in 1860, and after full and lengthened consideration received the sanction of that Synod. The thirteenth Section of these By-Laws is as follows: (Appendix to Minutes of Synod of 1860, page, 65): "It shall be the duty of the Chairman, and Secretary-Treasurer, on receiving from the Presbytery Clerks lists of Ministers of their respective Presbyteries, with the dates of their ordination, or induction, to pay to the Ministers who commuted £112.10 .0 per annum, to the Ministers on the Roll of the Synod at the time of the Secularization of the Clergy Reserves, but who were not allowed to commute £100 per annum, and to all others, until such time as the Board shall otherwise determine, a minimum stipend of £50 a year, the whole in half yearly payments, and also £500 a year to the Treasurer for the time being of Queen's College, to be employed as heretofore in the payment of Professors, being Ministers of the Church."

"That the clause of this Section, relative to the allowance to Queen's College was deliberately passed the following extract from the Minutes of the Proceedings of the same Synod, (page 35,) shows: "It was moved by Mr. W. Snodgrass, seconded by Mr. John McMurchy, that, instead of the words "£500 a year to the Treasurer for the time being of Queen's College, to be employed, as heretofore, in the payment of Professors. being Ministers of the Church," the words "That Professors of the Faculties of Arts and Theology in Queen's College, being Ministers, shall rank as Beneficiaries on the Temporalities Fund, according, as they may belong to one, or other, of the several classes of Ministers provided for by the By-Laws and former Resolutions of Synod on the subject," which motion was lost by a vote of 43 to 6."

"In short the Board of Trustees feel assured that the Temporalities Board will see from the above Statement, that the arrangement made with the consent of the Government by the original Committee, by whom the commutation settlement was effected, and by the By-Laws of the Temporalities Board sanctioned by the Synod, is simply this, that Queen's College should receive in perpetuity £500, a year, and that, therefore, it is the duty of the Chairman and Secretary-Treasurer to pay £500 a year to the Treasurer for the time being of Queen's College, to be employed as heretofore, in the payment of Professors, being Ministers of the Church."

The Chairman was requested to forward to the Secretary-Treasurer of the Temporalities Board, Mr. J. W. Cook, an extract of the above statement, with a Letter soliciting the Managers of the Board to take a favourable view of the case.

EDUCATIONAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE SYNOD OF THE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH (OF SCOTLAND).

June 3rd, 1863. The Report of the Trustees of Queen's College, having been called for, was read by the Principal. It was moved by the Reverend J. H. McKerras, seconded by the Reverend John McKinnon, and passed unanimously, That the Report be received; that the Synod record their high gratification at the many evidences furnished thereby of increased efficiency, more especially at the fact that the number of Graduates and of Students sent forth from the Divinity-Hall considerably exceeds that of any former year; and resolve to regard these evidences of extended usefulness as a renewed call to more generous support of the Institution throughout the Church, and more fervent Prayer on its behalf.

LETTERS FROM THE AUTHORITIES OF QUEEN'S UNIVERSITY TO THE REVEREND DOCTOR RYERSON, ON A DRAFT OF UNIVERSITY BILL, 1863.

The following are a number of private Letters from the Honourable Alexander Campbell and the Reverend Doctor William Leitch of Queen's College, to Doctor Ryerson, on the subject of a Draft of University Bill, designed to carry out the suggestion on the subject of University Reform of the University Commissioners. I regret that I have no copy of any of Doctor Ryerson's Replies to these Letters.

I. LETTER FROM THE HONOURABLE ALEXANDER CAMPBELL TO THE REVEREND DOCTOR RYERSON.

Principal Leitch proposes to have the Draft of a Bill to carry out the recommendations of the University Commissioners prepared, and that a Deputation from the Upper

Canada Colleges should carry it to Quebec, and wait upon the Attorney General West with it. Doctor Leitch has applied to me to prepare a Draft of such a Bill; but as you have had such a world of experience in such matters, I would gladly learn that you would cause the Draft Bill to be prepared, and allow me to go over it while in manuscript. It would, I am confident, be of essential advantage to the cause we have in hand that the Bill should have the impress of your judgment and great experience. Pray let me know if you will be so good as to undertake it?

