path: root/48244-0.txt

*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 48244 ***

Note: Project Gutenberg also has an HTML version of this
      file which includes the original illustrations.
      See 48244-h.htm or 48244-h.zip:
      (http://www.gutenberg.org/files/48244/48244-h/48244-h.htm)
      or
      (http://www.gutenberg.org/files/48244/48244-h.zip)


      Project Gutenberg has the other volume of this work.
      Volume I: see http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/47809


      Images of the original pages are available through
      Internet Archive/Canadian Libraries. See
      https://archive.org/details/montrealunderthe02atheuoft


Transcriber’s note:

      Text enclosed by underscores is in italics (_italics_).

      A carat character is used to denote superscription. A
      single character following the carat is superscripted
      (example: Benj^n).





MONTREAL 1535-1914

Under British Rule 1760-1914

by

WILLIAM HENRY ATHERTON, Ph. D.


   _Qui manet in patria et patriam cognoscere temnit
   Is mihi non civis, sed peregrinus erit_

VOLUME II







[Illustration]

Illustrated

The S. J. Clarke Publishing Company
Montreal Vancouver Chicago
1914




PREFACE


The history of “Montreal Under British Rule” is the “Tale of Two
Cities”, of a dual civilization with two main racial origins, two
mentalities, two main languages, and two main religions. It is
the story of two dominant races growing up side by side under the
same flag, jealously preserving their identities, at some times
mistrusting one another, but on the whole living in marvelous
harmony though not always in unison, except on certain well
defined common grounds of devotion to Canada and the Empire, and
of the desire of maintaining the noble traditions and the steady
progress of their city.

Montreal of today is a cosmopolitan city, but it is
preponderatingly French-Canadian in its population. This fact
makes it necessary to give especial attention to the history of
two-thirds of the people. There has, therefore, been an effort in
these pages, while recognizing this, to respect the rights of the
minority, and open-handed justice has been observed.

The position of a dispassionate onlooker has been taken as far
as possible in the narration of the domestic struggles in the
upbuilding of the city through the crucial turnstiles of Canadian
history under British rule--the Interregnum, the establishment
of civil government, the Quebec act, the Constitutional act,
the Union, and the Confederation. This attitude of equipoise,
while disappointing to partisans, has been justified if it helps
to present an unbiased account of different periods of history
and serves to maintain the city’s motto of “Concordia Salus”--a
doctrine which has been upheld throughout this work. _Tout savoir
c’est tout pardonner._

Charles Dickens in his visit to Montreal in 1842 observed that
it was a “heart-burning town.” There is no need to renew the
occasion for such a title in the city of today.

It only remains to express thankful indebtedness to those, too
numerous to mention, who have assisted in the compilation of
certain information otherwise difficult of access, and also to
thank a number of friends, prominent citizens of Montreal, who
in connection with the movement for city improvement and the
inculcation of civic pride have encouraged the author to embark
on the laborious but pleasant task of preparing this second
volume of the history of “Montreal Under British Rule,” as a
sequel to the first volume of “Montreal Under the French Régime.”

                                       WILLIAM HENRY ATHERTON.
  December, 1914.




NOTE TO THE READER


In presenting the second volume to the reader the writer would
observe that its first part deals mainly with the story of city
progress under the various changes of the political and civic
constitution, with certain chapters of supplementary annals and
sidelights of general progress. The second part treats in detail,
for the sake of students and as a reference book, the special
advancement of the city through its various eras in religion,
education, culture, population, public service, hospital,
charitable, commercial, financial, transportation and city
improvement growth, and in so doing the author has desired to
present the histories of the chief associations that have in the
past or in the present been mainly responsible for the upbuilding
of a no mean city.

                                                       W.H.A.




                            CONTENTS


                             PART I

                CONSTITUTIONAL AND CIVIC PROGRESS


                            CHAPTER I

                    THE EXODUS FROM MONTREAL

                              1760

          “THE OLD ORDER CHANGETH, GIVING PLACE TO NEW”

  AMHERST’S LETTER REVIEWING EVENTS LEADING UP TO THE
    CAPITULATION--THE SURRENDER OF ARMS--THE REVIEW OF BRITISH
    TROOPS--THE DEPARTURE OF THE FRENCH TROOPS--END OF THE
    PECULATORS--VAUDREUIL’S CAPITULATION CENSURED--DEPARTURE OF
    THE PROVINCIAL TROOPS--ARRANGEMENTS FOR THE GOVERNMENT OF THE
    COLONY--DEPARTURE OF AMHERST--THE TWO RACES LEFT BEHIND. NOTES:
    (1) THE EXODUS AND THE REMNANT.--(2) THE POPULATION OF CANADA
    AT THE FALL                                                         3


                           CHAPTER II

                         THE INTERREGNUM

                            1760-1763

                       MILITARY GOVERNMENT

  BRIGADIER GAGE, GOVERNOR OF MONTREAL--THE ADDRESS OF THE
    MILITIA AND MERCHANTS--GOVERNMENT BY THE MILITARY BUT NOT
    “MARTIAL LAW”--THE CUSTOM OF PARIS STILL PREVAILS--COURTS
    ESTABLISHED--THE EMPLOYMENT OF FRENCH-CANADIAN MILITIA CAPTAINS
    IN THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE--SENTENCES FROM THE REGISTERS
    OF THE MONTREAL COURTS--GOVERNOR GAGE’S ORDINANCES--TRADE--THE
    PORT--GAGE’S REPORT TO PITT ON THE STATE OF THE GOVERNMENT OF
    MONTREAL--THE PROMULGATION OF THE DECLARATION OF THE DEFINITIVE
    TREATY OF PARIS--REGULATIONS CONCERNING THE LIQUIDATION OF THE
    PAPER MONEY--LEAVE TO THE FRENCH TO DEPART--LAST ORDINANCES OF
    GAGE--HIS DEPARTURE                                                13


                           CHAPTER III

                 THE DEFINITIVE TREATY OF PARIS

                              1763

                    THE NEW CIVIL GOVERNMENT

  THE DEFINITIVE TREATY OF PEACE--SECTION RELATING TO
    CANADA--CATHOLIC DISABILITIES AND THE PHRASE “AS FAR AS THE
    LAWS OF GREAT BRITAIN PERMIT”--THE TREATY RECEIVED WITH DELIGHT
    BY THE “OLD” SUBJECTS BUT WITH DISAPPOINTMENT BY THE “NEW”--THE
    INEVITABLE STRUGGLES BEGIN, TO CULMINATE IN THE QUEBEC ACT
    OF 1774--OPPOSITION AT MONTREAL, THE HEADQUARTERS OF THE
    SEIGNEURS--THE NEW CIVIL GOVERNMENT IN ACTION--CIVIL COURTS AND
    JUSTICES OF THE PEACE ESTABLISHED--MURRAY’S ACTION IN ALLOWING
    “ALL SUBJECTS OF THE COLONY” TO BE CALLED UPON TO ACT AS JURORS
    VIOLENTLY OPPOSED BY THE BRITISH PARTY AS UNCONSTITUTIONAL--THE
    PROTEST OF THE QUEBEC GRAND JURY--SUBSEQUENT MODIFICATIONS
    IN 1766 TO SUIT ALL PARTIES--GOVERNOR MURRAY’S COMMENT
    ON MONTREAL, “EVERY INTRIGUE TO OUR DISADVANTAGE WILL BE
    HATCHED THERE”--MURRAY AND THE MONTREAL MERCHANTS--A TIME OF
    MISUNDERSTANDING. NOTE: LIST OF SUBSEQUENT GOVERNORS               25


                           CHAPTER IV

          CIVIC GOVERNMENT UNDER JUSTICES OF THE PEACE

                              1764

  RALPH BURTON, GOVERNOR OF MONTREAL, BECOMES MILITARY
    COMMANDANT--FRICTION AMONG MILITARY COMMANDERS--JUSTICES
    OF PEACE CREATED--FIRST QUARTER SESSIONS--MILITARY
    VERSUS CITIZENS--THE WALKER OUTRAGE--THE TRIAL--WALKER
    BOASTS OF SECURING MURRAY’S RECALL--MURRAY’S DEFENSE
    AFTER HIS RECALL--THE JUSTICES OF THE PEACE ABUSE THEIR
    POWER--CENSURED BY THE COUNCIL AT QUEBEC--COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
    ESTABLISHED--PIERRE DU CALVET--CARLETON’S DESCRIPTION OF THE
    “DISTRESSES OF THE CANADIANS”                                      35


                            CHAPTER V

            THE PRELIMINARY STRUGGLE FOR AN ASSEMBLY

                THE BRITISH MERCHANTS OF MONTREAL

  “VERY RESPECTABLE MERCHANTS”--A LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY ON
    BRITISH LINES PROMOTED BY THEM--INOPPORTUNE--VARIOUS
    MEMORIALS TO GOVERNMENT--THE MEETINGS AT MILES PRENTIES’
    HOUSE--CRAMAHE--MASERES--COUNTER PETITIONS                         45


                           CHAPTER VI

                     THE QUEBEC ACT OF 1774

            THE NOBLESSE OF THE DISTRICT OF MONTREAL

  THE GRIEVANCES OF THE SEIGNEURS--MONTREAL THE
    HEADQUARTERS--“EVERY INTRIGUE TO OUR DISADVANTAGE WILL BE
    HATCHED THERE”--PETITIONS--CARLETON’S FEAR OF A FRENCH
    INVASION--A SECRET MEETING--PROTESTS OF MAGISTRATES TODD AND
    BRASHAY--PROTESTS OF CITIZENS--CARLETON’S CORRESPONDENCE FOR
    AN AMENDED CONSTITUTION IN FAVOUR OF THE NOBLESSE--THE QUEBEC
    ACT--ANGLICIZATION ABANDONED                                       51


                           CHAPTER VII

                  THE REVOLUTIONARY WAR OF 1775

                 MONTREAL THE SEAT OF DISCONTENT

  THE QUEBEC ACT, A PRIMARY OCCASION OF THE AMERICAN
    REVOLUTION--MONTREAL BRITISH DISLOYAL--THE COFFEE HOUSE
    MEETING--WALKER AGAIN--MONTREAL DISAFFECTS QUEBEC--LOYALTY
    OF HABITANTS AND SAVAGES UNDERMINED--NOBLESSE, GENTRY AND
    CLERGY LOYAL--KING GEORGE’S BUST DESECRATED--“DELENDA EST
    CANADA”--“THE FOURTEENTH COLONY”--BENEDICT ARNOLD AND ETHAN
    ALLEN--BINDON’S TREACHERY--CALL FOR VOLUNTEERS FEEBLY
    ANSWERED--MILITIA CALLED OUT--LANDING OF THE REBELS--ENGLISH
    OFFICIAL APATHY--MONTREAL’S PART IN THE DEFENCE OF CANADA--THE
    FIRST SOLELY FRENCH-CANADIAN COMPANY OF MILITIA--NOTE: THE
    MILITIA                                                            63


                          CHAPTER VIII

                        MONTREAL BESIEGED

                              1775

                     THE SECOND CAPITULATION

  ETHAN ALLEN--HABITANTS’ AND CAUGHNAWAGANS’ LOYALTY TAMPERED
    WITH--PLAN TO OVERCOME MONTREAL--THE ATTACK--ALLEN
    CAPTURED--WALKER’S FARM HOUSE AT L’ASSOMPTION BURNED--WALKER
    TAKEN PRISONER TO MONTREAL--CARLETON’S FORCE FROM MONTREAL
    FAILS AT ST. JOHN’S--CARLETON LEAVES MONTREAL--MONTREAL
    BESIEGED--MONTGOMERY RECEIVES A DEPUTATION OF CITIZENS--THE
    ARTICLES OF CAPITULATION--MONTGOMERY ENTERS BY THE RECOLLECT
    GATE--WASHINGTON’S PROCLAMATION                                    71


                           CHAPTER IX

     MONTREAL, AN AMERICAN CITY SEVEN MONTHS UNDER CONGRESS

                              1776

              THE CONGRESS ARMY EVACUATES MONTREAL

  MONTREAL UNDER CONGRESS--GENERAL WOOSTER’S TROUBLES--MONEY AND
    PROVISIONS SCARCE--MILITARY RULE--GENERAL CONFUSION--THE
    CHATEAU DE RAMEZAY, AMERICAN HEADQUARTERS--THE COMMISSIONERS:
    BENJAMIN FRANKLIN, SAMUEL CHASE AND CHARLES CARROL--FLEURY
    MESPLET, THE PRINTER--THE FAILURE OF THE COMMISSIONERS--NEWS
    OF THE FLIGHT FROM QUEBEC--MONTREAL A STORMY SEA--THE
    COMMISSIONERS FLY--THE WALKERS ALSO--THE EVACUATION BY THE
    CONGRESS TROOPS--NOTES: I. PRINCIPAL REBELS WHO FLED; II.
    DESCRIPTION OF DRESS OF AMERICAN RIFLES                            79


                            CHAPTER X

                      THE ASSEMBLY AT LAST

                            1776-1791

                 THE CONSTITUTIONAL ACT OF 1791

  REOCCUPATION BY BRITISH--COURTS REESTABLISHED--CONGRESS’ SPECIAL
    OFFER TO CANADA--LAFAYETTE’S PROJECTED RAID--UNREST AGAIN--THE
    LOYALTY OF FRENCH CANADIANS AGAIN BEING TEMPTED--QUEBEC
    ACT PUT INTO FORCE--THE MERCHANTS BEGIN MEMORIALIZING FOR
    A REPEAL AND AN ASSEMBLY--HALDIMAND AND HUGH FINLAY OPPOSE
    ASSEMBLY--MEETINGS AND COUNTER MEETINGS--CIVIC AFFAIRS--THE
    ESTABLISHMENT OF A PROJECTED “CHAMBER OF COMMERCE”--THE FIRST
    NOTIONS OF MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS--THE MONTREAL CITIZENS’
    COMMITTEE REPORT--THE UNITED EMPIRE LOYALISTS--THE DIVISION OF
    THE PROVINCE PROJECTED--THE CONSTITUTIONAL ACT OF 1791. NOTE:
    MONTREAL NAMES OF PETITIONERS IN 1784                              87


                           CHAPTER XI

                   THE FUR TRADERS OF MONTREAL

                  THE GREAT NORTH WEST COMPANY

  MERCHANTS--NATIONAL AND RELIGIOUS ORIGINS--UP COUNTRY
    TRADE--EARLY COMPANIES--NORTH WEST COMPANY--CHARLES GRANT’S
    REPORT--PASSES--MEMORIALS--GEOGRAPHICAL DISCOVERIES--RIVAL
    COMPANIES--THE X.Y. COMPANY--JOHN JACOB ASTOR’S COMPANIES---
    ASTORIA TO BE FOUNDED--THE JOURNEY OF THE MONTREAL
    CONTINGENT--ASTORIA A FAILURE--THE GREAT RIVAL--THE HUDSON’S
    BAY COMPANY--SIR ALEXANDER SELKIRK--THE AMALGAMATION OF THE
    NORTH WEST AND HUDSON’S BAY COMPANIES IN 1821--THE BEAVER CLUB     97


                           CHAPTER XII

                  FRENCH REVOLUTIONARY DESIGNS

                 MONTREAL THE SEAT OF JACOBINISM

  THE ASSEMBLY AT LAST--MONTREAL REPRESENTATIVES--FRENCH AND
    ENGLISH USED--THE FRENCH REVOLUTION--MUTINY AT QUEBEC--THE
    DUKE OF KENT--INVASION FEARED FROM FRANCE--MONTREAL
    DISAFFECTED--ATTORNEY GENERAL MONK’S REPORT--THE FRENCH
    SEDITIONARY PAMPHLETS--PANEGYRIC ON BISHOP BRIAND--MONTREAL
    ARRESTS--ATTORNEY GENERAL SEWELL’S REPORT--M’LEAN--ROGER’S
    SOCIETY--JEROME BONAPARTE EXPECTED                                105


                          CHAPTER XIII

                  THE AMERICAN INVASION OF 1812

                    MONTREAL AND CHATEAUGUAY

                     FRENCH CANADIAN LOYALTY

  THE CAUSES OF THE WAR OF 1812--THE CHESAPEAKE--JOHN HENRY--HOW
    THE NEWS OF INVASION WAS RECEIVED IN MONTREAL--THE
    MOBILIZATION--GENERAL HULL--THE MONTREAL MILITIA--FRENCH AND
    ENGLISH ENLIST--MONTREAL THE OBJECTIVE--OFFICIAL ACCOUNT OF
    THE BATTLE OF CHATEAUGUAY--COLONEL DE SALABERRY--RETURN OF
    WOUNDED--THE EXPLANATION OF THE FEW BRITISH KILLED                115


                           CHAPTER XIV

                 SIDE LIGHTS OF SOCIAL PROGRESS

                            1776-1825

  THE “GAZETTE DU COMMERCE ET LITTERAIRE”--A RUNAWAY SLAVE--GUY
    CARLETON’S DEPARTURE--GENERAL HALDIMAND IN MONTREAL--MESPLET’S
    PAPER SUSPENDED--POET’S CORNER--THE HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
    DISCUSSED--FIRST THEATRICAL COMPANY: THE “BUSY BODY”--LORD
    NELSON’S MONUMENT--A RUNAWAY RED CURLY HAIRED AND BANDY
    LEGGED APPRENTICE--LAMBERT’S PICTURE OF THE PERIOD--MINE HOST
    OF THE “MONTREAL HOTEL”--THE “CANADIAN COURANT”--AMERICAN
    INFLUENCE--THE “HERALD”--WILLIAM GRAY AND ALEXANDER
    SKAKEL--BEGINNINGS OF COMMERCIAL LIFE--DOIGE’S DIRECTORY--MUNGO
    KAY--LITERARY CELEBRITIES--HERALD “EXTRAS”--WATERLOO--POLITICAL
    PSEUDONYMS--NEWSPAPER CIRCULATION--THE ABORTIVE “SUN”--A
    PICTURE OF THE CITY IN 1818--THE BLACK RAIN OF 1819--OFFICIAL,
    MILITARY AND ECCLESIASTICAL LIFE--ORIGIN OF ART, MUSIC, ETC.      123


                           CHAPTER XV

                    BUREAURACY vs. DEMOCRACY

                THE PROPOSED UNION OF THE CANADAS

  REPRESENTATIVE GOVERNMENT--MUNICIPAL AFFAIRS--FRENCH-CANADIANS
    AIM TO STRENGTHEN THEIR POLITICAL POWER--THE “COLONIAL” OFFICE
    AND THE BUREAUCRATIC CLASS VERSUS THE DEMOCRATIC REPRESENTATIVE
    ASSEMBLY--L. J. PAPINEAU AND JOHN RICHARDSON--PETITIONS FOR
    AND AGAINST UNION--THE MONTREAL BRITISH PETITION OF 1822--THE
    ANSWER OF L.J. PAPINEAU--THE LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL--THE BILL FOR
    UNION WITHDRAWN. NOTES: NAMES OF JUSTICES OF THE PEACE FROM
    1796 TO 1833--MEMBERS OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY FOR MONTREAL
    DISTRICT, 1791-1829--PETITION OF MONTREAL BRITISH--1822           133


                           CHAPTER XVI

                      MURMURS OF REVOLUTION

                    RACE AND CLASS ANTAGONISM

  “CANADA TRADE ACTS”--LORD DALHOUSIE BANQUETED AFTER BEING
    RECALLED--MOVEMENT TO JOIN MONTREAL AS A PORT TO UPPER
    CANADA--THE GOVERNOR ALLEGED TO BE A TOOL--EXECUTIVE
    COUNCIL--RIOTOUS ELECTION AT MONTREAL--DR. TRACY VERSUS
    STANLEY BAGG--THE MILITARY FIRE--THE “MINERVE” VERSUS THE
    GAZETTE AND HERALD--THE CHOLERA OF 1832--MURMURS OF THE COMING
    REVOLT--MONTREAL PETITION FOR AND AGAINST CONSTITUTIONAL
    CHANGES--MR. NELSON BREAKS WITH PAPINEAU--THE NINETY-TWO
    RESOLUTIONS--MR. ROEBUCK, AGENT FOR THE REFORM PARTY,
    ADVOCATES SELF-GOVERNMENT--FRENCH-CANADIAN EXTREMISTS--THE
    ELECTIONS--PUBLIC MEETING OF “MEN OF BRITISH AND IRISH
    DESCENT”--TWO DIVERGENT MENTALITIES--THE CONSTITUTIONAL
    ASSOCIATIONS--PETITIONS TO LONDON--LORD GOSFORD APPOINTED
    ROYAL COMMISSIONER--HIS POLICY OF CONCILIATION REJECTED--MR.
    PAPINEAU INTRANSIGEANT--RAISING VOLUNTEER CORPS FORBIDDEN--THE
    DORIC CLUB--“RESPONSIBLE” GOVERNMENT DEMANDED                     139


                          CHAPTER XVII

               MONTREAL IN THE THROES OF CIVIL WAR

                            1837-1838

  THE LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL TO REMAIN CROWN-APPOINTED--THE SIGNAL FOR
    REVOLT--FIRST INSURRECTIONARY MEETING. AT ST. OURS--DR. WOLFRED
    NELSON--CONSTITUTIONAL MEETINGS--THE PARISHES--THE SEDITIONARY
    MANIFESTO OF “LES FILS DE LIBERTE” AT MONTREAL--REVOLUTIONARY
    BANNERS--IRISH REJECT REVOLUTIONARY PARTY--MGR. LARTIGUE’S
    MANDEMENT AGAINST CIVIL WAR--THE FRACAS BETWEEN THE DORIC
    CLUB AND THE FILS DE LIBERTE--RIOT ACT READ--THE “VINDICATOR”
    GUTTED--MILITARY PROCEEDINGS--WARRANTS FOR ARREST--PAPINEAU
    FLIES--RELEASE OF PRISONERS AT LONGUEUIL--COMMENCEMENT
    OF HOSTILITIES--ST. DENIS--LIEUTENANT WEIR’S DEATH--GEN.
    T.S. BROWN--ST. CHARLES--ST. EUSTACHE--CAPTURE OF WOLFRED
    NELSON--SECOND MANDEMENT OF BISHOP LARTIGUE--DAY OF
    THANKSGIVING--CONSTITUTION SUSPENDED--THE INDEPENDENCE OF
    CANADA PROCLAIMED BY “PRESIDENT NELSON”--THE REGIMENTS LEAVE
    THE CITY--LORD DURHAM ARRIVES--AMNESTY AND SENTENCES--DURHAM
    RESIGNS--THE SECOND INSURRECTION--MARTIAL LAW IN MONTREAL--SIR
    JOHN COLBORNE QUASHES REBELLION--STERN REPRISALS--ARRESTS--TRUE
    BILLS--POLITICAL EXECUTIONS--“CONCORDIA SALUS”                    149


                          CHAPTER XVIII

                    PROCLAMATION OF THE UNION

                              1841

                    HOME RULE FOR THE COLONY

  THE DURHAM REPORT--THE RESOLUTIONS AT THE CHATEAU DE
    RAMEZAY--LORD SYDENHAM--THE PROCLAMATION OF UNION AT
    MONTREAL--RESPONSIBLE GOVERNMENT AT LAST                          159


                           CHAPTER XIX

             RESPONSIBLE GOVERNMENT UNDER THE UNION

  KINGSTON THE SEAT OF GOVERNMENT--THE RACE CRY
    RESUSCITATED--LAFONTAINE--RESPONSIBLE GOVERNMENT--MONTREAL
    ELECTIONS--RESTRICTION REMOVED ON FRENCH LANGUAGE IN
    PARLIAMENT--FREE TRADE MOVEMENT--FINANCIAL DEPRESSION--GEORGE
    ETIENNE CARTIER--REBELLION LOSSES BILL--THE BURNING OF THE
    PARLIAMENT HOUSE--THE MONTREAL MOVEMENT FOR ANNEXATION
    WITH THE STATES--“CLEAR GRITS” AND THE “PARTI ROUGE”--THE
    RAILWAY AND SHIPPING ERA--THE CAVAZZI RIOT--THE RECIPROCITY
    TREATY--EXIT THE OLD TORYISM--CLERGY RESERVES AND SEIGNEURIAL
    TENURE ACTS--THE MILITIA ACT--MONTREALERS ON THE ELECTED
    COUNCIL--THE _Année Terribe_ OF 1857--THOMAS D’ARCY MC
    GEE--QUEBEC TEMPORARY SEAT OF GOVERNMENT--PROTECTION FOR HOME
    INDUSTRIES--CONFEDERATION BROACHED IN MONTREAL--THE TRENT
    AFFAIR--ST. ALBAN RAID PROSECUTIONS--THE REMODIFIED CIVIL
    CODE--FENIAN RAID EXCITEMENT IN MONTREAL--OTTAWA SEAT OF
    GOVERNMENT--THE BRITISH NORTH AMERICAN ACT--CONFEDERATION         163


                           CHAPTER XX

                  THE MUNICIPALITY OF MONTREAL

  EARLY EFFORTS TOWARDS MUNICIPAL HOME RULE--1786--1821--1828--THE
    FIRST MUNICIPAL CHARTER OF 1831--THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF
    MONTREAL--JACQUES VIGER FIRST MAYOR--THE RETURN TO THE JUSTICES
    OF THE PEACE--LORD DURHAM’S REPORT AND THE RESUMPTION OF THE
    CORPORATION IN 1840--CHARTER AMENDMENT, 1851--FIRST MAYOR
    ELECTED BY THE PEOPLE--CHARTER AMENDMENT OF 1874--THE CITY OF
    MONTREAL ANNEXATIONS--CIVIC POLITICS--THE NOBLE “13”--1898
    CHARTER RECAST, SANCTIONED IN 1899--CIVIC SCANDALS--THE
    “23”--JUDGE CANNON’S REPORT--THE REFORM PARTY; THE “CITIZENS’
    ASSOCIATION”--REDUCTION OF ALDERMEN AND A BOARD OF CONTROL, THE
    ISSUE--THE WOMEN’S CIVIC ASSOCIATIONS--THE NEW REGIME AND THE
    BOARD OF CONTROL--FURTHER AMENDMENTS TO CHARTER--THE ELECTIONS
    OF 1912--ABOLITION OF THE SMALL WARD SYSTEM ADVOCATED--THE
    ELECTIONS OF 1914--A FORECAST FOR GREATER MONTREAL--SUPPLEMENT:
    LIST OF MAYORS--CITY REVENUE                                      181


                           CHAPTER XXI

  SUPPLEMENTAL ANNALS AND SIDELIGHTS OF SOCIAL LIFE UNDER THE UNION

  FOREWORD--MARKED PROGRESS GENERAL--THE EMBRYONIC
    COSMOPOLIS--THE DEEPENING OF LAKE ST. PETER--FOUNDATION OF
    PHILANTHROPIES--LIVING CHEAP--THE MONTREAL DISPENSARY--RASCO’S
    HOTEL AND CHARLES DICKENS--PRIVATE THEATRICALS--MONTREAL
    AS SEEN BY “BOZ”--DOLLY’S AND THE GOSSIPS--THE MUNICIPAL
    ACT--ELECTION RIOTS--LITERARY AND UPLIFT MOVEMENTS--THE
    RAILWAY ERA COMMENCES--THE SHIP FEVER--A RUN ON THE SAVINGS’
    BANK--THE REBELLION LOSSES BILL AND THE BURNING OF PARLIAMENT
    HOUSE--RELIGIOUS FANATICISM--GENERAL D’URBAN’S FUNERAL--A
    CHARITY BALL--THE GRAND TRUNK INCORPORATORS--EDUCATIONAL
    MOVEMENTS--THE “BLOOMERS” APPEAR--M’GILL UNIVERSITY
    REVIVAL--THE GREAT FIRE OF 1852--THE GAVAZZI RIOTS--PROGRESS
    IN 1853--THE CRIMEAN WAR OF 1854--THE PATRIOTIC FUND--THE
    ASIATIC CHOLERA--THE ATLANTIC SERVICE FROM MONTREAL--ADMIRAL
    BELVEZE’S VISIT--PARIS EXHIBITION PREPARATIONS--“S.S.
    MONTREAL” DISASTER--THE INDIAN MUTINY--THE FIRST OVERSEAS
    CONTINGENT--THE ATLANTIC CABLE CELEBRATED--A MAYOR OF THE
    PERIOD--THE RECEPTION OF ALBERT EDWARD, PRINCE OF WALES--FORMAL
    OPENING OF THE VICTORIA BRIDGE--THE GREAT BALL--“EDWARD
    THE PEACEMAKER”--THE AMERICAN CIVIL WAR--MONTREAL FOR THE
    SOUTH--FEAR OF WAR--CITIZEN RECRUITING--THE MILITARY--OFFICERS
    OF THE PERIOD--PEACE--THE SOUTHERNERS--THE WAR SCARE--THE
    BIRTH OF MODERN MILITIA SYSTEM--THE MILITARY FETED--CIVIC
    PROGRESS--FENIAN THREATS--D’ARCY MCGEE--SHAKESPEARE
    CENTENARY--GERMAN IMMIGRANTS’ DISASTER--ST. ALBAN’S
    RAIDERS--RECIPROCITY WITH THE UNITED STATES TO END--ABRAHAM
    LINCOLN AND THE CITY COUNCIL--THE FIRST FENIAN RAID--MONTREAL
    ACTION--MILITARY ENTHUSIASM--THE DRILL HALL--A RETROSPECT AND
    AN APPRECIATION OF THE LATTER DAYS OF THE UNION                   195


                          CHAPTER XXII

             CONSTITUTIONAL LIFE UNDER CONFEDERATION

                FEDERAL AND PROVINCIAL INFLUENCE

  MONTREAL AN IMPORTANT FACTOR IN FEDERAL AND PROVINCIAL
    POLITICS--CONFEDERATION TESTED--CARTIER AND THE PARTI ROUGE
    AT MONTREAL--ASSASSINATION OF THOMAS D’ARCY M’GEE--THE
    HUDSON’S BAY TRANSFER--THE METIS AND THE RIEL REBELLION--LORD
    STRATHCONA--THE CANADIAN PACIFIC RAILWAY BILL--RESIGNATION
    OF SIR JOHN A. MACDONALD--SECOND FENIAN RAID--THE “NATIONAL
    POLICY”--VOTING REFORM--TEMPERANCE BILL--ORANGE RIOTS--SECOND
    NORTH WEST REBELLION--THE “SIXTY-FIFTH REGIMENT”--THE
    MANITOBA SCHOOL QUESTION--PROMINENT CITIZENS--BRITISH
    PREFERENTIAL TARIFF--BOER WAR--“STRATHCONA HORSE”--THE
    NATIONALIST LEAGUE--RECIPROCITY AND FEAR OF ANNEXATION--THE
    ELECTIONS OF 1911--NAVAL BILL--PROVINCIAL POLITICS--MONTREAL
    MEMBERS--PROVINCIAL OVERSIGHT OVER MONTREAL--HOME RULE--THE
    INTERNATIONAL WAR OF 1914--THE FIRST CONTINGENT--MONTREAL’S
    ACTION                                                            219


                          CHAPTER XXIII

        SUPPLEMENTAL ANNALS AND SIDELIGHTS OF SOCIAL LIFE

                       UNDER CONFEDERATION

                            1867-1914

  CONFEDERATION--IMPRESSIONS OF--FUNERAL OF D’ARCY M’GEE--PRINCE
    ARTHUR OF CONNAUGHT--THE SECOND FENIAN RAID--THE “SILVER”
    NUISANCE--ORGANIZATION OF CANADIAN PACIFIC RAILROAD--RUN ON
    A SAVINGS BANK--FUNERAL OF SIR GEORGE ETIENNE CARTIER--NEW
    BALLOT ACT--THE “BAD TIMES”--THE NATIONAL POLICY--THE ICE
    RAILWAY--THE CANADIAN PACIFIC RAILROAD CONTRACT--THE FORMATION
    OF THE ROYAL SOCIETY OF CANADA--OTHER CONGRESSES--THE
    FIRST WINTER CARNIVAL--FIFTIETH ANNIVERSARY OF ST. JEAN
    BAPTISTE ASSOCIATION--THE GREAT ALLEGORICAL PROCESSION AND
    CAVALCADE--THE MONUMENT NATIONAL--THE RIEL REBELLION--SMALLPOX
    EPIDEMIC AND RIOTS--THE FLOODS OF 1886--THE FIRST
    REVETMENT WALL--THE JESUITS ESTATES BILL AND THE EQUAL
    RIGHTS PARTY--LA GRIPPE--THE COMTE DE PARIS--ELECTRICAL
    CONVENTION--HISTORIC TABLETS PLACED--THE TWO HUNDRED AND
    FIFTIETH ANNIVERSARY OF VILLE MARIE--THE BOARD OF TRADE
    BUILDING BURNT--THE CITY RAILWAY ELECTRIFIED--HOME RULE FOR
    IRELAND--VILLE MARIA BURNT--THE “SANTA MARIA”--CHRISTIAN
    ENDEAVOURERS CONVENTION--THE CHATEAU DE RAMEZAY AS A PUBLIC
    MUSEUM--MAISONNEUVE MONUMENT--LAVAL UNIVERSITY--QUEEN
    VICTORIA’S DIAMOND JUBILEE--MONTREAL AND THE BOER WAR--THE
    VISIT OF THE DUKE AND DUCHESS OF CORNWALL--TURBINE STEAMERS--A
    JAPANESE LOAN COMPANY--FIRST AUTOMOBILE FATALITY--FIRES AT
    MCGILL--ECLIPSE OF SUN--THE WINDSOR STATION ACCIDENT--THE
    “WITNESS” BUILDING BURNT--THE OPENING OF THE ROYAL EDWARD
    INSTITUTE--GREAT CIVIC REFORM--THE DEATH OF EDWARD VII--THE
    “HERALD” BUILDING BURNT--THE EUCHARISTIC CONGRESS--MONTREAL A
    WORLD CITY--THE DRY DOCK--THE “TITANIC DISASTER”--CHILD WELFARE
    EXHIBITION--MONTREAL AND THE WAR OF 1914                          231


                             PART II

                        SPECIAL PROGRESS


                          CHAPTER XXIV

                     RELIGIOUS DENOMINATIONS

                       THE CATHOLIC CHURCH

  EARLY CHAPELS AND CHURCHES--THE FIRST PARISH CHURCH--OTHER
    CHURCHES STANDING AT THE FALL OF MONTREAL--NOTRE DAME DE
    VICTOIRE--- NOTRE DAME OF PITIE--THE “RECOLLET”--THE PRESENT
    NOTRE DAME CHURCH--ERECTION AND OPENING--THE “OLD AND
    NEW”--THE TOWERS AND BELLS--THE ECCLESIASTICAL DIOCESE OF
    QUEBEC--THE BISHOPS OF MONTREAL--THE DIVISION OF THE CITY
    INTO PARISHES--THE CHURCHES AND “RELIGIOUS”--ENGLISH-SPEAKING
    CATHOLICS--ST. PATRICK’S, IRISH NATIONAL CHURCH, ETC. NOTE: THE
    “RELIGIOUS” COMMUNITIES OF MEN AND WOMEN                          251


                           CHAPTER XXV

                  OTHER RELIGIOUS DENOMINATIONS

  ANGLICANISM--EARLY BEGINNINGS--FIRST “CHRIST CHURCH”--THE BISHOPS
    OF MONTREAL--HISTORY OF EARLY ANGLICAN CHURCHES.

  PRESBYTERIANISM--ST. GABRIEL’S STREET CHURCH--ITS OFFSHOOTS--THE
    FREE KIRK MOVEMENT--THE CHURCH OF TODAY.

  METHODISM--FIRST CHAPEL ON ST. SULPICE, 1809--THE DEVELOPMENT OF
    METHODIST CHURCHES.

  THE BAPTISTS--FIRST CHAPEL OF ST. HELEN STREET--FURTHER GROWTH
    AND DEVELOPMENT--PRESENT CHURCHES.

  CONGREGATIONALISM--CANADA EDUCATION AND HOME MISSIONARY
    SOCIETY--FIRST CHURCH ON ST. MAURICE STREET--CHURCHES OF TODAY.

  UNITARIANISM--FIRST SERMON IN CANADA, 1832--ST. JOSEPH STREET
    CHAPEL--THE CHURCHES OF THE MESSIAH.

  HEBREWS--SHEARITH ISRAEL--SHAAC HASHOMOYIM AND OTHER
    CONGREGATIONS.

  SALVATION ARMY--ITS GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT.

  OTHER DENOMINATIONS.

  A RELIGIOUS CENSUS OF MONTREAL FOR 1911                             271


                          CHAPTER XXVI

                            1760-1841

          SCHOOL SYSTEM OF MONTREAL BEFORE THE CESSION

  NEW MOVEMENT FOR BOYS--THE COLLEGE OF MONTREAL--THE BEGINNINGS
    OF ENGLISH EDUCATION--THE FIRST ENGLISH SCHOOLMASTERS BEFORE
    1790--A REPORT OF 1790 FOR THE SCHOOLS OF CANADA--THE DESIRE
    TO REAR UP A SYSTEM OF PUBLIC EDUCATION--THE JESUITS’
    ESTATES--THE “CASE” AGAINST AMHERST’S CLAIM TO THE JESUITS’
    ESTATES AND FOR THEIR DIVERGENCE TO PUBLIC EDUCATION--NEW
    ENGLISH MOVEMENT FOR A GENERAL SYSTEM OF EDUCATION--THE
    ACT OF 1801--THE ROYAL INSTITUTION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF
    LEARNING--NEVER A POPULAR SUCCESS--ITS REFORM IN 1818--A
    COUNTERPOISE--THE FABRIQUE ACT OF 1824--REVIEW OF SCHOOLS UNDER
    THE ROYAL INSTITUTION--SUBSIDIZED SCHOOLS--REVIEW OF CATHOLIC
    SCHOOLS--LAY SCHOOLS--LORD DURHAM’S REPORT ON EDUCATION. NOTE:
    THE JESUITS’ ESTATES                                              293


                          CHAPTER XXVII

                            1841-1914

                THE SCHOOL SYSTEM AFTER THE UNION

        THE RISE OF THE “SCHOOL COMMISSIONS OF MONTREAL”

  EDUCATION AFTER THE REBELLION--THE EDUCATIONAL ACT OF
    1846--THE PERSONNEL OF THE FIRST CATHOLIC AND PROTESTANT
    COMMISSIONERS--NORMAL SCHOOLS--THE AMENDED SCHOOL ACT
    OF 1868-69--THE CHARTER--THE PROTESTANT HIGH SCHOOL--THE
    PROTESTANT COMMISSIONERS, 1869-1914--HISTORY OF
    SCHOOLS--LIST OF CATHOLIC COMMISSIONERS, 1869-1914--PRESENT
    SCHOOLS UNDER COMMISSION--INDEPENDENT CATHOLIC SCHOOL
    COMMISSIONS--THE ORGANIZATIONS COOPERATING WITH THE CENTRAL
    COMMISSION--“NUNS”--“BROTHERS”--“LAITY.”

  NOTE: SECONDARY EDUCATION--TECHNICAL AND COMMERCIAL--VOCATIONAL     305


                         CHAPTER XXVIII

                     UNIVERSITY DEVELOPMENT

                      I. M’GILL UNIVERSITY

  THE ROYAL INSTITUTION--JAMES M’GILL--CHARTER OBTAINED--THE
    “MONTREAL MEDICAL INSTITUTE” SAVES M’GILL--NEW LIFE IN
    1829--THE RECTOR OF MONTREAL--THE MERCHANTS’ COMMITTEE--M’GILL
    IN 1852--THE HISTORY OF THE FACULTIES--BUILDINGS--DEVELOPMENT
    SINCE 1895--RECENT BENEFACTORS--MACDONALD COLLEGE--THE
    STRATHCONA ROYAL VICTORIA COLLEGE FOR WOMEN. NOTE: THE UNION
    THEOLOGICAL MOVEMENT--THE JOINT BOARDS OF THE CONGREGATIONAL,
    ANGLICAN, PRESBYTERIAN AND WESLEYAN AFFILIATED COLLEGES.

            II. LAVAL UNIVERSITY (MONTREAL DISTRICT)

  THE STORY OF ITS COMPONENT PARTS--EVOLUTION FROM THE “ECOLES
    DE LATIN”--COLLEGE DE ST. RAPHAEL--ENGLISH STUDENTS--COLLEGE
    DECLAMATIONS--THE PETIT SEMINAIRE ON COLLEGE STREET--THE
    COLLEGE DE MONTREAL--THE SCHOOLS OF THEOLOGY AND PHILOSOPHY,
    CLASSICS, LAW AND MEDICINE--THE APOSTOLIC CONSTITUTION “JAM
    DUDUM”--DESCRIPTION OF THE UNIVERSITY BUILDINGS--AFFILIATED
    BODIES--THE FACULTIES AND SCHOOLS. NOTE: NAMES OF EARLY
    “ENGLISH” STUDENTS AT THE “COLLEGE”                               325


                          CHAPTER XXIX

                         GENERAL CULTURE

                     I. THE LIBRARY MOVEMENT

  FRENCH:--L’OEUVRE DES BONS LIVRES, 1844--THE CABINET DE LECTURE
    PAROISSIAL, 1857.

  ENGLISH:--“MONTREAL LIBRARY” AND MONTREAL NEWS ROOM,
    1821--MERCANTILE LIBRARY ASSOCIATION, 1844--THE FRASER
    INSTITUTE, INCORPORATED 1870--ITS EARLY LITIGATIONS--ITS PUBLIC
    OPENING IN 1885--OTHER LIBRARIES.

               II. LITERARY AND LEARNED SOCIETIES

  THE NATURAL HISTORY SOCIETY, 1827--THE MECHANICS INSTITUTE,
    1828--LA SOCIETE HISTORIQUE, 1856--CONFERENCE DES INSTITUTEURS,
    1857--THE “INSTITUT CANADIEN”--CERCLE LITTERAIRE DE VILLE
    MARIE, 1857--UNION CATHOLIQUE, 1858--(THE GUIBORD CASE)--THE
    ANTIQUARIAN AND NUMISMATIC ASSOCIATION, 1862--THE “ECOLE
    LITTERAIRE” 1892--ST. JAMES LITERARY SOCIETY, 1898--THE
    “DICKENS’ FELLOWSHIP” 1909--OTHER LITERARY ASSOCIATIONS--THE
    “BURNS SOCIETY”--THE ALLIANCE FRANCAISE--THE CANADIAN CLUB,
    1905.

                   III. ARTISTIC ASSOCIATIONS

  FOREWORD:--INTELLECTUAL AND ARTISTIC EXCLUSIVENESS.

  ART:--EARLY ART IN CANADA--THE MODERN MOVEMENT--THE MONTREAL
    SOCIETY OF ARTISTS--THE ART ASSOCIATION OF MONTREAL--ITS
    HISTORY--ITS PAINTINGS--MONTREAL ART COLLECTIONS--THE ART
    SCHOOL--MONTREAL ARTISTS--THE WOMAN’S ART SOCIETY--THE CHATEAU
    DE RAMEZAY--THE ROYAL ACADEMY OF ARTS--THE ROYAL SOCIETY OF
    CANADA--OUTSTANDING ARTISTS.

  THE DRAMA:--PLAYS IN 1804--THE FIRST THEATRE ROYAL BUILT IN
    1825--THE SECOND OPENED IN 1850--OTHER THEATRES TO THE
    PRESENT--AMATEUR THEATRICAL ASSOCIATIONS--THE DRAMATIC LEAGUE.

  MUSIC:--MODERN SOCIETIES--SOCIETE DE STE CECILE--SOCIETE
    DE MONTAGNARDS--AMATEUR MUSICAL LEAGUE--MENDELSSOHN
    CHOIR--MONTREAL PHILHARMONIC--INSTRUMENTAL MUSIC.

  NEWSPAPERS:--MONTREAL HISTORIES                                     349


                           CHAPTER XXX

               NATIONAL ORIGINS OF THE POPULATION

  1834, THE YEAR OF THE SIMULTANEOUS ORIGIN OF THE EARLIEST
    NATIONAL SOCIETIES.

  ST. JEAN BAPTISTE ASSOCIATION--REORGANIZATION IN 1843--THE
    “MONUMENT NATIONAL”--EDUCATION AND SOCIAL AMELIORATIONS--THE
    FRENCH-CANADIAN SPIRIT--PRESIDENTS.

  ST. GEORGE’S SOCIETY--A CELEBRATION IN 1821--OBJECT--EARLIEST
    OFFICERS--THE HISTORY OF ST. GEORGE’S HOME--PRESIDENTS.

  ST. ANDREW’S SOCIETY--ORGANIZATION AND FIRST OFFICERS--JOINT
    PROCESSIONS OF NATIONAL SOCIETIES--EARLIEST CHARITABLE
    ACTIVITIES--THE HEALTH OF THE POPE--THE LORD ELGIN
    INCIDENT--THE CRIMEAN WAR--SUBSCRIPTION TO A PATRIOTIC
    FUND--THE HISTORY OF ST. ANDREW’S HOME BEGINS--THE HISTORY
    OF ST. ANDREW’S HALL--CONDOLENCE ON DEATH OF D’ARCY
    MCGEE--PRESIDENTS.

  ST. PATRICK’S SOCIETY--ORIGINALLY NON-DENOMINATIONAL--EARLY
    PRESIDENTS--THE REORGANIZATION IN 1856--FIRST OFFICERS--FIRST
    SOIREE--FIRST ANNIVERSARY DINNER--NATIONAL SOCIETIES
    PRESENT--THE TOASTS--IRISH COMPANIES IN CORPUS CHRISTI
    PROCESSION--IRISH PARLIAMENTARY REPRESENTATION--T. D’ARCY
    M’GEE--EMIGRATION WORK--ST. PATRICK’S HALL--PRESIDENTS.

  IRISH PROTESTANT BENEVOLENT SOCIETY--EARLY
    MEMBERS--WORKS--PRESIDENTS.

  GERMAN SOCIETY--HISTORY AND PRESIDENTS.

  WELSH SOCIETY--ORIGINALLY THE “WELSH UNION OF
    MONTREAL”--AFTERWARD--ITS OBJECT--PRESIDENTS.

  NEWFOUNDLAND SOCIETY--ORIGIN--PRESIDENTS.

  THE ZIONIST MOVEMENT--THE JEWISH COMMUNITY.

  OTHER NATIONAL ASSOCIATIONS AND CENSUS OF POPULATION FOR 1911       369


                          CHAPTER XXXI

                     PUBLIC SAFETY SERVICES

            FIGHTING FIRE--DARKNESS--FLOODS--DROUGHT

  1. FIRE FIGHTING--THE FIRE OF 1765--“THE CASE OF THE CANADIANS
    OF MONTREAL”--THE EXTENT OF THE FIRE--FIRE PRECAUTIONS
    SUGGESTED--OTHER HISTORICAL FORCES--THE MONTREAL FIRE FORCES OF
    THE PAST AND PRESENT.

  2. THE LIGHTING OF MONTREAL--OIL LAMPS, 1815--GAS,
    1836--ELECTRICITY--FIRST EXPERIMENTS IN THE STREETS, 1879--THE
    ELECTRIC LIGHTING COMPANIES--NOTES ON INTRODUCTION OF THE
    TELEGRAPH--FIRE ALARM--ELECTRIC RAILWAY.

  3. FLOODS, EARLY AND MODERN, 1848, 1857, 1861, 1865, 1886--THE
    PRACTICAL CESSATION IN 1888.

  4. THE CITY WATER SUPPLY--THE MONTREAL WATER WORKS--PRIVATE
    COMPANIES--THE MUNICIPAL WATER WORKS--THE PUMPING PLANTS--THE
    WATER FAMINE OF 1913                                              397


                          CHAPTER XXXII

                          LAW AND ORDER

        JAILS--POLICE SERVICES--COURTHOUSE--LAW OFFICERS

  EARLY PUNISHMENTS--FIRST CASES OF THE MAGISTRATES--GEORGE THE
    “NAGRE”--“EXECUTION FOR MURDER”--OTHER CRIMES PUNISHED BY
    DEATH--SOLDIER DESERTIONS--A PUBLIC EXECUTION--THE JAILS--- THE
    JAIL TAX TROUBLES--OBNOXIOUS TOASTS--THE NEW JAIL OF 1836--ITS
    POPULATIONS--THE NEW BORDEAUX PRISON--OTHER SUPPLEMENTARY
    PRISONS--THE EARLY POLICING OF MONTREAL--THE LOCAL POLICE
    FORCE OF 1815--THE POLICE FORCE AFTER THE REBELLION OF
    1837-1838--POLICE CHIEFS--MODERN LAW COURTS AND JUDGES--THE
    HISTORY OF THE BAR--THE BAR ASSOCIATIONS OF MONTREAL--THE
    RECORDERS--THE ARCHIVES. SUPPLEMENT--THE JUDGES OF THE HIGHER
    COURTS FROM 1764 TO 1914--THE SHERIFFS OF MONTREAL--THE
    PROTHONOTARIES--THE COURTHOUSE SITES--THE BATONNIERS              413


                         CHAPTER XXXIII

                            HOSPITALS

  THE HOTEL DIEU: JEANNE MANCE--THE HOSPITALIERES OF LA FLECHE--THE
    HOTEL DIEU CHAPEL--ST. PATRICK’S HOSPITAL--THE MIGRATION TO
    PINE AVENUE--THE PRESENT MODERN HOSPITAL.

  THE GENERAL HOSPITAL: “THE LADIES BENEVOLENT SOCIETY”--THE HOUSE
    OF RECOVERY--THE MONTREAL GENERAL HOSPITAL--ITS BENEFACTORS AND
    ITS ADDITIONS--THE EARLY TRAINING OF NURSES--THE ANNEX OF 1913.

  THE NOTRE DAME HOSPITAL: THE LAVAL MEDICAL FACULTY--THE OLD
    DONEGANI HOTEL--THE LADY PATRONESSES--MODERN DEVELOPMENT.

  THE WESTERN HOSPITAL: THE BISHOPS COLLEGE MEDICAL FACULTY--THE
    WOMEN’S HOSPITAL.

  THE ROYAL VICTORIA HOSPITAL: IN MEMORY OF QUEEN VICTORIA--ITS
    DESCRIPTION--ITS INCORPORATION--ITS EQUIPMENT.

  THE HOMEOPATHIC HOSPITAL: FIRST ORGANIZED
    WORK--INCORPORATION--THE FIRST HOSPITAL--THE FURTHER
    DEVELOPMENTS--THE PHILLIPS TRAINING SCHOOL FOR NURSES.

  THE HOSPITALS FOR THE INSANE: EARLY TREATMENT OF INSANE--THE
    ORIGIN AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE HOSPITALS ST. JEAN DE DIEU AT
    LONGUE POINTE AND THE PROTESTANT ASYLUM AT VERDUN.

  CIVIC HOSPITALS: THE SMALLPOX HOSPITAL--“CONTAGIOUS”
    HOSPITALS--HOSPITAL ST. PAUL--ALEXANDRA HOSPITAL.

  TUBERCULOSIS DISPENSARIES: THE ROYAL EDWARD INSTITUTE--PIONEER
    TUBERCULOSIS CLINIC IN CANADA--PUBLIC HEALTH EXHIBITIONS--THE
    INSTITUTE BRUCHESI: ITS DEVELOPMENT--THE GRACE DART HOME--CIVIC
    AID.

  CHILDREN’S HOSPITALS: THE CHILDREN’S MEMORIAL HOSPITAL--STE.
    JUSTINE. OTHER HOSPITAL ADJUNCT ASSOCIATIONS. NOTE: MEDICAL
    BOARDS: PRIVATE, PROVINCIAL, MUNICIPAL                            433


                          CHAPTER XXXIV

                     SOCIOLOGICAL MOVEMENTS

     I.   CARE OF THE AGED, FOUNDLINGS AND INFANTS.
    II.   RELIEF MOVEMENTS.
   III.   SICK VISITATION AND NURSING BODIES.
    IV.   MOVEMENTS FOR THE “UNFORTUNATES.”
     V.   VOCATIONAL TRAINING FOR THE HANDICAPPED.
    VI.   IMMIGRATION WORK.
   VII.   HUMANITARIAN MOVEMENTS FOR BOYS.
  VIII.   HEBREW SOCIAL WORKS.
    IX.   COOPERATIVE MOVEMENTS.
     X.   MOVEMENTS FOR SAILORS AND SOLDIERS.
    XI.   TEMPERANCE MOVEMENTS.
   XII.   THE IMPROVEMENT OF THE CONDITIONS OF WORKERS.
  XIII.   RECENT SOCIAL MOVEMENTS.
   XIV.   MUNICIPAL CHARITIES.                                        457


                          CHAPTER XXXV

               COMMERCIAL HISTORY BEFORE THE UNION

  MONTREAL’S EARLY BUSINESS FIRMS--A PROPHECY AT BEGINNING
    OF NINETEENTH CENTURY--CULTIVATION OF HEMP--ST. PAUL
    STREET--SLAVES IN MONTREAL--DOCTORS AND DRUGS IN
    1815--WHOLESALE FIRMS IN 1816--FIRST MEETING OF COMMITTEE
    OF TRADE--NOTRE DAME STREET--M’GILL STREET--FRENCH CANADIAN
    BUSINESSES--SHIP CARGOES--THE SHOP FRONTS IN 1839                 527


                          CHAPTER XXXVI

               COMMERCIAL HISTORY SINCE THE UNION

         THE RISE OF MODERN MANUFACTURES AND INDUSTRIES

  MONTREAL CENTER OF CANADIAN TRADE--LORD ELGIN’S OPINION OF THE
    CANADA CORN ACT--TRADE DEPRESSION BEGINNING IN 1847--SUGAR
    AND FLOUR INDUSTRIES--THE PANIC OF 1860--A PROSPEROUS
    DECADE--ANOTHER DEPRESSION--THE NATIONAL POLICY--PROSPERITY
    AGAIN IN THE EIGHTIES--ST. CATHERINE STREET--THE RISE
    OF FURTHER INDUSTRIES--THE RISE OF THE COMMERCIAL
    ASSOCIATIONS--THE COMMITTEE OF TRADE--ITS ACTIVITIES--THE BOARD
    OF TRADE--ITS ACTIVITIES IN CANAL, PORT, RAILWAY, CANADIAN AND
    EMPIRE EXPANSION--ITS INTEREST IN CIVIC GOVERNMENT AND GENERAL
    CIVIC BETTERMENT--ITS BUILDING--ITS SOCIAL FUNCTIONS--THE
    “CHAMBRE DE COMMERCE”--ITS ORIGIN--THE OTHER MERCHANTS’
    ASSOCIATIONS OF THE CITY--A TRIBUTE TO THE MERCHANTS OF
    MONTREAL. NOTES: PRESIDENTS OF THE BOARD OF TRADE--CENSUS
    (1912) OF MONTREAL MANUFACTURES                                   535


                         CHAPTER XXXVII

                             FINANCE

              MONTREAL BANKING AND INSURANCE BODIES

  I. BANKING: HAMILTON’S PLAN FOLLOWED BY THE FIRST BANK OF THE
    UNITED STATES IN 1791--1792, THE ATTEMPTED CANADA BANKING
    COMPANY AT MONTREAL--DELAY THROUGH AMERICAN WAR OF 1812--1815,
    RENEWED AGITATION FOR A BANK CHARTER FOR MONTREAL--1817,
    THE FIRST BANK OF MONTREAL WITHOUT A CHARTER--ITS FIRST
    OFFICERS--OTHER BANKS FOLLOW--THE QUEBEC BANK--THE RIVAL
    “BANK OF CANADA”--THE BANK OF BRITISH NORTH AMERICA--MOLSONS
    BANK--THE MERCHANTS BANK--BANQUE JACQUES CARTIER, PREDECESSOR
    TO BANQUE PROVINCIALE--THE ROYAL BANK--THE BANQUE
    D’HOCHELAGA--THE MONTREAL CITY AND DISTRICT BANK--BANKS WITH
    HEAD OFFICES ELSEWHERE--MONTREAL BANK CLEARINGS WITH CANADIAN
    AND NORTH AMERICAN CITIES.

  II. INSURANCE: THE PIONEER FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY OF CANADA--THE
    “PHOENIX”--THE “AETNA”--IN THE FIFTIES AND SIXTIES--THE GREAT
    FIRE OF 1854--LATER COMPANIES. A. LIFE INSURANCE: THE PIONEER
    COMPANIES--THE SCOTTISH AMICABLE AND SCOTTISH PROVIDENT
    COMPANIES. B. MISCELLANEOUS INSURANCE                             553


                         CHAPTER XXXVIII

                         TRANSPORTATION

                                I

                   SHIPPING--EARLY AND MODERN

                       BY RIVER AND STREAM

  MONTREAL HEAD OF NAVIGATION--LAKE ST. PETER--JACQUES CARTIER’S
    DIFFICULTIES--THE GRADUAL DEEPENING OF THE CHANNEL--THE LACHINE
    CANAL IN 1700--ITS FURTHER HISTORY--MONTREAL THE HEAD OF THE
    CANAL SYSTEM OF CANADA.

                               II

              THE DEVELOPMENT OF MONTREAL SHIPPING

                       A--SAILING VESSELS

  BIRCH BARK CANOE--BATEAU--DURHAM BOAT--SHIPBUILDING IN MONTREAL.

                        B--STEAM VESSELS

  JOHN MOLSON’S ACCOMMODATION, 1809--PASSENGER FARES BETWEEN
    MONTREAL AND QUEBEC--PASSAGE DESCRIBED--THE TORRANCES--INLAND
    NAVIGATION--THE RICHELIEU AND ONTARIO COMPANY--THE FIRST UPPER
    DECK STEAMER TO SHOOT THE LACHINE RAPIDS.

                       C--ATLANTIC LINERS

  THE ROYAL WILLIAM FIRST OCEAN STEAMER AND PIONEER OF THE
    OCEAN LINERS--ITS CONNECTION WITH MONTREAL--MAIL SERVICE TO
    MONTREAL--THE GENOVA--- ARRIVAL IN MONTREAL IN 1853--DINNER TO
    CAPTAIN PATON--THE CRIMEAN WAR--THE MONTREAL OCEAN STEAMSHIP
    COMPANY--THE FIRST CANADIAN ATLANTIC SHIP COMPANY--THE ALLAN
    LINE--EARLY BOATS--MAIL CARRIERS--1861 DISASTERS--SUBSEQUENT
    SUCCESS--THE PRESENT MONTREAL ALLAN SERVICE--THE CANADIAN
    PACIFIC RAILWAY STEAMSHIP LINES--OTHER LINES--THE SHIPPING AND
    THE WAR OF 1914--THE GREAT ARMADA                                 569


                          CHAPTER XXXIX

                         TRANSPORTATION

                                I

  THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PORT OF MONTREAL--HERIOT’S DESCRIPTION
    IN 1815--T.S. BROWN IN 1818--THE ISLAND WHARF--THE
    CREEK--THE PRIMITIVE WHARVES--THE “POINTS”--THE RIVER
    FRONT--THE SPRING FLEET--FIREWOOD RAFTS--TOW BOATS--THE
    EVERETTA--AN ACCOUNT OF 1819--BOUCHETTE’S PLAN OF 1824--THE
    FIRST HARBOUR COMMISSIONERS, “THE TRINITY BOARD”--FIRST
    REPORT--LATEST REPORT--EARLY ENGINEERS--REVIEW OF HARBOUR IN
    1872--A TRANSFORMATION FROM 1818--GRAIN ELEVATORS--NUMBER
    OF VESSELS--MARKET AND WOOD BOATS--THE BONSECOURS
    MARKET--1875 PLAN FOR IMPROVEMENT NOW CARRIED OUT--FLOATING
    DOCK--DESCRIPTION OF PRESENT HARBOUR--ITS FACILITIES FOR
    FURTHER DEVELOPMENT--THE DESIRE TO LENGTHEN THE SHIPPING SEASON.

                               II

  HARBOUR COMMISSIONERS--THE HARBOUR COMMISSIONERS FROM 1830 TO THE
    PRESENT TIME.

                               III

  CUSTOMS--SHIPPING FEDERATION--THE PILOTAGE AUTHORITY--IMPORTS AND
    EXPORTS                                                           585


                           CHAPTER XL

                     TRANSPORTATION BY RAIL

                               IV

               MONTREAL AND THE RAILWAYS OF CANADA

  MONTREAL THE CENTRE OF RAILWAY COMMUNICATION--THE FIRST
    RAILWAY--THE SNAKE RAIL AND THE “KITTEN”--“THE CHAMPLAIN AND
    THE ST. LAWRENCE”--THE SECOND RAILWAY. THE ATLANTIC AND ST.
    LAWRENCE--THE AMALGAMATION INTO THE GRAND TRUNK RAILWAY COMPANY.

  1. ITS HISTORY--ITS PRESIDENTS--AN INTERESTING REPORT AT
    CONFEDERATION--NEW FREIGHT YARDS--CHAS. M. HAYS AND THE GRAND
    TRUNK PACIFIC RAILWAY--THE BUILDING OF THE VICTORIA BRIDGES BY
    THE GRAND TRUNK RAILROAD.

  2. THE CANADIAN PACIFIC RAILWAY--ITS FINANCIERS--TWIN TO
    CONFEDERATION--OPPOSITION TO PROMOTERS--EARLY FINANCIAL
    DIFFICULTIES--NO BIG FORTUNES MADE--ROLLING STOCK--A
    REAL EMPIRE BUILDER--HELPING NEW INDUSTRIES--HUGE LAND
    HOLDINGS--IRRIGATION OF BARREN LANDS.

  3. OTHER SYSTEMS--THE “INTERCOLONIAL”--THE CANADIAN NORTHERN AND
    ITS MOUNTAIN TUNNEL                                               607


                           CHAPTER XLI

                     TRANSPORTATION BY ROAD

                                I

        THE ANCIENT AND MODERN POSTAL SERVICE OF MONTREAL

  ANCIENT ROADS--THE “GRAND VOYER”--GOOD ROADS MOVEMENT--THE
    EVOLUTION OF ROADS--“POST” MASTERS RECOGNIZED IN
    1780--THE EARLY POSTAL SYSTEM OF MONTREAL AND BENJAMIN
    FRANKLIN--BURLINGTON THE TERMINUS--EARLY LETTER RATES--MAIL
    ADVERTISEMENTS--THE QUEBEC TO MONTREAL POSTAL SERVICE--EARLY
    POSTOFFICE IN MONTREAL--OCEAN AND RAILWAY MAIL SERVICE--THE
    PRESENT POSTOFFICE--ITS HISTORICAL TABLETS BY FLAXMAN--THE
    DEVELOPMENT OF THE POSTAL SYSTEM--THE POSTMASTERS OF MONTREAL.

                               II

                      STREET TRANSPORTATION

                      MODERNIZING MONTREAL

  MONTREAL IN 1861--THE STREET RAILWAY MOVEMENT--THE “MONTREAL
    CITY PASSENGER RAILWAY COMPANY” CHARTERED--THE HISTORY OF THE
    COMPANY--ITS FIRST PROMOTERS--EIGHT PASSENGER CARS, SIX MILES,
    HORSE SERVICE IN 1861--THE OPENING UP OF THE STREETS--WINTER
    SERVICE OF SLEIGHS--1892 THE BEGINNING OF ELECTRIC ERA--THE
    CONVERSION OF THE SYSTEM INTO ELECTRIC TRACTION--THE GRADUAL
    GROWTH OF THE COMPANY                                             623


                          CHAPTER XLII

                            1760-1841

                CITY IMPROVEMENT FROM THE CESSION

                   UNDER JUSTICES OF THE PEACE

  EARLY STREET REGULATIONS--A PICTURE OF MONTREAL HOUSES IN
    1795--FURTHER STREETS OPENED--A “CITY PLAN” MOVEMENT IN
    1799--HOUSES AT THE BEGINNING OF THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY--MAP
    OF 1801--CITY WALLS TO BE DEMOLISHED--CITADEL HILL
    REMOVED--FURTHER IMPROVEMENTS--ROAD COMMISSIONERS--PICTURE
    OF 1819--IMPROVEMENTS DURING THE TRANSITIONAL PERIOD OF THE
    JUSTICES AND THE MUNICIPALITY--PICTURE OF 1839 BY BOSWORTH        635


                          CHAPTER XLIII

                            1841-1867

                CITY IMPROVEMENT AFTER THE UNION

                     UNDER THE MUNICIPALITY

  GREAT STRIDES AT THE UNION--THE EARLY MARKET PLACES--THE
    BONSECOURS MARKET--OTHER MARKETS--PUBLIC PLACES--THE EARLY
    SQUARES--PRESENT PARKS--THE EARLY CEMETERIES--THE FIRST JEWISH
    CEMETERY--THE DORCHESTER STREET PROTESTANT CEMETERY--DOMINION
    SQUARE--MOUNT ROYAL--COTE DES NEIGES--OTHER CEMETERIES--GENERAL
    CITY IMPROVEMENT--AREAS OF PUBLIC PLACES                          641


                          CHAPTER XLIV

                            1867-1914

              CITY IMPROVEMENT SINCE CONFEDERATION

                THE RISE OF METROPOLITAN MONTREAL

  THE METROPOLITAN ASPECT OF MONTREAL IN 1868--EDUCATIONAL
    BUILDINGS--THE CITY STREET RAILWAY AIDS SUBURBAN
    EXTENSION--FORECAST OF ANNEXATIONS--THE CITY HOMOLOGATED
    PLAN--THE ANNEXATION OF SUBURBAN MUNICIPALITIES IN 1883--TABLE
    OF ANNEXATION SINCE 1883--PREFONTAINE’S REVIEW OF THE YEARS
    1884-1898--IMPROVEMENTS UNDER THE BOARD OF CONTROL--A REVIEW
    OF THE LAST TWO DECADES OF METROPOLITAN GROWTH--THE CHANGES
    DOWNTOWN--THE GROWTH UPTOWN.

  STATISTICAL SUPPLEMENTS: 1. STATEMENT OF BUILDINGS. 2. REAL
    ESTATE ASSESSMENTS. 3. RECENT BUILDINGS ERECTED OR COMPLETED.
    4. THE METROPOLITAN POPULATION; COMPARATIVE STUDIES ON THE
    POPULATION OF MONTREAL WITH THE CITIES OF THE CONTINENT. 5. OF
    THE WORLD. 6. OPTIMISTIC SPECULATIONS FOR THE FUTURE. 7. VITAL
    CITY STATISTICS IN 1912. 8. A PLAN FOR “GREATER MONTREAL”--THE
    HISTORY OF THE PRESENT MOVEMENT                                   651




                       UNDER ENGLISH RULE


                             PART I

                CONSTITUTIONAL AND CIVIC PROGRESS


CHAPTER

      I   THE EXODUS--“THE OLD ORDER CHANGETH, GIVING PLACE TO NEW.”
     II   THE INTERREGNUM--MILITARY RULE.
    III   THE TREATY OF PARIS--NEW CIVIL GOVERNMENT.
     IV   CITY GOVERNMENT UNDER JUSTICES OF THE PEACE.
      V   PRELIMINARY STRUGGLES FOR AN ASSEMBLY--THE CASE FOR THE
          MERCHANTS.
     VI   THE QUEBEC ACT--1774. THE CASE FOR THE NOBLESSE.
    VII   REVOLUTIONARY WAR OF 1775.
   VIII   MONTREAL BESIEGED.
     IX   MONTREAL AN AMERICAN CITY.
      X   THE ASSEMBLY AT LAST. 1791.
     XI   THE FUR TRADERS.
    XII   FRENCH REVOLUTIONARY DESIGNS.
   XIII   THE INVASION OF 1812-1813.
    XIV   ANNALS AND SIDELIGHTS.
     XV   BUREAUCRACY AND DEMOCRACY.
    XVI   MURMURS OF REVOLUTION.
   XVII   IN THE THROES OF CIVIL WAR.
  XVIII   PROCLAMATION OF UNION--RESPONSIBLE GOVERNMENT.
    XIX   UNDER THE UNION.
     XX   THE MUNICIPALITY OF MONTREAL.
    XXI   ANNALS AND SIDELIGHTS.
   XXII   UNDER CONFEDERATION.
  XXIII   ANNALS AND SIDELIGHTS.




