year, gave me no small thanks for the results
of the election of 1836. But all that ceased within a week after my
return to Canada.... And why? Because I availed myself of the first
opportunity after my return to submit and press upon Sir Francis and the
Attorney-General and others, the importance and necessity of an early
and equitable settlement of the clergy reserve question, in order to
satisfy the expectations of thousands who had voted for constitutional
candidates.... The very moment it was seen that my views and intentions
on that subject remained unchanged, I saw a change in the expression of
countenances. Sir Francis, indeed, _never_ thanked me, for [the
letters]; he wished me to say nothing about the clergy reserve question;
and within four weeks sent a calumniating letter against me to Lord
Glenelg; and the Attorney-General, so far from remembering the estimate
he professed (on my return from England) to place upon my services to
the Province, sought last winter to get a clause inserted in the Report
of the Select Committee on the Upper Canada Academy, impugning my
motives and exonerating Sir Francis from the allegations contained in my
petition (see page 180), without even investigating its merits, etc.
[93] In a letter to a friend, in January, 1838, Dr. Ryerson relates an
amusing incident which was characteristic of Sir Allan MacNab's love of
a bit of fun. He said:--In conversation one day with Mr. Speaker MacNab,
he gravely proposed to me that I should meet Archdeacon Strachan and a
clergyman of the Church of Scotland; and for him and other members of
the Assembly to hear us put forth our respective claims to the clergy
reserves, and for them to say a word now and then if they liked. After
having heard the parsons argue the point, some member was to bring such
a measure before the Assembly, as we three should propose. This rather
amusing way of settling the question was evidently by way of a joke, so
I made no objection to it. He is to inform me of the time and place for
the argument, after having consulted the other parties concerned; but I
shall hear no more of it!
[94] The cause of this apathy will be apparent from the narrative in
chapter xxxi., and the note on page 225.
[95] In their address they designated themselves as the Bishop,
Archdeacons, and Clergy of the Established Church _of Upper Canada_; but
Sir George Arthur, in his reply, addressed them as the Bishop,
Archdeacons, and Clergy of the established Church _of England_ in Upper
Canada.
CHAPTER XXX.
1838-1839.
The Ruling Party and the Reserves.--"Divide et Impera."
In dealing with so large and influential a body as the Methodists, made
up, as it was years ago, of two distinct elements, somewhat antagonistic
to each other, it can easily be understood that the more astute among
the high church or "family compact" party clearly saw that their only
hope of success in the clergy reserve controversy was by taking
advantage of the presence of this antagonistic element in the Methodist
body, and to turn it to practical account against Dr. Ryerson, so as to
checkmate him in the contest. Queen Elizabeth's motto: _Divide et
impera_, was therefore adopted. And every effort was made to intensify
the feelings and widen the breach which already existed between the two
sections of the Methodists. This was the more easily done by the appeal
which was made to the national prejudices of Methodists of British
origin, as against the alleged republican tendency of their colonial
brethren.[96] In this effort the ruling party were publicly and
privately aided by members of the Missionary Committee in London. To
discuss this question now would be practically useless. None but actors
in the scenes and conflicts of those times could realize the strong,
even bitter, feelings which existed in the chief towns between the two
parties at the time. Cherished sentiments of loyalty, strong home
feelings, and orthodox Methodist principles, were appealed to, and
alternately asserted their influence on opposite sides in the contest.
Added to the difficulty which Dr. Ryerson experienced in conducting the
clergy reserve controversy was the fact, that many Methodists of British
origin fully sympathized with the claims of the old national and
historical Church of England--they held that it was _ipso facto_ the
"established" church in every British Colony, as often asserted by the
Missionary party.
As the clergy reserve question gradually became the absorbing topic of
discussion in the country (with Dr. Ryerson as one of the chief leaders
in that discussion), it was natural that so important a matter should
receive the attention of Conference. This it did at an early date. In
1837 strong resolutions were passed upon the subject, which excited much
uneasiness among the English Missionary party. The Rev. W. H. Harvard,
President of the Conference, in writing to Dr. Ryerson on the subject
after Conference, said:--
Since I came away from the Conference, I have been greatly
concerned as to the anti-church impression likely to be made on the
mind of our people by our recent resolutions of Conference; and I
would fain engage your interest with Rev. E. Evans, our Editor, to
accompany them with some saving paragraph on the general principle
of an establishment which may keep our people from the danger of
imbibing the principle of dissent, the operation of which will
always foster a religious radicalism in our body, and the influence
of which our fathers at home strongly deprecate. I think with you,
that in the altered circumstances of our Colonial relations, we
have reason to plead for concessions of equality of rights and
privileges which would never be granted in the Mother Country. In
that respect I do not dissent from the spirit of the resolutions.
But I more and more think and feel that there is a middle path of
respectful deference to the principle of an establishment even in
the Colonies, which, so modified, would not be injurious, but
rather helpful, to our good cause,--and which is a vantage ground
on which none of our enemies could touch us. It is true, that from
Wesleyan high quarters you have had encouragement to believe an
independent stand against Church domination would not be
disapproved; yet even there a denial of the principle of an
establishment (or that the Government should profess some one form
of Christianity, with equal privileges to other Christians) would
meet with reprobation; and if not, who does not see, if we take
that anti-Wesleyan ground, it may involve the question of Wesleyan
consistency on our part, while at the same time it would be in
danger of throwing our people into the arms of the
Radical-popish-infidel faction, where they will, bear like, be
hugged till the breath of piety is pressed out of them. Of course,
it would drive away from our congregations many of those pious or
well-disposed Church people who occasionally mingle with and derive
good from us. It was Mr. Wesley's conviction that the Methodists
were in part raised up to spread scriptural holiness in the Church
of England, as well as in the world at large. I must repeat my
wish, that you had yielded to my suggestion to admit into the
resolution the phrases, "that the principle of an establishment
should be so administered in this Province as to secure perfect
equality of rights and privileges among all other communities."
You may have ulterior views which I am too short-sighted to
perceive. But I am fully convinced, that if the _Guardian_ does not
save us from identification with dissent from the Church of England
at this crisis, the real friends of our Zion will bitterly deplore
it another day.[97]
Here was a broad and distinct declaration of principle, as fully in
harmony with the views of the dominant party as they were entirely
opposed to those held by the Canadian Conference party. They were
perfectly sincere, too, and were uttered by one of the most moderate,
and yet most thoroughly representative agents of the British Missionary
party in this Province. It can be easily seen how tempting an
opportunity it was for the ruling party to foster this feeling amongst
the English Missionary section of Methodists, by strong appeals to their
well-known loyalty--their respect and love for the old mother-church,
which John Wesley so venerated. Even condescension and flattery were
employed. _The Church_ and other newspapers made appeals with tact and
ability[98] (see page 236); the Lieutenant Governor himself took the
trouble to address a letter on the subject direct to the Missionary
Committee in London, and Archdeacon Strachan never failed to single out
for respectful mention and commendation the representatives of the
British Missionary party in Canada, as distinguished from the "disloyal
and republican section of the Methodists."[99]
Referring to this period, Rev. John Ryerson, in his Historical
Recollections of Methodism (as annotated by Dr. Ryerson) informs us
that--
After aiding to suppress the rebellion, the _Guardian_ resumed the
discussion of the clergy reserve question, and insisted that it
should be settled. But nothing was farther from the thoughts of Dr.
Strachan and Sir George Arthur. They contended that the mooting of
the question at such a time was evidence of disloyalty on the part
of those who were endeavouring to despoil the Church of its lawful
rights. The Editor of the _Guardian_ (Dr. Ryerson) was threatened
with personal violence, with prosecution, and banishment. Yet the
_Guardian_ kept on the even tenor of its way; and in proportion to
the fury of the monopolists, did the Editor increase his exertions
to wrest from them their unjust gains. Then the oppressors of equal
rights, seeing that nothing else would do, called into requisition
the old craft to divide the Methodists, or, by other influences, to
coercively control them.
Sir George Arthur, the amanuensis of Dr. Strachan in these matters,
wrote to the Missionary Committee in London of the evil and
disturbing doings of the _Guardian_, and called on them for their
interference. This flattering appeal received a very complimentary
reply. The Committee also wrote to their missionary agents in
Canada, directing them to interpose and arrest the unjustifiable
course of the _Guardian_. The objection was that the paper "had
become party-political;" that "its course was disquieting to the
country, and disreputable to Wesleyan Methodism," ... etc. It is
not denied (adds Rev. J. Ryerson), that the _Guardian_ at this time
was very political for a religious journal....
On this Dr. Ryerson remarked--
It is true, as my brother has intimated, that the _Guardian_ was "very
political," because the Editor was intensely in earnest on the great
object for which he had been elected by the Conference.... The times of
his former proposed conciliations and compromises were now past. He felt
the awfulness of the crisis and the responsibility of his position. The
Reform party had been crushed by the rebellion of 1837, and the Reform
press silenced; there was, in fact, no Reform party. The high-church
party thought that their day of absolute power and ecclesiastical
monopoly had dawned. It had been agreed by Mr. W. L. Mackenzie and his
fellow rebels ... that Egerton Ryerson [should be their first victim].
He alone stood above successful calumny by the high-church party, and
backed as he was by his Canadian Methodist brethren, he determined to
defend to the last, the citadel of Canadian liberty....
He knew that, as in a final struggle for victory between two armies,
when that victory was trembling in the scales, the wavering of a single
battalion on either side might animate and decide victory in favour of
the enemy; so a compromising sentence or ambiguous word from the Editor
might rouse the high-church party to increased confidence and action,
and proportionally weaken the cause of civil and religious liberty in
Upper Canada. The Editor of the _Guardian_ had no fear, and he evinced
none.... I contended that all the political questions then pending had a
direct or indirect bearing on this great question; ... that I would not
be turned aside from the great object in view until it was obtained;
that the real object of the Government and of the Missionary Committee
was not so much to prevent the introduction of politics into the
_Guardian_, as the discussion of the clergy reserve question itself, and
of the equal religious rights of the people altogether, so that the
high-church party might be left in peaceable possession of their
exclusive privileges, and their unjust and immense monopolies, without
molestation or dispute.
Rev. J. Ryerson adds: Had Dr. Ryerson "yielded to the dictation of Sir
George Arthur's government, and the interference of the London
Missionary Committee, one-seventh of the land of the Province might now
be in the hands of the Church of England. But the course of the
_Guardian_ in this matter, however right, brought upon [the Canadian
Methodist Church] calamities and sufferings of seven years'
continuance."
About a month before the Conference of 1839 met, Sir George Arthur
received a reply, by the hands of Dr. Alder, from the Missionary
Committee in London (signed by Dr. Bunting and the other Secretaries),
which he published in the _Patriot_ newspaper. Dr. Ryerson inserted the
letter in the _Guardian_ of the 22nd May, with these remarks:--
We copy from the _Patriot_ a letter, addressed by the Wesleyan
Missionary Secretaries in London to Sir George Arthur, disclaiming
"all participation in the views expressed in the _Guardian_ on the
ecclesiastical questions of this Province."
He then goes on to show that the views expressed in the _Guardian_ were
identical with those embodied in the proceedings of the Wesleyan
Conference in Upper Canada from the beginning, and that they were
explicitly avowed and understood by both parties at the time of the
union of the Conferences in 1833.
The object of the publication of the letter was evidently twofold: 1st.
To put a weapon into the hands of the friends of a dominant church in
Upper Canada. 2nd. To paralyze the efforts of Dr. Ryerson to secure
equal rights for all religious bodies, and thus to weaken his powerful
influence as a champion of those rights.
It was a noticeable fact that all of the disclaimers from the British
party first appeared in the Church of England organs, and were there
triumphantly appealed to as the unbiassed expression of Methodist
opinion from headquarters in England. In supplementing Rev. John
Ryerson's Historical Narrative of events at this period, Dr. Ryerson
stated, in substance, that:--
It was soon found that Sir George Arthur had thrown himself into
the hands of the oligarchy on the question of the clergy
reserves--he would not consent to have them applied to any other
purpose than the support of the clergy, and was anxious to have
them revested in the Crown. When Sir George's views and plans were
brought before the Legislature, I opposed them. The Missionary
Committee interposed (at Sir George's own request) and supported
him on that question. However, Her Majesty's Government
subsequently set aside the proceedings of Sir George Arthur, upon
the very same grounds on which I had opposed them; but that made no
difference in the feelings towards me of Dr. Alder and his
colleagues.
Early in June, 1839, Dr. Alder addressed a letter to the _Guardian_,
explaining and defending his views on church establishments. On the 12th
of that month, Dr. Ryerson replied to him at length, and, at the close,
put a series of questions to Dr. Alder. From the 2nd and 6th I make the
following extracts:--
2. Are you satisfied that you are providentially called of God to
attempt to make Methodism an agency in promoting a national
establishment of religion in a new country, in the teeth of an
overwhelming majority of the inhabitants?
6. Are you warranted from any writings or authority of Mr. Wesley
to insist that, "under _no_ circumstances," the principle of an
establishment shall be abandoned?... Mr. Wesley and his coadjutors
have left it on record, in the minutes of their Conference, as
their deliberate judgment, that "there is no instance of, or ground
at all for, a national church in the New Testament;" that they
"apprehended it to be a merely political institution." How can any
true Wesleyan convert that into a matter of faith and religious
principle for which Mr. Wesley declared there "was no instance or
ground at all in the New Testament?" ... I know that the local
Executive is most intent to secure the aid of the Missionary
Committee to support the recent re-investment act of spoliation; I
believe that your letter ... emboldened and encouraged them in the
re-investment scheme, and His Excellency stated some months since
that he had written for you to come to this country; they think
that they can bargain with you upon more advantageous terms than
they can with the Methodist Conference in this Province, but I
entreat you to pause before you proceed to insist that that which
Mr. Wesley declares ... to be "a merely political institution,"
forms any part of Wesleyan Methodism.[100]
Dr. Ryerson's account of what transpired at the ensuing Conference is in
substance as follows:--
Dr. Alder attended the Conference at Hamilton, June, 1839, and
introduced resolutions expressive of his views, to which he
insisted upon the concurrence of the Conference. The resolutions
were discussed for three days. On the last day Dr. Ryerson replied,
after which the resolutions were negatived by a vote of 55 to
5.[101]
At the same Conference Dr. Ryerson was appointed secretary, by a vote of
41 to 14. But it was in regard to the election of Editor that the
greatest interest was taken, not so much amongst the Canadian section of
the Methodist people as amongst the members of other religious bodies.
The _Guardian_ stated:--
For the last two months the several provincial journals have
renewed their efforts of vehement vituperation against the Editor;
... they have sought and hoped to create a division in the ranks of
the Methodist family, and, by thus dividing, to conquer; they even
triumphed by anticipation--so much so, that the Editor of _The
Church_ oracularly predicted the speedy release of the Editor of
the _Guardian_ from his editorial duties.
The chagrin which was felt by these parties can be well imagined when
the ballot announced that Dr. Ryerson had been re-elected editor, by a
vote of 60 to 13! Speaking of this memorable triumph, Dr. Ryerson
declared that:--
Never before did I receive, directly or indirectly, so many
unequivocal testimonies of respect and confidence, not merely from
the Methodist Church at large, but also from members of other
churches.
In the meantime (as Dr. Ryerson stated elsewhere) the discussion on the
question of a dominant church monopoly and party ... proscription waxed
hotter and hotter; ... rumours prevailed of a change of Governors in
Upper Canada; the high church party felt that this was their time, and
perhaps their last chance to confirm their absolute power.... Under
these circumstances, I stated to the Conference that the moment that
the clergy reserve and other questions affecting our constitutional and
just rights as British Canadian subjects, and as a religious body, were
adjusted, we ought to abstain entirely from any discussions in reference
to civil affairs. When Dr. Alder's resolutions were rejected by our
Conference, one prepared by myself was agreed to, as follows:--
While this Conference has felt itself bound to express its
sentiments on the question of an ecclesiastical establishment in
this Province, and our constitutional and religious rights and
privileges, and our determination to maintain them, we disclaim any
intention to interfere with the merely secular, party-politics of
the day.
This resolution, as it afterwards appeared, did not go far enough to
meet the wishes and designs of Dr. Alder. He, therefore, brought the
matter before the Book Committee, Toronto, in October, 1839. To that
Committee he stated at length his decided objection to the course
pursued by the _Guardian_ since Conference as "a violation of the known
design of the resolution adopted by it." Dr. Ryerson, while fully
justifying the course which he had pursued, nevertheless tendered to the
Committee his resignation as Editor. The Committee, however, instructed
Rev. William Case to write to him as follows:--
By request of the Book Committee, I beg leave to communicate the
result of their deliberations on the subject of your proffered
resignation of the editorship of the _Guardian_. "_Resolved_, That
the Committee do not feel themselves at liberty to accept of the
resignation of the Editor of the _Guardian_, and that he be
affectionately requested to withdraw it, and to continue his
services in accordance with the deliberately framed regulations of
the Committee until the ensuing Conference, the regulations to
which he objects having been adopted, not for the purpose of
reflecting in any way upon the Editor; and that we assure him that
we have the utmost confidence in his ability, his integrity, and
his anxious desire to promote the best interests of the Connexion."
Dr. Ryerson withdrew his resignation at the time, but resolved to press
it at the next Conference. This he did; and peremptorily declined
re-election at the Conference of 1840--in fact other and more serious
matters were pressed upon him. He thus finally retired from the
editorship of the paper which he had established in 1829, and which he
had made such a power in Upper Canada. He justly felt that, with the
enlarged Methodist constituency which the _Guardian_ at this time
represented, it would be impossible for him, while great questions
remained unsettled, to harmonize the conflicting opinions on
politico-religious matters which were then held by opposite and
influential sections of the Methodist Church. He clearly foresaw further
conflict on these and other inter-connexional subjects, and was,
therefore, the more anxious to free himself from the unwise, official
trammels, which a hostile, anti-Canadian and unpatriotic party sought
to impose upon him--single-handed as he was. He longed for more
congenial work. He also felt that literary freedom was essential to him
in his thorough and practical discussion of the all absorbing questions
of the day.[102] This it was well known he could do, in dealing with
these questions, not only on their own merits, but with the
comprehensive grasp which his enlarged experience, intuitive clearness
of perception, and naturally statesmanlike views on grave public
questions, eminently qualified him for.
As an illustration of the acknowledged ability, fairness, and
conclusiveness of argument with which he dealt with questions which
touched the sensibilities and even prejudices of leading members of the
British Missionary party in Canada, it is a striking fact that when
these gentlemen were not under the direct and potent influence of the
Mission House, they were Dr. Ryerson's personal friends, and gave him an
active support. This was particularly the case with the late Rev. Dr.
Stinson, a man of noble and generous impulses; Rev. W. H. Harvard,
always kind and courteous; Rev. Dr. Richey, a man of much refinement and
culture, and others. In the important crisis of 1838, both Dr. Stinson
and Dr. Richey voted for Dr. Ryerson as Editor. The former wrote a
strong letter urging his appointment as Editor. (Page 201.) The latter,
on his way to Halifax, after the Conference of 1839, wrote from Montreal
to Dr. Ryerson, as follows:--
Sir John Colborne, on whom I called, and by whom I was graciously
received, is delighted with the continuance of the Union. So are
all our Montreal friends, after my explanations. They will
immediately order the _Guardian_. Sir John paid a handsome tribute
to your talents, as who with whom I conversed did not? however they
might happen to view your course. They all say you commenced
admirably,--that the moment the paper passed into your hands, it
manifestly improved; and they all approve of your course for the
last six months, just about as well as you know I do. Adhere most
religiously, my dear brother, to the spirit and letter of the
resolutions, by which the Conference has expressed its will that
you should be guided. Your friend Joseph Howe[103] begins, I
perceive, to mingle with tories, as they are invidiously
designated. I do not wish you to be a tory; and I will not insult
you by expressing a desire that you were a high conservative.
I do not flatter you in saying, that on no man in Upper Canada does
the peace of our Church and of the Province so much depend, as on
yourself. May all your powers be employed for good! Guard against
the fascination of political fame. It will do no more for you on a
dying bed than it did for Cardinal Wolsey. O! that your fine mind
were fully concentrated upon the [Greek: politeuma] of Heaven!
FOOTNOTES:
[96] Dr. Ryerson, in the _Guardian_ of October 31, 1838, says:--Five
columns of _The Church_, of the 20th ult., are occupied with an appeal
to the old country Methodists, to induce them to oppose the Conference
and Connexion in this Province in the clergy reserve question. The
Cobourg _Star_ follows in the wake of _The Church_, in the same pious
crusade. The _Patriot_ of the 26th inst. also copies the schismatic
appeal of _The Church_.
[97] Even Rev. J. Stinson (who heartily sympathized in many things with
the Canadian Methodists), in a letter to Dr. Ryerson, written in
February, 1839, said:--I have read your address to Hon. W. H. Draper, on
the clergy reserve question, with considerable attention; and while
there is much in it which I admire, I must honestly tell you, _en
passant_, that it contains more against the principle of an
establishment in this Colony than I like.
[98] Not satisfied with these strong appeals in the newspapers, resort
was had to personal ones, made to leading members of the missionary
party. In a kind and yet candid letter which Dr. Ryerson received in
November, 1838, Rev. Joseph Stinson says:--I sincerely sympathize with
you in your present perplexing and trying circumstances. I heard to-day
that some of the dominant church champions are appealing to me to array
myself against you. They may save themselves the trouble of making such
appeals. Whenever I have differed in opinion with you, I have told you
so, and shall do so again,--but shall never, unless you become a
revolutionist, either directly or indirectly sanction any factious
opposition to you. I think, as Wesleyan Methodists, we ought, openly and
fearlessly, to advocate the righteous claims of our own Church; but we
ought to do it without detracting from the merits or opposing the
interests of that Church which is so closely connected with our
Government, as is the Church of England. I know that the exclusive
spirit--the arrogant pretentiousness--the priestly insolence--the
anti-Christian spirit of certain members of that Church richly deserves
chastisement.... I know that your public services have been undervalued;
your faults have been shamefully exaggerated; your motives have been
misrepresented; your influence (connected as you are with a large and
influential body of Christians) is feared, and your enemies are as
bitter as Satan can make them; but, if you are conscious that, in the
sight of God, you are aiming at the right object, why not leave your
cause in His hands? why so frequently appeal to the people? You may not
see it; but there is a recklessness in your mode of writing, sometimes,
which is really alarming, and for which many of the members of the
Conference of our Society do not like to be responsible. I know well,
that the acts of the high church party are far more likely to excite
rebellion than your writings. There is a strong, a very strong, feeling
against a dominant Church; but a majority of the Province would rather
have that, and connection with Great Britain, than republicanism.
[99] On the other hand, the Editor of _The Church_ thus sketched Dr.
Ryerson:--As The promoter, if not originator, of prejudices of
indigenous growth, against the Church of England, and as the thoughtless
scatterer of the seeds of political error and of antipathy to the
national church. Notwithstanding these counteracting influences, the
Editor does not despair of seeing the day when Methodists in Canada will
join with Churchmen in vindicating the Church's right to the property of
the reserves, which will enable them to plant the established church in
every corner of these Provinces. And this they will do, not upon the
ground merely of filial partiality, but on the most rational security
for the permanence and purity of our Protestant faith, etc. Under these
circumstances, Dr. Ryerson said:--
I have felt it due to the _Guardian_ connexion to enter my protest
against the claims of the Episcopal Church, and to combat and explain
the opinion of my English brethren as not those prevalent in this
Province.
A lengthened communication, embodying those views, appearing on page 109
of the _Guardian_ of May 16th, 1838.
[100] With a view to increase the clamour against the Editor of the
_Guardian_ on this subject, Mr. Alex. Davidson, writing to Dr. Ryerson
from Niagara, said:--Dr. Alder's letter to you had been printed and
circulated there in the form of a hand-bill. Mr. E. C. Griffin, of
Waterdown, writing from Hamilton on the same subject, said: I have
learned from brother Edward Jackson what are the feelings of the Society
in Hamilton, respecting the letter of Dr. Alder. He says, that if the
leaders' meeting is any index of the views of the entire Society here,
they are a "unit" to a man (except the preacher) in their determination
to support you in your principles and proceedings.
[101] The following incident in connection with this vote is mentioned
by Dr. Ryerson: Dr. Alder (he said) appeared disappointed and depressed;
and, after the close of the Conference I said to him: Dr. Alder, you see
how entirely you have mistaken the state of Canadian society, and the
views and feelings of the Methodist people. Now, I do not wish that you
should return to England a defeated and disgraced man. I purpose to
write a short editorial for the _Guardian_, stating that the differences
and misunderstandings which had arisen, after having been carefully
considered and fully discussed, were adjusted in an amicable spirit, and
the unity of the Church maintained inviolate. Dr. Alder appeared
delighted and thankful beyond expression. I prepared the editorial. Dr.
Alder used and interpreted this editorial on his return to England, to
show that the Canadian Conference and its Editor had acceded to all of
his demands, and that he had been completely successful in his mission
to Canada! The English Committee adopted resolutions complimentary to
Dr. Alder in consequence; but I did not imagine that Dr. Alder's
fictitious representation of the results of his mission would afterwards
be made the ground of charges against myself!
[102] Dr. Ryerson gave full expression to these views in a letter
addressed to the Governor-General in April, 1840. (See chapter xxxiii.,
page 266.)
[103] See letter from Mr. Howe to Dr. Ryerson on page 258.
CHAPTER XXXI.
1839.
Strategy in the Clergy Reserve Controversy.
The year 1839 was somewhat noted for the prolonged and animated
discussions which took place in and out of the Legislature on the clergy
reserve question. There were some new features in the discussion of the
preceding year which had their effect on the clergy reserve legislation
of that year. And while they partially ceased to be influential in the
discussions of 1839, yet the legislation of that year was practically
brought to the same issue as that of 1838, only that it was more
decisive. It may be interesting, therefore, to refer to these special
features in the discussion of 1838-9.
The first was the final change of tactics on the part of the leaders of
the Church of England party in the contest. The second was the
persistent and personal efforts which Lieutenant Governor Arthur put
forth in behalf of that party, so as to enable them to accomplish their
object, and, at the same time, to counteract the efforts of those who
were seeking to uphold Canadian and popular rights. The third was (as
shown in the last chapter) the plan adopted to foment discord in the
Methodist body--which was by far the most formidable opponent of the
scheme of monopoly and aggrandisement which the ruling party was seeking
to promote.
At this distance of time it is easy to survey the whole field of
conflict, and to note the plans and strategies of the combatants.
Although efforts had hitherto been made to shift the battle-ground from
Upper Canada to England, yet, as the Colonial Secretary had discouraged
such efforts as unwise, and as an unnecessary interference with the
rights of the Provincial Legislature, the matter was not openly pressed
in 1839. Nor was it pressed at all to a conclusion in 1838. For, by a
singular coincidence, the very day (29th December, 1837) on which Mr.
Cartwright had moved to bring a bill into the House of Assembly to
revest the clergy reserve in Her Majesty, Sir George Grey penned a
despatch to Sir George Arthur, in which he disclaimed, on behalf of the
Imperial Government, any wish or intention to interfere, in the
settlement of the clergy reserve question, with the functions of the
Provincial Legislature, on the ground that--
Such interference would tend to create a not unreasonable suspicion
of the sincerity with which the Legislature have been invited to
the exercise of the power [to vary or repeal] reserved to them on
this subject by the Constitutional Act of 1791.
It is likely that the publication of this despatch prevented the House
of Assembly from proceeding any farther with Mr. Cartwright's bill, than
ordering it to a second reading on the 26th February, 1838. In this
dilemma the ruling party were evidently at a loss how to act. It
required much tact and skill to break the ranks of the chief forces
arrayed against the scheme to revest the reserves in the Crown--a scheme
distasteful to Canadians generally, and subversive of the legislative
independence of Upper Canada. Two methods were therefore adopted: The
first was to divide the Methodists (as shown in the last chapter). The
second and more astute one was to appeal to the professed loyalty of
that class which hitherto had been held up to scorn as disloyal, and
denounced as republican in its tendencies, as well as seditious in their
conduct. The appeal was varied in form, but it was in substance that as
those who made it were not themselves afraid to trust their interests in
the hands of the Sovereign, their opponents should be equally trustful
in the equal and entire justice which would be meted out to all of her
Canadian subjects.[104] This appeal, from its very speciousness, and the
skill with which it was pressed, had its effect in many cases. But, as a
general rule, it failed. The object of the decisive change of tactics
was too transparent to deceive the more sensible and thoughtful men to
whom the appeal was addressed.
The two other methods adopted (already referred to) were only partially
successful; but the three combined, no doubt, strengthened the hands of
the advocates of the scheme for the re-investment of the reserves in the
Crown. They, however, ceased to press the matter upon public attention,
being determined to bide their time, and (as events proved), to carry
their point in another and more skilful way.
In the meantime, and early in 1839, Dr. Ryerson was deputed by several
important circuits to present loyal addresses to Sir George Arthur. This
he did on the 2nd February; and in enclosing them to the Governor's
secretary, used language which sounds strange in these days of religious
equality. He said:--
I feel myself fully authorized, by various communications and my
official position, to assure His Excellency that the members of the
Wesleyan Methodist Church will not be contented with subordinate
civil standing to any other church, any more than the members of
the Church of Scotland. They do not, and never have asked for any
peculiar advantages; but they feel that upon the principles of
justice, by labours, by usefulness, by character, by numbers, and
by the principles laid down in royal despatches, they are entitled,
in the eye of the law, and in the administration of an impartial
government, to equal consideration, and equal advantages with any
other church. I am confident that I but state a simple fact, when I
express our belief that the Methodist Church, in its doctrines,
ministry, and institutions, furnishes as formidable a barrier
against the irreligion and infidelity of the times as any other
section of Protestantism. Nor is it possible for
us--notwithstanding our unfeigned respect for His Excellency--to
feel ourselves under any obligations to tender our support to
another section of the Protestant Church, whose clergy, in this
Province, collectively, officially, and individually (with solitary
exceptions), have resisted the attainment of every civil and
religious privilege we now enjoy--have twice impeached our
character and principles before the Imperial Government--who deny
the legitimacy of our ministry, who, in their doctrines respecting
Church polity, and several points of faith, do not represent the
doctrines of the Church of England, or of the established clergy in
England as a body, but that section only of the established clergy
that have associated with all arbitrary measures of government
against various classes of Protestant non-conformists which have
darkened the page of British history, and also the dark ages,
notions of rites and ceremonies, and the conductor of whose
official organ in this Province has recently represented the
Methodist ministry as the guilty cause of those divine
chastisements under the influence of which our land droops and
mourns. I am sure my brethren, as well as myself, freely forgive
the great wrongs thus perpetrated against us; but we feel ourselves
equally bound in duty to ourselves, to our country, and to our
common Christianity, to employ all lawful means to prevent such
exclusive, repulsive, and proscriptive sentiments from acquiring
anything more than equal protection in the Province.
I might appeal to circumstances within His Excellency's knowledge,
to show that from 1836 to the close of the last session of our
Provincial Parliament, I have spared no pains--without the remotest
view to personal or even Methodistic advantage--to second, to the
utmost of my humble ability, any plan to which the Province might,
under all circumstances, be induced to concur, in order to settle
the protracted controversy on the clergy reserve question; and that
it has not been, until I have had indubitable proofs that there was
no disposition or intention on the side of the Episcopal clergy to
yield a single iota any further than they were compelled. It was
not until all these circumstances had transpired, that we
reluctantly determined to appeal against the exclusive and unjust
pretensions of the Episcopal clergy, to the bar of public
opinion--a power recognized by our free constitution, and which no
party or administration can successfully resist many years.
The reply of the Governor was friendly and conciliatory; but in it he
expresses his
Surprise to find that his appeal on a late occasion to the Wesleyan
Methodists, to give the Church of England their most cordial
support, had been misunderstood and construed into an expression of
sectarian preference. By inviting the Methodists to such a course
of conduct, His Excellency thought that he was only appealing to a
feeling of attachment for the Church of England, which he had
always been induced to consider--especially from personal
observation--as a badge of "legitimate Wesleyan Methodists" all
over the world.
Dr. Ryerson in his remarks on this reply, said:--
The questions at issue about the clergy reserves do not involve the
principle of "attachment for the Church of England" from the well
known fact that many respectable members of that Church, in every
district throughout the Province, concur in the views advocated in
the _Guardian_ on that question--therefore an appeal to "attachment
for the Church of England" as the rule of judgment in this
controversy, much less as a "badge of legitimate Wesleyan
Methodists," is the very climax of absurdity.
The discussions on the clergy reserve question up to the time when the
House reassembled (27th February, 1839), must have convinced the
dominant party that it was, and ever would be, hopeless, in the face of
the determined opposition which their schemes encountered, to obtain
that which they wanted from the local legislature. They could not again
openly bring in a bill (as they did last year) to revest the reserves in
the Crown, in the face of the declarations of the Colonial Secretary,
that--
Imperial Parliamentary Legislation on any subject of exclusively
internal concern, in any British colony possessing a representative
assembly is, as a general rule, unconstitutional. It is a right of
which the exercise is reserved for extreme cases, in which
necessity at once creates and justifies the exception. (Lord
Glenelg to Sir F. B. Head, 5th December, 1835.)
They therefore adopted what events proved to be a ruse, to accomplish
their object. It is true that Sir George Arthur, in his opening speech,
urged that--
The settlement of this vitally important question ought not to be
longer delayed.... I confidently hope, that if the claims of
contending parties be advanced ... in a spirit of moderation and
Christian charity, the adjustment of them by you will not prove
insuperably difficult.
The Governor then adroitly added--
But, should all your efforts for the purpose unhappily fail, it
will then only remain for you to re-invest the reserves in the
hands of the Crown, and to refer the appropriation of them to the
Imperial Parliament, as a tribunal free from those local influences
and excitements which may operate too powerfully here.
Both Houses, in apparent good faith, sought to carry out the wishes of
the Governor as expressed in the first part of his speech. The managers
of the scheme indicated in the latter part of the speech initiated a
totally different bill in each House, apparently liberal and
comprehensive in character, but yet objectionable in detail. Dr. Ryerson
felt this so strongly that he petitioned to be heard at the Bar of the
House of Assembly against the bill which had been introduced into it.
His request was at first granted on the 7th April, by a vote of 24 to
22, but afterwards refused by a vote of 21 to 17. After protracted
debates in the House of Assembly and about forty-four divisions, that
House sent up its bill to the Legislative Council for concurrence. The
Council struck out the whole of the bill after the word "whereas," and
substituted one of its own, and in turn sent it down to the House of
Assembly for concurrence. That House, not to be outdone by the other,
struck out the whole of the Legislative Council bill, and substituted a
bill of its own, totally different from the one first sent up to the
Legislative Council, the last clause of which read as follows:--
The moneys to arise, and to be procured and henceforth received for
any sale or sales [of clergy reserve lands] shall be paid into the
hands of Her Majesty's Receiver-General of this Province, to be
appropriated by the Provincial Legislature for religion and
education.
The bill thus constructed needed but the alteration of the last five
words to adapt it admirably to the object and purpose of the Church
party. The Legislative Council, therefore, changed the concluding words
in the last clause into the words "Imperial Parliament for religious
purposes." In this apparently simple way, but in reality, fundamental
manner--and without any attempt at a conference between the Houses, with
a view to adjust differences--the Legislative Council, taking advantage
of a comparatively thin House of Assembly, made the desired change on
the last day of the session. By adroit manoeuvring the agents of the
Church party carried the bill in the House of Assembly thus altered. In
this way they succeeded in destroying the whole object of the bill, as
passed by the House of Assembly. Sir George Arthur, in his despatch to
the Colonial Secretary, virtually admitted that the passage of the
altered bill was due to the fact that it was carried in the House of
Assembly by a majority of one vote [22 to 21], in a House of 44 members,
and at a late hour on the night preceding the prorogation!
Such were the discreditable circumstances under which the bill
re-investing the clergy reserves in the Crown was passed. It, however,
required the assent of the Queen before it became law. This it was
destined never to receive, owing to a technical objection raised in
England in the following October, that such a delegation to the Imperial
Parliament could not be made by a subordinate authority. This defeat,
however, proved to be a moral victory for the vanquished, as it gave
them time for farther deliberation; it incited them to greater caution
in their mode of warfare, and induced them to adopt tactics of a more
secret and, as it proved, effective character.
FOOTNOTES:
[104] In the _Guardian_ of September 19th, 1838, the question is put in
this form and discussed: "Why do you not appeal to Her Majesty's Privy
Council, or to the High Court of Parliament instead of appealing to the
public here?" The answer was conclusive.
CHAPTER XXXII.
1839.
Sir G. Arthur's Partizanship.--State of the Province.
The bill for revesting the clergy reserves in the Crown barely escaped
defeat (as just mentioned) in the House of Assembly, on 11th May, 1839.
On the 14th Sir George Arthur sent the bill to Lord Normanby (successor
to Lord Glenelg) for Her Majesty's assent, with an elaborate despatch.
On the 15th, Dr. Ryerson also addressed to Lord Normanby a long letter
on the same subject. In it he called the attention of the Colonial
Secretary to the following facts, which he discussed at length in his
letter:--
1. That the great majority of the House of Assembly in four successive
parliaments had remonstrated against the exclusive pretensions of the
Church of England in Upper Canada; and that the claims of the Church of
England to be the established Church of the Province had from the
beginning been steadily denied by such representatives, and elsewhere.
2. That the ground of dissatisfaction in the Province was not merely
between the Churches of England and Scotland, but between the
high-church party, and the religious denominations and the inhabitants
of the Province generally.
3. That from the beginning the House of Assembly had protested against
any appropriation of the clergy reserves being made to the Church of
England, not granted equally [for educational purposes] to the other
Christian denominations.
4. That notwithstanding the annual remonstrances of the House of
Assembly, large grants had been paid since 1827, to the Episcopal
Clergy, exclusive of grants by the Imperial Parliament and the
Propagation Society.
5. That under these circumstances it was not surprising that there
should be a widespread and deeply seated dissatisfaction. It is rather
surprising that a vestige of British power exists in the Province.
6. That Sir George Arthur has for the last five months endeavoured--by
official proclamations and other published communications through
public offices, and by military influences in various parts of the
Province--to prevent any expression of opinion on this subject, even by
petition to the Legislature.
7. That the Lieutenant-Governor has been induced to make himself a
partizan with the Episcopal Church in the clergy reserve discussion; the
entire influence of the Executive has been thrown into that scale; the
representation of impartial sovereignty has been made the watchword of
party.
8. That under the pretense of resisting brigand invasion, large militia
forces have been raised; violent penniless partizans have been put on
pay in preference to respectable and loyal men; and these forces have
not been placed on the frontier where invasion might have been expected,
but have been scattered in parties over many parts of the interior, in
order to exterminate discontent by silencing complaint.
These, with a reference to the embarrassed financial condition of the
Province, were the chief points to which Dr. Ryerson called the
attention of the Colonial Secretary in this elaborate letter.
On the 22nd of the same month (May) Dr. Ryerson addressed another
vigorous letter to Lord Normanby, on the clergy reserves and kindred
questions. "That letter," he says, he writes "with feelings which he has
no language to express."
The main points of the letter were as follows:--
1. For thirty years (up to 1820) nothing was heard of an ecclesiastical
establishment in the Province: all classes felt themselves equally free,
and were, therefore, equally contented and happy.
2. From the first open and unequivocal pretensions to a state
establishment being made, the inhabitants of Upper Canada, in every
constitutional way, have resisted and remonstrated against it.
3. Every appropriation and grant to the Episcopal clergy out of the
lands and funds of the Province has been made in the very teeth of the
country's remonstrance.
4. The utter powerlessness of the representative branch of the
Legislature has rendered the officers and dependents and partizans of
the Executive more and more despotic, overbearing, and reckless of the
feelings of the country.
5 This most blighting of all partizanship has been carried into every
department of the Executive Government--the magistracy, militia, and
even into the administration of justice. Its poison is working
throughout the whole body politic; it destroys the peace of the country;
rouses neighbour against neighbour; weakens the best social affections
of the human heart, and awakens its worst passions; and converts a
healthy and fertile province into a pandemonium of strife, discontent,
and civil commotion.
6. While upwards of $220,000 (besides lands) have been given to the
Episcopal clergy since 1827, the grants made by the Imperial Parliament
to the clergy of Upper Canada amount to over $400,000, being over
$620,000 in all.
7. A very large sum has been expended in the erection of Upper Canada
College, on the grounds of King's College, and with an endowment of
$8,000 or $10,000 a year. This institution is wholly under the
management of Episcopal clergymen, while the Upper Canada Academy, which
has been built at Cobourg by the Methodists at a cost of about $40,000,
could not without a severe struggle get even the $16,000 which were
directed to be paid over to it by Lord Glenelg. The matter had to be
contested with Sir F. B. Head on the floor of the House of Assembly
before he could be induced to obey the Royal instructions. (Page 179.)
8. In the recent legislation on the clergy reserve question, the high
church party resisted every measure by which the Methodist Church might
obtain a farthing's aid to the Upper Canada Academy. And, to add insult
to injury, the high church people denounce Methodists as republicans,
rebels, traitors, and use every possible epithet and insinuation of
contumely because they complain, reason, and remonstrate against such
barefaced oppression and injustice--notwithstanding that not a single
member of that church has been convicted of complicity with the late
unhappy troubles in the Province.
9. A perpetuation of the past and present obnoxious and withering
system, will not only continue to drive thousands of industrious farmers
and tradesmen from the country, but will prompt thousands more, before
they will sacrifice their property and expatriate themselves, to
advocate constitutionally, openly, and decidedly, the erection of an
"independent kingdom," as has been suggested by the Attorney-General, as
best both for this province and Great Britain.
10. It rests with Her Majesty's Government to decide whether or not the
inhabitants shall be treated as strangers and helots; whether the
blighted hopes of this province shall wither and die, or revive, and
bloom, and flourish; whether Her Majesty's Canadian subjects shall be
allowed the legitimate constitutional control of their own earnings, or
whether the property sufficient to pay off the large provincial debt
shall be wrested from them; whether honour, loyalty, free and
responsible government are to be established in this province, or
whether our resources are to be absorbed in support of pretensions
which have proved the bane of religion in the country; have fomented
discord; emboldened, if not prompted, rebellion; turned the tide of
capital and emigration to other shores; impaired public credit; arrested
trade and commerce, and caused Upper Canada to stand "like a girdled
tree," its drooping branches mournfully betraying that its natural
nourishment has been deliberately cut off.
In a third and concluding letter to Lord Normanby, Dr. Ryerson uses this
language:--
The great body of the inhabitants of this province will not likely again
petition on the question of the clergy reserves and a church
establishment in this province. They will express their sentiments at
the hustings with a vengeance, to the confusion of the men who have
deceived, and misrepresented, and wronged them; ... A petition would
acknowledge the right of the Imperial Parliament to interfere--which
ought not to be admitted. If past expressions of public sentiment will
not satisfy Her Majesty's Government, none other can do it; and more
efficient means (such as the coming elections), must and ought to be
adopted, instead of the fruitless method of asking by petition for what
has been guaranteed to the constituencies of the country as a right.
The validity of the recent Act of the Legislature, revesting the
reserves in the Crown, never will be acknowledged, or recognized by the
electors of this province. Any Ministers of the Crown in England would
more than lose their places, who should press through the House of
Commons, on the last night of the session, in a thin house, a great
public measure which had not only been repealed by four successive
parliaments, but had been negatived from six to twelve times during the
same session of the existing parliament. Nor would the British nation
ever submit to any public measure (much less to loss of the control of
one-seventh of their lands, and the infliction upon them of an
uncongenial ecclesiastical system) which had been forced upon them.
The declarations of the Representative of Royalty have heretofore been
regarded in this province as sacred and inviolable; but the reliance of
the Canadian electors upon those declarations from the lips of Sir
Francis Head has cost them bloodshed, bankruptcy, and misery.... The
electors will employ the elective franchise to redress their accumulated
wrongs to the last farthing.
It is, of course, my good or bad fortune to be assailed from week to
week, whether I write or not.... I am no theorist. I advocate no change
in the Constitution of the Province. I have never written a paragraph
the principles of which could not be carried out in accordance with the
letter and spirit of the established Constitution. I desire nothing
more than the free and impartial administration of that Constitution for
the benefit of all classes of Her Majesty's subjects. I only oppose or
support men, or measures, for the attainment of that object.
Entertaining such strong feelings in regard to the personal conduct of
Sir George Arthur in respect to the passage of the clergy reserve bill,
Dr. Ryerson felt that he could not accept any social courtesy at his
hands. In reply, therefore, to an invitation from Sir George, for Her
Majesty's birthday, he felt constrained to decline it. In his letter to
the A.D.C., he said:--
After the most mature deliberation up to the last moment in which
it is proper to reply, I feel it my duty respectfully to decline
the honour of His Excellency's invitation. I most firmly believe
that the office of impartial sovereignty has been employed by His
Excellency for partial purposes; that an undue and an
unconstitutional exercise of the office of royalty has been
employed by His Excellency to influence the public mind, and the
decisions of our constitutional tribunals on pending and debatable
questions between equally loyal and deserving classes of Her
Majesty's subjects in this Province; that His Excellency has also
employed the influence of the high office of the Queen's
representative to procure and afterwards express his cordial
satisfaction at the passing of a Bill, in a thin House, on the very
last night of the session, the provisions of which had been
repeatedly negatived by a considerable majority of the people's
representatives, and which deprive the faithful but embarrassed
inhabitants of this Province of the control of a revenue and lands
sufficient in value to pay off the whole public debt--a proceeding
at complete variance with the fair and constitutional
administration of a free monarchical government, and the imperial
usages since the accession of the present Royal Family to the
throne of Great Britain; and, finally, that His Excellency has
employed the influence of his high office to the disparagement of
the large section of the religious community whose views, rights,
and interests, I have been elected to my present offices to
advocate and promote.
I beg that my declining the honour proposed by His Excellency may
not be construed into any disrespect to His Excellency personally,
or to the high office His Excellency holds--for the inviolableness
and dignity of which I feel the jealous veneration of a loyal
subject--but I beg that it may be attributed solely to a fixed
determination not to do anything that may in the slightest degree
tend to weaken, but on the contrary, to use every lawful means, on
all occasions, to advance those civil and religious interests which
I am most fully convinced are essential to the happy preservation
of a prosperous British Government in this country, and to the
happiness and welfare of the great body of Her Majesty's Canadian
subjects.
In order to insure the assent of Her Majesty to the Bill which had been
sent to the Colonial Secretary by Sir George Arthur, the authorities of
the Church of England in the Province circulated a petition for
presentation to the Queen and the British Parliament[105] containing the
following statement and request:--
"Your petitioners, consisting of the United Empire Loyalists and
their children, took refuge in this Province after the American
Revolution, under the impression that they possessed the same
constitution as that of the Mother Country, which includes a
decent provision for the administration of the Word and Sacraments
according to the forms of the Church of England."
The prayer of the petition was--
That the proceeds of the clergy reserve lands be applied to the
maintenance of such clergy, and of a bishop to superintend the
same, so that the ministrations of our Holy Religion may be
afforded without charge[106] to the inhabitants of every township
in the Province.
Dr. Ryerson, having with difficulty procured a copy of this petition,
pointed out in the _Guardian_ of July 3rd, 1839: 1st. Its historical
misstatements, and denounced the selfish and exclusive character of its
demands. He showed in effect that the Province was settled in 1783,
whereas the constitutional Act (which was invoked as though it had
existed long before that date), was not passed until 1791--eight years
after "the United Empire Loyalists and their children took refuge in
Upper Canada." 2nd. That for forty years and more, nine-tenths of the
United Empire Loyalists and their descendants, with all their
"impressions," might have perished in heathen ignorance had not some
other than the Episcopal clergy cared for their spiritual interests; and
that after these forty years of slumbering and neglect, and after the
incorporation of the great body of the old Loyalists and their
descendants into other churches, the Episcopal clergy came in, and now
seek, on the strength of these apocryphal "impressions" (which never
could have existed), to claim one-seventh of the lands of the Province
as their heritage.[107] In proof of these facts Dr. Ryerson referred to
the testimony of fifty-two witnesses, given before a select Committee of
the House of Assembly in 1828, and published in full at that time.
I have purposely abstained from making any special reference to
discussions in the clergy reserve question with which Dr. Ryerson had no
connection. An important one, however, took place between Hon. Wm.
Morris and Archdeacon Strachan in 1838-39, chiefly in regard to the
claims of the Church of Scotland. Mr. Morris, however, did good service
in the general discussion.
* * * * *
In November, 1838, Dr. Ryerson received a letter from Thomas Farmer,
Esq., of London, England, in regard to the Centenary Celebration, to
which he replied as follows:--
Our prospects as a country are rather gloomy. We have lately had
the excitement and loss produced by Lord Durham's departure, and
the second rebellion in Lower Canada, followed in a few days by a
brigand invasion of this province to distract and destroy us. You
refer to a Centenary Offering. I cannot say what we shall be able
to do. We have not the slightest provision yet for the education of
preacher's children; nor a contingent fund to aid poor circuits, or
to relieve the distressed preachers' families; and an unpaid for
Book Room, and not an entirely paid for Academy;--all of which
subjects have engaged our most anxious consideration;--but in the
present entirely unsettled state of our public affairs, we scarcely
know what to do in respect to the future. We cannot, therefore, as
yet fix upon the objects of our Centenary Offering.
The Methodist Centenary Year occurred in 1839. The Conference set apart
the 25th October for its celebration,
By holding religious "services in all of our chapels and
congregations, for the purpose of calling to mind the great things
which the Lord has done for us as a people; of solemnly recognizing
our obligations and responsibilities to our Heavenly Father; and of
imploring, on behalf of ourselves and the whole Wesleyan Methodist
family throughout the world, a continuance and increase of
religious happiness, unity and prosperity."
Meetings were held all over the Province during the months of August,
September and October, for the collection of a centenary offering, to be
applied to the Superannuation Fund, Book Room, Parsonages, Missionary,
and other objects. Dr. Ryerson, as one of a deputation, attended a large
number of meetings. Writing from Brockville, he mentions the fact that
he
Stopped at a graveyard, a few miles west of Prescott, to survey the
graves of some of the honoured dead. The remains of Mrs. Heck, the
devoted matron who urged Philip Embury (the first Methodist
preacher in America) to lift up his voice in the city of New York,
in 1766, are deposited here.
FOOTNOTES:
[105] See note on page 224.
[106] This selfish demand--"that the ministrations of our Holy Religion
be afforded without charge to the inhabitants of every township" (in
which members of the Church of England were persistently educated in
those days)--was most unfortunate in its influence on the Church, and
has borne bitter fruit in these later times. Its legitimate effect has
been to dry up the sources of Christian benevolence, paralyze the arm of
Christian effort, and secularize, if not render impossible, any
successful plan of Church extension and missionary work. Witness the
almost complete failure (as compared with other Christian bodies) to
raise sufficient funds to support even the limited number of Home
missions in most of the dioceses, and the nearly hopeless task of
infusing a genuine missionary zeal in behalf of the "regions beyond."
[107] It should be noted, in connection with this petition, that one
most important part of its prayer was granted in that year--viz., the
appointment of the Archdeacon (who went to England to present the
petitions and to receive the appointment) as first Bishop of Toronto.
His patent bears date, 27th July, 1839. The other part of the prayer was
also granted, but not until 1840, when Lord John Russell, then Colonial
Secretary, by an unprecedented and unlooked for stretch of official
authority, but no doubt with the assent of his colleagues, introduced a
bill into the House of Commons to do what even he and other Colonial
Secretaries had deprecated doing--viz., the re-investing of the reserves
in the Crown. Dr. Ryerson, then in England, strongly protested against
this act of provincial spoliation and legislative invasion, but the bill
became law. (See next chapter.)
CHAPTER XXXIII.
1838-1840.
The New Era--Lord Durham and Lord Sydenham.
In the midst of the gloom which overspread the Province, in consequence
of the long continued exercise of irresponsible and arbitrary power on
the part of the local executive, Dr. Ryerson, like many other
loyal-hearted Canadians, rejoiced at the advent of Lord Durham,--a man
possessed of plenary powers to inquire into and report on the grievances
existing in Canada. Those who wished to perpetuate the reign of the
ruling party, strongly deprecated Dr. Ryerson's advocacy of Lord
Durham's schemes of reform. One of the most respectable organs[108] of
that party (Neilson's Quebec _Gazette_) in a complimentary editorial on
Dr. Ryerson (in May, 1839), expressed regret that a man "of his
undoubted talents and great industry" should have endorsed Lord Durham's
system of Responsible Government. In the _Guardian_ of the 5th June, Dr.
Ryerson replied, pointing out the fair and equitable system of
Responsible Government advocated by Lord Durham, as compared with the
crude one put forth by Messrs. W. L. Mackenzie and L. J. Papineau. He
then illustrates the necessity for the reform proposed by Lord Durham,
by referring to the arbitrary and irresponsible acts of Sir Francis
Head. He said:--
The published word of the Representative of Royalty had [until Sir F. B.
Head's time] been sacred and inviolable in Upper Canada; the majority of
the people believed him. In 1836 they elected a House of Assembly in
accordance with his wishes. He fulfilled his pledges by dismissing many
of the magistrates and militia officers, because they voted against his
candidates at the elections, and finished his career by plunging the
country into misery, and thereby insuring its ruin.
Now, where (he asked) was the "responsibility" under which ... such a
Governor acts? He abuses the confidence reposed in him,--where is his
censure? He disobeys the orders given him from England,--where is his
punishment? He ruins men [Bidwell, etc.] whom he was ordered to
appoint,--where is their redress, and his accountability? They are
exiles, and he is made a Baronet! He disgraces and degrades numbers of
persons without colour of reason, or justice, or law--yet they are
without redress, and he is even without reproof. He tramples upon the
orders from Her Majesty's Government, and attacks her ministers in their
places--then returns to England, and boasts of his disobedience.... And
there are those who tell us of the responsibility of our Governors to
the Queen and Parliament!... The history of Sir F. B. Head's
administration is enough to make the veriest bigot a convert to
"Responsible Government."
For these and other important reasons it can be seen how the great
question of the day (in 1839) was that of responsible government for
these provinces. Dr. Ryerson and others had written freely on the
subject, claiming that the government of the country should be
administered, as it was then expressed--"according to the well
understood wishes of the people." This could only be done by men
representing their wishes, and responsible to the legislature for their
exercise of power and for every official act of the Governor.
In October, Dr. Ryerson received a letter on this subject from a
well-known advocate of the principle of responsible government in Nova
Scotia--Hon. Joseph Howe. He said:--
May I beg your acceptance of a little work on responsible
government, the object of which is to advance the good cause in
which you have so heartily and with so much ability embarked. It is
a great satisfaction to the friends of responsible government here,
that the cause has been taken up in Canada by men about whose
intentions and loyalty there can be no mistake. So long as we
deprive the family compact of their only defence, which the folly
of rebels and sympathizers raised for them, and act together
without just cause for suspicion that we are anything but what we
say, there can be little doubt of ultimate success. Should your
electors return a majority favourable to responsibility at the next
election, and all the colonies unite in one demand, it will be
yielded. Our legislature, and any that can be chosen here, will
uphold the principle. So will the majorities in Newfoundland, and
Prince Edward Island, and New Brunswick. I cannot speak with
certainty, but hope they will soon understand the question
thoroughly in that province. It may be necessary for all the
provinces to send delegates at the same time to England, to claim
to be heard on the subject at the Bar of the Commons and Lords, and
to diffuse, through every fair channel, correct views of the
question. Think of this, and drop me a line at your leisure.
This Dr. Ryerson did in due time.
The coming of Lord Durham was the first harbinger of better days for
Canada. His mission was one of enquiry, and for the suggestion of
remedial measures. The mission of Mr. Poulett Thompson (who followed
Lord Durham as Governor-General) was hailed with delight by the people
generally. He came to give practical effect to pressing measures of
reform--to unite the provinces, and to introduce a new element of
strength into the administrative system of the country.
* * * * *
The year 1839 was noted for the enthusiasm with which "Durham Meetings"
were held throughout Upper Canada. These meetings were for the purpose
of endorsing the famous report of Lord Durham, and for approving of the
many valuable reforms which that report suggested. Much opposition and
even violence characterized these meetings; but they revived and again
inaugurated the right of free speech on public questions. The only
record which Dr. Ryerson has left of this period of his history is as
follows:--
In 1838 I yielded to persuasion and remonstrances, and was again
re-elected Editor, and continued as such until June, 1840, when I
relinquished finally all connection with the Editorship of the
_Christian Guardian_.
It was during this period, from 1833 to 1840, that the most important
events transpired in Upper Canada; the controversy respecting the clergy
reserves, and a church establishment, was steadily and earnestly
maintained.
The constitution of Lower Canada was suspended for two years, and an
Executive Council Government was established in its place. The dominant
party in Upper Canada by liberal professions succeeded in the elections,
in 1836; but, instead of adopting a just and liberal policy, they sought
to exclude all Reformers from a share in the Government as virtual
rebels, and set themselves to promote a high-church establishment
policy, to the exclusion of the Methodists and members of other
religious denominations.
This unwise, unjust, and inverted-pyramid policy laid the foundation for
a new agitation. The Methodists were the only party capable of coping
with the revived high-church policy to crush out the rights of other
denominations and the liberties of the country, and to paralyze their
influence. The Presbyterians being divided, the Canadian Conference was
not to be deterred, or moved from its principles, avowed and maintained
for more than ten years; the result was a contest between the English
and Canadian Conferences, which culminated in 1840 in a separation of
the two bodies, and a conflict of seven years--wholly political--for
London Wesleyan, English superiority, and tory ascendancy on the one
side, and Canadian Methodist and Canadian liberty on the other side.
* * * * *
It is not my purpose to enter into detail, except in so far as Dr.
Ryerson became an actor in the new scenes and events which followed the
appointment of Mr. Charles Poulett Thompson as Governor-General.
Mr. Poulett Thompson arrived in Quebec on the 19th October, 1839, and in
Toronto on the 21st November. As Governor-General, he superseded both
Sir John Colborne at Quebec and Sir George Arthur at Toronto.
On the 3rd December, the Governor-General opened the Upper Canada
Legislature; and on that very day Dr. Ryerson addressed to him an
elaborate letter on the chief object of his mission. In referring to the
clergy reserve question, he said:--
For sixteen years this question has been a topic of ceaseless
discussion; and one on which the sentiments and feelings of a very large
majority of the inhabitants have been without variation expressed;
notwithstanding that Governor has succeeded Governor, and party has
succeeded party.... From the time when, at the elections of 1824, the
sentiments of the country were first called forth to the present moment,
its collective voice has demanded, what your Excellency has avowed on
another subject, "equal justice to all of Her Majesty's subjects." This
question is the parent of social discord in Upper Canada; all the other
party questions have originated in this. The elevation of one class
above all others in a community where there is little diversity of rank
or intelligence, begets a necessity for special means to support that
elevation. Hence partizan appointments to office; hence partizan
administration of offices; hence party animosities, embittered by the
jealousies of conscious weakness on one side, and a deep sense of
unmerited exclusion and provocation on the other.... Hence on the one
side a selfish, insolent, baseless ecclesiastical and political
oligarchy, and, on the other side, an abused, an injured, and
dissatisfied country.
* * * * *
The bill providing for the vesting of the proceeds of the reserves in
the Imperial Parliament, to which I have referred in the preceeding
chapter, was not sanctioned by Her Majesty. This was "a sore blow and a
heavy discouragement" to those who had laboured so assiduously to carry
such a bill through the local Legislature. The objection raised to it by
Lord John Russell was twofold. The chief reason, however, was thus
expressed:--
It appeared to Her Majesty's Government that strong objections
existed to this delegation to Parliament by a subordinate authority
of the power of legislation. The proceeding should have been by
address to the three estates of the Realm, asking them to undertake
the decision of the question.
Thus by a stroke of Lord John Russell's pen, the whole of the pet scheme
of the ruling party, devised after three months' anxious local
legislation, was irrecoverably lost. And yet it was not lost, for by the
after careful manipulation of Lord John and his colleagues by Bishop
Strachan, Lord Seaton (Sir John Colborne) and Sir George Arthur, that
bill afterwards proved to be, for ten years, the basis of a far more
sweeping and unjust measure than even the most reckless and partizan
member of the Legislature in Upper Canada would have ventured to
propose.
When it was known that Her Majesty had declined to sanction Sir George
Arthur's bill, steps were taken by the Governor-General to devise such a
measure as would meet with the approval of the great mass of the people
in Upper Canada. To aid him in accomplishing this desirable end, Mr.
Poulett Thompson privately sought the aid of leading public men in the
Province. Having obtained their assistance, he, with the advice of his
Council, prepared a compromise measure which was designed to be just and
equitable to all parties concerned.
On the 6th January, 1840, the Governor-General sent a message to the
House of Assembly, in which he thus outlines the measure which, with his
sanction, Hon. Solicitor-General Draper submitted to the House:--
The Governor-General proposes that the remainder of the land should
be sold, and the annual proceeds of the whole fund, when realized,
be distributed [one half to the Episcopal and Presbyterian
Churches, and the other half among other religious bodies desiring
to share in it] for the support of religious instruction within the
Province, and for the promotion there, of the great and sacred
objects for which these different bodies are established or
associated.
On this bill, Dr. Ryerson remarked:--
From this message, the hopelessness of success in any further
attempts to get the annual proceeds of the reserves appropriated to
exclusively secular objects, is apparent.... Up to the present time
I have employed my best efforts, by every kind of argument,
persuasion and entreaty, to get the proceeds applied simply and
solely to educational purposes.... This is unattainable, and is
rendered so by an original provision of our Constitution (of 1791),
as stated by the Governor-General.
The bill was fiercely attacked by the then newly-appointed Bishop of
Toronto. He denounced it as--
Depriving the National Church of nearly three-fourths of her
acknowledged property, and then, in mockery and derision, offering
her back a portion of her own, so trifling as to be totally
insufficient to maintain her present Establishment; it tramples on
the faith of the British Government by destroying the birthright of
all the members of the Established Church who are now in the
province, or who may hereafter come into it; it promotes error,
schism and dissent, and seeks to degrade the clergy of the Church
of England to an equality with unauthorized teachers, etc.
The Bishop then uttered, that which events proved to be a memorable and
true prophecy, that the Church--
Need be under no great apprehension in regard to any measure likely
to pass the Provincial Legislature on the subject of the
reserves:--reckless injustice in their disposition will not be
permitted; although the Church may appear friendless and in peril,
from the defection and treachery of some professing members.... If
any of her children incline to despondency, let them turn their
eyes to England, where we have protectors both numerous and
powerful, watching our struggles, and holding out the hand of
fellowship and assistance. [See next page.]
Dr. Ryerson at once joined issue with the Bishop, and--
Confuted the pretensions of "John Toronto" by the doctrines and
statements of "John Strachan," who, when in England in 1827,
published a pamphlet in which he stated that "the provincial
legislatures have nothing to do, either directly or indirectly,
with the Romish Church; but the same legislatures may vary, repeal,
or modify the 31st Geo. III., cap. 31, as far as it respects the
Church of England."
Dr. Ryerson pertinently asked the Bishop--
How could a "birthright" be "varied, repealed, or modified," as he
had admitted that the constitutional act could do, "as far as it
respects the Church of England?" Can (he asks) the Legislature
"vary or repeal" the deeds by which individuals hold their
lands?--Which of the "dissenting" denominations recognized by law
is not as orthodox in doctrine as the Church of England, and far
more orthodox than those who endorse the Oxford "Tracts for the
Times?"
The bill was finally passed in the House of Assembly, by a vote of 31 to
7, and in the Legislative Council, by a vote of 13 to 4, notwithstanding
a remarkably outspoken and defiant speech from the Bishop. In it he used
the following language:
Feeling that the bill provides for the encouragement and
propagation of error; inflicts the grossest injustice by robbing
and plundering the National Church; that it attempts to destroy all
distinction between truth and falsehood; that its anti-Christian
tendencies lead directly to infidelity, and will reflect disgrace
on the Legislature, I give it my unqualified opposition.
The Bishop again utters his prediction, and stated that what he wanted
would be secured in England. He said--
At the same time I have no fear of its ever becoming law. But it
may be useful, for its monstrous and unprincipled provisions will
teach the Imperial Government the folly of permitting a Colonial
Legislature to tamper with those great and holy principles of the
Constitution, on the preservation of which the prosperity and
happiness of the British Empire must ever depend.
Although it was almost impossible to reason with any one who would
deliberately use such extravagant language, yet Dr. Ryerson replied to
the Bishop's statements _seriatim_. With a touch of irony, he said:--
After penning such an effusion, the Bishop might well betake
himself to the Litany of his Church, and pray the good Lord to
deliver him--from all blindness of heart; from pride, vain glory
and hypocrisy; from envy, hatred and malice, and all
uncharitableness.
The fate of the bill is thus described in a statement on the subject,
prepared by Dr. Ryerson. What he details clearly reveals the powerful
and sympathetic influences which the Bishop of Toronto was able
successfully to bring to bear upon "Henry of Exeter"--the then leader of
the Bench of Bishops,--and, through him, upon the other Bishops in the
House of Lords. Besides, Sir John Colborne (now Lord Seaton) took strong
ground in the House of Lords in favour of the views of his old friend,
Bishop Strachan, and aided the English Bishops in giving them practical
effect. Thus the reiterated prophecy of the Bishop of Toronto was not
uttered without abundant foreknowledge. It proved too true. Knowing
this, he no doubt felt free to deal in strong language, both against the
Legislature of Upper Canada, and the members of the Church of England in
both Houses, who were too patriotic, just and reasonable, as well as
far-seeing, to second his efforts to aggrandize the Church at the
expense, and against the strongly-expressed and oft-repeated wishes, of
the majority of the people, of Upper Canada. He said:
On the bill being sent to England (accompanied by a most energetic
despatch from the Governor-General, imploring Her Majesty's
Government not to disallow, but to sanction it), the Bishop of
Exeter moved in the House of Lords, that the question of the right
to the clergy reserve property in Canada should be referred to the
twelve Judges of England; but the decision of the Judges having
proved adverse to the exclusive pretensions of the Bishop of Exeter
and his party in England and Canada, the English Bishops then
conferred with Lord John Russell, in order to set aside Lord
Sydenham's Canadian bill, and introduce one into the Imperial
Parliament which would accomplish as far as possible the objects
aimed at by referring the question to the Judges. Lord John Russell
became a consenting party and agent in this unconstitutional act of
injustice and spoliation against the rights and feelings of a large
majority of the people of Upper Canada. It was against this act
that Messrs. W. and E. Ryerson (then in England), on behalf of the
Wesleyan Church in Canada, remonstrated in an elaborate and
strongly-worded letter to Lord John Russell--the only communication
of the kind made by any religious body in Canada against the bill
while it was before the British Parliament, or for several years
afterwards.
Knowing the strong influences which had been brought to bear upon Mr.
Poulett Thompson against Dr. Ryerson, by Sir George Arthur (page 193),
and against the Methodist body generally by interested parties in this
discussion, Dr. Ryerson addressed a letter to the Governor-General on
the 25th March, 1840, in which he reviewed the course of the _Guardian_
and his own attitude on public questions during the preceding ten years.
The letter was evidently written with deep feeling, and under a keen
sense of the injustice done to the Methodist people by means of the
prolonged and persistent misrepresentation of these years. He said:--
I address your Excellency with feelings of the highest respect and
strong affection. You are the first Governor of Canada who has
exerted his personal influence and the authority of his station,
to accomplish that in Upper Canada which has been avowed and
promised by every Colonial-Secretary during the last ten
years--framing enactments and administering the Government for the
equal protection and benefit of all classes of Her Majesty's
Canadian subjects.... In doing so, your Excellency has been told
that you have patronized "republicans and rebels." ... The
_Guardian_, which you have been pleased to honour with an
expression of your approbation, has been charged with opposite
crimes from different quarters.... You have been told that the
ministers of the Wesleyan Methodist Church--whose rights you have
justly and kindly consulted--have formerly come from the United
States; and that the _Guardian_, during the first years of its
existence, was nothing but a vehicle of radicalism, disaffection,
and sedition.... As to the former, I may say that the Methodist
ministers have not come from ... the United States during the last
twenty years.... As to the latter, I furnish three columns of
extracts from the _Guardian_, ... from which the following may be
adduced:--
1. That in 1830 I entertained less friendship towards our American
neighbours than I do in 1840.
2. That in 1830 I advocated the very principles in the
administration of the Provincial Government that your Excellency
has declared to be the basis of your administration in 1840.
3. That in 1830 I was as strongly opposed to an exclusive, or
sectarian, spirit as I am in 1840.
4. That the very advice which I gave to the electors in 1830, as to
their rights and interests, I could now repeat with a view to
support your Excellency's administration.
5. That the very principles upon which your Excellency has
commenced your administration, ... were actually promised and
assured to the people of Upper Canada by a Tory Government in 1830.
In 1830 the Colonial-Secretary and Sir John Colborne proclaimed the
"good laws and free institutions," and the non-preference system
amongst religious denominations, which your Excellency is
determined to carry into practice.... When the hopes created by
these avowals have not only been deferred for these years, but
those who have indulged these hopes have been maligned and
proscribed for constitutionally seeking a realization of them, you
cannot be surprised if many of their hearts have been made sick,
and that confidence and hope has yielded to distrust and despair.
The Governor-General, through his private secretary, often requested Dr.
Ryerson, while Editor of the _Guardian_, to correct misstatements which
were made in regard to His Excellency's proceedings.[109]
After an interview with His Excellency, at his request, Dr. Ryerson, in
a letter dated 4th April, 1840, made a practical suggestion as to the
desirability of establishing the _Monthly Review_, as a means of
disseminating the liberal views which he entertained in regard to the
future government of this country, and also as an organ of public
opinion in harmony with these views. It was at first proposed that Dr.
Ryerson should edit the _Review_, but after fuller consideration of the
matter he declined, and the editing and management of it was, at his
suggestion, placed in the hands of John Waudby, Esq., Editor of the
Kingston _Herald_. It was issued in Toronto early in 1841, but ceased on
the death of Lord Sydenham, in September of that year. In Dr. Ryerson's
letter to the Governor he said:--
About a fortnight after your Excellency left Toronto, I happened in
the course of conversation with Hon. R. B. Sullivan to mention the
subject of establishing a monthly periodical, such as I had
mentioned to you. Mr. Sullivan was anxious that something of the
kind should be undertaken; I stated to him that I understood that
your Excellency would highly approve of such a publication, if it
could be successfully established. Mr. Sullivan pressed me to
prepare a prospectus and submit it for your Excellency's
consideration. I drew up a prospectus, and got an estimate of the
cost, covering all expenses. Mr. Sullivan fully concurred in the
prospectus, except the first paragraph. He was afraid it might be
construed into an expression of opinion in favour of "responsible
Government," and proposed another paragraph in place of it. The one
was as acceptable to me as the other. A feeling of apprehension and
embarrassment at the responsibilities of such an undertaking, and
the course of exertion which a successful accomplishment of it
would require, has deterred me from forwarding, until now, the
accompanying prospectus for your Excellency's perusal and
signification of your pleasure thereon.[110]
I cannot but see that the public mind in this country is in a
chaotic state, without any controlling current of feeling, or fixed
principle of action, in civil affairs; but susceptible, by proper
management and instruction, of being cast into any mould of
rational opinion and feeling; yet liable, without judicious
direction, to fall into a state of "confusion worse confounded." I
know that now is the time--perhaps the only time--to establish our
institutions and relations upon the cheapest, the surest, and the
only permanent foundation of any system, or form of Government--the
sentiments and feelings of the population. But I alone have not the
means or the power of contributing to the accomplishment of these
objects. To the utmost of my humble abilities and acquirements, I
am willing to exert myself; and that without a shillings'
remuneration--although my present salary is less than £200 per
annum. I believe the government about to be established in these
provinces may be made the most enduring and loftiest memorial of
your Excellency's fame, and the greatest earthly blessing to its
inhabitants; and it will be to me a source of satisfaction to
contribute towards the formation and cementing of materials for the
erection of a monument at once so honourable to its founder, and so
beneficial to Her Majesty's Canadian subjects.
The personal influence of your Excellency in Lower Canada will be
required to induce two or three of the cleverest men in Lower
Canada to contribute to the columns of the _Review_; especially on
questions and subjects which grow out of the state and structure of
society in that province. Mr. Sullivan thinks he will be able to
contribute one, if not two, articles for each number. I am
acquainted with several other gentlemen who are competent to
contribute very ably on some subjects. I know from experience that
furnishing matter for any periodical, as well as giving it
character, must chiefly devolve upon the conductor of it. He must
give it soul, if it have any; he must combine, concentrate, and
direct its power. And such a publication, got up under so high and
favourable auspices, and properly conducted, and embodying the
productions of the leading minds of both provinces, cannot fail to
prove an engine of immense and even irresistible moral power in the
country; and must materially contribute to its intellectual as well
as political elevation.
As to my own views and feelings, I would greatly prefer retiring
altogether from any connection with the press in all discussions of
civil affairs in every shape and form, and I can consistently and
honourably do so in June. But if this course be not justifiable in
the present circumstances of the province; if it be deemed
expedient for me still to take a part in public matters, I am
sensible I ought to do more than I do now, or can do through the
organ of a religious body. The relation, character and objects of
the publication I now conduct, impose a restriction upon the topics
and illustrations which are requisite to an effective discussion of
political questions. Under such circumstances I can neither do
justice to myself, nor to the subjects on which I occasionally
remark, or might discuss.
I have felt the more disposed to make this communication, because
your Excellency's avowed system and policy of Government is but
carrying out and reducing to practice those views of civil polity
in Canada which have guided my public life, as your Excellency will
have observed from the articles and references which have appeared
in the _Guardian_. I have been defeated and disappointed
heretofore, because the local executive itself has been for the
most part rather the head of a party, than the Government of the
country, and the opposition, or "Reform" party, has often gone to
equal extremes of selfishness and extravagance; so that I have
occupied the unenviable and uncomfortable position of a sort of
break-water--resisting and checking the conflicting waves of mutual
party violence, convinced that the exclusive and absolute
ascendancy of either party would be destructive of the ends of just
Government, and public happiness; a position which, previously to
your Excellency's arrival in Canada, I had determined to abandon,
as I found myself possessed of no adequate means of accomplishing
any permanent good by occupying it.
I think the appearance in this province of Lord John Russell's
despatch on "Responsible Government" is timely. The "Reformers" are
too fully committed to Government to fly off; and a large portion
of the old "Conservative" party are glad of an excuse to change
their position. Neither party can triumph, as _both_ must concede
something. This mutual concession will prepare the way for mutual
forbearance, and ultimately for co-operation and union. Having
perceived that the Editor of the _Examiner_ was seeking, under the
pretence of supporting the Government, to get a House of Assembly
returned, consisting wholly of the old Reformers, who had
identified themselves in 1834-5-6, with the Papineau party of Lower
Canada, I thought it desirable to check such a design in the bud,
by insisting upon the support of Hon. W. H. Draper, and that he
should be returned upon the same grounds as those of Mr. Baldwin.
The elucidation and description of this one case will affect the
position of parties in the character of the elections throughout
the province, and make them turn, not upon Lord Durham's "Report,"
or any of the old questions of difference, but upon your
Excellency's administration. This, I have no doubt, with a little
care, will, in most instances be the case. Thus will the members
returned from Upper Canada, be isolated from the French
anti-unionists of Lower Canada, and be more fully, both in
obligation and feeling, identified with the Government. I have not,
therefore, been surprised at the _Examiner's_ indignation, as it is
so ultra, and thorough a partizan, and as it has some discernment,
though but little prudence.
In reply, the Private Secretary of the Governor-General said:
I am to express to you His Excellency's approbation of the plans
you have suggested, and he desires me to say that he requests that
you will visit Montreal, on your way to New York, as he is anxious
to see you on the subject contained in your letter.
The Special Council meets this day for the first time.
The Secretary further added:--
His Excellency agrees that the line which you have taken is most
judicious. There is no doubt that the gentleman to whom you refer
is doing very great mischief both to Hon. Robert Baldwin and the
Government, by the extremes to which he is pushing his cry for
responsible government, and his opposition to Hon. W. H. Draper.
Dr. Ryerson (who was on his way to the General Conference at Baltimore)
in a note, dated Montreal, 4th May, said:--
The Governor-General having kindly invited me to visit him and
converse on matters relating to public affairs, I did so, and was
most cordially received by him. I also had a long interview with
him on Friday afternoon, and am desired to spend the evening with
him on Saturday. His Excellency has given every requisite
information as to his plans. I am thus enabled to accomplish the
object of my visit far beyond what I expected when I left home.
In a letter from New York (dated 9th May) Dr. Ryerson said:--Much to my
surprise to-day, while in New York on my way to Baltimore, I received a
note from the Governor-General's Secretary, T. W. C. Murdoch, Esq., as
follows:--
By direction of the Governor-General I send you the enclosed bill
of exchange for £100 stg., the receipt of which I would request you
to acknowledge.
You will have seen the English papers which hold out every prospect
that both the Union and the Clergy Reserve Bills will be
satisfactorily settled. I feel that I may congratulate you, and
every friend of Canada, on such a result.
I acknowledged this kind and generous act, but at once returned the Bill
of Exchange to His Excellency--at the same time respectfully assuring
him, that under no circumstances could I receive anything for what I had
done, or might do, to support the policy and administration of Her
Majesty's Government, in the peculiar circumstances of the Province.
* * * * *
One of the chief points discussed in Upper Canada, in connection with
the proposed union of the provinces, was the effect it would have on the
Protestant character of the government and institutions of the county.
Mr. John W. Gamble, a public man, and a leading member of the Church of
England, in Vaughan, writing to Dr. Ryerson on the subject, said:--
I feel deeply the conviction that the time has now arrived when
Protestants must sink all points of minor consideration, and unite
in defence of our common faith. The union of the provinces will
most assuredly result in giving not only a preponderance, but a
large majority to the Roman Catholics in the united legislature;
and this taken in conjunction with the plans now in operation for
pouring a large Roman Catholic population into these provinces,
surely ought not only to excite the fears, but rouse the energies
of those who know and love the truth as it is in Jesus. I am
altogether ignorant of your opinion upon the union question, but I
call upon you as a Protestant to unite with me in endeavouring to
avert the threatened calamity.
Mr. Gamble was for many years afterwards an earnest opponent in the
Legislature of United Canada of the extension of the Separate School
system in the province.
* * * * *
Although greatly enfeebled in health, yet Dr. Ryerson's Mother was
enabled to write to him occasionally. In a letter written by her in
1839, after returning from seeing him, she said:--
I suppose you are anxious to know the state of my mind. I yet feel
that the Lord is my trust, and I am waiting daily till my change
come. I feel that when the "earthly house of this tabernacle be
dissolved, I have a house not made with hands, eternal in the
heavens." Dear Egerton, I feel very much as I did when I left
you--a great deal of weakness. I am anxious to live to see you all
once more, perhaps for the last time. Do not neglect to come up,
one and all, as soon as convenient, if you only stay one day. When
you come fetch some books, such as you think would be profitable
for me, and one of your good-sized Bibles; also three of your
likenesses. I thought that your Father had brought them up when he
came. Do not fail to come up and see us. Don't let me be denied the
happiness of seeing you soon.
FOOTNOTES:
[108] The organs of that party in Upper Canada spoke of Dr. Ryerson's
advocacy of Lord Durham's reforms with far less courtesy, and for
obvious reasons.
[109] Thus in a note dated 8th April, 1840, the Private Secretary
said:--I know that His Excellency would wish you to comment on Lord
John's despatch in the sense in which it is treated in the Montreal
_Gazette_. [This was done in the _Guardian_ of 15th April.] There
is no doubt also that it is absurd in Hon. Henry Sherwood to pretend
that he is supporting the Government when he opposes their own
Solicitor-General, but not less so in the _Examiner_ to support him and
oppose Mr. Draper, or to stand up for a kind of responsible government
which both His Excellency and Lord John Russell have declared to be
inadmissible. I know that His Excellency would wish you to do everything
in your power to support both Mr. Draper and Mr. Baldwin. Should any
article come out which you consider would interest His Excellency, may I
request you to send me a copy.
[110] The following was the prospectus agreed upon and issued:--
A Monthly Review, Devoted to the Civil Government of Canada.
The Canadas have been united under an amended constitution; the
foundation has been laid for an improved system of government. The
success of that constitution will greatly depend upon a correct
understanding and a just appreciation of its principles; and the
advantages of the new system of government will be essentially
influenced by the views and feelings of the inhabitants of the Canadas
themselves. At a period so eventful, and under circumstances so
peculiar, it is of the utmost importance that the principles of the
constitution should be carefully analysed, and dispassionately
expounded; that the relations between this and the Mother Country, and
the mutual advantages connected with those relations, should be
explained and illustrated; the duties of the several branches of the
government and the different classes of the community, stated and
enforced; the natural, commercial, and agricultural resources and
interests of these Provinces investigated and developed; a comprehensive
and efficient system[a] of public education discussed and established;
the subject of emigration practically considered in proportion to its
vast importance; the various measures adapted to promote the welfare of
all classes of the people originated and advocated; and a taste for
intellectual improvement and refinement encouraged and cultivated.
As the Editor's views on all the leading questions of Canadian policy
accord with those of His Excellency the Governor-General, who has been
pleased to approve of the plan of the _Monthly Review_, it will be
enabled to state correctly the facts and principles on which the
government proceeds; yet the writers alone will be held responsible for
whatever they may advance.
[a] Dr. Ryerson, who wrote this prospectus, evidently had in view such a
system of Education as he afterwards established.
CHAPTER XXXIV.
1840.
Proposal to leave Canada--Dr. Ryerson's Visit to England.
The year 1840 is somewhat memorable in the Methodistic history of Upper
Canada, for three things: 1st. The final retirement of Dr. Ryerson from
the editorship of the _Christian Guardian_; 2nd. Visit of Revs. William
and Egerton Ryerson to England, and the painful, yet fruitless,
discussions with a Committee of the British Conference on the lapsed
Union; 3rd. The annual and special Canada Conferences of that year--at
the latter of which the formal separation of the British and Canadian
sections of the Conference took place under peculiarly affecting
circumstances.
Dr. Ryerson and his brother John attended the American General
Conference at Baltimore, May, 1840. In a letter from there he said:--
The Methodist Connexion here are much in advance of us, and, as a
whole, even of the British Connexion. I have never seen a more
pious, intelligent, and talented body of men than the preachers
assembled here at Conference; nor more respectable, intelligent
congregations. The manners of the people in these Middle States are
very like the manners of intelligent people in Upper Canada--alike
removed from the English haughtiness and Yankee coldness--simple,
frank, and unaffected. Bishops Roberts, Soule, Hedding and Waugh
dined with us to-day. They are venerable and apostolic men. We have
had cordial invitations to come to this country, and did we consult
our own comfort, brother John and I would do so without hesitation.
Bishop Hedding hopes to visit us at our approaching Conference.
Rev. R. Newton, of England, will not visit Canada. Mr. ---- has
told him that it was not worth while to go to Canada; and all that
can be said to induce him to come is unavailing. We in Canada are
not worth so much trouble, or notice!
In a letter from Baltimore, dated May 25th, 1840, Dr. Ryerson states the
reason why he proposed to leave Canada:--
I am still at the General Conference. Rev. Dr. Bangs says that I
ought to remain until the close. After much consideration I have
decided upon a step which, for many reasons, appears desirable.
Instead of coming to this country for a few months, in order to
avail myself of some collegiate lectures, to pursue certain
branches of science, I have concluded and have made arrangements to
take a station in the city of New York for one, if not for two
years. My brother John would have done the same if we could have
both left Canada this year. If things in the province do not go on
better with us he will do so another year. I have seen the new
constitution which is about to be adopted by the British Parliament
for the future Government of Canada. I do not approve of it. To
interfere any more in civil contentions will be wasting the best
part of my life to little purpose, for there seems to be no end to
such things. To remain in Canada and be silent, will incur the
hostility of both parties. The government will regard my neutrality
as opposition, and the popular party will view it as indifference
to the rights of the people; and, in such circumstances, I shall
neither be useful nor happy. While, therefore, I am on good terms
with the Government and the country at large, my brother thinks
with me that it is by all means best to withdraw from such scenes.
I have the offer of one of the three or four largest Methodist
Chapels in New York. I shall be appointed to one of the largest and
most elegant in the city, where all the great public meetings are
held. There are, however, three or four vacant, equally desirable.
I much prefer this to my taking a district in Canada. I would not
return to the _Guardian_ again for any earthly consideration.
Dr. Ryerson went to the Conference at Belleville after his return from
Baltimore. Writing from there, he said:--
Previously to proceeding to elect the Secretary, an English brother
remarked that he had certain communications from the Committee in
London, which he wished to read. I observed that no communications could
be read until the Conference was organized, and the Conference could not
be organized until the Secretary was elected. The brother persevered,
and then stated that the documents referred to me. I then arose, and
observed that the proceeding was at variance with law, Methodism, and
justice. The Conference was justly roused to indignation by my remarks,
which were followed by some observations from my brother John, in the
same strain. Not a man spoke in favour of the English brother's
proceeding, and he was compelled to withdraw his proposal. Such an
anti-Methodistic and barbarous attempt to sacrifice me (as some of the
preachers afterwards expressed it), excited a strong feeling in my
favour, and, I was told, increased my majority of votes for the
Secretaryship. When the Conference balloted for Secretary, the votes
stood as follows:--Matthew Richey, 1; Anson Green, 1; Wm. Case, 2; E.
Evans, 12; Egerton Ryerson, 43. The circumstance has so deeply affected
me, that I feel it to be like tearing soul from body to be separated
from brethren who stand by me in the day of trial, and who will not
suffer me, as one of them expressed it to me, to be sacrificed at the
pleasure of my enemies.[111] But I see no reason to change my purposes;
and my brother John thinks I can do more good to the Connexion by being
in New York, than by remaining in Canada.
I desire, with humble dependence upon the wisdom and providence of God,
to commit my all to Him. I hunger and thirst after the mind which was in
Christ Jesus.
Subsequently Dr. Ryerson wrote, saying:--
My plans in regard to the United States must now be changed. The charges
of the London Committee, and the state of the Connexion in regard to the
Union, render my absence from the Province, in the judgment of my
brethren, unjustifiable and out of the question. Some of the preachers
insist that I must go to England, and meet Mr. Alder before the British
Conference. Such a mission is not impossible, but, I hope, not probable.
After the election of Secretary, the charges against Dr. Ryerson were
read. They were embodied in a resolution to the effect that he had
improperly interfered and sought to deprive the British Conference of
its annual grant from the Imperial Government for the extension of
missions in the province. The resolution was negatived by a vote of 59
to 8, and a series of resolutions sustaining Dr. Ryerson, in the
strongest manner, was passed. He and his brother William were appointed
as Representatives at the British Conference, with directions "to use
all proper means to prevent collision between the two Connexions."
As intimated in Dr. Ryerson's letter from Baltimore, he decided to
retire finally from the Editorship of the _Christian Guardian_. This he
did at the Belleville Conference, and on the 24th of June, 1840, he laid
down his pen as Editor of the _Christian Guardian_, and was succeeded by
Rev. Jonathan Scott. In his valedictory of that date, Dr. Ryerson
said:--
The present number of the _Guardian_ closes the connection of the
undersigned with the provincial press. To his friends and to those of
the public who have confided in him, and supported him in seasons of
difficulty and danger, he offers his most grateful acknowledgments;
those who have opposed him honourably, he sincerely respects; those who
have assailed him personally, he heartily forgives; and of those whose
feelings he may have wounded in the heat of discussion, he most humbly
asks pardon. While he is deeply sensible of his imperfections,
infirmities, and failings, he derives satisfaction from the
consciousness that he has earnestly aimed at promoting the best
interests of his adopted church and his native country.
Egerton Ryerson.
Immediately after the close of the annual Conference of 1840, Dr.
Ryerson and his brother William left for England. From his diary,
written at that time, he had made the following extracts for this
work:--
_July 22nd, 1840._--After landing at Liverpool, I called upon an
old and kind friend, Mr. Michael Ashton, and I had much
conversation with him and Rev. R. Young, on the affairs of our
mission. I and my brother William arrived in London on the 23rd.
Took up our lodgings with my old hostess, 27 Great Ormond Street.
Addressed a note to Lord John Russell, on the object of our
mission; an interview was appointed for the next day. Went to the
House of Commons in the evening, having an order for admission to
the Speaker's gallery, through the kindness of Lord Sandon.
_July 24th._--Went to the Colonial office; had a long interview
with Lord John Russell, on the Canada Clergy Reserve Bill. Mr.
[afterwards Sir James] Stephen was present. We pointed out to His
Lordship the injustice of the bill, and the probable consequences
if it were passed in its present shape. We spoke at some length,
but with great plainness; intimating that we regarded the measure
as the forfeiture of good faith on the part of Her Majesty's
Government, as the violation of the constitutional rights of the
inhabitants of Upper Canada, and as the cause of the unpopularity
of the British Government in that country. But his Lordship
appeared inflexible, and seemed to regard it essential to
conciliate the Bishops, but not essential to do what he considered
just in itself, or to fulfil the declarations of Government to the
inhabitants of Upper Canada, or to consult their oft-expressed
views and wishes. In the afternoon we went to see Mr. Charles
Buller, but he was not in town. In going through Hyde Park we saw
the Queen and Prince Albert, coming from Windsor. We took a hasty
view through Westminster Abbey, and in the evening we called upon
the Rev. Mr. Stead, formerly a missionary to India, and received
from him many useful suggestions respecting the object of our
mission.
_July 27th._--Prepared a long letter to Lord John Russell on the
Canada Clergy Reserve Bill, now before Parliament. Went to the
House of Commons in order to hear the debate on the third reading
of said bill. Lord John Russell was not present. But we heard a
long debate on the China opium trade, etc. Mr. W. E. Gladstone
introduced the discussion. Afterwards Sir Robert Peel spoke on the
present position of the Church of Scotland in resisting the
decision of the House of Lords. Mr. Fox Maule [Lord Panmure] spoke
in reply, and contended that the point for which the General
Assembly contended was the right of the people to a voice in the
choice of their ministers.
_July 28th._--Visited the City Road Chapel Grave-yard, the Bank,
various book establishments, and St. Paul's Cathedral.
_July 30th._--Left London yesterday; entered the city of York by
the southwest gate; got a glimpse of the Minster; the country
exceedingly beautiful, and in a high state of cultivation. Heard of
the death of poor Lord Durham. The attacks upon him in the House of
Lords as Governor-General of Canada, the abandonment of him by the
Government, the mortification experienced by him in consequence of
the Royal disapprobation at his sudden return from Canada before
his resignation had been accepted, are said to have hastened, if
not caused his death. His heart seems to have been set upon making
Canada a happy and a great country, and I think he intended to
rest his fame upon that achievement. He was defeated, disappointed,
died! How bright the prospect two years ago--how sudden the change,
how sad the termination! Oh, the vanity of earthly power, wealth
and glory!
_July 29th._--Arrived this morning at Newcastle-upon-Tyne by stage,
eighty miles from York. The next morning we went to the Conference,
and sent in our cards to Rev. G. Marsden; he came out and kindly
received us, and hoped our mission would be for good. We met with a
very cool reception from several of the preachers, with whom I was
acquainted and on friendly terms during my former visits. Not
feeling very well, or very much at home, we enquired our way to our
lodgings, and left.
_July 31st._--Went to the Conference this morning at 7 a.m. We were
furnished with the President's card of admittance, and shown a seat
in a corner at the side of the Chapel, and could hear but a part of
the debates. In the afternoon we addressed a note to the President,
to which we only received a verbal reply.
_Aug. 1st._--This morning we were engaged in writing a strong
letter to the President concerning our treatment, our position, the
objects of our mission, etc., but we were saved the pain of
delivering it, as, on our arrival, we were met and introduced as
accredited Representatives of the Canada Conference. Rev. J.
Stinson and Rev. M. Richey were also introduced at the same time.
My brother William then presented the address and resolutions of
the Canada Conference. A comfortable seat was now provided for us,
in front of the President. Thank God, we now have a right to speak,
can take our own part, and maintain the rights and interests we
have been appointed to represent!
_Aug. 3rd._--The Committee of the last year on Canadian affairs had
met and reported:--That the resolutions of the Committee of which
the Canadian Conference had complained we unanimously confirmed,
and recommended that the Conference appoint a large Committee to
whom the Messrs. Ryerson and the documents of the Canadian
Conference be referred.
The cases of Circuits proposed to be divided were next taken up.
This caused many amusing remarks. Rev. R. Newton thought they were
losing the spirit of their fathers in travelling, who had
insuperable objections to solitary stations. Dr. Bunting assigned
as a reason for the failure of the health of so many young men, the
custom of giving up horses: said it was an innovation; quoted some
of the last words of Wesley: "I cannot make preachers--I cannot buy
preachers--and I will not kill preachers."
A long conversation ensued on the subject of reading the Liturgy
generally, and concluded by a resolution that the Liturgy be read
on the principal Sabbath at each Conference. On the subject of
reading the Liturgy by the preachers themselves, Dr. Bunting said:
It was very well for men to spend their strength in preaching, and
let others read the prayers, when Methodism was only a Society
supplementary to the Church; but having in the order of Providence
grown up into an independent and separate Church, the preachers
were something more than mere preachers of the Word--they were
ministers of the Church, and ought to read as well as preach.
The address of the Irish Conference was read. Rev. T. Jackson said
he could bear testimony to the very respectful manner in which the
address of the British Conference had been received by the Irish
Conference, and he trusted the brethren would understand the import
and bearing of that remark. Rev. Mr. Entwistle referred to the
liberality and cheerfulness of the Irish preachers in their
difficulties, when Dr. Bunting replied that if they had been in
such difficulties their heads would have hung down.
Dr. Ryerson's diary ends here. A full account of the interviews and
discussions with the Wesleyan authorities in England are given in the
Epochs of Canadian Methodism, pages 407-426. The result was, that the
Committee on the subject reported a series of resolutions adverse to the
Canada representatives, which were adopted by the Conference after "more
than four-fifths of its members had left for their circuits." The
pacific resolutions of the Upper Canada Conference were negatived by a
majority, and it was declared "that a continuance of the more intimate
connection established by the articles of 1833 [was] quite
impracticable."
Thus was ignominously ended a union between the two Conferences which
had (nominally) existed since 1833, and which had promised such happy
results, and thus was inaugurated a period of unseemly strife between
the two parties from 1840 to 1847, when it happily ceased. What followed
in Upper Canada is thus narrated by Dr. Ryerson:--
The English Conference having determined to secede from the Union which
it had entered into with the Canadian Conference in 1833, and to
commence aggressive operations upon the Canadian Conference, and its
societies and congregations, a special meeting of the Canadian
Conference became necessary to meet this new state of things, to
organize for resenting the invasion upon its field of labour, and to
maintain the cause for which they had toiled and suffered so much for
more than half a century.
The prospects of the Canada Conference were gloomy in the extreme; the
paucity of ministers, and the poverty of resources in comparison to the
English Conference, besides numerous other disadvantages; but the
ministers of the Canadian Conference with less than a dozen individual
exceptions, had hearts of Canadian oak, and weapons of New Jerusalem
steel, and were determined to maintain the freedom of the Church, and
the liberties of their country, whatever might be the prestige or
resources of their invaders; and "according to their faith it was done
unto them;" out of weakness they waxed strong. They sowed in tears, they
reaped in joy. Their weeping seed-sowing was followed by rejoicing,
bringing their sheaves with them.
The Special Conference caused by these events was held in the Newgate
(Adelaide) Street Church in October, 1840. The venerable Thomas
Whitehead, then in his 87th year, opened the proceedings, after which
Rev. William Case was elected to preside. Rev. Mr. Whitehead was
subsequently elected President. Dr. Ryerson was elected Secretary, but
declined, and Rev. J. C. Davidson was appointed in his place. The whole
matter of differences between the two Conferences was discussed at
great length, and with deep feeling on the part of the speakers. Dr.
Ryerson spoke for five hours, and his brother William for nearly three.
Finally a series of eleven resolutions were adopted, strongly
maintaining the views of the Canadian Representatives to England, and
protesting--
Against the Methodistic or legal right or power of the Conference
in England to dissolve, of its own accord, articles and obligations
which have been entered into with this Conference by mutual
consent.
In consequence of the adoption of these resolutions, the following
ministers requested permission to withdraw from the Canada Conference
with a view to connect themselves with the British Missionary party,
viz:--
Rev. Messrs. William Case, Ephraim Evans, Benjamin Slight, James
Norris, Thomas Fawcett, William Scott, John G. Manly, Edmund
Stoney, James Brock, Thomas Hurlburt, Matthew Lang, John Douse,
William Steer, John Sunday, and C. B. Goodrich.
The leave-taking was said to have been very tender and sorrowful. Of the
members of the Canada Conference who left it, Dr. Ryerson said:--
Among the ten who seceded from the Canada Conference to the London
Wesleyan Committee was the venerable William Case, who took no part
in the crusade against his old Canadian brethren, but who wished to
live in peace and quietness, with the supply of his wants assured
to him in his old, lonely Indian Mission at Alnwick, near Cobourg,
isolated alike from the white inhabitants and from other Indian
tribes, where he continued until his decease.
The character of this untoward contest with the British Conference
party--so far as it related to Dr. Ryerson--can be best understood from
the conclusion of his five hours' speech before the Special Conference.
He said:--
I am aware that a combined effort has been determined upon and is
making to destroy me as a public man, and to injure this Connexion,
as far as my overthrow can affect it. I rejoice to know that the
strength and efficiency of our Church are not depending upon me;
but I am not insensible to the advantages which it is supposed will
be gained over the Church if I can be put down. Our adversaries
seem to have abandoned the idea of answering my arguments, or of
diverting me from my purposes, in regard to my position, and views
and feelings towards this Connexion. The only expedient left is
that which requires no strength of intellect--no solid
arguments--no moral principle--but abundance of confidence,
malignity, and zeal. It is the expedient of impeaching my moral
integrity, and blackening my character. And this is attempted to be
accomplished. One class of adversaries, not by an appeal to reason,
or even to official documents, but by the importation and retail
from one side of the Atlantic to the other, and one end of the
province to the other, and from house to house, of bits and parcels
of perverted private conversations--a mode of warfare disgraceful
to human nature, much more to any Christian community. History
apprizes me that, in such a warfare, some of the best of men have
not triumphed until long after they slept in death, when the hand
of time and the researches of impartial history did them that
justice which the cupidity and jealousies of powerful
contemporaries denied them. I know not the present result of
existing combinations against myself. On that point I feel little
concern, though I am keenly alive to their influence upon my public
usefulness. I engaged in the Union, because I believed the
principles upon which it was founded were reasonable, and the
prejudices against it on all sides were unreasonable. I do not
regret the opposition which I have experienced--the reproaches
which I have incurred--the labours I have endured; but I do
regret--and every day's reflection adds fresh poignancy to my
regrets--that in carrying out a measure which I had hoped would
prove an unspeakable blessing to my native country, I have lost so
many friends of my youth. No young man in Canada had more friends
amongst all Christian denominations than I had when the Union took
place. Many of them have become my enemies. I can lose property
without concern or much thought; but I cannot lose my friends, and
meet them in the character of enemies, without emotions not to be
described. I feel that I have injured myself, and injured this
Connexion, and I fear this province, not by my obstinacy, but by my
concessions. This is my sin, and not the sins laid to my charge. I
have regarded myself, and all that Providence has put into my hands
from year to year, as the property of this Connexion. I can say, in
the language of Wesley's hymn--
"No foot of land do I possess,
No cottage in the wilderness;
A poor wayfaring man."
And it is to me a source of unavailing grief, that after the
expenditure of so much time, and labour, and suffering, and means,
one of the most important measures of my life may prove a
misfortune to the Church of my affections and the country of my
birth. I have only to say, that as long as there is any prospect of
my being useful to either, I will never desert them.
We have surveyed every inch of the ground on which we stand: We
have offered to concede everything but what appertains to our
character, and to our existence and operations as a Wesleyan
Methodist Church. The ground we occupy is Methodistic, is rational,
is just. The very declarations of those who leave us attest this.
They are compelled to pay homage to our character as a body; they
cannot impeach our doctrines, or discipline, or practice; nor can
they sustain a single objection against our principles or standing;
the very reasons which they assign for their own secession are
variable, indefinite, personal, or trivial. But the reasons which
may be assigned for our position and unity are tangible, are
definite, are Methodistic, are satisfactory, are unanswerable.
The effect of this disruption was disastrous to the peace and unity of
the Wesleyan body, especially in the towns and cities.
Some time after the Conference, Dr. Ryerson received the following
characteristic letter from the venerable Thomas Whitehead, the President
of the Canada Special Conference:--
I have been not a little pleased with the expectation of seeing you
this evening, and of hearing you speak of the sorrows and joys of
Wesleyan Methodism in Upper Canada. God grant that you and I and
all of us, when our labours, sorrows and joys on earth are ended,
may meet around the throne of God and the Lamb. Your labours,
sorrows and joys for these years past have been unparalleled, and
to the present they are increasing. Well, you have been called
(with not a few invaluable assistants) to stand up in defence of
the Gospel, and have been sometimes placed near the swellings of
Jordan; however, you still rejoice in your labours, and the effects
thereof, and so do I; and, blessed be God, the Pilot of the
Galilean lake is still on shipboard, and he will soon speak peace
to the troubled waters, and there will be a great calm. I have no
doubt but Brother Green and Brother Bevitt (a comical soul) and
yourself have had cold travelling (I hope good lodging) in your
western rides; I am persuaded you have met with friends, and a
generous people. God bless them!
I greatly rejoice that our brethren in the ministry are faithful,
affectionate, and successful in defence of all that appertains to
the privileges of the glorious Gospel of the Son of God, long, long
preached by the Wesleyan Methodist ministers in the wilds of Upper
Canada, and I trust they will, by all Christian means and measures,
support Her Majesty's Government in Canada. May the Holy and
Blessed God give us peace, and good government in our day. I have
been a little vexed with the travelling gab of one of our own
former friends, who is pleased to inform the people that you were
the sole cause of the late rebellion. I must tell him, the first
time I meet with him, that the meaning of his sing-song is not
understood, and that if he will explain his hidden meaning, it will
be, that he is ready to prove that the Rev. Egerton Ryerson was the
sole cause of the rebellion in Heaven, by the fallen angels. In
that case no one would mistake his meaning.
In a letter of congratulation, written in May, 1841, to Rev. Dr. Bangs,
on his appointment to the Presidency of the Wesleyan University,
Middletown, Conn., Dr. Ryerson said:--
I hope and pray that you may be able to continue without abatement
to favour and edify the religious public with the rich results of
your varied reading and matured thinking. On this ground I desire
to express my personal obligations; and not the least for your
"Letters to young Ministers of the Gospel," which were the first I
recollect of reading. Many of your remarks and suggestions, on the
subjects which they treat, have been of great service to me.
Speaking of the rupture of the union between the British and Canadian
Conferences, and of alleged personal obstacles which he presented in the
way of a reunion, Dr. Ryerson said:--The agents of the London Missionary
Committee have not injured the Societies generally; although the scenes
of schism which have been and are exhibited in many places are highly
disgraceful. I am not aware that Elder Case has taken any active part in
these transactions, and he has continued an acting and useful member of
the Academy Board, notwithstanding his strange secession from our
Conference. I have observed by the discussion, especially in the
pamphlet lately published by the Committee in London, that the whole
affair is made to appear, as much as possible, a matter of difference
between the Committee and me personally, and epithets have been
multiplied against me in proportion to the want of facts. I have always
resolved not to allow myself to be the ground of difference between two
bodies. If I can make this circumstance instrumental in effecting an
amicable adjustment of differences, such as would be agreeable and
advantageous to my brethren, I have thought it would be best to do so,
and retire personally from the Conference, either employing my pen for
the religious and general interests of my native land, or seeking a
more peaceful field of labour in your part of the world, where I almost
wish I had gone last year as proposed--although I know not that I could
have done otherwise than I did, in accordance with what is due to
personal honour and character.
The Imperial Parliament has disposed of the clergy reserves in a manner
the most unfair, unjust, and corrupt, although the old Constitution of
Canada provides for the disposal of them by the Provincial Legislature.
Wide-spread, secret dissatisfaction exists in the country; a majority of
the new Assembly (which has not yet met) are friends of the people, but
many are afraid to move, or to say what they think. My own apprehension
is that, notwithstanding all exertions to the contrary, under the
present system of things the morals and intelligence of the people will
be on a level with their liberties. Whether my continued silence in such
circumstances is a virtue, or a crime; or whether I should retire from
the country, or remain and make one Christian, open, and decisive effort
to secure for my fellow-countrymen a free constitution and equal rights
among their churches, is a perplexing question to me, as well as to my
brothers. It is believed by some intelligent men, who have talked on the
subject, that if I would come out as the advocate of the country, there
would be no doubt of success, from my knowledge of the subject, from a
general, and, as I think, overweening confidence on the part of my
friends in my powers of concentration, perseverance and energy, and from
the feelings of the country. It is also thought that, if there should be
a failure of success, I could then honourably retire to the United
States. I am no theorist, but I hate despotism as I do Satan, and I love
liberty as I do life; and my thoughts and feelings flow so strongly in
favour of the religious and civil freedom of my native country, that
with all my engagements and duties, I cannot resist them, at least half
of the time. I would be most grateful to you for your opinion on this
general matter, irrespective of details, with which, of course, you
cannot be acquainted.
To this letter Rev. Dr. Bangs replied as follows:--
I feel much for my Canadian brethren, and I can never be
indifferent to their weal or woe. I have never had but one opinion
respecting your separation from us, and that is, that it was an
erroneous step at the time, originating with the ambition of one
man--Henry Ryan. (See page 87.) Regrets, however, are useless now.
The die has been cast; but from that unhappy moment you have been
tossed about from one point of the compass to another. What a sad
condition the people are in, according to your representation! And
who shall right them? I suppose you cannot do it, although you
cannot be indifferent to their interests, temporal and eternal.
Respecting your leaving the country, I would say, that if your
brethren judge it best, you will receive a cordial welcome among
us; as I am sure you would from me. In the meantime, you would do
well to consult Bishop Hedding, who presides among us this year. I
thank you for the expressions of affection. Whatever of good you
may have received from my poor labours, let God have the praise and
glory. I never undertook any duties with more appalling feelings
than I did the present ones; and yet I have been wonderfully
blessed and favoured by providential indications. When I was called
to the Presidency of the Wesleyan University, I dared not say no;
but I accepted it with a trembling sense of my responsibilities,
and thus far I have been greatly blessed and comforted. I shall be
glad to see you, and remember that I have a prophet's room, and a
bed and a table for you.
From Rev. Dr. D. M. Reese, a noted member of the New York Conference,
Dr. Ryerson received the following letter:--
I am at a loss to say what is the opinion of our great men here,
touching your Canadian conflict with the British Conference; though
all our sympathies are with you. All concur that you have the
victory in your pamphlet war. I have not heard a different opinion
from any one who has read them. I suppose you may have learned how
cavalierly Rev. R. Newton treated Rev. Mr. Gurley, though
introduced to him by letters from those to whom Mr. N. was largely
indebted here. He refused to introduce him to Dr. Bunting, etc.,
although this favour was solicited. He neither invited Mr. G. to
see him again, nor even called on him. This British reciprocity of
American politeness is humiliating, and resembles the treatment you
and your brother received at his hands, as well as that of other
great men in the Wesleyan Conference towards you.
At the Special Conference of October, Dr. Ryerson was appointed
Corresponding Secretary of the Wesleyan Missionary Society of Upper
Canada. On the 10th November he issued a statement and appeal on behalf
of the Society. In it he indicates definitely the secret causes which
led to the disruption of the Union. He said:--
Zealous attempts have been made to lead astray sincere friends of
Methodism and religion by the pretense that party politics is the
[difficulty]. Never was a pretext more unfounded.... It will be seen by
the proceedings of our Conference-- ... and is even admitted in the
report of the ... English Conference--that no political party question
should, on any account, be suffered amongst us, ... or in our official
organ, and that we did not even desire the continued discussion of the
clergy reserve question.... But with even silent neutrality on all
questions of civil polity ..., the authorities of the English Conference
were not satisfied; they insisted that we should "admit and maintain,
even in this Province, the principle of Church and State Union"--a
question which has been the most exciting and baneful topic of party
feeling and party organization of any question which has ever been
discussed in Upper Canada. They also insisted that we should concede to
the Conference in England the right of an "efficient direction over the
public proceedings" of the Connexion in this province.... These are the
real grounds of the difference between the two bodies.
In a letter on this subject, written by Dr. Ryerson, 13th November, he
said:--
Herewith is a copy of a letter which I addressed to the late Rev.
Richard Watson in 1831 [see _Guardian_ of November 18th, 1840],
deprecating the interference of the London Committee with our work
in this province, and explaining our views and operations as a
body.... In going one day into the Wesleyan Mission House, when in
England in 1833, I found one of the clerks copying that letter into
the official books of the Committee. That letter is of some
importance on several accounts. It will show that we were just as
moderate, and as reasonable, and as constitutional in our views as
a body in 1831, as we have been from that time to this, and that
the representations to the contrary are the fabulous creations of
party feelings.... [It will also show] that [the London Committee]
fully understood our views on the question of a church
establishment in Upper Canada, respecting which they have not even
pretended that we ever made the slightest compromise; and that we
as a body were in a prosperous condition before the Union.
It was not, therefore, without full knowledge of Dr. Ryerson's views on
this subject, and of the state of the Methodist body in Upper Canada,
that the British Conference in 1833, and again in 1840, sought to
interfere with the work in this province and divide the Societies. By
Dr. Ryerson's mission to England this evil was averted by a union in
1833, which proved to be but a hollow truce, as the events of 1840
demonstrated.
That the evil genius of Rev. Robert Alder exercised a baneful influence
upon both Conferences, is abundantly evident from his own subsequent
conduct and other events. And that this was the case is more clearly
manifest from the fact that when he ceased to exert any influence in the
Connexion, and when Dr. Ryerson and the Canadian Representatives were
able to lay the whole case before the British Conference in 1847, that
body, led by Dr. Bunting himself, entirely endorsed the consistent
action of the Canada Conference in all of this painful and protracted
business. He said: "The Canadian brethren are right, and we are wrong."
(See a subsequent Chapter on the subject.)
Looking at the facts of the case in the light of to-day, can any one
wonder at the pertinacity and zeal with which Dr. Ryerson resisted the
unnatural and unwise system of foreign dictation sought to be imposed
upon the Canadian Connexion. This he did at a great sacrifice of
personal feeling, and of personal friendship, as well as of personal
comfort and popularity. He maintained, as he had stipulated in the
articles of Union, that "the rights and privileges of the Canadian
preachers and Societies should be preserved inviolate." He knew that a
Church in a free country like Canada, characterized as it was by
Methodistic zeal and vigour, and yet tempered by the moderation of
Canadian institutions and manners, possessed within itself a spirit of
independence and of growth and progress which would never brook the
official control of a Committee thousands of miles away. To be subject
to even the generous control of such a Committee, possessed of no
practical experience in Canadian matters, would, he knew, doom the
Church to a dwarfed, and unnatural, and a miserable existence. Events
had already proved to Dr. Ryerson (while the Union during 1839-1840 was
in a moribund state) that the Church, controlled by a dominant section
of the British Conference, would be a prey to internal feuds and
jealousies. In the conflicts that would then ensue spiritual life would
die out, missionary zeal would be fitful in its efforts, and every
Church interest would partake largely of a sectional and partizan
character, destructive alike to the symmetry, growth and harmony of
development of a living Church, endowed with rich spiritual life and
free and vigorous in its independent action.
To a person of the statesman-like qualities of mind which Dr. Ryerson
possessed in so high a degree, these things must have been ever present.
They gave evident decision to his thoughts and vigour to his pen. He was
no novice in public or ecclesiastical affairs. He had been trained for
fifteen years in a school of resistance, almost single-handed, to
ecclesiastical domination, and had detected and exposed intrigues,--one
of which was of parties in this conflict, which was entirely derogatory
to the dignity and independence of Methodism in Canada. (See pages
238-241.)
His knowledge of public affairs and of party leaders gave him abundant
insight into the motives and tactics of men bent upon accomplishing pet
schemes and favourite projects. And all of this knowledge had so ripened
his experience that it rendered him the invaluable and trusted leader in
Canadian Methodism, which in those days made his name a household word
in the Methodist homes of Upper Canada. This trust and confidence he
never betrayed. His unswerving fidelity to his Church and people cost
him dearly--the loss of many friends, and the reproaches of many
enemies. But he survived it all, and was enabled, under Providence, to
mould the institutions of Canadian Methodism and even of his native
country. He has left on some of them the impress of his mind and genius,
which it is the pride of Canadians to recognize and acknowledge to this
day.
FOOTNOTES:
[111] The more important parts of the painful proceedings at this
Conference are given in "Epochs of Canadian Methodism," pages 341-358.
The result of this formidable attack on Dr. Ryerson by the English
Missionary party before the Canada Conference, is thus stated by Rev.
Dr. Carroll: "When the Rev. Matthew Richey's motion of condemnation on
the Rev. Egerton Ryerson for his interference in the matter [of the
Government grant of £900 to Wesleyan missions] was put to the
Conference, there were only eight in its favour, several of whom, after
obtaining further light, wished to change their votes; and fifty-nine
against it. Three were excused from voting."--_Case, etc._, vol. iv.,
page 298, note.
CHAPTER XXXV.
1840-1841.
Last Pastoral Charge.--Lord Sydenham's Death.
The following paragraphs, prepared by Dr. Ryerson, refer to this period
of his history:--
In the autumn of 1840, on returning from England, when the English
Wesleyan Committee and Conference seceded from the Union with the
Canadian Conference, I was appointed to Adelaide Street station in
Toronto, which had been filled for two years by the Rev. Dr. Richey--an
eloquent and popular preacher. The separation between the two
Conferences had taken place the week before I assumed the charge of
Adelaide Street station. Dr. Richey had carried off the greater part of
both the private and official members of the Church, and I was left with
but a skeleton of each. When I ascended the pulpit for the first time,
the pews in the body of the church, which had been occupied by those who
had seceded, were empty, and there were but scattered hearers, here and
there, in the other pews and in the gallery. By faith and prayer I had
prepared myself for the crucial test, and conducted the services without
apparent depression or embarrassment. I made no pretensions, and had
never made any, to pulpit eloquence--the motto of my ministry being to
make things plain and strong by previous thought and prayer, and without
verbal preparation. I often went from lying on my back in my study, in
an agony of distress and prayer, to the pulpit, where a divine anointing
seemed to rest upon me, such as I had never before experienced. There
were frequent prayer-meetings in my own study, at six o'clock in the
morning. The result was, by the Divine blessing, that the church was
filled with hearers, and the membership was more than doubled.
