Egerton Ryerson and Education in Upper CanadaPutman, J. Harold (John Harold)
History
Egerton Ryerson and Education in Upper Canada
Putman, J. Harold (John Harold)
Education -- Ontario; Ryerson, Egerton, 1803-1882
"Whereas the establishment of sectarian or Separate Schools, upheld
by periodical grants of money from a provincial treasury and placed
under the control of the Executive Government through its
Superintendents of Education and other civil officers, is a
dangerous interference with the Common School system of Upper
Canada, and if allowed to Protestants and Roman Catholics cannot
reasonably be refused to Episcopalians, Presbyterians, Quakers,
Tunkers, Baptists, Independents and other religious denominations;
and whereas if it is just that any number of religious sects should
have Separate Public Schools it is not less reasonable that they
should have separate Grammar Schools, Colleges and professorships in
the Universities; and whereas it is unjust for the State to tax
Protestants in order to provide for the instruction of children in
Roman Catholic doctrines or to tax Roman Catholics for religious
instruction of youth in principles adverse to those of the Church of
Rome; and as the early separation of children at school on account
of the creeds of their parents or guardians would rear nurseries of
strife and dissension and cause thousands to grow up in comparative
ignorance who might under our Common School system obtain the
advantages of a moral, intellectual and scientific education, be it
enacted therefore that the nineteenth section of the Act of 1850 be
repealed."
[91] See Journals of Canadian Assembly for 1851.
Mackenzie's Bill was defeated by 26 to 5. It lays down broad general
principles that are not easy to overthrow, and no doubt several who
voted against it would have been glad to see all young Canadians
educated together. But if the right to have Separate Schools be granted,
and it had been granted by successive School Acts for Upper Canada, then
it seems naturally to follow that the Legislature was bound to place no
obstacles in the way of their formation and to make them efficient.
Separate Schools were at first grudgingly granted as a privilege, but
not as a right. Naturally, every extension of the privilege was used by
the supporters of these schools as a vantage-ground from which to secure
further privileges and gradually convert these into rights. At first the
parties seceding from the Public Schools shared only in the school fund
made up of the legislative grant and an equal sum levied by the
district, town or city council--the whole being available only for the
payment of teachers' salaries. Supporters of Separate Schools were
liable to be taxed for the building and equipment of Public Schools in
addition to the support of their own. They claimed a _pro rata_ share of
all moneys levied by taxation, and in some cases the law was invoked in
an attempt to secure such share.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account