                       HISTORY OF MONTREAL




                            CHAPTER I

                    THE EXODUS FROM MONTREAL

                              1760

          “THE OLD ORDER CHANGETH, GIVING PLACE TO NEW”

  AMHERST’S LETTER REVIEWING EVENTS LEADING UP TO THE
    CAPITULATION--THE SURRENDER OF ARMS--THE REVIEW OF BRITISH
    TROOPS--THE DEPARTURE OF THE FRENCH TROOPS--END OF THE
    PECULATORS--VAUDREUIL’S CAPITULATION CENSURED--DEPARTURE OF
    THE PROVINCIAL TROOPS--ARRANGEMENTS FOR THE GOVERNMENT OF THE
    COLONY--DEPARTURE OF AMHERST--THE TWO RACES LEFT BEHIND. NOTES:
    (1) THE EXODUS AND THE REMNANT.--(2) THE POPULATION OF CANADA
    AT THE FALL.


On the capitulation of Montreal in the grey of the early morn of
September 8, 1760, British Rule began and the Régime of France
was ended. On the 9th the victorious Amherst wrote his official
account to the Honourable Lieutenant Governor Hamilton. The
details therein will serve to recapitulate the history of the
final downpour on Montreal during the days preceding its fall,
with the new era commencing, and accordingly we present it to our
readers.

                                     “Camp of Montreal,
                                             9th September, 1760.

  Sir:

  In Mine of the 26th ultimo I acquainted You with the progress of
  the Army after the departure from Oswego and with the Success of
  His Majesty’s Arms against Fort Levis, now Fort William Augustus,
  where I remained no longer than was requisite to make Such
  preparations as I Judged Essentially necessary for the passage of
  the army down the River, which took me up to the 30th.

  In the morning of the following day I set out and proceeded from
  Station to Station to our present Ground, where we arrived on the
  6th in the evening, after having in the passage sustained a loss
  of Eighty-Eight men drowned,----Batteaus of Regts. seventeen of
  Artillery, with Some Artillery Stores, Seventeen Whaleboats, one
  Row Galley staved, Occasioned by the Violence of the Current and
  the Rapids being full of broken Waves.

  The Inhabitants of the Settlements I passed thro’ in my way
  hither having abandoned their Houses and run into the Woods I
  sent after them; Some were taken and others came of their own
  Accord. I had them disarmed and Caused the oath of Allegiance to
  be tendered to them, which they readily took; and I accordingly
  put them in quiet possession of their Habitations, with Which
  treatment they seemed no less Surprised than happy. The troops
  being formed and the Light Artillery brought up, the Army lay on
  their Arms till the Night of the 6th.

  On the 7th, in the morning, two Officers came to an advanced post
  with a Letter from the Marquis de Vaudreuil referring me to what
  one of them, Colonel Bouguinville, had to say. The Conversation
  ended with a Cessation of Arms till 12 o’Clock, when the
  Proposals were brought in; Soon after I returned them with the
  terms I was willing to grant, Which both the Marquis de Vaudreuil
  and Mons. de Lévis, the French General, were very strenuous to
  have softened; this Occasioned Sundry Letters to Pass between us
  During the day as well as the Night (when the Army again lay on
  their Arms), but as I would not on any Account deviate in the
  Least from my Original Conditions and I insisted on an Immediate
  and Categorical answer Mr. de Vaudreuil, soon after daybreak,
  Notified to me that he had determined to Accept of them and two
  Sets of them were accordingly Signed by him and me and Exchanged
  Yesterday when Colonel Haldimand, with the Grenadiers and the
  Light Infantry of the Army took Possession of One of the Gates of
  the town and is this day to proceed in fulfilling the Articles
  of the Capitulation; By which the French Troops are all to lay
  down their arms; are not to serve during the Continuance of the
  Present War and are to be sent back to Old France as are also
  the Governors and Principal Officers of the Legislature of the
  Whole Country, Which I have now the Satisfaction to inform You
  is entirely Yielded to the Dominion of His Majesty. On which
  Interesting and happy Event I most Sincerely Congratulate you.

  Governor Murray, with the Troops from Quebec, landed below the
  Town on Sunday last & Colonel Haviland with his Corps (that took
  possession of the Isle aux Noix, Abandoned by the enemy on the
  28th) Arrived Yesterday at the South Shore Opposite to My Camp. I
  am, with great regard,

                   Sir,
                     Your most Obedient,
                                 Humble Servant
                                                     JEFF AMHERST.

  The Honourable Lt. Governor Hamilton.

(Endorsed by Hamilton, Camp Montreal, 7 ber, 1776. General
Amherst, received by Post Tuesday, 23d September.)”[1]

Haldimand, as directed by Amherst on the 9th, received the
submission of the troops of France.

In the French camp, de Lévis reviewed his forces--2,132 of all
ranks. In his Journal they are thus summarized:

  Officers present                                    179
  Soldiers                                           1953
                                                     ----
                                                               2132

  Officers returned to France                          46
  Soldiers invalided                                  241
                                                     ----
                                                                287
                                                               ----
         Total                                                 2419
  Soldiers described as absent from their regiments             927
                                                               ----
                                                               3346

[Illustration: FORTIFICATIONS OF MONTREAL, 1760]

There on the Place d’Armes yielded up their arms, all that was
left of the brave French warriors who had no dishonour in their
submission, surrendering only to the overwhelming superior
numbers of the English conquerors. With de Lévis was the able
de Bourlamaque and the scholarly soldier de Bougainville, with
Dumas, Rocquemaure, Pouchot, Luc de la Corne and so many of the
heroes of Ticonderoga and Carillon. There too was de Vaudreuil,
the Governor General, Commander-in-Chief, and last governor of
New France, with his brother, the last Governor of Montreal under
the Old Régime. Haviland’s entourage and the British troops
present could not but admire their late opponents.

The only jarring note of the ceremony was the absence of the
French flags from the usual paraphernalia to be delivered up.
The omission is thus signaled by Amherst, in his official report
of the submission, who after mentioning the surrender of the
two captured British American stands of colours goes on to say
that there were no French colours forthcoming: “The Marquis de
Vaudreuil, generals and commanding officers of the regiment,
giving their word of honour that the battalions had not any
colours; they had brought them with them six years ago; they were
torn to pieces and finding them troublesome in this country they
had destroyed them.”

They had however been but recently destroyed, for the “Journal”
of de Lévis, written by him Cæsar-like in the third person,
tells how, after being unable to shake the determination of de
Vaudreuil to capitulate without the honours of war, de Lévis,
in order to spare his troops a portion of the humiliation they
were to undergo, had ordered them to burn their colours to avoid
the hard condition of handing them over to the enemy. “_M. le
Chevalier de Lévis voyant avec douleur que rien ne pouvoit faire
changer la determination de M. le Marquis de Vaudreuil voulant
épargner aux troupes une partie de l’humiliation quelles alloient
subir, leur ordonna de brûler leurs drapeaux pour se soustraire à
la dure condition de les remettre aux ennemis._”[2] (_Cf. Journal
des Campagnes du Chevalier de Lévis en Canada, 1756-1760. Edited
by l’Abbé H.R. Casgrain, Montreal, C.O. Beauchemin et fils,
1889._)

On the 11th Amherst turned out his whole force and received
Vaudreuil on parade. Between these two, friendly relations had
been established. Place d’Armes was again a scene of colour with
the presence of the British regiments led by Murray, Haviland,
Burton, Gage, Fraser the gallant Highlander, Guy Carleton, who
was to become the famous viceroy of Canada and to die Lord
Dorchester, Lord Howe, and the scholarly Swiss soldier Haldimand.
There were present, too, Sir William Johnston, the baronet of the
Mohawk Valley and leader of the six nations, Major Robert Rogers
of the famous rangers,[3] with his two brothers, and others
of note. No doubt de Vaudreuil’s suite was not far off with
de Lévis, de Bourlamaque, de Bougainville, Dumas, Roquemaure,
Pouchot, Luc de la Corne, with the nefarious Intendant Bigot
and all the principal officers of the colony who had been in
Montreal, the headquarters of government since the fall of Quebec.

During the three following days the town was definitely occupied
by the British, and the arrangements completed for the departure
of the French Regulars. The regiments of Languedoc and Berry,
with the marine corps, were embarked on the 13th; the regiments
of Royal Rousillon and Guyenne on the 14th; on the 16th the
regiments of La Reine and Béarn. On the 17th de Lévis, with de
Bourlamaque, started for Quebec; de Vaudreuil and Bigot left on
the 20th and 21st. By the 22nd every French soldier had left
Montreal, except those who had married in the country and who had
resolved to remain in it and transfer their allegiance to the new
government.[4]

Fate had dealt a severe blow to the brave defenders of Canada
whom we now find sailing from Montreal to France, which would
appear to have abandoned them. The regulars and the colonial
troops, in spite of their jealousies and emulations, were brave
men, and duly honoured as such by the British soldiery who saw
the vessels bearing on the broad St. Lawrence so many of those
who had recently disputed the long drawn out strife for the
conquest of Canada. Speaking of this, “the most picturesque
and dramatic of American wars,” Parkman continues: “There is
nothing more noteworthy than the skill with which the French
and Canadian leaders use their advantages; the indomitable
spirit with which, slighted and abandoned as they were, they
grappled with prodigious difficulties and the courage with which
they were seconded by regulars and militia alike. In spite of
occasional lapses, the defence of Canada deserves a tribute of
admiration.”--(“Montcalm and Wolfe,” Vol. II, p. 382.)

The departures from Montreal and Quebec must have been indeed
heart-rending. That from Montreal, since the fall of Quebec,
the home of all the high officials of the civil, religious and
military governments, was the most striking, as the natural
leaders of the colony were mostly there. “There repassed into
Europe,” says the French Canadian historian, F.X. Garneau, “about
185 officers, 2,400 soldiers valid and invalid, and fully 500
sailors, domestics, women and children. The smallness of this
proved at once the cruel ravages of the war, the paucity of
embarkations of succour sent from France, and the great numerical
superiority of the victor. The most notable colonists at the
same time left the country. Their emigration was encouraged,
that of the Canadian officers especially, whom the conquerors
desired to be rid of and whom they eagerly stimulated to pass to
France. Canada lost by this self-expatriation the most precious
portion of its people, invaluable as its members were from their
experience, their intelligence and their knowledge of public and
commercial affairs.”[5] (Bell’s translation, Vol. II, p. 294.)

[Illustration: SIR GUY CARLETON]

[Illustration: GENERAL JAMES MURRAY]

[Illustration: LORD JEFFREY AMHERST]

The clergy, however, solidly remained at their posts to build up
the self-esteem of the people and to rear up a loyal race. Hence
the respect and gratitude due to them by the French Canadians of
today.

Yet there were many of whom the country was well rid, such as
Bigot, Cadet, Péan, Bréard, Varin, Le Mercier, Pénisseault,
Maurin, Corpron and others, accused of the frauds and peculations
that helped to ruin Canada. A great sigh of relief might well
have escaped from the French who had been ruined by them.

Most of the ships provided by the English government weathered
the November gales. The vessel L’Auguste containing Saint-Luc de
la Corne, his brother, and others, after being storm-tossed and
saved from conflagration, finally drove towards the shore, struck
and rolled on its side, and became wrecked on the Cap du Nord,
Ile Royale. La Corne, with six others, gained the shore, and he
reached Quebec before the end of the winter, as his journal tells
us. His name was to become familiar at Montreal under the British
régime.

The sloop Marie, which had been fitted up to receive the Marquis
de Vaudreuil, his family and staff, had an early mishap between
Montreal and Three Rivers, having run aground.

M. de Vaudreuil and the staff of officers of the colony arrived
at Brest on the English vessel L’Aventure under a flag of
truce, with 142 passengers from Canada. Thence, de Vaudreuil
wrote to the minister of mariné. On December 5th the latter
wrote back acknowledging this letter and that of September
from Montreal containing the articles of capitulation, with
papers relating thereto. A précis of this letter to Vaudreuil
reveals that, although the king was aware of the condition of
the colony, in default of the reinforcements it was unable to
receive, yet, after the hopes the governor had given, by his
letters in the month of June, of holding out some time longer,
and his assurances that the last efforts would be put forth to
sustain the honour of the king before yielding, His Majesty
did not expect to learn so soon of the surrender of Montreal
and of the whole colony. Granting the force of all the reasons
which led to the capitulation, the king was nevertheless
considerably surprised, and less satisfied, at having to submit
to conditions so little to his honour, especially in the face
of the representations which had been made to him by M. de
Lévis on behalf of the military corps of the colony. The king,
in reading the memorandum of these representations, which the
minister was unable to avoid placing before him, saw in it that,
notwithstanding the slight hope of success, Vaudreuil was still
in a condition, with the diminished resources remaining to
him, to attempt an attack or a defence that might have brought
the English to grant a capitulation that would have been more
honourable for the troops. The king left him at liberty to
remain at Brest for the time, for his health. With regard to the
officers who were with him, they could retire to their families
or elsewhere. It was sufficient for him to be informed of their
place of residence.--(“Canadian Archives,” Vol. III, p. 313.)

Not only was Vaudreuil censured for the capitulation of
Montreal, but finally he had the honour of being placed in the
Bastille with the peculators whom we have above mentioned.[6]
His release, however, was speedy. Whatever his gains might have
been from trading in the early part of his career, e. g., as
Governor of Louisiana, he reached France from his government
of Canada a poor man. The trial of those accused of peculation
lasted from December 1, 1761, till the end of March, and on
December 10, 1763, the president of the commission rendered his
final decision. Vaudreuil with five more were relieved from the
accusation, but he died in 1764 less from age than from sorrow.

“In the course of his trial he stood by the Canadian officers,
now being slandered by Bigot. ‘Brought up in Canada myself,’
said the late Governor General, ‘I knew them, every one, and
I maintain that almost all of them are as upright as they are
valorous; in general the Canadians seem to be soldiers born; a
masculine and military training early inures them to fatigues and
dangers. The annals of their expeditions, their explorations, and
their dealings with the aborigines abound in marvelous examples
of courage, activity, patience under privation, coolness in
peril, and obedience to leaders during services which have cost
many of them their lives, but without slackening the ardour of
the survivors. Such officers as these, with a handful of armed
inhabitants and a few savage warriors, have often disconcerted
the projects, paralyzed the preparations, ravaged the provinces,
and beaten the troops of Great Britain when eight or ten times
more numerous than themselves. In a country with frontiers
so vast, such qualities were priceless.’ And he finished by
declaring that he would fail in his duty to those generous
warriors, and even to the state itself, if he did not proclaim
their services, their merits and their innocence.”--(Bell’s
translation of Garneau, Vol. II, p. 298.)

Governor Carleton, writing in 1767 to Lord Shelburne, confirms
this tribute. “The new subjects could send into the field about
eighteen thousand men well able to carry arms, of which number,
above one-half have already served with as much valour, with more
zeal, and more military knowledge for America, than the regular
troops of France that were joined with them.”

Vaudreuil might also have paid a compliment to the brave women
of New France, who, like Madeleine de Verchères and others, were
ready to fight with the men, and who were true women and wives.
“Brave and beautiful,” George III summed them up in a compliment
paid at his court in London after the conquest to Madame de Léry,
the wife of Chevalier de Léry, the engineer who repaired the
fortifications of Montreal: “If all the Canadian ladies resemble
you, I have truly made a fine conquest.”

It must not be thought that the departure of the French colonial
officers was an entire abandonment of the project of regaining
the country. They were to be retained for the French service
and possibly for future use in Canada.[7] They were called to
Tourraine and there held at the king’s pleasure under pay, to all
intents and purposes officers in the French service, and liable
to be sent on any service.

“The British provincial troops were sent from Montreal at an
early date. The New Hampshire and Rhode Island regiments crossed
the river and proceeded to Chambly, thence went to Crown Point.
The Connecticut troops were ordered to Oswego and Fort Stanwix;
the New York and New Jersey regiments to the lately named Fort
William Augustus, at the head of the rapids, and to Oswegatchie
(Ogdensburg). Rogers, with four hundred men, bearing letters from
Vaudreuil instructing the forts to be given over, was sent to
Detroit, Miami, St. Joseph and Michillimackinac.[8] Moncton at
the same time received orders to forward regular troops to take
permanent possession of these forts.”--(Kingsford, “History of
Canada,” Vol. IV, p. 409.)

The troops that were to remain in Montreal for the winter were
now established in their quarters. The French Indians in the
neighbourhood were summoned to the city and requested to bring
their prisoners; they appeared with several men, women and
children, and Johnston established rules and regulations for
their future government.

Amherst remained in Montreal till September 26th, when he went
down the river to Quebec. He left on October 5th and on the
18th was on Lake Champlain, thence to Albany, which he left on
the 21st to arrive in New York on the 28th of October. He never
visited Canada again, but he left it, however, well organized.

Immediately after the capitulation of Montreal he had occupied
himself with the establishment of a provisional military
government with tribunals to administer justice summarily until
a definite form of government should be determined. The French
division of the province into the three administrative districts
of Quebec, Three Rivers and Montreal was maintained. In a
despatch to Pitt dated October 4, 1760, from Quebec (Amériques
et Indes Occidentales, No. 699), Amherst renders an account of
all the dispositions which he had made since the date of the
capitulation of Montreal. Although the greater part of these
were military matters, the following items concerning the civil
administration may be found:

September 15; I have sent officers with detachments to the
different villages to collect the arms and to make them take the
oath of allegiance.

September 16; I have named Colonel Burton governor of Three
Rivers.

September 17; I have given order to the militia of the town
(Montreal) and of the suburbs to give up their arms and to
take the oath of allegiance next day, immediately after the
embarkation of M. de Vaudreuil.

September 22; I have named Brigadier General Gage governor of
Montreal.

On the same day he published a proclamation for the government
of Three Rivers similar to the one for Montreal, dated merely
September, 1760 (“Amériques et Indes Occidentales”), in which
arrangements are made for the transaction of business and
amicable arrangements with the new government and the troops.

The new government was only, however, of an _ad interim_ nature,
for it was not certain that England would keep Canada. It was
this thought that reconciled the Canadians to the new situation.

Meanwhile the British Flag floated over Citadel Hill.

The country was now British. France had been tried in the balance
and found wanting. It had lost, through its wavering policy, a
fair domain and a noble people. This poignant loss was voiced by
de Vaudreuil, the deposed governor general, who, in spite of his
faults, was a true Canadian and had visions of its future as one
of the proudest jewels in the crown of France, for was it not La
Nouvelle France? On quitting his beloved country he paid it this
homage in a letter to his minister:

“With these beautiful and vast countries, France loses 70,000
inhabitants[9] of a rare quality; a race of people unequaled
for their docility, bravery and loyalty. The vexations they
have suffered for many years, more especially during the five
years preceding the reduction of Quebec--all without a murmur,
or importuning the king for relief--sufficiently manifest their
perfect submissiveness.”

The qualities, they had then, remain still the mark of those of
the same race living in Montreal of today.

    “In all things we are sprung, from
    Earth’s best blood, have titles manifold.”

As their predecessors took the oath of allegiance to King George
II, and became good Britishers, so have their descendants
remained today, in the days of George V. “What perished in
the capitulation of Montreal,” says Parkman, “was the Bourbon
monarchy and the narrow absolutism which fettered the life of
New France throughout the Old Régime. What survives today is the
vigour of two races striving to make Canada strong and free and
reverent of law.”


                             NOTE I

                   THE EXODUS AND THE REMNANT

Judge Baby of Montreal, in an article in the Canadian Antiquarian
and Numismatic Journal, 3d Edit., Vol. II, p. 304, has combatted
very successfully the traditional view started by Bibaud and
followed by Garneau that after the capitulation of Montreal, and
the Treaty of Paris, 1763, the seigneurs, the men of learning,
and the chief traders and others of the directing classes, left
the country. This emigration was from the town but the country
places were untouched. He proves that a great many remained
outside the civil and military party who had governed the
country, and the soldiery who were taken officially to France;
that many of the young colonial officers who had thought to have
a chance to follow a career in the army or navy of France shortly
returned at the call of their fathers whose interest in their
lands and whose poverty, heightened by the depreciation of the
paper money, would not have induced them to begin life again in
France; that even of those who did go to France there were very
many who returned, as they had intended; hence the recurrence
of names, in the history after the cession, made familiar
before it. The long list given by Judge Baby of Seigneurs and
gentlemen proved by him to have remained, strengthens his case.
An interesting list of French-Canadians remaining in Montreal
engaged in business at this time is also given by him as follows:

Guy, Blondeau, Le Pellé De LaHaye, Lequindre Douville, Perthuis,
Nivard St. Dizier, Les freres Hervieux, Gaucher-Gamelin, Glasson,
Moquin, St. Sauveur, Pothier, Lemoine de Monnière, De Martigny,
De Couagne, Desauniers, Mailhot, St. Ange-Charly, Dumas, Magnan,
Mitiver, L’Amy, Bruyère, Pierre Chaboillez, Fortier, Lefèbre du
Chouquet, Courtheau, Vallée, Cazeau, Charly, Carignan, Auger,
Porlier frère, Pommereau, Larocque, Dumeriou, Roy-Portelance,
De Vienne, De Montforton, Sanguinet, Campeau, Laframboise,
Vauquier, Guillemain, Curot, Dufau, Campion, Lafontaine,
Truillier-Lacombe, Périneault, Arillac, Léveillé, Bourassa,
Pillet, Hurtubise, Leduc, Monbrun, Landrieu, Mezière, Hilbert,
Tabeau, Sombrun, Marchesseau, Avrard, Lasselle, Dumas St.
Martin, Beaubien-Desrivières, Réaume, Nolin, Cotté, St. Germain,
Ducalvet, L’Eschelle, Beaumont.

The Judge gives the names of many jurisconsults who remained
in the country, three of whom eventually became members of
the Superior Council; also of doctors; the great majority of
the notaries remained in the country. In summing up, he finds
“130 seigneurs, 100 gentry, 125 traders of mark, twenty-five
jurisconsults, and men of law, twenty-five to thirty doctors and
surgeons, notaries of almost the same number”--“were these not,”
he asks, “sufficient to face the political, intellectual and
other needs of the population then in Quebec, Montreal and Three
Rivers?”


                             NOTE II

                POPULATION OF CANADA AT THE FALL

M. de Vaudreuil’s estimate of 70,000 population has been
challenged by Dr. Kingsford (“History of Canada,” Vol. IV, p.
413).

Amherst before leaving Canada obtained a census of the population
which he reported as 76,172 by parishes and districts.

                         Companies  Number
                            of        of      Total of
                Parishes  Militia  Militia    all souls
  Montreal        46        87      7,331      37,200
  Three Rivers    19        19      1,105       6,388
  Quebec          43        64      7,976      32,584
                 ---       ---     ------      ------
                 108       170     16,412      76,172

The census must have been obtained through the French and there
is no ground for supposing that they would designedly furnish
an incorrect statement. It does not, however, accord with the
previous or subsequent tables of population.

The population in 1736 was 39,063; 1737, 39,970; 1739, 42,701;
1754, 55,009. In the fifteen years between the last two dates the
population increased 12,003, something less than one-third. If
we apply this increase to the next six years we may be justified
in estimating the increase at one-eighth, which would place
the population at 62,000. It is not provable that in these six
years of war the population could have increased upwards of
20,000,--five-elevenths--nearly half of the former total. In 1761
the three governors were called upon to furnish a census of their
several districts. The reports were:

  (Gage) Montreal        24,957
  (Burton) Three Rivers   6,612
  (Murray) Quebec        30,211
                         ------
          Total of       61,780

“I am inclined, therefore,” says Kingsford, “to estimate the
French population of Canada in 1760 at 60,000 souls, the number
of which hitherto has been generally accepted as correctly
representing it.”

At the same time Doctor Kingsford placed too much reliance on
the census of 1761. It is well known that fear of conscription
and other bogies caused the census returns of French-Canadian
inhabitants to be minimized for many a long day under British
rule. If Amherst’s census of 76,172 is correct, as well as the
61,780, that of the year 1761, then a loss of 14,392 is to be
accounted for.


FOOTNOTES:

[1] From R. McCord’s collection.

[2] A detailed and romantic account of their burning on St.
Helen’s Island is to be found in “L’Ile de Ste. Helène, Passè,
Présent et Avenir, par A. Achintre et J.A. Crevier, M.D.,
Montreal, 1876.” I have found no historical proof of them being
burnt there.--Ed.

[3] Major Rogers’ picture in ranger uniform long decorated the
shops of London. His bold, bucanneering deeds caught the popular
fancy. The late Lord Amherst recalled long afterward how certain
verses traditional in his family had been taught the children
of successive Amhersts so long that the meaning of the allusion
was forgotten until quite recently, when it was found that they
referred to Rogers.

[4] The French troops were only able to leave Quebec on the 22nd
and 25th of October.--“Can. Arch. A. and W.I.,” 95, p. 1.

[5] See Appendix for Judge Baby’s criticism and qualification of
the extent of this exodus.

[6] The accused numbered fifty-five. Among those condemned either
to banishment from France or restitution and fines were: Bigot,
the Intendant, Varin, his sub-delegate, and Duchesnaux, his
secretary; Cadet, commissary general of Canada, and his agent,
Corpron; Péan, captain and aide-major of the marine troops in
Canada; Estèbe, the keeper of the King’s stores in Quebec; (all
these had operated in Montreal directly or through their agents);
Martel de St. Antoine, keeper of the King’s store at Montreal;
Maurin, Pénisseault, merchants and operators in Cadet’s offices
in this city; and Le Moyne-Despins, a merchant employed in
furnishing provisions to the army. See “Montreal Under the French
Régime,” Vol. I.

[7] In 1767 Guy Carleton feared an uprising in Canada on the
probable return of this body of officers. See letter to Lord
Shelburne. (Constitutional Documents--Shortt & Doughty.)

[8] Rogers reached New York, on his return from Detroit, the
following February. Owing to the setting in of winter he had been
unable to proceed to other forts. He reported that he had found
one thousand Canadians in the neighbourhood of Detroit.--“Can.
Arch. A. and W.I., 961,” p. 219.

[9] See note at the end of this chapter.




                           CHAPTER II

                         THE INTERREGNUM

                            1760-1763

                       MILITARY GOVERNMENT

  BRIGADIER GAGE, GOVERNOR OF MONTREAL--THE ADDRESS OF THE
    MILITIA AND MERCHANTS--GOVERNMENT BY THE MILITARY BUT NOT
    “MARTIAL LAW”--THE CUSTOM OF PARIS STILL PREVAILS--COURTS
    ESTABLISHED--THE EMPLOYMENT OF FRENCH-CANADIAN MILITIA CAPTAINS
    IN THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE--SENTENCES FROM THE REGISTERS
    OF THE MONTREAL COURTS--GOVERNOR GAGE’S ORDINANCES--TRADE--THE
    PORT--GAGE’S REPORT TO PITT ON THE STATE OF THE GOVERNMENT OF
    MONTREAL--THE PROMULGATION OF THE DECLARATION OF THE DEFINITIVE
    TREATY OF PARIS--REGULATIONS CONCERNING THE LIQUIDATION OF THE
    PAPER MONEY--LEAVE TO THE FRENCH TO DEPART--LAST ORDINANCES OF
    GAGE--HIS DEPARTURE.


Brigadier Gage was appointed governor of Montreal on September
21, 1760.[1] He early won the esteem of the townspeople. All his
ordinances manifest the desire to act in accordance with justice
and in harmony with the people. Montrealers recognized this and
shortly after the death of George II, which took place on October
25th, expressed their confidence in their rulers in an address
written in English and French. The English version as inserted in
the New York Gazette is as follows:

“To his Excellency, General Gage, governor of Montreal and its
dependencies.

“The address of the officers of militia and merchants of the city
of Montreal.

“Cruel Destiny has thus cutt short the Glorious Days of so Great
and so Magnanimous a Monarch! We are come to pour out our Grief
unto the paternal Bosom of Your Excellency, the Sole Tribute
of Gratitude of a People who will never cease to Exalt the
mildness and Moderation of their New Masters. The General who has
conquered us has rather treated Us as a Father than a Vanquisher
and has left us a precious Pledge[2] by name and deed of his
Goodness to Us. What acknowledgements are we not beholden to make
for so many Favours? Ha! They shall be forever Engraven in our
Hearts in Indelible Characters. We Entreat Your Excellency to
continue us the Honour of Your Protection. We will endeavour to
Deserve it by Our Zeal and by the Earnest Prayers We shall ever
offer up to the Immortal Being for Your Health and Preservation.”
(Canadian Archives, A. & W., I, 96, I, page 327.)

The mildness and moderation of the “New Masters” was particularly
shown by the retention of existing laws and customs. It will
be recalled that Vaudreuil, in the Articles of Capitulation
had asked that “French and Canadians should be _continued_ to
be governed according to the customs of Paris and the laws and
usages established for this country and should not be subject
to any other laws than those established under the French
dominion.” Whereupon Amherst had replied that this had been
answered by the preceding article and especially by the reply
to the last (Article 41), asking that the British government
should only require a strict neutrality of the Canadians, which
said curtly: “They become subjects of the king”--a non-committal
reply, which at first looked severe but was, as the conscientious
historian, Jacques Viger,[3] has said, just and reasonable under
the circumstances. In the event, Amherst granted more than his
answer would suggest, for during the Interregnum, the French and
British incomers continued to be governed according to the custom
of Paris. Hence the gratitude expressed through General Gage was
well deserved.

The period of the Interregnum, now beginning (September 8, 1760,
to August 10, 1764), which was to last until the promulgation of
the treaty of Paris, and the official publication by Governor
General Murray of his civil appointment, has been called
erroneously by several French historians, “_La Regne Militaire_,”
a term suggestive of military despotism and summary justice.
Commander Jacques Viger, M. Labrie, Judge Mondelet and others
rejected this erroneous misnomer in the columns of the Journal
“La Bibliotheque Canadienne,” being edited in 1827 by Bibaud,
the well known historian. For, after examining the documents
of the period they came to the conclusion that the name of _La
Regne Militaire_ could only be merited because, as most of the
official men of the law having been in Government employ had left
the country and new justices had to be created who should judge
according to “_les lois, formes et usages_” of the country, the
government devolved perforce on the _military_ men and _of the_
“_milices_,” the only educated men left besides the clergy.

This is made clear by a memoir of October 15, 1777, to the
British government on the subject of the administration of
justice, drawn up by Judges Panet, Mabane and Dunn, of whom
Pierre Panet had been one of the _greffiers_ at Montreal, and the
others had had close relations with the military judges. Their
testimony is therefore convincing. They state: “Though Canada
was conquered by His Majesty’s arms in the fall of 1760, the
administration in England did not interfere with the interior
government of it till the year 1763. It remained, during that
period, as formerly, with three districts, under the separate
command of military officers who established in their respective
districts, military courts under different forms, indeed, but in
which, _according to the policy observed in wise nations towards
a conquered people the laws and usages of Canada were observed in
the rules of decision_.”

The basis of the new military government was the placard issued
by General Amherst from Montreal on the 22d of September, 1760,
in which he announced the new order of the government for the
old and new subjects, and outlined the new form of military
government throughout the three districts, by the appointment
in each parish of the officers of the militia, the commandant
of the regular troops and a third court of further appeal to
the governor, as the future demonstrators of justice, and then
left it to the local governors of the other two divisions of
the country to establish their own courts. These officers of
militia were the most competent at the time to carry on the
traditional “custom of Paris” as they were mostly appointed from
the Seigneurs of the district and the educated class.

Accordingly on October 28, 1760, General Gage issued his orders
establishing tribunals of militia officers to regulate civil
disputes among individuals and a second tribunal of appeal before
the regular military court, with a final court of appeal to
himself.

The rest of the document deals with police prohibitions to the
inhabitants, not to harbour deserters or to traffic with the
soldiers for their arms, clothing, etc., or any other of their
accoutrements; it orders chimneys to be swept once a month, and
other precautions against fire; carpenters were to be prepared
with an adz, the inhabitants with an axe and bucket; also
arrangements for safety against snow from falling from houses,
the cleansing of the portions before the house and the disposal
of garbage, the keeping of the roads and bridges in good order,
and regulations concerning the sale of provisions brought in by
the country people, the sale to be made in the common market
place with the prohibition to town merchants to forestall the
citizens by buying up the supplies brought in. The militia
captains being no lawyers, were only required by Amherst to
dispense law and justice as best they could, being limited to
civil cases.

The ordinance of Thomas Gage, governing the administration of
justice in his jurisdiction of Montreal by dividing it into
five districts with definite powers and the regulations for the
upkeep of the courts therein, was dated at Montreal, October 13,
1761. In each of the five districts there was to assemble on the
first and fifteenth of each month a court of officers of the
“_Milice_.” These militia courts were to be composed of not more
than seven and not less than five members, of which one should
hold the rank of captain, the senior to act as president. The
officers of militia of each district were summoned to meet in
their parishes on the 24th of October to make arrangements for
the whole of these courts and to prepare rosters of officers for
duty therein.

The Town of Montreal was set apart as a judicial district of
its own, with a local board of officers to administer the laws.
Appeal was allowed from these courts to three boards of officers
of His Majesty’s Troops, one to meet at Montreal, the other at
Varennes and the third at St. Sulpice, these courts of appeal to
sit on the 20th of each month. A further appeal from these courts
to the governor in person was provided for.

In the event of capital crimes, officers of militia were
authorized to arrest the criminals and their accomplices and to
conduct them under guard to Montreal, the militia officers to
furnish with each prisoner an account of the crime and a list of
witnesses. In civil cases involving small amounts, not exceeding
twenty _livres_ all the officers of the militia were individually
granted authority to adjudicate with an appeal to and no further
than the militia courts of the districts.

Provision was made for the payment of the militia officers
for all of these duties by a scale of fees, a treasurer to be
appointed for each court. The officers of militia were especially
enjoined to maintain peace and order within their respective
districts.

On October 17th the _Conseil des Capitaines de Milice de
Montreal_ presented a memorial to the governor expressing their
willingness to administer justice gratuitously, as they had done
in the past, but requesting as a favour from His Excellency that
they be exempted from the obligation to billet troops in their
domiciles. They requested that six cords of wood be purchased to
heat the chamber in which their sittings were held and that Mr.
Panet, their clerk, be compensated for his services at the rate
of thirty _sols_ for each sentence. Two militia sergeants had
been appointed to act as bailiffs and criers of the court, and
a tariff of fees was asked for to provide for their pay. These
sergeants, it was also explained, were not only made use of in
the administration of justice but also for the district, for the
supervision of the statutory labour or _corvèe_. This memorial,
which was signed “R. Decouange,” was approved by the governor.[4]

The inclusion of the French officers in the administration of
the affairs of the country was a wise and honest attempt on the
part of the British to carry out the promise of the capitulation
to retain for the present the laws and customs of the past. In
choosing the officers of the militia they were well advised,
since the commissions there were held by the Seigneurs and the
other notabilities of their respective districts, men who were
the best educated and the most esteemed in the country. The
choice was politic also, for it secured the continuance of the
services of men who, under the old régime, had already been in
charge of the conduct of justice, as well as public and communal
affairs. Indeed it was to them that there had been intrusted
the carrying out of the public works, such as road making and
repairs, bridge building, the regulation of statutory labor
through corvèes, etc. In the new régime, therefore, the militia
officers were practically reinstated in their former functions.

An examination has been made by Judge Mondelet of Three Rivers,
of the registers kept of the decisions of the military court of
Montreal. These latter have been generally found equitable and
founded on positive law; they are legally attested to in most
cases, the secretary of the council being a Frenchman skilled
in the law, such as was Pierre Panet, the notary, and the
minutes are all in French. The first four registers contain the
transactions of the “Chambre de Milices” presided over by the
captains of the militia, and dealt only with civil cases. The
fifth and sixth of these registers contain the criminal decisions
of the court martials of the _Chambre Militaire_ of Montreal
and that of St. Sulpice, as well as appeals from the “Chambre de
Milices.” This court was composed only of officers of the regular
army to the number of five. In addition there was the further
right of appeal to the governor. The seventh register “appeals to
the governor,” records the decisions of General Gage (page 299),
and of General Burton (page 95).

By consulting the records we find that order during this period
was observed independently of the racial distinctions in the
city. We hear of, for instance, early in 1761 of the execution
of a grenadier of the Forty-fourth Regiment for robbery, which
is balanced by that of a French soldier, formerly of the La
Salle Regiment, for the murder of a habitant at Ile Jésus, the
execution being carried out in the market place.

It will be interesting here to notice some of the court martials
held at Montreal in the years 1761 and 1762. It will be seen
that French and English, the “new” and the “old” subjects,
came equally under them, being treated with equal justice. The
following cases from the “Livre d’orde” reveal this.

Montreal, June 3, 1761, at the court martial general,
Lieutenant-Colonel Grant presiding, Jean Marchand of
Boucherville, was prosecuted for the murder of Joseph Carpentier,
a Canadian,--acquitted.

Tuesday, June 30, William Bewen accused of having intoxicated
soldiers and of selling rum without license, is found guilty,
having been accessory to his associate, Isaac Lawrence, who has
the habit of selling rum to the soldiers,--condemned to receive
200 stripes of the cat-o’-nine tails, and to be driven from the
town at the beat of the drum. (First of July, Isaac Lawrence
similarly condemned.)

August 6, Joseph Lavalleé and François Herpin, inhabitants of
Montreal, prosecuted for theft,--acquitted.

Joseph Burgen, one of those who came following the army, is
accused and convicted for theft, and condemned to be hanged
by the neck until death shall ensue. The General approved the
sentence, but pardoned him on the condition that he left this
government without delay.

August 13, George Skipper and Bellair, bakers, accused and
arraigned by Captain Disnay for having sold bread, which had not
the requisite weight,--acquitted.

September 19, John Charlette and one named Lameure, Canadians,
are indicted for having solicited Joseph Myard, a drummer, to
desert. Charlette is acquitted and Lameure is found guilty and
condemned to receive 300 blows from the whip. He is pardoned by
the General.

December 13, William Morris, accused of having kept a dissolute
house, is condemned to a fine of £5.

December 24, two Canadians prosecuted for having the property
of the King in their possession. One is acquitted and the other
found guilty and condemned to receive 400 stripes of the lash.
The General approves the sentence, but reduces the lashes to
fifty.

For 1762, we may choose an incident which shows the growth of the
tendency towards the unpleasant relations between the Montreal
English merchants and the military, which afterwards had such
serious results, and helped to occasion the recall of General
Murray.

February 26, Mr. Grant and Edward Chinn, merchants, accused of
having insulted Ensign Nott of the Fourth Battalion of the Sixth
Regiment of Royal Americans, are found guilty and condemned, Mr.
Grant to a fine of £30 and Mr. Chinn to a fine of £20, “which
sums will be employed according to the direction of the General
to the relief of the unhappy poor in Montreal.” Pardon is to be
asked of Ensign Nott in the presence of the garrison of Montreal
in the following terms, namely--“Ensign Nott I am very sorry for
having been guilty of assault in your regard and very humbly ask
your pardon.” The General approved the sentence, but reduced the
fine of Mr. Grant to £20. Mr. Forrest Oakes was also prosecuted
for a like offence and condemned also to ask pardon of Ensign
Nott, and to undergo fourteen days’ imprisonment. The General
reduced the imprisonment to twenty-four hours and exempted Mr.
Oakes from asking pardon, because it appeared to him that the
injuries received had been reciprocal.

From these judgments, we may see that, while the Chambre de
Justice of Chambre de Milices judged purely civil affairs, all
criminal affairs, great and small, were relegated to the “Council
of War,” otherwise called the “Court Martial,” which performed
the functions nowadays of the courts of Quarter Sessions and
criminal courts of King’s Bench. The “General” was the final
court of appeal.

A glance at some of the ordinances of this period will further
illustrate the life of the town. On November 27 Governor Gage
found it necessary to issue ordinances against merchants,
who without permission of the governor, went to sell their
merchandise and intoxicating liquors in the country places. On
the 13th of January, 1762, there occurred a further ordinance,
explaining the former and forbidding in addition the sale of
liquors to soldiers and savages, and fixing the quantity lawful
to be sold to the inhabitants at one time. These merchants
were probably newcomers from the English colonies now drifting
into the city and anxious to make good quickly rather than
scrupulously.

On the 12th of May regulations were issued concerning the amount
of cords of wood that should be furnished to the troops.

On July 26th, Gage endeavors to arrange for the money exchange
values. He orders that six _livres tournois_ shall be equal to
eight shillings, or ten _sols_ of Montreal money.

On July 31st, Gage has his mind on the repair of the
fortifications, “seeing that they are falling into ruin and
wishing to carry on the old regulations for the common good,
following in this time of uncertainty, the ancient usages, which
are not opposed to the service of the king,” and therefore he
ordered that there shall be imposed every year commencing with
1762, a sum, of which a third shall be paid by the Seminary of
St. Sulpice and the other two-thirds by the regular and secular
communities and the inhabitants of the said Town of Montreal, for
repairs to commence in the following spring, but that the gate,
on which they are working, shall be made perfect this year, and
“that the said imposition, for which the money shall be remitted
to a person named by the Chambre of Militia of the said Montreal,
shall not surpass the sum of 6,000 _livres_ each year” and shall
continue until the entire repair of the said enclosure is made,
at the end of which repairs, the present ordinance shall remain
null and void.

On August 3d, Gage seeing that different standards of weights and
measures were being used, and to prevent frauds slipping into the
commercial life of the city, established that, in Montreal,
the English standard yard measure should be used according to the
standard to be kept by the “major of the place.” This regulation
it was hoped would suit both the English and French.

[Illustration: IN THE DAYS OF THE OLD REGIME St. Amable Street,
a narrow thoroughfare west of the lower part of Jaques Cartier
Square and near the spot where the Chateau de Vaudreuil once
stood, was a fashionable quarter in the gay days before the
“Capitulation.” The house marked by a projecting sign “The
Woodbine” is said to have been the site of a saloon for two
hundred years.]

On October 18th he has to settle the prices, which the bakers of
the town should charge for various kinds of bread.

On November 15th, foreseeing the future possibilities of Montreal
trade, Governor Gage issued an ordinance for the establishment of
a Customs House and he orders Thomas Lambs to be recognized as
its director, and Richard Oakes as the visitor of the said Custom
House in Montreal.

The following will interest Montreal merchants of today, being
significant of the first loosening of restrictions upon Montreal
on the part of Quebec. “All ship owners and others interested in
trade are warned that all of the vessels coming from Europe or
the colonies charged on account of merchants and others, who wish
to come there to do business, can follow their destinations up to
the city of Montreal without being discharged and re-charged with
merchandise at Quebec under any pretext whatever, unless they
are suspected of carrying goods of contraband, in the design of
making illicit trade.”

On the 7th of January, 1763, regulations forbidding excess speed
of the carriages and horses in the streets of Montreal and
suburbs had to be laid down.

On the 4th of April Gage issued an ordinance establishing the
Custom House at Montreal, with regulations to the captains
of ships and officers, sailors and others to carry out the
regulations issued, which show that all the paraphernalia and
customary duty of ships reporting to the customs, avoiding
smuggling, etc., were now full of vigour. Montreal was beginning
to be a port of some pretensions.

All these regulations show that the British authorities, while
affirming the customs of the country and maintaining the law, as
known by the people and administered by their own men of ability
and learning, the captains of the militia, of whom many were of
the noblesse, providing progressive trade regulations, required
for the development of the port and of the up-country commerce,
of which the headquarters were at Montreal, were wise rulers.

The care with which the inhabitants were instructed in the
knowledge of political events happening outside of their own
sphere, the participation in their own judicial code by their
own officers, thus beginning, as it were, to be permitted for
the first time to participate in their duty of taking part in
the government, the justice with which they were treated by the
conquerors, the faithful fulfilment of dues for service received,
brought about a unity with the English soldiery and the new
governors, that disposed the conquered people to feel little
regret at the departure of the French Régime from Canada.

Many there were, who were still borne up by the hope that the
expected peace would restore Canada to France, but the majority
were indifferent and if anything glad to have things remain as
they were. The position at Montreal may be summed up in the words
of General Gage’s report to Amherst, dated March 20, 1762, sent
on to London the same year.[5]

“I feel the highest satisfaction that I am able to inform you
that during my command of this government I have made it my
constant care and attention that the Canadians should be treated
agreeable to His Majesty’s kind and humane intentions. No
invasion on their property or assault on their person has gone
unpunished. All reproaches on their subjection by the fate of
arms, revilings on their customs or country and all reflections
on their religion, have been discountenanced and forbid. No
distinction has been made between the Briton and Canadian, but
equally regarded as subjects of the same prince. The soldiers
live peaceably with the inhabitants and they reciprocally acquire
an affection for each other.”

Those who know the British soldier will not be surprised to hear
that in the distress that fell upon the French Canadians in 1761,
mostly through the non-payment of the obligations incurred by the
French government, for the redemption of the paper money not yet
liquidated since the capitulation, the soldiers gave each one
a day’s provisions monthly to relieve the immediate distress.
Quebec suffered most. Montreal merchants came to the rescue and
swelled the general subscription lists.

As Governor Gage was on the spot, his official report may be
further largely quoted as that of an historian of Montreal. After
the above opening remarks on the amicable relations existing
between the French-Canadians and British, he continues: “The
Indians have been treated on the same principles of humanity.
They have had immediate justice for all their wrongs and no
tricks or artifices have hitherto been attempted to defraud them
in their trade.”

He sends a return of the present state of the troops and
artillery and a report of the fortifications. Speaking of those
of Montreal he notes: “Upon a height within the city is a small
square work of wood, completed since the capitulation, provided
with a few pieces of artillery and capable of containing seventy
or eighty men.”

“The soil produces all sorts of summer grains. In some parts
of the government the wheat is sown in autumn. Every kind of
pulse and other vegetables to which I may add some fruits, viz.,
apples, pears, plums, melons, etc. Cider is made here, but as yet
in small quantities. In general every fruit tree hardy enough to
withstand the severity of the winter will produce in the summer,
which affords sufficient heat to bring most kinds of fruit to
maturity.”

Reporting as befits one stationed at the center and headquarters
of the fur trade on the profits to the French king from the posts
he says, “I must conclude His Majesty gained very little from
this commerce.”

He then records what must have been of great importance to
the interests of the British merchants of Montreal desirous
of up-country trade. “Immediately after we became masters of
this country all monopolies were abolished and all incumbrances
upon trade were removed. The traders chose their posts without
the obligation of purchasing them and I can by no means think
the French management in giving exclusive grants of trade at
particular posts for the sake of the sale thereof or the sale
of permits to trade at the free posts worthy our imitation. The
Indians, of course, paid dearer for their goods and the trade in
general must have been injured by the monopolies.”

Summing up the gain to France of Canada he says: “The only
immediate importance and advantage the French king derived from
Canada was the preventing the extension of the British colonies,
the consumption of the commodities and manufactures of France
and the trade of pelletry. She had no doubt views to further
advantages that the country might in time supply her with hemp,
cordage, iron, masts and generally all kinds of naval stores.
The people in general seemed well enough disposed to their new
masters.

“The only causes of dislike which I can discover proceed from
the fear of money, and the difference of religion. I understand
Canada to be on the same footing in respect of this money as all
the French colonies and if France pays any of them I don’t see
how she can avoid paying the bills of exchange drawn from Canada
in the same proportion as she pays the rest. It is the Canadians
only who would be sufferers by an exception, as Canadian bills to
a very large amount are in the possession of French merchants and
the rest may be sent to France and nobody be able to distinguish
which is French and which Canadian property.”

Speaking of the second cause of dislike, the difference
of religion, he says: “The people having enjoyed a free
and undisturbed exercise of their religion ever since the
capitulation of their country, their fears in that particular
are much abated, but there still remains a jealousy. It is to
be hoped that in time this jealousy will wear off and certainly
in this, much will depend upon the clergy. Perhaps methods may
be found hereafter to supply the _curés_ of this country with
priests well affected. But whilst Canada is stocked as she is
now with corps of priests detached from seminaries in France, on
whom they depend and to whom they pay obedience, it is natural to
conceive that neither the priests nor those they can influence
will ever bear that love and affection to a British government
which His Majesty’s auspicious reign would otherwise engage from
the Canadians as well as from his other subjects.”

In passing it may be noted that Gage’s fears were never realized,
for to the Canadian clergy is due the credit of having saved
Canada to English rule, as will be seen afterwards. A last
quotation is interesting as bearing on the question of the
exodus in 1760 after the capitulation. “No persons have left
this government to go to France except those who held military
and civil employment under the French king. Nor do I apprehend
any emigration at the peace, being persuaded that the present
inhabitants will remain under the British dominion. I perceive
none preparing to leave the government or that seem inclined to
do it unless it is a few ladies whose husbands are already in
France, and they propose to leave the country when peace is made,
if their husbands should not rather choose to return to Canada.”

Meanwhile the peace was eagerly looked forward to. The
proclamations of the 26th of November, given from the Palace
of St. James in London, having reference to the preliminaries
for peace and the cessation of hostilities, prepared the minds
of all for further intelligence. This was eventually given by
Thomas Gage from his Château of Montreal on the 17th of May,
1763, in which the definitive treaty of peace made between their
Brittannic and very Christian and Catholic majesties, signed
on the 6th of February, and ratified on the 10th of March, was
made known. On this occasion Gage indicated to the people the
chief portions bearing upon their rights, especially that of
the exercise of their religion according to the rights of the
Roman church “as far as the laws of Great Britain permit,” and
secondly that whereby the inhabitants of His Christian Majesty
had permission to leave Canada in safety and liberty, the limit
fixed for this emigration being the space of eighteen months, to
count from the day of the exchange of the treaty. He communicated
to the captains of his government a letter from Monseigneur de
Choiseul, which had reference to the payment of debts due and
relating to the redemption of the paper money, which was still in
circulation, although the English governors sought to prohibit
it. It was set forth that the Most Christian King would pay the
sum due to the new subjects of Great Britain, but that the amount
must not be confounded with the money held by the French subjects.

On May 27, the governor of Montreal issued through the captains
of Militia of Montreal regulations concerning the liquidation of
this paper money, directing the captains to make a declaration
of the amount in their possession. They were to place the amount
held by them in the hand of Pierre Panet, _Notaire et Greffier_
of Montreal, appointed for this purpose, between the first and
thirtieth of June, designating the character of the notes, with
the name of the holder and other safeguards to be observed,
upon which certificates of receipt would be given. Care was to
be taken that the money, which they brought, should belong to
them and that they did not lend their names to anyone. Fault
in this regard would lead to prosecution for falsifying. For
this transaction a fee of five _sous_ was to be paid for every
thousand _livres_ so deposited. Money was received from 7 o’clock
in the morning to midday and from 2 o’clock to 5, except on
Sundays and holidays. This must have caused great excitement in
the city. Great care was taken to instruct the habitants of the
value of their money and warn them against becoming the victims
of speculators.[6]

Meanwhile preparations were being made for the removal of General
Gage from the post, which he had filled with excellent judgment
and with habitual prudence.

On August 5th, Gage issued some further ordinances regulating the
transport of merchandise and ammunition to the savages, seeing
that these latter had again been making incursions into the
country.

On August 18 he upheld a complaint of the established merchants
against the peddlers who were underselling the merchants in the
streets, forbidding anyone to sell in the public places of the
city, the streets and even the squares, river banks and suburbs.

On the 16th of September he issued an ordinance concerning
certain uncultivated lands in the districts of the Government,
which had been granted with titles of concessions “en fief” under
the former régime, and on which there had been no ground broken
as yet, on account of wars or other events. Those having these
should present their credentials or applications at once, so
as to have them recognized, to avoid any conflict with future
concessions.

General Gage left Montreal with the esteem of all. He was
presented with an affectionate address by the captains of the
_Chambre de Milice_, over which he had presided as the Chief
Judge, and he replied to them by a letter on October 15, 1763,
begging them to accept his testimony in recognition of the
services which they had rendered to the king of the country,
trusting that they would continue the same for the public good
and that their service, for which they had already required
so great a reputation among their own compatriots, would not
fail to draw upon them the good-will and protection of the
king. Certainly Gage might safely boast, as he had done in his
letter to Amherst, of the peaceful state of Montreal under his
government. He had helped to forge the links of intimacy that
bound the _noblesse_ and the British officials, the militia and
the military officers, which made for the harmonious transition
between the old and the new régimes. Whether or not the alliance
was an unmixed blessing is shown by subsequent events.


FOOTNOTES:

[1] Before leaving, General Amherst appointed military governors
for three districts. Their tenures of office were as follows:
District of Montreal, General Thomas Gage, September, 1760, to
October, 1763; Colonel Ralph Burton, October, 1763, to August,
1764. District of Quebec, General James Murray, September, 1760,
to August, 1764. District of Three Rivers, Colonel Ralph Burton,
September, 1760, to May, 1762; Colonel F. Haldimand, May, 1762,
to March, 1763; Colonel Ralph Burton, March, 1763, to October,
1763; Colonel F. Haldimand, October, 1763, to August, 1764.

[2] The French runs: “_Et nous a laissé un gage precieux_, etc.”
The word “pledge” instead of “gage” in the English translation
destroys the delicate _double entendre_ and compliment, evidently
meant in the French version.

[3] The first mayor of Montreal.

[4] For the above abstracts of the ordinance of October 13th and
October 17th see “The Canadian Militia,” by Captain Ernest J.
Chambers, 1907.

[5] This was prepared for Pitt according to the order of Lord
Egremont in his dispatch to Sir Jeffrey Amherst of December
12, 1761, in which the king approves of the system of military
government established in the districts of Quebec, Three Rivers
and Montreal. He instructs Amherst to send for His Majesty’s
information a full account of the newly acquired country. In
response to this command communicated to Murray, Burton and Gage,
reports from the latter were prepared and forwarded to Amherst.
These reports were among the documents submitted to the Board of
Trade for their information in preparing a plan of government for
the territories ceded to Britain by the treaty of Paris of 1763.

[6] The same arrangements were carried out at Quebec and Three
Rivers and Murray reported that the total amount of the paper
money in circulation was nearly 17,000,000 of _livres_, that, in
the government of Montreal alone, being 7,980,298-8-4. Kingsford,
History of Canada, Vol. V, page 181, remarks: “An attempt to
depreciate the value of this paper was made by the court of
France in which it was pointed out that from the discredit to
which it had fallen it had been purchased at 80 to 90 per cent
discount; that it did not represent the value of what had been
received, owing to the high price paid for the articles obtained;
that the bills of exchange of 1759 were paid in part and that
bills that remained were only such as had been issued after this
payment. The British reply was that the court of France, having
been the cause of the discredit alleged had no right to profit by
it, that the prices paid for supplies had been established by the
intendant, that the date of the ordinances could not constitute a
reason why they should not be paid, that such paper money was the
currency of the colony issued by France, consequently the country
was responsible for it.”




                           CHAPTER III

                 THE DEFINITIVE TREATY OF PARIS

                              1763

                    THE NEW CIVIL GOVERNMENT

  THE DEFINITIVE TREATY OF PEACE--SECTION RELATING TO
    CANADA--CATHOLIC DISABILITIES AND THE PHRASE “AS FAR AS THE
    LAWS OF GREAT BRITAIN PERMIT”--THE TREATY RECEIVED WITH DELIGHT
    BY THE “OLD” SUBJECTS BUT WITH DISAPPOINTMENT BY THE “NEW”--THE
    INEVITABLE STRUGGLES BEGIN, TO CULMINATE IN THE QUEBEC ACT
    OF 1774--OPPOSITION AT MONTREAL, THE HEADQUARTERS OF THE
    SEIGNEURS--THE NEW CIVIL GOVERNMENT IN ACTION--CIVIL COURTS AND
    JUSTICES OF THE PEACE ESTABLISHED--MURRAY’S ACTION IN ALLOWING
    “ALL SUBJECTS OF THE COLONY” TO BE CALLED UPON TO ACT AS JURORS
    VIOLENTLY OPPOSED BY THE BRITISH PARTY AS UNCONSTITUTIONAL--THE
    PROTEST OF THE QUEBEC GRAND JURY--SUBSEQUENT MODIFICATIONS
    IN 1766 TO SUIT ALL PARTIES--GOVERNOR MURRAY’S COMMENT
    ON MONTREAL, “EVERY INTRIGUE TO OUR DISADVANTAGE WILL BE
    HATCHED THERE”--MURRAY AND THE MONTREAL MERCHANTS--A TIME OF
    MISUNDERSTANDING. NOTE: LIST OF SUBSEQUENT GOVERNORS.


Before proceeding further it will be well to set before the
reader some special portions of “_The definitive treaty of peace
and friendship between His Britannic Majesty, the Most Christian
King, and the king of Spain, concluded at Paris the 10th day of
February, 1763, to which the king of Portugal acceded on the same
day_.”

Section IV relating to Canada was as follows:

  “His Most Christian Majesty renounces all pretensions which he
  has heretofore formed or might have formed to Nova Scotia or
  Acadia in all its parts, and guarantees the whole of it and with
  all its dependencies to the King of Great Britain. Moreover
  his most Christian Majesty accedes and guarantees to his said
  Britannic Majesty in full right, Canada with all its dependencies
  as well as the island of Cape Breton and all the other islands
  and coasts in the Gulph and river of St. Lawrence and in general
  everything that depends on the said countries, lands, islands
  and coasts with the sovereignty, property, possessions and all
  rights acquired by treaty or otherwise, which the Most Christian
  King and the crown of France have had till now over the said
  countries, lands, islands, places, coasts and their inhabitants,
  so that the Most Christian King cedes and makes over the whole to
  the said King and to the Crown of Great Britain and that in the
  most ample manner and form, without restriction and without any
  liberty to depart from the said cession and guarantee under any
  pretense, or to disturb Great Britain in the possessions above
  mentioned.

  “His Britannic Majesty on his side agrees to grant the liberty of
  the Catholick religion to the inhabitants of Canada; he will in
  consequence give the most precise and most effectual orders that
  his new Roman Catholick subjects may profess the worship of their
  religion according to the rights of the Romish church as far as
  the laws of Great Britain permit. His Britannic Majesty further
  agrees that the French inhabitants or others who have been
  subjects of the Most Christian King in Canada may retire with all
  safety and freedom whenever they shall think proper and may sell
  their estates provided it be to the subjects of His Britannic
  Majesty, and bring away their effects as well as their persons
  without being restrained in their emigration under any pretense
  whatever except that of debts or of criminal prosecutions; the
  term limited for this emigration shall be fixed to the space of
  eighteen months to be computed from the day of the exchange of
  the ratification of the present treaty.”

The definitive treaty of Paris of February 10, 1763, proclaimed
by Governor Gage in Montreal on May 17th, was received with
delight by the English merchants, for they looked forward eagerly
for the civil government to be set up in which they, but a
handful, hoped by the right of conquest to assume the high hand.
They had long chafed under what they, more than the “Canadians,”
chose to call military despotism. They had looked upon the
amicable temporary participation of the Canadians in their own
government, with eyes of envy. They were of the same metal as
the British merchants of Quebec who, relying on their undoubted
energy in developing the commercial interests of the country, and
in their self-satisfaction, so aggrandized their own importance
that they wished to rule solely, so that they early petitioned
his Majesty for a representative assembly in this province as in
all the other provinces of His Majesty. “There are,” they said,
“a sufficient number of loyal and interested Protestants outside
the military officers to form a legislative assembly, and the new
subjects of His Majesty, if he should believe it proper, could
be authorized to elect Protestants without having to take oath
against their conscience.” (See constitutional documents, Doughty
& Shortt.)

There were only about two hundred Protestants, and these not all
educated or upright men, in the whole country at this time--in
Quebec 144, in Montreal 56. Yet they desired to represent the
whole people and to exclude the “new subjects” from every
position of trust under the new civil government. At the time of
Murray’s recall in 1766 they had reached the number of 450.

The Canadians were not prepared for the new turn of the tide. In
consequence we shall see that between 1763 and 1774 the country
was in an unsettled state, owing to the conflict inevitable
between the two forces of the old and new régimes striving for
recognition.

Under the military law the “new subjects” had been entrusted with
a share in the government. The English rulers were officers and
gentlemen who respected the claims of the Seigneurs as well as
of the simple habitants, and moreover their religion was held in
honour. They had been led to believe that this happy state would
continue. Gage and Murray in their report to Egremont seem to
hint how they were hoodwinked. “Canadians are very ignorant and
extremely tenacious of their religion. Nothing can contribute to
make them staunch subjects to His Majesty as the new government
giving them every reason to imagine no alteration is to be
attempted in that point.”

Thus when the “new subjects” came to understand that they were
only to “profess the worship of their religion according to the
rights of the Romish church _as far as the laws of Great Britain
permit_,” and that that permission was to be interpreted along
the lines of the Catholic civil disabilities in England, they
felt that they were proscribed men who had been ensnared by
roseate promises of a wise interpretation of British liberty to
be extended to them as new subjects.

The situation was impossible and at once there began the
inevitable struggle and the long series of accommodations that
were eventually to culminate in the Quebec act of 1774, the Magna
Charta of French Canadians. The significance of this act cannot
be understood unless the religious proscription in the policy of
the new government be understood. Hence the opposition among the
Seigneurs in Montreal, their headquarters, was secretly fostered,
which later alarmed Carleton so much, as we shall see. The French
Canadian clergy and Seigneurs of Montreal looked upon the new
change of government as an attempt to Anglicize their religion
as well as their laws. And they were not far wrong. In a letter
to Governor Murray, the secretary of state, Lord Egremont, wrote
from Whitehall on August 13, 1763, acquainting him that the King
had been graciously pleased to confer on him the civil government
of Canada and making special reference to the qualification,
“as far as the laws of Great Britain permit,” which laws, he
explains, prohibit absolutely all Popish hierarchy in any of
the dominions belonging to the Crown of Great Britain and can
only admit of a toleration of the exercise of that religion; this
matter was clearly understood in the negotiation of the exercise
of that religion; the French ministers proposed to insert the
words _comme ci-devant_ in order that the Romish religion should
continue to be exercised in the same manner as under their
government; and they did not give up their point until they were
plainly told that it would be deceiving them to admit those
words, for the king had not the power to tolerate that religion
in any other manner than as far as the laws of Great Britain
permit. “These laws must be your guide in any disputes that may
arise on this subject.”

The intention was precisely to tolerate for a time the Romish
religion and gradually to supplant it. The royal instructions to
Governor Murray, given from the court of St. James by King George
on the 7th day of December, 1763, leave no doubt on this head.
The intention to suppress the natural growth of the Catholic
church in Canada by crippling it forever at its fountain head by
giving no guarantee of the recognition of the Episcopal power and
jurisdiction, had already been foreshadowed in the two clauses
submitted by Vaudreuil in the terms of the capitulation of
Montreal.

  Article XXX: “If by the treaty of peace Canada shall remain in
  the power of His Britannic Majesty, His Most Christian Majesty
  shall continue to name the bishop of the colony, who shall always
  be of the Roman communion and under whose authority the people
  shall exercise the Roman religion: ‘Refused.’”

  Article XXXI: “The bishop shall, in case of need, establish new
  parishes and provide for the building of his cathedral and his
  Episcopal palace; and in the meantime he shall have the liberty
  to dwell in towns or parishes as he shall judge proper. He shall
  be at liberty to visit his diocese with the ordinary ceremonies
  and exercise also the jurisdiction which his predecessor
  exercised under the French dominion, save that an oath of
  fidelity or a promise to do nothing contrary to His Britannic
  Majesty’s service, may be required of him: ‘This article is
  comprised under the foregoing.’”

The reason for this was signalized in the instructions later to
Murray, Carleton and Haldimand in the clause beginning:

  “And to the end that the ecclesiastical jurisdiction of the
  lord bishop of London may take place in our province under your
  government as conveniently as possible,” etc.

  Section XXXII reads: “You are not to admit of any ecclesiastical
  jurisdiction of the See of Rome or of any other foreign
  jurisdiction whatsoever in the province under your government.”

  Section XXXIII: “And to the end that the Church of England may
  be established both in principle and practice and that the said
  inhabitants may by degrees be induced to embrace the Protestant
  religion and their children be brought up in the principles of
  it, we do hereby declare it to be our intention when the said
  province shall have been accurately surveyed and divided into
  townships, districts, precincts or parishes in such manner as
  shall be hereinafter directed, all possible encouragement shall
  be given to the erecting of Protestant schools in the same
  districts, townships and precincts by settling, appointing and
  allotting proper quantities of land for that purpose and also for
  a glebe and maintenance for a Protestant minister and Protestant
  schoolmaster, and you are to consider and report to us by our
  Commissions for Trade and Plantation by what other means the
  Protestant religion may be promoted, established and encouraged
  in our province under your government.”

This instruction to Murray is repeated in those to Governor
Carleton, 1768, and to Governor Haldimand, 1778.

Let us see how the civil government worked out. It was proclaimed
on April 10, 1764, the delay being caused to allow the French
Canadians the eighteen months, stipulated by the treaty of Paris,
in which they might leave the country. Murray had been appointed
governor-general of the province of Quebec by the commission of
November 21, 1763, and the instructions were dated on December
7th. But Murray had not promulgated the new dignity accorded him
till on September 17th, 1764, the first great act of the new
régime being opened by his ordinance establishing civil courts.
It may be briefly stated as follows: there was to be a Superior
Court of judicature or King’s Bench, which should be held at
Quebec twice a year at the Hilary term commencing on January 1st
and at Trinity term on June 21st. Its president should be the
chief justice of Canada. This was William Gregory. This man,
with the attorney-general, Suckling, were soon removed for
incompetency. Later in 1766 a Michaelmas term was added. Montreal
and Three Rivers were to have the chief justices’ court of
assizes and jail delivery after Hilary once a year.

Strangely enough, though not unnaturally, Murray had inserted
a clause in the act which was afterwards violently objected to
by the English merchants as going beyond his commission, viz.,
that _all the subjects of the colony_ could be called upon
without distinction to take their place on the jury. Murray had
to explain this to the English government and accordingly with
the copy of the above act sent, he remarked to the following
effect: “As there are only two hundred Protestant subjects in
the province, the greater part of which is composed of disbanded
soldiers of small fortunes and of little capacity, it is
considered unjust to prevent the Roman Catholic new subjects from
taking part on juries, for such an exclusion would constitute
the said two hundred Protestants perpetual judges of the lives
and fortunes not only of the eighty thousand new subjects but of
all the military in this province. Moreover, if the Canadians
are not admitted to juries many will emigrate.” Murray felt that
his position might not carry, for he adds: “This arrangement is
nothing else than a temporary expedient to leave affairs in their
present state until the pleasure of His Majesty on this critical
and difficult point be made known.”

Besides the superior court there should be an inferior court of
“Common Pleas” to settle civil cases involving sums of beyond
ten _louis_. Beyond twenty _louis_ there was appeal allowed to
the superior court. If desired there could be juries called in
this court. French advocates and proctors could practice in this
court, though not in the superior court. Murray explains the
liberty taken by him in allowing this: “Because we have not as
yet a single English advocate or proctor understanding the French
language.” He also observed that the court of common pleas was
established solely for the protection of the French Canadian.

In addition to the other two courts, Justices of the Peace were
established at Quebec and Montreal who should hold quarter
sessions. These officers of the magistracy, according to Murray’s
instructions, had to be Protestants. One justice was to have
jurisdiction in disputes to the value of five pounds; two were
required for cases to the value of ten pounds. Three justices
should form a quorum to hold quarter sessions, to adjudicate in
cases from ten pounds to thirty pounds. Two justices were to sit
weekly in rotation in Quebec and Montreal.

Finally there should be elected in every parish in the country
bailiffs and sub-bailiffs. The elections were to take place
every 21st day of June and they were to enter upon their duties
on September 29th. “We call them bailiffs,” commenced Murray,
“because the new subjects understand the word better than that of
constables.” The word constable, will, however, better explain
the nature of their multifarious duties.

We now have a view of the change in the law courts in Montreal:
a yearly session of the king’s court and of the court of common
pleas, quarter sessions held by the justices of the peace, and in
the parishes, the bailiffs or constables.

Hardly had the courts erected by the act of September 7th
been held, than the grand jury of Quebec protested vehemently
at the new courts and especially at the privileges given the
new subjects. Their opposition was expected by Murray for his
comment, sent with the act, ran: that some of the English
merchants residing here of whom only ten or a dozen at most
possess any settled property in this province, are very
dissatisfied at the privileges granted to the Canadians to act on
juries; the reason of this is very evident as their influence is
restrained by the measure.