At the first Annual Missionary Meeting in the Church after the division,
the President of the Executive Council presided; several members of the
Government were on the platform, and the collections and subscriptions
were more than double those of any previous year. The pretext for this
separation of the English Wesleyan Committee and Conference from the
Canadian Conference, was professed loyalty in Church and State; but both
the Imperial and Canadian Government of that day approved the position
of the Canadian Conference, withdrew and suspended the grant previously
made to the London Wesleyan Missionary Committee during the seven years
of its hostility to the Canadian Conference, and only consented to its
restoration for the joint interests of the two Conferences, and on
recommendation of the Representatives of the Canadian Conference, after
the reconciliation and reunion of the two Conferences, in 1847.
[Illustration: Old Newgate Street (afterwards Adelaide St.) Wesleyan
Church, 1832-1872.]
In October, 1840, Dr. Ryerson addressed a letter of congratulation to
Lord Sydenham, on his elevation to the peerage. He again referred to
the publication of the _Monthly Review_, proposed by His Excellency. In
regard to the latter he said:--
The publication of a monthly periodical such as I suggested to your
Excellency last spring, appears to me now, as it did then, to be of
great importance, in order to mould the thinkings of public men and
the views of the country in harmony with the principles of the new
Constitution and the policy of Your Excellency's administration,
and to secure a rational and permanent appreciation of its objects,
and merits; and it would have afforded me sincere satisfaction to
have given a proper tone and character to a publication of that
kind. But what I have written publicly in reference to the
principles and measures of Your Excellency's Government has already
been productive of serious consequences both to myself and the Body
with which I am connected.
In the discharge of my ecclesiastical duties, I have to devote
several hours of four days in each week to visiting the sick, poor,
and other members of my pastoral charge, and am preparing a series
of discourses on the Patriarchal History, and the Evidences of
Christianity, arising from the discoveries of modern science, and
the testimony of recent travellers, besides the correspondence and
engagements which devolve upon me in the office I hold in the
Methodist Church. Under such circumstances the assumption by me of
the management of such a periodical is impracticable. I could not
do justice to it, nor to my other appropriate duties. I might, in
the course of my miscellaneous reading, select passages from
established authors, which would be suitable for a miscellany at
the end of each number, to illustrate and confirm the principles
discussed in the preceding pages of it. I might now and then
contribute a general article on the Intellectual and Moral Elements
of Canadian Society; or, on the Evils of Party Spirit; or, on the
Necessity of General Unity in order to General Prosperity, etc.,
etc.; but even in these respects I fear I could not render much
efficient aid, from the exhaustion of my physical strength in other
labours, and for want of the requisite time for study, in order to
write instructively and effectively on general subjects.
In the same letter, Dr. Ryerson thus referred to his determination to
take no further part in the discussion of public affairs, owing to the
hostility which his support of Lord Sydenham's policy had excited in
various quarters[112]:--
In retiring from taking any public part in the civil affairs of this
country, I beg to express my grateful sense of the frankness, kindness,
and condescension which I have experienced from Your Excellency. You are
the first Governor of Canada who has taken the pains to investigate the
character and affairs of the Wesleyan Methodist Church for himself, and
not judge and act from hearsay; the first Governor to ascertain my
sentiments, feelings, and wishes from my own lips, and not from the
representations of others. As a body, considering our labours and
numbers, we have certainly been treated unjustly and hardly by the Local
Government. Every effort was used here to deprive us of the Royal
liberality, and Lord Glenelg's recommendations in regard to the Upper
Canada Academy. I think Lord John Russell himself was prepossessed
against me by the representations of Rev. Mr. Alder, and probably of Sir
George Arthur and others. But by your condescension and courtesy I have
been prompted and emboldened to express myself to Your Excellency on all
questions of civil government and the affairs of this country, more
fully than I have to any man living. My private opinions and public
writings have been simultaneously before Your Excellency, together with
all the circumstances under which I have expressed the one and published
the other. I feel confident, therefore, that however I may be
misrepresented by some, or misunderstood by others, I shall have justice
in the estimate and opinions of Your Excellency--that I have been
anything but theoretical or obstinate--that I have shrunk from no
responsibility in the time of need and difficulty--and that my opinions,
whether superficial or well-considered, are such as any common-sense,
practical man, whose connection, associations, and feeling are involved
in the happiness and well-being of the middle classes, might be expected
to entertain.
It is not my intention or wish to obtrude my opinions upon your
attention, except in so far as may be necessary to acquaint Your
Excellency with the interests and wishes of the body whom I have been
appointed to represent. In regard to the many other important questions
embraced in the great objects of your Government, I shall abstain from
any officious interference; although all that may be in my mind or heart
on any subject shall be at the service of Your Excellency when desired.
From what I have witnessed and experienced, I have no doubt that every
possible effort will made to prejudice me in Your Excellency's mind, and
induce Your Excellency to treat the Methodist body in this province as
preceding Governors have done. But I implore Your Excellency to try
another course of proceeding, whether as any experiment, or as an act of
justice. I am persuaded that Your Excellency has found no portion of the
people of this Province more reasonable in their requests, or more
easily conciliated to your views and wishes than the Representatives,
members and friends of the Wesleyan Methodist Church in Canada; and, I
doubt not, Your Excellency will find them cultivating and exhibiting the
same spirit during the entire period (and may it be a long one!) of your
administration of the Government of Canada.
On the 8th of the same month, Dr. Ryerson felt himself constrained to
address a note to Lord Sydenham in regard to the policy of Lord John
Russell's Clergy Reserve Bill, so far as it might affect the question of
public education, in which he was deeply interested. He said that he
conceived the Bill to be most unjust in its provisions, as he had stated
to His Lordship (while it was under consideration of Parliament). He
added: Should the partial and exclusive provisions of the measure
pervade the views and administration of Government in Canada, in regard
to a general system of education, etc., I should utterly despair of ever
witnessing social happiness, general educational culture, or unity in
this country. But I have no doubt the exclusive powers with which the
Bill invests the Governor, will be exerted to counteract the inequality
of its other provisions, and that Your Excellency's whole system of
public policy will be based upon the principles of "equal justice to all
classes of Her Majesty's Canadian subjects." Under these circumstances,
I have suggested to the conductor of the _Christian Guardian_ (from the
editorship of which I retired last June) not to make any remarks on the
Bill which may tend to create dissatisfaction; nor do I intend, for the
same reasons, to publish the letter which my brother and I addressed to
Lord John Russell on the subject. His Lordship said, indeed, that the
Bill was not what he wished, nor could he say it was just; but he had
clearly ascertained that a more liberal one could not be got through the
House of Lords, and he thought that that Bill was better than none.
The Hon. Isaac Buchanan, in a letter to the Editor, dated April
1882,--speaking of these times and events--said:--
I was one of Dr. Ryerson's oldest friends and coöperators that have
survived him. I was first in Toronto (then York) in 1830. Although
not then 20 years of age, I came out to Montreal as a partner in a
mercantile firm; and in the fall of 1831 I came up to York to
establish a branch House. From that time I have known Dr. Ryerson,
and then formed that high opinion of both his abilities and his
character which went on increasing more and more; so that for the
last forty years of his life I have regarded him as Canada's
greatest son. Of late years I seldom met him, but when I did, it
was an inexpressible pleasure to me, as an interchange of the most
unbounded mutual confidences took place between us in our views and
objects. He knew my view of religion,--that as with Spiritual
Religion (which is nothing to the mind unless it is everything), so
with the Religion of Humanity (my name for the removal of all
impediments out of the way of the employment, and of the enjoyment
of living of our own people)--it will not take a second place, but
must be the first question in the politics of every
country--otherwise its Government is a mere political machine. He
knew my belief that the Church Question being in the way of this
people's question, it took the first place among the causes of all
the industrial evils in England and Ireland. With me, therefore, it
was a _sine qua non_ to get quit of our dominant Church nuisance in
Canada, viewing it as a thing in the way of the prosperity of the
people, and therefore as a thing insidiously undermining their
loyalty. I am sure that his views were not far removed from mine in
this matter, and yet not a particle of enmity to the Church ever
affected me, and, I believe, the same thing was true of Dr.
Ryerson. But I felt the insufferable evil of the position it had in
this country, not only as usurping the first place in politics,
which the Labour Question should occupy, but as rendering the
connection with England odious and short-lived. Being one of those
sent for by the Governor-General (Mr. Poulett Thompson) on the
clergy reserve question, I told His Excellency plainly that
although my countrymen, the Scotch, did not hesitate to dissent, as
a matter of conscience, they would not be loyal to a government
that made them dissenters by Act of Parliament.
Five years previous to this, or in 1835, I had, as an extra of the
_Albion_ newspaper, published by Mr. Cull, about the time York
became Toronto, proposed a plan of settlement for the clergy
reserves, fitted to solve the difficulties connected with them,
whether Industrial, Educational, or Political. My proposal was that
an educational tax should be levied, the payments by each church or
sect being shewn in separate columns, and each sect receiving from
the clergy reserve fund, in the proportion of its payments for
education.
This first attempt of mine to get an endowment for education
failed, as there was then no system of Responsible Government. But
five years afterwards (in 1840) when my election for Toronto had
decided the question of Responsible Government, and before the
first Parliament met, I spoke to Lord Sydenham, the
Governor-General, on the subject. He felt under considerable
obligation to me for standing in the breach when Hon. Robert
Baldwin found he could not succeed in carrying Toronto. I told him
that I felt sure that if we were allowed to throw the accounts of
the Province into regular books, we would show a surplus over
expenditure. His Excellency agreed to my proposal, and I stipulated
that, if we showed a surplus, half would be given as an endowment
for an educational system. Happily we found that Upper Canada had a
surplus revenue of about $100,000 a year--half of which the
Parliament of 1841 set aside for education as agreed--the law
stipulating that every District Council getting a share of it would
locally tax for as much more, and this constituted the financial
basis of our educational system. Thus I have given you a glimpse of
the time when Dr. Ryerson and I were active coöperators.
Dr. Ryerson has left no farther record of his two years' ministry in
Newgate (Adelaide) Street circuit, Toronto, than that recorded on page
282. Some incidents of it will be found in the letter of the Rev.
Jonathan Scott, editor of the _Guardian_, on page 294. Rev. I. B.
Howard, Dr. Ryerson's assistant at the time, has also furnished me with
some personal reminiscences of his intercourse with him during the
latter year of Dr. Ryerson's pastoral life. He says:--
When I was Dr. Ryerson's assistant in Toronto, upwards of forty
years ago (in 1841-2), he was studying Hebrew with a private tutor.
As I had previously taken lessons in that language he kindly
invited me to unite with him (at his expense) in this study. This
I did three times a week at his house. On those days I always dined
with him; and as it was his custom to spend the hour before dinner
in devotional reading and prayer, I had the great privilege of
spending this hour with him in his study--and I shall never forget
the sincere, heart-searching, and devout manner in which he
conducted these hallowed exercises, nor the great spiritual
instruction and benefit I received from them. His humble
confessions, earnest pleadings, and fervent spirit deeply impressed
my youthful heart with the fact that he was indeed a man of God.
During that year (one of the few of his regular pastorate) I had
also the privilege of frequently hearing him preach, especially
during eight weeks of special and very successful revival services,
which we held in old Adelaide (then nearly new and known as
"Newgate") Street Church. I have frequently heard him preach since
that time, mostly on special occasions, and always with pleasure
and profit; but never since he left the pastoral work have I heard
from him such earnest, powerful and overwhelming appeals to the
minds, and hearts, and consciences of men, as when, with the
responsibilities and sympathies of a pastor's heart, he delighted,
and moved, and melted the large and admiring audiences which
attended his ministry. I have always believed, that, had he
continued in his pastoral work, he would have been not only an able
and popular, but also in an eminent degree a successful soul-saving
preacher.
During the year I was with him in Toronto, Dr. Ryerson frequently
heard me preach; and as it was only the second year of my ministry
his presence in the congregation was at first a great terror to me;
but the kind words of encouragement, as well as the wise and
fatherly counsels which he frequently gave me soon allayed my
fears, and led me to regard it rather as a privilege than a cross
to have him for a hearer.[113] Would that every young preacher had
such a kind and sympathizing superintendent!
Hon. William Macdougall also bears testimony to the kindness which he
experienced from Dr. Ryerson at this period. He says:
About the year 1840, I was living in the township of Vaughan, and
like other boys of the same class and age, devoting my winters to
school, and my summers to the healthful exercise of the farm. My
father was a good farmer, pretty well-to-do, and I, being the
eldest son, was second in command. He had purchased two or three
uncleared lots in the same township, one of which was designed for
me. I was fond of books, and possessed some good ones, besides I
had made diligent use of a circulating library in the
neighbourhood. We took in a political newspaper, an agricultural
monthly, and the _Christian Guardian_. At this point of my career I
met Dr. Ryerson. He came into our neighbourhood to attend a
missionary meeting, and stopped at my father's house. I was asked
to go with him to his next appointment. We were thus alone together
for some hours. On the way we chatted about temperance, history,
politics, education, etc. The rebellion of 1837, and the political
questions that grew out of it still agitated the public mind. He
spoke of Mackenzie and Rolph; of Baldwin and Bidwell; of Sir
Francis Head and the Family Compact. I discovered that he admired
Bidwell, but disliked Mackenzie. He took much pains to explain to
me some points in reference to the clergy reserve and rectory
questions, and seeing that I was an appreciative listener, he asked
me if I would like to be a politician. I said I would, if I thought
I could overturn the Family Compact, secure the clergy reserves for
education, and drive the Hudson Bay Company out of the North-West.
He looked at me for a moment with an amused expression. The last
plank of my platform seemed to arouse his curiosity. The Hudson Bay
Company and its affairs had not then attracted much notice. He
asked me why I desired to drive out the Hudson Bay Company. I
replied that I had read a lecture by Hon. R. B. Sullivan, on
immigration and the movement of population westward, in which he
described the Great Valley of the Saskatchewan in colours so
glowing, that I wondered why we did not all go there, but on
further enquiry I found that a small body of London Fur-traders
claimed the whole country as a preserve for musk-rats and foxes,
under an old charter from a King who, at the time, did not own a
foot of it; that I thought the fur-traders ought to be compelled to
give up the good land, _vi et armis_, if need be. He said, "My
young friend, your ambition is great; I am afraid you have not
considered the difficulties to be overcome." I felt slightly sat
upon; but I warmed with my subject, and as I had already made
temperance speeches to admiring audiences in the "back
concessions," I was not easily disconcerted. He then made the
remark which forty years afterwards I recalled to his recollection.
"Before you undertake such enterprises you must study law; it is a
noble profession, and in this country is the only sure road to
success in politics. If I had not felt it my duty to preach the
Gospel, I would have studied law myself." I remarked that I had
read articles in the _Christian Guardian_, attributed to him, which
I had heard people say exhibited a great deal of legal knowledge.
He seemed pleased by the compliment, but did not acknowledge the
paternity of the articles. After some further conversation as to my
studies, etc., he recommended me to begin at once to read Latin,
and promised to speak to my father and advise him to let me study
law. He kept his promise; my father rather reluctantly consented,
telling me that if I left home I would lose the farm. You know the
rest.
May I not venture the remark, that if a promising agriculturist was
spoiled by that interview, Dr. Ryerson was the spoiler? and, if
Canada has derived any benefit from my humble labours as
journalist, legislator, executive councillor, etc., he is entitled
to a share of the credit, for, as I loved--and still recall with
envious regret--the unsophisticated pleasures and contentment of a
farmer's life, I would, probably, have pursued the even tenor of my
bucolic way but for his advice and kind-hearted mediation.
In the political controversies that agitated the country from 1850
to 1862, we sometimes crossed swords. In 1865, it became my duty,
as a member of Government, to carry through Parliament an important
measure relating to Grammar Schools. Much to his surprise, I
successfully resisted all attempts at mutilation, for which he
warmly expressed his acknowledgements. During the serious, and
sometimes acrimonious discussions which preceded and followed the
Act of Confederation, I enjoyed the benefit of his approving
sympathy and wise counsel. Others with better warrant may speak of
his great power and achievements as a Christian Minister; but you
will permit me to say that I knew him as a generous friend and
patron of Canadian youth; as a sagacious and resolute man of
affairs; as a staunch defender of the British constitutional system
of government; and as a patriotic, true-hearted son of Canada--_Si
monumentum requiris--circumspice!_
Dr. Ryerson's pastoral charge of the Toronto City Circuit in 1840-41,
and other ministerial duties, engrossed all of his time to the exclusion
of other matters. It seemed to have been a positive relief to him to
engage in these more congenial pursuits. He rarely used his pen, except
on very pressing occasions. He was nevertheless a close observer of
passing events, but took no active part in them.
Lord Sydenham frequently availed himself of Dr. Ryerson's counsel and
co-operation. Shortly before the death of that able Governor, Dr.
Ryerson had gone to Kingston, as requested, on matters of public
interest. The unexpected death of Lord Sydenham, on the 19th of
September, 1841 (the immediate cause of which was a fall from his
horse), called forth a burst of universal sorrow throughout the then
newly created Province of Canada. One of the most touching tributes to
his memory was penned by Dr. Ryerson, while on his way to Kingston to
see him. It was published in the _Guardian_ of the 29th September, and
republished with other notices in a pamphlet by Mr. (now Sir) Francis
Hincks, then editor of the Toronto _Examiner_. From that sketch of Lord
Sydenham's career I take the following concluding passages:--
At the commencement of His Lordship's mission in Upper Canada, when
his plans were little known, his difficulties formidable, and his
Government weak, I had the pleasing satisfaction of giving him my
humble and dutiful support in the promotion of his non-party and
provincial objects; and now that he is beyond the reach of human
praise or censure--where all earthly ranks and distinctions are
lost in the sublimities of eternity--I have the melancholy
satisfaction of bearing my humble testimony to his candour,
sincerity, faithfulness, kindness and liberality. A few days before
the occurrence of the accident which terminated his life, I had the
honour of spending an evening and part of a day in free
conversation with His Lordship; and on that, as well as on former
similar occasions, he observed the most marked reverence for the
truths of Christianity--a most earnest desire to base the civil
institutions of the country upon Christian principles, with a
scrupulous regard to the rights of conscience--a total absence of
all animosity against any person or parties opposed to him--and an
intense anxiety to silence dissensions and discord, and render
Canada contented, happy and prosperous.
... The day before his lamented death he expressed his regret that
he had not given more of his time to religion.... The last hours of
his life were spent in earnest supplications to the Redeemer, in
humble reliance upon whose atonement he yielded up the ghost.
After the publication of this letter in the _Guardian_, Dr. Ryerson
received the following acknowledgment from T. W. C. Murdoch, Esq., late
private Secretary to Lord Sydenham:--
I ought to have thanked you before for the numbers of the
_Guardian_ containing your letter on the death of Lord Sydenham.
That letter I have read over and over again with the deepest
emotion, and I cannot but feel how much more worthily the task of
writing the history of his administration might have been confided
to your hands than to mine. That I shall discharge the duty with
affectionate zeal and good faith, I hope I need not assure you, but
I fear my inability to do justice to so statesmanlike an
administration, or to make apparent to others those nice shades of
policy which constituted the beauty and insured the success of his
government. In the meantime what are we to hope or expect from the
new Governor Sir C. Bagot. My principal confidence is that Sir R.
Peel is too prudent a man to wish discredit to his administration
by allowing the re-introduction of the old, bad system, and that
consequently Sir Charles will be instructed to follow out to the
best of his ability Lord Sydenham's policy.
FOOTNOTES:
[112] In the _Guardian_ of October 7th, 1840, Dr. Ryerson says:--Lord
Sydenham well knows the feelings of reluctance and apprehension under
which I assumed the responsibility of giving my humble and earnest
support to the measures of his government in Upper Canada.... He well
knows that I adopted the course I did with a deep consciousness that it
would be attended with personal sacrifice, with no other expectation or
wish but justice to the church to which I belonged--equal justice to
other churches--and the hope of prosperity to my native country under an
improved and efficient system of government. I did not indeed expect
that hostility against me from London would be prosecuted to the extent
it has been.... I have incurred the censure of the British Conference
for supporting, and not for opposing, the government when it needed my
support, and when it was in my power to have embarrassed it.... As it
respects myself personally, I shall not repine at having made the
sacrifice, if the new system of government but succeeds, and the land of
my birth and affections is made prosperous and happy. Note on page 199.
[113] This the Editor has been assured was also Rev. Dr. Potts'
experience of Dr. Ryerson as a hearer, several years afterwards, and
during the time that he (Dr. Potts) was pastor of the Metropolitan
Church, Toronto.
CHAPTER XXXVI.
1841.
Dr. Ryerson's attitude toward the Church of England.
The constant references in this volume to Dr. Ryerson's attitude of
hostility to the exclusive claims and pretensions put forth on behalf of
the Church of England in this province, require some explanation. His
opponents sought to neutralize this opposition by endeavouring to make
it appear that, because he opposed these claims and ignored these
pretensions, he was hostile to the Church of England as a great
spiritual power in the land.[114] He had himself often pointed out the
fallacy of this reasoning, and drawn so clear a distinction between men
and things in the controversy--the Church and her representatives--that
I cannot add any thing to what he has written on the subject. In one
letter he said:--
I am often charged with hostility to the Church of England. Did I
know nothing of the Church of England except what has been
exhibited in this province, ... how could I have any partiality for
that Church? There is a large and growing branch of the Established
Church in England that I venerate, admire, and love; but there is a
semi-popish branch of it for which I have no such respect, and that
is the branch, with a few individual exceptions, which exists in
this province....
Again, in a letter to Hon. W. H. Draper, on the clergy reserve question,
dated October 12th, 1838, he said:--
I would not derogate an iota from the respect claimed by the Church
of England on account of the prerogatives to which she is legally
entitled [in England]. As the form of religion professed by the
Sovereign and rulers of the Empire--as the Established Church of
the British realm--as the Church which has nursed some of the
greatest statesmen, philosophers, and divines that have
enlightened, adorned, and blest the world, she cannot fail to
command the respect of all enlightened men, whatever may be thought
of the conduct and pretensions of the Canadian branch of that
Church--pretensions which have been virtually repudiated in royal
charters, and contradicted by the entire civil and ecclesiastical
history of the old British colonies.
Dr. Ryerson's attitude to the Church of England was clearly defined in a
private and friendly correspondence between him and John Kent, Esq.,
Editor of _The Church_ newspaper, in 1841-42. (See page 97.) That paper
was established in May, 1837, as the organ of the Church of England in
Upper Canada. It was at first edited by Rev. Dr. (afterwards Bishop)
Bethune, rector of Cobourg. In 1841, John Kent, Esq., became its
editor.[115] In the religions controversies of those days _The Church_,
was ably edited. It was a decided champion of the high church, or
Puseyite party, and, as such it came into constant conflict with the
Wesleyan Methodists and their organ, the _Christian Guardian_, and
especially with its chief editor, Dr. Ryerson. On the 21st December,
1841, Dr. Ryerson wrote a letter for insertion in _The Church_, and
accompanied it with a private note to Mr. Kent. From that letter I make
the following extracts:--
I, as well as my friends, have been the subjects of repeated
strictures in your pages; during the last two years I have replied
not a word, nor published a line in reference to the Church Of
England.
I have stated on former occasions--and perhaps my two years'
silence may now give some weight to the statement--that my
objections had no reference to the existence, or prosperity, of the
Church of England as a Church, but simply and solely to its
exclusive establishment and endowment in Upper Canada, especially,
and indeed entirely, in reference to the clergy reserves. During
the discussions which took place, and which were continued for
years, I wrote many strong things; but nothing on the Episcopal
form of Government, or the formularies, or doctrines of the Church
of England. The doctrines of the Church of England, as contained in
the Articles and Homilies, I always professed to believe. On the
subject of Church Government, I often expressed my views in the
language of Dr. Paley, and in accordance with the sentiments of
many distinguished dignitaries and divines of the Church of
England, that no particular form of Church Government has been
enjoined by the Apostles. I have objected to the Episcopal, or any
other one form of Church Government, being put forth as essential
to the existence of the Church of Christ, and as the only
Scriptural form; but no further. I do not think the form of Church,
any more than the form of civil government, is settled in the
Scriptures; I believe that both are left, as Bishop Stillingfleet
has shown at large, to times, places, and circumstances, to be
determined upon the ground of expediency and utility--a ground on
which Dr. Paley has supported the different orders of the Church of
England with his accustomed clearness, ability and elegance. I
know, on the contrary, that much may be said upon the same ground
in favour of itinerancy, of Presbyterianism, and of independency.
On the subject of forms of prayer, I have never written; though I
have for many years used forms of prayer in private as helps to,
not substitutes for, devotion. I believe the foundation of the
Church of Christ is not laid in forms, but in doctrines....
I believe it would be a moral calamity for either the Church of
England, or Church of Scotland, or the Wesleyan Methodist Church,
the Congregational, or the Baptist Churches to be annihilated in
this province. I believe there are fields of labour which may be
occupied by any one of those Churches with more efficiency and
success than by any of the others. They need not, and I think,
ought not, to be aggressors upon each other....
As there were seven Apostolic Churches in Asia, we believe
ourselves one of the Apostolic Churches in Canada.... Those
persons, who believe that the instruction, and religious advantages
and privileges afforded by our Church will more effectually aid
them in working out their salvation than those which they can
command in any other part of the general fold of Christ, are
affectionately received under our watch-care; but not on account of
our approximation to, or our dissent from, the Church of England,
or any other Church.
With the settlement of the clergy reserve question ended my
controversy with the Church of England, as I have again and again
intimated that it would. Churches, as well as individuals, may
learn wisdom from experience. I therefore, submit, whether the
controversies and their characteristic feelings between the Church
of England and the Wesleyan Methodist Church in this province ought
not to cease, with the removal of the causes which produced
them?... Whether both Churches are not likely to accomplish more
religious and moral good by directing their energies against
prevalent vice and ignorance than by mutual warfare?
Dr. Ryerson concludes his letter in the following truthful and striking
language:--
I intend no offence when I express my conviction that the Church of
England in this province has vastly greater resources for doing
good than for warring with other Protestant Churches. I know her
weak points, as well as her strong towers. I am not a stranger to
the appropriate weapons for assailing the one, and for neutralizing
the strength of the other. And you have not to learn that it is
easier to deface than to beautify--to pull down a fair fabric than
to rear a common structure; and that a man may injure others
without benefitting himself. On the other hand I am equally
sensible that the Wesleyan Methodist Church has nothing to gain by
controversy; but I am quite sure, from past experience, as well as
from present aspects, that she has not so much to fear, to risk, or
to lose, as the Church of England. If controversy be perpetuated
between your Church and our own, I wash my hands from all
responsibility of it--even should the duty of self-defence compel
me to draw the sword which I had, in inclination and intention,
sheathed for ever. History, and our own experience to some extent,
abounds with monitory lessons, that personal disputes may convulse
churches, that ecclesiastical controversies may convulse provinces,
and lead to the subversion of governments....
In his private note to Mr. Kent, Dr. Ryerson said:--
I have long been impressed with the conviction that Canada could
not prosper under the element of agitation. I supported the Union
of the Canadas with a view to their civil tranquility. I believe my
expectations will be realized. In our new state of things I desire
not to be considered as standing in an attitude of hostility to the
Church of England, any more than to any other Church. I have wished
and resolved to leave civil and ecclesiastical party politics with
the former bad state of things. Travelling, observation and
experience, have been a useful school to me, and time will do
justice to the merits or demerits of my motives and conduct.
On the 22nd of December, Mr. Kent replied to Dr. Ryerson:--
Do not think that I wish to meet you coldly. I would gladly fling
away the weapons of strife. The warfare in which I am engaged, and
which I dare not decline, is literally embittering my existence,
and pressing upon me very severely. I am not aware that I have in
any way personally attacked you, or ever by name, since the
commencement of my editorial career. I should hail a day of concord
with overflowing joy. I should rejoice to see your powerful, acute,
and vigorous mind exerting itself in a manner that we should all
consider serviceable to the cause of loyalty and the Protestant
religion.
From a glance at your letters, I fondly hope that some gleam of
light is breaking in upon us all. My firm conviction is that the
doctrine of the apostolical succession will be the bond of union
and the cementer of differences, now apparently impossible. You
must have studied the question--and how can your vivid and clear
mind elude its force? Must there not be some one apostolical mode
of conferring the ministerial functions, or must it be open to all,
and Quakerism be right? I do not think I have been the assailant.
The _Guardian_ is outrageously personal and unscrupulous in its
misstatements.... I am far from thinking that I am meek and gentle
enough; but I have carefully excluded personalities,--though I
readily concede that my course of argument, which pervades all I
write or select, has been to cut away the ground from under the
feet of every denomination in the province, outside of the Church.
The papists, I firmly believe, are meditating some grand movement
all over the world; and it would be glorious indeed if Protestants
could find a common centre of union. But what can I, in my humble
way, do? I dare not drop the necessity of the apostolical
succession,--though I might dwell less upon it, and avoid, as much
as possible, as I always have done, to mix it up with offence to
other denominations. Yet, as I before intimated, the assertion and
maintenance of it, in the simplest and least controversial manner,
must ever provoke hostility. It is an endless subject to get
upon....
I shall be very happy to call on you at an early opportunity, and
obtain, or rather revive, the pleasure of your personal
acquaintance. It would be the happiest Christmas I ever spent, if
it witness the extinction of long theological enmities, and the
dawn of an era of Christian concord and love.
On the 29th December, Dr. Ryerson wrote a private note again to Mr.
Kent. He said:--I was glad to learn by the last _Church_ that you will
give my remarks a place in your columns, and that you cordially and
elegantly respond to the general spirit and design of them....
I have had a correspondence with the Editor of the _Guardian_ in
reference to the mode of conducting it, in regard to the Church of
England, and in some other respects. I am happy to be able to say that
he has at length yielded to my reasonings and recommendations, and will,
I have no doubt, conduct the _Guardian_ in accordance with the general
views expressed in my communications to you.[116] To-day's _Guardian_,
as you see, presents a visible and agreeable improvement in the points
referred to.
I blame you not for your strict and high principles as a churchman, but
I do not think that you do now make sufficient allowance for difference
of forms and ceremonies in the common faith of Protestantism. I think
you should allow as much as Archbishop (Lord Keeper) Williams has done,
and as much as is involved in the passage quoted by him from Irenæus.
Why should we be "unchurched" any more than the continental churches?
Mr. Kent, in reply to Dr. Ryerson (31st December), said:--
I trust you will think that in the remarks which I have made on
your letter in _The Church_, I have met your overtures in a pacific
and cordial spirit. I am sure that my remarks will be much more
acceptable to churchmen, so far as such remarks are friendly to
you, than they will be to others not belonging to our pale. I have
not consulted a soul about what I have written, nor have I shown
your pleasing reply to my first note to any one save good and safe
Mr. Henry Rowsell; though I should like to show it to Rev. H. J.
Grasett, and Bishop Strachan. You need never be afraid of what you
say to me in confidence.... It is certainly much more consistent in
you (provided only you get rid of Mr. Wesley's authority, and then,
by the way, you destroy your genealogy and succession) to call
yourselves a Church, than to be of the Church and not in it.... You
are said to possess some fine old Divinity works. You cannot have
read them without some approximation to our Church.
You are not in the position of the continental Churches. No
constraint is upon you. You can get Episcopacy, if you desire it.
Neither does the Church of England stand relatively towards you, as
the Gallican Church towards the Huguenots. You admit the purity of
our doctrine, and do not consider our discipline unscriptural. If
you were to read Bishop Stillingfleet on Separation, I think you
would open up new trains of thought. I just became so staunch an
Episcopalian, from viewing the matter extrinsically of Scripture
and history, and was led to conclude, from the nature of things,
that there can be but one valid ministry.
You are certainly a _Prospero_. You have waved your magic wand over
the _Guardian_. I saw it in an instant, and saw that you had done
it. I purposely, in my editorial, abstained from all allusions to
our confidential intercourse, or I would have thanked you for this
exercise of your healing influence.
It is by no means an unpleasing marvel that you and I, on the last
day of 1841, should be conversing so pleasantly and amicably. I
trust that peace and amity will flourish still more!
Do me the favour to accept a slight New Year's gift at my hands.
Dr. Ryerson wrote a reply to the strictures of _The Church_ newspaper,
and on the 26th addressed a private note on the subject to Mr. Kent, in
which he said:--
... The great difference between us seems to be that I value what I
hold to be the cardinal doctrines, and morals and interests of
Christianity, above either Churchism or Methodism. So that those
interests are advanced, either through the Church of England, or
Church of Scotland, or any other Protestant Church, I therein do
rejoice and will rejoice. You make the Church of England first of
all--essential to all--all in all; and that all who are not in the
Church of England are enemies to the Church of Christ, "strangers
to the covenants of promise, and aliens from the commonwealth of
Israel." ... It is true you have exempted me by way of compliment;
but no intelligent man would wish to hold his religious intercourse
and standing on the tenor of a compliment; and that too at the
expense of his ecclesiastical connexion and general principles. If
I cannot but be viewed as an enemy of the Church of England as a
Methodist, it is a poor compliment to tell me that I am friendly to
it as a man. I do not understand the hair-splitting casuistry which
separates the man from the Christian....
I believe in your perfect sincerity and personal disinterestedness
and kindness, but I must say that you do not appear from the last
_Church_ to suppose it possible for a man to think in a different
channel from yourself without endangering his title to the skies,
or to common sense, and without absolutely forfeiting his claim to
orthodox Christianity. I refer not all to your maintenance of
apostolic succession, but to your unqualified reprobation of the
motives, feelings, and character of all who are not of your own
fold. How different are the sentiments and spirit of Bishop
Onderdonk's essay in support of the "Divine Right of Episcopacy"
from those of your articles in the last _Church_? Now, though we
may be without the attributes of what you believe to be a
scripturally constituted Church, we are not without the attributes
and feelings of men.... The apparatus of the Church of England is
surprisingly powerful when spiritually, rightly, and
comprehensively applied; but to build your structure like an
inverted pyramid, and to rouse every one not of you into warfare
against you, does not appear to me to be sound in theory, or wise
in practice.
Mr. Kent, in a private reply, dated 3rd February, said:--
I have read your letter over so as to prepare my remarks. In doing
this I anticipate no trouble. On the contrary, I hope to strengthen
my position and give greater weight to my axioms respecting the
duties of Churchmen in withholding aid from all religious societies
unconnected with the Church. I find, however, that your tone of
remark is excessively warm and indignant; and, deeming from the
tenor of your conversation on Thursday last, that you have doubts
on your mind respecting church government, and feeling convinced
that if ever you are led to subscribe to the indispensable
obligations of episcopacy, ... you will admit the validity of my
reasons for acting and writing as I do--under all these
circumstances I feel bound to ask you to meditate whether you will
not withdraw your letter. I give you my sacred honour that I do not
dread its effects. But I feel this, that should you ever experience
and avow a change of opinion in reference to the matters that are
now engaging your attention, it will be brought up against you by
your enemies, and may altogether prove a constant embarrassment.
Should you withdraw it, I will only mention the matter to Mr.
Grasett, who has already seen it. Should you determine on its
insertion, it shall appear next Saturday.
Dr. Ryerson did not withdraw his letter, and it appeared in _The Church_
of February 5th. The personal correspondence, however, ended here.
In accounting for his decided opposition to a church establishment in
Upper Canada, Dr. Ryerson said:--
Before I was twenty years of age I had read Paley's Political
Philosophy, including his chapters on the British Constitution and
a Church Establishment; Locke on Government, and especially
Blackstone's Commentaries, particularly those parts on the Rights
of the Crown and the Rights of the Subject. From Paley I learned
that a Church Establishment is no part of Christianity, but a means
of supporting it, and a means which should be used only when the
majority of the people are of the religion thus supported. From
Blackstone I learned that the Church of England is the Established
Church of England and Ireland, but not of any colony, except under
one or more of three conditions, none of which existed in Upper
Canada. Upon the grounds, therefore, furnished by Blackstone and
Paley, I opposed the erection of a Church Establishment in Upper
Canada, without touching the question of a Church Establishment in
England.
Dr. Ryerson in a letter to a friend, thus refers to his early
experiences in regard to the Church of England:--
Although I had no opportunity of attending the service of the Church of
England until I was nearly twenty years of age, I made the Homilies and
Prayer Book, with the Bible, very constant companions of travel and
subjects of study. I drew my best pulpit illustrations from them, at the
very time that I was controverting the pretensions of the leaders of
that Church to exclusive establishment and supremacy in Upper Canada;
and, in so doing, I had the sympathies and support of a large portion of
the members of the Church of England, in addition to the unanimous
support of the members of other religious denominations. I felt that I
was preaching the Protestant Reformation doctrines of the Church of
England; and throughout life I have loved the Church of England with all
its faults, only second to that of my own church. I declined the offer
of ordination in the Church of England [page 206] several months after I
commenced preaching on a Methodist circuit, simply and solely upon the
ground that I was indebted to the Methodists for all the religious
instruction and influences I had experienced. I believed that I would be
more useful among them, though my life would be, as then appeared, one
of privation and labour. During the first four years of my ministry, my
salary amounted to less than one hundred dollars per annum, and during
the next twelve years (after my marriage) my salary did not exceed six
hundred dollars a year, including house rent and fuel.
In a letter written on the 28th October, 1843, to the Editor of the
_Guardian_ by Dr. Ryerson, he says:--
It is still, as it has long been, the position with the Editor of _The
Church_ and writers of his school to represent the efforts of other
Churches to maintain their own equal rights and privileges as hostility
to the Church of England.... Who proposed peace, and who has perpetuated
war--aggressive war? [page 292.] ... Who is it that proclaims bodies
prior to his own in Western Canada as "Dissenters," and seeks by every
species of unfair statement and insinuation to injure and degrade
them--both politically and religiously--and substantially maintaining
that Civil Government itself is an appropriate Providential instrument
to put down "dissent." For one, I have as yet been silent under this
provocation, insult, and proscription.
Circumscribed must his views be who does not perceive that "Puseyism,"
both in a religious and civil point of view, will soon become a far more
important question for the consideration and decision of the inhabitants
of Western Canada than that of the seat of Government, or than even that
of the University. And the day is hastening apace, when it will be a
prime matter of inquiry with them to determine ... whether they will
quietly consent to have their civil rights and liberties placed in any
form in the hands of men who regard the great majority of their
Christian fellow-subjects as unbaptized heathens and aliens in a
Christian country. Such is the issue to which _The Church_ is bringing
matters in Western Canada.[117]
* * * * *
In a journey from Kingston to Toronto by stage, which Dr. Ryerson made
in February, 1842, Bishop Strachan was a fellow passenger. Dr. Ryerson
thus speaks of the agreeable intercourse which he had with the Bishop on
that occasion:--
For the first time in my life I found myself in company with the Lord
Bishop of Toronto. He was accompanied by Mr. T. M. Jones, his
son-in-law, and Mr. Jarvis (Indian Department), very pleasant
companions, nor could I desire to meet with a more affable, agreeable
man than the Bishop himself. It would be unpardonable to introduce
remarks ... of one's neighbours ... into travelling notes in any form,
but there has been something so peculiar in the relations of "John
Toronto" and "Egerton Ryerson," that I must beg, in this instance, to
depart from a general rule. Conversation took place on several topics,
on scarcely any of which did I see reason to differ from the Bishop. He
spoke of the importance to us of getting our College at Cobourg
endowed--that an annual grant was an insufficient dependence--that as
the clergy reserve question had been settled by law, we had as much
right to a portion of the clergy lands as the Church of England--that as
we did not desire Government support for our ministers, we ought to get
our proportion appropriated to the College, as religious education was
clearly within the provisions of the Clergy Reserve Act. Valuable
suggestions, for which I thanked his lordship. I took occasion to advert
to what had excited the strongest feelings in my own mind, and in the
minds of our people generally--namely imputations on our loyalty to the
Government and laws of the country. The Bishop, with his characteristic
energy, said that what he had written on the subject he could at any
time prove--that he never represented or supposed that the Methodist
body of people were disaffected; nor had he represented or supposed that
those preachers who had been born and brought up in the country were
disloyal; but he was satisfied that such was the case with the majority
of those who used to come from the United States. I felt that the whole
matter was one of history, and not of practical importance in reference
to present interests; and I was much gratified in my own mind to find
that the real question, as one of history, was the proportion of
preachers who formerly came from the United States, and the character
and tendency of their feelings and influence; for no preachers have come
from the United States to this country these many years, and we have
none but British subjects in the Canada Conference.
After parting with the Bishop at Cobourg, in analyzing the exercises of
my own mind, I found myself deeply impressed with the following facts
and considerations:--
1. That the settlement of the clergy reserve question had annihilated
the principal causes of difference between those individuals and bodies
in this province who had been most hostile to each other.
2. That how much asperity of feeling, and how much bitter controversy
might be prevented, if those most concerned would converse privately
with each other before they entered into the arena of public
disputation.
3. That how much more numerous and powerful are the reasons for
agreement than for hostility in the general affairs of the country, even
among those who differ most widely on points of religious doctrine and
polity.[118]
FOOTNOTES:
[114] I have already on pages 41 and 206 mentioned the overtures which
were made to Dr. Ryerson by the late Bishop Stewart of Quebec to induce
him to enter the ministry of the Church of England. See also page 97.
[115] "From 1841 to 1843 the editorial management of _The Church_ was
assumed by Mr. John Kent, who had been a valuable contributor to its
pages from the commencement. The excitement, however, amid the clash and
din of party strife was too much for him, and the paper came back to its
first editor, who held it again ... for nearly four years.... It
gradually lost ground, and died out ... in 1856. Memoir of Bishop
Strachan by Bishop Bethune," page 159.
[116] From Dr. Ryerson's letter to Rev. J. Scott, Editor of the
_Guardian_, I make the following extracts:--I take the liberty to
mention two or three things that I have seen in the _Guardian_ which
have caused me some pain and concern. I refer to your mode and style of
controversy with "_The Church_." During, and since my late tour to the
West, I have heard several preachers and some others allude to it, and
nearly all in terms of regret. I set down the questions as they occur to
my own mind.
1. We have no controversy with the Church of England as a Church
Establishment. We have disclaimed opposing, or doing anything to
disparage the Church Establishment in England.... 2. Then on the subject
of church polity. Your articles, especially the series entitled
"Dissent, etc., No Wonder"--were put forth as a defence.... But which of
our institutions did they defend? The burden of them went to prove that
the Church of England is unscriptural in its polity, union with the
state, etc. Suppose all this were true, would it prove that our own
Church is apostolic and Scriptural? To prove that our neighbours are
black, does not prove that we are white. We do not profess to build up
ourselves upon the ruin of any body else, or to be "foragers" upon
others, although we readily accept members of other churches when they
offer themselves. To prove that Presbyterian ordination is valid (as did
the valuable series of articles copied by you from the _Wesleyan
Magazine_, and Powell, on Apostolic Succession) defends our ordination.
To prove that the Church of England is wrong and rotten from beginning
to end cannot be a defence of ourselves. It may, indeed, please some of
our friends; but it also tends to prove that we are settled enemies to
the Church of England in all its forms and features, as well as in its
union with the state.
Far be it from me to look upon the things I have mentioned as
characteristics of the _Guardian_; I look upon them as blemishes, and as
drawbacks from its usefulness--objects which I know are scarcely less
dear to your heart than life itself. If we narrow our own foundations by
such sweeping denunciations against the Church of England, and
strictures on persons without our communion, ... we multiply our
opponents, and reduce the circulation of our journal within the circle
of our own members.
I am sensible of my own errors, deficiency and unworthiness; but I have
felt that I should not do my duty to you as a brother beloved, and one
from whom I have received too many proofs of regard, and so much aid in
my labours, without thus telling you what was in my heart.
Rev. Mr. Scott at first felt aggrieved and disappointed on receiving
this letter and a personal correspondence between him and Dr. Ryerson
ensued, which, however, ended satisfactorily. In a letter to Dr.
Ryerson, written in 1864--23 years afterwards,--Mr. Scott thus recalls
the reminiscence of his career as Editor of the _Guardian_. He says:--My
esteemed friend: You and I have not always thought alike (and what is
manliness worth that is not independent enough to disagree?) but as age
advances I have an increasing pleasure in recalling to mind the years,
when you were Superintendent of old Adelaide street Church, and I was
your supplementary helper,--in joint intercession with the humbled at
night--in the damp basement, and during the day pursuing the penitents
in dirty taverns, and the dens of dirtier March [now Lombard] street,
the sainted Mrs. S. E. Taylor praying for us; and Christ won many souls.
Since then what progress Scriptural Christianity--Methodism--has made in
Canada! I trust that when you repose in the tomb, and I am beneath some
quiet sod of loved Canada, we shall meet those again for whose salvation
we laboured. In the words of an ancient wish: May your last days be your
best days! Mr. Scott entered the ministry in 1834; and died at Brampton,
May 5th, 1880, aged 77.
[117] In this connection see the significant conclusion of the note on
page 291.
[118] This incident might also form a fitting sequel to chapter xxvii,
page 213.
CHAPTER XXXVII.
1841-1842.
Victoria College.--Hon. W. H. Draper.--Sir Chas. Bagot.
Amongst the last public acts performed by Lord Sydenham was the giving
of the Royal assent to a Bill for the erection of the Upper Canada
Academy into a College with University powers. This he did on the 27th
August, 1841. Dr. Ryerson thus refers to the event, in a letter written
from Kingston on that day:--
The establishment of such an institution by the members of the
Wesleyan Methodist Church in Canada attests their estimate of
education and science; and the passing of such an act unanimously
by both Houses of the Legislature, and the Royal assent to it by
His Excellency in Her Majesty's name, is an ample refutation of
recent statements and proceedings of the Wesleyan Committee in
London ... while the Act itself will advance the paramount
interests of literary education amongst Her Majesty's Canadian
subjects.... For the accomplishment of this purpose, a grant must
be added to the charter--a measure ... honourable to the
enlightened liberality of the Government and Legislature. When they
are securely laying a broad foundation for popular government, and
devising comprehensive schemes for the development of the latent
resources of the country, and the improvement of its internal
communication, and proposing a liberal system of common school
education, free from the domination of every church, and aiding
colleges which may have been established by any church, we may
rationally and confidently anticipate the arrival of a long-looked
for era of civil government and civil liberty, social harmony, and
public prosperity.
In October, 1841, Dr. Ryerson was appointed Principal of the
newly-chartered College, and on the 21st of that month, he opened its
first session by a practical address to the students.
At the close of that address he said:--
His late Most Gracious Majesty William IV., of precious memory,
first invested this institution, in 1836, with a corporate charter
as an Academy--the first institution of the kind established by
Royal Charter, unconnected with the Church of England, throughout
the British Colonies. It is a cause of renewed satisfaction and
congratulation, that, after five years' operation as an Academy, it
has been incorporated as a College, and financially assisted by the
unanimous vote of both branches of the Provincial
Legislature,--sanctioned by more than an official cordiality, in
Her Majesty's name, by the late lamented Lord Sydenham, one of
whose last messages to the Legislative Assembly was, a
recommendation, to grant £500 as an aid to the Victoria College....
We have buoyant hopes for our country when our rulers and
legislators direct their earliest and most liberal attention to its
literary institutions and educational interests. A foundation for a
common school system in this province has been laid by the
Legislature, which I believe will at no distant day, exceed in
efficiency any yet established on the American Continent;[119] and
I have reason to believe that the attention of Government is
earnestly directed to make permanent provision for the support of
colleges also, that they may be rendered efficient in their
operation, and accessible to as large a number of the enterprising
youth of our country as possible.
[Illustration: University of Victoria College, Cobourg.]
Dr. Ryerson, although appointed Principal of the newly chartered
Victoria College in October, 1841, did not relinquish his pastoral
duties as Superintendent of the Toronto City Circuit until the
Conference of June, 1842. His appointment as General Secretary of the
Wesleyan Missionary Society, in 1840, necessitated his constant
attendance during the winter season at missionary-meetings.
Correspondence, consultation, and committee meetings filled up such time
as he could spare from his duties as Superintendent of the Circuit. His
was indeed a busy life; and by his untiring energy and industry he was
enabled to give more than the usual time to the various departments of
the Church's work. His aid and counsel was constantly being sought in
these things, and was as freely given as though he had the most abundant
leisure at his command. In February, 1842, he went to Kingston to attend
its missionary anniversary. While there he says:--
In an interview which I had with Sir Charles Bagot, the new
Governor-General, it affords me a satisfaction I cannot express, to
be able to say that, in advancing the interests of Victoria
College, and in securing the rights and interests of our Church,
Sir Charles Bagot will not be second to Lord Sydenham--that while,
as a man and a Christian, His Excellency is a strict and
conscientious churchman, as a Governor he will know no creed or
party in his decisions and administration.... I believe that it is
a principle of His Excellency's Government, in public appointments,
etc., qualifications and character being equal, to give the
preference to native and resident inhabitants of the
province--those who have suffered in the privations, have grown
with the growth, and strengthened with the strength of the country.
Sir Charles has the wisdom and experience of sixty-three years, and
the buoyant activity of our public men of forty. If I mistake not,
the characteristics of his government will be impartiality and
energy--not in making further changes, but,--in consolidating and
maturing the new institutions which have been established amongst
us--in obliterating past differences, in developing the latent
resources of the country, and in raising up a "united, happy, and
prosperous people."
In March, 1842, the question was raised as to the right of ministers of
the Wesleyan Methodist Church in Canada, who had been members of the old
organization of the Methodist Episcopal Church in Upper Canada, to
solemnize matrimony, or for the Conference legally to hold church
property. Dr. Ryerson prepared a case on the subject, and submitted it
to Hon. R. S. Jameson, the Attorney-General, for his opinion. The
opinion of the Attorney-General was conclusive in favour of these
rights, and thus this troublesome question, so often raised by
adversaries, was finally set at rest.
The transition period between the death of Lord Sydenham and the arrival
of his successor, Sir Charles Bagot, was marked by much uncertainty in
political matters. In September, 1842, Dr. Ryerson wrote to his friend,
Mr. John P. Roblin, the Liberal M.P.P. for Prince Edward county, on the
apparently threatening aspect of affairs. Mr. Roblin, in his reply,
dated Kingston, September 16th, said:[120]
The political sea has indeed appeared rough; the clouds were dark
and ominous of a dreadful storm. But I am happy to say that they
have passed away, and the prospect before us is now favourable.
There were in the House quite a large majority against ministers;
this they plainly saw, and, therefore, shaped their course to avert
the blow. Hon. W. H. Draper stated distinctly that it was, and had
been, his opinion, that the Lower Canadians should have a fair
proportion of members in the Executive Council, and for that
purpose he had no less than three times tendered his resignation;
that he was ready to go out, and would do so at any moment. Hon. R.
Baldwin certainly occupies a proud position at present, and may
continue to do so, if he is not too punctilious. The arrangement,
which it is understood has been come to, is that Messrs. Ogden,
Draper, and Sherwood go out, and that Mr. L. H. Lafontaine comes in
as Attorney East; Mr. Baldwin, Attorney-General West; Mr. T. C.
Aylwin, Solicitor-General East; Mr. James E. Small, or some other
Liberal, as the third man. This will make a strong Government, for
it can command a large majority in the House. It is true that the
gentleman you mentioned, and a few others will be dead against it,
but they are a small minority, and will form a wholesome check.
No man would regret more than I would to see the country thrown
into confusion at this time. I entertain a high opinion of the
Governor-General (Sir Charles Bagot.) He certainly has shown a
disposition to do everything he consistently could to give
satisfaction to the prominent party, and being (as he is) of the
Tory school, and appointed by a Tory ministry, he certainly is
deserving of much credit for going as far as he did to meet the
views of the Reformers.
The following was the only record left by Dr. Ryerson of his
principalship of Victoria College:--At the end of two years' labours in
the station of Adelaide Street Church (the predecessor of the present
Metropolitan Church), I was again wrested from my loved work by an
official pressure brought to bear upon me to accept the Presidency of
Victoria College, which was raised from Upper Canada Academy to a
College, and opened and inaugurated, in 1842, as a University College.
* * * * *
On the 3rd of August, 1842, the Wesleyan University at Middletown,
Connecticut, conferred on the Principal of Victoria College the degree
of D.D. His old and valued friend Francis Hall, Esq., proprietor of the
New York _Commercial Advertiser_, was the first to convey to him the
pleasing intelligence. He said:
Perhaps this will be the first communication from Middletown which
announces to Victoria College that its head is Rev. Egerton
Ryerson, D.D. May you long live to enjoy the distinguished title! I
hope to take you by the hand in a few days, and congratulate you
personally.
On the 21st of June, 1842, Dr. Ryerson was, with appropriate ceremonies,
formally installed as Principal of Victoria College. The Editor of this
volume well remembers what a joyful day it was for the College; and how
heartily and kindly the new Principal spoke words of encouragement to
each of the students then present. On that occasion he delivered a
carefully prepared inaugural address, which was afterwards published in
pamphlet form and widely circulated. On the 10th September, he sent a
copy of the address to Hon. W. H. Draper. In his note Dr. Ryerson called
Mr. Draper's attention to what he conceived to be the defective nature
of the provisions for the education of law-students, before their
entrance on the study of the law (pages 24 and 25 of the address). To
this Mr. Draper replied on the 16th. He also added an explanation in
regard to his present position in the Government. He said:--
I have perused your address with much satisfaction. The Law Society
of Upper Canada, by appointing a well-qualified examiner last term,
will, I think, forward your views as to the education which should
precede the study of that profession.
By the recent changes which have taken place, I have no longer the
right to visit Victoria College officially; but I hope that I may
be favoured with an opportunity of doing so in my private capacity.
You will not, I trust, consider it intrusive in me to briefly state
the cause of my retirement from the Cabinet. I have long considered
the Government in a false position, while the French Canadians saw
in the Council no person acquainted with their wants and
wishes--able and willing to look after their interests, and in whom
they had confidence. Apprehending from what took place in the
beginning of last session that they might refuse to take office
with me, I signified several months ago my readiness to retire if
that were the case. In July I renewed that offer. And now, when a
negotiation was opened on, it appeared that they would not come in
without Mr. Baldwin. I again offered my resignation, because,
taking the view I do of his conduct when we were last in Council
together, I feel I should not be in that body if he were there
also. From that moment I ceased to advise or have anything to do
with the matter. Had every other part of it been satisfactory to
me, or had it been altered so as to make it satisfactory,
nevertheless his being brought in inevitably put me out. Should you
hear my conduct canvassed and misunderstood, this explanation will,
I trust, set it right.
To Mr. Draper's letter Dr. Ryerson replied, and on the 7th October again
wrote, asking him to deliver an address to the students at the opening
of the session. In his letter Dr. Ryerson said:--
I deeply regret any occurrence which would deprive Canada of the
advantage of your official counsels. I have observed your public
conduct throughout, and it has been such in my estimation, as I
have felt it a pleasurable duty to appreciate and defend, even in
the most doubtful and trying circumstances. You now enjoy the proud
distinction of advising and assisting, on public grounds, to form a
government, from which, on personal grounds, you have felt it your
duty to retire. You cannot suppose that I entertain a less exalted
opinion of your disinterestedness and high sense of honour, when
the strong opinions I have again and again expressed of it, have
been more than realized by your present patriotic and noble course
of proceeding.
In regard to the address which I have solicited you to deliver at
the opening of the next session of our College, I desire to state
that you will of course make it long or short, as you like,
although I should like it long. It is my intention to get, if
possible, some gentleman of high public standing and literary
talent to deliver an address at the commencement of each collegiate
year. I think that such addresses will have a salutary influence
upon the taste and feeling and ambition of the students; and the
notices and publication of them in the newspapers will tend to
elevate the standard of the public taste, and will, I think, be
useful to public men themselves. I shall be gratified, and I am
sure good will ensue, from your appearing before the public in a
somewhat new character.
To this letter Mr. Draper replied, on the 10th October:--
I find that, consistently with my professional engagements at the
different assizes (which are now of paramount importance to me), I
cannot prepare an address so as to do justice to your request. If
it involved only the attendance on the day, I would cheerfully make
some sacrifice to accomplish it; but there is more, for I would
wish, if I undertook the task, to perform it well, and try to
approximate the favourable expectation of those who were willing to
entrust it to me; and for this end I cannot devote time enough out
of the short interval between this and the latest day named by you.
Accept my assurance that I feel great reluctance in declining your
proposal. The compliment it conveyed was highly gratifying to me
under existing circumstances, and I should have felt sincere
pleasure in exciting my humble abilities in favour of an
institution to which, when I had fuller opportunities, I had
endeavoured to be of use (page 179). Accept my acknowledgements for
the kindness and courtesy of your other remarks in reference to
myself.
Sir Charles Bagot did not long hold the office of Governor-General. Like
Lord Sydenham, he was unexpectedly stricken by the hand of death, at
Kingston, on the 19th May, 1843. A sketch of his life and character was
prepared by Dr. Ryerson and published in the Kingston _Chronicle_. In
that sketch he said:--
Sir Charles Bagot has created throughout the length and breadth of
United Canada the settled and delightful conviction that its
Government is henceforth to be British, as well as Colonial--and,
as such, the best on the continent of America; that Canadians are
to be governed upon the principle of domestic, and not
transatlantic, policy; that they are not to be minified as men and
citizens, because they are colonists; that they are (to use the
golden words of Sir Robert Peel) "to be treated as an integral
portion of the British Empire."
This sketch was very favourably received by the leading public men of
Canada, and, after it appeared in the _Chronicle_, was reprinted by
Stewart Derbyshire, Esq., Queen's Printer, who, in a letter to Dr.
Ryerson on the subject, said:--
Your letter in the _Chronicle_ has attracted high admiration in the
quarters most competent for criticism, and it is felt you have done
a real service to the country. Supposing your wish is to diffuse
the sentiments of your letter, I have taken the liberty of giving
it to our printers of the _Canada Gazette_ to set up in handsome
type, 8 octavo pages, and shall strike off 1,000, and send about,
giving away a good many, and putting the rest at book-stores at a
very small price. The common run of people do not value what they
do not pay for. Have I acted in this in accordance with your
wishes--or do you interdict the publication? Many extra copies of
the _Chronicle_ were struck off, and about forty copies sent to-day
to England by the steamer "Great Western." Sir Robert Peel, Lord
Stanley, and Sir Charles Buller had one each.
Dr. Ryerson assented to the republication of his letter.
* * * * *
In the light of after events, the following extract from a letter
received by Dr. Ryerson from Hon. R. B. Sullivan, dated Kingston, 21st
July, 1843, is somewhat interesting. Mr. Sullivan had placed one of his
sons under Dr. Ryerson's care at Victoria College. After referring to
matters relating to the education of youth, Mr. Sullivan proceeded:--"I
hope that our friendship will be a sufficient inducement to you to teach
my boy that upon his own good conduct under Providence his future
happiness depends, and to give him that steadfastness of mind which lads
naturally want. In asking these things of you, I place myself under no
common obligation. There is no man in Canada of whom I would ask the
same. My doing so of you arises from a respect and regard for you
personally, which has grown as we have been longer acquainted, and which
no prejudices on the part of those with whom I have mixed, and no
obloquy heaped upon you by others, have ever shaken."
* * * * *
It is pleasant to get a kind word from those who approve of one's
course. It is pleasanter to get it from those who have been indifferent,
or even hostile. Thus, in a letter from Rev. Matthew Holtby to Dr.
Ryerson, written in March, 1842, he said:
Soon after I arrived here from England, I became acquainted with
you and your writings, and ever since, I have watched your course,
often with painful and prayerful anxiety. It is long since I
doubted the propriety of your public conduct, or the justice of
your cause; but as I observed the storm gathering around you, and
the winds blowing into a hurricane, from all the cardinal points at
once, I have had my fears, that you might faint in the apparently
unequal conflict. Thank God, he has delivered you--he has enabled
you to stand at the helm, and to steer the Old Ship into smoother
water. But we may rest assured that our foes are not dead. I only
wish you may manifest as much nautical skill in a calm, as you have
in the long storm, and I doubt not but all will be well.
FOOTNOTES:
[119] This memorable prophecy as to the future of our educational system
was evidently made by Dr. Ryerson under the conviction that the verbal
promise made to him by Lord Sydenham in 1841,--that he should have the
superintendence of that system--would have been carried out by his
successor, Sir Charles Bagot. There was no written promise, however, on
the subject, and he and his friends were greatly surprised at the
singular appointment made in May, 1842. It was not until 1844 that Dr.
Ryerson received the promised appointment--the reward (as was then most
unjustly alleged against him) of services rendered to Sir Charles
Metcalfe in the crisis of that year. (See, however, chapter xliii. on
Dr. Ryerson's appointment as Superintendent of Education.)
[120] This correspondence illustrates one phase of the political history
of the times.
CHAPTER XXXVIII.
1843.
Episode in the Case of Hon. Marshall S. Bidwell.
As mentioned in Chapter xxiv., page 188, an effort was made in 1843 to
induce Hon. M. S. Bidwell to return to Canada. Copies of the
correspondence on the subject were enclosed to Dr. Ryerson, by the Hon.
Robert Baldwin, in a letter dated Kingston, 5th June, 1843, as
follows:--
I enclose you copies of letters which I am sure will afford you
much pleasure. At present this communication of them must be
confidential, as you will see by their date that they have not yet
reached their object himself. But after the warm interest you have
taken in the cause of my friend, at a time when any interference on
my part would have been worse than useless, I feel it due to you to
make you early acquainted with what has taken place. I have seen,
with much pleasure, that you have carried out the intention you
hinted to me when I last had the pleasure of seeing you at
Kingston. Your admirable letter must have had a good effect. I see
that some little popguns were let off at you on the occasion, but
they are too puny to excite anything but a smile at their
imbecility.
I regret much my inability to have been present at your last annual
examination, but hope to be more fortunate another year.
The Hon. Robert Baldwin's letter to Mr. Bidwell, enclosed to Dr.
Ryerson, dated Kingston, 2nd June, 1843, was as follows:--
I have great pleasure in being able to transmit to you a copy of a
note addressed by me to His Excellency the Governor-General, with a
copy of that of Mr. Secretary Harrison, conveying His Excellency's
reply, which, I am happy, so distinctly removes every obstacle to
your return to what has been in all essentials your native country;
and that without the descent on your part, by even a single step,
from the high ground which you have always maintained in relation
to your unjust expatriation.
I will at present only stop to assure you of the sentiments of
unabated affection and respect with which you have ever continued
to be regarded in this country, during the whole period of your
exile, and to express my conviction of the satisfaction with which
your return will be hailed by all your former friends, and by many
even of your former political opponents--in which satisfaction, I
trust, I need scarcely add that no one will more sincerely
participate than myself.
The following is a copy of Mr. Baldwin's note to Sir Charles Metcalfe,
the Governor-General, dated 25th May:--
Mr. Robert Baldwin, having been informed by Mr. Secretary Harrison
that with reference to the case of Mr. Bidwell, which Mr. Baldwin
had the honour of bringing under the notice of the Governor-General
shortly after his assumption of the Government, His Excellency only
requires a request to be made to him as a foundation for his
directing that the pledge taken from that gentleman, in his
departure from Upper Canada, should be cancelled, and giving His
Excellency's sanction for the introduction into Parliament of a
Bill to restore to Mr. Bidwell the political rights of which his
residence abroad, under pressure of that pledge, has deprived him,
Mr. Baldwin respectfully begs leave to make that request.
The letter in reply, of Mr. Secretary Harrison to Hon. Robert Baldwin,
dated 29th May, was as follows:--
I am commanded by the Governor-General to inform you, in reply to
your note of the 25th inst., that His Excellency considers it right
that whatever pledge may have been given by Mr. Bidwell on his
departure from Upper Canada, to preclude his return, should be
cancelled. The letter of that gentleman to the then
Lieutenant-Governor, Sir Francis Bond Head, supposed to contain
such a pledge, is not to be found in the archives of the
Secretary's office. I am, therefore, directed to say that the
pledge is considered as cancelled, and that the letter, if ever
found, may be returned.
I am also further desired to acquaint you that in the event of Mr.
Bidwell's proposing to return, His Excellency will give his
sanction to the introduction into Parliament of a Bill to restore
to that gentleman the political rights of which his residence
abroad, under pressure of his pledge, deprived him.
On the 14th August, 1843, Hon. Robert Baldwin wrote the following letter
to Dr. Ryerson:--
I send you a copy of a letter from our friend, Mr. Bidwell, in
answer to my letters to him. The original I have sent up to my
father, but had a copy made for you, knowing the interest you have
ever taken in his case.
Hon. M. S. Bidwell's letter to Hon. Robert Baldwin, dated New York, 31st
July, 1843, was as follows:--
I hardly know how to commence my answer to your letter after so
long a delay which has been unintentional and unexpected, and in a
great measure unavoidable. I might, indeed, and ought to have
written to you when I first received it, but I then hoped it would
be in my power to make you a short visit in compliance with your
invitation. On this point I was kept in suspense by the state of
Mrs. Bidwell's health, and was besides very laboriously occupied
with indispensable professional engagements. With this frank
explanation I throw myself upon your indulgence to pardon my delay.
Never, my dear friend, for one moment have I doubted your kind and
friendly feelings, or your anxiety that I should be treated with
justice and liberality by the Government, and I have never ceased
to be gratified that I was honoured with the friendship of one
whose wishes and talents have, for many years, commanded my
respect. Amidst the dejection of spirits and perplexity of mind
that I have suffered, this consideration has afforded me great
consolation.
Your communication has now taken me by surprise. You will add to
your former obligations if you will make suitable acknowledgements
for me to His Excellency for the answer which, by his directions,
Mr. Secretary Harrison returned to your letter.
All that I have learned of Sir Charles Metcalfe's character and
measures has filled me with the highest respect, and with a
confidence that Canada will be governed by him with wisdom,
justice, and liberality. Loving that country, this confidence has
been a source of great joy to me.
Let me add that, in my judgment, Sir Robert Peel in all his
measures, since his last appointment has shown a wise moderation
and conciliatory spirit, and an anxious desire for the true welfare
of the vast Empire beneath the sway of Her Majesty's sceptre.
I would gladly make you a visit at once if I could, but I should
feel great pleasure to see you here. I shall do with great pleasure
what I can to make the visit agreeable to you. I have heard with
concern of the feeble health of your venerable father. I cannot
tell you with what deep interest and great respect I think of him.
He has been the consistent friend of constitutional liberty through
evil report as well as good report. Amidst perfidy and violence,
folly and bigotry and intolerance, he has presented a rare and
happy example, which I admire, of an enlightened and cultivated
mind supporting the great principles of the British Constitution
with discriminating zeal, constancy of purpose, and moderation of
temper. I beg that you will do me the favour when you write to him
to present my most affectionate and respectful regards.
I perceive that Mr. Secretary Harrison alludes to the possibility
of my returning to Canada. I cannot fail to feel, as long as I
live, a deep interest in that country, and the most ardent wishes
for its prosperity. But I have formed no plans for a change of
residence. A constant attention to my business, which is necessary
for the support of my family, has left me no time to form plans.
With a gratified sense of your kindness and with great regard and
affection, your friend,
Marshall S. Bidwell.
To this letter from Mr. Bidwell, Hon. Robert Baldwin replied on the 12th
August, as follows:--
I have, believe me, great pleasure in acknowledging the receipt of
your letter, as well on account of its relieving me, to a certain
extent at least, from apprehensions that Mrs. Bidwell's health was
the cause of your silence.
I cannot, however, conceal my disappointment at the last paragraph
of your letter, in which, though you do not altogether shut out the
hope of our having you again amongst us.... The obligations in
regard to Mrs. Bidwell's health which you wrote (as precluding such
consideration for the present) are, however, too sacred for even
friendship to venture upon more than a repetition of those
assurances, which my former letter contained, of the feelings of
affection entertained towards you in this country, and the
satisfaction which your return would afford. I, however, find it
impossible to do otherwise than indulge in the pleasing
anticipation of again seeing you amongst us, not as a mere visitor,
but as once more a Canadian, in fact as well as in feeling. We have
not, and certainly for the generation to which we belong, shall
not, have any subjects of equal importance, in a pecuniary point of
view, to those which seek the aid, and reward the exertion, of your
professional talents where you are. It seems, therefore, to partake
somewhat of selfishness to wish to withdraw you from an arena
worthy of your great talents, to appropriate those talents to a
sphere so much more limited. Be that as it may, I will indulge the
hope, so long as you do not forbid it. In the meantime, could you
not take a leave of absence for a few weeks during the coming
Autumn Assizes, and amuse yourself with holding some briefs on some
of them here? We have now five Circuits--the Eastern, Midland,
Home, Niagara, and Western. Mr. Justice Jones takes the Eastern,
Mr. Justice McLean the Midland, the Chief Justice the Niagara, and
Mr. Justice Hagerman the Western. Nothing would give me more
pleasure than to see you thus renew your relations with our bar;
even if you should not do so with a view to a final return to it.
Let me know soon, in a post or two, if possible, as well as the
circuit you mean to go on.... Now as I have gone on with this
scheme, I find myself grow warm on it, so do not throw cold water
upon it by a negative.
If I could do so with any propriety, I would avail myself of your
kind invitation to visit you at New York for the purpose, not only
of seeing you, but of urging this my suit in person. But I assure
you it is out of my power to do so. Parliament is called for 2nd
September, and I shall not have a moment's leisure from this time
till the Session is over. You must recollect that, as a Parliament
man, I am comparatively but a young hand, and I have to try and
make up for want of experience by hard work; though I find it by no
means a sufficient substitute.
I complied in substance with your request to make your
acknowledgements to His Excellency for the answer, which by his
direction, Mr. Secretary Harrison returned to my letter; but lest I
should do so less appropriately than I ought, I took the liberty of
letting you speak for yourself, by showing His Excellency your
letter.
Your opinions of the Governor-General and of Sir Robert Peel
entirely agree with my own. But I regret to say that some of our
friends, and of our firm friends too, seem to me to forget what has
been accomplished because everything is not done at once, or,
because some things are done not exactly as they would have them.
This impatience is much to be regretted. If I were one whom it was
necessary to keep up to the mark, as it may be called, it might be
excusable, but they do not even profess to think that to be the
case as respects the points in question. Their display of
dissatisfaction, therefore, has only the effect of lessening the
weight of the party in Upper Canada in the eyes of both the Head of
the government here and the Imperial authorities at home. But I did
not mean to make this a letter of complaint; but the fact is, I am
just now smarting under an ebullition of violence on the part of
our friends in Toronto, on the subject of Mr. Stanton's appointment
to the Collectorship there, which almost involuntarily led me into
these remarks. You will, I hope, excuse me.
My dear father, I am happy to say, appears by his last letters to
be rather better. I fear much, however, that the improvement cannot
be considered of a permanent character. As the Governor-General
kept your letter till yesterday, I was only able to send it up to
him to-day. It will, I am sure, afford him much gratification.
I hope you will excuse the length of this epistle, and rebuke me by
the shortness of your reply, which need contain no more than six
words, to wit: "I will ride the circuit." I believe "ride" is the
professional term; at least used to be so, though it may belong to
the era of Mr. Justice Twisden, if not a still more remote one,
rather than at present.... You see how inclined I am to run on, so
that lest I should transgress beyond endurance, I will conclude at
once, with the assurance of my warm and continued regard. Ever your
affectionate friend,
R. B.
CHAPTER XXXIX.
1844.
Events Preceding the Defence of Lord Metcalfe.
The defence of Lord Metcalfe, the Governor-General of Canada, who
succeeded Sir Charles Bagot in 1843, was unquestionably the most
memorable act of Dr. Ryerson's long and eventful life.
His previous training for twenty years in the school of controversy in
relation to civil and religious rights; his personal intercourse with
leading statesmen in England on Canadian affairs; his contests for
denominational equality with successive Governors in Upper Canada, and
his counsels and suggestions, (offered at their request), to such
notable representatives of Royalty in Canada as Lord Durham, Lord
Sydenham, Sir Charles Bagot, and Sir Charles Metcalfe, put it beyond the
power of even the most captious to question the pre-eminent
qualifications of Dr. Ryerson to discuss, in a practical and intelligent
manner, the then unsettled question of responsible government as against
the prerogative--a question which had arisen between Sir Charles
Metcalfe and his late Councillors. In the chapter which Dr. Ryerson had
prepared for this part of the Story of his Life, he thus refers to his
intercourse with, and relations to, the distinguished Governors whom I
have mentioned. He said:--
In 1839 a Royal Commission was issued to Lord Durham to investigate the
affairs of Canada, and report thereon to Her Majesty. While engaged in
his important duty he sent for and conferred with me repeatedly, and
treated me with such consideration, as that on leaving him he would
accompany me to the door and open it for me, shaking hands with me most
cordially. After his return to England he sent me a copy of his famous
Report (addressed by himself) before it was laid on the table of the
House of Lords. On receiving in advance this report of Lord Durham I
published in the _Guardian_, with appropriate headings, extracts from
that part of it which related to the establishment of responsible
government and its administration in Canada, and then lent the extracts
and the type on which they were printed to Mr. (afterwards Sir) Francis
Hincks for insertion in the _Examiner_ newspaper, of which he was at
that time proprietor and Editor. I afterwards aided Lord Sydenham in
every way in my power to allay the party passions and animosities of the
past, and to establish responsible government upon liberal principles,
irrespective of past party distinctions, comprehending Hon. W. H. Draper
and Hon. Robert Baldwin in the same administration--a union or coalition
which did not long survive the life of Lord Sydenham--Mr. Baldwin
declaring his want of confidence in Mr. Draper, and retiring from the
government. Soon afterwards, Mr. Baldwin and his friends succeeded to
power under Sir Charles Bagot.
This was the state of things until 1843, when Sir Charles Bagot died,
and Sir Charles Metcalfe was appointed to succeed him. I had the
melancholy pleasure of offering a tribute (in the form of an obituary
notice) to the character and administration of both Lord Sydenham and
Sir Charles Bagot--papers much noticed and widely circulated at the time
as the best specimens of any writing which had ever appeared; but I had
a genial theme and good subjects in both cases. Sir Charles Metcalfe was
popular with all parties at first: but after a few months a difference
arose between him and his Councillors as to the appointment of the Clerk
of the Peace of the County of Lanark, and then on the principle of
appointments to office; or in other words, the exercise of the patronage
of the Crown.
To understand the character of this famous and much misrepresented
controversy, and how I became involved in it, some preliminary and
explanatory remarks are necessary:--
It is to be observed in the first place, that one chief subject of
complaint by "Reformers" for many years--nay from the beginning--was the
partial exercise of the patronage of the Crown, appointing magistrates,
officers of militia, judges, etc., from men of one party only, in whose
behalf every kind of executive favour was bestowed for years. This was
the purport of their complaints in the various petitions and addresses
of "Reformers" to the Earl of Durham, Lord Sydenham, Sir Charles Bagot,
etc., who necessarily promised that the Governments should henceforth be
conducted upon the principles of justice, "according to the well
understood wishes of the people," of whom "Reformers" claimed to
contribute a large majority, and even of the liberal Conservative
members of the Church of England. But singular to say, on the occurrence
of the first vacancy, the Reform government urged upon Sir Charles
Metcalfe the appointment of one of their own party, irrespective of the
superior claims, as the Governor conceived (on the ground of service,
experience and fitness), of a deserving widow and her orphan son. The
circumstances were as follows:--
Amongst the early gentlemen immigrants in the County of Lanark was
a Mr. Powell, a man of wealth and education; but in attempting to
clear and cultivate a farm in a new country, he soon expended his
means and became reduced in circumstances. He was appointed Clerk
of the Peace, and discharged its duties for many years, when he
sickened and died. During the two years' sickness which preceded
his death, the duties of office were discharged satisfactorily by
his son, who was then about twenty or twenty-one years of age. On
the death of her husband, the Widow Powell proceeded to Kingston to
plead in person before Sir Charles Metcalfe for the appointment of
her son to the office vacated by the death of her husband, and as
the only means of supporting herself and family. One can easily
conceive the effect of such an appeal upon Sir Charles Metcalfe's
benevolent feelings. He declined the advice of his Councillors for
a party appointment, and determined to appoint the widow's son to
the office rendered vacant by the death of her husband, and one
which he had successfully discharged for nearly two years. The
Council, instead of resigning on the fact of the appointment,
sought to obtain from Sir Charles Metcalfe a promise that he would
henceforth act upon their advice. He said he would always receive
and consider their advice, but would give no promise on the part of
the Crown as to how far he would pledge the prerogative in advance
and act upon that advice. On this the Councillors resigned,
charging Sir Charles Metcalfe with violating the principles of
responsible government. This he positively denied. The
circumstances of the case were so mystified by the statements made,
that general prejudice was excited against Sir Charles Metcalfe,
and the Councillors seemed for the time to have the country at
their backs.[121]
I was at that time President of Victoria College; and the late Hon. Wm.
Hamilton Merritt, returning from Kingston at the sudden close of the
Session of Parliament held there, stopped the stage in front of the
College, called to see me, and asked me what I thought of the
occurrences between the Governor-General and his Councillors. I told him
that, from what I had heard, my sympathies were with the Councillors. He
answered that I was mistaken; that the Councillors were clearly in the
wrong; that they had made a great mistake, and were endangering
principles of government for which he had so long contended. He then
stated the particulars of what had transpired, and referred me, in
confirmation of his statement, to the documents and correspondence which
would all be printed in a few days. I replied, that if what he (Mr.
Merritt) stated was correct, Sir Charles Metcalfe was an injured man,
and that the new system of responsible government was likely to be
applied in a way contrary to what had always been professed by its
advocates. Mr. Merritt requested me to examine for myself the documents
and correspondence to which he had referred, but enjoining secresy as to
his conversation with me--and which I never mentioned to any human being
during his life.
After Mr. Merritt returned to St. Catharines he wrote to Dr. Ryerson
early in January, 1844 on the subject, as follows:--
There can be little doubt that both the Governor and his late
administration have erred. A conciliatory spirit would have avoided
this crisis; they had an opportunity of placing this Province in a
most enviable situation--they have neglected, or did not possess
the ability to avail themselves of it; and I am sorry to say, that
I am neither satisfied with their measures, nor can I place
confidence in their judgment. At the same time I feel so thoroughly
convinced of the necessity of having under the control of our
Legislature the entire management of our internal concerns--without
which any attempt at a thorough reformation would be useless--that
I have my apprehensions, that any movement which would have a
tendency to check its onward progress, would be injurious--the
principle does not appear to be fully understood, or fully
conceded. The time has not arrived--nevertheless I feel satisfied
the Governor-General would admit it, and act fully up to it with
any Cabinet which possessed his confidence, and thus bring it into
action much earlier than persisting in the opposite course. On the
other hand, you are subject to the imputation of abandoning men who
resigned for the maintenance of that principle, and few can doubt
the honesty of purpose of Lafontaine and Baldwin.
Being thus placed on the horns of a dilemma, the wisest plan is,
perhaps, to let matters take their course--at all events I have
made up my mind to do so. I should be most happy to hear from you
on the subject, knowing you have given those subjects much
attention; and believing that your mind is devoted to promoting the
best interests of your fellow countrymen, your opinions are
received with attention, and always carry great weight with me.
To this letter from Mr. Merritt, Dr. Ryerson replied on the 20th
January, 1844, as follows:--
After you called upon me, I turned my attention to the state of our
public affairs, and reflected on them from various points of view. I
concluded to state my views to His Excellency, if he requested me to do
so, and also to Hon. S. B. Harrison, if I should see him.
Dr. Ryerson having gone to Kingston at the request of Sir Charles
Metcalfe, saw Mr. Harrison, who urged him to state his views fully to
the Governor-General. In the same letter to Mr. Merritt, Dr. Ryerson
said:--The next day, in compliance with His Excellency's expressed wish,
I laid before him the result of my reflections on the present state of
our affairs, in an interview of three hours and a half. In them His
Excellency expressed his full concurrence, and thanked me cordially for
the trouble I had taken to wait upon him and state at large what he
considered of so much importance. In addition to the question at issue
between Sir Charles Metcalfe and his late Councillors, Dr. Ryerson
discussed with him the subject of the reconstruction of his Cabinet. The
result he thus states in his letter to Mr. Merritt:--I cannot of course
enter into every one of the subjects to which I referred in my
conversation with the Governor-General. Mr. Harrison has doubtless
written to you on the whole matter. The result was that Mr. Harrison
will take office if you will.[122]
As to your superior qualifications for the position offered you, there
can be but one opinion in the country. I am satisfied that, without the
slightest sacrifice of principle or consistency--upon the broadest
principles of responsible government, and in harmony with the best
interests of the country--you can accept of office. I think that when
the views I have expressed to His Excellency are fairly and fully stated
to the country, you would, in office, have a large majority of at least
the Upper Canada members of the present House of Assembly to support
you; and, in case of a general election, I doubt not but you would have
an ample majority in the new Parliament. Should you consent to take
office, I think you need not fear the result. I think there is a fair
opportunity for you to render a great service to the country, and to
establish still more widely and permanently an already honourable
reputation of no common order.
I shall be glad, at your earliest convenience, to learn the result of
your deliberations. I should also be happy to see you, if you should
soon proceed to Kingston. Whatever the Governor-General may have
heretofore thought of either the theory or practice of responsible
government, he is certainly right on the subject now. And when His
Excellency avows what Sir F. Head denied, and offers everything that has
been demanded, surely, as far as principles of government are concerned,
the country wants, and ought to have, no more. I think it will be a
fearful calamity to the country, if we drive Sir Charles Metcalfe away
from us. I doubt whether England can produce his like for Canada.
To this letter Mr. Merritt replied, on the 25th January:--
I regret to say that my own private affairs, arising from
circumstances which have occurred since I saw you, prevent my
assuming any situation under the Government which must necessarily
occupy my undivided attention. I have heard from and replied to Mr.
Harrison to the same effect. No person can more regret the
unfortunate position in which we are placed than I do, and I agree
with you that the loss of Sir Charles Metcalfe will be a public
calamity. I have no doubt he will honestly carry out the principles
of responsible government, and with a competent council, who
understand what the country requires, and with competent
individuals to carry those measures into effect, he would render
more essential service to Canada than any former Governor whatever.
I am under some apprehension that you mistake the feelings of the
majority of Upper Canada members. A mere majority would ensure
defeat; they must act in a body to give a majority in the present
House; and from recent indications, there appears to be a change in
the minds of those who were under very different impressions some
time since. Although I was under a different impression some time
since, I cannot see any chances of a new ministry being sustained,
unless by a dissolution. 1. A majority seems indispensable to
secure which the Reformers of Upper Canada must unite--and every
Conservative must support them also;--the first cannot be relied
on, therefore it is unnecessary to discuss the second. Most of the
present members will feel themselves committed by their recent
vote; they will all be pressing for a new election; and shape their
course to the prevailing opinions. No ministry can have time to
bring their measures before the public to produce any general
impression; and no ministry can have confidence in the ultimate
success of the wisest measures. In short, they will have no chance
to exercise their ability, with a view of commanding success.
Whereas, were a new election to take place (on the declaration by
the Governor-General, that from the difficulty he experienced in
making up a ministry which would command a majority of the present
House, in conformity to the principles he avowed), the
Governor-General could appeal to the people to return a
representation from which he could select a Council possessing
their confidence. Such an appeal would not be inconsistent with his
former declarations, which must have been predicated on his
obtaining a Council which would command a majority. Under such
circumstances members would feel very naturally a much greater
anxiety in sustaining any ministry with a chance of four years to
test their measures, than as many days, as in the present instance.
As far as I am individually concerned, even in that case, I could
not accept of office unless I succeeded in arranging my own
personal concerns, which I hope to effect during the season.
I hear that in this district a strong feeling prevails in favour of
the late ministry, who resigned, as they believe, to support the
principle of responsible government; and they cannot understand
that the Governor-General adheres to the same. This impression is
natural; and it takes a long time to remove error. No man doubts
the motives of Mr. Baldwin; none other of the administration is
named, or possesses the least weight. I have not moved about or
corresponded with a single member of the House, and I shall remain
as passive as possible.
I fully agree with you, that with the present Governor-General a
fair opportunity offers to carry out useful projects; nay more, I
am sure that one half of the present revenue now wasted, could be
saved (not less than £100,000) for useful objects; but I cannot at
present assist in carrying it into effect, which you cannot regret
more than I do.
In a note received from Mr. Civil Secretary Higginson, dated 10th April,
he gave Dr. Ryerson the reasons for the unexpected delay in the
formation of a new Cabinet. Hon. S. B. Harrison had also written to him
on the same subject, so far as he and the other proposed Upper Canada
members were concerned. Mr. Higginson said:--
The formation of a permanent Council has been most vexatiously, but
unavoidably, delayed, owing to the extraordinary timidity--I can
call it by no more appropriate name--of our friends in Lower
Canada--the most eligible of whom have hitherto shrunk from the
responsibility they would incur by the acceptance of office. Hon.
D. B. Viger, who is still in Montreal, and who ought from long
experience, to have a good knowledge of his countrymen, expresses
himself confident of the result, and is of opinion that the delay,
of which we complain, produces good and strengthens His
Excellency's position. It is very evident that it has a different
effect in the West; and it is to be hoped that as soon as the
Montreal election is over (of which, barring violence, Mr. Molson
is certain) immediate steps will be taken to fill up the offices
now vacant.
In reply to Mr. Higginson's note, Dr. Ryerson said:--
I do not think that much evil arises at the present time, even in Canada
West, from delay. Could the vacancies be filled up two or three months
ago, the government would have secured the support of thousands who have
since swelled the ranks of the ex-Councillors. But the loss by delay
was, I think, incurred to its full extent during the months of January,
February, and March. The proceedings of the late meeting of the Leaguers
in Toronto have doubtless added something to their strength. But some
portions of these very proceedings will meet them in a way they little
expect--not, to be sure, before a jury of twelve men, as did the nine
months' proceeding of O'Connell and his associates, but before the jury
of the whole country, and upon principles sanctioned by the Constitution
and history of England, which, I believe more confidently than when I
wrote last, will result in a triumphant acquittal and justification of
the Vice-Regal defendant.
On the 23rd May, Mr. Civil Secretary Higginson wrote to Dr. Ryerson, as
follows:--
You will be sorry to hear that Hon. Mr. Harrison has failed to make
certain private arrangements which he so much hoped for, and that
he has declined to take office. He is, therefore, unable to join
the Cabinet.
FOOTNOTES:
[121] As an indication of outside opinion on this question, I insert the
following note, written by Rev. Anson Green, on the 31st December, 1843,
to Dr. Ryerson. Mr. Green said: I cannot see why the Executive Council
should resign at the present time, for they stated in the House that
both Mr. Stanton, Collector at Toronto, and the Speaker of the
Legislative Council were appointed by their advice. I think they should
have waited until His Excellency refused to ask or take their advice,
and not force him to make pledges. In my opinion both parties have acted
indiscreetly. I have reason to believe that a majority of the Reformers
from Upper Canada, in Parliament, would be happy to support Hon S. B.
Harrison, if he could form a ministry from the majority on the question
at issue.
[122] In regard to this proposal, Mr. Harrison wrote to Dr. Ryerson on
the 17th of January, to say that he had an interview with the
Governor-General, and that: His Excellency expressed himself favourably
disposed upon all the points touched upon, and was willing to consider
the means of carrying out the objects contemplated. It appears,
therefore, to me, that the matter may be arranged if our friend Merritt
can be persuaded to join. I have written to him in that view. Should
that be the case, I am prepared, and a communication should be made to
Hon. W. H. Draper, which I will make immediately upon hearing from you
and Mr. Merritt. As Mr. Draper will be here by the latter end of this
week, it would be better, on hearing from Mr. Merritt, that you should
be here yourself.
CHAPTER XL.
1844.
Preliminary Correspondence on the Metcalfe Crisis.
With a view to a thorough understanding of the question at issue between
Sir Charles Metcalfe and his Councillors, the following statement by Dr.
Ryerson is necessary:--
After the conversation with Hon. W. H. Merritt, in January, 1844, and
after subsequent communications with him on the subject, I most
carefully and minutely examined the documents and correspondence and
other statements of parties, and was satisfied of the correctness of Mr.
Merritt's statements and conclusion. The question then arose in my own
mind, whether, after I had so much to do in the establishment of
responsible government and was morally so largely responsible for it, I
should silently witness its misapplication, and see a man stricken down
for maintaining, as the representative of his Sovereign, what Reformers
had maintained in all previous years--that the patronage of the Crown,
like the administration of justice, should be administered impartially
according to merit, without respect to religious sect, or political
party.
Dr. Ryerson also states (26th February) that:--After a prolonged and
interesting interview with the Governor-General, I addressed a letter to
him on the subject of that interview. In it I said: In looking over what
I have from time to time, during the last eight years, written on the
best government for Canada, I find that I have invariably insisted upon
precisely the same views which I expressed to your Excellency, and with
a frequency and fulness that I had no recollection of when I was
honoured with the late interviews by you. These views were then warmly
responded to by that portion of the public for whom I wrote. I am,
therefore, the more fully (if possible) convinced of their correctness
and importance to the best interests of Canada, and that they will be
sustained when properly brought before the public--at least in Western
Canada.
In reply to a note from Mr. Civil Secretary Higginson, dated 2nd March,
Dr. Ryerson, on the 7th, addressed a reply of some length to His
Excellency. In it he said:--
The aspect of things in Western Canada has clearly changed for the
worse during the last two months--since my first interview with
Your Excellency in January. The party of the opposition have become
organized--organized under circumstances more formidable than I
have ever witnessed in Canada. Their ranks and influence have been
increased by numbers who, two months since, were neutral, and who
could have been forthwith brought to the side of constitutional
government. Private letters to me (on which I can rely) speak in a
very different tone as to the state of public sentiment and
feeling. Unless a change to a very considerable extent be affected
in the public mind, I think a dissolution would rather strengthen
than weaken the ex-Council party. I am confident I do not overrate
their strength--and it is a dangerous, though common error, to
underrate the strength of an adversary. They are likewise
organizing their party, and exciting the public mind to such a
degree as to prevent any sentiments or measures from the present
administration from being regarded or entertained at all. Such
being the case, I have felt that delay has been loss. Whether that
loss can be repaired presents to my own mind a problem difficult of
solution.
Speaking of his former relations with the Lieutenant-Governors of Upper
Canada, Dr. Ryerson said:--
I love liberty, personal and public, as much as any man. I have written
much in its defence; but as much as I love liberty, and as ultra liberal
as some may have supposed me to be, I have always regarded an
infringement of the prerogative of the Crown as a blow at the liberty of
the subject, and have, in every instance, resisted and repelled it as
such. I did so in support of Sir F. Head in 1836. I did so in support of
Sir George Arthur, in the difficult and painful task of administering
the criminal law after the insurrection of 1837. I did so in support of
the Royal instructions and recommendations of which Lord Sydenham was
the bearer and agent; but in each instance, after having been lauded
without measure, I was abandoned, or pursued, without protection or
mercy. Sir Francis Head took offence at certain communications which
Rev. Dr. Alder and Rev. Peter Jones justly made to the Imperial
Government respecting his treatment of the Indians, and swore that, "as
he had put down the radicals, he would now put down the Methodists;" and
the Bishop of Toronto avowed and rejoiced that, radicalism having been
extinguished, "the Church" would and should be maintained inviolate in
all its (assumed) rights and immunities. Sir George Arthur having got
through his many difficulties (in the course of which he gave me many
thanks) determined, when the Session of the Legislature came, not to
split with the Bishop of Toronto; not to grant, under any circumstances,
the Methodists more than a mouse's share of public aid, and none at all
except as salaries for their clergy, actually employed. He embodied
these views in resolutions, and employed Hon. R. B. Sullivan to advocate
them in the Legislative Council.
It was with extreme reluctance that I could at all assent to the measure
of Union of the Canadas. The agents of the London Wesleyan Committee
vehemently opposed it, and wished me to write against it. I wished to
remain neutral. Lord Sydenham most earnestly solicited my aid--promised
a just measure on the clergy reserve question, and assured me against
any hostility of the agents of the London Committee, of all the
protection and assistance that the Government could give. He died,--and
I have been left, without the slightest assistance or protection on the
part of the Government, to meet alone the hostile proceedings and
influence of the London Wesleyan Committee. In order to sustain myself
in these reverses, and especially in the last, but most painful one, I
have been compelled to put forth physical and intellectual efforts that
I am absolutely incapable of repeating.
I have adverted--even at the expense of being tedious and egotistic--to
these unpleasant details, that Your Excellency may fully understand and
appreciate my present position, and my caution in embarking in another
conflict without a reasonable hope that I will not be made a victim of
abandonment and of oppression, after I have employed the utmost of my
humble efforts in support of the principles of the constitution and
prerogatives of the Crown.
In the present crisis, the Government must of course be first placed
upon a strong foundation, and then must the youthful mind of Canada be
instructed and moulded in the way I have had the honour of stating to
Your Excellency, if this country is long to remain an appendage to the
British Crown. The former, without the latter, will only be a partial
and temporary remedy.
Anything like a tolerable defence of Your Excellency's
position--anything approaching to an effective exposure of the
proceedings of the late Council in their demands, the grounds of their
resignation, their explanation, their tribunal of appeal, their
variations of position, the principles and consequences involved in each
step of their course, and the spirit and doctrines they now exhibit,
appears to me to be a desideratum. They could be convicted out of their
own mouths on every count of the charges they have brought against the
Governor-General, and from the same source might evidence be adduced
that they advocate sentiments and sanction proceedings which are unknown
to the British Constitution, and which appertain only to an independent
state. Yet, in place of exposition, and arguments and illustrations that
would tell upon the public mind, we have nothing but puerile effusions,
thread-bare assertions, and party criminations--nothing that would
convince adversaries and make friends of enemies. Your Excellency's
replies, and a few passages in the Montreal _Gazette_, and in a
pamphlet which lately appeared in the Kingston _Chronicle_, are all that
I have seen which are calculated to produce practical effect upon the
public mind. Hon. D. B. Viger's pamphlet is too limited in its range of
topics, and too speculative and refined to be effective upon any other
than well-educated statesmen.
The desideratum required I would attempt to supply, and then devise
measures, put forth publications, and employ efforts to direct the
public mind into new channels of thinking, and furnish the youthful mind
with instruction and materials for reading that would render this
country British in domestic feeling, as I think it now is intentionally
in loyalty. To do anything effectual toward the accomplishment of such a
task, my position should be made as strong as possible. At best my
qualifications for a work so difficult and varied are extremely limited,
but more especially under present circumstances.
After weighing the matter carefully, and pondering (in comparing small
things with great) upon the part which Bishop Burnet took in settling
the disordered elements of British intellect after the revolution of
1688, I have resolved to do as he did--place my humble services at the
disposal of my Sovereign--and in whatever situation Your Excellency is
of opinion I can render most service to the government and the country
under existing circumstances. I will hazard the enterprise, and stand or
fall with the Governor-General in the present crisis, notwithstanding
the increased cloudiness of our political atmosphere. I would rather aid
as a private individual, and as an independent volunteer in the service
of the Crown and country--as I have been on former occasions--than be
placed in any official situation.
To this letter Dr. Ryerson received the following reply from Mr.
Secretary Higginson, dated 12th March:--I am directed to convey to you
the expression of the Governor-General's cordial thanks for the public
spirited offer of your able and valuable services in the present crisis
of public affairs; an offer which His Excellency accepts with a high
degree of satisfaction, feeling confident that you will bring most
efficient aid to the Government.
On March 18th Dr. Ryerson replied to this note from Mr. Higginson. He
said:--I think there will be but little difficulty in disentangling the
question from the perplexing confusion in which it has been involved,
and placing it upon the true issue as to a government of party, or of
justice. If, in elucidating and applying it, I can incorporate some of
Lord Brougham's fulminations on the evil of party with my own
conceptions, I may be able to add the occasional discharge of a cannon,
or the bursting of a bombshell, to the running fire of ordinary
musketry. Though I am no stranger to contests, I cannot divest myself
of palpitations at the approach of an engagement. When once the fire has
commenced, I feel but little concern except to keep cool and
good-natured, and to have an ample supply of ammunition for all
exigencies--satisfied of the righteousness of the cause and the
government of an over-ruling Providence.
In February the Rev. John Ryerson wrote to Dr. Ryerson on the Metcalfe
crisis, and said:--
While I believe that the late Executive Council, in the main, and
in principle, was right, and Sir Charles wrong, yet I am very far
from endorsing all that the Council did as right. I think that they
should not have resigned when they did. I think they were guilty of
a breach of trust in throwing up office in the midst of a session
of Parliament, and when many important measures were pending. I
think, as the "antagonism" which caused the resignation of the late
Council existed before the Parliament was convened, that they
should then have resigned, or remained in office until the
prorogation....
You are not to suppose from these remarks that I have turned
politician, or that I am intermeddling with things which do not
belong to me. I have been endeavouring to attend to my appropriate
work; and though continually pressed with questions, soliciting my
opinions respecting passing events, I have said as little on all
these matters as possible, and I am identified with no party.
Indeed, the state of my health is such as to admonish me to think
about other things than worldly politics, and I blush to think that
I have written so much respecting them. Powerfully convincing
reasoning, with truth on your side, might produce a great effect
among our people; but at the present more than nine-tenths of them,
in these western parts, are the supporters of the late Executive
Council.
In reply to a letter from his brother John, asking his opinion on the
pending dispute between Sir Charles Metcalfe and his late Councillors,
Dr. Ryerson wrote on April 3rd, and said:--
Of the general measures of the late Council I cordially approve. I
cannot say so of their dispute with the Governor-General. Of the policy
which he or they had pursued, I have nothing to say. In that they might
have been right, and he wrong. But, according to British practice, they
ought to have resigned on what he had done, and not on what he would not
promise to do. If the Crown intended to do just as they desired the
Governor-General to do, still the promise ought not to be given, nor
ought it to have been asked. The moment a man promises to do a thing he
ceases to be as free as he was before he made the promise. It is
essential principle that in the British Constitution that the Crown
should be free--should be undefined in its prerogative. The exercise in
that prerogative may be checked in various ways; but to bind it by
promises is to infringe its constitutional liberty. If the Queen were to
bind herself by promise, or declaration, that she would not appoint any
person contrary to Sir Robert Peel's advice, how could she refuse to
make O'Connell a peer, or appoint him Lord Chancellor of England if Sir
Robert were to insist upon it? How could she ever get clear of Sir
Robert by differing with him on a question of policy, if she were to
bind herself before-hand to act according to his advice? Would it not be
virtually giving the regal power into his hands?
Dr. Ryerson then proceeded to illustrate the views which he held on this
subject:--
I can find examples in English History since 1688, of British Sovereigns
having done just as Sir Charles Metcalfe is alleged to have done; I can
also find examples of ministers resigning on account of what such
Sovereigns had done; but I can find no example of any minister resigning
on account of what the Sovereign would not promise to do on the subject
of consultation and possible appointments.
I have seen it alleged, that the Governor-General was not bound to
act upon the advice of his Council, only to ask it before he made
any appointment. But the Governor-General did take the advice of
the Council, in regard to the appointments of the Clerks of the
Peace, both in the Bathurst and Dalhousie districts. Yet he is
blamed as much for not acting upon it as if he had acted without
taking it. But in Mr. Hincks' writings, and in all the papers
advocating the same sentiments, I observe that it is contended that
the Governor-General should act upon, as well as take, the advice
of his Council. If so, what is he but their amanuensis--the
recorder of their decrees?--the office which Sir Charles Bagot
sustained on account of his illness; but whose example, in such
circumstances, can not be laid down as a general rule.
Responsible government was a mere theory with the late Council, or
until they came into office under Sir Charles Bagot. They had
thought and reasoned about it, but they had never acted upon it,
until then; what they learned under the government of a sick and
dying man was not adapted to make them perfect practitioners. So
they were about as wise and as raw in the business practically, as
was Sir Charles Metcalfe, who had doubtless thought, and read, and
reasoned upon the subject also. The unskilfulness of inexperience,
with good intentions, seems to me to have been evinced in the whole
proceeding.
Of course it was considered, on the impulse of the moment, good
policy to take a stand upon the principle of responsible
government, and not upon the propriety, or policy, of certain
appointments. By taking the latter ground, all might be lost; by
taking the former ground, all would be gained, and a great deal of
glory too, in the course of a few days, or a few weeks at most. But
it has turned out otherwise. The question of prerogative has been
brought up--a constitutional and imperial question. As such the
British Government have decided upon it.... It is now no longer a
question between the late Councillors and Sir Charles Metcalfe, but
between them and Her Majesty's Government. I see, therefore,
nothing in prospect but a renewal of the scenes of 1837, and 1838,
only on a larger scale. Whether the point contended for is worth
that price, or will be even obtained at that price, is
problematical. I see no alternative, unless some enlightening,
healing agency interpose. I pray for the safety of our Zion and
people, especially, while I implore Divine interposition in behalf
of our beloved country.
I am no party man--I have never judged--I cannot judge questions
according to party, but according to constitutional principles and
history. On the first blush I was favourably impressed with the
position and resignation of the late council; but when I came to
examine their position, as I had done Hon. Mr. Draper's speech on
the University question by the light of history (it being a new
question), I came to the conclusions that I have stated above. I
think the most general impression in the country, and perhaps
amongst the members of our Church, is that which first struck my
own mind; but I think it is contrary to the principles and practice
of the British Constitution.
During one of his visits to Kingston, early in 1844, Dr. Ryerson called
at the office of his old friend, Hon. J. H. Dunn (one of the late
Councillors), who had desired to see him. Mr. Dunn was not in when he
called. He therefore, on his return to Cobourg addressed him as
follows:--My brother John told me that you had asked him what I thought
of the late differences between the Governor-General and his Council.
After all that I have read and learned, I think very much of them as I
did of the differences between the late Lord Sydenham and Hon. Robert
Baldwin. You then asked me (at the Lambton House) whether I approved of
your remaining in office, or of Mr. Baldwin's resigning. You will
recollect my reply, that I thought Mr. Baldwin ought to have waited
until an actual difference arose between him and other members of the
Council on some measure, or measures; and that he ought not to have
resigned on account of an alleged want of confidence, or theoretical
difference of opinion. So I think in the present case. After stating
your views to Sir Charles Metcalfe, you ought to have waited until some
act, or acts, had taken place in contravention of these views, and which
act, or acts, you were not disposed to justify; or if you thought it
your duty to resign, then it appears to me you should have resigned on
some acts which had been performed, and which you would not justify, and
on the policy involved in which you were prepared to appeal to the
country. But to resign upon a conversation, and not upon specific
administrative acts, appears to me to be without precedent. It has
brought up the question of prerogative, the constitutional decision of
which, rests of course, with the supreme tribunals of the Empire. I
think Mr. Baldwin's conscientious theoretical rigidness has led to an
error, praiseworthy in its motives, but not the less an error--an error
which in private life would have attracted no attention, but in public
life makes a great noise, and may lead to serious consequences. I could
wish with all my heart that you were in your late office, which you have
so long and so faithfully filled.
In a note to Dr. Ryerson, on various matters, dated April 10th, Mr.
Civil Secretary Higginson said:--
The Reform League in Toronto are making unusual exertions, and as
you may have seen by their late resolutions, no longer conceal
their real object, but in defiance of all their machinations, and
they are not over scrupulous as to their means, truth and honesty
of purpose, backed by loyal hearts and liberal measures, must and
will prevail.
To this note Dr. Ryerson thus replied on the 12th April:--
I think the public feeling in Canada West is now stationary; or since
the rumour of my appointment as Superintendent of Education (and how it
got afloat I cannot imagine) is rather turning in favour of the
Governor-General. The reason seems to be this: The opponents of His
Excellency represent him as weak--as supported by nobody but a weak
ultra-party. It has been alleged by both my friends and enemies, that
whether the best or worst man in Canada, I have not hesitated to face in
succession the united press and councils of each of the two
ultra-parties in Canada, and succeeded in each instance to reduce them
from a large majority to a small minority--deriving no advantage from
the victories, except as some suppose, the pleasure of humbling my
enemies. It is the impression of great numbers of persons, and to an
extent and degree which has often amused me, that whatever cause I
espouse, be it good or bad, will succeed; and that I never undertake a
thing, however apparently impracticable, without a certainty of success.
Though such a feeling increases the difficulty of every step of a man's
career, it furnishes him with capital to begin with. My life having been
bound up with the two great principles of constitutional monarchy on the
one hand, and equal civil and religious principles in Canada on the
other, all who really desire such a government, without regard to the
domination of a party, ... seem to think the Governor-General will
succeed if I have resolved to espouse his government....
From this state of mind in the case of many Reformers, and from what I
have learned from other sources, I am satisfied that, notwithstanding
the efforts to inflame party spirit--to produce party blindness, and
create party organizations--there is still a spirit of candour and
enquiry (all I ask) amongst a large portion of the Liberal party which
will furnish an ample fulcrum for a lever that will overthrow the enemy.
I think that June will probably be the best time for the application of
such a lever. The opposition can do nothing more at present. June is
rather a leisure month for reading--the hay and wheat harvest will come
on in July, August and September,--during which time agitators can do
but little, and then I suppose will come the session of the Legislature.
I hope to produce a vindication of His Excellency that will do no
discredit to him, and shake, if not confound, his enemies, and exhibit
such a platform of government as will appeal to every candid, common
sense, sound British subject, best adapted to promote the best interests
and greatest happiness of Canada....
To vindicate injured worth, either in high or humble life, has on
different occasions, afforded me peculiar pleasure, and I contemplate,
even as a pleasing task (though painful from the occasion) the purpose
and opportunity of doing so in respect to so noble a subject and so good
a cause as that with which His Excellency is identified. When the
Government once assumes the attitude of strength, many who are now
neutral, or perhaps professedly leaning to the apparently stronger
party, will come over avowedly to the Crown. The timidity of the secret
friends of the government in Lower Canada is an infirmity (I think of a
majority of mankind) which requires as much pity as it deserves censure.
All Greeks are not Spartans. Ten men seem to be made for work, where one
is constituted for war. I have found it so in the hour of peril; when I
have been left almost alone, though I found abundance of helping and
co-operating friends as soon as the tide of victory began to turn in my
favour. I think it will be so with the government in less than twelve
months--at least in Upper Canada. The League organization in Toronto is
the most formidable affair that has ever been formed in western Canada.
I am told that its funds are large also,--several thousand pounds--but I
think its power can be broken.
In a note to Dr. Ryerson from Mr. Higginson, dated 23rd of May, he
said:--You will of course have seen the manifesto just hatched and
brought forth by the League, jesuitically and cleverly enough put we
must admit; it will no doubt be widely circulated, and it is very
desirable that an antidote to the poison should be as extensively
communicated to the people; and who in the province is so capable as
yourself for such a task? If you would take up the arguments
_seriatim_--you could prove their fallacy without much difficulty. The
fabric being founded upon misapprehension and falsehood, must go with a
run. I confess I long to see these ambitious party-men unmasked.
CHAPTER XLI.
1844.
Sir Charles Metcalfe Defended against his Councillors
On the 27th May, 1844, Dr. Ryerson issued the first part of his
memorable Defence of Sir Charles Metcalfe, not only against the attacks
of his late Councillors, but also against those of the all-powerful
League which had been formed against him on the 24th March, under the
auspices of the Toronto Reform Association. The Manifesto of that famous
League was dated on the 16th May. Its issue at once decided Dr. Ryerson
to enter the lists in defence of Sir Charles, and the prefatory note to
his rejoinder was written on the 27th May. From the introductory portion
of it I make the following extract:--
Rev. Egerton Ryerson ... proposes ... to prove [from the] testimony
of his late Advisers ... that His Excellency is entitled to the
verdict of the country on every count of the indictment got up
against him.
Sir Charles Metcalfe may say to the people of Canada, as
Themistocles said to the Athenians who were incensed against him,
"Strike, but hear me!"
... If Leonidas,[123] with three hundred Spartans, could throw
themselves into the Thermopylæ of death for the salvation of their
country, it would ill become one humble Canadian to hesitate at any
sacrifice, or shrink from any responsibility, or even danger, in
order to prevent his own countrymen from rushing into a vortex,
which, he is most certainly persuaded, will involve many of them in
calamities more serious than those which followed the events of
1837.
The following account of this memorable controversy was written by Dr.
Ryerson himself. It has been slightly abridged and a few explanatory
notes added:--
After much consideration, but without consulting any human being, I
determined to enter the arena of public discussion to set forth and
vindicate the true principles of responsible government, and to defend
Sir Charles Metcalfe, as I had before defended Mr. Bidwell, from the
unjust attacks made upon him; and I published an introductory paper
avowing my purpose. My friends generally and the country at large were
against me. My elder brother, John, a life-long Conservative, on first
meeting me after the publication of that introductory paper, said,
"Egerton, you have ruined yourself, for nine-tenths of the people are
opposed to the Governor-General." I answered, "I know it; but I believe
that nine-tenths of the people are mistaken, and that if they will read
what I am about to write they will think as I do."
The contest was severe; the ablest and most meritorious public men in
the province were arrayed on the opposite side; but I felt that truth
and justice did not rest on numbers--that there was a public, as well as
an individual, conscience, and to that conscience I appealed, supporting
my appeal by reference to the past professions of Reformers, the best
illustrations from Greek, Roman, and English history, and the authority
of the best writers on constitutional government, and moral and
political philosophy, and the highest interests, civil and social, of
all classes of society in Upper Canada. For months I was certainly the
"best abused man" in Canada; but I am not aware that I lost my temper,
or evinced personal animosity (which I never felt), but wrote with all
the clearness, energy, and fire that I could command.
The general elections took place in October, 1844, and in all Upper
Canada (according to the _Globe's_ own statement) only eight candidates
were elected in opposition to Sir Charles Metcalfe! Such a result of a
general election was never before, or since, witnessed in Upper Canada.
It has been alleged again and again, that Sir Charles Metcalfe was
opposed to responsible government and that I supported him in it. The
only pretext for this was, that in the contest with Sir Charles Metcalfe
his opponents introduced party appointments as an essential element of
responsible government, which they themselves had disavowed in previous
years when advocating that system of government. The doctrine of making
appointments according to party (however common now, with its
degenerating influences) was then an innovation upon all previously
professed doctrines of reformers, as I proved to a demonstration in my
letters in defence of Sir Charles Metcalfe.
Sir Francis Hincks, in an historical lecture delivered at Montreal, in
1877, has revived this charge against Sir Charles Metcalfe, and has
attempted to create the impression that there was a sort of conspiracy
between the late Earl of Derby and Lord Metcalfe to extinguish
responsible government in Canada. For such an insinuation there is not a
shadow of reason, though the author may have thought so, from his strong
personal feelings and former party views, as one of the actors in the
struggle.
I was in England during the latter part of 1844 and 1845, when the Earl
of Derby was Colonial Secretary, and had more than one conversation
with him on Canadian affairs; and I know that the Earl of Derby had no
more intention or desire to abolish responsible government in Canada
than had Sir Francis Hincks himself. The Earl of Derby had, indeed,
fears lest the party in power, under the new system, should act upon the
narrow and prescriptive principles and spirit of the old tory party, and
wished to see that with the new system an enlarged policy would
extinguish the hatreds, as well as the proscriptions, of the past, and
unite all classes in the good government and for the advancement of the
country. This was the view of Lord Metcalfe; and this was the view
advocated in my letters in his defence, which may be appealed to in
proof that the essence of that contest was not responsible government,
but as to whether or not the distribution of the patronage of the Crown
should be dispensed upon the principles of party, or on those of justice
and morality.
I may add an illustrative and curious incident on this subject:--On the
passing of the Imperial Act for confederating the British North American
Colonies into the Dominion of Canada, and its proclamation, I wrote and
published an address to the people of Upper Canada in 1868, suggesting
to them to forget the differences of the past, and the principles and
spirit in which they should introduce the new system of government, and
build up for themselves a united and prosperous nation. A few days after
the publication of this address, I met in the street, an honourable
gentleman, who had been one of the party opposed to Sir Charles
Metcalfe, a member of a Liberal government, a life-long Reformer. He
complimented me on my recent address to the people of Upper Canada; but
added, "The great mistake of your life was the letters you wrote in
defence of Lord Metcalfe." I answered, "Do you think so?" "Yes," said
he, "that was the great mistake of your life." "And," said I, "you
approve of my recent public address?" "Yes," he answered, "I think it is
the best thing you ever wrote." "Well," said I, "do you know that that
address with the exception of the introductory and concluding
paragraphs, is a reproduction, word for word, of my third letter in
defence of Lord Metcalfe, counselling my fellow-countrymen as to the
principles and spirit in which they should act in carrying into effect
the then new system of responsible government!" He exclaimed, "It cannot
be! I have these letters." I said, "It can be; and it is so; and if you
will compare my third letter in defence of Lord Metcalfe with my recent
address, you will find that I have not omitted an illustration from
Greek, or Roman, or English history, or an authority from standard
writers, on political or moral science, or a petition or address from
Reformers from the rebellion of 1837 to the establishment of
responsible government under Lord Sydenham and Sir Charles Bagot in
1840-42; that I have not added to, or omitted, a word, but have repeated
_verbatim et literatim_ in 1868, in regard to confederate government,
what I advised the people of Canada in 1844 in regard to responsible
government." And now, I continued, "who has changed? you or I?" "Oh," he
said, "circumstances alter cases." "Truly," I said, "circumstances alter
cases; but circumstances don't change principles; I wrote on the
principles and spirit of government irrespective of party." On such
principles I have endeavoured to act throughout my more than half a
century of public life--principles, the maintenance of which has
sometimes brought me into collision with the leaders of one party, and
sometimes in opposition to those of another party; but principles which
I have found higher and stronger than party.
* * * * *
A day or two after the issue of Dr. Ryerson's first paper in defence of
Sir Charles Metcalfe, Hon. Isaac Buchanan sent to him copies of letters
which he had written to Hon. Joseph Howe, Halifax, and to Civil
Secretary Higginson, Kingston, on the Metcalfe controversy. In this
letter he said:--
It is with infinite pleasure that I see you have publicly come out
to tell the truth as to politics and public men. The fact is,
politics in a new country are either the essential principles of
society or parish business. In both cases every man is interested,
and to a less extent than in an old state of things, where in a
hereditary educated class, there are natural guardians of the
public virtue. Is it objectionable that clergymen interfere in the
arrangement of detail for the happiness of the country? But it is,
as I have always maintained, their most imperative duty to hold and
express an opinion on constitutional politics. The priests in Lower
Canada, from not doing so, permitted the rebellion of 1837. I,
myself, care nothing, and never did care anything, for party
politics in Canada; and, in my mind, the distinction has always
been more marked between these and constitutional politics than I
have been able to explain.