KINGSTON, January 24th, 1863.

ALEXANDER CAMPBELL.

NOTE. As Doctor Ryerson had prepared a Draft of University Bill in 1860, he revised it at a later date, so as to carry out the Suggestions of the University Commissioners. He sent a copy of this Draft of Bill to Mr. Campbell, as will be seen by reference to the Letter of the Reverend Doctor Leitch, [Number III of this series, on this page, herewith.]

II. EXTRACT FROM A LETTER OF THE REVEREND DOCTOR LEITCH TO THE REVEREND DOCTOR

RYERSON.

Our Board of Trustees have requested me to draw up a Statement, [being a "Defence of the Plan of University Reform,"] to be circulated among the Members of Parliament.t I am not sure what would be the best time. Perhaps you could arrange with the Honourable Alexander Campbell as to our future course of action. Mr. Campbell is retained as the Legal Adviser of our College, so that he has power to act on behalf of the College in any proceedings that may be entered into. KINGSTON, January 31st, 1863.

WILLIAM LEITCH.

III LETTER FROM THE REVEREND DOCTOR LEITCH TO THE REVEREND DOCTOR RYERSON.

I merely write to acknowledge the receipt of your Letter, and to say that I highly approve of all that you have done. Your plan of writing a Pamphlet, in the name of the Conference Committee, will serve the purpose excellently well. Anything that I can do will only be to second your efforts. I am not at all up to the arguments suitable for the Legislators of Canada, but your long experience will be of good service to you in this matter.

I am glad that you have forwarded the Draft of a University Bill to Mr. Campbell, who is to let me know when a Deputation from the Colleges ought to be sent, [to interview the Government at Quebec on the subject].

I have had some correspondence with the Reverend Provost Whittaker on the subject. He is evidently most anxious to join us, although unwilling to give up his peculiar views. It would be a great thing to get the Church of England to go along with us; and, if there are practical men to represent them, they will see that Trinity is not left out in the cold," in any measure that may be passed. There is to be a Meeting of the Corporation of Trinity College to-morrow, when Provost Whittaker is to bring the University subject before it.

KINGSTON, February 9th, 1863.

WILLIAM LEITCH.

IV. LETTER FROM THE HONOURABLE ALEXANDER CAMPBELL TO DOCTOR RYERSON.

I have this morning received your Draft of the University Bill. I had left home early in the month for Ottawa and Montreal and came here, without having returned

For this Draft of University Bill of 1860, see page 66 of the Sixteenth Volume of this Documentary History. For its revisal by Dr. Ryerson, see note above.

†This Statement will be found in the next Chapter of this Volume.

to Kingston. I have read the Draft and send it to-day to Doctor Leitch to peruse; on its being returned to me by him I will go through it with the Report of the Commissioners, and your Letter before me, and will afterwards do myself the pleasure of writing to you about it.

QUEBEC, February 11th, 1863.

ALEXANDER CAMPBELL.

IV. LETTER FROM THE HONOURABLE ALEXANDER CAMPBELL TO DOCTOR RYERSON.

Many thanks for your kind congratulations, they are the more grateful to me from the sympathy which I have long felt towards the Canadian spirit, so to speak, with I which your many years of patriotic and most useful exertions have been animated. say Canadian Spirit, without the slightest disparagement of the more enlarged national feeling, but rather as in addition to it.

I hope still to be of use in the matter of the University Reform. Doctor Leitch is to send me your Draft of the University Bill, which I shall revise, and with which the Deputation from the Colleges will wait on the Attorney General.

Unless the Government take up the subject, I fear we shall make no progress this Session, but everything which I can do shall be done.

QUEBEC, February 19th, 1863.