Britishers on the jury who thought the favours to Catholics
unconstitutional were only victims of their narrow prejudices
formed by the prevailing intolerance then existing in England and
its colonies. The toleration to Catholics according to the phrase
“as far as the laws of Great Britain allow” was not the wide
freedom we see nowadays.

A protest against allowing the latter class to practice in the
courts or to serve on juries was made early by the Protestant
members of the grand jury of Quebec on October 16, 1764, as
follows: “That by the definitive treaty the Roman religion was
only tolerated in the province of Quebec as far as the laws of
Great Britain had met. It was and is enacted by the third act,
January 1st, chapter V, section 8, ‘No Papist or Popish recusant
convict shall practice the common law as a counsellor, clerk,
attorney or solicitor, nor shall practice the civic law as
advocate or proctor, nor practice physick, nor be an apothecary,
nor shall be a judge, minister, clerk or steward of or in any
court, nor shall bear any office or charge as captain, master,
or governor, or bear any office of charge of, or, in any ship,
castle or fortress, but be utterly disabled for the same, and
every person herein shall forfeit one hundred pounds, half to
the king and half to them that shall sue.’ We therefore believe
that the admitting of persons of Romish religion, who own the
authority, supremacy and jurisdiction of the church of Rome,
as jurors is an open violation of our most sacred laws and
liberties, tending to the utter subversion of the Protestant
religion and His Majesty’s power, authority, right and possession
of the province to which we belong.” Later these jurors pretended
that they had never meant to exclude Catholic jurors, but only
as jurors when Protestants were contestants. The above argument
shows their original _intrinsigeance_.

Later, in February, 1766, modifications were introduced; when
the contestants were British the jury should be British; when
Canadians, Canadians; when the contestants were mixed the
jury should also be mixed. These conflicts were inevitable
in unsettled times when two peoples were of different mental
outlooks, politically, racially and religiously. The melting pot
of time will solve such difficulties, when the viewpoints of both
parties would be more sympathetically understood. In the meantime
the historical situation at the time was painful.

Governor Murray’s letter to the Lords of Trade, written a
few days after the presentment of the jury is a fair and
statesman-like view of the difficult period.

                           “Quebec, 29th of October, 1764.

“* * * Little, very little, will content the new subjects, but
nothing will satisfy the licentious fanaticks trading here, but
the expulsion of the Canadians who are perhaps the bravest and
best race upon the globe, a race who, could they be indulged
with a few privileges which the laws of England deny to Roman
Catholics at home, would soon get the better of every national
antipathy to their conquerors and become the most faithful and
most useful set of men in this American empire.

“I flatter myself there will be some remedy found out even in
the laws for the relief of this people. If so, I am positive the
popular clamours in England will not prevent the humane heart
of the king from following its own dictates. I am confident,
too, my royal master will not blame the unanimous opinion of
his council here for the ordinance establishing the courts of
justice, as nothing less could be done to prevent great numbers
from emigrating directly and certain I am, unless the Canadians
are admitted on juries and are allowed judges and lawyers who
understand their language, His Majesty will lose the greatest
part of this valuable people.”

His letter immediately continues with the following allusion
which helps us to place the position of Montreal in the above
general constitutional crisis then affecting the colony. “I beg
leave further,” says Murray, “to represent to your Lordship that
a lieutenant governor at Montreal is absolutely necessary. That
town is in the heart of the most populous part of the provinces.
It is surrounded by the Indian nations and is 180 miles from
the capital. It is there that the most opulent priests live and
there are settled the greatest part of the French noblesse.
Consequently every intrigue to our disadvantage will be hatched
there.”

A postscript to this letter to the Lords of Trade and
Plantations, gives Murray’s appreciation of some of the great
commercial class: “P.S.--I have been informed that Messrs.
William McKenzie, Alexander McKenzie and William Grant have been
soliciting their friends in London to prevail upon Your Lordship
to get them admitted into his Majesty’s council of this province.
I think it my duty to acquaint Your Lordships that the first of
these men is a notorious smuggler and a turbulent man, the second
a weak man of little character and the third a conceited boy. In
short it will be impossible to do business with any of them.”

This postscript indicates the strain and bitter personal
relations between Murray and some of the British commercial
element in the colony, who finally succeeded in obtaining his
recall.

Unfortunately, Murray was not always as discreet or as just in
the consideration of his opponents, as his position justified.
He was a soldier rather than a peace maker. In addition, others
besides the British merchant did not see eye to eye with him
in the interpretation of the new Treaty of Paris or in the
application of English laws in Canada.

They retorted as did the Quebec traders, that the governor “doth
frequently treat them with a rage and rudeness of language and
demeanour as dishonourable to the trust he holds of Your Majesty
as painful to those who suffer from it.”

In commenting on this period, Prof. F.P. Walton, dean of the
faculty of Law at McGill University, has the following criticism
(Cf. University Magazine, April, 1908):

He is speaking of the charge against Murray’s interpretation of
the new situation of the application of the new civil government.

“It is probable,” he says, “that at no period in the history of
Canada were legal questions so much discussed among the mass of
the population as in the first ten years of the English _régime_.
This is not surprising when we consider that the question whether
the English or the French law was in force in the Province
was one of no little difficulty. It was contended with much
plausibility that Murray’s Ordinances were of no legal validity
because, under the King’s proclamation, legislative authority
in the Province was to be exercised only by the governor with
the consent of a council and assembly, and that no assembly had
ever been summoned. This is not the place for a discussion of
this subject. I prefer the view of those who maintain that the
English law was introduced by the proclamation of 1763. The case
of Campbell and Hall is sufficient authority for the proposition,
that the King had the power without parliament to alter the law
of Quebec. It seems to me that the natural construction of the
proclamation itself is, that the King intended to introduce
the English law there and then. Murray, as Masères says in his
very convincing argument, ‘meant only to erect and constitute
courts of judicature to administer a system of laws already in
being, to wit, the laws of England.’ The whole affair was to a
great extent a misunderstanding. The English government had no
intention to force the English laws on an unwilling people. They
understood that they were giving ‘Home Rule’ to the Province of
Quebec, and expected that the Canadians would abrogate such parts
of the English law as they did not consider suitable, and would
re-enact the portions of the old French law which they desired to
retain. They did not foresee that, owing to the impracticability
of calling an assembly, the Province would be left without any
authority competent to legislate.”

It was, indeed, a time of great misunderstanding.


                              NOTE

                  GOVERNORS UNDER BRITISH RULE

As it may be convenient henceforth to omit mention of the advent
of successive governors, this list is appended for the purpose of
reference.

  * (Gen. Jeffrey Amherst)                                            1760
  * Gen. James Murray                                                 1763
    P. Aemilius Irving (President)                                    1766
  * Gen. Sir Guy Carleton (Lieutenant Governor and Acting
        Governor General)                                             1766
    H.G. Cramahé                                                      1770
  * Gen. Sir Guy Carleton                                             1774
  * Gen. Frederick Haldimand                                          1778
    Henry Hamilton (Lieutenant Governor)                              1784
    Henry Hope (Lieutenant Governor)                                  1785
  * Lord Dorchester (Guy Carleton)                                    1786

               ON THE DIVISION OF THE TWO CANADAS

    Alured Clarke                                                     1791
  * Lord Dorchester                                                   1793
  * Maj.-Gen. Robert Prescott                                         1796
    Sir. R.S. Milnes                                                  1799
    Hon. Thomas Dunn                                                  1805
  * Sir James H. Craig                                                1807
    Hon. Thomas Dunn                                                  1811
  * Sir George Prevost                                                1811
    Sir Gordon Drummond                                               1815
    Gen. John Wilson                                                  1816
  * Sir John Sherbrooke                                               1816
  * Duke of Richmond                                                  1818
    Sir James Monk                                                    1819
    Sir Peregrine Maitland                                            1820
  * Earl of Dalhousie                                                 1820
    Sir. F.N. Burton                                                  1824
  * Earl of Dalhousie                                                 1825
    Sir James Kempt                                                   1828
  * Lord Alymer                                                       1830
  * Earl of Gosford                                                   1835
  * Sir John Colborne                                                 1838
  * Earl of Durham                                                    1838
  * C. Poulett Thomson (Lord Sydenham)                                1839

                         UNDER THE UNION

  * Baron Sydenham (Hon. Charles Poulett Thomson)                     1841
    R.D. Jackson (Administrator)                                      1841
  * Sir Charles Bagot                                                 1842
  * Sir Charles Metcalfe                                              1843
  * Earl Cathcart                                                     1845
  * Earl of Elgin                                                     1847
    W. Rowan (Administrator)                                          1853
  * Sir Edmund Head                                                   1854
  * Lord Viscount Monck                                               1861

                     UNDER THE CONFEDERATION

  * The Rt. Hon. Viscount Monck, G.C.M.G.                             1867
  * The Rt. Hon. Lord Lisgar, G.C.M.G. (Sir John Young)               1868
  * The Rt. Hon. The Earl of Dufferin, K.P., K.C.B., G.C.M.G.         1872
  * The Rt. Hon. The Marquis of Lome, K.T., G.C.M.G., P.C.            1878
  * The Rt. Hon. The Marquis of Lansdowne, G.C.M.G.                   1883
  * The Rt. Hon. Lord Stanley of Preston, G.C.B.                      1888
  * The Rt. Hon. The Earl of Minto, G.C.M.G.                          1898
  * The Rt. Hon. The Earl of Aberdeen, K.T., G.C.M.G.                 1893
  * The Rt. Hon. The Earl Grey, G.C.M.G.                              1904
  * Field Marshal, H.R.H., The Duke of Connaught, K.C., G.C.M.G.      1911

  ----

  Those not marked * acted only as administrators. When a governor
  had acted as administrator immediately before becoming governor,
  the earlier date is given. The names of all the ad interim
  administrators are not given.

                 LIEUTENANT GOVERNORS OF QUEBEC

                      (After Confederation)

  The Rt. Hon. Sir Narcisse Fortunat Belleau
  The Rt. Hon. Sir Narcisse Fortunat Belleau (re-appointed)
  Hon. Rene Edouard Caron
  Hon. Luc Letellier de St. Just
  Hon. Theodore Robitaille
  Hon. Louis François Rodique Masson
  Hon. Auguste Real Angers
  Hon. Sir J.A. Chapleau
  Hon. L.A. Jetté
  Hon. L.A. Jetté (re-appointed)
  Hon. Sir Charles A.P. Pelletier
  Hon. Sir François Langelier




                           CHAPTER IV

          CIVIC GOVERNMENT UNDER JUSTICES OF THE PEACE

                              1764

  RALPH BURTON, GOVERNOR OF MONTREAL, BECOMES MILITARY
    COMMANDANT--FRICTION AMONG MILITARY COMMANDERS--JUSTICES
    OF PEACE CREATED--FIRST QUARTER SESSIONS--MILITARY
    VERSUS CITIZENS--THE WALKER OUTRAGE--THE TRIAL--WALKER
    BOASTS OF SECURING MURRAY’S RECALL--MURRAY’S DEFENSE
    AFTER HIS RECALL--THE JUSTICES OF THE PEACE ABUSE THEIR
    POWER--CENSURED BY THE COUNCIL AT QUEBEC--COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
    ESTABLISHED--PIERRE DU CALVET--CARLETON’S DESCRIPTION OF THE
    “DISTRESSES OF THE CANADIANS.”


The governor of Three Rivers, Ralph Burton, proclaimed to the
Montrealers on October 29, 1763, his nomination by General
Amherst as governor of Montreal in succession to General Gage.
He announced that the civil justice would be administered by the
same courts as hitherto. His ordinances have nothing striking
beyond one ordering all who had gunpowder in their homes, and
there were many, to take it to the powder magazine, and another
announcing that on April 24, 1764, all who in accordance with
the definitive treaty of peace wished to leave for France must
within three weeks send in their declarations with their exact
descriptions and the number of their household they propose to
take with them. In August, Murray reported that only 270 men,
women and children, mostly officers and their families, left the
colony.

On August 10th military rule ended in Montreal but Burton
continued on as military commandant.

Burton resigned his governorship in July, 1764. As the position
of governor was not to be continued at Montreal or Quebec, no
one succeeded him. He was confirmed, however, as Brigadier. Yet,
although in command of a few troops, he refused to recognize
Murray as his military superior, hence complications and
conflicts arose. Murray wrote in indignation that if Burton were
removed it would be better for himself and everybody. Murray is
accused by his enemies of quarreling with everybody, but it is
evidently hard on a governor general to have his wings clipped
by having under him in a civil capacity a commander who took his
orders from General Gage of New York. Where the military rights
and civil duties of Burton at Montreal or of Haldimand at Three
Rivers and Murray at Quebec, began and ended, was a harassing
doubt to all three.

On January 11, 1764, letters patent were sent to the first
justices of the peace at Montreal, including Moses Hazen, J.
Grant, John Rowe, Francis McKay, Thomas Lambe, F. Knife, John
Burke, Thomas Walker and others. Among these were two Swiss
Protestants, Catholics being excluded from the office as yet,
owing to the difficulty of their subscribing to the religious
test not being yet solved.

The first general quarter sessions of the peace was held on
December 27, 1764, and there were present Moses Hazen, J. Dumas,
F. McKay, Thomas Lambe and Francis Knife. The court adjourned.
The first case was one of battery and assault.

On August 10, 1764, military rule ceased. The new civil
government brought to a head much of the ill feeling existing
in the city. The tables were now turned, the merchant class,
already become the magistrates, were now in the ascendant and
rancours prevailed. The old-time antipathies between the soldiers
and citizens at New York and Boston were being reproduced in
Montreal. There were no barracks, although the troops had been
there four years. Consequently the system of billeting became
necessary and caused continual annoyance.

The famous Walker outrage grew out of one of these troubles.
Captain Fraser had billeted a Captain Payne on a French-Canadian.
In the house lodged one of the new justices of the peace who
claimed exemption for the house. In reply he was told that
the justices’ rooms were exempt but not the other rooms, and
on Payne’s persistence in claiming the billet, the magistrate
refused to yield his possession. The case was brought before
Justice Walker, who, as a magistrate, ordered Payne to vacate the
rooms and on his refusing to comply committed him to jail for
contempt. He was released on bail. Two days afterwards, on the
6th of December, 1764, occurred the “Walker outrage,” which has
been described more or less fully in various histories of Canada,
sometimes incorrectly.

Walker was an Englishman who had lived for many years in Boston,
coming to Montreal some time after the close of the war in 1760,
where he engaged in trade with the upper country. He was a bold,
aggressive man, full of democratic notions, who set himself up as
the agent of the people, opposed the actions of Governor Murray
in every way, and afterwards had endeavoured to use his influence
to have Murray recalled. In many ways he showed that he was no
great friend of the Military then established in Montreal.

The outrage on him, dated on the night of the 6th, he attributed
to the Military, and was the occasion of the seizure of “John
Fraser, Esq.,” Deputy Grand Paymaster; “John Campbell, Esq.,” now
Captain of His Majesty’s Twenty-seventh Regiment; “Daniel Disney,
Esq.,” now Captain of the Twenty-fourth Regiment; “St. Luke La
Corne, Esq.,” (Knight St. Louis), “Samuel Evans,” Lieutenants
in His Majesty’s Twenty-eighth Regiment, and “Joseph Howard,”
Merchant, all of the City of Montreal, being to their great
surprise seized and taken out of their beds in the middle of
the night of the 18th inst., November, 1766, by “Edward William
Gray, Esq.,” Deputy Provost Martial in and for the district of
Montreal, assisted by a party of soldiers with fixed bayonets,
and by them hurried down to Quebec, where they were in close
custody on the charge of having on or about “the sixth day of
December, 1764, feloniously and with malice forethought, and by
lying in wait assaulted, wounded and cut off part of the ear
of ‘Thomas Walker, Esq.,’ of Montreal in this Province, with
intention in so doing to disfigure the said ‘Thomas Walker.’”
The informant was “George Magovock” late soldier in the
Twenty-eighth Regiment of foot, making oath before “William Hey,”
Chief Justice in and for the Province of Quebec.

The Chief Justice was petitioned by the prisoners to be released
on bail, but apparently the influence of Walker was so great,
that this was not easy. The whole of Montreal was in a great
state of irritable excitement, a deputation of the members of the
Council, the principal merchants of Montreal and the officers of
the Fifteenth, Twenty-seventh, Fifty-second and Royal American
Regiments entreated the Chief Justice to grant the petition of
the prisoners for bail, asking him to interpose his authority and
to mitigate the rigour of the law for gentlemen, “whose honors we
are so well convinced, that we offer to become their bail until
the trial.”

The petition is signed by the following: Colonel Irving,
A. Mabane,[1] Thomas Dunn,[1] J. Goldfrap, F. Mounier, T.
Mills, Members of the Council; Thomas Ainslie, Collector of
the Customs and Justice of the Peace; J. Marteilhe, J.P.; J.
Collins, J.P.; C. Drummond, Comp. of the Customs; J. Porteus,
Charles Grant, S. Frazer, J. Woolsey, W. Grant, G. Measam, T.
Scott, J. Werden, E. Gray, J. Aitken, Wm. Garett, G. Allsopp,
J. Antill, Gridley, H. Boone, J. Watmough, Samuel Jacobs, H.
Taylor, F. Grant, S. Lymbery, Amiet, Perras, Dusault, Deplaine,
Fleurimont, Fremont, Perrault, Bousseau, Guillemain, Panet,
Beaubien, Principal Merchants; La Naudiere, Crois de St.
Louis; Captain Grove, Royal Artillery; Colonel Irving, Captain
Prescott, Captain-Lieutenant D’Aripe, Lieutenants Mitchel,
Lockart, Dunn, Magra, Doctor Roberts, Fifteenth Regiment; Captain
Morris, Ensign Winter, Twenty-seventh Regiment; Colonel Jones,
Captains Phillips, Williams, Addison, Davidson, Alcock, Geofrey,
Lieutenants Neilson, Dinsdale, Smyth, Aderly, Hamilton, Watters,
Holland, Hawksley, Adjutant Splain, Ensigns Stubbs, Molesworth,
Fifty-second Regiment; Captains Carden, Etherington, Schloser,
Tucker, Burin, Rechat, Ensign McKulloch, Royal Americans.

Whatever the whole hubbub was about it was evidently of such
importance that the Chief Justice did not see his way to grant
the bail, and it was not until two years later that the case came
before the Grand Jury in Montreal. Meanwhile the city had been
divided in two factions.

On the 28th of February, the cases against all but Captain
Disney were thrown out by the Grand Jury,[2] but a true bill was
brought against him. This was on a Monday. Francis Masères, who
succeeded Suckling as attorney general, prosecuted for the Crown,
and Morison, Gregory and Antill defended Town Major Disney.

We may now tell the story in the words of the report of Chief
Justice Hey, transmitted to London on his return to Quebec on
April 14, 1767.

  “_The bill against Major Disney being returned on a Monday,
  I appointed Wednesday for his trial, his Jury, after some
  few challenges on both sides, was composed of very reputable
  English merchants residing at Montreal, of very fair characters
  & as unprejudiced as men could be who had heard so much of so
  interesting a story._

  “_The only evidence that affected Major Disney was that of Mr. &
  Mrs. Walker & Magovock, the substance of which I will take the
  liberty to state to yr. Lordship as shortly & as truly as my
  notes & my memory will enable me to do, all the other witnesses
  speaking to the fact as committed by somebody without any
  particular knowledge of Major Disney._

  “_The narrative will perhaps be less perplexed--The house opens
  with two doors, one a strong one next the street, (within that a
  sashed one), into the hall where the Family were at supper when
  the affair began; short on the right hand at the entrance from
  the street are folding doors which lead into a Parlour, at the
  further end of which Fronting the Folding doors is ye door of
  the bed chamber where Mr. Walker keeps his fire arms of which he
  has great numbers ready loaded. In the hall almost fronting the
  street doors, are 2 which lead into a kitchen & a back yeard,
  through which Mrs. Walker & the rest of the family separately
  made their escape very soon after the entrance of the Ruffians._

  “_The account which Mr. Walker gave to the Jury upon the trial
  was that on the 6th of Decr. 1764 at ½ past 8 in the evening
  Mrs. Walker looked at her watch and said it was time to go to
  supper--that the cloth was laid in the hall but that he not
  having been very well that day she was persuading him to stay &
  eat his supper in the Parlour--that they staid about 10 or 15
  minutes in this and other conversation & then went into the hall
  to supper--that he sat with his back to, & very near the street
  door--that he had been but a very little time at supper when he
  heard a rattling of the latch of the door as of Persons wanting
  to come in in a hurry--that Mrs. Walker said Entre, upon which
  the outward door was thrown open & thro’ the sash of the inward
  one he saw a great number of People disguised in various ways,
  some with little round hats others with their faces blacked,
  and others with crapes over their faces--that he had time to
  take so much notice of them as to distinguish 2 Persons whose
  faces tho’ blacked he was sure he should know again if he saw
  them--that they burst the inward door & several of them got round
  to the doors leading to the Parlour as designing to cut off his
  retreat into that room--that upon turning his head towards that
  room he received from behind a blow which he believes was given
  with a broad sword,--that he passed thro’ them into the Parlour
  receiving many wounds in the passage got to the further end of
  the room near the chamber door before which stood 2 men who had
  got before him & prevented his entrance into it--that these 2
  with others who had followed him striking and wounding all the
  way, sett upon him & forced him from the door into window, the
  curtains of which entangled itself round him and he believes
  prevented their dashing his brains out against the wall, that he
  received in the whole no less than 52 contusions besides many
  cuts with sharp instruments--that he believes during the struggle
  in the window he was for some little time deprived of his senses,
  sunk in stupefaction or stunned by some blow, till he heard a
  voice from the opposite corner of the room say ‘Let me come at
  him I will dispatch the Villian with my sword’ that this roused
  him and determined him to sell his life as dear as he could--that
  ’till this time tho’ he had apprehended & experienced a great
  deal of violence, he did not think they intended to take away his
  life because he had seen Major Disney in the outer room & knowing
  he had done nothing to disoblige him, he did not believe that
  he would have been amongst them if they had intended to murther
  him--that he broke from the persons who held him in the window &
  advanced towards the Part of the room from whence the voice came
  where 2 persons were standing with their swords in a position
  ready for making a thrust at him, but does not know whether they
  actually made a Pass at him or not, that he put by one of their
  swords with his left hand upon which they both retreated into
  the corner--that his Eyes at this time being full of blood, he
  was not capable of distinguishing the features of a face with
  great accuracy, but from the size & figure & gesture of the
  person whose sword he parried & from whom he believes the words
  came, he thought it to be Major Disney--that several of them then
  seized him at once (one of them in particular taking him up under
  the right thigh) and carried him towards the fire place with
  the intention as he believed to throw him upon the fire--that
  the marks of his bloody fingers were upon the jamb of the
  chimney--that he turned himself from the fire with great violence
  & in turning received a blow on his head which the surgeons say
  must have been given with a Tomahawk--which felled him to the
  ground & after that a blow upon his Loins which he feels to this
  day--that then one of them sat or kneeled by him (he lying at
  his length upon the floor) andeavouring as he imagined to cut
  his throat--that he resisted it by inclining his head upon his
  shoulders & putting his hand to the place, a finger of which was
  cut to the bone--that it was a fortnight before he knew that he
  had lost his ear, his opinion all along having been that in that
  operation they intended to cut his throat & believed they had
  done it--that one of them said the Villian is dead, another Damn
  him we have done for him, and a third uttered some words but his
  senses then failed him & he does not recollect what they were._

  “_This was the whole of the Evidence given by him in Court in
  the cross-examination great stress was laid upon his positive
  manner of swearing to Major Disney in disguise upon the transient
  view which by his own account he had of him, and under the
  circumstances of terrour and confusion which such an appearance
  must have occasioned; to which he answered that he had time
  in the hall before any blow was given to take a distinct view
  of him, and that he actually did do it, and tho’ it was true
  he had a crape over his face, yet it was tied so close that
  he discerned the features and Lineaments of it very perfectly
  and that he was positive it was Mr. Disney, of his dress other
  than the crape upon his face he could give no account, and then
  he was questioned if he had not often declared that he knew
  nobody but upon slight surprise he said that he remembered Mr.
  Disney perfectly the next morning, but that he mentioned him to
  nobody but Mrs. Walker, charging her at the same time to conceal
  it, because he thought he had suffered by her in discretion in
  mentioning the name of another Person whose influence with People
  in Power had prejudiced the inquiry which was then making into
  the affair._

  “_Mrs. Walker confirmed all the circumstances of their manner
  of coming in & swore as directly to Major Disney, that Lieut.
  Hamilton (as she did for some time believe but has since had
  occasion to think she was mistaken) was the first that entered
  that she saw Major Disney among a Groupe of figures very
  distinctly with a crape over his face and dressed in a Canadian
  Cotton Night Gown._

  “_Magovock went thro’ his story as contained in his affidavit
  a copy of which has been transmitted to your Lordship, not
  without a manifest confusion of his countenance & a trembling
  in his voice common to those who have a consciousness that they
  are telling untruly, & a fear of being detected--his cross
  examination took a great deal of time in the course of which he
  contradicted all the other witnesses & himself in circumstances
  so material that I am persuaded he was not himself present at the
  transaction._

  “_Major Disney proved by several witnesses, Dr. Robertson,
  Madam Landrief, Madam Campbell & Mrs. Howard that he spent that
  afternoon from 5 till ½ past 9 when he was sent for by Genl.
  Burton (he being town Major, upon the uproar that this affair had
  occasioned) at the house of Dr. Robertson--it was a particular
  festival with the French of whom the company was mostly composed,
  that he danced ’till supper time with Madam Landrief in the midst
  of which Genl. Burton’s servant came & called him out--they spoke
  all very positively to his being present the whole time & the
  impossibility that he could be absent for 5 minutes without their
  knowing it._

  “_Upon this evidence the Jury went out of Court and in about an
  hour returned with their Verdict Not Guilty--In justice to them
  and to Major Disney I must declare that I am perfectly satisfied
  with the Verdict._

  “_Mr. Walker’s violence of temper and an inclination to find
  People of rank in the Army concerned in this affair, has made
  him a Dupe to the artifices of a Villian whose story could not
  have gained credit but in a mind that came too much prejudiced
  to receive it, the unhappy consequence of it I fear will be that
  by mistaking the real objects of his Resentments the public will
  be disappointed in the satisfaction of seeing them brought to
  justice._

  “_I should inform Your Lordship that the G. Jury inflamed with
  Mr. Walker’s charge against them are preparing to bring in
  several actions for words and have presented both him and Mrs.
  Walker for Perjury--I have endeavoured to put a stop to both and
  I hope I shall succeed._

                    “_I have the honour to be_
                                    “_My Lord_
                 “_Yr. Lordship’s most obedt & humble servant_,
                                                       “_W. Hey_.”

The report of the trial was printed by Brown and Gilmour at
Quebec, it being the second book that appeared in Canada. The
first book published is generally believed to be “Catechisme du
Diocese de Sens Imprimé a Quebec chez, (Brown and Gilmour).” Brown
and Gilmour were the printers of the first journal “The Quebec
Gazette” published on June 21, 1764. It was printed with columns
of English and French and was issued weekly.

Walker was afterward removed on the consideration of the Council
from the commission of the peace at Montreal because of his
seditionary tendencies and of the frequent accusations of his
insolent and overbearing temper which made it impossible for
his brother magistrates to associate with him. General Murray
reluctantly consented if for no other reasons than his enemies
would otherwise see vindictiveness in his actions.

On the 27th of March, 1766, Walker, who had powerful friends
in England, was ordered by His Majesty to be restored to the
magistracy. On the same day an order from the privy council
was issued by the governor of Michillimackinac and Detroit to
give him effectual assistance in his business pursuits. At
the same time stringent orders were given for the discovery
of the perpetrators of the outrage on him. The government
offered a reward of two hundred pounds, and of a free pardon
and a discharge from the army to any person informing. Montreal
inhabitants offered another three hundred pounds. But there was
nothing done.

Between the actual outrage and the final acquittal of Captain
Disney, Walker had been a thorn in the flesh to Murray. His
dismissal from the bench made him no friend of the Governor and
he boasted afterwards that he had influenced Murray’s recall.

The first news of this likely recall came in 1765; on February
3d Murray wrote lamenting that Mr. Walker should have known it
before himself.

Murray’s position was an unenviable one; his sympathy with the
French Canadians was the basis of the anger of the little knot
of powerful merchants against him; he was made the scape-goat
for the difficulties arising from the bad working of the
unfavorable new civil government. In addition he had troubles
with the commandants of Montreal and Three Rivers who as military
commanders had much independent authority, over which Murray had
no control, much to his chagrin. The constitutional documents
of this period contain the petitions signed by twenty-one of
the merchants for his recall, and that of the seigneurs for his
maintenance. Their description of those allied against Murray
runs thus: “A cabal of people who have come in the train of the
army as well as clerks and agents for the London merchants.”
Their testimony to Murray is his justification. “We were suited
in the government of Mr. Murray. We knew his character, we were
fully satisfied with his probity and his feelings of humanity; he
was fitted to bring your new subjects to a regard for the yoke of
your kindly domination by his care to make it light.”

On April 1, 1766, Conway, secretary of the colonies, wrote
to Murray requesting his immediate return. He left Quebec on
June 28th, leaving the government in the hands of the senior
councillor, Lieut.-Col. Aemilius Irving; on the same day there
arrived the new bishop, M. Briand to fill the vacancy left by
Pontbriand, who died in Montreal before the capitulation.

The result of the Walker outbreak was that Murray’s frequent
representations that barracks should be built were listened to
and in 1765 they were erected, but hardly so, when in February,
1766, they were burned down with all the stores placed there. A
public meeting was called to appeal for shelter for the soldiers,
who were again billeted upon the inhabitants, but with the
promise that by May 1, houses should be hired for them. On his
return to London Murray in his report to Shelburne on August 20,
1766, had his revenge on the New England settlers whom he calls
broadly the most immoral collection of men he had ever known, and
says:

“Magistrates were made and juries composed from four hundred and
fifty contemptible sutters and traders. The judge pitched upon
to conciliate the minds of seventy-five thousand foreigners to
the laws and government of Great Britain was taken from a jail,
entirely ignorant of law and of the language of the people.

“* * * On the other hand the Canadians, accustomed to an
arbitrary and a sort of military government, are a frugal,
industrious and moral race of men who from the just and mild
treatment they met with from His Majesty’s military officers that
ruled the country for four years past until the establishment of
the civil government had greatly got the better of the natural
antipathy they had of their conquerers. They consist of the
noblesse who are numerous and who pride themselves much upon
the antiquity of their families, their own military glory and
that of their ancestors. These noblesse are Seigneurs of the
whole country and though not rich are in a situation, in that
plentiful part of the world where money is scarce and luxury
still unknown, to support their dignity. The inhabitants, their
tenanciers, who pay only annual quit rent of about a dollar for
one hundred acres, are at their ease and comfortable. They have
been accustomed to respect and obey the noblesse; their tenure
being military they have shared with them the dangers of the
field and natural affection has been increased in proportion to
the calamities which have been common to both in the country.
So they have been taught to respect their Seigneurs and not
get intoxicated with the abuse of liberty; they are shocked at
the insults which their noblesse and the king’s officers have
received from the English traders and lawyers since the civil
government took place.”

He adds: “The Canadian noblesse were hated because their birth
and behaviour entitled them to respect and the peasants were
abhorred because they were saved from the oppression they were
threatend with.”

The letter concludes: “I glory in having been accused of war
with unfairness in protecting the king’s Canadian subjects and
of doing the utmost in my power to gain to my royal master the
affections of that great, hardy people whose emigration, if ever
it should happen, will be an irreparable loss to this country.”

Though Murray was recalled it must not be assumed that his policy
of colonial government was disapproved of by the ministers for
it was not until April, 1768, that he relinquished the office
of governor in chief. After a time the opposition between the
military and the magistrates died down, but the latter now became
a fertile source of oppression to the civil population.

Let us then turn our attention to the Montreal justices of the
peace. In 1769, reports had reached the Council at Quebec as
to the oppresive practices of some of the magistrates of the
Montreal district, and in consequence the council addressed
to many of them on July 10, 1769, a letter of remonstrance
applicable to “those magistrates only who had given occasion for
the complaint.”

The circular prepared by a committee of the Council was addressed
“To the Justices of the Peace active in and for the district
of Montreal.” It opened with a charge that “it appears from
facts too notorious to be dispelled that His Majesty’s subjects
in general, but more particularly his Canadian subjects, are
daily injured and abused to a degree they are no longer able to
support nor public justice endure.” The chief charges were of
extorting excessive fees from litigants applying freely to the
court and that in addition a low class of bailiffs, many of them
French Canadians, who provoked and instituted lawsuits among the
inhabitants were going about with blank forms signed with the
justices’ names ready to be filled up at any moment. Thus abuses
were numerous.

In August a committee of the Council sat to consider further
the state of the administration of Justice under the justices
of peace. A report was prepared and was read on August 29th and
September 11th. It was agreed to in the Castle of St. Louis
by the council on September 14th, and Acting Attorney General
Kneller was instructed to prepare an ordinance on the point.

The report after stating that although the original powers
in matters of property given to justices of the peace by the
ordinance of September 14, 1764, were exceedingly grievous and
oppressive to the subjects, yet even so “the authority given
to the Justices hath been both too largely and too confidently
entrusted and requires to be retrenched if not wholly taken
away.” It then notices “The Justices of Montreal have in one
instance, and probably in many others which have passed without
notice, assumed to themselves powers of a nature not fit to
be exercised by any Summary Jurisdiction, whatsoever, in
consequence of which Titles to Land have been determined and
possessions disturbed in a way unknown to the laws of England and
inconsistent with the solemnity and deliberation which is due to
matters of so high and important a nature. And we are not without
information, that even where personal property only has been in
dispute, one magistrate in particular under pretense that it was
at the desire and request of both the contending parties has by
himself exercised a jurisdiction considerably beyond what the
ordinance has allowed even to three Justices in full court at
their Quarter Sessions.

“From an omission of a similar nature and for want of
ascertaining the manner in which their judgments were to be
inforced, we find the Magistrates to have assumed another very
high and dangerous Authority in the exercise of which Gaols are
constantly filled with numbers of unhappy objects and whole
families reduced to beggery and ruin.”

Later the report refers to evils “which will probably always be
the case when the office of a Justice of Peace is considered as a
lucrative one and must infallibly be so when it is his principal,
if not, only dependence.”

One consequence of the report was the appointment in the
ordinance of a Court of Common Pleas to be held before judges
constantly residing in the town of Montreal. This court was
now to be independent of, and with the same powers as, that
at Quebec. Hitherto the latter had held adjourned meetings on
different days at Montreal. The object was to give inexpensive,
speedy and expert hearing to Montrealers.

The ordinance passed in the council on February 3, 1770, was
translated and soon appears in English and French in the
“Gazette.” When it appeared in Montreal it roused strong
indignation among the magistrates whose powers were now
curtailed. A memorial signed by fifty signatures only was
presented on the part of “merchants and others of the city of
Montreal” with twenty objections to the Ordinance. Pierre du
Calvet, a French Huguenot magistrate, was one of the indignant
protestors and his usual high-flown style characterizes his
memorial. According to Sir Guy Carleton’s statement to the
deputation they had issued handbills calling a meeting of the
people to discuss grievances, they had importuned and even
insulted several French Canadians because they would not join
them. Carleton who had now succeeded Murray in the Government
of Canada warned them that they were acting against their own
interests, that the firm refusal of the Canadians as well as
of most of their countrymen plainly showed the opinion the
generality of the public entertained. In his letter to Lord
Hillsborough of the 25th of April, 1770, Carleton, however, after
pointing out the evils caused by the law as administered by the
justices says: “Though I have great reason to be dissatisfied
with the conduct of some of the justices there are worthy men in
the commission of the peace in both districts and particularly in
this of Quebec.” (See Brymner’s Canadian Archives Report, 1890,
whose abstract is here used.)

To the credit of the better class of Montreal merchants of this
period we must clearly dissociate the names of men who like
James McGill and others have deserved the city’s most grateful
remembrance, from the inferior “grafters,” to use a modern term,
then exploiting the people. These were disapproved of by many of
their own race. Carleton’s report of them to Lord Hillsborough
dated Quebec, 28th of March, 1770, clearly designates the
“rascals” of the day. “Your Lordship has already been informed
that the Protestants who have settled, or rather sojourned here
since the conquest, are composed only of Traders, disbanded
soldiers and officers, the latter, one or two excepted, below
the Rank of Captains, of those in the Commission of the Peace
such as prospered in business could not give up their time to
sit as Judges, and when several from accidents and ill-judged
undertakings became Bankrupts they naturally sought to repair
their broken fortunes at the expense of the people; hence a
variety of schemes to increase their business and their own
emoluments. Bailiffs of their own creation, mostly French
soldiers either disbanded or Deserters, dispersed through the
parishes with blank citations, catching at every little feud or
dissension among the people, exciting them on to their Ruin and
in a manner forcing them to litigate what, if left to themselves,
might have been easily accommodated, putting them to extravagant
Costs for the Recovery of very small sums; their Lands, at a
time there is the greatest scarcity of money and consequently
but few Purchasers, exposed to hasty sales for the Payment of
the most trifling debts, and the money arising from these sales
consumed in exorbitant Fees, while the Creditors reaped little
benefit from the Destruction of their unfortunate Debtors. This,
My Lords, is but a very faint sketch of the Distresses of the
Canadians and the cause of much Reproach to our National Justice
and the King’s Government.” (Report Canadian Archives for 1890.)


FOOTNOTES:

[1] For their action in this case Carleton removed their names
from the council.

[2] List of the grand jury of the district of Montreal before
which bills were laid against the prisoners charged with the
assault on Thomas Walker:

  1. Samuel McKay, Esq. (Foreman).
  2. M. St. Ours (K. of St. Louis).
  3. Isaac Todd.
  4. Francis de Bellestre (K. of St. Louis).
  5. Louis Mattorell.
  6. Mons. Contrecoeur (K. of St. L.).
  7. Mons. Niverville (K. of St. L.).
  8. Thomas Lynch.
  9. Mons. La Bruiere.
  10. John Livingston.
  11. Jacob Jordan.
  12. Mons. Niverville de Trois Rivières.
  13. Mons. Normanville.
  14. Moses Hazen.
  15. Dailbout de Cuisy.
  16. Jas. Porteous.
  17. Jno. Dumas.
  18. Wm. Grant.
  19. Samuel Mather.
  20. Augustus Bailie.
  21. John Jennison.

In a P.S. from Sir Guy Carleton to Lord Shelburne it is stated:
“The attorney general at the desire of Mr. Walker objected to the
Knights of St. Lewis being of the grand jury as not having taken
the oath of allegiance, which objection they immediately removed
by cheerfully taking them.”




                            CHAPTER V

            THE PRELIMINARY STRUGGLE FOR AN ASSEMBLY

                THE BRITISH MERCHANTS OF MONTREAL

  “VERY RESPECTABLE MERCHANTS”--A LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY ON
    BRITISH LINES PROMOTED BY THEM--INOPPORTUNE--VARIOUS
    MEMORIALS TO GOVERNMENT--THE MEETINGS AT MILES PRENTIES’
    HOUSE--CRAMAHE--MASERES--COUNTER PETITIONS.


Trade passed over almost bodily to the English. The records of
the _Chambre de Milice de Montreal_ at present at Quebec reveal
even in the civil disputes during the Interregnum of 1760-63
a boom in trade in Montreal such as those of the past never
portrayed.

The early traders have been whipped unmercifully by Murray and
Carleton but there were certainly some who were recognized as
“very respectable merchants.” The British merchants were first
at Quebec at its fall, and soon they also followed to Montreal
at the Capitulation. Many were weeded out by failure and the
climate, but the residue that remained of the class of the canny
mercantile adventurers who always adorn the hour of advancing
civilization, with the addition of more solid representatives of
the large English houses, was the foundation of the enterprising
merchant class of Quebec and Montreal, but especially of the
latter centre, which quickly seized the control of the wholesale
business, particularly the fur trade, the traffic with the
Indians and the foreign commerce. Despite the narrowness of their
vision and the jealous grasping after power due to them, they
considered, as the conquering body, this small group of men by
their superior activity, wealth and political skill came to wield
great influence in the city and on the country on the whole well
and wisely.

Hitherto, we have had to point out some of the weaknesses of
those of the less honourable and unsuccessful merchant class,
even of those who became magistrates. It remains now to chronicle
the action of a well meaning body of the substantial business
men at Montreal toward consolidating the constitutional system
of the country and developing it along British colonial lines.
Their political foresight was ahead of their time. Yet from
the earliest days of British rule the English merchants of
Montreal, together with those of Quebec, certainly kept before
themselves and the Home Government the need of a representative
assembly as promised to them, such as they had been familiar
with in other British colonies in America. Unfortunately the
desire to have this manned by Protestants only was made too
evident from the outset and alienated the sympathy of those of
the French Canadians otherwise becoming well disposed. Their
narrow inherited spirit of intolerance, their conception of
British rights, for they came “bearing all the laws of England
on their backs,” their belief in their own capabilities, their
evident business success and the large capital they invested in
Canada,[1] the strong conviction of the ultimate needs of such
an institution, if ever the country was to be reduced to the
same uniformity as the other colonies where British institutions
flourished, blinded them to the inopportuneness of the hour for
the establishment of such an assembly. They forgot, imbued as so
many of them were with democratic and republican tendencies, that
the New British Province was not an infant colony, but one which
had been long in existence and impregnated with French feudalism.

Again the upper classes were against the assembly, and the lower
not prepared by education[2] or desire, to take their share in
popular government; much less were they inclined to be permitted
to vote for a class who desired openly and not very discreetly to
ignore the political existence of their race.

Still the merchants persisted. An opportunity was given by the
departure of Carleton, who had asked leave of absence for a few
months to place his views directly before the government, but
it was not till 1774 that he returned. During that time his
delayed presence in London was valuable for consultation in the
preparation of the “Quebec Act.” Carleton left behind his first
counsellor, a Swiss Protestant, Hector Theophile Cramahé, to act
for him. Carleton departed early in August and on the 9th Cramahé
issued a proclamation declaring that the command had temporarily
devolved upon him. In 1771, on July 21st, Cramahé was appointed
Lieutenant Governor. Shortly after Carleton’s departure Cramahé
sent two petitions to him to be presented to the King’s Most
Excellent Majesty.

The first was that of the Quebec and Montreal British
free-holders, merchants and traders on behalf of themselves and
others. His Majesty is reminded of his direction to governors
in his Royal proclamation of the 7th of October in the third
year of his reign, that general assemblies should be called
as soon as the state and circumstances thereof would admit,
in such manner as is used in the provinces of America under
His Majesty’s immediate government. The arguments adduced are,
that such an assembly would strengthen the hands of government,
give encouragement and protection to agriculture and commerce,
increase the public revenue and in time would be a happy means of
uniting the new subjects in a due conformity to the British laws
and customs.

The memorialists represented: “That Your Majesty’s British
subjects residing in this province have set examples and given
every encouragement in their power to promote industry, are
the principal importers of British manufactures, carry on
three-fourths of the trade of this country, annually return a
considerable revenue into Your Majesty’s exchequer in Great
Britain; and though the great advantages this country is
naturally capable of, are many and obvious, for promoting the
trade and manufactures of the mother country, yet for some time
past both the landed and commercial interests have been declining
and if a General Assembly is not soon ordered by Your Majesty
to make and enforce due obedience to laws for encouraging
agriculture, regulating the trade, discouraging such importations
from the other colonies as impoverish the Province, your
petitioners have the greatest reason to apprehend their own ruin
as well as that of the province in general.

“That there is now a sufficient number of Your Majesty’s subjects
residing in and possessed of real property in this province and
who are otherwise qualified to be members of a General Assembly.”

This petition is signed by thirty-one of the principal merchants.
It will be noticed that there are only two of these names that
appeared on the petition of 1765 for the assembly and the recall
of Murray. The whole document is more dignified. The memorialists
are men of great weight. Their claim as the developers of
commerce is undoubted. The only weakness lay in the concluding
clause which is merely the outcome of the traditional intolerance
then in vogue but which was to be the chief cause of the delay of
their efforts till the act of 1791 at last crowned their efforts.
Among the Montreal signatures in the above memorial are those of
Alexander Henry, John Porteous, James McGill, Alexander Paterson,
Richard Dobie, J. Fraser and Isaac Todd.

The above memorial was set off by that of fifty-nine “Canadian”
leaders who appealed for the restoration of their customs and
usages according to the laws, customs and regulations under which
they were born and which served as the basis and foundations of
their possessions. They also ask not to be excluded from offices
in the service of the king. The petition is to be presented by
Sir Guy Carleton. “It is to this worthy representative of Your
Majesty who perfectly comprehends the ambitions of this colony
and the customs of this people that we confide our most humble
supplications to be conveyed to the foot of your throne.”

The year 1773 saw great activity in the duel; the case of the
old and new subjects was being argued in London. The most
eminent statesmen and lawyers, state officials, were studying
the numerous documents in view of the proposed Quebec act of
settlement. The merchants of Montreal and Quebec determined to
make a great effort. In the winter of 1772 Thomas Walker, of
Montreal, and Zachary Macaulay, of Quebec, had already conferred
in London with Masères about the prospect of an Assembly.
Mazères, though now a cursitor baron of the exchequer, still
kept his interest in Canadian affairs as when attorney general
at Quebec. There is no name more prominent among those who
contributed to the elucidation of the difficulties of this time
than this able man. His Huguenot upbringing, however, somewhat
warped his otherwise calm judgment in surveying the French
Canadian position, yet his was a warning of the opportunist. “I
told them,” wrote Masères to Dartmouth on January 4, 1774, “that
I thought a legislative council, consisting of only Protestants
and much more numerous than the present, and made perfectly
independent of the Governor so as to be neither removable nor
suspendible by him on any pretense but only removable by the
King in council, would be a better instrument for that province
than an assembly for seven or eight years to come, and until the
Protestant religion and English manners, laws and affections
shall have made a little more progress there and especially an
assembly unto which any Catholics shall be admitted.”

The two representatives, however, seemed to have been resolved
to push for an Assembly for they were both found to be on the
committee organized for that purpose on October 30, 1773,
in Quebec at Miles Prenties’ Inn. The meeting was called by
John McCord. The circumstances are related by Cramahé’s letter
to Dartmouth of December 13th when he inclosed the final
petitions sent to him by the merchants. “About six weeks or
two months ago a Mr. McCord from the north of Ireland, who
settled here soon after the conquest, where he picked up a
very comfortable livelihood by the retailing business in which
he is a considerable dealer, the article of spiritous liquors
especially, summoned the principal inhabitants of this town that
are Protestants to meet at a tavern where he proposed to them,
applying for a house of assembly.”

The transactions, of the meeting called by McCord and of the
subsequent ones, were recorded and sent to Masères by Quebec
and Montreal citizens. He was thought to be the right person to
approach as their agent, to have their case ventilated in London.
They wrote to him on November 8, 1773, “The British inhabitants
of whom we are appointed a committee are of very moderate
principles. They wish for an assembly as they know that to be
the only sure means of conciliating the new subjects, etc.” How
the assembly is to be composed is a matter of the most serious
consideration; “They would submit that to the wisdom of His
Majesty’s council.”

They had evidently become less exacting in their demands that it
should be reserved for Protestants. What they really wanted was
the Assembly.

The meeting at Miles Prenties’ in the Upper Town held on October
30th resulted in a committee of eleven being formed to draw up a
petition for an assembly. The following were the eleven: William
Grant, John Wells, Charles Grant, Anthony Vialars, Peter Fargues,
Jenkin Williams, John Lees, Zachary Macaulay, Thomas Walker (of
Montreal), Malcolm Fraser (secretary), John McCord (chairman). It
was resolved that a copy of the minutes be sent to the gentlemen
of Montreal. At the second meeting at Prenties’, November 2d
(Tuesday), it was resolved to translate the petition into French
and that the principal French inhabitants be invited to meet them
at Prenties’ on Thursday, November 4th. It was further resolved
to send a copy of the minutes and a draft of the petition by
next post to Montreal addressed to Mr. Gray, to be communicated
to the inhabitants of Montreal. On Thursday, November 4th, of
the fifteen invitations sent out only eight French gentlemen
appeared. The translation of the petition was read, and the
clause on the composition of the assembly according to His
Majesty’s wisdom, doubtless noted. After discussion M. Decheneaux
and M. Perras undertook to convene a meeting of their fellow
French citizens at 2 o’clock on Saturday next, to interest them
in furthering the petition.

On Monday, November 8th, the English committee met at Prenties’.
Being anxious to know what measures had been taken by the French
on Saturday, Malcolm Fraser sent a note by a bearer to M. Perras,
M. Decheneaux being out of town. A brief reply was sent back
dated Quebec, 8-10th November, saying that the hasty departure of
the vessels for Europe had not permitted him to reply according
to his desire; “However I have seen some of my fellow citizens
who do not appear to me to be disposed to assemble as some of
us could wish. ‘Le grand nombre l’emporte et le petit reduit a
prendre patience.’”

The next meeting of the committee was to be called at the
discretion of the secretary as “the business will depend on the
letters to be received from Montreal.”

Cramahé, explaining to Dartmouth, who had succeeded Hillsborough
as Colonial Secretary, the want of cooperation by the French,
says: “The Canadians, suspecting their only view was to push them
forward to ask, without really intending their participation
of the privilege, declined joining them here or at Montreal.”
Had the petition asked for the abolition of the religious test
and the inclusion of Catholics in the assembly the Canadians
would have doubtless cooperated. The petition was presented
on December 4, 1773; the Quebec (fifty-two) and Montreal
(thirty-nine) signatures are both dated November 29th. It was
presented to Cramahé as the Lieutenant Governor and he was prayed
in accordance with the powers given the Governor by the Royal
proclamation of 1763: “To summon and call a general assembly of
the freeholders and planters within your government in such a
manner as you in your jurisdiction shall judge most proper.” As
the words stand it may be argued that the merchants were ready
to forego their Protestantism in favour of a mixed assembly, but
evidently the acting Governor had his doubts. Cramahé therefore
answered cautiously, as was expected, “That the petition was
altogether of too much importance for His Majesty’s Council here
to advise at a time when the affairs of the province were likely
to become an object of public regulation. The petition and his
answer would be transmitted to His Majesty’s Secretary of State.”

The second petition already arranged for, and containing the
answer of Cramahé, was prepared and sent to the King’s Most
Excellent Majesty, praying him “to direct Your Majesty’s Governor
or Commander in Chief to call a general assembly in such manner
and of such constitution and form as to Your Majesty, in your
Royal wisdom, shall seem best adapted to secure its peace,
welfare and good government.” Besides the copy sent through
Cramahé to Dartmouth, the committee sent another to Masères to
enable him to present their case and to communicate its purport
to their mercantile associates in London. The signatures of the
Quebec subscribers, dated December 31, 1773, numbered sixty-one,
those of Montreal dated January 10, 1774, reached eighty-one.

Cramahé’s comment on these signatures in his letter to Dartmouth
reads: “It may not be amiss to observe that there are not above
five among the signers to the two petitions who can be properly
styled freeholders and the value of four of these freeholds
is very inconsiderable. The number of those possessing houses
in the towns of Quebec and Montreal, or farms in the country
held of the king for some private seigneur upon paying a yearly
acknowledgment, is under thirty.”

As an offset, the memorial to the petition sent by the seigneurs
and principal Catholics about February, 1774, and made in
opposition to an assembly, urges the granting of their request
“because we possess more than ten out of twelve of all the
seigneuries of the province and almost all the lands of the other
tenures or which are holden by rent service.”

In addition to the petition to the king signed by the “ancient
and loyal subjects” of Quebec and Montreal, two memorials to Lord
Dartmouth were separately sent by the promoting committees at
either place. These seemed to have been presented through Masères
since they are not indorsed, as were the petitions to the king,
as received through Cramahé.

The Montreal memorial urging the furtherance of their petition
is dated Montreal, January 15, 1774, and signed by a committee
appointed at a general meeting of the inhabitants of Edw. W.
Gray, R. Huntley, Lawrence Ermatinger, Will Haywood, James
McGill, James Finlay, Edward Chinn.

The memorial included a new element, viz., “Your Lordship’s
memorialists further see with regret the great danger that
children born of Protestant parents are in of being utterly
neglected for want of a sufficient number of Protestant pastors
and thereby exposed to the usual and known assiduity of the Roman
Catholic clergy of different orders who are very numerous and who
for their own friends have lately established a Seminary for the
education of youths in this province, which is the more alarming
as it excludes all Protestant teachers of any science whatever.”
The name of James McGill, the founder afterwards of McGill
University, is significant, therefore, on this petition.

The counter petition and the memorial accompanying it, signed by
sixty-five of the noblesse, followed in February, 1774. Thus the
duel went on. We delay recounting its outcome till the case for
the Seigneurs is more fully disclosed in the next chapter.


FOOTNOTES:

[1] Witness the appeal for Murray’s recall. Thomas Walker is said
to have brought ten thousand pounds into the province.

[2] M. Lothbiniere, the representative of the noblesse in London
said that he doubted whether more than four or five persons in a
parish could read.




                           CHAPTER VI

                     THE QUEBEC ACT OF 1774

            THE NOBLESSE OF THE DISTRICT OF MONTREAL

  THE GRIEVANCES OF THE SEIGNEURS--MONTREAL THE
    HEADQUARTERS--“EVERY INTRIGUE TO OUR DISADVANTAGE WILL BE
    HATCHED THERE”--PETITIONS--CARLETON’S FEAR OF A FRENCH
    INVASION--A SECRET MEETING--PROTESTS OF MAGISTRATES TODD AND
    BRASHAY--PROTESTS OF CITIZENS--CARLETON’S CORRESPONDENCE FOR
    AN AMENDED CONSTITUTION IN FAVOUR OF THE NOBLESSE--THE QUEBEC
    ACT--ANGLICIZATION ABANDONED.


The _Noblesse_ of the district of Montreal are now to play a
great part in the making of the constitutional history of Canada.
They had appreciated the government of Murray and had petitioned
for his continuance but in vain. At the same time while thanking
the king for the appointment of the Bishop Briand which was
a great concession, they asked for two favours: first, the
suppression of the Land Register, the expense of which exhausted
the colony without its drawing any profit therefrom; second,
that all the subjects of this province without any distinction
of religion should be admitted to all offices without any other
qualifications but those of talent and personal merit; for to
be excluded by the state from having any participation in it is
not to be a member of the state. This petition was signed by
Chevalier D’Ailleboust and thirty-nine other seigneurs and was
endorsed as received on February 3, 1767.

The grievance of the seigneurs in the latter request was briefly
this: that though the French Canadians were not obliged by the
Royal Instructions of 1763 to take the oath of the test of
allegiance, supremacy and religious abjuration, yet these oaths
were obligatory on all who would hold an appointment under
government such as members of the proposed assembly, civil
and military officials, etc. Hence the constant effort of the
noblesse to remove this odious civil disability continued until
in 1774 the act of Quebec made it disappear and saw a formula
substituted which was acceptable to all honest and conscientious
“new subjects.” The following oath, afterwards taken almost
textually by Bishop Briand, in the light of today will be seen to
be quite adequate:

  “Je, A.B. promets et jure sincèrement que Je serai fidèle et
  porterai vraie allégeance à Sa Majesté le roi George, que Je
  le défendrai de tout mon pouvoir contre toutes conspirations
  perfides et tous attentats quelconques, dirigés contre sa
  personne, sa couronne et sa dignité; et que Je ferai tous mes
  efforts pour découvrir et faire connaitre à Sa Majesté, ses
  heretiers et successeurs, toutes trahisons et conspirations
  perfides et tous attentats que Je saurai dirigés contre lui ou
  chacun d’eux; et tout cela, Je le jure sans aucune équivoque
  subterfuge mental ou restriction secrète, renoncant pour m’en
  relever, à tous pardons et dispenses de personne ou pouvoir
  quelconques.

  “Ainsi que Dieu me soit en aide,”

The same form taken from the English was as follows:

  “I, A.B., do sincerely promise and swear that I will be faithful
  and bear true allegiance to His Majesty, King George, and that I
  will defend him to the utmost of my power against all traitorous
  conspiracies and attempts whatever, which shall be made against
  His Person, Crown and Dignity, and that I will do my utmost
  endeavor to disclose and make known to His Majesty, His Heirs or
  Successors, all treasons and traitorous conspiracies and attempts
  which I shall know to be against him or any of them; And all this
  I do swear without any equivocation, mental evasion or secret
  reservation and renouncing all pardons and dispensations from any
  Person or Power whichever to the Contrary.

  “So help me God.”

After the recall of Murray the seigneurs and clergy had looked
forward to the arrival of the new lieutenant governor, Sir Guy
Carleton, who reached Quebec on September 23, 1766, to relieve
Col. Aemiluis Irving, who had acted for nearly three months as
administrator on the departure of General Murray. He did not
become governor-in-chief until October 25, 1769, Murray yielding
up the government about April, 1768.

It may be noted that Carleton’s first message to the Council is
one which promulgated the doctrine Salvation through Harmony or,
Safety in Concord, which under the form of “Concordia Salus” is
that now recognized as the official motto of the City of Montreal:

  “Gentlemen of the Council:

  “I return you Thanks for your kind and dutiful Address and for
  the Respect shown to His Majesty’s Commission; I doubt not but I
  shall always find your hearty Concurrence to Everything I shall
  propose for the Good of His Service.

  “My present Demand is that all may join to preserve good Humour
  and a perfect Harmony, first among His Majesty’s natural born
  Subjects, also between His Subjects by Birth and His Subjects by
  Acquisition, so that no Distinction may be noted but the great
  Difference between good men and bad. As the Good and Happiness
  of His People is the first Object with the King, our Sovereign,
  we must all know, nothing would be more acceptable to them; We
  must all Feel nothing can be more agreeable to the great Laws of
  Humanity.

      “Quebec, 24th Sept., 1766.”

The new Governor soon found that in proportion to the arrogance
of the English-speaking minority demanding an assembly in which
they would be the sole representatives, the noblesse were
becoming increasingly restless, for while accepting the English
criminal law they demanded their French civil code and customs
unmodified. Carleton was inclined to accept this view, but
Masères, the attorney-general, who had presented lengthy reports
on the situation and had pointed out his own remedies, argued
that the English law should be the basis of jurisdiction with the
admission of certain sections of Canadian law and customs which
would have been acceptable to the English inhabitants, also. He
recommended the immediate preparation of a code reviving the
French law relating to tenure, dower and inheritance of landed
property, and the distribution of the effects of persons who died
intestate.

What may have influenced Carleton in his willingness to concede
so much to the demand of the seigneurs was the fear of the
movement spreading in Canada among the seigneurs to cast off
British rule. His attention was drawn to Montreal as the center
of the secret negotiations and dissatisfaction. General Murray
in his letter of October 29, 1764, had already pointed out to
the Lords of Trade and Plantation the difficulties likely to be
created there if the Canadians were not accepted on juries. “I
beg leave,” he says, “further to represent to Your Lordship that
a lieutenant-governor at Montreal is absolutely necessary; that
town is in the heart of the most populous part of the province.
It is surrounded by the Indian nations and is 180 miles from
the capital. It is there that the most opulent priests live and
there are settled the greatest part of the French noblesse,
consequently every intrigue to our disadvantage will be hatched
there.” (“Canadian Archives,” Vol. II, page 233.)

One of the causes of General Murray’s allusions to plots at
Montreal at this time may have been the presence of Ensign
William Forsyth who had commanded an independent patrol of
Scotch settlers in New Hampshire during the Indian war along the
border, shortly after the session of Canada in 1763. He had been
wounded and escaped to Montreal. He was related to several of
the Canadian noblesse, particularly that of the Denys family. It
is suggested that on the occasion of this visit there may have
been planted the germs of an alliance between the French noblesse
and the Scotch legitimists in favour of a Stuart dynasty which
afterwards ripened into a more complete understanding.

On January 7, 1763, a petition signed by ninety-five of the chief
inhabitants, including Montrealers such as Guy, and Jacques
Hervieux, was presented to the king, protesting against the
attitude of the British minority in excluding them from the law
courts and asking for a confirmation of the privileges contained
in Murray’s act for French Canadians. “Who are they that wish to
proscribe us? About thirty English merchants of whom fifteen at
the most are settled. Who are the proscribed? Ten thousand heads
of families who breathe only submission to Your Majesty’s orders.”

Can it be wondered that at Montreal, the headquarters of the
seigneurs, there is much dissatisfaction? The seigneurs at this
time in petitioning the king for the maintenance of General
Murray complained: “Our hopes have been destroyed by the
establishment of the civil government that had been so highly
extolled; we saw rise with it cabal, trial and confusion.” This
may be taken as their prevailing attitude of mind.

On the 25th of November, 1767, Carleton wrote a remarkable letter
in which, forecasting the possibility of a French war surprising
the province, he recommends “The building of a citadel within
the town of Quebec that the troops might have a fort capable of
being defended by their numbers till succour could be sent them
from home or from the neighbouring colonies; for should a French
war surprise the province in its present condition the Canadian
officers sent from France with troops might assemble such a body
of people as will render the king’s dominion over the province
very precarious while it depends on a few troops in an extensive
fort open in many places.” (“Archives,” Series Q, Vol. V, page
250.)

Again Carleton, in the same letter to Shelburne, feared the
possibility of former French officers, especially those who left
after the capitulation, being sent back to Canada to lead an
uprising. He knew these had been encouraged to return to France
and were being upkept as a separate body with pay. “For these
reasons,” he says, “I imagine, an edict was published in 1672,
declaring that, notwithstanding the low state of the king’s
finances, the salary of the captains of the colony troops of
Canada should be raised from 450 _livres_, the establishment by
which their pay was fixed at first, to 600 _livres_ a year, to
be paid quarterly, upon the footing of officers in full pay, by
the treasurer of the colonies, at the quarters assigned them by
His Majesty in Tourraine, and that such of them as did not repair
thither should be struck off, the king’s intentions being that
the said officers should remain in that province until further
orders, and not depart from thence without a written leave from
the secretary of state for the marine department.

“A few of these officers had been sent to the other colonies, but
the greater part still remained in Tourraine, and the arrears
due to those who have remained any time in this country are
punctually discharged, upon their emigration, from them and
obedience to the above mentioned injunction.

“By the secretary of state’s letter a certain quantity of wine,
duty free, is admitted to enter the towns where these Canadian
officers quarter, for their use according to their several ranks.”

In a further letter to Shelburne of December, 1767, he again
clearly recognized the difficult political situation. “The most
advisable method in my opinion for removing the present as well
as for preventing future evils is to repeal that ordinance
(of September 17, 1764) as null and void in its own nature
and for the present leave the Canadian laws almost entire;
such alterations might be afterwards made in them as time and
occurrences rendered the same advisable so as to reduce them to
that system His Majesty shall think fit, without risking the
dangers of too much precipitation; or else such alterations might
be made in the old and new laws judged necessary to be inevitably
introduced and publish the whole as a Canadian code as was
practiced by Edward I after the conquest of Wales.”

Meanwhile the seigneurs were not idle. In 1767 there was
an assembly at Montreal of the noblesse presided over by
the Chevalier D’Ailleboust and the petition was signed of
remonstrance to the king, dated February 3d, already quoted,
against discrimination against them.

This leads us to ask the question: Did the seigneurial body
meet in open or secret conclave when their interests were to be
safeguarded? Both kinds of conclaves would seem likely. It is
certain, however, that such meetings were as far as possible
prevented. Garneau “Histoire du Canada,” 4th edit., (Vol. II,
page 400) relates that in 1766 Hertel de Rouville in the name
of the seigneurs of Montreal applied for permission for the
seigneurs to meet, which was granted on condition that two of
the Supreme Council should be present with power to dissolve the
gathering. When the seigneurs assembled General Burton, who had
not been warned, wrote to the magistrates who replied that all
was in order. “In any case,” replied the suspicious general, “if
you have any need of assistance I will send it you.” The meeting
was called by Hertel de Rouville “by a particular order of the
Governor and Council” who doubtless thought by conciliating the
seigneurs, so far the responsible representatives of the people,
that peaceful relations could be maintained with the new subjects.

A document recently unearthed by Mr. Massicotte, at the
Court House archives, reveals that on the 3d of March, 1766,
the Montreal merchants met in the house of James Crofton,
inn-keeper “to protect against the meeting of the seigneurs
held in the public court house on Friday, February 21st, 1766.”
Their declaration before Edward William Gray, “Notary and
Tabellion Publick,”[1] protested that the seigneurs had been
unconstitutionally chosen at the different parish meetings to
represent the inhabitants of the seignories as agents “without
the knowledge or consent of the magistrates of the districts, the
commander-in-chief of His Majesty’s forces or the inhabitants
of the city;” that these separate meetings not only for the
entire exclusion of His Majesty’s ancient British subjects in
general but of the mercantile part of His Majesty’s new subjects,
did not make for unity or content. They further protested that
“several of His Majesty’s British subjects who are possessed
of seignories never received an order or summons to this said
meeting.” The declaration further states that upon the principal
English and French citizens assembling at the courthouse in
order to be present at and know the cause of the public meeting
they were informed by Adam Mabane, Esq., one of His Majesty’s
council for the province that their presence was not necessary,
as the meeting did not regard them and ordered them out. There
were two of His Majesty’s justices of the peace present, Isaac
Todd and Thomas Brashay, who “the public, thinking they had been
given sanction to it, expressed them in such a manner that they
sent down their resignation to the governor.” The malcontents
withdrew under the impression that representatives for the
people were being chosen without their consent. They flattered
themselves, however, that when the house of assembly promised in
His Majesty’s proclamation should come “His Majesty’s ancient
subjects will be permitted at least to have a share in the choice
of their representatives.”

The document written in English and French is signed in the
former by John Wells, R. Stenhouse, Mathew Lessey, Samuel Holmes,
John Stenhouse, G. Young, Joseph Howard, Lawrence Ermatinger,
Mathew Wade, James Price, Thomas Barron, Jonas Desaulles,
Richard Dobie, William Haywood, John Blake, and in the French
by Jean Orilliat, Le Cavelier Pappalon, Le Prohon Dissan, Guy,
Am. Hubert, St. Germain, Gagnée, Hervieux, Jacques Hervieux,
Lg Bourassa, C. Depré, P. Le Duc, Pillet, Augé, Chenville. The
witnesses to both documents are B. Frobisher, John Thomson.[2]
The names of the seigneurs given as present at the meeting are,
(1) Claude Pierre Pecaudy de Contrecoeur, (2) Roch St. Ours
Deschaillons, (3) Jacques Michel Hertel de Rouville, (4) Joseph,
Michel Legardeur Sr. de Croiselle-Montesson, (5) Joseph Boucher
de Niverville, (6) Joseph Godfrey de Normanville, (7) Louis
François Pierre Paul Margane de Lavaltrie, (8) Hyacinthe Godfrey
de Lintot, (9) Pierre Louis Boucher de Niverville, (10) Louis
Gordian or Louis Charles, D’Ailleboust, (11) René Ovide Hertel
de Rouville, (12.) Louis Joseph Godefroy de Tonnancourt, (13)
Jean François Nepveu, Seigneur d’Autray, (14) Jacques Hyacinthe
Simon dit Delorme, Seigneur Delorme (or St. Hyacinthe), (15) Jean
Baptiste Normand, Seigneur de Repentigny, (16) Charles Etienne
Crevier, Seigneur de St. François, (17) Joseph de Fleury, Sr.
d’Archambault, (18) René Boudier de la Breyère, (19) Abbé Etienne
Montgolfier (Superior of the Seminary and Seigneur of the Isle of
Montreal).

Carleton writing to Earl of Shelburne, one of His Majesty’s
principal secretaries (given in Q 5, page 260, “Canadian
Archives”), may again be quoted as indicating the grounds
on which his toleration of such meetings as the one above
recorded.[3]

                                    “Quebec, 25th November, 1767.