Dr. Ryerson did not attend the opening of Conference at Kingston, in
June, 1844. Mr. Higginson wrote to him on the 12th to express his
disappointment at not seeing him there, and added:--
Of your letters--your admirable letters--I only hear one opinion,
that they are most powerful, unassailable; and this the opposition
press appears to find them, for I can perceive no attempt to answer
the convincing arguments adduced by you. They merely abuse you and
impugn your motives: lying and misrepresentation are their
favourite weapons.
You will have heard of the discovery of the Orange Plot, the
conspiracy between Sir C. Metcalfe and Ogle R. Gowan to upset the
Government!
We had a very satisfactory communication from Lord Stanley, by the
last packet, entirely approving of the "dignified and temperate"
conduct of the Governor, and assuring him of the strenuous support
of Her Majesty's Government, in resisting the "unreasonable and
exorbitant pretensions of the late Cabinet." Shall we see you
again before we move to Montreal? Sir Charles goes to the Falls,
and then returns to Kingston, which he leaves on the 20th for
Montreal.
From Mr. Higginson Dr. Ryerson received the following interesting
letter, dated Montreal, 20th July:--
As you will no doubt think it right, after you complete the series
of your admirable and unanswerable letters, to expose the fallacy
and falsehood with which Hon. R. B. Sullivan, as "Legion,"
endeavours to bolster up his arguments in reply to them, I think
the enclosed _précis_ of a conversation that took place between the
leader of the French party in the late Council and myself, early in
May last, will convince you that His Excellency did not write his
despatch of the 23rd of that month, quoted in the debate by Lord
Stanley, upon insufficient grounds, or in ignorance of the real
sentiments and inclinations of his then advisers. Letter No. 5 of
"Legion," in referring to this despatch, charges His Excellency
with what he calls paraphrasing, or, in other words,
misrepresentation, as no men in their senses could have made such
demands as the late Council are stated to have urged. The words
made use of by His Excellency are not theirs, it is true; but did
not the opinions expressed by Mr. Lafontaine, their leader, bear
out the assertion? I regret that Lord Stanley did not quote what
followed. I have given the meaning, rather than the words, of the
dictatorial Councillor; but I have not in the slightest degree
exaggerated the substance of his discourse. I ought to add that the
conversation originated in a rumour of His Excellency's intending
to appoint a Provincial Aide-de-camp, of whom Mr. Lafontaine did
not approve; and that, although addressed to me, I could only
suppose that it was intended for the ears of His Excellency. You
will, of course, not believe the newspaper statements of Sir
Charles having sent for Mr. Lafontaine. Ever since our arrival here
the French party have been urging that the only way of getting out
of our difficulties is by allowing Messrs. Lafontaine and Baldwin
to resume their places--as the French people believe that they
cannot enjoy responsible government without them. To this His
Excellency cannot consent. What the result may be is not quite
clear; our future plans have been delayed by this negotiation,
which, though still pending, must terminate in a day or two. I hope
that under any circumstances we shall be able to meet the present
Parliament, if not with a majority, at least with a strong
minority.
The following is the _Précis_ to which I refer:--
Mr. Lafontaine said: Your attempts to carry on the government on
principles of conciliation must fail. Responsible government has
been conceded, and when we lose our majority we are prepared to
retire; to strengthen us we must have the entire confidence of the
Governor-General exhibited most unequivocally--and also his
patronage--to be bestowed exclusively on our political adherents.
We feel that His Excellency has kept aloof from us. The opposition
pronounce that his sentiments are with them. There must be some
acts of his, some public declaration in favour of responsible
government, and of confidence in the Cabinet, to convince them of
their error. This has been studiously avoided. Charges have been
brought against members of the Council, in addresses, and no notice
given to them, viz.: Mr. B. was even mentioned by name, or at least
by office, and will declare on the first day of the session that it
is only as a member of responsible government that he for one would
consent to act. If he supposed for a moment that Sir Charles could
introduce a different system, he would resign. In fact, the
Governor ought to stand in the same position towards his Cabinet as
Her Majesty does. They cannot be prepared to defend his acts in
Parliament if done without their advice--instance the case of the
Collector of Customs' intended dismissal. No new-comers ought to be
appointed to office. Declares his disinterestedness, as his
party--_i.e._ the French Canadians--must carry the day. The
Conservatives would be just as ready to join them as those that
have--has no desire for office for office's sake. If the Governor
does not take some steps to denounce and show his disapprobation of
Orangeism, his not doing so will be construed into the reverse, and
the system will extend, and bloodshed will follow. The other party
will organize--and they would be great fools if they did not--no
Orangemen to be included in Commissions of the Peace--no justice at
present for Catholics in Upper Canada. A law for the suppression of
illegal societies does exist, but very difficult to discover
members of them and to execute the law. Conciliation is only an
attempt to revert to the old system of government--viz: the will of
the Governor. It must fail. Lord Stanley decidedly adverse to the
Lower Canadians; does not forget their expunging one of his
despatches from their journals--it was so impudent. Trusts the Home
Government will accept the proposed civil list; they will never
have so large a one offered again. In conclusion, Sir Charles
Metcalfe's great reputation places him in an eminently favourable
position for carrying out Sir Charles Bagot's policy, by which
alone the Province can be satisfactorily governed. A declaration by
Government to this effect would put a stop to political agitation
which the opposition keep alive as long as they have the slightest
hopes of office--all they care for. Let them know that the game was
up, and all would go right, and many come round. The differences of
religion in Upper Canada will always prevent amalgamation; you must
make them all of the same, like ourselves in Lower Canada. French
language clause in Union Bill must be expunged.
On the 26th July Dr. Ryerson replied to Mr. Higginson--
I shall make use of the enclosure _Précis_ in substance when I come to
reply to "Legion"--which will, of course, not be until he shall have got
through his series.
The "Defence" of Sir Charles Metcalfe consisted of nine papers, in which
the whole question at issue was fully discussed. In concluding the
ninth, Dr. Ryerson said:--
I have written these papers ... as a man who has no temporal
interest whatever, except in common with that of his native
country--the field of his life's labours--the seat of his best
affections--the home of his earthly hopes;--up to the present time
I have never received one farthing of its revenue. I know something
of the kinds and extent of the sacrifices which are involved in my
thus coming before the public. If others have resigned office, I
have declined it, and under circumstances very far less propitious
than those under which the late Councillors stepped out.... I have
no interest in the appointment of one set of men to office, or in
the exclusion of any other man, or set of men, from office. I know
but one chief end of civil government--the public good; and I have
one rule of judging the acts and sentiments of all public
men--their tendency to promote the public good.... I am as
independent of Messrs. Viger, Draper and Daly, as I am of Messrs.
Baldwin, Sullivan and Hincks.... I might appeal to more than one
instance in which the authority and patronage of the Governor did
not prevent me from defending the constitutional rights of my
fellow-subjects and native country.... The independent and
impartial judgment which I myself endeavour to exercise, I desire
to see exercised by every man in Canada. I believe it comports best
with constitutional safety, with civil liberty, with personal
dignity, with public duty, with national greatness. With the
politics of party--involving the confederacy, the enslavement, the
selfishness, the exclusion, the trickery, the antipathies, the
crimination of party, no good man ought to be identified.... With
the politics of government--involving its objects, its principles,
its balanced powers, its operations--even against the encroachments
of any party--every British subject has much to do. Civil
government, as St. Paul says, "is an ordinance of God." Every
Christian ... is to see it not abused, or trampled under foot, or
perverted to party or sectional purposes; but he is to seek its
application to the beneficent ends for which it was designed by our
common Creator and Governor. Such have been the ends for which the
people of Canada have long sought its application; such have been
the ends sought by the Governor-General.
Dr. Ryerson, in his letter to Mr. Higginson (26th July) said:
I have now concluded my defence of His Excellency against the attacks of
his late councillors. I have done the best I could. As to its influence
upon the public mind, I am, of course, not responsible. I cannot compel
persons to read, think, or reason, however I may do so for them. In some
places, I am told, a most essential change has taken place in the public
mind, in consequence of the perusal of my letters. In other places,
passion has prevented the perusal of them, and numbers of persons have
just become calm enough to desire to peruse them, and are anxiously
waiting for the pamphlet edition.
I have not yet heard of any one who has read them all, who has not
become convinced of the correctness of my reasoning. But it is the
opinion of persons who have far better means of judging than I have,
that the effect of them the next two months will be much greater than
during the last two months. The violent feelings which the whole party
of the Leaguers sought to excite against myself have, to a great extent,
subsided, and a spirit of inquiry and reflection is returning to the
public mind. I believe nothing has been done to circulate my articles
among the mass of the people--beyond the ordinary newspaper agency. I
believe that were my ninth number itself printed and widely circulated
in Upper Canada in tract form, it would prepare the way for the success
of a just administration, consisting of any persons whom His Excellency
might select--at least so far as the great majority of the people of
Western Canada is concerned. I think the decision of the Imperial
Government on the whole question should be laid before the Legislature
in a despatch. The matter would be thus brought to a single issue, and I
doubt not but the prerogative would be placed upon the true foundation.
To proceed again to legislation, without a distinct settlement of this
question, appears to me derogatory to the dignity of the Crown itself
(both in England and Canada) and unsafe in every respect; and unjust to
both His Excellency and to all who have supported him. I think also that
the Hon. Mr. Draper ought (if necessary) to be supported as strongly as
ever George III. supported Mr. Pitt. Mr. Draper has thrown himself into
the breach, and defended and supported the Government in no less than
three emergencies, when others have abandoned, and even sought to
overthrow it. I think that Mr. Draper ought not to be made a sacrifice,
without an appeal to the people. Much prejudice and passion have, of
course, been excited by the Leaguers since last January, and they have
formed a regular and extensive organization; but a reaction has already
commenced; the backbone of their power is broken. They can form
branches, associations, and threaten us as they did a few months ago;
but not a few amongst themselves are wavering. If the Government will
act with liberality and energy, and the Home Government transmit an
official decision on the question at issue, to be first submitted to the
Legislature and then to the people, I believe His Excellency's exertions
will be crowned with a glorious victory, to his own credit, the honour
of the British Crown, the strengthening of our connection with the
Mother Country, and the great future benefit of Canada.
As to myself: when I commenced this discussion I did not know what might
be my own fate in respect to it. I wished, at least, to do my duty to my
family; to quiet their apprehension, and not embarrass and distrust my
own mind, while undertaking a task of so great magnitude.
In regard to the past: I have completed my task to the best of my humble
ability. The satisfaction of having done my duty is all the
acknowledgment or commendation I desire, or can receive. With my present
experience, I might perform the task in a manner more worthy of the
subject, and more to my own satisfaction. I hope, however, an occasion
for such a discussion may not occur again in Canada. The hostile
personal feelings excited against me in some quarters will, I hope, be
lived down in time. The disclosures which have been made of the alleged
sins of my public, and even private life, have not, I trust, brought to
light one dishonourable act, one republican or unconstitutional
sentiment, even under the severest provocations, and grossest abuse.
Dr. Ryerson had written to the Governor-General early in August on
several matters. He received a reply from Mr. Secretary Higginson on the
15th of that month. In it he says:--
The Governor-General looks forward to the pleasure of seeing you
soon, when he will have an opportunity of personally expressing his
warmest thanks for your admirable and unanswerable letters in
defence of the Queen's Government. His Excellency feels very much
indebted to you for the zeal and ability that enabled you to
perform, in so truly an efficient manner, the arduous task which
your patriotism and public spirit induced you to undertake. Upon
other important subjects adverted to in your letter, His Excellency
will be very happy to have personal communication with you when
you come down. Our object now is to complete the Council, as far as
may be practicable, without the body of the French party, who
doggedly refused to take part in any Administration of which
Messrs. Lafontaine and Baldwin are not members. Mr. William Smith,
of the Montreal Bar, accepts the Attorney-Generalship, for the
duties of which he is said to be well qualified. He is a Liberal in
politics, and has always been looked on as a friend of the French
party. The Hon. Mr. Morris is willing to take the
Receiver-Generalship, and I hope that Mr. W. H. Merritt will now
find himself at liberty to join the Council. The Crown Lands
Department will still remain unfilled; and perhaps it is well that
that door should be still kept open.
Mr. Billa [now Hon. Senator] Flint, of Belleville, in a letter dated
14th August, in correcting an error in one of Dr. Ryerson's Metcalfe
letters on a matter of fact, adds:--
I hope soon to read your pamphlet, but in not reading your letters
heretofore, I have been enabled to answer the attacks of your
enemies, not on the grounds of a consent, but upon other, and I
trust better ground, that of not condemning a man unheard, as is
the case in this part of the community, and as I have stated that
you must be near right from the fact that your enemies dare not
publish your productions.
With a view to aid Dr. Ryerson in his personal defence, Hon. Isaac
Buchanan wrote to him on the 22nd August, and said:--
As I think you may feel called on to answer the personal attacks
made upon you, or, at all events, to defend the ministerial
character from those who deprive it of all manliness and
independence, I send you Hetherington's "History of the Church of
Scotland." On one page, and in the note referred to, you will find
the methods and conduct of Knox explained. It will be the best, as
well as the most truthful policy on your part, to show your
agreement with this great character. The effect will be great, not
only on the Methodist Scotch, but all other Scotch in the Colony,
for we are all for national, instead of party, freedom; we prefer
our country to our party.
It may be my fondness for my country; but I think no other country,
or people, have ever shown that indomitable love of equal justice
and rational, because national freedom, as opposed to party
supremacy, as we have done in Scotland.
I feel sure that you may make some happy illustrations from
Hetherington's History to enlighten the public on the present state
of affairs, when we are about to be enthralled by party tyranny,
and do much to revive the spirit:
"Ne'er will I quail with down-cast eye
Beneath the frown of tyranny;
In freedom I have lived, in freedom I will die."
The history of our Church is not only the history of Scotland, but
the history of the world's freedom from the tyranny of men, or
parties.
Dr. Ryerson had written to His Excellency in regard to the issue of his
letters in a pamphlet with a full index. To this letter Mr. Higginson
replied on the 19th August:--
I am desired by His Excellency to repeat his thanks for your
continued exertions in support of Her Majesty's Government.
Your index to the pamphlet will be exceedingly useful. I should
like very much to have the pamphlet translated into French, for the
benefit of the Lower Canadians, and perhaps I shall be able to
accomplish it. I should be obliged by your ordering a few hundred
copies to be sent to me for distribution in the Eastern Townships.
FOOTNOTES:
[123] By a singular popular error, which this sentence may have
suggested, it was stated and generally believed that the Defence of Lord
Metcalfe by Dr. Ryerson was written and published under _the nom de
plume of_ "Leonidas."
CHAPTER XLII.
1844-1845.
After the Contest.--Reaction and Reconstruction.
Dr. Ryerson naturally took a deep interest in political affairs at this
time, and Sir Charles Metcalfe kept him fully informed of events
transpiring at the seat of Government. In a letter, dated 19th August,
1844, Mr. Civil Secretary Higginson said to him:--
You will be glad to hear that Hon. D. B. Papineau accepts a seat in
the Council. The Inspector-General and Solicitor-General of Lower
Canada are the only offices unprovided for. As to Mr. W. H.
Merritt, the state of his private affairs may operate in his case,
as in that of Mr. Harrison. If it should prove so, the Hon. James
Morris may be induced to join the Council, and a very worthy
representative of the Upper Canada Constitutional Reformers he
would be. Whether the present Parliament is to be met again, or to
be dissolved, remains for discussion. Sir Charles inclines to meet
them, and I think we can do with a majority, albeit a small one, to
support the Government.
Mr. Higginson wrote to Dr. Ryerson, Sept. 8th, and said:
Dissolution or no dissolution, still undetermined. Thorburn
declines office. We must have an Inspector-General, and from the
Upper Canada Liberals. Where are we to find one fit for the duties?
Dr. Ryerson addressed a letter, on the 10th September, to Hon. W. H.
Draper, in reply to Mr. Higginson's note--
I need scarcely say that I congratulate you most heartily on your
formal appointment as Attorney-General, and on the important
additions which have been made to your strength in the Council.
Would not Mr. Scobie make a good Inspector-General? He is said to
be a good financier. His private character, sound principles, and
moderate feelings, are all that you could desire. After much
reflection, and conversation with some judicious persons who have
travelled more than I have throughout the country, and have better
opportunities of forming an opinion than I have, I am inclined to
think that you will gain much more than you can lose, by meeting
the present Parliament, and declaring your views, and taking your
stand upon the true principles of responsible government. I make
these remarks, because I spoke rather in favour of a dissolution
when I saw you last.
To this letter Hon. W. H. Draper replied, on the 17th:--
I acknowledge the force of your arguments against a dissolution,
but at the same time it appears to me you have not weighed the
arguments on the other side. These may be concisely stated. 1st.
That the ensuing session will be one certainly preceding a general
election, and therefore, one in which popular doctrines have their
fullest force. 2nd. That members having committed themselves by the
vote of last session would fear to retrace their steps and brave
the charge of inconsistency at such a time. 3rd. That the
ex-ministers would have an opportunity, which they would not
neglect, of presenting a new question for the country. You have
sickened them of the first question; they would like a second,
better selected, if they could get it. For example, if they moved a
committee to inquire how the Government has been administered
during the last ten months, would they not be very likely to carry
it? Information can do no harm; enquiry is a right of the House,
etc., etc. Who would venture to oppose when the committee was
granted? No business would be done till it had reported. Whatever
the report--and if they got a majority on the committee, we may
judge its character--their point would be gained, and they would
have a new issue to try before the country; a new topic of
inflammatory harangue, and studious misrepresentation. Whether this
would be their move I cannot say, but they would do something
tending to a similar end. The experience of 1836 will teach them
not to make a dead set against doing business, or granting
supplies, etc. They will make that a consequence, and if possible
force the Government to a dissolution, thus casting the onus of
doing no public business on the Government. Again, although not
meeting the present House may be considered as an admission of
inferiority there, I think this less injurious than that the new
Administration should be beaten there; and I cannot in any way
anticipate a different result. After going over the list in every
way I see no just ground for hoping for victory there. Again, of
those in whom we might place some hope of a vote in a crisis, there
are some who will not be in their places. Col. Prince certainly
will not, and I doubt much if Hon. W. H. Merritt, or Mr. Thorburn
can. Does no other Upper Canadian Reformer suggest himself? I
confess that I am at a great loss. Neither Harrison nor Merritt can
take office, as they say, because of their private affairs. Hon.
James Morris has given up politics. I have not failed to note your
observation respecting Mr. Scobie, and have brought the matter
before the Council.
To this letter Dr. Ryerson replied on the 19th September:--
You will observe that my remarks had reference almost exclusively
to the best means of augmenting the elective suffrage in favour of
the Government. The facilities for circulating knowledge amongst
the mass of the people are so very imperfect, that it takes a long
time, and great exertions, even out of the ordinary channel, to
inform the great body of the people on any subject.
In the present instance, the Tory party, although they approve of
my letters, do not take pains to circulate them gratuitously. It is
amongst the persons opposed to the Governor-General, that the
reading of them is the most important. That class of persons cannot
be supposed to be very solicitous to procure publications against
their own sentiments and feelings, although they--at least very
many of them--would readily read them if they were put into their
hands. I have scarcely heard of an individual who has read all my
letters who does not adopt the sentiments of them--how strong
soever his feelings might be against the Governor-General. It was
with a view, therefore, of gaining over to the Government a larger
portion of the electors, that I proposed delay, and the
intermediate means of fully informing the public mind.
From the considerations which you assign, I do not see that you can
do otherwise than dissolve the House. I can easily conceive how
some persons can absent themselves from a short session, and thus
weaken the Government more than others could strengthen it by their
presence and support; and that popular movements may be devised to
shift the question and embarrass you. You will probably not gain
as many elections now as you would six months or three months
hence; but what you may not gain in numbers you may gain in the
moderation of new members, or in a new House; especially if you can
reduce the majorities of opposition members who may be returned,
and hold before them in a new House the possibility of a second
dissolution.
Dr. Ryerson then sums up his suggestions as follows:--
The great question then is, How can you come before the country
forthwith to the best advantage? I would take the liberty of offering
the following suggestions, which have probably occurred to yourself,
with others that I shall not mention: 1. Ought not the views of the
Government, on the great questions, be put forth in some more
authoritative, or formal and imposing way, than has yet been adopted? I
know not whether it would be in order for the Governor-General to issue
a proclamation in some such form as Lord Durham adopted, when he made
his extraordinary appeal to the inhabitants of British North America. In
such a document, whatever ought to be the form of its promulgation, the
question and doctrine of responsible government should be stated with an
explicitness that will leave the ex-Council party no room to cavil, or
justify further resistance on that subject. You have this advantage,
that you can state your case as you please, and as fully as you please,
to the country. 2. Ought there not to be more effective means used than
have yet been employed to circulate the refutations of the ex-Council's
publications amongst their own supporters? Every one you gain from that
side counts two, in more ways than one. And from what I have understood,
I am persuaded the chief desideratum is to furnish them with the
refutations of the attacks of the late Councillors. A proper improvement
of means for nearly two months might accomplish a great deal, and would
soon reduce them to a minority, in a large majority of the counties in
Upper Canada.
On the 18th September, Mr. Higginson wrote to Dr. Ryerson:
The question of meeting the present Parliament, or of going to the
people, has at last been decided in favour of the latter measure.
There was so much to be said, _pro_ and _con_, that it was a most
difficult point to decide. If the Government could have reckoned
with any degree of certainty upon a majority in the House, which
they unfortunately could not, there would have been the strongest
reasons, as your brother so forcibly put them, for not dissolving.
Your suggestion to Hon. Mr. Draper as to Mr. Scobie filling the
Inspector-Generalship, engages the attention of His Excellency and
the Council. Can the gentleman referred to command a seat? I fear
not.
They complain of a great want of information in the Colborne
District. I mean Dr. Gilchrist's portion of it, where they see
nothing but the Peterborough _Chronicle_. Mr. Hickson may be
depended on as far as he can be of use in circulating some of your
wholesome truths. As there will now be no opportunity of speaking
to the people from the Throne previous to the elections, some other
mode must be taken to ensure our not coming before the country upon
a wrong issue, and such language used as the masses can readily
comprehend. It is to the electors we must look for victory, and
that Sir Charles Metcalfe will triumph I entertain no doubt.
In acknowledging an official letter to His Excellency, Mr. Higgins on
(October 10th) informed Dr. Ryerson that he should receive an official
reply through Mr. Daly. He then added:--
I doubt not that you will outlive all the abuse that foul-mouthed
radicalism can heap upon you.
It is, as you know, impossible to calculate with any degree of
certainty upon the results of the elections until the polls are
tested; but, I think I may assert with safety that our prospects in
Lower Canada are by no means so discouraging as our enemies, and, I
believe, some of our friends, would make it appear. Of the latter,
there is a class that stand still with their arms folded, fancying
that there must be a majority against the Government, and that it
will be taken by the Home authorities as an evidence of the
impossibility of working responsible government.
In sending letters of introduction to friends in England, Hon. George
Moffatt, of Montreal, wrote to Dr. Ryerson in October to say:--
As to the result of the Metcalfe contest, returns have been
received from more than half of the constituencies in the two
sections of the Province, and it is gratifying to find that the
Governor-General is assured of having a good working majority in
the Assembly. I have no fears about him, and my only anxiety now is
that things may not be again grossly mismanaged at the Colonial
Office. Unfortunately, however, Sir Charles Metcalfe's health is
very precarious, and should he resign, it will be of the utmost
importance that a statesman of ability and character should be sent
out to succeed him.
I drew your attention to the ungrateful conduct of the returned
exiles, generally; and if proof were wanting of the entire failure
of the conciliation system in this section of the Province, it
would only be necessary to refer to the active part taken by these
men in the late contest.
Hon. Peter McGill, of Montreal, in his letter of introduction to Sir
Randolph Routh, thus referred to Dr. Ryerson:--
The Rev. Egerton Ryerson, with whose name you, and every one
connected with Canada, must be familiar, has recently been doing
the State some service, by his eloquent writings in defence and
vindication of Sir Charles Metcalfe's Government, and in support of
law, order, and British Connection.
Having applied to His Excellency for letters of introduction to parties
in England, Mr. Secretary Higginson writes:--
I have the pleasure to enclose an introduction from His Excellency
to Lord Stanley, and letters to old friends of his and mine, Mr.
Trevelyan, of the Treasury, and Mr. Mangles, M.P.
How nobly and strongly Upper Canada has come out! She will send us
at least thirty good men and true, who will not be overawed by a
French faction. From this section of the Province we shall have, on
the lowest calculation, thirteen or fourteen, which gives us a
majority of five or six to commence with, and that will doubtless
increase.
From no one did Dr. Ryerson receive during the Metcalfe contest more
faithful and loving counsel than from his old friend, Rev. George
Ferguson. Mr. Ferguson had been a brave soldier before he entered the
ministry, in 1816, and he was, up to the time of his death, in 1857, a
valiant soldier of the cross. In a letter to Dr. Ryerson, in September,
1844, he said:--
My esteemed friend, beloved brother, (and may I add) dear son:
These epithets you know come from a warm heart; a heart of
friendship, affection, and love, without dissimulation. If you have
a friend in this little wicked and deceitful world it is George
Ferguson. I have watched you in all your movements from first to
last with great anxiety and deep concern. Your welfare and
prosperity I have, do, and will rejoice in; and when you are
touched in character, or otherwise, I feel it acutely. When I
understood what you intended to undertake, and hearing the clamour
among the people, I felt awful, not that I feared that any
production or argument coming from your pen would be controverted
successfully. I believe that your last production is unanswerable
on logical, constitutional, and fair, honest principles, but I was
afraid that it would not accomplish the end for which it was
designed; for the people, generally, had run mad, formerly by the
word "reform," and now they are insane by the word "responsible." I
fear that the Governor will lose the elections in Canada West. Your
pamphlet may, it is true, be a text book to the next Parliament,
and keep them right from fear. I was not afraid that you had
committed yourself with the Conference and the Church after all the
fuss preachers and people made in this respect, (and I am of
opinion many would have been glad of it) but I had my serious fears
that it would injure your enjoyments in religion, and be a source
of temptation that would cause you to leave the ministry. But I
hope and pray that one who has stood against all the bribes, baits,
and offers made to buy him, when but a boy, will be upheld. Oh! no,
no; having Christ in the soul, walking with God, having secret
communion and fellowship with the Deity continually, with your
talents and qualifications what a treasure to the Church! and the
good you would be made the happy instrument of doing! This is true
honour, real dignity, true popularity, and eternal wealth. I would
rather go to the grave with you dying well, than ever hear that my
beloved Egerton was lost to the Church. But, my dear son, you have
need to watch, to stand fast, to be strong, and acquit thyself as a
man; to have an eye single to the glory of the Lord, to keep the
munition, to watch the way. You never will be out of danger till
you get to heaven. Be much in secret prayer and communion with your
Maker. These simple truths come from a father in his 29th year of
his ministry--one that is, in every sense of the word,
superannuated, and one that will shortly be known no more.
* * * * *
Hon. R. B. Sullivan (under the _nom de plume_ of "Legion") in a series
of thirteen letters, with appendix, extending to 232 pages of a
pamphlet, replied to Dr. Ryerson's Defence of Lord Metcalfe. These
letters were afterwards reviewed by Dr. Ryerson in a series of ten
letters, extending to 63 pages of a pamphlet. This review was in the
form of a rejoinder, but in it no new principles of government were
discussed. Dr. Ryerson's "Defence" proper, was originally published, as
was his review of "Legion's" letters, in the _British Colonist_, then
edited by the late Hugh Scobie, Esq. The Defence was afterwards
published in pamphlet form, and extended to 186 pages.
CHAPTER XLIII.
1841-1844.
Dr. Ryerson Appointed Superintendent of Education.
The alleged "reward" which Dr. Ryerson was positively asserted to have
received from Lord Metcalfe for his memorable Defence of that nobleman,
was long a favourite topic on which Dr. Ryerson's enemies loved to
dilate. Beyond the fact that the appointment was finally made by the
administration of Sir Charles Metcalfe, upon the recommendation of Hon.
W. H. Draper, there was nothing on which to base the charge of such a
_quid pro quo_ having been received by Dr. Ryerson for his notable
Defence of the Governor-General.
In point of fact, the appointment was first spoken of to Dr. Ryerson by
Lord Sydenham himself, in the autumn of 1841. The particulars of that
circumstance are mentioned in detail in a letter written by Dr. Ryerson
to T. W. C. Murdoch, Esq., Private Secretary to Sir Charles Bagot, on
the 14th January, 1842. Dr. Ryerson said:--
In the last interview with which I was honoured by [Lord Sydenham],
he intimated that he thought I might be more usefully employed for
this country than in my present limited sphere; and whether there
was not some position in which I could more advantageously serve
the country at large. I remarked that I could not resign my present
official position in the Church, with the advocacy of whose
interests I had been entrusted, until their final and satisfactory
adjustment by the Government, as I might thereby be represented as
having abandoned or sacrificed their interests; but that after such
adjustment I should feel myself very differently situated, and free
to do anything which might be beneficial to the country, and which
involved no compromise of my professional character; that I knew of
no such position likely to be at the disposal of the Government
except the Superintendency of Common Schools (provided for in the
Bill then before the Legislature), which office would afford the
incumbent a most favorable opportunity, by his communications,
preparation and recommendation of books for libraries, etc., to
abolish differences and jealousies on minor points; to promote
agreement on great principles and interests; to introduce the best
kind of reading for the youth of the country; and the not onerous
duties of which office would also afford him leisure to prepare
publications calculated to teach the people at large to appreciate,
upon high moral and social considerations, the institutions
established amongst them; and to furnish, from time to time, such
expositions of great principles and measures of the administration
as would secure the proper appreciation and support of them on the
part of the people at large. Lord Sydenham expressed himself as
highly gratified at this expression of my views and feelings; but
the passing of the Bill was then doubtful, although His Lordship
expressed his determination to get it passed if possible, and give
effect to what he had proposed to me, and which was then
contemplated by him.
Apart from this statement of the intentions of Lord Sydenham, it is also
clear that the determination of Sir Charles Metcalfe to appoint Dr.
Ryerson to a position in which he could carry out a comprehensive scheme
of Public School Education, in Upper Canada, was come to some time
before the question of the difference between Sir Charles Metcalfe and
his late Councillors had engaged Dr. Ryerson's attention, and even at a
time when his impressions on the subject were against the
Governor-General. This conclusion was arrived at by Sir Charles
Metcalfe, after full and frequent conversations with Dr. Ryerson on the
subject of the University Bill. With a view to avail himself of Dr.
Ryerson's knowledge and judgment on that subject, he directed his
Private Secretary to address the following note to him on the 18th of
December, 1843:--
One of the many important subjects that at present engages the
attention of the Governor-General your Church is particularly
interested in, and His Excellency is, therefore, desirous of having
the benefit of your opinion upon it. I mean the consideration of
the arrangements that are now necessary in consequence of the
failure of the University Bill introduced last session. I beg to
add that His Excellency will be happy to have some conversation
with you on the question to which I allude, the first time you may
visit this part of the province.
Not having been able to go at once to Kingston, Dr. Ryerson wrote to the
Governor-General in regard to the University Bill. His Secretary replied
early in January, saying:--
When it suits your convenience to come this way, His Excellency
will have an opportunity of fully discussing the subject touched
upon in your letter.
Dr. Ryerson soon afterwards went to Kingston and saw Sir Charles
Metcalfe on the subject. In a letter written to Hon. W. H. Merritt
shortly after this interview, Dr. Ryerson said:--
His Excellency's object in desiring me to wait upon him had
reference to the University question, on which he intends, with the
aid of Mr. Draper, etc., to have a measure brought into the
Legislature, which I think will be satisfactory to all parties
concerned. I took a day to consider the questions he had proposed.
In the meantime I saw Mr. S. B. Harrison and stated to him the
opinions I had formed. Of their correctness and importance, and
practicability he seemed to be fully satisfied, and urged me to
state them to His Excellency.
In a letter from Dr. Ryerson, published in the _Guardian_, and dated
28th October, 1843, the character of Mr. Baldwin's University Bill is
thus described:--
It is a measure worthy of the most enlightened government; and is,
I have reason to know, entirely the production of Hon.
Attorney-General Baldwin.... In the discussion [on the University
question] the authorities of Victoria College have taken no part.
We have remained perfectly silent and neutral, not because we had
no opinion as to the policy which has been recently pursued in
converting a Provincial ministry into a Church of England one[124]
... because we, as a body, had more to lose than to gain by any
proposed plan to remedy the abuse and evil complained of. As a
body, we gain nothing by the University Bill, should it become a
law; it only provides for the continuance of the small annual aid
which the Parliament has already granted; whilst, of course, it
takes away the University powers and privileges of Victoria
College--making it a College of the University of Toronto. Our
omission, therefore, from the Bill would be preferable, as far as
we, as a party, are concerned, were it consistent with the general
and important objects of the measure. But such an omission would
destroy the very character and object of the Bill. As a Provincial
measure, it cannot fail to confer unspeakable benefits upon the
country. Viewing the measure in this light, the Board of Victoria
College have consented to resign certain of their rights and
privileges for the accomplishment of general objects so
comprehensive and important.
In a written statement on this subject prepared by Dr. Ryerson for this
volume he says:--
Towards the close of 1843, Sir Charles Metcalfe determined to prepare
and give effect to a liberal measure on the University question--on
which subject Hon. Robert Baldwin had proposed elaborate and
comprehensive resolutions. Sir Charles Metcalfe sent for me to consult
with me on the University question, as I was then connected with one of
the colleges. I explained to His Excellency my views, and added that the
educational condition of the country at large was deplorable, and should
be considered in a system of public instruction, commencing with the
Common School and terminating with the University; being connected and
harmonious throughout, and equally embracing all classes without respect
to religious sect or political party. Sir Charles was much impressed and
pleased with my views, and expressed a wish that I could be induced to
give them public effect.
Dr. Ryerson then goes on to say:--I remarked to Sir Charles that Lord
Sydenham, a few days before his sudden death, had proposed the same
thing to me, and that had he survived a few weeks, I would likely have
been appointed, with a view of organizing a system of Elementary
Education; but that as Lord Sydenham died suddenly, and as I scorned to
be an applicant to Government for any office, I mentioned the fact to no
member of the Government. In May, 1842, another gentleman was appointed
Assistant to the Provincial Secretary as Superintendent of Education. He
was treated as a clerk in the office of the Provincial Secretary, having
no clerk himself, and having to submit his drafts of letters, etc., to
the Provincial Secretary for approval. [For particulars of this
appointment, see p. 347.]
After this interview Dr. Ryerson, on the 26th February, wrote to the
Governor-General on the University Question. Mr. Secretary Higginson
replied, and at the conclusion of his letter repeated the offer which
Sir Charles Metcalfe had made at the close of the year:--The
Governor-General is so sensible of the great value of the aid you would
bring to the Government in the intellectual improvement of the country,
that he anxiously hopes, as suggested, that some arrangement may be
devised satisfactory to you to obtain your co-operation; and His
Excellency will keep his mind bent on that object, and will be happy to
hear any further suggestion from you with a view to its accomplishment.
Early in this month (February, 1844), Dr. Ryerson's appointment as
Superintendent of Education has been talked of. His brother John wrote
to him on the 6th of March, recalling the fact of that appointment
having been the subject of conversation with Sir Charles Bagot and some
members of the Cabinet in 1842. Rev. John Ryerson then went on to say:--
You know that when your appointment to the office of Superintendent
of Education was talked of in Toronto, in 1842, I was in favour of
your accepting the appointment. The appointment that was made I
thought a most unwise one, and the late Executive greatly lowered
themselves in making it. Whenever I have thought of the thing
since, I have felt disgusted with the late Government, that they
should have been guilty of such a shameful dereliction of duty and
honour as not, at least, to have offered the appointment to you.
In reply to this letter, Dr. Ryerson said:--
As liberal as the Council of Sir Charles Bagot were in many things,
they rejected the application of every Methodist candidate for office.
Making appointments upon the principles of party, they must be given
only to one of the party; a system of appointment which holds out a poor
prospect to the Methodist who makes religion first, and party not more
than second--especially when he may have as a rival candidate one who
makes party everything, and religion nothing.
To this letter Rev. John Ryerson replied:--
I am very well pleased with the idea of your being appointed to the
office of Superintendent of Education--an office for which, I
think, you are better qualified than any other person in the
Province, and an office in which you can be of more service to the
Church, and the country generally, than in any other way.... You
say the appointment is not political.... Yet, is it true, in point
of fact, that the appointment is not political?... Would any person
be continued in the office who would not support the Government for
the time being?... Did not Lord Sydenham create this office for the
very purpose of connecting the incumbent with the Government, and
did he not have you in his mind's eye when he influenced this part
of the enactment?... There is no doubt, however, that in case of
the Baldwin Ministry again coming into power, the stool will be
knocked from under you. And we should not forget that the success
of the Governor-General, in carrying out his contemplated measures,
respecting the University, Colleges, etc., depends upon the
Parliament; and I have very little expectation of his being able to
secure the support of the present Parliament, in connection with
every other Ministry but the late ones; and what will be the result
of another election, who can tell?
In corroboration of the foregoing statements, Hon. Isaac Buchanan, in a
letter to the Editor of this volume dated 24th March, 1883, says:--
Being on the other side of the Atlantic from the fall of 1841 to that of
1843, I was not in circumstances to know to what extent the name of Dr.
Ryerson was discussed prior to the appointment of Mr. Murray [in May,
1842]; but I cannot believe that the minds of many who knew him to be
the fittest man, could have been otherwise than on Dr. Ryerson. On the
contrary, I believe that nothing prevented him being gladly offered the
originating of an educational system for Upper Canada--a Province which
he knew so well and loved so much--but the most unworthy church
prejudices of parties who had influence with the Government of the day,
for it was known to be a herculean task which no one could do the same
justice to as Dr. Ryerson, and which few men (however great as scholars
themselves) could have carried through at all.
Thus from the foregoing statements of Dr. Ryerson, Rev. John Ryerson,
and Hon. Isaac Buchanan, the following facts clearly appear:--
1. That Dr. Ryerson was offered the appointment of Superintendent of
Education by Lord Sydenham in 1841, and "had he survived a few weeks
[Dr. Ryerson] would likely have been appointed, with a view of
organizing a system of Elementary Education" for Upper Canada.
2. That Dr. Ryerson's appointment as Superintendent was "the subject of
conversation with Sir Charles Bagot and some members of his Cabinet in
1842."
3. That the failure to appoint Dr. Ryerson was due to the fact that the
Cabinet of Sir Charles Bagot--the Governor himself being unable to
act--"rejected," as Dr. Ryerson himself stated, "the application of
every Methodist candidate for office;" or, as Hon. Isaac Buchanan
states: "Nothing prevented [Dr. Ryerson] being gladly offered the
originating of an educational system for Upper Canada, but the most
unworthy church prejudices of parties who had influence with the
Government of the day."
4. That the appointment of Dr. Ryerson by Sir Charles Metcalfe was due
to the discussion on the comprehensive scheme of education which took
place between Dr. Ryerson and Sir Charles Metcalfe, on the University
question, late in 1843.
It may be proper to state that the appointment of Rev. Robert Murray in
May, 1842, was a surprise to the public, as the Editor of this volume
well remembers, and was, as Rev. John Ryerson states, "a most unwise
one." Mr. Murray was a minister of the Church of Scotland at Oakville.
He was chiefly known at the time as an anti-temperance writer[125]; but
had never been known to have taken any special interest in education. He
was intimate with Hon. S. B. Harrison, who owned mills at Bronte, a few
miles west of Oakville, where Mr. Harrison resided for some years. To
Mr. Harrison, the then leader of the Government, Mr. Murray was
indebted, as was then understood, for the appointment.
Rev. John Ryerson having written to his brother Egerton, asking if the
rumour of his appointment as Superintendent of Education was true, Dr.
Ryerson replied, on the 3rd April:--
As to the appointment to which you allude, it is but a rumour. No
appointment has yet been made. Should it take place, it will not require
my removal from Cobourg. Whatever has been proposed to me on that
subject, has been proposed with a view of giving body, form, practical
character and efficiency, to a system of general education, upon these
non-sectarian principles of equal justice which have characterized my
life. Nothing political is involved in the appointment--although it was
at first proposed to give me a seat in the Council! The education of the
people has nothing to do with the dispute with Lord Metcalfe, of which
you speak. I do not think it would become me to refuse to occupy the
most splendid field of usefulness that could engage the energies of man,
because of the dispute which has arisen.
On the 12th April, Dr. Ryerson replied to a letter from Mr. Secretary
Higginson, in which he said:--
Dr. Bethune, the Editor of _The Church_, has indeed protested
against my proposed appointment;[126] but I understand that a
majority of the members of his own congregation at Cobourg approve
of the appointment. Mr. Boswell, M.P.P., and Mr. Sheriff Rultan
(the most influential churchmen in the District), have expressed
themselves in favour of it in the strongest and warmest terms; as
have Mr. Keefer, of Thorold (who is a magistrate of wealth, leisure
and benevolence,--was foreman of the Grand Jury at the late assizes
in the Niagara District, and has, at the request of the District
Council, consented to superintend the schools in that district);
also Dr. Beadle, who is an old resident, and I believe, an American
Presbyterian.
Up to this time (April), Dr. Ryerson had decided to take no part in the
controversy between Sir Charles Metcalfe and his Councillors, but to
devote his energies to the great work of founding a system of education
for his native country. Much to the surprise of his friends, and (as he
says in his prefatory paper) "without consulting a human being," he felt
that it was his duty--after the issue of the manifesto of the Toronto
League--to relinquish the work assigned to him, and once more to take up
his pen in defence of one whom he believed to be in the right, and yet
who was left single-handed to meet the storm of popular clamour which
had been excited against him by combined and powerful enemies. Dr.
Ryerson, therefore, determined to decline the appointment offered to
him, and to abide the issue of the impending contest in which he
proposed to take a prominent part. In the opening remarks of this
memorable "Defence," he said:--
I was about entering upon the peaceful work--a work extensive and
varied beyond the powers of the most untiring and vigorous
intellect--a work down to this time almost entirely neglected--of
devising and constructing (by the concurrence of the people,
through their District Councils) a fabric of Provincial common
school education--of endeavouring to stud the land with appropriate
school-houses--of supplying them with appropriate books and
teachers--of raising a wretched employment to an honourable
profession--of giving uniformity, simplicity, and efficiency to a
general system of elementary educational instruction--of bringing
appropriate books for the improvement of his profession within the
reach of every school-master, and increased facilities for the
attainment of his stipulated remuneration--of establishing a
library in every district, and extending branches of it into every
township--of striving to develop by writing and discourses, in
towns, villages and neighbourhoods, the latent intellect, the most
precious wealth of the country--and of leaving no effort unemployed
within the limited range of my humble abilities, to make Western
Canada what she is capable of being made, the brightest gem in the
crown of Her Britannic Majesty. Such was the work about to be
assigned to me; and such was the work I was resolving, in humble
dependence upon the divine aid, to undertake; and no heart bounds
more than mine with desire, and hope, and joy, at the prospect of
seeing, at no distant day, every child of my native land in the
school-going way; and every intellect provided with the appropriate
elements of sustenance and enjoyment; and of witnessing one
comprehensive and unique system of education, from the a, b, c, of
the child, up to the matriculation of the youth into the Provincial
University, which, like the vaulted arch of heaven, would exhibit
an identity of character throughout, and present an aspect of equal
benignity to every sect, and every party upon the broad basis of
our common Christianity.
But I arrest myself from such a work--leave it perhaps for other
hands, and the glory of its accomplishment to deck another's brow;
and, if need be, to resign every other official situation; and,
unsolicited, unadvised by any human being--inwardly impelled by a
conviction of what is due to my Sovereign, to my country, to a
fellow-man--I take up the pen of vindication, of reasoning, of
warning and appeal, against criminations and proceedings of
impending evil, which, if they be not checked and arrested, will
accomplish more than the infamous ostracism of an Aristides, render
every other effort to improve and elevate Canada abortive, and
strew in wide-spread desolation over the land the ruins of the
throne and its government.
From the date of Mr. Higginson's letter (12th April) until the 7th of
September nothing was done in regard to the appointment of a
Superintendent of Education. On the latter day, however, Mr. Higginson
wrote to Dr. Ryerson as follows:--
We find a great difficulty in making a provisional arrangement for
the Educational duties. The University authorities require the
immediate services of a mathematical professor, and His Excellency
proposes Mr. Murray for the office, which will, it is hoped, be a
satisfactory arrangement to all parties; but Mr. Murray cannot
hold both positions, even for a time. Under these circumstances it
appears to be worthy of consideration, whether your appointment
ought not to take place at once, which would not, of course,
interfere with your projected visit to Europe in November, when it
might be easier to make some proper temporary provision for the
performance of your duties during your absence. His Excellency is
aware that you were in favour of deferring your nomination until
after your return from Europe; and if you should adhere to this
opinion, you may, perhaps, be able to suggest some means of meeting
the apparent difficulty.
On the 18th September, Mr. Higginson addressed another note to Dr.
Ryerson, in reply to one from him, in which he said:
You will have learned from my last note that Sir Charles approved
of all your suggestions, except the non-announcement of your
appointment. As you see reason to alter your opinion on this point,
the difficulty is removed, and you shall be gazetted in the last
week of the month, as you propose. I wish, with you, that the
College question could be settled in England, if we could only
prevail on the contending parties to agree to a case of facts. This
might be accomplished, and I am not without hope that some scheme
may be devised to which no party will have just ground of
objection. I shall write to you upon this subject as soon as
anything is determined on.
At this point I resume the narrative which Dr. Ryerson had prepared for
this volume in regard to his appointment:--In September, 1844, a vacancy
occurred in the Professorship of Mathematics in the University of
Toronto, by the resignation and return to England of Mr. Potter; and, as
the gentleman who had been appointed to the Education branch of the
Secretary's Office, was reputed to be an excellent mathematician, and
had high testimonials of his qualification, he applied for the
professorship; evidently feeling the anomalousness of his position, and
his inability and powerlessness to establish a system of Public School
Education.[127]
The Governor-General appointed him to the Mathematical Professorship,
and formally offered the Education Office to me. I laid the official
letter containing the offer before the executive authority (a large
committee) of my Church, and was advised to accept it. But as I had
determined to abide by the decision of the country as to the principles
of its future government, on which I was then appealing to it, I
determined not to accept of office until I should know the result of
that appeal.
After the endorsement of my views by all the constituencies of Upper
Canada, with eight exceptions, I felt no hesitation, in accepting an
office which had been some months before offered to me. The draft of my
official instructions, stating the scope and design of my appointment
and of the task assigned to me, was written by myself, at the request of
Mr. Secretary Daly, afterwards Governor in Australia.
During my connection with the Education Department--from 1844 to 1876--I
made five educational tours of inspection and enquiry to educating
countries in Europe and the United States. I made an official tour
through each county in Upper Canada, once in every five years, to hold a
County Convention of municipal councillors, clergy, school-trustees,
teachers and local superintendents, and thus developed the School system
as the result of repeated inquiries in foreign countries, and the freest
consultation with my fellow-citizens of all classes, in the several
County Conventions, as well as on many other occasions.
During the nearly thirty-two years of my administration of the Education
Department, I met with strong opposition at first from individuals--some
on personal, others on religious and political grounds; but that
opposition was, for most part, partial and evanescent. During these
years I had the support of each successive administration of Government,
whether of one party or the other, and, at length, the co-operation of
all religious persuasions; so that in 1876 I was allowed to retire, with
the good-will of all political parties and religious denominations, and
without diminution of my public means of subsistence.
I leave to Dr. J. George Hodgins, my devoted friend of over forty years,
and my able colleague for over thirty of these years, the duty of
filling up the details of our united labours in founding a system of
education for my native Province which is spoken of in terms of strong
commendation, not only within, but by people outside of the Dominion.
* * * * *
Note.--It is the purpose of the Editor of this book (in accordance with
Dr. Ryerson's oft expressed wish) to prepare another volume, giving,
from private letters, memoranda, and various documents, a personal
history of the founding and vicissitudes of our educational system from
1844 to 1876 inclusive.
FOOTNOTES:
[124] The second resolution adopted by the Victoria College Board, on
the 24th October, 1843, says:--the noble and comprehensive objects of
the amended Charter have been entirely defeated; and the abrogated,
sectarian Charter has been virtually restored, by the partial and
exclusive manner in which appointments to that institution have been
made, and its affairs managed; apart from the misappropriations of large
portions of its funds.
[125] In September, 1839, Rev. Robert Murray, of Oakville, published a
series of lectures on "Absolute Abstinence." From a review of these
lectures, by Dr. Ryerson in the _Guardian_ of the 18th of that month, I
make the following extracts:--
We confess we have seldom read anything so illiberal and sweeping....
The principle of total abstinence is wholly repudiated, and temperance
societies are forbidden an existence.... But such a work ... shall not
by us be allowed to go forth without the accompaniment of our decided
reprobation. This is not the day for encouragement to be given to the
drunkard, nor this the time when a Minister of the Gospel is ... to fill
the cup of death and present it to his fellows without an attempt being
made to dash it to the ground.
The following extract from the second lecture, relating to the
fulfilment of a certain prophecy in the book of Jeremiah, is given by
Dr. Ryerson:--
"Many of you, I am persuaded, have witnessed this prophecy fulfilled to
the very letter. Have you never seen young men making themselves
cheerful with malt liquors, while the young maids were producing the
same effect with the blood of the grape? Nor is there the slightest
doubt on my mind, that the prophet hailed this event as a special
manifestation of the great goodness of God."
It was in reference to the author of such opinions, and the advocate of
such views, that Rev. John Ryerson used the language quoted on the
preceding page.
[126] On the 19th October, 1844, Dr. Ryerson was appointed
Superintendent of Education for Upper Canada. Of his appointment, Rev.
Dr. Bethune, Editor of _The Church_, on the 25th October, said:--It was
an impolitic and a heartless step, as regards the Church of England in
this colony, to raise to the office of Superintendent an individual who
has thriven upon his political obliquities, and who owes his fame, or
rather his notoriety, to his unquenchable dislike to the National
Church. In a moment of danger we can forget the injury; but it must not
be thought that we shall sit quietly beneath the wrong.
Rev. Dr. Bethune subsequently changed his opinion of Dr. Ryerson, and,
when Bishop of Toronto, referred to him in some of his public utterances
in very kind and complimentary terms.
[127] In regard to this appointment, the Hon. Isaac Buchanan, in a
letter to the Editor of this volume, dated March, 1883, said:--I was one
of the first to see the necessity of our getting Dr. Ryerson to take
hold of our Educational system, and I shared the somewhat delicate duty
of getting our esteemed friend, Rev. Robert Murray (whom we had got
appointed Assistant-Superintendent of Education), to accept a
professorship at the Toronto University, when Rev. Dr. Ryerson succeeded
to the vacant post in 1844.
CHAPTER XLIV.
1844-1846.
Dr. Ryerson's First Educational Tour in Europe.
Dr. Ryerson left Canada for Europe in November, 1844, on his first
educational tour through Europe. He visited and examined into the
educational systems of Belgium, France, Italy, Bavaria, Austria, the
German States, and Switzerland. He kept a full diary of his travels.
Much of it is out of date, but I shall give those portions of it which
relate to his personal history, and his impressions of men and things.
The epitome of these travels which he had prepared is as follows:--
_England._--Scenery of Essex and Kent from the Thames; landing in
Holland; its scenery, palaces, school system, schools,
universities, museums, principal cities and towns, churches, canals
and roads.
_Belgium._--From Utrecht to Antwerp--cathedral, churches, schools,
museums; Rubens' paintings; Brussels--schools; Hôtel de Ville,
etc.; field of Waterloo; Belgian school system; Howard's Model
Prison; convent; university buildings.
_France._--Journey to Paris; curiosities and peculiarities of
Paris; acquaintance with the Protestant clergy; my residence and
employments there for three months, to qualify myself to speak as
well as write official letters, etc., in the French language.
_From Paris to Rome._--Modes of travel; places viewed on the way;
Orleans, Loire, Lyons, Rhone, Avignon, Nismes, Montpellier, Arles;
antiquities; Marseilles, Genoa, Leghorn, Civita Vecchia, to Rome.
_Rome._--Three weeks among its antiquities, palaces, churches,
colleges and schools.
_June 13th, 1845._--Naples; the peasants on the way from Rome to
Naples; Vesuvius, Herculaneum, Pompeii, museums, hospitals,
college, schools.
_June 20th._--In a steamer from Naples to Leghorn, thence in a
hired coach to Pisa and Florence,--beautiful country, and highly
cultivated. Employed four weeks in studying the institutions and
peculiarities of Florence; no beggars or Jesuits allowed in
Florence; the grand Duke a father to his people.
_July 19th._--Proceeded to Bologna, re-enter the Papal dominions,
and crossed the Appenines; views; a Normal School at Bologna,
containing 1,000 pupils, and a Foundling Hospital with 3,000
children.
_July 23rd._--Left Bologna in a vetturina, in company with two
agreeable gentlemen, a German and an American; Ferrara; reached the
Po, where we entered Austrian dominions; when we entered the first
custom-house in Italy, the head officers of which did not ask for
money, and declined it when offered to them. Crossed the Adige;
interesting places; thence to Venice, where I spend four days in
that wondrous city.
_Bavaria._--In a stage by the Trent, through the Tyrolese Alps to
Munich, capital of Bavaria, where I employed nineteen days in
visiting its schools and museums, conversing with the professors.
From Munich by stage to Ratisbon; down the Danube to Luiz and
Vienna--the most perfect city in its buildings, streets, and
gardens I had visited. Gave a day to go down the Danube to the
capital of Hungary.
_Bohemia._--From Vienna, through Bohemia, by the first train on the
then new railroad to Prague; women working on the railroad.
_Saxony and Germany._--From Prague to Dresden--visits to schools;
thence to Leipsic--visits to public buildings, schools, and
university; thence to Halle--Franke's foundations, and other
schools; to Wittemburg--Luther and Melancthon.
_Prussia._--Berlin, Sept. 8th.--Examination of its various
institutions, schools, and its university; Hanover, Cologne,
Mayence, Wiesbaden, Frankfort, Strasbourg, Bâle, Zürich; school of
M. Fellenburg; Lausanne--Geneva--to Paris.
_Episode in my European travels, 1844, etc._--Acquaintance and
travel with a Russian nobleman, who becomes a Catholic priest--the
Pope's Nuncio at the Court to have the Canadian school regulations
for Separate School translated and published in the Bavarian
newspapers; also requested me to be the bearer of a medal to
Cardinal Antonelli. Rome; presentation to, and interview with, the
Pope.
_London--February 22nd, 1845._--Started this morning in company
with a young Russian nobleman (Dunjowski), for the Continent. We
commenced our voyage on the Thames, wending our way amidst shoals
of craft of all descriptions. The most prominent object in the
river was the new "Great Britain" iron steamer; she seemed to
preside Queen of the waters; excelling every other ship, as much in
the beauty and elegance of her form, as in the vastness of her
dimensions. On our left lay Essex, rising gradually at a distance
from the river; the undulating surface presents a high state of
cultivation, variegated by stately mansions, farm-houses, and
villages. On the right lay Kent, remarkable for its historical
recollections. The chalk-hills near Purfleet, the men working in
them, also the lime and sand, attracted my attention as a novelty I
had never before witnessed. We had a tolerable view of Gravesend,
the great thoroughfare of south-eastern England. We passed the
ancient village of Tilbury Fort, and Sheerness. We arrived at
Holland on Sunday morning (about twenty hours from London), but
could not ascend the river to Rotterdam on account of the ice. We
therefore steamed to Screvinning, a village on the sea-shore, about
three miles from the Hague. There were about fifty fishing-boats
lying on the shore, high and dry, with their prows to the sea, as
the tide was out. I was struck with their shortness, breadth,
strength, and clam-like shape of their bottoms, with a portion in
the centre perfectly flat. The speed of these curiously-constructed
crafts is considerable; they sail close to the wind; having boards
at the side as a substitute for a keel. Our mode of landing was
novel. The boats were run aground, when several stout Dutch sailors
jumped into the water nearly waist deep, and each took a passenger
on his shoulders, soon placing him on _terra firma_. I have
travelled in a great variety of ways, but I was never before placed
on a man's shoulders, astride of his neck; but in this way I took
my leave of the German Ocean. There is not a rock to be seen on the
shore; which consists of fine sand thrown up from the sea, and
forms a bank about twenty feet high; the highest land on the coast
of Holland, forming a ridge from one to three miles wide along the
northern coast. Screvinning is principally inhabited by fishermen.
The road to the Hague is perfectly straight, level, and smooth,
lying between two rows of oak trees, one row of which divides
between it and a collateral canal--the accompaniment of every road
throughout Holland. At 5 p.m. we went to the French Protestant
Church, the place in which the famous Saurin delivered his eloquent
discourses. The congregation was thin; my emotions and
recollections of Saurin contrasted with the present preacher and
congregation. The pulpit was at the side; the form of the church
was amphi-theatrical. I noticed old Bibles, and Psalms; the text
was Luke xxiii 27-28. A moderate preacher, calm, solemn and
graceful; baptisms after the service. Went from the French to the
English Church; only fifteen persons were present, including
ourselves. I spoke to the clergyman (Mr. Beresford), introducing
ourselves, and the object of our mission.
_February, 24th._--Went to the British Embassy with Rev. Mr.
Beresford; from thence to the Royal Library; and then proceeded to
the Chinese and Japanese collection of curiosities; then on to the
Gallery of Paintings; some very exquisite. From thence to the
residence of the Russian (Greek) clergyman, Chaplain to the Queen
of Holland, who kindly shewed us the Queen's private
apartments--refined taste, and great magnificence. Then on to a
Protestant school, of about 800 poor children, which is supported
by subscription. The King is a subscriber to the amount of 1,000
guilders. The teachers consist of a head master and four
assistants. No monitors; admirable construction of the seats;
excellent order of the children; rod never used--shame, the chief
instrument of correction; fine specimens of painting; Scriptures
read, and prayers four times a day; salary of the head master 1,000
guilders, and assistants from 300 to 400; books furnished to the
children, and all the stationery; an excellent building,
well-ventilated, comfortably warm, and perfectly clean; the
children remain from six to twelve years of age. Saw the British
Chargé d'Affaires, who procured me a general letter of introduction
to teachers, etc., throughout Holland, from the Minister of the
Interior. Visited the largest and principal free school at the
Hague; it contains about eleven hundred children, girls and boys,
taught by a head-master, aided by a second, and five other
under-masters, and five assistants, lads from fifteen to eighteen
years of age. No master ever sits, or has a seat to sit on. Were
conducted by the Russian clergymen to the palace again; the state
apartments were splendid indeed; collection of paintings extensive
and most select; hot-houses and gardens delightful. Spent the
evening with this gentleman, and was deeply interested in his
conversation on his own labours, and the customs and character of
the Hollanders.
_February 25th._--Left the Hague for Leyden. The country perfectly
level, looking like a low meadow won from the empire of water by
the industry of man, intersected by dykes and canals, interspersed
with villas and good private dwellings; here and there a wood of
twenty or fifty years growth. On our way we visited Dr. de Rendt,
who keeps the most select private school in Holland for the first
class of nobility and gentry.
_February 26th--Leyden._--Attended the University, and conversed at
large with the Inspector of Schools for the district, Mr. Blusse,
who gave the history, and explained the whole system of elementary
education in Holland. Visited six schools, admirable upon the
whole. Three thousand poor children are taught in them, at an
expense to the State. Visited the Museum, University, and Library;
then proceeded to Haarlem, examined the schoolrooms of the
celebrated Mr. Prinsen and afterwards heard his own views of the
essentials of a good system of popular education: his remarks were
profound and practical. He remarked, "a good system of education
consists in the men. Theory and practice make the teacher. The
government of the head, how acquired and how exercised. Few books;
much exposition." His business for forty-four years has been to
make school-masters. Religious instruction, history of his own
career and of his own school. Afterwards examined Casler's
monument and the church; heard the organ, and proceeded to
Amsterdam.
_Feb. 27th--Amsterdam._--Had some talk with the Government
Inspector of Schools. Visited a school, taught by a Roman Catholic,
in which there were 950 children in one room, all quiet, and all
attentive. There were four masters and twelve assistants. They have
prayers four times a day.
_Feby. 28th._--Went to Saundau. Reflections on Peter the Great.
Visited the palace, its paintings and museum. Took supper with the
Rev. Mr. Jameson, Episcopal clergyman.
_March 1st--Belgium._--Proceeded to Utrecht, thence to Antwerp.
_March 2nd--Sunday._--Went to the cathedral; paintings by Rubens;
earnestness and oratory of the preacher. Went to St. Pauls; the
streets very quiet.
_March 3rd._--Visited the Jesuit's church, and three schools;
phonic and Lancasterian method of learning. Visited the museum, the
city, the view from the tower of the cathedral, statues of Rubens,
of the Virgin and Saviour. Proceeded to Brussels; visited three
schools; courteously received; arrangements good. Visited the Hotel
de Ville; Gobelin tapestry; history of Clovis; abdication of
Charles V. Paintings. Reflections.
_March 4th._--Spent three hours in examining the field of Waterloo.
Went to Nivelles and visited the Normal School for south Belgium;
all the arrangements perfect. Returned to Brussels.
_March 3rd._--Left Brussels for Ghent; met a commissioner at the
railway station, and visited the Government Model School; the views
of the intelligent master were very excellent. Called on a Doctor
to whom I had a letter of introduction. He explained the school
system of Belgium with great clearness. Visited the prison, the
celebrated establishment that excited the admiration of Howard, and
after the model of which several prisons in England and America
have been built. There were about twelve hundred
prisoners--arrangements wonderful, discipline apparently
perfect--kept by twenty-eight men. Visited a poorhouse, a
benevolent establishment to assist poor old people; about three
hundred inmates; grateful feelings, sympathy. Visited the
celebrated convent, containing about eight hundred nuns, who come
and remain voluntarily; none, it is said, have ever left. Visited
the university buildings--the best I have seen on the continent;
lecture-rooms very fine. Left for Lille, in France; courteously
treated at the French custom house.
_March 8th--Paris._--On our way from Lille we crossed a branch of
the Rhine and the Meuse on the ice; country level and well
cultivated; passed Cambray and other towns. Walked to the park,
Tuileries, to the Triumphal Arch of Napoleon--a world of
magnificence.
_March 9th._--Studying French; walked through and around the Palais
Royale in the boulevards--noble, splendid.
_March 10th--Sunday._--Attended the Wesleyan chapel--about one
hundred present--then the English Church; thence to the Madeleine
Church--most magnificent; congregation vast; music and chanting
excellent beyond description; discourse read; paintings and
sculpture fine; church built by Napoleon.
_March 11th._--Went to Dr. Grampier, the director of the French
Protestant Evangelical Mission, a pious man, an able author, at the
head of an excellent institution having missions in Africa as well
as in different parts of France.
_March 12th._--Removed to new lodgings; tolerably comfortable.
_March 13th._--Went to the university; heard lecture on history;
Attended an evening party at Dr. Grampier's; was introduced to
several gentlemen of rank and wealth. Singing and reading of the
Scriptures; much pleased with the party; as many ladies as
gentlemen; assembled at eight, broke up at eleven o'clock.
_March 14th._--Heard a most splendid lecture on astronomy from the
celebrated Arago; audience very large; the professor had no notes;
the subject was light--comets, causes of the changes in the color
of the stars, etc., etc.; lecture two hours, much cheered.
_March 15th._--Went to the French Chamber of Deputies; saw Guizot.
Difference between the French Chamber of Deputies and the British
House of Commons struck me--1st. The more ample accommodations for
members; 2nd. The little attention which appeared to be paid to the
President of the Chamber; 3rd. In the members going to the tribune
to speak, and reading their speeches; 4th. In the position of the
different officers of the House; 5th. The fine appearance of the
servants, and the very convenient accommodations for them; 6th. The
superior accommodations for strangers. Heard two lectures at the
university, one on mineralogy; lecture good; specimens
numerous--the other on electricity; splendid lecturer; fine
illustrations.
_March 16th--Sunday._--Went to the Oratoire, the principal
Protestant place of worship; about seventy catechumens admitted;
the dress of the females white. Sermon by Mr. Monod; text--"_Mon
fils, donne-moi ton coeur_;" very practical and impressive; the
singing peculiarly touching. He is a complete talking machine; read
from Lamartine, as did M. Delille beautifully and effectively.
_March 17th._--Close application to the study of French all day.
Anecdotes at breakfast respecting the pride of Victor Hugo. Walked
along the Seine, then across the river into Notre Dame--the
Westminister Abbey of Paris--worthy of the appellation.
_March 18th._--Pursued my studies till 7 p.m., when I attended a
party given by Count Gasparin, M.H.D., who, with his father, is
styled the Wilberforce of France--the one being a member of the
House of Peers, the other of the House of Deputies. They are
regarded as the representatives of Protestantism in the French
Legislature. Had a good deal of conversation with Dr. Grampier, on
the strength, state, and prospects of Protestantism in France; also
the mode of instructing young persons for public recognition in the
Church, and admission to the Holy Communion. These catechumens are
instructed two or three times a week, for six months, in the
evidences, doctrines, and morals of Christianity. They are then
examined, and if they shew themselves qualified, they are publicly
admitted. The ceremony of admission takes place twice a year, a
little before Easter, and at Pentecost. None are admitted under
fifteen years of age. Dr. Grampier considered that Protestantism
was decidedly gaining upon Popery; and that his own university had
been as successful amongst the Catholics, as amongst Protestants,
in genuine heart conversions; that whole congregations in some
parts of France had embraced Protestantism. His remarks respecting
Guizot were interesting and curious. The mother of this great man
is now eighty-four years of age, a woman of great vigour of mind; a
saint, and nursing-mother in Israel; she offers daily prayers for
her son. Guizot is an orthodox Protestant, employed Dr. Grampier to
instruct and prepare his children for the Holy Communion, but never
goes to church himself, but has told Dr. Grampier that he prays
every day. He has been much afflicted in the loss of two wives whom
he greatly loved; and also of a son, about twenty-one, a young man
of most amiable disposition, great acquirements, talents and
virtues. Conversed also with Count Gasparin, who appears to be a
truly converted man; spoke of the inefficiency of a formal
religion, and the necessity of the religion of the heart. Mentioned
the readiness of Roman Catholics to hear Protestant missionaries.
He believes that God is about to do a great work in France. The
Count is an author; his father has been Minister of the Interior.
_March 19th._--Heard lecture on chemistry by Prof. Dumas, one of
the ablest chemists of the present day, and a most eloquent
lecturer.
_March 20th--Good Friday._--Went to hear a Protestant clergyman,
one of the most pious and able ministers in Paris; his manner
unaffected, eloquent, and impressive. No organ; singing good, all
sang. It being a holy day, crowds were everywhere; streets for
miles were filled with three, and sometimes four lines of
carriages, of all descriptions; the broad sidewalks were literally
crowded with pedestrians, forming solid masses from twenty to fifty
feet wide, and extending two miles. Order was preserved by soldiers
and cavalry, stationed at short distances. I never saw such a
moving mass of people, embracing, no doubt, every nation in Europe
and America. The attractions of the harlequins, jugglers,
hucksters, etc., of all descriptions, surpass imagination. I walked
to Napoleon's Arch of Triumph; observed the inscriptions and
remarkable figures on that elegant and extraordinary structure;
ascended to the top, and there enjoyed one of the most magnificent
views I ever beheld, embracing all Paris and its environs for many
miles, the day being cloudless; the serpentine Seine, the richly
cultivated country, its parks, its gardens, its arcades of trees,
its villas, churches, colleges, hospitals, palaces, squares, and
monuments, together with the elegant Tuileries, the noble Louvre,
the magnificent Champs Elysées, the playing fountains, the spacious
streets, and the moving masses of people, presented a scene which
for variety, splendour, and I may add, solemnity, could not be
excelled by any prospect that might have been commanded on the
pinnacle of Jerusalem's Temple. In fifty years the mass of this
vast multitude will be numbered amongst a bygone generation; and
these stately works of art shall perish. What a worm am I amongst
such a multitude! yet I am destined to immortality; have but a few
years to live in a probationary state, but an eternity to exist!
_March 21st._--Went to the Louvre to see the paintings; about two
thousand in number; some large and splendid, many beautiful, and
some affecting; none of the paintings from sacred history equal
those I have seen in England, Holland, and Belgium, especially in
Antwerp.
_March 22nd--Easter._--Went to the Oratoire, where a discourse was
delivered, and the Lord's Supper celebrated. The preacher, Mons.
Venueil, was so impressive and affecting that the greater part of
the congregation were in tears several times. Being Easter Sunday,
his subject was the resurrection, of Christ. He reminded me of
Saurin. The spectacle presented of the communicants standing around
a long table, and the minister in the midst, at one side,
distributing the emblems with suitable addresses, reminded me of
pictures I have seen of Christ at the Last Supper. The catechumens
who had been received on the previous Sabbath, first partook. I,
for the first time, communed with French Protestants, and I felt it
good to be there. I attended the Wesleyan chapel; service in
French; congregation about seventy-five; preacher (a little
Frenchman), quite animated; he quoted many passages of Scripture,
chapter and verse, proving the universality of the Atonement. The
communion followed.
_March 24th, 1845._--This day I am forty-two years of age! My life
is more than half gone, at the best. The recollections of the past
year are painful and humiliating beyond expression. It has been the
least spiritual year of my Christian life. For some weeks past I
have been revived in my purposes, devotions and enjoyments. By
God's grace, my future life and labours shall be His. I have never
before felt so keenly the weakness and depravity of the human
heart; nor have I ever felt so deeply the necessity and the
sufficiency of the atoning blood of Christ. He is all. All is
wretchedness and death without Him.
_March 26th._--Worked very hard at my French studies; much
discouraged, but must not abandon my efforts to speak a new
language. Visited the Pantheon--wondrous structure--a sovereign's
pride, and a nation's monument. Visited the tombs of the dead;
ascended to the dome--magnificent view; fine paintings in fresco.
My impressions will never be effaced. This evening was in company
with Count Gasparin and his noble father, and Mr. Monod, one of the
principal Protestant ministers in Paris. Mr. Monod spoke strongly
of Puseyism; mentioned that he was at a school this week where
there were twelve Protestant young ladies sent from England to be
educated in a Papal school, and every one of them had become Roman
Catholics. He told me there was no intercourse between the
Protestants in France and Holland; he considers vital religion is
advancing in Holland.
_March 27th._--Went to the Observatoire; heard lecture from Mons.
Arago; room crowded. Visited the beautiful gardens of the
Luxembourg.
_March 30th._--Heard Mons. Armand Delille (my host) preach, in Dr.
Grampier's Church; impressive service, and a comfortable place of
worship outside the gates of the city.
_March 31st._--Commenced receiving lessons in French from Mons. O.
De Lille; believe I shall soon be able to speak. The name of God be
praised for His help and blessing!
_April 2nd._--Went to the College (Sorbonne); heard a lecture on
Botany.
_April 3rd._--Was strongly talked with for not speaking French; Oh,
that God would help me; I desire to employ it to His honour. Heard
Mons. Arago on Astronomy.
_April 5th._--Commenced conversing in French, in good earnest.
Heard a lecture by Mons. Despretz on Modern History, in which the
eloquent lecturer drew a parallel between France and Rome, and the
reign of Augustus and the career of Buonaparte, of course in favour
of the latter.
_April 6th--Sabbath._--Attended church both morning and evening.
Received this morning a present of several books in French from the
pious author of them; read the description and reflections upon
"Jésus Bénissant les Enfants"; was deeply affected with the
remembrance of the manner in which my most pious and excellent
mother brought me, in various ways, to the Saviour, when I was a
little boy. I owe my all to her, as a divinely-owned instrument, in
my early conversion and dedication of myself to God and His Church.
She is now on the verge of heaven--may grace strengthen me to meet
her there.
_April 7th._--Heard four lectures this day on law, chemistry,
theology, and philosophy. The lecture on theology was on the
authenticity of the Scriptures--comparing the prophecies of Isaiah
with the narrative of the evangelists. Lecture on philosophy was
devoted to an admirable analysis of Locke.
_April 8th._--Attended four lectures at the university at 9
o'clock. "Droit de la nature et des nations," (in the college of
France) by Mons. de Postels; "Poésie latine," by M. Patin, the
subject was Horace; "Anatomie, physiologie comp. et zoologie," by
De Blainville; much of geological theory; "Physique-Acoustique," by
M. Despretz; musical instruments.
_April 9th._--Have attended five lectures: "Histoire de Littérature
Grecque," by Egger; "Histoire Ecclésiastique," by l'Abbe Jager;
"Botanique anat. et Physiologie Végétales," by Payer; "Théologie
Morale," by l'Abbe Receveur.
_April 10th._--Attended three full lectures, and part of a fourth.
1st. Eloquence latine--Cicero, by M. Hanet; 2nd. Histoire Moderne,
by M. Michelet, celebrated, (Collége de France) crowded audience
and much applause; 3rd. Littérature Grecque; 4th. Histoire Moderne,
par M. Sornement. I understood more than I ever did before. The
name of the Lord be praised!
_April 11th._--Attended five lectures. 1st. Civil Law of France;
2nd. Astronomical Geography; 3rd. Sacred Literature; 4th. Botany
and Vegetable Physiology; 5th. French Eloquence. Read French and
English with a young collegian. The name of the Lord be praised for
the goodness of this day, and for the success of my labours!
_April 12th._--Was enabled to make a long recitation this morning,
and have attended five lectures at the university. Received a
parcel from London, furnishing me with Canadian papers; how
refreshing is news from home in a foreign country. Thus has my
heavenly Father blest me with all good things.
_April 13th--Sabbath._--Attended service at the Chapelle Tailbout;
M. Bridel preached on prayer; thence to the Wesleyan Chapel, which
was crowded. Read the religious intelligence from Canada. I rejoice
to hear of the doings of my brethren; the success of the work in
their hands; hope still to labour with them.
_April 14th._--Attended four lectures at the university, besides my
studies. I pray my heavenly Father to assist and prosper my
exertions. I can do nothing without confidence in Him. To the glory
of His name shall the fruit of my unworthy labours be consecrated.
_April 15th._--Attended the meeting of the "Société des Introits
généraux du Protestantisme français." Proceedings commenced with
prayer. The meeting was addressed by a number of pasteurs; most of
the speakers had notes. Also attended the annual meeting of the
"Société des Traités religieux" in the Chapelle Tailbout; report
well read; speeches short and energetic.
_April 16th._--Attended the Conference of the Protestant Pastors,
in the Consistory of the Oratoire. About sixty present; the
proceedings opened with prayer. The President then asked the
members present to propose the subject of their friendly
conversation; several were proposed. Two hours brotherly
conversation took place on the duties, powers, and interests of the
synod. Most of those who spoke had notes; delivered their
sentiments sitting; were asked in order. Attended the twenty-fifth
anniversary of the "Société Biblique Protestante;" commenced with
prayer and singing. The Count de Gasparin spoke extemporaneously,
and with great elegance and ease. A number spoke with energy and
force; the last speaker selected passages to show that the Gospel
is not incomprehensible to the vulgar, as Romanists assert; also
attended the annual meeting of the "Société Evangélique de France;"
Chairman read a very short address; several spoke; M. de Gasparin
concluded by prayer.
_April 17th._--Attended the Conference of Pastors; the proceedings
the same as yesterday. At the annual meeting of the "Société des
Missions Evangélique;" the chair was occupied by a venerable old
man, who seemed, from the allusions made, to be an old friend and
supporter of the Society. The aged President read with a feeble
voice a short address. There were nine speakers; the last the
venerable Monod, who delivered a charge and parting address to the
young men who were going to Africa. He embraced in his address the
marrow of the Gospel, its power, its promises, its preciousness.
The young men were deeply affected, as were all present. He
directed them to the power and promises of Christ; assured them of
the continued sympathy of the Protestant pastors and churches of
France. Another pastor volunteered a few words of address to the
young men, on the distribution of religious tracts, and everywhere
proclaiming themselves as the missionaries of Christ from France.
There was a most affectionate greeting of pastors and old friends.
In the Consistory Chapel of the Oratoire de l'Eglise, there are
four busts of ministers whose memory is cherished by their
survivors. The names and epitaphs are as follows:--(1) F.
Methezet--"Il se repose de ses travaux et ses oeuvres le
suivent." (2) J.A. Barbant--"Je sais en qui j'ai cru." (3) J.
Monod--"Christ est ma vie, et la mort est gain." (4) P. H.
Marron--"O mort où est ton aiguillon! O sépulcre où est ta
victoire!"
_April 18th._--Attended the annual meeting of the "Société Biblique
Françoise et Etrangère." Count de Gasparin in the chair; speeches
spirited; details of report interesting and encouraging. Went to
Dr. Grampier's; a social meeting of pastors, to converse and pray
on the subject of Missions; subject of conversations; the
Missionary work and spirit. From thence went to an annual party,
where there was much of fashion and elegance; magnificent tea;
peculiar manners; conversed with Mr. Touse, an English clergyman,
and with M. G. de Gasparin.
_April 19th._--Attended the annual meeting of the "Société pour
l'encouragement et l'instruction primairie le protestants de
France." The Protestants are not satisfied with the system of mixed
schools; they wish to have exclusively Protestant schools. The
report was full, explicit, and decided. Several speeches from the
principal Protestant ministers, dwelling upon religious instruction
in primary schools. Attended the morning conference; nothing new in
the proceedings; but there was a marriage; but neither groomsmen
nor bridesmaids. Address of the pastor. The bride led by her
father, the brother-in-law leading the bridegroom; salutations of
friends; the presentation of the wedding-ring by the father of the
bride; presentation of a Bible to the newly-married couple;
touching offering to the poor.
_April 20th--Sabbath._--Went to the "Institution des Diaconesses de
l'Église Evangélique de France." The situation is delightful.
Several addresses and statements of affairs. Employed the evening
in religious study. Witnessed much lightness among certain
ministers of the Protestant Reformed Church. The prevalent views
here respecting the sanctity of the Sabbath are very different from
those which prevail either in England or Canada.
_April 25th._--Visited several schools of the Protestant dissenters
in Paris--called "Ecoles Gratuités." The first was the Female
Normal School, containing nineteen pupils. I was impressed with the
admirable arrangement of the school and its appliances, as well as
the taste and neatness of the botanical garden. The dormitory was
plain, neat, and airy; in it on the wall were pasted the following
passages of Scripture, viz., Psalms xv. 5., Amos iv. 12. There were
two schools for boys and girls attached to the institution, but
these several departments constitute one school--all Roman Catholic
children taught by Protestants, on strictly Protestant principles.
The priests make no opposition. People independent of the priests.
_April 26th._--Pursued my studies with encouraging success. Visited
M. Toase who gave me useful information.
_April 27th--Sabbath._--Heard M. Toase; went afterwards to the
Madeleine; building magnificent; passed through the garden of the
Tuileries; a paradise of a place; shades; walks; grass-plots;
lakes; fountains; fish; statues; amusements; but, alas! what
profanation of the Sabbath!
_April 30th._--Went to Versailles; grand and little Trainon,
magnificent.
_May 1st._--The King's birthday and fête; illuminations; fireworks;
appearance of the King Louis Philippe on the balcony of the palace.
The Tuileries; the Champs Elysées; booths; fêtes; riding; examples
of physical strength; girls riding; jumping; great multitudes; good
order preserved; Church of St. Roch; music; saw Lord Cowley; his
kindness in lending me his ticket for the House of Peers; getting
recommendations from the Government; documents on education, etc.
_May 3rd._--Visited Notre Dame; Hôtel-Dieu; Chambre des Pairs;
Chapelle; gallery of paintings; nuns; few peers present; old men;
session short; not imposing; fine paintings in the Chapel;
admirable selection in the gallery; answer from Lord Cowley.
_May 8th._--Have devoted several days to study, nothing worthy of
remark.
_May 9th._--Left Paris for Lyons; on the top of the diligence on
the railroad to Orleans, level, fertile country; passed through
Orleans; saw Cathedral; Jeanne d'Arc; Loire; historical
recollections.
_May 12th._--Examined the curiosities of the town; rough-looking
people; homage to the Virgin; "Hôtel du Midi;" view from the
Observatoire; Roman antiquities.
_May 13th._--Left Lyons in a steamer for Avignon; confluence of the
Rhone and Soane; varied, beautiful, and sometimes bold; romantic
scenery on the Rhone. Vienne; vineyards; wines; St. Villars;
Pontius Pilate; river very narrow and crooked; Roch de Tain;
Hannibal; vista of the valley of the Isère; Alps; Valence; St. Pay;
Percy; wine of St. Peroy; Castle of Crupol; Drôme; Montilvart;
Viviers; rocks; canal; Ardiche; "Paul St. Esprit," great curiosity;
Roquemon; women carrying stones; noble and extensive work on the
banks of the river, and in the erection of new bridges.
_May 14th._--Avignon; wall; view from the tower of the Cathedral;
visit it; paintings very beautiful; palace; inquisition; left
Avignon for Beaucaire; river uninteresting; thence to Nismes by
railway; poor country; asses and mules used; women shoeing them;
people athletic, but very passionate and quarrelsome.
_May 15th._--Examined the antiquities of Nismes; truly wonderful
and interesting.
_May 16th._--Arrived at Montpellier; narrow streets; Citadel
Fountaine; promenade; Jardin des Plantes; Mrs. Temple's tomb; read
a passage from Young's Night Thoughts there; Baunia Palm; Ecole de
Médicine; Cathedral; Museum of Painting.
_May 17th._--Returned to Nismes; revisited the Amphitheatre and the
Maison Carée; beautiful in proportion and execution. Returned to
Beacaise; visited the Castle; very high, and remarkably strong;
crossed the river to examine a castle, now a prison; historical
recollections of both castles. Visited the Church dedicated to St.
Martha; curious front. Visited St. Martha's Tomb; felt awful in the
grim darkness, rendered barely visible by the flickering lamp;
inscription at the head of the Tomb: "Solicita Noritubatur";
singular well; old women in the Church; the Image of St. Martha,
with its knees and feet worn by kissing. Proceeded to Cette; the
Amphitheatre is by no means as well preserved as that of Nismes,
but larger; the walls immeasurably thick. Saw the remains of a
Roman theatre; its curious workmanship attests its former
magnificence.
_May 18th--Sabbath._--Back at Marseilles, but no Sabbath here;
theatres all open, and crowds pressing into them; saw some curious
handbills about the Pope granting indulgences; holy water in the
churches; children using it.
_May 20th._--Coast from Marseilles, bold, varied, picturesque;
barren rocks; vineyards and olive trees; entrance into the bay and
harbor of Genoa very beautiful.
_May 21st._--In Genoa the streets are very narrow; the buildings
very high; the city clean; all preferable to Paris; left for
Leghorn.
_May 22nd._--At Leghorn, visited Smollet's tomb. At Pisa, saw the
leaning tower; baptistry, etc.
_May 23rd._--Entered Rome at sunset. We could see St. Peter's more
than fifteen miles off.
_May 25th._--Commenced visiting the churches of the city. 1. Temple
of Antonius; column to his honour, and his victories inscribed. 2.
Church of St. Ignazia; tomb of Gregory XV. 3. Pantheon of
Agrippa--built 22 B.C., of Oriental granite brought from Egypt. The
obelisk is from the Temple of Isis. 4. In the second chapel to the
left, Raphael was buried in 1520. He gave orders to his scholar
Lorenzetto to make the statue of the Virgin, behind which he is
buried. It is ornamented by gold and silver offerings of trinkets,
rings, and bracelets. 5th. Piazza della Minerva--formerly Temple
of Minerva, another of Isis, another of Serapis, now a church
obelisk. Statue of Michael Angelo. 6. Roman College. 7. Palace of
Prince Doria. In the picture gallery I was especially struck by a
beautiful painting of the Holy Family; also Titian, by himself, his
last work. Visited the Church of St. Joseph--under which was the
Mamertine Prison, where St. Paul was confined. Arch of Titus. The
Church of St. Peter's in Vincola has twenty pillars from the
Diocletian Bath, two of them Oriental granite. Michael Angelo's
last work is a marble figure of Moses, with the two tables of the
law under his right arm,--magnificent. There are also twelve
magnificent marble figures of the twelve apostles.
_May 26th._--Church of St. Maria, in Villicella; festival in honour
of St. Fillippo. High mass was celebrated in presence of the Pope
and cardinals. I stood near the altar, and had a good view of them
all. The Pope passed twice within a few feet of me; was carried in
a splendid chair by twelve men, who passed up the aisle into the
vestry. He is eighty years of age, good looking and walked with a
firm step; he blessed the people as he passed. The cardinals kissed
the Pope's hand, the priests his toe or foot. Next went to the
Church of the Jesuits, where there is a splendid representation of
Religion, giving the foot to Protestant heresy in the person of
Luther and Calvin.
_June 1st--Sunday._--Went to the Roman College to the worship of
the congregation of Jesuits. In another hall a discourse was being
delivered to the pupils, some four hundred being present. At St.
Paul's, was shown the house in which St. Paul resided during two
years a prisoner in Rome. Witnessed an extraordinary but most
impressive service in the celebrated Amphitheatre, where, it is
said, 200,000 Christians were put to death in two centuries.
_June 6th._--During the last five days have been studying Italian,
and revisiting some of the more remarkable remains of Roman
antiquities, colleges, and schools; also a prison for women, well
managed and arranged; much attention is paid to their religious
instruction.
_June 10th--Sabbath._--Visited the Churches of St. John, and Maria
Maggiore; visited one of the most important and interesting schools
of the Christian Brothers; 400 pupils taught by four masters; 4,000
pupils are taught by the same fraternity. Visited also the College
of Propaganda; was shewn by the Rector over the whole
establishment; it is wonderful, the influence of which is felt in
all lands; he shewed me the oldest and most curious MSS. I ever
saw.
_June 14th._--Arrived at Naples, after a stage journey of thirty
hours. Peasants very lazy; passed the murdered body of a man. As we
advanced we observed a great change in the manners and habits of
the people.
_June 15th--Sabbath._--Vesuvius was splendid last night, to a
degree, I understand that has not been seen since 1839. Visited the
Poor House; the establishment accommodates upwards of 2,000.
_June 16th._--Visited Pompeii, and Herculaneum, and Vesuvius. Met
with the Jesuit Prefect of Educational Institutions; and a Priest
from the United States. From the Jesuit I obtained a full account
of the educational institutions in Naples; from the American Priest
much useful information on various subjects. Ascended Mount
Vesuvius; when we reached the summit my face was burnt; lava
falling all round us--God of dreadful majesty, who art a "consuming
fire!" Beheld here the setting sun--God of glory who art "the light
of the world!" Descending we reached our hotel about midnight;
thank God for His protection and mercy.
_June 18th._--Went to the museum to examine the antiquities of
Herculaneum and Pompeii. Left for Leghorn.
_June 20th--Pisa._--Took a coach with two other gentlemen; a
beautiful ride of eight hours along the valley of the Arno, from
Pisa to Florence. The best cultivated country, and the best looking
peasantry I have ever seen; the river walled, and the bridges fine.
_June 24th._--The celebration of the Feast of John the Baptist,
commenced by a chariot race, after the fashion of the chariots in
the games of the Greeks and Romans.
_June 26th._--The Grand Duke of Tuscany will not allow Jesuits in
his dominion; but in Naples the Jesuits are all
powerful--confessors to the king and royal family--and that even an
artist cannot get employment who has not a Jesuit for a confessor.
_July 19th._--This day I leave Florence after four weeks of study,
and acquaintance with its schools, arts and science.
_July 20th--Bologna._--Crossed the Appenines, and had a view of the
Adriatic. Visited the Scoules Normali, containing upwards of 1,000
pupils.
_July 23rd._--Left Bologna in a vetturina for Ferrara, in company
with a German and two Americans. Ferrara is fallen, forsaken,
solitary.
_July 25th._--Crossed the Po in a curious ferry-boat, and entered
the Lombardo-Venetian dominions of Austria. Here I met with the
first instance in Italy of money not being asked by Custom House
officers; every part of the proceeding indicated dignity unknown to
the Papal States. Crossed the Adige by a ferry; passed through
Monselice, near which is the town and castle of Este. North of Este
is Argna, or Argnota, where Petrarch retreated, dwelt, and died!
Next passed through Battaglia and Padua; on the left is Abano, the
birth-place of Livy. Gothic laggia, vast hall, said to be the
largest unsupported roof in the world, built by Frate Giovanni;
bust and tomb of Livy.
_July 30th._--Came on to Venice, where we spent four days; a
wondrous city.
_August 4th._--Have been in Munich nineteen days; visited its
museum, churches, elementary schools, &c., &c.; conversed with many
professors.
_August 25th._--Left Munich; passed through Landsport; arrived at
Ratisbon; visited Valhalla; descended the Danube to Linz.
_Sept. 3rd._--The city of Vienna is the most perfect I have seen,
in its buildings, streets, gardens, etc.; it would furnish me with
materials for a volume were I a writer of travels.
_Sept. 4th._--Came through Bohemia by the first railroad train from
Vienna to Prague, where I remained two days. The houses in the
villages through which we passed, were all of one story, thatched
with straw; the peasants wear skins, and women work on the
railroads.
_Sept. 5th._--Left Prague in a small steamer for Dresden; visited
Dr. Blockman's school; every appurtenance; very complete schools,
both public and private. From thence on to Leipsic; visited all the
principal buildings; visited the Burgher school, designed for the
education of the middle ranks, and those of the upper ranks, if
desired.
_Sept. 15th and 16th._--From Leipsic went on to Halle (in Prussia);
visited the schools on Franke's Foundations; several farms belong
to the establishment; there are six schools, rather small; there
are free scholars, orphans, and money scholars. Went to the
University.
_Sept. 17th--Wittemburg._--This morning visited the church in which
Luther first preached the doctrines of the Reformation, and where
both Luther and Melancthon are buried; I ascended the pulpit, and
there prayed that the spirit of the Reformation might more
abundantly rest upon me; I experienced strong sensations on
entering the church; it is a plain building with a few monuments;
the statue (bronze) of Luther is in the market-place, with the
words:--
"Ist's Gottes Werk, so wird's bestehen;
Ist's Menschen, so wird's untergehen."
We then visited the house in which Melancthon lived, now being
repaired; Luther's chamber in the convent; his study, with his
chair, table, and stove; his library, his bed-room; at his table I
knelt and prayed, and renewed my covenant with my God. I afterwards
visited the place where Luther burnt the Pope's Bull.
_Sept. 18th--Berlin._--Employed the day in visiting the great
schools of this magnificent city: Frederick William Gymnasium,
Dorothean Higher City School, Royal Red School, embracing both the
classical and scientific departments; went over the establishment.
_Sept. 19th._--Visited the University and Picture Gallery; went
through all the apartments of the City Trade School; the collection
of apparatus and specimens to carry out the course of instruction
is perhaps the most complete in Prussia, in schools of this class.
_Sept. 20th._--Potsdam--a magnificent place; went into the Court,
and visited several of the rooms of the Royal Military School--a
noble establishment; visited the Normal School; witnessed the
teaching of two of the pupil-teachers,--both used the blackboard,
and both appeared thorough masters of what they were teaching,
using no books,--other pupil-teachers were looking on; never saw a
finer class of young men.
_Sept. 23rd._--Berlin. Dined with the British Ambassador, and had
an interview with the Prussian Minister of Public Instruction;
witnessed the semi-annual parade of the Prussian army--more than
10,000 men; saw also the King of Prussia and the Empress of Russia.
_Sept. 24th._--Hanover. Passed through several townships; visited
the Palace; saw the gold and silver plate, much of which belonged
to former British Sovereigns; visited Herrenhausen, favourite
residence of George I. and II. of England.
_Sept. 28th._--Cologne. Visited Cathedral and Churches; saw the
tomb of Charlemagne, and the house in which Rubens was born.
_Oct. 1st._--Bonn. Saw the University buildings; saw the great
Catholic Normal School, at Bright.
_Oct. 2nd._--Mayence. Ascended the Rhine from Bonn,--embracing all
the magnificent scenery of this celebrated river.
_Oct. 3rd._--Visited Wiesbaden, capital of Hesse-Cassel; went to
Frankfort; visited Burgher School there, 700 children. Birth-place
and monument of Goethe.
_Oct. 5th._--Strasburg. Left Frankfort; passed through Darmstadt;
heard two sermons in French, and one in German; visited the
magnificent Cathedral, and Normal School.
_Oct. 7th._--Zurich. Came to Bâle yesterday; arrived here this
morning; visited the great Cantonal Industrial School--noble
building.
_Oct. 8th._--Cargon. Obtained much information from the director of
the Gymnase, Real and Higher Burgher School here.
_Oct. 9th._--Berne. Travelled through a mountainous and picturesque
country to Papiermühle; walked three miles to the celebrated school
of M. de Fallenberg; had the whole system explained--gymnasium,
real, intermediate, poor, and limited to the number of thirty;
dined at the Agricultural School,--situated on a gentle hill, in
the midst of the valley of Switzerland, surrounded by mountains,--I
have been abundantly repaid in spending a whole day in surveying
such an establishment.
_Oct. 11th._--Lausanne. Fine view of the Alps; visited the garden
where Gibbon finished his History on the rise and fall of the Roman
Empire.
_Oct. 12th._--Geneva. Arrived here in heavy rain; attended three
services; visited the tomb of Sir H. Davy; had a fine view of Mt.
Blanc; left for Paris.
CHAPTER XLV.
1844-1857.
Episode in Dr. Ryerson's European Travels.--Pope Pius IX.
One of the many episodes in my European travels which I have been
requested by many to narrate led to my presentation to Pope Pius IX.,
and is as follows:--
On my arrival in England on my first educational tour, near the end
of 1844, I was invited to a Christmas dinner party at the house of
an English clergyman, where I was introduced to a young Russian
nobleman, by the name of Dunjowski, who had attended lectures in
several German universities, and came to England to learn the
English language, in which he soon became a proficient. During his
residence in England he became acquainted with a number of
distinguished men, noblemen and others; among whom were the late
Rev. Dr. Chalmers. This young Russian nobleman, having learned that
I was on a tour of investigation of the educational institutions of
Europe, proposed before the close of the evening to join me in
investigating the educational institutions of western and central
Europe, with a view to his writing an account of them on his return
to St. Petersburg. I accepted his proposal; and in the course of a
few weeks we commenced our tour through Holland and Belgium to
Paris, of which some account will be found in the extracts from my
Journal in the preceding Chapter.
At Paris my Russian friend conceived the idea of attending another
course of lectures on some branch of Roman law at Tubigen. We
parted, but he changed his mind, and instead of attending an
additional course of lectures in a German university, he proceeded
to Rome. A few weeks after my arrival there, I felt a tap on my
shoulder at the dinner table, and, on looking up, I recognized my
young Russian friend, who was already speaking Italian, with as
much fluency as he had spoken English, French, and German, when we
parted at Paris six weeks before.
We renewed our travels together, after having completed our tour of
Rome, with its antiquities and institutions; we proceeded to Naples
by stage, where we spent several days in examining its College of
Nobles and other educational institutions, including its
antiquities of Herculaneum and Pompeii, Vesuvius, etc. In the
College of Nobles we met an American Priest, who was President of
the Roman Catholic College at Georgetown, near Washington, and
invited him to take a seat in our carriage the next day on an
excursion to Herculaneum and Pompeii. In the course of the day a
religious discussion took place between the American Priest and the
Russian, who was very fond of controversy. I took no part in it,
but I thought the Priest had rather the best of it. The result was,
my Russian friend was persuaded to go into a house of retirement
near Rome, and devote some weeks to solitary prayer, fasting, and
meditation. I never afterwards saw him or heard from him for eleven
years, though I remonstrated with him, and wrote him from Florence,
entreating him to reconsider what he was doing; but he said that
what I spoke and wrote rather confirmed him in his course, than
diverted him from it.
When making my third educational tour on the Continent of Europe, I
was, with my daughter, at Munich, in Bavaria, about the beginning
of 1857, and while at dinner at our hotel, I felt two hands placed
upon my shoulders; on looking up, I recognized, notwithstanding his
present dress, my old friend, Dunjowski, who embraced and kissed me
as a brother. After dinner we retired to the parlour, and talked
over the past. I asked him what he had been doing these eleven
years, how he had become transformed from a Russian nobleman,
scholar, and lawyer, into a Roman Catholic priest, in full
canonicals. He told me that after we separated at Naples, eleven
years before, he went into a house of retirement at Rome, and by
prayer, fasting, and meditation, devoted himself to God and His
Church, without reserve of rank, fortune, or country; that he had
ultimately decided to be a Catholic; that he had studied theology
four years in France; that he had been appointed a Missionary to
the North, and had been some years a Missionary to the Lapps, and
had preached before the Kings of Denmark and Sweden; that he was
then Missionary Apostolic to all the Catholic Missions in Europe
and America, north of latitude 60; and that he might yet visit
Canada. This extraordinary man had mastered the languages of the
various countries in which he had travelled and laboured, and gave
my daughter specimens of his writing in twenty-seven different
languages. I never knew a man of more disinterestedness, more
devotion, and singleness of purpose, than Mr. Dunjowski. He was up
and out at prayers to his church before five o'clock, in the
terribly cold mornings the last of December and the beginning of
January, in one of the coldest capitals of Europe.
On the other hand he asked me what I had been doing during the last
eleven years. I replied that I had devised and brought into
operation a system of public instruction, which had been approved
by the Government and Legislature, and by the people at large, whom
I had consulted, in the several counties of Upper Canada. He wished
to know what I had done in respect to his co-religionists. I shewed
him the provisions of our School Act, and the Regulations founded
upon it in respect to Roman Catholics in Upper Canada. My Russian
friend thought that nothing could be more just and fair than these
clauses of the law and regulations, and requested permission to
shew them to the Pope's Nuncio (an Italian Archbishop), at the
Court of Bavaria. The Pope's Nuncio was so pleased with them, that
he requested the loan of them until he got them translated into
German, and published in the Bavarian newspapers, to shew how
fairly the Roman Catholics were treated under the Protestant
Government of Upper Canada. The Pope's Nuncio afterwards desired me
to call upon him; and during the interview, after some
complimentary remarks, requested me to be the bearer of a medal
from the King of Bavaria to Cardinal Antonelli, at Rome. I readily
accepted the honour and the office, and found the Pope's arms and
seal a ready passport when I got in a tight place among the
avaricious Italian Custom House officers.
Dr. Ryerson thus describes his interview with Pope Pius IX.:
On my arrival at Rome I duly delivered my letters of introduction,
and the King of Bavaria's medal to Cardinal Antonelli who received
me with the utmost courtesy, offered me every facility to get
pictures copied by my own selection at Rome, and proposed, if
acceptable to me, to present me to His Holiness the Pope. I readily
accepted the attentions and honours offered me; but told the
Cardinal that I had a young daughter, and young lady companion of
hers, whom I should wish to accompany me; His Excellency said, "By
all means."
On the day appointed we went to the Vatican. Several foreign
dignitaries were waiting in an ante-room for an audience with the
Pope, but the Methodist preacher received precedence of them all.
"Are you a clergyman?" asked the Chancellor, who conducted me to
the Pope's presence; "I am a Wesleyan minister," I replied. "Ah!
John Wesley. I've heard of him," said the Chancellor, as he
shrugged his shoulders in surprise that a heretic should be so
honoured above orthodox sons of the Church. We were then in due
form introduced to the Pope, who received us most courteously, and
stood up and shook hands with me and with whom I conversed (in
French) for nearly a quarter of an hour; during the conversation
His Holiness thanked me for the fairness and kindness with which he
understood I had treated his Catholic children in Canada. Before
the close of the interview, His Holiness turned to the young ladies
(each of whom had a little sheet of note paper in their hands) and
said, "My children, what is that you have in your hands?" The girls
curtsied respectfully, and told His Holiness that they brought
these sheets of paper in hopes His Holiness would have the
condescension and kindness to give them his autograph. He smiled,
and wrote in Latin the benediction: "Grace, mercy, and peace from
God our Father, and Jesus Christ our Lord," and then kindly gave
them also the pen with which it was written.
Thus ended our interview with Pope Pins IX., of whose unaffected
sincerity, candor, kindness, and good sense, we formed the most
favourable opinion, notwithstanding the system of which he is the
head.
Dr. Ryerson also mentions another interview which he had:--
In addition to my letters of introduction to Cardinal Antonelli, my
Russian friend, Dunjowski, gave me a letter of introduction to
Father Thyner, the keeper of the Archives at Rome, and an intimate
personal friend of the Pope; in which letter he referred to the
school systems of Upper Canada, in reference to Roman Catholics.
Father Thyner wished to see the Canadian school law and
regulations, and shewed and explained them to the Pope, who
afterwards spoke of their fairness and kindness, in my interview
with His Holiness.
Father Thyner was once Librarian to the King of Prussia, and being
a Roman Catholic, he went to Rome, where his varied learning and
high character soon obtained him a high position at the Vatican.
He, as well as the Pope, in his early life was an enemy of the
Jesuits, and was regarded by them as such throughout his whole
life.
I had a severe illness of some weeks at Rome, during which Father
Thyner visited me almost daily, but never said one word to me on
the grounds of difference between Roman Catholics and Protestants.
During my last visit to England in 1876-7, I spent part of a day at
the residence of the Rev. Wm. Arthur, A.M., who showed me the works
in his library from which he had derived the principal materials of
his masterly work on _The Pope and The People_. Among other works
he shewed me some volumes written by Father Thyner, containing an
account of the proceedings of the Council of Trent. "Why," I said,
"I know Father Thyner personally," and related my acquaintance with
him. Mr. Arthur said in reply, "This work is the chief source of my
knowledge of the proceedings of the Councils of Trent;" and added,
"Father Thyner having determined to publish an account (which had
never before been published) of this Council, was forbidden to do
so, and banished, or driven from Rome, when he went to Hungary, and
published his great work on the Councils."
I have observed in the papers, that Father Thyner died in Hungary a
year or two since. He was a man of profound learning, of fervent
devotion, of great moderation in his views, of uncompromising
integrity. I visited him in his convent, near Rome, and drank the
juice of the grape grown in his own garden, and pressed by his own
hand.
CHAPTER XLVI.
1844-1876.
Ontario School System.--Retirement of Dr. Ryerson.
Although I hope to be able to prepare a record of the private and
personal history of the founding of our System of Public Education, and
of the vicissitudes through which it passed, as requested by Dr. Ryerson
(page 350), yet in this chapter I give a brief outline of the principles
of that System.
After his educational investigations in Europe, in 1844-1846, Dr.
Ryerson prepared an elaborate Report on a "System of Public Instruction
for Upper Canada," which was published in 1846. In that report he
says:--
By Education, I mean not the mere acquisition of certain arts, or
of certain branches of knowledge, but that instruction and
discipline which qualify and dispose the subjects of it for their
appropriate duties and appointments in life, as Christians, as
persons in business, and also as members of the civil community in
which they live.
A basis of an educational structure adapted to this end should be
as broad as the population of the country; and its loftiest
elevation should equal the highest demands of the learned
professions; adapting its gradation of schools to the wants of the
several classes of the community, and to their respective
employments or professions, the one rising above the other--the one
conducting to the other; yet each complete in itself for the degree
of education it imparts; a character of uniformity, as to
fundamental principles, pervading the whole: the whole based upon
the principles of Christianity, and uniting the combined influence
and support of the government and the people.
The branches of knowledge which it is essential that all should
understand, should be provided for all, and taught to all; should
be brought within the reach of the most needy, and forced upon the
attention of the most careless. The knowledge required for the
scientific pursuit of mechanics, agriculture, and commerce, must
needs be provided to an extent corresponding with the demand, and
the exigencies of the country; while, to a more limited extent, are
needed facilities for acquiring the higher education of the learned
professions.
With a view to give a summary sketch of Dr. Ryerson's exposition of the
system of Public Instruction which he desired to establish, I give the
following additional extracts from his first Report. After combating the
objection which then existed in some quarters to the establishment of a
thorough system of primary and industrial education, commensurate with
the population and wants of the country, he remarked:--
The first feature then of our Provincial System of Public Instruction,
should be universality. The elementary education of the whole people
must, therefore, be an essential element in the legislative and
administrative policy of an enlightened and beneficent government. Nor
is it less important to the efficiency of such a system that it should
be practical than that it should be universal. The mere acquisition, or
even the general diffusion of knowledge, without the requisite qualities
to apply that knowledge in the best manner, does not merit the name of
education. Much knowledge may be imparted and acquired without any
addition whatever to the capacity for the business of life.... History
presents us with even University Systems of Education (so called)
entirely destitute of all practical character; and there are elementary
systems which tend as much to prejudice and pervert, not to say corrupt,
the popular mind as to improve and elevate it.
The state of society, then, no less than the wants of our country,
requires that every youth of the land should be trained to industry and
its practice, whether that training be extensive or limited.
Now education, thus practical, includes religion and morality; secondly,
the development to a certain extent of all our faculties; thirdly, an
acquaintance with several branches of elementary knowledge.
By religion and morality, I do not mean sectarianism in any form, but
the general truth and morals taught in the Holy Scriptures. Sectarianism
is not morality. To be zealous for a sect and to be conscientious in
morals are widely different. To inculcate the peculiarities of a sect
and to teach the fundamental principles of religion and morality are
equally different.
I can aver, from personal experience and practice, as well as from a
very extended inquiry on this subject, that a much more comprehensive
course of biblical and religious instruction can be given than there is
likely to be opportunity for in elementary schools, without any
restraint on the one side, or any tincture of sectarianism on the
other--a course embracing the entire history of the Bible, its
institutions, cardinal doctrines and morals, together with the evidences
of its authenticity.
With the proper cultivation of the moral feelings, and the formation of
local habits, is intimately connected the corresponding development of
all the other faculties, both intellectual and physical. The great
object of an efficient system of instruction should be, not the
communication of so much knowledge, but the development of the
faculties. Much knowledge may be acquired without any increase of mental
power; nay, with even an absolute diminution of it. (See Chapter li.)
In founding the System of Public Instruction, Dr. Ryerson wisely laid
down certain great principles which he believed to be essential to the
success of his labours. These general principles may be thus summarized:
1. That the machinery of education should be in the hands of the people
themselves, and should be managed through their own agency; they should,
therefore, be consulted in regard to all school legislation. 2. That the
aid of the Government should only be given where it can be used most
effectually to stimulate and assist local effort in this great work. 3.
That the property of the country is responsible for, and should
contribute towards the education of the entire youth of the country, and
that as a complement to this, "compulsory education" should necessarily
be enforced. 4. That a thorough and systematic inspection of the schools
is essential to their vitality and efficiency. These, with other
important principles, Dr. Ryerson kept steadily in view during the whole
thirty-two years of his administration of the school system of Ontario.
Their judicious application has contributed largely, under the Divine
blessing, which he ever sought, to the wonderful success of his labours.
Notwithstanding the zeal and ability with which Dr. Ryerson had
collected and arranged his facts, analyzed the various systems of
education in Europe (largely in Germany) and America, and fortified
himself with the opinions of the most eminent educationists in those
countries, yet his projected system for this province was fiercely
assailed, and was vehemently denounced as embodying in it the very
essence of "Prussian despotism." Still, with indomitable courage he
persevered in his plans, and at length succeeded in 1846 in inducing the
legislature to pass a School Act which he had drafted. In 1849 the
Provincial administration personally favourable to Dr. Ryerson's views
went out of office, and one unfavourable to him came in. The Hon.
Malcolm Cameron, a hostile member of the cabinet--although he afterwards
became a personal friend of Dr. Ryerson--having concocted a singularly
crude and cumbrous school bill, aimed to oust Dr. Ryerson from office,
it was (as was afterwards explained) taken on trust, and, without
examination or discussion, passed into a law. Dr. Ryerson at once called
the attention of the Government (at the head of which was the late
lamented Lord Elgin) to the impracticable and un-Christian character of
the bill, as under its operation the Bible would be excluded from the
schools. Rather than administer such an Act, Dr. Ryerson tendered the
resignation of his office to the Government. The late Honourable Robert
Baldwin, C.B., Attorney-General (the Nestor of Canadian politicians, and
a truly Christian man), was so convinced of the justness of Dr.
Ryerson's views and remonstrance, that he took the unusual course of
advising His Excellency to suspend the operation of the new Act until
Dr. Ryerson could prepare a draft of a bill on the basis of the repealed
law, embodying in it, additional to the old bill, the result of his own
experience of the working of the system up to that time. The result was
that a law passed in 1850, adapted to the municipal system of the
Province, so popular in its character and comprehensive in its
provisions and details, that it is still (in a consolidated form) the
principal statute under which the Public Schools of Ontario are
maintained.
The leading features of that measure may be briefly summed up under the
four following heads:--
1. The machinery of the system was mainly adapted to the circumstances
of Upper Canada, from the school laws of the Middle (United) States.
2. The method of supporting the schools by a uniform rate upon property
was adopted from the New England States.
3. The Normal and Model schools (established in 1847), were projected
after those in operation in Germany.
4. The school text-books were originally adapted from the series then in
use in Ireland, and acceptable to both Protestants and Roman Catholics.
In 1850, Dr. Ryerson, while in England, made preliminary arrangements
for establishing the Library, and Map and Apparatus Depository in
connection with his department; and in 1855 he established
Meteorological Stations in connection with the County Grammar Schools.
In this he was aided by Colonel (now General) Lefroy, R.E., for many
years Director of the Provincial Magnetical Observatory, at Toronto.
Sets of suitable instruments (which were duly tested at the Kew
Observatory) were obtained, and in 1855, the law on the subject having
been amended, twelve stations were selected and put into efficient
working order. In 1857 Dr. Ryerson made his third educational tour in
Europe, where he procured at Antwerp, Brussels, Florence, Rome, Paris,
and London an admirable collection of copies of paintings by the old
masters; statues, busts, etc., besides various articles for an
Educational Museum in connection with the Department. In 1858-60, Dr.
Ryerson took a leading part in the discussion in the newspapers, and
before a committee of the legislature, in favour of grants to the
various outlying universities in Ontario, chiefly in terms of Hon.
Robert Baldwin's University Bill of 1843. He maintained that "they did
the State good service," and that their claims should be substantially
recognized as colleges of a central university. He deprecated the
multiplication of universities in the province, which he held would be
the result of a rejection of his scheme. In consideration of his able
services in this contest, the University of Victoria College conferred
upon him the degree of LL.D. in 1861.
In 1867 he made his fourth educational tour in England and the United
States. On his return, in 1868, he submitted to the Government a highly
valuable "special report on the systems and state of popular education
in the several countries of Europe and the United States of America,
with practical suggestions for the improvement of Public Instruction in
Upper Canada." He also made a separate and extensive "Report on
Institutions for the Deaf and Dumb and Blind in Various Countries."
In a letter to a friend, Dr. Ryerson thus explained the principles upon
which he conducted the educational affairs of the Province for upwards
of thirty-one years. He said:--
During these years I organized the school system and administered the
Education Department upon the broad and impartial principles which I had
advocated. During the long period of my administration of the
Department, I knew neither religious sect nor political party--I knew no
other party than that of the country at large--I never exercised any
patronage for personal or party purposes--I never made or recommended
one of the numerous appointments of teachers in the Normal or Model
Schools, or Clerks in the Education office, except upon the ground of
testimonials as to personal character and qualifications, and on a
probationary trial of six months.
In this way only competent and trained persons were appointed to the
Normal and Model Schools, and to the Education Office, when a vacancy
occurred by resignation or death. Each employé below the one who had
resigned or died was advanced a step if deserving; and the most
meritorious lad was selected from the Model school, or on other
testimonials, and placed at the bottom of the list, and trained and
advanced according to his merits in the work of the Education
Department. Each one, thus felt, that he owed his position not to party,
or personal patronage or favour, but to his own merits, and respected
himself and performed his duties accordingly.
I believe this is the true method of managing all the Public
Departments, and every branch of the public service. I believe it would
contribute immensely to both the efficiency and economy of the public
service. Needless and inefficient appointments would not then be made;
and it would greatly elevate the standard of action and attainments, and
emulate the ambition of the young men and youth of the country, when
they know that their selection and advancement in their country's
service depended upon their individual merits, irrespective of sect or
party, and not as the reward of zeal as political party hacks in
elections and otherwise, on their own part, or on that of their fathers
or relatives.
The power of government in a country is immense, for good or ill. It is
designed by the Supreme Being to be "a minister of God for good," to a
whole people (without partiality, as well as without hypocrisy), like
the rays of the sun; and the administration of infinite wisdom and
justice, and truth and purity. But when government becomes the mere
agency of party, and its highest gifts the prizes of party zeal and
intrigue, it loses its moral prestige and power; and from the corrupt
fountain would flow polluted streams into every Department of the public
service, which would corrupt the whole mass of society, were it not for
the counteracting and refining influences which are exerted upon society
by the ministrations and labours of the different religious
denominations.
I know it has been contended that party patronage, or, in other words,
feeding partizans at the public expense, is an essential element in the
existence of a government. This is the doctrine of corruption. The
Education Department--the highest public department in Upper
Canada--existed for more than thirty years without such an element, and
with increased efficiency and increased strength in the public
estimation, during the whole of that period. Justice and virtue, and
patriotism and intelligence, are stronger elements of power and
usefulness than those of buying and rewarding partizans; and if the
rivalship and competition of public men should consist in who should
best devise and promote measures for the advancement of the country, and
who should exercise the executive power most impartially and
intelligently, for developing and promoting the interests of all
classes, then the moral standard of government and of public men would
be greatly exalted, and the highest civilization of the whole country be
advanced. But I will not pursue this topic any further. The truths I
state are self-evident.
* * * * *
For many years after Confederation Dr. Ryerson felt that the new
political condition of the Province--which localized as well as
circumscribed its civil administration of affairs--required a change in
the management of the Education Department. He, therefore, in 1869 and
1872, urged upon the Government the desirability of relieving him from
the anomalous position in which he found himself placed under the new
system.
