In a private letter to Hon. Attorney-General Draper, dated 20th April, 1846, Dr. Ryerson replies to several objections made in the House of Assembly and by the press to his first School Act of 1846. I quote the following:-- "The Montreal _Pilot_ objects to appointing trustees for three years. This is one of the improvements adopted in the New York law of 1843. The superintendents, in their reports, speak largely of the evils of the annual system, and strongly on the advantages of the triennial one. The opposition to the Bill seems to be based on notions derived from what the State of New York system was several years ago. The opponents do not seem to be aware that it was amended in 1841, and amended again in 1843. Messrs. Price, Roblin, etc., seem to be where the Americans were ten years ago. "I anticipate the objection to the rate-bill clause. I look upon that above all others to be the poor man's clause, and at the very foundation of a system of public education. It is objected to by precisely the class of persons or rather by the individuals that I expected. I have heard of one rich man objecting to it, who educates his own children at colleges and ladies' seminaries, but who looks not beyond his own family. He says, I am told, that 'he does not wish to be compelled to educate _all the brats_ in the neighborhood.' Now, to educate 'all the brats in every neighborhood' is just the very object of this clause; and, in order to do so, it is proposed to compel selfish, rich men to do what they ought to do, but what they will not do voluntarily.[46] [46] In this matter of trustees' rate bill or school rate on the property of the school section, Dr. Ryerson was quite in advance of his times. The rate-bill clause, as he had prepared it, was rejected by the House of Assembly and a school fee substituted for it. In a brief, private note from Mr. Draper, dated 22nd April, 1846, he said:-- "Last night, or rather this morning at one, I got the School Bill through Committee of the Whole. I have been forced to submit to some changes, none very serious.... The rate-bill is to be on people sending children to school--not on the whole section. I fought this, but was well beaten." In his reply, Dr. Ryerson said:-- "I deeply regret the loss of the original rate-bill clause. It involved a new and important principle.... I am persuaded that it will on a future occasion pass by a strong majority." It did so pass in 1850; but it was not until 1871 that the Municipal Council was authorized by the Legislature to impose the whole of the school tax as desired and predicted by Dr. Ryerson in 1846.