  “The king’s forces in this province, supposing them compliant to
  their allowance and all in perfect health, rank and file, would
  amount to 1,627 men. The king’s old subjects in this province,
  supposing them all willing, might furnish about five hundred men
  able to bear arms, exclusive of his troops; that is, supposing
  all the king’s troops and old subjects collected in Quebec; with
  two months’ hard labor they might put the works in a tolerable
  state of repair and would amount to about one-third the forces
  necessary for its defense. The new subjects could send into
  the field about eighteen thousand men well able to carry arms;
  of which number above one-half had already served with as much
  valour, with more zeal and more military knowledge for America
  than the regular troops of France that were joined with them.
  As the common people are greatly to be influenced by their
  Seigneurs, I annex a Return[4] of the noblesse of Canada, showing
  with tolerable exactness their age; rank and present place of
  abode, together with such natives of France as served in the
  colony troops so early in life as to give them a knowledge of the
  country, an acquaintance and influence over the people equal to
  natives of the same rank; from whence it appears that there are
  in France and in the French service about one hundred officers,
  all ready to be sent back in case of a war to a country they are
  intimately acquainted with and with the assistance of some troops
  to stir up a people accustomed to pay them implicit obedience.
  It further shows there remain in Canada not more than seventy of
  those who ever had been in the French service; not one of them
  in the king’s service nor any one who from any motive whatever
  is induced to support his government and dominion; gentlemen who
  have lost their employment at least by becoming his subjects and
  as they are not bound by any offices of trust or profit we should
  only deceive ourselves by supposing they would be active in the
  defense of a people that has deprived them of their honours,
  privileges, profits and laws and in their stead have introduced
  much expence, chicannery and confusion with a deluge of new laws
  unknown and unpublished. Therefore, all circumstances considered,
  while matters continue in their present state, the most we can
  hope for from the gentlemen who remain in this province is a
  passive neutrality on all occasions, a respectful submission to
  government and deference for the king’s commission in whatever
  hand it may be lodged; this they almost to a man have persevered
  in since my arrival, notwithstanding much pains have been taken
  to engage them in parties by a few whose duty and whose office
  should have taught them better. * * *

  “Having arrayed the strength of His Majesty’s old and new
  subjects and shewn the great superiority of the latter, it may
  not be amiss to observe there is not the least probability this
  present superiority should ever be diminished. On the contrary
  ’tis more than probable it will increase and strengthen daily.
  The Europeans who migrate never will prefer the long inhospitable
  winters of Canada to the more cheerful climates and more fruitful
  soil of His Majesty’s southern provinces; the few old subjects at
  present in this province have been mostly left here by accident
  and are either disbanded officers, soldiers or followers of the
  army, who not knowing how to dispose of themselves elsewhere,
  settled where they could at the Reduction; or else they are
  adventurers in trade or such as could not remain at home, who set
  out to mend their fortunes at the opening of this new channel for
  commerce, but experience has taught almost all of them that this
  trade requires a strict frugality they are strangers to, or to
  which they will not submit; so that some from more advantageous
  views elsewhere, others from necessity, have already left this
  province and I fear many more for the same reason will follow
  their example in a few years; but while this severe climate and
  the poverty of the country discourages all but the natives, its
  healthfulness is such that these multiply daily so that, barring
  a catastrophe shocking to think of, this country must to the end
  of time be peopled by a Canadian race who already have taken
  such a firm root and got to so great a height that any new stock
  transplanted will be totally hid and imperceptible amongst them
  except in the towns of Quebec and Montreal.”

This last consideration no doubt largely influenced Carleton in
his readiness to uphold the ancient laws and customs. He had not
the vision of an English-speaking Dominion such as that of today,
of which the British merchants of Montreal and Quebec of the
early days with all their faults were laying the sure foundation
by their commercial enterprise and dogged pertinacity.

Writing again to Shelburne on December 24, 1767, Carleton reminds
his Lordship that the colony had submitted to His Majesty’s
arms on certain conditions. He doubtless had in view, good tory
as he was, the objection of the noblesse to the institution
of a democratic representative assembly already urged by the
merchants of Quebec and Montreal with their experience of such
in the English colonies, as inimical to the established order of
things, for the system of laws so long in vogue before the act of
1763 maintained the subordination between the different social
divisions from the highest to the most humble ranks and upheld
the harmony now being threatened, thus keeping this far-off
province in its loyalty to the crown.

On January 20, 1768, he again wrote recommending the inclusion,
in the Council and the army, of a number of the noblesse. By
this means he said: “We would at least succeed in dividing the
Canadians and in case of war we would have a certain number on
our side who would stimulate the zeal of the national troops
of the king. Besides, the nobles would have reason to hope
that their children without having received their education in
France and without serving in the French service would be able
to support their families in the service of the king, their
master, in the exercise of offices which would prevent them
from descending to the level of the common people through the
division and the subdivision of their lands in each generation.”
(Constitutional Documents, French Edit.)

On April 12, 1788, he again champions the noblesse and even
recommends that the ceremony of seigneurial feudalism be kept
up as under the ancient régime. “All lands here,” he says,
“are dependent on His Majesty’s Château of St. Louis and I am
persuaded that nothing can be more agreeable to the people and
more suitable to secure the allegiance of the new subjects as
well as the payment of fines, dues and rights which take the
place of quit rents in this colony as a formal requisition,
enjoining all who hold their lands directly from the king to
render him _foi et homage_ in his Château of St. Louis. The oaths
taken by the vassals on this occasion are very solemn and binding
and involve serious obligations; they are obliged in consequence
to produce what they call here their ‘aveux et dénombrement,’
i. e., an exact return of their tenants and their revenue. In
addition they have to pay their dues to their sovereign and
to take arms to defend him in the case of an attack on the
province.” (Constitutional Documents, French Edit.)

A letter of Carleton to Lord Hillsborough of November 20, 1768,
is headed “Secret Correspondence” (“Archives,” Series Q, Vol. V,
page 890).[5] It shows that others besides Murray and Carleton
had been viewing with suspicion the actions of the noblesse
who were thought to be meditating a revolt. “My Lord,” writes
Carleton, “since my arrival in this province I have not been
able to make any discovery that induces me to give credit to
the paper of intelligence inclosed in Your Lordship’s letter of
the 20th of May, last, nor do I think it probable the chiefs of
their own free notion in time of peace dare assemble in numbers,
consult and resolve on a revolt; that an assembly of military men
should be so ignorant as to fancy they could defend themselves
by a few fire ships only against any future attack from Great
Britain after their experience in fifty-nine. Notwithstanding
this and their decent and respectful obedience to the king’s
government hitherto, I have not the least doubt of their secret
attachment to France and think this will continue as long as they
are excluded from all employment under the British government
and are certain of being reinstated at least in their former
commissions under that of France by which chiefly they supported
themselves and families. When I reflect that France naturally
has the affections of all the people, that to make no mention
of fees of office and of the vexations of the law, we have done
nothing to gain one man in the province by making it his private
interest to remain the king’s subject, and that the interests
of many would be greatly promoted by a revolution, I own my not
having discovered a treasonable correspondence never was proof
sufficient to convince me that it did not exist in some degree,
but I am inclined to think if such a message had been sent, very
few were intrusted with the secret; perhaps the court of France
informed a year past by Mons. de Chatelet that the king proposed
raising such a regiment of his new subjects caused this piece
of intelligence to be communicated to create a jealousy of the
Canadians and prevent a measure that might fix their attachments
to the British government and probably of those savages who
have always acted with them; however that may be, on receiving
this news from France last spring, most of the gentlemen in the
province applied to me and begged to be admitted to the king’s
service, assuring me that they would take every opportunity to
testify their zeal and gratitude for so great a mark of favour
and tenderness, extended not only to them but to their posterity.”

The passage following is prophetic of the active interference
which ten years later France was to take in the American war
against Great Britain. “When I consider further that the king’s
dominion here is maintained but by a few troops necessarily
dispersed without a place of security for their magazines, for
their arms or for themselves, amidst a numerous military people,
the gentlemen all officers of experience, poor, without hopes
that they or their descendants will be admitted into the service
of their present sovereign, I can have no doubt but France as
soon as determined to begin a war will attempt to regain Canada,
should it be intended only to make a diversion while it may
reasonably be undertaken with a little hazzard should it fail,
and where so much may be gained should it succeed. But should
France begin a war in hopes the British colonies will push
matters to extremities, and she adopts the project of supporting
them in their independent notions, Canada, probably, will then
become the principal scene where the fate of America may be
determined. Affairs in this situation, Canada in the hands
of France would no longer present itself as an enemy to the
British colony but as an ally, a friend and protector of their
independency.”

The sympathy, respect and even fear of the seigneurs which
Carleton evinced in his reports home largely influenced the final
passage of the Quebec act. Their firmness and persistency in
their demand for their privileges and their influence over the
_habitant_ and the possibility of their allegiance being tampered
with by France made them prevail over the small but active
minority of the commercial class. At this time preparations
were being made in London for the settlement of the Quebec
difficulty. Secrecy was being observed in high quarters. Lord
Hillsborough’s answer, January 4, 1769, to Carleton’s last is
also secret, “acknowledging your secret dispatch of November
21st before His Majesty. The remarks you make upon the state and
temper of His Majesty’s new subjects will be of great utility
in the consideration of the measures now under deliberation
and do evince both the propriety and necessity of extending to
that grave and faithful people a reaonable participation in
those establishments which are to form the basis of the future
government of Quebec.” He fears, however, although he agreed with
Carleton’s recommendation, that prejudice being so strong it will
be difficult to admit them to military offices.

The following summary of investigations conducted for the
governments at this time may now be added as evidence of the
military strength of the party Carleton wished to conciliate.

  Noblesse in the Province of Quebec:

      Captains having the order of St. Louis                             9
      Captains named in the order but not invested                       1
      Captains who have not the order                                    4
      Lieutenants having the order                                       1
      Lieutenants                                                       16
      Ensigns                                                            2
      Officers de Reserve                                                2
      Cadets                                                            23
      Have never been in the service                                    44
      In the upper country who have never been in the service            6
                                                                      ----
        Total                                                          126
  (At least eighty-five of these are reported as in the Montreal district.)

  Noblesse in France:

    Grand Croix                                                          1
    Governors, lieutenant governors, majors, aide majors,
      captains and lieutenants of ships of war, having the
      order of St. Louis                                                26
    Aide-majors and captains not having the order                        6
    Lieutenants                                                         12
    Ensigns                                                             19
    Canadian officers in actual service whose parents have
      remained in Canada                                                15
                                                                      ----
      Total                                                             79

  Natives of France who came over to Canada as cadets, served and
  were preferred in the colony troops and were treated in France as
  Canadian officers:

    Captains not having the Croix of St. Louis                           7
    Had the rank of captain in 1760, raised to lieutenant in
      France, Knight of St. Louis                                        1
    Lieutenants                                                          7
    Was captain in the colony troops at Mississippi, came to Canada
      in 1760 and is raised to the rank of colonel in the Spanish
      service at Mississippi; Knight of St. Louis                        1
    Having had civil employment                                          5
    Officers of the port                                                 2
                                                                      ----
      Total                                                             23

The case of the seigneurs and that of the merchants was by this
time well understood in England by the colonial authorities and
the parliament. The insistent demand for an assembly had been
well presented by Masères, while the no less repeated opposition
to it in the form of an amended constitution to guarantee
French-Canadian liberties had been equally well presented by the
seigneurs and their upholders. It remained for legislators to
settle which was the more opportune, the delay of the assembly or
the immediate concessions of favours to the conquered race.

The session of 1774 was drawing to a close but the culminating
point looked to with such eagerness on both sides of the
Atlantic, the Quebec act, was not introduced till May 17th, when
it quickly passed the three readings in the house of lords. On
the 26th it reached the second reading in the commons when the
serious opposition began. The debate was continued on June 6th,
7th, 8th and 19th, on which latter day the bill was carried in
committee by eighty-three to forty. On the third reading the
final vote was fifty-six to twenty. The House of Lords received
the bill and its amendments for further consideration on June
17th and the bill was passed on June 22d. The house was prorogued.

The Quebec Act restored the French civil law _in toto_. It
declared that Roman Catholics were to enjoy the free exercise of
their religion, though the clergy might only levy tithes on their
own subjects. It amended the oath of allegiance so as to make it
possible for an honest Roman Catholic to take it.

The act was in a sense a formal renunciation of the British
government to Anglicize the province of Quebec.[6] It was the
logical ratification of the British government’s promises to
protect the laws and institutions of the French-Canadians. It
was also a wise move. We know the views of Murray and Carleton.
General Haldimand, writing in 1780, six years after it had been
tried, confirms this thus: “It requires little penetration to
discover that had the system of government solicited by the old
subjects been adopted in Canada this colony would, in 1775, have
become one of the United States of America.”


FOOTNOTES:

[1] Mr. Gray was the first English notary of Montreal, being
named such October 7, 1765; on August 15, 1768, he became an
advocate; on the 1st of May, 1776, he succeeded Mr. Turner as
sheriff. In 1784 he accepted the position of sub-director of the
post in the city.

[2] The above names are not given with this fullness. Some are
obscure, hence Mr. Massicotte’s identification of them is used
here. (Canadian Antiquarian, January, 1914.)

[3] The object of this letter is to urge the strengthening of the
fort at Quebec against the possibility of an uprising.

[4] (Canadian Archives, Q 5, page 269.) This is printed in full
in Canadian Archives for 1888, page 44.

[5] This letter does not appear among the state papers in the
Canadian Archives.

[6] Cf. F.P. Walton, Dean of the Faculty of Law, McGill
University, in an article in the University Magazine, April,
1908, entitled “After the Cession.”




                           CHAPTER VII

                  THE REVOLUTIONARY WAR OF 1775

                 MONTREAL THE SEAT OF DISCONTENT

  THE QUEBEC ACT, A PRIMARY OCCASION OF THE AMERICAN
    REVOLUTION--MONTREAL BRITISH DISLOYAL--THE COFFEE HOUSE
    MEETING--WALKER AGAIN--MONTREAL DISAFFECTS QUEBEC--LOYALTY
    OF HABITANTS AND SAVAGES UNDERMINED--NOBLESSE, GENTRY AND
    CLERGY LOYAL--KING GEORGE’S BUST DESECRATED--“DELENDA EST
    CANADA”--“THE FOURTEENTH COLONY”--BENEDICT ARNOLD AND ETHAN
    ALLEN--BINDON’S TREACHERY--CALL FOR VOLUNTEERS FEEBLY
    ANSWERED--MILITIA CALLED OUT--LANDING OF THE REBELS--ENGLISH
    OFFICIAL APATHY--MONTREAL’S PART IN THE DEFENCE OF CANADA--THE
    FIRST SOLELY FRENCH-CANADIAN COMPANY OF MILITIA--NOTE: THE
    MILITIA.


The Quebec act, which was hailed by the leaders of the
French-Canadians as their Magna Charta, was received with
execration in England and America. On the day of the prorogation
of Parliament, June 22d, the mayor of London, attended by the
recorder, several aldermen and 150 of the common council, went to
St. James with a petition to the king to withhold his assent from
the bill. The lord chamberlain receiving them, told them that
it was too late, that the king was then on the point of going
to parliament to give his consent to a bill agreed on by both
houses of parliament and that they must not expect an answer.
Among other objections this petition claimed: “that the Roman
Catholic religion which is known to be idolatrous and bloody
is established by this bill and no legal provision is made for
the free exercise of our reformed faith nor the security of our
Protestant fellow subjects of the church of England in the true
worship of Almighty God according to their consciences.”

In the American colonies the Quebec act largely precipitated the
American Revolution then being concocted. Strong protest was
made, as for example, that shown by the delegates of Philadelphia
on September 5, 1774, in the address to the people of England;
“By another act the Dominion of Canada is to be so extended,
modeled and governed as that by being disunited from us, detached
from our interests by civil as well as by religious prejudices,
that by their numbers, swelling with Catholic emigrants from
Europe, and by their devotion to administration so friendly
to their religion, they might become formidable to us, and on
occasion be fit instruments in the hands of power to reduce the
ancient free Protestant colonies to the same state of slavery as
themselves.” Again speaking of the Quebec Act, it adds “Nor can
we suppress our astonishment that a British parliament should
ever consent to establish in that country a religion which has
deluged your Island in blood and dispersed impiety, bigotry,
persecution, murder and rebellion through every part of the
world.” The Quebec act added fuel to the fire of discontent
and the people were ready for war if the Congress said so. The
congress of Philadelphia at the same time published a long,
bombastic and revolutionary address signed by Henry Middleton,
president.

         “To the inhabitants of the province of Quebec.”

  “We do not ask you to commence hostilities against the government
  of our common sovereign but we submit it to your consideration
  whether it may not be expedient to you to meet together in your
  several towns and districts and elect deputies who after meeting
  in a provincial congress may chose delegates to represent your
  province in the continental congress to be held at Philadelphia
  on the 10th of May, 1775.” An unanimous vote had been resolved
  “That you should be invited to accede to our federation.” It is
  interesting to note that, forgetful of the previous letter to the
  British parliament breathing religious intolerance just referred
  to, the artful Americans now used also the following _argumentum
  ad hominem_: “We are too well acquainted with the liberality of
  sentiment distinguishing your nation to imagine that difference
  of religion will prejudice you against a hearty amity with us.
  You know that the transcendent nature of freedom, elevates those
  who unite in the cause above all such low-minded infirmities.”

This was printed for wide circulation in Canada and the question
of sending the delegates was eagerly discussed in Montreal’s
affected circles.

The Quebec act was one of the causes of grievance which led
to the American Revolution; it was one of the acts of tyranny
specified in the Declaration of Independence, “For abolishing the
free system of English law in a neighbouring province (Canada),
establishing therein an arbitrary government and enlarging
its boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit
instrument for introducing the same absolute rules into these
colonies.”

But how was the bill received in Montreal? Truth to tell,
Montreal was the seat of discontent in Canada. Its infection
was carried to Quebec. Sir Guy Carleton, who shortly after the
passage of the Quebec bill left England with his young wife,[1]
the Lady Maria Howard, the third daughter of Thomas, the second
Earl of Effingham, to resume his office as governor general,
tells how the trouble started at Montreal in his letter to
Dartmouth, dated Quebec, 11th of November, 1774. We are there
informed that at Quebec there were addresses of loyal acceptation
of the situation. “I believe,” wrote Carleton, “that most of
them who signed this address were disposed to act up to their
declaration, which probably would have been followed by those
who did not, if their brethren at Montreal had not adopted very
different measures. Whether the minds of the latter are of a more
turbulent turn or that they caught the fire from some colonists
settled among them, or in reality letters were received from
the general congress, as reported, I know not; certain it is,
however, that shortly after the said congress had published in
all the American papers their approbation of the Suffolk County
Resolves[2] in the Massachusetts Assembly, a report was spread
at Montreal that letters of importance had been received from
the general congress and all the British there flocked to the
coffee house to hear the news. Grievances were publicly talked
of and various ways for obtaining redress proposed, but that the
government might not come to a true knowledge of their intentions
a meeting was appointed at the house of a person then absent,
followed by several others at the same place and a committee of
four named, consisting of Mr. Walker, Mr. Todd, Mr. Price and
Mr. Blake, to take care of their interests and prepare plans of
redress. Mr. Walker now takes the lead. * * * Their plans being
prepared and a subscription commenced, the committee set out for
Quebec, attended in form by their secretary, a nephew of Mr.
Walker and by profession a lawyer.”

Carleton proceeds to describe how the Montreal emissaries worked
up the Quebecers[3] through several “town meetings” to join
in petitions, for a repeal of the Quebec act, which were sent
to “His Majesty, to the Lords spiritual and temporal, to the
Honourable, the Commons.” The chief grievances were that they
had lost the protection of the English laws and had thrust on
them the laws of Canada which are ruinous to their properties
as thereby they lose the invaluable privilege of trial by
juries; that in matters of a criminal nature the habeas corpus
act is dissolved and they are subjected to arbitrary fines and
imprisonment at the will of the governor and council. Masères was
entrusted with the promotion of their cause. The petitions were
signed on November 12th. In February secret agents from congress
were in Montreal to see if an aggressive policy could be safely
pursued.

The majority of the English population was on the side of the
discontented provinces. The French-Canadian _habitants_ were
encouraged to remain neutral, being plied with specious arguments
to undermine their loyalty to the king. They were told that
they had nothing to lose from the government by this position
and everything to gain from the congress faction who threatened
reprisals if they became actively opposed to them. But the
noblesse, the gentry and the clergy were against the congress,
for the Quebec act had guaranteed them the securities for the
rights they most valued; they knew that there was little to hope
for from the Americans. The Quebec act came into operation on
May 1st and an instance of the unsettled state of men’s minds
in Montreal is remembered by the incident of the desecration of
the king’s bust on this day. It was discovered daubed with black
and decorated with a necklace of potatoes, and a cross attached
with the words “voila le pape du Canada et le sot Anglais.”[4]
Kingsford, following Sanguinet, says that the perpetrator of
the foolish insult, for such it was intended to be, was never
discovered. The act was regarded as insolent and disloyal and it
caused great excitement. A public meeting was called at which 100
guineas were subscribed to discover the perpetrators. The company
of grenadiers of the Twenty-Six made a proclamation by beat of
drum offering a reward of $200 and a free pardon excepting the
person who had disfigured it to any one giving information which
would lead to the discovery of the offenders. The principal
French-Canadians were greatly annoyed at this proceeding, the
words being in French. It was claimed, however, that they were
written by an English speaking revolutionist.

On April 19th the affair at Lexington, the commencement of
a civil revolution, took place and rapidly the news of it
spread. Montreal was well posted. The leaders of the provincial
sympathizers here reported to the leaders of congress the easy
fall of Canada to the insurgents. Canada was more feverishly
coveted at this time than ever. In 1712 Dummers had written:
“I am sure it has been the cry of the whole country ever since
Canada was delivered up to the French,--Canada est delenda.” In
1756 Governor Livingston of New Jersey had cried: “Canada must
be demolished--Delenda est Carthago,--or we are undone.” And now
Canada was desired as the “fourteenth colony.”

In Montreal those who had received in the coffee house
John Brown, John Adams’ ambassador, were still keeping up
communications led by Thomas Walker, Price and others. At last
the Congressists thought the conquest was being made, relying on
the presumed neutrality of the Canadians. Ticonderoga had fallen
in the beginning of May to the revolutionary party under Ethan
Allen’s self-constituted forces. The road to Canada was being
cleared. Benedict Arnold, sailing from Ticonderoga, had arrived
unexpectedly on the morning of the 18th of May at Fort St. John’s
and captured the small war sloop there and took prisoners the
sergeant and ten men in charge of the military garrison. A second
landing was made by Ethan Allen and his Green Mountain Boys at
St. John’s on the 18th and 19th with a party said to be three
hundred strong, as Carleton was informed at Quebec. There was
great consternation in Montreal when the news of the seizure of
Ticonderoga and Crown Point and the first capture of St. John’s
was brought by Moses Hazen,[5] a merchant of Montreal now living
near St. John’s. The military was immediately put in motion by
Colonel Templer who dispatched Colonel Preston with a regiment of
one hundred men of the Twenty-sixth and this would have cut off
Allen’s descent up the lake with his bateaux had not Bindon, a
friendly Montreal merchant, hurried on horseback from Longueuil
to St. John’s to apprize Allen of the approach of the party from
Montreal.[6]

Allen before embarking gave a letter to this same Bindon
addressed to one Morrison and the British merchants at Montreal,
lovers of liberty, demanding a supply of provisions, ammunition
and spirituous liquors which some of them were inclined enough
to furnish had they not been prevented. (Carleton to Dartmouth,
June 7, 1775, from Montreal.) Bindon in returning to Montreal
fell across Colonel Preston who would have detained him but
he rode off and, crossing the St. Lawrence, found his way to
Montreal with his letters. On arriving he added to the excitement
of Montreal--it being market day--by reporting that Preston’s
detachment had been defeated. Colonel Templer called a meeting
of the citizens for 3 o’clock at the Récollet church to consider
the situation. It was numerously attended and it was resolved to
take arms for the common defense. During the proceedings Templer
received a letter from Preston detailing Bindon’s reprehensible
conduct. Bindon was himself present and turned pale as the facts
were read. The meeting was adjourned until 10 o’clock next
morning when it was held on St. Anne’s common. Templer proposed
that the inhabitants should form themselves into companies of
thirty and elect their officers. Several well known citizens were
chosen to make the roll of those willing to serve.[7] They were
of the old Canadian families known for their loyalty. Preston’s
detachment returned to Montreal, the men greatly infuriated
against Bindon. They had learned that it was from no fault of his
they had not been intercepted in the woods and shot down. So soon
as they were dismissed for parade they went in search of him.
When he was found the men forcibly led him to the pillory with
the intention of hanging him, but they were without a ladder and
the officers rescued Bindon before one could be obtained. But he
was arrested and carried before the magistrates, when he pleaded
guilty to imprudence but protested his innocence. To save his
character he played the part of a loyalist and took service in
the force organized for defense. The action of the troops with
regard to Bindon was the occasion of a public meeting called by
the party for congress.

Meanwhile a call for volunteers was met by an insignificant
enrollment of fifty Canadians who set out for St. John’s
under Lieutenant McKay, to remain there until relieved by the
Twenty-sixth regiment. Carleton moved the troops from Quebec
thither, also. The few troops at Three Rivers were also sent;
the garrison of Montreal as well. Carleton arrived at Montreal
on May 26th. He found how poorly the French-Canadians had
responded to the call to organize themselves into companies. In
St. Lawrence suburb the commissioners sent to enroll volunteers
had been met by the women with threats of stoning. The loyalty
of the French-Canadians had been sorely tampered with. There is
not a family resemblance between the letters written by Carleton
about the quality of their obedience, before the Quebec act and
after. On June 7, 1775, Carleton wrote from Montreal to Dartmouth
gloomily reviewing the situation and telling of the preparations
for the safety of St. John’s. “The little force we have in the
Province was immediately set in Motion and ordered to assemble
at or near St. John’s; the Noblesse of this Neighbourhood were
called upon to collect their Inhabitants in order to defend
themselves. The Savages of these parts likewise had the same
orders but though the Gentlemen testified great Zeal, neither
their Entreaties or their Example could prevail upon the People;
a few of the Gentry consisting principally of the Youth residing
in this place and its Neighbourhood, formed a small Corps of
Volunteers under the Command of Mr. Samuel McKay and took post
at St. John’s; the Indians showed as much Backwardness as the
Canadian Peasantry. * * * Within these few Days the Canadians and
Indians seemed to return a little to their senses, the Gentry
and Clergy had been very useful on this occasion and shewn great
Fidelity and Warmth for His Majesty’s Service, but both have
lost much of their influence over the People. I proposed trying
to form a Militia and if their minds are favourably disposed
will raise a Battalion upon the same plan as the other Corps in
America, as to Numbers and Experience, and were it established
I think it might turn out a great public Utility; but I have my
doubts as to whether I shall be able to succeed.

“These Measures that formerly would have been extremely popular
require at present a great Degree of Caution and Circumspection;
so much have the Minds of the People been tainted by the Cabals
and Intrigues, I have from time to time given to your Lordship
some information of. I am as yet uncertain whether I shall
find it advisable to proceed in the forementioned Undertaking;
to defame their King and treat with Insolence and Disrespect,
upon all Occasions to speak with the utmost contempt of His
Government, to forward Sedition and applaud Rebellion, seems
to be what too many of his British-American Subjects in those
parts think their undoubted Right.” (Constitutional Documents,
1760-1791, page 450.)

On the 9th of June, Carleton, by proclamation, authorized
the calling out of the militia throughout the whole province
according to the provisions of the old law, reinstating
officers appointed by Murray, Gage and Burton. The movement was
not popular even with the new subjects, uninfluenced by the
discontent of the disloyalists who feared in the return of the
old militia the exactions of the French régime. Chief Justice
Hey, then in Montreal, prevailed upon some of the dissatisfied
“old” but “loyal” subjects to enroll for good example, which
done, they were joined by the French-Canadians so that a
sufficient force was ready for a review before General Carleton.

The Indians of Caughnawaga at first hesitated in their loyalty,
which had also been tampered with, but they were also brought to
serve. At this time Colonel Johnson arrived in Montreal with 300
Indians of the six nations; a council of 600 Indians was held
and all agreed to take the field in defense, but not to commence
hostilities. The congressists had endeavoured to persuade them to
neutrality and the leaven was still working.

July was drawing to a close. Carleton left Montreal by way of
Longueuil to inspect the militia at Sorel and then proceeded to
Quebec, where he arrived on August 2d, to make preparations for
the establishment of the new Legislative Council. This met for
the first time on August 17th but it was adjourned on September
7th on account of news of the congress troops again appearing
on the Richelieu. The lieutenant governor, Cramahé, writing to
Dartmouth from Quebec on September 21st, tells the circumstances
how on the news of the rebel army approaching, Carleton set out
for Montreal in great haste; that “on the 7th inst. the Rebels
landed in the woods near St. John’s and were beat back to their
Boats by a Party of Savages encamped at that Place. In this
Action the Savages behaved with great Spirit and Resolution and
had they remained firm to our Interests probably the Province
would have been Saved for this Year, but finding the Canadians
in General adverse to taking up Arms for the Defence of their
Country, they withdrew and made their peace. After their Defeat
the Rebels returned to the Isle aux Noix, where they continued
till lately, sending out some Parties and many Emisaries to
debauch the Minds of the Canadians and Indians.”

Cramahé adds that no means had been left untried to bring the
Canadian peasantry to a sense of their duty and to engage them
to take up arms in defense of the province but to no purpose.
“The Justice must be done to the Gentry, Clergy and most of the
Burgeoisie that they have shewn the Greatest Zeal and Fidelity
to the King’s Service and Exerted their best Endeavours to
reclaim their infatuated Countrymen. Some Troops and a Ship of
War or two would, in all likelihood, have prevented this general
Defection.”[8]

Chief Justice Hey, writing at the end of August to the Lord
Chancellor, says in a postscript dated September 11th “that
all there was to trust to was about five hundred men, two war
boats at St. John’s and Chambly; that the situation is desperate
and that Canada would shortly be in complete possession of the
rebels.” In a further postscript of September 17th he adds that
not one hundred Canadians, except in the towns of Quebec and
Montreal, are with the king. He holds himself ready to return,
to be of more use in England. Carleton, sick at heart with
disappointment at the ingratitude of the Canadians who would
not march to defend their own country, the uncertainty of the
Indians, and the disloyalty of many of the old subjects, and
crippled by an inadequate army which was nearly all enclosed in
Forts Chambly and St. John’s, nevertheless determined to act
boldly on the defensive until General Gage should send from
Boston the two regiments earnestly asked for.

Canada was abandoned at this period by as criminal apathy and
ignorance on the part of English officials, as it had been before
by the French. As Cramahé had pointed out, some troops and a ship
of war or two sent from England, or from Gage in America, would
have saved Canada from the invasion of 1775.

The part that Montreal took in the defence of Canada must now
be told. When the news of the rebels advancing on to St. John’s
reached Montreal, Colonel Prescott, then in command, sent an
order to the parishes around the city for fifteen men of each
company of militia to join the force at St. John’s. Though no
report came from without, the Montreal army men came forward to
the number of 120 French and Canadians under the command of de
Belestre and de Longueuil, many of the volunteers being young
men of family and several being prosperous merchants, this being
perhaps the first recorded separate unit composed solely of
French-Canadians, ever raised as an arm of Imperial defence. The
party for St. John’s departed on September 7th. The loyal British
volunteers remained to perform duty in Montreal. Time will
discover who were truly loyal and who were not.

The Imperial forces in Canada were now represented by the two
companies in Montreal, eighty-two men at Chambly and the garrison
of St. John’s, consisting of 505 men of all rank, of the Seventh
Royal Fusiliers and the Twenty-sixth Regiment, thirty of the
Royal Artillery, eight of Colonel McLean’s newly raised corps
from Quebec and fifteen of the Royal Horse and 120 volunteers
from Montreal--the whole making a total of 696 in the garrison,
not counting some artificers.

Around St. John’s and in the district of the Richelieu the
inhabitants were either neutral or, with the majority, actively
espousing the congress party, some by taking to the field, others
by supplying provisions, assisting in the transport of munitions
of war and artillery and giving information.

Surely the _morale_ of the once loyal French-Canadian _habitants_
had been undermined effectively by Walker and other malcontents
and had been recently further weakened by the manifesto of
General Schuyler from the Isle aux Noix on September 15th to his
“dear friends and compatriots, the habitants of Canada,” advising
them to join him and escape the common slavery prepared for them.
Montgomery’s scouting parties, out for supplies and information,
did the rest. Of Richard Montgomery, Schuyler’s second in
command, we shall hear more.


                              NOTE

                           THE MILITIA

The militia, which was called out for service in the field in
1775, 1776, 1812, 1814, 1837, 1839, with the exception of a few
small independent corps, consisted of provisionally organized
units armed and equipped from the magazines, the regular army,
paid by the British government, drilled, disciplined and often
commanded by regular officers. After the denudation of Canada
of the regular troops at the time of the Crimean war, it became
necessary for the colony to take more provisions for its own
defence. In 1855 the military act (18 Victoria, Chapter 77),
passed by the Upper Canada, for raising and maintaining at the
colonial expense, created the nucleus of our present militia
system. The “Trent” excitement of 1861-62 and the Fenian raids
of 1867-70 further stimulated the movement. The first Dominion
militia act (31 Victoria, Chapter 40) was passed in 1868. The
present militia act (4 Edward VII, Chapter 23) received assent on
August 15, 1904. According to this statute the militia is divided
into active and reserve forces.


FOOTNOTES:

[1] Carleton was then in his fiftieth year, his wife in her
twenty-second. They were married on May 22, 1772.

[2] Adopted on September 9, 1774.

[3] The Montreal agitators were fiercer than those of Quebec.
John McCord, of Quebec, wrote April 27, 1775, to Lieutenant
Pettigrew, “I pray God to grant peace at any price; the blood of
British subjects is very precious.” Walker, writing to Samuel
Adams on April 7th, breathes fire: “Few in this colony dare
vent their quip but groan in silence and dream of _Lettres de
Cachets_, confiscations and improvements.” The colonists had
declared they would fight for their rights and liberties while
they had a drop of their blood left.

[4] “This is the pope of Canada and the fool of England.”

[5] Moses Hazen passed his boyhood at Haverhill, in
Massachusetts. He served in the Louisberg expedition, rose to
be a captain in the Rangers at the taking of Quebec and was
remarked by General Wolfe as a good soldier. Later he obtained
a lieutenant’s commission in the 44th Foot and soon after the
conquest retired on half pay. We then find his name attached to
petitions of the Montreal merchants. At this time he appears to
have settled near St. John’s, carrying on not only large farming
operations but owning sawmills, a potash house and a forge.

[6] When the Americans appeared there in arms he saw, doubtless,
the losses war would bring him and he wished them elsewhere. For
a time he “trimmed” successfully, but at last was held suspicious
by both parties and was held prisoner by both.

[7] Dupuy-Desauniers, de Longueuil, Panet, St. George Dupré,
Mesére, Sanguinet, Guy and Lemoine Despins. (See the Abbé
Verreau’s valuable book “Invasion du Canada par les Americains.”)

[8] Constitutional Documents, page 435.




                          CHAPTER VIII

                        MONTREAL BESIEGED

                              1775

                     THE SECOND CAPITULATION

  ETHAN ALLEN--HABITANTS’ AND CAUGHNAWAGANS’ LOYALTY TAMPERED
    WITH--PLAN TO OVERCOME MONTREAL--THE ATTACK--ALLEN
    CAPTURED--WALKER’S FARM HOUSE AT L’ASSOMPTION BURNED--WALKER
    TAKEN PRISONED TO MONTREAL--CARLETON’S FORCE FROM MONTREAL
    FAILS AT ST. JOHN’S--CARLETON LEAVES MONTREAL--MONTREAL
    BESIEGED--MONTGOMERY RECEIVES A DEPUTATION OF CITIZENS--THE
    ARTICLES OF CAPITULATION--MONTGOMERY ENTERS BY THE RECOLLECT
    GATE--WASHINGTON’S PROCLAMATION.


While Montgomery at Isle aux Noix is planning his descent on St.
John’s, the portal of Canada, twelve miles lower down, it will
be well to follow Ethan Allen on his venturesome and abortive
attempt to take Montreal. Ethan Allen, of Bennington, was, as
Carleton had reported, “an outlaw in the province of New York,
who had become famous by his daring capture of Ticonderoga and
had been emboldened enough by his success to persuade the New
York congress to raise a small regiment of rangers.” Thus this
freebooter, with his Green Mountain Boys, became a commissioned
officer. He got employment under Schuyler and it was Ethan
Allen with John Brown, now Major, who had formerly been sent to
Montreal to sound the merchants, who bore Schuyler’s manifesto
from Isle aux Noix to the habitants of Canada. From parish
to parish he hurried and his ready wit and hustling address
captivated the peasant housewives who, being educated better than
their husbands, read the proclamation with approval to them.
He visited the Caughnawaga Indians and played havoc with their
loyalty, receiving beads and wampum from them. His reappointment
was from Montgomery, then commencing the investment of St.
John’s, who, it is said, wanting to find employment for Allen
at a distance from himself, sent him to gather up a recruit of
Canadians around Chambly. According to his own account he was
easily successful. Writing to Montgomery on September 20th from
St. Ours, “You may rely on it,” he says, “that I shall join you
in three days with five hundred or more Canadian volunteers.
* * * Those that used to be enemies to our cause come cap in
hand to me; and I swear by the Lord I can raise three times the
number of our army provided you continue the siege.” Yet, on
the night of September 23d, when he found himself at Longueuil
looking across the St. Lawrence to the city which it was his
ambition to capture, he had only about eighty still following.
He was returning to St. John’s next morning, and when two miles
from Longueuil he met John Brown, now Colonel in command of a
considerable force at La Prairie. These two, retiring to a house
with some others, conceived the plan of attacking Montreal. The
plan was for Brown with two hundred followers to cross over the
St. Lawrence in canoes above the town, and Allen’s party below
it; each would silently approach the gate at his end of the city;
Brown’s party would give three Huzzas! Allen’s would respond and
then both would fall to.

It was a brilliant idea and elated Allen. Montreal, captured by
a force of two to three thousand and the easy fall of the rest
of Canada had been the vision put before congress often enough.
“I still maintain my views,” says Colonel Easton before the
congress of Massachusetts on June 6, 1775, “that policy demands
that the colonies advance an army of two or three thousand men
into Canada and environ Montreal. This will inevitably fix and
confirm the Canadians and Indians in our interests.” On June 13,
1775, Benedict Arnold wrote to congress, sketching out a plan by
which with an army of 2,000 men, Chambly and St. John’s should
be cut off with 700 men, 300 more should guard the boats and
the line of retreat and a grand division of 1,000 should appear
before Montreal, whose gates on the arrival of the Americans were
to be opened by friends there “in consequence of a plan for that
purpose already entered into by them.”

On May 29th Allen, over confident, had written to the Continental
Congress: “Provided I had but 500 men with me at St. John’s when
we took the king’s sloop, I would have advanced to Montreal.” On
June 2d he wrote to the New York congress: “I will lay my life
on it that with 1,500 men and a proper train of artillery I will
take Montreal,” and on July 12th to Trumbull that if his Green
Mountain Boys had not been formed into a battalion under certain
regulations and command he would further “advance then into
Canada and invest Montreal.”

Here, then, was Allen to attempt to take the city of his dreams
with a smaller force than his dreams provided for! He had
forgotten, perhaps, that Carleton was in that city. He was elated
that he had added about thirty English Americans to his force,
but he was sorry that Thomas Walker had been communicated with
at his home in L’Assomption. Night came on. Allen’s little fleet
spent all the night being driven backward and forward by the
currents, but at last after six crossings were made to land his
men in the limited number of available boats, on the morning of
the 25th the daring invaders were all landed at Longue Pointe.
But they heard no Huzza! from Brown’s party from the other side
of the city. Brown had either known better or was jealous of
Ethan Allen’s desire to claim the capture of Montreal, as he had
done that of Ticonderoga.

Longue Pointe was not unfriendly but thought discretion better
than valour. Allen saw himself in a foolish position; his
slightness of force would soon be known in Montreal through the
escape from his guards of a Montrealer named Desautel going out
early to his Longue Pointe farm.

Montreal was in great excitement and confusion at the news of
the presence of the notorious New Hampshire incendiary. Even
some of the officers took to the ships.[1] It was, however, only
at 9 o’clock that Carleton heard the news. There was a hurry
and scurry and a beating of drums and the parade ground of the
Champ de Mars behind the barracks was filled with the people.
Carleton briefly told the citizens of their dangers and ordered
them to join the troops at the barracks. The instinct of
self-preservation in a common danger made most obey except some,
chiefly American colonists, that stepped forward and turned off
the contrary way.

[Illustration: COLONEL ARNOLD]

[Illustration: GENERAL RICHARD MONTGOMERY]

[Illustration: HOUSE AT THE CORNER OF NOTRE DAME AND ST. PETER
STREETS Occupied by Montgomery and the American officers during
the winter of 1775-76.]

[Illustration: HOUSE ON THE CORNER OF RUE BONSECOURS AND ST. PAUL
STREET Occupied by government representatives from 1775 to 1791.]

At last the Montreal party was ready. They dashed through the
Quebec gate, smashing the boats there to cut off the enemies
retreat, and hurried up north. The fight with Allen’s men began
at 2 o’clock and lasted an hour and three-quarters by the
watch. Though carefully using all natural advantages of the
ground, ditches and coverts chosen beforehand, Allen himself was
compelled to surrender his sword to Peter Johnson, a natural
son of Sir William, “providing I can be treated with honour,”
he added. The officers received him with politeness, like
gentlemen. In the fight Allen lost twelve to fifteen men, killed
and wounded; some had fled, but a body of forty prisoners were
marched to the city. The defenders had lost only six to eight of
their men, so it was a famous victory. When the prisoners were
brought before Colonel Prescott in Barrack Yard an extraordinary
incident occurred, according to “Allen’s Narrative.”

“Are you the Colonel Allen who took Ticonderoga?” thundered
out the British soldier. “The very man,” was the reply.
Prescott angrily raised his cane to strike the roughly dressed,
dust-stained ranger in a short deerskin coat, breeches of
sagathy, and woolen cap. “You had better not strike me, I’m not
used to it,” cried the aroused prisoner, shaking his fist at the
angry commander of the garrison. Prescott then turned to the
habitant prisoners and ordered a sergeant to bayonet them. Allen
then stepped between his men and the soldiers and, tearing open
his clothes and exposing his shaggy bosom, exclaimed to Prescott:
“I am the one to blame. Thrust your bayonets into my breast. I am
the sole cause of their taking up arms.” A long pause. Finally
muttered Prescott, “I will not execute you now, but you shall
grace a halter at Tyburn, ---- ye!” There was no suitable prison
in Montreal so Allen was put into the hold of the Gaspé in the
harbour to wait until he should be shipped to England for trial.

Montreal was saved for the present; and Allen’s failure, as
the governor reported it, gave a favourable turn to the minds
of the people and many began now to come back to loyalty. It
seems strange, the impunity with which known plotters had been
hitherto treated. Carleton would now make an example. He turned
his eyes sternly upon Thomas Walker. Already Mrs. Walker had been
told that her husband must quit the country. Now an order for
arrest on the charge of high treason was issued. Prescott handed
the warrant to Captain Bellair. On the night of the 5th-6th of
October in their comfortable farm house at L’Assomption they were
surprised by a posse of twenty regulars and twelve Canadians.
Walker, determined to resist, shot into the crowd, who fusilladed
back. At last the four corners of the house were fired. As the
house began to burn, the smoke within almost suffocated Mrs.
Walker, so that he took her to a window and held her by the
shoulders while she lowered herself in her nightdress as far as
she could, clinging to the windowsill. Finally she was rescued by
one of the soldiers setting a ladder to the wall. The floor that
Walker was standing on was in flames, and on the promise of good
treatment from the soldiers, he surrendered. Their property was
plundered and destroyed and the farm house wrecked. The Walkers
were given some wraps to cover their unfinished attire and were
hurried to Prescott at Montreal. Charged with rebellion, Walker
was taken to the barracks and for thirty-three days and nights
he was confined in his solitary cell on a straw pallet under
a heavy load of irons. Then he was taken to Lisotte’s armed
schooner and buried in the hold prison, to be taken for trial
over seas. It was a terrifying example to all, a leading citizen,
a wealthy merchant, a Montreal magistrate and a felon! Truly a
warning to traitors.

Using this as a propitious moment Carleton issued another levy
of men from the militia around Montreal. That October he was
so encouraged that he assembled on St. Helen’s island, facing
Montreal, seven or eight hundred men, counting Indians, and later
on the afternoon of October 30th pushed off, accompanied by Luc
la Corne and Lorimier with thirty-five or forty boats for the
shore of Longueuil to bear relief to the invested fort of St.
John’s. Alan Maclean was to go from Quebec to meet Carleton at
St. John’s. But as they approached the harbour they were met with
such havoc by a force under Seth Warner that had been making use
of Longueuil Castle and who had a four-pounder emptying grape
and a goodly backing of musketry at the landing, and quickly
playing upon the astonished flotilla, so that it turned around,
bearing some forty or fifty dead and as many wounded. No American
received a scratch.

The grand stroke had failed. Maclean’s force heard the bad
news and many began to desert. It was a game of battledore and
shuttlecock for the French Canadian peasantry. It was not that
their want of loyalty was to be blamed as the practical politics
of the affair. It was a war of Englishmen again Englishmen, and
they were for the winners. The loss of Chambly was the turning
point in the siege of St. John’s which had been going on since
September 18th. Chambly had been surrendered by Major Stafford
after a siege of one day and a half, on October 17th, a sorry
event, for it was well supplied with winter provisions and
ammunition. The rebels, with the aid of others, were able for
six weeks to reinforce Montgomery at St. John’s, when he would
have been forced by the approach of winter to retire. Thus on the
morning of the 3d of November, at 10 o’clock, the surrender of
St. John’s was made by Colonel Preston to Montgomery.

The fall of Montreal was now assured and with winter approaching,
Montgomery secured his position at Chambly, St. John’s and the
Richeleau district. At Longueuil, Warren was posted with 300 men.
The complacent Indians at Caughnawaga willingly enough received
an order to remain neutral. Everything was ready for the march on
Montreal and Montgomery advanced to La Prairie, there collecting
all the boats and bateaux available for the transportation of the
troops across the river to the city. On the 11th of November news
came to Carleton in Montreal that Montgomery was crossing over.
It was now his policy to leave. The capture was inevitable and
he had prepared for it since the fall of St. John’s. He spiked
the guns and burned the bateaux he could not use and caused the
munitions, provisions and baggage to be loaded on the three
armed sloops. About one hundred and twenty regular troops were
embarked on the vessels available. In the evening at 5 o’clock
Carleton went aboard. Brigadier Prescott and the military and
staff accompanied. Eleven sail went down to Quebec. At Lavaltrie,
twelve miles west of Sorel, owing to contrary winds the flotilla
was detained during the 13th and 14th of November. On the 15th
a written summons came from Colonel Easton calling on Carleton
to capitulate. On the night of the 16th and 17th of November
Carleton went on the barge of Captain Bouchette and arrived at
Quebec on Sunday, November 19th, escaping the batteries erected
beyond Sorel to intercept the fleet at Lavaltrie.

On the same day this fleet was visited by Major Brown with
a peremptory order to surrender. Prescott saw no way out of
it; he first threw the powder into the St. Lawrence and then
surrendered. The congress troops now took charge of the fleet and
with a favourable north wind convoyed the army and fleet back to
Montreal. Walker, a prisoner in irons in the hold, was released
as soon as possible. The fleet arrived on November 22d. The
prisoners were ordered by Montgomery to parade on the river front
the following morning before the market and then lay down their
arms.

We must go back to the 11th of November and visit defenseless
Montreal. The loyalists were sad, as having been at a funeral,
in the passing away of its defenders. The discontented, now that
Montreal was on the point of changing hands, openly abandoned
their arms and threw off their disguise. That night Montgomery’s
force encamped on St. Paul’s Island. On Sunday morning, about
9 o’clock, when many were going to church, news arrived that
Montgomery was coming from the island to Point St. Charles and
a committee of twelve citizens was appointed to go to meet him.
Meanwhile he had arrived and the inhabitants of the suburbs
west of the city had assured him of their neutrality. He had
also received encouraging messages from the disaffected within
the city, for Bindon, now a sentry at one of the embrasures,
traitorously allowed a partner of Price, whom we have mentioned
as in league with the Boston party, and another, to communicate
with the congress party now advancing. Montgomery must have
learnt that there was a strong following in the city prepared
to side with him and that those opposed to him were handicapped
for want of ammunition and provision. It was reliance on these
elements within and without the city, with the knowledge that few
were willing to take up arms against him, that made it possible
for Montgomery with his slight force to capture a city of 1,200
inhabitants.

The deputation meeting him was told that he gave them four
hours to consider the terms on which they would accede to his
authority. Being told that he must not approach nearer the
city, he answered that it was somewhat cold weather and he
immediately sent fifty men to occupy the Récollet suburb, and
before 4 o’clock his whole force was established there. This made
an uproar in the town and the loyalists were for shooting on
them. The articles of capitulation were prepared and presented
to Montgomery. “I will examine them and reply soon,” said he.
They demanded that “The religious orders should enjoy their
rights and properties, that both the French and English should
be maintained in the free exercise of their religion, that trade
in the interior and upper part of the provinces and beyond the
seas should be uninterrupted, that passports on legitimate
business should be granted, that the citizens and inhabitants
of Montreal should not be called upon to bear arms against the
mother country, that the inhabitants of Montreal and of every
part of the province, who have borne arms for the defense of the
province then prisoners, should be released, that the courts of
justice should be reestablished and the judges elected by the
people, that the inhabitants of the city should not be forced to
receive the troops, that no habitant of the country parishes and
no Indians should be admitted into the city until the commandant
had taken possession of it and made provision for its safety.”

The general in reply stated first, “that owing to the city
of Montreal having neither ammunition, adequate artillery,
troops nor provisions and not having it in its power to
fulfill one article of the treaty, it could claim no title
to its capitulation, yet the continental army had a generous
disdain of every act of oppression and violence; they are come
for the express purpose of giving liberty and security.”[2]
He accepted most of the provisions laid down. But from the
unhappy differences of Great Britain and the colonies he was
unable to engage that trade should be continued with the mother
country. In acceding to the demands he made it understood that
the engagements entered upon by him would be binding on his
successors.

Next day, the 13th of November, the congress troops, many of
whom wore the scarlet uniforms of the British troops found in
the military stores at St. John’s and Chambly, entered by the
Recollet gate (at the corner of McGill and Notre Dame streets)
and, receiving the keys to the storehouses of the city, marched
proudly along Notre Dame Street to the barracks opposite what is
now known as Jacques Cartier Square.

The capture of Montreal was quickly made known in the American
province. “Dispatches for His Excellency, General Washington;
news of Montreal’s quiet submission of that city to the
victorious arms of the United Colonies of America” was soon
announced in the New England Chronicle.

Montgomery remained in Montreal until November 28th. News came of
the success of the detachment placed at Sorel. For, on the 22d,
as already stated, the eleven vessels captured by Colonel Easton
at Lavaltrie were brought into Montreal with Colonel Prescott and
the military prisoners and the released Thomas Walker. One reason
for Montgomery’s delay was due to the expectancy of the arrival
of the detachments he had ordered. He now left General David
Wooster in command of the detachment kept behind in the city
and went down the river to join Benedict Arnold, who had been
unsuccessful in his attack on Quebec, and to take command of the
besieging forces. For unless Quebec were taken, Canada could not
be said to have been subdued.

Wooster’s first action was to disseminate Washington’s proclamation
confided to Arnold for the inhabitants of Canada. It started
“Friends and Brethren.” The second paragraph runs thus: “Above all
we rejoice that our enemies have been deceived with regard to you.
They have persuaded themselves, they have even dared to say, that
the Canadians were not capable of distinguishing between the
blessings of liberty and the wretchedness of slavery; that
gratifying the vanity of a little circle of nobility would blind
the people of Canada. By such artifices they hoped to bind you to
their views, but they have been deceived; they see with a chagrin
equal to our joy that you are enlightened, generous and virtuous;
that you will not renounce your own rights or serve as instruments
to deprive your fellow subjects of theirs. Come then, my brethren,
unite with us in an undissoluble union, let us run together to the
same goal. We have taken up arms in defence of our liberty, our
property, our wives and our children; we are determined to preserve
them or die. We look forward with pleasure to that date not far
remote, we hope, when the inhabitants of America shall have one
sentiment and the full enjoyment of a free government.”

[Illustration: ENDORSEMENT ON SAMUEL ADAMS’ LETTER OF FEBRUARY
21, 1775]

[Illustration: FROM LETTER OF APRIL 8, 1775, TO ADAMS AND HIS
ASSOCIATES]

[Illustration: SAMUEL ADAMS]

[Illustration: GEORGE WASHINGTON]

[Illustration: FROM SCHUYLER’S LETTER TO WASHINGTON]

The reference to the little circle of noblesse blinding the
people of Canada shows the line of argument which had been
making the people, until lately so happy, now so discontented
and disloyal. Will any impartial student of Canada under the
French régime say that the Bostonians’ insinuation of oppression
as being the habitual lot of the French Canadian peasants, was
founded on fact? They had succeeded so far in unsettling for
a time a people newly enfranchised with powers hitherto not
entrusted to them, but the reaction will follow and the argument
of slavery and oppression will fall on deaf ears. To the credit
of the clergy, seigneurs and professional classes of this period
be it said that they saved Canada.

If the French habitant was weak in 1775, watching which way to
jump, he will be strong in 1812 and 1813 and the victory of
Chateauguay, though but a “bush fight,” will serve to consolidate
the British rule in Canada. It has been noticed that the French
Canadian loyalty is of the “head” rather than of the “heart.”
But the analogy between French Canadians and Scotchmen has also
been pointed out. The latter point with pride to Bannockburn as
well as to Waterloo. They, with the help of time, have a hearty
affection for the Empire. So it is with the French Canadians in a
more and more growing manner.


FOOTNOTES:

[1] There must have been a miscellaneous collection of canoes,
and one or two bateaux.

[2] A transcript lately issued by the Canadian Antiquarian and
Numismatic Society of Montreal, of the expense book of the
commissary under Arnold which has entries from February to May,
1776, goes to show that, to give the invader his due, large sums
of money were disbursed for beef and other supplies. During the
war bread was very dear and wheat was scarce. A brown loaf cost
thirty _sols_ or 1 s. and 3 d. a pound; white, 25 _sols_, or 1 s.
½ d. a pound.




                           CHAPTER IX

     MONTREAL, AN AMERICAN CITY SEVEN MONTHS UNDER CONGRESS

                              1776

              THE CONGRESS ARMY EVACUATES MONTREAL

  MONTREAL UNDER CONGRESS--GENERAL WOOSTER’S TROUBLES--MONEY AND
    PROVISIONS SCARCE--MILITARY RULE--GENERAL CONFUSION--THE
    CHATEAU DE RAMEZAY, AMERICAN HEADQUARTERS--THE COMMISSIONERS:
    BENJAMIN FRANKLIN, SAMUEL CHASE AND CHARLES CARROL--FLEURY
    MESPLET, THE PRINTER--THE FAILURE OF THE COMMISSIONERS--NEWS
    OF THE FLIGHT FROM QUEBEC--MONTREAL A STORMY SEA--THE
    COMMISSIONERS FLY--THE WALKERS ALSO--THE EVACUATION BY THE
    CONGRESS TROOPS--NOTES: I. PRINCIPAL REBELS WHO FLED; II.
    DESCRIPTION OF DRESS OF AMERICAN RIFLES.


Meanwhile the efforts of Montgomery and Arnold with a force
of about one thousand, five hundred men, among whom were the
Canadians under Major Duggin, formerly a Quebec barber, were
engaged in besieging Quebec, a more difficult task than they
expected. On the last day of 1775 Montgomery met his death.
Arnold was wounded in the foot and many of the congress soldiers
had caught the smallpox. Still the siege went on, although under
great depression. The death of Montgomery had placed General
Wooster in command of the province till the appointment of
General Charles Lee in February. “For God’s sake,” wrote Arnold
to Wooster at Montreal on December 31st, “order as many men as
you can possibly spare consistent with the safety of Montreal.”

But Wooster had his own troubles. The Canadians around him could
not be relied on. Besides he had no cash. Price, of Montreal,
who had enticed the Americans over, had enabled them to subsist
as an army, having already advanced about £20,000; but now he
was “almost out of that article himself,” and could find no one
in the city willing to lend. (Price to General Schuyler, January
5th.) Wooster, therefore, looked upon Montreal as the place to be
reserved for a retreat. “I shall not be able to spare any men to
reinforce Colonel Arnold,” he wrote to Schuyler on January 5th.
“What they will do at Quebec for want of money God only knows,
but none can be spared from Montreal.” Yet in the last week of
January Wooster had been enabled to send about one hundred and
twenty from Montreal.

During February Wooster’s letters from Montreal were gloomy:
“Our flour is nearly expended, we have not more than enough for
the army for one week; we can purchase no provisions or wood
or pay for the transporting of anything without hard cash. Our
credit sinks daily. All the provisions and wood that we want for
the army for two or three weeks to come must be purchased and
transported to camp by the middle of March. There will be no
passing for a month or six weeks; these things must be provided
immediately, or the consequences will be dreadful.”

In Montreal, Wooster found other trouble. The clergy were in
favour of the British régime. On January 6th, writing to Warner,
the commandant wrote: “The clergy refuse absolution to all who
have shown themselves our friends and preach damnation to all
those who will not take up arms against us.” Then there was
nothing but paper money, which had little value, seeing that
it might never be redeemed. At Quebec and Montreal men were
forced to serve congress, even when legally freed. Quarrels
between the military authorities such as that between Schuyler
and Wooster were not edifying to the Canadians, used to harmony
in government. A mutiny arose among the soldiers who refused to
go to serve at Quebec. Six ring leaders were flogged. On the
14th of January an ordinance of General Wooster appeared at the
church doors forbidding anyone speaking against congress under
penalty of being sent out of the province. It is to be owned
that orders were given for the soldiers to live peacefully and
honestly with their Canadian brethren, but in spite of this,
there were many individual abuses, at least. The people began to
feel that the strangers who came to them as suppliants to succour
them, ruled them with military law at times despotic. General
Lee gave an order to General Wooster which made the Montreal
merchants consider their trade injured; he was told “to suffer
the merchants of Montreal not to send any of their woolen cloths
out of the town.”

The loyalists were named _tories_ and Wooster became convinced
“of the great necessity of sending many of their leaders out
of the province,” and he would have sent Hertel de Rouville,
the Sulpician Montgolfier, and many others out of the way, and
it is said no less than forty sleds of indignant tories made
the journey to Albany.[1] Carleton, be it remembered, took a
long time before he requested Walker to leave the country. When
expostulated with by a number of citizens Wooster answered: “I
regard the whole of you as enemies and rascals.” He was unwise
enough to have the churches shut up on Christmas eve. Altogether
the reports, sent to Schuyler and others, indicated that there
was great confusion in Montreal and Canada. Soon it began to
appear as if nothing but terror was keeping the Canadians. A
plot was laid as early as January to overcome the garrison of
Montreal.[2] Secretly many were combining under the royal flag.

[Illustration: FROM THE COMMISSIONERS’ LETTER TO CONGRESS, MAY 1,
1776]

[Illustration: FROM THOMAS WALKER’S LETTER TO ADAMS, MAY 30, 1776]

[Illustration: POSTSCRIPT OF ARNOLD’S LETTER TO CLINTON, MAY 12,
1776]

[Illustration: FROM CARLETON’S LETTER TO GERMAIN, MAY 25, 1776]

[Illustration: FROM MONTGOMERY’S LETTER TO MONTREAL, NOVEMBER 12,
1775]

Meanwhile at Quebec, Carleton pursued Fabian tactics and would
not venture out into the open. He had seen this mistake made
by Wolfe, and he had not been his quarter-master-general for
nothing, so he waited for the ships from England to come, as
indeed they did, at last, on May 6th, the Surprise leading,
followed by the Isis and the Martin. The flight of the Americans
to Montreal soon began.

At Montreal exciting circumstances had occurred at the American
headquarters, the Château de Ramezay, which had been that of
Gage, Burton and other British commandants since it had ceased
being the seat of the East India Fur Company under the French
regime.

On April 26th its doors had opened to General John Thomas on
his arrival to take command of the army before Quebec, and
its council chamber had been the scene of hasty conference
with Arnold and other gentlemen. It was now to receive the
commissioners from congress, long asked for by Montgomery and
Schuyler, but only named and appointed on the 15th of February
by the resolution “that a committee of three (two of whom to be
members of congress) to be appointed to proceed to Canada, there
to pursue such instructions as shall be given them by congress.”
The instructions given later directed the commissioners to
represent to the Canadians in the strongest terms that it was
the earnest desire of congress to adopt them as a side colony
under the protection of the Union and to urge them to take a part
in the contest then on, that the people should be guaranteed
“the free and undisturbed exercise of their religion,” that the
clergy should have the full, perfect and peaceable possession
and enjoyment of all their estates and the entire ecclesiastical
administration beyond an assurance of full religious liberty
and civil privileges to every sect of Christians should be
left in the hands of the good people of that province and such
legislature as they should constitute. The commissioners started
from New York on April 2d. They were men of mark--the great
Benjamin Franklin, Samuel Chase of Maryland, and Charles Carroll,
of Carrollton, described by John Adams as a “gentleman of
independent fortune, perhaps the largest in America, one hundred
and fifty or two hundred thousand pounds sterling, educated in
some university in France, though a native of America, of great
abilities and learning, complete master of the French language,
a professor of the Roman Catholic religion, yet a warm, a firm,
a zealous supporter of the rights of America in whose cause he
has hazarded his all.” With the commissioners was adjoined John
Carroll, the brother of Charles. He was a clever ecclesiastic,
become through the suppression of the Society of Jesus, an
ex-Jesuit who was afterwards to become the first archbishop
of Baltimore. Much reliance was placed on his intermediary
overtures to the Canadian clergy. On their arrival at St. John’s
the commissioners felt their first check. They had carried no
hard cash with them. They were brought up at once against the
fundamental difficulty. In their letter to congress on May 1st
the commissioners wrote, “It is impossible to give you a just
idea of the lowness of continental credit here from the want
of hard money and the prejudice it is to our affairs. Not the
most trifling service can be purchased without an appearance
of instant pay in silver or gold. The express we sent from St.
John’s to inform the general of our arrival there and to request
carriages for La Prairie, had to wait at the ferry till a friend,
passing, changed a dollar for us into silver.” This friend, a
Mr. McCartney, had also to pay for the calèches for La Prairie or
they would have had to remain stranded.

They reached Montreal on April 27th and were received by Arnold
with some ostentation at the Château, where guests among the
French ladies were invited to meet them. That night after supper
the commissioners lodged in Thomas Walker’s house.

Walker’s house was that originally built by Bécancourt, which
became the depôt of the Compagnie des Indes. It passed finally
into the McGill family. It stood immediately west of the Château
de Ramezay. It was demolished in 1903.

With the commissioners there came about the same time the French
printer, Fleury Mesplet. He was brought, along with his printing
press, to spread campaign literature for the congress. His press
was soon installed in the basement of the Château. It had been
his press in Philadelphia from which the original proclamation
of 1775 to the Canadians originated. He became the first printer
of Montreal. The first book published by him is supposed to be
“Réglement de la Confrèrie de l’Adoration Perpetuelle du Saint
Sacrément et de la Bonne Mort, chez F. Mesplet et C. Berger,
1776.”[3] Another book bearing the same date, 1776, and published
by Mesplet at Montreal, is “Jonathan et David, ou le Triomphe de
L’Amitié,” tragedie en trois actes, representèe par les ecoliers
de Montréal, a Montréal chez Fleury Mesplet et C. Berger,
Imprimeurs et Libraires, 1776.

John Carroll early began to get in touch with the clergy, but he
found an impenetrable barrier--the clergy had nothing to gain
by swerving from their allegiance to England. What more than
the Quebec act could the provincials give them? They feared
the intolerance of the Americans. Had they not seen Wooster’s
conduct? They were now offering religious freedom, but the clergy
could not forget the letter addressed by congress to the British
people in 1774, after the Quebec act, containing this significant
sentence: “Nor can we suppress our astonishment that a British
parliament should ever consent to establish in that country a
religion that has deluged your island in blood and dispersed
impiety, bigotry, persecution, murder and rebellion through every
part of the world.”

The political arguments of the commissioners were of no avail,
either. The great Continental Congress was there before their
eyes, and the great Continental Congress was bankrupt. The paper
money was discredited. Not all Charles Carrol’s wealth was of
avail, unless it were in hard cash. An urgent request was sent to
Philadelphia to send £20,000 in specie. Only one-twelfth of this
could be promised.

There were other grievances, but most were from the non-payment
of money lent or furnished for supplies. On the commissioners
fell the superintendence of the army. This was no easy task, as
provisions were giving out. Smallpox was breaking out among the
soldiers. The commissioners were not trained to rule the army
and in the confused state of affairs they recognized the failure
of their mission. In their letter of May 17th to congress they
said: “The possession of this country must finally be settled
by the sword. We think our stay here no longer of service to the
publick * * * and we await with impatience the further orders of
the congress.”

[Illustration: FROM FRANKLIN’S LETTER TO CHASE AND CARROLL]

[Illustration: FROM CHASE AND CARROLL’S LETTER TO THOMAS]

[Illustration: JOHN CARROLL]

[Illustration: FRANKLIN MEMORIAL TABLET (ENGLAND)]

[Illustration: CHARLES CARROLL]

[Illustration: LETTER FROM CHASE AND CARROLL TO GENERAL WOOSTER]

[Illustration: CARROLL’S REPORT ON MRS. WALKER’S CONDUCT]

The commissioners in their first report from Montreal blamed
Wooster and declared him totally unfit for his command; the state
of Canada was desperate; everything was in confusion, there was
no discipline, the army unpaid, credit exhausted. “Such is our
extreme want of flour that we were obliged yesterday to seize
by force sixteen barrels to supply the garrison with bread. We
cannot find words to describe our miserable condition.”

To crown the difficulty of the commissioners, the news of the
Quebec disaster and flight reached their ears on the 9th of May.
“Every military plan and hope staggered under the shock. Montreal
became a stormy sea.” Dreading that one of the British frigates,
which were ascending the river but with an unfavourable wind,
would run up and cut them off, the commissioners began to prepare
to leave the city.

The state of Montreal after the news of Quebec, is well described
by Justin H. Smith in “Our Fight for the Fourteenth Colony,”
(Vol. II, page 374): “Montreal is listening eagerly for his drum
(Captain Young’s of St. Anne’s Fort).” Hazen had declared a month
before, “There is nothing but plotting and preparations making
against us throughout the whole district.” When it was proposed
to abandon the town after the news of the flight from Quebec
arrived, Arnold feared the people would attack his departing
troops. On all sides the tories whom Ripley had found very plenty
in March but mostly living like woodchucks underground, were now
showing noses and even feet. The commissioners, getting daily
intimations of plots hatching and insurrections intended, had
abandoned perforce the rôle of dispensing pure liberty, filled
the jails with malcontents and sent others into the exile they
had lately protested against, but these measures did not reach
the seat of the trouble. Night after night a rising was talked of
and expected; Lieutenant Colonel Vose would go round the barrack,
waken the men coming down with smallpox and make them dress
themselves and load their guns. “If they do take us it shall not
be for nothing,” he quietly said.

On the morning of May 17th Benjamin Franklin left, accompanied by
Mrs. Walker and Mrs. Price.[4] Next day he was joined by Father
Carroll and the party ascended Lake Champlain for New York.
Walker joined them later and both were left at Albany, “civilly
but coldly.” So he passes out of the history of Montreal.

The other commissioners, Carroll and Chase, left Montreal on May
29th for Chambly for a council of war; on the 31st they left St.
John’s; on the 2d of June they left for Crown Point, a distance
of 106 miles. Thus ended their unsuccessful mission.