The reasons which he urged for his retirement are given in a pamphlet
devoted to a "Defence" of the System of Education, which he published in
1872, and are as follows:--
When political men have made attacks upon the school law, or the school
system and myself, I have answered them. Then the cry has been raised by
my assailants, and their abettors, that I was "interfering with
politics." They would assail me without stint, in hopes of crushing me,
and then gag me against all defence or reply.
So deeply did I feel the disadvantage and growing evil of this state of
things to the Department and school system itself, that in 1868 I
proposed to retire from the department.... My resignation was not
accepted; ... when, two months later, I proposed that, at the
commencement of each session of the legislature, a committee of seven or
nine (including the Provincial Secretary for the time being) should be
elected by ballot, or by mutual agreement of the leading men of both
parties, on the Education Department; which committee should examine
into the operations of the Department for the year then ending, consider
the school estimates, and any bill or recommendations which might be
submitted for the advancement of the school system, and report to the
House accordingly. By many thoughtful men, this system has been
considered more safe, more likely to secure a competent and working head
of the department, and less liable to make the school system a tool of
party politics, than for the head of it to have a seat in Parliament,
and thus leave the educational interests of the country dependent upon
the votes of a majority of electors in one riding. This recommendation,
submitted on the 30th January, 1869, was not adopted; and I was left
isolated--responsible in the estimation of legislators and everybody
else for the Department--the target of every attack, whether in the
newspapers or in the Legislative Assembly, yet without any access to it,
or to its members, except through the press, and no other support than
the character of my work and the general confidence of the public.
* * * * *
In 1876, however, Dr. Ryerson was permitted to retire on full salary
from the responsible post which for nearly thirty-two years he had so
worthily and honourably filled.
CHAPTER XLVII.
1845-1846.
Illness and Final Retirement of Lord Metcalfe.
In a letter to Dr. Ryerson from Mr. Higginson, dated 27th May, 1845, he
thus refers to Lord Metcalfe's increasing illness:--
I wish that I could answer your inquiries about Lord Metcalfe's health
in a satisfactory manner. The torturing malady with which he is
afflicted is no better; and although there is no decided change for the
worse, yet there is in my mind too much reason to apprehend that the
disease, though slow in its progress, keeps constantly advancing and
threatens farther ravages. The pain is incessant and unabated. The
resignation with which he suffers, and his unyielding determination to
remain at his post as long as his presence can serve Canada, inspires a
feeling of veneration which I will not attempt to describe. He seems to
be quite prepared to realize, if necessary, that noble sentiment--
"Dulce et decorum est pro Patria mori."
Mr. Higginson again wrote to Dr. Ryerson, from Montreal, on the 28th of
October, as follows:--
As bad news travels fast, you will probably have heard before this
reaches you of the aggravation of the painful malady from which Lord
Metcalfe has so long suffered. No other man, in his present lamentable
condition, would think of administering the Government. He seems quite
ready to die in harness, if necessary, but is determined not to leave
here as long as he can, at any sacrifice of personal considerations,
continue to discharge the duties. I hope and believe that Her Majesty's
Government will not hesitate to relieve him as soon as a successor can
be found--it would be inhuman to delay any longer. How much of Canada's
weal or woe depends upon the selection? It is far easier to mar than to
mend the triumph my inestimable friend has achieved--to weaken than to
strengthen its effects.
Mr. Higginson wrote to Dr. Ryerson on the 18th December:--
I, two days ago, had the pleasure to receive your kind and feeling
letter of the 11th. It will afford me great satisfaction to communicate
to my suffering friend the grateful sentiments to which you give
expression.
Lord Metcalfe's retirement was, as you justly observe, strictly a
providential dispensation. He remained at his post until it pleased the
Almighty to render him physically incapable of discharging all its
duties; and he was quite prepared to die at it, in the service of his
country. The terms in which the Queen's permission to return home was
acceded are, beyond measure, gratifying and complimentary. I shall have
much pleasure in reading the despatch to you the first time we meet. Of
the fearful malady, I can only say that its onward progress seems to be
beyond human control, and that I entertain no hope of its being
arrested. But the surgical skill of Europe may, and I earnestly pray to
God will, alleviate the intensity of the blessed man's sufferings.
After Lord Metcalfe had returned to England, the Hon. D. Daly, Secretary
of the Province, wrote to Dr. Ryerson, who had returned to Canada, on
the 20th December, as follows:--
Your disappointment was naturally great at missing the only opportunity
that, in all human probability, can be afforded you in this world of
seeing our lamented and excellent Governor. In his late and most severe
suffering, the greatness of that most inestimable man's character was,
if possible, more resplendent than under the trials to which you saw him
subjected. May he enjoy a peaceful termination to his useful existence!
We can know nothing certain of his successor until the news of which he
is the bearer has reached England, his relinquishment of the Government
having been left entirely to his own free will. He had the comfort of
knowing how fully his services were appreciated by his Sovereign; and
his removal was effected in the most gratifying way by Her Majesty's
command.
On the 9th May Dr. Ryerson wrote a farewell letter to Lord Metcalfe,
from which I make the following extract:--
Having passed Your Lordship on the ocean, and being disappointed of the
privilege of ever seeing you again in this world, I wrote by the first
packet after my arrival to Mr. C. Trevelyan, requesting him to have the
goodness to convey to Your Lordship the expression of those sentiments
of gratitude and affectionate respect which I can never fail to cherish
while memory remains....
In Your Lordship's retirement and suffering, ... I think it wrong to
intrude further than to state my deep sympathy in your sufferings, and
that my supplications are offered up daily to the God of all
consolation, that He would grant you patience, resignation, and a "sure
and certain hope of a glorious resurrection to everlasting life;" and to
assure Your Lordship that my life shall be sacredly devoted to the work
in behalf of the youthful and future generations of Canada, for which
Your Lordship's kindness has done so much, to enable me to qualify
myself. With, these the strongest feelings of my heart, I have, etc.
The final letter received from Mr. Higginson was dated Montreal, June
10th, 1840:--
I beg you to accept my cordial thanks for your very kind communication
of the 30th ult. I am not insensible to the high honour that has been
conferred upon me by our Sovereign--far beyond my humble merits; but I
have great satisfaction in feeling that I won it fighting shoulder to
shoulder with you and the other advocates of those great British
Constitutional principles of Government, for which we contended, and
which were so fiercely assailed by the British Democratic party, who, I
earnestly trust may never again be able to make head in Canada. That I,
in the slightest degree contributed to the victory will be to me a
source of pride. To the eminent Pilot who directed us no one knows
better than yourself how much is due. Would that he had been spared to
perfect the good work. My latest account of his health encourages the
hope that I may yet be permitted to see him again.
We closed the session yesterday, which was got through with success, and
I hope with some advantage to the public interests.
I regret very much that I have not had the pleasure of seeing you since
your return from Europe. Farewell!
J. M. H.
* * * * *
The appointment which Mr. Higginson received from the Queen was that of
Governor of Antigua. In his reply to an address from the Wesleyan
missionaries of that island, on his arrival, he thus referred to his
experience of that body in Canada:--
I have had frequent opportunities of witnessing in various quarters
of the globe the untiring exertions of your brethren in the sacred
cause of religion and humanity, and whether in the sultry heat of
Asia, ... or struggling against the rigours of a Canadian winter, I
have always found the Wesleyan missionaries animated by the same
benevolent and philanthropic spirit, and undaunted by obstacles,
however appalling, manifesting the same discreet zeal to spread far
and wide the healing influence of the holy Gospel of Christ.
CHAPTER XLVIII.
1843-1844.
Clergy Reserve Question Re-opened.--Disappointments.
Extraordinary efforts were put forth (as shown in Chapter xxxiii., page
263) by the leaders of the Church of England party in Upper Canada to
prevent the Royal assent being given to Lord Sydenham's Clergy Reserve
compromise Bill of 1841. Equally strenuous efforts were successfully
made to ensure the fulfilment of Bishop Strachan's prediction that the
rejected Bill of Lord Sydenham would form the basis of an Imperial Act,
which would secure to the national Churches of England and Scotland, for
all time, the lion's share of the proceeds of George the Third's
ill-fated gift to Canada of the clergy reserves. Lord John Russell, the
pretentious and vacillating Secretary of State for the Colonies at the
time, proved himself to be, in this matter, a pliant instrument in the
hands of Henry of Exeter. This prelate endorsed, _con amore_, all the
extreme views of the Bishop of Toronto; and with the aid of Lord Seaton
(Sir John Colborne) and the Bench and Bishops in the House of Lords,
compelled the Government to perpetuate an act of legislative usurpation
and injustice, which even the tyros in constitutional law, as applied to
the Colonies, were wont at the time to instance in the press as examples
of history repeating itself--quoting, as an illustration, the
ill-advised Imperial legislation in the case of the Stamp Act, etc.
By a singular fatality, which often attends arbitrary and unjust
proceedings, the success of the scheme, which had been so carefully
prepared, and carried through the British Parliament in the interests of
the Church of England, was destined to become a source of weakness to
that Church, and a foreboding of financial disaster. On the 29th
December, 1843, the Attorney and the Solicitor-General of Canada (as
stated by the Bishop of Toronto in his pastoral letter of the 10th of
December, 1844) reported that having attentively examined the provisions
of the acts for this subject, it was their opinion that the proper
construction of the law threw upon the revenues of Canada the burthen of
making up any deficiency in the clergy reserve fund, in paying the
usual and accustomed allowances and stipends to the Ministers, ... and,
while that deficiency lasted, the Imperial Treasury could not be called
upon to make any payments to the two Churches. (See page 4 of Pastoral.)
The Bishop then charges the Provincial Government with being the cause
of this financial difficulty, and accounts for the deficiency in the
fund by the mismanagement of that Government. He adds further on:--
But, alas! the mismanagement has increased, pending these
difficulties; and while my clergy are left in a state of
destitution, large sums continue to be wasted in remunerating
services which are really worse than useless, and this to such an
extent as to render hopeless the expectation that the clergy
reserve fund will ever answer the wise and holy purpose for which
it was established.
In this dilemma the Bishop states what he had done to extricate the
Church out of its difficulty. In doing so, he uses language which
partakes more of the character of a wail than of a simple statement of
facts. He also draws a most gloomy picture of the prospective religious
state of Upper Canada, should the dearly prized, and as dearly bought,
Imperial Clergy Reserve Act prove, after all, to be an apple of Sodom.
It is curious to notice how the Bishop, in his despairing outburst,
studiously ignores the active and successful labours of the several
voluntary churches--whose claims to a share in the reserves he had so
strongly and selfishly opposed--churches which were even then actively
engaged in "spreading scriptural holiness throughout the land," without
the aid of a penny from the State. In his Pastoral, the Bishop says:--
I applied to the venerable [Propagation Society] in England to
advance, in the meantime, the salaries (only £100 per annum each)
to my five suffering clergy,--assuring the Society that I had the
fullest conviction it would be repaid as soon as it was decided
which Government was liable.... The Society paid the stipends for
the year ending 30th June, 1843, but have declined since that time
to continue the advance.... In consequence, my five clergymen have
been left without their stipends since June, 1843 [to December,
1844], ... and this large and increasing Diocese [then the whole of
Upper Canada], already so destitute of the means of public worship
(if the statute be allowed to operate as it has done for the last
four years), will, in a spiritual sense, become, through half its
extent, a wilderness. Not only are five clergymen in a state of
want, but two parishes are left vacant, and the process is
unhappily going on.... I have brought this disheartening and
deplorable state of things under the notice of the Provincial
Government.... I have pressed [the matter] upon His Excellency the
Governor-General.... But all that was in my power to do has been
without avail (page 6).
I also quote the foregoing passages from this noted Pastoral, as they
throw a vivid side-light upon the course of the Bishop in so vehemently
pursuing the shadow of a state endowment for the Church of England in
Upper Canada. The subsequent utterances of the Pastoral show how
persistently the otherwise clear-headed and practical chief ruler of
that Church shut his eyes to the remarkable success and vitality of the
non-endowed Churches in the Province, and how much he deplored the
necessity of adopting their successful voluntary system in his own
church.[128] He says:--
I represented to His Excellency, in May last, that, "on a review of
this unfortunate subject ... the distress of my five clergymen, and
the desolation with which it menaces the Church, it involves
consequences so calamitous and imminent as to justify the
representative of the sovereign in assuming more than ordinary
responsibility in arresting their progress...."
On the 31st October, I again brought this painful subject at great
length before the Provincial Government, and stated that, having
failed to receive relief, I could only see one way left of
mitigating the evil, and that is by an appeal to my people on the
present critical situation of the Church, and in behalf of my
destitute clergymen. It is indeed a step which I take with extreme
reluctance, and which, were it possible, I would most willingly
avoid.... (page 6.)
In a remarkable document, which the Bishop published in 1849, on "_The
Secular State of the Church in the Diocese of Toronto_," he furnishes a
painful and striking commentary on the effect of his own teaching: that
it was the duty of the State to support the Church, and thus relieve the
people of the chief obligation of supporting the Gospel amongst them.
Speaking of "contributions to the Church within the Province," he says:
Till lately we have done little or nothing towards the support of
public worship. We have depended so long upon the Government and
the [Propagation] Society, that many of us forget that it is our
bounden duty. Instead of coming forward manfully to devote a
portion of our temporal substance to the service of God, we turn
away with indifference, or we sit down to count the cost, and
measure the salvation of our souls by pounds, shillings, and
pence.... While we are bountifully assisted, and seldom required to
do more than half; yet we are seen to fail on every side (page
19).[129]
On pages 34-40 of this pamphlet, Bishop Strachan is very severe on the
clergy to whom Bishop Fuller refers, whom he accuses of putting forth
efforts "to disturb the peace of the diocese--efforts which were rapidly
being organized into something of a regular system of agitation, so
common ... among the traders in politics" (page 34).
An agitation having been commenced by the Bishop and clergy in Western
Canada, in 1843, for "better terms" and an amendment to the Imperial
Clergy Reserve Act of 1840, the question was re-opened. The effect of
this re-opening of the question was deprecated by Dr. Ryerson and
others. Early in January, 1844, Mr. Surveyor-General Parke sent to Dr.
Ryerson the copy of a letter written by Rev. Prof. Campbell, of Queen's
College, Kingston, in which Mr. Campbell sets up the claim of the Kirk
of Scotland, having a branch in Canada, as such, to a portion of the
Canadian clergy reserves. Mr. Parke says:--
The writer of the letter arrives at two other conclusions, which, I
think, are based on error, and calculated to interfere materially
with the rights of the other bodies of Protestant Christians:
namely, that the Kirk in Canada participate in the clergy reserves,
solely by the right it has as a branch of the Kirk in Scotland; and
that other bodies of Christians participate in them merely as an
act of favour. To the first of these conclusions I entirely object,
on the ground that the Act confers the reserves, purely and solely,
on Canada, and for the benefit of interests and persons, absolutely
within Canada. To the second conclusion or statement of the
Professor, that is, that other bodies participate as a matter of
favour, I object on every ground on which it is possible for equity
to place the subject. What! shall the unexampled toils, and
incessant labours of the early and later Methodists, and other
pioneers of the christianizing of Canada, have doled out to them,
as a matter of simple grace, and a body in Scotland, who never knew
nor participated in the labour of sowing the seeds of the Gospel
through the length and breadth of the land, claim as a matter of
absolute right, for one of its branches, a participation in lands,
purely Canadian in fact and law? This I can never assent to; it was
the question on which, as a Methodist, I first became a Canadian
politician, and it is the question on which I yet feel the keenest.
I desire to call your attention to the matter, and solicit a
correction from you of errors which, I think, are insidiously
calculated to mislead the public mind, and make uphill work in
combating other questions which may arise in unfortunate Canada,
bye-and-bye. Some of the Kirk folks would monopolize for
themselves, as far as they dare, and the Church of England too; but
the general community, who have borne the burden and heat of the
day--fought and won the battle--should not in any way have their
interests and feelings trifled with by the unreasonable claims of a
few, who at comparatively a late day entered the field.
As the agitation increased, Dr. Ryerson, who was in England in 1845,
addressed a letter to Lord Stanley, Colonial Secretary, in January, on
the injustice to the non-episcopal churches of the Act of 1840. He
said:--
There is a subject which, in connection with transpiring
circumstances in Canada, deeply involves the future condition of
the government of Canada, and which can be considered by your
Lordship alone: I refer to the withholding, to the present time,
from the Wesleyan Methodist body in Upper Canada all benefit of the
Act passed for the settlement of the clergy reserve question--a
question which certain parties in Canada propose to re-open, with a
view of depriving the Church of England of what is considered a
disproportionate share of the proceeds of the clergy reserves. The
advantage afforded by such a subject of agitation would be eagerly
seized upon by the leaders of the opposition in Parliament. The
Wesleyan Methodist body in Upper Canada (now numbering 131 regular
ministers, and 24,000 communicants), has for many years possessed
and does still possess the casting vote between the contending
political parties in that country; and should they join in the
agitation contemplated, nothing but military power will prevent the
wresting out of the hands of the Church of England their--the
chief--pecuniary advantages which it derives from public sources.
Hitherto the leading members of the Wesleyan Methodist body have
declined any public agitation on the subject--though solicited by
influential parties--contenting themselves with private
communication to the Government until they should find them
hopelessly unsuccessful. Should not their case be considered? I
have reason to believe that they will at their next annual meeting,
to be held in June, commence an appeal to the public and to the
Local Legislature on the injustice done them; as they have
ascertained that all the leading lawyers in Upper Canada of both
parties, as well as three successive Governors considered them
wronged in the manner in which they alone, of the four great
leading denominations of the country, have been excluded from the
benefits of an act, to the basis of which Lord Sydenham never could
have obtained the consent of the Canadian Legislature without their
most decided support.
I should deeply lament the re-agitation of the clergy reserve
question in Canada. Such a step, on the part of the great Wesleyan
body there, would doubtless be attended by the strengthening of the
opposition in the Legislature, and to probable withdrawal of the
support of several members from the present Government. In an
interview with the official Committee of the Wesleyan body, shortly
before I left Canada, I promised them to bring the subject before
your Lordship during my stay in England. They, therefore, deferred
appealing to the Local Legislature to interpose in their behalf,
until they should learn the result of such an appeal to your
Lordship....
I cannot suppose that it has been the wish of your Lordship, any
more than the intention of the Crown officers, to perpetuate the
exclusion of the Wesleyan Methodist Church in Canada from their
confessedly-just claim of which they have already been deprived for
a period of four years. The amount of the claim is less than
one-half of what has been secured to the Roman Catholic Church in
Upper Canada--less than one-third of the amount paid the Church of
Scotland, and less than one-tenth of what has been guaranteed to
the Church of England. The Wesleyan body, whose members in Upper
Canada have increased eight thousand during the last four years,
will be satisfied on the payment of the sum admitted in their
behalf. And I submit that the sanctioning of it by your Lordship
will, in my humble opinion, be far better, even as a matter of
policy--apart from higher considerations--than affording just
ground for an agitation, the consequences of which cannot be easily
foreseen.
No relief was, however, afforded by a change in the administration of
the Act of 1840. The Act itself remained unrepealed until 1853.
FOOTNOTES:
[128] In process of time, the necessities of his Church compelled the
Bishop to adopt a new financial scheme, which he laid before his clergy
in 1841, one main feature of which was to incorporate the voluntary
principle with a system of moderate grants--such as has been the rule
adopted for some years by the Mission Board of the Diocese of Toronto.
[129] In sending a copy of this pamphlet some years ago to the Editor of
this volume, Archdeacon Fuller (now Bishop of Niagara), said:--This able
and interesting document ... was drawn out from the late Bishop by the
growing dissatisfaction amongst the clergy and laity, in consequence of
Bishop Strachan managing the whole of the clergy reserve fund, without
consulting anybody, and managing to get several thousand pounds of
arrears paid to himself, as Bishop, and his protegé, the present Bishop
[Bethune], made Archdeacon of York, with a salary of £365 a year as
Archdeacon, while he could not find means to pay the missionaries more
than £100 a year.
CHAPTER XLIX.
1846-1848.
Re-Union of the British and Canadian Conferences.
During and before the period of the Metcalfe Controversy events were
transpiring in Methodist circles in which Dr. Ryerson took an active
part, and in which he was deeply interested.[130]
Important correspondence on the relations to each other of the British
and Canadian Conferences took place in 1842. But as the issue of the
contest between these Conferences was so prolonged, and involved so many
important questions--religious and public--I think it desirable to give
a brief preliminary outline of the origin of the difficulties between
the two bodies. This is the more necessary, as Dr. Ryerson's own
personal history and conduct became, from a variety of circumstances,
most prominently mixed up with these controversies. His letters to the
Government on the subject, and to the Missionary Secretaries, now first
published, are also valuable Methodist historical documents--although
they partake largely of a personal character--as he was the foremost
figure in all of these connexional contests. They are highly
characteristic of the courage and self-sacrifice of the writer.
Methodism, after its introduction into Upper Canada in 1790, was
organized into a Church by preachers from the United States. In 1811,
when Upper Canada was on the eve of being the theatre of war with the
United States, several American preachers who had been appointed to
Canada declined to come, while those here (Messrs. Roads and Densmore)
applied to the Canadian Government in 1812 for leave to return to their
own country.[131] Nevertheless, after the war, and on the representation
of persons prompted by high churchmen, the London Wesleyan Missionary
Society sent out missionaries to four of the larger towns in Upper
Canada. This schismatical policy was pursued by the British Conference
until 1820, when the American General Conference sent Rev. John
(afterwards) Bishop Emory, as a deputation to that Conference to
remonstrate. The result was that the following resolutions were passed
by the British Conference in that year (1820):--
1. That as the American Methodists and ourselves are but one body,
it would be inconsistent with our unity, and dangerous to that
affection which ought to characterize us in every place, to have
different societies and congregations in the same towns and
villages, or to allow of any intrusion on either side into each
other's labours.
2. That this principle shall be the rule by which the disputes now
existing in the Canadas, between our missionaries, shall be
terminated.
In transmitting these and several other resolutions on the subject to
the British Missionaries in Canada, the Secretaries (Rev. Joseph Taylor
and Rev. Richard Watson) said:--
We know that political reasons exist in many minds for supplying
even Upper Canada, as far as possible, with British Missionaries;
and, however natural this feeling may be to Englishmen, and even
praiseworthy when not carried too far, it will be obvious to you
that this is a ground on which, as a Missionary Society, and
especially as a Society under the direction of a Committee which
recognizes as one with itself the American Methodists, we cannot
act.
The British Conference loyally observed this compact from 1820 until
1833. At that time (Dr. Ryerson says) the advocates of a dominant church
establishment, though in a small minority in the House of Assembly, were
all powerful in the Executive and Legislative Councils, and employed
very naturally all the resources at their command to perpetuate their
supremacy. For this purpose they appealed to the Wesleyan Missionary
Committee in England, and solicited them upon the ground of their
loyalty to the Church of England and to the Throne to send out
Missionaries to Upper Canada, offering $4,000 per annum out of the Crown
revenues to assist in so loyal a work. The English Wesleyan Missionary
Committee sent out a representative agent, who contended that the
engagement into which the English Conference had entered with the
American General Conference in 1820, through Dr. Emory, to leave Upper
Canada to the Canadian preachers, was no longer binding since the
Conference in Canada has become separate from that in the United States,
and the English Committee was therefore free to send missionaries into
any part of Upper Canada. The Canadian Conference was thus confronted by
a double danger--the danger of division in their congregations, and the
danger of increased power against their claims to equal rights and
privileges; and a two-fold duty devolved upon them--to prevent division
if possible, and, at the same time, to secure the attainment of their
own constitutional rights.
* * * * *
In the meantime other disturbing influences occurred. In 1824, an
agitation was commenced, with a view to take the appointment of the
Presiding Eldership out of the hands of the Bishops, and make the office
elective by the annual Conferences. The Presiding Elders of Upper Canada
(Rev. Henry Ryan and Rev. William Case) opposed this change, and, in
consequence, failed in their election by the Genesee Annual Conference
as delegates to the General Conference. Mr. Ryan was chagrined at this
result, and on his return to Upper Canada commenced to agitate for an
entire separation from the American Church. A memorial to that effect
was sent to the General Conference. The request was not granted, but the
Canadian work was set off to itself as the "Annual Conference of the
Methodist Episcopal Church in Canada." This was not what Mr. Ryan
wanted, and it displeased him. The theme of his complaint was "the
domination of republican Methodism and the tyranny of Yankee Bishops."
He therefore, set himself again to agitate for entire independence.
Finally, after having been the means of stirring up personal strife all
through the Connexion, the Conference of 1827 directed that he should be
reproved and admonished by Bishop Hedding in presence of the Conference.
This was done. Next day Mr. Ryan withdrew from the Conference. (See
chapter vii.)
The high-church party encouraged Mr. Ryan in his disaffection; and when
he withdrew, and set up a separate church organization, Dr. Strachan
actually sent Mr. Ryan $200 to assist him in his schismatical efforts!
(Epochs, page 305.) Hon. John Willson, Speaker of the House of Assembly,
and formerly a Methodist, joined the high-church party, and did all he
could to aid and encourage Mr. Ryan. Thus, in addition to the £50 sent
to Mr. Ryan by Ven. Archdeacon Strachan, to aid him in his schismatical
crusade against the Conference, a Government grant of £666 ($2,664) was
made to the new organization at the instance of Mr. Willson in 1833, and
£338 ($1,352) in 1834. (Epochs, page 359.)
The cry of disloyalty having been again raised, the Government and
clerical party (for they were one under the control of the Archdeacon of
York), lost no time, therefore, in maturing a plan to induce the British
Conference again to undertake the occupancy of Upper Canada as
missionary ground, and forthwith to send missionaries into the province
for that purpose. A correspondence was opened between the head of the
Canadian Executive Government, Sir John Colborne, and the Wesleyan
Missionary Committee, on the subject of the new missionary enterprise
into Upper Canada. (Epochs, page 305.) The result was, that in May,
1832, without notice, an intimation was received that the Rev. Robert
Alder, and twelve missionaries were to be sent out to Canada. With a
view to avert the calamity of again having hostile Methodist camps in
every city and town in Upper Canada, Rev. John Ryerson suggested to Dr.
Ryerson that the Canada Conference should endeavour to form a union with
the British Conference, and thus secure harmonious action instead of
discord and disunion. This was done, and provisional arrangements were
made with Dr. Alder at the Hallowell Conference of 1832, subject to the
ratification of the British Conference. This ratification was made, and
took effect in 1833, and the union continued for four or five years
only.
About the year 1840, a considerable controversy arose in regard to the
payment of an annual grant of £900 by the Government, in aid of the
general work of the Church. It may be well, therefore, to state the
circumstances under which this grant was made, and then point out the
personal causes which intensified the feeling of estrangement between
the English and Canadian Conferences.
In a letter on this subject to the Provincial Secretary, dated 28th
December, 1842, Dr. Ryerson said:--
Rev. Robert Alder was in Upper Canada in the spring and summer of
1833, negotiating on the subject of the grant and the union, which
Sir John Colborne was anxious to promote. The Canadian Conference,
aided by Dr. Alder's counsels, agreed to propose certain articles
of union with the English Conference. Those articles contemplated a
financial, as well as ecclesiastical union; and Dr. Alder expressed
his conviction that the English Conference would grant £1,000 per
annum out of its Contingent Fund, to aid our Conference, besides
the aid granted out of the Mission Fund, in aid of Missions in
Upper Canada. A copy of these proposed articles of union was
forthwith laid before Sir John Colborne by Dr. Alder, and published
in the _Guardian_, of the 29th August, 1832, five days after which
Sir John Colborne wrote to Lord Ripon, recommending a grant to the
Wesleyan Committee of £900 per annum [on terms of the comprehensive
scheme mentioned on page 155]. But the Government delayed making
any payment until October, 1833, after the ratification of the
union by both bodies. In the meantime, however, the English
Conference declined granting any aid out of their Contingent Fund,
and had a clause inserted in the Articles of Union against any
claims upon the funds of the English Conference on the part of the
Canadian Preachers. Of this clause in the Articles of Union the
Government seems never to have been made aware until Lord Sydenham
came to Upper Canada in 1839.
In a long and valuable historical letter to Mr. Murdoch, Chief Secretary
to Sir Charles Bagot, dated May, 1842, Dr. Ryerson further said:--
The first payment of the grant was made in October, 1833, a few
days after the final ratification of the Articles of Union by the
Canadian Conference; so that every payment of the grant was made
and applied according to the "usage" prescribed by the Articles of
Union....
Dr. Ryerson then discussed various matters relating to their "usage,"
and the articles of Union, and proceeded: Some weeks after Lord
Sydenham's arrival in Toronto, His Lordship sent for me--as I was
afterwards informed, at the recommendation of Sir Allan MacNab,
Receiver-General Dunn, and others--but the interview, and one or two
subsequent ones, related entirely to the objects of his Lordship's
mission, in accomplishing which, he desired all the aid I could give
him. The last week of the year 1839, and the first week of 1840, Lord
Sydenham spent in seeing various parties and concerting a measure on the
clergy reserve question. He sent for the Rev. Messrs. Stinson and Richey
(agents of the London Wesleyan Committee) as well as for me. As all the
present difficulties grew out of these interviews of the London Wesleyan
Committee's agents and myself, with Lord Sydenham, I think it important
to state the substance of them, and the evidence on which I make my
statement.
First as regards myself. The proposed measure being intended to secure a
continued payment of grants already made out of the Casual and
Territorial Revenue, and the Clergy Reserve Fund, to the parties
receiving them, I submitted to Lord Sydenham that, as the three
principal denominations (Church of England, Church of Scotland, and
Roman Catholics) received large aid out of one or both of these funds,
it was clear that unless some assistance was granted to the Wesleyan
Methodist Church before the passing of the Clergy Reserve Bill, and
transferred with other charges by the provisions of the Bill, we would
be effectually excluded from obtaining any aid for a series of years. I
submitted to Lord Sydenham an application, which I had been directed to
make, in behalf of the Upper Canada Academy--now Victoria College. His
Lordship acceded to the justice of my views, but replied that aid was
given to us also in the form of an annual grant. I replied, and sought
to impress upon his Lordship, that the grant referred to by him had not
been made to the Canadian Conference, and did not operate to its
advantage, but to the sole advantage of the Wesleyan Missionary Society
in England; and, at his request, I prepared a statement of the case in
writing. It will be seen by the date of my letter that these
communications took place January 2nd, 1840. It is perfectly clear,
therefore, that up to that time there could have transpired between Lord
Sydenham and myself, nothing relative to the transfer of the grant.
On the same day, Rev. Messrs. Stinson and Richey (agents of the Wesleyan
Committee) had an interview with Lord Sydenham. They told him that the
union between the English and Canadian Conferences was not likely to
continue; and prayed (in their memorial, written the day after) "that
the sum intended for the Wesleyan Methodist Church in Canada, should be
given to the Wesleyan Methodists, who are now, and who may be hereafter,
connected with the British Wesleyan Conference." I believe Lord
Sydenham's laconic reply was, that he had to do with religious bodies in
Canada, not in England.
It will be seen that the communication of Messrs. Stinson and Richey, as
well as mine, served to impress Lord Sydenham that there was not an
identity of interests between the English and Canadian Conferences, as
he had supposed, and, as His Lordship said, Her Majesty's Government
also supposed.
A day or two after Messrs. Stinson and Richey's interview with Lord
Sydenham, I waited upon him, when I was given to understand that a
memorial had been presented to him in behalf of the British Conference,
on the ground of an anticipated dissolution of the Union. My feelings of
surprise and indignation, and my remonstrances against such a monstrous
proposition, may be easily conceived. It is known that Lord Sydenham,
from the very first, viewed such a proposition with disapprobation; it
was on this occasion also that His Lordship apprised me of the
conclusions he had come to on the subject of any proposition for a grant
to the Canadian Conference, previously to passing the Clergy Reserve
Bill; that he was satisfied that the Canadian Conference had a just
claim to assistance; that it did not derive any practical benefit from
the grant to the London Committee, but that it ought to do so, as such
were the original intentions of the Government in making it. Lord
Sydenham stated his recollection of the intention of the Government in
1832 to be--and perhaps the recollections of Lord Stanley may be to the
same effect--that it was supposed by the Government, from communications
from Upper Canada, that the Wesleyans here were not quite as
(conservatively) loyal as was desirable; that it being understood they
were willing to unite with the English Conference, the Government
thought it advisable to enable the English Conference to assist them,
as it would exert a salutary influence upon their feelings and
usefulness. Thus was the grant made; but from the peculiar nature of the
articles of Union, the leading objects of the grant had never been
accomplished, as the Canadian Conference had to support all its own
members and institutions--except a few missions--as much since, as
before the Union. He had, therefore, determined to write to Lord John
Russell, and recommend a different distribution of the grant; believing
that to accomplish the original and benevolent objects in Canada, it
ought to be placed under the entire control of the Canadian Conference.
In these views I did, of course, gratefully concur, although I never
fully understood until then the intentions of the Imperial Government in
making the grant. I also thought the course proposed would defeat the
intimated project of breaking up the Union, and furnish real aid to the
Church of which I was appointed advocate and representative. Leaving the
matter in the hands of Lord Sydenham, I had no intention of saying
anything more upon the subject, until, nearly a fortnight afterwards,
when His Lordship requested me--as I was so familiar with the
subject--to furnish him with a written statement of the financial
relations of the English and Canadian Conferences, in regard to the
grant, etc., as it would aid him in preparing his despatch to Lord John
Russell. I did so. The letter, written at the request of Lord Sydenham,
was intended as a memorandum for his Lordship. But he thought it best to
transmit a copy of it with his own despatch to Lord John Russell, by
whom it was enclosed to the Wesleyan Committee; and hence the present
controversy. That letter is dated 17th January, 1840.
I cannot but feel that I labour under great disadvantages in the present
discussion, from the numerous representations and statements which the
Wesleyan Committee have made to the noble Secretary of State to my
disadvantage. My standing, as a public man, is my all, and therefore,
however small relatively, is as important to me as a kingdom to a
monarch.
As the Wesleyan Committee have made me so prominent a subject in this
affair, I have offered to submit to His Excellency, Sir Charles Bagot,
or to the Executive Council--or to His Excellency and the Executive
Council--or to the Lord Bishop of Toronto; or to the Moderator of the
Synod of the Church of Scotland in Canada--or to the Lord Bishop of
Toronto and the Moderator of the Scotch Synod--and to bind myself in any
penalty to abide by the decision of such tribunal. When the Wesleyan
Committee are accusers, judge, and jury in their own case, it is not
likely they will be very impartial; but if there is a shadow of truth
or justice in their accusations and statements, I have given them full
opportunity to secure the confirmation of them, by the highest
tribunals, in the country of my life and labours.
* * * * *
The Wesleyan Committee declined to refer the matter in dispute to an
independent tribunal, and Dr. Alder wrote to members of the Canadian
Conference impugning Dr. Ryerson in the strongest terms, insisting upon
his withdrawal of certain things which he had written, and making
various threats. Dr. Ryerson decided then to address a final letter to
Rev. Messrs. Bunting, Beecham and Hoole, Missionary Secretaries. This he
did on the 19th October, 1842. This letter, and the preceding letter,
are doubly valuable from the fact that they embody a number of
interesting details of the interviews and correspondence between Lord
Sydenham and Dr. Ryerson, and also between Sir Charles Bagot and Dr.
Ryerson, which have not hitherto been published. There is a tone of
manly dignity and independence in this letter which commends itself, and
which were characteristic of Dr. Ryerson in his best moods as a
controversialist. From the letter, which extends to thirty-four foolscap
pages I make the following extracts. He said:--
I wish the most extended success to the general labours of the Wesleyan
Missionary Society, however much they have sought to retard those of the
Canadian Conference; nor have I ever objected to their labours among the
"destitute white settlements" and heathen tribes of Canada; I only
object to their works of schism, and division.... Did you ever think of
sending missionaries, or of employing your money and men, in our regular
circuits, before the breaking up of the Union?--Kingston, or Belleville,
or Toronto, or Hamilton, or Brantford, or London, etc.?--places where
there is no more need of missionary men or missionary money than there
is in City Road, or Great Queen street circuits in London--places in
which it is notorious that the soul, body, and strength of your
societies consists, not in converts from the world, but in secessions
from the Canadian Conference. When, therefore, four-fifths of your
missionaries (so called) in Western Canada are employed on regular
circuits of the Canadian Conference, is it surprising that I should
complain, remonstrate, and condemn?
The burden of Dr. Alder's letter is that I have been the first,
gratuitous, and wanton aggressor upon the character and motives of those
"to whom the British Conference has entrusted the transaction of its
most important business;" and, as such, the author and fomenter of the
difficulties between the British and Canadian Conferences. And it has
been more than once intimated on your part that if I, the Jonah, were
thrown overboard, the commotion of the Methodistic element of Western
Canada would soon cease, and mutual confidence and joy would be restored
to the whole ship's company.... Need I add, that in the columns of your
_Watchman_ newspaper, and in the pages of pamphlets, and in your
_Wesleyan_ in Canada, not only my public conduct, but my character, my
motives, my principles, have been impugned without delicacy or
restraint? Need I add, that the Canada Conference and myself have been
the defendants, and you the assailants, throughout? That in Dr. Alder's
letter to Lord John Russell the proceedings of the Canada Conference are
represented as revolutionary?
I am also impeached in almost every form of phraseology--the Christian
integrity and loyalty of my brethren and myself have been impugned by
your agents throughout this country--our fields of labour have been
invaded, and our flocks divided, while our principles and feelings have
been resented as dangerous to the safety and interests of the State. Yet
Dr. Alder complains of the occasional exposure of these things in the
_Guardian_, and is rampant at the application of the word divisionists,
to those of your missionaries who are dividing our regular societies,
and establishing rival congregations on our regular circuits!... But, in
reply, there may be opposed to the unanimous resolutions of your
Conference, adopted in Liverpool, in 1820, and the whole tenor and
spirit of the New Testament, especially the writings of St. Paul, who
denounces partialities for Peter, or Paul, or Apollos, as pretext for
schisms in the Church of God.
Then as to my desire to protract litigation. Does my having done all in
my power to have the affair referred to a third party--to any impartial
tribunal you might prefer--evince the truth of such a charge? Or does
your refusing to agree to any such reference look most like desiring to
protract hostilities? Great Britain and other civilized nations have
more than once submitted their differences to the decision of a third
party; ancient churches did the same; I have advocated the same; you
refuse; your refusal does not certainly argue a consciousness that you
are right, or a desire for peace, whatever else it may argue.
Furthermore, as to my own feelings and conduct, I will let the following
memorandum, which I presented at the late session of the Canada
Conference, speak in reply to your various allegations:--
I hereby resign my seat in the Conference of the Wesleyan Methodist
Church in Canada.
I do not resign my membership in the Conference, but I resign all
privilege and right to take part in its deliberations, or even to
be present at its sittings. I hold myself as much as ever
responsible and subject to the Conference, and am as ready as ever
to do all in my power to defend the Conference and Institutions of
the Church when necessary; but I voluntarily relinquish
participating in any way whatever in its Executive or Legislative
Councils. The following are the considerations which have induced
me to take this step:--
1. My presence and participation in the proceedings of the
Conference have been represented as forming an insuperable obstacle
to any adjustment of differences between the Wesleyan Conference in
England, and this Conference.
2. I prefer the unity of Methodism, and an honourable adjustment of
differences between two branches of the great Methodist family, to
the exercise of any influence I may possess, or may be supposed to
possess in the Councils of this Conference; or to the profit and
pleasure I may derive from attending the annual deliberations of my
reverend and beloved brethren.
3. I can now take this step without incurring any imputation upon
my character, and without injuring the interests of the Conference,
or of the Church at large.
I respectfully request that this memorandum may be inserted in the
journals of the Conference, as an official record and recognition
of this my voluntary act.
(Signed) Egerton Ryerson.
Hallowell, June 14, 1842.
You will see from the above memorandum, that I proposed to relinquish
all except my connection with a church which I had joined in obedience
to conscience, and my connection with a field of labour to which I
believed myself called by the voice and providence of God. My request
was laid upon the table of the Conference for a day, and then pressed by
me with as much propriety as I could employ on such a subject, but, with
one exception (Andrew Prindle), was unanimously rejected, it being
insisted that I should not be allowed to change my relations to the
Conference, in any respect, on account of your differences with me. To
relinquish my connection with the Church, and my labours as a Methodist
minister, involve considerations which ought not to yield to the impulse
of passion, or bow to the suggestions of expediency. By God's grace,
therefore, I hope to be able to "stand in my place to the end of the
day," say or do what you may....
Dr. Alder and his Canadian friends have advised you from the beginning
that my standing and influence in Canada was merely political; that I
was aware of this, and was, therefore, determined to employ myself in
political affairs in order to gratify my ambition. My assertions to the
contrary were, of course, rejected and scorned by you. Well, nearly
three years have elapsed since, by common consent, I have had nothing
whatever to do with the civil affairs of Canada, as all the public men
in it know. My own conduct, therefore, has thus far refuted one part of
the statements of your informers. As to the other part, has my standing
as a public man declined? or, have all parties, during that period,
awarded me a testimony of regard more gratifying than that which I had
ever before received from any party?
You were also told that my principles were revolutionary, and were so
viewed by the wealth and intelligence of this country, which would
support you and repudiate me and those connected with me. What do you
now see, but the Government at home and in Canada adopting the very
system of administration, both in religious, educational, and civil
affairs, which I maintained many years ago to be most suitable to the
social condition of this Province; and the wealth and intelligence of
our population (save a little knot of Puseyite ultras) rejoicing in its
establishment; and the country in happy tranquility, and blooming with
prosperity, under its operations? What do you see but Her Majesty
possessing a strength far more formidable than that of swords or
bayonets, in the hearts of her Canadian subjects? What do you see, but
three branches of the Legislature unanimously incorporating as a
College, with the privileges of a University, an institution under the
direction of the Canada Conference (which you had repudiated), and in
compliance with an application which I had the honour to have advocated,
and according to the provisions of a Bill, _verbatim et literatim_,
which I drew up? What do you see, but that same Legislature, with equal
unanimity, granting £500 to the same institution, and lately, by the
recommendation of His Excellency, Sir Charles Bagot, renewing that grant
as an annual aid to the institution, now presided over by the individual
against whom all your attacks have been directed? Can I but feel a
grateful, as well as a dutiful attachment to a Government so perfectly
consonant with my own feelings? Can I but feel an honest pride,
retrospecting the past, and looking abroad upon the present, to see in
the constitution and spirit of Her Majesty's Canadian Government my own
views and wishes carried out to the very letter? Can I but rejoice, to
see several members of the Government on our College Board and
Senate--and to be aided by their counsel, abilities, and influence?
I advert to these facts with heart-felt thankfulness, as a practical
vindication of my life and character against your imputations, and as an
indication strong, if not providential, that I have, in the main at
least, endeavoured to do my duty to my God, my Sovereign, and my
country.... Unconnected as I am with any party, and on friendly terms
with leading men of all parties, countenanced by the Government, aided
by the Legislature, and sustained by the public, I can, by the divine
blessing, employ my humble abilities, even under the weight of Dr.
Alder's frowns, to rearing up a large body of well instructed youth,
and a considerable number of ministers, who, I hope, will be a blessing
to this their country, and to the church, and who will, doubtless, do
justice to me when both Dr. Alder and myself shall be receiving our
reward according to our respective works, "whether they be good or
bad."...
My differences with you are wholly of a public and official character;
personally I esteem and honour you as much as I ever did, and wish you
God speed in your general works of faith and divine labours of love....
The only persons in England with whom I have the slightest personal
difference are Dr. Alder and Mr. Lord, for their uncalled for and unjust
personal attacks upon me. I cherish no ill-feeling towards them. But I
ask not your indulgence; I fear you not; I know and admire you as
distinguished servants of the Most High, but as greatly mistaken as to
what truly appertains to one hundred and twenty-one itinerant ministers,
and a large and growing branch of the Wesleyan body in Western Canada--a
body now beginning, like yourselves, to raise up a regularly educated as
well as a zealous ministry....
This epistle shall be my witness to the Government, to the church, and
to posterity, that the dreadful disgrace and varied evils of
perpetuating the present unseemly violation of Methodistic and Christian
unity in Upper Canada, and the creation and continuance of unnatural and
unchristian schisms and divisions in a Christian church, lie not at my
door; and that for the sake of peace, I have offered to do all that
could be demanded of me by reason of Christianity....
As the Government is interested in this controversy, I shall deem it my
duty to enclose a copy of the present letter to His Excellency the
Governor-General, with a request that His Excellency will have the
goodness to forward it to Her Majesty's Secretary of State for the
Colonial Department, that Her Majesty's Government, both at home and in
this country, may fully understand the present posture of this affair,
at least as far as you and myself are concerned, and with whom lies the
responsibility of this continued controversy.
* * * * *
For the reasons given above to the Secretaries of the Wesleyan
Conference in England, Dr. Ryerson transmitted a copy of his letter to
them to Sir Charles Bagot, on the 10th December, 1842, accompanied with
an explanatory letter, from which I extract the following narrative
connected with this matter:--Two weeks before the late Lord Sydenham's
arrival in Toronto (in November, 1839), at a meeting of the agents of
the London Committee, and the Executive Committee of the Canadian
Conference, every matter of misunderstanding and jealousy, as far as I
know, was satisfactorily settled. It was explicitly agreed on all sides,
and recorded, that I should press the settlement of the clergy reserve
question. On other things it was my wish and aim to remain neutral. This
I did, until some weeks after Lord Sydenham's arrival. Parties were very
equally divided on the question of the union of the Canadas, and the
terms on which it should be effected. I was then Editor of the
_Guardian_; I was desired by the agents of the London Wesleyan Committee
and their friends (and some of my own friends), to oppose the union of
the Canadas; Lord Sydenham sent for me, and earnestly solicited me to
advocate it, and assured me that it should involve no change in the
principles of our Constitution, but even secure greater privileges to
the people of Canada, and that it was the only hope of Canada. He
promised, in case he could get the Union measure through the Canadian
Legislature, to apply himself to the settlement of the clergy reserve
question, in accordance with such principles as I had expressed, and
which he understood to be general in Upper Canada. After much
consideration, I consented to give a decided support to the Government
in that great measure. The agents of the London Committee were greatly
offended, and were sure, as were many others, that Lord Sydenham would
not be supported by the Imperial Parliament, and threatened a breaking
up of the union between the English and Canadian Conferences; and in
about three weeks afterwards, they intimated to Lord Sydenham that the
union between the two bodies would not be continued, and sought to get
the Methodist portion of the proceeds of the clergy reserves secured to
those who should be connected with the British Wesleyan Conference. Lord
Sydenham, learning the circumstances in which I was placed, opposed by
the agents of the London Committee and all the opponents of the union of
the Canadas, and by the "radical reform" portion of the press, for
assenting to the application of the clergy reserves to religious
purposes at all, and by many of the members of my own Church, because I
assented to a Bill which recognized the Churches of England and Scotland
by name, and not the Methodist Church,--assured me of all protection and
support that his Government could give. I asked for nothing but a due
consideration and protection of the interests of the Church which I
represented. Of this I received repeated assurances; and when, a few
months afterwards, Lord Sydenham received from Lord John Russell, a copy
of Dr. Alder's first letter to his Lordship, Lord Sydenham not only
renewed the private expression of his views and purposes, but introduced
them voluntarily in an answer to a congratulatory address of the
Canadian Conference. In reference to these very matters, out of which
the present question has arisen, Lord Sydenham thus expressed himself,
and pledged the faith of his Government. He said:--
Whilst I administer the affairs of the Canadas, it is my duty to
look to the feelings of the people of that country; and you will
find me ever ready and willing, whenever any question connected
with the Executive Government may arise, to support the reasonable
views, and maintain the just rights of your society, as expressed
through your recognized authorities within these Provinces.
When it was ascertained that the English Conference would not abide by
the articles of union, and that several months' delay had taken place
without carrying out the views which Lord Sydenham had expressed--that
an Act on the clergy reserve question had been passed by the Imperial
Parliament, different in several important respects from that which Lord
Sydenham had got through the Canadian Legislature, it was our intention
to have the claims and interests of our Church in respect both to the
grant and clergy reserves, brought under the consideration of the
Canadian Legislature. But previously to taking this step, I was directed
to proceed to Kingston (June, 1841), to ascertain what measures the
Government were disposed to adopt; when I learned from Lord Sydenham
that he had been empowered to settle the question of the grant, and that
in that and all other respects he would consult the interests of our
Church to the utmost of his power. It was not his wish to communicate
his decision officially until near the close of the session of the
Legislature, which, unhappily, proved to be the end of his life. What
has since transpired is within the personal knowledge of Your
Excellency.
* * * * *
After all this correspondence, the question of reunion with the British
Conference was often and earnestly discussed privately between leading
members of the Canadian and British Conferences, as well as in the
American Methodist journals.[132]
In October, 1843, Rev. Joseph Stinson, then in Sheffield, England, wrote
to Dr. Ryerson on the subject, and said:--
There is a strong desire on the part of many of our most
influential ministers that the work in Canada should be
consolidated and made one. It is certainly most desirable that
there should be one vigorous, united, and prosperous Methodist
Church; in which the pure doctrines of Methodism, and of the
Gospel, shall be preserved, and a refuge for those who really want
to be saved shall be presented--to all those, I mean, who prefer
our religious system to any other. Now, my dear sir, allow me to
say, that I think that the only two men in the world who can effect
this most desirable object, are yourself and Dr. Alder. If any plan
could be adopted by which you and he could be reconciled to each
other, the work would be done; and it will not be done effectually,
I fear, until this is the case. I still entertain the hope of
spending many happy and useful years in Canada; and I thank you
sincerely for your kind offer with reference to Cobourg. I cannot
forget the happy, and, I may say, holy hours we have spent together
before God in prayer; and I hope and trust we shall yet be found
side by side in the Church militant and in the Church triumphant.
Rev. Joseph Stinson wrote again in December, and was very urgent in
regard to the reunion of the Conferences. He says:
Let us still labour and pray for the great object of union. Every
day, and every aspect which the Church and the world presents,
deepens the conviction of my mind of its necessity, and I hope we
shall live to see a united and prosperous Church in Canada, against
which the gates of hell cannot prevail. We are now very busy with
our Educational movements. We intend to raise £200,000 in seven
years, and we shall, by the Divine blessing, succeed. Our people
were never more united, and truly Methodistical in their feelings
and purposes. God has a great work for us to do in the world, and
if we are but faithful, we shall be a greater blessing to our
Empire than we have ever been.
In November, 1844, after his arrival in London, Dr. Ryerson addressed a
letter to his two friends, Rev. Joseph Stinson and Rev. G. Marsden, on
the Union question. From Mr. Stinson he received a reply, from which the
following is an extract:--
I heartily congratulate you on your promotion. I pray that you may
be happy and useful in the interesting and responsible station
assigned you by the providence of God and the Government of your
country. I hope your visit to this country may be one of those
Providential events which will lead to the accomplishment of an
object which lies as near to my heart now as it ever did--the unity
of our Methodist interests in Canada. The aspects of the times at
home and abroad surely are plainly indicating that our very
existence as a Church depends, in no small decree, upon our unity.
In the meantime, if I can, by any little influence I have, be able
to effect a reconciliation between you and our friends at the
Mission House, nothing on earth will afford me so much pleasure.
Rev. G. Marsden, in his reply to Dr. Ryerson, said:--
Often have I reflected with deep interest on the whole of that very
important affair--the union of the two bodies; and though it was
afterward dissolved, I firmly believe that the union at that time
was of God. It gave a favourable opportunity for our Conference
reviewing and improving the code of Discipline, and I hope that it
is now rendered permanent. In that respect I believe you in Canada
are on good ground; and I could almost wish that it may be
unalterable. There may be attempts made, under the pretence of
improvements, to alter in future our Book of Discipline, but I
trust that those preachers who were at the Conference when the
Discipline was settled and solemnly agreed upon, will not hastily
adopt any material alterations.
The union was also providential as it occurred before the rebellion
commenced. So far it appeared to be in the order of Providence; and
though in a few years the union was dissolved, yet you have gone
on well in Canada, and the Lord has prospered you.
The position which you now occupy is one of great importance, as it
respects the future good of Canada. If the youth of that country be
trained up in sound Christian principles, the country, as it
respects the inhabitants, may become one of the finest in the
world. The old countries are formed, yours is in some measure yet
to be formed; and as is the education, such in all probability will
be the inhabitants in future.
Dr. Ryerson after his arrival in England, also addressed a letter to Dr.
Bunting, dated December 11th, 1844, as follows:--
I desire your acceptance of the accompanying publication [relating to
the Metcalfe controversy]. The Prefatory Notice and Address will explain
to you the circumstances under which it was written.
I take the liberty of presenting you with this publication, not merely
from feelings of profound respect for yourself personally, but also for
the following reason:--That you may have the best possible proof of the
sentiments which I have ever inculcated upon the public mind in Canada,
and which are current among the ministers and members of the Wesleyan
Methodist Church in that country. In appendix No's. 3 and 4, pages
171-178, I have made extracts from what I wrote between the years 1838
and 1841, the period, in August, 1840, during which both my sentiments
and conduct were impugned in your presence. You will probably recollect
that I then stated that my principles were strictly British, and such
alone as could perpetuate British authority in Canada. The fact that the
present Governor-General of Canada, and Her Majesty's present
Government--apart from a candid inquiry into the nature of them--have
staked their character and authority in Canada upon those principles, is
ample proof of their constitutional orthodoxy and essential importance;
and the manner in which Sir Charles Metcalfe has been, and is, supported
in Upper Canada, is sufficient evidence of their influence over the
public mind there, without your expending some three thousand pounds a
year of missionary money within the bounds of the regular
self-supporting and missionary-contributing circuits of the Canada
Conference in order to teach us loyalty. (See pages 282, 283.) Since I
was last in England, I have not written a word on civil affairs, except
a short obituary notice of the late Sir Charles Bagot (which was not
inserted in the _Christian Guardian_, any more than what I have recently
written) until the publication which I herewith transmit. By referring
to pages 134, 153, 164, you will find that I have not, even as an
individual, written for party, or in the spirit of party, but with a
view of giving and securing the application of a Christian
interpretation of the fundamental principles of the British
Constitution, and of all good government.
I am thankful that I have been permitted to live and give to the British
Government in England, and to the public in Canada, a more tangible and
abiding proof of my principles and feelings than the representations
which were made of them in your presence in 1840.
It may not be improper for me to add, that the appointment with which
the Government has honoured me, in placing under my direction, the
public educational instruction of the youth of Upper Canada, was not
accepted by me, until after my ministerial brethren, officially, as well
as unofficially, expressed their approbation of my doing so.
* * * * *
After the Conference of 1845, Dr. Ryerson (then in Europe) received a
letter from Rev. John Ryerson, in which he said:--
The Conference received a note from the sub-Secretary of the
British Conference, enclosing certain resolutions which had been
passed two years ago, appointing a committee to settle matters with
the Canada Conference respecting the differences between the two
Connexions. Our Conference appointed a similar committee, and the
Secretary was directed to communicate to the British Conference,
and request it to make some proposals for settlement, as they had
rejected all the proposals which we had made. In fact, parties here
have taken advantage of the overtures which we have made to injure
the Canada Conference, while there is no move on the part of the
British Conference to indicate that they even desire a settlement.
For my own part, I would have gone so far as to have made the
proposal which you suggested; but I could not influence a majority
of the Conference to do so. The belief here is gaining ground that
the British Conference has no intention to settle the differences;
that they are only tampering with us, and, at the same time, they
are striving to get the £700. I believe that no settlement can be
effected until that grant matter is adjusted, and that no grant
will be paid until that settlement is made. I cannot forget the
reprehensible conduct of the Missionary party, in sending a
missionary to Bytown, at the very time that they were pretending to
negotiate a settlement with us! Still I am anxious to do almost
anything to effect an adjustment of our misunderstandings; but I
fear that the British Conference, influenced by the Missionary
party here, will accede to no feasible plan of settlement--at all
events, not while these men are kept here, and are allowed to have
the influence in England which they seem to possess.
You are aware, of course, that a party in Toronto have for these
six months been publishing a paper, the object of which is by
agitation among our people, to drive the Conference to censure you
and your political writings. The Radical party in the Conference
tried to get that body to pass some such resolutions as Rev. C. R.
Allison introduced at Brockville, but they totally failed. The
Conference in reply to two memorials--the one from Brantford, and
the other from Cobourg--defended the resolutions passed at
Brockville on political matters, and the pastoral address of the
same year, and remarked that it saw no reason to say more than it
had said. This was sadly mortifying to the parties opposed to you.
However, every effort of that party in this and other questions
totally failed. They were left in most miserable minorities in
everything they undertook of a party and revolutionary character.
The party has assailed all of our funds, especially our Missionary
Society and Victoria College. Indeed, there was nothing connected
with our institutions which they have not tried to injure, taking
good care to connect your name with everything, so as to let the
Church know that you would be a sacrifice entirely satisfactory to
them.
Political matters in the country are in a state of great quiet. I
think the present Government has got on strong ground--being
assailed by the two extreme sharks--the _Pilot_ and the
_Patriot_.... The impartiality and high-minded justice of the
Governor-General are becoming more and more apparent. Indeed, I do
not think the Radicals will be able to recover their power in any
degree while Lord Metcalfe remains, certainly not if he continues,
in defiance of party strife, to administer the Government as it has
been administered since the present Council has been organized.
The University Question is a most perplexing one, and the Ministry
will find the utmost difficulty to so devise a plan of settlement
so as to satisfy a majority of the people and carry the House with
them.
After this correspondence on the Union question had taken place little
was done and less resulted from it. When Dr. Ryerson returned to Canada,
he wrote to Rev. Peter Jones, then in England, to see Rev. Dr. James
Dixon, and urge him to come to Canada. In February, 1846, Rev. Mr. Jones
replied:--
On receiving your letter I lost no time in calling upon Dr. Dixon,
who appeared pleased with the invitation from our Executive
Committee. He said that if he could see that his visit to Canada
would bring about a reconciliation between the two Conferences, he
would be most happy to go. I am very glad that the Committee have
invited him to come and inspect the state of affairs. I believe
that the invitation will do much good, whether Dr. Dixon goes or
not, as it will be seen that our Conference is anxious for a
settlement, and courts investigation.
I do assure you that we are getting very homesick; and I am
heartily tired of the work of begging. I shall be glad when we are
again quietly settled in our own wigwams.
In reply to this invitation, Rev. Dr. Dixon wrote a letter to Rev. Dr.
Ryerson, in March, in which he foreshadowed the important Methodistic
legislation which resulted in the establishment of the General
Conference which met at Toronto in 1874, with Dr. Ryerson as its first
President. Dr. Dixon said:--
My own idea is that a measure much more comprehensive than that of
a mere settlement of these disputes is needed. The time must come
when the North American provinces will be united ecclesiastically,
by having a General Conference of their own, in connexion with the
Provincial or District Conferences, after the manner of the United
States. Things must come to this at no remote period; and this
being the case, it seems reasonable to consider such a scheme in
connection with the measure now under review. To do the thing well
will require, of course, very much and mature deliberation. In case
such a measure should be thought of, some form of fellowship, some
bond of union--must be recognized betwixt the British Conference
and such a body as I contemplate. Here is a ticklish point--it is
at this point that all splits and quarrels begin. But clearly the
line of justice, religion, and a Christian experience may be
discovered, if honestly sought. I am deeply convinced myself that
the organization of such a body as I refer to must, in the nature
of things develop the energies of Methodism in the Provinces
infinitely more vigorously than can be secured by the action of a
distant government.
I venture to throw this out as my general feeling and impression.
Of course, it has been thought of by others as well as myself; and
I found the other day from Rev. Peter Jones that the subject is
engaging the attention of different parties on your side of the
water. Could you not open a discussion on this question in your
periodicals? But it should be free from party bias, from angry
passions, from national views and partialities; indeed, the
discussion of such a subject requires the highest reason,
philosophy and statesmanship. If a calm head and pure patriot could
be found amongst you to argue such a point, it would be clearing
the ground. Of the soundness of the principle that the Methodist
body ought to be one in all the adjacent colonies; and I am
convinced that it would be wise and expedient to establish as soon
as men's minds are prepared for it, such an establishment as a
general colonial Conference. And in the present state of things, I
conceive it would be useful to receive a certain amount of British
influence in such a Conference. You cannot do very well without us;
and on this side there would be great alarm at the idea of an
entire separation. But all these are questions of detail.
Let me say now, that I have a strong desire to visit your
Provinces--I should like above all things to obey your call; but I
see it possible not only to do no good, but to do harm, by
exasperating parties on my taking up an independent position. Let
me say, I think the object we desire is being promoted by your
communication; and I hope that either myself, or some other one
better fitted, will, ere long, appear amongst you as a messenger of
peace. I long to see it.
It would afford Mrs. Dixon and I the highest gratification to see
you in this country again--to have the very great delight to see
you by our fireside, and experience over again some of the happy
moments we dearly enjoyed in your friendly society. Thank God there
is a Christianity infinitely above ecclesiastical divisions, and
sub-divisions; and there is a depth of feeling and affection in the
human heart which cannot be destroyed by the miserable squabbles of
nations and churches.
At the Conference held at Kingston, after the receipt of this letter
from Rev. Dr. Dixon, it was considered expedient to send a deputation
from Canada to the English Conference. Rev. John Ryerson and Rev. Anson
Green were selected for this important mission and soon left for
England. In a letter to Dr. Ryerson from his brother John, dated
Bristol, August 1st, he says that:--
The difficulties in the way of any proper adjustments of our
differences seem to be almost insurmountable. Prejudices so strong
and so extensive, have been excited against us that we, as the
representatives of the Canada Conference, are looked upon with
shyness, if not fear and contempt. Our situation is anything but
pleasant; it is even distressing and painful.... Rev. Joseph
Stinson is most cordial and affectionate, and is doing his utmost
to further the object of our mission and promote peace in Canada;
this is also the case of Rev. William Lord.
Subsequently Rev. John Ryerson wrote to say that:--
Dr. Alder presented the address of our Conference, and also the
certificate of our appointment to the British Conference. It was
moved by Dr. Bunting, and seconded by Dr. Alder, that the address
be received, and that we be affectionately and cordially requested
to take a seat in the Conference. The resolution was opposed, and
it called up a warm debate. The opposers contended that their
connection with the Canada Conference and its matters had only been
a source of trouble and injury to themselves, and that, as the
Union was now dissolved, they should keep aloof from all
intercourse with us. The resolution was warmly supported by
Doctors Bunting, Alder, Beaumont, Dixon, Mr. Lord, and Mr. Stinson.
It at length passed triumphantly, and all things are coming out
right, and will end well.
Rev. John Ryerson again wrote to Dr. Ryerson from Bristol:
Although we took our seats in the Conference last week, yet we were
not formally introduced until yesterday. It is clear that Dr. Alder
and others were resolved that we should not take our seats on the
platform, but Mr. Lord and Mr. Atherton (the President) and others
were resolved that we should. The President accordingly stated that
the brethren from Canada, Representatives of the Canada Conference,
would be introduced to the Conference, and would take their seats
on the platform, which we did. What Dr. Alder may hereafter do, I
know not; up to this time his conduct has been cold and repulsive;
he, however, continually declares that he is in favour of an
adjustment of matters in Canada.
In looking at matters here, I cannot express the painful anxiety of
my mind; sometimes I can neither eat nor sleep, and it quite
destroys all the satisfaction which I might otherwise enjoy from a
visit to England. Had I known that things would be as I find them,
I should never have come to England. I left Canada distressed in
mind about our mission; the distress has only continued to increase
every day since. Were I to follow the strong impulse of my mind, I
should leave at once and return to America.
All this was changed, however; and on the 15th September Rev. John
Ryerson thus writes to Dr. Ryerson as to the final issue of negotiations
with the British Conference:--
After four days' conference in committee on Canada affairs, the
whole business was brought to a happy and most amicable conclusion.
When I wrote my last letter I was under most painful apprehensions
respecting the results of our mission. Little change took place in
the bearing of the leading men towards us, until we met in
committee on the 9th inst. Then a most full, frank, and undisguised
explanation of all missionary and domestic matters was entered
into. After this full unburthening of ourselves, the one to the
other, a totally different feeling seemed to come over Drs.
Bunting, Alder, and the whole committee--which consisted of about
thirty leading members of the British Conference. In consequence of
the strong feeling which exists chiefly in Lower Canada, the
British North American plan mentioned by Dr. Dixon in his letter to
you, was thought not practicable at present. The plan of settlement
to which we have agreed, is a union with the British Conference, on
a basis similar to that by which the British and Irish Conferences
are united. The British Conference appoints our President and the
Superintendent of Missions, as in the former union; all of our
missions become missions of the Wesleyan Missionary Society; our
Missionary Society is auxiliary to their Society. The £700 grant is
to be placed under the Missionary Committee, to be appropriated for
missionary purposes in Canada. On the other hand, all the regular
British Missionary circuits in Canada, are to be placed under the
Canada Conference, the same as any other circuits; and there are to
be no missionary districts; but the missionaries are to be members
of the different districts in the bounds of which their missions
are situated. The missionaries are to be stationed by our
Stationing Committee, the same as other ministers. The British
Conference is to appropriate £600 sterling annually to our
contingent fund; and the Missionary Committee is to place £400 at
the disposal of our Conference for contingent purposes.
More kindness, more nobleness of sentiment and feeling, I never
witnessed than was manifested towards us after we had succeeded in
removing suspicion, and allaying fears, etc. In the course of the
conversations, your name came up frequently, but always in terms of
great respect; only they all seemed to think that you got astray in
the matter of the disruption of the union. I assured them, however,
that no man in Canada was more desirous of a settlement of
differences than you were, and in order to the attainment of it,
you were desirous that all the past should be forgotten, and that
henceforth in these matters all should become new. I assured Dr.
Alder that no man in Canada would receive him more cordially than
you would. This assurance seemed to be very gratifying to him and
all the other ministers present.
On the 24th November, 1846, after the return of the Conference
delegation from England, Dr. Ryerson addressed the following letter to
Drs. Bunting and Alder:--At the suggestion of my brother, Rev. John
Ryerson, and in accordance with my own feelings, I take the liberty of
addressing you a few lines on adjustment of differences between the
English and Canadian Conferences, and the concentration of the work of
Methodism in Upper Canada. In the arrangement which has been mutually
agreed upon between your Committees and the Canadian Representatives, I
entirely concur. Into the consideration of a measure so purely Christian
and Wesleyan, I have never allowed, and could not for a moment allow,
any sense of personal injury to enter. I have had the pleasure of
expressing to the Conferential Committee of the Canadian Connexion my
appreciation of the honourable and generous arrangement to which you
have agreed, and to propose a resolution expressive of the concurrence
of that Committee in that arrangement, to which it assented cordially
and unanimously. I have also had the pleasure of moving that Rev. M.
Richey be invited to occupy the relation to Victoria College which I
have for some years sustained, and to which the College Council has also
unanimously agreed. Nor shall I hesitate to use every exertion in my
power to complete and render beneficial an arrangement so honourable to
the British Conference, and so eminently calculated to promote the best
interests of Methodism in Western Canada.
Your treatment of my dear and most beloved brother, John, I regard and
acknowledge as a favour done to myself. I did not do myself the honour
of calling upon you personally when I was in England, nor should I feel
myself at liberty to do so even now, were I again to visit London. It is
not that you have objected to many things that I have said and done, and
have expressed your objections in the strongest language. In this you
have acted as I have done, and for which I ought not either to respect
or love you the less. But, in your resolutions of April, 1840, you were
pleased to charge me "with an utter want of integrity;" and in a
subsequent series of resolutions, you were pleased to represent me as
unworthy of the intercourse of private life. These two particulars of
your proceedings attracted the painful notice of the late Sir Charles
Bagot before I ever saw him, and, I have reason to believe, made no
slight impression on the mind of his successor, the late venerated Lord
Metcalfe; and they have sunk deeply into my own heart. But I have not so
much as alluded to them in my official intercourse with my Canadian
brethren, nor will I do so; and as a member of the Canadian Conference,
I shall (if spared) receive and treat Dr. Alder with as much respect and
cordiality as I ever did, and shall do my best to render his
contemplated visit to Canada agreeable to himself, and successful in its
objects. I have, more than once, through the press, disclaimed any
imputation upon his integrity, motives, or character; but with his
recorded declaration of my "utter want of integrity," and my unfitness
for social intercourse in private life, I feel that my own conduct
towards him should be confined to official acts and official occasions;
in which I shall treat him with as much cordiality as I would any other
member of the English Conference. Had it not been for the two
particulars in your former proceedings to which I have referred, I
should have as readily sought the opportunity of paying you my personal
respects, during my recent visit to England, as I did in 1836.
I have thought this explanation, at the present moment, due both to you
and to myself. I assure you at the same time of my personal regard, and
of my desire and purpose to promote, in every possible way, the great
objects which you have proposed, viz., the amicable reunion between the
English and Canadian Connexions. [The _amende_ was subsequently made.]
* * * * *
In order to place the English and Canadian reunion question fully and
fairly before the English Wesleyan public, Dr. Ryerson was requested to
prepare an article on the subject for the London _Watchman_. This he
did. Rev. M. Richey writes from Montreal, on the 28th June, 1847, and
thus acknowledges the service which Dr. Ryerson had rendered in this
matter:--
Your promptitude in preparing an article for the _Watchman_, and
the ability, as well as noble spirit of Wesleyan catholicity by
which it is characterized, have afforded to Dr. Alder the highest
satisfaction. The article perfectly corresponds to the ideal he had
conceived of a production adapted to place the whole matter before
the transatlantic public so as best to accomplish the important
object. The article will doubtless appear in the earliest
impression of the _Watchman_, to the joy of thousands of hearts. He
has also to acknowledge the receipt of the address of the Canada to
the British Conference. Permit me to assure you that Dr. Alder and
myself most affectionately reciprocate your expressions of kindness
and regard, and we have every confidence that no elements will be
ever hereafter permitted to disturb either our ecclesiastical
relations or our personal friendship.
On his return from Canada, Dr. Alder wrote to Dr. Ryerson, under date
of the 17th September, expressing his grateful feelings at the result of
his visit. He said:--
I assure you of the recollection which I cherish of the candid and
manly part which you took, both in public and in private, in
connexion with the various important matters of business which were
brought before us during the sittings of the last Conference in
Toronto, as well as previous to the meeting of that assembly. I
have not failed in my communications since my return, to do you
that justice to which you are so well entitled; and I trust, as I
doubt not you do, that the good understanding which has thus been
restored, will be as permanent as it is gratifying. Much will
depend upon you, as well as upon myself, in securing the harmonious
working of the union which has been accomplished; and I shall
always be happy to receive from you free and full communications,
which will be regarded by me as confidential.
Dr. Alder in a subsequent letter, to Dr. Ryerson, said:--
In the _Watchman_ I have prefaced an account of our Missionary
Anniversary by a few observations, in which I have taken occasion
to bear testimony to the spirit and conduct of your brother
William, as well as of your own, with a view, not merely to perform
an act of justice to you, but to prepare the way for the
appointment of one, or you both, coming, either now, or at some
future period, in a representative character, to our
Conference,--an arrangement which, I am persuaded, will be
productive of much good in various ways.
In carrying out practically so great a measure as that of the
union, difficulties of no ordinary kind will be felt. I have
pressed upon, and fully explained our financial matter to, Earl
Grey, who has, I believe, written to Lord Elgin on the subject. I
think I have made Earl Grey understand the peculiarity of our case.
You must press the matter on your side.
In the union matter you must have the greatest practical freedom of
operation. I have explained my views to Dr. Dixon, your new
President, who sailed last Saturday in the best of spirits.
In a fraternal letter, written in July, 1847, to the Rev. Dr. Olin,
President of the Wesleyan University, Middletown, Conn., Dr. Ryerson
gave some particulars as to the union with the British Conference. He
said:--
You have, doubtless, ere this, heard that a complete adjustment of
past differences between the Wesleyan Conferences in England and
Canada, has been effected, and that provision has been made for a
perfect _oneness_ of their interests and labours in Upper Canada.
This important object has been accomplished with a cordiality, and
unanimity, and devotion, that I have never seen surpassed, and
without the loss--so far as has yet been ascertained--of a single
minister or member of either body, and to the universal
satisfaction and even joy of both parties. We look upon it with
gratitude and wonder, as the Lord's doing, and as marvellous beyond
expression in our eyes.
In a reply to this letter written to Dr. Ryerson, in September, 1847,
Dr. Olin discusses the question of the Union, and also the relations of
the Church, North and South, on the Slavery question:--
I do most cordially rejoice at the happy termination of your
negotiations with the Wesleyan body in England. I must confess,
however, that I have been somewhat disappointed at the results of
your attempts to get on as an independent Conference. In theorizing
upon the subject, I have concluded that union would be far more
likely to embarrass than to facilitate your movements. I have since
learned that there were disturbing influences not discernible by
observers at a distance, growing out of the occupancy of the field
by conflicting agencies; the heterogenous character of your
population and the power of home associations, etc. I rejoice that
you have overcome these various obstacles, and are likely to have
harmony for the future. All parties will probably be warned and
instructed by the temporary interruption in your connexional
relations. All must be now deeply impressed with the importance of
forbearance and concessions after an experience so memorable of the
necessity of union.
I deeply regret that you should have received anything but kindness
from our side of the line. I think I can assure you that, as a
Church, our sympathies are, and have been, strongly with you; but
the natural and spontaneous feelings of the Body are not well
expressed; and they are in imminent danger of being perverted on
certain questions, which, unfortunately, become party questions
amongst us. The Methodist Episcopal Church is passing through a
crisis. It has fallen upon her to decide momentous questions under
peculiar temptations to error. The ministers are pure and high,
above all liability to be influenced by corrupt motives; but we are
calamitously enough thrown into a position where we must judge
between ourselves and our brethren, with powerful interests and
more potent prejudices to mislead us. Beyond all reasonable doubt,
we are coming to an issue for which, it is my opinion, the Church
of Christ, the world and history, will not cease to reproach us.
And yet we are coming to that issue with a good conscience,
honestly, so far as party spirit and blind prejudice, and the most
unfortunate leading, has left us the power of being honest. I wish
my convictions of the right were not quite so unchangeably settled.
It would afford me unspeakable relief to be able to suspect that
the predestined course of the Church could be other than a flagrant
violation of justice. I would gladly surrender my opinion, if I
could avail myself of even the benefit of a doubt in favour of
retraction. How we shall hereafter be looked upon by the world, is
a consideration of less interest than another which perpetually
thrusts itself upon my fears--what will God pronounce upon our
policy? My only hope is in the indulgence wont to be extended to
errors, and even to high offences which are the result of haste,
excitement, or prejudice. All of these mitigations may be claimed
in anticipation in behalf of the measures which will certainly
prevail at our next General Conference. Of the vast majority, which
will deny to the South what I esteem their unquestionable rights, I
am sure I shall never suspect a man of doing an intentional wrong.
I hope your public sentiment and your press will enable to temper
their disapprobation with this needful infusion of charity.
After his return to England Rev. Dr. Dixon, in a letter to Dr. Ryerson,
thus referred to the impression which his visit to Canada made upon him.
He said:--
My impressions are strong respecting the importance of Methodism in
Canada. It is at present a glorious religious element in the
country, and will become much more powerful. The colony is destined
to become, either in its present, or some new connection, a great
empire. It is consequently of great importance to adapt your
religious system to existing things, preserving points of doctrine.
I must say, that I never think of my intercourse with you; my
journeys with your brother; my connection with the Conference; and
the kindness of the brethren, but with feelings of intense
interest. In imagination, I try to live everything over and over
again. Many faces and persons are imprinted on my mind; and almost
every scene through which I passed lives in vivid reality. I am
often journeying down your glorious lakes and rivers, gazing on
your woods and forests, and stretching myself in the expanse, as if
there were room to live and breathe. Then, the affection and
kindness of everybody! The people and the scenery agree. All is
magnificent in America. I hope you may be able, by the divine
blessing, to preserve the purity of religion amongst you. I have
strong feelings on one point--viz.: the necessity of giving to all
our movements an evangelic and aggressive character. We Methodists
are so fond of organizations of every sort, and hence of
legislating and placing everything under rule and order, that we
leave no room for extension and for development. I am convinced
that a religious system which does not act on the evangelic
principle; and, moreover, have good people free to work and
exercise the divine affection, must break down.
I consider myself much more in the character of an observer now,
than an actor in anything. I have finished my mission, as regards
public work. It ended in Canada; and the above are my last, and, I
believe will remain, my unalterable convictions. Our danger is
over-legislation; cramping the energies of living piety by decrees
and rules; laying too much weight on the springs of individual
movement; destroying the man in society, the committee, etc.
I am glad to hear that you preach constantly. This is all that I
care about--to endeavour to do some little good in the way of
saving souls. Noble work this! So let me intreat you never to let
your other avocations interfere with this glorious calling. It is
painful to see some men merge the ministerial character in some
pitiful clerkship--some book-keeping affair. And worst of all,
these parties take it into their head, generally amongst us, to
consider themselves and their office as much higher than that of
the messengers of Christ!
* * * * *
Two deaths of notable representative men in Canadian Methodism occurred
during 1846:--Rev. Thomas Whitehead and Rev. James Evans. Rev. Thomas
Whitehead was the venerated representative of the early pioneers of
Methodism in Upper Canada, and Rev. James Evans was a remarkable type of
the self-sacrificing and devoted missionaries of that Church in the
great North-west. A brief sketch of each of these ministers will
illustrate points in the history of Methodism in Upper Canada, without
which the account of Dr. Ryerson's career and labours would be
incomplete,--especially as he had to do with both of these ministers
during his lifetime. Rev. Mr. Whitehead was one of these so-called
"Yankee Methodists," whom Dr. Ryerson so often and so strenuously
defended against the charge of disloyalty; and Rev. James Evans was one
of the five brethren with whom he remonstrated so earnestly and yet so
kindly in 1833. (See page 131.)
Rev. Thomas Whitehead was in many respects a strongly-marked
representative man. He was elected President at the memorable Special
Conference held, in the dark days of the Church, in 1840. (Page 274.) A
characteristic letter from him to Dr. Ryerson will be found on page
276. Mr. Whitehead was born in Duchess County, New York, in December
1762, when it was still a British Province. He was, therefore, not a
"Yankee Methodist," but a United Empire Loyalist. He commenced his
ministry in 1783, and went on a mission to Nova Scotia and New
Brunswick, where he remained from 1786 until 1804. In September, 1806,
he was sent by Bishop Asbury to Upper Canada, where he resided for forty
years. He preached his last sermon on Christmas Day, 1845. He was in the
ministry 62 years, and died at Burford in January, 1846, aged 83 years.
Rev. James Evans was one of the most noted missionaries of the
North-west; and was specially so from the fact that, by his wonderful
inventions of the syllabic character in the Cree language, he has
conferred untold blessings upon the Indian tribes and missions of all
the Churches in that vast North-West territory, in which he only was
permitted to labour for six years.
Mr. Evans was born in England in 1800. He was converted in Upper Canada,
and in 1830 entered the Christian ministry, and was a member of the
Canada Conference from that year. In 1840 he volunteered his services as
a missionary to the North-west. At his station of Norway House, he
devoted himself to his great work. Rev. E. R. Young, in the _Canadian
Methodist Magazine_ for November, 1882, thus speaks of Mr. Evans'
eminent service to the mission cause by his famous invention. He says:--
The invention of what are known as the syllabic characters was
undoubtedly Mr. Evans' greatest work, and to his unaided genius
belongs the honour of devising and then perfecting this alphabet
which has been such a blessing to thousands of Cree Indians. The
principle on which the characters are formed is the phonetic. There
are no silent letters. Each character represents a syllable, hence
no spelling is required. As soon as the alphabet is mastered, the
student can commence at the first chapter in Genesis and read on,
slowly of course, at first, but in a few days with surprising
facility.
When the invention became more extensively known, and other
Churches desired to avail themselves of its benefits, the British
and Foreign Bible Society nobly came to the help of our own, and
the kindred Churches having missions in the North West, and with
their usual princely style of doing things, for years have been
printing, and gratuitously furnishing to the different Cree Indian
missions, all the copies of the Sacred Word they require.
Rev. Mr. Young relates an interesting anecdote connected with this
alphabet, which occurred when he was a missionary in the North-West.
During Lord Dufferin's visit there he conversed with Mr. Young in regard
to the Indians in these distant regions, and expressed his solicitude
for the welfare and happiness of these wandering races, and made general
enquires in reference to missionary work among them. Mr. Young adds:--
In mentioning the helps I had in my work, I showed him my Cree
Indian Testament, in Evans' Syllabic Characters, and explained the
invention to him. At once his curiosity was excited, and jumping up
he hurried off for pen and paper, and had me write out the whole
alphabet for him, and then with that glee and vivacity for which
His Lordship was so noted, he constituted me his teacher, and
commenced at once to master them. Their simplicity, and yet
wonderful adaptation for their designed work became clearly
recognized by him, for in a short time he read a portion of the
Lord's Prayer. Lord Dufferin became quite excited, and, getting up
from his chair, and holding the Testament in his hand, exclaimed,
"Why, Mr. Young, what a blessing to humanity the man was who
invented that alphabet!" Then continuing, he added, "I profess to
be a kind of literary man myself, and try to keep up my reading of
what is going on, but I never heard of this before. The fact is,"
he added, "the nation has given many a man a title, and a pension,
and then a resting-place, and a monument in Westminster Abbey, who
never did half so much for their fellow-creatures." Then turning to
me again, he asked, "Who did you say was the author, or inventor of
the characters?" "The Rev. James Evans," I replied. "Well, why is
it, I never heard of him before, I wonder?" he answered. My reply
was, "Well, my lord, perhaps the reason why you never heard before
of him was, because he was a humble, modest Methodist preacher."
With a laugh he replied, "That may have been it," and then the
conversation changed. (Pages 437, 438.)
The following are examples of the
CREE SYLLABIC CHARACTERS.
[Cree characters] a, e, oo, ah.
[Cree characters] pa, pe, poo, pah.
[Cree characters] ta, te, tooh, tah.
[Cree characters] cha, che, choo, chah.
[Cree characters] na, ne, noo, nah.
[Cree characters] ka, ke, koo, kah.
[Cree characters] ma, mee, moo, mah.
[Cree characters] sa, see, soo, sah.
[Cree characters] ya, yee, yoo, yah.
The following is the mode of forming words:--
[Cree characters] Mah-ne-tooh--Great Spirit.
[Cree characters] Oo-mee-mee--Dove.
[Cree characters] Nah-pah-ne--Flour-making.
FOOTNOTES:
[130] In a letter to him from the Rev. A. Green, dated November, 1842,
the desirability of a union with the Episcopal Methodists was pressed
upon his attention. Mr. Green said:--The Episcopal Methodists are
gaining ground in many circuits. It would be of much service to us,
could we take them on board the old ship again. I learn from Brother
Richardson that they are anxious for this, and that Mr. Reynolds would
give up his claims, and many of their preachers would retire, could they
effect it. But in some parts of the Province the re-union would be
opposed; and some members have said, that they would even join the
English missionaries if we were to be united with them (the Episcopals).
You are a wise man, tell us what we should do. If we do not take steps
soon, it will be entirely too late. I understand that they talk of
having a Bishop elected soon,--and should Mr. Richardson or Mr. Smith be
appointed, it would add greatly to the influence of the party; and yet I
cannot now see what steps we could safely take, until we settle the
English Union question, for they would take advantage, I fear, of such a
reconciliation, to prejudice the old country members against us.
I wish also to obtain your views upon the propriety of petitioning the
Governor-General, at once, for a share of the public money granted for
the purchase of Sabbath-school books. The sum of £150 goes into the
hands of Dr. Strachan annually, for that purpose; and where is it? We
are never benefited a farthing by it! Could we obtain one-half, or even
one-third of the sum for our schools, it would be of great service to
them.[b]
[b] I have no copy of the reply sent to this letter. The letter itself,
however, shows what subjects were being discussed in Methodist circles
in 1842.
[131] Epochs of Canadian Methodism, pages 292-294.
[132] Dr. Thomas Bond, Editor of the New York _Christian Advocate_,
having suggested in December, 1842, the basis of settlement of the
differences between the English and Canadian Conferences, Rev. W. M.
Harvard wrote from Quebec to Dr. Bond, dissenting from his proposition.
Dr. Bond, in a letter to Dr. Ryerson, commenting on Mr. Harvard's
objections, thus refers to the Canadian Connexion:
The Canada Conference was sound in the faith, and well affected to
primitive Wesleyan discipline, and when it came of age, the Methodist
Episcopal Connexion allowed them, and aided them, to go to housekeeping
by themselves. We knew of no objection on either subject, when we, with
the kindest of feelings, have now hinted at the possibility of an
amicable arrangement between our British and Canadian brethren.
CHAPTER L.
1846-1854.
Miscellaneous Events and Incidents of 1846-1854.
After his return from England, Dr. Ryerson was engaged in the
preparation of his Report on a "System of Public Instruction for Upper
Canada," from which I have given extracts on page 368. In that report he
gave the broad outlines of his proposed scheme of education, and fully
explained the principles of the system which he proposed to found. He
also prepared a draft of a Bill designed to give effect to some of the
most pressing of his recommendations.
In a letter to a friend, dated 18th April, 1846, he said:--My report on
a system of public elementary instruction occupies nearly 400 pages of
foolscap. It will explain to all parties what I think, desire, and
intend. But I would not hesitate to resign my situation to-morrow, and
take my place and portion as a Methodist preacher, if I thought I could
be as useful in that position to the country at large. My travels have
added to my limited stock of knowledge, but they have not altered my
principles, or changed my feelings.
To another friend he wrote about the same time:--As the science of civil
government is the most uncertain of the uncertain sciences, if I should
fail in my exertions--if counteracting influences should intervene which
I cannot now foresee, and give success to the opposition against me, or
paralyze my influence--I would not remain in office a day, or would I
retain it any longer than I could render it a means of strength to our
system of government as well as of good to the country. I would rather
break stones on the street than be a dead weight to any government, or
in any community.
* * * * *
It may be of interest at the present time to learn what was Dr.
Ryerson's opinion of Mr. Gladstone in 1845. Writing in the _Guardian_ of
March 18th, 1846, in reply to strictures on that statesman, Dr. Ryerson
said:--During my late tour in Europe, I was one evening present at the
proceedings of the British House of Commons, and heard Mr. Gladstone,
the Secretary of State for the Colonies, avow a change in his opinions
in regard to ecclesiastical and educational matters. Sir Robert Peel's
Government had determined to establish several colleges in Ireland, not
connected with the Established Church. Mr Gladstone, in his book on
"Church and State," had maintained that the National Church was the only
medium through which the Legislature ought to instruct the nation in
every department of knowledge.... There was, therefore, a complete
antagonism between Sir Robert Peel's policy and Mr. Gladstone's book. On
the night I was present, Mr. Gladstone ... frankly stated that he had
written a book advocating an opposite policy to that which Her Majesty's
Government had deemed it their duty to pursue, in establishing secondary
colleges in Ireland; that further reflection and experience had
convinced him that his views were not correct; that he fully concurred
in the policy of the Government in respect to those colleges, and
should, as an individual member of Parliament, give it his support; but
that should he do so as a Minister of the Crown, after having publicly
avowed very different sentiments, he would not be in a position to place
his motives of action above suspicion. To exonerate himself, therefore,
from the imputation, or suspicion, of being actuated by a love of office
or power, to support, as a Minister of State, what he condemned as an
author, he resigned his office; and to do justice to his present
convictions of what he conceived the interests of Ireland demanded, he
avowed his change of opinion, and his determination to support the Irish
policy of Sir Robert Peel, with whom he declared he cordially concurred
in every measure which had been discussed in the Cabinet.
Sir Robert Peel followed in a beautiful and touching speech--appealing
to the sacrifice which the Cabinet had made in the loss of so able a
member as Mr. Gladstone, as a proof of the sincerity of the Government,
and the strength of its convictions in its Irish educational policy.
The conduct of those two distinguished statesmen (Dr. Ryerson adds)
towards each other on that occasion, presented one of the finest
examples of strong personal friendship between two public men that I
ever witnessed.
* * * * *
No man excelled Dr. Ryerson in his respect and love for his parents.
This was apparent from many incidents, and from the tone of his mother's
and father's letters to him, as given in this volume. He generally wrote
to them at the beginning of each year. His letter dated Toronto, 1st
January, 1847, is, however, the only one which I have. It is as
follows:--
My Dear and Most Venerated Parents,--
As heretofore, the first work of my pen is employed in presenting
to you my filial respects, and offering you my dutiful and
affectionate congratulations at the commencement of another
year,--lifting up, as I most earnestly do, my heart to Almighty
God, that, having brought you at so advanced an age to the
beginning of this year. He will make it the happiest, as well as
the holiest of your lives! I cannot but regard the lengthening out
of your earthly pilgrimage so much beyond the ordinary period of
human life--so much beyond what I expect to reach--as a special
means and call of God to become fully ripe for heaven. You stand a
long time on the margin of eternity--may that margin prove the
verge of eternal glory! As the body grows feeble, may the soul grow
strong! As the bodily sight becomes dim, may the heavenly vision
become brighter, and the heavenly aspirations and assurances
stronger! How great the privilege, and how soul-cheering the
thought, especially at the approach of death, to know that "your
life is hid with Christ in God." It is in safe keeping, and the
disclosure of it bye-and-bye will be glorious beyond conception;
for "when Christ, who is our life, shall appear, shall we then
appear like Him in glory." The sufferings of the present life,
however severe and protracted, are not worthy to be compared with
the glory which that life shall reveal. O, my dear parents, may
that glory be yours in all the fulness of its splendour, and in all
the perfection of its beatitudes!
I thankfully acknowledge the receipt of the two pairs of socks--the
last of the many like tokens of my Mother's affection, and the work
of her own hands. I scarcely ever put them on without a gush of
feeling which is not easily suppressed. They every day remind me of
the hand which sustained my infancy and guided my childhood, and
the heart which has crowned my life with its tenderest solicitudes,
and most fervent and, I believe, effectual prayers. Praised be God
above all earthly things, for such a Mother! May I not prove an
unfaithful son!
We are all well. I was at brother George's to-day. I hope to see
you in the course of the winter. Each of the family unite with me
in expressions of dutiful respect and affection to you. Please
remember me to all those who reside with you, and to all relatives,
and old acquaintances and neighbours.
With daily prayers at the family altar for your health, comfort and
happiness, and anxiously desirous of hearing from you, I am, my
most honoured Parents, your affectionate son,
Toronto, 2nd January, 1847.
Egerton Ryerson.
Between Dr. Ryerson and Rev. Peter Jones a life-long friendship existed.
In a note to Dr. Ryerson, dated Credit, Nov. 1st, 1847, Mr. Jones says:
I had the pleasure of receiving a set of your School Reports, for which
I thank you from the bottom of my heart, and I trust I shall receive
much valuable information which may prove beneficial in our Indian
School schemes.[133] My brother, I thank you for all the kindness you
have ever shown to me and my dear family, and I hope and pray that the
friendship which was formed between us many years ago will last for
ever. Pray for us. Rev. Peter Jones had been an inmate of Dr. Ryerson's
house during his last illness in 1856. As the crisis approached he
desired to return to his own home in Brantford. After he reached there,
Ven. Archdeacon Nelles visited him, and in a note to Dr. Ryerson, dated
25th June, said:--Mr. Jones has been gradually sinking ever since his
return from Toronto. He enjoys great peace of mind, and I believe truly
trusts on that Saviour whom he has so often pointed out to others as the
only refuge and hope of poor sinners. May my last end be like his.
* * * * *
After the change of administration, consequent on the result of the
recent elections, it was confidently stated that Dr. Ryerson would be
removed from office. Having written to his brother John on the subject,
his brother replied, on the 9th of February, 1847, as follows: It is
quite certain that combined and powerful efforts are being made against
you by certain parties, no doubt with a determination to destroy you as
a public man, if they can. The feeling of the "radical" party is most
inveterate. They are determined, by hook or by crook, to turn you out of
the office of Chief Superintendent of Education. All the stir among the
District Councils, and about the school law, etc., are but the schemes
and measures set on foot by the party in power for the purpose of
compassing the great object in view of ousting the "Superintendent of
Education."
* * * * *
In a letter which I received from Dr. Ryerson, while at the Belleville
Conference, dated June 13th, 1848, he said:--Every distinction has been
shown me in the appointments and arrangements of the Conference; and I
believe the great body of the preachers will sustain me in all future
contingencies.
The Conference thus far has been the most delightful I ever attended. I
took the evening service of yesterday, and preached with considerable
freedom to an immense congregation; text, John xvii. 17--first part of
verse.
There has been an advancement in every department of the interests of
our Church during the year. This is very encouraging, and a ground of
special thankfulness.
Judge then of Dr. Ryerson's surprise and of mine on seeing the following
paragraph in the _Globe_ newspaper, about the same time:
It is said that Egerton Ryerson is trying to get the Methodist
Conference to deprive him of his clerical standing, because of his
holding a permanent Government situation.
In the course of his reply, Dr. Ryerson said:--When the situation in
connection with elementary education was offered to me, in February,
1844, before replying to the offer, I laid the letter containing it
before the large Executive Committee of the Wesleyan Conference, and was
authorized by that disinterested body to accept of the appointment.
When, in the latter part of the May following, I placed the appointment
again at the disposal of the Government, as absolutely as if no offer
had ever been made or accepted, and determined in June not to accept it
under any circumstances, should the offer again be made, a written
address was got up to me, numerously signed by the Wesleyan ministers of
the Conference which assembled that month, requesting me not to refuse
it, should the offer be again made; and it is to the influence of that
judgment, in which I confided more than in my own feelings, that the
_Globe_ and some other papers are indebted for the opportunity and
privilege of abusing me in my present position these last four years.
Sir, the Wesleyan Conference is as incapable of entertaining such a
proposition as you have attributed to me, as I am indisposed to make it;
and, though I am not insensible to the honour and importance of my
educational office, I hold it as in all respects consistent with my
relations and obligations to the Church, through whose instrumentality I
have received infinitely greater blessings than it is in the power of
any civil government to bestow.
At the proper time I shall be prepared to show, that I was personally as
disinterested (whether right or wrong) in what I wrote in 1844, as in
what I wrote in 1838 and 1839 in connection with the names of Marshall
S. Bidwell and J. S. Howard, Esquires. I have ever maintained since 1827
what appeared to me right and important principles, regardless of man in
high or low places, and favour or oppose what party it might. I have
never borrowed my doctrines from the conclaves or councils of party, nor
bowed my neck to its yoke; nor have I made my office subservient to its
interests in any shape or form, but to the interest of the country at
large, so far as in my power, irrespective of sect or party. I should
contemn myself if I could perform one act or say one word to court party
favour, or avert party vengeance, if such exists. I shall do as I have
done, endeavour faithfully to perform the duties and fulfil the trusts
imposed upon me, and leave the future, as well as the past, to the
judgement of my native country, for the equal rights of all classes of
whose inhabitants I contended in "perilous times," and for years before
the political existence of the chief public men of any party in Canada,
with the exception of the Hon. William Morris.
The question, incidentally raised by the _Globe_ newspaper, after the
Conference of 1848, as to Dr. Ryerson's retaining a ministerial
_status_, while holding and administering a civil office was brought up
at the next Conference, held at Hamilton, in June, 1849. In a letter to
me from the Conference, dated 11th of the month, he said:--I brought my
position before the Conference in consequence of a remark from one of
the preachers, saying, while Mr. Playter's case was under consideration,
"that there was a general opposition among the members of the
Conference, occupying the position that Mr. Playter did, or a civil
situation." Several of the senior members of the Conference spoke in a
very complimentary way respecting me; and a strong satisfaction was
expressed from all parts of the Conference with my position--the manner
in which I had filled it, and consulted the interests of the
Church--expressing their earnest desire that I would continue in it.
In a letter to Dr. Ryerson from his brother, Rev. E. M. Ryerson, from
Brantford, on July 2nd, 1848, it would appear, from the foregoing, that
some hostile movement was being generally formed against him. His
brother said:--I found upon my return from Conference to Brantford that
the general topic of conversation was your dismissal from your present
office. When I told them it was not the case, some rejoiced, while
silent grief and disappointment were visible on the countenances of
others.
* * * * *
Dr. Ryerson having been called to Montreal on educational matters, in
April, 1849, wrote a letter to me from that city, dated 27th of the
month, in which he gave a graphic account of the state of the city
during the crisis at that time:--You may well imagine my surprise and
regret, on reaching Lachine yesterday, to learn that the Parliament
House had been burnt, together with a noble library of 25,000 volumes,
containing records of valuable books which can never be replaced. On
arriving in Montreal, I found nothing but confusion and excitement,
which, instead of subsiding, are increasing, and it is apprehended that
to-morrow will be a more serious day than any that has preceded it.
Yesterday, the court of the Government House was filled with soldiers,
while the street in front of it was crowded with a multitude, who
saluted every appearance of any members of the Executive Council, or any
of their Parliamentary supporters with hisses and groans. This continued
from one o'clock until eight or nine o'clock in the evening. Mr.
Lafontaine came out in care of Colonel Antrobus and soldiers, to get
into a cab, and he was pelted with eggs and stones. Not one of the
Ministers can walk the streets. Last night Mr. Lafontaine's house was
sacked, and his library destroyed; and Mr. Hincks' house was also
sacked, but he had removed nearly all of his furniture, as well as his
family. The scene of to-day was similar to that of yesterday. This
afternoon a meeting of several thousands of persons was held in the
Champs de Mars. I heard some of the speeches. They were moderate in
tone, but the feelings of disgust and contempt for Lord Elgin exceed all
conception. There have been two vast assemblages this evening--the one
French, the other British--in different parts of the city. Companies of
soldiers have been stationed in the streets between them, preventing
persons going from one party to the other. I have heard their shoutings
since I commenced this letter.
The next day Dr. Ryerson wrote to me again to say:--Nothing has occurred
in the city since last night, worth noticing. Soldiers meet you at every
turn almost. Two companies of soldiers were stationed to-day in the
building in which the Legislative Assembly met. There was a long debate
on the causes of the recent disturbances, and strong protestations from
all sides of the House against "annexation."
* * * * *
An opportunity to appoint Hon. M. S. Bidwell to the Bench in Upper
Canada having occurred, Dr. Ryerson, on the 3rd September, 1849,
addressed the following letter to Hon. Robert Baldwin, urging the
appointment:--There is one subject I take the liberty of mentioning,
although it is contrary to my practice to interfere in any matter of the
kind; but the peculiarity of it may excuse me on the present occasion. I
allude to the appointment of Mr. Bidwell as one of the new judges in
Upper Canada. The recent history of Europe affords many illustrations of
circumstances being seized upon by despots to compel the departure of
valuable and dreaded men from their own country. You know that it was
under such circumstances that Mr. Bidwell was compelled to leave Canada.
You know that it was the order of the Imperial Government to elevate Mr.
Bidwell to the Bench, that prompted Sir Francis Head to adopt the
course towards him that he did. You know, likewise, how long, and
faithfully, and ably, Mr. Bidwell laboured to promote the principles of
civil and religious liberty which are now established in Upper Canada;
and that at a time when great responsibility and obloquy attached to
such advocacy. Mr. Bidwell was the author, as well as the able advocate
of the laws by which the religious denominations in Upper Canada hold
Church property, and by which their ministers solemnize matrimony. I
believe he has never altogether abandoned the hope of returning to
Canada; but I believe he has felt that he was entitled to the offer of
that position, which the Home Government contemplated conferring upon
him in 1837. I felt it too delicate a question to propose to Mr. Bidwell
when I saw him the other day; but my friend Mr. Francis Hall, of the New
York _Commercial Advertiser_ (who sees and converses with him every
week), expressed his full conviction that Mr. Bidwell would accept a
Judgeship in Upper Canada--that Mr. Bidwell had constantly taken the
Canadian Law Reports, and procured the Canadian and English Statutes,
and kept up his reading of them as carefully as if he had lived in
Canada. I believe the appointment of Mr. Bidwell would be an honour to
the Canadian Bench, and an act of moral and political gratitude most
honourable to any party, and of great value to Upper Canada. You are
aware of the reasons for which I feel a deep interest in this subject,
and which will, I trust, excuse in your mind the liberty I
take--believing, as I do, that it will be as grateful to your feelings
as it will be noble in your character, to remember a man to whom our
common country is so much indebted.
To this letter Mr. Baldwin replied, on the 20th September
With respect to the principal object of your letter, you need not,
I assure you, have made any excuse for introducing it, even
independently of the part taken by you formerly with reference to
the case of my friend Mr. Bidwell, and which alone would give you a
just claim to address me. I can never feel any suggestion, no
matter from what quarter, having his good for its object, to be an
intrusion on me, and be assured that nothing could have afforded me
greater pleasure than to have had it in my power to have advised
his appointment to the Bench. Nor have I ever ceased to do all that
I could with propriety to get him to put himself in the position
which might lead to such a result. You are aware of the steps I
took in 1843 to have his pledge to Sir Francis Head cancelled. I
sent you, I think, the correspondence respecting it. (See page
308.) On that being done, I wrote him a letter of which I preserved
a copy, from which I send you one. By this you will see how
earnestly I pressed him to return then. Had he come in, as I
suggested, it was my intention to have offered him the Crown
business on whichever of the Circuits he might have chosen. I have
subsequently, as often as I felt I dared to do so, urged his
return. But it has been felt impossible, until he had placed
himself in the position of a practitioner, as formerly, at our own,
and not at a foreign, Bar, to advise his appointment to the Bench
of the Province. For myself, although friendship might have led me
to have overlooked, or overstepped, this difficulty, my judgment,
when appealed to, forced me to admit, with my colleagues, that the
objection was insuperable.
I am not acquainted with the income he realizes from his profession
in New York, but I doubt not it is much beyond what could be
obtained in Toronto. Still, if he really does wish to return to
Canada, the time is most propitious as far as professional
prospects are concerned. Mr. Sullivan, Mr. Blake, and Mr. Esten
being taken from the Bar leaves a space to be filled that, I should
say, offers the best possible opening.
Had Mr. Bidwell been in his proper professional position here when
the Government was called upon to appoint to the places now filled,
or on the eve of being filled, by those gentlemen, there is not one
of those high judicial positions to which it would not have been at
once a pride and a pleasure both to myself and my colleagues to
have advised his appointment. Vice-Chancellor Jameson's health,
too, will probably ere long lead to his retirement. When that time
arrives, will our friend's continued absence be still a barrier to
the gratification of our wishes?
If the affairs of the Province shall be then conducted by the same
Councils as now sway them, I may say, with almost the same
confidence of that future as I do of the past, that it will be the
only obstacle to such gratification. I should add, too, that last
winter one of my colleagues who, as well as myself, has always
taken a particular interest in Mr. Bidwell's return to the
Province, wrote to him, informing him of the Judiciary measures
intended to be introduced by the Administration, and giving him to
understand as distinctly as could properly be done, that, if he had
returned to this country when those measures were to go into
operation, it would afford us and our colleagues the greatest
pleasure to have it in our power to advise his being placed in a
situation alike agreeable to his tastes, deserving of his talents,
and satisfactory to the public at large. And though, when he wrote
first, he expressed some doubt of the Bills becoming law during the
last session, yet shortly after, when it was felt expedient to
carry them through, he again wrote to inform Mr. Bidwell that this
would be done if the sanction of Parliament was obtained to the
measures. Whether, in my letters to Mr. Bidwell, on the subject of
his return, I have appeared to him not to speak with sufficient
warmth, I know not. It has, at all events, not been from
indifference to the object. I certainly have felt that, in the
uncertainty that must for the future attach to political power,
there was a great responsibility in urging one in good business
elsewhere to leave that and throw his fortunes again in with us
here. I am naturally cautious, and my caution may have led me to
speak less warmly than I felt, particularly when I found my first
appeals unsuccessful. But he ought, and I hope, does, appreciate my
motives. It is true his ear may be poisoned by having had unjust
suspicions poured into it. I know I have never afforded any just
grounds for such suspicions, and I feel confident that his generous
nature would have been far above conceiving any such, had they not
been suggested by others. I am, however, perhaps doing wrong. It
may be that none such have ever been thought of by anyone. I trust
it is so. If otherwise, it is but just to myself to say that they
are the foulest, basest and most malignant that mortal ever
breathed.
Rev. Dr. Bangs attended the Conference at Brockville in 1850, as a
delegate from the American General Conference. On his return to New York
he wrote a letter to Dr. Ryerson on the 3rd July:--
I think my trip to Canada was one of the most pleasant tours I ever
made, and shall reflect upon it with peculiar delight. I have
commenced, as you will perceive by the _Christian Advocate_, to
give the public an account of my visit to your Conference.
The pleasure we enjoyed in our visit to Canada, and especially your
hospitality at Toronto, makes us feel truly thankful to God for
such hallowed friendships, and reminds us more forcibly than ever
of that eternal union which the spirits shall enjoy in a future
world.
Dr. Ryerson made a second educational trip to Europe in October, 1850.
Writing to me from London on the 8th November, he said:--The day before
yesterday, I left Lord Elgin's note of introduction, with my card, at
the Colonial Office; the same evening I received a note, appointing
yesterday for an interview. Mr. (afterwards Sir B.) Hawes, the
Under-Secretary was present. It was most agreeable and gratifying. Lord
Grey seemed much delighted with what had been done, educationally, in
Upper Canada; and of which he was until then, entirely ignorant. Mr.
Hawes asked if I had published any report of my tour in Europe, or the
results of it; and as I happened to have a copy of each of the documents
I brought with me, I presented Lord Grey with copies of them. He seemed
surprised that he had not seen them before, and said he must write to
Lord Elgin to send him a copy of each of them for the office. The
conversation extended to the United States--our system of Government as
contrasted with theirs, etc. Lord Grey and Mr. Hawes appeared
entertained and pleased. His Lordship offered to aid me in any way, in
his power, that I might devise; and asked me to dine with him.
Last evening, I received from Lord Grey letters of introduction to the
Marquis of Lansdowne (President of the Privy Council Committee of
Education) to the Rt. Hon. T. B. Macaulay, and Mr. Lingard, successor of
Sir J. P. Kay Shuttleworth, and an unsealed letter of introduction from
Mr. Hawes, to Sir Henry Ellis, Librarian of the British Museum, in which
he said: This will be presented to you by Dr. Ryerson, of Canada, who
has rendered great services to the cause of education, not only by his
writings, but by his great exertions.
Both Lord Grey and Mr. Hawes seemed to know something about me; and the
above copy of note shows the spirit in which they are desirous of aiding
me. I shall now commence my work here in good earnest.
Lord Grey introduced the subject of the Toronto University, and of the
Bishop of Toronto's Mission to this country, and when he found that I
had a copy of the amended University Bill, and the proceedings of the
Wesleyan Conference on the subject, he requested them for perusal. In my
next interview with His Lordship I shall introduce the subject of the
clergy reserves.
I have been very cordially received at the Wesleyan Mission House. I was
affected to see Dr. Bunting's great bodily weakness, and surprised to
see his intellect clear, quick, and powerful as ever. When he walks, he
can only step about six inches at a time. I expect to hear him on Sunday
morning, in the same Chapel (Spitalfields Chapel--a once French church,
in which the eloquent Saurin has preached, and made a collection for the
refugee Huguenots to the amount of £3,000) in which I preached last
Sunday, and aided in administering the Lord's Supper.
On the 10th January, 1851, Dr. Ryerson addressed the following note to
Sir Benjamin Hawes, from Paris: I saw Cardinal Wiseman on the strength
of your kind note of introduction. He appeared to be pleased with the
compliment which my call involved--invited me to hospitalities which I
think it would not be prudent for me to accept, and promised to have a
list of popular (but not denominational) reading books prepared, and the
books selected for my inspection on my return to London.
I most fervently hope that you will be prepared to bring before
Parliament, early in the approaching session, a Bill to settle the
Canadian clergy reserve question--the only remaining obstacle to the
social harmony of Canada, and to its affectionate and permanent union
with the Mother Country.
* * * * *
In 1852, the new buildings of the Education Department and Normal
School, as shown in the accompanying engravings were completed. For Dr.
Ryerson's Office see page 422.
Being in England in 1853, Dr. Ryerson wrote to me there:--
I was glad to learn that Lord Elgin was to go in the same steamship
with you from Boston. I have no doubt it will have proved
interesting to him as well as to you, and perhaps useful to you. I
miss you very much from the office, but I do not like to employ any
more aid without sanction of the Government, though I could get no
one to take your place. I would wish you to write me what Lord
Elgin may have thought or said as to our doings and plans of
proceeding. If the Library plan succeeds, it will achieve noble
results.[134] I feel that our success and happiness in the
Department are inseparably united.
In 1854 Dr. Ryerson was appointed a member of Commission to enquire into
matters connected with King's College, Fredericton, N.B. His
fellow-commissioners were Hon. J. H. Gray, Dr. Dawson, Hon. J. S.
Saunders, and Hon. James Brown. Mr. Grey the Chairman, in transmitting
the Report of the Commission to the Provincial Secretary of New
Brunswick, said:--
I beg to express, with the full conscience of my
fellow-commissioners, our acknowledgment of the very valuable
assistance offered us by Dr. Ryerson. His great experience, and
unquestioned proficiency in all subjects connected with Education,
justly entitles his opinions to great weight.
FOOTNOTES:
[133] Being a member of the Conference Committee appointed to confer
with the Government on the establishment of Manual Labour Schools for
the Indians, Rev. Peter Jones, in writing to Dr. Ryerson from the
Credit, on the subject, in September, 1844, said:--You will be glad to
see that our Indian brethren have subscribed liberally, which shews
their ardent desire to have Manual Labour Schools established amongst
them. We forwarded a copy to the Governor-General, and His Excellency
was pleased to approve of the liberality of the Indian tribes. From the
manner in which His Excellency has always spoken of Indian Manual Labour
Schools, I am sure that he will take great pleasure in aiding their
establishment. As you have access to the ears of our Great Father at
Montreal, may I beg the favour of your explaining to him the object of
my visit to England, and the necessity of His Excellency's sanctioning
the payment of my expenses. As I intend to visit England for the purpose
of augmenting the funds of the Manual Labour Schools, I think at least
my expenses should be paid out of the Indian subscriptions of $400.
[134] Lord Elgin always referred to Dr. Ryerson's library scheme in his
educational addresses, as the "Crown and Glory of the Institutions of
the Province."
[Illustration: The Ontario Education Department, and Normal and Model
Schools, Erected 1851.]
[Illustration: Education Department, showing Dr. Ryerson's Office for 25
Years, in the S. W. Angle of the Main Building in Front.]
CHAPTER LI.
1849.
The Bible in the Ontario Public Schools.
Early in 1849 an important crisis occurred in the history of our Public
School system, the evil effects of which were only prevented by the
prompt and emphatic protest on the part of Dr. Ryerson, and the equally
prompt measures taken by Hon. Robert Baldwin in the matter. The event to
which I refer was the hurried passage of a revolutionary School Bill at
the end of a Session of Parliament by parties hostile to Dr. Ryerson--a
Bill the effect of which would have been the exclusion of the Bible and
religious teaching and influence from our Public Schools. In regard to
that calamitous event, Dr. Ryerson stated that within three hours of
learning that such a Bill was law he informed Mr. Baldwin that the
office of Chief Superintendent of Education was at his disposal.
I was absent from Toronto at this time. Dr. Ryerson therefore wrote me a
letter on the subject, dated December, 1849, in which he said:--I am
happy to say the scandalous School Bill of last session is upset. The
members of the Government (including the Governor-General) have examined
my letter to Mr. Baldwin, of July last, and have come entirely into my
views. Mr. Malcolm Cameron is also out of office, and is striving to
create opposition against his former colleagues. Some of the extreme
radical papers (_Examiner_, _Mirror_, _Canada Christian Advocate_,
_Provincialist_, &c.,) all state that I had tendered my resignation, and
had been persuaded by one or two members of the Government to withdraw
it, and they speak piteously of the Government having succumbed to me.
The _Canada Christian Advocate_ says I have watched my opportunity to
get "Mr. Baldwin and the Government under my thumb." I have been
permitted to publish the correspondence of July last, and it has placed
me in this new and proud position. I thank God for His goodness in thus
opening before me a wider field of usefulness than ever, and for sealing
at so early a period, with His approbation, adherence to great
principles of Christian truth and social advancement, irrespective of
men or parties. I shall commence the New Year with new courage and
hope, and I am anxious to see you that we may together devise and
prosecute the best means to promote our great work.
The circumstances under which this abortive School Bill, as it proved,
of 1849, was passed, is thus described by Dr. Ryerson in a letter
written ten years afterwards (in 1859):--
From 1846 to 1849 a host of scribblers and would-be school legislators
appeared, led on by the _Globe_ newspaper. It was represented that I had
plotted a Prussian school despotism for free Canada, and that I was
forcing upon the country a system in which the last spark of Canadian
liberty would be extinguished, and Canadian youth would be educated as
slaves. Hon. Malcolm Cameron, with less knowledge and less experience
than he has now, was astounded at these "awful disclosures," and was
dazzled by the theories proposed to rid the country of the enslaving
elements of my Prussian school system. Mr. Cameron was at length
appointed to office; and he thought I ought to be walked out of the
office. Messrs. Baldwin and Hincks (as I have understood), thought I
should be judged officially for my official acts, and that, thus judged,
I had done nothing worthy of evil treatment. The party hostile to me
then thought that, as I could not be turned out of office by direct
dismissal, I might be shuffled out by legislation; and a School Bill was
prepared for that purpose. That Bill contained many good, but more bad
provisions, and worse omissions, but of which only a man who had studied
the question, or rather science, of school legislation could fully
judge. Mr. Cameron was selected to submit it to his colleagues, and get
it through Parliament. He executed his task with his characteristic
adroitness and energy. Mr. Hincks never read the Bill, and had left for
England before it passed. Mr. Baldwin, amid the smoking ruins of a
Parliament House and national library, looked over it, and thought from
the representations given him of its popular objects, and a glance at
the synopsis of its provisions, that it might be an improvement on the
then existing law, while the passing of it would gratify many of his
friends. On examining the Bill, I wrote down my objections to it, and
laid them before the Government, and proceeded to Montreal to press them
in person. I left Montreal in April, 1849, with the expectation that the
Bill would be dropped, or essentially mended. Neither was done; the Bill
was passed in the ordinary manner of passing bills during the last few
hours of the Session; and within three hours of learning that the Bill
was law, I informed Mr. Baldwin that my office was at his disposal, for
I never would administer that law.