ALEXANDER CAMPBELL.

V. LETTER FROM THE HONOURABLE ALEXANDER CAMPBELL TO DOCTOR RYERSON.

I notice the announcement of your arrival at the St. Louis Hotel, here, in the Papers this morning. I hope that you will, during your stay, go over the Draft of the University Bill with me. I will hold myself at liberty to-morrow at half past ten at my Rooms in the Parliament House, and on Wednesday at the same hour and place. Will you, if you can, make it convenient to join me on one day or the other? QUEBEC, February 23rd, 1863.

ALEXANDER CAMPBELL.

NOTE. The Reverend Doctor Ryerson met Mr. Campbell, as here arranged, and they went over the Draft of the University Bill, which Doctor Ryerson had prepared, and they agreed upon its details. It was not submitted to the Legislature, however, as the Government is not disposed to take the matter up at the time, owing to the strong pressure which was brought to bear upon it by Members of the Senate of the University of Toronto and by some of their own supporters in the Legislature.

THE REVEREND DOCTOR LEITCH ON THE REPORT OF THE UNIVERSITY COMMISSIONERS.

"The Reverend Doctor Leitch, Principal of Queen's University College, in his addresss to Graduates; after conferring the Degrees at Convocation on the successful Candidates in the several Faculties of Law, Medicine, Arts, and Divinity, said:

During the past year an important advance has been made in the University Question by the issuing of the University Commissioners' Report. We are concerned in its academic bearing; and it cannot but be a matter of satisfaction to all, that the Country is fully alive to the importance of a University System, sketched by the Commissioners, which shall tend to elevate and advance learning. Hitherto the public mind has been much bewildered with purely financial matters, connected with the University. while the question itself has become a matter of party politics. But the higher educatiou of the Country is not a matter of party politics. Learning should be kept sacred from the strifes of partizanship. Who would think of party, if we were suddenly called

to arise and defend our borders from foreign invasion? And so, learning is one of those subjects which ought to be exempt from the common lot of party warfare. And it is satisfactory to know that the desire for University Reform is confined to no party. The essential feature of the whole reform is to establish one great national system of higher education, instead of the fragmentary, disjointed, and mutually counteracting system which at present prevails. What the Country demands is a great national University Board, under which Degrees in all Colleges will have an equivalent and equal value; and all the public funds will not be wasted on Institutions for the efficiency of which the Country has no proper guarantee. At present, Degrees of Canada has no uniform, definite value. Every College has its own standard, and is under no public check whatever. If there was a General University Board, there would be a guarantee that every Graduate would attain a minimum standard of excellence. Again, the Honours conferred by different Colleges have different values; and great injustice is thus done to the Graduates, whose pass Degree of one College is, perhaps, more valuable than the Honour Degree of another College. But when two Graduates apply for the same situation, the Honour Degree of the one man, although possibly less valuable, will naturally have a greater weight than that of the pass Degree of the other. All this evil would be obviated by a Great National University, that would test the qualification of Graduates by a common standard; and until such a measure be passed, the inevitable tendency will be to degrade the standard of learning. It is long before a question of this kind sinks fully into the national mind; but it is the character of the Anglo-Saxon mind, when once it grasps a principle, to carry it out sternly to its legitimate and practical consequences. And this race will have changed its character in Canada, if it do not speedily effect a reform which shall have for its great end the elevation and wider diffusion of learning.

GIFTS TO QUEEN'S COLLEGE MUSEUM.

A large and valuable collection of Minerals and Plants, has been presented to the Museum of the University by Messieurs Augustus Thibodo, Oliver Thibodo, and Robert Thibodo, now at Walla Walla, Washington Territory. The specimens are sixty in number, and have been gathered at different places throughout British Columbia, Oregon, Washington Territory, and Mexico. The collection was received in good order. The thanks of the Senate have been conveyed to the Donors for this valuable gift.

CHAPTER V.