How finally the congress troops were driven out of the country,
how the additional reinforcements arrived at Quebec on June 1st
under Burgoyne, is Canadian history beyond that of Montreal.
Suffice it to say that by June 17th things had become so hot in
Montreal for Arnold who saw that the junction of the Canadas with
the colonies was now at an end, that the evacuation commenced on
this day. In two hours, the sick, the baggage and the garrison,
reduced by this time to 300 men, embarked on eleven bateaux and
in two hours more a procession of carts, escorted by the troops,
set out from Longueuil for La Prairie.[5]

Wilkinson, who was Arnold’s aide-de-camp in Montreal, has placed
it on record “that among the property on the bateaux was the
merchandise obtained by Arnold in Montreal. It was transferred
to Albany and sold for Arnold’s benefit.” “This transaction is
notorious,” says Wilkinson (Volume I, page 58), “and excited
discontent and clamour in the army; yet it produced no regular
inquiry, although it hurt him in the esteem of every man of
honour and determined me to leave his family on the first proper
occasion.”


                             NOTE I

                    PRINCIPAL REBELS WHO FLED

That those of the French Canadians of the better class who sided
with the Bostonians were very few is evinced by a list sent by
Carleton to Lord George Germain on May 9, 1777. There is only one
French name mentioned and that is Pelissier, of Three Rivers,
who was a Frenchman from France. The list is referred to in
a postscript by Carleton as follows: “Enclosed your Lordship
will receive a list of principal leaders of sedition here. We
have still too many remaining amongst us that have the same
inclination, though they at present act with more caution and so
much subtlety as to avoid the punishment they justly deserve.”
The enclosure is headed “List of the principal persons settled in
the province who very zealously served the rebels in the winter
of 1775-1776 and fled upon their leaving it, the place they were
settled at, and the country are natives of as England, Scotland,
Ireland, America or France.”

At Quebec two Englishmen, two Scotchmen and seven Americans are
named. At Three Rivers, Pelissier, a Frenchman. At Montreal were
named:

  Thomas Walker                  E   Lived many years at Boston.
  Price                          A}  Great zealots, originally barbers.
  Heywood                        A}
  Edward Antill                  A  Lieutenant colonel and * * *
  Moses Hazen                    A  Half-pay lieutenant of the 44th.
                                      Colonel of the rebel army.

  Joseph Bendon or Bindon        E
  William Macarty or McCartney   A
  Joseph Tory and two brothers   A
  David Salisbury Franks         A
  Livingston and two brothers    A  The eldest, lieutenant colonel;
                                      second, major; and youngest, captain.
  John Blake                     A  Carried goods down to the colonies
                                      in winter and did not return. The
                                      first known to be a rank rebel.
  ---- Blakeley                  A


                             NOTE II

             DESCRIPTION OF DRESS OF AMERICAN RIFLES

Lossing’s Field Book--Vol. I, p. 195--thus describes the dress of
the invaders: “Each man of the three rifle companies (Morgan’s,
Smith’s and Hendrick’s) bore a rifle-barreled gun, a tomahawk or
small axe, and a long knife, usually called a scalping knife,
which served for all purposes in the woods. His underdress, by
no means in a military style, was covered by a deep ash-coloured
hunting shirt,--leggings and moccasins, if the latter could be
procured. It was a silly fashion of those times for riflemen
to ape the manners of the savages. The Canadians who first
saw these (men) emerge from the woods said they were vêtus en
toile--‘clothed in linen.’ The word ‘toile’ was changed to
‘tôle,’ iron plated. By a mistake of a single word the fears of
the people were greatly increased, for the news spread that the
mysterious army that descended from the wilderness was clad in
sheet-iron.

“The flag used by what was called the Continental troops, of
which the force led into Canada by Arnold and Montgomery was a
part, was of plain crimson, and perhaps sometimes it may have
had a border of black. On the 1st of January, 1776, the army was
organized and the new flag then adopted was first unfurled at
Cambridge at the headquarters of General Washington, the present
residence of the poet Longfellow.

“That flag was made up of thirteen stripes, seven red and six
white, but the Union was the Union of the British flag of that
day, blue bearing the Cross of St. Andrew combined with the Cross
of St. George and a diagonal red cross for Ireland. This design
was used by the American army till after the 14th of June, 1777,
when Congress ordered that the Union should be changed, the Union
of the English flag removed and in its place there should be a
simple blue field with thirteen white stars, representing the
thirteen colonies declared to be states.

“Since then there has been no change in the flag, except that a
star is added as each new state is admitted.”

                                              W.C. HOWELLS.[6]


FOOTNOTES:

[1] Among those banished by Wooster was St. Luc de la Corne. He
had been well treated under the British régime and was one of the
first legislative council formed by Carleton. He is reported to
have been a trimmer during the late troubles.

[2] One advantage in holding Montreal was that British supplies
and presents for the savages could not reach the interior that
way. Yet the Americans had little means of supplying the Indian
trade. To meet the difficulty, the commissioners, desirous of
being on good terms with the Indians up country, offered early
on their arrival, passports to all traders who would enter
into certain engagements to do nothing in the upper country
prejudicial to the continental interests.

[3] The first book published in Canada is believed to be
“Catéchisme du Diocèse de Sens Imprimé a Quebec, chez Brown et
Gilmour, 1765.” The latter were the proprietors of the Quebec
Gazette, the first journal, established on June 21, 1764. The
Gazette Littéraire appeared in French, June 3, 1778, and in
French and English.

[4] Mrs. Price, according to Franklin’s letter to the
commissioners, had three wagon-loads of baggage with her. The
Walkers “took such liberties in taunting at our conduct in Canada
that it almost came to a quarrel. I think they both have an
excellent talent in making themselves enemies and I believe even
here they will never be long without them.” (Franklin’s Works,
Vol. VIII, pp. 182-3.)

[5] On July 4, 1776, the American Congress adopted the
Declaration of Independence and in 1781, on July 9th, the
Articles of Confederation were ratified.

[6] Cf. Lemoine’s “Picturesque Quebec.”




                            CHAPTER X

                      THE ASSEMBLY AT LAST

                            1776-1791

                 THE CONSTITUTIONAL ACT OF 1791

  REOCCUPATION BY BRITISH--COURTS REESTABLISHED--CONGRESS’ SPECIAL
    OFFER TO CANADA--LAFAYETTE’S PROJECTED RAID--UNREST AGAIN--THE
    LOYALTY OF FRENCH CANADIANS AGAIN BEING TEMPTED--QUEBEC
    ACT PUT INTO FORCE--THE MERCHANTS BEGIN MEMORIALIZING FOR
    A REPEAL AND AN ASSEMBLY--HALDIMAND AND HUGH FINLAY OPPOSE
    ASSEMBLY--MEETINGS AND COUNTER MEETINGS--CIVIC AFFAIRS--THE
    ESTABLISHMENT OF A PROJECTED “CHAMBER OF COMMERCE”--THE FIRST
    NOTIONS OF MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS--THE MONTREAL CITIZENS’
    COMMITTEE REPORT--THE UNITED EMPIRE LOYALIST--THE DIVISION OF
    THE PROVINCE PROJECTED--THE CONSTITUTIONAL ACT OF 1791. NOTE:
    MONTREAL NAMES OF PETITIONERS IN 1784.


Montreal was again occupied by the British in the last week
of June.[1] Sir John Johnson arrived about this time with 200
followers. On June 28th Carleton held a meeting in the Jesuit
church of about three hundred Iroquois who offered their
services. The Caughnawagas, of whom some were present, were
blamed for their neutrality during the war. An arrangement was
entered into for the services of the Iroquois for a year. As the
ceremony ended the braves passed by Carleton, each one giving
him his hand. On July 18th Carleton, still in Montreal, received
a deputation of about one hundred and eighty Indians from the
west offering their active service to their great father, the
king of England, and to their father Carleton. They were received
graciously and sent away happy.

Before leaving, Carleton issued commissions for the creation of
judges in the districts of Montreal and Quebec; a court of appeal
was established and judges were given authority to examine into,
and report on, the damages suffered during the invasion of the
Congress troops.

On the 20th of July 4 the governor returned to Quebec to
reestablish the courts of justice and to restore the legislative
council to its functions. Mr. Fraser, who had been judge of the
Court of Common Pleas at Montreal since 1764 was at this time a
prisoner among the rebels. In the meantime Carleton, unable to
get on with Lord St. Germain, the secretary in England, resigned
his position on June 27th, but he did not leave the country till
June 27th of the following year, 1777, when he was replaced by
Haldimand.

Meanwhile Congress still eyed Canada with longing. On the 4th of
July the eleventh article of “confederation and perpetual union”
provided that Canadas acceding to the confederation and joining
in the measures of the Union “shall be admitted into and entitled
to all the advantages of this union, but no other colony shall be
admitted to the same unless such admission shall be agreed to by
nine states.” In 1793 another bill was introduced into the United
States Congress for the admission of Canada, as one or more of
the United States, whenever asked with the consent of Great
Britain.

During the year 1777 young Marquis de Lafayette, who had joined
the continental army and had become a major general, backed by
Silas Deane, Major General Horatio Gates and those who thought
they could use him as a Frenchman to promote the political views
of the congress in Canada, was appointed with an independent
command to make an inroad into Canada, Montreal being his
objective. He was to prevail upon the people to confederate with
the States, but there was not wanting opposition to ruin the
Canada expedition lest it should ruin Congress, among these being
Gouverneur Morris and Arnold. Finally the mortified Lafayette
was recalled to the “grand army.” But those who promoted him
on the grounds of using him and the affection of the French in
Canada for France, as a lever in the present situation were soon
rejoiced with an alliance with France. Lafayette’s projected
descent on Montreal had come to naught, but what could be
expected now that the news of an alliance between France and
America became known? The symptoms became evident of universal
unrest. Montreal, already in ferment, was further disturbed in
November by a proclamation to the Canadians which was spread
broadcast through the parishes and seems to have unsettled many
of the best minds as well as those of the hitherto disaffected,
but who were settling down to loyalty again. It came from the
Comte d’Estaing, who had sailed from Toulon in May, 1778, in
command of a French fleet of twelve ships of the line and six
frigates, to throw in their lot with the Americans. It was a
move long thought of secretly, perhaps long previously nurtured
in the circle of the seigneurs around Montreal. The longings
for the old régime, it had been thought, had died down. The
new appeal carried weight not for any love for Congress or
sense of injustice or tyranny evoked on the part of the English
government, but from the powerful reminiscences it awoke. It is
said that even the clergy wavered.

The proclamation was dated from the “Languedoc in the harbour of
Boston, October 28, 1778.” It opened with the statement that the
undersigned was authorized by His Majesty to offer assistance to
all who were born to taste the sweets of his government. “You
were born French. There is no other house so august as that of
Henry IV, under which the French can be happy and serve with
delight.” He did not need to appeal to the companions in arms of
M. le Marquis de Lévis, to those who had seen the brave Montcalm
fall in their defence. “Could such fight against their kinsmen?
At their names alone the arms should fall from their hands.” The
priests were promised particular protection and consideration
against temporal interests. He then argued that it were better
for a vast monarchy having the same religion, the same customs
and the same language to unite for commerce and wealth with their
powerful neighbours of the United States than with strangers
of another hemisphere who as jealous despots would doubtless,
sooner or later, treat them as a conquered race. “I will not
suggest to a whole people when it is gaining the right to think
and act, and understand its interest, that to link itself with
the United States is to seek its happiness; but I will declare,
as formally I do in the name of His Majesty who authorized and
commanded me so to act, that all the former subjects of North
America who will no longer recognize the supremacy of England may
count on His Majesty’s protection and support.”

[Illustration: DECLARATION ADRESSÉE AU NOM DU ROI A TOUS LES
ANCIENS FRANCOIS DE L’AMÉRIQUE SEPTENTRIONALE. Le soussigné
autorisé par Sa Majesté, & revetu par là, du plus beau des
Titres; de celui qui efface tous les autres: chargé au nom du
Pere de la Patrie & du Protecteur bienfaisant de ses sujets,
d’offrir un appui à ceux qui étoient nés pour goûter les douceurs
de son Gouvernement; à tous ses Compatriotes de l’Amérique
Septentrionale. Vous êtes nés François, vous n’avez pû cesser
de l’être: une Guerre qui ne nous avoit été annoncée que par
l’enlévement de presque tous nos Matelots, & dont nos ennemis
communs n’ont dû les principaux succès qu’aux courage, au
talent, & au nombre des Braves Américains qui les combattent
aujourdhui, vous a arraché, ce qui est le plus cher à tous les
hommes, jusqu’au nom de votre patrie; vous forcer à porter
malgré vous des mains parricides contra elle, seroit le comble
des malheurs, vous en êtes ménacés: une nouvelle Guerre doit
vous faire redouter qu’on ne vous oblige à subit cette loi
la plus révoltante de l’esclavage: cette Guerre à commence
comme la précédente, par les dépradations de la partie le plus
intéressante de notre commerce. Les prisons de l’Amérique
contiennent depuis trop longtems un grand nombre de François
infortunés; vous entendez leurs gemissemens. Cette Guerre à été
déclarée par le message du mois de Mars dernier, par l’Acte le
plus authentique de la Souveraineté ADDRESS TO THE ANCIENT FRENCH
OF NORTH AMERICA]

[Illustration: WILLIAM PITT]

[Illustration: MARQUIS DE LAFAYETTE]

This proclamation which said ten words for France and one for
Congress, did not please even the leaders of the Revolution.
Washington viewed it with suspicion for he suspected it meant
eventual separation with the advantage all for the French. In
Canada it was most successful. It played adroitly upon the hopes,
ambitions, pride, vanity, race instincts and dearest memories, so
that Haldimand noted in 1779 “a very visible alteration amongst
all ranks of men.” This alteration continued for some time for
Haldimand wrote later: “I have for many months observed in the
Canadian gentry expectations of a revolution.”

The war of 1775 had delayed the putting into force of the Quebec
act of 1774. In 1777 the work of readjustment took place. But
on the 2d of April, 1778, the merchants of Quebec and Montreal,
through a committee of them then in London, returned to the
charge of petitioning Lord George Germain for the repeal of
the Quebec act. They again demanded trial by juries and the
commercial laws of England. They claimed that the Quebec act
reintroduced the feudal system and in consequence the system
of forced corvées and other compulsory services without any
emoluments whatever during the war; hence discontent and
dissatisfaction with His Majesty’s government had crept up. For
these reasons the memorialists “humbly entreat Your Lordship to
take into consideration the dangerous and confused situation
of this colony and grant us your Patronage and assistance in
endeavoring to obtain a repeal of the Quebec Act, the source
of these Grievances, and an establishment in its stead of a
free Government by an assembly or Representation of the People
agreeable to His Majesty’s Royal Promise contained in the
proclamation made in the year 1763.”

Haldimand in 1780, after an experience of upwards of two years in
the country, wrote to Germain a direct negative. “It Requires
but Little Penetration to Discover that had the System of
Government Solicited by the Old subjects been adopted in Canada
this colony would in 1775 have become one of the United States
of America. * * * On the other hand the Quebec Act alone has
prevented, or can in any Degree prevent, the Emissaries of France
from succeeding in their Efforts to withdraw the Canadian Clergy
and Noblesse from their allegiance to the Crown of Great Britain.
For this reason among many others this is not the time for
innovations and it cannot be Sufficiently inculcated on the part
of Government that the Quebec Act is a Sacred Charter granted by
the king and Parliament to the Canadians as a Security for their
Religion, Laws and property. * * * The clamour about the trial by
juries and Civil Causes is calculated for the Meridian in London;
in Canada Moderate and upright Men are convinced of the abuses
to which that institution is liable in a Small Community where
the jurors may be all Traders and very frequently either directly
or indirectly connected with the Parties. * * * Be assured, My
Lord, that however good the institution of Juries may be found
in England, the People of this Country have a great aversion to
them.”

On September 2d the definitive treaty of peace and friendship
between His Britannic Majesty and the United States of America
was signed at Paris. As soon as this was known the British
population at Montreal with that of Quebec again began agitating
for a change in the constitution. Their numerical strength was
little, but their activity great. Four years later Mr. Hugh
Finlay, postmaster general and member of the council, writing on
October 2, 1784, to Sir Evan Nepean criticizing the agitation for
an assembly says: “The advocates for a House of Assembly in this
Province take it for granted that the people in general wish to
be represented; but that is only a guess for I will venture to
affirm that not a Canadian landowner in fifty ever once thought
on the Subject and were it proposed to him he would readily
declare his incapacity to Judge of the Matter. Although the
Canadian Peasants are far from being a stupid race they are at
present an ignorant people from want of instruction; not a man in
500 among them can read. The Females in this Country have a great
advantage over the males in point of Education. * * * Before we
think of a house of Assembly for this country let us lay the
Foundation for useful Knowledge to fit the people to Judge of
their Situation and deliberate for the future wellbeing of the
Province. The first step towards this desirable End is to have
a free School in every Parish. Let the schoolmasters be English
if we would make Englishmen of the Canadians; let the Masters be
Roman Catholic if it is necessary, for perhaps the people at the
instigation of their Priests would not put their children under
the tuition of a Protestant.”

The English population of Quebec and Montreal did not think
with Finlay, for two days later, on November 24th, at Quebec,
they presented a petition for a House of Assembly outlining a
definite plan which they had never done before, having always
left it to his Majesty’s pleasure. It was the most numerously
signed document as yet appearing, bearing over two hundred and
thirty-three Quebec names, with, about eighteen of Three Rivers
and two hundred-forty-six in Montreal.

On November 30th, a counter meeting was held in a convent of
the Recollects and the objections of the French Canadians to
the petition above were registered, at the same time an address
was drawn up to the king briefly stating that the House of
Assembly “is not the unanimous wish nor the general Desire of
your Canadian People who through Poverty and the misfortunes of
a recent war of which this colony has been the Theatre are not
in condition to bear the Taxes which must necessarily ensue and
that in many respects the petition for it appears contrary to and
inconsistent with the wellbeing of the New Catholic Subjects of
Your Majesty.” On the 25th of February next, 1785, the seigneurs
and leading men were authorized at meetings held in the parishes
to sign a petition against any change as advocated by the
petition of 1784.

While the constitutional struggle is going on and preparations
are being made for the drafting of some inevitable amendments
to the Quebec act, we may now turn to an important move being
agitated to promote a larger sense of civic progress and
municipal freedom. The history of the future municipality of
Montreal may now be said to be in its conceptional stage.

In November of 1786 the merchants and citizens of Montreal,
Quebec and Three Rivers were taken into consideration by a
committee of the Council of Legislature who asked them to give
their views on the state of the external and internal commerce
and the police of the province. The Montreal names given in the
invitation are: Neven Sylvestre, E.W. Gray, St. George Dupré,
James McGill, Pierre Guy, James Finlay, J.S. Goddard, Pierre
Messiere, Pierre Fortier, Hertel de Rouville, John Campbell,
Edward Southouse, Alexander Fraser, Jacques Le Moyne, Benj.
Frobisher, Stephen de Lancey, Esq., and Messrs. Jacob Jordan,
Isaac Todd, Forsyth J. Blondeau, P. Perinault, Richard Dobie,
F. Chaboillez, McBeth and William Pollard, merchants. These
who appreciated the courtesy of being taken into consideration
thought it their duty to “call in and collect the general voice
of our citizens without delay.” “The report of the Merchants
of Montreal by their Committee to the Honorable Committee of
Council on Commercial Affairs and Police” subsequently appeared
dated Montreal, 23d January, 1787, and contained observations
on various points: e. g., “the establishment of a chamber of
commerce duly incorporated.”

This had been already promoted in Quebec ten years previously
and a plan presented on April 3, 1777. The object of this Quebec
plan, according to Shortt and Doughty (Constitutional Documents)
was to avoid bringing commercial matters into the regular courts
where under the Quebec act the French and not the English civil
law was made the basis of decision. The virtual effect of this
plan, had it been authorized, would have been to set up a
legislative, executive and judicial system within the Province
to govern the trade relations of the members of the Chamber;
and this in time must have involved the trade of others dealing
with them. The observation of the Montreal committee on this is:
“However beneficial to Trade and Commerce, Institutions of this
nature be considered, yet we are of opinion that the same would
prove ineffectual and inexpedient at this time; considering the
connection that subsists more or less among the Trading People of
this Place.” Observations were also returned on “Holding tenures
and the abolition of Circuits,” “The present establishment of
Appeals in Commercial Causes,” “The establishment of a Court of
Chancery” on “a register of all deeds,” on a “Bankrupt Law,” and
on the subject of Police in city administration in general.

There also were a number of important observations made of a
historical value. The first to be quoted heralds the idea of a
charter of corporation for Montreal. The question had also been
put for Quebec: “Whether or not we should apply for a charter,
incorporating a select number of citizens on some good and
Improved Plan with Powers to make By-laws, deeds, Civil and
Criminal Causes under certain restrictions, whether under the
stile and Title of Recorder, Mayor, Aldermen and Common Council
of the City and County of Quebec and the Precincts and Liberties
thereof or under any other Denomination,”--and similarly for
a like charter for Montreal. The observation of the Montreal
Committee was as follows:

“The bad state of the Police of this Town calls loudly for Reform
and tho’ Government in its Wisdom has attended thereto by the
Appointment of an Inspector of Police, yet we are sorry that the
Appointment has in no wise proven adequate to the Intent, and
by Experience we find that the exertions of the Magistrates are
not sufficient to remedy the Evil complained of. We beg leave
to point out as the only remedy that can be applied with Effect
the incorporating by Charter, of a select number of the Citizens
of Montreal on a good and approved Plan with such Powers and
privileges as are usually granted to Corporations for the purpose
of Police only. And we further beg to request that in case the
Honorable Council should approve of this move and Government
inclined to grant the same, That it be recommended to His
Excellency, Lord Dorchester, to bestow on the Corporations such
lots of Ground and Houses, the Property of the Crown, within the
Town and Suburbs of Montreal as Government has no present use for
in order to the same being applied towards the Erecting Schools,
workhouses and other Establishments of Public Utility.”

Other observations followed on the necessity of regulations to
reduce the number of liquor licenses for public houses, and for
the avoidance of fires, to enact that no wooden fence or building
of wood of what description soever be erected in the town of
Montreal in future under a severe penalty.

But the idea of a Municipal Corporation though now sown was not
to fructify till many years later. In the meantime the civic
government by justices of the peace or magistrates obtained as
before.

We must now return to the final stages of the Constitutional
struggle for an Assembly. An important factor has now entered
into the political aspect of the province, namely the advent of
the United Empire Loyalists, now beginning to leave the United
States for a wider freedom to settle on the lands above Montreal,
as were also the disbanded troops, a move which did much more
than anything else to promote the movement for an assembly, and
to point the direction in which the amendments to the Quebec act
must follow.

On April 11, 1786, Sir John Johnson, then in London, presented a
petition from the officers of the disbanded troops praying for a
change in the tenure of land. They prayed for the establishment
of a district from Point au Baudet upwards, distinct from the
province of Quebec, in which they prayed that “the blessings of
the British laws and of the British government and an exemption
from the French tenures,” might be extended to them. There is no
doubt, as Lord Dorchester[2] remarked in his letter of June 13,
1787, that the English party had gained strength by the arrival
of the loyalists and the desire for an Assembly would no doubt
increase.

At this time the movement for dividing the country into an upper
and lower province began. It was thought premature by Dorchester.
But the act of 1791 thought otherwise. By February 9, 1789,
according to the letter of Hugh Finlay, “the great question
whether a House of Assembly would contribute to the welfare of
this Province in its present state has been so fully discussed
that the subject is entirely exhausted; both old and New Subjects
here who have openly declared their sentiments now Composedly
await the decision of the British Parliament with respect to
Canadian affairs.”

In the Montreal district the seigneurs held their old position
while the merchants never budged from their original demand in
general for an assembly though their plans had been greatly
modified. The next two years were spent in preparing drafts
for the Constitutional act which was passed in 1791 under the
title of “An act to repeal certain Parts of an Act” passed in
the Fourteenth Year of His Majesty’s Reign entitled “an Act
for making more effectual Provision for the Government of the
Province of Quebec in North America and to make further Provision
for the Government of the said Province.”

Owing to the uncertainty of the maintenance of peace with Spain
in 1789, the Canada act was not introduced into parliament until
1790. On the 7th of March, 1791, Pitt introduced the bill to
divide Canada into two provinces. The bill became a law on the
14th of May, 1791. It divided Canada into two parts, Lower and
Upper; each province was to have an executive council appointed
by the crown, Lower Canada to have no less than fifteen members
and Upper Canada no fewer than seven; each was to have a
legislative assembly, the members for Lower Canada to be no less
than fifty and those for Upper Canada to be no less than sixteen.

The long struggle of the Merchants of Montreal for an assembly
was at last ended.


                              NOTE

 MONTREAL NAMES ATTACHED TO THE PETITION FOR AN ASSEMBLY. DATED
                        NOVEMBER 24, 1784

 These are given as an indication of the national origins of the
                   citizens of the period.[3]

  Jacob Jordan,
  James McGill,
  James Finlay,
  Benj^n Frobisher,
  Nicholas Bayard,
  William Kay,
  Alex^r  Henry,
  J. Blackwood,
  Geo. McBeath,
  Jn^o Askwith,
  William Allen,
  Joseph Frobisher,
  Hugh Ross,
  Angus Cameron,
  Alexander Hay,
  Charles Paterson,
  Sam^l Birnie
  James Dyer White
  J. McKinnsy,
  Jacob Ruhn,
  Fran Winton,
  John Forsyth,
  John Franks,
  William Harkness,
  Wm. Griffin,
  Rosseter Hoyle,
  Robert Griffin,
  Abraham Hart,
  Samuel Gerrard,
  Colin Hamilton,
  Laurence Taaffe,
  W^m H^y McNeill,
  Charles Smyth,
  Angus Macdonald,
  John Smith,
  Da^d Lukin,
  James Cameron,
  G. Young,
  Felix Graham,
  John Gregory,
  J. Grant,
  David McCrae,
  John Lilly,
  Geo. Selby,
  W. Maitland,
  James Caldwell,
  R. Sym,
  Robert Jones,
  William Taylor,
  F. Bleakley,
  Jno. Bell,
  Alexander Campbell,
  I.R. Symes,
  Rob^t McGrigor,
  James Laing,
  R. Gruet,
  David Davis,
  John Russell,
  Thomas Sullivan,
  Rich^d Dowie,
  (Oliver Church, Late Lieu^t 2d B.K.R.R. New York),
  John Dusenberg, Ens^n Late Royal Rangers,
  samuel Burch,
  Levai Michaels,
  Henry J. Jessup,
  Isaac H^t Abrams,
  Isaac Hall,
  John Campbell,
  Donald Fisher,
  Jos. Forsyth,
  (H. Spencer, Lieu^t late 2d B.K.R.R., New York),
  Rich^d Pollard,
  John Grant,
  John McKindlay,
  W^m Packer,
  John McGill,
  Fra^s Badgley,
  Peter Pond,
  Tho^s Burn,
  Dav^d Alex^r Grant,
  Alex^r Fraser,
  Thomas Frobisher,
  John Ogilvy,
  Andrew Todd,
  Thomas Corry,
  Wal^r Mason,
  Gor. Moore,
  R.J. Wilkinson,
  James Noel,
  R. Cruickshank,
  John Rowland,
  E. Edwards,
  Thomas Forsyth,
  D. Sutherland,
  James Grant,
  Allan Paterson,
  John Ross,
  Levy Solomons,
  Levy Solomon, Jun^r,
  John Turner and Sons,
  Uriah Judah,
  Ch^y Cramer,
  Alex^r Henry,
  Adam scott,
  Alex^r Mabbut,
  Jonas schindler,
  William Hunter,
  Alex^r Walmsley,
  Henry Edge,
  Allex^r Martin,
  James McNabb,
  James Ruott,
  Thomas McMurray,
  Isaac Judah,
  Sam^l Judah,
  Laurence Costille,
  Saint Louis,
  Henry Campbell,
  John Bethune,
  Nom^d MacLeod,
  James MacKenzie,
  W^m Murray,
  James Finlay, Jun^r,
  J. Symington,
  J. Pangman,
  John Tobias Deluc,
  Cuthbert Grant,
  Robert Grant,
  Tho^s Nadenhuvet,
  James Foulis,
  William Bruce,
  John Macnamara,
  Daniel Sullivan,
  Finlay Fisher,
  John Stewart,
  David Mackenzie,
  Joseph Anderson,
  Paul Heck,
  Robert Thomson,
  Samuel Heck,
  Alex^r Milmine,
  Robert Smith,
  William Smith,
  Jacob Tyler,
  Char^s Grimesley,
  W^m Grimesley,
  Charles Lilly,
  Duncan Fisher,
  John Ridley,
  Alex^r Campbell,
  John Milroy,
  Joseph Hamly,
  Sam^l White,
  Sam^l Douney,
  C. Rolffs,
  W^m Hall,
  Geo. McDougall,
  Robert Lindsay,
  Ja^s Robertson,
  Tho^s Breckenridge,
  John Foulis,
  Francis Crooks,
  Geo. Edw. Young,
  George Aird,
  Joseph Provan,
  Simon McTavish,
  John Lawrence,
  Sam^l Embury,
  S. Anderson,
  Dan^l Daly,
  Rich^d Whitehouse,
  James Fraser,
  Rich^d Whitehouse,
  James Fraser,
  Alexander fraser,
  Rich^d Whitehouse,
  Levi Willard,
  Joseph Johnson,
  M. Cuthell,
  James Leaver,
  Tobias Burke,
  Rob^t McGinnis,
  Rich^d McGinnis,
  John Hicks,
  George Hicks,
  Stephen Milers,
  William Tilby,
  James Perry,
  Edward Corry,
  Stephen Waddin,
  Peter Smith,
  Owen Bowen,
  Peter Grant,
  J^s Chaorles,
  James Fairbairn,
  John Hughes,
  Ranald McDonald,
  Watkin Richard,
  jenbaptiste Lafrenay,
  Thomas Sare,
  And^w Cockburn,
  Tho^s Isbusther,
  Joseph Landrey,
  Robert Withers,
  David Ross,
  Abram. Holmes,
  William Fraser,
  William Hassell,
  David Ray,
  Thomas Busby, Sen^r,
  Thomas Busby, Jun^r,
  William England,
  Conrad Marsteller,
  William Creighton,
  Hugh Holmes,
  Jervis George Turner,
  R^d Warffe,
  James Nelson,
  Philip Cambell,
  Duncan Cumins,
  Henry Gonnerman,
  Firedrick Gonnerman,
  John Maxwell,
  Tho^s Little,
  Christ^r Long,
  Edward Gross,
  Nicholas Stoneman,
  Jn^o Daly,
  Tho^s Oakes,
  John Grant,
  Will^m Wintrope,
  Joel Andras,
  Thomas Fraser,
  Jn^o Lumsden,
  William Holmes,
  Nicholas Montour,
  Patrick Small,
  David Rankin,
  (Richard Duncan, Late Capn. Royl. Yorkers),
  Dunc^n Cameron,
  And^w Wilson,
  Donald McFonell,
  Angus McDonald,
  Ed. Umfreville,
  John Lockhart Wiseman,

                        (Parchment Copy)
             endorsed: In L^t Gov^r Hamilton’s N^o 2
                        of 9 Jan., 1785.


FOOTNOTES:

[1] Montreal was occupied by General Phillips with the artillery
including a company of the Hesse Hanon and the Twenty-ninth
Regiment. McLeans’ Regiment and that of Sir John Johnson were
quartered on the island and the Ninth Regiment at Ile Jésus.

[2] Sir Guy Carleton returned to Quebec as the Earl of Dorchester
on August 23, 1786.

[3] A special chapter on National origins will be found in Part
II of this volume.




                           CHAPTER XI

                   THE FUR TRADERS OF MONTREAL

                  THE GREAT NORTH WEST COMPANY

  MERCHANTS--NATIONAL AND RELIGIOUS ORIGINS--UP COUNTRY
    TRADE--EARLY NORTH WEST COMPANY--CHARLES GRANT’S
    REPORT--PASSES--MEMORIALS--GEOGRAPHICAL DISCOVERIES--RIVAL
    COMPANIES--THE X.Y. COMPANY--JOHN JACOB ASTOR’S
    COMPANIES--ASTORIA TO BE FOUNDED--THE JOURNEY OF THE MONTREAL
    CONTINGENT--ASTORIA A FAILURE--THE GREAT RIVAL--THE HUDSON’S
    BAY COMPANY--SIR ALEXANDER SELKIRK--THE AMALGAMATION OF THE
    NORTH WEST AND HUDSON’S BAY COMPANIES IN 1821--THE BEAVER CLUB.


After the inefficient and unstable set of trade adventurers,
sutlers and purveyors for the army who came in upon the heels
of Amherst’s conquering band had been sifted, there remained a
strong nucleus of substantial business men, whose connections
were good in credit and in business methods, and who founded the
basis of Montreal’s future mercantile success. We get an idea of
the national origins or religion of some of the early settlers
from the censuses prepared by government for jury service.
In the last of 1765 there are 136 Protestant names and their
birthplace, former occupation and present calling are given. Of
these thirty-seven were from Ireland (mostly soldiers who became
inn-keepers), thirty from England, twenty-six from Scotland,
thirteen from New England, sixteen from Germany, six from
Switzerland and one each from France, Canada, Lapland, Italy and
Guernsey. The origin of three is undetermined.

The earliest merchants, as we have seen, were scored by Murray
and afterwards by Carleton. The records of the “military courts”
from 1760 to 1763 show that there was some cause for it. Yet it
is pleasing to hear Murray writing as early as December, 1760,
confess as follows: “I flatter myself you will pardon the liberty
I take in troubling you with the enclosed (petition); it regards
a set of men who have been very serviceable to His Majesty’s
troops, who have run many risks and who have been induced to pour
in their merchandise here for a laudable prospect of promoting
trade at the invitation of Mr. Amherst, the commander in chief.”

Howard, Chinn and Bostwick was probably the first British firm
in Montreal. Chinn became the deputy provost marshal and got
the licenses from Quebec; he also himself traded up country.
Joseph Howard shortly severed his connection with the firm and
established himself successfully on St. Paul street. William
Bostwick was a hatter but, hats not being in much demand, he
joined the Indian trade.

Jew merchants early settled here; the earliest firm was probably
that of the Levy Brothers, Solomon, Eleazer, Gershom and Simon.
Gershom came with the soldiers, Eleazer in 1763, and the other
two were already settled here by this date. The firm of Ezekiel
Solomon & Company was established in 1764. Tobias Isenhout was
a German sutler who prospered in the Indian trade, but was
murdered in 1771 or 1772 on a business trip by Michel Dué, his
French clerk, who was subsequently hanged under the mutiny act.
The Honourable Conrad Gugy, a Swiss, settled in the Montreal
district and became a legislative councillor. He died in April,
1786, and was buried in the Dorchester street cemetery. Lawrence
Ermantinger arrived in 1762 and became a prosperous merchant.
His name appears on many of the petitions sent from Montreal.
Benjamin Price was another legislative councillor, coming to
Canada in 1762 and died in 1768. James Price, of Price & Haywood,
was from New England, as was his partner. James Price it was who
abetted Ethan Allen in his march on Montreal. The name of Thomas
Walker, another merchant, enters largely into Montreal history,
as we have seen. James Finlay came to Montreal in 1762; he was
the first of the Englishmen to reach the upper Saskatchewan,
wintering at Nipawi House in 1771-2. He was one of those who
established the first Protestant school in the city; one of the
founders of the first Presbyterian church and one of the signers
of the capitulation to Montgomery in 1775. Alexander Henry came
to Montreal with the troops and became a great explorer in
the Indian trade. One of his spells up country lasted fifteen
years. He was one of the founders of the North West Company. In
1796 he retired from the Indian trade and lived to the age of
eighty-four, dying in Montreal on April 4, 1824. The prosperous
city merchants, McGill Brothers, John, James and Andrew, were
all settled by 1774. The firm of McTavish, Frobisher & Company
stands out as the actual founders of the North West Company, the
rivals of the Great Company. Of the Frobisher Brothers, Benjamin
seems to have settled first, before 1765. He died in 1787; Joseph
retired from business in 1798; Thomas died ten years earlier at
the age of forty-four. Simon McTavish came after the others.

The professions were not well represented by the English at
this time. Dr. Daniel Robertson, a retired lieutenant from the
forty-second regiment, practiced medicine in the city after the
conquest and there was a Doctor Huntly. Edward Antill was the
only English lawyer, moving here from New England in 1770. The
first Protestant school master was an Irishman, John Pullman,
brought from New York in 1773. The first Protestant divine was a
Swiss, the Reverend Dr. Chatrand Delisle, who came in 1766. In
striking contrast with latter-day practice, this clergyman’s name
heads the list of the supporters of practically all applicants
for liquor licenses in the city in his time.

The traders who left Montreal for the distant posts had no
license office in the city. Recourse had to be made to Quebec,
and the delay was annoying, although, no doubt, Edward Chinn,
who was the deputy provost marshal, did his best for his fellow
Montreal merchants. The value of the cargoes taken on the
up-country ventures averaged about five hundred pounds, and their
destinations, recorded on the passes, were mostly Oswegatchie,
LaBarge, Niagara, Detroit, Michillimackinac and the Grand
Portage on Lake Superior. The canoe men were voyageurs from
Montreal and the district.

[Illustration: THE HON. JAMES McGILL A prosperous Montreal
merchant, the founder of McGill University. He was born in
Glasgow, October 6, 1744, and died at Montreal, December 18,
1813.]

The following gives some idea of their ventures:

Monday, April 26, 1771, pass for Edward Chinn’s men--seven
men--£550 merchandise, ten fusils, 500 pounds gunpowder, 350
pounds shot and ball.

No. 10--Ezekial Solomon (April 10, 1772)--two canoes to
Michillimackinac, value £800; twenty men (La Prairie); 1,400
pounds shot and ball.

No. 21--Benj. and Jos. Frobisher--3 canoes for Grand Portage;
merchandise £2,000, fusils 96, powder, 2,000 pounds, shot, etc.,
1,300 pounds; liquor, 260 gals.; men, 28.

No. 10--Jas. and John McGill (March 10, 1773)--3 canoes; value
about £1,500; 48 guns, etc.; 23 men.

No. 65--James Morrison--1 small bateau, Niagara (July 17,
1775)--4 men; 22 bales mdse.; 1 quarter cask wine; 1 bbl. loaf
sugar; 1 bbl. coffee; 1 bbl. salt; 1 bbl. tea; 1 nest brass
kettles.

In the beginning the merchants themselves would join the party;
later, becoming richer, they entrusted it to an agent. On the
return they brought down the pelts to Montreal, whence they were
transferred by river sloops to Quebec for London, with which
there was a close connection. The “Mdse.” carried was for Indian
trade and contained scalping knives, hatchets, paints, blankets,
hosiery, beads, etc.

We have spoken of the Montreal merchants after the capitulation
of the city engaging in the fur trade.[1] As early as 1765 yearly
attempts were made by the first adventurers to trade with the
northwest beyond Michillimackinac, but with little success. In
1768 other adventurers joined, but in 1769 Benjamin and Joseph
Frobisher formed a connection with Messrs. Todd and McGill.
Gradually others were added. At first their canoes had difficulty
in getting beyond Lake La Pluye, for the natives plundered their
goods, but later they reached Lake Bourbon. This encouraged the
traders to persevere and by 1774 new ports were discovered,
hitherto unknown to the French. New adventurers followed in
their wake, independently, and, without regard to the management
of the Indians and the common good of the trade, soon caused
disorder, so that many of the substantial traders retired, there
only remaining at the latter end of 1782 twelve who persevered.
These, convinced by long experience of the advantage that would
arise from a general connection, not only calculated to secure
and promote their mutual interests but also to guard against any
encroachments of the United States on the line of boundary as
ceded them by treaty from Lake Superior to Lake du Bois, entered
upon and concluded articles of agreement under the title of the
North West Company, dividing it into sixteen shares. These were
arranged as follows: Todd & McGill, two shares; Benjamin and
Joseph Frobisher, two shares; McGill & Paterson, two shares;
McTavish & Company, two shares; Holmes & Grant, two shares;
Walker & Company, two shares; McBeath & Company, two shares;
Ross & Company, one share; Oakes & Company, one share. The above
seemed to have been bound together about 1779, but the North
West Company, as such, seems to date from about 1782 and for a
“term of five years” as first promoted. (Benjamin Frobisher to
Doctor McBane, April 1, 1784.)

The story of the North West Company founded at Montreal must now
be told. The war of 1775-6 had sadly interfered with the trade of
Montreal with the Indians up country. Haldimand set to work to
help the traders to rebuild it. A report of April 24, 1780, of
Charles Grant, one of the members of the North West Company, to
Haldimand, reveals the enterprise of the founders of Montreal’s
commercial prosperity, thus, that “at all times the trades of
the upper countries had been considered the staple trade in this
Province but of late years it has been greatly increased, in
so much that it may be reckoned one year with another to have
produced an annual return to Great Britain in Furrs to the amount
of £200,000 sterling, which is an object deserving of all the
encouragement and protection which Government can with propriety
give to that trade. The Indian Trade by every communication is
carried on at a great expense, labour and risk of both men and
property; every year furnishes instances of the loss of men and
goods by accident and otherwise; indeed few of them are able
to purchase with ready money such goods as they want for their
trade. They are consequently indebted from year to year until a
return is made in Furrs to the merchants of Quebec and Montreal
who are importers of goods from England and furnish them on
credit. In this manner the Upper Country Trade is chiefly carried
on by men of low circumstances, destitute of every means to pay
their debts when their trade fails; and if it should be under
great restraints or obstructed a few years the consequences will
prove ruinous to the commercial party of this Province and very
hurtful to the merchants of London, shippers of goods to this
country, besides the loss of so valuable branch of trade in
Great Britain. In these troublesome times the least stop to the
Indian Trade might be very productive of very bad effects, even
among the savages who are at present our friends or neuter, who
on seeing no supply of goods would immediately change sides and
join the enemies of the Government under pretense that the rebels
had got the better of us and that we had not it in our power to
supply them any more. All the property in the Upper Countries
in such a case would become an easy prey to their resentment;
and the lives of all of His Majesty’s Subjects doing business in
these Countries at the time of a rupture of this nature might
probably fall a sacrifice to the fury and rage of disappointed,
uncivilized barbarians.”

He then gives an insight into the value of each canoe load: “I am
informed that of late years, from ninety to one hundred canoes
have annually been employed in the Indian Trade from Montreal
by the communications of the Great River to Michillimackinac,
Lakes Huron and Michigan, LaBarge, and the North West. * * * In
this I shall insert the average value of a canoe load of goods
at the time of departure from Montreal, Michillimackinac and
at the Grand Portage. * * * A canoe load of goods is reckoned
at Montreal worth in dry goods to the amount of £300, first
sterling cost in England, with fifty per cent charges thereon
makes £150; besides that every canoe carries about 200 gallons
of rum and wine which I suppose worth £50 more, so that every
canoe on departure from that place may be said worth £500,
currency of this Province. The charges of all sorts included
together from Montreal to Michillimackinac, £160, and from
thence to the Grand Portage, £90; so it appears that each canoe
at Michillimackinac is worth £660, currency; every canoe is
navigated by eight men for the purpose of transporting the goods
only and when men go up to winter they commonly carry ten.”

[Illustration: From a sketch by R.G. Mathews, Esq. FIRST
RESIDENCE AND STORE OF THE HON. JAMES McGILL]

The report ends with an appeal for the early issue of passes.
For “last year the passes were given out so late that it was
impossible to forward goods to the places of destination,
especially in the North West. Considering the great number of
people in this province immediately interested in the Indian
Trade it is hardly possible to suppose but there may be among
them some disaffected men, but the major part of them I sincerely
believe are sure friends to Government and it would be hard the
whole community should suffer for the sake of a few bad men since
regulations and laws are or may be made sufficiently severe to
prevent in a great measure, or altogether, every effort that
may be made to convey goods to the enemy and if any person,
whatever, should attempt to ignore or violate such regulations
as are made for the safety of the whole, the law ought to be put
into execution against him with the utmost rigour on conviction
of guilt and the offender never should be forgiven offences
committed against the publick in general.” From which we may
learn that our justly honoured pioneer Montreal merchants were
law-abiding citizens and were not among the rebels of 1775-6.

This letter was followed by a memorial from the North West
traders on May 11, 1780, asking for no let or hindrance to the
departure of the canoes. The additional names of Adam Lymburner
and J. Porteous appear adjoined to this.

On October 4, 1784, Benjamin and Joseph Frobisher, the directors
of the North West Company, memorialized General Haldimand,
praying him to recommend to His Majesty’s ministers to grant to
the North West Company an exclusive privilege of trade from Lake
Superior to that country for ten years only as a reward “for
discovering a new passage to the River Ouinipigue and thereby
effectively securing to this Province the Furr trade to the
North West. And in consideration, also, of exploring at their
own expense between the latitudes of 55 and 65, all that Tract
of Country west of Hudson’s Bay to the North Pacific Ocean and
communicating to Government such surveys and other information
respecting that Country as it may be in their power to obtain.”

Mr. Peter Pond, one of the company, in memorializing Governor
Hamilton on the 18th of April in the following year, begs him to
recommend the memorial, already mentioned, of the Frobishers “as
a plan which will be productive of Great National advantages” and
the ten years’ exclusive monopoly as “only a reward for the toil
and expense of such an arduous and public Spirited Enterprise.”

This company gained in strength. While its headquarters were in
Montreal, it had “wintering” partners in the interior posts.
Fort William became the meeting ground of the partners who were
merchant princes of the period for the annual meetings which are
described by Washington Irving in “Astoria” as marked with great
splendour. It provided serious competition for the Hudson’s Bay
Company. The policy of the latter had been only to trade in the
winter with the natives, thus making a close season in summer.
Their posts were at first all on the coast, but the competition
forced them also to seek interior quarters. The contributions
to our geographical knowledge provided by the earlier explorers
of the first North West Company include the first overland
journey to the Pacific Ocean made by Sir Alexander Mackenzie in
1793 and his previous descent in 1789 from Lake Athabasca to the
Arctic Ocean by the Mackenzie River, called after this explorer,
from Montreal. The discovery of the Peace River must also be
attributed to him.

In 1798, troubles arising among the partners, the seceding
party formed a rival firm popularly known as the “X.Y.” from
those initials following the W. in N.W. Company.[2] Jealous
and rancourous friction arose again and the two companies were
amalgamated in 1804 into one firm called the North West Company.
It became a powerful body, purely Canadian and with exclusive
privileges. Sir Alexander Mackenzie was its moving spirit and his
cousin Roderick became one of the chief agents.

Meanwhile the great North West Company by 1806 had spread over
the continent from the Great Lakes to the remote side of the
Rocky Mountains and had established a trading post at Columbia
River. By 1812 it had fifty agents, seventy interpreters and
over one thousand one hundred voyageurs. Thus when the partners,
mostly Scotchmen, met at Fort William they were surrounded by
retainers and they acted like barons of old, the story of their
feasting and lavishness lighting up the tale of the otherwise
dreary days--the old north west days--and when they met at
their famous Beaver Club in Montreal they added considerable
magnificence to the social life of the city.

Meanwhile another rival to the North West Company was arising in
the person of the founder of the Astor family. John Jacob Astor,
born in the honest little village of Waldorf, near Heidelberg,
on the banks of the Rhine, arrived in America in a ship bound
for Baltimore in the month of January, 1783. In 1784 he settled
in New York and soon turned his attention exclusively to the fur
trade. The peltry trade not being regularly organized in the
United States, he determined to go to Canada, the seat of the
main supply. Accordingly he made annual visits to Montreal and
thence shipped furs to London, as trade was not allowed otherwise
than directly with the old country.

In 1794 or 1795 a treaty with Great Britain lifted the trade
restrictions and a direct commercial intercourse was established
with the United States. Mr. Astor then made a contract with the
North West Company and he was now enabled to ship furs direct
from Montreal to the United States for the home supply. In 1809
he obtained a charter from the legislature of New York state
incorporating a company under the name of “The American Fur
Company.” In 1811 he bought out the Anglo-Canadian Company,
the “Mackinaw,” whose headquarters were at Michillimackinac,
and merging it into the American Fur Company, called it the
“South West Company,” or the “Pacific Fur Company,” as it
afterwards became known. He associated with himself, as his
agents several of those who had hitherto served the North West
Company of Montreal, among these being Alexander McKay, who
had accompanied Sir Alexander Mackenzie in 1789 and 1793, Duncan
McDougal and Donald Mackenzie. He planned headquarters at the
north of the Columbia River. Accordingly the expedition was sent
out in duplicate to the mouth of the Columbia River, one-half
going on a six-months’ voyage around Cape Horn in a sailing
vessel, the Iroquois, the other marching overland or canoeing
on lakes and rivers in eighteen months from Montreal via the
Mississippi and the Missouri, to the mouth of the Columbia River.

[Illustration: ERECTED 1759 John Jacob Astor, the founder of the
Astor fortunes, is said to have lived in this building, on the
southwest corner of Vaudreuil and Ste. Therese streets, still
standing, and stored here Canadian beaver, racoon and muskrat
skins, Canadian coatings, etc., all of which he sold in 1789 at
No. 81 Queen Street, New York.]


[Illustration: OLD ST. GABRIEL CHURCH ON ST. GABRIEL STREET
Erected in 1792, standing till recently. The first “Scotch”
Church in the Province. Its chief supporters were the Scotch
fur-traders of the North-West Company. The bell in the steeple
of this church is said to have been “the first Protestant bell
sounded in Canada.”]

The voyageurs he got at Montreal in July, 1810, were not of
the best, for the old rival North West Company had secretly
interdicted the prime hands from engaging in the new service. It
was not long after the party left Lachine for St. Anne’s that the
“recruits enlisted at Montreal were fit to vie with the rugged
regiment of Falstaff; some were able-bodied but inexpert; others
were expert but lazy; while a third class were expert but totally
worn, being brokendown veterans incapable of toil.” (“Astoria,”
by Washington Irving, Chapter XII.)

These two parties together founded “Astoria” at the mouth of the
Columbia. But most of Astor’s employees were British subjects
derived from men of the North West and Mackinaw Companies, and
when the 1812 War broke out between the United States and Great
Britain a British warship came up the Pacific coast and promptly
turned it into “Fort George.” Forthwith the North West Company
bought up the derelict property of Mr. Astor’s company. British
employees and a few Americans in the concern retreated inland and
after almost incredible suffering from the attacks of unfriendly
Indians succeeded in reaching the Mississippi.” (“Pioneers in
Canada,” by Sir Harry Johnston.)

But the most powerful rival of the North West Company was to be
found in the person of Lord Selkirk, who had bought two-fifths
of the stock of the Hudson’s Bay Company. In May, 1811, he
prevailed on the directors to grant him 160,000 square miles of
territory in fee simple on condition he should establish a colony
and furnish from the settlers men required by the company at a
certain rate. In 1811 ninety persons, mostly Highland cotters
from Sutherlandshire, with some emigrants from the west of
Ireland, reached Hudson’s Bay, sent by Selkirk. Others followed
in subsequent years. This may be regarded as the beginning of the
North West Red River settlement. Its history was one of bitter
rivalry for the Montreal company. This was felt all the more
since Lord Selkirk, being a Douglas and a Scot, had after the
failure of this first settlement in Canada at Buldoon received
much hospitality and attention at Montreal from the Scottish
merchants of the company, who had given him so much inside
information on the subject of the fur trade industry that he
had turned his thoughts to the Hudson’s Bay Company and become
for many years the most determined opponent of his hosts. This
opposition, to the extent of bloodshed, did not cease till the
union of the two bodies as the reestablished Hudson’s Bay Company
in 1821.

But the competition with Selkirk’s Hudson’s Bay party had
brought sorry losses to both; no dividends were able to be paid
by the North West and there was a loss of men on either side
in the sanguinary incursions into one another’s territories.
The amalgamation of 1821 was therefore not too soon. The union
was followed by the gift of the government to the impoverished
companies of the exclusive trade of the territory which, under
the names of the Hudson’s Bay and North West territories,
extended from Labrador to the Pacific and from Red River to
the Arctic Ocean. The Hudson’s Bay Company, as the amalgamated
company was called, held Rupert’s Land by perpetual charter and
the rest of the territory, including Vancouver Island, granted to
it in 1848 by special license till 1859, maintaining under its
supreme rule about four million square miles. In 1860 it employed
five surgeons, eighty-seven clerks, sixty-seven postmasters,
1,200 permanent servants and 500 voyageurs, making with temporary
employees about three thousand men on its payroll, while about
one hundred thousand Indians were actively engaged in supplying
it with furs. Its profits were enormous, being from May 31,
1852, to May 31, 1862, an annual average of £81,000 on a paid-up
capital of £400,000. In 1863 the company was reorganized with a
capital of £2,000,000, with Sir Edmund Head as governor. After
confederation the northwestern territories and Manitoba were
joined to the Dominion on the indemnification of £3,000,000. This
will be told in its place. Henceforth the old company, no longer
a feudal government, is to play its part as one of the mercantile
bodies of Canada, but one which still has a great civilizing
power in the northern wilds of Canada.


                         THE BEAVER CLUB

  “The members of the famous Beaver Club, constituted perhaps
  the most picturesque and magnificent aristocracy that has ever
  dominated the life of any young community on this continent, with
  the possible exception of the tobacco lords of Virginia. The
  majority of them were adventurous Scotsmen, but they included
  French-Canadians, Englishmen and a few Irishmen, and were
  thoroughly cosmopolitan by taste and associations.”

The Beaver Club was instituted at Montreal in the year 1785,
by the merchants then carrying on the Indian trade of Canada.
Originally the club consisted of but nineteen members, all
voyageurs, having wintered in the Indian Country, and having been
in the trade from their youth. Subsequently the membership was
extended to fifty-five, with ten Honorary Members.

On the first Wednesday in December of each year, the social
gatherings were inaugurated by a dinner at which all members
residing in the town were expected to be present.

The club assumed powers which would, in the present day, be
strongly resisted; among the most notable of them was the rule,
that “no member shall have a party at his house on club days, nor
accept invitations; but if in town, must attend, except prevented
by indisposition.”

The meetings were held fortnightly from December to April and
there was, in addition, a summer club for the captains of the fur
vessels, who, in some instances, were honorary members.

The object of the meetings (as set forth in the rules) was “to
bring together, at stated periods, during the winter season,
a set of men highly respectable in society, who had passed
their best days in a savage country and had encountered the
difficulties and dangers incident to a pursuit of the fur trade
of Canada.”

The members recounted the perils they had passed through and
after passing around the Indian emblem of peace (the calumet),
the officer appointed for the purpose, made a suitable harangue.


FOOTNOTES:

[1] The effect of the conquest on the fur trade in the Northwest,
according to Mr. Beckles Wilson, “The Great Company,” was that
for awhile the Indians and the _voyageurs_ and _coureurs de bois_
awaited patiently for the French traders. Many of the French thus
cut off intermarried with the Indians and virtually lived as such.

[2] The new North West Company were composed of Gregory and
McLeod, now independent. It was first called the “little
Company,” or the “Potties,” an American corruption of the French
“Les Petit.” Later it developed into the X.Y. Company, or Sir
Alexander Mackenzie’s Company. Alexander Mackenzie and his
cousin, Roderick Mackenzie, became the chief agents of the new
company. (Alexander Mackenzie was knighted in 1799.)




                           CHAPTER XII

                  FRENCH REVOLUTIONARY DESIGNS

                 MONTREAL THE SEAT OF JACOBINISM

  THE ASSEMBLY AT LAST--MONTREAL REPRESENTATIVES--FRENCH AND
    ENGLISH USED--THE FRENCH REVOLUTION--MUTINY AT QUEBEC--THE
    DUKE OF KENT--INVASION FEARED FROM FRANCE--MONTREAL
    DISAFFECTED--ATTORNEY GENERAL MONK’S REPORT--THE FRENCH
    SEDITIONARY PAMPHLETS--PANEGYRIC ON BISHOP BRIAND--MONTREAL
    ARRESTS--ATTORNEY GENERAL SEWELL’S REPORT--M’LEAN--ROGER’S
    SOCIETY--JEROME BONAPARTE EXPECTED.


The persistence of the English merchants had at last secured
constitutional government with an assembly. It was inaugurated
by the lieutenant-governor, Sir Alured Clarke, in the absence of
Lord Dorchester in England, the day of its coming into effect
being December 26, 1791. The division of the province into
twenty-one counties with four town buroughs was made later in
1792, viz., Gaspé, Cornwallis, Devon, Hertford, Dorchester,
Buckinghamshire, Richelieu, Bedford, Surry (sic), Kent,
Huntingdon, York, Montreal, Northumberland, Orleans, Effingham,
Leinster, Warwick, St. Maurice, Hampshire and Quebec. Each county
returned two members except Gaspé, Bedford and New Orleans,
returning one each. Quebec and Montreal were to return four each,
Three Rivers two and William Henry (Sorel) one; in all fifty
members.

The house met on December 17, 1792, there being about sixteen
members of British origin, a proportion more or less maintained
for forty-six years. The Catholic members, objecting to take the
oath prescribed by the act of 1791, were allowed by Sir Alured
Clarke to take that of the act of 1774. The meeting was held in
the Bishop’s palace of Quebec hired by government and altered and
repaired at a cost of £428. Chief Justice Smith was nominated
speaker of the legislative council, the fifteen (legal number)
members being J.G. Chaussegros de Léry, Hugh Finlay, Picotté de
Belestre, Thomas Dunn, Paul Roc de St. Ours, Edward Harrison,
François Baby, John Collins, Joseph de Longueuil, Charles de la
Naudière, George Pownal, R.A. de Boucherville, John Fraser, and
Sir Henry Caldwell, Receiver General, subsequently named.

The assembly met to chose a speaker. Mr. Joseph Antoine Panet,
a lawyer of eminence in Quebec, was appointed. Montreal was
represented in the west ward by James McGill and J.B. Durocher
and in the east ward by Joseph Frobisher and John Richardson, the
county being represented by James Walker and Mr. Joseph Papineau.
French and English were both used from the beginning, being
accepted as a matter of course without any formal resolution.[1]
The first formal vote on the subject was taken a year later, on
December 27, 1792, when the following motion was proposed by Mr.
Grant, who accepted an amendment by Mr. Papineau “that it be an
instruction of the committee of the whole house charged with the
correctness of the minutes (or journals) that the digest they may
prepare as the journal of the house from the commencement to the
time of reference shall be in the English or French language, as
it may have been entered in the original minutes without drawing
into precedent for the future.”

Number 9 of the rules for conducting the business of the assembly
ran:

  “No motion shall be debated or put unless the same be in writing
  and seconded. When a motion is seconded it shall be read in
  English and French by the speaker if he is master of both
  languages. If not, the speaker shall read in either of the two
  languages most familiar to him and the reading in the other
  language shall be at the table by the clerk or his deputy before
  the debate.”

On the method of keeping the journals:

  “Resolved, that this house shall keep its journal in two
  registers, in one of which the proceedings of the house and the
  motion shall be wrote in the French language, with a translation
  of the motions originally made in the English language; and in
  the other shall be entered the proceedings of the house and the
  motions in the English language with a translation of the motions
  originally made in the French language.”

Finally it was resolved that the rules for introduction of bills
should be as follows:

  “The bills relative to the criminal laws of England enforced
  in this province and to the rights of the Protestant clergy as
  specified in the act of the thirty-first year of His Majesty,
  Chapter 31, shall be introduced in the English language; and the
  bills relative to the laws, customs, usages and civil rights of
  this province shall be introduced in the French language in order
  to preserve the unity of the texts.”

On the 9th of May, 1793, Sir Alured Clarke in his speech from
the throne was forced to make allusions to the first French
revolution, which had been already four years in progress before
the opening of the assembly of Lower Canada in December, 1792.
The Bastille had fallen on June 17, 1789. “At the first meeting
of the legislature I congratulated you,” he said, “upon the
flattering prospects which opened to your view and upon the
flourishing and tranquil state of the British empire, then at
peace with all the world; since that period, I am sorry to find,
its tranquility has been disturbed by the unjustifiable and
unprecedented conduct of the persons exercising the supreme power
in France, who, after deluging their own country with the blood
of their own fellow citizens and embruing their hands in that
of their sovereign, have forced His Majesty and the surrounding
nations of Europe in a contest which involves the first interests
of society.”

The king of France had been executed on January 21st and war with
Great Britain had been declared on February 1st, although Great
Britain had made every effort to avoid hostility. Washington
had issued the proclamation of neutrality on April 22d, warning
Americans of the penalties incurred by its infraction. The
revolted provinces had first shown great sympathy with the French
revolutionists. On the news of the evacuation of the allied
forces which began on September 20, 1793, all New England seems
to have lost its head: McMaster in his “History of the People
of the United States” (Vol. II, page 13-14) says: “Both men and
women seemed for a time to have put away their wits and gone
mad with republicanism. Their dress, their speech, their daily
conduct were all regulated on strict republican principles.
There must be a flaming liberty cap in every house. There must
be a cockade in every hat, there must be no more use of the old
titles, Sir and Mr. and Dr. and Rev., etc.”

But later when the excesses of the Revolution began to be known
excitement somewhat cooled. It was no pleasure, consequently,
to Washington to hear on the day of the proclamation of
neutrality that Genet, sent as minister by the French republic,
had arrived at Charleston. Genet was well received on his way
to Philadelphia, but was chilled by the reception given by
Washington and left in a rage. (Archives Report, 1891, Douglas
Brymner.)

Lower Canada was not uninfluenced by all this. Genet’s agents,
or those of his successor, Fauchet, for Genet was superseded in
February, 1794, had succeeded in creating a disaffected spirit
among people. At Quebec there was an open manifestation of
sedition on the parade. Kingsford tells how Prince Edward (Duke
of Kent)[2] was in command of the Seventh Fusileers at Quebec
when a threatened mutiny was suppressed. Several were charged on
a plot to seize the Prince, the general and the officers. One
man was sentenced to be shot, but at the Prince’s interception
was spared. Three men were severally sentenced to 500, 700 and
400 lashes, one being a sergeant. The details cannot be traced.
(Kingsford, Vol. VII, page 383.)

A descent on Canada by way of St. John’s and Lake Champlain
was reported to be meditated by congress. In April, 1794, the
authorities of Vermont had, as reported to Lord Dorchester, made
an offer to Congress to undertake the conquest of Canada without
assistance from the federal government, provided the troops were
allowed to plunder the inhabitants, and in order to facilitate
communications with the seditious of Montreal, Mason lodges were
instituted in Vermont under pretended charters from lodges in
Montreal.

On September 23d Dorchester arrived in Quebec; shortly Sir
Alured Clarke returned to England. The second parliament was
opened on November 11th. In January M. Chartier de Lothbinière
succeeded M. Panet as speaker, the latter having been made judge
of Common Pleas. At the end of November, 1793, Dorchester issued
proclamations to take means against the French emissaries in the
country. In May, 1794, orders were issued for the embodiment
of 2,000 militia to be ready for service. The extent of the
poisonous and seditious influences at work is shown by the fact
that out of the 7,000 men fit for service in forty-two parishes
only 900 men obeyed the law. Lord Dorchester attributed this
unwillingness to serve as due more to long absence from military
duty than disloyalty. The habitants were, however, dissatisfied,
for though the hand of the government was easy they claimed to
be oppressed by the expenses of the law and to be unprotected
against the exactions of their seigneurs as they had been under
the French intendants. (Dorchester to Dundas, May 24, 1794.)

The district of Montreal was reported to be universally
disaffected, though the British subjects were loyal and well
disposed. The militia law was opposed. At Côte de Neiges a party
of habitants had become possessed of arms and were determined to
defend themselves if attacked. As said, information was received
that a Freemasons’ lodge had been established at Montreal in
connection with a lodge in Vermont for the sole purpose of
carrying out a traitorous correspondence with the disaffected. On
all sides it was reported that the French were coming to seize
Canada.

Attorney General Monk, writing from Quebec to Dundas on May
3, 1794, gives an alarming picture of the spread of French
revolutionary principles becoming general. He states that
threats were used by disaffected new subjects against the
loyal new subjects; that it was astonishing to find the same
savagery exhibited here as in France, in so short a period for
corruption; that blood alliances did not check the menaces upon
the non-compliant peasants of burning their houses, of death,
emboweling, decapitation and carrying their heads on poles; that
religion was being thrown aside. The intrigues had been traced
to Genet and the French consuls; that correspondence had been
carried on between the disaffected Canadians of the United States
and Canada, and that French emissaries had been sent to prepare
the people to follow the example of France.

A pamphlet, extracts from which have been preserved, was
circulated in January, 1794, under the title of “les Français
Libres a Leurs frères les Canadiens.” This pamphlet deserves the
extracts extant being made known as indicating a picture of the
feelings of the seditionary party. They are to be found in French
in the Canadian Government Archives, Q 62, page 224.

The object was to encourage the Canadians “to emulate the
example of the people of America and of France. Break then,
with a government which degenerates from day to day, and which
has become the most cruel enemy of the liberty of the people.
Everywhere are found traces of the despotism, the avidity, the
cruelties of the king of England. It is time to overthrow a
throne which has been seated so long on hypocrisy and imposture.
In no way fear George III with his soldiers, too small in number
to successfully oppose your valour. The moment is favourable
and insurrection is for you the holiest of duties. Remember
that being born French you will always be envied and persecuted
by the kings of England and that this title will be more than
ever today a reason for exclusion from all offices. Also what
advantages have you drawn from the constitution which has been
given you since your representatives have been assembled? Have
they presented you with a single good law? Have they corrected
any abuse? Have they had the power to free your commerce
from its shackles? No! And why not? Because all the means of
corruption have been secretly and publicly employed to make
the balance weigh in favour of the English. They have dared to
impose an odious veto which the king of England has reserved
only to prevent the destruction of abuses and to paralyze all
your movements; here is the present which the vile stipendaries
have dared to offer you as a monument of the beneficence of the
English government. Canadians, arm yourselves. Call to your
assistance your friends, the Indians; count on the help of your
neighbours and on that of Frenchmen.”

A resumé is given of the advantages that Canadians will obtain in
throwing over the English domination.

  1. Canada will be a free and independent state.

  2. It can form alliances with France and the United States.

  3. The Canadians will choose their own government; they will
  themselves name the members of the legislative body and the
  executive power.

  4. The veto will be abolished.

  5. All persons who have obtained the right of citizenship in
  Canada can be named for all offices.

  6. The Corvées will be abolished.

  7. Commerce will enjoy a more extensive liberty.

  8. There will be no longer any privileged company for the fur
  trade. The new government will encourage this trade.

  9. The seigneurial _droits_ will be abolished. The _lods et
  ventes_, the millrights, the tolls, the lumber reservations, work
  for the service of the seigneur, etc., will be equally abolished.

  10. Hereditary titles will be also abolished. There will be no
  lords, seigneurs or nobles.

  11. All cults will be free. Catholic priests named by the
  people as in the primitive church will enjoy a treatment
  analogous to their ability.

  12. Schools will be established in the parishes and towns;
  there will be printing offices; institutions for the high
  sciences; medicine and mathematics. Interpreters will be trained
  who, known for their good morals, will be encouraged to civilize
  the savage nations and by this means to extend the trade with
  them.

In spite of these inflammatory circulars, and outside those
immediately disaffected, the majority of the Canadians were in
good disposition with the government. They would have resisted
an American invasion without hesitation. When their own people
tampered with them and offered to regain Canada to the French
it is only natural that many should have been unsettled.
But it must clearly be understood that the reports of the
French emissaries being in the country were not the dreams of
visionaries. It was expected in many quarters that Napoleon, the
First Consul, would have redemanded Canada at the general treaty
of peace. Canada was desired for the French “as an outlet for
French products and for the means of speculation to an infinite
number of Frenchmen who have no resources in their own country.”
The last quotation occurs in a letter dated January 12, 1803,
from France by an ex-Canadian, Mr. Imbert, to a brother of Judge
Panet.

Yet a panegyric on the occasion of the death of Bishop Briand
in 1794 reveals a change of opinion undergoing at this period
with regard to the relations of the English and the French.
“Ah!” cried the preacher, “how the perspective of our future
formerly spread out bitterness in all Christian families! Each
one mourned his unhappy plight and was afflicted not to be able
to leave a country where the kingdom of God seemed about to be
forever destroyed. No one could be persuaded that our conquerors,
strangers to our soil, to our language, our law, our customs, our
worship, could ever be able to give back to Canada what it had
just lost in the change of masters. Generous nation! which has
made us see with so much evidence how this prejudgment was false;
industrious nation! which has made riches sprout forth which the
bosom of this land enclosed; beneficent nation! which daily gives
to Canada new proofs of your liberality; No! no! you are not our
enemies, nor those of our properties which your laws protect,
nor those of our religion, which you respect. Pardon this first
mistrust in a people which had not yet the honour of knowing you.”