As to the effect of Mr. Cameron's Bill on Dr. Ryerson's future, he
said:--The new Bill on its coming into operation, leaves me but one
course to pursue. The character and tendency of the Bill clearly is to
compel me to relinquish office, or virtually abandon principles and
provisions [in regard to the Bible in the Schools] which I have
advocated as of great and vital importance, and become a party to my own
personal humiliation and degradation--thus justly exposing myself to the
suspicion and imputation of mean and mercenary conduct. I can readily
retire from office, and do much more if necessary, for the maintenance
of what I believe to be vital to the moral and educational interests of
my native country; but I can never knowingly be a party to my own
humiliation and debasement. I regret that an unprecedented mode of
legislation has been resorted to to gratify the feelings of personal
envy and hostility. I regard it as a virtual vindication of myself
against oft-repeated allegations, that it was felt I could not be
reached by the usual straightforward administration of Government.
Lately, in the English House of Lords, the Marquis of Lansdowne stated,
that Mr. Lafontaine had returned to Canada, and boldly challenged
inquiry into any of the allegations against him in reference to past
years. I have repeatedly done the same. No such inquiry has been granted
or instituted. Yet I am not only pursued by the base calumnies of
certain persons and papers, professing to support and enjoy the
confidence of the Government, but legislation is resorted to, and new
provisions introduced at the last hour of the Session, to deal out upon
me the long meditated blows of unscrupulous envy and animosity. But I
deeply regret that the blows, which will fall comparatively light upon
me, will fall with much greater weight, and more serious consequences,
upon the youth of the land, and its future moral and educational
interests.... Acting, as I hope I do, upon Christian and public grounds,
I should not feel myself justified in withdrawing from a work in
consequence of personal discourtesy and ill-treatment, or a reduction of
means of support and usefulness. But when I see the fruits of four
years' anxious labours, in a single blast scattered to the winds, and
have no satisfactory ground of hope that such will not be the fate of
another four years' labour; when I see the foundations of great
principles, which, after extensive enquiry and long deliberation, I have
endeavoured to lay, torn up and thrown aside as worthless rubbish; when
I see myself deprived of the protection and advantage of the application
of the principle of responsible government as applied to every other
head of a Department, and made the subordinate agent of a Board which I
have originated, and the members of which I have had the honour to
recommend for appointment; when I see myself officially severed from a
Normal School Institution which I have devised, and every feature and
detail of which are universally commended, even to the individual
capacities of the masters whom I have sought out and recommended; when I
see myself placed in a position, to an entirely novel system of
education at large, in which I can either burrow in inactivity or labour
with little hope of success; when I find myself placed in such
circumstances, I cannot hesitate as to the course of duty, as well as
the obligations of honour and self-respect.... I think it is my right,
and only frank and respectful, on the earliest occasion to state, in
respect to my own humble labours, whether I can serve on terms and
principles and conditions so different from those under which I have, up
to the present time, acted; though I cannot, without deep regret and
emotion, contemplate the loss of so much time and labour, and find
myself impelled to abandon a work on which I had set my heart, and to
qualify myself for which I have devoted four of the most matured years
of my life.
Having now fulfilled my promise--to communicate to you, in writing, my
views on this important and extensive subject--I leave the whole
question in your hands.
The result of this letter was, the suspension and abandonment of the Act
of 1849, and the preparation and passing of the Act of 1850.
Now Mr. Cameron might naturally feel deeply at the repeal of his own Act
without a trial; but after he had time for further examination and
reflection, and a more thorough knowledge of the nature and working of
the system I was endeavouring to establish, I believe no man in Canada
more sincerely rejoiced than Mr. Cameron at the repeal of the Act of
1849, and no man has more cordially supported the present system, or
more frankly and earnestly commended the course I have pursued.[135]
The letter to Mr. Baldwin was written on the 14th July, 1849. Speaking
of it, Dr. Ryerson said:--
In the former part of that letter I stated the circumstances under which
the Act of 1849 had passed, and the fact that my remonstrance against it
had not been even read. I then stated what I considered insuperable
objections to it. I will quote part of my eighth and tenth
objections:--the former relating to the exclusion of ministers as
school visitors--the latter relating to the exclusion from the schools
of the Bible and books containing religious instruction. They are as
follows:--
Another feature of the new Bill is that which precludes Ministers
of Religion, Magistrates, and Councillors, from acting as school
visitors, a provision of the present Act to which I have heard no
objection from any quarter, and from which signal benefits to the
schools have already resulted. Not only is this provision retained
in the School Act for Lower Canada, but Clergymen--and Clergymen
alone--are there authorized to select all the school books relating
to "religion and morals" for the children of their respective
persuasions. But in Upper Canada, where the great majority of the
people and Clergy are Protestant, the provision of the present Act
authorizing Clergymen to act as School Visitors (and that without
any power to interfere in school regulations or books) is repealed.
Under the new Bill, the Ministers of religion cannot, therefore,
visit the schools as a matter of right, or in their character as
Ministers, but as private individuals, and by the permission of the
teacher at his pleasure. The repeal of the provision under which
Clergymen of the several religious persuasions have acted as
visitors, is, of course, a virtual condemnation of their acting in
that capacity. When thus denuded by law of his official character
in respect to the schools, of course no Clergyman would so far
sanction his own legislative degradation as to go into a school by
suffrance in an unministerial character.... The character and
tendency of such a change in connection with the Protestant
religion of Upper Canada, in contrast with a directly opposite
provision in connection with the Roman Catholic Religion of Lower
Canada, must be obvious to every reflecting person.
To the school-visiting feature of the present system I attach great
importance as a means of ultimately concentrating in behalf of the
schools the influence and sympathies of all religious persuasions,
and the leading men of the country. The success of it, thus far,
has exceeded my most sanguine expectations; the visits of Clergy
alone during the last year being an average of more than five
visits for each Clergyman in Upper Canada. From such a beginning
what may not be anticipated in future years, when information shall
become more general, and an interest in the schools more generally
excited. And who can estimate the benefits, religiously, socially,
educationally, and even politically, of Ministers of various
religious persuasions meeting together at quarterly school
examinations, and other occasions, on common and patriotic ground,
and becoming interested and united in the great work of advancing
the education of the young.
The last feature of the new Bill on which I will remark, is that
which proscribes from the Schools all books containing
"controverted theological dogmas or doctrines." [Under a legal
provision containing these words, the Bible has been ruled out of
schools in the State of New York.] I doubt whether this provision
of the Act harmonizes with the Christian feelings of members of the
Government; but it is needless to enquire what were the intentions
which dictated this extraordinary provision, since construction of
an Act of Parliament depends upon the language of the Act itself,
and not upon the intentions of its framers. The effect of such a
provision is to exclude every kind of book containing religious
truth, even every version of the Holy Scriptures themselves; for
the Protestant version of them contains "theological doctrine"
controverted by the Roman Catholic; and the Douay version of them
contains "theological dogmas" controverted by the Protestant. The
"theological doctrine" of miracles in Paley's Evidences of
Christianity is "controverted" by the disciples of Hume. Several of
the "theological doctrines" in Paley's Moral Philosophy are also
"controverted;" and indeed there is not a single doctrine of
Christianity which is not controverted by some party or other. The
whole series of Irish National Readers must be proscribed as
containing "controverted theological doctrines;" since, as the
Commissioners state, these books are pervaded by the principles and
spirit of Christianity, though free from any tincture of
sectarianism.
I think there is too little Christianity in our schools, instead of
too much; and that the united efforts of all Christian men should
be to introduce more, instead of excluding what little there is.
I have not assumed it to be the duty, or even constitutional right
of the Government, to compel any thing in respect either to
religious books or religious instruction, but to recommend the
local Trustees to do so, and to provide powers and facilities to
enable them to do so within the wise restriction imposed by law. I
have respected the rights and scruples of the Roman Catholic as
well as those of the Protestant.
By some I have been accused of having too friendly a feeling
towards the Roman Catholics; but while I would do nothing to
infringe the rights and feelings of Roman Catholics, I cannot be a
party to depriving Protestants of the Text-book of their faith--the
choicest patrimony bequeathed by their forefathers, and the noblest
birthright of their children. It affords me pleasure to record the
fact--and the circumstance shows the care and fairness with which I
have acted on this subject--that before adopting the Section in the
printed Forms and Regulations on the "Constitution and Government
of the Schools in respect to Religious Instruction," I submitted
it, among others, to the late lamented Roman Catholic Bishop Power,
who, after examining it, said, [he could not approve of it upon
principle, but] he would not object to it, as Roman Catholics were
fully protected in their rights and views, and as he did not wish
to interfere with Protestants in the fullest exercise of their
rights and views.
It will be seen that New England or Irish National School advocates
of a system of mixed schools did not maintain that the Scriptures
and all religious instruction should be excluded from the schools,
but that the peculiarities of sectarianism were no essential part
of religious instruction in the schools, and that the essential
elements and truths and morals of Christianity could be provided
for and taught without a single bitter element of sectarianism. The
advocates of public schools meet the advocates of sectarian
schools, not by denying the connection between Christianity and
education, but by denying the connection between sectarianism--by
comprehending Christianity in the system, and only rejecting
sectarianism from it. The same, I think, is our safety and our
duty....
Dr. Ryerson concludes this part of his letter with these emphatic words:
Be assured that no system of popular education will flourish in a
country which does violence to the religious sentiments and feelings of
the Churches of that country. Be assured, that every such system will
droop and wither which does not take root in the Christian and patriotic
sympathies of the people--which does not command the respect and
confidence of the several religious persuasions, both ministers and
laity--for these in fact make up the aggregate of the Christianity of
the country. The cold calculations of unchristianized selfishness will
never sustain a school system. And if you will not embrace Christianity
in your school system, you will soon find that Christian persuasions
will soon commence establishing schools of their own; and I think they
ought to do so, and I should feel that I was performing an imperative
duty in urging them to do so. But if you wish to secure the co-operation
of the ministers and members of all religious persuasions, leave out of
your system the points wherein they differ, and boldly and avowedly
provide facilities for the inculcation of what they hold in common and
what they value most, and that is what the best interests of a country
require.
Speaking in a subsequent letter of another feature of this question of
the Bible in schools, Dr. Ryerson says: The principal opposition which,
in 1846 and for several years afterwards, I encountered was that I did
not make the use of the Bible compulsory in the schools, but simply
recognized the right of Protestants to use it in the school (not as an
ordinary reading book, as it was not given to teach us how to read, but
to teach us the way to Heaven), as a book of religious instruction,
without the right or the power of compelling any others to use it. The
recognition of the right has been maintained inviolate to the present
time; facilities for the exercise of it have been provided, and
recommendations for that purpose have been given, but no compulsory
authority assumed, or right of compulsion acknowledged; and the
religious exercises in each school have been left to the decision of the
authorities of such school, and the religious instruction of each child
has always been under the absolute authority of the parents or guardian
of each child.... Now many a parent may not exercise the right of using
the Bible as a text-book of religious instruction for his child in
school, but would even such parent (much less every Protestant parent)
be willing to be deprived of that right?
To the objection that the Bible is "often read in a formal and
perfunctory manner without any real benefit being derived from it by the
pupils," Dr. Ryerson replied: Is not the Bible often read in the family,
and even in the Church, "in a formal and perfunctory manner," without
any benefit to either reader or hearers: but should we, therefore, take
away even "the abstract right of reading the Bible" in the family and in
the Church?
To the objection urged against the reading of the Bible in the schools
because "a majority of the teachers are utterly unfit to give religious
instruction," Dr. Ryerson replied: The reading of the Bible and giving
religious instruction from it are two very different things. The
question is not the competency of teachers to give religious
instruction, but the right of a Protestant to the reading of the Bible
by his child in the school as a text-book of religious instruction. That
right I hold to be sacred and divine.
To a rejoinder that "the cry for the Bible in the schools is a sham,"
Dr. Ryerson thus replies: Apart from religious instruction, apart from
even the reading of the Bible in the schools, the right of having it
there--its very presence there--is not "a sham," but a sign, a symbol of
potent significance. The sign of the Cross ... is not a "sham," but a
symbol precious to the hearts of hundreds of thousands of our brethren;
the coat of arms which stands at the head of all royal patents, nor the
sparkling crown which encircles the brow of royalty, is not "a sham,"
but a symbol which speaks more than words to every British heart; the
standard that waves at the head of the regiment, nor the flag that
floats at the ship's masthead is not "a sham," but a symbol that nerves
the soldier and the sailor to duty and to victory. So the Bible is not
"a sham," but a symbol of right and liberty dear to the heart of every
Protestant freeman, to every lover of civil and religious liberty--a
standard of truth and morals, the foundation of Protestant faith, and
the rule of Protestant morals; and "the cry" for the Bible in the
schools is not a "sham," but a felt necessity of the religious
instructor, whether he be the teacher or a visiting superintendent or
clergyman,--is the birthright of the Protestant child, and the
inalienable right of the Protestant parent....
No man attaches more importance than I do to secular education and
knowledge, and few men have laboured more to provide for the teaching
and diffusion of every branch of it; yet, so far am I from ignoring the
Bible, even in an intellectual point of view, that I hesitate not to
say, in the language of the eloquent Melville, that--
Whilst every stripling is boasting that a great enlargement of mind
is coming on the nation, through the pouring into all its dwellings
a tide of general information, it is right to uphold the forgotten
position, that in caring for man as an immortal being, God cared
for him as an intellectual, and that if the Bible were but read by
our artizans and our peasantry, we should be surrounded by a far
more enlightened and intelligent population, than will appear to
this land, when the school-master, with his countless magazines,
shall have gone through it, in its length and its breadth.
With a view to supply an omission, and to provide a Manual on Christian
Morals for the schools, Dr. Ryerson, in 1871, prepared a little work,
entitled _First Lessons in Christian Morals_. This work was recommended
by the Council of Public Instruction for use in schools. It was objected
to by the _Globe_ newspaper on several grounds. To each of these
objections Dr. Ryerson replied. The first and second objections referred
to alleged errors and defects in style. In a letter on the subject,
written in April, 1872, Dr. Ryerson said:--
Your third objection is against any book of religious instruction being
recommended for use in the public schools. To this objection I reply,
firstly, that the want of such a book has been not only felt, but
expressed, from different quarters. Secondly, the Irish National Board
have not only books on this subject, in their authorized list of school
text books, but the Council of Public Instruction has long authorized
three of them; each of which contains more reading than any one book of
mine. Thirdly, in the Toronto University College, not only is Paley's
"Evidences of Christianity" an authorized text book, but also Dr.
Wayland's "Moral Science," of the most essential parts of which my books
are an epitome.
A fourth objection is that I have given a summary of the "Evidences of
Christianity," in respect especially to the inspiration of the
Scriptures, miracles, and mysteries. In reply, I observe, first, that if
young men, before they finish their collegiate education, should be
fortified on this ground, it is equally necessary that those youths who
finish their education in the public schools should not be left unarmed
on this point. Secondly, pupils in the public schools of the fourth and
fifth years are quite as capable of understanding the few pages in which
I have condensed and simplified the answers to the common infidel
objections, as are young men at college to master the large text books
prescribed on the subject. Thirdly, the Irish National Board has
provided a book on the subject to which I have devoted two lessons. On
the list of text books authorized by the Irish National Board is one
entitled, "Lessons on the Truth of Christianity, being an appendix to
the Fourth Book of Lessons, for the use of Schools." This book enters
far more largely into the subject of miracles than I have done, besides
the additional two lessons of answers to infidel objections.
A fifth objection is that I have pointed out the defects of the
teachings of Natural Religion, and shown the superiority of the
teachings of Revelation over those of Natural Religion. In this I have
followed the example of Rev. Dr. Wayland, President of Brown University,
R. I.
A sixth objection is, that I have not confined myself to those "laws
which regulate our natural obligations;" that I have taught the
"positive institutions" of Christianity, such as repentance, faith,
reading the Scriptures, personal devotion, family worship, attendance at
public worship. In this I have also followed Dr. Wayland. In the
conclusion of this letter Dr. Ryerson offers this "apology" for writing
his little book on "Christian Morals:" Besides desiring a small amount
of religious teaching, one hour (Monday morning) in the week, for the
senior pupils of the Public Schools, which the trustees and parents
might approve, I did desire a united testimony on the part of
Protestantism, as there is a united testimony on the part of Roman
Catholicism, as to religious teaching in the schools. One County
Inspector writes, that the Roman Catholic priest, in a separate school
which the Inspector visited, said, "Your schools are atheistic. You
don't acknowledge God." The same charge has been often repeated by the
same authority against the public schools. While I have provided and
contended for full provision by which the Roman Catholics could teach
their own children in their own books of religious instruction, I did
desire that there might be a somewhat corresponding unity of testimony
and teaching in religious principles and duties of common agreement
among Protestants, being first most strongly impressed with its
feasibility by the remarks of the late excellent Rev. A. Gale, who, when
principal of Knox's Academy, on closing a public examination of the
pupils, said that he was persuaded, from his own experience, that all
needful religious teaching could be given to pupils at schools without
infringing upon any denominational peculiarity. I had long meditated,
and at length sought to realize this grand idea in our public schools.
One discordant note has interrupted the harmony. The responsibility of
the failure, if it is to be a failure, is not with me. I hope the
Protestant Christians of Canada will yet realize it, and that my country
will yet enjoy the untold advantages of it, though I may die without the
sight.
FOOTNOTES:
[135] Mr. Cameron's avowals on the subject are frank and manly. On the
occasion of his nomination for the County of Lambton, in October, 1857,
he thus referred to the School System, and to its founder:--
On the whole, the system had worked well, the common schools of Canada
were admirable, and had attracted the commendation of the first
statesmen in the United States, and even in Great Britain they proposed
to imitate Canada. He was opposed to Dr. Ryerson's appointment
politically, but he would say, as he had said abroad, that Canada and
her children's children owed to him a debt of gratitude, as he had
raised a noble structure, and opened up the way for the elevation of the
people.
CHAPTER LII.
1850-1853.
The Clergy Reserve Question Transferred to Canada.
The re-opening of the clergy reserve question by Bishop Strachan, with a
view to obtain relief in the temporary distress mentioned in Chapter
xlviii., proved to be a fatal step, so far as his hopes for securing
"better terms" were concerned. In the next year after he had issued his
pastoral appeal for help, the clergy reserve fund yielded an increase,
"and an expectation of a gradual increase annually was officially
expressed." ("Secular State of the Church," page 11.)
The Bishop's complaint against the Provincial Government (Chapter
xlviii., page 379) was that its management of the clergy reserve lands
was wasteful and extravagant. An effort was therefore made, in 1846, to
vest these lands in the religious bodies then entitled to a share in the
income derived from their sale. Mr. Gladstone communicated with the
Governor-General on the subject, with this view, in February, 1846. The
proposal, was, however, viewed with alarm, as well as was the fact that
such efforts being made in England showed that, as in 1840, so in 1846,
the rights of the Canadian people to this patrimony could be at any time
alienated or extinguished by the Imperial Government, without the
official knowledge or consent of the Canadian Parliament.
These two facts, when they became known and appreciated by the people of
Upper Canada, led to the taking of decisive steps to prevent them from
becoming realities. The representatives in the Canadian House of
Assembly of the Bishop of Toronto sought to get an address to the Crown
passed, with a view to vesting a portion of the lands in the Church
Society of Toronto. Hon. Robert Baldwin warned the friends of the Bishop
of the impolicy and imprudence of such a proposition, and pointed out
that if the clergy reserve question was thus re-opened, the former
fierce agitation on the subject would be resumed, which might "end in
the total discomfiture of the Church." His warning was unheeded, and
although the motion for vesting the lands as proposed was rejected, by a
vote of 37 to 14, yet the Bishop in his charge, delivered the next year
(in June, 1847), said:--
After all, our great desire continues to be to acquire the
management of what is left to the Church of the reserves; and why
this reasonable desire is not complied with remains a matter of
deep regret (page 19).
The question thus brought before the Legislature, led to its being
brought before the people, until it became a subject of discussion in
political meetings and election contests. Finally, in 1850, the
Government of the day secured the passage in the House of Assembly of an
address to the Crown, praying for the repeal of the Imperial Clergy
Reserve Act of 1840. In that address it is stated that--
During a long period of years, and in nine successive sessions of
the Provincial Parliament, the representatives of the people of
Upper Canada, with an unanimity seldom exhibited in a deliberative
body, declared their opposition to religious endowments.... The
address further pointed out that the wishes of the people were
thwarted by the Legislative Council, a body containing a majority
avowedly favourable to the ascendancy of the Church of England.
That the Imperial Government, from time to time, invited the
Provincial Parliament to legislate on the subject of these
reserves, disclaiming on the part of the Crown any desire for the
superiority of one or more particular Churches; that Your Majesty's
Government, in declining to advise the Royal assent being given to
a Bill, passed by a majority of one, for investing the power of
disposing of the reserves in the Imperial Parliament, admitted that
from its inaccurate information as to the wants and general
opinions of society (in which the Imperial Parliament was
unavoidably deficient), the question would be more satisfactorily
settled by the Provincial Legislature; that subsequently to the
withholding of the Royal assent from the last-mentioned Bill, the
Imperial Parliament passed an Act disposing of the proceeds of the
clergy reserves in a manner entirely contrary to the formerly
repeatedly expressed wishes of the Upper Canadian people, as
declared through their representatives, and acknowledged as such in
a message sent to the Provincial Parliament by command of Your
Majesty's Royal predecessor.
That we are humbly of opinion that the legal or constitutional
impediments which stood in the way of provincial legislation on
this subject should have been removed by an Act of the Imperial
Parliament; but that the appropriation of revenues derived from the
investment of the proceeds of the public lands of Canada, by the
Imperial Parliament, will never cease to be a source of discontent
to Your Majesty's loyal subjects in this Province; and that when
all the circumstances connected with this question are taken into
consideration, no religious denomination can be held to have such
vested interest in the revenue derived from the proceeds of the
said clergy reserves, as should prevent further legislation with
reference to the disposal of them; but we are nevertheless of
opinion that the claims of existing incumbents should be treated in
the most liberal manner; and that the most liberal and equitable
mode of settling this long-agitated question, would be for the
Imperial Parliament to pass an Act providing that the stipends and
allowances heretofore assigned and given to the clergy of the
Church of England and Scotland, or to any other religious bodies or
denominations of Christians in Canada, and to which the faith of
the Crown is pledged, shall be secured during the natural lives or
incumbencies of the parties now receiving the same ... subject to
which provision the Provincial Parliament should be authorized to
appropriate as, in its wisdom, it may think proper, all revenues
derived from the present investments, or from those to be made
hereafter whether from the proceeds of future sales, or from
instalments on those already made.
As the agitation proceeded, Bishop Strachan and Dr. Ryerson again became
involved in it. The Bishop took the lead, and addressed a letter to Lord
John Russell on the subject. Dr. Ryerson at once joined issue with the
Bishop, and prepared the following able rejoinder in reply to the
Bishop's letter. He said:--
The statements of the Lord Bishop of Toronto, in his letter to Lord John
Russell, dated Canada, February 20th, 1851, and in his Charge delivered
to the clergy of the Diocese of Toronto, in May, 1851, relate to the
same subjects, and appear to be designed for perusal in England, rather
than in Canada. These statements, as a whole, are the most extraordinary
that I ever read from the pen of an ecclesiastic, much less from the pen
of a Bishop of the Church of England, and an old resident and prominent
actor in the affairs of the country of which he speaks. These statements
are not only incorrect, but they are, for the most part, the reverse of
the real facts to which they refer; and where they are most groundless,
they are the most positive. To discuss them _seriatim_ would occupy a
volume. I will, as briefly as possibly, notice the most important of
them under the following heads:--
1. The circumstances and objects of the original Clergy Land
Reservation.
2. The position of the Church of England in Canada, and the professed
wishes of the Lord Bishop.
3. The conduct of the Imperial and Canadian Governments towards the
Church of England.
4. The effect of the union of the two Canadas on the proceedings and
votes of the Legislative Assembly in regard to the Church of England.
5. Public grants to the Church of Rome, and the endowment of that Church
in Lower Canada.
6. The Toronto University and Public Schools.
I am to notice in the first place the statements of the Lord Bishop
respecting the circumstances and objects of the Clergy Land Reservation.
He speaks of it as having been suggested by the circumstances of the
American revolution, and as having been intended as the special reward
of those who adhered to the Crown of England during that seven years'
contest.
The Bishop says:--
At the close of the war, in 1783, which gave independence to the
United States, till then colonies of the British Crown, great
numbers of the inhabitants, anxious to preserve their allegiance,
and, in as far as they were able, the unity of the empire, sought
refuge in the western part of Canada, beyond the settlements made
before the conquest under the King of France. These loyalists, who
had for seven years perilled their lives and fortunes in defence of
the throne, the law, and the religion of England, had irresistible
claims when driven from their homes into a strange land (yet a vast
forest), to the immediate protection of government, and to enjoy
the same benefits which they had abandoned from their laudable
attachment to the parent State.
The Bishop subsequently states [See Chapter xxviii., page 219] that the
object of the Constitutional Act of 1791 was
More especially to confer upon the loyalists such a constitution as
should be as near a transcript as practicable of that of England,
that they might have no reason to regret, in as far as religion,
law, and liberty were concerned, the great sacrifices which they
had made.
Allusions of this kind pervade a considerable part of the Bishop's
letter, and furnish the first example, within my knowledge, of any
writer attempting to invest the dispute between the American colonies
and the mother country with a religious character; when every person the
least acquainted with the history of those colonies, and of that
contest, knows that the question of religion was never alluded to on the
part of the colonists--that General Washington and other principal
leaders in the revolution were professed Episcopalians--that the Church
of England did not exist as an established church in any of those
colonies, unless adopted as such by the local legislature, as in the
case of Virginia--and that in the northern and eastern parts of those
colonies, whence the first emigration to Upper Canada took place after
the peace of 1783, the Church of England never did exist as an
established church. Therefore, for the "religion of England" in that
sense, those "loyalists" never could have "perilled their lives and
fortunes;" nor could they have been influenced by any predilections for
an establishment which they had never seen. The Bishop says truly that:
The noble stand which the Province made against the United States
in the war of 1812, in which the attachment of its inhabitants to
the British empire was a second time signally displayed, brought
the country into deserved notice.
But nothing can be more fallacious than the claims he would found upon
this fact, any more than those of the American revolution of 1776, to
the clergy reserve land. For the Lord Bishop himself, when Archdeacon of
York, in a printed discourse on the death of the first Bishop of Quebec,
represents the benefits of the establishment as "little felt or known"
in Upper Canada, and states that down to the close of the American War
of 1812--namely, in 1815--there were but five clergymen of the Church of
England in that vast province. And a few years afterwards, December
22nd, 1826, the Upper Canada House of Assembly, consisting of the
representatives of the Loyalists and their sons, who had twice "signally
displayed their attachment to the British empire," adopted, by the
extraordinary majority of 30 to 3, the following remarkable and
significant resolution:--
_Resolved_, that the Protestant Episcopal Church in the Province
bears a very small proportion to the number of other Christians,
notwithstanding the pecuniary aid long and exclusively received
from the benevolent society in England by the members of that
Church, and their pretensions to a monopoly of the clergy reserves.
The original Loyalist settlers of Upper Canada, and their immediate
descendants, must be held to have understood their own feelings and
sentiments better than the Lord Bishop: and the almost unanimous
expression of such sentiments, through their representatives twenty-five
years since, together with other circumstances to which I have referred,
show how greatly mistaken is his Lordship, and how perfectly baseless
are his assumptions and frequent allusions and appeals in reference to
the hopes, wishes and sentiments of the original settlers of Upper
Canada as a ground of claim to the clergy reserves in behalf of the
Church of England.
I have next to say a few words on the Bishop's statement as to the
position of the Church of England in Canada, and the professions which
he makes in respect to her position. He says, "Our position has, for
some time, been that of a prostrate branch of the National Church;" and
that position he, in another place, calls "a condition of inferiority to
other religious denominations;" and he says, "she has been placed below
Protestant dissenters, and privileges, wrested from her, have been
conferred upon them." As to the position in which the Bishop would wish
the Church of England in Canada to be placed, he says, "We merely claim
equality, and freedom from oppression."
These expressions are deeply to be regretted, when it is perfectly
notorious that the pre-eminence and peculiar civil advantages claimed by
the Bishop for the Church of England, have been the ground of all the
disputes which have agitated the Legislature and people of Upper Canada
for more than twenty-five years; when every person of the least
intelligence in Canada knows that the Church of England, besides other
large educational and pecuniary patronage of government, enjoyed until
1840 an exclusive monopoly of the clergy lands which the Legislative
Assembly of Upper Canada long contended, and which the judges of England
have decided, extended by law to Protestants generally--that the Church
of England enjoys at this moment the greater part of the annual proceeds
of the sales of those lands, besides rectory endowments of portions of
them--that every political and religious party in Canada awards every
thing to the Church of England that they ask for themselves--"equality
and freedom from oppression." During the present session of the
Legislature, Bills have passed the Assembly giving the Church of England
in Lower Canada all the facilities of holding property and managing her
affairs which have been desired by the Bishop of the Diocese, as had
been granted a few years since in Upper Canada; and when it was objected
that privileges were given by such Bills to the Church of England not
possessed by any other religious persuasion, it was replied that others
might obtain them by asking for them, and the Bills in question were
passed with only two dissentient votes.
I repeat the expression of my regret that the Bishop should draw
entirely upon his imagination for such statements, and that his feelings
should prompt him to represent objections to his own particular views
and pretensions as oppression and persecution of the Church of England.
The next class of the Bishop's statements which I shall notice, relate
to the conduct of the Imperial and Canadian Governments towards the
Church of England. Throughout his voluminous documents the Bishop
represents the conduct of government, both Imperial and Colonial, as
hostile to the Church of England; and employs, in some instances, terms
personally offensive. The great question at issue is thus stated by the
Bishop himself in his recent charge to his clergy:--
In 1819, the law officers of the Crown gave it as their opinion
that the words Protestant clergy embraced also the ministers of the
Church of Scotland, not as entitling them to endowment in land, but
as enabling them to participate in the proceeds of the reserves,
whether sold or leased. In 1828, a select committee of the House of
Commons extended the construction of the words Protestant clergy to
the teachers of all Protestant denominations; and this
interpretation, though considered very extraordinary at the time,
was confirmed by the twelve judges in 1840.
In his letter to Lord John Russell, the Bishop alludes to two of these
decisions in terms peculiarly objectionable, while he omits all
reference to the latter. He says:--
The Established Church of Scotland claimed a share of those lands,
or the proceeds, as a National Church within the Empire; and in
1819, the Crown lawyers made the discovery that it might be
gratified, under the 37th clause of the 31st of George III., chap.
31. Next, the select committee of the House of Commons, in 1828, on
the Civil Government of Canada, influenced by the spurious
liberality of the times, extended this opinion of the Crown lawyers
to any Protestant clergy.
The Bishop thus impugns the impartiality and integrity of the opinions
expressed by the law officers of the Crown in England, and by the select
committee of the House of Commons, sarcastically calling the one a
"discovery," and ascribing the other to "spurious liberality;" while he
declares that the Act 3 and 4 Victoria, chapter 78 (which only carried
partially into effect the decision of the twelve judges, and was, as he
states, agreed to by the Archbishop of Canterbury and the other Bishops
in London), "deprived the Church of England in Canada of seven-twelfths
of her property."
In other documents the Bishop has designated this Act "an act of
spoliation," and "robbery" of the Church of England.
When the Bishop employs language of this kind in respect to Acts of
Parliament and the official opinions in regard to their provisions, he
cannot reasonably complain if other parties should respect them as
little as himself, much less regard them as a "final settlement" of a
question to which they have not been parties, and against which they
have always protested. Under any circumstances, it is singular language
to be employed by a person towards a government by whose fostering
patronage he has become enriched. The fact is, that the successive
Governors of Upper Canada have been members of the Church of England;
that the principal cause of their unpopularity, and the most serious
difficulties which both the Imperial and local governments have had to
encounter in the colony, have arisen from their efforts to secure as
much for the Church of England, in the face of the popular indignation
and opposition, so much inflamed and strengthened by the irritating
publications and extreme proceedings of the Bishop himself. It is
understood that the report of the committee of the House of Commons on
the civil government of Canada, in 1828, was written by Lord Stanley.
However that may be, the sentiments of that report on the clergy reserve
question were strongly expressed by his Lordship in his speech on the
subject, 2nd May, 1828; and he and the other distinguished men who
investigated the subject at that time, know whether they were
"influenced by a spurious liberality" in the conclusion at which they
arrived, or whether they were guided by a sense of justice, and yielded
to the weight of testimony. At all events, the grave decision of the
twelve judges of England to the same effect ought to have suggested to
the Bishop other terms than those of "spurious liberality,"
"spoliation," and "robbery," and to have protected not only the "powers
that be," but the great majority of the Canadian people, from the shafts
of his harsh imputations.
Here I think it proper to correct the Bishop's repeated references to
the origin and circumstances of the differences of opinion in Upper
Canada, as to the import of the words "Protestant clergy," and the
"right of dissenting denominations" to participate in the benefit of the
clergy reserves. He represents those differences as having originated
with the clergy of the Kirk of Scotland, and that the idea that any
other than the clergy of the Church of England had a right to
participate in the benefit of the reserves was never entertained in
Upper Canada until the friends of the Kirk of Scotland commenced the
agitation of the question.
So far from this representation being correct, it appears that
the first submission of the question to the law officers of the
Crown in England took place at the request of Sir P. Maitland,
in reference, not to the clergy of the Kirk of Scotland, but to
"all denominations" of Protestants--a question on which Sir P.
Maitland, then Lieutenant-Governor of Upper Canada, states in a
despatch to Earl Bathurst, dated 17th May, 1819, that there was not
only a "difference of opinion" on the subject, but "a lively feeling
throughout the Province." It appears that certain "Presbyterian
inhabitants of the town of Niagara and its vicinity" (not at that
time in connexion with the Church of Scotland), petitioned Sir P.
Maitland for "an annual allowance of £100 to assist in the support
of a preacher," to be paid "out of funds arising from the clergy
reserves, or any other fund at His Excellency's disposal." In
transmitting a copy of this petition to Earl Bathurst, Sir P.
Maitland ("York, Upper Canada, 17th May, 1819,") remarks as
follows:--
The actual product of the clergy reserves is about £700 per annum.
This petition involves a question on which I perceive there is a
difference of opinion, viz., whether the Act intends to extend the
benefit of the reserves, for the maintenance of a Protestant
clergy, to all denominations, or only to those of the Church of
England. The law officers incline to the latter opinion. I beg
leave to observe to your Lordship, with much respect, that your
reply to this petition will decide a question of much interest, and
on which there is a lively feeling throughout the Province. [See
page 221.]
Earl Bathurst's reply to this despatch is dated "Downing Street, 6th
May, 1820," and commences as follows:--
Having requested the opinion of His Majesty's law officers as to
the right of dissenting Protestant ministers, resident in Canada,
to partake of the lands directed by the Act of the 31st George
III., c. 31, to be reserved as a provision for the support of a
Protestant clergy, I have now to state that they are of opinion
that though the provisions made by the 31st George III., c. 31, ss.
36 and 42, for the support and maintenance of a Protestant clergy,
are not confined solely to the Church of England, but may be
extended also to the clergy of the Church of Scotland, yet that
they do not extend to dissenting ministers, since the terms
Protestant clergy can apply only to the Protestant clergy
recognized and established by law.
It is thus clear that the question of the right of different Protestant
denominations to participate in the benefit of the clergy reserves did
not originate in any claims or agitation commenced by the clergy of the
Church of Scotland; that as early as the beginning of 1819, (only four
years after the close of the last American War, during which, as the
Bishop truly says, "the attachment of the inhabitants to the British
empire was a second time signally displayed,") there was "a lively
feeling throughout the Province" on the subject. The first Loyalist
settlers, and their immediate descendants, were opposed to the Bishop's
narrow construction of the Act 31st George III., chapter 31; their
representatives in the Legislative Assembly maintained invariably the
liberal construction of the Act; the select committee of the House of
Commons in 1828, on the Civil Government of Canada, after taking
evidence as to the intentions of the original framers of the law,
expressed the same opinion, and that opinion was ultimately confirmed by
the decision of the twelve judges in 1840. The Bishop is, therefore, as
much at fault in his facts on this point, as he is in the language he
employs in reference to Imperial legal opinions, and an Imperial Act of
Parliament.
It now becomes my duty to examine another large class of statements,
which I have read with great surprise and pain; and which are, if
possible, less excusable than those which I have already noticed. I
refer to the Bishop's statements in regard to the influence of the union
of the two Canadas on the votes and proceedings of the Legislative
Assembly of the united Province, on the question of the clergy reserves.
The Bishop, in his letter to Lord John Russell (referring to the Address
of the Legislative Assembly, at the session of 1850, to the Queen),
states as follows:--
Before the union of Upper and Lower Canada, such an unjust
proceeding could not have taken place, for, while separate, the
Church of England prevailed in Upper Canada, and had frequently a
commanding weight in the Legislature, and at all times an influence
sufficient to protect her from injustice. But since their union
under one Legislature, each sending an equal number of members,
matters are sadly altered.
It is found, as was anticipated, that the members returned by
dissenters uniformly join the French Roman Catholics, and thus
throw the members of the Church of England into a hopeless minority
on all questions in which the National Church is interested.
The Church of England has not only been prostrated by the union
under that of Rome, and the whole of her property made dependent on
Roman Catholic votes, but she has been placed below Protestant
dissenters, and privileges wrested from her which have been
conferred upon them.
In his recent charge to the clergy of his Diocese, the Bishop remarks
again:--
So long as this diocese remained a distinct colony, no measure
detrimental to the Church ever took effect. Even under the
management and prevailing influence of that able and unscrupulous
politician, the late Lord Sydenham, a Bill disposing of the clergy
reserves, was carried by one vote only--a result which sufficiently
proved that it was not the general wish of the people of the colony
to legislate upon the subject.
I shall first notice that part of the Bishop's statement which relates
to Upper Canada, before the union with Lower Canada. The Bishop asserts
it not to have been "the general wish of the people of the colony to
legislate upon the subject" of the clergy reserves; that the Church of
England prevailed, and had sufficient influence to maintain what he
regards as her just rights. The Bishop has resided in Upper Canada
nearly half a century, and such a statement from him, in direct
contradiction to the whole political history of the Province during more
than half that period, is difficult of solution, though perfectly easy
of refutation. I have already transcribed one of a series of
resolutions, adopted by the Legislative Assembly as early as December,
1826, by a majority of 30 to 3, objecting entirely to the exclusive
pretensions made in behalf of the Church of England. But I find that
nearly a year before this, namely, the 27th of the January preceding,
the House of Assembly of Upper Canada adopted an Address to the King on
the subject, in which it is stated, respectfully, but strongly,--
That the lands set apart in this Province for the maintenance and
support of a Protestant clergy ought not to be enjoyed by any one
denomination of Protestants to the exclusion of their Christian
brethren of other denominations, equally conscientious in their
respective modes of worshipping God, and equally entitled, as
dutiful and loyal subjects, to the protection of Your Majesty's
benign and liberal Government; we, therefore, humbly hope it will,
in Your Majesty's wisdom, be deemed expedient and just, that not
only the present reserves, but that any funds arising from the
sales thereof, should be devoted to the advancement of the
Christian religion generally, and the happiness of all Your
Majesty's subjects of whatever denomination; or if such application
or distribution should be deemed inexpedient, that the profits
arising from such appropriation should be applied to the purposes
of education and the general improvement of this Province.
The following year (January, 1827), the House of Assembly passed a Bill
(the minority being only three), providing for the sale and application
of the whole of the proceeds of the reserves for purposes of education,
and erection of places of public worship for all denominations of
Christians. And, on examining the journals, I find that from that time
down to the union of the Canadas in 1841, not a year passed over without
the passing of resolutions, or address, or bill, by the House of
Assembly of Upper Canada, for the general application of the proceeds of
the reserves, in some form or other, but always, without exception,
against what the Bishop claims as the rights of the Church of England in
respect to those lands.
It is difficult to conceive a more complete refutation than these facts
furnish of the Bishop's statement, that the Church of England prevailed
in Upper Canada, and had a commanding weight in the Legislature; nor
could a stronger proof be required of "the general wish of the people of
the colony to legislate upon the subject," than such a course of
procedure on the part of their representatives for so many years during
successive Parliaments, and amidst all the variations of party and party
politics on all other questions.
It is also incorrect to say that the Bill of Lord Sydenham in 1840 "was
carried by a majority of one vote only." A Bill did pass the Assembly of
Upper Canada the year before, by "a majority of one vote only;" but that
was a Bill to re-invest the reserves in the Imperial Parliament for
"general religious purposes,"--a Bill passed a few hours before the
close of the session, during which no less than forty-eight divisions,
with the record of yeas and nays, took place in the Assembly on the
question of the clergy reserves; and after the Assembly had passed, by
considerable majorities, both resolutions and a Bill to give the Church
of England one-fourth of the proceeds of the clergy reserves, and the
other three-fourths to other religious denominations and to educational
purposes--a Bill which, with some verbal amendments, also passed the
Legislative Council, and against which the Bishop, joined by one other
member, recorded an elaborate protest. But just at the heel of the
session, and after several members of the Assembly voting in the
majority had gone to their homes, a measure (which had been previously
negatived again and again) was passed by a "majority of one vote only"
(22 to 21), to re-invest the reserves--a measure which the law officers
in England pronounced "unconstitutional," as the manner of getting it
through the Canadian Legislature was unprecedented. [See page 249.]
But the measure of Lord Sydenham was carried in the Assembly by a
majority of 4, and in the Legislative Council (of which the Bishop was a
member and voted against the bill) by a majority of 8. A considerable
majority of the members of the Church of England of both Houses of the
Legislature voted for the bill, and were afterwards charged by the
Bishop with "defection," and "treachery" for doing so. [See page 262.]
On this point Lord Sydenham, in a despatch to Lord John Russell, dated
Toronto, 5th February, 1840, stated as follows:--
It is notorious to every one here, that of twenty-two members being
communicants of the Church of England who voted upon this Bill,
only eight recorded their opinion in favour of the views expressed
by the right reverend Prelate; whilst in the Legislative Council
the majority was still greater; and amongst those who gave it their
warmest support are to be found many gentlemen of the highest
character for independence and for attachment to the Church, and
whose views in general politics differ from those of Her Majesty's
Government.
After this epitome of references to the proceedings of the people of
Upper Canada, through their representatives, from 1825 to 1840, on what
the Bishop terms the "rights" and "patrimony" of the Church of England,
it is needless to make more than one or two remarks on his statements
as to the influence of the union of the Canadas on the proceedings and
votes of the Legislative Assembly upon the subject. My first remark is,
that the question of the clergy reserves has not been introduced into
the present Legislative Assembly by any member, or at the solicitation
of any member, from Lower Canada. I remark, secondly, that though there
is not a Roman Catholic among the forty-two members elected for Upper
Canada; yet when a resolution was introduced into the Assembly, both at
the last and during the present session, expressing a desire to maintain
the present settlement of the clergy reserves, as provided in the Act, 3
& 4 Vic., chap. 78, only sixteen in the first instance, and thirteen in
the second, voted for it--only about one-third of the members for Upper
Canada. Should, therefore, the union of the Canadas be dissolved
to-morrow, the Bishop would be in as hopeless a minority as he was
before the union. The following remarks of a recent speech of Mr.
Lafontaine (the leader of the Roman Catholic French members of the
Assembly) will show how entirely groundless are the Bishop's imputations
upon that portion of the Assembly.
He thought the clergy reserves should be fairly divided among the
Protestant denominations, and that they should be altogether taken
out of the hands of the Government, as the only way to take them
out of the reach of agitation. He thought the rectories were vested
rights, and should not be disturbed, unless by due process of law,
if, as was pretended, they were improperly obtained. If there were
any claims in the Act of 1791 which seemed to connect the Church of
England to the State, though he did not think they did, they might
be repealed, and the Bishop of Toronto seemed to be of opinion that
that might be done. Let the appointment of the incumbents to the
rectories, too, be taken from the Government, if it were thought
proper, and given to the Church for other uses. He merely suggested
that without wishing to impose it. He would conclude with one
reflection: Let his Protestant fellow-countrymen remember they
would never find opposition to their just rights from Roman
Catholics and French Canadians. The latter had repeatedly passed
Acts in Lower Canada to give equal rights to those who were called
dissenters, and Jews, which were rejected by members of the Church
of England in the Council, and it was worthy of remark that, at a
moment when in England a pretended aggression had given occasion
for persecution, the Church of England here had to rely upon
Catholics to protect it against the aggression of other Protestant
sects.
I shall now make a few observations on the Bishop's statements
respecting government grants to the Church of Rome, and the endowments
of that Church in Lower Canada. The Bishop, framing his statements with
a view to the Protestant feeling of England, inveighs in general terms
against the Government on account of its alleged patronage of the Church
of Rome; makes exaggerated statements on one side, and omits all
references to facts on the other side which would enable the Protestants
of England, to whom he appeals, to understand the part which he has
himself taken in favour of grants to the Church of Rome, the manner in
which those grants are paid at the present time, and the alliance which
he has long endeavoured, and would still wish to form with that Church
in respect to endowments. The Bishop says:--
In Upper Canada, the Roman Catholic clergy do not, at present,
exceed seventy in number, and the provision for their support is
very slender. It depends chiefly on their customary dues, and the
contributions of their respective flocks; unless, indeed, they
receive assistance from the French portion of the Province, where
the resources of the Romish Church are abundant.
Now, while the Bishop presents an overdrawn and startling picture of the
emoluments of the Church of Rome in Lower Canada, he omits all
statements of public grants and payments to the clergy of that church in
Upper Canada. The Bishop must know, that in addition to their "customary
dues, and the voluntary contributions of their flocks," the clergy of
the Church of Rome receive £1,666 per annum, and that that sum is paid
out of the clergy reserve fund under the provisions of the very Act, 3 &
4 Vic., chap. 78, for the perpetuation of which he contends. The first
instructions to support the Roman Catholic clergy in Upper Canada out of
public funds, were given by Earl Bathurst, in a despatch to Sir P.
Maitland, dated 6th October, 1826, and which commenced in the following
words:--
You will receive instructions from the Treasury for the payment,
from funds to be derived from the Canada Company, of the sum of
£750 per annum, for the salaries of the Presbyterian ministers, and
a similar sum for the support of the Roman Catholic priests.
But what is remarkable is, that this very policy of granting aid to the
Roman Catholic priests in Upper Canada, for which Government has been so
much blamed by the Bishop's friends in England, was urged by, if it did
not originate with, the Bishop himself. For, in a speech delivered by
the Bishop in the Legislative Council of Upper Canada, 6th March, 1828,
and afterwards published by himself, I find his own statement of his
proceedings in this matter, as follows:--
It has always been my wish to see a reasonable support given to the
clergy of the Church of Scotland, because they belong to a Church
which is established in one section of the empire; and to the Roman
Catholic Church because it may be considered as a concurrent church
with the establishment in the sister Province; and to this end I
have, at all times, advised the leading men of both those churches
to make respectful representations to His Majesty's Government for
assistance, leaving it to Ministers to discover the source from
which such aid might be taken.--His Excellency, the
Lieutenant-Governor of this Province (Sir P. Maitland), having
represented in the strongest manner to His Majesty's Government the
propriety of making some provision for the clergy in communion with
the kirk, and also of the Roman Catholic clergy resident in Upper
Canada, a reference was made to me on that subject, while in
London, in June, 1826. On this occasion I enforced, as well as I
could, the recommendations made by His Excellency, in respect to
both churches.
Thus four months before Earl Bathurst sent out instructions to give
salaries to Roman Catholic priests in Upper Canada, the Bishop states
that he urged it upon the favourable consideration of His Lordship. The
Bishop then significantly adds:--
I did flatter myself that they would have been satisfied, as indeed
they ought to have been, and that henceforth the clergy of the two
denominations, the Roman Catholic and Presbyterian, while
discharging their own religious duties, would cordially co-operate
with those of the establishment in promoting the general peace and
welfare of society. It is gratifying to me to state that, as far as
I know, the Roman Catholic clergy, during this contest, have
observed a strict neutrality.
However ingenious it may be, I cannot regard it as ingenuous that the
Bishop should promote the endowment of the Roman Catholic clergy in this
country in order to secure their political alliance and support against
other Protestant denominations, and then appeal to Protestants in
England against the Government and Legislature in Canada, because of the
countenance given to the Church of Rome. It is hardly fair for the
Bishop to act one part in Canada and another in England; and it is
fallacious and wrong to represent the votes of Roman Catholics as
exerting any influence whatever on the state of the question in Upper
Canada--as of the twenty-five Roman Catholics who voted on the question
last year, twelve voted on one side and thirteen on the other; and they
are known to hold the opinion declared by their leader, Mr. Lafontaine,
that the proceeds of the clergy reserves belong to the Protestants of
the country in contradistinction to Roman Catholics.
The Bishop's statements in regard to the endowments of the Roman
Catholic Church in Lower Canada are most extravagant. They cannot
affect, in the least, the merits of the question which has so long
agitated Upper Canada; and they appear to be introduced merely for
effect in England, where the social state and position of parties in
Canada are little known or understood. It is needless to examine the
Bishop's statements on this subject in detail; but I will make two or
three remarks, to show the fallacy of both his assertions and his
reasoning. He gives no data whatever for his perfectly gratuitous and
improbable assumption of four hundred parish priests in Lower Canada at
a salary of £250 each, exclusive of those employed in colleges,
monasteries, and religious houses, making, he says,
The revenue of the Roman Catholic Church in Lower Canada, £100,000
per annum, a sum which represents a money capital of at least
£2,000,000!
This imaginary estimate of the Bishop is simply absurd, and supposes in
Lower Canada ten-fold the wealth that really exists.
The Bishop also gives a return of the seignorial lands of several
religious orders of the Roman Catholic Church in Lower Canada, then
invests those lands with a fictitious value, and sets them down as
representing "a capital of £700,000!" whereas the rights to these lands
are simply seignorial, and the annual revenue arising from them does not
amount to threepence per acre. The Jesuits' estates, 891,845 acres--by
far the largest item in the Bishop's paper--are in the hands of the
Government, and not of the Roman Catholic Church at all.
The fallacy of the Bishop's reasoning on this point will appear from the
facts, that the British Crown has never made a grant or endowment to the
Roman Catholic Church in Lower Canada, or to any religious order of that
Church; that whatever lands or endowments that Church or its religious
communities may possess, were obtained either from the Crown of France,
and therefore secured by treaty, or by the legacies of individuals, or
by purchase. The island of Montreal was obtained by purchase; the rights
are merely seignorial, or feudal, and yield to the seigneurs £8,000 per
annum.
There is, therefore, no analogy whatever between endowments thus
obtained and held, and lands appropriated by the Crown for certain
general objects, which have been vested in the hands of no religious
community, and over which Parliament has expressly reserved the power of
discretionary legislation.
I shall now offer a few remarks on the Bishop's statements respecting
the Toronto University and system of public schools in Upper Canada. As
these are questions which have been set at rest by local legislation, by
and with the sanction of the Imperial Government, I need only refer to
the Bishop's statements so far as to remove the erroneous impressions
and unjust prejudices which they are calculated to produce.
In reference to the Bishop's statements, that "graduates in holy orders
are declared ineligible as members of the Senate," I remark that such
graduates are and have been members of the Senate from the commencement.
And when the Bishop pronounces the University "essentially unchristian,"
he must have known that not only a Parliamentary law, but a University
statute, exists for the religious instruction and worship of all the
students of the University; whereas, when the Bishop had the management
of it, no provision whatever existed for the religious instruction and
worship of any of the students except members of the Church of England.
The statement, therefore, of the Bishop, that--
There is at present no Seminary in Upper Canada in which the
children of conscientious churchmen can receive a Christian and
liberal education,
is contradicted by the fact that the children of many churchmen, as
"conscientious" as the Bishop himself, are receiving such an education
at a "Seminary in Upper Canada."
* * * * *
The lands out of which the University has been endowed were early set
apart by the Crown, not on the application or recommendation of any
authority or dignitary of the Church of England, but on the application
of the Legislative Assembly of Upper Canada; and the cause of all the
agitation on the subject is, that the Bishop, unknown to the Canadian
people, and by representations which they, through their
representatives, declared to be incorrect and unfounded, obtained a
University Charter in England, and the application of those lands as an
endowment, which the Legislative Assembly never would recognize. And now
that that Assembly has at length got these lands restored to the objects
for which they were originally appropriated, but from which they had for
a time been alienated, the Bishop seeks, by the most unfounded
imputations and representations, to do all in his power to damage a
Seminary which he ought to be the first to countenance and support.
In his recent charge to his clergy, the Bishop has sought to damage the
public elementary schools; and here his statements are equally at fault
with those noticed in regard to the University. The Bishop says,
"Christianity is not so much as acknowledged by our School law." This
statement is contradicted by the 14th section of the School Act, and the
general regulations which are made under its authority, headed,
"Constitution and government of schools in respect to religious
instruction," and which commence with the following words:--
As Christianity is the basis of our whole system of elementary
education, that principle should pervade it throughout.
The Bishop says again:--
To take away the power of parents to judge and direct the education
of their children, which is their natural privilege from God, as
our schools virtually do, will never be allowed in Great Britain.
The Bishop makes this statement in the face of the express provision of
the 14th section of the School Act, which declares that "pupils shall be
allowed to receive such religious instruction as their parents or
guardians shall desire."
The Bishop furthermore states that "the Bible appears not among our
school books," and says also that the "system is not based on a
recognition of the Scriptures." It would be strange if the Bishop were
ignorant that in a lengthened correspondence, printed by order of the
Legislative Assembly, the Chief Superintendent of Schools objected to
any law or system which would exclude the Bible from the schools,--that
the Government sanctioned his views,--that his annual reports show that
the Bible is used in the great majority of the schools in Upper Canada.
By the returns of last year, the Bible was used in 2,067 of the 3,059
schools reported--being an increase of 231 schools over those of the
preceding year in which the Bible was used.
The Bishop likewise says:--
A belief of Christianity is not included among the qualifications
of school-masters; and I am credibly informed that there have been
instances of candidates for schools disavowing all religious
belief.
There is no law to prevent the vilest person from being "candidates" for
any office, even that of holy orders; but "candidates for schools," and
"school-masters," with legal certificates of qualification, are two very
different things. According to the school law, no person can be a
legally qualified teacher, or receive any portion of the school fund,
without appearing before a County Board of Examiners (who consist, in
all cases, more or less of clergymen), produce to them "satisfactory
evidence of good moral character," and be examined and approved by them.
Even the name of the church to which the "school-master" belongs is
specified, and the annual reports of the Chief Superintendent of Schools
include this item of information. A teacher may also, at any time, be
dismissed for intemperance or any immoral conduct. It is notorious that
the standard of qualification for teachers, both moral and intellectual,
and the provisions and regulations for religious instruction in the
schools, are much higher, and more complete and efficient, than under a
former school law which the Bishop himself introduced into the
Legislature, when he was Chairman of the Provincial Board of Education.
Again, the Bishop states that
All that is wanting is, to give power to the different boards or
authorities to grant separate schools to all localities desiring
them.
This is precisely what the school law provides; for the 24th section of
the Act expressly authorizes and empowers the Board of School Trustees
in each city or town, "to determine the number, sites, kind and
description of schools which shall be established in such city or town."
The Boards of School Trustees may therefore establish as many "separate
schools" in all the cities and towns in Upper Canada, as they shall
think proper. But they are not willing to establish such separate
schools as the Bishop desires; and when an amendment to the school law
was proposed at the last session, to compel the local "boards or
authorities" to do so, it was almost unanimously rejected. The Bishop
says, indeed, referring to this circumstance, that "when the Church of
England requested separate schools for the religious instruction of her
own children, her prayer was rejected by the votes of Romanists." The
fact is, that that proposition received the votes of but five members of
the Legislative Assembly, in which there are upwards of fifty
Protestants.
It is lamentable to see the Bishop making such statements to damage and
pull down the educational institutions of the country, merely because
they are not under his denominational control, and subservient to his
denominational purposes,--a system of schools which he has, from the
commencement, endeavoured to establish in Upper Canada, and for which he
has agitated the country these many years. That I do the Bishop no
injustice in this statement, I may remark, that in his letter to the
Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies, in 1827, applying for the
so-much-agitated Charter of the Provincial University, he states his
object to be, that the clergy of the Church of England in Upper Canada
may "acquire by degrees the direction of education which the clergy of
England have always possessed." Now that the Legislative Assembly, since
the establishment of free constitutional government, have defeated the
peculiar objects of the Bishop, he labours by groundless imputations and
statements to bring the whole system of public instruction into
contempt. It is to be hoped that such efforts will be as unsuccessful in
England as they have been in Canada, where his appeals for agitation
have not been responded to by one out of ten of the congregations of the
Church of England, and are not sustained by the greater part of the
members of the Church of England in both branches of the Legislature.
Not a petition has been presented by members of the Church of England
against the present system of public schools, except one, adopted by a
meeting presided over by the Bishop, and signed by himself; and the
Legislative Council within the last few days, by a majority of more than
two to one, concurred with the Legislative Assembly and Administration
in regard to the clergy reserves and University. The Bishop's extreme
policy and proceedings have been and are a great calamity to the Church
of England in Canada--a calamity which can only be mitigated and removed
by the discountenance of such proceedings, and by the adoption of a more
Christian and judicious policy on the part of members of the Church,
both in England and in Canada.
* * * * *
In reviewing the history of this question from 1840 until its final
settlement by the Canadian Parliament, in 1854, Dr. Ryerson said:--
Messrs. William and Egerton Ryerson had been appointed
representatives of the Canadian to the British Conference in 1840.
On their arrival in England, they found Lord John Russell's Bill
for the disposal of the Canadian Clergy Reserves to the Churches of
England and Scotland before Parliament; and, as representing the
largest religious denomination in Upper Canada, they requested an
interview with Lord John Russell on the subject of His Lordship's
Bill before Parliament. In the interview granted, they pointed out
to His Lordship the injustice, impolicy, and danger of the Bill,
should it become law, and respectfully and earnestly prayed His
Lordship to withdraw the Bill; but he was inflexible, when the
Messrs. Ryerson prayed to His Lordship to assent to their being
heard at the Bar of the House of Commons against the Bill; at which
His Lordship became very angry--thinking it presumptuous that two
Canadians, however numerous and respectable their constituency,
should propose to be heard at the Bar of the British House of
Commons against a measure of Her Majesty's Government. But the
Messrs. Ryerson knew their country and their position, and
afterwards wrote a respectful but earnest letter to His Lordship
against his measure, and faithfully warned him of the consequences
of it if persevered in; they went so far as to intimate that the
measure would prove an opening wedge of separation between Great
Britain and the people of Upper Canada; and lest they should be
considered as endeavouring to fulfil their own predictions, they
did not publish their letter to Lord John Russell, or write a line
on the subject for more than ten years--knowing that a wound so
deep would, without any action or word on their part, fester and
spread so wide in the people of Upper Canada as ultimately to
compel the repeal of the Act or sever their connection with Great
Britain. The result was as they, Messrs. Ryerson, had apprehended;
for in 1853 the Act was repealed by the British Parliament.[136]
Early in 1852, the Government of which Earl Grey was Secretary of State
for the Colonies, was superseded by that of the Earl of Derby, with Sir
John Packington as Secretary of State for the Colonies, who, in a
despatch to Lord Elgin, dated April 22nd, 1852, says:--
By a despatch from my predecessor, Earl Grey, of the 11th July
last, you were informed that Her Majesty's then servants found
themselves compelled to postpone to another Session the
introduction of a Bill into Parliament giving the Canadian
Legislature authority to alter the existing arrangements with
regard to the clergy reserves.
With reference to that intimation, I have to inform you that it is
not the intention of Her Majesty's present advisers to propose such
a measure to Parliament this Session. "The result would probably be
the diversion to other purposes" of the clergy reserves than "the
support of divine worship and religious instruction in the colony."
Sir John Pakington was soon undeceived as to the continued Canadian
sentiment on the subject, for Sir Francis Hincks, then Inspector-General
and Premier of Canada, who happened to be in London on official business
on behalf of the Canadian Government, enclosed to Sir John Pakington an
extract from a report, dated 7th April, 1852, approved by His
Excellency, in which the Executive Council said:--
The assurances of Her Majesty's late Government that such action
would be taken, had prepared the people of Canada to expect that no
further delay would take place in meeting their just wishes upon a
question of such paramount importance to them; the Council,
therefore, recommend that their colleague, the Inspector-General,
be requested by the Provincial Secretary to seek an interview with
Her Majesty's Ministers, and represent to them the importance of
carrying out the pledges of their predecessors on the subject of
the clergy reserves, and thus empower the Colonial Legislature to
deal with the question in accordance with the well-understood
wishes of the people of Canada.
The Derby ministry resigned office in December, 1852, and the Duke of
Newcastle succeeded Sir John Pakington as Secretary of State for the
Colonies. On the 15th January, 1853, the Duke addressed a despatch to
the Earl of Elgin announcing the decision of the new ministry to propose
the repeal of the Imperial Act of 1840, which was successfully
accomplished.
After the passing of the Imperial Act transferring the final settlement
of the clergy reserve question to Canada, a coalition Government was
formed by the aid of Sir Allan McNab, called the Hincks-Morin Ministry.
After protracted negotiation (with the beneficiaries under the Imperial
Act) and discussion in the Legislature, a Bill was passed providing for
the interests of these claimants, but "secularizing" the remaining
proceeds of the reserves to municipal purposes. This was the last of the
Acts assented to by Lord Elgin previous to his departure from Canada.
Sir Edmund Head, his successor, speaking on this subject, said:--
An Act assented to by my predecessor has finally settled the long
pending dispute with regard to the clergy reserves, and it has done
so in such a manner as to vindicate liberal principles, whilst it
treats the rights of individuals with just and considerate regard.
Thus was a struggle of more than twenty-five years ended, equality
before the law of all religious denominations established, and
constitutional rights of the people of Upper Canada secured, to their
great joy. But the Bishop of Toronto, whose policy and measures had
caused so much agitation in Upper Canada, regarded this settlement of
the clergy reserve question as an irreparable calamity to the Church of
England in Canada. On the 16th of March, 1853, the Bishop addressed a
letter to the Duke of Newcastle, of which the following are extracts:--
Power and violence are to determine the question; vested rights and
the claims of justice are impediments to be swept away. Hence the
spoliation sought to be perpetrated by the Legislature of Canada
has no parallel in colonial history. Even in the middle of the
American Revolution, the old colonists, during the heart-burnings
and ravages of civil war, respected the ecclesiastical endowments
made by the Crown against which they were contending....
The grants made by the Crown were all held by the same tenure--whether
to individuals or corporations--not reservations for certain purposes,
with power expressly given to Colonial Assemblies to "vary or repeal"
them. The Bishop proceeded:--
I feel bitterly, my Lord Duke, on this subject. Till I heard of
your Grace's despatch, I had fondly trusted in Mr. Gladstone and
his friends, of whom you are one, notwithstanding the present
doubtful Administration; and I still argued in my heart, though not
without misgivings, that the Church was safe, I have cherished her
with my best energies for more than half a century in this distant
corner of God's dominions; and after many trials and difficulties I
was beholding her with joy, enlarging her tent, lengthening her
cords, and strengthening her stakes, but now this joy is turned
into grief and sadness, for darkness and tribulation are
approaching to arrest her onward progress. Permit me, in
conclusion, my Lord Duke, to entreat your forgiveness if, in the
anguish of my spirit, I have been too bold, for it is far from my
wish or intention to give personal offence. And of this rest
assured, that I would most willingly avert, with the sacrifice of
my life, the calamities which the passing of your Bill will bring
upon the Church in Canada.
There is a touching pathos in the close of this letter; but the Bishop
himself lived to see his apprehended calamities turned into blessings;
for the most prosperous and brightest days of the Church of England in
Upper Canada have been from 1853 to the present time.
FOOTNOTES:
[136] Earl Grey had intended to propose its repeal in 1850-51, and had
requested the writer of these papers (who was then on an educational
tour in Europe) to remain in England in order to furnish His Lordship
with data and details to enable him to answer objections which might be
made to his Bill in the House of Lords, and wrote to Lord Elgin, then
Governor-General of Canada, requesting the protracting of Mr. Ryerson's
leave of absence for two or three months. But the Bill had to be
deferred until another Session, and Mr. Ryerson returned immediately to
Canada. (See page 455.)
CHAPTER LIII.
1851.
Personal Episode in the Clergy Reserve Controversy.
Dr. Ryerson made another educational tour in Europe in 1850-51. While in
London, early in 1851, Earl Grey sought Dr. Ryerson's counsel on the
clergy reserve question, which had been lately re-opened in Canada. The
proceedings and result of the interviews which he had with Earl Grey,
are detailed in several letters which he wrote to me from London during
a period of four months. I give such extracts from these letters as will
explain the nature of Dr. Ryerson's conferences with Earl Grey on the
subject. His first letter was written on the 7th February, in which he
said:--
You will rejoice to learn that Her Majesty's Government have
adopted the prayer of the Canadian Legislature on the question of
the clergy reserves, and have determined to bring forward a measure
on the subject. Whether Lord Grey will desire me to remain longer
on account of the question I have not had time to learn. Mr.
[afterwards Sir Benjamin] Hawes says that he will procure me
admission to the speaker's gallery to tear Lord John Russell bring
forward his measure on the Papal Question.
In a letter written by Dr. Ryerson the following week, dated 14th
February, he enclosed to me a confidential letter on the clergy reserve
question, in which he explained the likelihood of his being detained in
England by Lord Grey in connection with it. He said:--
I send this to you, so that you may know all the circumstances
which are likely to protract my stay for some months in this
country; and for the same reason, and that you may co-operate with
me, I entrust you with the perusal of my confidential
letter--another proof of my unreserved confidence in your prudence
and fidelity. I think it would not be well for you to mention
anything as to my probable delay in England, and especially as to
the reasons of it, until it becomes known to the public.
My position is, indeed, a gratifying one, after so long labour and
so much abuse in connection with the great clergy reserve question,
that I should be desired to aid in its final settlement according
to the voice of the people of Canada, and should now be called upon
to aid Lord John Russell himself to undo his own measure of 1840,
against which I then protested. I am sure you will be prepared to
perform any additional labour to enable me to fulfil such a
mission. I trust that I will be enabled to confer a benefit upon
Canada. It is a gratifying position in which such a concurrence of
circumstances will place me, and my personal character and history
in regard to a question which has engaged so large a portion of my
past life--the ground of all the opposition I formerly met with
from the London Wesleyan Committee and Conference. Verily there is
a God that ruleth over all things, that makes the wrath of man to
praise Him, that rules in ways we know not of. We should indeed
fear Him, bow down in the dust before Him, but at the same time
most calmly and implicitly trust Him. Please write me as to the
effects produced by Lord Grey's despatch, the manner in which it is
received, etc.
In a letter, dated 13th March, Dr. Ryerson said:--
I have received a letter from a member of the Government in Canada,
expressing a wish that I would remain in England until after the
great Exhibition, as the Canadian Parliament would not meet until
May. This, in anticipation of what Lord Grey has desired, has quite
settled my mind on the subject of remaining until May or June.
I shall remain in Paris until I am wanted in London on the clergy
reserve question--I suppose until the middle of next month.
Listening some hours each day in Paris to some of the most learned
men in Europe, giving the results of all their researches and
reflections on various branches of literature and science, will be
of great advantage to me in my future lectures, writings and
labours, and this I shall continue until the voice of war on the
clergy reserves shall echo across the Atlantic. I suppose my
presence in England at this time will be a great annoyance to the
exclusive Church party, and it will perhaps make them more cautious
than they might otherwise be in their statements.
As the ministry in England continue firm, I hope no effort will be
wanting in Canada to sustain Lord Grey, should an opposition be
raised against his proposed bill, the bringing in of which may be
delayed some time by the late long ministerial crisis in England.
In a letter, dated 11th April, Dr. Ryerson said:--
In regard to the clergy reserves, I have been inclined to think the
Bishop of Toronto and his friends would not attempt to renew the
agitation of the clergy reserve question in Canada, but would
prepare the strongest statement of their case for the Parliament
here, in the mouths of some of their ablest friends in both the
Commons and Lords, and thus take the Government here by surprise,
and try and defeat the Bill in the Lords, after having, reduced the
majority in favour of it in the Commons as much as possible.
On the 18th April, 1851, Dr. Ryerson wrote again:--
The Scotch Presbytery of Kingston, U. C., have sent a petition to
the House of Commons against Lord Grey's Bill, or against complying
with the prayer of the address of the Canadian Assembly, and sent
to me with the request that I would prepare an answer to it. I
think of preparing my answer in the form of a communication or two
to the _Times_ newspaper, and thus bring the whole subject before
the Members of Parliament and the public. Should I succeed in this,
Lord Grey may not think my longer stay to be necessary. I am
anxious to get away as soon as possible; the season is advancing,
and I have so much to do before the close of it in the autumn.
Business and embarrassments have so accumulated in the House of
Commons that it is pretty nearly decided to bring the clergy
reserve Bill into the Lords by Lord Grey himself, and he expects to
do so about the middle of May. Should it be brought into the Lords,
of course there would not be so long delay there before deciding
the question one way or the other. But the chances are so strong
against its success if brought into the Lords first, that Lord Grey
is unwilling to adopt that course until it is seen that that is
the only alternative. If it should be lost in the Lords now, he, of
course, thinks it would soon be carried by a pressure from Canada,
such as the rejection of the Bill by the Lords would probably call
forth.
On the 25th April, Dr. Ryerson wrote:--
The late crisis has made no change in the intentions of the
Government in regard to the clergy reserve question. I send you a
copy of the _Times_ of the 23rd instant, the day before yesterday,
in which you will see the first of my papers on "The Clergy
Reserves of Canada." The second and third will occupy a column and
a half or two columns, each. I finished and handed in the remaining
papers this morning. Lord Grey spoke to me twice on the subject of
writing something for the press, and Mr. Hawes, the last time I saw
him, seemed to think the Bill would be lost in the House of Lords,
but the Government would send out a despatch to Canada saying that
the question was not abandoned, but would be brought forward again
the next Session. I have thought this was a very poor consolation
for the loss of the Bill, and that it was best to see what could be
done. I have written strongly, and with an express view to the
House of Lords--confining myself wholly to the question of the
right of the people of Canada to judge and decide in the matter.
What may be the effect of these papers, I cannot, of course, tell;
but if Lord Grey should be of opinion that the publication of them
will supersede the necessity of my longer stay for that purpose, I
will leave as soon as possible--by the third week in May.
I wrote fully to Dr. Ryerson on this subject, pointing out the relation
of parties in Canada on this subject, and deprecating his taking any
further active part in the discussion which had become so heated in this
country. On the 2nd May, Dr. Ryerson replied:--
What you have communicated on the clergy reserve question has
changed my mode of proceeding in some respects; and the second and
third articles I prepared for the _Times_ will not appear as first
intended; but I will explain by and by. I was at the great
Exhibition yesterday. It was the grandest of all grand affairs I
ever witnessed. I had a place near the centre, within a few feet of
the "Iron Duke," until he left to join the procession.
On the 9th May, Dr. Ryerson wrote his final letter:--
On reflection, and from what I found to be the relations of parties
in Canada, and the turn the clergy reserve question was likely to
take, I came to the same conclusion you have expressed in your last
letter--not to come into collision with any party on the question,
beyond what is expressed in the short article in the _Times_
newspaper--namely, that Canada should judge for itself on the
question. I have determined to furnish Lord Grey with a memorandum
of facts and principles on the question. I have seen Lord Grey and
stated my wish not to remain longer, and not to be further mixed up
with the question--that I was now on good terms with all
parties--had thus great facilities for usefulness--that party
agitation in Canada was becoming violent--two extreme parties,
uniting against the Ministerial measure. I told him that I would
furnish him with a memorandum, with all the chief points of the
question on which he was likely to be opposed. He seemed to be
disappointed, but said if I thought my Department would suffer by
my longer absence, he would not insist upon my staying. I told him
that all parties would approve of my staying for the Great
Exhibition, and that I thought a memorandum, such as I would
prepare on the question of the clergy reserves, would be as
serviceable as my presence, etc.
Memorandum on the Clergy Reserve Question.
The following is the memorandum which Dr. Ryerson prepared for Lord Grey
on the clergy reserve question, and to which he refers in his letter to
me of the 9th May, 1851:--
Fully concurring in the remark of the Bishop of London, in a late reply
to the deputation of the inhabitants of St. George's, Hanover Square,
that "there is no kind of intestine division so injurious in its
character and tendency as that which is grounded on religious
questions;" and firmly believing, as I do, that the long continuance of
Canada as a portion of the British Empire depends upon the proceedings
of the British Parliament on the question of the clergy reserves, I
desire, as a native and resident of Upper Canada, as a Protestant and
lover of British institutions, to submit the following brief
observations on that question, in order to correct erroneous impressions
in England, and to induce such a course of parliamentary proceedings as
will conduce to the honour of Great Britain, and to the peace and
welfare of Canada:--
1. My first remark is, that this is a question agitated for more than
twenty-five years, almost exclusively among Protestants in Canada, and
the agitation of which, at the present time, has not, in any way
whatever, been promoted by Roman Catholic influence. An attempt has been
made in some quarters to create a contrary impression in England; but
that I am correct in my statement will, I think, appear from the
following facts:--First, though the question of the clergy reserves
nominally relates to Lower as well as Upper Canada (since the union of
the two Canadas under one Legislature), it is historically and
practically an Upper Canadian question. The agitation of it originated
in Upper Canada; it never was agitated in Lower Canada before the union
of the two provinces; it is discussed chiefly by the Upper Canada press,
and pressed most earnestly by the Upper Canada members of the
Legislature. So strongly is it viewed as an Upper Canadian question,
that a considerable portion of the press of Upper Canada has objected to
Lower Canadian members of the Legislature interfering in its discussion
or influencing its decision by their votes. Secondly, all the Upper
Canadian members, both of the Executive Council and of the Legislative
Assembly, are Protestants. Of the forty-two members of the Legislative
Assembly elected in Upper Canada, not one of them is a Roman Catholic;
of the five Upper Canadian members of the Executive Council, all are
Protestants, and all were in favour of the late Address of the Assembly
to the Queen, praying for the repeal of the Imperial Act, 4 & 5 Vic.,
chap. 78. and for restoring to the people of Canada the constitutional
right of judging for themselves as to the disposal of the clergy reserve
lands in that country. It ought, therefore, to be remembered in England,
that this question relates chiefly to Upper Canada, which is, for the
most part, a Protestant country, and which has not a single Roman
Catholic in the Legislative Assembly.
2. I remark, in the next place, that it is not a question of Church and
State union, or whether the State shall contribute to the support of
religion in one or more forms. It is whether the Canadian people shall
judge for themselves as to the mode of supporting their religious
worship, as well as to the religious creed they shall adopt. This right
was clearly secured to them by their constitutional Act of 1791, 31st
George III., chap. 31, but was taken from them by the Imperial Act of
1840, 3 & 4 Vic., chap. 78. In what manner the people of Canada, through
their representatives, may exercise the constitutional right, the
restoration of which they claim, for the support of religion, I am not
prepared to say. But whether they shall exercise wisely or not that, or
any other right constitutionally vested in them, is a matter
appertaining to themselves, and not to parties in England. I am not to
be the less anxious for the restoration to my country of its
constitutional rights because it may not exercise them wisely, or
exercise them in a manner opposed to my personal views and wishes. The
constitutional rights of legislation in Great Britain may not have
always been exercised most judiciously, but who would adduce that as an
argument for the annihilation of those rights, or against the existence
of constitutional freedom in England? Is Canada to be made an exception
to this rule?
3. I remark, thirdly, that neither is this a question which affects the
vested rights of any parties except those of the people of Canada
generally. When one-seventh of the wild lands of Canada was reserved for
the support of a Protestant clergy, by the Act of 1791, 31st George
III., chap. 31, the Canadian Legislature, created by the same Act, was
invested with authority, under certain forms, to "vary or repeal" the
several clauses relating to that clergy land reservation. That vested
right the people of Upper Canada possessed from 1791 to 1840. All other
vested rights are subordinate to those of a whole people, and are not to
be exalted above them. The Canadian Legislative Assembly has proposed to
secure all parties who have acquired rights or interests in the revenue
arising from the sales of the clergy reserve lands during the lives of
the incumbents or recipients; but, beyond that guarantee, it claims the
right of "varying or repealing," as it shall judge expedient, the landed
reservation in question, and the application of the revenues arising
from it.
4. The real question for consideration in England being thus separated
from other questions with which it has sometimes been erroneously and
injuriously confounded, I proceed to remark that the Imperial Act 3 and
4 Vic., chap. 78, is at variance with what the Imperial Governments
without exception and without reservation, for twenty-five years, have
admitted and avowed to be the constitutional rights of the people of
Canada. It has at all times been admitted in the first place, that the
Act 31st Geo. III., ch. 31, which created a legislature in Canada, and
authorized the clergy land reservation, invested the Canadian
Legislature with authority to legislate as to its disposal, and the
application of revenues arising from it; and secondly, that whatever
legislation might take place on the subject should be in harmony with
the wishes of the Canadian people. The Imperial Act 3 and 4 Vic., ch.
78, deprives the Canadian people of that right of legislation which they
had possessed for forty years, and does violence to their wishes and
opinions in the disposal which it makes of the revenues of the lands in
question. Now the rights of the people of Canada on this subject were
explicitly stated by the late Sir George Murray in 1828, by the Earl of
Ripon in 1832, by His late Most Gracious Majesty in a message to the
Legislature of Upper Canada in 1833, and by Lord Glenelg in 1835 and
1836. I give a summary of the whole in the words of Lord Glenelg, in a
despatch to the Lieutenant Governor of Upper Canada, dated December 5,
1835, in reply to an attempt on the part of the latter to induce
Imperial legislation on the subject. Lord Glenelg says, in behalf of the
Imperial Government, that:--
Parliamentary legislation on any subject of exclusively internal
concern, in a British colony possessing a representative assembly,
is as a general rule unconstitutional. It is a right of which the
exercise is reserved for extreme cases, in which necessity at once
creates and justifies the exception.
After showing that no necessity existed for setting aside the
constitutional rights of the Canadian people, Lord Glenelg expresses
himself in the following language of enlightened political philosophy:--
It is not difficult to perceive the reasons which induced
Parliament, in 1791, to connect with a reservation of land for
ecclesiastical purposes, the special delegation to the Council and
Assembly of the right to vary that provision by any Bill which,
being reserved for the signification of His Majesty's pleasure,
should be communicated to both Houses of Parliament for six weeks
before that decision was pronounced. Remembering, it should seem,
how fertile a source of controversy ecclesiastical endowments had
supplied throughout a large part of the Christian world, and how
impossible it was to foretell with precision what might be the
prevailing opinions and feelings of the Canadians on this subject
at a future period, Parliament at once secured the means of making
a systematic provision for a Protestant clergy, and took full
precaution against the eventual inaptitude of that system to the
more advanced stages of a society then in its infant state, and of
which no human foresight could divine the more mature and settled
judgment.
In the controversy, therefore, respecting ecclesiastical
endowments, which at present divides the Canadian Legislature, I
find no unexpected element of agitation, the discovery of which
demands a departure from the fixed principles of the constitution,
but merely the fulfilment of the anticipations of the Parliament of
1791, in the exhibition of that conflict of opinion for which the
statute of that year may be said to have made a deliberate
preparation. In referring the subject to the future Canadian
Legislature, the authors of the Constitutional Act must be supposed
to have contemplated the crisis at which we have now arrived--the
era of warm and protracted debate, which, in a free government, may
be said to be a necessary precursor to the settlement of any great
principle of national policy. We must not have recourse to an
extreme remedy, merely to avoid the embarrassment which is the
present, though temporary, result of our own legislation.
I think, therefore, that to withdraw from the Canadian to the
Imperial Legislature the question respecting the clergy reserves,
would be an infringement of that cardinal principle of colonial
government which forbids parliamentary interference, except in
submission to an evident and well-established necessity.
In January, 1840, the two branches of the Legislature of Upper Canada
passed a Bill (the Legislative Assembly by a majority of 28 to 20, and
the Legislative Council by a majority of 13 to 4) relative to the clergy
reserve--provided for the interests of their existing incumbents, and
dividing the proceeds of the sales of said lands among various religious
persuasions according to a census taken once in five years, and leaving
each religious persuasion free to expend the sum or sums to which it
should be entitled according to its pleasure, whether for the support of
its clergy, the erection of places of worship, or for purposes of
education. Though the great majority of the people of Upper Canada
desired the application of the proceeds of these lands for educational
purposes only; yet a majority of both branches of the Legislature agreed
to a compromise which could be defended as just to all parties, whatever
preferences might be entertained on the subject in the abstract. But
instead of the Royal assent being advised to be given to that Canadian
Bill on a local Canadian question, a new Bill was introduced into the
Imperial Parliament, giving about three-fourths of the proceeds of the
clergy reserves (including past and future sales) to the clergy of the
churches of England and Scotland, giving nothing to any other church,
but leaving the remaining one-fourth (or half of future sales) at the
discretionary disposal of the Executive for religious purposes. This
part of the Imperial Act has proved inoperative to this day; and should
any religious persuasion receive any portion of this comparative
pittance of the clergy land funds, it would do so not as a matter of
right (as do the Churches of England and Scotland in receiving their
lion's share), but at and during the pleasure of any party in power--a
position in which no religious community should be placed to the
Executive, and in which the Executive ought not to be placed to any
religious community. Such an Act can be justified upon no principle of
justice or sound policy, and is at variance with the almost unanimous
and often recorded wishes of the people of Upper Canada. The _Christian
Examiner_--a monthly organ of the Church of Scotland in Upper
Canada--expressed not only the general sentiments of the members of that
Church, but also of people at large, in the following words, contained
in an elaborate editorial which appeared in that publication a few
months before the passing of the Imperial Act of 1841:--
Year after year, at least during the last decade, the general
sentiment in this colony has been uttered in no unequivocal form,
that no church invested with exclusive privileges derived from the
State, is adapted to the condition of society among us. It cannot
be doubted that this is the conviction of nine-tenths of the
Colonists. Except among a few ambitious magnates of the Church of
England, we never hear a contrary sentiment breathed. Equal rights
upon equal conditions is the general cry. And although several
Assemblymen of the present House have chosen to misinterpret the
public voice, and to advocate a different principle, we doubt not
that on their next appearance before their constituents, they will
be taught that this is not the age, nor this the country, in which
the grand principle of equal rights can be departed from with
impunity.
Now, although the Imperial Act of 1840 may have induced "a few magnates"
of the Church of Scotland to unite with other "magnates," whom they once
considered "ambitious," in denying the "grand principle of equal rights"
to their more numerous Methodist brethren, and other religious
persuasions, yet the "convictions of nine-tenths" of the Canadian people
remain unchanged; nor will they, because of the changed circumstances of
a few clergymen of the Church of Scotland, suffer "the grand principle
of equal rights to be departed from with impunity."
5. I observe, likewise, that the continuance of the Imperial Act of 1840
is desired by a mere fraction of the Canadian population, while its
repeal is demanded by that country at large. The assertions of any
interested parties on a matter of this kind are of little weight against
the proceedings and statements of the representatives of the people. The
Address of the Legislative Assembly to Her Majesty must be regarded as
the authoritative and true expression of the opinions and wishes of the
Canadian people. It is true, there was diversity of opinion as to the
manner in which the incumbents on the clergy reserve fund should be
dealt with, and also as to certain other declarations contained in the
Address of the Assembly; but no member of the Canadian Legislature
ventured to justify the provisions of the Imperial Act, and very few
ventured to vote in favour of its continuance, even upon the ground of
expediency, in behalf of the "magnates" of two favourable Churches. When
the resolutions of the Address to Her Majesty were moved in the
Legislative Assembly of Canada on this subject, an amendment was moved
by the supporters of the present exclusive privileges of the Churches of
England and Scotland in Canada an amendment which contained the
following words:--
That in the opinion of this House it is inexpedient to disturb or
unsettle, by resolution or enactment, the appropriations or
endowments now existing in Upper and Lower Canada for religious
purposes; that the well-being of society and the growing wants of
the various Christian bodies in Canada demand that the several
provisions of the Imperial Act 3 and 4 Vic., cap. 78, should be
carried out to their fullest extent.
In favour of the amendment, that is, in favour of the continuance and
operations of the Imperial Act of 1840, voted sixteen; against it voted
fifty-two. Who would think of perpetuating a law in England at variance
with the sentiments of three-fourths of the members of the House of
Commons, and even of a large proportion of the constituency of Great
Britain? Could the present constitution of government in England be
maintained, could revolution be long prevented, if laws were retained on
the statute book condemned by three-fourths of the Commons, and more
than three-fourth of all classes of people in the land, and those
statutes involving religious questions? And is that to be perpetuated in
Canada which would not be retained in England for a month?
6. Into the origin and progress of the controversy connected with the
clergy reserves, it is needless for me to enter. They are sufficiently
stated in the Address of the Legislative Assembly of Canada to the
Queen, a copy of which is herewith annexed, together with the majorities
by which each of the thirty-one clauses of the Address was separately
voted. It will be seen that the first twenty-three clauses of the
Address were carried by a majority of 52 to 18; the 24th clause by 51 to
20; the 26th clause by 48 to 19; the 27th and 28th clauses by 47 to 20;
the 29th clause by 36 to 34; the 30th clause by 40 to 28; the 31st
clause, containing the prayer of the Address, by 45 to 23. The only
clause of the Address, therefore, in favour of which the majority of the
Assembly was not large and decided, was the 29th; and in a vote to that
clause, I have shown that the smallness of the majority was occasioned
by objections to different parts of the clause upon quite opposite
grounds, of three classes of members--the sixteen supporters of the
present pre-eminence of the Churches of England and Scotland, a section
of the Roman Catholic members, and what in England would be called the
extreme dissenters. In the vote referred to, I have explained the ground
of the opposition to this clause by each of these three classes of
members. It will be seen that the 29th clause is rather speculative than
practical, and does not affect the character and completeness of the
Address, every other clause of which was carried by a large majority. It
is, however, curious to remark, that while the supporters of the present
exclusive privileges of the Churches of England and Scotland are
indebted to the assistance of Roman Catholic members for the only vote
in which the minority was large; yet in England some of these same
parties represent the Address as having been carried chiefly by Roman
Catholic votes, with a view of destroying all Protestant institutions in
Canada.
7. No enlightened and candid person can look at the religious history
and social state of Canada and desire the perpetuation of the Imperial
Act 3 and 4 Vic., ch. 78. It is now quite sixty years since Upper Canada
was formed into a province with a representative government. Its
population was then 7,000 souls; it is now about 700,000. During the
first and most eventful half of that sixty years, the ministrations of
the Churches of England and Scotland can scarcely be said to have had an
existence there. The present Bishop of Toronto, in a discourse published
on the occasion of the death of the first Canadian Bishop of the Church
of England, states that down to the close of the war between Great
Britain and the United States in 1815, there were but four resident
clergymen or missionaries of the Church of England in all Upper
Canada--a statement which is confirmed by the annual reports of the
Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts; and the same
reports will show how few were the clergy of the Church of England in
that province down to a recent period. We learn from the same authority,
that till 1818 there was but one clergyman of the Church of Scotland in
Upper Canada, and that in 1827 there were but two. It is, therefore,
clear that during the first half of its sixty years' existence as a
province, Upper Canada must have been indebted almost entirely to other
than clergy of the Churches of England and Scotland for religious
instruction; yet during that thirty years, it is admitted that the
people of Upper Canada were a religious, an intelligent, and loyal
people. To whom the people of that province were mainly indebted for
their religious instruction, and for the formation and development of
their religious character, appears in a report of a Select Committee of
the Upper Canada House of Assembly, appointed in 1828, on the religious
condition of the country, and before which fifty witnesses, chiefly
members of the Church of England, were examined. I quote the following
words from the report of that Committee, (which was adopted by the
Assembly by a majority of 22 to 8), a report which was partly prepared
in reference to a letter addressed by the present Bishop of Toronto to
His Majesty's Secretary of State for the Colonies in 1827:--
The insinuations (says the report) in the letter against the
Methodist clergymen, the committee have noticed with peculiar
regret. To the disinterested and indefatigable exertions of these
pious men this province owes much. At an early period of its
history, when it was thinly settled, and destitute of all other
means of religious instruction, these ministers of the Gospel,
animated by Christian zeal and benevolence, at the sacrifice of
health, and interest, and comfort, carried among the people the
blessings, and consolations, and sanctions of our holy religion.
Their influence and instruction have been conducive in a degree
which cannot be easily estimated, to the reformation of the vicious
and to the diffusion of correct morals, the foundation of all sound
loyalty and social order.
This religious body has now 180 regular ministers in Upper Canada, about
1,100 churches and preaching places, and embraces in its congregations
one-seventh of the population.[137] Yet this oldest religious community
in Upper Canada, together with the Free Presbyterian Church of Canada,
the United Presbyterian Church, the Baptists and Congregationalists, are
treated as nobody by the Imperial Act, while the more modern Churches of
England and Scotland are exclusively endowed, and that by setting aside
legislative rights which the Constitution of 1791 had conferred upon the
people of Upper Canada! In Great Britain the Established Churches are
associated with the early and brightest periods of British history, and
are blended with all the influences which distinguish and exalt British
character; but the feelings and predilections arising from such
reminiscences and associations are not the proper rule of judgment as to
the feelings, predilections and institutions of Canadian society. As
Englishmen best know their own feelings and wants, and claim and
exercise the sole right of judging and legislating for themselves; so do
the people of Canada best know their own wishes and interests, and ought
to judge and legislate for themselves in all local matters which do not
infringe any imperial prerogative. No Englishman can refuse this who
wishes to do to others as he would have others do to him.
8. But it should also be observed, that down to the passing of the
Imperial Act of 1840, the influence of the Church of Scotland itself was
adverse to any such act of partiality and injustice, and in favour of
applying the proceeds of the clergy reserves even to educational as well
as religious purposes. The discussion of this question was first
introduced into the Legislative Assembly of Upper Canada in 1823, by the
Hon. William Morris--a gentleman of great respectability, and who has
always been regarded and acknowledged as the guardian of the interests,
and representative of the sentiments, of the Church of Scotland.
December 22nd, 1826, Mr. Morris moved a series of resolutions on this
subject, of which the following are the 9th and 10th:--
9. _Resolved_,--That it is the opinion of a great proportion of the
people of this Province that the clergy lands, in place of being
enjoyed by the clergy of an inconsiderable part of the population,
ought to be disposed of, and the proceeds of their sale applied to
increase the provincial allowance for the support of district and
common schools, and the endowment of a provincial seminary for
learning, and in aid of erecting places of public worship for all
denominations of Christians. [Carried by a majority of 31 to 2.]
10. _Resolved_, That it is expedient to pass a Bill, authorizing
the sale of the clergy lands within this Province, for the purposes
set forth in the foregoing resolution; and to address His Majesty,
humbly soliciting that he will be graciously pleased to give the
royal assent to said Bill. [Carried by a majority of 30 to 3.]
On the 28th of the same month, Mr. Morris reported a draft of Bill for
the sale of the clergy reserves, pursuant to the foregoing resolutions.
The Bill passed the Assembly by a majority of 20 to 3; was sent to the
Legislative Council, and was rejected. Similar attempts to legislate
having in like manner and from the same cause proved abortive, another
address to the King on this subject was adopted by the Assembly in
March, 1831, and supported, if not introduced, by Mr. Morris. That
address, which was adopted by a majority of 30 to 7, contains the
following words:--
That a large majority of the inhabitants of this Province are
sincerely attached to your Majesty's person and government, but are
averse to any exclusive or dominant Church. That this House feels
confident that, to promote the prosperity of this portion of your
Majesty's dominions, and to satisfy the earnest desire of the
people of this Province, your Majesty will be graciously pleased to
give the most favourable consideration to the wishes of your
faithful subjects. That, to terminate the jealousy and dissension
which have hitherto existed on the subject of the said clergy
reserves--to remove a barrier to the settlement of the country, and
to provide a fund available for the promotion of education, and in
aid of erecting places of worship for various denominations of
Christians: it is extremely desirable that the said land reserved
should be sold, and the proceeds arising from the sale of the same
placed at the disposal of the Provincial Legislature, to be applied
exclusively for those purposes.
This address was replied to the January following, 1832, by a formal
message from the King, from which I extract the following sentences:--
The representations which have at different times been made to His
Majesty and his Royal predecessors of the prejudice sustained by
his faithful subjects in Upper Canada, from the appropriation of
the clergy reserves, have engaged His Majesty's most attentive
consideration.... It has, therefore, been with peculiar
satisfaction that, in his inquiries into this subject, His Majesty
has found that the changes sought for by so large a portion of the
inhabitants of Upper Canada, may be carried into effect without
sacrificing the just claims of the established Churches of England
and Scotland.... His Majesty, therefore, invites the House of
Assembly of Upper Canada to consider how the powers given the
Provincial Legislature by the Constitutional Act to vary or repeal
this part of its provisions, can be called into exercise most
advantageously, for the spiritual and temporal interests of His
Majesty's faithful subjects in the Province.
It will be seen that the Address to the Crown and reply, above quoted,
contemplated the application of no part of the proceeds of the clergy
lands for the support of the clergy of any religious persuasion, but the
application of the whole to the promotion of education, and in aid of
erecting places of worship. I do not make these references to advocate
this view of the question, but to show that the Crown has long since
assented to the alienation of the whole of the proceeds of the reserves
from the support of the clergy of any Church, should the Canadian
Legislature think proper to do so, and that the Church of Scotland in
Upper Canada agreed with the other religious persuasions, and the great
majority of the Canadian people, in the advocacy of such an alienation
of said reserves. The same parties cannot now object on constitutional
and moral grounds to what they heretofore advocated on those same
grounds.
9. It has, however, been alleged that the people of Canada have
acquiesced in the provisions of the Imperial Act, and are satisfied with
it. At the time of passing the Imperial Act, in 1840, and down to within
the last two years, the discussion of questions relating to the
organization and system of government itself occupied the attention of
the public mind in Canada; but no sooner was the public mind set at rest
on those paramount and fundamental questions, than the Canadian people
demanded the restoration of their rights on the question of the clergy
reserves. What they have felt for two years, and often and strongly
spoken, through the local press and at the hustings, they now speak in
the ears of the Sovereign of the Imperial Parliament. That there must be
deep and general dissatisfaction in Canada on this subject, will appear
from the following circumstances: (1) The Imperial Act infringes the
rights, and contravenes the wishes of the Canadian people; (2) It
inflicts an injustice and wrong upon the great majority of the religious
persuasions in that country, where the "convictions of nine-tenths" or
rather ninety-nine one-hundredths, of the inhabitants are in favour of
"equal rights upon equal conditions," among all classes and persuasions;
(3) The Legislative Assembly, by a majority of 51 to 20, declare that
the Imperial Act, "so far from settling this long agitated question, has
left it to be the subject of renewed and increased public discontent;"
(4) The comparative silence of the Wesleyan body--the oldest, the most
numerous, and the most unjustly treated, of all the excluded
denominations--is expressive and ominous. Its representatives, having
proceeded to England in 1840, remonstrated against this Bill, then
before Parliament; they sought the assent of Her Majesty's Secretary of
State for the Colonies to be heard at the Bar of the House of Commons
against it, and having been refused, they presented to him, July 27th,
1840, a most earnest remonstrance against the Bill. On the Bill becoming
law, they silently submitted, and on grounds which were explained, a few
months since, by the official organ of the Wesleyan Methodist Church in
Canada, in the following words:--
On Lord John Russell's Bill becoming a law, the question was
changed from a denominational to a Provincial one--from an
ecclesiastical to a constitutional one. It was no longer a question
between one denomination and another, but a question between Upper
Canada and the Imperial Parliament. As Canadians, and acting in
behalf of a large section of the Canadian community, the
representatives of the Wesleyan Methodist Church expressed their
convictions, their feelings, and their apprehensions to Her
Majesty's Government while the question was pending before
Parliament; but when the execrable Bill became an Imperial Law, it
was as much out of place for them as clergymen, or of any religious
persuasion to strive to fulfil their own predictions, or set on
foot a Colonial civil contest, as it would have been pusillanimous
in them not to have remonstrated before the consummation of such an
act of wrong against the people of Upper Canada. The question is
now being taken up in the right place, and, we trust, in the right
spirit.
10. Under such circumstances it is impossible that the question can long
remain in its present state, and it is for the Imperial Parliament to
say what shall be done. It is admitted upon all hands that the members
of the Churches of England and Scotland in Canada are more wealthy in
proportion to their numbers, and, therefore, less needful of extraneous
aid than the members of any other religious persuasion; and in
proportion to their numbers and wealth will be their comparative
influence and advantages in the proceedings of their own Legislature. It
is a grave question, whether the Imperial Parliament will place itself
in an attitude of hostility to the Legislative Assembly and people of
Canada for the sake of conferring questionable pecuniary distinctions
upon the clergy of the two most wealthy denominations in that country?
Should any members of Parliament be disposed to pursue this course, and
hazard this experiment, I beg them to pause and consider the following
questions:--
(1) Can the real interests of the Churches of England and Scotland
themselves be advanced by occupying a position of antagonism to the
acknowledged equal rights of the great majority of the people of Canada?
And is it desirable that these Churches should be the instruments and
emblems of wrong to a country, rather than natural and powerful agencies
of its unity, advancement, and happiness? Interested parties in Canada
may not be able to see this, but British and Christian statesmen ought
not to overlook it.
(2) Ought the members of the Churches of England and Scotland, who take
a part in public affairs in Canada, and who may be candidates for
popular power, to be placed in circumstances in which they must either
war against the position and authorities of their own Church, or war
against all other religious persuasions, or retire from public life
altogether?
(3) What will be the natural, or apparently inevitable, result of thus
singling out two classes of Canadian people, and distinguishing them
from all others by pecuniary endowments, and sustaining them in that
position, not by the free Legislature of their own country--not by the
original principles of their constitution of government to which Canada
may have pledged itself--but by a recent Imperial Act, to the preparing
or provisions of which the Canadians were no parties, and against which
they protest? Is it likely that the will or predilections of a
transatlantic House of Lords, so largely composed of and influenced by
one class of ecclesiastical dignitaries, can long determine the mutual
relations of religious persuasions in a country constituted as Canada
is, and bordering on the northern free Anglo-States of America? What the
Canadians ask they ask on grounds originally guaranteed to them by their
constitution; and if they are compelled to make a choice between British
connection and British constitutional rights, it is natural that they
should prefer the latter to the former? It is also to be noted that the
Imperial Act in question has to be administered through the local
Canadian administration. Such is the machinery of the Act. The revenue
that it appropriates is Canadian, and it is worked through Canadian
agency--through Canadian heads of departments, responsible to the
representatives of the people of Canada. Should the Canadian people,
then, find that their respectful and earnest appeal to the Imperial
Parliament, through the Sovereign, is in vain, they will naturally look
to their own resources and elect representatives at the ensuing general
elections who will pledge themselves to oppose the administration of the
Imperial Act--representatives who will support no Inspector or
Receiver-General that will be responsible for the payment of even any
warrant for moneys under such Act. The consequence must soon be, not
only injury to existing incumbents whom the Canadian Assembly now
propose to secure, but collision between the Government and the
Legislative Assembly, and ultimately between the latter and the Imperial
authorities; and finally, either the establishment of military
government in Canada (an impossibility), or the severance of that great
country from Great Britain. On the other hand, if the reasonable demand
and constitutional rights of the people of Canada be regarded in this
question, I believe Canada will remain freely and cordially connected
with the Mother Country for many years, if not generations, to come. I
will conclude these observations in the expressive words of Lord
Stanley, to the spirit of which I hope every British statesman will
respond. On the 2nd of May, 1828, in a speech on this subject, Lord
Stanley expressed himself in the following terms:--
That if any exclusive privileges be given to the Church of England,
not only will the measure be repugnant to every principle of sound
legislation, but contrary to the spirit and intention of the Act of
1791, under which the reserves were made for the Protestant clergy.
I will not enter further into it at present, except to express my
hope that the House will guard Canada against the evils which
religious dissensions have already produced in this country and in
Ireland, where we have examples to teach us what to shun. We have
seen the evil consequences of this system at home. God forbid we
should not profit by experience; and more especially in legislating
for a people bordering on a country where religious intolerance and
religious exclusions are unknown--a country to which Parliament
looked in passing the Act of 1791, as all the great men who argued
the question then expressly declared. It is important that His
Majesty's Canadian subjects should not have occasion to look across
the narrow boundary that separates them from the United States, to
see anything there to envy.
FOOTNOTES:
[137] Since the foregoing was written, it has been ascertained that the
Wesleyan Methodists number 142,000, or more than one-fifth of the entire
population (1850).
[Illustration]
CHAPTER LIV.
1854-1855.
Resignation on the Class-Meeting Question.--Discussion.
The last important connexional discussion in which Dr. Ryerson was
engaged was on the Class-Meeting Question. For years he had objected,
chiefly privately, amongst his brethren, clerical and lay, to making
attendance at class-meeting a condition of membership in the Wesleyan
Methodist Church of Canada. For various reasons, few members of the
Conference desired to have the subject publicly discussed in Conference.
They felt that a serious practical difficulty surrounded the question
itself--difficulties which could not be surmounted by public discussion.
Many of them also knew that in calmly discussing, without personal
feeling, the abstract principle involved in the rule, it would be found
that their judgment and loyal feeling to the Church would go one way,
while their uniform practice in the administration of the rule would
often be at variance with both, owing to peculiar circumstances. On the
other hand, Dr. Ryerson thought, that not only should preaching and
practice in this matter agree, but that theory and practice should also
agree. And hence he felt that as his preaching and practice agreed in
opposition to the rule, he was not loyal to the Church in ministering at
her altars, while he was heartily and conscientiously opposed to the
fundamental rule of membership prescribed by that Church. Hence, on the
2nd of January, 1854, he addressed the following letter to the Rev. Dr.
Wood, President of the Wesleyan Methodist Conference (I omit extraneous
matter):--
I hereby resign into your hands, my membership in the Conference, and my
office as a minister of the Wesleyan Methodist Church--herewith
enclosing my parchments of ordination, thus taking my place among the
laity of the Church.
I have resolved to take this step after long and serious deliberation,
but without consulting any human being. I take this step, not because I
do not believe that the Wesleyan ministry is as fully authorized as the
ministry of any other branch of the universal Church, to exercise all
the functions of Christian priesthood; not because I do not as
unfeignedly as ever subscribe to all the doctrines of the Wesleyan
Church; not because I do not profoundly honour the integrity and
devotedness of the Wesleyan ministry; not because I do not think that
Christian discipline is as strictly, if not more strictly, maintained in
the Wesleyan Church than in any other Christian Church in the world.
But I resign (not my connection with, but) my ministerial office in the
Wesleyan Church, because I believe a condition of membership is exacted
in it which has no warrant in Scripture, nor in the practice of the
primitive Church, nor in the writings of Mr. Wesley; and in consequence
of which condition, great numbers of exemplary heads of families and
young people are excluded from all recognition and rights of membership
in the Church. I refer to attendance upon class-meeting--without
attendance at which no person is acknowledged as a member of the
Wesleyan Methodist Church, however sincerely and cordially he may
believe her doctrines, prefer her ministry, and support her
institutions, and however exemplary he may be in his life.
I believe the class-meetings, as well as love-feasts, have been and are
a means of immense good in the Wesleyan Church, and that both should be
employed and recommended as prudential and useful, means of religious
edification to all who may be willing to avail themselves of them. But
attendance at love-feast is known to be voluntary and not to be a
condition of membership in the Church; so I think that attendance at
class-meeting should also be voluntary, and ought not to be exalted into
an indispensable condition of membership in the Church; I am persuaded
that every person who believes the doctrines, and observes the precepts
and ordinances enjoined by our Lord and His Apostles, is eligible to
membership in the Church of Christ, and cannot, on Scriptural or
Wesleyan grounds, be excluded from its rights and privileges upon the
mere ground of his or her being unable to reconcile it to their views to
take a part in the conversations of class-meetings.
The views thus stated, I have entertained many years. After having
revolved the subject in my mind for some time, I expressed my views on
it in 1840 and 1841.... But since my more direct connection with the
youth of the country at large, and having met with numbers of exemplary
persons who prefer the Methodist Church to any other, but are excluded
from it by the required condition of attending class-meeting, besides
thousands of young people of Wesleyan parents and congregations, I have
become more deeply than ever impressed with the importance of the
question, to which I referred in remarks made at the last and preceding
Conferences. I had intended until within a short time to defer any
decision on the step I now take until the next annual Conference, and
until after bringing the question in the form of distinct propositions
before the Conference; but, after the best consideration in my power, I
have thought it advisable to resign my office in the Church at the
present time--fearing the revival and results of unpleasantnesses from
my bringing the question formally before the Conference, ... and from a
deep conviction that I should no longer delay taking the most effectual
means in my power to draw the attention of the ministry and members of
the Wesleyan Church to this anomaly in her Disciplinary regulations, and
secure, if possible, to tens of thousands of persons the rights and
privileges of membership in that branch of the Church of Christ which
they prefer--rights and privileges to which I am persuaded they are
justly entitled upon both Scriptural and Wesleyan grounds.
I do not think it is honest or right for a man to hold the office of a
minister in a Church, all whose essential regulations, as well as
doctrines, he cannot justify and recommend. I say essential regulations;
for there may be many regulations and practices in a Church of which a
minister may not approve, and the existence of which he may deplore, but
which would not prevent him from maintaining, as usual, his relations
and course of labour. An enlightened Christian mind can and will,
without any compromise of principle, allow a wide latitude in modes of
proceeding, and in matters of opinion, taste, and prudence. But a
regulation which determines who shall and who shall not be recognized as
members of the Church of Christ, involves a vital question, the
importance of which cannot be overrated, and which must be determined by
Divine Revelation, and not by mere conventional rules.
Now, while as an individual I may value and wish to attend, as far as
possible, all prudential as well as instituted means of grace in our
Church, I cannot as a teacher, by word or office, declare that all
persons who will not attend class-meetings, in addition to observing all
the ordinances of Christ, should be rejected and excluded from the
Christian Church. I cannot say so--I cannot think so--I cannot believe
it Scriptural or right, in respect to great numbers of estimable
persons, and of the sons and daughters of our people, who believe
Wesleyan doctrines, who respect and love the Wesleyan ministry, support
Wesleyan institutions, are exemplary in their lives, and who wish to be
members of the Wesleyan Church, but who, from education, or mental
constitution, or other circumstances, cannot face much less enjoy, the
developments and peculiarities of the class-meeting. I have met and
sympathized with many who have sought to reconcile their views and
feelings to the personal speakings and communications of class-meetings,
but who could not succeed; and not being allowed otherwise to enjoy the
privileges of membership in the Wesleyan Church, were driven to seek
admission into some other Christian communion.
Our Lord and His Apostles have prescribed no form of religious communion
but the Lord's Supper. The New Testament meetings of Christian
fellowship, in which the early Christians edified one another, are
appropriately adduced as the exemplars of Wesleyan love-feasts--that
voluntary and useful means of religious edification. But it is
remarkable that a person may neither attend love-feast nor the Lord's
Supper, and yet retain his membership in the Wesleyan Church, while he
is excluded from it if he does not attend class-meeting, though he may
attend both the Lord's Supper and love-feast, as well as the preaching
of the word and meetings for prayer. Nay, I find in the latter part of
the section of our Discipline on "Class Meetings," that the minister in
charge of a circuit is required to exclude all "those members of the
Church who wilfully and repeatedly neglect to meet their class," but to
state at the time of their exclusion, "that they are laid aside for a
breach of our rules of Discipline, and not for immoral conduct." I know
of no Scriptural authority to exclude any person from the Church of
Christ on earth, except for that which would exclude him from the
kingdom of glory, namely, "immoral conduct." But here is an express
requirement for the exclusion of persons from the Wesleyan Church for
that which it is admitted is not "immoral conduct," namely, neglect of
class-meeting. This is certainly going beyond Scriptural authority and
example.
I have said that I do not regard as Wesleyan, or having the sanction of
Mr. Wesley, the making attendance at class-meeting an essential
condition of membership in the Church of Christ. Mr. Wesley declared
that the sole object of his labours was, not to form a new sect, but to
revive religion in the Church and in the nation; that each class was a
voluntary society in the Church, but was no more a separate Church
organization than a Bible Society, or Temperance Society, or Young Men's
Christian Association, is a separate Church organization. Nor did Mr.
Wesley regard the admission of persons into, or exclusion from, any one
of his societies as affecting, in the slightest degree, such person's
Church membership. Nay, Mr. Wesley insisted that all who joined his
societies, in addition to attending class-meeting, and the ministrations
of his preachers, should regularly attend the services and sacraments of
the Church of England. In his sermon "On Attending Church Service," Mr.
Wesley says, "it was one of our original rules, that every member of our
society should attend the church and sacrament, unless he had been bred
among Christians of another denomination." In his Tract, entitled
"Principles of a Methodist Further Explained," (written in reply to the
Rev. Mr. Church,) Mr. Wesley says:--
The United Society was originally so called, because it consisted
of several smaller societies united together. When any member of
these, or of the United Society, are proved to live in known sin,
we then mark and avoid them: we separate ourselves from every one
that walks disorderly. Sometimes if the case be judged infectious
(though rarely) this is decided openly; but this you style
"excommunication," and say, "does not every one see a separate
ecclesiastical communion?"
Mr. Wesley replies:--
No. This society does not separate from the rest of the Church of
England. They continue steadfast with them both in the apostolical
doctrine, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.
And in further reply to the charge, that in excluding disorderly persons
from his society, he was usurping a power committed to the higher order
of the clergy, Mr. Wesley says:--
No; not in the power of excluding members from a private society,
unless on the supposition of some such rule as ours is, viz.: "That
if a man separate from the church, he is no longer a member of our
society."
These passages (from scores of similar ones in Mr. Wesley's works), are
sufficient to shew what Mr. Wesley understood and intended by admission
into, or exclusion from, any one of his societies--that it did not in
the least affect the relations of any person to the Church of which he
was a member. Now, the rule which Mr. Wesley imposed as a condition of
membership in a private society in a Church, we impose as a condition of
membership in the Church itself.
It is also worthy of remark, that attendance at class-meeting is not
required of members in the general rules of the society--those very
rules which our ministers are required to give to persons proposing to
join the Wesleyan Church.
In those rules no mention is made of class-meeting, nor is it there
required that each member shall meet the leader, much less meet him in a
class-meeting, in the presence of many others; but that the leader shall
see each person in his class, and meet the minister and stewards once a
week. Yet, by constant and universal practice, we have transferred the
obligation from the leader to the member, and made it the duty of the
latter (on pain of excommunication), to meet the former in
class-meeting; an obligation which is nowhere enjoined in the general
rules. In those rules it is said:
There is only one condition previously required of those who desire
admission into these societies--a desire to flee from the wrath to
come, and to be saved from their sins.
The rules then truly state, that wherever this desire is really fixed in
the soul, it will be known by its fruits. These fruits are briefly but
fully set forth under three heads. (1) By doing no harm. (2) By doing
good. (3) "By attending all the ordinances of God: such as, the public
worship of God; the ministry of the word, either read or expounded; the
Supper of the Lord; family and private prayer; searching the Scriptures,
and fasting or abstinence. These are the general rules of our societies,
all of which we are taught of God to observe, even in His written word,
which is the only rule, and the sufficient rule, both of faith and
practice." Now, neither class-meeting nor love-feast is mentioned among
the "ordinances of God" enumerated in the general rules of the society;
nor is it mentioned in Mr. Wesley's Large Minutes of Conference among
the instituted means of grace. So far as the general rules themselves
are concerned, there is nothing which makes attendance at class-meeting
a condition of membership, even in Mr. Wesley's societies as he
originally instituted them; nor did the idea of holding class-meetings
at all occur to Mr. Wesley until after the general rules were drawn up
and published.[138] But what was not required by the general rules soon
became a condition of membership in another way--this was by the system
of giving tickets. Mr. Wesley says in his Plain Account of People called
Methodists:
As the society increased, I found it required still greater care to
separate the precious from the vile. In order to this, I
determined, at least once in three months, to talk with every
member myself, and to inquire at their own mouth, as well as of
their leaders and neighbours, whether they grew in grace and in the
knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. To each of those whose
seriousness and good conversation I had no reason to doubt, I gave
a testimony under my own hand, by writing their name on a ticket
prepared for that purpose. Those who bore these tickets, wherever
they came, were acknowledged by their brethren, and were received
with all cheerfulness. These tickets also supplied us with a quiet
and inoffensive method of removing any disorderly member. He has no
ticket at the quarterly visitation (for so often the tickets are
changed); and hereby it is immediately known that he is no longer
of the community.
It was at length required by a minute of the Conference, (as our own
discipline enjoins,) that a preacher should not give a ticket of
membership to any person who did not meet in class. In our own
Discipline, in the section on class-meetings, will also be found the
following question and answer:--
_Question._--What shall be done with those members of our church
who wilfully and repeatedly neglect their class?
_Answer._--1. Let the chairman, or one of the preachers, visit them
whenever it is practicable, and explain to them the consequence if
they continue to neglect, viz., exclusion.
2. If they do not attend, let him who has charge of the circuit
exclude them (in the church), showing that they are laid aside for
a breach of our rules of discipline, and not for immoral conduct.
By this added ministerial authority and duty, a condition of membership
in the society is imposed which is not contained in the General Rules,
and which subjects a member to exclusion, for that which is acknowledged
to be "not immoral conduct."
This appears a strange regulation in even a private religious society
within a Church; but no objection could be reasonably made to any such
regulation in such a society, if its members desired it, and as it would
not affect their Church membership. But the case is essentially
different, when such society in a Church becomes a Church, and exercises
the authority of admitting into, and excluding from the Church itself,
and not merely a society in the Church.
In England, and especially in the United States and Canada, the Wesleyan
Societies have become a Church. I have repeatedly shewn in past years,
that they have become organized into a Church upon both Wesleyan and
scriptural grounds. I believe the Wesleyan Church in Canada is second to
no other in the scriptural authority of its ministry and organization.