DEFENCE OF THE PLAN OF UNIVERSITY REFORM PROPOSED BY THE SENATE OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO.

BEING A STATEMENT DRAWN UP, AT THE REQUEST OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF QUEEN'S COLLEGE, BY THE REVEREND DOCTOR LEITCH, PRINCIPAL OF THE COLLEGE.

The recent Report of the University Commissioners exhibits the latest and most important phase of the University Question. The subject has now assumed a definite form. There can be now no misunderstanding as to the question at issue. People have been long bewildered with the intricacy of the question, and have taken sides more from party instincts than from a deliberately formed judgment. The Report has the great merit of putting the question in an intelligible form, and has, so far, cleared the way for its final settlement.*

* For this Report, See page 57 of the Seventeenth Volumn of this Documentary History.

History of the University Question of Upper Canada.

It is with mingled feelings of admiration and shame that one looks back on the history of this long-vexed question-admiration for the longing of the people for a National System of Higher Education, and shame for the sectional and local influences that have constantly thwarted this national aspiration. It would be a profitless task to trace the history from 1827 downwards, of the munificent Endowment for Academic Education. The Fund was changed from one party to another in the vain hope that it would be at last turned to proper account. But all was in vain. Some malign influence defeated all the honest attempts of the Legislature to gratify the longings of the people. The national ideal was, in the early days, ever sacrificed on the shrine of local, personal, and sectarian interests. The Endowment was ample enough to meet the necessities of the whole of Canada, but being restricted by the above influences to the narrowest limits, it was felt to be necessary, in order to absorb the Revenue, to resort, of late days, to the most ingenious and startling devices for absorption. The scale of extravagance was such as to touch on the romantic; and, even in England, with so many similar cases to pall the appetite, the story of the University of Toronto is sometimes quoted as one of no ordinary piquancy. At a moderate computation, every

Student who has gone through a regular course at College has cost £4,000. That a country so young and practical should yet be so precocious in the art of extravagance, has often been a theme of curiosity and wonder. But no one can trace the successive stages of this University Question without discovering evidences of a decided advance in patriotic feeling and integrity of purpose.

The University Act of 1853.

The Act of 1853, under which the University of Toronto now exists, gives evidence of enlightened and generous purpose. It was evidently the original aim of the Bill to found a great National Institution, embracing the various Collegiate Institutions of the Country. It provides for Colleges throughout various parts of the Country, but they were all to be united under one University, or Superintending and Examining Board. By the Act, Trinity College, Queen's College, Victoria College, and Regiopolis College, were, as well as University College, affiliated to the University of Toronto, and they as much form part of the University of Toronto as University College, with the exception of sharing the Endowment. This fact has been very much overlooked in the controversy, and it has been assumed that University College is the only College of the University of Toronto, but the others equally form part of the Institution. These Colleges have Representatives in the Senate, and, if they choose, they can take advantage of the privileges of affiliation. Academically, they form an integral part of the University it is only financially that they are excluded. But how should such an anomaly exist, that all the various Colleges should be put on the same level in relation to the University, and that one College, videlicet, University College, should monopolize all the funds? There is perfect consistency in the whole of the Act except on this one point. It exhibits all the elements of a great national scheme of higher education without reference to religious differences. The Act does not, academically, draw any invidious and sectarian distinction between the various Colleges. It does not recognise the superior rights of a non-religious College over a religious one. A College whose Corporation holds a negative creed in Religion is not acknowledged as having any claim superior to that of a College whose Corporation holds a positive Religious creed. Creeds are entirely ignored, and regard is had only to the work done; and the University is appointed to test that work, from whatever quarter it may come. The Act assumes that if there is a danger in beliefs, the belief in no Religious doctrine may be quite as dangerous as a belief in some Religious doctrine, that a godless College may be as much fraught with evil as a godly one. Hence, as far as the Colleges are related to the University, there is no sectarian partial dealing. But it is far otherwise with the