At Montreal some important arrests were made; one, Duclos,
an active agent of the United States who had moved among the
people confidently foretelling the invasion of the French, and
a traitor named Costello, who was proved to have been diligent
in circulating the incendiary pamphlets in French. To meet this
disaffection Constitutional Associations were formed in Montreal
and Quebec of the leading French Canadian and British loyalists.
Gradually the sedition died down. But during the great fear of a
French invasion there had been no little doubt and uncertainty
among the mercantile classes as to the fate of the vessels that
might be dispatched with cargoes on the St. Lawrence. Jay’s
treaty, 19th of November, 1794, with Great Britain, for the
amicable adjustment of all differences between it and the United
States, was a potent factor in making for peace. It was finally
agreed to in the senate of the United States in 1795, although
the sympathizers of the French fought it determinedly.

In April, 1796, Dorchester, who had sent in his resignation,
received official information that Gen. Robert Prescott
had been appointed lieutenant governor of Lower Canada and
commander-in-chief in North America. Prescott arrived at Quebec
on the 18th of June and Dorchester sailed in July, being wrecked
on the island of Anticosti, but, being taken off by a ship of
war, reached his destination in safety. On the 18th of June,
1796, Sir Robert Prescott, Lord Dorchester’s successor, did
not find matters in the province in a satisfactory state. The
French republican designs on Canada were still represented in the
Montreal district by many sympathizers. Riots were caused and the
magistrates of Montreal seemed to have acted weakly, if not with
connivance, so that a new commission of the peace was issued with
several names omitted. The ostensible cause was opposition to the
execution of the Road Bill, but in reality it was a disaffection
stirred up by emissaries from the French republic, then in the
province.

Attorney General Sewell had been sent to Montreal to get
information and he reported the above to the executive council at
Quebec on Sunday, October 30, 1796, on the authority of Messrs.
de Lothbinière, McGill, Richardson, Murray, Papineau and others.
He reported: “That a pamphlet of most seditious tendencies,
signed by Adet, the embassador from the French republic to the
United States, was now in circulation in the district. That
this pamphlet bore the arms of the French republic and was
addressed to the Canadians assuring them that France, having now
conquered Spain, Austria and Italy, had determined to subdue
Great Britain and meant to begin with her colonies; that she
thought it her duty in the first instance to turn her attention
to the Canadians, to relieve them from the slavery under which
they groaned, and was taking steps for that purpose; that it
pointed out the supposed advantages which the republican form
of government possessed over the British and concluded that
in a short time there would only be heard the cry of ‘Vive la
Republique!’ from Canada to Paris.” The attorney-general added
that he had heard at Montreal that the French republic intended
to raise troops in Canada and had actually sent four officers’
commissions into the country. This brought a proclamation from
Lieutenant-Governor Prescott, commander-in-chief, ordering the
arrest of seditious persons, especially “certain foreigners being
alien enemies who are lurking and lying concealed in various
parts of the province.” This proclamation was ordered to be
published for three successive weeks in the Quebec Gazette and
Montreal papers in both languages, and also copies to be printed
to be affixed to the church doors in the province. During the
rest of the year various people were examined in Montreal, which
revealed the existence of a widespread revolt organized by
agitators.

On May 17th at the recent assizes for the district of Quebec and
Montreal a number had been arrested and tried. Attorney-General
Sewell in his report to Prescott on May 12, 1797, mentions among
the several indictments preferred the following:

  “High Treason: Inciting persons to assemble in a riotous manner
  for the purpose of opposing the execution of the Road Act;
  Conspiracy to prevent the market of Montreal being supplied with
  Provisions until the inhabitants of that city should unite with
  those of the Country in their opposition to the Road Act.

  “Assault on a Constable in the execution of his office under the
  Road Act.

  “Riot and assault on a justice of the peace in the execution of
  his Office.

  “Riots, assaults on and false Imprisonment of different overseers
  of the High Roads.

  “Riots and Rescue of Persons apprehended for the offence last
  above mentioned from the hands of the sheriff’s officers. Assault
  on the sheriff of Montreal in the execution of his Office and
  Rescue of a Prisoner from his custody for an offence against
  Government.

  “Seditious Conversation and Libels on the House of Assembly.

  “The number of Persons indicted in Montreal for the above
  offences amounted in all to nineteen, of which four for High
  Treason have not yet been tried. Thirteen were tried and of that
  number eleven were convicted and received Judgment. The remaining
  Two absconded.

  “The number of persons indicted at Quebec for the above offences
  amounted to twenty-four, of which twenty-three were convicted and
  received punishment.”

It is needless to review these cases. As, however, the name of
McLean stands out in this sedition, he must be noticed. This man
was not arrested till May 10, 1797, although information of his
seditionary mission work on the borders of Canada and the United
States was in the hands of the authorities in December, 1796. On
July 7th he was tried and found guilty and executed on the 21st.
On various occasions he had been known to be in Montreal planting
sedition. He was in close touch with Ira Allen, of Vermont, who
had been on board the “Olive Branch” from Ostend with 20,000
stand of arms. He tried to explain that these were purchased
for the Vermont militia. But there is no doubt that they were
furnished by the Directory in Paris for the army of the Lower
Canadians in an expedition in which McLean was to be interested.
Among McLean’s papers was found one from Adet confirming this.

The attempts of the French on Canada already mentioned under the
dates of 1796 and 1797 seemed never to have entirely relaxed. In
1801 Lieutenant-Governor Milnes became warned that persons were
plotting for the subversion of Canada and that a society of “a
parcel of Americans” had been formed in Montreal, proceeding on
the principles of Jacobinism and Illuminism, having one Rogers
as leader, it being supposed that he was the only one who knew
the real objects of the society, which had increased from six
to sixty-one members. Six were arrested and held for trial but
Rogers escaped. Attorney-General Sewell made a report of his
investigation. Rogers was a New England schoolmaster who had
settled a short time before at Carillon, forty miles west of
Montreal. The society formed by him was composed “of sundry
individuals of desperate fortunes,” and among them were many of
the persons concerned in McLane’s (sic) conspiracy, particularly
Ira Allen and Stephen Thorn, who were lately arrived from France.
The pretext on which Rogers founded his society was to search for
treasure. The depositions accompanying Sewell’s report implicate
Ira Allen and his Vermont marauders as bent on plundering Canada.
In this regard Montreal was especially aimed at. The trouble died
down somewhat in 1802 when peace with France was proclaimed,
but on June 1, 1803, long before any steps could be taken after
the declaration of war again, French emissaries were in the
province sapping the loyalty, some of them being in Montreal.
Again, this was no visionary conception, but a reality. A keen
lookout was maintained on strangers. Mr. Richardson, a magistrate
of Montreal, was appointed secret agent. One of those to be
watched was Jerome Bonaparte, the brother of the First Consul
of France. His description is as follows, as sent by Barclay
from New York, 2d December, 1803, to Milnes: “Jerome Bonaparte
appears about twenty-one years of age, five feet, six or seven
inches high, slender make, sallow complexion, sharp and prominent
chin, cropped dark hair, short, but he sometimes adds a queue
and is powdered; dark eyes.” Jerome had arrived at New York
about November 20th and was reported to be making, via Albany,
for Lake Champlain, where there was “a Frenchman named Rous, who
is notorious for assisting deserters. McLean, hung for treason,
is particularly intimate with Rous.” Richardson came to terms
with this Rous, whom he employed as a spy. The attempt on Canada
by the French was temporarily abandoned, the reason, given by
Pichon, Chargé d’affaires at Washington, being that Great Britain
was too powerful by sea.


FOOTNOTES:

[1] One of the first statutes was an act to prevent gun powder
drawn in ships and other vessels into the harbour of Montreal and
to guard against the careless transportation of the same into the
powder magazines.

[2] He landed at Quebec in August, 1791, and left Canada in
1794. On the 13th of September, in passing through Montreal, he
received a complimentary address. He went up country probably
as far as Niagara, returning through Montreal in September of
1792. On December 6, 1793, Chief Justice Smith died at Quebec.
His remains were interred on December 8th, and were attended to
the grave by H.R.H. Prince Edward.--(Quebec Gazette, Thursday,
December 12, 1793.)




                          CHAPTER XIII

                  THE AMERICAN INVASION OF 1812

                    MONTREAL AND CHATEAUGUAY

                     FRENCH CANADIAN LOYALTY

  THE CAUSES OF THE WAR OF 1812--THE CHESAPEAKE--JOHN HENRY--HOW
    THE NEWS OF INVASION WAS RECEIVED IN MONTREAL--THE
    MOBILIZATION--GENERAL HULL--THE MONTREAL MILITIA--FRENCH AND
    ENGLISH ENLIST--MONTREAL THE OBJECTIVE--OFFICIAL ACCOUNT OF
    THE BATTLE OF CHATEAUGUAY--COLONEL DE SALABERRY--RETURN OF
    WOUNDED--THE EXPLANATION OF THE FEW BRITISH KILLED.


The loyalty of the British and French Canadians was again to be
tested during the American war of 1812, which involved Canada in
war as a dependency of England.

Its causes were as follows: In 1806, on November 1st, Napoleon
issued his “Berlin decree” declaring a blockade on the entire
British coast, and let loose French privateers against her
shipping and that of neutral nations trading with her. Great
Britain retaliated by the celebrated “orders in council which
declared all traffic with France contraband and the vessels
prosecuting it with their cargoes, liable to seizure.”[1] By both
of these the United States was injured in its carrying trade.
Congress, therefore, in the following year superceded President
Jefferson’s contra-embargo on all shipping, domestic and foreign,
in the harbours of the United States, by a “non-intercourse
act” prohibiting all commerce with either belligerent till the
“obnoxious decree” or “orders” were removed.

Another cause conspired to fan the war feeling to a flame. Great
Britain, pressed by the difficulty of manning her immense fleets,
asserted the “right of search” of American vessels for deserters
from her navy. The United States frigate “Chesapeake” resisted
this right, sanctioned by international law, but was compelled by
a broadside from H.M. Ship Leopard (June, 1807) to submit. The
British government disavowed the violence of this act and offered
reparation. But the democratic party was clamorous for war and
eager to seduce from their allegiance and annex to the United
States, the provinces of British North America.

A further cause exasperating the United States, was the
publication of the secret correspondence of a Captain Henry,
an adventurer, sent by Sir James Craig, Governor General of
Canada, in 1809 to ascertain the state of feeling in New England
towards Great Britain. Henry reported a disposition to secede
from the Union and subsequently offered his correspondence to
the American government, demanding therefor the exorbitant sum
of $50,000, which he received from the secret service fund.
His information was authentic but unimportant and the British
government repudiated his agency, but the war party in Congress
was implacable.

This John Henry had lived as a boy in Montreal, after which he
crossed the border. In 1807 he applied through merchants in
Montreal for the office of puisné judge in Upper Canada, it
appearing that he had obtained the favour of the merchants of
Montreal by defending their conduct in a party newspaper. His
correspondence (1808-9) with Sir J. Craig while on his mission,
reveals that for some time in April, 1808, Henry was in Montreal.

On June 18, 1812, James Madison, the president, and Congress
approved the “act declaring war between the United Kingdom of
Great Britain and Ireland and the dependencies thereof and the
United States of America and their territories.” This news,
sent by an express of the North West Company, did not reach the
governor, Sir John Prevost, till July 7th. It had, however, been
sent by private means to General Brock in Upper Canada about June
26th by the Hon. John Richardson of Montreal, though others say
by John Jacob Astor, who had extensive fur interests in Canada.

How the news of the war was received in Montreal has been
published recently in the Huntingdon “Gleaner” (under the
editorship of Mr. Robert Sellar). The late Mr. Lewis MacKay of
Huntingdon, then twenty-one years of age, there relates what
he saw as an eye witness. “I recollect very well the day when
word reached Montreal that the American government had declared
war against Britain. It caused great dejection, for the general
belief was that the Americans would come at once and take Canada.
At night especially, there was great alarm. Everything in the
shape of a man was pressed into service. If dogs could have
carried firelocks they would have been taken. I saw at the sentry
posts mere boys too weak to carry their guns which they rested
against their bases.”

Quickly the militia and military were organized. Colonel Baynes,
adjutant general, writing to Brock from Quebec on July 3d, says:
“The flank companies here are on the march and 2,000 militia will
form a chain of posts from St. John’s to La Prairie. The town
militia of Montreal and Quebec to the number of 3,000 from each
city have volunteered, and are being embodied and drilled, and
will take their part in garrison duty to relieve the troops. The
proclamation for declaring martial law is prepared and will be
speedily issued. All aliens will be required to take the oath of
allegiance or immediately quit the Province.”

Writing from Montreal on August 17th, Sir George Prevost wrote to
Lord Bathurst, secretary of war: “A part of the Forty-ninth
Regiment has already proceeded from Montreal to Kingston and
has been followed by the remainder of the Newfoundland Regiment
of some picked Veterans; the other companies of the Forty-ninth
Regiment will proceed to the same destination as soon as
sufficient number of bateaux can be collected. * * * From
Kingston to Montreal the Frontier line appears at present secure.
* * * The Eighth or King’s Regiment has arrived this M(ornin)g
from Quebec to relieve the Forty-ninth Regiment. This fine and
effective Regt. of the Eighth, together with a Chain of Troops
established in the vicinity of this place, consisting of regular
and militia Forces, the whole amounting to near four thousand,
five hundred men, effectually serve to keep in check the enemy
in this quarter where alone they are in any strength and to
prevent any Attempt to carry on a Predatory Warfare against this
flourishing portion of Lower Canada.”

[Illustration: MONTREAL IN 1810 A view of the city of Montreal
and the river St. Lawrence from the mountain, by E. Walsh,
Forty-ninth Regiment, 1810.]

Brock made preparations to meet the American general, William
Hull, who was early in July descending on Canada from Detroit. He
had soon to return in hot haste and on August 16th surrendered
Detroit to Sir Isaac Brock.[2] Brock paroled many of the
prisoners but the rest he sent to Montreal on their way to Quebec
for embarkation. The Montreal Herald of Tuesday, September 12,
1812, facetiously describes their entry thus:

“Montreal, September 12th.

“Last Sunday evening the inhabitants of this city were gratified
with an exhibition equally novel and interesting. That General
Hull should have entered our city so soon at the head of his
troops rather exceeded our expectations. We were, however, happy
to see him and received him with all the honours due to his rank
and importance as a public character. The following particulars
relative to his journey and reception at Montreal may not be
uninteresting to our readers.

“General Hull and suite, accompanied by about twenty-five
officers and three hundred and fifty soldiers, left Kingston
under an escort of 130 men commanded by Major Heathcote of the
Newfoundland Regiment. At Cornwall the escort was met by Captain
Gray of the quartermaster general’s department who took charge
of the prisoners of war and from thence proceeded with them to
Lachine, where they arrived about 2 o’clock on Sunday afternoon.
At Lachine Captains Richardson and Ogilvie, with their companies
of Montreal militia and a company of the King’s, commanded by
Captain Blackmore formed the escort till they were met by Colonel
Auldjo with the remainder of the flank companies of the militia,
upon which Captain Blackmore’s Company fell out and presented
arms as the general passed with the others, and then returned
to Lachine, leaving the prisoners to be guarded by the Montreal
militia alone.” Then follows the order of march in procession
into the town through the illuminated streets to the Château de
Ramezay:

“When they arrived at the governor’s house the general was
conducted in and presented to his Excellency, Sir George Prevost.
He was received with the greatest politeness and invited to take
up his residence there during his stay in Montreal. The officers
were quartered in Holmes Hotel and the soldiers were marched to
Quebec Gate Barracks. The general appears to be about sixty years
of age and bears his misfortune with a degree of resignation that
but few men in similar circumstances are fitted with.”

General Hull was exchanged for thirty British soldiers taken by
the Americans. The rest of the prisoners proceeded to Quebec.[3]

Montrealers were elated at Hull’s capture, but they knew well
that revenge was being prepared. Montreal was still the objective
of the congress army as of old. Their secretary of state had said
that “Montreal was the apple of his eye. Why waste men and money
upon distant frontiers? Strike at their vitals, then you will
paralyze their extremities. Capture Montreal and you will starve
de Rottenburg and Proctor. In Montreal your troops will find
winter quarters and an English Christmas.”

The Montreal militia, therefore, had to keep up their drill in
earnest. On November 19th there was a call to arms on a report
the city was to be attacked. The militia left the city to meet
the foe, but on November 28th returned from “their pleasure trip”
unscathed, for either the enemy had disappeared or it was a false
alarm.

But it was not only volunteers for the militia that were being
required. Men were wanted for the front. Lewis MacKay describes
how Colonel McDonell (or Macdonnell) of Glengarry (who was
afterwards mortally wounded and whose remains were buried beside
those of Brock) came to Montreal to enlist men for his regiment.
“The men he brought with him were mostly from Glengarry. As I
spoke Gaelic I got amongst them. I enlisted with them, but on
examination was rejected because I was not up to the standard in
height. I was transferred to the Voltigeurs. There was nothing
doing in Montreal but raising troops of cavalry and regiments,
and they took everybody that offered, almost. The bounty was
$100, but the pay was very small. There were French among the
Glengarries and there were old country men in the Voltigeurs.
* * * Among others in Montreal was Captain Coleman of the Eighth
Dragoons. He got liberty to raise a troop for himself. He was
rich and bought horses with his own money and men were keen
to enlist with him. Wanting me as his body servant he got me
transferred from the Voltigeurs. When he had got his complement
of men the government did the rest, giving uniforms, saddles,
arms, etc. The troop got the name of the ‘French Troop’ and were
ordered to Upper Canada.”

The enthusiastic readiness of the French Canadians to protect
their country and the _camaraderie_ with which the different
subjects, old and new, now joined side by side, are also
evidenced in glancing at the lists of militia records of the
times. A picture is preserved by Dunlop of the good times of
the two corps “formed of the gentlemen of Montreal,” of whom
he says, “that if their discipline was commendable their
commissariat was beyond all praise. Long lines of carts were to
be seen bearing in casks and hampers of the choicest wines, to
say nothing of the venison, turkeys, hams and all other esculents
necessary to recruit their strength under the fatigues of war.
With them the Indian found a profitable market for his game, and
the fisherman for his fish. There can be little doubt that a
gourmand would greatly prefer the comfort of dining with a mess
of privates of these distinguished corps to the honour and glory
of being half starved (of which he ran no small risk) at the
table of the Governor-General himself.”

[Illustration: LETTER OF DE LORIMIER (1812) A call to arms]

While, therefore, the struggle was in the Upper Province, the
attack on Montreal was, however, reserved for the next year
and the Montreal militia, with men like Lieut. Col. Charles
de Salaberry, Lieutenant McDonell, Captains Jean Baptiste and
Jucherau Duchesnay, Daly and Ferguson, Bruyère and la Motte,
with adjutants O’Sullivan and Hedder--all to be mentioned in
despatches--were to give the Americans no cause to doubt either
British or French Canadian loyalty to the British flag.

The chance came to save Montreal in 1813, on October 21st, when
the militia battalions of Montreal and the district took the
field at Chateauguay to prevent the advance on the city by the
American army under General Hampton. It was a glorious victory
for the militia.

The attack on Montreal was planned by Major-General Wilkinson,
who had arrived about the end of August, 1813, in Sacketts
Harbour to take charge of the troops of the North American
frontier. There in his council of officers it was determined: “To
rendezvous the whole of the troops on the lake in the vicinity[4]
and in cooperation with our squadron to make a bold feint upon
Kingston; step down the St. Lawrence; lock up the enemy in our
rear to starve or surrender; or oblige him to follow us without
artillery, baggage or provisions, or eventually to lay down his
arms; to sweep the St. Lawrence of armed craft; and in concert
with the division of Major-General Hampton to take Montreal.”[5]

Montreal was therefore the main object of attack. “Montreal is
the safer and greater object,” wrote Armstrong to the Secretary
of War, fearing hard blows at Kingston, the weaker place, “and
you will find there a small force to encounter.” Montreal offered
no terrors for there were “no fortifications at that city, or
in advance of it,” and only “200 sailors and 400 marines with
the militia, number unknown,” but there were, to be sure, “2,500
regular troops expected daily from Quebec.”

Yet the American force which made its way under Major-General
Hampton from Burlington was a powerful army. It arrived on
October 8th at Chateauguay Four Corners, a small settlement
distant five miles from the national boundary, about forty-six
from Montreal, and about forty-five from the proposed junction of
Hampton’s force with Major-General Wilkinson’s.

William James, who published in London in 1818, “a full and
correct account of the military occurrences of the late war
between Great Britain and the United States of America,” says
of General Hampton’s force, now prepared against Montreal, that
it “has been stated at 7,000 infantry and 200 cavalry,” but we
have no American authority for supposing that the latter exceeded
180 or the former 5,520, making a total of 5,700 men accompanied
by ten pieces of cannon. This army, except the small militia
force attached to it, was the same that, with General Dearborn at
its head, paraded across the line and back to Plattsburg in the
autumn of 1812. During the twelve months that had since elapsed,
the men had been drilled under an officer, Major-General Izard,
who had served one or two campaigns in the French army. Troops
were all in uniform, well clothed and equipped; in short, General
Hampton commanded, if not the most numerous, certainly the most
effective regular army which the United States were able to send
into the field during the war.

At Montreal there was bustle and stir in getting the additional
forces out which were to join Lieutenant-Colonel Salaberry of
the Canadian Fencibles, who commenced operations to check the
American advance as soon as he had learned that the Americans
had crossed the lines. But the whole of the force that went to
meet Hampton between October 21st and 29th was only about eight
hundred rank and file, with 172 Indians under Captain Lamotte at
the settlements of Chateauguay. The battle of Chateauguay and its
results may now be told by Sir George Prevost in his dispatch
from Montreal to Earl Bathurst.

                    “Headquarters, Montreal, October 30, 1813.

  “My Lord:

  “On the 8th instant I had the honour to report to Your Lordship
  that Major-General Hampton had occupied with a considerable force
  of regulars and militia a portion of the Chateauguay River,
  near the settlement of the Four Corners. Early on the 21st the
  American army crossed the line of separation between Lower Canada
  and the United States, surprised the small party of Indian
  warriors and drove in a picket of sedentary militia posted at the
  junction of the Outard and Chateauguay Rivers, where it encamped,
  and proceeded in establishing a road of communication with its
  last position for the purpose of bringing forward its artillery.
  Major-General Hampton having completed his arrangements on the
  24th, commenced on the following day his operations against my
  advanced posts. At about 11 o’clock in the forenoon of the 26th
  his cavalry and light troops were discovered advancing on both
  banks of the Chateauguay by a detachment covering a working
  party of habitants employed in felling timber for the purpose
  of constructing _abattis_.[6] Lieutenant-Colonel de Saluberry
  (sic), who had the command of the advanced piquets composed of
  the light infantry company of the Canadian Fencibles and two
  companies of Voltigeurs on the north side of the river, made so
  excellent a disposition of his little band that he checked the
  advance of the enemy’s principal column led by Major-General
  Hampton in person and accompanied by Brigadier-General Izard;
  while the American Light Brigade under Colonel McCarty was in
  like manner repulsed in its progress on the south side of the
  river by the spirited advance of the right flank company of the
  Third Battalion of the embodied militia under Captain Daly,
  supported by Captain Bruyer’s Company of Chateauguay Chasseurs;
  Captains Daly and Bruyers being both wounded and their companies
  having sustained some loss, their position was immediately
  taken up by a flank company of the first battalion of embodied
  militia; the enemy rallied and repeatedly returned to the attack,
  which terminated only with the day in his complete disgrace and
  defeat; being foiled at all points by a handful of men who, by
  their determined bravery, maintained their position and screened
  from insult the working parties who continued their labours
  unconcerned. Having fortunately arrived at the scene of action
  shortly after its commencement, I witnessed the conduct of the
  troops on this glorious occasion, and it was a great satisfaction
  to me to render on the spot that praise which had become so
  justly their due. I thanked Major-General De Watteville for the
  wise measures taken by him for the defense of this position and
  lieutenant-Colonel de Saluberry for the judgment displayed by him
  in the choice of his ground and the bravery and skill with which
  he maintained it; I acknowledged the highest praise to belong to
  the officers and men engaged that morning for their gallantry
  and readiness, and I called upon all the troops in advance as
  well for a continuance of that zeal, steadiness and discipline as
  for that patient endurance of hardship and privations which they
  hitherto evinced; and I particularly noticed the able support
  lieutenant-Colonel de Saluberry received from Captain Ferguson in
  command of the Canadian Fencibles and from Capt. J.B. Duchesnay
  and Capt. J. Duchesnay and adjutant Hedder, of the Voltigeurs,
  and also from adjutant O’Sullivan of the sedentary militia and
  from Captain La Motte, belonging to the Indian warriors.

  “Almost the whole of the British troops being pushed forward for
  the defence of Upper Canada, that of the lower province must
  depend in a great degree on the valour and continued exertion
  of its incorporated battalions and its sedentary militia until
  the Seventieth Regiment and the two battalions of marines daily
  expected should arrive.

  “It is therefore highly satisfactory to state to Your Lordship
  that there appears a determination among all classes of His
  Majesty’s Canadian subjects to persevere in a loyal and
  honourable line of conduct. By a report of the prisoners taken
  from the enemy in the affair on the Chateauguay, the American
  force is stated at 7,000 infantry and 200 cavalry, with 10 field
  pieces. The British advanced force actually engaged did not
  exceed 300. The enemy suffered severely from our fire and from
  their own; some detached corps in the woods fired on each other.

  “I have the honour to transmit to your Lordship a return of
  the killed and wounded on the 26th. I avail myself of this
  opportunity to solicit from his royal highness, the prince
  regent, as a mark of his gracious approbation of the conduct of
  the embodied battalions of the Canadian Militia five pair of
  colours for the first, second, third, fourth and fifth battalions.

              “I have the honour to be, etc.,
                                                “GEORGE PREVOST.

“Return of killed, wounded and missing of his Majesty’s forces in
the action of the enemy in the advance on Chateauguay on the 26th
of October, 1813.

  “Canadian fencible infantry, light Company; three rank and file
    killed; one sergeant, three rank and file wounded.

  “Third battalion embodied militia, flank company; two rank and
    file killed; one captain, six rank and file wounded; four rank
    and file missing.

  “Chateauguay Chasseurs; one captain wounded.

  “Total: Five rank and file killed, two captains, one sergeant,
    thirteen rank and file wounded; four rank and file missing.

  “Names of officers wounded: Third battalion embodied
    militia--Captain Daly twice wounded, severely. Chateauguay
    Chasseurs: Captain Bruyers, slightly.

                           “EDWARD BAYNES, Adjutant-General.

  Right Hon. Earl Bathurst.”

The slight number of the British forces opposed to the Americans
could hardly be believed after the disorganization of the
latter. When Captain Debartzch of the militia was sent to the
headquarters of General Hampton with a flag and announced the
number of the opposing force, Hampton, scarcely able to keep his
temper, insisted that the British force amounted to 7,000 men for
he asked, “What, then, made the woods ring with rifles?”

This incident must be told. In the early course of the fight the
Americans opened a spirited fight upon the Canadians and drove
the skirmishers stationed near the left behind the front edge
of the _abattis_. “The Americans,” says William James, already
quoted, “Although they did not occupy one foot of the abattis nor
lieutenant-colonel de Saluberry retire one inch from the ground
on which he had been standing, celebrated this partial retiring
as a retreat. They were not a little surprised, however, to hear
their Huzzas repeated by the Canadians, accompanied by a noise
ten times more terrific than even ‘Colonel Boerstler’s stentorian
voice.’ By way of animating his little band when thus momentarily
pressed, colonel de Saluberry ordered his bugle men to sound the
advance. This was heard by lieutenant-colonel McDonell, who,
thinking that the colonel was in want of support, caused his
own bugler to answer, and immediately advanced with two of his
companies. He at the same time sent ten or twelve bugle men into
the adjoining woods with orders to separate and blow with all
their might. This little _ruse de guerre_ led the Americans to
believe that they had more thousands than hundreds to contend
with and deterred them from even attempting to penetrate the
_abattis_. They contented themselves with a long shot warfare in
which, from the nature of the defences, they were almost the only
sufferers.”

The Americans, after bungling the battle, delayed at Four
Corners, but on November 11th Hampton, feeling himself unsafe,
broke up his encampment and retreated to Plattsburg.

Chateauguay had served Montreal well and the tide of war again
rolled away from its gates.


FOOTNOTES:

[1] Cf. Withrow “History of Canada,” pp. 301-302.

[2] William Hull was born in Derby, Connecticut, on June 24,
1753. He graduated with honors from Yale at the age of nineteen,
studied law and was admitted to practice. He allied himself with
the Revolutionary party and obtained a commission from Congress
eventually rising to the rank of a colonel. At the conclusion
of peace he held a judicial office in Massachusetts and served
for eight years as a senator. In 1805 he was appointed the first
governor of the territory of Michigan and was commissioned a
brigadier general in the army of the United States on April 8,
1812. He was court-martialed for his surrender of Detroit in 1814
and after a trial of three months he was ordered to be shot,
but President Madison remitted his sentence in consideration of
his services in the Revolutionary war. His name was, however,
dropped from the army lists. He died at Newton, Massachusetts, in
November, 1825.

[3] Their arrival at Quebec is thus described by A.W. Cochran,
assistant civil secretary to the governor general in a letter
to his mother: “Both men and officers are a shabby looking set
as ever you set your eyes on, and reminded me of Falstaff’s men
very forcibly. Some of the officers talked very big and assured
us that before long there would be 100,000 men in Canada and
that they soon would have Quebec from us.” Later on, writing to
his father from Montreal on October 10th he further expresses
his views on the Americans: “The Americans, I think, bid fair
to rival and surpass the French in gasconading as well as in
everything that is dishonorable, base and contemptible. * * *
Yankees cannot tell a plain story like other folks; they cannot
help ‘immersing the wig in the ocean’ as Sterne says of the
Frenchmen.”

[4] The spot chosen was Grenadier Island, eighteen miles from
Sacketts Harbour.

[5] “Wilkinson’s Memoirs,” Vol. III, Appendix No. 1.

[6] Abattis. These were obstructions made by felled timber which
served as a succession of breastworks.




                           CHAPTER XIV

                 SIDE LIGHTS OF SOCIAL PROGRESS

                            1776-1825

  THE “GAZETTE DU COMMERCE ET LITTERAIRE”--A RUNAWAY SLAVE--GUY
    CARLETON’S DEPARTURE--GENERAL HALDIMAND IN MONTREAL--MESPLET’S
    PAPER SUSPENDED--POET’S CORNER--THE HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
    DISCUSSED--FIRST THEATRICAL COMPANY: THE “BUSY BODY”--LORD
    NELSON’S MONUMENT--A RUNAWAY, RED CURLY HAIRED AND BANDY
    LEGGED APPRENTICE--LAMBERT’S PICTURE OF THE PERIOD--MINE HOST
    OF THE “MONTREAL HOTEL”--THE “CANADIAN COURANT”--AMERICAN
    INFLUENCE--THE “HERALD”--WILLIAM GRAY AND ALEXANDER
    SKAKEL--BEGINNINGS OF COMMERCIAL LIFE--DOIGE’S DIRECTORY--MUNGO
    KAY--LITERARY CELEBRITIES--HERALD “EXTRAS”--WATERLOO--POLITICAL
    PSEUDONYMS--NEWSPAPER CIRCULATION--THE ABORTIVE “SUN”--A
    PICTURE OF THE CITY IN 1818--THE BLACK RAIN OF 1819--OFFICIAL,
    MILITARY AND ECCLESIASTICAL LIFE--ORIGIN OF ART, MUSIC, ETC.


Colonel Moses Hazen, who took command of Montreal, on April 1,
1776, for the congressional cause, was shrewd when in order to
strengthen their position he wrote to General Schuyler for a
printer, and Benjamin Franklin did a good thing for Montreal when
he brought Fleury Mesplet, the French printer, and his plant with
him, to the Château de Ramezay as an adjunct to the commission
which was to seduce the French Canadians from their allegiance.
Though this aim failed Mesplet remained behind on his own account
after the commissioners had returned on their bootless quest and
after publishing two works he started the “Gazette du Commerce et
Littéraire Pour Le Ville et District de Montreal” which first saw
light in French on Wednesday, June 3, 1778. His previous address
to the public announced that the subscription was to be two and
a half Spanish dollars per annum. Subscribers would pay one
Spanish dollar for every advertisement inserted in the said paper
during three weeks successively, non-subscribers one and one-half
Spanish dollars, and the paper was to be a quarter sheet. The
first number was rather literary than commercial. Advertisements
came with the second number. Jean Bernard exhorts the public not
to throw their wood-fuel ashes away. He would buy them at ten
coppers a bushel. In number four occurs the advertisement: “Ran
away on the 14th instant, a slave belonging to the widow Dufy
Desaulnier, aged about thirty-five years, dressed in striped
calico, of medium height and tolerable stoutness. Whoever will
bring her back will receive a reward of $6, and will be repaid
any costs that may be proved to have been incurred in finding
her.”

The Gazette du Commerce did not realize its name for some time,
there being in the small community a dearth of such, as Mesplet
deplored in the first paragraph of No. 1. Very little political
news ever filtered through the Gazette, but the arrival and
departure of governors was safe; consequently he printed the
address of Colonel Sevestre commanding the militia at Montreal
to Sir Guy Carleton, who finished his term of office in July,
1778; and the reply commending the virtues and experience of his
successor, General Haldimand.

The issue of August 12, 1778, records the latter’s visit thus:

“On the 8th instant at 6 P.M. General Haldimand made his entrance
into the town amid discharges of artillery from the citadel
and the vessels in the harbour. The English merchants were in
the front, followed by the Canadian Militia and the regulars,
the whole forming a line from the Quebec gate to the Company’s
house, where His Excellency now resides. A band of 600 Indians,
with Messrs. St. Luc de la Corne and Campbell, their officers
and interpreters at the head, came out of the town and welcomed
the new Governor with cries which proclaimed the joy they felt
at his arrival. The citizens of the two nations proved their
gratification by their enthusiasm and cheerful countenances.”

The next number does not appear, apparently being suppressed by
the new Governor, but in the succeeding week it again was issued
through the good graces of certain leading citizens who had
procured him this liberty. He promises gratitude to the Governor
and the succeeding numbers are strictly literary subjects, such
as discussions on the opinions of Voltaire and the utility of the
establishment of an Academy of Science.

In April, 1779, Mesplet invited criticism on a recent judicial
decision, for which he was summoned to court and reprimanded
against any repetition of the offence. But he was recalcitrant
and in the fall he was arrested and taken to Quebec, the paper
being suspended apparently till 1785.

By 1788 Mesplet’s paper was enlarged from quarter to foolscap
four pages, printed in double columns in French and English. It
seems to have become more of a newspaper and news a month old was
served up to eager Montrealers. In 1789 there was still little
commercial news, but there was a “Poet’s Corner” and several
poems of Robert Burns, then rising to fame, are honoured there.
In this year political discussion, a subject in the early days
tabooed, appears in the Gazette. A correspondent discussing the
burning question of a House of Assembly sums up thus:

“We are all Canadians and subjects of Great Britain. The
distinction of old and new subjects ought to have been done away
with long since. The prosperity of this country must depend on
the unanimity that prevails amongst us. I am of the opinion that
much good may be derived from a House of Assembly. Yet I fear
the consequent evils, one of which is taxing a country unable to
support the dignity of a House. The peasantry would not easily
digest what that House of Assembly might impose and few, if any,
of their class would be able to share in the legislation. It
will, therefore, be the policy of Government to procrastinate
this event until the province is really and fully Anglified,
when, perhaps, a House of Assembly may be better known and
received with the united voice of approbation.”

Up to this year the paper was published by F. Mesplet, 40 Notre
Dame Street. In 1795 it passed into the hands of Thomas A. Turner
and was issued from an office on the corner of Notre Dame Street
and St. Jean Baptiste. By 1804 it had passed over to E. Edward,
135 St. Paul Street.

The date of November 10, 1804, records the movement for the first
theatre in Montreal.

“Mr. Ormsby from the Theatre Royal, Edinburgh, respectfully
informs the ladies and gentlemen of Montreal that he intends,
with their approbation, establishing a company of comedians
in Canada, to perform in Montreal and Quebec alternately. The
theatre in this city is fitted up in that large and commodious
house next door to the Post Office, where will be presented on
Monday evening, 19th inst., a comedy in five acts called ‘The
Busy Body,’ to which will be added the much admired farce called
‘The Sultan.’

“N.B. Particulars in advertisement for the evening: Boxes, 5s;
gallery, 2s. 6d. Tickets to be had at Mr. Hamilton’s Tavern, the
Montreal Hotel and at the theatre where places for the boxes may
be taken.”

The news of the death and victory of Lord Nelson at Trafalgar
on October 21, 1805, reached Montreal in the winter of 1805-6
and was the occasion of great activity among the inhabitants, so
that immediately a subscription was taken up to raise their first
monument. A committee was appointed and these in conjunction with
Six Alexander Mackenzie, Thomas Forsyth and John Gillespie, then
in London, took steps to raise it. The Governor-General, Sir J.
Craig, having given the magistrates a piece of ground for general
improvement, these granted a portion of it, at the upper end of
the new market place, as a site for the intended column. The
foundation stone was laid on August 17, 1809, and the monument
was built of grey compact limestone of the district.

The four panel ornaments were of artificial stone invented by
Coade & Seeley, of London. The battle of the Nile is represented
on the north side. That on the east represents the interview
between Lord Nelson and the Prince Regent of Denmark on the
landing of Lord Nelson after the engagement off Copenhagen.
The panel on the south side facing the river commemorates the
battle of Trafalgar. The west side has the neatest panel, being
ornamented with cannon, anchors and other appropriate naval
trophies with a circular wreath surrounding the whole inscription:

                          In Memory of
      The Right Honorable Vice-Admiral Lord Viscount Nelson
                         Duke of Bronté
    Who terminated his career of Naval glory in the memorable
                       Battle of Trafalgar
                  On the 21st of October, 1805,
                   After inculcating by Signal
                         This Sentiment
              Never to be forgotten by his Country,
          “ENGLAND EXPECTS EVERY MAN WILL DO HIS DUTY.”
            This monumental column was erected by the
                     Inhabitants of Montreal
                        In the year 1808.

The expense of this column when complete with the iron railing
was £1,300. In the first cut stone at the east corner of the
base, a plate of lead was deposited bearing the following
inscription:

“In memory of the Right Honourable Admiral Lord Viscount Nelson,
Duke of Bronté, who terminated his career of naval glory on the
21st of October, 1805, this monumental pillar was erected by a
subscription of the inhabitants of Montreal, whereof the Hon. Sir
John Johnston, Knight and Baronet, the Hon. James Monk, Chief
Justice of Montreal, John Richardson, John Ogilvie and Louis
Chaboillez, Esquires, were a committee appointed for carrying it
into execution, and the same was erected under the direction of
William Gilmore, stone cutter and mason, from designs obtained
from Mitchell, an architect in London.--17th August, 1809.”

Returning to the Gazette, a sidelight of 1806 thrown by an
advertisement of William Gilmore, dated 7th June, reveals to us
the apprenticeship system as then in vogue. It may seem to some
an industrial tyranny.

“Ran away from the subscriber: Alexander Thompson, an indentured
apprentice, about 22 years of age, 5 ft. 5 in. in height, red
curly hair and bandy legs. All persons are hereby forbid hiring
him under penalty of law. Any person who will bring him back
shall receive three pence reward, no charges paid.”

Thus far the Gazette. The history of the Gazette of today, its
successor, may be found in “Montreal, the Commercial Metropolis
of Canada,” 1907.

Let us now present a side light of about this period.

At this time the Montreal Hotel was one of the chief hotels and
it was kept by a Mr. Dillon who had some reputation as a water
colourist of local scenes.

John Lambert, who visited the United States and Canada in 1806,
1807 and 1808, has the following picture: “The only open place
or square in the town,” he says in his account of Montreal,
“except the two markets, under the French Government was the
place where the garrison troops were paraded. The French Catholic
church occupies the whole of the east side of this square; and
on the south side, adjoining some private houses, is a very good
tavern, called the Montreal Hotel, kept by Mr. Dillon. During my
stay in this city I lodged at his house and found it superior
to any in Canada; everything in it is neat, cleanly and well
conducted.” From his characterization of the landlord, one is
somewhat disappointed that he does not mention his artistic
gift. “The old gentleman,” he says, “came out in the retinue of
Lord Dorchester; he is a very ingenious character.” But then,
instead of commending his water colors, as one would naturally
expect, Lambert concludes his notice of Dillon in these words:
“and fond of expressing his attachment to his King and country
by illuminations and firing his pedereroes off in the square.”
Lambert also refers to the new parade ground. “At the back of
the town, just behind the new courthouse, is the parade ground
where the troops are exercised.” And, after some further words of
description, he proceeds to suggest a truly attractive picture
of suburban Montreal in the early nineteenth century. “Here,” he
says, “the inhabitants walk of an evening and enjoy a beautiful
view of the suburbs of St. Lawrence and St. Antoine, and the
numerous gardens, orchards and plantations of the gentry, adorned
with neat and handsome dwelling houses.” These, with green fields
interspersed, lead up to the mountain from which the island and
the city have taken the name of Montreal.

We will now turn to a new literary venture.

[Illustration: About 1875 NELSON’S MONUMENT The building on
the left is the house originally built in 1720 by Baron de
Becancourt. It became the store of the Campagnie des Indes,
which in the French times answered to the Hudson’s Bay Company.
This was also the residence of the Hon. James McGill, founder of
McGill University. It was demolished in 1903.]

After the Gazette there came the “Canadian Courant” founded
at Montreal in 1807 by Nahum Mower, a native of Worcester,
Massachusetts. There came with him Stephen Mills, who was born
in Rozalton, Vermont. The latter remained at Montreal till 1810,
when he went to Kingston, where he founded the Kingston Gazette.
He became a minister in 1835. These two New Englanders placed a
distinctly American stamp on the new paper. The name “Canadian”
was revolutionary to the old British colonists, but it pleased
the French. The “Courant” lasted until between 1835 and 1840.
That it should have continued its existence so long, looked on
with suspicion by the chief English residents as democratic
and revolutionary, would suggest that it was subsidized either
by American merchants, for the trade relations now between
the two countries were becoming intimate and profitable, or
by the government of the United States, who, baulked in their
revolutionary designs hitherto, were still desirous of seducing
the neighbouring “Fourteenth” colony from its allegiance.

Nahum Mower left in 1829, and in his valedictory he claims to
have made good his pledge in the first number that he “should
make it his duty to become a good subject and endeavour others
to continue so.” He worshiped, till 1813, when he sold his pew,
in St. Gabriel’s Church, the only non-Anglican church then
in existence, and the temporary home of all English-speaking
non-conformists. Still he was accused of undue intimacy with the
enemies of the British Connexion in Canada, especially during the
troublous times of 1812 and the years of apprehension after.

The Canadian Courant had an early rival in the Montreal Herald,
which published its first number on Saturday, October 19, 1811.
Its first printer and founder was a young Scotchman, William
Gray, of Huntly, Aberdeenshire, born on August 12, 1789. He
arrived in Montreal in June, 1811. In 1812, May 25th, he was
married to Agnes Smith, of Aberdeen, by the Reverend Mr.
Somerville. William Gray, as surmised by Doctor Campbell in his
“History of St. Gabriel’s Church,” seems to have been related in
some degree of cousinship to Alexander Skakel, the most noted of
the Montreal early British schoolmasters. He died at the early
age of thirty-three, on February 28, 1822, having caught a cold
on a journey in a Durham boat on his way from Toronto to attend
to his business affairs, on hearing that in his absence his
office had been mobbed by a crowd of French-Canadians, displeased
with the tone of some of his articles. This young editor has left
behind him a record of personal probity, good discernment and
strong personal courage. His task in 1811 was no easy one--to
establish an independent and unsubsidized paper in a small town.

The files of the early Herald give a contemporary picture of
life of the community. Canada then had about four hundred
thousand inhabitants, of whom most were in the Lower province;
about four thousand five hundred regular British troops were
mostly stationed there, also. Upper Canada consisted of only a
few settlements, scattered here and there on the highways. Fur
trading was the basic industry of the colony and its headquarters
was at Montreal, the home and storage centre of the wealthy fur
traders of the Beaver Hall Club. Agriculture was neglected till
after the War of 1812, when it became realized that farming
should be the staple industry of the colony. Unskilled labour
was then performed by French Canadians, for there was yet no
British immigrant labouring class. The skilled artisans came
mostly from across the border, but the lesser storekeepers and
merchants, chiefly Scotch, with an admixture of English and
Yankees, were beginning to build up the permanent commerce of the
city that was not always to be exclusively that of the fur trade.
Among the business men then building up Montreal trade who were
already well established before the war of 1812 were Alexander
Henry, auctioneer; Benaiah Gibb, merchant; John Dillon, lumber
merchant; James Brown, book-seller and owner of the Gazette;
Peter McCutcheon, merchant; James and Andrew McGill, Forsyth,
Richardson & Company, Maitland, Garden & Auldjo, Woolrich &
Cooper, John Shuter, Samuel Gerrard, John Molson & Son, brewers
and steamboat proprietors; Daniel Arnoldi, surgeon, and others.

The first home of the Herald, as far as ascertainable, was the
23 St. Paul Street given in Doige’s Directory of Montreal in
1819, the first systematic list of Montreal addresses. There
is no proof of its having moved from elsewhere since 1811. On
either side of it were two taverns, the Montreal Academy, a
famous school kept by William Ryan, the residence of Joseph
Papineau, eminent notary and public notary and father of the
famous Louis Joseph, who was to become the “patriot” leader, and
a small bookshop kept by a J. Russell. Near at hand, following
Doige’s numbering, was the commissariat office and the residence
of Colonel McKey, of the Indian Department, while a few doors
away was the house of Peter McCutcheon, the famous merchant who
afterward took the name of McGill. The “Canadian Courant” was
established at 92 St. Paul Street, barely thirty doors from the
Herald, and shared its premises with Daniel Campbell, a grocer.
William Gray lived above his printing premises, as did his editor
in 1819, Doctor Christie, and probably the latter’s predecessor,
Mungo Kay, who was a Montreal merchant before he took to the
journalist’s pen. At that date, and indeed for many long years,
most of the storekeepers on St. Paul Street lived over their
places of business. St. Paul Street was then the chief retail
street; it ran the southern length of the town from the eastern
fortifications of the Quebec suburbs to the western ones, ending
at the present McGill Street. At either end there was a generous
supply of taverns to meet the needs of those coming in from the
country. In between them was a close succession of groceries,
tailor shops, dry goods houses, hardware stores, druggists,
bootmakers, glaziers, plumbers and the like. The Gazette at this
period had its home on St. François Xavier Street.

The newspapers of the period received an addition by the advent
of the first French-Canadian paper issued in Montreal, the
“Spectateur.” They frequently had “brushes” with one another. In
1814, on July 2, a writer for the Herald, probably Mungo Kay,
addressed an ode to a French-Canadian writer in the Spectator
whom he calls “a certain gros bourgeois” and rallying him
concerning a story, evidently known, of his efforts to cozen a
certain negro:

    See, wrapt in whirlwinds, from his stand
    On leathern wings he takes his flight,
    And on fell Mungo, with unequal hand
    Sped rancorous the rodures of the night;
    In deeds of darkness are their chief delight.
    And see, advancing ’thwart the storm
    Deception with his blotted form;
    Who tried the sable African to charm,
    But failed in his attempt to make him green,
    Albeit he the Justice did alarm,
    Who quaked with fear that he ’mong Truth’s friends should be seen.

[Illustration: THE PRESS BUILDINGS: The Herald]

[Illustration: THE PRESS BUILDINGS: La Presse]

[Illustration: THE PRESS BUILDINGS: The Star]

[Illustration: THE PRESS BUILDINGS: La Patrie]

Next week another satiric poem was addressed to certain
“Spectators” who had two urns.

    “One flows for B. and M----r warm with praise,
      And one for M----o bitter gall displays.”

For B. read Brown (John), the owner of the Gazette; for M----r,
Mower (Nahum), the proprietor of the Courant; and M----o for
Mungo Kay. Mungo Kay is credited by the Gazette in an obituary
notice of him in 1813 on his death on September 18th, as having
as editor for nearly seven years justified his choice of motto:
“Aninos Novitate Tenebo”--“I will hold attention by means of
novelty.” This was not meant to be satire but a tribute to his
efforts to obtain the earliest intelligence. The Herald early
began its “extra special additions.” In 1812, before it had been
a year in existence, the Quebec Gazette reprinted such a special
edition with the following acknowledgment:

“We beg the editors of the Herald to accept our thanks for their
attention in transmitting the intelligence of the surrender of
General Hull. This is not the first time that the public has been
indebted to them for early intelligence.”

News in those days was hard to obtain, but even if a month late
it was read with avidity, for the Napoleonic wars, involving the
peace and security of the mother country and their own colony,
which became involved in all British quarrels, found a passionate
source of interest in the truly colonial loyalists of Montreal,
who were surrounded by ill-wishers, secret or open, on all
sides. It is amusing, however, to read the account of the Battle
of Waterloo under the single line caption “Highly Interesting
Intelligence,” the art of display headlines not then having
become so pronounced.

The news of the victory of Waterloo reached Montreal in July,
1815. Montreal in its joy bethought itself of the widows
and children of those who fell in the fateful battle and in
consequence of a meeting called in the courthouse an amount of
£2,717 16s 8d was soon raised, which was later added to largely.

Of local or colonial news, there being little or none, there was
scant supply. But after 1815 the Montreal papers begin to have
criticisms on matters nearer home. A class of writers now arose,
especially in the Herald, the most daring unofficial paper of the
period, who dealt ably and trenchantly on questions of policy
and administration in Canada. These were written mostly under
mythological pseudonyms to avoid personal responsibility and
attack. This continued for many years. The anonymity of many has
not yet been disclosed in literature, although there must have
been many at Montreal to whom the real authorship was an open
secret. “Nerva,” who wrote in the Herald much to inflame public
opinion, has been disclosed later by the Montreal Gazette in an
obituary notice, to have been the Hon. Samuel Gale, afterwards a
famous justice of the superior court. Others, like “Aristides,”
an early critic of the House of Assembly; “A true Jacobin,”
a violent satirist of abuses in the police administration;
“Observer,” complaining of extortion and sale of justice by
police court officials; “Alfred,” with his suggestion that a
strip of land ten miles wide should be laid and kept absolutely
waste along the American frontiers as the only real safeguard
against renewed invasion after the peace of 1814 (this same
writer also protests earnestly against the insidious effects
of Webster’s republican spelling book); “Veritas,” with his
crushing exposure of the incapacity of Sir George Prevost--these
contributed letters, together with outspoken editorial utterances
written by Gray or Skakel, causing a fluttering in the dovecots
of officialdom.

In 1815 bills of indictment were found against the editor and
printer of the Herald for libel on the commander in chief, but as
Sir George Prevost was recalled the case never came to trial.

The earliest extant copy known of the Herald is dated March 2,
1812. It was a paper 13 inches by 20½ inches, and contained
four pages of four columns, which latter, in 1814, was changed
to five. It started with a circulation of 170 subscribers, 150
being Montrealers. On its third anniversary the statement was
given in the paper that the “weekly distribution rather exceeds
one thousand impressions.” The price was $4.00 per annum. In
August a larger sheet appeared, 15 inches wide by 21½ inches
deep, and was divided into five columns, the editor calling
his paper “a quarter larger than our former or any other paper
published in North America,” and adding “The Herald has more
circulation, probably by some hundred, than any other paper in
Canada.” The enlargement of the sheet, which was followed by
frequent supplementary sheets on a Wednesday, indicate the growth
of advertising and commercial correspondence, and the immense
increase of commerce after the peace. Indeed, at the time an
attempt was made to establish a fourth Montreal paper, “The
Sun.” Its promoters were Lane, a printer on St. Paul Street, and
Bowman, a stationer on St. François Xavier Street. It only lasted
a few issues.

Anti-American animadversions, however, still survived. The
democratic leaders of the time were accused of being supplied
with Yankee money and Yankee ideals. Samuel Sherwood, an American
by birth and an early leader for popular government, was accused
by the Herald of having given traitorous support and advice to
the Americans during the War of 1812 and of keeping the “Sun” and
the Canadian Courant supplied with “Jacobin” information from
American sources.

A picture of the pigmy city of the period, written in 1870 by
Mr. T.S. Brown in a small, forgotten pamphlet entitled “Montreal
Fifty Years Ago”, may fitly help to illustrate this period:

  “On the 28th of May, 1818, I first landed at Montreal. On my left
  was a dirty creek running down inside of a warehouse, being the
  outlet of a ditch, now tunnelled, that then, as a part of the old
  fortifications, ran around the city, westerly from the Champ de
  Mars through Craig street, with dilapidated banks, the receptacle
  of all sorts of filth. Above and below there was a revetment of
  a few hundred feet; except this, the beach and river bank were
  in their natural state. Just above the Grey Nunnery there was a
  cottage with a garden running down to the river, and adjoining
  this a ship yard where vessels continued to be built for some
  years later. Further on, the place of the Lachine Canal was a
  common with three windmills and the graves of three soldiers shot
  for desertion. The Island Wharf was then a little island, far off
  and alone.

  “The city gates and fortifications, such as they were, had
  been removed some time previous. A remnant of walls remained
  at the corner of McGill and Commissioners streets, and between
  Bonsecours street and Dalhousie Square there was a mound of earth
  55 feet high, called the ‘citadel.’ The old rampart on Great St.
  James street had been levelled, but there was no building on the
  west side between St. François Xavier and McGill streets. The
  northern portion had been a cemetery and an old powder magazine
  still stood in the middle of the street.... I came into the city
  through a narrow passage leading to the Custom House Square, then
  the ‘Old Market,’ a low, wooden shed-like building; and along
  the south side of the square was a row of old women seated at
  tables with eatables for sale. Capital street was a succession
  of drinking houses carrying on an active business from morning
  until night.... The largest was that of Thomas l’Italien (Thomas
  Delvecchio), facing the Market with a clock, on which small
  figures came out to strike the hours, to the continued wonderment
  of all, and next came Les trois Rois, of Joseph Donegani. This
  was the center of trade. A new market of similar construction
  had been erected on the present Jacques Cartier Square, running
  from Nelson’s monument (opposite to which was the guard house,
  jail, pillory and courthouse) to St. Paul street, but it was not
  liked. Everybody crowded to the little space of the Old Market
  and habitant vehicles so filled St. Paul street in each direction
  that constables were often sent to drive them down to the new
  market....

  “Along the beach were moored several small ships and brigs,
  constituting the spring fleet.... The city was bounded by the
  river on the east, by Bonsecours street and the Citadel on
  the north, Craig street on the west, and McGill street on the
  south; within which limits all the ‘respectable’ people with few
  exceptions resided. The population in it was nearly as great as
  today--the upper part of nearly every store being occupied as a
  dwelling. All the houses in Notre Dame street were dwellings--in
  its whole length there were but two shops and three auction
  rooms. The cross streets’ buildings were nearly all dwellings
  and commercial business was almost confined to St. Paul street.
  Wholesale stores, except the establishment of Gillespie, Moffat
  & Company, were small indeed compared to the growth of after
  years.... There were numerous shops for country trade, all doors
  and no windows, always open winter and summer, with a goodly
  portion of the stock displayed outside, where salesmen without
  number were stationed to accost and bring in customers, who were
  often dragged forcibly....

  “Nunneries occupied more space than now--the Hotel Dieu making
  an ugly break in St. Paul street. Of churches there were few....
  The city was composed of one and two story houses, very few of
  three stories, built, with very few exceptions, of rubble stone,
  plastered over. All the stores and many of the houses had iron
  doors and shutters; many buildings had vaulted cellars and many
  had the garret floored with heavy logs, covered with several
  inches of earth, and flat paving stones, with a stone staircase
  outside, so that a roof might burn without doing other damage....

  “Four streets leading to the country--St. Mary’s, St. Laurent,
  St. Joseph and St. Antoine--were bordered by houses, mostly of
  wood--one story, but intervening streets were short and vacant
  ground extensive. Log fences divided fields on the west of Craig
  street as far as Beaver Hall Hill, which was a grassy lawn with
  a long, one-story wooden building across the summit and a garden
  behind. All to the west of this was open fields where now stands
  the city of our richest people....

  “Village primitiveness had not disappeared in Montreal fifty
  years ago. Old men sat out on the doorsteps to gossip with
  passing friends and often the family would be found there of an
  evening. In the suburbs neighbours would collect for a dance in
  the largest house and any respectable passer-by was welcomed if
  he chose to step in.... Business relations were more intimate
  between French and English fifty years ago than now, and I think
  there was more kindly feeling.... But social relations were much
  as they are now, the races keeping separate in their charities,
  their amusements and their gatherings. The English were more
  dominant--they were more generally the employers, the French the
  employed.”

November of 1819 was marked by an alarming natural phenomenon.
On Sunday the 9th a dense black rain descended, depositing a
substance which to the eye and taste resembled common soot. On
the following Tuesday, after a dark morning of gloom, with the
sun clouds at times greenish black, pitch black, dingy orange
colour and blood red, so that some thought that the history of
Pompeii or Herculaneum was to be repeated, and feared that Mount
Royal, reported already to be the extinct crater of a volcano,
was again in activity. At 3 o’clock in the afternoon rain fell
again of the same sooty character mid fearful lightning and
thunder. At 4 o’clock the summit of the steeple of Notre Dame
Church was struck with lightning. The tocsin sounded a fire
alarm; the steeple was on fire. The people gathered on Place
d’Armes and before the conflagration was extinguished, the great
cross fell with a crash, breaking into many pieces. The rain had
deposited greater quantities of the sooty substance than on the
Sunday preceding and “as it flowed through the streets it carried
on its surface a dense foam resembling soapsuds. The evening
again became darker and thus ended a day which may be classed
among the _dies atri_ of Montreal.”

At this time there was a certain official society life in the
city which was fostered by the young military officers from the
old country, to whom, apart from their extravagances, the colony
is largely indebted for its heritage of culture, literature
and art. The religious situation was filled by three Catholic
churches, the Notre Dame parish church, built in 1672; the
Bonsecours Chapel, rebuilt in 1771, and the “Recollets,” built
in 1695, and loaned at different periods to the Anglicans and
Presbyterians till they had their own temples. There were two
Protestant churches, the Anglican Christ Church, which was the
old disused Jesuit church till 1803, but which was now in its
own edifice on Notre Dame Street in 1814, and the Presbyterian
or Scotch chapel on St. Gabriel’s Street, built in 1792. The
religious horizon was not clear. The Catholics and Presbyterians,
or non-Conformist group, both had grudges against the Anglicans,
arising from the question of the clergy reserves by which,
according to the Constitutional Act of 1791, the Anglicans were
the established church and reserves of land were provided for
their growth and expansion to the exclusion of other Protestant
denominations, who resented this privilege in a new country,
especially by the “Church of Scotland,” who claimed equal rights
to establishment, and the Catholics who had become civilly
crippled and disestablished since the conquest, when they came
under the same condition of the civil disabilities meted out to
the Catholics in the old country.

The government officials and most of the British military
officers therefore attended the Anglican services, while the
fur lords and the traders, those of St. Gabriel’s church. The
newspapers took sides. The Gazette followed the government
party, while the Courant and the Herald voiced the views of
the dissentients. In 1825 the Herald was bought by Archibald
Ferguson, a rich merchant of Montreal, for the express purpose
of upholding the rights of the Presbyterian church to a share in
the clergy reserves, on the ground that the Scottish Church in
Canada should be considered as much an established church as that
of the Anglicans. Eventually it gradually came to be recognized
in the courts that there were three “established” churches in
Canada, the Anglicans, the Scottish and the Catholics.[1] But
the increasing number of non-conformist bodies arising could
not brook this, and so the old opposition against the “clergy
reserves” was renewed and it was not till 1854 that this long
burning question was settled by total diversion of the reserves
from all religious purposes.

We may now return to the story of the Constitutional struggles
again about to commence and in which Montreal was to take a
leading part.


FOOTNOTES:

[1] The historical development of the churches of Montreal is
specially treated in the second part of this volume.




                           CHAPTER XV

                    BUREAURACY vs. DEMOCRACY

                THE PROPOSED UNION OF THE CANADAS

  REPRESENTATIVE GOVERNMENT--MUNICIPAL AFFAIRS--FRENCH-CANADIANS
    AIM TO STRENGTHEN THEIR POLITICAL POWER--THE “COLONIAL” OFFICE
    AND THE BUREAUCRATIC CLASS VERSUS THE DEMOCRATIC REPRESENTATIVE
    ASSEMBLY--L. J. PAPINEAU AND JOHN RICHARDSON--PETITIONS FOR
    AND AGAINST UNION--THE MONTREAL BRITISH PETITION OF 1822--THE
    ANSWER OF L.J. PAPINEAU--THE LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL--THE BILL FOR
    UNION WITHDRAWN. NOTES: NAMES OF JUSTICES OF THE PEACE FROM
    1796 TO 1833--MEMBERS OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY FOR MONTREAL
    DISTRICT, 1791-1829--PETITION OF MONTREAL BRITISH--1822.


The new Constitution of 1791 was honestly framed with the desire
of giving a measure of representative government, but it was
used, before long, by an oligarchy of the bureaucratic classes to
whom the governors were victims. In Lower Canada the bureaucratic
party opposed the French-Canadians and many of those of British
origin. Furthermore there was added the development of a race
enmity which ended so disastrously in the uprising of the
“patriots” in 1837. The political situation was tense for half a
century. The fight for mastery was between the legislative and
executive council appointed by the Governor, and the legislative
assemblies elected by the people.

Montreal felt the strain keenly. Viewed municipally its affairs
were regulated from Quebec. The Parliament there exercising
similar powers to those of our municipal council of today, but
greater. The justices of the peace nominated by the executive
council of the Province were but the executive arm carrying out
the will of Quebec.

The constitutional struggles of this period so affected the life
of Montreal, that to preserve a true picture we must still study
their history. Passion always showed itself there more than
elsewhere.

The war with the United States being over, the prevailing
sentiment of all parties was one of loyalty to Great Britain. To
none was this more attributable than to the French-Canadians,
for they saw that an alliance with the States would swamp them
politically and subvert their religion. They turned their
attention to securing a strong hold on the management of
government with the intention of strengthening the position
granted them by the Quebec and Constitutional acts in the
retainment of their laws, institutions and customs. They were
learning self-government. They were beginning to demand a form
of responsible government. Not, indeed, as it was afterwards
understood, for it took the form only of desiring an elective
council, one that, being outside crown nomination, would give
them real power to control revenues. This the Governors, acting
under instructions from the Colonial Office, were not prepared to
grant. Canada was to be ruled as a colony from Downing Street. It
was in _statu pupillari_.

The history of the next twenty-five years and more reveals the
efforts of the two classes; on the one hand, of the Governors,
the legislative council, the office holders under government,
British and French-Canadians and the wealthier British merchants,
whose interests lay in being in combination with the governing
classes; and on the other, the majority of the people feeling
their power, using their new freedom and striving democratically
to make their numerical superiority give them the dominance they
thought their right. Add to this the natural tendency of any
democratic assembly to assert itself and to claim the fullest of
powers for itself. Hence the House of Assembly, reflecting the
people, is seen to be in constant opposition to the executive
council, sometimes extravagantly asserting itself and running
to extremes. Thus attacked, the bureaucratic party grew nearer
together. Hence two spirits of suspicion and race enmity were
being formed. All this was reflected in the life of the people
and nowhere more strongly than in Montreal.

It would be tedious to follow the various sessions of Parliament,
even to watch the Montreal county and town representatives such
as the members for Montreal West, L.J. Papineau, the son of
Joseph Papineau, now being in the ascendant and the incarnation
of the most advanced Canadian pretensions, and Mr. Richardson,
a Montreal merchant, a member of the council of legislature
who represented the British minority, strongly siding with the
government. The tension existing between the two parties was
voiced by Mr. Richardson in 1821, when he exclaimed: “How can
we (the legislative council) rescind our resolutions when there
is a secret committee sitting in the House of Assembly which
is, perhaps, deliberating on the appointment of the governor of
their choice and on the removal of the person now in the castle,
and putting their own in his place. The committee even sits
without the knowledge of several members of the house of which
there is no example in England except in the times of Charles
I. The committee is, perhaps, a committee of public safety.”
(“Christie,” Vol. II, page 72.)

The words produced a hurricane. The assembly passed resolutions
calling for Mr. Richardson’s removal from all posts of honour.
The adverse state of feeling may be best described by the passion
aroused over a supposed act for the union of the two provinces in
1822, when the legislatures were to be united under the name of
“the legislative council and assembly of the Canadas.” The bill
was introduced in the English parliament by Sir Wilmot Horton,
Under Secretary of State of the Colonies. It was opposed by Sir
James McIntosh and others on the ground that Canada had not been
made aware of the contemplated changes, which was very true.
Consequently the bill was delayed.

In November Lower and Upper Canada were preparing their petitions
for and against the proposed union, both French and English names
being attached to the petition. Quebec was against it; Montreal
district was divided. The French constitutional committee also
refuted it. The names of those present embrace the Honourables:
L.J. Papineau (chairman); Chs. de St. Ours, M.L. C.; L.R.C. de
Léry, M.L.C.; P.D. Debartzch, M.L.C.; Chs. de Salaberry, C.K. and
M.L.C.; and Messrs. Louis Guy, Frs. Derivières, D.B. Viger, M.P.
P., J. Bouthillier, J. Bedard, J.R. Roland, H. Cuvillier, M.P.P.,
H. Henry, M.P.P., F.A. Quesnel, M.P.P., Louis Bourdage, M.P.P.,
F.A. Larocque, J. Quesnel, and R.J. Kimber. Eventually L.J.
Papineau and Mr. John Neilson were chosen to proceed to England
to represent the non-union case. Lower Canada as such prepared
a petition against the union. It is claimed to have been signed
by 60,000 by signature or by a mark. The Montreal bulky petition
of twenty-nine pages in favour of the union from His Majesty’s
“dutiful and loyal subjects of British birth and descent,
inhabitants of the city and county of Montreal” bore 1,452
signatures and the date, December, 1822. The committee in charge
of forwarding the petition was: John Richardson (chairman);
C. W. Grant; J. Stuart; S. Gerrard; George Garden; Fred’k W.
Ermatinger; Samuel Gale; G. Moffatt; John Molson; John Fleming.
Mr. Stuart was chosen to present the case for union in England.

The petition represented that the division of the Province of
Quebec into two provinces has been prolific of evil; that it
has resulted in that the English population of Lower Canada has
been rendered inefficient from the comparative smallness of
their numbers since the whole power of the representative branch
of the government had been given to the French-Canadians, so
that of fifty members who represent Lower Canada only ten are
English; that the assembly may indeed be said to be exclusively
in possession of the uneducated peasantry of the country,
under the management and control of a few of their countrymen
whose personal importance, in opposition to the interests of
the country at large, depend on the continuance of the present
vicious system; that the speaker elected by the assembly was
never of English origin “although if regard had been had to
ability, knowledge and other qualifications, a preference must
have been given to persons of that description;” that the
French-Canadian population hitherto unused to political power
had not used it with moderation, so that British emigration had
been prevented; that the advancement of the colony was paralyzed;
agriculture and “all commercial enterprise and improvement have
been crippled and obstructed and the country remains with all
the foreign characteristics which it possessed at the time of
the conquest; that is, in all particulars French. The division
into two provinces would result in Upper Canada availing itself
of the advantages offered to trade with American seaports
through the new canal system being elaborated by the state of
New York. Secondly it has resulted in the continual disputes
between Upper and Lower Canada respecting revenues from import
duties, which can only be settled by the union of the provinces
under one legislature. The petition refers to the desire of the
French to establish a separate nation under the nature of the
“Nation Canadienne.” The petitioners in conclusion beg leave to
“specify succinctly the benefits to be expected from a Union of
the Provinces. By this measure the political evils complained
of in both Provinces would be removed. The French population
in Lower Canada, now divided from their fellow subjects by
their national peculiarities and prejudices and with an evident
disposition under the present system to become a separate people,
would be gradually assimilated to the British population of
both Provinces; and with it moulded into one people of British
character and with British feelings. All opposition of interest
and cause of difference between the Provinces would be forever
extinguished: an efficient Legislature, capable of conciliating
the interests of the Colony with those of the Mother Colony, and
providing for the security and advancing the agricultural and
commercial prosperity of the country, would be established, by
means of which the international improvement of both Provinces
would not only be rapidly promoted with the consequent benefits
thereto arising from Great Britain, but the strength and capacity
to resist foreign oppression be greatly increased: the tie of
connection between the Colony and the Parent State would be
strengthened and confirmed and a lasting dependence of the
Canadas on the latter be ensured, to the mutual advantage of
both.”