Believing this, I believe that exclusion from the Wesleyan Church
(either by expulsion or refusal of admission) is exclusion from a branch
of the Church of God--is an act the most solemn and eventful in the
history and relations of any human being--an act which should never take
place except upon the clear and express authority of the word of God.
Far be it from me to say one word other than in favour of every kind of
religious exercise and communion which tends to promote the
spiritual-mindedness, brotherly love, and fervent zeal of professing
Christians. That class-meetings (notwithstanding occasional
improprieties and abuses attending them), have been a valuable means in
promoting the spirituality and usefulness of the Wesleyan Church, no one
acquainted with her history can for a moment doubt; and I believe that
myriads on earth and in heaven have, and will ever have, reason for
devout thankfulness and praise for the benefits derived from
class-meetings, as well as from love-feasts and meetings for prayer. But
attendance upon the two latter is voluntary on the part of the members
of the Wesleyan Church; and what authority is there for suspending their
very membership in the Church of God on their attendance upon the
former? The celebration of the Lord's Supper, and not class-meeting, was
the binding characteristic institution upon the members of the primitive
Church. So I am persuaded it should be now; and that Christian faith and
practice alone (and not the addition of attendance upon class-meeting,)
should be the test of worthiness for its communion and privileges.
While, therefore, as an individual I seek to secure and enjoy all the
benefits of the faithful ministrations and scriptural ordinances of the
Wesleyan Church, I cannot occupy a position which in itself, and by its
duties requires me to enforce or justify the imposition of a condition
of membership in the Church of Christ, which I believe is not required
by the Holy Scriptures, and the exclusion of thousands of persons from
Church membership and privileges, to which I believe they have as valid
a right as I have, and that upon the sole ground of their non-attendance
at a meeting, the neglect of which our own Discipline admits, does not
involve "immoral conduct," and which Mr. Wesley himself, in his Plain
Account of the People called Methodists, has declared "to be merely
prudential, not essential, not of divine institution."
It is passing strange, that while the Wesleyan Church is the avowed
"friend of all and enemy of none"--is the most Catholic of any
Protestant body towards other religious communions--she should close the
door of admission into her own fold even to attendance upon
class-meeting. I regard it as the misfortune rather than the dishonour
of the Wesleyan Church, that she repels thousands that seek her
communion rather than relax this term of admission. If her success has
been so great under disadvantages unparalleled, I cannot but believe,
that, with the same divine blessing, and upon a basis of membership less
narrow and more scriptural, the Wesleyan Church, would, beyond all
precedent, increase her usefulness, and enlarge her borders.
I will not permit myself to dwell upon associations and recollections
which cannot be expressed in words, any more than they can be
obliterated from the memory, or effaced from the heart. Though I retire
from councils in the deliberations of which I have been permitted to
take a part during more than twenty-five years, and relinquish all
claims upon funds to which I have contributed for a like period, I
should still deem it my duty and privilege to pray for the success of
the former, and continue my humble contributions to the latter; while I
protest in the most emphatic way in my power against shutting the doors
of the church upon thousands to whom I believe they should be opened,
and against making that essential and divine, which, as Mr. Wesley says,
"is merely prudential, not essential, not of divine institution." I hope
the day is not remote when the Wesleyan Church will be as scriptural in
her every term of membership as she is in her doctrines of grace and
labours of love.
To this letter of resignation, Rev. Dr. Wood, President of the
Conference, replied on the 4th of January:--
To accept the enclosed documents would be assuming a responsibility
at variance with my judgment and affections. If the proposal you
make of withdrawing from the Methodist ministry be ever received,
it must be with the concurrence of the collective Conference; or,
should the question require immediate attention, that of its
executive committee. I shall be glad to see the enactment of any
regulation which will promote the usefulness of our Church to the
benefit of a large and intelligent class of adherents now receiving
no recognition beyond their contributions to our institutions; and
also the adoption of practical measures by which the youth baptized
by Wesleyan ministers may be more personally cared for, and
affiliated to our ordinances. Your distinguished ability and
matured experience eminently qualify you as a safe legislator and
counsellor on such grave questions, which by some cannot be
separated from ancient usages greatly blessed to the growing
spirituality of true believers, without injury to the vital
character of the Church. After so long and useful a career, your
separation from our Conference and work would be a connexional
calamity. You stand among the few in Canada to whom the present
independent and legal position of the Wesleyan Church stands deeply
indebted. Future generations of ministers and people will partake,
imperceptibly to themselves, of the advantages a few of the more
gifted and noble-minded brethren struggled and contended for
against so many obstacles. You are as capable of remedying anything
wrong, or supplying anything wanting within the Church, as you were
many years ago, to overcome impediments to her usefulness without.
Nothing further was done in the matter until at the Belleville
Conference of 1854 Dr. Ryerson moved the following resolution:--
1. That no human authority has a right to impose any condition of
membership in the visible Church of Christ, which is not enjoined
by, or may be concluded from the Holy Scriptures.
2. That the General Rules of the United Societies of the Wesleyan
Methodist Church being formed upon the Holy Scriptures, and
requiring nothing of any member which is not necessary for
admission into the kingdom of grace and glory, ought to be
maintained inviolate as the religious and moral standard of
profession, conduct and character, in regard to all who are
admitted or continued members of our church.
3. That the power, therefore, of expelling persons from the visible
Church of Christ, for other than a cause sufficient to exclude a
person from the kingdom of grace and glory, which the fourth
question, and answers to it, contained in the second section of the
second chapter of our Discipline, confer and enjoin upon our
ministers, is unauthorized by the Holy Scriptures, is inconsistent
with the Scriptural rights of the members of Christ's Church, and
ought not to be assumed or exercised by any minister of our Church.
4. That the anomalous question and answers referred to in the
foregoing resolution, be, and are hereby expunged from our
Discipline and are required to be omitted in printing the next
edition of it. (See page 477.)
These resolutions having been negatived by a considerable majority on
the 12th June, Dr. Ryerson wrote to the President:
The decision of the Conference this afternoon on the scriptural rights
of the members of our Church, and the power of our ministers in respect
to them, makes it at length my painful duty to request you to lay before
the Conference the letter which I addressed to you the 2nd of last
January, and that you will consider that letter as now addressed to the
Conference through you.
I hereby again enclose you my parchments of ordination. I propose to do
all in my power to promote those important measures in regard to the
college and means for the regular training of received candidates for
the ministry which have been recommended by the Conference. I cannot
attempt to add anything more to what is contained in my letter of the
2nd January, expressive of what I feel on the present occasion, except
to say that, although I gave no intimation during the discussion of the
result of the decision on this subject upon my own official relations to
the Conference, I retire from it with feelings of undiminished respect
and affection for my Reverend Brethren, and my earnest prayer for their
welfare and usefulness.
In reply to this letter Dr. Wood said:--
The purpose you aim to accomplish can be effectually secured by a
different resolution to that introduced yesterday; if you will stay
and hear what the brethren may say about the appointment of a large
committee to take up this subject before I lay your resignation
before them, I shall feel much gratified. I again say, I look upon
your proposed withdrawal with deep sorrow, and must say, I cannot
bring myself to believe that on such grounds you can be justified
in taking so serious a step.
Dr. Ryerson did attend the Conference as suggested, after which he wrote
to Dr. Wood:--
I listened with delight and hope to the observations and recommendations
which you made. I anticipated happy results from the appointment of the
very large committee which you nominated, and which might be considered
as representing the sentiments and feelings of the Conference. But from
the lengthened meeting of that committee, in the evening, it was clear
that no disposition existed to modify the power of ministers to expel
persons from the Church for non-attendance at a meeting which, in the
12th section, chap. 1st, page 47, of our own Discipline, taken from the
writings of Mr. Wesley, is declared to be "prudential," even among
Methodists--that thus the highest and most awful penalty that the Church
can inflict--a penalty analagous to capital punishment in the
administration of civil law--is to be executed upon members of the
Church for the omission of what our own Discipline does not exalt to
the rank of a "prudential" means of grace among Christians,--only among
Methodists.
It was also clear that views of baptism prevailed (I cannot say how
widely) at variance with the 17th Article of Faith in our
Discipline,[139] and altogether opposite to those set forth by Mr.
Wesley in his sermons and in his Treatise on Baptism.
But that for which I was not prepared (which I supposed to have been
settled, and which I therefore assumed), was the obviously prevalent
opinion against the Church membership of children baptized by our
ministry. It will be recollected that I had not proposed any other
condition or mode of admitting persons into our Church from without,
than that which already exists amongst us; but I urged in behalf of both
parents and children, the practical recognition of the rights and claims
of children who were admitted and acknowledged as members of the Church
by baptism, as implied in our Form of Baptism, and according to our
Catechism, and according to what the Conference unanimously declared at
Hamilton, in 1853, our Church holds to be among the privileges of
baptized persons,--namely, that "they are made members of the visible
Church of Christ." Persons cannot, of course, be members of the
"visible" Church of Christ without becoming members of some visible
branch or section of it; and it is not pretended that children baptized
by our ministry are members of any other visible portion of the Church
of Christ than the Wesleyan. To deny, therefore, that the baptized
children of our people are members of our Church, and that they should
be acknowledged as such, and as such be impressed with their obligations
and privileges, and as such be prepared for, and brought into, the
spiritual communion and fellowship of the Church, on coming to the years
of accountability, is, it appears to me, to make the Sacrament of
Baptism a nullity, and to disfranchise thousands of children of divinely
chartered rights and privileges. Mr. Wesley, in his Treatise on Baptism,
in stating the third benefit of baptism, remarks:--
By baptism we are admitted into the Church, and consequently made
members of Christ, its Head. The Jews were admitted into the Church
by circumcision, so are the Christians by baptism.
Mr. Wesley, speaking of the proper subjects of baptism, says:
If infants are capable of making a covenant, and were and still are
under the evangelical covenant, then they have a right to baptism,
which is the entering seal thereof. But infants are capable of
making a covenant, and were and still are under the evangelical
covenant.
The custom of nations and common reason of mankind prove that
infants may enter into a covenant, and may be obliged by compacts
made by others in their name, and receive advantage by them. But we
have stronger proof than this, even God's own word: "Ye stand this
day all of you before the Lord,--your captains, with all the men of
Israel; your little ones, your wives, and the stranger,--that thou
shouldst enter into covenant with the Lord thy God."--Deut. xxix.
10-12. Now, God would never have made a covenant with little
children, if they had not been capable of it. It is not said
children only, but little children, the Hebrew word properly
signifying infants. And these may be still, as they were of old,
obliged to perform, in aftertime, what they are not capable of
performing at the time of their entering into that obligation.
The infants of believers, the true children of faithful Abraham,
always were under the Gospel covenant. They were included in it,
they had a right to it, and to the seal of it; as an infant heir
has a right to his estate, though he cannot yet have actual
possession.--Vol. x., English Edition, pp. 193, 194. Vol. vi.,
American Edition, pp. 16, 17.
Again, Mr. Wesley's third argument on this subject is so clear, so
touching, and so conclusive, that I will quote it without abridgement,
as follows:--
If infants ought to come to Christ, if they are capable of
admission into the Church of God, and consequently of solemn
sacramental dedication to Him, then they are proper subjects of
baptism. But infants are capable of coming to Christ, of admission
into the Church, and solemn dedication to God.
That infants ought to come to Christ, appears from his own words:
"They brought little children to Christ, and the disciples rebuked
them. And Jesus said, Suffer little children to come unto me, and
forbid them not; for of such is the kingdom of heaven."--Matt. xix.
13, 14. St. Luke expresses it still more strongly: "They brought
unto him even infants, that he might touch them."--xviii. 15. These
children were so little, that they were brought to him; yet he
says, "Suffer them to come unto me:" so little, that he "took them
up in His arms;" yet he rebukes those who would have hindered their
coming to Him. And his command respected the future as well as the
present. Therefore His disciples or ministers are still to suffer
infants to come, that is, to be brought, unto Christ. But they
cannot now come to Him, unless by being brought into the Church;
which cannot be but by baptism. Yea, and "of such," says our Lord,
"is the kingdom of heaven;" not of such only as were like these
infants. For if they themselves were not fit to be subjects of that
kingdom, how could others be so, because they were like them?
Infants, therefore, are capable of being admitted into the Church,
and have a right thereto. Even under the Old Testament they were
admitted into it by circumcision. And can we suppose they are in a
worse condition under the Gospel, than they were under the law? and
that our Lord would take away any privilege which they then
enjoyed? Would He not rather make additions to them? This, then, is
a third ground. Infants ought to come to Christ, and no man ought
to forbid them. They are capable of admission into the Church of
God. Therefore they are proper subjects of baptism.--Vol. x.,
English Edition, pp. 195, 196. Vol. vi., American Edition, pp. 17,
18.
Upon these Wesleyan and Scriptural grounds, I believe that the promise
and privileges of membership in the Church belong to the baptized
children of our people as well as to their parents; that the parents
have a right to claim this relationship and its privileges for their
children until such children are excluded from the Church by the lawful
acts of its executive authorities. Otherwise, the youth baptized by our
ministry are in the most pitiful and degrading religious position of the
youth of any Church that recognizes the doctrine of infant baptism; and
it appears to me that we ought rather not to baptize infants at all, or
recommend their parents to take them to other churches for baptism, than
thus to treat the feelings of such parents, and to regard their children
as having no more membership and privileges in our Church than the rest
of the youth of the land, or even the world at large.
It is happily true, that many of the children of our people, as well as
those of other people, are converted and brought into the Church under
the faithful ministrations of the Word; but how many ten thousand more
of them would never wander from the Church, would more easily and more
certainly be led to experience all the power of inward religion and the
blessings of Christian fellowship, were they acknowledged in their true
position and rights, and taught the significancy, and obligation, and
privilege of all that the outward ordinances and their visible relations
involve were intended to confer. It ought to make a Christian heart
bleed to think that our largest increase of members, according to
returns over which we are disposed to congratulate ourselves, falls
vastly short of the natural increase of population in our own community,
apart from the increase of the population of the country at large, and,
therefore, that perhaps five or more persons are sent out into the
world, as worldlings, from the families of our Church, while one is
retained or brought into it from the world by all our ministrations and
agencies. The prophets did not deny to a Jew his membership in the
Jewish Church, in order to make him a Jew inwardly. Mr. Wesley did not
un-church the tens of thousands of baptized members of the Church of
England to whom he successfully preached salvation by faith: he made
their state, and duties, and privileges, as baptized members of the
Church of Christ, the grounds of his appeals; and this vantage ground
was one great means of his wonderful success.
But I will not enlarge. I will only add, that as in former years, I,
with others, maintained what we believed to be the rights of Canada and
of our Canadian Church against pretensions which have long since been
withdrawn, and the erroneous information and impressions connected with
which have long since been removed; so, I now feel it my duty to do what
I can to secure and maintain the Scriptural and Wesleyan rights of
members of our Church against the exercise of ministerial authority
which has no warrant in Scripture nor in the writings of Mr. Wesley; and
I feel myself specially called upon by my position in respect to the
youth of the country, as well as by my strong convictions, to claim and
insist upon the Scriptural and Wesleyan rights of church membership in
behalf of the many thousands of children baptized by our
ministry--believing upon both Scriptural and Wesleyan grounds, it is due
to such children and to their parents.
I have no object in view, beyond what is avowed in this correspondence.
If I have had any personal ambition, it has been more than satisfied
both in the Church and in the country at large. I have nothing more to
seek or desire, than to employ the short and uncertain time that remains
to me in striving to become more and more meet for the intercourse of
the saints in light, to mature and promote for my native country the
great educational system in which I am engaged, and to secure to all
members of our Church, and to all parents and children baptized into it,
what I am persuaded are their sacred rights and privileges. I am
satisfied that Scriptural and Wesleyan truth will, as heretofore,
prevail, and that the Conference and the Church will yet rejoice in it,
however it may, for the moment, be clouded by error and
misrepresentation, or impeded by personal feelings, groundless fears, or
mistaken prejudice.
On the 13th June Dr. Ryerson made a request to the Conference that the
documents connected with his resignation be published in the _Guardian_.
He said:--
I wish the church to know the reasons which have influenced me on
this occasion--especially as I believe them to be both Wesleyan and
Scriptural. As I have for thirty years contributed to all the funds
of the preachers and Church, without receiving or expecting to
receive a farthing from them, and from the period and kinds of
labours I have performed in the Church, and from my wish to live in
connexion with it, I think my letters of resignation might at least
not be withheld from the members of our Church. If any expense
attend the publication of the correspondence between us, I will
defray every farthing of it.
I do not think any other member of the Conference is called upon to
do as I have done--my circumstances being peculiar. But I do not
wish to be wronged and blackened by misrepresentations; I only
desire that my brethren and old friends through the land may be
permitted and enabled to read my own reasons and views on this the
last occasion of my official intercourse with them.[140]
This request was denied, so that Dr. Ryerson published the documents in
a pamphlet himself. In doing so he said:--
A more vitally important and deeply affecting subject can scarcely be
laid before the Wesleyan community; but in order to present it to the
pious judgment of that body at large, I have had no other alternative
than to assume the position I now sustain--otherwise being compelled to
observe, as in past years, a strict silence beyond the walls of the
Conference room. But from what I have witnessed and heard in that room,
I appeal to the calm consideration of the intelligent and devout members
of the Wesleyan Church, either in their closets with their Bible before
them, or at their firesides with their children around them. Whether I
have or have not overrated the importance of the question, I leave
everyone to decide after reading the following correspondence. It will
be seen that the question is not one of a personal nature--is not one
which ought to excite any unkind feeling between persons who may take
different views of it. The question is as to whether, on the Wesleyan
Conference assuming the position and functions of a distinct and
independent Church, a condition of membership has not been imposed which
is a departure from the principles of Mr. Wesley and the doctrine and
practice of the Apostolic and Primitive Church--a condition which
ignores the church relation, rights and privileges of the baptized
children of the Wesleyan body, and excludes thousands from its
membership upon unscriptural and un-Wesleyan grounds. It will be seen by
an extract on page 20, that Mr. Wesley's disciplinary object in giving
quarterly tickets was, "to separate the precious from the vile," "to
remove any disorderly member;" but in vain have I sought for an instance
of Mr. Wesley ever excluding, even from his private societies in a
Church, an upright and orderly member for mere non-attendance at
class-meeting. That, however, he might have consistently done in a
society in a Church, if he had thought it expedient to do so, as it
would not have affected the membership of any parties in the Church to
which they belonged. The three paragraphs of our Discipline, containing
three sentences against which I protest, had no place in the Minutes of
Conference finally revised and printed by Mr. Wesley in the year of his
death; nor do they exist in the Minutes of the British Conference to
this day. From what is therefore modern and unauthorized by Scripture,
by the practice of the Primitive Church, or by Mr. Wesley, I go back to
first principles, and say, as did Mr. Wesley to Dr. Coke and Mr. Asbury,
when he sent them to organize the Societies in America into a Church,
let us "simply follow the Scriptures and the Primitive Church."
It is often said that "nobody objects to attending class-meeting except
those who have no religion." Persons who thus judge of others show more
of the Pharisaical, than of the Christian, spirit, and evince but little
of the "wisdom that cometh from above" in thus "measuring others by
themselves." The following correspondence shows that I am second to none
in my appreciation of the value and usefulness of class meetings; but I
have had too much experience not to know that the best talkers in a
class-meeting are not always the best livers in the world; and I attach
less importance to what a person may say of himself in a class-meeting,
than to uprightness in his dealings, integrity in his word, meekness in
his temper, charity in his spirit, liberality in his contributions,
blamelessness in his life. Doings, rather than sayings, are the rule of
Divine judgment....
It may not be improper for me to observe, that there are ministers who
loudly advocate attendance at class-meeting as a Church-law, and yet do
not observe that law themselves perhaps once a year, much less
habitually, as they insist in respect to private members; and the most
strenuous of such advocates pay no heed to the equally positive
prohibitions and requirements of the discipline in several other
respects, especially in regard to band-meetings, which were designed, as
the Discipline expressly states, "to obey that command of God, 'confess
your faults one to another, and pray for one another, that ye may be
healed.'" I am far from intimating, or believing, that there are many
advocates of class-meeting tests of this description. But history shows,
from our Lord to the present time, that the most vehement advocates for
the "mint, annise and cummin" of particular tests and forms, are not
proportionably zealous for the "weightier matters of the law." It is
easier for men to impose and enforce law upon others than to observe it
themselves. But when a man's words and actions contradict each other,
the argument of his actions is the more forcible, as well as the more
honest and sincere.
It has likewise been alleged, that if attendance at class-meeting be not
made a church-law, and the capital punishment of expulsion be not
attached to its violation, class-meetings will fall into disuse. I
answer, this is beside the question. The question is, whether there is
such a law in the Bible? Has our Lord or His Apostles given authority to
any conclave or conference to make such a law? Our Lord and the Apostles
knew better than their followers what was essential to membership in the
Christian Church, as well as what was essential to its existence and
prosperity. I may also observe, that if the existence of class-meetings
cannot be maintained except by the terror of the scorpion-whip, or
rather executioner's sword, of expulsion from the church, it says little
for them as a privilege, or place of delightful and joyous resort. My
own conviction is, that if class-meetings, like love-feasts, were
maintained and recommended as a privilege and useful means of religious
edification, and not as a law, the observance of which is necessary to
membership in the visible Church of Christ, but made voluntary, like
joining the Missionary Society, class-meetings would be more efficient
and useful than they are now, and attendance at them would be more
cordial and profitable, if not as, or even more, general. But what might
be or not be in any supposed case, is foreign to a question as to what
is enjoined in the law and testimony of the Holy Scriptures as essential
to discipleship with Christ.
It is well known that meeting in class, by a large portion of the
members of the Wesleyan Church, is very irregular--that their absence
from class-meeting is the general rule of their practice, and their
attendance the exception. Yet such persons are not excluded, as it would
involve the expulsion of the greater part of the members of the body,
including several of its ministers. It is, therefore, so much the more
objectionable, and so much the more wrong, to have a rule which ignores
at one sweep the membership of all the baptized children of the body,
which sends and keeps away the conscientious and straightforward, who
would not think of joining a religious community without intending
habitually to observe all its rules, and yet, after all, habitually
disregarded by a large portion of both preachers and people, and is
made, as far as my observation goes, an instrument of gratifying
individual hostility, rather than a means of promoting the religious and
moral ends of Christian discipline.
It is, however, the bearing of this question upon the relationship and
destinies of the youth of the Wesleyan body that has most deeply
impressed and affected my own mind, as may be inferred from the
correspondence on the subject. It requires less scriptural zeal, and an
inferior order of qualifications, and it is much more exciting and easy,
to minister or attend at special meetings, and in the ordinary public
services of the Church, than to pursue "in season and out of season" the
less conspicuous and more detailed labour of teaching and training up
children and youth in the knowledge and experience of the doctrines of
Christ, and thus secure them to the Church, and to the Saviour, and
secure to them the "godliness which has the promise of the life that now
is, and of that which is to come."[141]
And what is the result of the general adoption (with a few fine
exceptions), of the former in preference to the latter--instead of the
union of both? It is the humiliating and most painful fact that the
great majority of Methodist youth are lost to the Church, if not lost to
Christ and to heaven--that in a large proportion of instances, Methodism
is not perpetuated to the second generation of the same family--that in
the great majority of instances it is only so perpetuated very
partially, and in very few instances to all the children of Methodist
parents; while there is each year the conversion of only a few hundreds,
or thousands, mostly from without. The return of prodigals, and the
accession of strangers and aliens to the body, are indeed causes of
thankfulness and rejoicing; but prevention is better than cure--piety
from childhood is better than reformation in manhood. The judgment of
the Apostle upon him "who neglects to provide for his own house," even
in temporal matters, is well known; and must there not be a radical
defect and wrong in any religious organization which loses the great
majority of its own youth, and depends largely on infusions from without
for the recruit of its numbers? Such an organization may do much good,
and widely extend in many places for the time being, especially in a new
and unsettled state of society; but the vital element of permanent
strength and lasting prosperity is wanting, where, by its repulsion or
neglect, the great majority of its baptized youth are alienated from,
and lost to its communion. It is not in the promise of God, or in the
genius of Scriptural Christianity, that "children trained up in the way
they should go," will, in many instances, much less generally, depart
from it in after years....
Impressed with the magnitude of the wrongs and evils above referred to,
dreading personal collision in the Conference, anticipating but little
success from it, and feeling uncertain as to how few were likely to be
the days of my earthly career, and believing that a special duty was
imposed upon me in this respect by Providential circumstances, I
addressed to the President, the 2nd of January, ... as the most likely
means, without collision with any person or body, to draw practical
attention to the subject, on the part of both the ministry and the laity
of the Church.... I have the satisfaction of knowing that, if the first
efforts of my pen, after joining the Conference in 1825, were to
advocate the right of the members of the Church to hold a bit of ground
in which to bury their dead, and the right of its ministers to perform
the marriage service for the members of their congregations, my last
efforts in connection with the Conference have been directed to obtain
the rights of Christian citizenship to the baptized children and
exemplary adherents of the Church. While I maintain that each child in
the land has a right to such an education as will fit him for his duties
as a citizen of the state, and that the obligations of the state
correspond to the rights of the child, so I maintain, upon still
stronger and higher grounds, that each child baptized by the Church is
thereby enfranchised with the rights and privileges of citizenship in
it, until he forfeits them by personal misconduct and exclusion, and
that the obligations of the Church correspond to the rights of the
child. I also maintain that each member of Christ's visible Church, has
a scriptural right to his membership in it as long as he keeps the
"commandments and ordinances of God," whether he attends or does not
attend a meeting which Mr. Wesley (who instituted it), declared to be
"merely prudential, not essential, not of divine institution," and for
not attending which he never excluded, or presumed to authorize
excluding, a person from Church membership. It is a principle of St.
Paul, in the 14th chapter of Romans, of all true Protestantism, as well
as of the writings of Mr. Wesley, "in necessary things unity, in
non-essentials liberty, in all things charity."
* * * * *
In a letter, written from Quebec to a dear friend in Toronto, Dr.
Ryerson thus refers to his religious experience at that time of personal
trial on the class-meeting question. He said:--In compliance with the
entreaties of the Hon. James Ferrier and the Rev. Wm. Pollard, I
preached here last Sunday evening, and perhaps seldom with so much
effect--certainly, never in Lower Canada. The congregation was very
large; many members of the Legislature were present; and some were much
affected. I had felt condemned for not preaching in New Brunswick when
solicited; and I have felt that I have done right in obeying the powers
that be in this respect in Quebec. I am solicited to remain and preach
here again next Sunday, as many public persons have expressed
disappointment at not having heard me last Sunday evening. A leading
member of the church from Montreal was so comforted and edified, that
after having spent the evening in my room until after ten o'clock, he
went to write out all of the discourse he could remember. The friends
here seem delighted to think I will still preach, and say that I would
sin against God and man if I refused. My discourse on Sunday was the
result of my reflections and prayer here without books or notes; and I
feel much better since I consented to do what all seemed to think I
ought to do. They are quite satisfied with the course I have adopted,
and think it will result in great good, if I will not refuse to preach.
The words of St. Paul (1st Cor. ch. 9, verse 16), in a chapter to which
I opened the other day, have affected me much; and I know not that I can
otherwise do so much good during the very few years at most that now
remain to me, as to preach when desired by those who have authority in
the matter, in any church or place. I feel deeply humbled under a sense
of my own unfaithfulness, and am amazed at the great goodness,
long-suffering and compassion of God towards me.
FOOTNOTES:
[138] Mr. Wesley's own account of the origin of the office of
class-leader and class-meetings, illustrates the accuracy of what I have
stated. The office was first created at Bristol, 15th February, 1742,
for financial purposes alone. A few weeks afterwards, it was instituted
for religious purposes also; and for the twofold object of religion and
finance, it was embodied in the General Rules, which were drawn up and
signed by Mr. Wesley, 1st May, 1743; but in which there is no mention
made of class-meeting, or of the duty of any member to meet in class. In
his "Plain Account of the People called Methodists," Mr. Wesley thus
states the origin of the office of class-leader and the institution of
class-meetings.
At length (says he,) while we were thinking of quite another thing, we
struck upon a method for which we have had cause to bless God ever
since. I was talking with several of the Society in Bristol (Feb. 15,
1742,) concerning the means of paying the debts there, when one stood
up, and said, 'Let every member of the Society give a penny a week till
all are paid.' Another said, 'But many of them are poor, and cannot
afford to do it.' 'Then,' said the other, 'put eleven of the poorest
with me, and if they can give anything, well: I will see them weekly;
and if they can give nothing, I will give for them as well as for
myself. And each of you will call upon eleven of your neighbours weekly,
receive what they give, and make up what is wanting.' It was done. In a
little while some of these informed me, they found such and such an one
did not live as he ought. It struck me immediately, This is the very
thing we have wanted so long. I called together the Leaders of the
classes (so we used to term them and their companies,) and desired that
each would make particular inquiry into the behaviour of those whom he
saw weekly. They did so. Many disorderly walkers were detected. Some
turned from the evil of their ways. Some were put away from us. Many saw
it with fear, and rejoiced in God with reverence. As soon as possible,
the same method was used in London, and in all other places. The
following is Mr. Wesley's account of the first appointment of
class-leaders in London, extracted from his Journal, Thursday, March 25,
1742: I appointed several earnest and sensible men to meet me, to whom I
showed the great difficulty I had long found of knowing the people who
desired to be under my care. After much discourse, they all agreed there
could be no better way to come to a sure, thorough knowledge of each
person, than to divide them into classes, like those at Bristol, under
the inspection of those in whom I could confide. This was the origin of
our classes at London, for which I can never sufficiently praise God;
the unspeakable usefulness of the institution having ever since been
more and more manifest. In his "Plain Account of the People called
Methodists," Mr. Wesley says, "At first they (the Leaders) visited each
person at his own house; but this was soon found not so expedient, and
that on many accounts." Mr. Wesley assigns several reasons for this
change, and proceeds to answer several objections to class-meetings. The
following passage shows the exact ground on which Mr. Wesley based the
institution of class-meetings:
Some objected, 'There were no such meetings when I came into the society
first; and why should there be now? I do not understand these things,
and this changing one thing after another continually.' It was easily
answered: It is a pity but they had been from the first. But we knew not
then either the need or the benefit of them. Why we use them, you will
easily understand, if you will read over the Rules of the Society. That
with regard to these little prudential helps, we are continually
changing one thing after another, is not a weakness or fault as you
imagine, but is a peculiar privilege which we enjoy. By this means we
declare them all to be merely prudential, not essential, not of divine
institution.
Now, while it is proper for each person, as far as may be consistent
with his circumstances and views of duty, to use every prudential means
of doing and getting good, yet the observance of nothing but what is
Divinely instituted should be imposed as a condition of membership in
the Church of God. To make attendance at class-meeting that condition,
is to require what the Lord hath not commanded, and to change
essentially the character and objects of a means of good which Mr.
Wesley (with whom it originated) declared to be "merely prudential, not
essential, not of divine institution."
That Mr. Wesley conceived the basis of a church should be much more
comprehensive than the rules he drew up and recommended in regard to the
"little prudential helps" which were suggested to him from time to time,
is obvious from the eighth of his twelve reasons against organising a
new church--reasons published many years after the preparation and
adoption of all his society rules. His words are as follows: "Because to
form the plan of a new church would require infinite time and care, with
much more wisdom and greater depth and extensiveness of thought than any
of us are masters of."
[139] The following is the Article of Faith referred to:--
_XVII. Of Baptism._ Baptism is not only a sign of profession, and mark
of difference, whereby Christians are distinguished from others that are
not baptized, but it is also a sign of regeneration or the new birth.
The baptism of young children is to be retained in the church.
[140] I have understood, nevertheless, that a resolution was adopted
expressing the sense of the Conference as to my past labours in the
Church; but the publication of it has been suppressed in the official
organ, as also in the printed minutes, of the Conference.
The correspondence in the subsequent pages shows with what feelings and
sentiments I retired from the councils of the Conference; and I could
not have supposed that any members of that body were capable of
excluding from the public records of its proceedings what the Conference
had deemed a bare act of justice to an individual who had laboured
nearly thirty years in connection with it, and often performed most
difficult services and labours in its behalf. Such a proceeding will
reflect more dishonour upon its authors than upon me, in the judgment of
every honourable and Christian mind in Upper Canada, of whatever
persuasion or party. I am happy to believe that this poor imitation of
the system of the "Index Expurgatorius" cannot blot from the memories of
an older generation in the Church recollections of labours and struggles
of which the expurgators know nothing but the fruits--among which are
the civil and religious privileges they enjoy.
I have also been credibly informed that, while the real grounds of my
resignation and the judgment of the Conference upon my conduct and
labours during many years' connection with it, are withheld from the
Wesleyan public, insinuations are circulated, that my resignation has
been dictated by ulterior political objects--an idea which I have never
for one moment entertained, and which is foreign, as far as I know, to
the thoughts of every public man in Canada.
[141] Of the utter insufficiency of public ministrations alone, even for
grown up Christians, much more for children, Mr. Wesley thus speaks in
his large and authorized Minutes of Conference:--"For what avails public
preaching alone, though we could preach like angels? We must, yea, every
travelling preacher must, instruct them from house to house. Till this
is done, and that in good earnest, the Methodists will be little better
than other people. Our religion is not deep, universal, uniform; but
superficial, partial, uneven. It will be so, till we spend half as much
time in this visiting, as we now do in talking uselessly." "For, after
all our preaching, many of our people are almost as ignorant as if they
had never heard the gospel. I speak as plain as I can, yet I frequently
meet with those who have been my hearers many years, who know not
whether Christ be God or man. And how few are there who know the nature
of repentance, faith and holiness. Most of them have a sort of
confidence that God will save them, while the world has their hearts. I
have found by experience, that one of these has learned more from one
hour's close discourse than from ten years' public preaching." "Let
every preacher having a catalogue of those in each society, go to each
house. Deal gently with them, that the report of it may move others to
desire your coming. Give the children the instructions for children, and
encourage them to get them by heart. Indeed, you will find it no easy
matter to teach the ignorant the principles of religion. So true is the
remark of Archbishop Usher--'Great scholars may think this work beneath
them. But they should consider, the laying the foundation skilfully, as
it is of the greatest importance, so it is the masterpiece of the wisest
builder. And let the wisest of us all try, whenever we please, we shall
find that to lay this ground-work rightly, to make the ignorant
understand the grounds of religion, will put us to all our skill.'"
"Unless we take care of the rising generation, the present revival will
be _res unius aetatis_ (a thing of one generation); it will last only
the age of a man."
There are several ministers who earnestly labour in the spirit of these
extracts from Mr. Wesley's Minutes of Conference--printed the year of
his death. But their labours are the promptings of individual zeal and
intelligence, and not dictated or backed by the authoritative example of
the ministry and Church at large, or the recognition of the Church
relations of the interesting subjects of their instructions. The effect
of the general disuse or neglect of systematic individual instruction of
children, not speaking of such, instruction of adult members, and
reliance upon public ministrations and meetings alone, must be
instability of religious profession, want of clear and acute views of
the grounds, doctrines, nature, institutions and duties of religion,
indifference to all religion, or wandering from denomination to
denomination according to circumstances or caprice; but in all cases the
loss to the Wesleyan Church of the greater part of the harvest which she
should and might gather into the garner of Christ.
CHAPTER LV.
1855.
Dr. Ryerson Resumes his Position in the Conference.
Although the great majority of the Conference of 1854, after much
conflict of feeling--in which regret and sympathy were mingled--rejected
the resolutions proposed by Dr. Ryerson on the class-meeting question,
yet sorrow at the loss from their councils of so distinguished a man as
Dr. Ryerson prevailed amongst them. This feeling deepened as the year
advanced, and much personal effort was made to induce him to consent to
some honourable means by which his return to the ministerial ranks could
be secured. At length, as the Conference-year neared its close, he
yielded to the wishes of his friends, and, on the 26th May, 1855,
addressed the following letter to Rev. Dr. Wood, President of the
Conference:--
From the conversations which have taken place between you, my brother,
and some others of our ministers and myself, in reference to my present
and future relations to the Conference and to the Church, I think it but
respectful and an act of duty to state my views in writing, that there
may be no misapprehension on the subject, and that you may adopt such a
course as you shall think advisable.
When I wrote my letters of resignation of office in the Church, the one
dated 2nd January, 1854, and the other the 12th day of June following, I
had but faint expectations of being in the land of the living at this
time. In what I wrote and did, I acted under the apprehension of having
no longer time for delay in attesting, in the most decisive and
practical way in my power, what I believe to be the divine rights of
members of the visible Church of Christ whether they are baptized
children or professing Christians. Since then I have reason to be
thankful that the alarming symptoms in respect to my health have in a
great measure subsided, and that I have the prospect of being able to
continue my labours with undiminished strength and vigor, at least for
some time to come.
In my first letter to you I stated and explained at length my belief
that making attendance at class-meeting an essential condition of
membership in the Church of God, is not only requiring what is not
enjoined in the word of God, but excluding, on other than scriptural
grounds, exemplary persons from the Church of Christ, and unchurching
the baptized children of our people who, as well as their parents, are
scripturally entitled to membership in the Church. Having given the
subject much further consideration during the last twelve months, and
having examined all the works on it within my reach, I am, if possible,
more fully confirmed in the views I expressed last year, as both
Wesleyan and scriptural, than when I penned them. And it is not unworthy
of remark, that the only two newspapers in Canada which have combatted
my views have been _The Church_ and _The Catholic Citizen_; and both of
these papers have done so upon the ground that my views were not
compatible with the due authority of the Church to decree dogmas, rites
and ceremonies. I acknowledge myself a heretic according to their creed
of ecclesiastical authority; and I confess that the position I have been
unexpectedly compelled to assume during the last two or three years as
to the right of every man to the Bible, and the rights of individuals
and municipalities against compulsion in regard to taxation for the
support of sectarian schools, has more deeply impressed upon my mind
than ever that the Bible is the only safeguard of civil liberty, and
that "the Bible only ought to be the religion of Protestants;" and
especially in a matter so important as that which determines who are
members and what are the conditions of membership in the Church of
Christ.
I must, therefore, in all frankness and honesty, still declare my
conviction that there is no scriptural authority for the power which is
given to a minister, by the answers to the 4th question in the 2nd
section of the 2nd chapter of our Discipline, to exclude a person from
the Church of God for what is expressly stated not to be "immoral
conduct," namely, not attending a meeting which is not ranked among the
ordinances of the Church in the General Rules of our Societies, which
the 12th section of the 1st chapter of our Discipline does not enumerate
among the "prudential means of grace," even among Methodists, and which
Mr. Wesley stated to be "not spiritual, not of divine institution." I
would never exercise such authority myself; I never have exercised it;
but I will not assume to judge those who think and act otherwise.
I beg, however, that it may not be forgotten, that while I thus speak
and quote the authorities of the Church in respect to class-meeting as a
test or condition of Church membership; yet as a prudential means of
grace and a mode and means of Christian fellowship, I regard
class-meetings (as stated in my former letters above referred to), as
well as love-feasts and prayer-meetings, as of the greatest value and
importance. But when I think of class-meeting being converted into a
condition of membership in the Church of Christ, and thus made the
occasion of excluding from its pale the whole early generation of our
people and many other sincere Christians, I cannot view it as I would
wish, and as I could otherwise do, with the same feelings that I view
love-feasts and prayer-meetings.
In regard to the other aspect of the question, as it applies to the
baptized children of our people, and in which the nature and office of
Baptism are involved, I feel it to be of such vital importance that I
must beg to make some observations which I hope may not be considered
out of place, or prove altogether useless.
The circumstances which have caused me to feel so strongly on this point
were stated in my letter to you on the 2nd January, 1854, and afterwards
more fully justified in my letter of the 12th of June following; and it
is with no small degree of surprise that I have found my views
misapprehended and pronounced unsound. It has been alleged that they
involve baptismal regeneration. Nothing can be further from the fact.
What I maintain is simply what is stated in the 17th Article of Faith
professed by our Church, and by the catechism used in the Methodist
Church on both sides of the Atlantic, and what is set forth at large in
the writings of Mr. Wesley and Mr. Watson. Baptism, like the Lord's
Supper, is an outward sign; but, of course, neither can be that of which
it is the sign.
Baptism (as the 17th Article of our Faith expresses it), is not
only a sign of profession, and mark of difference whereby
Christians are distinguished from others that are unbaptized, but
it is also a sign of regeneration, or the new birth.
What I maintain is, that baptism is the outward and visible sign, while
regeneration, or the new birth, is the inward spiritual grace; that by
baptism we are born into the visible Church of Christ on earth, while by
the Holy Ghost we are born into the spiritual or invisible Church of
Christ in heaven, the same as in the Lord's Supper; there is the visible
act of the Church and of the body of communicants, and the invisible act
of the Saviour by the Holy Ghost and of the soul of the communicant. The
two are distinct; the one may not accompany the other; but they may, and
often do, accompany each other. The parent should bring his child in
faith to the Lord's baptism, the same as the communicant should come in
faith to the Lord's Supper. The communion of the Lord's Supper is the
act of a professed member of Christ's visible Church; the receiving of
the Lord's baptism, is receiving the seal of membership in Christ's
visible Church, that "mark of difference whereby Christians are
distinguished from others that are not baptized." Hence in the Wesleyan
catechism, the question is asked,--
What are the privileges of baptized persons? The answer is,--They
are made members of the visible church of Christ; their gracious
relation to Him as the Second Adam, and as the Mediator of the New
Covenant, is solemnly ratified by divine appointment; and they are
thereby recognized as having a claim to all the spiritual blessings
of which they are the proper subjects.
I maintain, therefore, that the language of our Articles of Faith and
Catechism, as well as of our Baptismal Service and the writings of Mr.
Wesley, explicitly declares baptism an act of the Church by which it
receives the children baptized into its bosom--that all baptized
children are truly members of Christ's visible Church, although they be
not communicants in it until they personally profess the Faith of their
Baptism, and evince their desire to flee from the wrath to come by the
negative and positive proofs so briefly and fully enumerated in the
General Rules of our societies.
The Church membership of baptized children is known to be the doctrine
of all parties in the Church of England, as well as of Mr. Wesley. It is
equally the doctrine of all sections of the Presbyterian Church, in
which the baptized children are regarded as members of the Church, but
not communicants until they make a personal profession of conversion,
and receive a token or ticket of admission to the Lord's Supper. On this
point it is sufficient to cite the following passages from the fifteenth
chapter of the fourth book of Calvin's Institutes.
Baptism is a sign of initiation, by which we are admitted into the
society of the Church, in order that being incorporated into
Christ, we may be numbered among the children of God.... For as
circumcision was a pledge to the Jews, by which they were assured
of their adoption as the people and family of God, and on their
parts professed their entire subjection to Him, and, therefore, was
their first entrance into the Church; so now we are initiated into
the Church of God by baptism, are numbered among His people, and
profess to devote ourselves to his service.... How delightful is it
to pious minds, not only to have verbal assurances, but even
occular proof, of their standing so high in the favour of their
heavenly Father, that their posterity also are the objects of his
care! This is evidently the reason why Satan makes such great
exertions in opposition to infant baptism: that the removal of this
testimony of the grace of God may cause the promise which it
exhibits before our eyes gradually to disappear, and at length to
be forgotten. The consequence of this would be an impious
ingratitude to the mercy of God, and negligence of the instruction
of our children in the principles of piety. For it is no small
stimulus to our education of them in the serious fear of God, and
the observance of His law, to reflect, that they are considered and
acknowledged by Him as His children as soon as they are born.
Wherefore, unless we are obstinately determined to reject the
goodness of God, let us present to Him our children, to whom He
assigns a place in His family, that is, among the members of His
church.
Richard Watson, the great expounder of Wesleyan Christian doctrine,
treats this subject elaborately in the third chapter of the fourth part
of his Theological Institutes. I will only quote the following
sentences:--
Infant children are declared by Christ to be members of His Church.
That they were members of God's Church, in the family of Abraham,
and among the Jews, cannot be denied.... The membership of the Jews
comprehended both children and adults; and the grafting-in of the
Gentiles, so as to partake of the same "root and fatness," will,
therefore, include a right to put their children also into the
covenant, so that they, as well as adults, may become members of
Christ's Church, have God to be their God, and be acknowledged by
Him, in the special sense of the terms of the covenant, to be His
people.... "Whosoever (says Christ) shall receive this child in my
name, receiveth me;" but such an identity of Christ with His
disciples stands wholly upon their relation to Him as members of
His "mystic body, the Church." It is in this respect only that they
are "one with Him;" and there can be no identity of Christ with
"little children" but by virtue of the same relation, that is, as
they are members of His mystical body, the Church; of which
membership baptism is now, as circumcision was then, the initiatory
rite.... The benefits of this Sacrament require to be briefly
exhibited. Baptism introduces the adult believer into the covenant
of grace and the Church of Christ; and is the seal, the pledge, to
him, on the part of God, of the fulfilment of all its provisions,
in time and in eternity; whilst on his part, he takes upon himself
the obligation of steadfast faith and obedience. To the infant
child, baptism is a visible reception into the same covenant and
church, a pledge of acceptance through Christ--the bestowment of a
title to all the grace of the covenant as circumstances may
require, and as the mind of the child may be capable of receiving
it; and as it may be sought in future life by prayer, when the
period of reason and moral choice shall arrive. It conveys also the
present blessing of Christ, of which we are assured by His taking
children in His arms, and blessing them; which blessing cannot be
merely nominal, but must be substantial and efficacious. It
secures, too, the gift of the Holy Spirit in those secret spiritual
influences, by which the actual regeneration of those children who
die in infancy is effected; and which are a seed of life in those
who are spared to prepare them for instruction in the word of God,
as they are taught by parental care, to incline their will and
affections to good, and to begin and maintain in them the war
against inward and outward evil, so that they may be divinely
assisted, as reason strengthens, to make their calling and election
sure. In a word, it is, both as to infants and adults, the sign,
and pledge of that inward grace, which, though modified in its
operations by the difference of their circumstances, has respect
to, and flows from, a covenant relation to each of the Three
Persons in whose one name they are baptized,--acceptance by the
Father--union with Christ as the head of His mystical body, the
Church--and communion with the Holy Ghost. To these advantages must
be added the respect which God bears to the believing act of the
parents, and to their solemn prayers on the occasion, in both of
which the child is interested; as well as in that solemn engagement
of the parents which the rite necessarily implies, to bring up
their child in the nurture and admonition of the Lord.
To these impressive words of Richard Watson, I add the following equally
impressive extract from the pastoral address of the Wesleyan Conference
in England to the Societies under its charge in 1837:--
By baptism you place your children within the pale of the visible
Church, and give them a right to all its privileges, the pastoral
care of its ministers, and as far as their age and capacity will
allow, the enjoyment of its ordinances and means of grace. These
children are not offshoots of the Church, enjoying only a distant
relation to it, but they are of it, as a fact; they are grafted
into the body of Christ's disciples; they are partakers of an
initiatory and provisional state of acceptance with God, and can
forfeit their right to the fellowship of the saints only by a
course of sin. Besides, when this sacred ordinance is regarded by
parents in the spirit of prayer and faith, it cannot be
unaccompanied by the divine blessing. Grace is connected with every
institution of the Christian Church; and when children are
constituted a part of the flock of Christ by being placed within
the fold, they have a peculiar claim on the care of that good
Shepherd who "gathereth the lambs with his arms and carries them in
his bosom;" and they will receive instruction, spiritual
influences, tender care, and the exercise of mercy, agreeing with
the relation in which they stand to God. On these grounds we
affectionately exhort you to place your beloved offspring within
the "courts of the house of our God," and amongst the number of His
family, by strictly attending to this divinely appointed ordinance
of our Saviour.[142]
Dr. Ryerson's views were, therefore, the same in 1834 as they were in
1854--that by Baptism children stand in the relation of members of the
Church, and should be enrolled in its registers, and entitled to its
privileges, until they, by their own voluntary irregularity or neglect,
forfeit them. The coincidence mentioned, and the consistency of the
views expressed by Dr. Ryerson twenty years before, are very remarkable.
* * * * *
Now what are these solemn and affecting words of John Calvin, of Richard
Watson, and of the British Conference, but a mockery and a snare, if the
baptized children are not to be acknowledged and treated as members of
the visible church of Christ? Ought not then children baptised by the
Wesleyan ministry to be recognized and cared for as members of the
Wesleyan Church? It is absurd, and leaves them in a state of religious
orphanage, to say that they are members of the visible Church of Christ,
but not members of any particular branch of it. As well might it be
said, that the children born in Canada, are members of the Canadian
family, but not members of any particular family in Canada. To be the
former without being the latter, would indeed allow them a country, but
would leave them without a home, without a parent, without a protector,
without an inheritance--homeless, houseless, destitute orphans. Is this
the relation in which the baptized children of our people are to be
viewed to the Church of their parents? In doing so, are not the most
powerful considerations, motives and influences brought to bear upon
both parents and children? In not doing so, is not the greatest wrong
inflicted upon both, the ordinance of baptism virtually ignored, and its
blessings lost? But in denying that any one is or can be a member of the
Church except one who meets in class, are not the baptized children of
our people refused a place within its pale? deprived of their baptismal
birthright, before they are old enough to forfeit it by transgression?
shut out from the family of God's people, and as practically unchurched
as if they had never received a Christian name, in the name of the
Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost? I cannot reflect upon the
subject or contemplate its consequences, without the deepest pain and
solicitude. I will pursue it no further, but will leave it with you and
those on whom the responsibility of deciding upon it devolves.
It will be remembered that I have never said anything as to the mode of
receiving adult persons from without into the Church; nor as to the
class of members who alone should be eligible to hold office in the
Church; nor have I entertained the idea that any other than the
scriptural summary of Christian morality contained in the General Rules
of our Societies should be applied to all members of the Church, whether
in full communion or not. Nor have I other than supposed that all
persons recognized as a part of the Church, would, as far as
circumstances can permit, be registered as classes, and called upon
regularly by a leader or steward for their contributions in support of
the ministry and other institutions of the Church, the same as persons
meeting weekly in a class. What I have said applies wholly and
exclusively to the Church relation and rights of the baptized children
of our people, and to the rights of persons otherwise admitted into the
Church, who, I believe, ought not to be excluded from it except for what
would exclude them from the kingdom of grace and glory.
Anything appertaining to myself personally is unworthy of mention in
such a connexion. I banish from my mind and heart the recollection and
feeling of anything I consider to have been uncalled for and unjust
towards myself on the part of others. Though I have resigned the
ecclesiastical or outward authority to exercise the functions of the
Christian ministry, I have never regarded myself as a secular man; I
have felt, and do feel, and especially with improved health, the inward,
and, I trust, divine conviction of duty to preach, as occasion may
offer and strength permit, the unsearchable riches of Christ to dying
men. And if after the past publication and foregoing statement of my
convictions on the point of Church Discipline and its administration, as
affecting baptized children and other scripturally blameless members of
the Church, and my purpose to maintain them on such occasions, and in
such manner as are sanctioned by the Discipline, the Conference thinks
it proper and desirable that I should resume my former relations to it
and to the Church, I am willing to cancel my resignation, and to labour,
as heretofore, to preach the doctrines and promote the agencies of the
Church which I have sought by every earthly means in my power, though
with conscious unfaithfulness before God, to advance during the last
thirty years, and which are, I believe, according to the Scriptures, and
calculated to promote the present and everlasting well-being of man.
The reading of this letter at the London Conference of 1855 led to a
great deal of discussion and various explanations, which unfortunately
afterwards resulted in much misunderstanding and recrimination. The
Conference, however, with a unanimity and heartiness which reflected
great credit for its calm judgment and Christian love of unity, passed
the following resolution by a nearly two-thirds majority:--
That while this Conference declares its unaltered determination to
maintain inviolate the position held respecting the views contained
in Dr. Ryerson's communications of last year, and upon which his
resignation was tendered and accepted; yet upon the application
which the latter part of Dr. Ryerson's present communication
contains, this Conference restores him to his former standing and
relations to the Conference and the Church.
After the resolution was passed, Dr. Ryerson went to the Conference at
London, and in a letter which he wrote to me, dated January 9th, he
said:--
My entrance into the Conference was cordially greeted. I was very
affectionately welcomed and introduced by the President, Rev. Dr. Wood,
after which I briefly addressed the Conference, and I have since taken
the same part in the proceedings as heretofore.
After a long discussion yesterday, a very important change was made in
the Discipline. By this change a minister may be stationed in the same
circuit during five years, if requested by the quarterly meeting. A
prominent member made a long and violent speech against it. I replied at
length, and stated the general grounds on which I thought the change
recommended by the Stationing Committee should be adopted. After the
adoption of the resolution, I congratulated the Conference on this
indication of progress in a direction to what was regarded as heretical
when I first introduced the proposition five years ago. Some preacher
said I was a little too soon. I said perhaps I had the misfortune of
having been born a few years too soon. Another said that he supposed I
expected that other changes would also follow. I replied, time would
show. I was informed that all (even Messrs. Jeffers and Spencer)
expressed a desire for my return to the Conference. The lengthened
discussion was based upon certain parts of my letter to Mr. Wood, which
it was held were not courteous, but a bearding of the Conference. On the
other hand, it was contended that my sentiments even on the
class-meeting condition of membership were the practice of those very
preachers who objected to them. Examples were given, much to the
surprise of certain parties, who professed to be the greatest sticklers
on the subject. It was professed by all, without exception, that but for
certain phrases in my letter (to the sentiments of which, it was
maintained, the Conference would be committed by the resolution
proposed) the vote in regard to me would have been unanimous.
* * * * *
Amongst other congratulatory letters received by Dr. Ryerson, none were
more gratifying to him than the following characteristic letter from
Rev. John Black, in township of Rawdon, written on the 16th of June:--
My good Mr. Lever, of Sidney, in a letter from the Conference,
informs me that "Dr. Ryerson is once more among his brethren, and,
as usual, taking an active part in the affairs of Conference."
Although three of my children were confined to bed by sickness, yet
on hearing such news I was almost ready for a shout.
Permit me to say that your departure from us at Belleville, twelve
months ago, lay heavy on my heart; and now to hear the above
intelligence is good to my soul. For many years I have been much
attached to Mr. Egerton Ryerson. We were "taken on trial" at the
same time, and together were ordained to the great work of the
ministry. And although you, Mr. R., have been near the head, and I,
Mr. B., near the foot, yet we are in the same ranks, fighting the
battles of the Lord, and exercising our talents in behalf of truth
and righteousness. I know that your time is precious, yet I believe
you will spare a minute or two in reading a few lines from your
affectionate, and now almost worn-out, friend and well-wisher. Long
may you live for the purpose of using your talents for the benefit
of Church and State! This fervent wish stands at a distance from
mere compliment and from flattery, and is the free emotion of a
Methodist heart.
FOOTNOTES:
[142] As early as 1834, Dr. Ryerson was deeply impressed with the
correctness of these views. Having, in the Guardian of the 9th of April,
1834, called the attention of his ministerial brethren to the pressing
duty of giving effect to the section of the Discipline on the
"Instruction of Children," he proceeded to point out in the Guardian of
the 23rd of that month, the privileges which baptism confers upon
Methodist children, fortifying his views by the following quotation from
Rev. R. Watson's Institutes:--Baptism introduces the adult believer into
the covenant of Grace, and the Church of Christ.... To the infant child
it is a visible reception into the same covenant and Church.... In a
word, it is both to infants and adults a sign and pledge of that inward
grace, which has respect to and flows from a covenant relation to each
of the three persons, in whose one name they are baptized--acceptance
with Christ as the Head of His mystical body, the Church, and of
communion of the Holy Ghost.
CHAPTER LVI.
1855-1858.
Personal Episode in the Class-Meeting Discussion.
I have already referred to the character of the discussion which
resulted in Dr. Ryerson's restoration to the Conference. In the heat of
that discussion some things may have been said by Dr. Ryerson's friends
which were not warranted by the terms of his letter of the 26th of May;
or what was said may have been construed (designedly or otherwise) into
an admission of assurance on Dr. Ryerson's part that he would cease to
agitate the question, or that he would hold his opinions in abeyance.
The discussion on the Class-meeting question was the chief event in the
proceedings of the Wesleyan Conference of 1855. Yet not the slightest
reference to the subject, or to Dr. Ryerson's return to the Conference
was made in the report of the proceedings which were published in the
_Guardian_ of the 13th and 20th of June in that year. It was not until
some time after the adjournment of the Conference, and the departure of
Dr. Ryerson for Europe, that the subject was mentioned in that paper,
and what did appear was apparently an afterthought.[143]
After Dr. Ryerson had gone, an editorial appeared in the _Guardian_ of
the 27th of June from which the following is an extract:--
We did not notice in our summary account of the proceedings of the
Conference the return of Dr. Ryerson to his former position with
that body, but as erroneous statements have appeared in the paper
respecting it we think proper to give the facts of the case.
A short time previous to the sitting of the Conference Dr. Ryerson
addressed a letter to the President, in which he stated that his
views remained unaltered respecting the points of difference
between himself and the Conference; he expressed a desire to resume
his ministerial duties in the Church. The communication was
accompanied with a verbal assurance that his own peculiar views on
the questions at issue would be held in abeyance in deference to
the determination of the Conference to maintain inviolate those
parts of the Wesleyan Discipline to which his communication
referred. This was the position in which the application of Dr.
Ryerson was presented to the Conference, and, after a somewhat
animated discussion on the subject, the resolution [for his
re-admission] was adopted by nearly a two-thirds majority.
Immediately on the publication of this article, I sent it to Dr. Ryerson
at Boston, where he was about to take the steamer for England. He at
once replied to the Editor, and sent the letter to me for insertion in
the _Guardian_. In his private note to me, dated 3rd July, he said:--
I think the _Guardian's_ statement is the most shameful attack that
was ever made upon me--one that I did not expect even from him--one
that I would not have believed had I not seen it. What may be the
end of this affair, I cannot yet see. But I am satisfied in my own
conscience as to the course I have pursued, and as to my present
duty. As to rescinding the clause of the Discipline relating to the
exclusion of persons for not attending class-meetings, no
determination was expressed to enforce it. On the contrary, it was
declared to be a dead letter in many places. What I maintained was,
that the practice and the rule should be in harmony. You will see
what I have said to the Editor of the _Guardian_ in a private note.
Remember me affectionately to all; and may Almighty God prosper you
in your educational work during my absence.
The following is a copy of the private letter to Rev. J. Spencer, which
accompanied Dr. Ryerson's reply to the editorial:
I was not a little surprised and pained at your unfair and unjust
statement respecting me, and especially after what passed on my leaving
the Conference, and your careful silence on the subject until I had left
home, and would not therefore be likely to have it in my power to
furnish an antidote until your injurious statement had accomplished its
object as far as possible. But I am thankful that, through the prompt
kindness of Mr. Hodgins, and by that means alone, I have been furnished
with a copy of the _Guardian_ in time to write a hasty reply before
embarking for the other side of the Atlantic. I have requested Mr.
Hodgins to take a copy of my communication to you, as I have not time to
transcribe it. You can as easily command my letter to the President of
the Conference as you did the resolution of the Conference. I ask for no
indulgence or favour; I ask for nothing but truth and justice.
I will thank you to inform Mr. Hodgins as early as possible as to
whether you intend to perpetuate the wrong you have done me, by refusing
to insert my letter to the President of the Conference, and the note I
have this evening addressed to you in reference to your statement. I
wish Mr. Hodgins to inform me of the result by the next mail to England,
and also to act otherwise by me as I would by him in like
circumstances.[144]
Having got Dr. Ryerson's reply to the _Guardian's_ attack of 27th June,
inserted in the Toronto city papers, I wrote to him to that effect. His
reply is dated, London (Eng.,) 3rd August:--I thank you sincerely for
the pains you have taken in regard to my letter to the _Guardian_. I am
thankful that, by your zeal and good management, the Methodist body, as
well as the public at large, will have an opportunity of learning my own
views from my own pen; but considering the intended course of the
_Guardian_, and what he alleges to be the feelings of many others, I
have great doubts whether I can be of any use to the Wesleyan body, or
of much use to the interests of religion in connection with the
Conference, and that I shall rather embarrass, and be a burden to my
friends in the Conference, than be a help to them. My only wish and aim
as a minister is, to preach the evangelical doctrines I have always
proclaimed, and which are preached with power by many clergymen of the
Church of England and Presbyterian Churches, and often more forcibly,
than by many Methodist ministers.
I confess, from what you state, I see no prospect of effecting the
changes in the relation and privileges of baptized children, and the
test of membership in the Methodist Church, which I believe to be
required by the Scriptures, and by consistency. I apprehend that
anything proposed by me on these subjects will be made the occasion of
violent attacks and agitation, and that personal hostility to me will be
made a sort of test of orthodoxy among a large party in the Conference
and in the Church--thus exposing my friends to much unpleasantness and
disadvantage on my account, and reducing, if not extinguishing, all
opportunities on my part to preach, as I should be (as in times past)
wholly dependent upon the invitations of others.
* * * * *
From this incident a private and confidential correspondence on the
subject was maintained for months between Dr. Ryerson in Europe and
myself, in Canada.
It was clear to my mind at the time that the Editor took an unfair
advantage of Dr. Ryerson's absence from the country to injure (as he
supposed) his brother in the ministry. In this he was mistaken; and, in
his chagrin, he attacked me personally in the _Guardian_ for my zeal on
behalf of Dr. Ryerson. Events proved that my interposition was opportune
and just; and that, had I not done so, the Methodist people would have
been improperly and cruelly misled, and irreparable injustice would have
been done to the character and motives of a noble and generous man, who,
in this instance, ought not to have been held responsible for the
utterances of warm hearts, but of possibly indiscreet tongues.
I speak advisedly when I say that I understood perfectly well the two
men with whom I had to deal. Rev. James Spencer was well known to me,
when I was a student at Victoria College forty years ago. He was a good
man, no doubt; but no student at that College ever thought of comparing
him with the Principal of the College. How he ever got to be Editor of
the _Guardian_ was always a mystery to me. I never had the slightest
difference with him--quite the reverse; but no comparison could be
instituted between James Spencer and Egerton Ryerson.
In this matter I had no personal feeling. Both men were Methodists,
while I am an Episcopalian, and both have gone to their final account.
Moreover, the question was not one of doctrine, or of denominational
preference. It was one of simple justice and fair play between man and
man. Hence, I took the earliest opportunity of apprising Dr. Ryerson of
the unjust and anomalous position in which he had been placed by the
Editor of the _Guardian_.
* * * * *
The following private letters were successively received by me from Dr.
Ryerson while he was in Europe:--
_Paris, 23rd August._--I enclose my answer to Rev. James Spencer. I wish
you would have it inserted in the _Globe_ and _Colonist_. As you are
acquainted with all the circumstances in Canada, being on the spot, if
you think it best to abridge, omit, or modify the words of any part of
my communication, I would wish you to do so. Whatever course I may think
it my duty to pursue in future, I wish in this communication to preserve
that tone of remark which can give no offence to any minister or member
of the Wesleyan Church. I will not be the offending party, and the
responsibility of a wider breach between the Conference and myself will
not be with me. What course duty may require me to pursue, I still leave
to the direction of Infinite Wisdom, and to future consideration....
The Queen is in Paris this week, during which all business in my way
seems to be suspended. She is received with great enthusiasm. We have
seen her and the Emperor two or three times.
_Paris, 30th August._--Rev. Dr. Wood's denial of my having given him any
pledge, or any thing that would be so construed, is full and decided,
and if my brother John says anything at all, it will be, I have no
doubt, less than I have stated in my letter. But still the main question
of my position in the Conference is unaffected by these disclaimers. It
appears from Mr. Spencer's statement (in which he seems to be sustained
by others) that the terms of my letter were not acted upon or complied
with by the Conference, but that the Conference acted upon a verbal
assurance that I never made, or authorized. The simplest and most
natural way for me to act, is, to withdraw my letter on these grounds,
and to decline availing myself of, or recognizing an act of, the
Conference based upon what I never proposed or authorized. Thus the
responsibility of this irregular and absurd proceeding will rest with
others, and I will stand, in the maintenance of all that I have stated
and done, with the advantage of having acted a most conciliatory part.
But what I shall do must not be decided upon hastily, as I act for life,
and finally. If it ultimately appears to me, as it does at present, that
there is no consistent or justifiable ground on which I can remain a
member of the Conference, it will then be for me to consider whether I
can occupy the position of a layman, or enter the ministry of some other
section of the Christian Church. I would like to have your own
impressions and views on this point, in reference to my future standing
and usefulness in Canada.
_Paris, 20th September._--In my reply to Mr. Spencer I did not allude to
the cases of Montreal and Quebec. Perhaps the disclaimer which has been
adopted by quarterly meetings in those places may require from me a
remark or two. What I said was founded upon what was told me on reliable
authority that no preacher had enforced, or dare enforce, the rule. I
understand the same at Quebec. I have been assured, and I have no doubt
the enquiry will establish the fact, that there are men, trustees of the
Churches, in either or both Montreal or Quebec, who do not meet in
class, and whose names are not, and I think whose names never have been,
on any class book. But I think the natural and necessary effect of the
whole is, to terminate my connection with the Methodist Church. I still
remain undecided; but I see no other course on the ground of
consistency, propriety, or duty, as well as of religious enjoyment. But
this is only to yourself. The remaining question will be whether I
should remain a private member of a Church, or enter another Church. On
this point I am quite undecided. May I be divinely directed!
In a further letter directed to me from Paris in September, 1855, Dr.
Ryerson discussed the whole question at issue. After pointing out the
unfair conduct of the Editor of the _Guardian_ in attacking and
misrepresenting a member of the Conference, and then saying that his
columns were closed against any further discussion of the subject, Dr.
Ryerson said:--The Editor of the _Guardian_ and others represent me as
hostile to class-meetings. This may do injury, in the estimation of some
persons, to a means of religious edification which I regard as one of
the most efficient human agencies for promoting spiritual-mindedness
among religious people. The responsibility of such a proceeding is with
themselves. The Editor of the _Guardian_ represents this as a matter of
dispute between the Conference and myself. This is wholly incorrect. The
resolution of the Conference is avowedly based upon my letter, and upon
that alone. That record cannot be falsified. The variation between the
wording of the resolution of the Conference and the latter part of my
letter referred to in it, is not of the slightest consequence. The acts
of the Conference, as well as of the Legislature, are to be judged of,
not by what may have been said by individual members in the course of
discussion, but by its attested records and official papers.
Now with the same truth and propriety that my assailants charge me with
having written against class-meetings, might I charge them with being
opposed to prayer-meetings and love-feasts, and even the Lord's Supper,
because they do not make the observance of all or of any one of these
institutions (though the latter is expressly instituted by our Lord
himself), a condition of membership in the Church of God. Because I have
avowed my long-settled conviction that class-meetings ought not to be
exalted above all the other ordinances and institutions of
religion--giving as an authority the words of John Wesley himself--am I
to be charged with having written against class-meeting? So far from
having written against these meetings, I have expressed myself in the
strongest terms in their favour; and I repeat that, after the public
preaching of the Word, and the Lord's Supper, I believe class-meetings
have been the most efficient means of promoting personal and vital piety
among the members of the Wesleyan Societies.
Yet I am not insensible to the fact that Mr. Wesley found the prototype
of this kind of religious exercises, not in any institution or practice
of the Primitive Church for fifteen hundred years, but in a society of
Monks called _La Trappe_, whose ardent piety Mr. Wesley greatly admired,
the lives of some of whose members (such as the Marquis de Renty, etc.,)
he wrote, and whose manual of piety (Imitation of Jesus Christ) he
translated and abridged, for the use of his own Societies, and several
of whose questions in conducting what may be called their weekly band or
class-meetings, Mr. Wesley adopted, translated and modified, for
conducting his own meetings of a similar character. These weekly
exercises in the Societé de la Trappe were eminently instrumental in
reforming, and kindling the name of devotional piety among its members;
and Mr. Wesley found them equally useful among the members of his own
Societies, and so they have continued till the present time. But will
any Wesleyan minister in England or Canada--will any man of intelligence
and honesty--venture to assert that Mr. Wesley ever intended that
attendance at such weekly exercises should be an essential condition and
fundamental test of membership in the visible Church of God? Will any
one assert, or can he believe, that Mr. Wesley ever could have
anticipated, or supposed, that such an application would, or could, be
made of an institution which he expressly stated to be "merely
prudential, not essential, not of divine origin?" But I am again met
with the charge, on another ground, of having departed from Mr. Wesley.
It is said, in substance: "Mr. Wesley has committed class-meeting to us
as a trust; it is not for us to inquire into the origin of the
institution; it is our duty to maintain inviolably the trust committed
to us--which trust Dr. Ryerson has violated." In reply, I remark that
the statement of the question itself is fallacious, and the charge
groundless. In the first place, the question assumes, what is contrary
to fact, that Mr. Wesley instituted and committed the trust of
class-meetings as a condition of membership in the visible Church of
God, whereas he instituted and transmitted it as a means of grace among
the members of a private society in a church. In the next place, the
trust of class-meetings was only one part of a system which Mr. Wesley
committed as a trust to his followers. The one part of that trust was as
sacred as another, and the connection of one part with another is
essential to the fulfilment of the obligation. Now one part of Mr.
Wesley's trust, and that on which he insists ten times more voluminously
and vehemently than he ever spoke of class-meetings, was that his
followers should attend the services of the Church of England, should
receive the ordinances of Baptism and the Lord's Supper in it, should
abide in the Church of England, and that whenever they separated from
the Church of England they separated from him. These are so many trusts
that Mr. Wesley committed to his followers in England, and on which he
insisted as tests of membership in his Society; and in connection with
these trusts, he committed the trust of class-meetings--"as the
observance and practice of members of a private society in the Church of
England." Have Dr. Bunting and others, who charge me with being
anti-Wesleyan, fulfilled these trusts committed to them by Mr. Wesley?
Have they not wholly separated from the Church of England--ordaining
their own ministers, administering the ordinances, claiming and
exercising all the attributes of a Church, as much as the authorities of
the Church of England herself. And while Mr. Wesley disclaimed
exercising the office of excommunicating Church members, and denied that
admission into or exclusion from his Societies was admission into or
exclusion from the visible Church of Christ, my accusers exercise this
authority in the highest degree--confessedly and avowedly admitting into
and excluding persons from the visible Church, and making the attendance
at class-meeting a test of Church-membership--which Mr. Wesley never
believed, much less authorized. I leave it, therefore, to the judgment
of every man of common sense to say whether there is the shadow of a
reason for the pretensions and charges of my assailants. I am not
surprised that Dr. Bunting and others should feel sensitive on the
class-meeting test of church-membership, as it so enormously increases
clerical power--the ruling idea of Dr. Bunting's legislation throughout
his whole life. It virtually places the membership of each member in the
hands of the minister. The quarterly class ticket, signed by the
minister, is the only proof and title of membership for each member. If
the minister withholds this (and he may be prompted to do so on many
grounds, personal and others, irrespective of any suspicion, much less
charge, against the moral or religious character of the member) the
member is deprived of his membership, and this I believe has occurred in
more than twenty thousand instances, in England, during the last six
years, during which period the connection has experienced the lamentable
and unprecedented loss of nearly a hundred thousand members, the fruits
of the labours of an age.
_London, 5th October._--I know that my brother John was not pleased with
my letter to Mr. Wood, read in the Conference. He told me so on the way
to the Conference; he wished me to write a short letter, couched in
general terms, and that the affair might be passed over in the
Conference as quietly as possible--believing that to be the best way to
accomplish the object I had in view. In this I could not agree with him,
and stated that unless received in the terms of my letter, I did not
wish to be received at all; nor did I wish the letter read if any
opposition were apprehended. What has transpired shows, I think very
clearly, that had I not been as explicit as I have, I should have been
more grossly misrepresented, and with some degree of plausibility. I am
exceedingly glad that I wrote as I did. It has removed all uncertainty
on the subject. There can now be no mistake or misunderstanding. I do
not think my friends have been frank with me in not telling me all that
has transpired in the Conference. But it is not worth while to refer to
these things now. The question is settled. I shall write to Dr. Beecham
on the subject of the remarks reported to have been made in reference to
me by Dr. Bunting and Mr. Methley, in the English Conference, and
respecting my settled and avowed convictions and position--affording him
an opportunity of stating how far he and others think such views are
consistent with the relations I sustain to the Wesleyan Body. I shall
also advert to the propriety of such men as Mr. Methley, or any member
of the English Conference, assuming to exercise a censorship over the
character of any members of the Canada Conference. After receiving Dr.
Beecham's answer, I shall finally decide as to my future course. I look
upon my connection with the Wesleyan body as virtually terminated. I
have not been in one of their chapels, or seen one of their ministers,
since I left America. On seeing, at Boston, what Mr. Spencer had
written, and what was likely to occur, I thought I would keep myself
entirely aloof until the final issue of the whole affair.
_London, 10th October._--I wrote you on the 5th inst., under the
influence of strong and indignant feelings. But I have since calmly, and
with much prayer and many tears, for days considered the whole matter of
Church relations. I have resolved to stand my ground in my present
position, and fight out the battle with my assailants.
In a letter to me, written a few days afterwards, Dr. Ryerson thus
states the conclusion which he had come to in regard to his remaining in
the Methodist Church. He said:--Last Sunday I heard a very powerful
sermon from Dr. Cumming on, "No man liveth to himself, and no man dieth
to himself;" and I resolved, by meditation and prayer, to come to a
conclusion on the subject of my Church relations, and future course. I
walked, and wept, and prayed over the subject from seven till twelve
o'clock last night, and the conclusion at which I have now arrived is to
stand in my present position and relation, and maintain my views, and
let my opponents do their worst, and thrust me out if they will or can.
If I lived to myself, that is, if I consulted my taste, feelings,
personal comforts, and enjoyments, I could not remain in the Methodist
Church a week; I have more views and sympathies with the evangelical
clergy and members of any Protestant church than I have with such men as
Mr. Spencer. But still I have, in the Providence of God, been called to
labour in connection with the Methodist Church, and have been prospered
in it; and I think, all things considered, I can do more good to stand
my ground. If I do nothing else than secure to Methodist children and
youth the recognition of their rights and privileges, and the
appropriate religious instruction and care, that point alone will
involve more good in the end than all I could do in any other section of
the Christian Church. If Methodist pulpits should be closed against me,
others will be opened to me in abundance.
_Paris, 18th October._--I feel very happy in my own mind since I have
finally decided upon my future course, and which, I have no doubt you
will think with me, is, under all the circumstances, the best that I
could take. After the course which has been pursued towards me, I shall
be free from all restraints on the matters respecting which they hoped
to impose silence. I shall make the James Methleys, and the James
Spencers, of both the English and Canadian Conferences, feel very
uncomfortable, while I think I shall secure the respect and sympathies
of various religious persuasions and parties in Canada, and the ultimate
accomplishment of the great and divine end I have had in view. Mr.
Spencer's remarks that you enclosed are very weak and flat--more so than
I expected. He speaks of a difference between the Conference and me. The
difference is between him and his abettors (as individuals) and me, not
between the Conference and me. The Conference has avowedly based its
proceedings upon my letter--which is all I care for since my letter is
published. If the terms of the resolution of the Conference are not in
harmony with the terms of my letter, that is of no consequence to me
now--it is for the judgment or taste of those who wrote it. I am glad to
hear that my remarks on Mr. Spencer are favourably received by all my
friends. Mr. Malcolm Cameron has said that if I never wrote another word
on the subject I had mooted, or were I even to leave the Body, the
subject would not sleep--it would be taken up by others--it could not
sleep--and their attacking me, and I defending myself, was, in effect,
discussing the question in the most telling manner.
_Paris, 8th November._--I am glad to learn that at that period when I
was undecided, you entertained the views as to my relations and future
course which I have at length decided to maintain and pursue. I will
stand my ground and battle the affair with my adversaries, on both sides
of the Atlantic, to the last. In order to exclude me from the Conference
they must now bring charges against me; and, in attempting this, they
will raise a difficulty such as they have never yet encountered, and
will invest the whole question with an interest and importance that they
little dream of. Indeed, they have done so already.
_Paris, 14th November._--I am happy to learn that you also entirely
concur in the course I have decided to pursue. I care not a fig for all
that the parties to whom you refer may do or try to do. I have not a
shadow of doubt as to the result. It is most strange that rashness
should be attributed to you in the matter. It was the course best
calculated to defeat the objects they wish to counteract. I do not think
my letters would have appeared at all in the _Guardian_ had you not
pressed the matter as you did; and had I not taken the course I did at
Belleville, the questions could not have been brought before the body as
they can and must. I have written a reply to the _Guardian_--it contains
sixteen pages of letter paper. But after your suggestion, I will keep it
another week, and may, perhaps, substitute for it a note making my
acknowledgements to the daily press of Toronto, and stating my position
and intended course of proceedings. I think something of this kind may
be best to counteract the misrepresentations which they are no doubt
industriously circulating. Possibly I may not say anything at all, as
you suggest.
_Paris, 29th November._--I cannot but smile at the pamphlet on the
Class-meeting question, after it had been declared as the determination
of the Conference that the subject of my letters was not to be agitated.
I could not be more effectually aided in what I would wish to see
accomplished than by such a publication, as it will afford me an
opportunity to re-consider the subject, and to say what I please on the
general subject, and expose every petty sophism and absurdity of my
opponents, and to show what are really the rights of the members of the
Church in more senses than one. The strength of the opposite side of the
question is silence and Conference authority; the strength of my side is
discussion. For one on the opposite side to write and publish a pamphlet
is to give up Conference authority, and to come upon the ground of
reason and Scripture. It is also an abandonment of the pretence that the
question is not a debatable or open one. There being several writers on
one side and only one on the other, gives the latter an advantage. He
can point out the variations and weak points of the former, illustrating
the criteria of error and truth. The whole will afford me an opportunity
to deal with general principles, and curiosity and enquiry will be
attached to what I can say in reply to such efforts to prove me
heretical. I look upon all such occurrences as the ways of Providence to
open the way of truth and righteousness.
Dr. Ryerson returned to Canada in time to attend the Conference at
Brockville. While there he wrote to me, on the 6th of June, 1856:--Mr.
Spencer has given me notice that, as I have denied and repudiated the
terms upon which I had been re-admitted into the Conference, when my
name comes up in the examination of character, it will be moved
that the resolution re-admitting me into the Conference be rescinded.
I am glad of this. It will afford me an opportunity of exposing the
conduct of my assailants, and of entering into the whole question.
To-day the subject of class-meetings came up, by a philippic on the
subject by one of the ministers, in connection with the return of
members, and the manner of administering the Discipline. I at once
accepted the challenge--reiterated my sentiments, and stated when the
time came I should be prepared to show that they were founded on the
Scriptures, the primitive Church, the Fathers of the Protestant
Reformation, and such men as Baxter and Howe, down to the present
time. What I said seemed to be favourably received by a considerable
portion of the Conference. I think the Spencer clique (and it is only
a clique) will be disappointed greatly when the affair comes up. I feel
that I stand upon the Rock of Truth. I would that my soul were more
fully baptized with the Spirit of the Truth, the principles of which
I maintain.
On the 9th of June, he also wrote as follows:--This afternoon, on my
name being called, Rev. J. Borland moved, seconded by Rev. W. Jeffers,
the following resolution:--
_Resolved_, That as Dr. Ryerson has denied the authority of the
verbal assurances given in his behalf at the Conference in London,
and repudiated the basis upon which the resolution restoring him to
his former standing in the Conference was founded; therefore, all
that part of the said resolution which relates to his re-admission
be, and is hereby, rescinded.
When the President came to the question as to the examination of
character, he observed that that question was always considered with
closed doors, and intimated to strangers to withdraw. I arose at once,
and said that as far as I was concerned, notice had been given to me of
a resolution to exclude me from the Conference, and that upon the ground
of what had appeared in the public papers--that I had been
misrepresented and maligned in the official organ of the Conference--in
professed reports of what had taken place in the Conference, and I
demanded, as a matter of right and equity, that the proceedings of the
Conference should be public as far as I was concerned. A discussion then
took place in regard to reporting. I at length moved an amendment that
the proceedings of the Conference should be public as far as I was
concerned. This was adopted by a large majority, though voted against by
the whole clique hostile to me. Several of them made speeches against
me. My brother John, Rev. E. Wood, Rev. R. Jones, Dr. Green, as well as
others, stated what was said as to my pledge, just what I had supposed
and intended; and my brother John made a most powerful speech, and
scathed Mr. Spencer and others. His references to me were warmly cheered
by an evident majority of the Conference. The cheers to the remarks
maligning me seemed to be made by about fifteen or twenty--many less
than I had supposed. I have no doubt they will be defeated by a very
large majority. When the hour of adjournment arrived, the President
asked me if I wished to make any remarks; I stated to the Conference I
was willing to give my assailants the advantage of leaving their strong
statements and attacks unrefuted and unnoticed until Monday morning. A
large number of persons were present, and a strong popular feeling
seemed to be excited in my favour. My opponents have themselves in the
very position in which I have desired to get them, and I shall now have
the best possible opportunity of exposing them.
At the request of the friends here, I have consented to preach
to-morrow evening, notwithstanding the opposition of the preachers
hostile to me. I feel as if God the Lord would help me on this occasion,
notwithstanding my unfaithfulness and unworthiness; He has never failed
me in such an extremity.
On the following Monday Dr. Ryerson's case was brought up for
discussion. Rev. J. Borland made a strong appeal on behalf of his
resolution. The _Canadian Independent_, of July 16th, in speaking of the
debate said:--
Mr. Borland had not spoken long in support of this before he was
interrupted by Rev. Dr. Wood, the President, who made this most
important declaration, that--
He gave no verbal assurance for, or in behalf of Dr. Ryerson; that
he received no such assurance from him; that the document he
received from Dr. Ryerson was laid on the table, and read before
the Conference, unaccompanied by any verbal statements or
assurances of any kind from him.
This he afterwards repeated, when Rev. J. Spencer, the Editor of the
_Guardian_, re-asserted the giving of such assurances. The co-delegate,
Rev. J. Ryerson, also said that--
He never thought of pledging Dr. Ryerson to silence on any of these
questions, and he was sure the Conference would not ask him to do
so, as the Conference never gagged any man.
The _Independent_ then proceeds:--
Dr. Ryerson has been most unfairly treated. He has not denied
having made application for re-admission, but only an application
with pledges of silence. The resolutions of Conference, in 1854,
accepting his resignation and warmly acknowledging his past
services, and, in 1855, consenting to his re-admission, were never
communicated to him, and were suppressed by the _Guardian_. This
was most unmanly and unjust.[145] The matter now before the
Conference was introduced at the Toronto District Meeting in his
absence, and without notice being given him.[146]
He uttered some memorable things in his eloquent defence.
I believe the true foundation or test of membership in the Church
of Christ is not the acute angle of a Class-meeting attendance, but
the broad bases of repentance, faith, and holiness. I can have no
sympathy with that narrow and exclusive spirit, the breadth of
whose catholicity is that of a goat's track, and the dimensions of
whose charity are those of a needle's point, whether inculcated by
the Editor of _The Church_ on the one hand, or by the Editor of the
_Guardian_ on the other. He would give no pledges, had no
concessions or promises to make; would be accountable to the rules
of the Church as others, and would stand in that Conference on the
same footing as other members, or not at all. While he subscribed
to all that had been said as to the utility of Class-meetings, and
reiterated the grounds on which he had recommended and maintained
them; yet, on the ground of Scripture obligation he demurred, and
averred, in the language of Mr. Wesley, with whom they originated
and who best knew their true position in the Church, that they are
merely prudential, not essential, not of Divine institution.
The Editor of the _Independent_, in conclusion, said:--
We congratulate Dr. Ryerson on his successful defence.... We should
esteem it a dire calamity, could any dishonour be attached to his
name. He is one of the most devoted, conscientious, able and
successful officers in the public service. In the school system of
Upper Canada, he has built for himself an enduring monument, as a
benefactor of the Province. He is a brave yet courteous champion
for some of our most precious rights. May those who watch for his
halting be confounded and put to shame!
After a reference to some personal matters, Dr. Ryerson, in the course
of his remarks, showed that he was prepared to sacrifice much for the
maintenance of the truth. He said: Shortly after the occurrence to which
I have just referred, an act was got through the Legislature at the end
of the Session of 1849, which excluded clergymen from visiting the
public schools in their official character, and which would have
excluded the Bible from the schools. What was my conduct on the
occasion? Why, I forthwith placed my office at the disposal of the Head
of the Government sooner than administer such a law. The result was the
Government authorized the suspension of the Act, and caused its repeal
at the next Session of Parliament.
* * * * *
The debate lasted over two days, and was finally closed by the adoption
of an amendment by the Rev. A. Hurlburt, recognizing the application of
the previous year as admitted by Dr. Ryerson, and as understood by the
Conference. The amendment was passed by an immense majority, only 23 out
of 150 members present voting against it.
FOOTNOTES:
[143] Dr. Ryerson left Toronto for Quebec immediately after Conference,
to confer with the Government there on matters connected with his
Department. While there he wrote to me a private letter as follows:--
At Mr. Attorney-General Macdonald's suggestion I have been appointed
Honorary Commissioner at the Paris exhibition. Mr. Macdonald also
endorsed my recommendation for your appointment as Deputy Superintendent
with an increased salary. His Excellency appointed you yesterday
according to my recommendation, and you will be gazetted on Saturday....
Sir Edmund Head has given me very flattering letters of introduction to
Lord Clarendon and Lord John Russell.... I leave here for Boston on my
way to England.... I have no doubt but that you will do all things in
the best manner, and for the best. I fervently pray Almighty God greatly
to prosper you, as well as guide and bless you in your official duties.
[144] The antagonism between Mr. Spencer (now Editor of the _Guardian_)
and Dr. Ryerson was of long standing. Thirteen years before the date of
this attack upon Dr. Ryerson, Mr. Spencer was proposed, in 1842, as a
candidate for a Mastership in Victoria College. Dr. Ryerson advised him
to attend the Wesleyan University at Middletown, Conn., so as to fit
himself for the post. He did so. But the Board of Victoria College
refused to appoint him. He was very indignant, and so expressed himself
to Dr. Ryerson. He afterwards wrote to him a letter (in 1842) as
follows:--You were no doubt surprised at the remarks I made to you, and
perhaps you thought they were unnecessarily harsh and severe, and made
under the momentary impulse of excited feelings. If so, you are
mistaken. I spoke deliberately, though strongly. You know the
circumstances under which, at your request, I went to the College, and
that the situation, though congenial to my feelings, was not sought for
by me. Of the decision of the members of the Board, to give the
Principal permission to employ me part of the year, I express my decided
disapprobation. Now, Sir, I consider such a resolution a downright
insult. Had I come before that Board as a stranger, or under the
character of a mercenary hireling, and one concerning whose
qualifications you were entirely ignorant, then there would have been
some appearance of propriety in making such a proposition, as a
safeguard, and against imposition. But I am a member of that Conference
under whose direction the affairs of that institution are placed; its
interests are closely connected with those of the Church of which I am
now, and expect to remain, a member. I believed I could render greater
service to the Church in labouring to promote the prosperity of that
institution. I trust I have yet too much of public spirit, and too
ardent a desire for the prosperity of our College, to wish to remain
there if my labours were not conducive to its efficiency. But what is
the spirit of that resolution? "Why, we wish to get rid of you, and the
easiest way to do it is, to employ you for a specified time, and then we
can dismiss you with propriety. But the absurdity of that resolution is
its most prominent feature. I intend, at the first opportunity, to
express my mind more fully to you personally upon this subject." In one
of his letters in this controversy, Dr. Ryerson thus refers to this
Victoria College episode. He says: In regard to Mr. Spencer, I am aware
of his feelings toward me during these many years; ever since he failed
to procure an appointment to the Chair of Chemistry and Natural
Philosophy in Victoria College, for which he had devoted a year of
special preparation. I believe he has attributed his disappointment to
me, and that I had not acted toward him in a brotherly way, in not
securing his appointment, as he supposed I could have done from my
connection with the College. The fact was, I recommended his
appointment, at least for a trial, but my recommendation was not
concurred in by any other member of the Board, as Dr. Green and others
know.
[145] Dr. Ryerson, in his speech at the Brockville Conference, referring
to this omission, said:--The Conference passed a resolution
complimentary and affectionate towards myself, and expressive of its
high sense of my long services in defending the rights and advocating
the interests of the Connexion. The copy of that resolution has never
been communicated to me to this day; Mr. Spencer suppressed the
publication of it in the _Guardian_, and thus defeated the noble and
generous intentions of the great majority of the Conference in regard to
myself.
[146] To this proceeding, Dr. Ryerson also referred in his speech as
follows:--How did my opponents bring up their charge against me? Did
they inform the defendant of the approaching ordeal, and secure his
presence in an ecclesiastical court prior to his attempted execution?
No, Sir; the defendant obeys the call of duty, at personal sacrifice, to
attend to a meeting of the senate and annual public exercises of the
students of Victoria College; and, while absent, these professed
advocates of Methodistic rule, arraign him without notice, and seek to
get a resolution passed against him. Is that Methodism? Is that old
Methodism? If these, my assailants, believe, as they say, that the
interests of the Church will be greatly promoted by my expulsion, then
let them do it on Methodistic principles. Now, although I was well aware
that they were opposed to me personally, yet I thought, though I was
absent from the district meeting, they would treat me, at least,
honourably. If I had done wrong, let them accuse me--give me a specific
charge and due notice of trial, and let me prepare for my defence. This
would be the manly course--this would be Methodism; and if I had
committed no offence, if no charge could be brought against me, why seek
to exclude me from this body without a charge and without a crime? Is
not this course opposed to all proceedings of civil and ecclesiastical
tribunals, and to every principle of civil and religious liberty--to
true Protestant freedom and to genuine Methodism, whether new or old?
CHAPTER LVII.
1854-1856.
Dr. Ryerson's Third Educational Tour in Europe.
While in Europe in 1854 and 1856, Dr. Ryerson, under the authority of
the Government, commenced the collection of objects of art for the
Educational Museum in the Education Department. While there he met Hon.
Malcolm Cameron, who after Dr. Ryerson returned to Canada, wrote to him
from London on the subject of his mission. In a letter, dated 3rd of
January, 1857, Mr. Cameron said:--
I have myself witnessed the result of the labour and reading which
you must have gone through with in order to obtain the information
and cultivation of judgment necessary to get the things our young
Canada can afford; things, too, of such a character and description
as shall be useful, not only in elevating the taste of our youth,
but of increasing their historical and mythological lore, as well
as inform them of the facts of their accuracy in size and form. I
was much flattered to find that my humble efforts to begin, in some
degree, a Canadian gallery--by securing a few of Paul Kane's
pictures in 1851--had been followed up by you in your
universally-acknowledged enlightened efforts for education, which
(in my bitterest moments of alienation from you, for what I
esteemed a sacrifice of Canadian freedom, and right to
self-government), I have ever cheerfully admitted.
Your determination to obtain a few works of art and statuary, a few
paintings, prints of celebrities, and scientific instruments, has
cost you much labour, anxiety and thought, which I never would have
conceived of had I not met you, and gone with you, and seen your
notes and correspondence.
You have passed through many trials, and in most of them I was with
you. The period that presses on my mind (as Lord Elgin said of
Montreal), I do not want to remember. God grant that we may see, in
all matters for the rest of our few days, eye to eye, as we do now
on all the subjects in which you are now engaged, publicly and
privately. I think God is with you, and directing you aright in
that Conference matter which is nearest to your heart, and I am
confident that you will have a signal triumph.
Dr. Ryerson has written the following account of a distinguished
physician whom he met at Rome:--
One of the most remarkable men with whom I became acquainted in
Italy, in my tour there in 1856-7, was Dr. Pantelioni, a scholar,
physician, patriot, and statesman; to whose character and
banishment from Rome the London _Times'_ newspaper devoted about
three columns.
Prefatory to the circumstances of my acquaintance with this
remarkable man, I may observe, that when in England in 1850-1, I
had a good deal of correspondence with Earl Grey, who was then
Secretary of State for the Colonies, and through whom I was able to
procure maps, globes, and essential text-books for Canadian
schools, at a discount of forty-three per cent. from the published
selling prices. Earl Grey was much pleased in being the instrument
of so much good to the cause of public education in Canada; wrote
to the English booksellers and got their consent to the
arrangement, shewed me much kindness, and invited me to dine at his
residence, in company with some distinguished English statesmen,
among whom was Sir Charles Wood (afterwards a peer), and the late
Marquis of Lansdowne, the Nestor of English statesmen, and beside
whom I was seated at dinner. The Countess of Grey shewed me many
kind attentions, and the Marquis of Lansdowne invited me to call
the next day at Lansdowne House, and explain to him the Canadian
system of education, as he was the Chairman of the Privy Council
Committee on Education, and wished to know what had been done, and
what might be done for the education of the labouring classes. I
called at Lansdowne House, as desired, and explained as briefly and
clearly as possible the Canadian school system, its popular
comprehensiveness and fairness to all parties, its Christian, yet
non-sectarian, character. At the conclusion of my remarks, the
noble Marquis observed, "I cannot conceive a greater blessing to
England than the introduction into it of the Canadian school
system; but, from our historical traditions and present state of
society, all we can do is to aid by Parliamentary grants the cause
of popular education through the agency of voluntary associations
and religious denominations."
Five years afterwards, in another educational tour in Europe,
myself and daughter spent some months at the Paris Exhibition in
1855. The Earl and Countess of Grey, seeing our names on the
Canadian Book of the Exhibition, called and left their cards at our
hotel. We returned the call the following day, when the Earl and
Countess told us they had an aunt at Rome devoted to the fine arts,
who would have great pleasure in assisting us to select copies of
great masters for our Canadian Educational Museum; that they would
write to her, and, if we left our cards with her on our arrival,
she would gladly receive us. We did so, and, in less than an hour
after, we received a most friendly letter from Lady Grey, saying
that she had been expecting and waiting for us for some time, and
writing us to come to her residence that evening, as she had
invited a few friends.[147] In the course of the evening, I was
introduced to Dr. Pantelioni with this remark, "Dr. Ryerson, if you
should become ill, you cannot fall into better hands than those of
Dr. Pantelioni." I replied that "I was glad to make his personal
acquaintance, but hoped I should not need his professional
services." But the very next day I was struck down in the Vatican
while examining the celebrated painting of Raphael's
Transfiguration and Dominichino's Last Communion of St. Jerome,
with a cruel attack of lumbago and sciatica, rendering it necessary
for four men to convey me down the long stairway to my carriage,
and from thence to my room in the hotel, where I was confined for
some three weeks, requiring three men for some days to turn me in
bed. Language cannot describe the agony I experienced during that
period. Dr. Pantelioni was sent for, and attended me daily for
three weeks, and never charged me more than a dollar a visit. After
two or three visits, finding that I was otherwise well, and had
knowledge of government and civil affairs in Europe and America,
he entered into conversation with me on these subjects. I found him
to be one of the most generally read and enlightened men that I had
met with on the Continent.
He frequently remained from one to three hours conversing with me;
and in the course of these frequent and lengthened visits, Dr.
Pantelioni related the following facts:
1st. That he was one of the liberal party in Rome that opposed the
despotism of the Papal government, and contributed to its
overthrow, when Garibaldi for a time became supreme at Rome.
2nd. That he, with many other liberals, became convinced that the
government which Garibaldi would inaugurate, would be little better
than a mob, and would be neither stable nor safe.
(Garibaldi was a bold and skilful party leader, but no statesman. I
witnessed his presence in the Italian Legislature, then held in
Florence; he could declaim against government, and find fault, with
individual acts; but he seemed to have no system of government in
his own mind, and commanded little respect or attention after his
first speech.)
3rd. Dr. Pantelioni stated, that under these circumstances, he,
with several liberal friends, agreed to go confidentially to the
Pope, who was then an exile at Gaeta, and offer their offices and
influence to restore him to power at Rome, provided he would
establish a constitutional government, and govern as a
constitutional ruler. The pope agreed to their propositions, but
when they reduced them to writing for his signature, and those of
the gentlemen waiting upon him, he declined to sign his name; in
consequence of which Dr. Pantelioni and his friends felt they had
no sufficient ground upon their own individual word, without a
scrap of writing from the pen of the pope, to influence their
friends, and risk their lives; they, therefore, retired from the
presence of his holiness, disappointed but not dishonored.
4th On my recovery Dr. Pantelioni invited me to visit him at his
residence. I did so and found him possessed of the best private
library I had seen in Italy, or even on the continent. It filled
three, large rooms; one of which contained books (well arranged) of
general history and literature, comprising the latest standard
works in English (published both in England and America), French,
German, Italian and Spanish. The second room was equally filled
with shelves and books, beautifully arranged, on medical and
scientific subjects of the latest date, and highest authority, in
English, French, Italian, German, and Spanish, &c. The third room
contained a fine and extensive collection of the latest standard
works which had been published in England and the United States,
France, Spain, Germany, and Italy, on Civil Government. I was not
before aware that the Italian language was so rich in political
literature. I selected the titles, and ordered several books in
that language for myself.
5th. In the course of these conversations, Dr. Pantelioni related
the efforts of himself and friends to establish a constitutional
government, despairing, as they did, of any competence of the
Garibaldi party to establish such a government. A deputation (of
whom Dr. Pantelioni was one) went from Rome to Florence to consult
the Right Honourable Richard Shiel, then the British Ambassador, or
representative of the British Government, at Florence, as the
British Government had no diplomatic relations with Rome. Mr. Shiel
asked them what they wanted? They replied, nothing more than the
protection of the British Government for twelve months, during
which time they could establish a just and safe government, if
protected from the interference of other governments. Mr. Shiel
agreed to support their views, and Dr. Pantelioni and one or two
others of the deputation took letters from Mr. Shiel on the subject
to the late Viscount Palmerston and Lord John Russell, who
encouraged their undertaking, entirely agreeing with the
recommendations of Mr. Shiel, who, although a Roman Catholic, was
a constitutional liberal. But it unfortunately happened that on the
very day on which Dr. Pantelioni and his friends, after their
mission to England, had intended to carry their plans into
operation, the French army landed at Civita Vecchia, and having
subdued the Garibaldi party at Rome, restored the Pope to the
Vatican, with all his former pretensions and power.
6th. Some time afterwards, when the King of Italy overran the Papal
territories, Dr. Pantelioni was nominated to the Italian
Legislature for one of the new electoral divisions, but declined at
once the acceptance of the nomination, and sent his resignation by
the first post, well knowing the effect it might have upon his
personal safety and interests at Rome, which was still under the
rule of the Pope. But the partiality shown to Dr. Pantelioni by his
newly enfranchised fellow-countrymen enraged the Court of Rome,
which banished him from his city and country on a notice of only
twenty-four hours! The London _Times_ newspaper devoted some two
articles to Dr. Pantelioni's history and banishment, eulogizing him
in the strongest terms.
7th. Dr. Pantelioni then took up his abode at Nice, in the south of
France, and there pursued his profession.
Some years afterward, when making my last educational tour on the
Continent in 1867, I stopped a day with my son at Nice, and learned
that there was an Italian physician residing there, an exile from
Rome. I knew it must be my old physician and friend, and
immediately called upon him. We were, of course, both delighted to
see each other again; and he invited myself and son to spend the
evening at his house, which we did. He had, since I saw him at
Rome, married an English lady, who seemed in every respect worthy
of him.
When in the course of the evening I expressed my sympathy with him
in his exile, privation of his beautiful residence and fine
library, he replied with energy, bringing his hand down strongly on
the table, "I have such faith in the principles on which I have
acted, and in the providence of God, that I shall just as surely go
back to Rome, as that I am sure I am now talking to you." Some one
or two years afterwards I learned from the newspapers, that Dr.
Pantelioni had been recalled to Rome by the King of Italy, and
appointed to the head of all the Roman Hospitals.
* * * * *
In a letter from Dr. Ryerson dated London, 30th October, 1857, he said:
"On the 28th inst. we witnessed the consecration of Dr. Cronyn as Bishop
of Huron, and were afterwards invited to lunch with the Archbishop of
Canterbury. Several bishops were present. Afterwards we went with Dr.
Cronyn to Woolwich, and dined with him at his son-in-law's (Col.
Burrows)."
FOOTNOTES:
[147] These evening parties are conversazioni on a small scale. There
were no suppers, but cups of tea and biscuits, chiefly for ladies; the
gentlemen did not take off their gloves or sit down, but kept their hats
in their hands or under their arms. We were introduced to, and conversed
with various parties. Lady Grey seemed to be ubiquitous, and to know
everybody, and to make all feel at home. She is the widow of General
Grey, and is said to have been in early days a belle and bright star in
the highest London society.
CHAPTER LVIII.
1859-1862.
Denominational Colleges and the University Controversy.
One of the most memorable controversies in which Dr. Ryerson was engaged
was that on behalf of the Denominational Colleges of Upper Canada.
Unfortunately, at various stages of the discussion, the controversy
partook largely of a personal character. This prevented that clear,
calm, and dispassionate consideration of the whole of this important
question to which it was entitled, and hence, in one sense, no good
result accrued. Such a question as this was worthy of a better fate. For
at that stage of our history it was a momentous one--worthy of a
thoughtful, earnest and practical solution--a solution of which it was
then capable, had it been taken up by wise, far-seeing and patriotic
statesmen. But the opportunity was unfortunately lost; and in the
anxiety in some cases to secure a personal triumph, a grand movement to
give practical effect to somewhat like the comprehensive university
scheme of the Hon. Robert Baldwin, of 1843, failed. Mr. Baldwin's
proposal of that year was defeated by the defenders of King's College,
as a like scheme of twenty years later was defeated by the champions of
the Toronto University. The final result of the painful struggle of
1859-1863 was in effect as follows:--
1. Things were chiefly left in _statu quo ante bellum_.
2. An impetus was given to the denominational college principle; and
that principle was emphasized.
3. Colleges with university powers were multiplied in the province.
4. Life and energy were infused into the denominational colleges.
5. Apathy and indifference prevailed (and, to some extent, still
prevails) among the adherents of the Provincial University.
I have already stated that the issues raised in the memorable university
contest of 1859-1863 were important. So they were, as after events have
proved. The question, however, was unfortunately decided twenty years
ago, not by an independent, impartial and disinterested tribunal, but
by the parties in possession, whose judgment in the case would naturally
be in their own favour. Besides, members of the Government at the time
felt no real interest in the question, and were glad, under the shelter
of official statements and opinions, to escape collision with such
powerful bodies as the Wesleyan Methodists and the Church of Scotland.
This discussion originated in the presentation to the Legislature of a
memorial from the Wesleyan Methodist Conference, prepared by Dr.
Ryerson, dated November, 1859, to the following effect:--
That the Legislature in passing the Provincial University Act of
1853, clearly proposed and avowed a threefold object. First, the
creation of a University for examining candidates, and conferring
degrees in the Faculties of Arts, Law, and Medicine. Secondly, the
establishment of an elevated curriculum of University education,
conformable to that of the London University in England. Thirdly,
the association with the Provincial University of the several
colleges already established, and which might be established, in
Upper Canada, with the Provincial University, the same as various
colleges of different denominations in Great Britain and Ireland
are affiliated to the London University--placed as they are upon
equal footing in regard to and aid from the state, and on equal
footing in regard to the composition of the Senate, and the
appointment of examiners.
In the promotion of these objects the Conference and members of the
Wesleyan Methodist Church cordially concurred; and at the first
meeting after the passing of the University Act, the Senatorial
Board of Victoria College adopted the programme of collegiate
studies established by the Senate of the London University, and
referred to in the Canadian Statute. But it soon appeared that the
Senate of the Toronto University, instead of giving effect to the
liberal intentions of the Legislature, determined to identify the
University with one college, in contradistinction and to the
exclusion of all others, to establish a monopoly of senatorial
power and public revenue for one college alone; so much so, that a
majority of the legal quorum of the Senate now consists of the
professors of one college, one of whom is invariably one of the two
examiners of their own students, candidates for degrees, honors,
and scholarships. The curriculum of the University studies, instead
of being elevated and conformed to that of the London University,
has been revised and changed three times since 1853, and reduced by
options and otherwise below what it was formerly, and below what it
is in the British Universities, and below what it is in the best
colleges in the United States. The effect of this narrow and
anti-liberal course is, to build up one College at the expense of
all others, and to reduce the standard of a University degree in
both Arts and Medicine below what it was before the passing of the
University Act in 1853.
Instead of confining the expenditure of funds to what the law
prescribed--namely, the "current expenses," and such "permanent
improvements or additions to the buildings" as might be necessary
for the purposes of the University and University College--new
buildings have been erected at an expenditure of some hundreds of
thousands of dollars, and the current expenses of the College have
been increased far beyond what they were in former times of
complaint and investigation on this subject.
Your memorialists therefore submit, that in no respect have the
liberal and enlightened intentions of the Legislature in passing
the University Act been fulfilled--a splendid but unjust monopoly
for the city and college of Toronto having been created, instead
of a liberal and elevated system, equally fair to all the colleges
of the country.
A Provincial University should be what its name imports, and what
was clearly intended by the Legislature--a body equally unconnected
with, and equally impartial to every college in the country; and
every college should be placed on equal footing in regard to public
aid according to its works, irrespective of place, sect, or party.
It is as unjust to propose, as it is unreasonable to expect, the
affiliation of several colleges in one University except on equal
terms. There have been ample funds to enable the Senate to submit
to the Government a comprehensive and patriotic recommendation to
give effect to the liberal intentions of the Legislature in the
accomplishment of these objects; but the Senate has preferred to
become the sole patron of one college to the exclusion of all
others, and to absorb and expend the large and increasing funds of
the University, instead of allowing any surplus to accumulate for
the general promotion of academical education, as contemplated and
specifically directed by the statute. Not only has the annual
income of the University endowment been reduced some thousands of
pounds per annum by vast expenditures for the erection of buildings
not contemplated by the Act, but a portion of those expenditures is
for the erection of lecture-rooms, &c., for the Faculties of which
the Act expressly forbids the establishment!
But whilst your memorialists complain that the very intentions of
this Act have thus been disregarded and defeated, we avow our
desire to be the same now as it was more than ten years ago, in
favour of the establishment of a Provincial University, unconnected
with any one college or religious persuasion, but sustaining a
relation of equal fairness and impartiality to the several
religious persuasions and colleges, with power to prescribe the
curriculum, to examine candidates, and confer degrees, in the
Faculties of Arts, Law, and Medicine.
We also desire that the University College at Toronto should be
efficiently maintained; and for that purpose we should not object
that the minimum of its income from the University Endowment should
be even twice that of any other college; but it is incompatible
with the very idea of a national University, intended to embrace
the several colleges of the nation, to lavish all the endowment and
patronage of the state upon one college, to the exclusion of all
others. At the present time, and for years past, the noble
University Endowment is virtually expended by parties directly or
indirectly connected with but one college; and the scholarships and
prizes, the honors and degrees conferred, are virtually the rewards
and praises bestowed by professors upon their own students, and not
the doings and decisions of a body wholly unconnected with the
college. Degrees and distinctions thus conferred, however much they
cost the country, cannot possess any higher literary value, as they
are of no more legal value, than those conferred by the _Senatus
Academicus_ of the other chartered colleges.
It is therefore submitted that if it is desired to have one
Provincial University, the corresponding arrangement should be made
to place each of the colleges on equal footing according to their
works in regard to everything emanating from the state. And if it
is refused to place these colleges on equal footing as colleges of
one University, it is but just and reasonable that they should be
placed upon equal footing in regard to aid from the state,
according to their works as separate University colleges.
It is well known that it is the natural tendency, as all experience
shows, that any college independent of all inspection, control, or
competition in wealth--all its officers securely paid by the state,
independent of exertion or success--will in a short time, as a
general rule, degenerate into inactivity, indifference, and
extravagance. In collegiate institutions, as well as in the higher
and elementary schools, and in other public and private affairs of
life, competition is an important element of efficiency and
success. The best system of collegiate, as of elementary education,
is that in which voluntary effort is developed by means of public
aid. It is clearly both the interest and duty of the state to
prompt and encourage individual effort in regard to collegiate, as
in regard to elementary, education and not to discourage it by the
creation of a monopoly invidious and unjust on the one side, and on
the other deadening to all individual effort and enterprise, and
oppressive to the state.
We submit, therefore, that justice and the best interests of
liberal education require the several colleges of the country to be
placed upon equal footing according to their works. We ask nothing
for Victoria College which we do not ask for every collegiate
institution in Upper Canada upon the same terms.
We desire also that it may be distinctly understood that we ask no
aid towards the support of any theological school or theological
chair in Victoria College. There is no such chair in Victoria
College; and whenever one shall be established, provision will be
made for its support independent of any grant from the state.[148]
We claim support for Victoria College according to its works as a
literary institution--as teaching those branches which are embraced
in the curriculum of a liberal education, irrespective of
denominational theology.
We also disclaim any sympathy with the motives and objects which
have been attributed by the advocates of Toronto College monopoly,
in relation to our National School system. The fact that a member
of our own body has been permitted by the annual approbation of the
Conference to devote himself to the establishment and extension of
our school system, is ample proof of our approval of that system:
in addition to which we have from time to time expressed our
cordial support of it by formal resolutions, and by the testimony
and example of our more than four hundred ministers throughout the
Province. No religious community in Upper Canada has, therefore,
given so direct and effective support to the National School system
as the Wesleyan community, but we have ever maintained, and we
submit, that the same interests of general education for all
classes which require the maintenance of the elementary school
system require a reform in our University system in order to place
it on a foundation equally comprehensive and impartial, and not to
be the patron and mouthpiece of one college alone; and the same
consideration of fitness, economy and patriotism which justify the
state in co-operating with each school municipality to support a
day school, require it to co-operate with each religious
persuasion, according to its own educational works, to support a
college. The experience of all Protestant countries shows that it
is, and has been, as much the province of a religious persuasion to
establish a college as it is for a school municipality to establish
a day school; and the same experience shows that, while pastoral
and parental care can be exercised for the religious instruction of
children residing at home and attending a day school, that care
cannot be exercised over youth residing away from home and pursuing
their higher education except in a college where the pastoral and
parental care can be daily combined. We hold that the highest
interests of the country, as of an individual, are its religious
and moral interests; and we believe there can be no heavier blow
dealt out against those religious and moral interests, than for the
youth of a country destined to receive the best literary education,
to be placed, during the most eventful years of that educational
course, without the pale of daily parental and pastoral instruction
and oversight. The results of such a system must, sooner or later,
sap the religious and moral foundations of society. For such is
the tendency of our nature, that with all the appliances of
religious instruction and ceaseless care by the parent and pastor;
they are not always successful in counteracting evil propensities
and temptations; and therefore, from a system which involves the
withdrawal or absence of all such influence for years at a period
when youthful passions are strongest, and youthful temptations most
powerful, we cannot but entertain painful apprehensions. Many a
parent would deem it his duty to leave his son without the
advantages of a liberal education, rather than thus expose him to
the danger of moral shipwreck in its acquirement.
This danger does not so much apply to that very considerable class
of persons whose home is in Toronto; or to those young men whose
character and principles are formed, and who, for the most part,
are pursuing their studies by means acquired by their own industry
and economy; or to the students of theological institutions
established in Toronto, and to which the University College answers
the convenient purpose of a free Grammar School, in certain secular
branches. But such cases form the exceptions, and not the general
rule. And if one college at Toronto is liberally endowed for
certain classes who have themselves contributed or done nothing to
promote liberal education, we submit that in all fairness, apart
from moral patriotic considerations, the state ought to aid with
corresponding liberality those other classes who for years have
contributed largely to erect and sustain collegiate institutions,
and who while they endeavour to confer upon youth, as widely as
possible, the advantages of a sound liberal education, seek to
incorporate with it those moral influences, associations, and
habits which give to education its highest value, which form the
true basis and cement of civil institutions and national
civilization, as well as of individual character and happiness.
The various statements and propositions in this memorial were fully and
ably discussed on both sides at the time before a Committee of the
Legislature. The discussion itself and voluminous papers and documents
on either side were published in pamphlet form and in the newspapers, so
that no further reference to them is necessary. The only other point
raised in the discussion which is not mentioned in the memorial, is one
on which Dr. Ryerson has expressed himself clearly. That is the
relations of denominational colleges to the national system of public
schools. On that point he says:--
The denominational collegiate system which I advocate is in harmony with
the fundamental principles of our Common School system.... The
fundamental principle of the school system is two-fold. First, the right
of the parent and pastor to provide religious instruction for their
children; and to have facilities for that purpose. While the law
protects each pupil from compulsory attendance at any religious reading
or exercise against the wish of his parent; it also provides that within
that limitation "pupils shall be allowed to receive such religious
instruction as their parents and guardians shall desire, according to
the general regulations which shall be provided according to law." The
general regulations provide that the parent may make discretionary
arrangements with the teacher on the subject; and that the clergyman of
any Church shall have the right to any school house being within his
charge for one hour in the week between four and five, for the religious
instruction of the pupils of his own Church. Be it observed, then, the
supreme right of the parent, and the corresponding right of the pastor
in regard to the religious instruction of youth, even in connexion with
day schools, where children are with their parents more than half of
each week day, and the whole of each Sunday, is a fundamental principle
of the Common School system. The less or greater extent to which the
right may be exercised in various places, does not affect the principles
or right itself, which is fundamental in the system. The second
fundamental principle in the school system is the co-operation and aid
of the State with each locality or section of the community as a
condition of, and in proportion to local effort. This is a vital
principle of the school system, and pervades it throughout, and is a
chief element of its success. No public aid is given until a school
house is provided, and a legally qualified teacher is employed, when
public aid is given in proportion to the work done in the school; that
is, in proportion to the number of children taught, and the length of
time the school is kept open; and public aid is given for the purpose of
school maps and apparatus, the prize books and libraries, in proportion
to the amount provided from local sources. To the application of that
principle between the State and the inhabitants of localities there is
no exception whatever, except in the single case of distributing a sum
not exceeding £500 per annum in aid of poor school sections in new
townships, and then their local effort must precede the application for
a special grant.
Such are the two fundamental principles of the school system, on which I
have more than once dwelt at large in official reports.
Now apply these principles to the collegiate system of the country.
First, the united right and duty of the parent and pastor. Should that
be suspended when the son is away from home, or should it be provided
for? Let parental affection and conscience, and not blind or heartless
partisanship, reply. If, then, the combined care and duty of the parent
and pastor are to be provided for as far as possible when the son is
pursuing the higher part of his education, for which he must leave home,
can that be done best in a denominational or non-denominational College?
But one answer can be given to this question. The religious and moral
principles, feelings, and habits of youth are paramount. Scepticism and
partisanship may sneer at them as "sectarian," but religion and
conscience will hold them as supreme. If the parent has the right to
secure the religious instruction and oversight of his son at home, in
connection with his school education, has he not a right to do so when
his son is abroad? and is not the State in duty bound to afford him the
best facilities for that purpose? And how can that be done so
effectually--nay, how can it be effectually done at all--except in a
college which, while it gives the secular education required by the
State, responds to the parent's heart and faith to secure the higher
interests which are beyond all human computation, and without the
cultivation of which society itself cannot exist? It is a mystery of
mysteries, that men of conscience, men of religious principle and
feeling, can be so far blinded by sectarian jealousy and partizanship,
as to desire for one moment to withhold from youth at the most feeble,
most tempted, most eventful period of their educational training, the
most potent guards, helps, and influences to resist and escape the
snares and seductions of vice, and to acquire and become established in
those principles, feelings, and habits which will make them true
Christians, at the same time that they are educated men. Even in the
interests of civilization itself, what is religious and moral stands far
before what is merely scholastic and refined. The Hon. Edward Everett
has truly said in a late address, "It is not political nor military
power, but moral sentiments, principally under the guidance and
influence of religious zeal, that has in all ages civilized the world."
What creates civilization can alone preserve and advance it. The great
question, after all, in the present discussion, is not which system will
teach the most classics, mathematics, etc. (although I shall consider
the question in this light presently), but which system will best
protect, develop, and establish those higher principles of action, which
are vastly more important to a country itself--apart from other and
immortal considerations--than any amount of intellectual attainments in
certain branches of secular knowledge. Colleges under religious control
may fall short of their duty and their power of religious and moral
influence; but they must be, as a general rule, vastly better and safer
than a College of no religious control or character at all. At all
events, one class of citizens have much more valid claims to public aid
for a College that will combine the advantages of both secular and
religious education, than have another class of citizens to public aid
for a College which confers no benefit beyond secular teaching alone. It
is not the sect, it is society at large that most profits by the high
religious principles and character of its educated men. An efficient
religious College must confer a much greater benefit upon the State than
a non-religious College can, and must be more the benefactor of the
State than the State can be to it by bestowing any ordinary amount of
endowment. It is, therefore, in harmony with the first fundamental
principle of the Common School system, as well as with the highest
interests of society at large, that the best facilities be provided for
all that is affectionate in the parent and faithful in the pastor,
during the away-from-home education of youth; and that is a College
under religious control, whether that control be of the Church of the
parent or not.
I have already given on page 344, Dr. Ryerson's opinions in regard to
the provisions of Hon. Robert Baldwin's University Bill of 1843. From
the extract there inserted it will be seen that the practical objection
which he raised in 1859, to the administration of the University Act of
1853, was in general harmony with the views and opinions on University
matters which he had expressed fifteen or sixteen years before. A fuller
expression of these opinions was given in a letter which Dr. Ryerson
wrote to the _British Colonist_ on the 14th of February, 1846. From that
letter I make the following extracts:--
The Board of Victoria College took no part in the University
question until after the introduction of a Bill into the
Legislature which affected the chartered rights and relations of
Victoria College. On that occasion a special meeting of the Board
was called, to decide whether it would, under any circumstances,
acquiesce in that Bill, and upon what terms. The Board expressed a
strong opinion in favour of the general terms of the Bill, but
expressed an unfavourable opinion respecting some of its details,
especially the project of the "Extra mural Board," and the
non-recognition of Christianity. The Board also objected to the
smallness of the amount proposed to be given to Victoria College.
It stated that Victoria College, having been erected by public
subscription, for the purpose of "teaching the various branches of
science and literature upon Christian principles," could not cease
to be a literary institution, as some supposed the Bill
contemplated; it stated the peculiar hardships of the aspect of the
Bill to the Methodist institution, under all the circumstances
(which it explained), and submitted them to the honourable and
generous consideration of the Government.... Mr. Baldwin's Bill
proposed to grant the sum of £500 per annum each for several years
to no less than four seminaries [besides the University].... It was
objected to on the part of both Presbyterians and Methodists, that
its application to them was not liberal enough; it was objected to
on the part of King's College Council that it gave even a farthing
to any of them.
Afterwards King's College Council objected to the Bill, and
employed counsel to oppose it, on the ground that the Legislature
had no right to interfere with their charter, or to divert any
portion of King's College funds in aid of other institutions. To
this plea of the King's College Council an individual member of the
Victoria College Board offered an argumentative reply, contending
that the endowment of King's College was the property of the
Province, and upon legal, constitutional, and equitable grounds,
came within the limits of Provincial legislation. This principle, I
believe, is now generally admitted.
From this summary of well known facts it is evident--1. That Mr.
Baldwin's Bill did contemplate giving aid to other institutions
than the Toronto University. 2. That the friends of Queen's,
Regiopolis, Victoria and King's Colleges did expect to derive
assistance from the University funds. 3. That the objections to Mr.
Baldwin's Bill on the part of the Presbyterians and Methodists
were, not that any portion of the University funds should be
applied in aid of their institutions, but that the portion proposed
was entirely too small. 4. That those who supported Mr. Baldwin's
Bill cannot consistently object to aid being given from the
University funds to institutions in connection with the Church of
England, Roman Catholics and Methodists. The amount and duration of
such aid is a mere prudential consideration; the principle is the
same, whether the amount of aid be five hundred or five thousand
pounds, whether the duration be five years or five hundred
years....
That there should be a Provincial University, furnishing the
highest academical and professional education, at least in respect
to law and medicine; that there should be a Provincial system of
common school education, commensurate with the wants of the entire
population; that both the University and the system should be
established and conducted upon Christian principles, yet free from
sectarian bias or ascendancy; that there should be an intermediate
class of seminaries in connection with the different religious
persuasions, who have ability and enterprise to establish them,
providing on the one hand a theological education for their clergy,
and on the other hand a thorough English and scientific education,
and elementary classical instruction for those of the youth of
their congregations who might seek for more than a common school
education, or who might wish to prepare for the University, and
who, not having the experience and discretion of University
students, required a parental and religious oversight, in their
absence from their parents; that it would be economy and patriotic
on the part of the Government to grant liberal aid to such
seminaries, as well as to provide for the endowment of a University
or a common school system;--these are views which I explained and
argued at length when the University question was under discussion,
from 1828 to 1834; these are the views on which the Methodists
asked in establishing the Upper Canada Academy, now Victoria
College; these are views, by pressing which, a royal charter and
government aid were obtained for that institution; these are the
views which received strong confirmation in the recommendation of a
despatch from Lord Goderich to Sir John Colborne in 1832, and which
greatly encouraged the friends of the Upper Canada Academy in their
commencing exertions. That institution was not originally intended
to be a University College; nor was it sought to be made so until
after the establishment of a Presbyterian University College at
Kingston; when, prompted by example and emulation, and
encouragement of aid, it was thought that the operations of a
University might be grafted upon those of the academy, without
interfering with the more extended objects of the latter....
More than a thousand youth have received more or less instruction
at the Cobourg Institution; very few of them, apart from other
considerations, have gone from it without forming a high standard
of education, and a deeper conviction of its importance than they
had before entertained; it has prevented hundreds of youth from
going out of the country to be educated, upon whom, and upon
hundreds of others, it has conferred the benefits of a good
practical education. Its buildings present the most remarkable
monument of religious effort and patriotic energy which was ever
witnessed in any country of the age and population of Upper
Canada....
The Wesleyan Methodists have not, like the Churches of England,
Scotland and Rome, derived any assistance from the clergy reserve
fund, or other public aid to their clergy or churches. It is much
easier to figure upon a platform than to establish educational
institutions, or to preach the Gospel throughout new countries.
Those who have been in Canada twelve months can do the former, and
sneer at the latter. The flippant allusions of certain speakers at
the late Toronto meeting to the Methodists and to Victoria College
... were as unfounded as they were unbecoming.
The discussions on the University question at Quebec in 1860 were, as I
have intimated, bitter and largely personal. Dr. Ryerson, being in the
fore front of the University reformers, was singled out for special
attack by some of the ablest defenders of the University. I shall not
enter into detail, but will give the opening and concluding parts of Dr.
Ryerson's great speech, which he made before the Committee of the
Legislature on the 25th and 26th of April, 1860:--
I am quite aware of the disadvantage under which I appear before you
to-day. I am not insensible of the prejudices which may have been
excited in the minds of many individuals by the occurrences of the last
few days; ... I am not at all insensible of the fact that the attempt
has been made to turn the issue, not on the great question which demands
attention, but upon my merits or demerits, my standing as a man, and the
course which I have pursued. This subject, of very little importance to
the Committee, ... possesses a great deal of importance to myself. No
man can stand in the presence of the Representatives of the people; no
man can stand, as I feel myself standing this morning, not merely in the
presence of a Committee, but, as it were, in the presence of my native
country, the land of my birth, affections, labours, hopes, without
experiencing the deepest emotion. But how much more is that the case
when attempts have been made, of the most unprecedented kind, to deprive
me of all that is dear to me as a man, as a parent, as a public officer,
as a minister of the Christian Church. More especially do I thus feel
because reading and arranging the papers on this subject, to which my
attention has been called, occupied me until five o'clock this
morning....
Sir, the position of the question which demands our consideration this
day, is one altogether peculiar, and, I will venture to say,
unparalleled in this or any other country. The individuals connected
with myself--the party unconnected with what may be called the National
University of the country, stand as the conservators of a high standard
of education, and appear before you as the advocates of a thorough
course of training that will discipline, in the most effectual manner,
the powers of the mind, and prepare the youth of our country for those
pursuits and those engagements which demand their attention as men,
Christians, and patriots, while the very persons to whom has been
allotted this great interest, this important trust, stand before you as
the advocates of a reduction, of a puerile system which has never
invigorated the mind, or raised up great men in any country; which can
never lay deep and broad the foundations of intellectual grandeur and
power anywhere, but which is characterized by that superficiality which
marks the proceedings of the educational institutions in the new and
Western States of the neighbouring Republic. Sir, I feel proud of the
position I occupy; that if I have gone to an extreme, I have gone to the
proper extreme; that even if I may have pressed my views to an extent
beyond the present standing, the present capabilities of the Province,
my views have been upward, my course has been onward, my attempt has
been to invigorate Canada with an intellect and a power, a science and a
literature that will stand unabashed in the presence of any other
country, while the very men who should have raised our educational
standard to the highest point, who should have been the leaders in
adopting a high and thorough course, have confessed during the
discussion of this question, that the former standard was too high, and
that they have been levelling it down, incorporating with it
speculations which have never elevated the institutions of any country,
and adopting a course of proceedings which never advanced any nation to
the position to which I hope in God my native country will attain.
The resolutions on which these proceedings have taken place, were
adopted by the Wesleyan Conference in June, 1860. Now, whatever other
changes may have taken place, I still adhere to the people of my youth,
who were the early instruments of all the religious instruction I
received until I attained manhood. Whether they are a polished and
learned or a despised people, I still am not ashamed of them, nor of the
humblest of their advocates or professors. I stand before you without a
blush, in the immediate connection, and identified with that people. The
resolutions that were adopted by the Conference, in pursuance of which
the Conference appointed a large Executive Committee, consisting of
nearly one hundred of the most experienced members of their body, to
prepare the memorial which has been presented to Parliament, are
these:--
_Resolved._ 1st. That it is the conviction of a large proportion,
if not a large majority of the inhabitants of Canada, that their
sons, in pursuing the higher branches of education (which cannot be
acquired in day schools, and rarely without the youth going to a
distance from the paternal roof and oversight), should be placed in
institutions in which their religious instruction and moral
oversight, as well as their literary training, are carefully
watched over and duly provided for; a conviction practically
evident by the fact that not only the members of the Wesleyan
Methodist Church, and other Methodists, but the members of the
Churches of England, Scotland and Rome have contributed largely,
and exerted themselves to establish colleges and higher seminaries
of learning for the superior education of their children.
2nd. That no provision for instruction in secular learning alone,
can compensate for the absence of provision, or care, for the
religious and moral instruction of youth in the most exposed,
critical, and eventful periods of their lives.
3rd. That it is of the highest importance to the best interests of
Canada that the Legislative provision for superior education, shall
be in harmony with the conscientious convictions and circumstances
of the religious persuasions, which virtually constitute the
Christianity of the country.
4th. That the exclusive application of the Legislative provision
for superior education, to the endowment of a college for the
education of the sons of that class of parents alone who wish to
educate their sons in a non-denominational institution,
irrespective of their religious principles and moral character, to
the exclusion of those classes of parents who wish to educate their
sons in colleges or seminaries where a paternal care is bestowed
upon their moral and religious interests, at the same time that
they are carefully and thoroughly taught in secular learning; is
grossly illiberal, partial, unjust and unpatriotic, and merits the
severest reprobation of every liberal and right-minded man of every
religious persuasion and party in the country.
5. That the ministers and members of the Wesleyan Methodist Church,
aided by the liberal co-operation of many other friends of
Christian education, have largely and long contributed to establish
and maintain Victoria College, in which provision is made for the
religious instruction and oversight of students, independent of any
Legislative aid--in which there are fifty-nine students in the
Faculty of Arts, besides more than two hundred pupils and students
in preparatory and special classes--in which no religious test is
permitted by the charter in the admission of any student, or pupil,
and in which many hundreds of youths of different religious
persuasions, have been educated and prepared for professional and
other pursuits, many of whom have already honourably distinguished
themselves in the clerical, legal and medical professions, as also
in mercantile and other branches of business.
6th. That Victoria College is justly entitled to share in the
Legislative provision for superior education, according to the
number of students in the collegiate and academical courses of
instruction.
7th. That we affectionately entreat the members of our Church, to
use their influence to elect, as far as possible, public men who
are favourable to the views expressed in the foregoing resolutions,
and do equal justice to those who wish to give a superior religious
education to the youth of the country, as well as those who desire
for their sons a non-religious education alone.
Dr. Ryerson concluded his speech on the 26th April. Towards its close he
said:--[One of the speakers] thought to amuse the Committee, by a
reference to an expression of mine, used in a letter written by me
several years since, that I had meditated my system of public
instruction for this country--(for I contemplated the whole system from
the primary school to the University)--on some of the highest mountains
in Europe, and said, using a very elegant expression, it must therefore
be rather "windy." ... No one can have read the history of Greece or
Scotland, or the Northern and Western parts of England, without knowing
that, from elevated and secluded places, some of the finest inspirations
of genius have emanated which have ever been conceived by the mind of
man. There are mountains in Europe where the recluse may stand and see
beneath him curling clouds, and roaring tempests spending their
strength, while he is in a calm untroubled atmosphere, on the summit of
a mountain of which it may be said,
"Though round his breast the rolling clouds are spread,
Eternal sunshine settles on his head."
And I ask whether it was unphilosophical for an individual who had
examined the educational systems of various countries, and who was
crossing the Alps, to retire to a mountain solitude, and there, in the
abode of that "eternal sunshine," and in the presence of Him who is the
fountain of light, to contemplate a system which was to diffuse
intellectual and moral light throughout his native country, to survey
the condition of that country as a whole, apart from its
political-religious dissensions, and ask what system could be devised to
enable it to take its position among the civilized nations of the
world?...
After giving expression to his views on what he conceived to be a proper
and suitable University system for the Province, he concluded with these
words:--It is perfectly well known to the Committee that its time, for
the last four or five days, has been occupied, not in the investigation
of these principles, but by attempts to destroy what is dearer to me
than life, in order to crush the cause with which I am identified; and a
scene has been enacted here, somewhat resembling that which took place
in a certain committee room, at Toronto, in regard to a certain
Inspector-General. Every single forgetfulness or omission of mine has
been magnified and tortured in every possible way, to destroy my
reputation for integrity, and my standing in the country. A newspaper in
Toronto, whose editor-in-chief is a man of very great notoriety, has
said, since the commencement of this inquiry, that, in my early days, I
made mercenary approaches to another church, but was indignantly
repelled, and hence my present position. I showed the other day that I
might have occupied the place of Vice-Chancellor of the University which
Mr. Langton now holds, had I desired (and the proposal was made to me
after my return from Europe in 1856), and I have similar records to
prove that in 1825, after the commencement of my Wesleyan ministry, I
had the authoritative offer of admission to the ministry of the Church
of England (see pages 41 and 206). My objection, and my sole objections
was, that my early religious principles and feelings were wholly owing
to the instrumentality of the Methodist people, and I had been
providentially called to labour among them; not that I did not love the
Church of England. Those were "saddlebag days," and I used to carry in
my saddlebags two books, to which I am more indebted than to any other
two books in the English language, except the Holy Scriptures, namely,
the Prayer Book and the Homilies of the Church of England. At this very
day, Sir, though I have often opposed the exclusive assumptions of some
members of the Church of England, I only love it less than the Church
with which I am immediately associated.
I have been charged with being the leader of the present movement. I am
entitled to no such honour. If I have written a line it has been as the
amanuensis of my ecclesiastical superiors; if I have done anything, it
has been in compliance with the wishes of those whom I love and honour;
and my attachment to the Wesleyan body, and the associations and doings
of my early years, have been appealed to, as a ground of claim for my
humble aid in connection with this movement. Sir, the Wesleyan people,
plain and humble as they were, did me good in my youth, and I will not
abandon them in my old age.
I have only further to add, that whatever may be my shortcomings, and
even sins, I can say with truth that I love my country; that by habit of
thought, by association, by every possible sympathy I could awaken in my
breast, I have sought to increase my affection for my native land. I
have endeavoured to invest it with a sort of personality, to place it
before me as an individual, beautiful in its proportions, as well as
vigorous in all the elements of its constitution, and losing sight of
all distinction of classes, sects, and parties, to ask myself, in the
presence of that Being, before whom I shall shortly stand, what I could
do most for my country's welfare, how I could contribute most to found a
system of education that would give to Canada, when I should be no more,
a career of splendour which will make its people proud of it. I may
adopt the words of a poet--though they may not be very poetical:--
'Sweet place of my kindred, blest land of my birth,
The fairest, the purest, the dearest on earth;
Where'er I may roam, where'er I may be,
My spirit instinctively turns unto thee.'
Whatever may have been the course of proceeding adopted towards me in
this inquiry, I bear enmity to no man; and whatever may be the result of
this investigation, and the decision of the committee, I hope that
during the few years I have to live, I shall act consistently with the
past, and still endeavour to build up a country that will be
distinguished in its religious, social, moral, educational, and even
political institutions and character; to assist in erecting a structure
of intellectual progress and power, on which future ages may look back
with respect and gratitude, and thus to help, in some humble degree, to
place our beloved Canada among the foremost nations of the earth.
* * * * *
The following private letters, written to me at the time from Quebec and
Kingston, by Dr. Ryerson, throw additional light upon the nature of the
contest in which he was engaged. They also reveal what the character of
his personal feelings and the exercise of his mind during that eventful
time were.
On the 20th April, Dr. Ryerson said:--I have had a very painful and
laborious week; but I hope to-morrow to be able by divine help, to
answer two of my principal opponents effectually. One of these gentlemen
made a very plausible speech yesterday in defence of the University, and
in reply chiefly to me, but full of fallacies and misquotations.
_April 27th._--I finished my defence yesterday in the presence of a
densely crowded room--consisting of a large number of Legislative
Councillors and members of the House of Assembly--several of whom, I was
told, were quite moved when I closed, and cheered me heartily when I sat
down. I was congratulated on all sides by them in the afternoon, upon
the manner in which I had triumphantly defended myself. I can only say,
to God be all the praise. I felt myself as weak as water. I was so
depressed and affected the night before, and the morning of commencing
my defence, that I could not speak without emotion and tears; but I
prayed and relied upon Him who had never failed me in the hour of trial,
and my personal friends were also engaged in prayer in my behalf.
As soon as I commenced, I felt as if an army of such assailants were as
so many pigmies, and, my friends say, I handled them as such. The
remarks of members of both Houses are various, and some of them
amusing--all agreeing in the completeness of the defence. All agree also
as to the extravagance and defects of the system, and the unquestionable
claims of denominational colleges.
I cannot review the great goodness of God to me during this mortifying
week without an overflowing heart and tears of gratitude. More conscious
and manifold help from above I never experienced. I hope I may never be
called to pass through such another conflict. I spoke two hours and
forty minutes on the day before yesterday, and one hour and
three-quarters yesterday.
_May 8th._--I shall be able to send you to-morrow a copy in slips of my
reply to my two principal opponents. I know not what will be the result,
but I trust in God, who has done better for us than all our fears or our
hopes thus far. I hear that the general conviction of members is with
me. One of the Senators told me that he had heard but one opinion on the
subject. There are some who are satisfied that I have gained in the
contest, but who are not in favour of dividing the endowment. All seem
to feel that the present system is bad, and that something must be done,
and that denominational colleges must be sustained. I think the House
will refuse to do anything until the evidence, etc., on the subject is
laid before the country. I thank you for your very kind sympathy in my
conflicts.
_Kingston, June 7th._--The Conference met yesterday, and seems to be in
a very good spirit. A Committee was appointed, named by myself, and
moved by Rev. Dr. Wood--to arrange for proceedings on the University
question. The Committee met last night, and agreed to have a public
meeting; and myself and one or two more to draw up resolutions to be
submitted to it. I am desired to address the meeting in the evening,
when it is expected there will be a great gathering. I find the
preachers to be very cordial and grateful.
_Kingston June 8th._--The official lay members of the Church in the city
of Kingston presented a congratulatory address to the Conference this
forenoon, in which they referred with great feeling and force to the
University question, also to the representatives of the Conference at
Quebec, and especially to myself--requesting that the _Guardian_ might
be more and more the medium of furnishing the connexion with facts and
information on the subject, and that my Defence should be inserted in it
for the information of our people.
Rev. G. R. Sanderson, seconded by Rev. W. Jeffers, moved a vote of
thanks to the official members of Kingston for their address. Rev. J.
Spencer, Editor of the _Guardian_, regarded the address as an attack
upon himself, and said the lay members had been instigated to make the
attack upon him. Dr. Wood showed that the address simply made a request.
Mr. Spencer was considered to have made a great mistake for himself.
The feeling of Conference in regard to myself is very cordial and very
enthusiastic on the University question. The article in _The Canadian
Church_ is much admired. A copy of it has been sent to the Montreal
_Gazette_, also to the Kingston _Daily News_. It is an able and most
scholarly article.
_Kingston, June 13th._--Yesterday afternoon, the Conference
considered and unanimously and cordially adopted a series of
resolutions on the University question--thanking those who were at
Quebec, especially myself--endorsing the memorial pamphlet. My name
was received with cheers, whenever mentioned in the resolutions. In
the evening, a public meeting was held, and it was a perfect
ovation to myself. Some of those present thought that that was the
object of the meeting. Rev. W. Jeffers, the new editor, made an
excellent speech. Rev. Lachlan Taylor read extracts in a most
amusing and effective manner from the Hamilton _Spectator_,
_Colonist_, _Echo_, and _Church Press_. The Hon. Mr. Ferrier spoke
most happily on the effect of the discussion, and also of the
effect of my speech on the members of both branches of the
Legislature. I was cheered throughout, and sat down with four long
rounds of cheers. There was much laughter, and occasional deep
feeling during my criticisms on the variations, and some of the
topics of the speeches of my opponents at Quebec, especially the
after-dinner speeches at the Toronto University gathering.
FOOTNOTES:
[148] Since established and supported, as is the one in Montreal, by
contributions from the Methodist people.
CHAPTER LIX.
1861-1866.
Personal Incidents.--Dr. Ryerson's Visits to Norfolk Co.
During the years of 1861-1866, Dr. Ryerson was chiefly engaged in his
official duties, and part of the time with the University question.
There is, therefore, little to record during these years except personal
matters. The following letters from two of his brothers indicate how
strong was their attachment to him:--
_Brantford, 4th October, 1861._--Rev. John Ryerson writes: I have
derived more benefit from reading Milner's History this time than I
ever did before; especially the experience, writings, &c., of St.
Augustine, Cyprian, Bernard, Luther and Zwingle. St. Augustine's
conversion and "confessions" have been much blessed to me. I have
been led to examine with more care and prayerful attention than
ever before, the power, influence, and fruits of vital godliness,
as experienced and manifested in the hearts and lives of both the
Greek and Latin Fathers; and also the principal instruments of the
Reformation in the sixteenth century. O! the power, wisdom, and
goodness of God; displayed in all these scenes, matters and lives!
_Kingston, May 8th, 1862._--The Rev. Geo. Ryerson writes: We
arrived here safely this morning. I write this by the first mail
because I feel anxious concerning you. I fear that if you undertake
a journey to Quebec in your present state of weakness and disease,
that it will be fatal to you. You are providentially unable to bear
the bodily and mental exertion. God does not send a sick man to
labour in any good work, and he requires us to use ourselves
tenderly, when he weakens us.
_Brantford, May 9th._--Rev. John Ryerson writes: I had no idea that
you had been so seriously ill. It is, however, gratifying now to
learn that you are convalescent, and the loss of a little of your
"fleshly substance" may prove no great calamity. Were I to lose
"forty pounds," as you have, there would be very little of me left!
_Brantford, December 22nd._--Rev. John Ryerson writes: During my
long missionary tour I preached about ten times, always with
liberty and freedom. Since I returned home I have resumed all of my
domestic and private devotional exercises, and after my missionary
labours realize the return of quiet peace and spiritual communion.
Recently, after much prayer, I received a great blessing to my
soul, the peace of God coming down upon my heart and going all over
me, and I still have peace. God is my portion, my righteousness,
and my salvation all the day long.
In September, 1864, Dr. Ryerson wrote the following account of visits
which he made to his native county of Norfolk:--
In compliance with many requests, I have thought it would not be
improper, and might be acceptable to my Norfolk friends, for me to
give an account of my visits during the last two years to my native
place, and to the Island within Long Point, which my father
obtained from the Crown, and which now belongs to me--marked on old
maps as Pottahawk Point, but designated on later maps, and more
generally known, as "Ryerson's Island."
I may remark, by way of preface, that for more than thirty-five
years of my public life my constitution and brain seemed to be
equal to any amount of labour which I might impose on them; but of
late years, the latter has been the seat of alarming attacks and
severe pain, under any protracted or intense labour; and the former
has been impaired by labour and disease. Change of scene and
out-door exercise have proved the most effectual remedy for both.
My first adoption of this course (apart from foreign travel) was
two years since, when a month's daily sea-bathing, boating and
walking, at Cape Elizabeth, near Portland, State of Maine,
contributed greatly to the improvement of my health and strength.
After again resuming my usual work for several weeks, I found that
my relief, if not safety, required a further suspension of ordinary
mental labour, and diversion of my thought by new objects. I
determined to visit the place of my birth and the scenes of my
youth. At Port Ryerse I made myself a little skiff after the model
of one I had seen at the sea-side, and in which I rowed myself to
and from Ryerson's Island, a distance of some thirteen miles from
Port Ryerse, and about four miles from the nearest mainland--the
end of Turkey Point.
Last autumn I lodged two weeks on the farm on which I was born,
with the family of Mr. Joseph Duncan, where the meals were taken
daily in a room the wood-work of which I, as an amateur carpenter,
had finished more than forty years ago, while recovering from a
long and serious illness.
When invited to meet and address the common schools of the county
of Norfolk, at a county school picnic held in a grove near Simcoe,
the 24th of last June, I determined to proceed thither, not by
railroad and stage, as usual, but in a skiff fifteen feet and a
half long, in which I had been accustomed for some months to row in
Toronto Harbour, between six and eight o'clock in the morning.
Providing, as far as possible, against the double danger of
swamping and capsizing, by a canvas deck, proper ballast, and
fittings of the sail, I crossed Lake Ontario alone from Toronto to
Port Dalhousie in nine hours; had my skiff conveyed thence to Port
Colborne on a Canadian vessel, through the Welland Canal, and
proceeded along the north shore of Lake Erie, rowing in one day,
half-way against head wind, from the mouth of Grand River to Port
Dover, a distance of forty miles, taking refreshments and rest at
farm houses, and bathing three times during the day. The following
day scarcely conscious of fatigue, I delivered two addresses; the
one to a vast assemblage of school pupils and their friends, in a
grove; the other a lecture to teachers and trustees in the evening.
After visiting my island and witnessing the productive and
excellent garden of the family that occupies it, I returned to
Toronto in my skiff, by the way of Niagara river, sailing in one
day between sun-rise and sun-set (stopping for three hours at Port
Colborne) from Grand River to Chippewa, within two miles of the
Falls. I had my skiff conveyed on a waggon over the portage from
Chippewa to Queenstown (ten miles), and started from Niagara to
Toronto about noon of the first Friday in July. When a little more
than half way across the lake, I encountered a heavy north-east
storm of rain and wind, and a fog so thick as to completely obscure
the Toronto light-house, which was within a mile of me. When it
became so dark that I could not see my compass, I laid my course,
with the sail reefed, by the wind and waves, reaching (a mile west
of my due course) the east side of the Humber Bay, between ten and
eleven in the evening, and making my way, by a hard pull, to the
Toronto Yacht Club House a little before midnight.
About four weeks since my son and myself made the voyage in the
same skiff from Toronto to Long Point, but proceeding by railroad
from Port Dalhousie to Port Colborne, intending to spend a week or
two on the farm, and two or three days on the Island.
I conclude this epitomised sketch with three remarks. I am satisfied of
the truth of what I have long believed, that a small boat is as safe, if
not safer, than a large one, if properly constructed, fitted out,
trimmed, and managed. I believe that many a large open boat, if not
capsized by the wind, would have been swamped by the waves over which my
little craft rode in safety.
I have never experienced the benefit of out-door exertion and the
comfort of retirement to the same degree as during these excursions,
besides daily riding on horseback and preparing all the wood consumed at
my cottage. Between two and three years ago I found it painful labour to
walk one mile, I have since walked twelve miles in a day, besides
attending to other duties--an improvement of my general system, which is
already acting sensibly and encouragingly on the seat of thought and
nervous influence. In my lonely voyage from Toronto to Port Ryerse, the
scene was often enchanting, and the solitude sweet beyond expression. I
have witnessed the setting sun amidst the Swiss and Tyrolese Alps, from
lofty elevations, on the plains of Lombardy, from the highest eminence
of the Appenines, between Bologna and Florence, and from the crater
summit of Vesuvius, but I never was more delighted and impressed (owing,
perhaps, in part to the susceptible state of my feelings) with the
beauty, effulgence, and even sublimity of atmospheric phenomena, and the
softened magnificence of surrounding objects, than in witnessing the
setting sun the 23rd of June, from the unruffled bosom of Lake Erie, a
few miles east of Port Dover, and about a mile from the thickly wooded
shore, with its deepening and variously reflected shadows. And when the
silent darkness enveloped all this beauty, and grandeur, and
magnificence in undistinguishable gloom, my mind experienced that
wonderful sense of freedom and relief which come from all that suggests
the idea of boundlessness--the deep sky, the dark night, the endless
circle, the illimitable waters. The world with its tumult of cares
seemed to have retired, and God and His works appeared all in all,
suggesting the enquiry which faith and experience promptly answered in
the affirmative--
With glorious clouds encompassed round
Whom angels dimly see;
Will the unsearchable be found;
Will God appear to me?
My last remark is the vivifying influence and unspeakable pleasure of
visiting scenes endeared to me by many tender, and comparatively few
painful recollections. Amid the fields, woods, out-door exercises, and
associations of the first twenty years of my life, I have seemed to
forget the sorrows, labours and burdens of more than two score years,
and to be transported back to what was youthful, simple, healthy,
active, and happy. I can heartily sympathise with the feelings of Sir
Walter Scott when, in reply to Washington Irving, who had expressed
disapprobation in the scenery of the Tweed, immortalized by the genius
of the Border Minstrel, he said,--
It may be partiality, but to my eyes these gray hills and all this
wild border country have beauties peculiar to themselves. I like
the very nakedness of the land. It has something bold, and stern,
and solitary about it. When I have been for some time in the rich
scenery of Edinburgh, which is ornamented garden land, I begin to
wish myself back again among my honest gray hills, and if I did not
see the heather at least once a year I think I should die.
Dr. Ryerson was very bold and skilful in the management of a sail boat,
as may be inferred from the foregoing incidents. On one occasion, a few
years ago, while sailing on the Toronto bay in his skiff, he was
overtaken by a gale, during which the steeple of Zion Church was blown
down, but, through God's goodness, he reached _terra firma_ in safety.
He frequently sailed his little craft, as he has mentioned, from Port
Ryerse and Port Rowan to his Long Point cottage--a distance of thirteen
and nine miles respectively--and that, too, in all sorts of weather, and
sometimes when much larger boats would not venture outside of the
harbour.
For many years Dr. Ryerson was considered one of the best shots at Long
Point. When over seventy years of age, he killed from seventy to eighty
duck in one day in his punt and with his own gun. In the spring of 1880,
when in his seventy-eighth year, he was overtaken by darkness, and, not
being able to reach his cottage, was compelled to remain all night in
the marsh. Rolling himself up in his blankets, in his boat, he quietly
went to sleep. In the early morning he was rewarded by capturing nine
wild geese.
He crossed Lake Ontario, between Toronto and Port Dalhousie, four times
alone in his skiff (only sixteen feet long), and three times accompanied
by his son. Fear was unknown to him, and he never lost his presence of
mind, even in the most perilous circumstances.
Another favourite recreation of his was riding. He was often seen before
six o'clock in the morning enjoying a canter in the suburbs of Toronto.
* * * * *
Writing to me from Ridgeway in August, 1866, he said:--
To-day I left Toronto in my little skiff for Port Dalhousie. The lake
was as smooth as glass the greater part of the day, and the latter part
of the day there was not a breath of wind, so that I had to row. I got
into Port Dalhousie in the evening. I was at the Queen's Own camp at
Thorold yesterday. I visited a large number of tents, and examined the
whole mode of living, and especially of cooking. It was amusing, among
other cases of the same kind, to see several young gentlemen of Toronto
cooking, and others assisting. I saw them cutting their meat, etc. They
have the reputation of being the best cooks in the battalion. I go to
Port Colborne in the rail cars, and will proceed in my skiff to Port
Ryerse, or rather to Port Dover first. I hope to get there to-morrow. I
went over the battle-ground here last evening.
* * * * *
As many people were curious to know how Dr. Ryerson spent his time at
his Long Point cottage, the following letter, written to his cousin,
Major Ryerse, in April, 1873, will supply the information. It relates to
one day's experience, and was about the average of these experiences
there:--On leaving the island cottage, I paddled and pushed my boat
about six miles in the marsh, Monday forenoon. I rowed all the way to
Port Ryerse against a head wind, one part of the way so strong that I
shipped a good deal of water, and got wet. I was from two to eight
o'clock rowing from my cottage to Port Ryerse. I was too wet and
fatigued to walk to your house, but went to bed at nine, got up at five,
and started for Simcoe at six. I walked eight miles out of ten on the
ice, from Port Rowan over--going the other two miles by water, in a
skiff which we took with us on a hand-sled. During the first eight days
I did not go out in the marsh at all, but devoted myself wholly to my
papers and books. The second week I went out three times, about three
hours each, got a little game, but not enough to leave any on the way,
except to a few friends. I am now beginning to enjoy rest more than
exertion; and am not certain when I shall come again, or whether I shall
come at all again.
* * * * *
While on his educational tour in 1866, Dr. Ryerson wrote to me from
Napanee, and said:--There was a very large meeting in Picton on Saturday
and another here to-day, and both went with me in everything, with
showers of compliments and almost enthusiastic feeling.
A large number of the oldest settlers and Methodists were invited to
meet me last night at Mr. Dorland's, in Adolphustown. The service in the
evening was to them a feast of fat things, and some of them spoke of it
as the happiest occasion of their lives. I felt very happy with them.
They said it reminded them of "old times."
CHAPTER LX.
1867.
Last Educational Visit to Europe.--Rev. Dr. Punshon.
In 1867 Dr. Ryerson made his last educational tour to Europe. On his
return he prepared two elaborate reports--one on Systems of Education in
Europe, and the other on the Education of the Deaf and Dumb. He also
went to Paris as an Honorary Commissioner to the International
Exhibition held in that city in 1867. While absent he constantly wrote
to me. From his letters I make the following selections:--
_Paris, January 22nd, 1867._--The pretended concessions of the Emperor
of France to the French nation was not much thought of in Paris, as it
is regarded here of little value. His announcement of his concessions,
as being final, will do him more harm, than the concessions themselves
will do good.
The Attorney-General told me to-day that I had won the the heart of Mr.
Adderly, M.P., Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies, who is an able
man. The Attorney-General gave me a note of introduction to him (in the
absence of Lord Carnarvon) in order to introduce me to Lord Stanley,
which Mr. Adderly did. He asked me many questions about our school
system, and told the Attorney-General I had given him an immense deal of
information in a short time.
_Nice, February 25._--We left Paris Wednesday evening, and reached
Marseilles Thursday noon--passing Lyons, Vienne, Avignon, etc., in the
valley of the Rhone, by daylight. The scenery was very beautiful,
vine-yards on the hillsides, cultivated fields, trees and shrubs green,
almonds in blossom. In the afternoon we "did" Marseilles, visiting the
Exchange, the Palais de Justice, the ancient and modern port with its
thousands of ships,--28,000 entering it per year--ascended the lofty
mount, with garden walls on its sides, to the Notre Dame church which
surmounts it--a small church of the sailors hung with innumerable
characteristic mementoes of their escapes from shipwreck, through the
intercession of their Mother-protector! The view of the city and
surrounding country, all dotted with villas, is magnificent. Next
morning we started for Nice. Toulon, the Mediterranean naval station of
France, is about thirty-six miles this side of Marseilles--about
one-third of the way to Nice. It is strongly fortified; its port, which
is admirable, contains many French ships of war. The population is about
50,000. Between Toulon and Nice lies the town of Cannes--a rival to Nice
as a resort for invalids. The scenery from Marseilles to Nice is
beautiful, and sometimes grand--the sea on one side, and the gardens,
fields, olive and orange orchards, hillsides and mountain slopes, dotted
with hamlets and villas, on the other. In the back-ground of Nice are
seen the maritime Alps. Oranges are here seen on the trees; and the
trees, shrubs and flowers are green, and some of them in blossom. The
breezes gentle, the sun bright and warm, the sky clear, and the
atmosphere soft and balmy, one seems to inhale healthful vigour with
every breath, and to behold cheerful beauty on every side.
I have here met my old friend, Dr. Pantelioni, who attended me when I
was ill in Rome, who was employed by Count Cavour to negotiate with
Prince Napoleon and the Emperor the treaty of the 15th September, by
which the French troops have evacuated Rome; but he is now an exile from
Rome, but hopes soon to return thither. He has the first medical
practice here, as he had at Rome.
_Florence, March 19th._--Since I wrote to you from Rome, we went to
Naples, in ten hours, by railway; spent three days there, and returned,
the fourth, here--in 23 hours from Naples--arriving here Sunday morning,
in time to dress, get breakfast, and go to church, where we heard the
liturgy read evangelically, and a good evangelical sermon. The Church at
Rome is High Church; that at Florence is evangelical. But I heard an
excellent service from the Dean of Ely (Mr. Goodwin), at Rome. I can
give you no particulars of our tour. I do not enjoy it. I have wished a
good many times that you were in my place, and that I had a week's quiet
on my Island. Rome was dirty, as well as almost wholly given to
superstition, though there is a strong and widespread hostility among
the masses to the temporal power of the Pope. Naples was dirty, but
evinced much business activity. Florence is clean, industrious, and all
the people cleanly and well-dressed, except some beggars--an old legacy.
But the general hostility to the priesthood is remarkable, though not
surprising. The Government had gained in the recent elections, but has a
difficult part to play, between the Church and Anti-Church parties, and
keeping up a large army, and imposing heavy taxes, of which all
complain.
_Venice, March 28th._--At Florence, the British Minister introduced me
to Count Usedon, the Prussian Minister at Florence, formerly at Paris,
a most delightful and variously learned man, who invited me to go to his
villa, but I had not time, and who told me all about the working of the
Prussian System of Public Instruction, in each neighbourhood--saying
that the law had not been changed at all since I was in Prussia; that
the Government did nothing but inspect, and see that each locality had a
school of a certain kind, and that each person educated his children;
but that each locality taxed itself for the support of its school. He
told me I could find nothing suitable to my purpose in Prussia, in
respect to the militia organization in connection with the school
system, as there was no connection between the one and the other, and
that the military system was expensive, and much interfered with the
ordinary employments; but that Switzerland was the place for me to learn
and study the blending of the school system with military training, in
consequence of which every Swiss had a good education, understood the
use of arms and military drill, and was yet practical, industrious, and
sober, while the whole system was very inexpensive. He gave me a letter
of introduction to a friend of his in Switzerland, who could give me
every information I might desire, and all needful documents.
_Lake Como, April 1st._--This is the first place of rest and retirement
that we have had since we came to Europe. We are inhaling fresh country
air every day. We are in the centre of a natural magnificence, beauty,
and grandeur such as I have never witnessed--before us the little, deep,
Y-shaped lake, abounding in fish, dotted with skiffs, skirted with
flower gardens, walks, shrubs, and villas, and overhung on either side
by snow-capped mountains--roses and plants and green flowers at the
bottom of the mountains--craggy rocks and deep snow at the top, and all
apparently within a mile's distance. Here where we stop is the villa of
the Duke of Meiningen, and the palace-residence of the late Queen
Caroline of England (now an hotel), and the villa of the King of the
Belgians--a favourite place of retirement of the late King. What I have
witnessed here, in the quiet Sabbath of yesterday, has given me more
impressive views of the varied beauty and magnificence of the works of
God than I ever had before, though I had travelled much, and finished my
sixty-fourth year the Sabbath before.
_London, 30th April._--I was present two hours at the anniversary of the
Church Missionary Society--heard the report (a very good one) read, and
heard Lord Chichester (President), the Lord Bishop of Norwich, Dean of
Carlisle, and the Lord Bishop of Cork. The speaking was
evangelical--Methodistically experimental, but nothing like so able and
effective as that at the Wesleyan Missionary meeting yesterday.
I attended a meeting this afternoon at City Road Chapel, to hear an
address from Lord Shaftesbury on Ragged Schools, and to witness the
laying of the corner-stone of a chapel school-house in an alley about
six minutes' walk from City Road Wesleyan Chapel--one of the most
wretched neighbourhoods in London. I never knew before what the ragged
poor of London, in the lanes and alleys, were. I never witnessed such a
sight of squalid wretchedness--the neighbourhood literally swarming with
children--every window of the houses around full of heads--all
indicating that lowest degradation, but many of the children had good
features and bright eyes sparkling through the encrustation of dirt. We
have no such class in Canada, and I hope we never may.
Lord Shaftesbury's remarks were of the highest type of Scriptural and
experimental truth--eminently practical and suggestive. His address to
the poor creatures, at the laying of the corner-stone of the edifice,
was full of kindness and affection--adopting even the very style of
address common among the class whom he addressed. As a specimen, his
Lordship said:--"I just heard a boy say behind me, 'which is him?' Now,
I am him; you want to see him; and I want to see you, and to talk to
you, and to do you good. We have all come here to do you good, because
we love you, and the poorer you are, and the more you suffer, the more
we wish to help you, and to do you good." He reminded me of the Saviour
going about doing good, and of the words of Job (chap. 29), "When the
ear heard me, then it blessed me, and when the eye saw me it gave
witness to me, because I delivered the poor that cried, and the
fatherless, and him that had none to help him," etc. (verses 11, 13, 15,
and 16). It was to me an impressive, affecting, and, I trust, a useful
lesson.
_London, 1st May._--We attended to-day the annual meeting of the British
and Foreign Bible Society. The Report was admirably read, and was most
gratifying and encouraging. The speeches were excellent, and some parts
of them produced a wonderful effect. The Lord Bishop of Carlisle spoke
nobly and scripturally; the Dean of Carlisle spoke fervently and
affectingly; the Rev. Dr. Miller spoke very ably and effectively; but
Mr. Calvert (of Fiji mission), spoke irresistibly to the heart; and Dr.
Phillips spoke with surpassing beauty, and charming power. The latter
two are both Welshmen, and Methodists--the former a Wesleyan, and the
latter a Whitfield Welsh Methodist. The Rev. Mr. Nolan spoke with great
excellence; Lord Shaftesbury speaks as a matter of business, naturally,
simply, but with dignity, and great force.
But the speeches of clergymen to-day, as well as yesterday, painfully
impressed me with the divided, and deplorable state of the Church of
England. Indeed, I thought to-day that it was hardly in good taste, or
even politic, for clergymen to give such prominence to the internal
heresies and divisions of the Church, at a non-denominational meeting,
and before their brethren of other denominations, and before the world.
But they feel that the evil and danger is so great that they should
speak out, and do so on all occasions. There have been disputes and
divisions among the Methodists, on personal and political
quasi-ecclesiastical grounds, but never of the grave character of those
which agitate the Church of England. It is the opinion of many of the
clergymen and laymen of the Church, that a formal and great separation
will ere long take place between the opposing parties. But, still, I
think that the heart of the Church is sound--that neither the ritualists
nor the neologists touch the masses of the labouring and middle
classes--only some speculative minds, and imaginary spirits, seeking for
excitement in religion, as they do in reading novels, and at the
theatre. But, after all, I believe, as I hope, the Church will come out
of this fiery trial, better, stronger, and more qualified to do good,
and with a deeper baptism of the Divine Spirit for its promotion. So far
as I have had opportunity to mingle with the ministers and members, and
to witness services and meetings, I think I never saw the Wesleyan body
in so good a state; so perfectly at peace and united, and so devoted to
their one great work; and with a fervour and depth of spirituality not
excelled even in Mr. Wesley's day. The personal example and influence of
the most eloquent and leading men in the Connexion is highly spiritual
and practical.
_London, 5th May._--During my present visit to England I have been so
deeply impressed with the vast benefit to my native land by a visit to
it of Rev. William Morley Punshon that I have written to him on the
subject, and have got others to speak to him about it. I was rejoiced,
therefore, to get from him a note to-day, dated Bristol, 4th May, as
follows:--The more I think about your proposition the more I am
impressed that it is in the order of Providence that I should accept it.
I have always hoped that I might some day see your great continent and
have the opportunity of acquainting myself with the capabilities of your
country, and with the work which has been done in it; and on many
accounts the present seems to be the most favourable time. If,
therefore, you should honour me with an invitation, and the British
Conference shall see good to appoint me, I shall place no hindrance in
the way, but shall endeavour to regard it as the wish of the Lord.
_London, 6th May._--I have gratefully replied to Mr. Punshon, and shall
now return to Canada, satisfied that I have, with God's help,
accomplished a great work for her, and that we shall reap a rich reward
from the services of this honoured minister of Christ.
_London, 15th May._--In a kind parting note from Rev. Dr. Elijah Hoole
to Dr. Ryerson, dated Mission House, May 15th, the former says: I have
written to Dr. Wood to-day, and have informed him how grateful it has
been to us to renew our personal intercourse with you. When you have
once taken your departure we may hardly hope to meet again, but I shall
always thankfully retain the impression of the ability and purity, and
Christian love, and missionary zeal, which have always distinguished
your personal intercourse with us.
_London, 19th June._--This day I had the pleasure of writing to Rev.
William Morley Punshon, inviting him to my house when he comes to
Toronto. I said to him,--You have probably learned, ere this reaches
you, that the Canadian Conference, (now consisting of altogether 612
ministers and preachers), has most cordially and warmly solicited your
appointment as its next President, with the request that you will visit
and travel through Canada the current year. I assume that you will
accept this appointment, and I understood from Rev. Gervase Smith that
you would probably come to Canada, in September or October next. As
Toronto is the centre of Methodism in Canada, as well as the largest
city, and capital of Canada West, I assume, for reasons I have stated in
a letter this day addressed to your friend, Mr. Gervase Smith, that you
will make Toronto your home. I shall be most happy to entertain you and
yours, on your arrival there. I shall be happy to do all in my power to
consult your wishes, and promote your comfort, as well as usefulness, in
Canada. I pray that the Lord will direct your steps, and prosper your
way, to us in this country.
_London, July 17th._--In a note from Rev. Gervase Smith to Rev. Dr.
Ryerson, dated July 17th, he says:--We all seemed to feel from your
first call at our house, that we were adding another valuable friendship
to our list, and we followed you over the water with many kind feelings
and remembrances. I am very glad to hear so cheering an account of your
Conference. As far as I can see, the way is opening out for Mr.
Punshon's visit to Canada, as clearly as you or his friends in this
country could wish. His removal from us, even for a space, will be a
great loss to us; and on grounds of friendship, especially so to myself;
but I hope it is all right. It is our earnest prayer that he, and the
Conference in his case, may be guided rightly. I should very much like
to accompany him. I do not give up the hope of seeing you and the
Canadian world, during his residence among you. I have formed a secret
resolution to steal away for a few weeks within the next year or two.
But perhaps it is wrong to anticipate. "Ye know not what shall be on the
morrow."
_Toronto, 24th July._--I was thankful this day to receive from Rev. Wm.
Morley Punshon a letter dated Bristol, 10th July, acknowledging mine to
him of the 19th June. He says:--It brought me the only intimation which
I have yet received of the request of the Canadian Conference that I
should be appointed to preside over its next session. I feel humbled and
thankful for this mark of the confidence of my brethren over the water,
and, if Providence opens my way, shall regard myself as favoured with no
mean opportunity of getting and doing good. No step in this whole matter
has been of my own motion. I am simply passive in the hands of God and
of His Church. You have very truly interpreted my wishes and feelings in
what you have said to some of my brethren. All our affairs are in higher
hands than our own; and if by God's overruling providence, I shall be
assured of welcome in Canada, and enabled to work for Christ upon that
continent, which I have so often longed to see, I shall regard the
disruption of all older ties, and the sacrifice of present position in
this country, as a small price to pay--the more, if I can aid in the
establishment of a grand Methodist confederacy which shall be one of the
great spiritual powers of the New World.
Dr. Ryerson adds, With a grateful heart at God's goodness in this
matter, I replied to the letter on the 1st of August, 1867.
While I was in England in 1867, Dr. Ryerson wrote to me (_Toronto,
August 1st_,) to say that:--The Rev. W. M. Punshon, M.A., is coming out
to Canada, in October, with his family. He has addressed me several
inquiries, which I answer by this mail; but I wrote him to say who you
were, what your address was in London, and that you could give him every
needful information and suggestion as to his best mode of proceedings. I
told him I would write you, and request you to write him a line--also
telling him your address, and where you could see him, if he came to
London, and offering him every information in your power, that he might
desire. All things go on as usual in the Office.
Rev. Gervase Smith, in a letter to Dr. Ryerson, dated at the Bristol
Conference, 4th August said:--We have had many important conversations
and decisions. Some of which will be interesting to you, and the
Canadian friends. Mr. Punshon's appointment to Canada was made by the
Conference. I need not say that we are all sorely grieved at even the
temporary loss of his presence and service. But the call from Canada
was loud, and Providence seemed to indicate the way thither. I need not
say that you will take care of him, and let us have him back again as
soon as practicable. I am sure that his sojourn among you will be made a
great blessing to multitudes, and I doubt not that the future of
Methodism in Canada will be influenced by it. He is also heartily
appointed as our Representative to the General Conference in America. I
judge that the Conference now being held here will be regarded in the
future as a very important one.
CHAPTER LXI.
1867.
Dr. Ryerson's Address on the New Dominion of Canada.
While I was in England, in 1867, Dr. Ryerson wrote to me late in July,
to say:--Some of our leading public men were anxious that I should do
something to assist in placing government upon the right foundation in
our new civil state. But before communicating with them I determined to
write boldly, an Address to the people of Upper Canada. These friends
were delighted when they learned my determination, after I had written
about half my address. It was printed last evening. It will, of course,
draw upon me a great deal of abuse. But I have counted the cost, and
thought I ought to issue it under the circumstances. I think a reaction
is already beginning. I have thought it my duty to make one more special
effort to save the country from future wretchedness, if not ruin, caused
by the bitter party spirit of the press, whatever it might cost me.... I
am wonderfully well; but take some exercise every day, and do not work
very long at a time.
The Address was issued in pamphlet form in July, 1867, and under the
title of "The New Canadian Dominion: Dangers and Duties of the People in
regard to their Government." From it I make the following extracts:
While I heartily unite in your rejoicings over our new birth as a
nation, I beg to address you some words on our national duties and
interests. I do so because my opinions and advices have been requested
by many persons deeply interested in the public welfare; because I am
approaching the close of a public life of more than forty years, during
which I have carefully observed the hindrances and aids of our social
progress, and have taken part, since 1825, in the discussion of all
those constitutional questions which involved the rights and relations
of religious denominations and citizens, and which have resulted in our
present system of free government and of equal rights among all
religious persuasions; because my heart's desire and prayer to God is,
that the new Dominion of Canada may become prosperous and happy, by
beginning well, by avoiding those errors which have in time past been
injurious to ourselves, and which have impeded the progress and marred
the peace of other peoples, and by adopting those maxims of both feeling
and conduct which the best and most experienced public men of Europe and
America have enjoined as essential to the strength and happiness, the
advancement and grandeur of a nation....
We are passing from an old into a new state of political existence. The
alleged evils of former civil relations have induced the creation of new
ones; and the denounced evils of a former system of government have led
to the establishment of a new system.... We have been raised from a
state of colonial subordination to one of affectionate alliance with the
mother country. Then the first act of wisdom and duty is, to note and
avoid the evils which marred our peace and prosperity in our former
state, and cultivate those feelings and develop those principles of
legislation and government which have contributed most to the promotion
of our own happiness and interests as well as those of other nations.
If you will call up to your recollection the events of our country's
history for the last twenty years, I am sure you will agree with me that
personal hostilities and party strife have been the most fatal obstacles
to our happiness and progress as a people--an immense loss of time and
waste of public money in party debates and struggles--a most fruitful
source of partiality and corruption in legislation and government....
During the last two years that there has been a cessation of party
hostilities and a union of able men of heretofore differing parties for
the welfare of the country, there has been an economy, intelligence and
impartiality in legislation, and in the whole administration of
government, not equalled for many years past, a corresponding
improvement in the social feelings and general progress of the country,
as well as an elevation of our reputation and character abroad, in both
Europe and America....
In no respect is the education of a people more important than in
respect to the principles of their government, their rights and duties
as citizens. This does not come within the range of elementary school
teaching; but I have sought to introduce, as much as possible,
expositions on the principles, spirit and philosophy of government, in
my annual reports, and other school addresses and documents, during the
last twenty years, and so to frame the whole school system as to make
its local administration an instrument of practical education to the
people, in the election of representatives, and the corporate management
of their affairs--embracing most of the elementary principles and
practice of civil government, and doing so to a greater extent than is
done in the school system of any country in Europe, or of any State in
America. And the strength and success of the school system in any
municipality have been in proportion to the absence of party spirit, and
the union of all parties for its promotion.... What is true in school
polity is true in civil polity; and what is true in the educational
branch of the public service, is true in every branch of the public
service.
I am aware that many good and intelligent men, of different views and
associations, regard partyism as a necessity, a normal element, in the
operations of free civil government.... I think they are in error, at
least in the Canadian sense of the term party; and that this error has
been at the bottom of most of our civil discords and executive abuses. I
think that partyism is a clog in the machinery of civil government, as
in that of school or municipal government; in which there is free
discussion of measures, and of the conduct of Trustees and Councillors;
and there have been elections and changes of men as well as of
measures.... When party assumptions and intolerance have gone so far as
to interfere with the proper functions of government, with the
constitutional rights of citizens, or of the Crown, I have, at different
times, in former years, being trammelled by or dependent upon no party,
endeavoured to check these party excesses, and oppressions, sometimes to
the offence of one party, and sometimes to the offence of another, just
as one or the other might be the transgressor. I was, of course, much
assailed by the parties rebuked; but no consideration of that kind
should prevent the public instructor--whether educator or preacher--from
... teaching what he believes to be true and essential to the
advancement of society, please or offend whom it may, or however it may
affect him personally.
I have rejoiced to observe, that many who have heretofore been men of
party and of party government have resolved to inaugurate the new system
of government, not upon the acute angle of party, but, upon the broad
base of equal and impartial justice to all parties, the only moral and
patriotic principle of government, according to my convictions, and the
only principle of government to make good and great men, and make a
progressive and happy country....
Thankful to find that the new system of civil government was to be
established upon the same principles as those on which our school system
has been founded and developed to the satisfaction of the country, and
to the admiration of all foreign visitors; and believing that the
present was the juncture of time for commencing a new and brighter era
in the history of Canada--I have felt that it had a claim to the
result, in epitome at least, of my fifty years reading and meditation,
and more than forty years occasional discussion, respecting these first
principles of government, for the freedom, unity, happiness, advancement
and prosperity of a people....
I believe there is a judgment, a conscience, a heart in the bosom of a
people, as well as in that of an individual, not wholly corrupted--at
least, so I have in time past found it in the people of Upper
Canada--and to that judgment, and conscience, and heart, I appeal. If
what I have written is true, and if what I have suggested is wise, just,
and patriotic, I am not concerned as to what any deceptive or dishonest
art can do to the contrary; for, as Robert Hall beautifully said, on a
similar occasion, "Wisdom and truth, the offspring of the sky, are
immortal; but cunning and deception, the meteors of the earth, after
glittering for a moment, must pass away."
After devoting several pages to illustrate the evils of partyism in
government, Dr. Ryerson proceeds:--This partyism in government is
contrary to the avowed principles and objects of reformers in the true
heroic age of Canadian reform. "Equal rights and privileges among all
classes, without regard to sect or party," was the motto of the
reformers of those days, and was repeated and placed upon their banners
in almost every variety of style and form. And what was understood and
meant by that expressive motto, in the whole administration of
government, will be seen from the following facts:--The reformers and
reform press of Upper Canada, hailed and rejoiced in the principles of
the government of Lord Durham, Lord Sydenham and Sir Charles Bagot. The
Earl of Durham, in his reply to the address of the citizens of Toronto,
July, 1838, said:
On my part, I promise you an impartial administration of
government. Determined not to recognize the existence of parties,
provincial or imperial, classes or races, I shall hope to receive
from all Her Majesty's subjects those public services, the
efficiency of which must ever mainly depend upon their
comprehensiveness. Extend the veil of oblivion over the past,
direct to the future your best energies, and the consequences
cannot be doubted.
The favourite phrase and avowed doctrine of Lord Sydenham was "equal and
impartial justice to all classes of Her Majesty's subjects." After the
union of the Canadas, Lord Sydenham appointed Mr. Draper
Attorney-General, and the late Mr. R. Baldwin, Solicitor-General--the
first "coalition" in Upper Canada. He also intimated at the time that he
attached equal importance to the return of Mr. Draper and Mr. Baldwin;
and that opposition to the one as well as to the other, under whatever
pretence it may be got up, is equally opposition to the
Governor-General's administration. Parties and party spirit have nearly
ruined the country; the object of the Governor-General is to abolish
parties and party feelings by uniting what is good in both parties....
Lord Sydenham's two years administration of the Canadian government
proved the greatest boon to Upper Canada, and the principles and policy
of it were highly approved by Reformers and the Reform press
generally....
Judge Story, in his Commentaries on the Constitution of the United
States, says:--
The best talents and the best virtues are driven from office by
intrigue and corruption, or by the violence of the press or of
party.
In harmony with the statement of the great Judge Story, the famous
French writer, M. de Tocqueville, in his Democracy in America,
observes:--
It is a well authenticated fact that, at the present day, the most
talented men in the United States are very rarely placed at the
head of affairs, and it must be acknowledged that such has been the
result in proportion as democracy has outstripped its former
limits. The race of American statesmen has evidently dwindled most
remarkably in the course of the last fifty years.
These remarks of M. de Tocqueville apply to some extent to Canada where
there has been a manifest decline in the standing and ability of our
public men. There are exceptions, but what instances have we now of the
representatives or equals of the Robinsons, the Macaulays, the Bidwells,
the Jones', the Lafontaines, the Hagermans, the Baldwins, the Drapers,
the Willsons, and many other political men of forty and twenty years
ago?[149] To what is this decline in public men, in an otherwise
advancing country, to be ascribed but to the unscrupulous partizanship
of the press and politics, which blacken character instead of discussing
principles, which fight for office instead of for the public good, and
that by a barbarous system of moral assassination, instead of public men
respecting and protecting each other's standing, and rivalling each
other's deeds of greatness and usefulness. In England, the character of
public men is regarded as the most precious property of the nation; and
if the personal character of any member of Parliament, or other public
man, is assailed by the public press or otherwise, you will see
opponents as well as friends rallying round the assailed, and sustaining
and shielding him by their testimony, as a matter of common or national
concern. When Sir Robert Peel, in the last great debate of his life,
objected to Lord Palmerston's Grecian policy, he referred to Lord
Palmerston's character and abilities--not to depreciate and calumniate
his great rival, but to exclaim, amid the applause of the House of
Commons, "We are proud of the man! And England is proud of the man!" But
in Canada, the language of a partizan press and politician is "down with
the man; execrate and execute the man as a corruptionist and traitor!"
It is with a view to the best interests of our whole country, that I
have thus addressed my fellow countrymen, contributing the results of my
best thoughts and experience to your beginning well, that you may do
well and be well under our new Dominion, though I cannot expect long to
enjoy it. My nearly half a century of public life is approaching its
close. I am soon to account for both my words and my deeds. I have
little to hope or fear from man. But I wish before I go hence to see my
fellow citizens of all sects and parties unite in commencing a new
system of government for our country and posterity,
That all things may be so ordered and settled by their endeavours,
upon the best and surest foundations, that peace and happiness,
truth and justice, religion and piety, may be established among us
for all generations.
On the publication of this Address, Dr. Ryerson received commendatory
letters from various gentlemen throughout the Province. I select three.
The first is from Mr. Jasper J. Gilkison, Brantford, dated August
10th:--
As a Canadian and British subject, permit me to thank you for the
admirable pamphlet which you have had published, as it is the one
thing wanted for the instruction and guidance of the people of the
Dominion, aye, and for the world. It should be circulated free
throughout the land. Never in the history of any country did a more
favourable opportunity arise to test the fallacy that good
government can alone emanate from that of party. We have, in fact,
had an illustration of no-party government during the past few
years productive of peace and quiet among us, and it could be
continued indefinitely, were it not for bad-hearted men.
Were men actuated solely for the welfare and progress of our
country, the Government could most successfully be carried on, much
in the same way as a great company; the Executive and Parliament
being somewhat analagous to a board of directors and shareholders.
Your pamphlet cannot fail to be productive of immense good, for it
will cause reflection on a subject but little thought of by many
with a vast amount of ignorance as to the true form of government
calculated to confer the greatest benefits and happiness on a
people, and which, I think, you have clearly pointed out. In our
present position, were the Government to try the experiment, and
take Parliament into its counsels, I fancy it would succeed, by all
uniting for the common good.
The second was from Mr. Wm. (now Judge) Elliot, dated London, August
20th:--
Allow me to express to you a sense of gratitude, which I feel in
common, I trust, with all reasonable people, on the occasion of
your address on the political aspect of the Dominion of Canada.
I have had some limited connection with political contests in this
part of the Province, and what I have seen and learned impels me to
offer you my humble thanks for this contribution to our political
treasury.
Whether we have arrived at such a condition of society as entirely
to discard party political conflict may, I suppose, admit of
serious doubt. But that at this juncture your admonitions are most
valuable, all who reflect on the future will, I think, acknowledge.
In more than one electoral contest already, I have referred, I
believe with good effect, to your remarks, and I beg of you to
allow me the pleasure of thus acknowledging the value of your
counsel. That you may long be spared to advance the educational
interests of the country, and to allay the discord and acrimony of
faction, is the sincere prayer of yours faithfully,
William Elliot.
The third from a gentleman in Matilda:--
Permit me to thank you for the seasonable pamphlet you have issued
on the Dominion, and the sound advice it contains, addressed to the
people of this country. I have read it with pleasure, and am of
opinion that it should be scattered broadcast, for the
consideration of electors at this very important juncture.
FOOTNOTES:
[149] It affords me pleasure to remark, and I do so without any
reference to the political opinions or relations of the gentlemen
concerned, that some of our rising Canadians have entered, and others
are seeking an entrance into Parliamentary life upon the ground of their
own avowed principles, personal character and merit, as free men, and to
exercise their talents as such, and not as the articled confederates, or
protegés, or joints in the tail of partizanship. Free and independent
men in the Legislature, as in the country, are the best counterpoise to
faction, and the mainspring to a nation's progress and greatness.
Faction dreads independent men; patriotism requires them.
CHAPTER LXII.
1868-1869.
Correspondence with Hon. George Brown.--Dr. Punshon.
On the 24th of March, Dr. Ryerson addressed the following letter to the
Hon. George Brown:--
I desire, on this the 65th anniversary of my birth, to assure you of my
hearty forgiveness of the personal wrongs which, I think, you have done
me in past years, and of my forgetfulness of them so far, at least, as
involves the least unkindness and unfriendliness of feeling.
To express free and independent opinions on the public acts of public
men, to animadvert severely upon them when considered censurable, is
both the right and duty of the press; nor have I ever been discourteous,
or felt any animosity towards those who have censured my official acts,
or denounced my opinions. Had I considered that you had done nothing
more in regard to myself, I should have felt and acted differently from
what I have done in regard to you--the only public man in Canada with
whom I have not been on speaking and personally friendly terms. But
while I wish in no way to influence your judgment and proceedings in
relation to myself, I beg to say that I cherish no other than feelings
of good will, with which I hope to (as I soon must) stand before the
Judge of all the earth--imploring, as well as granting forgiveness for
all the wrong deeds done in the body.
On the same day Mr. Brown replied as follows:--
I have received your letter of this day, and note its contents.
I am entirely unconscious of any "personal wrong" ever done you by me,
and had no thought of receiving "forgiveness" at your hands.
What I have said or written of your public conduct or writings has been
dictated solely by a sense of public duty, and has never, I feel
confident, exceeded the bounds of legitimate criticism, in view of all
attendant circumstances. What has been written of you in the columns of
the _Globe_ newspaper, so far as I have observed, has been always
restrained within the limits of fair criticism toward one holding a
position of public trust.
As to your personal attacks on myself--those who pursue the fearless
course as a politician and public journalist that I have done for a
quarter of a century, cannot expect to escape abuse and
misrepresentation; and assuredly your assaults have never affected my
course toward you in the slightest degree. Your series of letters
printed in the _Leader_ newspaper some years ago, were not, I am told,
conceived in a very Christian spirit, but I was ill at the time they
were published, and have never read them. Your dragging my name into
your controversy with the Messrs. Campbell--on a matter with which I had
no personal concern whatever--was one of those devices unhappily too
often resorted to in political squabbles to be capable of exciting more
than momentary indignation.
The following letter from Dr. Ryerson to Mr. Brown, dated Toronto, April
13th, closed the correspondence:--Your note of the 24th ult., did not
reach me until Saturday evening--night before last.
I wrote my note of that date with the view of forgetting, rather than
reviving, the recollection of past discussions.
I never objected to the severest criticisms of my "public conduct or
writings." My remarks had sole reference to your "personal attacks" and
"assaults," made over your own name, and involving all that was dear to
me as a man, and a father, and a Christian--"personal attacks" and
"assaults" to which my letters in the _Leader_ referred to by you, and
which you had engaged to insert in the _Globe_, but afterwards refused,
were a reply; in the course of which I convicted you not only of many
misstatements, but of seven distinct forgeries--you, by additions,
professing to quote from me in seven instances the very reverse of what
I had written, and your having done all this to sustain "personal
attacks" and "assaults" upon me.
Besides this, on at least two subsequent occasions, you charged me with
what involved an imputation of dishonesty; and when I transmitted to you
copies of official correspondence relating to the subject of your
allegations, and refuting them, you refused to insert it in the _Globe_,
and left your false accusations unretracted to this day.
It was to such "personal attacks" and "assaults" on your part against
me, and not to any legitimate criticisms upon my "public conduct or
writings," that I referred in my letter of the 24th ult.
I admit the general fairness of the _Globe_ towards me during the last
few months; but that does not alter the character of your former
"personal attacks" and "assaults" upon me, and to which alone what you
call my "personal attacks" and "assaults" upon you were but defensive
replies and rejoinders.
I certainly have no reason to be dissatisfied with the results of such
"personal attacks" and replies, notwithstanding your great advantage in
having a powerful press at your disposal; and I am prepared for the
future, as I have been for the past, though I wish, if possible, to live
peaceably with all men.
* * * * *
Dr. Ryerson having been appointed delegate (with Dr. Punshon) to the
American General Conference of 1868, at Chicago, he wrote to me from
that city on the 14th of May:--
On our way here we stopped at London, where Mr. Punshon lectured
nobly. We reached here Tuesday evening, and were most heartily
welcomed by Bishop Janes, and by our hosts.
We were introduced to the Conference to-day, and were most
cordially received. Mr. Punshon was introduced by Bishop Janes, and
made a touching and noble address, which won the hearts of the
Conference, and vast audience, and was frequently and loudly
cheered.
I was introduced heartily and eulogistically by Bishop Simpson, and
addressed the Conference. The latter part of my address was warmly
cheered.
Rev. Dr. Richey, President, and Representative of the Eastern
Conference of British America, was introduced by Bishop Simpson,
and made a very excellent address to the Conference.
Mr. Punshon preached powerfully and gloriously before the
Conference and an immense crowd to-day; all were delighted, and
seemed deeply affected.
On the 18th of May, Dr. Ryerson wrote again to me:--
Mr. Punshon has made a wonderful impression here by his addresses
and discourses, beyond any thing they have ever heard from the
pulpit and the platform. He is to lecture to-morrow evening in the
Opera House--the largest room in Chicago--and there is a great rage
to get tickets. He preached there yesterday afternoon to several
thousand persons, a great part of whom were affected to tears
several times. I trust that many sinners were awakened, while
believers were greatly comforted and encouraged.
We went out on Saturday on an excursion train to Clinton, in Iowa,
145 miles west of this, crossing the Mississippi there, by
railroad, and crossing the prairies. The people of
Clinton--Presbyterians, etc., and Methodists--united, and prepared
an excellent dinner for three hundred and six persons, after which
speeches were delivered. The North-West Railroad Company prepared
the excursion gratuitously for the General Conference.
Dr. Ryerson having addressed a request to the British Conference for the
re-appointment of Rev. W. M. Punshon to Canada, Rev. Gervase Smith
replied on the 17th of August:--
Your first request was complied with without much debate. Mr.
Punshon is transferred to you for a term. The second request raised
a long discussion; the result of which was that you should be left
to elect your own President next year. Mr. Arthur, Drs. Waddy and
Rigg, and others, pleaded for Mr. Punshon's appointment on the
ground that the preceding vote placed him under Canadian
jurisdiction. But there were others who were influenced by the
consideration that to leave you to elect your own President, would
doubtless lead to Mr. Punshon's election. I pray that you all may
be guided rightly at this important juncture.
Dr. Punshon's continued residence in Canada was a source of great
delight to Dr. Ryerson. Of the wonderfully beneficial effects upon
Canadian Methodism of that memorable visit, it is not necessary that I
should speak. The hallowed memories of those days are engraven on
thousands of hearts on both sides of the lines.
Rev. Dr. R. F. Burns, of the Fort Massey Presbyterian Church, Halifax,
in a letter to the _Presbyterian Witness_, gives the following graphic
account of the visit of Drs. Ryerson, Punshon, and Richey to the General
Conference at Chicago. The _Wesleyan_, of Halifax, speaking of Dr.
Burns' letter, says:--The reminiscence is of special interest to the
editor of this paper, as he was one of the party who lunched with Dr.
Ryerson at Dr. Burns' on the occasion mentioned. Dr. Burns says:--
A memory of the worthy man comes up which you will excuse me for
jotting down. In the summer of 1868, during my residence in
Chicago, the Quadrennial Convention of the Methodist Episcopal
Church was held. It was then that I first made the acquaintance of
Dr. Punshon, who came out as delegate from the English Conference
to that great gathering. Dr. Matthew Richey was there representing
the Methodism of Eastern, and Dr. Ryerson of Western Canada. Quite
a colony of Canadian Methodists came over, including my old friend
Rev. A. F. Bland, to whom the celebrated Robert Collyer expressed
himself more indebted than to any other living man.
I invited several of the Methodist brethren to luncheon--Drs.
Ryerson and Richey of the number--(Punshon had a prior engagement).
Ryerson had given his speech that forenoon, and Richey too, with
characteristic ability, representing the two Canadian Conferences.
Dr. Richey had, a little before, met with the accident, but yet
though he had aged and failed considerably since the days when I
counted him the beau-ideal of elegance in manner and style in
pulpit and on platform, he bore himself with much of his former
stately demeanour and fine felicity of diction. Ryerson was hale
and hearty as of yore, and with perhaps less of the old tendency to
tremble while speaking which surprised me so much when I first
witnessed it, for, under the influence of strong feeling, and a
sort of constitutional timidity, linked in him with indomitable
pluck, his limbs--indeed often his whole massive frame--so shook
that I have felt the platform quiver. The Rev. George Goodson told
me in an undertone of an unkind remark made by a distinguished
member of the Conference to his neighbour as Dr. Ryerson got up to
speak, and that he had rebuked him for it, not knowing at the time
who he was. This gentleman, it came out in course of conversation,
was closely related to Elder Henry Ryan, a well-known minister in
the old Canada Methodist Church, with whom Dr. Ryerson, in his
early days, carried on a keen warfare. The Ryan-Ryerson controversy
is one with which the older Canadian Methodists are familiar.
Without hinting at the rudeness of his relative, I alluded to Elder
Ryan when conversing with Dr. Ryerson, and got from him in graphic
detail, the history of that ancient controversy in which he was a
principal party. It was very keen while it lasted, but there was no
bitter animus in the recital--though the old war horse pricked up
his ears and seemed to "hear the sound of battle from afar." I then
discovered a reason for the sharp tone of the gentleman's remarks,
aforesaid, which drew forth Brother Goodson's rebuke. Though but
four years of age when he left Canada, he had imbibed a dislike to
his old relative's chief antagonist, and to the very people amongst
whom the Ryerson party had proved victorious. Hence his remark on
another occasion to a lady friend of mine, with reference to his
early connection with Canada, to the effect that he was "ashamed of
being born there," which so roused her patriotic spirit that she
promptly retorted: "Well, I am ashamed of you for saying so." The
gentleman was then one of the rising hopes of that great
denomination, and has since risen to a foremost rank in it. When
this little incident was mentioned to Dr. Ryerson, he richly
enjoyed it, and before leaving the house, with his native
gallantry, he expressed a desire to use the privileges of an old
man towards the fair defendress of her country's honour, saying,
naively, as we all stood, before parting in the hall, "I would like
to kiss you for your patriotism?" (See chapter vii.)
While at Peake's Island, near Portland, Maine, in 1869, Dr. Ryerson met
with a serious accident, which nearly proved fatal. In a letter to me,
he said:--
On Monday a plank from the wharf to a vessel, on the outside of
which lay our boat, fell and precipitated me some feet on the deck
of the vessel; I falling on my head, shoulder, and side. I was
stunned and much injured, and have suffered much from my side; but
I am now getting better and am able to dress myself, and to use my
right arm. My head came within six inches of the band which
surrounds the hatchway. There was thus but six inches between me
and sudden death! I am truly thankful for my deliverance, and for
my blessings.
CHAPTER LXIII.
1870-1875.
Miscellaneous Closing Events and Correspondence.
On the 23rd of April, 1870, Rev. Drs. Punshon, Wood and Taylor, Chairman
and Secretaries of the Central Board of Wesleyan Missions, addressed a
letter to Sir George Cartier, Minister of Militia, on the subject of
sending a Methodist chaplain with the Red River expedition under General
Lindsay and the present Lord Wolseley. In their letter they said:--
Believing that many who will volunteer to complete this enterprize
will be members of our own church, we are desirous of securing your
official sanction to the appointment of a Wesleyan Minister as
Chaplain to that portion of the military expedition who are
professedly attached to our doctrines and ordinances, upon such
terms as may be agreed upon, affecting personal rights and military
operations and duties.
This letter was merely acknowledged, and no action was taken upon it. In
the following June Conference, the subject was brought up, and much
feeling was evoked at Sir George Cartier's apparent want of courtesy to
the Missionary Board. Sir Alexander Campbell, on seeing a report of the
Conference proceedings on the subject, wrote a very kind note to Dr.
Ryerson, in which he expressed his opinion that some mistake must have
occurred in the matter, and that he was sure no discourtesy was thought
of on the part of Sir George Cartier. To this note Dr. Ryerson replied
on the 18th of June:--
I yesterday received your very kind letter of the 13th inst. I think you
know too well my high respect, and even affection for you, and my
expectations long since formed of your success and usefulness to the
country, as a public man, to doubt my implicit confidence in any
statement made by you, and my desire to meet your views as far as
possible.
In the matter as relating to Sir George E. Cartier, I may remark, that
the President of the Wesleyan Conference stated to me the week before
its annual meeting, that a communication had been addressed by himself,
and the Missionary Secretaries, to Sir George Cartier respecting our
sending a Wesleyan Minister with the Red River expedition, to supply
the spiritual wants of many members of our own congregations, and
proposing to confer with him (Sir G. C.) as to the arrangement; that he
regarded the treatment of their letter by Sir George as discourteous,
and that he thought the Conference should be informed of it, and that it
should take some action on the subject. The Rev. Dr. Wood, senior
Missionary Secretary, read to the Conference the correspondence and the
draft of four resolutions, on the subject of which he gave notice. I was
not in the Conference when this took place. On reading Dr. Wood's
resolutions, I suggested some modifications of them, and prepared
resolutions which he preferred to his own, and which I proposed for
adoption the day after giving notice of them.
As to Sir George's courtesy, I may observe that the letter addressed to
him, proposed a conference with him on the subject: that his Deputy, in
reply, by direction of Sir George Cartier, as he says, acknowledged the
receipt of the letter addressed to him, but though that letter was dated
at Toronto, and signed officially, the answer to it was addressed simply
to the "Rev. Mr. Punshon, Montreal," and no further notice taken of it
to this day. And it seems that Sir George did not think it worth his
while even to mention, much less submit the letter, to you and your
colleagues from Upper Canada.
In regard to the question of chaplain, our view is, and the proposal
contemplated by our President and Missionary Secretaries was, that the
Government should not pay any salary to the chaplain, but simply provide
his rations and accommodations. It is our view that the Government
should not pay or appoint any chaplain, but leave to each denomination
the right of doing so, if it should think proper. Each chaplain thus
nominated and paid, to be recognized by the military authorities, and be
subject, of course, to the military regulations. In such circumstances,
it is probable there would have been three Protestant chaplains--Church
of England, Presbyterian, and Methodist. I infer or assume this on the
ground of experience. In our Normal School of one hundred and fifty
students, each is asked his religious persuasion, and the chief minister
of that persuasion is furnished with a list of the names of students
adhering to or professing his Church, and the day, and hour, and place
where he can give them religious instruction. The result is, that by
mutual consultation and agreement of ministers, all the Presbyterians,
including even the Congregationalists and Baptists, meet in one class,
and receive religious instruction from one minister, the ministers
agreeing to take the labour in successive sessions--one minister
performing all the duty one session. The arrangement voluntarily exists
among the different classes of Methodists--though Wesleyan ministers do
all the work. A Church of England minister attends to the instruction
and religious oversight of the Church of England students, and the chief
Roman Catholic priest does the same in regard to the Roman Catholic
students. Nothing can be more fair, practical, and satisfactory than a
similar arrangement in regard to the Red River expedition. What may be
the peculiar views, habits, etc. of the Church of England chaplain
appointed and salaried by the Government, I know not; but you know as
well as I do that a man being a clergyman of the Church of England is no
longer a guarantee that he does not entertain and teach views and
practices more subversive of unsophisticated Protestant principles and
feelings than could be as successfully done by a Roman Catholic priest.
Besides, as a general rule, men, especially young men, do not regard,
and are not controlled, as to their own worship and pastorate, except by
the services and pastoral oversight to which they are accustomed and
attached; and without such influence and aid to the preservation and
strengthening of moral principles, habits, and feelings, more young men
are liable to be demoralized and ruined in military expeditions, such as
that of the Red River, than are likely to be killed in battle or die of
disease.
This is the view for which the Methodist body will contend, whatever may
be the result. The Secretaries of the Bible Society went among the
volunteers, while at Toronto, and proffered a Bible to each one that
would accept of it, and found on inquiry, that four-fifths of the
volunteers, even from Lower Canada, were Protestants, and a much larger
proportion of the volunteers of Upper Canada, and a large number of them
not members of the Church of England but Methodists and Presbyterians.
Of course, it answers the Roman Catholic purpose, and will doubtless be
acceptable to many members of the Church of England, for the Government
to appoint and pay chaplains of those persuasions; but I am persuaded
there will be little difference of a contrary opinion on the subject
among the ministers and members of the excluded persuasions. I wish I
could share with you in your expressed confidence in Sir George Cartier,
but I have no such confidence in him, and especially in the
ecclesiastical influence under the dictation of which he acts. Wherein I
may have been misinformed, and may not have stated matters correctly, I
shall be prepared to correct any such errors, when I come to reply to
the various attacks which have been made upon me, in vindication of
myself, and the Wesleyan Conference in regard to the complaint made, and
the position assumed in respect to Sir George E. Cartier, and the Red
River business.
On the 30th June, Mr. James Wallace, of Whitby, addressed Dr. Ryerson a
letter on the subject, in which he said:--
A stranger to you personally, although not so to your many able,
pungent, and truthful letters, connected with public matters, that
have from time to time appeared in the public press: I trust you
will excuse this liberty, and accept my congratulations on your
last effort in that connection as published in the _Globe_.
I have some knowledge of the Red River matter, having been there
during the first stages of the rebellion, and had, therefore,
chances of becoming acquainted with its origin and progress that
few men had; and when I see one in your position come forward so
bravely and lay bare the origin of that infamous revolt, I must say
that I feel proud of you as a Canadian, and not only of you, but of
the body with which you are connected, who so nobly sustained you.
On the 24th August, 1870, the corner stone of the Metropolitan Church,
Toronto, was laid. Dr. Ryerson felt that it was a memorable day in the
annals of Methodism in Toronto. I was honoured (he said) by being
selected to lay the corner stone of the Metropolitan Church. Rev. Dr.
Punshon, President of the Conference was present, and delivered an
admirable address. He also read one which I had prepared, but which I
was unable to deliver myself. The auspicious event of the day amply
repaid me for the anxiety which I had so long felt in regard to the
success of the enterprise, and for the responsibility which, with other
devoted brethren, I had personally assumed to secure the site, and carry
to a successful issue the erection of a building which would be an
honour to Methodism, and a credit to the cause in Toronto.
* * * * *
On the 17th March, 1871, Dr. Ryerson received a letter from the
venerable Rev. Dr. James Dixon, dated Bradford, Eng., 2nd inst. In it he
says:--In my eighty-third year, blind, deaf, and so paralyzed as to be
unable to walk without assistance, I feel that the world is fast
receding. Having sense and affection remaining, I feel desirous of
holding a little fellowship once more with you, my dear old friend. The
world to me looks like one of your forests with the trees cut down,
except here and there one a little stronger than the rest. I look upon
you as one of those, vigorous forest trees still remaining. And may you
long remain, a blessing to your country and the Church! After referring
to his own religious life and experiences, he concludes:--As long as I
live my affection for you will never vary. I also remember other
Canadian friends with great interest and affection. Farewell! my dear
old friend. We shall meet again before long in a brighter world. If you
can find time, I shall be most happy to receive a line from you.
[Illustration]
Dr. Ryerson did find time to respond to the letter of his dear and
valued friend Dr. Dixon. His venerable aspect was well remembered, when,
as President of the Canada Conference in 1848, he did good and valued
service for the Methodist Church in Canada.
* * * * *
On the 29th of June, 1871, Mr. John Macdonald and Rev. Dr. Evans having
asked Dr. Ryerson to enclose to Rev. W. M. Punshon a letter urging him
to continue his noble work in Canada, he did so most heartily, as the
letter to be enclosed expressed the real sentiments not only of the
ministers and members of the Church generally, but those of the country
at large. Dr. Ryerson accompanied the letter with a note from himself,
in which he said to Mr. Punshon:--To have the power, as God has given
you, to mould, to a large extent, the energies and labours of six
hundred ministers, and developments of the Canadian Church, and to
control largely the public mind in religious and benevolent
enterprises--looking at the future of our country--appears to me to
present a field of usefulness that Mr. Wesley himself might have coveted
in his day. All that God has enabled you to do already in this country
is but the foundation and beginning of what there is the prospect of
your doing hereafter by the Divine blessing. You know this is the old
ground on which I first proposed to you to come to this country, and
which I am sure you have no reason to regret. This is the only ground on
which I ought to desire your continued connection with it.
* * * * *
A pleasing episode in the _Globe_ controversy respecting Dr. Ryerson's
"First Lessons on Christian Morals," occurred in June, 1872. Bishop
Bethune, in his address to the Synod of the Diocese of Toronto, spoke of
the increasing spread of evil, and of the duty of the Church, under her
Divine Master, to cope with it. He said:
Her work is, confessedly, to lead fallen man to the true source of
pardon, and to teach him to aim at the recovery of the moral image
in which he was at first created. If the passions, and prejudices,
and divisions of professing Christians themselves are a distressing
hindrance to the attainment of this noble and dutiful aspiration,
we have much in the condition of the world around us to warn and
rouse us to a vigorous and united effort to arrest the increasing
tide of sin and crime. The developments of a grossly evil spirit at
the present day fill us with horror and alarm; the profligacy and
wanton cruelty of which we hear so many instances, make us tremble
for our social peace and safety.
It is but right to enquire to what all this enormity of wickedness
is traceable, that we may come, if possible, to the remedy. That is
largely to be ascribed, as all must be persuaded, to the neglect of
religious instruction in early life; to the contentment of peoples
and governments to afford a shallow secular education, without the
learning of religious truth, or the moral obligations that it
teaches. The child taught and trained for this world's vocations
only, without a deep inculcation of the love and fear of God, and
the penalty hereafter of an irreligious and wicked life, will have
but one leading idea--self-aggrandizement and self-indulgence, and
will be checked by no restraint of conscience in the way and means
of securing them. Gigantic frauds will be perpetrated, if riches
can thus be acquired; atrocious murders will be committed, if these
will remove the barrier to unholy and polluting connections, or
cast out of sight the objects of jealousy and hatred.
I have no disposition to reprobate this defect in the system of
education, prevailing with the authority and support of Government
among ourselves. I know the difficulty, the almost impossibility,
of securing the temporal boon with the addition of the spiritual;
how hard it must prove in a divided religious community to
introduce among the secular lessons which are meant for usefulness
and advancement in this world, that lofty and holy teaching which
trains the soul for heaven. The irreverent and fierce assaults
recently made upon a praiseworthy effort of the Superintendent of
Education in this Province to introduce a special work for moral
and religious instruction amongst our common school pupils, testify
too plainly the difficulty of supplying that want.
I have confidence in the good intentions and righteous efforts of
that venerable gentleman to do what he can for the amelioration of
the evils which the absence of systematic religious teaching of the
young must induce; so that we may have a hope that, from his tried
zeal and unquestionable ability, a way may be devised by which such
essential instruction shall be imparted, and the terrible evils we
deplore to some extent corrected.
In response to this portion of his address, Dr. Ryerson addressed the
following note to the Bishop on the 1st of July.
I feel it my bounden, at the same time most pleasurable duty, to thank
you with all my heart for your more than kind reference to myself in
your official charge at the opening of the recent Synod of the Diocese
of Toronto; and especially do I feel grateful and gratified for your
formal and hearty recognition of the Christian character of our Public
School System, and of the efforts which have been made to render that
character a practical reality, and not a mere dead and heartless form.
It has also been peculiarly gratifying to me to learn that your
Lordship's allusions to myself and the school system were very generally
and cordially cheered by the members of the Synod.
My own humble efforts to invest our school system with a Christian
character and spirit have been seconded from the beginning by the
cordial and unanimous co-operation of the Council of Public Instruction;
and without that co-operation my own individual efforts would have
availed but little.
Since the settlement of the common relationship of all religious
persuasions to the State, there is _a_ common patriotic ground for the
exertions of all, without the slightest reasonable pretext for political
jealousy or hostility on the part of any. On such ground of
comprehensiveness, and of avowed Christian principles, I have
endeavoured to construct our Public School System; such, and such only
has been my aim in the teachings of my little book on Christian Morals;
and such only was the aim and spirit of the Council of Public
Instruction in the recommendation of it,--a recommendation to which the
Council inflexibly adheres, and which it has cordially and decidedly
vindicated.
The Bishop replied on the 3rd of July, thus:--I have to thank you for
your letter of the 1st instant, received last evening, and to express my
gratification that I had the opportunity to bear my humble testimony to
your zealous and righteous efforts to promote the sound education of the
youth of this Province.
I believe that in the endeavours to give this a moral and religious
direction, you have done all that, in the circumstances of the country,
it was in your power to accomplish. I was glad, too, to give utterance
to my protest against the shameless endeavours to hold up to public
scorn the valuable little work by which you desired to give a moral and
religious tone to the instruction communicated in our Common Schools. If
more can be done in this direction, I feel assured you would assume any
allowable amount of responsibility in the endeavour to effect it.
Wishing you many years of health and usefulness, I remain, dear Dr.
Ryerson, very faithfully yours,
A. N. Toronto.
This correspondence affords a striking instance of the fact that the
very earnest discussions between the writers of these notes in past
years, had not diminished in any way the personal respect and kindly
feeling which happily existed between them. And it was so with the late
venerable Bishop Strachan, with whom Dr. Ryerson more than once measured
swords in days gone by. Among his very latest utterances on the Separate
School Question in the Synod of 1856, he thus referred to the Head of
the Education Department and his labours:--
One new feature, which I consider of great value, and for which I
believe we are altogether indebted to the able Superintendent, deserves
special notice: it is the introduction of daily prayers. We find that
454 schools open and close with prayer. This is an important step in the
right direction, and only requires a reasonable extension to render the
system in its interior, as it is already in its exterior, nearly
complete. But till it receives this necessary extension, the whole
system, in a religious and spiritual view, may be considered almost
entirely dead.
I do not say that this is the opinion of Dr. Ryerson, who no doubt
believes his system very nearly perfect; and so far as he is concerned,
I am one of those who appreciate very highly his exertions, his
unwearied assiduity, and his administrative capacity. I am also most
willing to admit that he has carried out the meagre provisions of the
several enactments that have any leaning to religion, as far as seems
consistent with a just interpretation of the law.--_Charge of 1856, pp.
15, 16._
* * * * *
In a note dated Toronto, 2nd October, 1872, Hon. W. B. Robinson sent to
Dr. Ryerson an extract from the Barrie _Northern Advance_ containing an
obituary notice of Dr. Ryerson. In enclosing it, Mr. Robinson said:--
I send you a Barrie paper that I think will amuse you. It is not
often we are permitted to "see ourselves as others see us" when
once we go "hence and are no more seen,"--but you are an exception,
and I congratulate you on such being the fact; and hope the Editor
will be satisfied that he is in "advance" of the times, and may
have cause to give you credit for much more good work in the
position you have so long held, with so much benefit to the
country. I observed the death of your brother William in the papers
a short time ago, which I suppose accounts for the mistake.
The extract from the Barrie paper is as follows:--
Most of our readers are aware of the fact that the great champion
of education in Upper Canada has gone to his rest. Coming
generations, so long as time lasts, will owe a debt of gratitude to
Dr. Ryerson, as the only real founder of a comprehensive school
system in Ontario. Through evil report and through good report he
has steadily worked on his way; neither daunted by the abuse he has
received, nor unduly elated by the unmeasured tribute of praise
paid to his efforts in the department to which his whole life was
devoted. He kept the even tenor of his way, and we think most
people, unblinded by partisan prejudice, will acknowledge that his
life purpose has, more than that of most men, been accomplished. He
leaves behind him a structure so nearly completed that men with a
tithe of his enthusiasm, and infinitely less knowledge of the
educational requirements of the Province, can lay the capstone, and
declare the work complete.
Hon. Marshall S. Bidwell died in New York shortly after his visit to
Canada in 1872. Hon. Judge Neilson, his friend, wrote to Dr. Ryerson for
particulars of Mr. Bidwell's early life, with a view to publish it in a
memorial volume. This information Dr. Ryerson obtained from Sir W. B.
Richards, Clarke Gamble, Esq., Q.C., and Rev. Dr. Givens, and, with his
own, embodied it in a communication to Judge Neilson. In a letter to Dr.
Ryerson, dated 30th April, 1873, the late Rev. Dr. Saltern Givens
said:--
A short time since, Hon. W. B. Robinson informed me that a letter
of condolence was written by the late Mr. Bidwell to Lady Robinson
and her family, on the death of Sir John, and that he thought it
would answer your purpose.... I am sure that you will peruse it
with as much pleasure as I have done.
It ought to be a matter of devout thankfulness and congratulation
with us Canadians, that two of our most distinguished statesmen and
jurists have left behind them such unequivocal and delightful
testimonies of their faith in Christ, and of their experience of
the power of His Gospel, in extracting the sting from death and in
comforting the bereaved.
I am sure that Sir John's letters to Mr. Bidwell, under his similar
trial, if you could obtain them, would be read with a thrill of
delight and profit by their many friends throughout Canada.
When witnessing--as we have done, some forty years ago--those
fierce political contests in which our departed friends were
involved, how little did we think that in the evening of their days
they would have been united in the bonds of Christian love and
sympathy, as this interchange of friendship evinces.
The following is Mr. Bidwell's letter to Hon. W. B. Robinson, dated 24th
February, 1863:--
I thank you for your kind and friendly letter, and for the
particular account of the closing scenes of the life of your
honoured and lamented brother. The wound inflicted by his death can
never be altogether healed. The grief which it produces is natural
and rational, and is not inconsistent with any of the precepts, or
with the spirit of the Gospel. It is a duty, however, to keep it
within bounds, and not to allow murmurs in our heart against Divine
Providence. The language of our hearts should be that of the
Patriarch, "The Lord gave, and the Lord taketh away, blessed be the
name of the Lord." Gratitude for the gift should be mingled with
our deep sorrow for the loss of it. In my own case, a consideration
of the unspeakable goodness of God in having bestowed upon me such
an inestimable blessing has been continually present to my mind,
and trust such feelings will abound in the bosom of Lady Robinson,
her family, and yourself. He, whose removal from earthly scenes
your hearts deplore, was all that you could have desired, in his
public and private character, and in the homage of universal
veneration and esteem. Where will you find one like him? Was there
not great and peculiar goodness in God's bestowing him upon you?
Was he not the joy and pride of your hearts continually? Did not
his presence irradiate his home, and make it like an earthly
Paradise? Every pang which you may suffer attests the value of the
blessing which you have so long had. Your gratitude to God, the
author of every good and perfect gift, ought to be in proportion to
your grief. It is to be remembered, also, that he was not cut down
prematurely in the midst of his days, but had passed the period
which Moses, the man of God, in his sublime and pathetic prayer
(Psalm xc.) considers as the ordinary boundary of human life, and
retained all his powers and faculties to the last; and that during
this long life he had not been absent from his family, at least not
from Lady Robinson (if I am not mistaken) except during the
transient separation when he was on the circuit. It is natural that
your hearts should yearn for him, should long to see him again, and
enjoy the pleasure of his company; yet death must sooner or later
have separated you, and longer life might have been a scene of
suffering. Would it not have been inexpressibly painful to you all
to have seen his mental and bodily powers decay and fade away? Such
a spectacle would have been distressing and mortifying. Now his
memory is associated with no humiliating recollections; but you
remember him as one always admired, respected and loved. Death has
set his seal upon him, and although he is removed from you to
return no more to earthly scenes, you know that it is only a
removal, and that he is now in a state of exalted and perfect,
though ever progressive, felicity. I trust you have the most
consolatory evidence that this is now his present and unalterable
state, and that you constantly think as David thought and said, "I
shall go to him, but he shall not return to me." In the meantime
you have the consolation of knowing that while you remember him
with the tenderest affection and interest, he has not forgotten
you, but has a more distinct and perfect recollection of you than
you have of him. That this is literally true is the conviction of
my understanding, founded not only upon reason and analogy, but
upon the irrefragable testimony of divine revelation. There surely
is nothing in such a thought that is improbable. We have daily
experience of the revival in our minds of past events long
forgotten; they lived there, though dormant. Then how many well
authenticated and well known instances, where persons recovered
from drowning have stated that before they lost consciousness, all
the scenes and incidents of their lives flashed instantaneously, as
it were, upon their minds, and appeared to be present to their
view. They had been treasured up there, though latent. Death does
not extinguish the mental faculties, thought does not cease, but
the conscious and thinking being passes from scenes present to
scenes eternal. "Mortality is swallowed up of life." There would be
good ground for this conviction, if revelation gave us no higher
proof; but it is explicit. "Every one of us shall give account of
himself to God." This necessarily implies a perfect recollection of
our lives. We are to answer for all the deeds done in the body; for
every idle word, for every secret and sinful thought and feeling.
This requires a perfect recollection of every event, sentiment, and
emotion of our lives. The soul, therefore, must carry into the
unseen world a perfect recollection of its associates and friends;
and as there will be no decay then of mental powers, this will be
an abiding, ever-present recollection. Every holy feeling will also
continue after death--conjugal, parental, filial, fraternal
affections are holy; they are expressly enjoined upon us by divine
authority. Love, indeed, pure, fervent affection, is the
characteristic element of Heaven. It is impossible, therefore, that
the holy affections should cease at death. I have, therefore, a
conviction that our departed friends, whose death we mourn,
remember us distinctly and with tender affection. I have dwelt upon
this subject because it has afforded me in my great affliction much
consolation, and if I had time, I might expatiate more fully upon
it, and adduce further evidence in support of its truth.
Yes! it is a truth, and therefore it is full of consolation. While
we are thinking of our departed friends with grief, they, too, are
thinking of us, with at least equal affection, and this they will
continue to do until we meet. In the meantime we may comfort
ourselves with the thought that, to use the language of a sober and
judicious commentator on the sacred Scriptures, "The separation
will be short, the re-union rapturous, and the subsequent felicity
uninterrupted, unalloyed, and eternal."
I have felt peculiar sympathy for Lady Robinson. I am sure her
affliction must be extreme. I hope the Son of God is with her in
the furnace, and that she has a consciousness of His presence. He
can give both support and consolation, and both she must greatly
need. He can gently, and imperceptibly, bind up and heal her
wounded and bleeding heart.
I wish that I could furnish reminiscences that would be interesting
to you, for I should be glad to testify my respect for the memory
of your brother, but I cannot tell you anything with which you are
not familiar. I remember distinctly his appearance the first time I
saw him. He had just returned to Canada, after his first visit to
England. I was a student at law, and had gone from Bath to Toronto,
to attend the Court of King's Bench at Michaelmas Term. He, and
Lady Robinson, came from Kingston in the steamer "Frontenac." I
think that Mr. Hagerman was on board also. From another passenger,
I heard that on the voyage they were overtaken at night by a storm,
which stove in the dead-lights, and poured a flood of water into
the cabin. It was a time of alarm, probably of danger; your brother
was perfectly composed. He came into court on his arrival, and upon
that occasion I saw him. His appearance was striking. His features
were classically and singularly beautiful; his countenance was
luminous with intelligence and animation; his whole appearance that
of a man of genius and a polished gentleman, equally dignified and
graceful. Altogether his features, figure and manners filled my
youthful imagination with admiration, which subsequent
acquaintance, and opportunities to hear him at the Bar and in
Parliament, only strengthened, and which was not diminished by the
difference between us in our views and opinions on public affairs.
I heard him frequently at the Bar, and upon some occasions, I had
the honour to be junior counsel with him.
He was a consummate advocate, as well as a profound and accurate
lawyer. He had extraordinary powers for a speech _impromptu_, and
needed as little time for preparation for an address to a jury, or
an argument to the Court, as any one I have ever known. But he was
never induced by this readiness to neglect a patient and careful
attention to his client's case.
No one could be more faithful. He studied every case thoroughly,
examined all the particular circumstances, made himself master of
its details, and considered it carefully, in all its aspects and
relations. I do not think he ever delivered a speech from memory.
He was self-possessed in the trial, his mind was vigilant, his
thoughts flowed rapidly, he had rapid association of ideas, great
quickness of apprehension, as well as great sagacity, and a power
of arranging anything in his mind, luminously and instantaneously;
his fluency was unsurpassed.
I was present upon those occasions in Parliament which aroused him
to great exertions.
He was at all times a correct, elegant, interesting speaker, but
upon those occasions he spoke with great force and effect.
The fire of his eye, the animation of his countenance and the
elegance of his manner, combined with dignity, cannot be
appreciated by any one who did not hear him. No report of his
speeches, no description of his manner and appearance, can convey
to others a just and adequate idea. To report him _verbatim_ was
impossible. His ideas flowed so rapidly, and he had such fluency of
language, that no reporter could have kept pace with his delivery.
He was an admirable parliamentary leader. He never exposed himself
by any incautious speech or act, and never failed to detect and
expose one on the other side. He was sincere and earnest in his
opinions, uncompromising, frank and fearless in the expression of
them. He never attempted to make a display of himself, or indulged
in useless declamation; but spoke earnestly and for the purpose of
producing an immediate effect. I heard that when he was in England
in 1823 (I think that was the year), the ministry had under
consideration introducing him through one of their boroughs into
Parliament. If it had been done, I have no doubt he would have
become a distinguished member of the House of Commons, and I think
it probable that he would have attained to the highest honours of
the land. During two years I had the honour to be Speaker of the
House of Assembly, while he was Speaker of the Legislative Council;
our official stations rendered it necessary for us to confer
together concerning the business before Parliament. He was always
courteous, communicative and obliging. The difference between us on
political questions while I was in Parliament precluded intimate or
confidential relations, but he was always pleasant and candid, and
more than once did I share in that elegant hospitality which was
dispensed so cordially and so gracefully by him and Lady Robinson.
I have had the honor to receive friendly letters from him
occasionally since I have been here, and after my great affliction
last spring he wrote to me two very kind letters for which I shall
ever be grateful.
I should be sincerely glad to evince my respect for his memory. I
have not space left to add anything respecting his judicial
character and career, but this is unimportant. Every one in Canada
knows it.
Writing to me after the Conference at London, in June, 1873, Dr. Ryerson
said:--The proceedings of the Conference were very harmonious, and the
discussions very able and courteous upon the whole. I received many
thanks for my labours in connection with the scheme for Methodist
Confederation and for union with the New Connexion Methodists. I trust I
have been able, through Divine goodness, to render some service to the
good cause.
* * * * *
In a letter to Dr. Ryerson from Rev. Dr. Punshon, dated 2nd December,
the latter expressed some fears as to one or two points in the future of
the General Conference arrangement. He says:--
I am looking with some solicitude to the result of the Appeal to
the Quarterly Meetings on the Union question. I hope it will be
carried, though your modifications of the scheme do not quite meet
my approval, as one who would like to see a statesman's view taken
of things. I do not see the bond of cohesion twenty years hence,
when those who are now personally known to, and therefore
interested in, each other, have passed off the stage. Then the
General Conference will meet as perfect strangers, having hardly a
common interest but that of a common name; and as there are no
General Superintendents, who know all the Conferences, there will
not be, as in the States, any link to bind them together. I trust
some remedy will be found for this, or the lack of such link will
be disastrous.
We are losing our prominent men. You will have seen that Mr. Heald
has passed away--also Mr. Marshall, another Stockport "pillar." I
am greatly concerned about my dear friend, Gervase Smith, the
Secretary of the Conference. He has overtaxed himself, and is very
ill. Absolute rest is enjoined for some time. It would be a sad day
for me, if dear Gervase were to pass from my side. We have just
heard of the loss of the "Ville du Havre," with 226 lives. Emile
Cook, from Paris, was on board, and injured by the collision. How
terrible! Now, my dear Dr. Ryerson, the good Lord be with you, and
make you always as happy in His love as you desire to be, and spare
you yet for many years, to counsel and to plan for His glory and
the benefit of Canada.
Writing from his Long Point Cottage to me on the 12th of April, 1873,
Dr. Ryerson said:--Some days I have felt quite young; but upon the
whole, I doubt whether the means which have been so successful in the
past in renewing my strength, can be of much use any longer to "stave
off" old age. A medical gentleman here from Port Rowan said yesterday, I
looked the perfection of health at my age; but my strength I feel
already to be "labour and sorrow." So true are the words of inspiration
to practical life.
* * * * *
The union question having been carried, and the General Conference
established, that body met in Toronto in September, 1874. Speaking of it
Dr. Ryerson said:--In 1874 I was elected the first President of the
first General Conference of the Methodist Church of Canada; consisting
of an equal number of ministers and laymen, and representing the several
Annual Conferences of the Dominion of Canada.
On his return home from the General Conference held in Toronto in 1874,
Hon. L. A. Wilmot, a former Judge, and late Lieutenant-Governor of New
Brunswick, wrote to Dr. Ryerson a note, in which he said:--How can we
ever repay you and your dear family for the warm-hearted hospitality and
the intellectual repast we so much enjoyed while with you? To me it is
much more than a sunny memory, as you have so enriched me with treasures
of thought, and words of wisdom. Really, I long to see you again, and I
cannot express to you the pleasure it will afford us to welcome you all
to our suburban home. We have room enough for you all, and sincerely do
we pray that we may all be spared to meet again. [Mr. Wilmot has since
then gone home to his reward.]
CHAPTER LXIV.
1875-1876.
Correspondence with Rev. J. Ryerson, Dr. Punshon, etc.
Dr. Ryerson went up to Simcoe to preach the anniversary sermons there,
in December, 1874, and hoped to have gone to Brantford to see his
brother John, but was prevented. He therefore wrote to him a New Year's
letter, on the 3rd January, 1875: I have often prayed for you, thinking
sometimes that I was even praying with you. We have spoken of you more
than once during the recent holiday salutations and good wishes, and
have wished you happy returns of this season of kindly greetings and
renewed friendships.
I feel to bless God that during the last several weeks I have
experienced, in a deeper and brighter degree than I ever experienced
before, "the love of Christ which passeth all knowledge." The pages of
God's book seem to shine with a brighter lustre and a more luminous,
comprehensive and penetrating power than I ever beheld in them. Without
care, without fear, without a shadow of doubt, I can now, through God's
wonderful grace, and by His Holy Spirit, rest my all upon Christ--lay my
all upon His altar, and say, "For me to live is Christ, and to die is
gain."
On Sunday afternoon we had the renewal of the Covenant Service, in the
Metropolitan, and the Communion. It was a good time. I think there were
more than five hundred at the Communion--the largest number I ever
witnessed in America, even at a camp-meeting. It took Rev. Dr. Potts and
I more than an hour to distribute the elements.
I am anxious to go up to my cottage for change and retirement, so as to
be quite alone for a few weeks with my books and papers.
I am at work, as hard as I can, upon my history. On New Year's Day I
worked at it for fifteen hours--writing upwards of twenty pages of
foolscap, besides researches, comparing authorities, etc. I am anxious
to complete the two volumes of the New England Loyalists, before I go to
England in May.
In reply to Dr. Ryerson's letter of 3rd January, his brother John
wrote:--
My health is still precarious.... My attention to religious duties
(reading the Scriptures, private and meditative self-examination,
etc.,) I unremittingly persevere in, but my religious enjoyment is
low and my faith weak.... This winter I have read the Life of Dr.
Bradshaw, an eminent clergyman of the Church of England, some time
Rector of Colchester, then of Birmingham, and then of a Rectory in
the suburbs of London, where he died in 1865, at the age of
eighty-nine. His ministry extended over more than sixty years. He
was one of the most devoted, and singularly pious ministers whose
memoirs I ever read. O! into what dwarfishness the morality, and
the spiritual and elevated attainments of most Christians sink in
the presence of such men! Dr. Bradshaw's life was written by Miss
Marsh, the authoress of the Life of Captain Vicars, and other
excellent books. I have also read the Life of Miss M. Graham, a
most eminently pious and devoted lady, also a member of the Church
of England. She died at the early age of twenty-eight. Another
memoir--of Mrs. Winslow, from the reading of which I ought to have
derived much profit, one of the holiest women of whom I ever read,
was a devoted member of the English Church. She was the daughter of
a wealthy West India planter, and born in the West Indies. Her
father died when she was quite young. She was married to a Captain
in the British army, in one of the regiments stationed in the
Island of Jamaica, but singular to say, not long after her
marriage, was wonderfully converted, and towards the close of his
life, was the means of saving her affectionate and devoted husband,
who was a nephew of the once Governor of the Colony of
Massachusetts. He was very wealthy, besides his West India
estate--owning a large estate in England. The wonderful piety of
this devoted saint, during the long years of her widowhood, ought
to humble pigmy Christians, like me, in the dust. Oh, can I ever be
saved, if such men and women are only saved?
I am now reading the life and labours of Rev. Dr. Shrewsbury, a
Wesleyan missionary to the West Indies and South Africa--then late
in life back to England, where he died in 1866, aged seventy-three
years. He was a man of ability, much industry and zeal, and of more
than the medium piety of Methodist preachers generally.
In reply to this letter, Dr. Ryerson wrote to his brother on the 21st of
February and said:--
You speak of the want of joy in your religious experience. I do not
pray for joy, I simply pray for the indwelling of Christ, for the
stamp of His image upon my soul, and for the harmony of every
desire, and thought, and feeling, with His holy will, and divine
glory; and there comes a "peace that passeth all understanding," a
rest of the soul from fear, and anxiety--a sinking into God,--and
now and then greater or less ecstacies of joy. I think we mistake
when we make what is usually termed joy, the end of prayer, or of
desire. I believe that even heaviness, and especially when
superinduced by bodily disease, is not only consistent with a high
state of grace, but even instrumental in its increase--especially
of faith; the faith which realizes things invisible, as visible,
and things to come, as things present.
I should like to read the biographies of which you speak,
especially that of Rev. Dr. Marsh, but my time is insufficient to
read what I have to read for my historical purposes. After all,
biographies are very much what the biographers choose to make of
their heroes. The writings of the Holy Apostles are the simple and
true standard of Christian experience, practice and privilege, and
help us also from sinking into despondency by the illustrations
they give of human imperfections and infirmities, and directing us
so plainly to the source of all strength and supply, as well as to
the "God of all consolation." We will talk more of these things
when I see you.
Rev. John Ryerson, in his letter of February 24th, said:--
I never pray for joy in religion; to pray or seek for such a thing
would be to begin at the wrong end; but truly pious persons might
have joy as the fruit of a real experience, as growing out of a
life "hid with Christ in God," joy in believing, joy in the Holy
Ghost--but what I do offer my poor prayers for, is to know my sins
forgiven, my acceptance with God; that I have a lot among the
sanctified, that I have peace with God, through our Lord Jesus
Christ. If I had an abiding evidence of such an experience, it
would produce more or less joy. Surely the Bible is the best book;
it is "The Book;" but still he may find many blessed illustrations
of its truths, of its morality, its spirituality, in the experience
and lives, not only of saints of ancient days, but many of modern
times. Rev. Dr. Marsh was one of these. He was a man of great
learning, and extensive reading, but he loved the Bible infinitely,
and above all books, read it (I was going to say) almost
continually, and died with the New Testament in his hand. I try to
read God's blessed Word. I am reading the Bible through by
course--five or ten chapters every day in the Old Testament, and
two or so in the New, besides on my knees, I read all the Psalms
through every month. But what does this amount to? Nothing, so long
as I am not saved from pride, irritability, selfishness, etc.,
within; the workings of which, more or less, I daily feel. This
greatly troubles and distresses me; besides the remembrance of my
sins of unfaithfulness, wanderings, backslidings, is grievous to
me, and sometimes a burthen too heavy to be borne. The temptations,
trials, sorrows, of true saints sometimes shed a little light upon
my dulness, and give some strength to my weak and wavering faith.
On the 28th of February, Dr. Ryerson replied:--
I thank you for your kind and interesting letter. I did not suppose
you had made joy an object or subject of prayer; but from the tone
of your letter, it appeared to me that the absence of joy, or
"heaviness of spirit," had led you to judge of your state too
unfavourably. I quite agree with the views you express on the
subject. I have not seen Rev. Dr. Marsh's life: but I can conceive
him quite worthy of what is written, and of the opinion you express
respecting him. During my attendance at the Wesleyan Conference in
Birmingham, in 1836, my host invited Rev. Dr. (then Mr.) Marsh,
Rev. John Angell James, and several other clergymen and persons of
note, to meet me. I was very much struck with Mr. Marsh's
appearance, and the more so from a circumstance mentioned to me by
the hostess. A short time before that, a publisher there wished to
get a portrait of the Apostle St. John, to have it engraved as an
illustration in some book or publication he was issuing; and Mr.
Marsh was solicited to sit for the artist, as his countenance was
supposed to reflect more strongly the purity and loveliness of the
Apostle than any ideal that could be found. In consequence of this
circumstance, I was told that Mr. Marsh was often called St. John
the Apostle, from his Apostolic character and truly lovely manner
and countenance. His praise was then in every mouth, as I was told,
among the Dissenters as well as members of the Church of England.
(See page 163.)
After Dr. Ryerson became President of the General Conference in 1874, he
was gratified at the many kind things said to him by his brethren and
other friends. None were more kind and loving than those contained in a
letter from his friend, Rev. Dr. Punshon, who speaks of his own
elevation to the Presidency of the British Conference. Dr. Punshon, in
his letter to Dr. Ryerson of the 19th of February, said:--
First of all, let me congratulate you most heartily upon your
well-merited elevation to the Presidency of the General Conference.
They did themselves honour, and you will do them honour in their
choice. My elevation here was unexpected, but very grateful,
although the responsibility and work which it entails make me long
for July, when, if God wills, I shall doff my regalia. I hope most
earnestly to have the pleasure of seeing the Canadian
representatives at the next Conference in Sheffield. I have already
spoken for a very sweet home for you. It will be a great
gratification to see you once again, and to enjoy sweet converse,
with you as of old. Mr. Gervase Smith and I are to be with
relatives just across the road. So please do not delay your coming
for another year, as no one knows to what place the Conference will
be carried. It seems almost improper to talk about it when we
remember the heavy loss into which, as into an inheritance, we have
all come by the death of dear Wiseman. You would, I am sure, be
very grieved to hear of it. It fell on all here like a
thunder-clap. But the Lord is good, and knows what is best for us
all. There is a sorrowfully-occasioned vacancy at the Mission
House, which the friends say I must fill, but I cannot tell how it
will go, and of course, all is premature as yet. The Lord will
direct us as He has always done.