Having given the British view of the situation it would only be
just to give that of the other side. Analysis of their various
petitions shows that they relied mainly on the wisdom of the
Government in its past enactments which had been successful so
that the country was progressing in agriculture and commerce
in spite of great obstacles. The differences that had arisen
between Upper and Lower Canada relative to revenues were not in
consequence of the division of the two provinces but of temporary
causes which could easily be removed by the acts of the executive
legislature. The Union of the Provinces would only resuscitate
dissension resulting from differences of language, religion,
laws and other local interests. The new bill was directed
against the dearest interests of nine-tenths of the population
of this province. Allusion was made to the injustice of the new
bill which would make English the language of debate, would
exclude many from being elected to the Assembly and would give
humiliating preference to the members of the Assembly from Upper
Canada by affording the minority an equal representation with
those of the Lower Province, whose population was five times as
numerous.

It may be well here to allow the criticisms of Mr. L.J. Papineau
to supply an element underlying the opposition of the opponents
of the bill. In a letter to Mr. R.J. Wilmot, M.P., 23 Montague
Square, London, Mr. Papineau alluding, doubtless, to the Montreal
pro-union petition of which he had known, and speaking for
his committee, wishes to dispel the odious aspersions on the
great body of the people in this province, contained in several
communications intended for England: “such as assertions that
the opposition, manifested in this province on the part of the
population so stigmatized, is the effect of prejudices alone;
alluding to their supposed attachment for France and French
principles; calling them foreigners (foreigners in their own
land!). The bill in question, say these friends of the union,
being so well calculated to Anglify the country which is to be
ultimately peopled by the British race. * * * The preposterous
calumny against the Canadians of French origin as to their
supposed attachment for France requires no further answer than
that which is derived from their uniform conduct during the wars
and the loyalty evinced by them on every occasion. They are not
foreigners in this, the land of their birth; they claim rights
as British subjects in common with every other subject of His
Majesty in these colonies. By what they call Anglifying the
country is meant the depriving the great majority of the people
of this province of all that is dear to men, their laws, usages,
institutions and religion. An insignificant minority wish for
a change and are desirous of ruling against every principle of
justice by destroying what they call Canadian influence, that is
to say, the influence of the majority of men entitled to the same
rights as themselves, of the great mass of the natives. * * * Great
Britain wants no other Anglifying in this country than that which
is to be found in the loyalty and affection of the inhabitants,
no other British race than that of natural born subjects, loyal
and affectionate.”

The opinion of the legislative council of Lower Canada is finally
to be recorded. In its petition it gives its fixed and determined
opinion that the union of the two legislatures in one would only
tend directly to enfeeble and embarrass His Majesty’s government
and finally to create discontent in the minds of His Majesty’s
faithful subjects in this colony. Upper Canada was quite
satisfied with the existing conditions. The chief agitators,
therefore, for the bill were to be found in Montreal and with
them sided the Eastern Townships.

The bill for the union was withdrawn. When it was brought up
later it was more wisely thought out. It did not tread on
established prejudices and rights and it brought with it the
panacea of true responsible government. But at the present date
this was not fully seen. The great objective was to become
independent of the colonial office by a representative and
elective legislative council. It was hoped thus to control all
expenditures. Hence the members of the lower assembly, not
content with the exercise of mere municipal legislation, were
ever asserting their rights in the latter regard and the Colonial
Office as often, checking their aspirations.


                             NOTE I

      NAMES OF JUSTICES OF PEACE OF MONTREAL FROM 1796-1833

  James McGill
  John McKindlay
  St. George Dupré
  Charles Blake
  Louis Porlier
  Thomas McCord
  Pierre Vallèe
  John Lilly
  Robert Cruickshank
  Patrick Murray
  John McGill
  James Finlay
  Neveu Sylvestre
  Alexander Henry
  Gabriel Franchere
  James Walker
  James Alexander Grant
  Joseph Frobisher
  John Richardson
  Isaac Winslow Clarke
  Alexander Auldjo
  William Maitland
  James Hughes
  Simon McTavish
  James Dunlop
  Thomas Forsyth
  John Lees
  Louis Chaboillez
  Jean P. Leprohon
  Jean Bouthillier
  Francois Desrivièrés
  Jean Durocher
  Jean Marie Mondelet
  François Rolland
  Paul Lacroix
  Etienne St. Dizier
  James Caldwell
  Henry Deschambault
  Henry McKenzie
  James Milne
  William McGillivray
  Jean Jorand
  L.C. Deléry
  Chartier de Lothbinière
  Joseph Turgeon
  Archibald N. McLeod
  Louis Guy
  Thomas Porteious
  Joseph Senet
  Francois Ant. Larocque
  William Robertson
  Pierre de Boucherville
  Hughes Heney
  Charles Fremont
  Alexandre Malbut
  Henry Bing
  Louis Marchand
  Thomas A. Turner
  Angus Shaw
  Pierre de Rocheblave
  James Miller
  Fred W. Ermatinger
  Samuel Safe
  George Auldjo
  James Leslie
  John Gray
  George Moffatt
  Jonas Wurtele
  George Garden
  William Lunn
  Horatio Gates
  N.B. Doucet
  Henry Griffin
  Peter McGill
  Robert Frost
  D.C. Napier
  Thomas Barron
  William McKay
  William Prady
  John Fleming
  Charles de Montenac
  David Ross
  Touissant Pothier
  Denis Benjamin Viger
  Joseph Shuter
  John Fisher
  Jules Quesnel
  Adam McNider
  Pierre Lukin
  Benjamin Holmes
  Andre Jobin
  Austin Cavillier
  Joseph Roy
  Joseph Masson
  William Hall
  John McKenzie
  J.P. Saveuse de Beaujeu
  John Forsyth
  Jos. Ant. Gagnon
  Tancrede Bouthillier


                             NOTE II

   MEMBERS OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY FROM MONTREAL DISTRICT FROM
                            1792-1829

              COUNTY OF           MONTREAL            MONTREAL
  SESSION      MONTREAL             WEST                EAST

    1      Joseph Papineau      James McGill        James Frobisher
           James Walker         J.B. Durocher       John Richardson

    2      J.M. Ducharme        Joseph Papineau     A. Auldjo
           E. Guy               D. Viger            L.C. Foucher

    3      Joseph Papineau      James McGill        P.L. Panet
           Thomas Walker        Joseph Perinault    F. Badgeley

    4      Benjamin Frobisher   James McGill        John Richardson
           L. Roy Portelance    Louis Chaboillez    J.M. Mondelet

    5      J.B. Durocher        Wm. McGillvray      J. Stuart
           L. Roy Portelance    D.B. Viger          J.M. Mondelet

    6      J.B. Durocher        E.B. Viger          J. Stuart
           L. Roy Portelance    Thomas McCord       Jos. Papineau

    7      J.B. Durocher        E.N. St. Dizier     Stephen Sewell
           L. Roy Portelance    A.N. McLeod         Joseph Papineau

    8      James Stuart         L.J. Papineau       Sauveuse de Beaujeu
           Aug. Richer          James Fraser        George Platt

    9      James Stuart         L.J. Papineau       L. Roi Portelance
           August Richer        F. Souligny         John Molson

    10     Joseph Perrault      L.J. Papineau       Hughes Heney
           Joseph Valois        George Garden       Thomas Busby

    11     Joseph Perrault      L.J. Papineau       Hughes Heney
           Joseph Valois        George Garden       Thomas Thain

    12     Joseph Perrault      L.J. Papineau       Hughes Heney
           Joseph Valois        P. de Rocheblave    James Leslie

    13     Joseph Perrault      L.J. Papineau       Hughes Heney
           Joseph Valois        Robert Nelson       James Leslie




                           CHAPTER XVI

                      MURMURS OF REVOLUTION

                    RACE AND CLASS ANTAGONISM

  “CANADA TRADE ACTS”--LORD DALHOUSIE BANQUETED AFTER BEING
    RECALLED--MOVEMENT TO JOIN MONTREAL AS A PORT TO UPPER
    CANADA--THE GOVERNOR ALLEGED TO BE A TOOL--EXECUTIVE
    COUNCIL--RIOTOUS ELECTION AT MONTREAL--DR. TRACY VERSUS
    STANLEY BAGG--THE MILITARY FIRE--THE “MINERVE” VERSUS THE
    GAZETTE AND HERALD--THE CHOLERA OF 1832--MURMURS OF THE COMING
    REVOLT--MONTREAL PETITION FOR AND AGAINST CONSTITUTIONAL
    CHANGES--MR. NELSON BREAKS WITH PAPINEAU--THE NINETY-TWO
    RESOLUTIONS--MR. ROEBUCK, AGENT FOR THE REFORM PARTY,
    ADVOCATES SELF-GOVERNMENT--FRENCH-CANADIAN EXTREMISTS--THE
    ELECTIONS--PUBLIC MEETING OF “MEN OF BRITISH AND IRISH
    DESCENT”--TWO DIVERGENT MENTALITIES--THE CONSTITUTIONAL
    ASSOCIATIONS--PETITIONS TO LONDON--LORD GOSFORD APPOINTED ROYAL
    COMMISSIONER--HIS POLICY OF CONCILIATION REJECTED--MR. PAPINEAU
    INTRANSIGEANT--RAISING VOLUNTEER CORPS FORBIDDEN--THE DORIC
    CLUB--“RESPONSIBLE” GOVERNMENT DEMANDED.


The bill for the proposed union, shorn of the notion of union,
came up in the Imperial parliament and passed as the “Canadian
Trade Acts.” Its object was to secure Upper Canada from the
possible injustice and caprice of the legislature of Lower Canada
and the imposition and payment of duties. The act was challenged
in the house of Quebec, but to no avail. In 1824 the president of
the United States claimed the free navigation of the St. Lawrence
to the ocean. This was objected to by the legislative council as
pernicious to the interests of British trade and the merchants
of Montreal in a petition of February 20, 1826, combatted the
admission of the claim.

The constitutional record of the next few years of Montreal
shows the growth of contention between the English and French
population. In 1828 this came temporarily to a head in the
petition and counter petition for the recall of Lord Dalhousie,
the Governor General. Messrs. Denis B. Viger and Cuvillier were
the bearers of a petition from Montreal. Lord Dalhousie was in
consequence appointed commander in chief in India. At a banquet
held in Montreal on June 7, 1828, with the Hon. John Richardson
in the chair, a farewell was given to Lord Dalhousie prior to his
leaving Canada, approving of his just government.

In 1831 a movement began to be advocated, especially in Upper
Canada, that the island of Montreal should be separated from the
Lower province and added to the Upper, so that this might have
a seaport of its own, with power to regulate the duty on the
imports without interference from Quebec. It was argued that in a
few years the Upper province would be in advance of Lower Canada
in agriculture and population. The movement found favour among
the British party in Montreal but was strongly resented by those
of French-Canadian birth. The house in session in 1832 rejected
it as a premeditated and unprovoked spoilation in violation of
the Capitulation treaty. This year, Montreal was incorporated as
a city with a charter. (William V, Cap. 39.)

It was a charge against the legislative council that it consisted
largely of officials holding their places at the pleasure of the
crown and therefore irresponsible to the people and subversive
of its interests. A view of the position of the legislative
council may be seen from the returns that Gov. Gen. Sir James
Kempt (1828-1830) was requested to furnish to the colonial
office. These showed that the legislative council consisted of
twenty-three members, twelve of whom held office under the crown,
sixteen were Protestants and seven Roman Catholics. The executive
council consisted of nine members, only one being unconnected
with government, and all were Protestants with one exception.

In order to gain confidence and to remove the suspicion that the
legislative council was under the influence of local government
and guided in its proceedings by the will of the Governor, which
he alleged to be an absolute misrepresentation, Sir James advised
that one or two of the most important of the assemblymen should
be advanced to the legislature.

Lord Aylmer, who succeeded Sir James Kempt, in a private letter
to Mr. Hay said, on the other hand, that the impression on
the public mind was that a sinister influence was continually
operating on the governor, who was being swayed to a very great
extent by the executive council; although this was not the case,
he thought the public should be satisfied on that head. But he
agreed that Mr. Papineau and Mr. Neilson should be advanced. He
disapproved of Mr. Papineau’s public conduct and language, though
he esteemed his private character. “There is,” he wrote to Mr.
Hay, “one consideration which, more than any other, renders it
desirable, in my view of the matter, to make choice of these
gentlemen. A very general opinion prevails in this country that
the person at the head of the government is always more or less
influenced by the executive council which, whether justly or
otherwise, I will not take it upon myself to say, is not held in
general estimation, and it appears to me that the introduction
of two gentlemen enjoying like Mr. Papineau and Neilson the
confidence of the public, into that body and, as it were, behind
the scenes, would go far towards removing the opinion alluded to,
and which I can positively state, as far as regards myself, is
wholly without foundation.”[1]

In 1832 a vacancy occurred in the west ward of Montreal by
the resignation of Mr. Fisher. As it reflects the turbulent
conflicts that had been going on so long in the House at Quebec
and indicates the high pitch of excitement to which minds were
then brought, a lengthy notice is not out of place. It also
foreshadowed the violent scenes of 1837. The candidates were
Mr. Stanley Bagg, a representative of one of the oldest British
firms in Montreal who shared in the views of British party, and
Doctor Tracy, an Irishman attached to the “Vindicator” which had
espoused the extreme views of the assembly; indeed, he had been
recently imprisoned for his censures on the legislative council.
The contest was very close and lasted for some days. On May
21st, when Doctor Tracy was a few votes ahead, there was every
appearance of a riot around the polls. The Fifteenth Regiment
was called out, the riot act was read but the tumult continued.
The account given by Kingsford’s History of Canada, Volume IX,
pp. 481-99, tells graphically what follows. As the poll was
being closed the partisans of Tracy, headed by himself, rushed
against those of the opposite side. The troops were now ordered
to advance and reached the old Montreal Bank, the site of the
present postoffice. The troops were received with volley after
volley of stone. Colonel McIntosh called to the mob to cease
this aggressiveness, or he would give orders to fire. The troops
continued to advance up St. James Street, giving opportunity for
the mob to retire. The stones continued to be thrown. A second
halt was made. The crowd, now composed almost entirely of Tracy’s
supporters, had greatly increased. The attack upon the military
continued. Again Colonel McIntosh threatened to give the order
to fire. According to the evidence of the lieutenant present,
Mr. W. Dawson, from whose testimony this narrative is taken,
several men in the ranks were severely hurt by these missiles.
The colonel was struck, as was the subaltern. Colonel McIntosh,
still hesitating to act, again warned his assailants. It was
all in vain. To judge by the testimony given at the inquest the
mob evidently believed that the military would not dare to act.
They were cruelly mistaken. The first platoon of sixteen men
were ordered to fire; three of the crowd fell dead, two were
wounded. In a few seconds the street was cleared. * * * It was
the first event of this character in Canada and caused a great
sensation. From the violence shown it was dreaded that the riot
might continue. The consequence was that a detachment with some
field pieces was stationed at the Place d’Armes. During the night
pickets paraded the streets. The _Minerve_ in its continuation
of abuse described the event as the massacre of peaceable,
unarmed citizens, and that in order to make the military forget
their crime they had been abundantly supplied with rum. * * *
No arrests were made. * * * The coroner’s inquest was held. Mr.
Papineau attended every day.[2] * * * Nine witnesses testified
that the soldiers fired upon the people as they were dispersing
after the close of the poll. Three witnesses described the act as
the consequence of the riot. No verdict was given.[3] * * * The
coroner, nevertheless, issued warrants for the arrest of McIntosh
and Temple. They were immediately bailed to the amount of £1,000.
The proceedings of the coroner were set aside as illegal, but the
matter did not stop here. These officers were again arrested and
subjected to much annoyance. Finally, in September, the grand
jury returned the indictment with “no bill.” The same result was
obtained in the case of the magistrates, Messrs. Robertson and
Lukin, indicted on a similar criminal charge as having given
orders to the troops.

The action of the military was approved by the grand jury, and
by the commander in chief, the latter being further commended by
Lord Fitzroy Somerset through Lord Aylmer, the governor general.
An address of sympathetic citizens was presented to the two
officers. La Minerve on the 24th of May, 1832, however, was
implacable. “It is difficult,” it says, “not to be convinced
that there was a desire to make a general massacre. It is
clearly proved that the faction hostile to the Canadians has
been preparing for this atrocity for a long time. The party
that we have opposed for thirty years desired today to shoot
us down. * * * They also wished to shoot Mr. Tracy. * * * Mr.
Bagg’s partisans laughingly approached the corpses and saw with
fierce joy the Canadian blood flowing down the street. They have
been seen shaking hands congratulatingly and regretting that the
number of the dead was not greater. * * * Let us never forget the
massacre of our brethren. * * * Let the names of the wrongdoers
who have planned, advised and executed this crime be inscribed in
our annals handed down to infamy and execration.”[4] (History of
Canada, page 109.)

The funeral of the three Canadians was attended by about five
thousand persons and following the bodies were Mr. Papineau, the
speaker of the assembly, the leader of the French-Canadian party
and his chief supporters.

From this date the tone of the newspapers Le Spectateur at Quebec
and La Minerve at Montreal is noticeably inflammatory in the
demand for the redress of their grievances. On the other hand,
the English papers representing the British party, especially
the Gazette and Herald of Montreal, dealt no uncertain blows
in return and Mr. Papineau fared ill. He was looked upon as a
demagogue inciting dissension and making political capital from
the late misfortune of May 21st.

The memory of the riot was not allowed to die down in the
neighbourhood of Montreal and elsewhere. At Longueuil on June
11th a resolution, provoked by the affair of May 21st, set
forth that “the British government deceived by men who are our
envenomed enemies, are following in a line of conduct leading
to our destruction and slavery; that the fate of the Acadians
is being prepared for us, that the neglect of the frequent
demands of our rights on the part of England had tended to break
the contract between her and us.” In these and other meetings
there was generally a protest against granting to capitalists
independently of the colonial legislature a large portion of the
uncultivated lands of the crown. This was aimed at members of the
British party.

Another protest was at immigration from Great Britain. The
parishes were being inoculated with discontent. This last was
emphasized at this period especially, as in 1832 Canada was
suffering from cholera; from June 9th to September 30th, the
number described as having died being 3,292. It was at this date
that Gross Ile, thirty miles below Quebec, was established by
the provincial executive as a quarantine station on the warning
from the home government, having itself suffered its ravages
in the winter of 1831-2. The disease was thought to have been
brought early in June by the “Carrick” with emigrants from Dublin
containing 133 passengers, of whom fifty-nine had died on the
voyage. The malady is supposed to have quickly spread from the
emigrants to others through Quebec and Montreal. Apparently
the disease did not spread in Upper Canada to any extent. The
boards of health lately established did all they could, by the
establishment of hospitals, to stay the disease. The Montreal
board of health reported on the 26th day of June that there had
been from the 10th to the 25th of June inclusive 3,384 cases and
947 deaths. The Fifteenth Regiment suffered severely. But at the
end of June the disease was abating. A correspondent writing from
Montreal on the 25th of June said that the printers, like others,
had deserted their work a fortnight before, but at the date he
wrote activity was resumed, the stores were again opened and the
markets better supplied. On the 6th of July Lord Aylmer wrote:
“The panic in the public mind is rapidly subsiding and the people
are returning to their ordinary occupations, which at one period
of the prevalence of the disease were almost entirely abandoned.”
The arrival of emigrants during 1831 and 1832 had been numerous.
The official returns for 1831 and 1832 give the numbers as being
48,973 and 49,281.

At Montreal the seriousness of the political and social situation
and the menaces that were looming to the peace and to the
security of life and property, was not blinked. Moderate men of
both parties already heard the rumblings of the revolt of 1837.
A meeting was held at the British American Hotel on the 4th of
November with 500 persons present. Mr. Horatio Gates, a prominent
merchant, was in the chair and many other important men discussed
the situation earnestly. A committee was formed to draft the
petition, to the throne, based on the resolutions of the meeting.
The names reveal the inclusion of weighty French-Canadians: “J.C.
Grant, Hypolite Guy, Alex Buchanan, Jules Quesnel, George Auldjo,
Turton Penn, Pierre Bibaud, Dr. W. Caldwell, Dr. B. Rollin,
Augustin Perreault, T.B. Anderson, Felix Souligny, Joseph Masson,
and J.T. Barrett.”

Briefly the resolutions expressed confidence in the present
system of government, desiring no change in the system of
the legislative council which was an essential product of
the legislature; it was stated that the political excitement
of disaffected persons was creating a want of confidence in
the security of property and had embarrassed all commercial
relations, and it was felt now a boundened duty “to declare their
unalterable attachment to the government, etc.”

This action at Montreal was offset by a petition from Montreal
considered in the session, praying for constitutional changes; it
demanded an elective government in every department; it protested
against any system of emigration which, while being beneficial
to the Upper Province was not so to the Lower. It assailed the
officials for the proceedings consequent upon the riot of May
21st at Montreal. Mr. Leslie, a British merchant of Montreal and
extreme supporter of Mr. Papineau, moved the inquiry into the
affairs of the 21st. On this occasion Mr. Andrew Stewart threw
it into the face of Mr. Papineau that he was creating national
distinctions, that he had given rise to the consternation
which he felt, when he should have shown moderation. During
this session Mr. Neilson also took a decided stand against Mr.
Papineau, the first step towards a break in their political
relationship. The discussion on the events of May 21, 1832, was
deferred to next session. The house was prorogued on April 3,
1833.

This year, 1833, was remarkable as that of coming into effect
of the municipal act of Montreal and Quebec, a forward movement
treated of elsewhere. During the session of 1834 the famous
Ninety-two Resolutions introduced by Mr. Bibaud kept up the
agitation for change and redress. In 1834 Mr. Roebuck, who had
left Canada in 1825 and had, as member for Bath, moved in April,
1834, in the house of parliament in London for the appointment
of a committee to enquire into the means of remedying the evils
in the government of Upper and Lower Canada, took a step which
largely fanned the fire of discontent in Montreal. Addressing
the united and permanent committee of the reform party of
Montreal in favour of self-government as then meditated through a
representative elective legislative council, he advised them to
resist the parliament of Great Britain. He advocated peaceable
methods before taking to arms. But they had to fight sooner than
lose all hope of self-government.

This infused, if possible, more vigour to the pens of the
writers in La Minerve and the Vindicator, of which Doctor
O’Callaghan was editor.[5] Violent attacks on the government
were renewed. French-Canadians were urged to organize for the
revolutionary movement. The moderate French-Canadians were
fearful of the outcome. The British party, in self-defence,
prepared a petition, and a deputation to Quebec to Lord Aylmer
with an address conceived in opposition to the spirit of the
Ninety-two Resolutions. On August 24th Mr. Hume presented Mr.
Bibaud’s Ninety-two Resolutions to the imperial parliament signed
by 18,083 persons. On the 24th of September the supporters of
the Ninety-two Resolutions met and supported resolutions on the
same lines. Among those present was Girod as a delegate from
Verchères; he was a strong adherent of Papineau and later, in
1838, was one of the leaders in the insurrection of St. Eustace.

In October and November the elections took place. In the west
ward of Montreal Papineau and Dr. Robert Nelson were declared
elected by the returning officer Lusignan before the legal time
for the close of the polls had arrived. A protest was made by Mr.
Walker and Mr. Donnellan, the opposing candidates, without avail.
A few days later Mr. Papineau issued a fiery philippic--a common
custom of his--against the Governor General with the effect when
Lord Aylmer visited Montreal later, La Minerve and the Vindicator
appeared with their columns in mourning. In Quebec the new city
council had the insolence to pass a vote not to pay the “visite
de cérémonie” to Lord Aylmer on New Year’s Day.

During November Constitutional Associations were formed in
Montreal and Quebec by the British party who now feared a
separation with the mother country. At Montreal an address was
prepared as a result of a public meeting on November 22d to men
of “British and Irish descent.” It was signed by John Molson,
Jr., and was directed to their fellow countrymen of the Province
of British America for their oppressed brethren of Montreal, and
solicited their “attention to a brief and temperate exposition
of our principles and grievances.” It is a lengthy statement
containing about three thousand words, though not so long as
the grievances of the Ninety-two Resolutions, which occupied
twenty-five pages of the journals of the house in 1834. As we
have not reproduced the latter neither do we those of the British
party, though a perusal of each would give a vivid picture of
the seriousness of the situation and the tension on both sides.
It was the conflict of two mentalities become, for the time,
hopelessly irreconcilable and highly inflamed by the vision
of their real or imaginary grievances and injustices. It was
commercial progress and British expansion versus a conservative
agriculturalism and a “nation Canadienne” for Lower Canada.

[Illustration: Drawn by John Murray. ABOUT 1845 St. James Street,
West. The Bank of Montreal on the right]

In February of 1835 the new parliament met. Its proceedings are
more marked with the signs of the anarchy so soon to become a
thing of fact. In answer to the Governor’s address there was
demanded in the name “of the great body of the people without
distinction, the introduction of the elective principles for
the legislative council.” A petition was also prepared for the
king, in which it was claimed that the people at large “fully
participated in the opinions of the majority of the house.”
The real proportion of the constituencies for and against the
Ninety-two Resolutions was less than three to one,[6] the country
parishes largely contributing to this result. The house was
prorogued on March 18th, having sat only twenty-five days.

Scenting trouble, the “constitutional associations” of Quebec and
Montreal prepared to meet emergencies. Branches were multiplied
in other places when possible. Circulars to public bodies and
prominent men over Canada were diffused. The interest and aid of
the United States were canvassed. The statement of grievances
from Montreal signed by John Molson was a dangerous precedent.
Leading men in London were approached. To meet the activity of
Mr. Roebuck, who had recently been appointed an agent for the
reform party, Mr. Neilson was sent to present a petition to the
king from Quebec, and Mr. William Walker that of Montreal. They
left _via_ New York in April. Mr. Roebuck presented the counter
petition of the House of Assembly to the House of Commons on
March 9, 1835. That from Montreal was presented by Mr. Stuart on
March 16th.

The Canadian difficulties were now so notorious that the king
determined to send an extraordinary commissioner. Lord Gosford
was finally appointed and with him were associated Sir Charles
Grey and Sir George Gibbs. These arrived at Quebec on August 23d.
On September 17th Lord Aylmer with his family left for England.
His term of office had been stormy but while vituperation fell
upon him on one hand, he was otherwise sustained by the strong
minority. Lord Gosford came with a policy of conciliation openly
manifested and openly rejected. He met his parliament within
two months after his arrival. His opening speech as governor
general, the longest on record on such an occasion, was delivered
on October 27, 1835. He unfolded his theory of conciliation
and promises of redresses of grievances. The house, however,
was tuned up only for extremes and showed no readiness for
compromise. This lesson has been since well learned, experience
of the failure of any other course having been abundant. The
concluding words of Lord Gosford’s speech are noteworthy and
impressive. “To the Canadians, both of French and British
origin, and every class and description, I would say, consider
the blessings you might enjoy and the favoured situation in
which but for your own dissensions you would find yourselves
to be placed. The offsprings of the two foremost nations of
mankind, you hold a vast and beautiful country, a fertile soil,
a healthy climate and the noblest river in the world makes your
most remote city a port for the ships of the sea. Your revenue is
triple the amount of your expenditure for the ordinary purposes
of government. You have no direct taxes, no public debt, no poor
who require any aid more than the natural impulses of charity.
If you extend your views beyond the land in which you dwell you
find that you are joint inheritors of the splendid patrimony of
the British empire which constitutes you in the best sense of
the term citizens of the world and gives you a home on every
continent and in every ocean on the globe. There are two paths
open to you. By the one you will advance to the enjoyment of all
the advantages which lie in prospect before you. By the other
I will say no more than you will stop short of these, and will
engage yourselves and those who have no other object than your
prosperity in darker and more difficult courses.”

The existence of the Commission was studiously ignored by the
Assembly. But on the 6th of November an amendment to the draft
in answer to the address was moved, approving of the appointment
of the commission as a proof of the wisdom and magnanimity with
“which the grievances of the province had been listened to,
and now confidently hope that the results of its labours will
be satisfactory to all classes.”[7] Mr. Papineau vehemently
attacked the motion. The commissioners were without legal or
constitutional power. Their report, favourable or not, was
immaterial. The motion was voted down by forty-five to eight. The
governor general’s position as such was, however, recognized.

The “Constitutional” associations of Montreal and Quebec,
composed of those who held substantially by the existing
constitution with certain reforms dictated by expediency, were
meanwhile viewing with dissatisfaction the intransigeant attitude
of the majority of the house. At Montreal it was proposed by the
British population to raise a volunteer corps of 800 strong.
A memorial was sent at the close of December to the Governor
General asking for official sanction for the enrollment and
offering its services to the Government. It was not granted
on the grounds that no rights were in danger and that the
enrollment would endanger public tranquillity. The organization
was proceeded with. Lord Gosford issued a proclamation declaring
it illegal and unconstitutional. The corps was dissolved and in
notifying Lord Gosford he was informed that “As committee men
of the British Rifle Corps we must express to Your Excellency
our regrets that the day has arrived when, in a colony conquered
by British arms, a body of loyal subjects has been treated as
traitors by a British Governor General for no other crime than
that of rousing themselves to protect their persons and property
and to assist in maintaining the rights and privileges granted
them by the constitution.”

In addition a meeting was called and a memorial sent to Lord
Gosford justifying their conduct on the grounds that the
constitution was endangered. They would always be ready to
defend British institutions.[8] It is said that the Doric Club,
a more or less secret society of Britishers, now dated its
formation.

The policy of conciliation was meeting a rebuff on both sides.
The Montreal “Vindicator” later even spoke of “the treacherous
administration of Lord Gosford.”

On the 21st of March, 1836, the parliament was prorogued. There
was the same stubborn determination of the majority of the
assembly to assert itself to overrule the existing constitution
and thus control the situation on the lines of the Ninety-Two
Resolutions so as to make government impossible. It met again on
September 22d. No bills were passed; two were introduced, one
for the appointment of an agent in London, another to amend the
Imperial act of 1791 (an unconstitutional proceeding beyond the
powers of the assembly), with a view of establishing an elective
legislative assembly directly responsible to the representatives
of the people. This appeal for “responsible” government as it
was then vaguely conceived, was always steadfastly pursued as
the basic reform needed to solve all the other grievances under
which the province was suffering. The aim was self-government and
the abolition of the bureaucracy and privileged class incidental
on an appointed legislative council chosen by the Crown. After a
short session of thirteen days in all, the house was prorogued on
October 4th. The parliament of Lower Canada met again on August
18, 1837, but as its members would not transact any business at
all, it was prorogued on August 20th, never to meet again.

The annual meeting of the Montreal Constitutional Association
met in December, 1835. Ward committees were appointed. Among
the principles to be advocated was the abolition of the feudal
tenure, the continued improvement of the harbour of Montreal
and of the canal communications. In February, 1836, Sir John
Colborne was relieved of his position as Lieutenant Governor
of Upper Canada. Before embarking for England he was appointed
Commander-in-Chief of the forces in both provinces. On July 1st
he issued a general order from Montreal on the assumption of
command. In June a movement of a “Constitutional” committee was
afoot in Montreal for the recall of Lord Gosford. It dropped,
however, on opposition from the Quebec Constitutional party.


FOOTNOTES:

[1] “Canadian Archives,” Q. 197, p. 78; see report by Dr. Brymner
for 1899.

[2] The Quebec Gazette justified Mr. Papineau’s being present as
he was acting in his profession as an advocate.

[3] These were French Canadians.

[4] Bibaud, “History of Canada,” Vol. III, p. 109.

[5] Dr. O’Callaghan was subsequently returned to the house of
assembly in the new parliament of 1835 as the representative
of Yamaska. There he was unknown but Mr. Papineau’s influence
carried the seat. In the subsequent parliament he became a
staunch lieutenant of his leader.

[6] Mr. Jacques Viger, the first mayor of Montreal and also
a conscientious historian and archaeologist, made a concise
statement of the political strength of the opposing parties in
the counties, towns and boroughs as recorded in the votes at
the last election for and against the spirit of the Ninety-Two
Resolutions on which the election turned.

                 For                 Against                Not Voting

              361,801½               115,838                 35,619½

  Quebec        7,120½ (i.e. ¼)       20,148½ (i.e. ¾)

  Montreal     13,714  (i.e. ½)        6,254  (i.e. ¼)

One-fourth did not vote, owing to the vacancy in the seat of one
of the representatives. See “Christie,” Vol. V, 238-242.

[7] The commissioners finished their six reports before the end
of 1836. They were eventually doubtless useful to Lord Dunham
in the preparation of his report. The commissioners considered
an elective legislative council undesirable but they formulated
a system of representative government on lines which we now
understand. While granting the government of internal affairs it
strove to preserve the unity of empire.

[8] In the Imperial parliament in 1837 Mr. Robinson quoted La
Minerve of Montreal, which stated that immediate separation
from England was the only means of preserving French Canadian
nationality.




                          CHAPTER XVII

               MONTREAL IN THE THROES OF CIVIL WAR

                            1837-1838

  THE LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL TO REMAIN CROWN-APPOINTED--THE SIGNAL FOR
    REVOLT--FIRST INSURRECTIONARY MEETING AT ST. OURS--DR. WOLFRED
    NELSON--CONSTITUTIONAL MEETINGS--THE PARISHES--THE SEDITIONARY
    MANIFESTO OF “LES FILS DE LIBERTE” AT MONTREAL--REVOLUTIONARY
    BANNERS--IRISH REJECT REVOLUTIONARY PARTY--MGR. LARTIGUE’s
    MANDEMENT AGAINST CIVIL WAR--THE FRACAS BETWEEN THE DORIC
    CLUB AND THE FILS DE LIBERTE--RIOT ACT READ--THE “VINDICATOR”
    GUTTED--MILITARY PROCEEDINGS--WARRANTS FOR ARREST--PAPINEAU
    FLIES--RELEASE OF PRISONERS AT LONGUEUIL--COMMENCEMENT
    OF HOSTILITIES--ST. DENIS--LIEUTENANT WEIR’S DEATH--GEN.
    T.S. BROWN--ST. CHARLES--ST. EUSTACHE--CAPTURE OF WOLFRED
    NELSON--SECOND MANDEMENT OF BISHOP LARTIGUE--DAY OF
    THANKSGIVING--CONSTITUTION SUSPENDED--THE INDEPENDENCE OF
    CANADA PROCLAIMED BY “PRESIDENT NELSON”--THE REGIMENTS LEAVE
    THE CITY--LORD DURHAM ARRIVES--AMNESTY AND SENTENCES--DURHAM
    RESIGNS--THE SECOND INSURRECTION--MARTIAL LAW IN MONTREAL--SIR
    JOHN COLBORNE QUASHES REBELLION--STERN REPRISALS--ARRESTS--TRUE
    BILLS--POLITICAL EXECUTIONS--“CONCORDIA SALUS.”


In the March and April of 1837, the parliament in London
seriously considered the Canadian emergency. On March 6th, Lord
John Russell introduced ten resolutions, which passed. The fourth
stated that it was inadvisable to make the legislative council
of Canada an elective body, but that measures should be taken
to secure for it a greater degree of public confidence, and
the fifth, that while expedient to improve the composition of
the executive council, it was inadvisable to subject it to the
responsibility demanded by the house of assembly.

The news was received with welcome by the British constitutional
party who had clung tenaciously to the crown-appointed executive
as their only hope of adequate representation in the government
of the province. To the national party it came as a signal for
revolt. On May 7th, the first insurrectionary meeting was held
at St. Ours, Dr. Wolfred Nelson having a large share in its
convention. Mr. L.J. Papineau was acclaimed as an O’Connell,
a man called by God as the regenerator of his nation. Other
meetings now began in the parishes of the Montreal district
and Mr. Papineau left his home in Montreal for his mission of
agitation.

On July 6th the constitutional party held a meeting in the
Place d’Armes. On the motion of the Hon. Peter McGill, the Hon.
George Moffatt took the chair. Messrs. Quesnel and de Bleury
were elected vice presidents. Among the resolutions proposed
were those of the necessity of the connections with the mother
country for the prosperity and advancement of the colony and the
necessity of resisting any attempts at dismemberment. A similar
meeting was held at Quebec on July 31st, on which day the news of
the death of William IV reached Canada. On August 1st Victoria
was proclaimed Queen of British North America.

The country districts outside of Montreal were fomenting
revolt. At St. Eustache and St. Benoit “anti-coercion” meetings
were held, as well as at Napierville, seven miles west of the
Richelieu. On August 18th the last parliament of Lower Canada was
called but was prorogued on the members refusing to legislate
because of want of confidence in the Imperial government in
London through its failure to grant their demands. Forty years
later the House of Assembly was reestablished as that of the
Province of Quebec. The proceedings of the last assembly
were regarded by the constitutional association as a virtual
annihilation of the constitution and an address was issued on
September 4th to this effect and signed by the Hon. Peter McGill
and Mr. Badgley as secretary. This address given in full in the
Montreal Gazette on the 9th of September advocates the union of
the legislatures of the two provinces as affording a solution by
giving a fair share of proportional representation to the British
population.

On the 5th of September the new society “Les Fils de Liberté”
held a meeting in Montreal. The members were to meet as a
military corps with arms for the purpose of being drilled
as if under sanction of the government. Its motto was to be
“En Avant!” On October 1st it published a manifesto of which
certain paragraphs clearly disclose its seditionary purpose.
“The authority of a parent state over a colony can only exist
during the pleasure of the colonists; for the country, being
established and settled by them, belongs to them by right and
may be separated from all foreign connection, whenever the
inconveniences, resulting from an executive power residing abroad
and ceasing to harmonize with the local legislature, makes such a
step necessary to the inhabitants for the pursuit of happiness.”
Again: “The separation as commenced between parties which will
never be cemented but which will go on increasing until one of
those sudden, those unforeseen events that attend the march
of time, affords us a fit opportunity for assuming our rank
among the independent sovereignties of America. Two splendid
opportunities have been lost. Let us not be unprepared for the
third.”

Writing on October 6th Sir John Colborne, an old Peninsular
veteran who had fought at Waterloo and was now the commander
in chief of the forces, says: “The game which Mr. Papineau is
playing cannot be mistaken and we must be prepared to expect that
if four hundred or five hundred persons be allowed to parade the
streets of Montreal at night, singing revolutionary songs, the
excited parties will come in collision.” On the 7th of October
the offer of a British rifle corps in Montreal was again politely
declined. Yet those of British, Irish and United States origin
were facing the inevitable conflict foreseen by them.

It soon came. On October 23d a meeting took place at St. Charles
on the Richelieu. Dr. Wolfred Nelson took the chair. Mr.
Papineau, Thomas Storrow Brown, L.M. Viger, Lacoste, Coté, Girod,
and others, being present among the speakers. It was a fine
day and the militia were there. Flags in abundance streamed out
with inscriptions such as “Long live Papineau and the elective
system!” “Down with Debartzch!”[1] “Independence, Lord of the
Eagle Heart and Lion Eye!” “The Canadians know how to die but
not to surrender!” “Papineau and the Majority of the House of
Assembly!” “An elective council, a _sine qua non_ of liberty: I
will conquer or die for her!” A death’s head and cross-bones with
the words “Legislative Council.” (See Montreal Gazette, Tuesday,
31st October, 1837.)

It is said that on this occasion Papineau, fearing the excitement
prevalent, counseled moderation, but Wolfred Nelson rejoined:
“Well, I differ from Mr. Papineau. I think the time has come to
melt our spoons and make balls of them.” A wooden pillar with a
cap of liberty was erected with an inscription in French that
was dedicated to Papineau by his grateful brother patriots of
1837. Lengthy resolutions were passed of no uncertain seditionary
tendency. The British soldiers were encouraged to desert and
assistance was promised. On the same day a great meeting of
constitutionalists was held in Montreal with Peter McGill in the
chair; 7,000 persons were said to be present. The note struck
was the need of organization in anticipation of crimes now
threatening civil life. On this occasion the Irish, abhorring
attempts to connect them with the rebellious party, declared
their readiness to repel by force, if necessary, the enemies of
the constitution.

Next day, October 24th, Monseigneur Lartigue, who had become the
first Catholic bishop of Montreal on September 8, 1835, issued a
mandement taking the view that revolt to constituted authorities
was against the doctrine of the Catholic church. It condemned the
proceedings of the revolutionary leaders at public meetings. He
bade the faithful not to be seduced, and called upon the country
to reflect on the horrors of civil war. On November 6th what Sir
John Colborne had feared, took place. The Doric Club, a kind
of secret society recently founded and joined by a number of
the British and Irish young men, met the “Fils de Liberté.” It
had been reported that the “Fils de Liberté” were to proceed in
procession and to hold a demonstration in the Place d’Armes and
there plant a tree of liberty. A proclamation was issued calling
upon all to refrain from the procession. About 2 o’clock the
“Fils de Liberté” began to muster at Bonacina’s Tavern at the
corner of St. James and McGill streets, opposite the American
church which then stood there. A party of “loyalists” watching
the proceedings provoked the “Fils de Liberté” to chase them
up St. James street, breaking the windows of the loyalists’
houses, among them being that of Doctor Robertson. The members
of the Doric Club now came to the rescue, changing the face of
affairs and driving the opponents “pell mell” down St. Lawrence
Main Street in confusion until they were dispersed. In the early
course of the fracas “Gen.” Thomas Storrow Brown, a leader, or at
least a sympathizer of the “Fils de Liberté,” received an injury
which resulted in the loss of an eye.

The riot act was read in the afternoon and the First Royals and
the artillery, with some field guns, marched through the streets
headed by two French-Canadian magistrates, Mr. Desrivières and
Mr. John Donegani. The loyalists marched to Bonsecours Street and
were, with difficulty, restrained from attacking Mr. Papineau’s
house. The office of the Vindicator on St. Lambert’s Hill, near
Fortification Lane, was gutted, type, presses, paper, etc., being
thrown into the street.

This paper in the reform and malcontent interest had made
itself particularly obnoxious to the constitutionalists. Such
incitements as the following had been appearing in its columns:
“Henceforth there must be no peace in the province, no quarter
for the plunderers. Agitate! Agitate!! Agitate!!! Destroy the
revenues; denounce the oppressors. Everything is lawful when
the fundamental liberties are endangered. The guards die,
they never surrender.” During that night the main guard was
strengthened; pickets were placed on St. Lawrence Main, Place
d’Armes and in the Quebec suburbs. The Montreal Royal Artillery
patroled the streets and Griffintown was paraded by a body of
independent mechanics. On November 9th Sir John made Montreal his
headquarters and his firm conduct gave confidence in contrast
with the dilatory methods of Lord Gosford. Soon Montreal began
to receive fugitives from the parishes, many of these being
magistrates and militia officers and others under government who
had been forced by threats to resign.

On the 12th of November a proclamation was issued against
meetings for military drills. All public assemblies and
processions were forbidden. Volunteer corps of riflemen,
artillery and cavalry were now raised under the authority of the
Government. A new commission of the peace was issued for the
Montreal district. Sixty-one of the former had been struck off.

On November 16th[2] warrants were issued for the arrest of
twenty-six insurgents, among them being Mr. Papineau, Doctor
O’Callaghan, Mr. Thomas Storrow Brown and the accredited leaders
of the “Fils de Liberté.” The principal leaders escaped, Mr.
Papineau flying to Doctor Nelson at St. Denis.

On the same day Lieutenant Ermatinger with a party of eighteen of
the Montreal cavalry was sent to St. John’s to arrest three who
had been instrumental in forcing the resignation of government
officials. They were returning with the prisoners when they were
surprised at Longueuil by a rescue party of two or three hundred
and after some heavy firing the assailants departed with the
rescued prisoners. This victory organized by Mr. Bonaventure
Viger and others, gave courage to the insurrectionists and was
the commencement of hostilities. To counteract the dangers
arising from the éclat of the release, an address to the parishes
was issued and signed by thirteen French-Canadian magistrates of
Montreal, D.B. Viger, Pierre de Rocheblave, Louis Guy, Edouard M.
Leprohon, Etienne Guy, P.R. Leclerc, W.B. Donegani, Charles J.
Rodier, Alexis Laframbroise, Jules Quesnel, Felix Souligny, P.J.
LaCroix, and N.G. Barron, counseling submission to law and order.
“Those who urge you to these excesses,” it said, “are not your
true friends. They have already abandoned you and will abandon
you in a moment of danger, whilst we, who recall you to the paths
of peace, believe ourselves to be the most devoted servants of
the country.”

The insurrection feared was likely to be confined to the counties
bordering on the Richelieu and to the county of Two Mountains
north of Montreal. Consequently detachments of military were sent
from Montreal to the disaffected districts, such as St. Denis
and St. Charles. At St. Denis on November 23d Colonel Gore’s
detachment besieged Madame St. Germain’s storehouse, whither Dr.
Wolfred Nelson had retreated with a number of men and from which
Papineau had already fled early in the day. Gore left behind him
thirteen of the defenders killed, and of his own, six dead, five
wounded, and a spiked howitzer. On the morning of November 23d
the tragedy of the death of Lieutenant Weir of the Thirty-second
regiment took place. He had been sent with dispatches and was
captured by Doctor Nelson’s patrol. He was given to a Captain
Jalibert to be taken in a wagon to St. Charles. On the way
thither Weir attempted to escape. It was alleged that he was
brutally cut down. The autopsy disclosed many sword wounds and
pistol shots. His body was found in the Richelieu weighted down
with stones, lying on its face in two feet of water. On December
8th it was buried with much solemnity. In 1839 Jalibert was tried
for murder but was acquitted.

At St. Charles the insurgents were under the leadership of
Thomas Storrow Brown who, from being in the iron retail trade in
Montreal, now became “General” in the absence of the accredited
leaders. He had lost an eye in the riot of November 6th and was
looked upon as a patriot. At St. Charles the curé, M. Blanchet,
lent his support to the insurgents, one of the few examples
of the clergy meddling in this trying time. The other was M.
Chartier of St. Eustache, who was afterward interdicted by Mgr.
Bourget for his conduct. The engagement at St. Charles took place
on November 24th. Of Colonel Wetherall’s detachment, the official
report gives one sergeant, two rank and file killed, eighteen
wounded, ten seriously. It is difficult to chronicle the returns
of the insurgents. One statement is that 152 of the insurgents
were killed and 300 wounded. The tradition in the village today
is that forty-two were left on the field and a great many
wounded. It is certain that thirty prisoners were received in
Montreal.

In the north of Montreal the insurrection broke down after the
news of St. Charles, so that even at St. Eustache the opposition
offered by Amery Girod and Doctor Chenier collapsed on December
14th, though it is said not without the loss of seventy killed.
The loss of military is reported as one private killed, one
corporal and seven privates wounded. Sir John Colborne had been
in charge of the column. This returned to Montreal on the 16th
with 106 prisoners from the insurrectionary district, including
St. Eustache. The Abbé Chartier escaped to the States; Amery
Girod fled but on the fourth day of his flight he blew his brains
out to avoid falling into the hands of the police. Doctor Chenier
fell pierced with a ball as he was escaping from the window of
the parish church.

On the 29th of November a proclamation had been issued offering
£500 for the apprehension, among others, of Dr. Wolfred Nelson,
Thomas Storrow Brown, Doctor O’Callaghan, Doctor Coté and
Drolet of St. Marie. On December 1st a proclamation offered
£1,000 for the arrest of Mr. Papineau. Mr. Papineau and his
faithful companion, Doctor O’Callaghan, had fled together from
St. Denis to St. Hyacinthe and after the news of the disaster
at St. Charles they made for Swanston in Vermont. Afterwards
he spent some years in Paris. Doctor O’Callaghan never returned
to Montreal, although permitted with Wolfred Nelson and Thomas
Storrow Brown by the _nolle sequi_ of 1843, secured through
Mr. Hippolyte Lafontaine, attorney general under the Union. He
became distinguished at New York as a peaceful translator and
editor of the documentary history of New York. Dr. Wolfred Nelson
escaped in the direction of the United States, but was captured
on December 12th, worn out with hunger and cold, and was taken
back prisoner to Montreal. His courage and uprightness, however,
entitled him to the respectful treatment he was there accorded.
On December 5th martial law was proclaimed and the banks conveyed
their “specie” to the citadel. On January 8, 1838, Mgr. Lartigue
issued a second mandement in which he blamed those who turned a
deaf ear to the clergy, who had warned them against the danger
of listening to the “coryphèes d’une faction” with whom they had
become infatuated.

On February 20th a day of thansgiving was held for the
termination of rebellion and the renewal of peace. This day
also marked the handing over of the administration of Lord
Gosford to Sir John Colborne, who entered on his authority on
the 27th. In the meantime, in London, it had been determined to
send Lord Durham as special commissioner. The act suspending
the constitution of Canada reached Canada in February and
was proclaimed on the 20th of March. A special council[3] of
the legislature was appointed and gazetted on April 5th with
a summons to meet on the 18th. This provisional council was
afterwards dissolved by Lord Durham on his arrival.

About the beginning of March an abortive attempt to arouse
insurgents was made under Robert Nelson, brother of Wolfred, and
Doctor Coté, on the frontier, who were both arrested and handed
to the civil power. Six hundred “patriots” surrendered on this
occasion to General Wool of the United States army. At this time
a fatuous declaration of the independence of Canada appeared in
the Montreal papers signed by Robert Nelson, _president_, by
order of the Provincial Government: the proclamation accompanying
it was also signed by Nelson as Commander-in-Chief.

About the end of April the Glengarry and Lancaster Regiments
marched through Montreal on their way home, their presence being
no longer required, owing to the proclamation of the termination
of martial law on April 27th.

On May 29th Lord Durham arrived with his large staff. One of his
early acts was to issue on the 28th of June an amnesty to all
who had engaged in the late insurrection on giving security for
their good behaviour applicable to those in custody or who had
fled. There was an exception made for eight who were to be
sent without trial to the convict station of Bermuda. These were
Dr. Wolfred Nelson, R.S.M. Bouchette, Bonaventure Viger, Simeon
Marchesseault, Godda, Dr. L.H. Masson, Gauvin, and Desirivières.
Death penalties were to be awarded to L.J. Papineau, Doctor
O’Sullivan, Thomas S. Brown, John Brown (father and son), George
Etienne Cartier and others if they should return of their own
accord. This was afterward annulled. On the 7th of July, Durham
left Quebec for Montreal and the west. In Montreal he was well
received. His stay in the country as a commissioner was, however,
very short. For on September 25th, as the Imperial government
disallowed these ordinances, Durham notified his resignation
to the British government, remaining at his post till November
1st, when he sailed for Quebec.[4] Sir John Colborne assumed the
administration on this day. On the 16th of January, 1839, he
became governor general.

[Illustration: LORD DURHAM]

The second insurrection opened on November 4th, when Robert
Nelson entered Napierville to declare himself President of the
Republic of Canada. During the summer Nelson, Coté, Mailhot and
others of the refugees on the Vermont and New York frontiers had
been organizing the insurrection among the _habitants_ of the
counties of the Richelieu extending west to Beauharnois. The
district of the Two Mountains did not rise this time.

Sir John Colborne was at Sorel when he heard of the Richelieu
gatherings. Posting to Montreal he proclaimed martial law and by
the 7th and 8th of November the military was dispatched from the
city under Sir James Macdonell. The campaign was over by November
10th, when the resistance at Beauharnois was suppressed. Yet but
for the decisive action of Colborne it might have been serious.
Sir John wrote that no fewer than thirteen thousand habitants
had assembled between the 3d and 8th of November expecting to be
furnished arms by their Vermont and New York sympathizers.

If the second insurrection was of less importance its reprisals
were more serious. The first rebellion had passed without the
judicial shedding of any blood and with a generous amnesty. On
the second revolt it was thought necessary by Sir John Colborne
to put the fear of the law into all further harbourers of
treason. A special court martial was constituted in Montreal, and
many suspects were imprisoned. In Montreal 679 had been arrested
in December, and in January following 129 more. Sir Hippolyte
Lafontaine was one, but he was released on December 13th. Mr.
D.B. Viger refused to give a security for his good conduct and
he was kept prisoner until he was specially and unconditionally
released by Governor General Lord Sydenham. Those arrested
elsewhere were few. Of those convicted and sentenced to death,
twenty-seven were pardoned on security of good behaviour. Four
were bound not to come within a stated distance of the frontier.
Of the prisoners tried in Montreal, sixty-eight were embarked
at Quebec on the transport “Buffalo” for New South Wales,
accompanied by eighty-three from Upper Canada. Later, within five
years, they returned, pardoned, to the Province.

In September, 1839, the trial of Jalibert and others for
the murder of Lieutenant Weir took place, and the prisoners
were released. The grand jury found true bills against Louis
Joseph Papineau, Thomas Storrow Brown, Robert Nelson and E.B.
O’Callaghan. The political executions which took place in
Montreal as the aftermath of the January insurrection were twelve
in number. Six were convicted as murderers and five zealous
insurgents of 1838. The last was a foreign adventurer. The
executions were as follows:

Friday, December 21, 1839: Joseph Narcisse Cardinal, a notary
and member of the Assembly for Beauharnois. Joseph Duquette, a
young man who had followed his leader, Cardinal, in the attack of
Caughnawaga.

Eighteenth of January, 1839: Pierre Theophile Decoigne, notary of
Napierville, a leader in the insurrection of January, 1838, at
Napierville. Joseph Jacques Robert, a farmer and leader. François
Xavier Hamelin, a lieutenant of Robert; Ambroise Sanguinet, a
captain; Charles Sanguinet, his brother, a lieutenant; who all
four had been engaged in the murder, in 1838, of one, Walker,
living at La Tortue, seven miles from La Prairie.

Fifteenth of February, 1839: Pierre René Narbonne, a house
painter, present at Napierville. Marie Thomas, Chevalier de
Lorimier, a lawyer, who had been prominent in the insurrection
and had been engaged in the seizure of the “Lord Brougham”;
François Nicholas and Amable Daunais, both acquitted of murder of
Chartrand in 1837, but retaken on the occasion of their presence
in the engagement of Odelltown, and Charles Hinderlang, taken at
Odelltown, a foreign adventurer.

On the eve of their execution[5] the five last named were allowed
to give a supper to their “compatriotes” imprisoned with them.
It was a sorry repast. The Chevalier de Lorimier is reported to
have said on this occasion: “Can my country ever forget that we
die for her upon the scaffold? We have lived as patriots--as
patriots let us die. Down with the tyrants! Their reign is over!”
Next day, as Hindelang was approaching the gallows, de Lorimier
called to him: “Courage, mon ami! the end is near!” “Death is
nothing to a Frenchman,” was the reply. On his arrival at the
scaffold Hindelang addressed the crowd. “On this scaffold, raised
by English hands, I declare that I die with the conviction of
having done my duty. The sentence which condemns me is unjust,
but I willingly forgive my judges. The cause for which I die is
noble and great. I am proud of it and I fear not to die. The
blood shed will be redeemed by blood. Let the blameworthy bear
the responsibility. Canadians! In bidding you adieu I bequeath to
you the device of France! ‘Vive liberté.’” Nicholas also made a
short address: “I have only one regret,” he said, “and that is,
to die before seeing my country free, but Providence will end
by having pity on it, for there is no country in the world more
badly governed.” The Chevalier de Lorimier was the last to suffer
the extreme penalty. When he was cut down, a brief letter was
found on his breast addressed to his wife and children. It ended,
“Adieu, my tender wife, once more adieu! Live and be happy.
(Signed) Your unhappy husband, Chevalier de Lorimier.”[6]

Among the prominent Montrealers arrested in 1838 and 1839 the
following names are found: Louis H. Lafontaine, Denis B. Viger,
Charles Mondelet, François Desrivières, advocates; L.J. Harkins,
D. Chopin, Aug. Racicot, George Dillon, Henry Badeau, Louis
Coursolles, F. Pigeon, Cyrille David, François Blanchard, Louis
Morin, William Brown, T. Willing, J.A. Labadie, J.B. Choquette,
Derome P. de Boucherville, J. Donegani, M. de Marchand, Felix
Goulet, Avila Weilbrenner, Richard Dillon, H. Hamelin, J.B.
Houlée, A. Dupère, M. Bourbonnière, Samuel Newcombe, Pierre
Lussier, François Lauzon, Luc Dufresne, E.A. Dubois, Bouthillier,
John Fullum, François Contant, François St. Marie, E. Hauschman,
J.E. Coderre, P. Coté, Jérémie Hippolyte, Jérémie Barrette,
Leandre Ducharme, John McDonald, J. Berthelet, A. Perrault, E.R.
Fabre, G.J. Vallée, Jean Dubrec, A.B. Lesperance, Jean Leclaire,
Chevalier de Lorimier, François Cinq Mars, J.P.B. Belleville,
S. Reeves, J.S. Ney Smith, Celestin Beausoleil, Louis Dubois,
Jérémie Longpré, etc.

It is a significant commentary on the sad troubles of 1837-8
that the names of several prominent British Montrealers are
to be found as actively sympathizing with the insurgents.
The fact, too, that the “Vindicator,” conducted by Doctor
O’Callaghan, could find sufficient English readers to support
it, is another indication of a wider sympathy than usually
recognized. A man like Dr. Wolfred Nelson who had lived with
the French habitants at St. Denis, spoke their language and
understood their grievances, a man of uprightness, sincerity
and disinterestedness, would never have resisted authority and
risked his reputation and fortune unless the irksomeness of
the situation had become intolerable.[7] Writing from jail at
Montreal on the 18th of June, 1838, to Lord Durham, he said on
behalf of his fellow prisoners: “We rebelled neither against
Her Majesty’s person nor her government, but against colonial
misgovernment. * * * We remonstrated; we were derided. The press
assailed us with calumny and contumely; invective was exhausted;
we were goaded on to madness and were compelled to show we had
the spirit of resistance to repel injuries or to be deemed a
captive, degraded and recreant people. We took up arms not to
attack others but to defend ourselves.”

His imprisonment and his loss of fortune effected his health,
but without repining he boldly played the game of life. In 1843
a “nolle sequi” allowed him to return to practice medicine in
Montreal. He was shortly elected to the Assembly under the Union.
He became twice mayor of his native city. He was one of the first
harbour commissioners and became the inspector of prisons. In
siding with the insurgents he was no hair-brained enthusiast or
adventurer and he died without the stain of reproach--an honoured
citizen.

It has been felt necessary to delay long on this unpleasant part
of civic history because it exemplifies the evil of different
races living together with mistrust and misunderstanding of one
another. If they would but strive to see each other’s viewpoints
and would read each other’s history there would be an end of
racial prejudices.

“Tout savoir, c’est tout pardonner.” May the mutual
misunderstanding of 1837-8 never occur again. “Concordia Salus,”
the motto chosen by Jacques Viger, the first mayor of Montreal,
for the city arms, should never be forgotten.


FOOTNOTES:

[1] Mr. Debartzch, of St. Charles, a legislative councillor, had
till this date been a strenuous upholder of Mr. Papineau. The
turn of events seemed to him to be unconstitutional and he became
opposed to the new insurrectionary methods. He was now accounted
a traitor. He escaped to Montreal with his family.

[2] On November 16th Mr. Turton Penn, one of the justices of
the peace, signed the order for the imprisonment of Charles A.
Leblanc (afterwards sheriff), Jean Dubrec, Amable Simard, Georges
de Boucherville, Andre Ouimet and François Tavernier accused of
high treason on November 17th, Jean François Bossé Lionnais, and
on the 18th Louis Michel Viger (Beau Viger), the president of the
recently founded Banque du Peuple and father of D.B. Viger were
imprisoned; on the 21st Michel Vincent, and on the 26th, Narcisse
Lamothe suffered the same fate.

[3] The following constituted the first special council,
District of Quebec: The Honorable C.E.C. de Léry (Quebec); the
Honorable James Stuart (Quebec); John Wilson, Esq., and William
Walker, Esq. (Quebec); Amable Dionne, Esq. (Kamouraska); Charles
Casgrain, Esq. (Rivière Oulle); the Honorable R.P. de Sales de la
Terrière (Eboulements), District of Montreal: The Honorable T.
Pothier; P. McGill; P. de Rocheblave (Montreal); Samuel Gerrard,
Esq.; Jules Quesnel, Esq.; W.P. Christie, Esq.; Turton Penn,
Esq.; and John Molson, Esq. (Montreal); the Honorable J. Cuthbert
(Berthier); the Honorable B. Joliette (St. Paul Lavaltrie);
Joseph E. Fairbault, Esq. (L’Assomption); Paul H. Knowlton,
Esq. (Brome); Icabod Smith, Esq. (Stanstead). District of Three
Rivers: Joseph Dionne, Esq. (St. Pierre les Becquets); Etienne
Mayrand, Esq. (Rivière du Loup).

[4] Lord Durham did not live to see the eventual success of the
Union recommended by his famous report. Prematurely worn out, he
died at Cowes on the 28th of July, 1840.

[5] See “Histoire Populaire de Montreal,” p. 357. LeBlond Brumath.

[6] See “Histoire Populaire de Montreal,” p. 357. LeBlond Brumath.

[7] Writing a reminiscence of Montreal from 1818 to 1868. Mr.
Thomas Storrow Brown has the following allusion to 1837-8:
“Mixing much with these French Canadians, I became interested
in the cause. I thought the stipulation of the capitulation had
not been fulfilled to a ceded people and when grown to manhood
a sense of justice, that generous inheritance from a British
ancestry, urged me to a knight errancy in their battle that
terminated in the overthrow of my own fortunes and that after
years of hard struggle to regain a lost position, all for no
thanks or even recognition of service.”




                          CHAPTER XVIII

                    PROCLAMATION OF THE UNION

                              1841

                    HOME RULE FOR THE COLONY

  THE DURHAM REPORT--THE RESOLUTIONS AT THE CHATEAU DE
    RAMEZAY--LORD SYDENHAM--THE PROCLAMATION OF UNION AT
    MONTREAL--RESPONSIBLE GOVERNMENT AT LAST.


Durham was wisely lenient with the political prisoners waiting
for trial at Montreal, but his injudicious step in securing
confessions, through an intermediary, from Doctor Nelson and
his companions--by inducing them to place themselves at his
discretion, and then his condemnation of them without trial to
be transported to Bermuda, forbidding them to return under pain
of high treason, and his extraordinary ordinance declaring that
Papineau and the fifteen others who had escaped and had neither
confessed nor been found guilty should suffer death if they
returned to Lower Canada--was held in the English parliament,
on the initiative of his enemy, Lord Brougham, to be utterly
subversive of the principles of English colonial law. Accordingly
his ordinance was disallowed; hence his resignation and return
to England. He died about eighteen months later, a broken man.
But he did much for Canada and his famous report stands out a
masterpiece of statesmanship. It is to the credit of Adam Thom,
of Montreal, to have been associated in its compilation as
Durham’s secretary for the purpose.

This report of Durham has had far reaching effect. It was
based on a study of the situation. He found an acute political
association as follows:

The Assembly complained that the constitutional government
given them in 1791 was a mockery. They could elect members but
members who had no control, who might fret and fume and froth
but could not appoint a single crown servant. In name it was a
representative body, French, Catholic and popularly elected.
The legislative council was all powerful, its members nominated
by the government, and holding their offices permanently, but
British, Protestant and exclusive, and above all the clatter
was the Executive Council and the governor, who were dependent
hand and foot on Downing Street officialdom and from it received
instructions, so that the few ruled the many, independently of
the council’s representation of the latter. Thus a race war had
developed, the majority, French, savagely demanding their rights
of popular representation and the minority, British, desirous of
keeping the upper hand. Thus the French Assembly developed into
a permanent opposition to everything British till it flamed out
into recourse to arms when British and French paired off into
distinct camps.

“I expected,” says Durham in his report, “to find a contest
between a government and a people. I found two nations warring
in the bosom of a single state. I found a struggle not of
principles but of races.” Hence his grand solution was “home
rule” for the colony and the abolition of the Downing Street
restrictive régime of red tape. He was accused by the British of
deserting his own side; he pleased the French-Canadians by this
above recommendation but bitterly disappointed them by making
responsible government dependent on the Union of the Canadas,
for it was feared by this Union with Protestant Ontario their
national existence was jeopardized. But this was precisely what
Durham wanted, trusting in the inevitable growth of immigration:
“I have little doubt,” he says, “that the French, when once
placed in a majority by the legitimate course of events and the
working of natural causes in a minority, would abandon their vain
hopes of nationality.”

Durham looked forward to the time when British North America
should have one parliament only. Thus he foresaw confederation.

Lord Durham’s masterly and statesmanlike report was presented
to the Imperial parliament on January 31, 1839. It advocated
the repeal of the Constitutional Act of 1791, which divided the
two provinces and so created two distinct nationalities, and
it recommended the legislative Union of the Canadas. The bill
proposed for this effect by Lord John Russell was postponed
till next year. Another bill, however, passed to continue the
legislative council in their especial powers till 1842. Canada
was still, therefore, without a constitution.

The new governor general to succeed Sir John Colborne, who had
been invested with the Grand Cross of the Bath for his services,
arrived at Quebec on October 17th. He was Mr. Charles Poulett
Thomson, who had been president of the Board of Trade in England.
He entered on his office on October 19th. He left for Montreal in
October to meet the legislative council, now established there.

The news of the proposed union was grateful, especially at
Montreal, to the British merchant class, who foresaw commercial
expansion and progress. At Quebec there was some dissension,
since the meeting place of the projected union parliament was
likely to be at Montreal, and thus Quebec would lose its ancient
prestige. The measure was not as yet looked on with full favour
by the French-Canadians in general, as it seemed to them to be
a scheme to weaken the influence of their political life and to
be destructive of their national aspirations. On the 11th of
November the legislative council of Lower Canada met and on the
16th six resolutions were passed at the Château de Ramezay.

First: The Union was affirmed to be an indispensable and urgent
necessity. Second: that the determination to reunite the
Provinces received ready acquiescence. Third: that suitable
civil lists should be provided securing the independence of the
judges and maintaining the executive in its functions. Fourth:
that the proportion of debt of Upper Canada contracted for the
improvement of internal communication should be charged to the
revenue of both provinces; the outlay for defraying expenses of
a local character not to be included. Fifth: that the adjustment
and settlement of the terms of Union should be submitted to the
wisdom and justice of the Imperial parliament. Sixth: that a
permanent legislature composed of the people of both Provinces
should be convened as soon as possible.

The resolutions were carried with three dissenters, Messrs.
Cuthbert (Berthier), Neilson (Quebec) and Quesnel (Montreal),
the members of the council supporting the union being Chief
Justice Stuart, Pothier, de Léry and Walker (Quebec), McGill,
de Rocheblave, Gerrard, Christie, Molson, Moffatt (Montreal),
Harwood and Hale (Sherbrooke).

The majority of the legislative assembly being ready for the
union of the provinces, which was an equivalent to yielding
to responsible government power they had held so long and
arbitrarily, must be noted as significant of the trend of
opinion. Some ordinances were passed: first, continuing until
June, 1840, the power to retain arms and gunpowder; second,
continuing the ordinance relating to persons charged with high
treason; third, incorporating the Ecclesiastics of Montreal in
the fief and seignories of St. Sulpice and of Two Mountains--the
conclusion of many years’ negotiations.

On November 18th Mr. Paulett Thomson wrote from Montreal to
Lord John Russell to urge the speedy adoption of the Union by
parliament. He wrote: “All parties look with extreme satisfaction
on the present state of government. * * * The suspension of
all constitutional rights affords to reckless and unprincipled
agitators a constant topic of excitement. * * * All parties,
therefore, without an exception, demand a change. On the nature
of that change there undoubtedly exists some difference of
opinion. The large majority, however, of those whose opinions I
have had the opportunity of learning, both of British and French
origin, and of those, too, whose character and station enable
them to the greatest authority, advocate warmly the establishment
of the union and that upon terms of perfect fairness, not merely
to the two provinces but to the two races within the provinces.”
Mr. Thomson then left for the Upper Province, arriving at Toronto
on November 21st.