By the way, I have been set seriously thinking by Mr. Wiseman's
removal, whether I had sufficiently secured, by the document I gave
to Rev. Dr. Rice, that the principal of the Testimonial Fund, given
to me on leaving Canada, should, at my death, pass to the Canadian
Conference for the benefit of the worn-out ministers and widows. I
found on enquiry that it was not so secured as to be beyond doubt.
I have been in consultation with my solicitor as to the best method
of effecting this. I have therefore given directions for a deed of
trust to be prepared, which will state that I hold this money in
trust for the "Superannuated Minister's Fund of the Methodist
Church of Canada." I advise you of this as the honoured President
of the General Conference. I was, on the whole, satisfied with the
proceedings of the General Conference. I felt a little pang at the
hasty change of name. It was inevitable to do it, at the same time,
but it showed rather a leaping desire of freedom, and a wish to get
as far as possible from the old mother at once, which might have,
perhaps, been spared. This was not, I dare say, present to all who
desired the change. I admit all the force of your able reasoning
for the present--but twenty years hence the General Conference will
meet as strangers, with no community of interest, and I dread the
result, without a visible bond of cohesion.
Writing to me from Port Rowan in September, 1875, Dr. Ryerson said:--My
friends here think that I am stronger, walk better, and appear more
active than when I was last in this village. This is a common remark to
me, and for which I cannot feel sufficiently thankful to my Heavenly
Father. He is my portion; my all is His; and I feel that He is all and
in all to me--my joy as well as my strength.
Writing from his Long Point cottage to me on the 13th April, 1876, Dr.
Ryerson said:--Next Sunday will be Easter Sunday--the 51st anniversary
of my ministerial life, and what a life! Much to lament over; much to
humble; with many exposures and hardships; full of various labours;
abounding in heavenly blessings.
* * * * *
Dr. Ryerson was appointed as a representative of the Conferences of
British America to the General Conference of the United States in 1876.
Being unable to go, he addressed a letter to Bishop Simpson, from which
I take these extracts:--
I regret that I have been unable to fulfil my last public mission in
behalf of our Canadian Church to the Conference of British Methodism to
go to Baltimore to look upon your General Conference, and bid a last
earthly farewell to brethren whom I esteem and love so much--with whom I
was first brought into church membership, by whose Bishop Hedding I was
ordained both deacon and elder, and with whom I feel myself as much one
this day as I did half a century ago.
My first representative mission was in 1828, to visit and urge upon the
late Rev. Dr. Wilbur Fisk, of Wilbraham, Conn., the request of our
Conference to become our first bishop; and had he consented, or Dr.
Bangs afterwards, I believe it would have been a great blessing to
Methodism in Canada; but an overruling Providence ordered it otherwise,
and the extension of the work of God, through our ministry and Church,
down to the present time, is one of the greatest marvels to ourselves
and to others.
For thirty-one years and upwards, by the annual permission of my
Conference, I have administered the governmental system of public
instruction in this country; but the Government and Legislature have at
length acceded to my request to retire, and have done so without
reducing my official allowance; and now, in the seventy-fourth year of
my age, and fifty-second of my ministry, I am enabled, in the enjoyment
of good health, to go in and out, as aforetime, among my brethren, with
a brightening hope and increasing desire of soon being permitted to
"depart and be with Christ, which is far better," and where I feel sure
of joyously meeting thousands of fellow-ministers and labourers whom I
have known in the flesh on both sides of the Atlantic.
* * * * *
In May, 1876, Dr. Ryerson went to England to consult works on the
history of America in the British Museum Library. Writing to me from
near Leeds, just after his arrival, he says:--I was most cordially
received by Rev. Gervase Smith, and Dr. Punshon. The latter insisted
upon my being his guest first, as he had the strongest claim upon me. I
was his guest for eight days--and they were very agreeable days to me.
When I came here I was enthusiastically received by the Methodist New
Connexion Conference--a most cultured, gentlemanly, and respectable body
of men--their whole body being not numerous, but select.
I have thus far enjoyed my visit to this country most thoroughly--free
from care, and surrounded by most kind friends and agreeable
associations.
Writing to me from London, on the 17th July, he says:--I experienced a
great pleasure in my visit to Ireland, in becoming personally acquainted
with many of the Irish preachers, and in witnessing their conferential
proceedings. They are a faithful, hard-working body of men; they have
hard work to do, and their success the last year has been in advance of
that of preceding years.
I have seen Mr. Longman in regard to publishing my history. He was very
cordial and complimentary. I explained to him in brief the origin and
scope of what I had written, and of what I intended to write, and gave
him the table of contents of the first fifteen chapters--to the end of
the reign of Elizabeth, and the 13th chapter on the "Protestantism of
Queen Elizabeth," as published in the _Canadian Methodist Magazine_.
I was at the Houses of Lords and Commons a part of one afternoon and
evening. Sir Stafford Northcote, hearing that I was there, came to me
under the Speaker's gallery, and conversed with me nearly half an hour.
Other members also spoke to me. Earl Grey recognized me in the street,
and stopped and conversed with me.
I go to the Wesleyan Conference at Nottingham next Monday, and may
probably remain there ten days. I attended four services yesterday--at 8
a.m. (communion), at the parish Church of St. James, near Piccadilly,
where I was lodging; at the Temple at 11 a.m., a grand service,
delightful music, and an excellent sermon from Rev. C. J. Vaughan,
Master of the Temple; at 3 p.m. at Westminster Abbey--prayers read by
the Dean of Lichfield, and sermon by the Dean of Richmond on the words,
"Where your treasure is, there will your heart be also,"--a plain,
practical sermon, but the music, etc., inferior to that of the Temple.
In the evening I went to one of the most fashionable and advanced
Ritualistic Churches; poor singing, poorer preaching. Everything
pretentious, and certainly not attractive to me. In all three churches,
the hymns and tunes were old Methodist hymns and tunes, and well sung.
Dr. Ryerson did go to the British Conference as President and
Representative of the General Conference of Canada. The London
_Methodist Recorder_, speaking of his presence there, said:--Rev. Dr.
Punshon, the President, gave a brief and discriminating introduction to
Dr. Ryerson. The Doctor's personal appearance is very prepossessing; he
is grey-haired; of a fine, healthy complexion; has a gentle eye; and a
full, emotional voice. He dresses in the style of the "fine old English
gentleman," with a refreshing display of "linen clean and white." One
scarcely knows which most to admire--the simplicity of the man, his
well-furnished intellect, or his practical good sense; which most to
wonder at, the real progress which has been made in this one lifetime,
or the boundless possibilities of the future to which that progress
leads. It is something to have rocked the cradle of an empire-Church.
The audience was several times deeply moved by the Doctor's allusions to
the memories of the past, but most of all when, in the conclusion of his
address, he said "farewell," with a tearful expression of his own
rejoicing "in the hope of eternal life."
Rev. D. Savage, who was also Representative of the General Conference,
in a private note, said:--It is a grand Conference, distinguished by
remarkable manifestations of Divine power. The reports which will come
to you through the press cannot do justice to the influence that is
abroad. Dr. Ryerson's address was eloquent and impressive. The fact that
Dr. Ryerson was representative to the British Conference in 1833, and
that after the lapse of forty-three years, he has returned in the same
capacity, is in itself a most extraordinary event. The words in which
Dr. Punshon introduced Dr. Ryerson were eloquent and kindly.
The following letters were addressed to me by Dr. Ryerson while in
London, at the dates mentioned:--
_September 19th._--My lodgings are just opposite the British Museum, the
library of which I find of great use to me. I am absorbed in revising
and completing my work. Whether it will be a success or not, is one of
the uncertainties of the future.
I am glad to be here, instead of being in Toronto, during the ensuing
session of our Legislature, as I do not wish to be where any party can
call upon me, or use my name in respect to any measure that the
Government may think proper to bring forward on the subject of
education.
_November 14th._--The Earl of Dufferin enclosed flattering letters of
introduction to the Earl of Carnarvon and the Dean of Westminster, both
of whom have received me with great cordiality. The Earl of Carnarvon
shook hands with me two or three times, and said how glad he was to see
and shake hands with an old Canadian, whose services to his country were
spoken of as Lord Dufferin has spoken of mine. His Lordship told me he
would give instructions, whenever I desired, to have every possible
facility and aid given me in the Record Office in referring to any
documents or papers there, relating to the history or affairs of the
British Colonies.
I submitted to the Dean of Westminster the last (14th), recapitulating
summary chapter on the "Relations of Early English Puritanism to
Protestant Unity and Religious Liberty," for his judgment. I last
evening received a kind note from him (returning the manuscript), in
which he says: "I have gone through the summary of the reign of
Elizabeth, and find it full of just views, rendered the more attractive
by the impartiality of judgment, and by the exact knowledge of the
subject which pervades the chapter." The Dean kindly suggests the use of
some neutral word, such as "Roman Catholics" for "Papists," and not to
use the words "Ritualists," "Ritualism," as all these words are terms of
reproach, and the use of them may lay me open to the charge of
partizanship. I shall adopt his suggestions.
_December 7th._--With your letter I received day before yesterday a long
letter from my brother John--a real news letter with some sparklings of
wit. He mentions that during each of two preceding Sabbaths he had
attended a quarterly meeting on neighbouring circuits, and on each day
he had conducted a love-feast, preached at half-past ten in the morning,
administered the Lord's Supper (one to-day to 150 alone) and preached
again at half-past six in the evening, riding several miles in the
afternoon between each appointment, which, I think, as he says, "is
pretty well for an old man in his seventy-seventh year."
I am wonderfully well--having no pain of back, or limb, or head. I am
careful of my living and exercise; but during the last three years I
have worked fifteen hours each day. I have every possible facility of
books, retirement, and an amanuensis; and am doing what I would have to
do under less favourable circumstances on my return to Canada. It is
singular that your History and other books are almost the only ones
which have been furnished to the British Museum, and are found on its
catalogue. I have read every word of your essay on a Central University
and think it admirable, exhibiting much research, acute observation, and
profound thought.
_December 14th._--My present purpose is to finish and publish my purely
Canadian History of the United Empire Loyalists as soon as possible, and
leave the other to my executors--yourself and others--to do as you
please. I am assured that my two volumes on the Puritans in Old and New
England will raise a storm on both sides of the Atlantic. I wish to
have nothing more to do with controversy, and I do not wish to die in a
storm. I am now popular with all parties. I am sure I am right and just
on the character and relation of the Puritans and their opponents; but I
am strongly inclined to believe what I have written in regard to them
(for I am done with them) will perhaps take better if left as a legacy,
than if now put forth by myself. My reputation, and the pleasure to my
country, will chiefly depend upon my United Empire Canadian History, and
to that my all of strength and time is now directed until I finish it.
_December 26th._--I heard Dean Stanley preach in Westminster Abbey, on
Christmas Day. His sermon was able and eloquent, but disappointed me by
the absence of all mention of the guilt and depravity of man, and the
"good tidings," including an atonement for the pardon of guilt, and the
power of the Holy Spirit to regenerate and sanctify. He is a very
amiable man, and looks at the good side of everything. He enumerated ten
blessings brought to man by the Incarnation of Christ, as distinguished
from all the advantages of science and philosophy; but I felt, if I had
not received through Christ the two blessings he omitted to mention, I
should never have received the blessings, to which I owe my all, of
renewal, pardon, strength and comfort and hope, in the religion of our
Lord Jesus Christ.
* * * * *
The award to the Ontario Educational Collection at the Centennial
Exhibition, at Philadelphia, was made during Dr. Ryerson's absence in
England. Being a government exhibit, no medal could be awarded for it. A
diploma was, however, granted by the Centennial Commission, which was
declared to be--
For a quite complete and admirably arranged Exhibition,
illustrating the Ontario system of Education and its excellent
results; also for the efficiency of an administration which has
gained for the Ontario Department a most honourable distinction
among Government Educational agencies.
Such was the gratifying tribute which a number of eminent American
educationists paid to the Ontario system of Education, and through it to
its distinguished founder, in estimating the results of his labours as
illustrated at the Centennial Exhibition.
Having communicated this to Dr. Ryerson, in England, he replied:--I
cannot sufficiently express my gratitude with you to our Heavenly
Father, for His abounding care and goodness in connection with the
Education Department, in prospering us in our past work, and in
sustaining us during all these years against attacks and adversaries on
all sides. It is a singular and gratifying fact, that the Centennial
Exhibition at Philadelphia should afford us, at this juncture (the year
of my retiring from office), the best of all possible opportunities, to
exhibit the fruits (at least in miniature) of our past policy and
labours. To you, with myself, equally belongs the credit, as I am sure
the pleasure and gratitude, of these signal displays of the Divine
goodness to us.
During his stay in England Dr. Ryerson received a note from Rev. Dr.
Jobson, dated January 25th, 1877, in which he said:--
It will afford me lasting pleasure to think that I have said or
done anything towards augmenting your enjoyment on what you have
been pleased to term your 'last visit to England.' I remember with
pleasure your former visits, and our associations together with
Princes in our Israel who have passed to "the better country--even
a heavenly." And, for more than a quarter of a century, I have
traced your course as an acknowledged leader and counsellor for
Methodism in Canada. The result of this has been to produce within
me deep reverential esteem and affection towards you, which have
been only slightly expressed by such attention and acts that you
are pleased to acknowledge. My best wishes will accompany you on
your return to Canada; and I am sure that I express the feeling of
all my ministerial friends when I say that your appearance among us
at our late Conference in Nottingham heightened its interests with
us and that your utterances in it render it joyously memorable to
us.
[Illustration]
[Illustration]
CHAPTER LXV.
1877-1882.
Closing Years of Dr. Ryerson's Life-Labours.
After Dr. Ryerson's return from England, he devoted some time to the
final revision of his principal work, in two volumes: _The United Empire
Loyalists of America_, and to two additional volumes on the Puritans of
Old and New England. These works cost him a good deal of arduous labour,
but their preparation was in many respects a source of pleasure to him,
and of agreeable occupation. After their completion, he lived in quiet
retirement at his residence, No. 171 Victoria-street, Toronto. His pen
was soon again employed in writing a series of essays on Canadian
Methodism for the _Canadian Methodist Magazine_, which were afterwards
re-published in book form. Immediately after his return from England,
his brother John addressed him the following letter on the 23rd March,
1877:--
I heartily congratulate you on your safe arrival in your native
land, and also that in health and strength you are spared to see
your seventy-fourth birthday. As age advances time seems to fly
more and more rapidly; and however it may be with others, certainly
we are to the "margin come," and how important it is that we live
in readiness, and in continual preparation for our departure.
[Illustration: Dr. Ryerson's Private Residence and Study (in the rear
building), 171 Victoria St., Toronto.]
On the 7th May, 1877, Dr. Ryerson received a letter from his brother
John urging him to commence a proposed series of essays on Canadian
Methodism. He says:--
I am glad that you think of writing a review of Church matters, and
that there are so many leading ministers who think you ought to do
so. The more I think and pray about the matter, the more I am
satisfied that is a path of duty opened up to you, the pursuit of
which will be a great blessing to the Church and the country in
coming time. The matters referred to and somewhat explained and
exhibited, with other things which doubtless will occur to you,
might be:--1. Missionary Society; 2. Ryanism; 3. Canadian
Conference formed; 4. Clergy reserve land matter; 5. _Christian
Guardian_ commenced; 6. Church Land and Marriage Bill; 7. Victoria
College; 8. Book-Room; 9. Centenary celebration and fund; 10. Union
with the British Conference; 11. Hudson Bay mission; 12. Disruption
with British Conference; 13. Re-union; 14. Superannuated ministers;
Contingents; Chapel Relief, and Childrens' Funds; 15. Remarkable
camp-meetings--Beaver Dams, some one hundred and fifty professed
conversion; seventy or eighty joined the Church. Ancaster Circuit:
Peter Jones converted. Yongestreet Circuit: Mrs. Taylor converted
under a sermon preached by Wm. Hay. Bay Circuit: Peter Jacobs, and
many other Indians saved. Hamilton, back of Cobourg, held in time
of Conference--Bishop George presiding; when and where the Rice and
Mud Lake bands were all converted; a nation born in a day! 16. The
first protracted meeting; held at the twenty-mile camp, by Storey
and E. Evans, and Ryerson, P. E.--no previous arrangement, between
two hundred and three hundred professed religion, the wonderful
work spreading through most of the Niagara district.
In a letter to me dated Guelph, 9th June, 1877, Dr. Ryerson said:--I
came here yesterday forenoon, and was most respectfully and cordially
received by the Conference. In the course of the day, Rev. J. A.
Williams, seconded by Rev. E. B. Ryckman, moved that I be requested to
prepare a history of the principal epochs of our Church, etc. The
resolution, with many kind and complimentary remarks, was unanimously
passed by a standing vote. I assented, and am now committed to the work,
and will lose no time in commencing--dividing my time between it and my
history, which I hope to complete in a few months. I hope before the
next General Conference to complete what this Conference has requested,
and what, from what I hear, will be repeated by other Conferences. As I
am endeavouring to do some justice to the founders of our country and
its institutions, I hope to do the same for the Fathers of our Church
and its institutions. I spoke last night at the reception of young men,
and my remarks were very favourably received.
In a letter to me from Whitby, dated 27th June, Dr. Ryerson
said:--To-day I had the great pleasure of laying the foundation stone of
an important addition to the Methodist Ladies' College at Whitby. Mr.
Holden kindly intimated that the trustees had decided to name the new
structure "Ryerson Hall." My remarks were few, and related chiefly to
the importance of female education. I referred to the great attention
which was now given to the education of women, on both sides of the
Atlantic. There were different theories, I said, as to how it should be
done, but all were agreed that women should be educated. Even the
English Universities were helping in the work. I did not believe, I
said, in Colleges for both ladies and gentlemen. They should be
separate. It was of vital necessity that the mothers of our land should
be educated. Woman made the home, and home made the man. If the
daughters were educated, the sons would not remain ignorant. Both
patriotism and piety should make people encourage these institutions,
which would be the pride of future generations.
* * * * *
On the 30th July Dr. Ryerson received an affecting letter from his
brother John, enclosing to him the manuscript of his "Reminiscences of
Methodism," during his long and active life. In regard to them, he
said:--
What I have written is entirely from memory. In speaking about many
things I had to do with, of course I had to speak a good deal about
myself, but I was writing for the public, not for you; and if any
of the facts I have referred to will be of any use to you in your
Essays, I shall be glad. That use, however, can be made without
mentioning my name, which I have dreaded to see in print anywhere.
By prayer, reading, reflection, and God's grace helping a poor
worm, I have so far overcome the natural pride of my evil nature,
as to be content, and sometimes happy, in my position of
nothingness. My circumstances give strength to these feelings of
contentment. My age and growing weakness show me that I am come
very near the margin of my poor life, and unfavourable symptoms,
from time to time, strongly remind me that, with me at least, "in
the midst of life, we are in death." I do not, however, deprecate,
nor pray deliverance from, sudden death. My prayer is that of
Charles Wesley's:--
"In age and feebleness extreme,
Who can a sinful worm redeem?
Jesus, my only help Thou art,
Strength of my failing, flesh and heart;
Oh I might I catch one smile from Thee
And drop into eternity."
Several years ago I read a poem, or part of one, written in old age
by the celebrated English poetess, Mrs. Barbauld, whose sweet words
I very frequently repeat. She says:--
"Life, we have been long together,
Through pleasant and through cloudy weather,
'Tis hard to part when friends are dear,
Perhaps 'twill cost a sigh, or tear.
Then steal away, give little warning,
Choose thine own time;
Say not 'good night,' but in some happier clime,
Bid me 'good morning.'"
These words were almost prophetic, for within three months after they
were written, Dr. Ryerson left Toronto for Simcoe to attend at the dying
bed of his beloved brother. Immediately after his death, Dr. Ryerson
wrote to me and said:--Nothing could have been more satisfactory than
the last days of my dear brother; and it was a great comfort to him and
all the family that I was with him for ten days before his departure.
His responses to prayer were very hearty. He seemed to dwell in a higher
region. He was so nervously sensitive that he could not only not
converse, but could hardly bear being talked to. On one occasion he
said, "Egerton, don't talk to me, but kiss me." One day I asked him if I
should unite with him in prayer; he answered (and this was the longest
sentence during the ten days I was with him) with some warmth, "Egerton,
why do you ask me that? You know I always want you to pray with me." One
day I repeated, or began to repeat, the fifth verse of the thirty-first
Psalm, "Into Thy hands I commit my spirit: Thou hast redeemed me, O
Lord God of truth." He said "I have uttered these words many times. I
have not a doubt upon my mind." Another day he seemed to be very happy
while we united in prayer, and after responding "Amen and Amen!" he
added, "Praise the Lord."
* * * * *
As the General Conference of September, 1878, approached, Dr. Ryerson
was anxiously hoping that the Conference would be favoured with the
presence of an able counsellor and friend, Rev. Dr. Punshon. Greatly to
his regret, he received a note from Dr. Punshon, saying:--
You will know by this time that I am not coming to Canada this
year, but that Mr. Coley is appointed Representative to your
General Conference. Among other things, Dr. Punshon said:--You will
see that our Conference has been a solemn one. A minister and a lay
representative were smitten with death on the premises, and died
before they could be removed. These shocks did not help my already
shaken nerves to regain their tone. Otherwise the Conference was a
memorable success. I shall have some of my heart with you in
Montreal. I trust you will have a blessed Conference, and will be
able to get some solution of the transfer question, and some
approach to a scheme for connexional superintendency on a broad,
practical basis, thus strengthening the two weak places of your
present system.
On the 31st August, 1878, Rev. Dr. Wood addressed the following note to
Dr. Ryerson:--
Thirty-one years ago, when appointed by the British Conference to
the office of General Superintendent of Missions in the Canada
Conference, I forwarded to your address some testimonials which my
brethren presented to me when giving up the chair of the New
Brunswick District. I now enclose to you the resignation of my
office as one of the General Secretaries of the Missionary Society,
which you can either present personally, or hand over to the
President. I have very pleasant recollections of the past
associations, especially in the early years of the Union of 1847,
to which you gave invaluable assistance in the working out of its
principles, which have resulted in the present wonderful
enlargement of the Methodist Church.
As was his custom, Rev. Dr. Punshon sent to Dr. Ryerson a kind note at
the New Year of 1879. Speaking of Methodist affairs in England he
says:--
The new year has dawned gloomily enough with us in England. I never
knew such protracted commercial depression. In spite of all,
however, Church enterprises are projected, and we have started our
Connexional Thanksgiving Fund auspiciously, both so far as spirit
and money go. It is proposed to raise £200,000 at least, and some
are sanguine enough to think, if times mend, that a good deal more
will be raised. There never was a meeting in Methodism like the one
at City Road. It was an All-day meeting. The first hour was spent
in devotional exercises, and then the contributions flowed in
without pressure, ostentation, or shame. We are beginning the
Circuit Meetings next week. Our Brixton one is fixed for Monday
evening, but the cream of our subscriptions was announced at City
Road. Dr. Rigg makes a good President.
Writing to a friend in December, 1880, Dr. Ryerson said:--
You speak of being old. I feel myself to be an old man. It is more
labour for me to write one page now, than it used to be to write five
pages.... We shall soon follow those who have gone before. With you I am
waiting and endeavouring to be prepared for the change, and have no fear
of it, but often rejoice in the bright hopes beyond.
* * * * *
Again, writing to the same friend on the 9th of August, 1881, he said:--
My latest attack has reduced my strength (of which I had little to
spare) very much. My desire is likely soon to be accomplished--to depart
hence.
Writing to another friend on the 24th of July, 1881, Dr. Ryerson
said:--I have to-day written a letter of affectionate sympathy to Rev.
Dr. Punshon on the decease of his son John William. I trust that his
last days were his best days.
It has always been a source of thankfulness and gratification, that I
was able to show him some kind attentions during his last visit to
Canada.
I have been deeply concerned to read in this morning's newspaper that
Dr. Punshon himself was seriously ill. I trust and pray that the Church
and nation may not yet, nor for a long time to come, be deprived of his
eminent services.
I cannot tell how deeply we all sympathize with Dr. and Mrs. Punshon in
this great trial.
* * * * *
From the last (almost illegible) letter written by Dr. Ryerson, two
weeks before his death and dated 6th of February, 1882, I make the
following extracts. It was addressed to Rev. Hugh Johnston, B.D., of
Montreal, (now of Toronto).
I am helpless myself--have lost my hearing so that I cannot converse
without a tube. I have been confined to my room for five weeks by
congestion of the lungs, from which I have only partially recovered. I
have not been out of the house since last September, so that I can take
no part in Church affairs. But God has been with me--my strength and
comforter. I am beginning to revive, but have not yet been able to go
down stairs, or move, only creep about with the help of a cane. I do not
know whether you can read the scrawl I have written, but I cannot write
any better.
Yours most affectionately,
Monday, February 6th, 1882. E. Ryerson.
The concluding words of Dr. Ryerson's story of his life were:--
In 1878, I was elected for the third time Representative of the Canadian
to the British Conference. After the fulfilment of these functions, I
have retired from all active participation in public affairs, whether of
Church or State. I have finished, after twenty years' labour, my
"History of the Loyalists of America and their Times." I have finished
the "Story of my Life"--imperfect and fragmentary as it is--leaving to
another pen anything that may be thought worthy of record of my last
days on earth, as well as any essential omissions in my earlier career.
* * * * *
At length the end of this great Canadian drew near; and the shadows at
the closing of life's eventide deepened and lengthened. I visited him
frequently, and always found him interested in whatever subject or topic
I might speak to him about. His congenial subject, however, was God's
providential goodness and overruling care throughout his whole life. In
his personal religious experience, he always spoke humbly of himself and
glowingly of the long-suffering tenderness of God's dealings towards
him. At no time was the character of his religious experience more
practical and suggestive than when laid aside from duty. Meditation on
the past was the subject of his thoughts.
To him God was a personal, living Father--a Brother born for
adversity--a Friend that sticketh closer than a brother--a great and
glorious Being, ever gracious, ever merciful. His trust in God was
child-like in its simplicity, firm and unwavering. His conversation
partook of it and was eminently realistic. He had no more doubt of God's
daily, hourly, loving care and superintending providence over him and
his than he had of any material fact with which he was familiar or which
was self-evident to him. He entirely realized that God was his ever
present friend. There seemed to be that close, intimate union--reverent
and humble as it was on his part--of man with God, and this gave a
living reality to religion in his life. To him the counsels, the
warnings, the promises; the encouragements of the Bible, were the voice
of God speaking to him personally--the very words came as living words
from the lips of God, "as a man speaketh to his friend." This was the
secret of his courage, whether it was in some crisis of conflict or
controversy, or in his little frail craft when crossing the lake, or
exposed to the storm.
To such a man death had no terrors--the heart had no fear. It was
cheering and comforting to listen to him (as I often did alone) and to
hear him speak of his near departure, as of one preparing for a
journey--ceasing from duty, in order to be ready to be conveyed away,
and then resuming it when the journey was over.
Thus he spoke of the time of his departure as at hand, and he was ready
for the messenger when He should call for him. He spoke of it
trustfully, hopefully, cheerfully, neither anxious nor fearful; and yet,
on the other hand, neither elated nor full of joy; but he knew in whom
He had trusted, and was persuaded, and was not afraid of evil tidings
either of the dark valley or the river of death. He knew Him whom he
believed, and was persuaded that He was able to keep that which he had
committed unto Him against that day.
Thus the end drew near, and with it, as the outward man began to fail,
the feeling of unwavering trust and confidence was deepened and
strengthened. At length hearing failed, and the senses one by one
partially ceased to perform their functions. Then to him were fully
realized the inspired words of Solomon: Desire failed, and the silver
cord was loosed, the golden bowl was broken, the pitcher broken at the
fountain, and the wheel at the cistern. Gradually the weary wheels of
life stood still, and at seven o'clock on Sunday morning, February 19th,
1882, in the presence of his loved ones and dear friends, gently and
peacefully the spirit of Egerton Ryerson took its flight to be forever
with the Lord!
Servant of God, well done!
Thy glorious warfare's past;
The battle's fought, the vict'ry won,
And thou art crowned at last;
Of all thy heart's desire
Triumphantly possessed;
Lodged by the sweet angelic choir
In thy Redeemer's breast.
In condescending love,
Thy ceaseless prayer He heard;
And bade thee suddenly remove
To this complete reward.
O happy, happy soul!
In ecstacies of praise,
Long as eternal ages roll,
Thou seest thy Saviour's face.
Redeemed from earth and pain,
Ah! when shall we ascend,
And all in Jesus' presence reign
With our translated friend?
CHAPTER LXVI.
1882.
The Funeral Ceremonies, Wednesday, Feb. 22nd, 1882.
Amid the tolling of bells, said the Toronto _Globe_, and the
lamentations of many thousands of people, the remains of the late Rev.
Dr. Ryerson were conveyed to their final earthly resting-place in Mount
Pleasant Cemetery, on Wednesday, the 22nd February. During the day large
numbers visited the sorrowing house, and gazed for the last time on the
features of the revered dead. As was to be expected, the larger number
were, like the venerable deceased, far into "the sere and yellow leaf,"
and many who had known him for a long time could scarce restrain the
unbidden tear as a flood of recollections surged up at the sight of the
still form cold in death.
No one present, probably, says the _Guardian_, ever saw so many
ministers at a funeral. Among the ministers and laymen were many
grey-haired veterans, who had watched with interest the whole brilliant
career of the departed.... All the Churches were well represented, both
by their ministers and prominent laymen. Bishop Sweatman and most of the
ministers of the Church of England were present. Nearly all the
Presbyterian, Baptist, and Congregational ministers of the city were
present; and even Archbishop Lynch and Father McCann, of the Roman
Catholic Church, showed their respect for the dead by their presence
during the day. Devotional service at the house was conducted by Rev. R.
Jones, of Cobourg, and Rev. J. G. Laird, of Collingwood.
The plate on the coffin bore the inscription:--"Egerton Ryerson born
21st March, 1803: died 19th February, 1882." The floral tributes
presented by sorrowing friends were from various places in Ontario, and
not a few came from Detroit and other American cities. The following may
be noted:--Wreath, with "Norfolk" in the centre, from Mr. E. Harris;
wreath, with "Rest" in the centre, from Dr. and Mrs. Hodgins; pillow,
with "Father," from Mrs. E. Harris; crown from the scholars of Ryerson
school; pillow, with "Grandpapa," from the grandchildren of the
deceased: wreath from Mr. C. H. Greene; cross, also scythe, with sheaf,
from Mr. and Mrs. George Harris, London; crown and cross from Rev. Dr.
and Mrs. Potts; anchor from W. E. and F. E. Hodgins; sheaf from George
S. Hodgins; lilies and other choice flowers inside the casket from Dr.
and Mrs. Hodgins.
Shortly before three o'clock the room was left to the members of the
family, after which the coffin was borne to the hearse by the following
pall-bearers, preceded by the Rev. Dr. Potts:--Dr. Hodgins, Rev. Dr.
Nelles, Dr. Aikins, Rev. Dr. Rose, Rev. R. Jones, Mr. J. Paterson.
Previous to the arrival of the hearse at the church, His Honour the
Lieutenant-Governor, the Speaker of the House, members of the
Legislature, which had adjourned for the occasion, and the Ministerial
Association, were in the places assigned to them. The members of the
City Council and Board of Education were also present in a body. The
pupils of Ryerson and Dufferin Schools marched into the church in a
body, wearing mourning badges on their arms. There were representatives
of all conditions in society, and it might be said of all ages. The
lisping schoolboy who was free from the restraint imposed by the
presence of his master; and the aged man and woman tottering unsteadily
on the verge of the grave--all were hushed in the presence of death.
Everywhere within the building were the evidences of a great sorrow.
Crape was seen wherever the eye turned--surrounding the galleries,
fronting the platform, encircling the choir. But there was one spot
thrown into _alto relievo_ by the sombre drapery of woe. In front of the
pulpit, on a small table, were the exquisitely beautiful floral tributes
of friendship and affection, whispering of the beauty and glory of that
spring-time of the human race, when this "mortal shall have put on
immortality."
Cobourg and Victoria College were well represented; the Rev. T. W.
Jeffery and Wm. Kerr, Q.C., and others, being present; also the
following professors and students from Victoria College:--Rev. Dr.
Nelles, Prof. Burwash, Prof. Reynard, Prof. Bain, Mr. McHenry
(Collegiate Institute), and Dr. Jones. The students from the
College--one from each class--were Messrs. Stacey, Horning, Eldridge,
Brewster, and Crews. The Senate of Victoria University walked in a body
immediately after the carriages containing the mourners. Upon entering
the west aisle of the church, Rev. Dr. Potts commenced reading the
burial service, the vast audience standing. The pall-bearers having
deposited their charge in front of the pulpit, Rev. Mr. Cochran gave out
the 733rd hymn,
"Come, let us join our friends above,
Who have obtained the prize."
Rev. Dr. Rose offered prayer, after which Rev. Wm. Scott, of Montreal
Conference, read a portion of the 1st Cor. xv., commencing at the 20th
verse. The choir of fifty voices, led by the organist, Mr. Torrington,
sang an anthem--
"Brother, thou art gone before us"
Rev. Mr. Telfer, from England, gave out the 42nd hymn, which was
fervently sung by the congregation. The Rev. Dr. Potts then delivered
the following funeral address:--
My place of choice on this deeply sorrowful occasion would be in the
ranks of the mourners, for I feel like a son bereft of his father.
Gladly would I sit at the feet of aged ministers before me, and listen
to them speak of one they knew and loved so well. I venture to address a
few words to you, in fulfilment of the dying request of my reverend and
honoured father in the Gospel.
Regarding the well-known wishes of the departed, my words must be few
and simple. To-day, Methodism, in her laity and ministry mourns over the
death of her most illustrious minister and Church leader. To-day, many
in this house, and far beyond Toronto, lament the loss of an ardent and
true friend. To-day, Canada mourns the decease of one of her noblest
sons. This is not the time nor the place for mere eulogy; in the
presence of death and of God eulogy is unbecoming. We would glorify God
in the character and in the endowments of his servant and child.
We cannot, we should not, forget the greatness of the departed. His was
a many-sided greatness. Dr. Ryerson would have been great in any walk in
life. In law he would have been a Chief Justice. In statesmanship he
would have been a Prime Minister. He was a born leader of his fellows.
He was kingly in carriage and in character. The stamp of royal manhood
was impressed upon him physically, mentally, morally. We cannot forget
the distinguished positions occupied so worthily and so long by our
departed friend. He lived for his country, spending and being spent in
the educational and moral advancement of the people.
As a servant of Methodism, he was a missionary to the Indians of this
Province, an evangelist to the scattered settlers, and a pastor in this
city long, long ago. He was President of Victoria College, and never
ceased to love and support that institution of learning. For it he
solicited money in England and in this country, and to it he gave the
intellectual energy of his early manhood, as well as ranking in the
front place as a personal subscriber to its funds. He was the first
Editor of the _Christian Guardian_, the connexional organ of our branch
of Methodism.
As a servant of Canada, he was for over thirty years Chief
Superintendent of Education in this Province. His monument--more
enduring than brass--is the Public School system of Ontario. When the
history of this country comes to be written, the name, the imperishable
name of Egerton Ryerson shall shine in radiant lustre as one of the
greatest men produced in this land.
But it is not of these things Dr. Ryerson would have me speak if he
could direct my thoughts to-day. Rather would have me speak of him as a
sinner saved by grace, as a disciple of our Lord Jesus Christ. I knew
him well in his religious life. His experience was marked by scriptural
simplicity, and his conversation was eminently spiritual. Of all the
ministers of my acquaintance, none spoke with me so freely and so
frequently on purely religious subjects as the venerable Dr. Ryerson. He
gloried in the cross of Christ. He never wearied speaking of the
precious blood of the Lamb. He was one of the most helpful and
sympathetic hearers in the Metropolitan Church congregation. Rarely, in
my almost six years' pastorate, did he leave the church without entering
the vestry and saying a kindly, encouraging word.
The doctor belonged to a class of men rapidly passing away. Most of his
companions passed on before him. But few linger behind. Grand men they
were in Church and State. Canada owes them a debt of gratitude that she
can hardly ever pay. Let us revere the memory of those gone to their
rest and reward, and let us treat with loving reverence the few pioneers
who still linger to bless the land for which they have done so much. We
may have a higher average in these times, but we lack the heroic men who
stood out so conspicuously in the early history of Canada.
Dr. Ryerson was a Methodist, but not a narrow sectarian. He knew the
struggles of our Church in this country, and shared them; he witnessed,
with gratitude to God, the extension of Methodism from feeble beginnings
to its present influential position. He desired above all things that
our Church should retain the primitive simplicity of the olden time, and
yet march abreast of the age in the elements of a Christian
civilization.
At the first General Conference which met in this church, after the
Union, and after that eminently providential event, the introduction of
laymen into the highest Court of the Church--at that time, when the
representatives of both ministry and membership desired a man to preside
over the Methodist Church of Canada, to whom did they look? To the man
whom Methodism delighted to honour--Egerton Ryerson.
Dr. Ryerson was regarded by the congregation belonging to this church
with peculiar respect and affection. While he belonged to all Canada,
we, of the Metropolitan Church, claimed him as our own especial
possession. He was a trustee of the Church, and one of its most liberal
supporters; for its prosperity he ever prayed, and in its success he
ever rejoiced. It is hard to realize that we shall no longer see that
venerable form--that genial and intellectual countenance.
The life of Dr. Ryerson was long, whether you measure it by years or by
service--service to his God, to his fellow-men, and to his native land.
He was a shock of corn ripe for the heavenly garner. He was an heir,
having reached his majority, and made meet for the inheritance of the
saints in light, has gone to take possession of it. He was a pilgrim,
who after a lengthened pilgrimage has reached home. He was a Christian,
who with Paul could say, "For me to live is Christ, to die is gain." In
such an hour as this, what comfort could all the honours of man give to
the sorrowing family as compared with the thought that the one they
loved so dearly was a man in Christ and is now a glorified spirit before
the throne. Henceforth we must think of him and speak of him as the late
Dr. Ryerson, and to many of us this shall be difficult and painful. We
have been so accustomed to see and hear him, we have so long looked up
to him as one specially gifted to lead, that a sad feeling comes over
us, left as we are without the guidance of our beloved leader and father
in the Church. The memory of the just is blessed, and our memory of Dr.
Ryerson shall be precious, until we overtake him in the better country,
that is the heavenly. Until then let us not be slothful, but followers
of them who through faith and patience inherit the promises. Could he
speak to us to-day from the heights of the heavenly glory to which he
has just been admitted, he would say to this vast concourse of friends,
"Follow Christ; seek first the kingdom of God; serve your generation;
build up in your Dominion a nationality based on righteousness and
truth; be strict in your judgment upon yourselves, but be charitable in
your judgment of others; live that your end may be peace, and your
immortality eternal blessedness."
Dr. Potts concluded by reading the following extract from a letter
written by Dr. Ormiston, of New York, to Dr. Hodgins:--
Dear Dr. Ryerson, I mourn thee as a son for a father. Thou wert very
dear to me. I owe thee much. I loved as I esteemed thee. I have no one
left now to fill thy place in my heart and life. Through riches of
Divine grace I hope soon to meet thee again. My dear Brother
Hodgins--You and I knew our noble-hearted friend better than most, and
to know him was to love him. You have been longer and more intimately
associated with him in social life and earnest work than I was. But I
scarcely think that even you loved him more, and I feel as if I was
hardly even second to you in his regards. Let our tears fall together
to-day, and in each of our hearts let his memory live ever fresh and
fondly cherished.
Hymn 624, "Rock of Ages, cleft for me," was then sung, after which
prayer was offered and the benediction was pronounced by the Rev. J. G.
Laird, President of the Toronto Conference. A musical voluntary and the
"Dead March" concluded the impressive service.
The remains were then borne to Mount Pleasant Cemetery, where they were
afterwards interred.[150] The concluding portion of the burial service
was read by the Rev. Dr. Nelles.
On the following Sunday the funeral sermon was preached by Rev. Dr.
Nelles. The _Guardian_ said:--
The discourse of Dr. Nelles was a masterly and eloquent review of
the salient points in Dr. Ryerson's life and character. We have
rarely listened to a sermon with greater satisfaction, and never to
a funeral sermon so discriminating in its statements and
characterization. It was distinguished by a broad mental grasp of
the great lessons and facts of history, in the light of which all
personal and local events must be viewed, to be seen truly and
impartially. His appreciative recognition of the privileges of
religious equality which we possess in Canada, and of the prominent
part taken by Dr. Ryerson in obtaining them, was very suggestive
and felicitous. We rarely follow to the grave so eminent a man as
Dr. Ryerson; and we seldom have heard a discourse so fully equal to
a great occasion.
Tributes to Dr. Ryerson's Memory.
After Dr. Ryerson's death kind telegrams and letters of condolence were
received by the family from many sympathizing friends, among which was
one from the Marquis of Lorne, Governor-General. The following letter
was also received by Mrs. Ryerson from the Rev. William Arthur, M.A.,
dated London, England, April 10th, 1882:--
The news of your great bereavement, a bereavement which, though yours in
a special sense, is not yours alone, but is felt by multitudes as their
own, came at a moment when a return of an old affection of the eyes
made writing difficult, and I did not like to give you a mere line. From
my heart I do condole with you on the removal from your side of one who
was pleasant to look upon, even for strangers, and whose presence was
not only a natural delight, but a stay, and an honour. Not many women
are called to sustain the loss of such a husband. But on the other hand,
not many women in the day of their great loss have the legacy left to
them of such a memory, such a career, and such appreciation of whole
communities of the merits of that career. Very few have such a
combination of true religious consolation, of full hope and unclouded
faith, with the sense of comfort derived from general sympathy and
universal public respect. Dr. Ryerson was the servant of God, and the
Lord blessed him. He was the servant of the Church, and the Church loved
and revered him. He was the servant of his country, and his country
delighted to honour him, and will hold him in permanent and honourable
remembrance. To many friends on this side of the Atlantic, as well as on
his own, he was a rarely honoured and prized representative of long and
noble services to the cause of God, and to general society, services
rendered with commanding abilities and unflinching vigour. To you and to
the children the loss is far different to what it is to others. To you
and to them have the hearts of others turned with unaffected sympathy.
You have had many praying for you; many hoping that blessings will rest
upon the name of Ryerson, and that it will long be represented in every
Christian work, and every branch of public usefulness. With truly
affectionate regards, and condolences to Mr. and Mrs. Charles, believe
me, dear Mrs. Ryerson, yours with heartfelt sympathy,
Wm. Arthur.
The Lord Bishop of Manchester, who was in Canada as one of the Royal
Commissioners on Education, in concluding his report on our Canadian
Schools, said: "Such, in all its main features, is the school system of
Upper Canada. A system not perfect, but yet far in advance, as a system
of national education, of anything we can show at home. It is indeed
very remarkable to me that in a country, occupied in the greater part of
its area by a sparse and anything but wealthy population, whose
predominant characteristic is as far as possible removed from the spirit
of enterprise, an educational system so complete in its theory and so
capable of adaptation in practice should have been originally organized,
and have maintained in what, with all allowances, must still be called
successful operation for so long a period as twenty-five years. It shows
what can be accomplished by the energy, determination, and devotion of a
single earnest man. What national education in England owes to Sir J.
K. Shuttleworth, what education in New England owes to Horace Mann, that
debt education in Canada owes to Egerton Ryerson. He has been the object
of bitter abuse, of not a little misrepresentation; but he has not
swerved from his policy or from his fixed ideas. Through evil report and
good report he has found others to support him in the resolution, that
free education shall be placed within the reach of every Canadian parent
for every Canadian child."
In a letter addressed to Dr. Ryerson in 1875, the Bishop says:--I take
it very kindly in you that you remember an old acquaintance, and I have
read with interest your last report. I am glad to observe progress in
the old lines almost everywhere. I was flattered also to find that some
words of mine, written in 1865, are thought worthy of being quoted....
It is pleasant to find a public servant now in the thirty-second year of
his incumbency, still so hopeful and so vigorous. Few men have lived a
more useful or active life than you, and your highest reward must be to
look back upon what you have been permitted to achieve.
The Very Reverend Dean Grasett, in a letter to Dr. Hodgins, dated 9th
November, 1875, said:
I thank you very much for your kindness in presenting me with a complete
set of the _Journal of Education_ from the date of its commencement in
1848 to the present time.
You could not have given me a token of parting remembrance more
acceptable to me on various accounts; but chiefly shall I value it as a
memorial of the confidence and kindness I have so invariably experienced
from the Rev. Dr. Ryerson from the day I first took my seat with him at
a Council Board in 1846 to the time that I was released from further
attendance there this year. Similar acknowledgments I owe to yourself,
his coadjutor, in the great work of his life, and the editor of the
record of his labours, contained in these volumes.
I shall carry with me to the end of life the liveliest feelings of
respect for the public character and regard for the private worth of one
who has rendered to his country services which entitle him to her
lasting gratitude. My venerable friend has had from time to time many
cheering recognitions of his valuable public services from the Heads of
our Government, who were capable of appreciating them, as well as from
other quarters; but I think that in his case, as in others that are
familiar to us, it must be left to future generations adequately to
appreciate their value when they shall be reaping the full benefit of
them.
I esteem it an honour that I should have been associated with him in his
Council for so many years (30), and a privilege if I have been of the
least assistance in upholding his hands in performing a work, the credit
of which is exclusively his own.
* * * * *
The Rev. Dr. Withrow, in his "Memorials of Dr. Ryerson," (_Canadian
Methodist Magazine_, April, 1882,) said: No man ever passed away from
among us in Canada whose true greatness was so universally recognized as
that of Dr. Ryerson. He lived in the hearts of his countrymen, and
"Read his history in a nation's eyes."
Even envy and detraction could not lessen his grandeur nor tarnish the
lustre of his name.... Scarce an organ of public opinion in the country,
no matter what party or what interest it represented, has not laid its
wreath of praise on the tomb of this great Canadian. And far beyond his
own country his character was revered and his loss deplored.... From the
Roman Catholic Archbishop; from the Anglican Bishop, from many members
of the Church of England and other religious bodies, as well as of his
own Church; resolutions of the Board of the Bible Society, the Tract
Society, School Boards and Conventions, and Collegiate Institutes, all
bore witness to the fact that the sorrow for his death was not confined
to any party or denominational lines, but was keenly felt in other
churches as well as in that of which he was the most distinguished
minister.... Almost every Methodist journal in the United States has
also paid its tribute to his memory. We quote from the _North Western
Christian Advocate_, of Chicago, but one such tribute of loving
respect:--"We believe that Canada owes more to him than to any other
man, living or dead. In all his official relations to the public he was
true to his Church. Men like Wellington and Washington 'save their
countries,' but men like Ryerson make their countries worth saving. The
mean little soul flinches when its brethren rise in reputation and power
in the Church. The more exalted soul rejoices when the Church grows rich
in competent workers. The death of such a servant as Ryerson is a loss
to the world greater than when the average president or king passes
away. Thank God, the great Ruler lives, and He will continue the line of
prophets in modern Israel!"
Dr. Ryerson possessed in a marked degree the faculty of commanding the
confidence and winning the friendship of distinguished men of every
rank, of every political party and religious denomination. He possessed
the confidence and esteem of every Governor of Canada, from Lord
Sydenham to the Marquis of Lorne. No native Canadian ever had the
_entree_ to such distinguished society in Great Britain and in Europe
as he. He had personal relations with several of the leading British
statesmen. He enjoyed the personal friendship of the Bishop of
Manchester, the Dean of Westminster, the Archbishop of Canterbury, and
other distinguished divines of the Anglican and Dissenting Churches. He
was one of the very few Methodist preachers who have ever shared the
hospitalities of Lambeth Palace, for six hundred years the seat of the
Primates of England; and when Dean Stanley passed through Toronto, he
and Dean Grasett called together on Dr. Ryerson. When making his
educational tour in Europe....
Speaking of his personal worth, Dr. Withrow says:--A very good criterion
of a man's character is: How does he get on with his colleagues? Does
the familiarity of daily intercourse, year after year, increase or
lessen their esteem? Few men will bear this test as well as Dr. Ryerson.
The more one saw of him the more one loved him. Those who knew him best
loved him most. Dr. Hodgins, the Deputy Minister of Education, for
thirty-two years the intimate associate in educational work of Dr.
Ryerson, knowing more fully than any living man the whole scope of his
labours, sharing his anxieties and toils, tells us that in all those
years there never was an hour's interruption of perfect mutual trust and
sympathy. No son could have a stronger filial love for an honoured
father than had Dr. Hodgins for his late venerated Chief. It was his
privilege to minister to the latest hours of his revered friend, and it
is to him a labour of love to prepare for the press the posthumous story
of his life.
With all his catholicity of sentiment and charity of spirit, Dr. Ryerson
was a man of strong convictions, and he always had the courage of his
convictions as well. When it came to a question of principle he was as
rigid as iron. Then he planted himself on the solid ground of what he
believed to be right, and said, like Fitz James:
"Come one, come all! this rock shall fly,
From its firm base, as soon as I."
Dr. Ryerson's controversies were for great principles, not for personal
interests. Hence no rancour, no bitterness disturbed his relations with
his antagonists. Even his old and sturdy foe, Bishop Strachan, after his
controversy was over, became his personal friend....
Such benefactors of his kind and of his country, as Dr. Ryerson, deserve
to be held in lasting and grateful remembrance. His imperishable
monument, it is true, is the school system which he devised.
To future generations of Canadian youth the career of Dr. Ryerson shall
be an inspiration and encouragement. With early educational advantages
far inferior to those which he has brought within the reach of every boy
and girl in the land, what a noble life he lived, what grand results he
achieved! One grand secret of his success was his tireless industry. As
a boy he learned to work--to work hard--the best lesson any boy can
learn--and he worked to the end of his life. He could not spend an idle
hour. The rule of his life was "no day without a line," without
something attempted--something done.... Over a score of times he crossed
the Atlantic on official duties. He often turned night into day for
purposes of work and study; and on the night before making his famous
three-hours' speech on University Administration before the Committee of
the Legislature in 1860, he spent the whole night long in the study of
the documents and papers on the subject--to most men a poor preparation
for such a task.
But again we remark his moral greatness was his noblest trait--his
earnest piety, his child-like simplicity, his Christ-like charity, his
fidelity to duty, his unfaltering faith. Not his intellectual greatness,
not his lofty statesmanship, not his noble achievements are his truest
claim upon our love and veneration--but this--
"The _Christian_ is the highest style of man."
The Rev. Dr. Dewart, in the _Christian Guardian_, of February 22nd,
1882, says:--The simple announcement that Dr. Egerton Ryerson is dead,
will awaken sorrow and regret in many Canadian homes.... For several
years of his early life he faithfully bore all the hardships and
privations of the pioneer work of that day, being for a time missionary
to the Indians of the Credit Mission--a circumstance to which he often
referred with peculiar satisfaction. His keen and vigorous refutation of
the misrepresentations of the Methodists and other bodies by the then
dominant Church party, led by the late Bishop Strachan, revealed to his
own, and other Churches, his rare gifts as a powerful controversial
writer. From that time forward for many years, his pen was used with
powerful effect, in defence of equal religious rights and privileges for
all Churches.... Dr. Ryerson was longer and more prominently associated
with the interests of Methodism in Canada than any other minister of our
Church. His life covers and embraces all but the earliest portion of the
history of our Church in this country.
But it is his work as an educationist that has made him most widely
known, and upon which his fame most securely rests.... The office of
Chief Superintendent of Education for Upper Canada was not a new one;
but the vigorous personality of Dr. Ryerson lifted it into a prominence
and importance in public estimation that had never belonged to it
before. For thirty-two years he continued to discharge the duties of
this high office with a broad intelligence and rare executive ability,
which have for all time stamped his name and influence on the
educational system of his country. He was not a mere administrator,
acting under the orders of the Government of the day. He was the leader
of a great educational reform.... Changes of Government made no change
in his department. Such was the estimate which the Ontario Government
took of his public services that on his resignation, in 1876, his full
salary was continued till the time of his death, and after his death the
Legislature made a grant of $10,000 to his widow. It is not too much to
say that among the gifted men whom Canada delights to honour, not one
has left a more permanent impression for good on the future of our
country than Egerton Ryerson.
He was large-minded and liberal in his views on all subjects. Though
strong in his attachment to Methodism he was no sectarian, but cherished
the most liberal and kindly feeling toward all sincere Christians. He
was an able controvertialist, and in the heat of conflict dealt heavy
blows at his opponents; but when the battle was over he retained no
petty spite toward his late antagonists. His controversial pamphlets are
numerous, and mostly relate to current events with which he was in some
way associated. Though a man of war, from his youth engaging in many
conflicts, religious and political, Dr. Ryerson's last years were
eminently tranquil. He had outlived the bitterness of former times, and
in a sincere and honoured old age possessed in a high degree the respect
and good feeling of men of all parties. During these later years he
produced his most important contributions to literature, viz., his
"Loyalists of America," and "Chapters on the History of Canadian
Methodism." His Educational Reports are also valuable treasuries of
facts relating to public education.
During all the years of his public life he co-operated heartily with
every enterprise of his Church, and was always ready to preach at the
shortest notice for any of his brethren who required his help. In his
later years there was an increasing spirituality and unction observable
in his ministrations.
Though not exempt from the faults and failings of humanity--yet his wide
range of information--his broad and statesmanlike views--his intense
devotion to a great work--his patriotic interest in all public
questions--his wonderful personal energy and force of character--and his
long and intimate connection with Canadian Methodism--warrant us in
saying:
"He was a man, take him for all in all,
We shall not look upon his like again."
Rev. Dr. Douglas, in a letter to the _Guardian_, says: A great man and a
prince has fallen in our Israel! The last of the illustrious three who
bore the name of Ryerson has gone to enrich the heavens. Henceforth that
honoured name will be enshrined in the history of our land.
Egerton Ryerson's patriotic service to the State, in resisting the
introduction of feudal distinctions and ecclesiastical monopolies will
ensure to him enduring recognition, as one of Canada's noblest
benefactors. No statues of marble or of bronze need be raised to
perpetuate his memory. The academies and schools which his organizing
genius brought into existence, lifting up successive generations to the
dignity which education ever confers, will make that name immortal. For
nearly six decades he laid his great powers of intellect and heart on
the altar of service for Canadian Methodism--winning for her ministry
equality before the law, and for her people a status which allowed no
coign of vantage to a favoured class--vindicating her polity and
proclaiming her distinctive truth....
Now, when the sepulchre has received him, will not a grateful Church
arise and give a permanence to his name more lasting than marble, by the
founding of a Ryerson Chair of Philosophy with whatever is required to
augment the usefulness of the institution which his great manhood loved,
and for which he toiled with a life-lasting endeavour? Would that every
minister, who bows his head in sorrow for a fallen chieftain, might in
every circuit gather the piety, intelligence, and financial strength of
the Church together, and in this supreme hour of the Church's grief,
decree that before the spring-time shall come with its emerald robe
enamelled with flowers, adorning the resting-place of our honoured dead,
the name of Egerton Ryerson will be inwrought with our University, as an
abiding inspiration to the student-life that shall throng her halls
along the coming years.
* * * * *
The Methodist Ministers of Toronto, in a sketch of Dr. Ryerson's life
and character, written by Rev. W. S. Blackstock, say: To most of us,
from our early childhood, the name of Egerton Ryerson has been a
household word, and we learned to esteem and love him even before we
were capable of estimating his character, or the greatness of the
service which he was rendering to his own and coming generations; and
the knowledge of him which we have been permitted to acquire in our
riper years, has only tended to deepen the impressions of him which we
received in early days.
As the fearless and powerful champion of civil and religious liberty,
and of the equal rights of all classes of his countrymen, he is
associated in our memory with the patriotic and Christian struggles of a
past generation, which have resulted in securing to our beloved land as
large a measure of liberty as is enjoyed by any country under the sun.
In respect to the incomparable system of Public Instruction, to the
perfecting of which he devoted so many years of his active and laborious
life, and with which his name must ever be associated, we feel that he
has laboured and we have entered into his labours. We can hardly
conceive how either our country or our Church could have been what they
are to-day, but for his fidelity and the work which he accomplished.
The lively interest which he took in every patriotic, Christian, and
philanthropic movement, especially those which tended to increase the
influence and usefulness of his own Church--the zeal with which he
laboured for them, and the large-hearted, generous liberality with which
he contributed of his means for their support--awaken our gratitude and
thankfulness, and will be a perpetual inspiration in our efforts to
promote those objects which lay so near his heart, and to further the
interests of that cause which he served so well.
But standing, as we are to day, with bowed heads and stricken hearts,
beside the grave which has just closed upon the mortal remains of our
venerable departed brother, though we would not forget what he had done
for us, we prefer to think of what, by the grace of God, he was, than of
what by God's good Providence he was permitted to accomplish. We delight
to cherish the memory of his penitent and childlike faith in Christ--the
sinner's only Saviour and hope--and of those graces of the Holy Spirit
which gave so much beauty and sweetness to his character, and which were
more and more conspicuous in his declining years.
Though Dr. Ryerson was a man of positive views and devotedly attached to
his own Church, he was distinguished for his comprehensive charity, and
his genuine appreciation of great and good men from whom he differed
widely in opinion. His goodness no less than his greatness will serve to
keep his memory fresh among us, and the recollections of his virtue is
to us a powerful incentive to a fuller consecration to the service of
God.
The General Conference at its Session of 1882, passed the following
resolution:--
Whereas it has pleased Almighty God, in His divine wisdom, to call from
a life of faithful service in the Church of Christ on earth to his
everlasting reward in heaven our reverend and honoured father in the
Gospel, the Rev. Egerton Ryerson, D.D., LL.D., the first President of
the General Conference of the Methodist Church of Canada, this General
Conference desires to place upon record its deep feelings of gratitude
to God for His gift to the Methodist Church and to the people of this
land for so many years of a man so richly endowed with native gifts and
so largely adorned with the Christian graces and its profound sense of
the great loss the Church and country have sustained in his death. As
the devoted Christian missionary and pastor; as the faithful defender of
the rights and liberties of the people of this land against
ecclesiastical assumptions and civil disabilities; as the Editor for
many years of the _Christian Guardian_, the official organ of our Church
and the first religious journal in Canada; as the President of the
University of Victoria College, the oldest institution of higher
learning of Canadian Methodism; as the trusted representative of his
Church in the religious councils of Methodism in the old world and the
new; as the Superintendent for over thirty years of the education of his
native Province--a system which he almost created, and which he
developed to a state of proficiency unsurpassed by that of any country
in the world; as the wise counsellor in the union movement which led to
the organization of the Methodist Church of Canada; and as the
President-Administrator of its highest office during the first
quadrennium of its history, Dr. Ryerson has an imperishable claim upon
the love and gratitude especially of his own church, and also of the
entire community. We magnify the grace of God as manifested in him; we
revere his memory as that of a true patriot and devoted Christian; we
rejoice in his labours for the glory of God and the welfare of man; and
we deeply sympathize with his bereaved family, and pray that the
consolations of God may more and more abound in their souls to the end.
FOOTNOTES:
[150] This interment took place in May. The ceremony was a private one,
attended only by immediate relatives and intimate personal friends.
Among the former were the venerable doctor's aged eldest brother, Rev.
George Ryerson (91 years old) and Mrs. George Ryerson; the bereaved
widow, Mrs. Ryerson, Mr. Charles E. Ryerson, his two sons, and Mrs.
George Duggan. Among the latter were the Rev. Dr. Potts, Mrs. Potts, Dr.
Hodgins, and Mr. H. M. Wilkinson (son of Rev. H. Wilkinson), of the
Education Department, and two or three others. After lowering the coffin
into the grave, the Rev. Dr. Potts read a portion of the burial service,
committing the body to the earth in hope of a joyful resurrection at the
last day.
THE END.
INDEX.
BIOGRAPHICAL REFERENCES.
Aberdeen, Earl of, 160.
Adams, Rev. A. A., 130.
Adderly, Mr., M.P., 540.
Agnew, Sir A., 163.
Aikman, John, 32, 36.
Aikman, Miss Hannah, 86, 111, 112.
Alder, Rev. Dr. Robert, 109, 110, 114, 119, 143, 153, 155, 158, 166,
174, 206, 240, 241, 242, 243, 271, 280, 285, 320, 386, 390, 391, 392,
393, 394, 395, 397, 401, 402, 403, 404, 405.
Allan, Hon. William, 170.
Alley, Mr., 99.
Allison, Rev. C. R., 399.
Althorp, Lord, 123.
Anderson, Capt., 99.
Antonelli, Cardinal, 366, 367.
Antrobus, Colonel, 416.
Arago, M., 356, 358.
Archibald, Rev. G., 76.
Armstrong, Jas. R., 120.
Armstrong, Miss Mary, 120.
Arthur, Rev. Wm., 367, 556, 598.
Arthur, Sir George, 183, 188, 189, 193, 200, 224, 225, 230, 234, 239,
240, 241, 245, 246, 248, 249, 250, 251, 254, 260, 261, 263, 285, 320.
Atherton, Rev. Mr., 117.
Attwood, Thos., M.P., 123, 129.
Attwood, Rev. J. S., 154.
Asbury, Bishop, 408.
Ashburton, Lord, 160.
Ashley, Lord, 163.
Ashton, Michael, 272.
Atherton, Rev. Mr., 402.
Aylwin, Hon. T. C., 304.
Bagot, Sir Charles, 290, 301, 303, 304, 306, 312, 313, 324, 331, 333,
342, 345, 347, 350, 387, 389, 390, 393, 394, 398, 404, 550.
Bain, Prof., 594.
Bakewell, Rev. Mr., 117.
Baldwin, Dr. W. W., 79, 101, 310, 311.
Baldwin, Hon. Augustus, 170.
Baldwin, Hon. Robert, 127, 145, 170, 194, 264, 267, 287, 288, 303, 305,
308, 309, 313, 315, 317, 328, 332, 333, 336, 344, 346, 370, 371, 416,
417, 424, 425, 426, 433, 518, 525, 526, 550.
Bangs, Rev. Dr. Nathan, 32, 78, 88, 93, 115, 269, 277, 278, 418, 577.
Baring, Thomas, M.P., 160.
Barker, Dr., 127, 150.
Bathurst, Lord, 221, 440, 445, 446.
Beadle, Dr., 348.
Beardsley, Colonel, 185.
Beatty, Rev. J., 184, 228.
Beaumont, Rev. Dr., 402.
Beecham, Rev. Dr. John, 119, 159, 228, 390, 507.
Bell, Rev. Wm., 101, 212, 221.
Belton, Rev. S., 90.
Benson, Henry, 89.
Beresford, Rev. Mr., 354.
Bethune, Donald, 102.
Bethune, Bishop A. N., 77, 216, 292, 348, 380, 564, 565.
Betteridge, Rev. Wm., D.D., 95.
Bevitt, Rev. Thomas, 277.
Bexley, Lord, 116.
Bidwell, Hon. M. S., 68, 127, 138, 145, 184, 188, 189, 190, 191, 192,
193, 194, 195, 196, 197, 198, 231, 258, 288, 308, 309, 310, 328, 414,
416, 417, 418, 551, 567, 568.
Black, Rev. John, 176, 498.
Blackstock, Rev. W. S., 605.
Blainville, M. de, 358.
Blake, Hon. Chancellor, 418.
Bland, Rev. A. F., 557.
Blockman, Dr., 363.
Blomfield, Dr. (Bishop of London), 160.
Blusse, Mr., 354.
Bond, Dr. Thomas, 396.
Borland, Rev. J., 511, 512.
Bostwick, Col. John, 24.
Boswell, G. M., M.P.P., 182, 348.
Boulton, Mr., M.P.P., 229.
Bowers, Rev. John, 158.
Bridel, M., 359.
Brock, Rev. James, 275.
Brooking, Mr., 160.
Brough, Rev. C. C., 183.
Brougham, Lord, 123, 322.
Brouse, George, 89.
Brown, Hon. George, 554, 555.
Brown, Hon. James, 453.
Brunskill, Mr., 161.
Buchanan, Hon. Isaac, 197, 286, 331, 336, 346, 347, 350.
Buller, Sir Charles, 272, 307.
Bunting, Rev. Dr. Jabez, 117, 119, 143, 154, 158, 159, 160, 162, 228,
240, 273, 279, 280, 390, 398, 401, 402, 403, 420, 506, 507.
Burchel, Mr., 89.
Burke, Edmund, 220.
Burnet, Bishop, 322.
Burns, Rev. Dr. R. F., 557.
Burrows, Colonel, 517.
Burwash, Prof., 594.
Buxton, Mrs., 163.
Calvert, Mr., 542.
Cameron, Hon. Malcolm, 370, 423, 424, 426, 509, 514.
Cameron, James W., 76, 77.
Campbell, Rev. Prof., 381.
Campbell, Sir J., 165.
Campbell, John, M.P.P., 184, 192.
---- Sir Alexander, 192, 559.
Canterbury, Archbishop of, 602.
Carlisle, Bishop of, 542.
Carlisle, Dean of, 541, 542.
Carnarvon, Lord, 539, 579.
Carroll, Rev. Dr. John, 214, 270.
Cartier, Sir George, 559, 560, 561.
Cartwright, M.P.P., 213, 226, 229, 245, 246.
Cartwright, Thos., 133.
Case, Rev. Elder Wm., 56, 66, 68, 74, 77, 78, 79, 81, 87, 91, 92, 93,
176, 228, 243, 270, 274, 275, 277, 378, 385.
Cassidy, Henry, 149,191, 196.
Chalmers, Rev. Dr. Thomas, 215, 365.
Chapman, E. H., 160, 161.
Chester, Bishop of, 116.
Chichester, Lord, 541.
Clarendon, Lord, 499.
Cochran, Rev. Mr., 594.
Colborne, Sir John, 98, 102, 118, 126, 130, 155, 158, 161, 170, 171,
196, 222, 224, 232, 244, 260, 261, 263, 264, 386, 526.
Coley, Rev. Mr., 589.
Collard, Rev. Mr., 93.
Collins, F., 129.
Cook, Emile, 571.
Cork, Bishop of, 541.
Counter, John, 154.
Cowley, Lord, 360.
Crane, John, 73.
Cronyn, Bishop, 517.
Cubitt, Rev. Mr., 159.
Cull, Mr., 287.
Cumming, Rev. Dr., 508.
Daly, Sir Dominick, 333, 340, 351, 376.
Davidson, Alex., 133, 241.
---- Rev. J. O., 143, 175, 274.
Dawson, Dr. J. W., 453.
Dawson, Wm., 161.
Delille, M. Armand, 356, 358.
Delille, Mons. O., 358.
Densmore, Rev. Mr., 384.
Despretz, M., 358.
Derby, Earl of, 329, 330, 451, 452.
Derbyshire, Stewart, 307.
Dewart, Dr. E. H., 602.
Dixon, Rev. Dr. James, 400, 402, 405, 406, 562, 564.
Doolittle. Rev. Mr., 119.
Dorland, Mr., 538.
Douglas, Rev. Dr., 605.
Douse, Rev. John, 275.
Doxtadors, Mr., 78.
Draper, Hon. W. H., 50, 179, 181, 225, 228, 229, 231, 237, 261, 264,
267, 292, 301, 304, 305, 306, 313, 316, 325, 333, 334, 336, 337,
339, 342, 344, 550, 551.
Dufferin, Lord, 408, 409.
Dumas, Prof. 356.
Duncan, Mr. Joseph, 535.
Duncan, Prof. Thomas, 215.
Duncombe, Dr. Charles, 167, 168, 188, 190.
Dunjowski, 353, 365, 366, 367.
Dunkin, Christopher, 196, 197.
Dunn, Colonel, 197.
Dunn, Hon. J. H., 145, 166, 170, 180, 181, 197, 198, 325, 387.
Durbin, Dr. J. P., 115.
Durham, Lord, 196, 197, 225, 256, 257, 258, 259, 267, 272, 312,
339, 550.
Edwards, Mr. 117.
Egger, M., 358.
Elgin, Lord, 370, 405, 416, 419, 420, 451, 452, 514.
Ellice, Rt. Hon. Edward, 117, 160.
Elliott, Judge Wm., 552.
Ellis, Sir Henry, 419.
Elmsley, Hon. John, 170, 179.
Embury, Rev. Philip, 256.
Emory, Bishop, 384, 385.
Entwistle, Rev. Joseph, 116, 273.
Esten, Hon. Vice-Chancellor, 418.
Evans, Rev. Dr. Ephraim, 133, 153, 181, 237, 270, 275, 564.
Evans, Rev. James, 130, 131, 132, 153, 228, 407, 408, 409.
Exeter, Bishop of, 263.
Fallenberg, M. de, 364.
Farmer, Thomas, 159, 166, 256.
Farrar, Canon, 205.
Fawcett, Rev. Thomas, 275.
Ferguson, Rev. George, 340.
Ferrier, Hon. James, 490, 533.
Fisk, Rev. Dr. Wilbur, A.M., 88, 90, 115, 162, 577.
Fitzgibbon, Colonel, 177.
Fletcher, Silas, 178.
Flint, Hon. Billa, 336.
Fox, Charles James, 220.
Fuller, Bishop (Archdeacon of Niagara), 380.
Gage, James, 78.
Gale, Rev. A., 432.
Galt, John, 221.
Gamble, John W., 268.
Gamble, Clarke, Q. C., 567.
Gasparin, Count, 356, 358, 359, 360.
Geikie, Rev. Dr. Cunningham, 187.
Gibson, David, 178.
Gilchrist, Dr., 339.
Gilkison, Jasper J., 552.
Gillespie, A., Jun., 160.
Givens, Col., 44, 61, 63, 75.
---- Rev. Dr. Saltern, 77, 567.
Gladstone, Rt. Hon. W. E., 168, 272, 410, 411, 433, 452.
Glenelg, Lord, 154, 156, 158, 159, 160, 162, 165, 168, 169, 170, 178,
180, 182, 189, 190, 196, 197, 199, 224, 225, 226, 227, 228, 230,
235, 248, 250 252, 285, 459.
Goderich, Lord, 118, 126, 155, 156, 195, 526.
Goodrich, Rev. C. B., 275.
Goodson, Rev. George, 557.
Goodwin, Dean, (of Ely), 540.
Gourley, Robt., 185.
Gowan, Ogle R., 331.
Graham, Dr. James, 28.
Grampier, Dr., 355, 356, 360.
Grasett, Very Rev. Dean, 295, 297, 600, 602.
Gray, Hon. J. H., 453.
Green, Rev. Dr. Anson, 90, 111, 129, 134, 175, 176, 181, 203, 210, 228,
270, 277, 314, 383, 401, 501, 511.
Greenfield, Mr. 79.
Greig, William, 212.
Grey, Earl, 123, 405, 419, 451, 454, 455, 456, 457, 515, 578.
Grey, Sir George. 165, 168, 169, 189, 246.
Griffin, Smith, 29.
---- Rev. W. S., 29.
Griffin, Rev. Wm., Jun., 130.
Griffis E. C., 129, 241.
Grindrod, Rev. E., 120, 143, 147, 163.
Gurley, Rev. Mr., 279.
Guizot, M., 356.
Hagerman, Daniel, 189.
Hagerman, Mr. Justice, 119, 191, 192, 193, 194, 196, 223, 310, 551, 570.
Halkett, Capt, 177.
Hall, Francis, 78, 92, 115, 305, 417.
Hamilton, Rev. R. W., 116.
Hanet, M., 358.
Hanna, Rev. John, 158, 159.
---- Mrs. John, 159.
Harris, Dr. 79.
Harris, Rev. Mr., 102.
Harrison, Hon. S. B., 314, 315, 316, 317, 318, 337, 338, 344, 347.
Harrison, Mr. (A.D.C.), 308, 309, 310, 311.
Harvard, Rev. W. M., 181, 202, 203, 204, 228, 237, 244, 396.
Hawes, Sir Benjamin, 419, 420, 454, 456.
Hay, Mr., 160.
Head, Sir F. B., 162, 166, 170, 171,176, 179, 180, 181, 182, 183, 189,
190, 191, 192, 196, 197, 198, 200, 201, 206, 224, 225, 228, 235,
248, 252, 253, 257, 258, 288, 309, 316, 320, 416, 417.
Head, Sir Edmund, 499.
Heald, Rev. Mr., 571.
Healy, Rev. E., 172, 173.
Hedding, Bishop, 32, 48, 90, 172, 174, 269, 385, 577.
Henings, Rev. Mr., 88.
Herkimer, Wm., 66, 72.
Hess, Mr. J., 78, 79.
Hetherington, Rev. Mr., 128, 141.
Heyland, Rev. Rowley, 40, 148.
Hickson, Mr., 339.
Higginson, Secretary, 317, 318, 319, 322, 325, 327, 331, 332, 333, 334,
335, 336, 337, 339, 340, 345, 348, 349, 350, 375, 377.
Hill, Lord, 116.
Hill, Rev. Rowland, 116, 159.
Hincks, Sir Francis, 187, 190, 290, 313, 324, 329, 330, 333, 416,
424, 451.
Holden, Mr., 587.
Holtby, Rev. Matthew, 307.
Hoole, Rev. Dr. Elijah, 390, 544.
Horne, Dr., 177.
Horton, Hon. R. W., 222.
Howard, James S., 198, 414.
Howard, Mr., 118.
Howard, Rev. I. B., 287.
Howe, Hon. Joseph, 244, 258, 331.
Howick, Lord, 118.
Hume, Joseph, M. P., 118, 123, 126, 129, 134, 135, 136, 138, 167, 168,
169, 171, 175, 228.
Hurlburt, Rev. Thomas, 275, 513.
Hyland, Edward, 64.
Inglis, Sir Harry, 163.
Inglis, Sir Robert, 121.
Irvine, Rev. Mr., 154.
Irving, Rev. Edward, 116.
Izard, Miss C., 163.
Jackson, Edward, 241.
Jackson, Rev. Thos., 273.
Jacobs, Peter, 63, 78.
Jager, Abbe, 358.
James, Rev. John Angel, 162, 163.
Jameson, Vice-Chancellor, 304, 418.
---- Rev. Mr., 355.
Janes, Bishop, 556.
Jarvis, Mr., 299.
Jarvis, Sheriff, 183.
Jay, Rev. Wm., 116.
Jeffers, Rev. Dr. W., 498, 511, 533.
Jeffery, Rev. T. W., 594.
Jenkins, Rev. Wm., 154, 169.
Jeune, Rev. Dr., 163.
Jobson, Rev. Dr., 582.
Johnston, Rev. Hugh, B.D., 590.
Jones, Dr., 594.
Jones, Jonas, 111.
---- John, 65, 66, 70.
Junes, Mr. Justice, 177, 310, 551.
Jones, Rev. R., 593, 594.
Jones, T. M., 299.
Jones, Rev. Peter, 41, 44, 45, 56, 61, 66, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75,
79, 83, 107, 108, 112, 228, 20, 400, 401, 413.
Junkin, S. S., 149, 150, 151, 170.
Keefer, Jacob, 348.
Kent, Duchess of, 164.
Kent, John, 97, 292, 293, 294, 296, 297.
Kenyon, Lord, 160.
Kerr, Mrs. Wm. (_nee_ Brant), 56.
Kerr, Wm., 78, 594.
Lafontaine, Hon. L. H., 304, 315, 332, 336, 416, 425, 444, 446, 551.
Laird, Rev. J. G., 593, 598.
Lane, William, 75.
Lang, Rev. Matthew, 275.
Langton, John, 530.
Lansdowne, Marquis of, 419, 425, 515.
Law, Rev. John, 28, 32, 39.
---- William, 62, 63.
Lefroy, General, 371.
Lessey, Rev. Theophilus, 116.
Lever, Rev. Mr., 498.
Lindsay, General, 569.
Lindsey, Charles, 185, 186.
Lindsey, Rev. Mr., 88.
Lingard, R. W., 419.
Lloyd, Jesse, 178.
Longman, Mr., 578.
Lord, Rev. Wm., 121,140, 148, 151, 152, 153, 164, 166, 210, 394,
401, 402.
Lorne, Marquis of, 598.
Lount, Samuel, 178, 182, 183, 184, 188.
Luckey, Rev. Dr., 88.
Lunn, Mr. Wm., 154, 169.
Lynch, Archbishop, 593.
Macaulay, Lord, 123, 205, 419.
Macaulay, Mr. Justice, 172, 173, 177, 551.
Macdonald, John, 564.
Macdonald, R., Q.C., 182.
Macdonald, Rt. Hon. Sir John A., 194, 499.
Macdonnell, Vicar-General, 106.
Macdougall, Hon. Wm., 288.
Mackenzie, W. L., 118, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 134, 135,
136, 137, 138, 144, 145, 155, 156, 157, 168, 171, 175, 178, 185,
186, 187, 188, 189, 190, 200, 207, 239, 257, 288.
Macnab, Sir Allan, 177, 229, 387.
Madden, Rev. Thomas, 29, 40, 55, 68.
Maitland, Sir Peregrine, 62, 63, 221, 440, 445.
Manchester, Bishop of, 599, 602.
Mangles, Mr., M.P., 340.
Manly, Rev. John G., 275.
Mann, Horace, 600.
Markland, Hon. George H., 170.
Marsden, Rev. G., 115, 120, 147, 163, 273, 397.
Marsh, Rev. Dr. Wm., 163.
Marshall, Rev. Mr., 571.
Matthews (see Lount and Matthews), 89, 182, 183, 184, 188.
Maule, Fox (Lord Panmure), 272.
Meredith, Mr., 163.
Merritt, Hon. W. H., 314, 315, 316, 319, 336, 337, 338, 343.
Metcalfe, Sir Charles, 138, 194, 198, 303, 308, 313, 313, 314, 315, 316,
317, 319, 323, 324, 325, 328, 329, 330, 331, 332, 333, 337, 340, 341,
342, 343, 344, 345, 347, 348, 375, 376, 377, 383, 398, 400, 404.
Methley, Rev. Mr., 507, 508.
Mitchell, Judge James, 24.
Michelet, M., 358.
Miller, Rev. Dr., 542.
Moffatt, Hon. George, 340.
Molson, Hon. Mr., 318.
Monod, M., 356, 358, 359.
Montgomery, John, 177.
Moore, Archbishop, 220.
Moore, Hugh, 211.
Morpeth, Lord, 116.
Morris, Hon. James, 337, 338.
Morris, Hon. Wm., 221, 222, 227, 228, 256, 336, 415, 465.
Morrison, Dr. T. D., 70, 118, 182.
Mosely, Rev. Mr., 163.
Moss, Mr., 163.
Mountain, Bishop, 221.
Mulkins, Rev. Hannibal, 173.
Murdoch, T. W. C., 267, 290, 312, 387.
Murray, Rev. Robt., 346, 347, 349, 350.
Murray, Sir George, 459.
Muskrat, John, 66.
McCann, Rev. Father, 593.
McCrae, Miss, 77.
McDonnell, A., 177.
McGill, Hon. Peter, 340.
McHenry, Mr., 594.
McIntyre, Rev. John, 211.
McLean, Mr. Justice, 177, 310.
McMullen, Rev. D., 210.
McMurray, Archdeacon, 77.
McOwan, 160.
Naylor, Rev. Wm., 116.
Neilson, Hon. Judge, 567.
Neilson, Mr., 257.
Nelles, Rev. Dr., 594, 598.
Newcastle, Duke of, 452, 453.
Newton, Rev. Dr. Robt., 116, 119, 162, 269, 273, 279.
Noel, Hon. and Rev. Baptist, 116, 159, 162.
Nolan, Rev. Mr., 542.
Noll, Rev. James, 212.
Normanby, Lord, 250, 251, 253.
Norris, Rev. James, 275.
Northcote, Sir Stafford, 578.
Norwich, Bishop of, 541.
Ogden, Mr. Justice, 304.
Oldham, Mr., 162.
Olin, Rev. Dr., 406.
Ormiston, Rev. Dr., 17, 597.
Osgood, Rev. Thaddeus, 75.
Ousley, Gideon, 161.
O'Callaghan, Dr., 190.
O'Connell, Daniel, 316, 323.
O'Brien, Rev. J., 77.
Packington, Sir John, 451, 452.
Palmerston, Lord, 516, 551.
Panmure, Lord (see Mr. Fox Maule).
Pantelioni, Dr., 514, 515, 516, 517, 540.
Papineau, Hon. D. B., 337.
Papineau, Hon. L. J., 167, 168, 257, 267.
Parke, Thomas, 381.
Parsons, Rev. James, 159.
Patin, M., 358.
Patterson, Mr. James, 594.
Payer, M., 358.
Peck, Bishop Jesse T., 172.
Peel, Sir Robert, 121, 160, 291, 306, 307, 309, 311, 323, 324, 411, 551.
Perry, Peter, 156, 157, 189.
Philip, Dr., 163.
Phillips, Rev. Dr., 542.
Pitt, Rt. Hon. William, 218, 219, 220, 334.
Pius IX., Pope, 361, 362, 365, 366, 367.
Playter, Rev. George, 416.
Postels, M. de, 358.
Potter, Prof., 350.
Potts, Rev. Dr., 30, 288, 573, 594, 595, 596.
Powell, Ald. J., 177.
Powell, Mr., 314.
Power, Bishop, 428.
Prince, Colonel, 338.
Prindle, Rev. Andrew, 392.
Prinsen, Mr., 364.
Punshon, Rev. Dr. W. M., 539, 543, 544, 545, 556, 557, 558, 560, 562,
564, 571, 573, 576, 577, 579, 589, 590.
Radcliffe, Mr., 127, 128, 130, 141.
Receveur, Abbe, 358.
Reece, Rev. Richard, 92, 115, 159, 162.
Reese, Rev. Dr. D. M., 279.
Reynard, Rev. Prof., 594.
Reynolds, Bishop, 383.
Rice, Rev. Dr., 576.
Richards, Sir W. B., 194, 567.
Richardson, Bishop, 40, 48, 53, 75, 78, 90, 93, 99, 108, 118, 154,
183, 383.
Richey, Rev. Dr. M., 154, 209, 244, 270, 273, 387, 388, 403, 404,
556, 557.
Rigg, Rev. Dr., 556, 589.
Ripon, Earl of, 118, 224, 232, 235, 386, 459.
Roads, Rev. Mr. 384.
Roaf, Rev. John, 212.
Roberts, Bishop, 269.
Robinson, Hon. Peter, 170.
---- Chief Justice, 173, 177, 300, 310, 551, 568, 570.
Robinson, Hon. W. B., 567, 568.
Robinson, Mr., 162.
Roblin, John P., M.P.P., 304.
Roebuck, J. A., M.P., 167, 169, 171, 175, 228.
Rolfe, Sir R. M., 165.
Rolph, Dr. John, 127, 170, 189, 190, 288.
Rose, Rev. Dr. S., 61, 62, 594.
Routh, Sir Randolph, 340.
Rowsell, Henry, 296.
Russell, Lord John, 123, 216, 255, 260, 261, 263, 264, 267, 272, 285,
286, 378, 389, 391, 395, 435, 438, 441, 443, 451, 454, 467, 499, 516.
Rultan, Sheriff, 348.
Ryan, Rev. Henry, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 131, 195, 278, 385, 557.
Ryckman, Rev. E. B., 587.
Ryerse, Major, 538.
Ryerse, Samuel, 24.
Ryerson, Rev. George, 25, 36, 37, 42, 45, 52, 53, 55, 56, 64, 67, 68,
69, 70, 79, 83, 94, 107, 108, 109, 113, 412, 534.
---- Rev. John, 25, 52, 55, 67, 86, 87, 88, 89, 109, 111, 115, 127, 128,
136, 141, 142, 147, 150, 151, 152, 154, 156, 161, 166, 171, 172, 177,
181, 183, 184, 188, 196, 199, 200, 201, 228, 239, 240, 241, 269, 270,
271, 323, 325, 328, 345, 346, 347, 348, 386, 399, 401, 402, 403, 413,
503, 507, 511, 512, 534, 573, 574, 575, 580, 585, 587.
---- Rev. William, 25, 29, 40, 52, 58, 69, 75, 78, 83, 81, 88, 111, 118,
130, 141, 142, 147, 177, 179, 228, 263, 269, 271, 272, 276, 405, 450.
Ryerson, Rev. Edwy, 69, 83, 84, 130, 133, 228, 415.
Ryerson, Mrs., Sr., 23, 25, 27, 28, 37, 42, 43, 45, 54, 55, 56, 82, 84,
139, 140, 178, 268, 358, 412.
Ryerson, Samuel, 24.
---- Colonel, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 41, 43, 44, 45, 51, 52, 55,
56, 58, 60, 61, 84, 127, 134, 178, 310, 412.
Ryerson, Lucilla Hannah, 111.
Ryland, Rev. John, 162.
Salt, Rev. Allen, 78.
Sanderson, Rev. Dr. G. R., 211, 533.
Sandon, Lord, 168, 272.
Sandwich, Dr., 159.
Saunders, Hon. J. S., 453.
Saurin, Rev. J. S., 354, 357.
Savage, Rev. D., 579.
Sawyer, Chief Joseph, 72.
Scobie, Hugh, 337, 338, 339, 341.
Scott, Rev. Jonathan, 271, 287, 294, 295.
Scott, Rev. Wm., 201, 275.
Seaton, Lord (see Sir J. Colborne).
Shaftesbury, Rt. Hon. Lord, (see Lord Ashley), 163, 542.
Sherwood, Mr. Justice, 173, 264, 304.
Sherwood Sheriff, 111.
Shiel, Rt. Hon. Richard, 516, 517.
Shuttleworth, Sir J. P. Kay, 419, 600.
Simcoe, Governor, 219, 220.
Simpson, Bishop, 556, 577.
Skinner, Bishop, 213.
Slater, Rev. Wm., 86.
Slight, Rev. Benjamin, 275.
Small, James E., 304.
Smart, Rev. W., 221.
Smith, Elias, 50.
Smith, Rev. Bishop Philander, 383.
Smith, Rev. Dr. Gervase, 544, 545, 571, 576, 577.
Smith, William, 336.
Snake, Wm., 77.
Sornement, M., 358.
Soule, Bishop, 269.
Spark, Dr., 216.
Spencer, Rev. James, 498, 500, 501, 502, 503, 504, 508, 509, 510,
511, 512, 513, 533.
Squire, Rev. Wm., 148.
Stanley, Right Hon. Lord, 118, 119, 123, 135, 163, 307, 331, 332, 333,
340, 381, 388, 439, 469, 539.
Stanley, Very Rev. Dean, 579.
Stanton, Mr., 311, 314.
Stead, Rev. Mr., 272.
Steer, Rev. Wm., 275.
Steinheur, Rev. Henry, 78.
Stephen, Sir James, 158, 168, 189, 228, 272.
Stewart Rev. Mr., 102, 119.
Stewart, Rt. Rev. Dr., (Bishop of Quebec), 48, 76, 103, 206, 213, 217,
222, 291, 463.
Stickney, Miss, (Mrs. Ryerson, Sen.), 23.
Stinson, Rev. Dr. Joseph, 142, 154, 174, 183, 201, 204, 210, 227, 228,
237, 238, 244, 273, 337, 388, 396, 397, 401, 402.
Stoney, Rev. Edmund, 275.
Strachan, Bishop, 24, 44, 45, 47, 48, 49, 81, 83, 84, 91, 92, 95, 97,
98, 102, 103, 104, 105, 118, 125, 155, 182, 185, 195, 213, 215, 216,
217, 218, 219, 221, 222, 227, 229, 237, 239, 255, 256, 261, 262, 263,
292, 296, 299, 300, 320, 378, 379, 380, 385, 386, 389, 419, 433, 435,
436, 437, 438, 439, 441, 442, 443, 444, 445, 446, 447, 448, 449, 450,
452, 453, 455, 457, 463, 464, 566, 602, 603.
Sturge, M. P., Joseph, 154, 162, 163.
Sunday, Rev. John, 61, 77, 78, 275.
Sunegoo, Wm., 68.
Sullivan, Hon. R. B., 170, 265, 266, 289, 307, 320, 332, 338, 341, 418.
Sweatman, Bishop. 595, 580, 581, 602.
Sydenham, Lord, (C. Poulett Thompson), 193, 197, 216, 257, 258, 260,
261, 263, 264, 265, 266, 268, 282, 283, 284, 286, 287, 290, 301, 302,
303, 304, 306, 312, 313, 320, 321, 325, 331, 342, 343, 345, 346, 378,
382, 387, 388, 389, 390, 394, 395, 396, 441, 443, 550, 561.
Taylor, Rev. Dr. Lachlan, 533, 559.
Taylor, Rev. Joseph, 384.
Telfer. Rev. Mr., 595.
Thompson, C. H., 91, 195.
Thompson, Chas. Poulett (see Lord Sydenham)
Thorburn, A. B., 328.
Thyner, Father, 367.
Touse, Rev. Mr., 360.
Townley, Rev. Dr., 198.
Trevelyan, Sir Charles, 340, 376.
Turner, Rev. R. L., 158.
Usedon, Count, 540.
Vaughan, Rev. C. J., 578.
Venueil, Mons., 357.
Viger, Hon. D. B., 318, 322, 333.
Waddy, Rev. Dr., 556.
Wallace, James, 562.
Wahwahsinno, Chief, 76.
Washburn, Daniel, 188.
Waudby, John, 265.
Watson, Rev. Richard, 106, 108, 110, 280, 384, 493, 494, 495.
Waugh, Bishop, 269.
Waugh, Dr., 115.
Waugh, Rev. Mr., 119.
Wayland, Rev. Dr., 26, 431.
Wellington, Duke of, 602.
Wells, Hon. Joseph, 178.
Wenham, Dr., 79.
West, Rev. Mr., 79.
Whitehead, Rev. Thomas, 274, 276, 407, 408.
Wilkinson, Rev. Henry, 130, 214, 228.
Wilson, Mr., 176.
Wilson, Thomas, & Co., 160.
Wilmot, Lient.-Gov., L. A., 572.
William IV., King, 118.
Williams, Rev. J. A., 587.
Willson, Hugh, 29.
Willson, Hon. John, M.P.P., 46, 195, 385, 386, 551.
Winchester, Bishop of, 116.
Wiseman, Cardinal, 420.
Wiseman, Rev. Mr., 576.
Withrow, Rev. Dr., 600.
Wolseley, Sir Garnet, 559.
Wood, Rev. Dr. Enoch, 470, 479, 480, 491, 497, 498, 503, 507, 511, 512,
533, 544, 559, 560, 589.
Wood, Rev. James, 116, 119.
Wood, Sir Charles, 515.
Wright, Rev. David, 130, 131, 228.
Yellowhead, Chief, 75, 76.
Yeomans, Rev. D., 75.
Young, Rev. E. R., 408, 409.
Young, Rev. R., 272.
INDEX TO SUBJECTS.
American General Conference of 1868, attendance at, 556.
Bagot, Government of Sir Charles, 306.
Bethune, Correspondence with Bishop, 564.
Bible, The, in Public Schools, 423, 564.
Bidwell, Defence of, 188 _et seq._ 306, 416, 567.
British Conference, Union with, 107 _et seq._ 114, 121, 141, 269.
---- Separation from, 269, 272, 277, 383.
Cartier, Sir George. Correspondence relating to, 559.
Chapel Property Cases, 172.
_Christian Guardian_, 93, 107, 109, 121, 131, 144, 172, 199, 201, 230,
239, _et seq._, 259, 269, 271.
_Christian Guardian_, Discussion with, 499.
Church of England, Dr. Ryerson's attitude towards, 291.
Church Property, Right of Conference to hold, 303.
Civil Rights Controversy, 81.
Class Meeting Question, 470, _et seq._, 491, _et seq._, 499.
Clergy Reserve Question, 47, 68, 81, 83, _et seq._, 91, 95,
_et seq._ 119, 155, 168, 170, 216, 218, 225, _et seq._, 236 _et seq._,
246, 250, _et seq._, 260 _et seq._, 278, 286, 300, 378, _et seq._,
387 _et seq._, 433 _et_ _seq., 454 et seq._
Confederation, Dr. Ryerson's Address on, 547.
Connecticut University, 106.
Controversy with W. L. Mackenzie, 124, 135, 145.
Controversy with Rev. W. M. Harvard, 202.
Controversies, Newspaper, 205, _et seq._
Council, Legislative, 168, 170.
Denominational Colleges Controversy, 518, _et seq._
Dominion, Dr. Ryerson's Address on the New, 547.
Durham, Government of Lord, 257, _et seq._, 312.
Early Life, Sketch of, 23.
Early Education, 24.
Education, Appointment as Chief Superintendent of, 342.
---- Retirement from Office of, 337.
Educational Administration, 352, 368, _et seq._
Educational Tours, 352, 365, 371, 419, 454, 514, 539, 577.
Education, Dr. Ryerson's status in the Conference while holding Office
of Chief Superintendent of, 415.
England, Visits to, 115, _et seq._, 121, 152, _et seq._, 158, 269, 272,
352, 371, 419, 454, 514, 539, 577.
Estimate of Dr. Ryerson's Character and Labours, by Rev. Dr.
Ormiston, 17.
Estimates of Dr. Ryerson's Character and Work, 595, 598, 600, _et seq._
Family Compact, 145.
Funeral Ceremonies, 593.
Grievance Report, 155.
Hume and Roebuck Letters, 167.
"Impressions" of England, 121, 137.
Indians, Labour among, 64, _et seq._
Infant Baptism, 470, _et seq._, 491, _et seq._
"Legion's" Letters, 341.
Loyalists, U. E., History of, 577, 585, 590.
Matrimony, Right of Methodist Ministers to Celebrate, 303.
Metcalfe, Defence of Sir Charles, 198, 312, _et seq._, 319, _et seq._,
328, _et seq._, 349.
Metcalfe, Administration of Sir Charles, 198, 312, _et seq._, 319,
_et seq._, 328, _et seq._, 337, _et seq._, 375.
Methodist Union, 571.
Metropolitan Church, 562.
Minister, Work as, 80, 86, 149, 282, 287.
Mission to River Credit Indians, page 58, _et seq._
Norfolk County, Visits to, 534.
Presidency of General Conference, 575.
Rebellion of 1837, 175, _et seq._, 182.
Rectories Question, 218, 225, _et seq._, 236, _et seq._, 245,
250, _et seq._
Red River Expedition, 559.
Religious Experiences, 25, 30, 32, 42, 51-57, 82, 85.
Religious Instruction in Schools, 423, 564.
Responsible Government, 257, _et seq._
Roebuck and Hume Letters, 167.
Ryanite Schism, 87.
School Act, 370.
Spencer, Controversy with Rev. Mr., 499.
Style, Controversial, 105.
Sydenham, Administration of Lord, 260, 284, 286, 290, 301.
Thompson, Mr. Charles Poulett, Government of, 260.
Union, Methodist, 571.
United Empire Loyalists, History of, 577, 585, 590.
University Controversy, 518, _et seq._
Upper Canada Academy, 113, 152, 161. _et seq._, 164, _et seq._, 179,
301, 305, 307.
Victoria College, 113, 152, 161, _et seq._, 164, _et seq._, 179,
301, 305, 307.
OPINIONS OF THE PRESS,
OF
STATESMEN AND OTHERS,
ON
REV. DR. RYERSON'S "HISTORY OF THE LOYALISTS OF AMERICA AND THEIR TIMES,
FROM 1620 TO 1816."
_From the Toronto_ Daily Mail, _July 7th, 1880._
In a lengthened review of more than two columns, the _Mail_ says:
"It is with great pleasure that we introduce and commend to our
readers these portly volumes, which together contain nearly a
thousand pages. Dr. Ryerson deserves well of his country on account
of his long and inestimable services to the cause of popular
education. He is the still surviving father of our public school
system, and for over thirty years directed its progress with
characteristic zeal and activity. But apart from the author's
public work, these volumes--the result of twenty-five years'
labour--are exceedingly valuable on their own account. * * * Dr.
Ryerson has performed his task with great thoroughness, inspired by
a deep interest in his subject. The style is easy and flowing; the
facts stated are almost superabundantly established by reference to
the authorities; and wherever it becomes necessary to demonstrate
the misrepresentations of American writers, the author's forcible
way of putting the subject-matter in dispute is at once clear and
cogent. In short, the narrative is interesting, whilst the
arguments that crop up now and again are pointed and convincing. We
had some doubts as to the venerable author's age; but he leaves no
doubt upon the point in a passage relating to the war of 1812 (Vol.
II., p. 353). At the outbreak of the war, amongst the Norfolk
volunteers who went with General Brock to the taking of Detroit
were the elder brother and brother-in-law of the writer of these
pages (he being then ten years of age). Dr. Ryerson must be
consequently seventy-eight, or thereabouts; still, as his father
lived to the ripe old age of ninety-four, the author may have a
long lease of life before him."
_From the Hamilton_ Evening Times, _June 13th, 1880._
"It has been well said, that Dr. Ryerson needs no monument to
perpetuate his industry, zeal, ability, and aptitude for literary
work, and successful management other than the system of public and
high schools of Ontario, which he may be said to have created
nearly forty years ago, and nourished until 1876, when he retired
from the position of Chief Superintendent of Education. But if he
do, that other monument will be found in his _History of the
Loyalists of America and their Times_. This contribution to native
literature is not the work of a day. It is the result of
twenty-five years of more or less arduous labour and diligent
inquiry. It is therefore all the more valuable and trustworthy.
When one carefully examines the tersely-written pages of the two
volumes comprising the History, one can, in a measure, conceive the
pains taken by the venerable author to do justice to his subject.
* * * The History is a mine of information. It stands alone as a
voluminous authority, and will probably do so for many years. It is
admirably written, thoroughly systematised, and clear and concise.
It is just such a work as should adorn the shelves of every
Canadian library."
_From the Hamilton_ Spectator, _June 19th, 1880_.
"No book issued in Canada in recent years is more worthy of cordial
reception than the one which forms the subject of this notice. With
the name of U. E. Loyalists most Canadians are familiar, but with
the experience, the noble deeds, the unswerving loyalty to king and
country, of those who took part in the events of the early history
of America, very many are lamentably ignorant; or such knowledge as
they have has been derived from unfriendly or unreliable sources.
* * * The work Dr. Ryerson undertook was no light one. The time was
long past when the events treated of took place, and when the
actors in them could be consulted. But though the actors in the
stirring scenes of our early history had passed away, there were
authentic documents and records of them left behind, and these the
author has searched out and consulted. The results of his
researches appear as a work which must be commended for the vast
amount of information it contains, its accuracy of detail, and the
supplying of a want long felt and often deplored. * * * Altogether,
the book is one which should be read throughout the length and
breadth of Canada; and even across the sea it should, and doubtless
will, find a place. The Rev. Dr. Ryerson's efforts in the cause of
education have borne good fruit; it is certain that his great
literary work will also accomplish high beneficial results.
"The mechanical part of the book is in every way creditable to the
publishers."
_From the_ Evangelical Churchman, _Toronto, June 24th, 1880_.
"This is, without exception, the most important and elaborate
historical work which has yet issued from the Canadian press. The
incidents of the memorable struggle, which resulted in the
separation of the colonies from the Empire, are given in nervous
and graphic language, and shed a flood of light on the contest
itself. The subsequent privations and sufferings of the "United
Empire Loyalists" are most vividly portrayed. Their settlement in
this and other Provinces are feelingly and touchingly described.
Reminiscences, recollections and experiences of expatriated
Loyalists are also given, and illustrations of the hardships
endured by them are related in the work by many of the living
descendants of these Loyalists. This portion of the history is
deeply interesting and instructive, but space forbids us to enter
into it. Our readers cannot do better than possess themselves of
these entertaining volumes, which we most cordially commend as a
most valuable addition to our colonial historical literature."
_From the Toronto_ Christian Guardian, _July 14th, 1880_.
"This new book by the venerable Dr. Ryerson is the most important
literary work of his life. It fitly crowns a career of unusual
intellectual activity with a standard history of the formative
period of Anglo-American civilization. The range and scope of the
work are much wider than most persons would suppose from the
announcement. Most people looked for a work that would be mainly
made up of biographical sketches of the U. E. Loyalist pioneer in
the settlement of Canada. But Dr. Ryerson goes back to the
beginning, and traces the whole origin and growth of the English in
America, the relation of the Colonists to the Home Government, the
character and doings of the Colonial Governments, and the political
causes which produced dissatisfaction, and ultimately led to
rebellion and independence.
"The first thing that strikes us in examining this work is the
evidence it presents of extensive research, in the examination of
original documents, and consequently the extent to which it must be
a valuable repertory of important historic facts for future
historians of American civilization.
"One thing that invests this work with special interest to all
Canadians and Britons is that nearly all the histories of the
United States, as well as the popular literature of that country,
glorify the deeds and character of all who took a part in the
Revolutionary war, on the Republican side; but the Loyalists who
could not feel justified in fighting against their Sovereign and
country, are uniformly painted in the blackest colours, as if they
were cowardly and base wretches who had no redeeming qualities. All
that is hateful and mean is suggested by the word 'Tory' or
'Royalist' in the annals of the United States. They have never had
fair play; because they were generally painted by those who
bitterly hated them. But while the author admits fully the folly
and unconstitutional despotism that goaded the colonists into
rebellion, and the patriotic feeling of many on the Republican
side, no one can read his work without feeling that great injustice
has been done to the Loyalists, whose wrong acts were generally
provoked by the relentless persecution of the other party. In the
light of the real facts, it does not appear criminal or
discreditable that they were unwilling to join in open war against
the land of their fathers and the Government to which they owed
allegiance. * * * The account of the war of 1812 will possess still
greater interest for Canadians. The part played by the people of
Canada at that time, in resolutely resisting an unjustifiable
invasion, made by a greatly superior power, at a time when England
was contending almost single-handed against the immense forces
Napoleon I. had combined against her; and the fact that eleven
different attacks were repelled without loss of territory, are
achievements of which Canadians have no need to be ashamed."
_From the Montreal_ Gazette, _June 26th, 1880_.
In the course of an elaborate review of three columns of this work,
the editor of the _Montreal Gazette_, June 26th, 1880, says:
"This most important work, whose approach to completion we had the
pleasure some months ago of announcing to our readers, is now an
accomplished fact, and the people of Canada will have an
opportunity of gratifying their desire for a full and fair history
of one of the most interesting and meritorious elements of our
population. For the laborious, and in some respects perilous task
of writing such a history, few, if any, of our prominent men of
learning could have been so well fitted as Dr. Ryerson. Himself the
son of a leading Loyalist, of a family which had given Canada many
men of earnest thought and strenuous act, familiar from his
childhood with the traditions of those heroic settlers who were
mainly the founders of his native Province, and having himself had
no small share in extending the progress and perpetuating the
prosperity of which, at the cost of their fortunes and the risk of
their lives, they laid the firm basis, he was indignantly conscious
of the many calumnies propagated by hostile pens, from which, for
nearly a century, they had suffered almost undefended. Not alone,
indeed. Happily there were others also who longed to see the story
of the Loyalists written by an impartial and skilful hand. And when
those who represent what was best in the public life, the
literature, the pulpit and the press of the two united Provinces a
quarter of a century ago, looked around on each other and beyond
their own circle for a person to whom they might entrust the
performance of so needed a duty, they unanimously fixed upon the
Superintendent of Education of Upper Canada as that person. Thus
selected, and not unmoved, besides, by potent inward urgings, Dr.
Ryerson accepted the honourable but difficult charge." [Then
follows an analysis of the principal facts and arguments of the
work.]
_From the_ Morning Chronicle, _Halifax, Nova Scotia, August 4th, 1880._
"This is undoubtedly one of the most notable of recent works from
the press of Canada. It is a work of such interest as to its
subject, and, we must add, of such merit as to its execution, that
no proper justice can be done to it in any such review as can be
afforded within the limited eligible space of a daily newspaper."
_From the_ Morning Herald, _Halifax, N. S., July 24th and August 4th,
1880._
The _Herald_ devotes two articles in review of this work, commencing
with the following words:
"The author of this work is so well known to the people of this
country, that any publication in which his name appears is a
sufficient guarantee of its value, its accuracy, and the
interesting nature of its contents. No work ever published in
Canada is more worthy of a cordial reception from our people than
the 'Loyalists of America and their Times,' and none will be read
with more intense interest by the descendants of those noble men
and women, 'who, stripped of their rights and property during the
war, * * * were driven from the homes of their birth and of their
forefathers,' because of their loyalty to their king, to seek new
homes in the (then) wilderness of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick."
N.B.--Numerous other notices, of a similar character to the above, are
said to have appeared in various provincial newspapers.
Letter from Sir Stafford Northcote.
"79 Portland Place, July 26th, 1880.
"My Dear Sir,
"I ought long ago to have thanked you for so kindly sending me your
work on the 'Loyalists,' but I have been so busy since it came that
I have had little time for reading. I have been much interested
with it, and am very much obliged for it.
"Believe me, yours very faithfully,
(Signed) "Stafford H. Northcote."
Letter from Lord Carnarvon.
"Highclere Castle, Newbury, Sept. 1st, 1880.
"My Dear Sir,
"I have received the 'History of the Loyalists of America' which
you have been good enough to send me. I have as yet only been able
to turn the pages, but before long I hope to find the leisure to
become acquainted with the contents of these two volumes, of which
I have seen enough in my rapid glance to be sure that they embrace
not only much that is most interesting, but in a historical point
of view very valuable matter.
"I remain, my dear Sir, yours faithfully,
(Signed) "Carnarvon."
Letter from Alpheus Todd, Esq., Librarian of the House of Commons.
"Ottawa, September 16th, 1880.
"My Dear Dr. Ryerson,
"I have just returned from a visit to England, much refreshed. I
found your two interesting volumes on my desk, and am very grateful
for your kind remembrance of me. I shall prize them highly.
"We have all reason for congratulation that you have completed this
great book, which is a noble retrospect of the loyalty of our
forefathers. I earnestly hope that it may be the means of
quickening and strengthening the present generation in this land in
the endeavour to render themselves worthy of the noble inheritance
that the zeal and devotion of our ancestors obtained for us, and
that it will deepen our attachment to the British Crown and
Imperial connection.
"Always with much respect and regard,
"Your sincere friend,
(Signed) "Alpheus Todd."
Letter from His Excellency the Marquis of Lorne.
"Citadel, Quebec, June 10th, 1880.
"My Dear Dr. Ryerson,
"I have to-day received your most welcome gift, and hasten to tell
you my gratitude for what was to me a very pleasant surprise--a
surprise, for I had not heard that you were engaged in the task you
have now completed, and had I heard it, I could not have expected
the kindness which has made me the recipient from the author of
such a full and extremely interesting history.
"It should become a household book in Canada; and I can well
imagine the delight it will give to those who are able through the
work, as you have been in its composition, to trace the actions and
live again in sympathy with the thoughts of heroic ancestors.
"Believe me, with very many thanks,
"Yours very truly,
(Signed) "Lorne."
Letter from Lord Dufferin.
"St. Petersburg, September 6th, 1880.
"My Dear Dr. Ryerson,
"I have just received your two beautiful volumes. I cannot tell you
how grateful I am to you for your kind thought of me. There is no
present I value more than that of a book from its author. Indeed, I
have now a very interesting library composed of volumes given to me
at different times by the various distinguished men of the present
generation whom I have had the happiness to know, and your work
will find an honoured place upon its shelves.
"You well know how fully I understand and appreciate all that you
have done for education in Canada, and that there are few people in
the Dominion for whom I have always entertained a greater regard or
respect.
"Believe me, my dear Dr. Ryerson,
"Yours most sincerely,
(Signed) "Dufferin."
Canadian Methodism:
ITS
EPOCHS AND CHARACTERISTICS,
WRITTEN AT THE REQUEST OF THE
LONDON, TORONTO, AND MONTREAL CONFERENCES.
BY THE
_REV. EGERTON RYERSON, D.D., LL.D._
_This Volume is elegantly bound in Extra English Cloth, with ink and
gold stamping, 12mo. size, containing 448 pages_,
WITH STEEL PORTRAIT,
PRICE ... $1.25
This Volume is not a mere reprint of the Essays that appeared in the
Magazine from month to month, but contains a large amount of new matter
which has not heretofore appeared.
It possesses also, to the many admirers of its beloved and honoured
author, a melancholy interest, as being the latest production of that
pen which, during a long and busy life, was ever wielded in defence of
civil and religious liberty.
Agents wanted to sell this important Work.
Address--
WILLIAM BRIGGS, Publisher,
78 & 80 King St. East, Toronto.
The Loyalists of America
AND
THEIR TIMES.
BY THE
REV. EGERTON RYERSON, D.D., LL.D.,
_Chief Superintendent of Education for Upper Canada from 1844 to 1876._
This book is one of national importance. It is the most ample and minute
account of the U. E. Loyalists and their Times which has hitherto been
published. It describes very fully the early Colonial History of
America, and traces the important distinction, often overlooked, between
the Pilgrim Fathers and the Puritan Fathers in New England, who
maintained separate Governments for seventy years. The religious
persecutions of the Quakers and other dissidents from Puritan creed and
civil constitution are reviewed, and the stern intolerance of the latter
is shown. The fortunes of the Colonies under the Long Parliament, the
Commonwealth, and the Restoration, are carefully traced. The prolonged
conflict between France and England for the possession of the Continent,
with its battles, sieges, and adventurous campaigns is given in detail.
The growing estrangement between Great Britain and the Colonies, and the
stormy events of the Revolutionary War, are recounted. This epoch is
very fully discussed from a British Loyalist point of view. The author
avows his sympathy with the colonists in their assertion of their rights
as British subjects, and avers his belief that but for their
revolutionary Declaration of Independence they would within a
twelvemonth have obtained all that they desired without the shedding of
blood, without the unnatural alliance with France, much less a war of
seven years. But the outbreak and conduct of the war are emphatically
condemned.
No portion of this history will be read with greater interest than that
which describes the sufferings, in maintaining their allegiance to their
King, of the U. E. Loyalist Founders and Fathers of Canada. For the
first time, the full and detailed account of these sufferings is now
published. The account of the early development and organization of the
Government of the Maritime Provinces and of Upper Canada is full and
minute. The stirring events of the War of 1812-15 are also given with
much copiousness of detail. The grand patriotism of our country,
struggling against tremendous odds, is amply asserted and illustrated.
To this work the venerable author has devoted several of the best years
of his life. Of U. E. Loyalist stock himself, he writes with hearty
sympathy with his subject. He has devoted many years to the study of
historical and constitutional questions. He has made laborious and
extensive research. And he furnishes in these volumes copious
documentary evidence of the validity of his assertions and conclusions.
It is beautifully printed on extra calendered paper, and forms
TWO HANDSOME OCTAVO VOLUMES,
containing 1,055 pages, with Steel Portrait of the Author. Strongly
bound
IN EXTRA ENGLISH CLOTH, $5 00
IN HALF MOROCCO, 7 00
AGENTS WANTED.
Address for particulars,
_WILLIAM BRIGGS, Publisher_,
78 & 80 KING STREET EAST, TORONTO.
End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of The Story of My Life, by Egerton Ryerson
*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE STORY OF MY LIFE ***
***** This file should be named 24586-8.txt or 24586-8.zip *****
This and all associated files of various formats will be found in:
http://www.gutenberg.org/2/4/5/8/24586/
Produced by Stacy Brown, Jason Isbell and the Online
Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This
file was produced from images generously made available
by The Internet Archive/Canadian Libraries)
Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions
will be renamed.
Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no
one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation
(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without
permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules,
set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to
copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to
protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark. Project
Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you
charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission. If you
do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the
rules is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose
such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and
research. They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do
practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks. Redistribution is
subject to the trademark license, especially commercial
redistribution.
*** START: FULL LICENSE ***
THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free
distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project
Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project
Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at
http://gutenberg.org/license).
Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm
electronic works
1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm
electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all
the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy
all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession.
If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project
Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the
terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or
entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.
1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be
used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few
things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See
paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project
Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement
and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
works. See paragraph 1.E below.
1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation"
or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project
Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the
collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an
individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are
located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from
copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative
works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg
are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project
Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by
freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of
this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with
the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by
keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project
Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others.
1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in
a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check
the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement
before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or
creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project
Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning
the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United
States.
1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate
access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently
whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the
phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project
Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed,
copied or distributed:
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or
re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived
from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is
posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied
and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees
or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work
with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the
work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1
through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the
Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or
1.E.9.
1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted
with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional
terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked
to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the
permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.
1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm
License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm.
1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
Gutenberg-tm License.
1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any
word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or
distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than
"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version
posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org),
you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a
copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon
request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other
form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm
License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works
unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided
that
- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method
you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is
owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he
has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the
Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments
must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you
prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax
returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and
sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the
address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to
the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation."
- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm
License. You must require such a user to return or
destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium
and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of
Project Gutenberg-tm works.
- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any
money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days
of receipt of the work.
- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works.
1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm
electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set
forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from
both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael
Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark. Contact the
Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.
1.F.
1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm
collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain
"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or
corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual
property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a
computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by
your equipment.
1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right
of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH F3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
DAMAGE.
1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you
received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with
your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with
the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a
refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity
providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to
receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy
is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further
opportunities to fix the problem.
1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS' WITH NO OTHER
WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO
WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages.
If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the
law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be
interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by
the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any
provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.
1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance
with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production,
promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works,
harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees,
that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do
or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm
work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any
Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause.
Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm
Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of
electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers
including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists
because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from
people in all walks of life.
Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
assistance they need, is critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's
goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will
remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations.
To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4
and the Foundation web page at http://www.pglaf.org.
Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation
The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit
501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification
number is 64-6221541. Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at
http://pglaf.org/fundraising. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent
permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.
The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S.
Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered
throughout numerous locations. Its business office is located at
809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email
[email protected]. Email contact links and up to date contact
information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official
page at http://pglaf.org
For additional contact information:
Dr. Gregory B. Newby
Chief Executive and Director
[email protected]
Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation
Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide
spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest
array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations
($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
status with the IRS.
The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations
where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To
SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any
particular state visit http://pglaf.org
While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
approach us with offers to donate.
International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation
methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other
ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations.
To donate, please visit: http://pglaf.org/donate
Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
works.
Professor Michael S. Hart is the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm
concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared
with anyone. For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project
Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.
Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed
editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S.
unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily
keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.
Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility:
http://www.gutenberg.org
This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm,
including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