The union bill of Lord John Russell received the royal sanction
on July 23, 1840, but it did not take effect till February 10,
1841. On this day the union was solemnly established at Montreal.
Mr. Paulett Thomson now became Lord Sydenham of York and Toronto
in recognition of his part in the union. He took the oath of
office as governor-general in 1840.

February 10, 1841, Lord Sydenham issued a proclamation uniting
Upper and Lower Canada into the province of Canada.

“The choice of this date,” says Kingsford, “was because it was
on this day that the Imperial parliament assented to the act
which had suspended the constitution of Lower Canada three years
previously, and it was thought an act of wisdom to re-establish
on the anniversary of this extreme measure constitutional
liberty, which effectively terminated it. It was also the date of
the conclusion of the treaty of 1763, which ceded Canada to the
British crown, and it was likewise the marriage day of the Queen.

“On that day, in Montreal, in the presence of all the dignitaries
of the church and of civil life, of the commander of the forces,
of officers commanding regiments, and all who could be collected
of the principal citizens, the oath was taken and the two
provinces were established as the province of Canada.

“Lord Sydenham issued a proclamation on this occasion, in which
he urged the inhabitants to be united in sentiment as in name
and reminded them that they were ‘a part of the mighty empire
of England, protected by her arms, assisted by her treasury,
admitted to all the benefits of trade as her citizens, their
freedom guaranteed by her laws, and their rights supported by the
sympathy of their fellow-subjects there.’”

Lord Sydenham lived to call the first session of the United
Province, which met at Kingston on June 14th, when Mr. Cuvillier
was elected speaker, and on July 15th His Excellency gave the
speech from the throne, but he was a sick man and he never lived
to the close of the session. The prorogation of the legislature
had been appointed for September 15th. It was deferred till
September 17th to allow him to be present, since on September
4th he had met an accident horse-riding (taken for his health)
in the neighbourhood of Kingston. He died on September 19th.
“The Success of the Union,” as Kingsford[1] remarks, in the last
chapter of his “History of Canada,” “is Lord Sydenham’s epitaph.”

Responsible government was at last attained. The union so
ardently denied by the British party and needlessly feared by the
other was to bring progress and prosperity to both. The Union was
not a perfect measure, but it redressed many grievances and made
for a more united people.

“The act provided for a legislative council of not less than
twenty members for a legislative assembly in which each section
of the united province would be represented by an equal number
of members--that is to say, forty-two for each, or eighty-four
in all. The speaker of the council was appointed by the crown
and ten members, including the speaker, constituted a quorum. A
majority of voices was to decide and in case of an equality of
votes the speaker had a casting vote. A legislative counsellor
would vacate his seat by continuous absence from two consecutive
sessions. The number of representatives allotted to each province
could not be changed except with the concurrence of two-thirds
of the members of each house. The quorum of the assembly was
to be twenty, including the speaker. The speaker was elected
by the majority and was to have a casting vote in case of the
votes being equal on a question. No person could be elected
to the assembly unless he possessed a free-hold of land and
tenements to the value of £500 sterling over and above all debts
and mortgages. The English language alone was to be used in
legislative records. A session of the legislature should be held
at least every year and each legislative assembly was to have
a duration of four years unless sooner divided.” (Bourinot’s
“Constitution of Canada,” page 35.)


FOOTNOTES:

[1] Mr. Kingsford published, after twelve years of labour the
last of his ten volumes of the “History of Canada,” in 1898.
The preface was signed “Ottawa, 24th of May, 1898.” He died on
September 29, 1898. His work is that of a conscientious historian
and the facts he has marshalled together are invaluable to
students.




                           CHAPTER XIX

             RESPONSIBLE GOVERNMENT UNDER THE UNION

  KINGSTON THE SEAT OF GOVERNMENT--THE RACE CRY
    RESUSCITATED--LAFONTAINE--RESPONSIBLE GOVERNMENT--MONTREAL
    ELECTIONS--RESTRICTION REMOVED ON FRENCH LANGUAGE IN
    PARLIAMENT--FREE TRADE MOVEMENT--FINANCIAL DEPRESSION--GEORGE
    ETIENNE CARTIER--REBELLION LOSSES BILL--THE BURNING OF THE
    PARLIAMENT HOUSE--THE MONTREAL MOVEMENT FOR ANNEXATION
    WITH THE STATES--“CLEAR GRITS” AND THE “PARTI ROUGE”--THE
    RAILWAY AND SHIPPING ERA--THE GAVAZZI RIOT--THE RECIPROCITY
    TREATY--EXIT THE OLD TORYISM--CLERGY RESERVES AND SEIGNEURIAL
    TENURE ACTS--THE MILITIA ACT--MONTREALERS ON THE ELECTED
    COUNCIL--THE _Année Terribe_ OF 1857--THOMAS D’ARCY MC
    GEE--QUEBEC TEMPORARY SEAT OF GOVERNMENT--PROTECTION FOR HOME
    INDUSTRIES--CONFEDERATION BROACHED IN MONTREAL--THE TRENT
    AFFAIR--ST. ALBAN RAID PROSECUTIONS--THE REMODIFIED CIVIL
    CODE--FENIAN RAID EXCITEMENT IN MONTREAL--OTTAWA SEAT OF
    GOVERNMENT--THE BRITISH NORTH AMERICAN ACT--CONFEDERATION.


The seat of the new parliament was chosen for Kingston. This was
naturally regarded jealously by Montreal and Quebec. The Montreal
elections resulted in the sending thither of Mr. Benjamin Holmes
and the Hon. George Moffatt to represent the city at the first
session, which opened for the dispatch of business on the 14th
of June, 1841. Mr. D.B. Viger was elected for the Richelieu
district. Another well known at Montreal, one who had there
conducted the “Minerve,” Mr. Augustus Norbert Morin, sat for
Nicolet.

The language of the house was English. This, together with the
absence of any French name from the new cabinet ministry was a
natural grievance which was seized upon by a part of the French
press and race hatred seemed in danger of being renewed. The
following extract from a British Montreal paper of the day
adverts to this:

   “It is but a few weeks since the olive branch has been frankly
  and honorably extended, since several English journals earnestly
  advocated an oblivion of the past and a reconciliation of the
  future. We must own that, however much we respect the attempt,
  we never anticipated that it would be successful, and we daily
  find in the pages of the Canadien, the French Gazette, the Aurora
  and the other small fry, the proof of our prognostication. It
  is the truth, a truth boldly and continually proclaimed by the
  above mentioned public journals printed in the French language,
  that the Canadian leaders and all who aspire to lead this
  class of the population, now, as heretofore, must base their
  only pretentions to popular support on their utter and entire
  abhorrence of everything that is English. The word ‘anti-British’
  is the type of their political existence, the only true passports
  to the affections of a French constituency. They hate us not
  because we are unionists or anti-unionists, whigs, tories,
  radicals or conservatives, but because we are British. They hate
  us not because we are Catholics, Protestants, Presbyterians or
  Methodists, but because we are British. They hate us because
  we speak English, because we love English laws, because we
  admire English constitutions, because we would introduce English
  improvements, because we have given them two or three good
  English drubbings and are ready to give them again if provoked.
  First they hate the Briton, secondly the American and lastly
  their seigneurs and clergy are included in the same category, and
  if they could only accomplish what they never will, get rid of
  the Briton, they would be rapidly ‘used up’ by the Americans, who
  would rob their seigneurs, discard their priests and improve the
  ‘nation Canadienne’ off the face of the earth.”

It is pleasing to find that our newspapers of today do not
reflect a like jarring exchange of bitterness. Montreal has
learned that its “salvation lies in harmony,” according to the
city’s motto, “Concordia Salus.”

The session passed without any hitch. The Union act had stood
its test. The advent of Sir Charles Bagot as governor-general
with his policy of reconciliation saw M. Joseph Remi Vallières
appointed chief justice of the district of Montreal and Dr.
Jean Baptiste Meilleur the superintendent of public instruction
for Lower Canada. When parliament met on September 8, 1842,
Montreal looked with interest for the development likely to
follow on the entrance into the House of Mr. Louis Hippolyte
Lafontaine, an able lawyer who had practiced at Montreal and
who was known to be a born leader of men and to have succeeded
to the position of M. Papineau in popular estimation. His short
imprisonment as a rebel in 1838 added to his prestige. He was an
old parliamentarian, having been in 1830, when only twenty-three
years of age, elected to the assembly of Lower Canada. On October
12th the reconstructed government[1] saw the Hon. L.H. Lafontaine
as attorney-general for Lower Canada (his friend, the Hon. Robert
Baldwin, held the same office for Upper Canada) and the Hon. A.N.
Morin, commissioner of crown lands. These appointments made the
Union more palatable to French-Canadians and it began to appear
that out of evil good was to come.

During the next session of 1843 question of the future location
of the parliament was settled by the choice of Montreal, on the
motion of Mr. Baldwin, seconded by Mr. Lafontaine.

The full signification of the term “Responsible Government” now
began to be tested. The new governor, Sir Charles Metcalfe, who
had been sworn in on March 29, 1843, had come from Bengal with
Indian ideas of dictatorship and he acted now independently of
his ministers, making appointments without consultation with
them, so that nine out of ten of the ministers resigned on
November 26th on the ground that by the system of responsible
government adopted in the resolutions of the house in September,
1841, to carry on a government the ministry must not only have
the confidence of the house and through it of the people, but
also of the head of the government. For nine months, therefore,
the country was without a ministry, Sir Charles Metcalfe being
unable to construct one.

At this point Mr. D.B. Viger came into prominence as a supporter of
the governor and it was his efforts to win over the French-Canadians.
Accordingly he visited Montreal and Lower Canada to be followed
by Mr. Draper, but Lafontaine’s hold was too great. The hold-up
of government created much anxiety, and trade and industry were
affected. After great efforts a partial ministry was formed, the
post of attorney-general for Lower Canada being accepted by Mr.
James Smith, of Montreal, Mr. Denis Benjamin Papineau, a brother
of Louis Joseph, becoming commissioner of lands. Other offices
were filled but the completion of the names was left until after
the election.

These were held over the country mid scenes of riot and even
bloodshed. At no place was the party strife more keenly shown
than at Montreal. By an election scheme it is said, to the
surprise of the opposition who ought to have commanded a
majority, the Hon. George Moffatt and Charles Clement Sabrevois
de Bleury, supporters of the newly formed ministry, were elected
against Mr. Lewis Thomas Drummond, a lawyer of Irish Catholic
origin, afterwards a well known judge, and Doctor Beaubien. Mr.
Drummond was returned, however, for Port Neuf. Among the new
members of other constituencies Dr. Wolfred Nelson was returned
for Richelieu against D.B. Viger, the president of the new
council, who found a seat, however, elsewhere. John Alexander
Macdonald was returned for Kingston as a supporter of the
government. The new government entered into power with a small
majority. Early in 1844 the government moved from Kingston to
Montreal and Monklands became the home of the governor-general.
On July 1st the Parliament met in Montreal, being dissolved on
September 23d.

On November 12th the general elections began, the like of which
had never been seen in Canada. The voting in these times was
open, lasting for days. Citizens were keen politicians; axe
handles were in readiness; heads were broken and the “claret”
flowed. Party spirit ran high and men were kept drunk in the
taverns so as not to allow them to reach the polls. In this
election at Montreal, Drummond was opposed to Molson, who was
beaten. On November 28th parliament met and was prorogued on
March 29th of the following year.

The removal of the restrictions on the French language in
parliament took place on January 31, 1845. Mr. Lafontaine had
desired to make the motion, but his plan, having become known to
the new government, desirous of furthering a popular move, he was
anticipated by Mr. D.B. Papineau, seconded by the Hon. George
Moffatt of Montreal.

In 1846 the merchants of Montreal held meetings to protest
against the Free Trade movement, then being promoted in England
by Cobden. On January 30, 1847, Lord Elgin, the successor of
Sir Charles Metcalfe, proceeded from Monklands, the home of the
governor-general of Montreal, to be sworn in at Government House.
On May 31st Mr. Peter McGill became speaker of the legislative
council, with a seat in the cabinet of the reconstructed cabinet,
known as the Sherwood-Daly ministry. Mr. D.B. Papineau was the
only French-Canadian in it. Parliamentary life this year was
affected by the evils of the “ship fever” brought over by the
Irish emigrants who had made their exodus after the failure of
the potato crop. The opposition made political capital out of the
event by making the government responsible for the emigration
laws of the country.

On Friday, the 25th of February, 1848, the new parliament was
held at Montreal. Messrs. L.H. Lafontaine and Benjamin Holmes
were returned for the city. On the occasion Mr. L.J. Papineau,
who had been in pleasant exile so long in Paris, although he
could have returned in 1843, found himself elected in the Union
parliament. He was little changed, but his star had waned, while
that of Lafontaine was in the ascendant. On March 10th Mr.
Lafontaine accepted office as Premier and attorney-general and
with his friend Baldwin formed the Lafontaine-Baldwin ministry.
During this year the Canadian merchants suffered great commercial
depression, owing to the working out of the free trade act of
1846. “Three-fourths of the merchants were bankrupt and real
estate was practically unmarketable.”

The session of 1849 saw the advent into political life of George
Etienne Cartier, the erstwhile rebel. He was born in Verchères
county, at St. Antoine, but was educated at the college of St.
Sulpice at Montreal. His early law studies were in the office of
M. Edouard Rodier and he was called to the bar and began practice
in Montreal in 1835. He came early under the magnetic influence
of Mr. Papineau and we find him a member of the “Fils de Liberté”
and engaged in the fight under Doctor Nelson at St. Denis, thence
flying as a proscribed man to the States. He quietly returned
later, when the embargo was raised, and settled down again to
practice law at Montreal, but still keeping his attention on
politics.

An important bill came up this session entitled “an act to
provide for the indemnification of parties in Lower Canada whose
property was destroyed during the rebellion in the years 1837 and
1838.” It was called the Rebellion Losses Bill. It would seem
rather belatedly brought in but it had been promised in some
form during the past ten years as a means of indemnifying those
who had suffered from the very great destruction of property
during that agitated period. In 1845 the rebellion losses
committee first sat. On April 18th the commissioners reported
that they recognized 2,276 claims, amounting in the aggregate
to £241,965, and were of the opinion that £100,000 would be
sufficient to pay all real losses. On January 18, 1849, Mr.
Lafontaine moved the belated bill. It made provision for the
appointment of five commissioners to carry out the act and a sum
of £100,000 was appropriated to pay the claims. Those, however,
who had been convicted of treason during the rebellion and who
had been sent to Bermuda, were excepted from claiming any share
in the grant. This, it will be seen, allowed “rebels” who had
not been convicted, an equal right to compensation with the
“loyalists.” Consequently a storm broke out in parliament and
in the country, but especially in Montreal. Various pamphlets
appeared in Montreal at this time, indicating opposition, such
as that entitled “The Question Answered; Did the Ministry intend
to pay Rebels? Montreal, 1849,” supposed to have been written by
the Hon. Alexander Morris, then a law student, and a young tory
journalist, Hugh E. Montgomerie. Yet the government was right in
their inclusion of “rebels” for it would have been very unwise at
that period to reopen the question as to who had been rebels and
who had not. Besides the amnesty granted long since had plastered
over all differences.

Yet, within and without Parliament the opposition was loud,
fierce and tumultuous. The bill, however, passed the third
reading in both houses. For some time previously petitions
from the tories of the opposition body had been pouring in to
Lord Elgin, praying that the bill should either be reserved
for Imperial sanction, or that parliament should be dissolved.
Lord Elgin, who personally did not approve of the diversion
of so much public money from more useful objects, feeling,
however, that while no imperial interests were at stake, that the
principle of responsible government was assented to the bill when
it had passed both houses. This he did on Wednesday afternoon,
the 25th of April, 1849. On this occasion the galleries of the
house were packed with “loyalist” opponents to the bill, and a
tumult immediately arose which was continued as the crowd went
out down the stairs to await Lord Elgin’s departure. When the
governor-general, having finished his business, reached the front
door, a hostile crowd had gathered and the fury of the opponents
to the bill visited itself on him in oppobrious epithets. Groans,
hisses, mud and addled eggs brought for the purpose were hurled
at him. Some say also stones were added and in the midst of this
hostile demonstration he drove off to Monklands, surrounded by
the military, by a long detour east and round the mountain to his
home. Three days afterwards at a special meeting of the Scotch
National Association, the “St. Andrew’s Society,” a resolution
was passed, erasing his name as a patron and an honorary member
of that body.

[Illustration: AUGUSTIN-NORBERT MORIN]

[Illustration: GEORGE ETIENNE CARTIER]

[Illustration: ROBERT BALDWIN]

[Illustration: LOUIS-JOSEPH PAPINEAU]

[Illustration: SIR LOUIS-HIPPOLYTE LAFONTAINE]

[Illustration: A.A. DORION]

That night about 8 o’clock the parliament buildings were
burned by an angry mob. It was not unpremeditated, for the day
previously even some of the soldiers were warned to shut their
eyes next day if anything happened, and many did. After the
signing of the bill a meeting was held on Champ de Mars as the
result of printed notices, at which inflammatory speeches were
made. One of the leaders was a Fred Perry, who lived to be sorry
for his deed. “We are not in ’37,” he cried. “If you are men
follow me to the parliament house!” and he drove in a buggy,
surrounded by a sympathetic crowd, some carrying lighted torches
and crying, “To the parliament house.” The parliament building
which had been built as St. Ann’s market and leased to the
government, was a two-story building, the bottom floor of which
was remodeled to contain the government offices, while upstairs,
at the head of a broad staircase, leading off a wide passage,
were two halls, one that of the legislative assembly, a room 342
by 50 feet, and the other of the legislative council. Meanwhile
the house of assembly was discussing the judicature bill, and
it was warned by the noise of the advancing mob. When the crowd
reached the building, at a given signal stones crashed through
the windows like hail. A rush was made by some of the crowd into
the assembly hall from which the members had retreated. One of
the mob named Courtney sat boldly in the Speaker’s chair and
muttered threats about dissolving the parliament. The work of
demolition was begun, sticks being thrown at the glass globes on
the gaseliers that were out of reach. Then there was raised the
cry of “fire!” The gas pipes in the building had been cut and
a light applied. An explosion followed and a blinding sheet of
flame lit up the scene. Then ensued a mad rush of the members
and their friends and enemies to get out of the building. The
mob made no attempt to save it. The fire engines were only used
upon the surrounding property and an eye witness relates that
the soldiers who were ordered to fire on the mob discharged
their shots in the air. In half an hour the whole building was
wrapped in one sheet of flame. The valuable library containing
the archives and records of the colony was destroyed. In the
beginning of the incendiarism lighted torches thrown through the
window began the sad work of destruction. Little was saved but
the mace and the picture of Queen Victoria with the gilt crown
surmounting it. A newspaper account of two days later stated
in effect “that the Queen’s picture was carried away by four
scoundrels.” These have lately been identified as Colonel Wiley,
formerly chief of police, a Scotchman of the name of McGillivray,
from the eastern townships, an employee of the parliament, the
uncle of Mr. Todd, of the Library of Parliament, and Mr. Sanford
Fleming (afterwards Sir).

The latter in reply to the historian, Henry J. Morgan, wrote in
1901:

“Having spent a number of days previously in examining rare
books, I felt I should try to save some of them. I gained an
entrance but the fire had taken possession of the library and
I could do nothing. Turning to the legislative hall I saw the
Queen’s picture. With three other men (then) unknown to me I
made an effort to save it, but it was no easy matter. It was in
a massive gilt frame, firmly bolted to the wall. We at last put
our shoulders underneath and raised the whole, little by little,
allowing it to fall down each time. This was repeated many times
till at last the fastenings gave way and all came down. We laid
it on its face and, not being able to carry very easily the heavy
frame, removed the canvas on its stretching frame and the four of
us carried it out in a horizontal position, a shoulder under each
corner. With difficulty we got it downstairs on account of the
flames passing overhead, but each stooped and covered the picture
to prevent it getting scorched and thus got it to the open door.
Having done so, I left it to be taken to a place of safety by
others, some of whom were connected with the House. I thought
I would return to the chamber to try to save something else,
but I saw nothing of much value which I could myself remove. I
did, however, carry out the gilded crown which had been over the
picture, carrying it to Mack’s Hotel, where I was stopping, and
afterwards took it with me in a tea chest to Toronto, where it
remained in my possession for some years. What afterwards became
of it I am not aware.” The picture of Queen Victoria is in the
House of Commons at Ottawa.

The most unpopular man of the hour after Lord Elgin was Mr. L.H.
Lafontaine, who was in charge of the bill. His stables were burnt
and his house ransacked. There were no proceedings taken against
the rioters and incendiarists, this being an evident sign that
many of those in power secretly sympathized with the movement.
The house of Mr. Hays, on Dalhousie Square, was leased for a
temporary parliament house, but shortly afterwards government
moved to Toronto and Montreal lost its position as the political
capital of Canada.

In August, 1849, the British American League was formed in
Montreal with branches at Toronton, Kingston and elsewhere
in Upper Canada. It had various aims--the chief planks being
opposition to the existing government, a return to a protective
policy, the election of members of the legislative council, and
most important of all, a general union of the British North
American provinces. A meeting was held in Kingston towards the
end of July. Among the chief speakers were George Moffatt and
Hugh E. Montgomerie, of Montreal, John A. Macdonald, of Kingston,
also spoke. The League did not hold together, but the extreme
party soon banded together and in consequence during the month
of October a manifesto “to the people of Canada,” advocating the
annexation of Canada to the United States, appeared in Montreal,
signed by many leading citizens, including the Torrances,
the Redpaths, the Molsons, the Workmans, the Dorions, Luther
Hamilton Holton, Benjamin Holmes, David Lewis Macpherson,
Jacob de Witt, Edward Goff Penny, D. Lorn Macdougall and John
Ross--325 signatures in all. L.J. Papineau threw in his weight
to the movement. Among the subscribers to the manifesto were
justices of the peace, officers of the militia, Queen’s counsels
and others holding commissions at the pleasure of the crown.
Men of different political parties forgot their differences
to promote the scheme. The ebullition was the outcome of the
commercial depression and unpromising outlook then prevailing.
The manifesto, after pointing out the deplorable state of the
country, proceeded to suggest the remedies: the revival of
protection in the markets of the United Kingdom; the protection
of home manufactures; a federal union of the British American
colonies as a federal republic and reciprocal free trade with
the United States. But the most sweeping remedy of all was the
last one suggested, namely, a “friendly and peaceful separation
from British connection; a union upon equitable terms with the
great North American Confederacy of Sovereign States,” in brief,
_annexation_.[2] The movement was known in England and the
Morning Advertiser of London of the period said in comment that
England would be no loser were the Canadas to carry their threat
of annexation into effect; indeed, England would gain.

“The result,” it says, “of careful examination of the Canadian
connection in all its aspects, is, that so far from England being
a sufferer from the renunciation of their allegiance to the
British Crown on the part of the Canadas, she would be an actual
gainer. It is a well ascertained fact that the expenses of the
connection have more than counterbalanced its advantages. The
maintenance of that part of our colonial possessions subjects
us to a yearly expenditure of £800,000 hard cash. Will any one
tell us that the Canadas confer on us benefits at all equivalent
to this? It may, indeed, be debated whether our exports to the
Canadas would not be as great as they have been at any former
period. At any rate we speak advisedly when we say that this
country would be no loser by the secession of the Canadas. That
is certainly the conclusion at which ministers have arrived after
the most able and careful consideration. On that conclusion they
have determined to act. When the session meets we shall see the
fact brought fully before the public, with the ground on which
the cabinet has come to the conclusion at which it arrived.”

Such a statement, from a responsible English journal, sounds
strangely to us even today--but it is of value in reminding us
that at that time Britain was spending some four millions of
dollars annually on the Canadas. Four years later, in 1854, the
annexation movement received its quietus at the hands of Lord
Elgin, when he secured the passage of the Reciprocity Treaty.

As there was no very general support in Canada, the movement
soon collapsed. It was begotten of temporary gloom and despair.
Annexation was thought by serious and well meaning men to be
the necessary remedy--if it could come peaceably. Hence it was
not rebellion. The annexation movement was communicated to the
Upper Province, but it never had as great a hold anywhere as in
Montreal. There was little aftermath beyond the cancelling of the
commissions of those who held them at pleasure, a course deemed
necessary as a protest by the governor general, Lord Elgin.

In the beginning of November of this year, 1849, the government
offices were removed to Toronto. In the early part of 1850
a party known as the “Clear grits,” composed of the more
progressive of the reform party in Upper Canada, and dissatisfied
with the slowness of ministry, elaborated a programme which,
among other heads, advocated, first, the complete application
of the elective principle from the highest to the lowest
member of the government, and, secondly, universal suffrage. A
corresponding but more radical movement was organized at Montreal
for Lower Canada by L.J. Papineau, under the title of “La Parti
Rouge.” Its members were mostly young French-Canadians, although
a number of British radicals were with them, such as L.H.
Holton, and others. The “Parti Rouge” pronounced in favour of
the repeal of the Union, of a republican form of government and
of annexation to the States. “La Parti Rouge,” says La Minerve,
the organ of the “bleus,” “has been formed at Montreal under
the auspices of Mr. Papineau in hatred of English institutions,
of our constitution, declared to be vicious, and above all, of
responsible government which is regarded as a takein, with ideas
of innovation in religion and in politics, accompanied by a
profound hatred for the clergy and with the very formal and very
pronounced intention of annexing Canada to the United States.” By
the end of the year the prospects of trade had so brightened that
with this annexation and other desperate remedies were forgotten.
In October the first provincial exhibition of agricultural and
industrial products was held at Montreal.

During the session of 1851, the legislation for railways was of
primary importance to Montreal; if it was to keep its place as
the center of transportation by land as it had been by water it
would now enter into its new railroad era forced by the competing
enterprises of the adjoining republics. In October the great
Lafontaine-Baldwin ministry resigned. Mr. Lafontaine resumed his
law practice at Montreal. In the month of August, 1853, he became
chief justice of Lower Canada and held that position to his
death, February 26, 1864. Ten years previously, in 1854, he was
created a baronet. Sir L. Hippolyte Lafontaine’s name and fame
stand high in the remembrance of Montreal.

On the 6th of November the existing parliament was dissolved. In
the following elections Mr. John Young was returned from Montreal
and was given a place in the Hincks-Morin cabinet as commissioner
of public works. Mr. Papineau was defeated in Montreal, but found
a seat for the county of Two Mountains. In the early part of 1852
Mr. Hincks visited England and arranged for the capitalizing
of the Grand Trunk Railway to proceed westward from Montreal.
Consequently during the fourth parliament’s first session at
Quebec, which opened on August 19th, conspicuous among the acts
passed was one to incorporate the Grand Trunk Railway. Other
acts interesting to Montrealers were the municipal loan fund act
to enable municipalities to borrow money on the credit of the
province for local improvement, an act for the establishment
of a trans-Atlantic line of steamers and the appropriating of
£19,000 sterling per annum for the purpose. The contract was
secured by McKean, McLarty & Company, of Liverpool, and steamers
began to run during the following spring. Two years later the
contract was annulled and an arrangement was made with Messrs.
Edmonstone, Allan & Company, of Montreal. The small fleet of
the last named company has since developed into the well known
Allan line of trans-Atlantic steamships. On October 23d Mr.
Charles Wilson, mayor of Montreal, was added to the legislative
council. Before the session ended there occurred the famous
Gavazzi riots in Quebec and Montreal, the latter place especially
maintaining its reputation for mob violence. As the government
was afterwards attacked for delay in ordering an unavoidable
and searching investigation into the perpetrators of the fatal
disaster at Montreal the story may be told here rather than in
the ecclesiastical history of the city. During the spring of
1853 Alessandro Gavazzi, an ex-monk, had been giving a course
of lectures in the States, mostly against Romanism. He had
previously been received with success in England. Posing as an
Italian patriot of liberty, with the reputation for impassioned
and eloquent oratory and the added piquancy of being an
ex-priest, he had attracted elsewhere a favourable hearing. But
on his entrance to Lower Canada, at Quebec, he received a check
on June 6th when delivering a lecture on the Inquisition in the
Free Church on St. Ursule Street. A scene of disorder occurred in
the church. The lecturer was attacked in the pulpit, and though
he defended himself right valiantly with a stool, knocking down
some sixteen of his assailants, he was overmastered and thrown on
to the heads of the people below. Confusion reigned. The military
were providentially soon on the scene and quiet obtained. The
proceedings were sufficient to warrant an informal discussion
in the House next day. On the night of the 9th of June Gavazzi
was in Montreal, lecturing in Zion Church on the Haymarket
square, now Victoria Square. Without, to prevent a recurrence of
the Quebec assault, a posse of police was placed opposite the
church, another in the Square and a small body of military, hard
by, in concealment. These were the “Cameronians” but recently
arrived in the city. There was an attempt of a body of Catholic
Irishmen to break a way into the church, but they were repulsed.
On retreating the second time a shot was fired by one of the
intruders who was immediately shot down by a Protestant. Other
shots followed. Confusion reigned. The lecture was hurriedly
concluded and the people made for home. On the church being
attacked the Gavazzi called for three cheers for the Queen and
congratulated his hearers on freedom of speech being maintained.
On their way through the streets shots were fired at them by the
military. Who gave the order to fire has never been discovered.
The mayor, the Hon. Charles Wilson, who had read the riot act,
was accused and denied it. So also did Colonel Hogarth, of the
Twenty-sixth Cameronian Rifles, also accused. It is said that the
soldiers fired, at the order of some one in the crowd, but over
the heads of the people, so that those making their way up Beaver
Hall Hill received the shots. The Cameronians were very unpopular
for a time. About forty were killed or wounded, of whom many were
injured by stones and other missiles. Two women were struck down
and almost trampled to death. The scene was one of frenzied riot,
heightened by the screams of women. Gavazzi made his way between
two clergymen to St. James street, narrowly escaping with his
life. He afterwards escaped from St. Lawrence Hall in an inclosed
cab to the wharf, where the Iron Duke took him to La Prairie.
Thus his career ended in Canada. On June 26th an investigation
was held into the causes of the riot, but nothing was the
outcome and there were no apprehensions, at which there was much
disapproval, as it was thought the affair was being hushed up
as a political move. It is for this reason that the story has
been inserted in this portion. The occasion was made an occasion
of _odium theologicum_. At that time the St. Patrick’s Society,
founded in 1834, was composed of Irishmen of different religions,
but as Mr. Hincks and the mayor, the Hon. Charles Wilson, were
both prominent members, Mr. Hincks was accused of being under the
influence of the Roman Catholic majority for political purposes.
Mr. Drummond, the attorney-general for Lower Canada, being a
Catholic, was also accused in being dilatory in bringing the
rioters to justice.

[Illustration: L.H. HOLTON]

[Illustration: SIR FRANCIS HINCKS]

[Illustration: D’ARCY McGEE]

Parliament adjourned on the 14th of June. It did not meet again
till June 13, 1854, just a day within the limit allowed by the
thirty-first clause of the Union act. The chief reason for this
was the absence of the governor and the premier in England and at
Washington, at which latter place, on June 15th, the treaty of
reciprocity was signed between the United States and Canada. The
parliament was dissolved in view of the general elections to come
in July and August, when the attitude of the people on the two
great questions so long postponed, the clergy reserves and the
seigneurial tenure was to be taken as an index of confidence and
trust in the government. Mr. L.H. Holton and Mr. (afterwards Sir)
A.A. Dorion, the leader of the “Parti Rouge,” since Mr. Papineau
did not seek reelection, were returned for Montreal. The country
as a whole had pronounced in favour of the abolition of the
seigneurial tenure and the secularization of the clergy reserves.
The parliament met on the 5th of September. The rejection of the
ministerial candidate, George Etienne Cartier, for speaker in the
assembly, in favour of Mr. Sicotte, indicated to Mr. Hincks and
Mr. Morin that they could not carry on the administration against
the combined opposition of the conservative, clear grits and the
“Parti Rouge.” This was confirmed on September 7th when, on a
question of privilege, the opposition carried it. On September
8th the resignation of the Hincks-Morin ministry was accepted
by Lord Elgin. The government fell without dishonour. It had
obtained the imperial acts enabling the Canadian parliament to
deal with the clergy reserves and the application of the elective
principle to the legislative council. It had completed the
reciprocity treaty with the States and had inaugurated the era of
Canadian railway. Montreal largely shared in the prosperity which
prevailed in its term. The task of forming a new ministry was
entrusted by Lord Elgin to Sir Allan MacNab. With the concurrence
of Mr. Morin, Sir Allan effected a coalition between his own
conservative following and the late liberal government resulting
in the liberal-conservative alliance as the only method possible
of obtaining a majority in the assembly capable of conducting
the administration in accordance with the now accepted principle
of responsible government. The death knell of the old toryism
had been sounded. It also marked the virtual extinction of the
British party in Lower Canada as a separate political body. Since
that date there may be traced the growth of a more united policy
in Montreal in the common welfare.

A bill giving effect to the reciprocity treaty with the United
States was introduced by attorney-general (East), Hon. L.T.
Drummond. The long delayed bill for secularizing the clergy
reserves was introduced by Attorney-General (West), Hon. John A.
Macdonald, and that abolishing the seigneurial tenure originally
introduced by Mr. L.T. Drummond became law. By the former not
only the Anglican establishment, but all churches were deprived
of any participation in the funds accruing from the reserved
lands granted for the support of the Anglican communion since the
commencement of the British régime, a privilege that had been
all along keenly contested by other denominations. It was now
enacted that all proceeds arising from the sale of these lands
should be placed into the hands of the receiver-general, by whom,
after expenses were paid, they were to be apportioned equally
among the several county and city municipalities in proportion to
population.

The Seigneurial Tenure Act while abolishing the system of
feudal rights and duties so long prevailing in Lower Canada,
authorized the governor to provide commissioners to appropriate
indemnifications for the despoiled seigneurs. Thus the two great
questions which had long been exercising Montreal politicians
were at last solved. Parliament was prorogued on the 18th of
December and Lord Elgin concluded his office as governor-general
with credit and honour.

Parliament opened on February 23, 1855. It was marked by the
retirement of Mr. Morin from the ministry. The McNab-Taché
administration was therefore formed. The Crimean war was now on,
and as it became necessary to remove the Imperial Troops from
Canada “a militia act was passed, which was the first step toward
the modern organization of a regular volunteer force in Canada.”

The fifth parliament was opened at Toronto on the 15th of
February, 1856. On Her Majesty’s birthday, May 24th, through the
resignation of Sir Allan McNab, the Taché-Macdonald ministry
assumed the reins, in which John A. Macdonald held the whip hand.
In this session the postponed elective legislative council act
was passed for which imperial authority had already been given.
While those already in the legislative council were to retain
their seats for life, every future member was to be elected
by the people for a term of eight years. This continued till
confederation, in 1867, when the system of appointment for life
was reverted to. The Montreal members in the legislative council
for 1856 were the Honourables Peter McGill, William Morris, Adam
Ferrie, James Ferrier, Denis B. Viger, James Leslie, Frederic
A. Quesnel, Joseph Bourret and Charles Wilson. This year the
stringency in the money market was felt as the result of the
Crimean war.

The year of 1857 is spoken of as _l’année terrible_. The toll of
death was exacted as the price of advancing civilization. Near
Hamilton seventy lives were lost by a train crashing through a
bridge spanning the Desjardins canal. The steamer Montreal which
plied between Montreal and Quebec, was burned so rapidly near
Cape Rouge that about two hundred and fifty emigrants lost their
lives. The harvest was a failure. By the beginning of winter
trade had become almost stagnant. Mercantile disaster which was
to last for a long time stared the wholesale and retail merchants
in the face. Mercantile credit collapsed and every industry was
crippled. Agriculture also shared in the general paralysis. The
cause of this disastrous state was the public extravagance in
that era of public works and railway development. The whirlwind
was being reaped. During the year the Taché-Macdonald government
had sat continuously from February 26th to June 10th. The
premier, Colonel Taché, resigned on November 25th and thereupon
the Hon. John A. Macdonald and the Hon. George Etienne Cartier
formed their administration. At the general elections held in
consequence at Montreal, Mr. A.A. Dorion, leader of the “Rouge
Party,” was one of the few of his party returned, but Mr. Holton
was defeated by the new attorney-general.

A new member for the city was the brilliant young Irishman,
Thomas D’Arcy McGee, who had only been a year in Canada. He
was, however, well known in the United States as a powerful
journalist and public speaker imbued with Irish-American
ideas. He was born in Carlingford, County Louth, in Ireland,
in 1825. In his seventeenth year he went to the States and
began journalism. In 1845 he undertook the editorship of the
“Freeman’s Journal” in Dublin. Becoming identified with the
New Ireland party and involved with Charles Gavan Duffy in the
Smith-O’Brien’s insurrection, he escaped to New York, where he
started the “New York Nation,” which was suppressed by Bishop
Hughes for the attacks on the Irish hierarchy. At Boston he
founded the “American Celt” and continued it at Buffalo for
five years. Gradually he became reconciled to the hierarchy
and received their support, so that his paper was the exponent
in America of Irish Catholic opinions. In 1857 he accepted an
invitation from the Irish party in Montreal to settle here. After
having fulfilled the necessary period of “domicile” he was soon
nominated for parliament, as we have seen.

The new parliament assembled on February 25th. It had become
known after the election that Her Majesty had fixed upon Ottawa
as the permanent seat of government. Parliament had ratified the
choice and a sum of money had been appropriated for the erection
of buildings. But there was serious opposition in many quarters.
It broke out in the House on July 28th, when Mr. Dunkin moved
an address to the Queen, praying Her Majesty to reconsider the
decision and have Montreal named instead of Ottawa. Mr. Brown
moved for an amendment for delay in the erection of buildings and
the removal of government offices to Ottawa, and Mr. Piché moved
as a further amendment that “in the opinion of this house Ottawa
ought not to be the permanent government for the province.” The
amendment was carried, supported by the opposition, and being
considered by the minority equivalent to a vote of censure on Her
Majesty, the government resigned on the following day. Mr. George
Brown was put in charge of forming a ministry which was announced
on Monday, August 2d. At once a vote of want of confidence in
the new Brown-Dorion government, moved by Mr. Hector Langevin,
was passed in the Assembly and in the Upper House. On Wednesday
afternoon after having been in office for forty-eight hours
and without having initiated a single act, parliamentary or
administrative, the short-lived administration was forced to
resign. On August 6th George Cartier becoming prime minister, the
Cartier-Macdonald ministry virtually resumed the situation of the
Macdonald-Cartier government of a few days ago. The portfolios,
however, were exchanged and thus, by making use of a statute
of 1857 there was avoided the necessity of the ministers going
to the people for reelection. This was known as the “Double
Shuffle.” The reconstructed government found themselves with a
strong majority. During the session of this year the question of
“protection to home industries,” a live subject at Montreal, came
up for legislation and was followed by the protective tariff of
the following year.

The government offices having been removed from Toronto,
parliament met at Quebec on January 29th, for the government
offices were not removed to Ottawa till 1865, where the first
session was held in 1866. During this year the principle of
Confederation began to be broached tentatively but surely, by the
opposition party led by Mr. George Brown. A reform convention in
Toronto held in November drew up a series of resolutions which,
when compared with the British North American act of 1867, show
a clear family likeness. At Montreal similar meetings were held
under the auspices of Messrs. Dorion, Drummond, McGee and others
for the same purpose of approving a federal union, but as yet the
movement was weak in Lower Canada.

The sixth parliament met at Quebec for its fourth and last
session on the 16th of March, 1861. By a proclamation of the
governor-general on the 10th of June it came to an end.

On the 8th of November there occurred in mid-ocean, during
the Civil war in the States between the North and South, the
“Trent Incident,” which caused a commotion at Montreal and
throughout Canada. The British Mail steamer Trent had on board
the Confederate envoys, Messrs. Mason and Slidell, when they were
forcibly taken prisoners by Captain Wilkes of the United States
sloop of war San Jacinto. War looked inevitable and the Canadian
Volunteers were augmented, drilled and ready for war. Regular
military troops arrived also from England. The first day of the
new year, 1862, saw the envoys delivered back to England and the
danger of war was over. One result of the “Trent” affair was a
great deepening of the Canadian sympathy, especially at Montreal,
with the southern Confederacy.

In 1862 the Cartier-Macdonald government fell, on the occasion of
their “Militia Bill,” on May 21st, and on the 24th the Macdonald
(J.S.)-Sicotte ministry was sworn in, being succeeded on May 26,
1863, by the Macdonald (J.S.)-Dorion combination, which only
lasted till the 2d of March, 1864, when the Taché-Macdonald
(J.A.) again came into power. It was agreed upon, that the
government should be pledged to introduce the federal principle
into Canada and to aim at a confederation in which all British
America should be “united under a general legislature based upon
the federal principle.”

The idea of confederation as a remedy for government ills had
occupied attention at intervals with increasing acuteness even
before the Union of 1841. It had not been confined to Upper and
Lower Canada, for Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Prince Edward
Island had long discussed the idea of a union among themselves.
Various political dreamers had forecasted it, no doubt following
the lead of the United States. A meeting for the purpose being
called at Charlottetown, Prince Edward Island, the coalition
government of Canada sent eight ministers[3] to confer with
their representatives on the merits of a larger scheme of union
between all the provinces with the result that by agreement a
further convention was to be held at Quebec on a day named by
the governor general. His excellency fixed upon October 10th and
notified the respective lieutenant governors of Nova Scotia, New
Brunswick, Prince Edward Island and Newfoundland. The result was
the pledge to promote the projected confederation.

During the fall of this year, 1864, Montreal was the scene of
the St. Alban’s Raid prosecutions. As already said, Canada and
Montreal especially had sympathized with the Southerners. Many
refugees had found a home here. Canada being so close to the
frontier was, therefore, frequently used as the basis of southern
plots. In the summer two vessels plying on Lake Erie and Lake
Ontario, belonging to American merchants, had been seized and
partially plundered by the southern refugees. In September St.
Albans, a little town in Vermont, on the frontier, was raided by
twenty-three southerners from Canada under the command of Bennett
H. Young, an ex-Confederate soldier, who escaped to Canada on
captured horses with $223,000 booty, after having plundered
three local banks and shot one of the cashiers. Their excuse
was that they were representatives of the Confederate States of
America and they were there to retaliate the outrages committed
by General Sherman. In November the trial of the captured rioters
took place at Montreal and on March 30th they were discharged.

Parliament met on the 19th of January. It was prorogued on
the 18th of March. During the following month four of the
administration, J.A. Macdonald, Cartier, Brown and Galt,
proceeded to England to discuss with the imperial government
the scheme of confederation. The delegates returned in time for
the opening of the last session of the Canadian legislature at
Quebec on the 8th of August. The premier, Sir E.P. Taché, had
died full of honours on the 30th of July. He was succeeded by Sir
N.F. Belleau. During this session the bill was passed to carry
out the recommendation of the commissioners appointed in 1857
“to reduce into one code to be called the civil code of Lower
Canada those provisions of the laws of Lower Canada which relate
to civil matters and are of a general and permanent character.”
Attorney-General Cartier who had introduced the bill appointing
the commission in 1857 had the satisfaction of seeing its labours
adopted in 1865. The code came into operation in 1866. This was
welcomed by the jurists of Montreal and Quebec, as it simplified
the law, reducing order out of chaos; the abolition of the
seigneurial tenure act of 1854 had rendered the codification very
necessary. Parliament closed on the 18th of September. The public
offices were removed to Ottawa during the autumn, but for a time
the cabinet meetings were held at Montreal.

In the beginning of 1866 a delegation was sent by the government
to Washington to obtain a renewal of the reciprocity treaty
which came to an end this year. The mission was a failure. St.
Patrick’s day, March 17th, was looked forward to in Canada by
more than those of Irish nationality. For although during the
year 1865 rumours had gone around that the Fenian Brotherhood of
the States, organized about this time with a branch in Ireland
to liberate Ireland, had determined to invade Canada as a base
of their operations against England, they were not taken very
seriously. But in 1866 the announcement of combined movements
upon Canada to commence on St. Patrick’s day forced serious
preparation for their reception and caused great anxiety over the
country and much recruiting in volunteer circles. St. Patrick’s
day passed and nothing happened. Beginning, however, in April
and gaining strength in May and June, the filibustering Fenians
massed their forces at various points, such as that marked by the
raid under O’Neill upon the Niagara frontier in June, that of
Ogdensburg, menacing a march upon Ottawa, and that at St. Albans
on the Vermont frontier, where 1,800 men had collected on June
7th to pass over into Canada. In Montreal doubtless they hoped
to find some sympathizers. None of these movements met eventual
success and quiet was successfully maintained on the frontier by
both governments. But these were the occasion of military ardour,
shown by the enrollments of the militia and of general patriotism.

The parliament met at Ottawa on the 8th of June in the midst
of the Fenian excitement. The address of His Excellency, the
governor general, forecasted the hope that the next time
parliament met at Ottawa it would be under the confederation
of Province. It lasted to the 15th of August. About three months
later a joint delegation of the representatives of Canada, Nova
Scotia, and New Brunswick met on December 4th in London at the
Westminster Palace Hotel and a conference was held. Prince Edward
Island and Newfoundland had seceded from the project. The upshot
of the negotiations was such that on the 22d of May, 1867, the
Confederation Act, technically known as “the British North
American Act, 1867,” was proclaimed at Windsor Castle by Her
Majesty, Queen Victoria, appointing the 1st of July following as
the date upon which it should come into force. This act joined
Canada (Upper and Lower), Nova Scotia and New Brunswick into
one Dominion, under the name of CANADA. There should be one
federal parliament, consisting of the Queen, represented by the
governor general, an _upper house_ consisting of seventy-two
_life_ members appointed by the Crown, and a House of Commons
_elected_ on the principle of representation by population. Its
jurisdiction was to affect matters concerning the Dominion at
large. Each of the four provinces of Quebec, Ontario, Nova Scotia
and New Brunswick was to have a provincial legislature to manage
its internal affairs. Each was to have a lieutenant governor. In
Ontario the legislature consisted only of a house of assembly. In
the other three provinces a council was added.

[Illustration]

[Illustration: CONFEDERATION SISTERS Arranged from studies of the
Cartier monument (G.W. Hill) being erected in 1914]

In the following year the northwest territories were added to the
Dominion, in 1870 Manitoba, in 1871 British Columbia, and in 1873
Prince Edward Island, and in 1905 the new provinces of Alberta
and Saskatchewan were established. Since confederation the
history of Canada has been one of continued commercial and social
development. The British North American act was the Magna Charta
of Canadian nationhood.

Montreal is proud of the share it took in the promotion of
Confederation.

       LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY FOR MONTREAL DISTRICT FROM THE
         CONSTITUTIONAL ACT, 1791 TO CONFEDERATION, 1867

                             MEMBERS

  Montreal (County)--

    Papineau, Joseph                       July 10, 1792, to May 31, 1796
    Walker, James                          July 10, 1792, to May 31, 1796
    Ducharme, Jean-Marie                   July 20, 1796, to June 4, 1800
    Guy, Et.                               July 20, 1796, to June 4, 1800
    Papineau, Joseph                      July 28, 1800, to June 13, 1804
    Walker, Thomas                        July 28, 1800, to June 13, 1804
    Frobisher, Benjamin                 August 6, 1804, to April 27, 1808
    Roy Portelance, Louis               August 6, 1804, to March 22, 1814
    Durocher, Jean Baptiste               June 18, 1808, to July 12, 1811
    Stuart, James                   December 4, 1811, to February 9, 1820
    Richer, Augustin                    May 13, 1814, to February 9, 1820
    Perrault, Joseph                 April 11, 1820, to September 2, 1830
    Valois, Joseph                   April 11, 1820, to September 2, 1830

    Montreal (East)--
    Frobisher, Joseph                      July 10, 1792, to May 31, 1796
    Richardson, John                       July 10, 1792, to May 31, 1796
    Papineau, Joseph                       July 20, 1796, to June 4, 1800
    Viger, Denis                           July 20, 1796, to June 4, 1800
    Panet, Pierre Louis                   July 28, 1800, to June 13, 1804
    Badgley, Fra                          July 28, 1800, to June 13, 1804
    McGill, James                       August 6, 1804, to April 27, 1808
    Chaboillez, Louis                   August 6, 1804, to April 27, 1808
    Mondelet, Jean-Marie                June 18, 1808, to October 2, 1809
    Stuart, James                         June 18, 1808, to March 1, 1810
    Papineau, Joseph                 November 23, 1809, to March 22, 1814
    Sewell, Stephen                     April 21, 1810, to March 22, 1814
    Beaujeu, Saveuse de                May 13, 1814, to February 29, 1816
    Platt, George                      May 13, 1814, to February 29, 1816
    Roy Portelance, Louis             April 25, 1816, to February 9, 1820
    Molson, John                      April 25, 1816, to February 9, 1820
    Heney, Hughes                    April 11, 1820, to September 2, 1830
    Busby, Thomas                         April 11, 1820, to May 29, 1820
    Thain, Thomas                          July 25, 1820, to July 6, 1824
    Leslie, James                   August 28, 1824, to September 2, 1830

  Montreal (West)--

    McGill, James                          July 10, 1792, to May 31, 1796
    Durocher, Jean-Baptiste                July 10, 1792, to May 31, 1796
    Auldjo, Alex                           July 20, 1796, to June 4, 1800
    Foucher, Louis Charles                 July 20, 1796, to June 4, 1800
    McGill, James                         July 28, 1800, to June 13, 1804
    Périnault, Joseph                     July 28, 1800, to June 13, 1804
    Richardson, John                    August 6, 1804, to April 27, 1808
    Mondelet, Jean-Marie                August 6, 1804, to April 27, 1808
    McGillivray, William                June 18, 1808, to October 2, 1809
    Viger, Denis Benjamin                 June 18, 1808, to March 1, 1810
    McCord, Thomas                    November 23, 1809, to March 1, 1810
    St. Dizier, Et. N.                  April 21, 1810, to March 22, 1814
    McLeod, Arch. N.                    April 21, 1810, to March 22, 1814
    Papineau, Louis Joseph             May 13, 1814, to September 2, 1830
    Fraser, James                      May 13, 1814, to February 29, 1816
    Vinet dit Soulignay, Félix        April 25, 1816, to February 9, 1820
    Garden, George                        April 11, 1820, to July 6, 1824
    Rocheblave, Pierre de                August 28, 1824, to July 5, 1827
    Nelson, Robert                  August 25, 1827, to September 2, 1830

  Montreal (County)--

    Valois, Joseph                   October 26, 1830, to October 9, 1834
    Perrault, Joseph                 October 26, 1830, to August 28, 1831
    Mondelet, Dominique            October 13, 1831, to November 24, 1832
    Papineau, l’hon. Louis Joseph  November 22, 1834, to November 3, 1835
    Cherrier, Côme                   November 22, 1834, to March 27, 1838
    Jobin, André                     November 25, 1835, to March 27, 1838

  Montreal (East)--

    Heney, Hughes                  October 26, 1830, to February 28, 1832
    Leslie, James                     October 26, 1830, to March 27, 1838
    Berthelet, Oliver                   April 6, 1832, to October 9, 1834
    Roy, Joseph                      November 22, 1834, to March 27, 1838

  Montreal (West)--

    Papineau, l’hon. Louis Joseph     October 26, 1830, to March 27, 1838
    Fisher, John                      October 26, 1830, to March 26, 1832
    Tracey, Daniel                         May 22, 1832, to July 18, 1832
    Nelson, Robert                   November 22, 1834, to March 27, 1838

  Montreal (City)--

    Moffatt, l’hon. George             April 8, 1841, to October 30, 1843
    Holmes, Benjamin                 April 8, 1841, to September 23, 1844
    Beaubien, Pierre             November 22, 1843, to September 23, 1844
    Moffatt, l’hon. George         November 12, 1844, to December 6, 1847
    Bleury, Charles-Clément Sabrevois de   Nov. 12, 1844, to Dec. 6, 1847
    Lafontaine, l’hon. Louis-Hippolyte     Jan. 24, 1848, to Nov. 6, 1851
    Holmes, Benjamin                January 24, 1848, to November 6, 1851
    Young, l’hon. John                 December 6, 1851, to June 23, 1854
    Badgley, l’hon. William            December 6, 1851, to June 23, 1854

  Montreal (County)--

    Delisle, Alexandre-Maurice            April 8, 1841, to July 13, 1843
    Jobin, André                    October 26, 1843, to November 6, 1851
    Valois, Michel-François           December 10, 1851, to June 23, 1854

  Montreal (City)--

    Dorion, Antoine-Aimé                  July 28, 1854, to June 10, 1861
    Holton, Luther-Hamilton           July 28, 1854, to November 28, 1857
    Young, l’hon. John                July 28, 1854, to November 28, 1857
    Rose, John                        December 28, 1857, to June 10, 1861
    McGee, Thomas D’Arcy              December 28, 1857, to June 10, 1861

  Montreal (Center)--

    Rose, l’hon. John                       July 9, 1861, to July 1, 1866

  Montreal (East)--

    Cartier, l’hon. George-Etienne          July 9, 1861, to July 1, 1867

  Montreal (West)--

    McGee, Thomas D’Arcy                   June 26, 1861, to July 1, 1867

    Montreal (County)--

    Hochelaga
    Laporte, Joseph                   July 24, 1854, to November 28, 1857
    Jacques-Cartier
    Valois, Michel-François           July 20, 1854, to November 28, 1857


FOOTNOTES:

[1] Sometimes called the “First Baldwin-Lafontaine Government.”

[2] See Dent, “The Last Forty Years of Canada,” Vol. II, pp.
180-1.

[3] The eight were J.A. Macdonald, George Brown, George Etienne
Cartier, A.T. Gault, T. D’Arcy McGee, H.L. Langevin, W. McDougall
and Alexander Campbell. Of these fathers of confederation,
Montreal records with pride the names of Cartier and McGee,
its sometime political representatives. The two especially did
much to disarm the strong opposition in certain quarters in the
province of Quebec.




                           CHAPTER XX

                  THE MUNICIPALITY OF MONTREAL

  EARLY EFFORTS TOWARDS MUNICIPAL HOME RULE--1786--1821--1828--THE
    FIRST MUNICIPAL CHARTER OF 1831--THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF
    MONTREAL--JACQUES VIGER FIRST MAYOR--THE RETURN TO THE JUSTICES
    OF THE PEACE--LORD DURHAM’S REPORT AND THE RESUMPTION OF THE
    CORPORATION IN 1840--CHARTER AMENDMENT, 1851--FIRST MAYOR
    ELECTED BY THE PEOPLE--CHARTER AMENDMENT OF 1874--THE CITY OF
    MONTREAL ANNEXATIONS--CIVIC POLITICS--THE NOBLE “13”--1898
    CHARTER RECAST, SANCTIONED IN 1899--CIVIC SCANDALS--THE
    “23”--JUDGE CANNON’S REPORT--THE REFORM PARTY; THE “CITIZENS’
    ASSOCIATION”--REDUCTION OF ALDERMEN AND A BOARD OF CONTROL, THE
    ISSUE--THE WOMEN’S CIVIC ASSOCIATIONS--THE NEW REGIME AND THE
    BOARD OF CONTROL--FURTHER AMENDMENTS TO CHARTER--THE ELECTIONS
    OF 1912--ABOLITION OF THE SMALL WARD SYSTEM ADVOCATED--THE
    ELECTIONS OF 1914--A FORECAST FOR GREATER MONTREAL--SUPPLEMENT:
    LIST OF MAYORS--CITY REVENUE.


The citizens of Montreal, as already narrated, had had in
view for many years under the British rule, the introduction
of a responsible form of Home Rule in municipal affairs. As
early as 1786, on the invitation of the Superior Council, they
had reported in favour of the incorporation by charter of a
municipality, but notwithstanding, the system of government by
justices of the peace was continued. At a meeting of October
23, 1821, the citizens again agitated for a charter. In 1828
a great meeting was held on December 6th and resolutions were
passed to the effect that in the flourishing state of the
growth of population and the progress of trade the government
by magistrates was not sufficient to provide for municipal
advance in the future; that among the evils due to insufficient
powers granted to the magistrates was the inefficiency of police
regulations and the want of an efficient system of bookkeeping
in the appropriation of the revenues of the town; the deplorable
state for many years of the water front and the lands adjoining
the “little river,” which by their unhealthy condition, had
become dangerous to the well being of the great part of the
surrounding population; the lack of means and authority for
undertaking and executing a preconceived and general plan of
improvement, it being left to the individual to put obstacles
to the proper growth of the town which narrowness of view and
self-interest might suggest to the delay in growth and the
increase of avoidable expenses. The citizens concluded by
demanding from the legislature the incorporation of the town. The
committee formed to present the petition was as follows: For the
town, J.B. Rolland, P. McGill, J. Quesnell and A. Laframbroise;
for the districts of St. Antoine, St. Ann and the Recollets,
John Fry, Father Desautels, John Torrance, Charles de Lorimier,
C. Wagner and H. Corse; for St. Lawrence, C.S. Delorme, A.
Tullock (Père), A. Tullock (Fils), John Baptiste Castonguay,
B. Hall and Louis de Chantal; for the Quebec and St. Louis
districts, John Richelieu, Louis Parthenais, Francis Derome and
C.S. Rodier.

In 1830 the harbour commission was appointed as a partial remedy.

In 1831 the first act incorporating the city of Montreal was
presented on March 31st for the sanction of His Majesty,
which was given on April 12, 1832, its publication being by
proclamation of the governor general on June 5th following. On
the 18th of July, 1833, the city council unanimously adopted
the seal of the arms of the city, the Beaver,[1] the Rose, the
Shamrock and the Thistle, and its motto, “Concordia Salus.”
By this act under the name of “The Corporation of the City of
Montreal” the city was divided into eight wards, East, West, St.
Ann, St. Joseph, St. Antoine, St. Lawrence, St. Louis and St.
Mary. Each was to elect two councillors with certain financial
qualifications, and these sixteen were to elect from their number
one to act as mayor to whom a salary not exceeding four hundred
dollars should be granted. The right of citizenship was to be
accorded to every man attaining the age of twenty-one years and
possessing real estate in the limits of the city and having
resided therein for twelve months prior to the election. Every
elector became a member of the corporation. The corporation
acquired powers to borrow, acquire and possess property, to take
action at law, to be in turn liable to legal prosecution and
to have a seal. The other powers granted them were similar to
those exercised hitherto by the justices of the peace for the
government and maintenance of the city. The act was not to remain
in force after May 1, 1836.

On the first Monday in May, 1833, the justices of the peace met
to appoint the first Monday of June as the day of election of
the councillors. These, when elected, met on June 5th in the
courthouse for the first séance. Jacques Viger, who acted as
secretary, was elected the first mayor, the councillors being
John Donegani, William Forbes, Joseph Gauvin, Alexander Lusignan,
John McDonell, Robert Nelson, C.S. Rodier, Joseph Roy, John
Torrance, Augustin Tullock, John Turney, Guillaume J. Vallée,
François Dérome, Mahum Hall, Julien Perrault, and Turton Penn.
The secretary appointed was Francis Auger. On the first Monday
of June, each year, half of the council had to be replaced or
re-elected. The charter required that each regulation of the
council before taking effect should be submitted for approbation
to the court of King’s Bench after having been published in the
newspapers and by town criers.

This charter remained in force till May 1, 1836, when for
unaccountable reasons its renewal was refused, and the justices
of the peace again ruled the city till August, 1840. These,
following the official lists, were: Denis B. Viger, Peter
McGill, Pierre de Rocheblave, William Robertson, Lawrence Kidd,
James Miller, Austin Cuvillier, James Quesnel, Adam L. McNiver,
Joseph Shuter, William Hall, Jos. Ant. Gagnon, Daniel Arnoldi,
E.M. Leprohon, George S. Holt, Joseph T. Barrett, Jacob DeWitt,
Pierre Lukin, Turton Penn, Thomas Cringan, Joseph Masson, Henry
Corse, John Molson, Sidney Bellingham, James Browne, Pierre E.
Leclere, John Donegani, Guillaume J. Vallée, Charles Lamontagne,
Henri Desrivières, Theophile Dufort, Benjamin Hart, James McGill
Desrivières, Charles S. Rodier, John Jones, Charles Tate, Hugh E.
Barron, Alexis Laframboise, J. Bte. Castonguay, Patrice Lacombe,
Olivier Berthelet, Paul Jos. LaCroix, Thomas B. Wragg, M.J.
Hayes, Etienne Guy, Logan Fuller, François P. Bruneau, Pierre
Louis Panet, Hugh Brodie, Joseph Baby, Alexander Buchanan, John
Dyke and William Evans. The clerks of the justices were Delisle
and Delisle, then Delisle and Brehaut.

[Illustration: SEAL OF THE CITY OF MONTREAL]

During this period Lord Durham arrived and his report
animadverting on the absence of municipal government in Montreal
and Quebec, doubtless caused the reintroduction of the municipal
council under the name of the mayor, the aldermen and the
citizens of the city of Montreal. The governor, Mr. C. Poulett
Thomson (afterwards Lord Sydenham) was authorized to name the
first council for the first term to end on December 2, 1842. His
choice was as follows: Mayor, the Hon. Peter McGill; councillors,
Jules Quesnel, Adam Ferrier, C.S. Rodier, J.G. McKenzie, C.S.
De Bleury, J.M. Tobin, Olivier Berthelet, F. Bruneau, Hippolyte
Guy, John Donegani, Charles Tate, J.W. Dunscomb, Thomas Philipps,
Colin Campbell, Stanley Bagg, Archibald Hume, D. Handside and
William Molson. On September 12, J.P. Sexton was appointed city
clerk and remained in office till 1858.

In 1843 the second council was elected by the people from six
wards only, viz., East, Center, West, Queen, St. Lawrence and St.
Mary. These councillors, two for each ward, elected the mayor
from among themselves, as well as six other citizens under the
title of aldermen who all composed the council as follows: Mayor,
Joseph Bourret; aldermen, Joseph Masson, Benjamin Holmes, William
Molson, Joseph Roy, Joseph Redpath, C.S. De Bleury; councillors,
James Ferrier, Pierre Jodoin, Peter Dunn, William Lunn, William
Watson, Olivier Frechette, Pierre Beaubien, P.A. Gagnon, François
Trudeau, François Perrin, and John Mathewson. The six wards into
which the city was divided were: East, Center, West, Queen, St.
Lawrence and St. Mary. In 1845 the city was divided into nine
wards, the city wards being East, Center and West and having each
three representatives in the council, the other six, called the
suburban wards, only having two councillors each. Thus the whole
council had twenty-one members.

This system obtained till 1852,[2] when by the statute Victoria,
14, 15, chapter 128, passed in 1851, the election of the mayor
passed from the council to the people at large. The first thus
elected was the Hon. Charles Wilson. The number of the aldermen
was raised to nine and each of the suburban wards received the
same rights as the city wards to three representatives. This
brought the council up to twenty-seven members. The statute of
1851 only imposed four quarterly sessions of the council, but the
mayor had the right, however, to call special meetings. As an
instance of the parochial measures then engaging the thoughts of
our municipal rulers, we may quote the following relating to the
breaking of a monopoly:

“Mayor Wolfred Nelson, in his address to the Council in 1854,
after alluding to the pestilence which had visited the city and
the poverty which followed, said: ‘The misery in which we have
been involved would have been immeasurably greater had not the
Council adopted energetic measures having the effect of breaking
down a cursed monopoly--that of firewood--by purchasing several
hundred cords of firewood and selling it in small lots at cost
price; as well as of arresting the most extraordinary practice
of converting our greatest thoroughfares, the wharves, into wood
yards by speculators and monopolists, who prevented the purchase
of wood in small quantities from the boats. The adoption of
these measures in one week reduced the price of fuel over one
quarter, at a period when it had been boasted that it would be
worth ten or twelve dollars a cord during the winter. Instead of
this exhorbitant rate the best wood can now be obtained for $6 a
cord.’”

In 1859 Charles Glackmeyer was appointed city clerk and remained
in office till 1892, when he was succeeded by L.O. David till
today.

In 1874 (Victoria 37, Chapter 41) the charter was amended and
the name of the corporation was changed to that of “The City of
Montreal.” The distinction between aldermen and councillors was
abolished, the title for all being that of aldermen, who were all
elected by the people.

The history of Greater Montreal now begins in the annexation of
the rural municipalities. In 1883 the new Hochelaga ward added
three aldermen; in 1886 that of St. Jean Baptiste three others;
in 1887 St. Gabriel ward also added three.

Commenting on the state of civic politics under this charter a
contemporary has the following chatty appreciation:[3]

  “For many years the English-speaking element had dominated in
  civic affairs by virtue of a very small majority in the City
  Council, and there was just a little tendency among the city
  fathers forming that majority, not only to dominate but to
  domineer. They were not disposed to be unjust to the citizens
  who formed the majority of the electorate, but they showed a
  lack of tact amounting at times to a want of delicacy in dealing
  with and speaking of the diverse elements of the population.
  The French-Canadians had the good sense to elect their ablest
  men. To be quite frank there was a long period during which the
  English-speaking people seemed to think that almost anybody was
  good enough to make an alderman. The result was inevitable.
  Each ward was represented by three aldermen, one retiring each
  year and the English-speaking majority in the Center Ward was
  in 1880 only a little one. It took just three years of good
  electioneering work to replace three English-speaking aldermen
  by three French-Canadians. The latter element now dominated the
  Council and to prevent accident Hochelaga was annexed in 1883.
  This not only brought in three more French-Canadian aldermen on
  December 1, 1883, but it brought in Raymond Préfontaine, who was
  a host in himself, and who almost immediately became the ruling
  spirit in civic affairs. Of course, most of the English-speaking
  aldermen did not take kindly to the new régime and Raymond
  Préfontaine got his full share of their hot shot and it hurt
  him as much as water hurts a duck’s back. The attitude of most
  of the English journalists (including the writer) must have
  been consoling to the Council minority, on account of the sweet
  sympathy expressed. ‘The Honest Minority,’ the ‘Noble Thirteen,’
  the ‘Faithful Anti-Monopolists’ were among the compliments
  lavished by a discriminating press; and were taken not only
  seriously but appreciatively by the recipients, some of whom were
  in the habit of discussing on the floor of the Council their
  own sterling qualities with a frankness which left nothing to
  be desired. One of the noblest Romans of them all could seldom
  speak of his own honesty (and he had no false delicacy about
  introducing the subject), without shedding tears and sobbing.
  Strangers might have imagined he was crying over his lost
  opportunities, but he wasn’t; it was just his way.

  “Time is apt to and ought to modify our judgments of our
  fellowmen. Let it be said for Raymond Préfontaine by one who
  generally disagreed with his plans and disapproved of his public
  actions that among his qualities were some decidedly good
  ones. He was a man of his word and a man of ideas and infinite
  resource. He was the first public man to set about systematic
  modernizing and development of Montreal. When he talked about
  electric cars and electric lighting, he was laughed to scorn by
  the ‘Noble Minority’ in the Council and the rest of the nobility
  outside the Council. He went in for street widening and permanent
  paving (no doubt at an expensive rate) and he added to the size
  of the debt as well as to the size of the city. He was, in fact,
  Montreal’s Baron Haussmann. The Baron was ‘fired’ by the Olivier
  government for his financial extravagance; he only borrowed a
  hundred million dollars, from 1865 to 1869; but he made the
  modern Paris.

  “The Noble Thirteen and their admirers, like the coloured troops
  in the American Civil war fought nobly against Mr. Préfontaine’s
  schemes and predicted unmerciful disaster if the City Passenger
  Railway were electrified. To the plea that electric railways
  were a success elsewhere the opposition replied triumphantly and
  without fear of contradiction ‘but New York isn’t Montreal’--and
  neither Alderman Préfontaine nor any of his followers ever dared
  to take up the challenge and prove that New York was Montreal.

  “Then the Noble Thirteen had its own troubles. One, at least,
  lost his patent of nobility by voting wrong on the gas question;
  another was laid out on the City Passenger Railway Monopoly; a
  third was promoted to the retired list because his popularity
  threatened to make him a dangerous rival to another nobleman in
  a parliamentary election. Strenuous opponents of ‘monopoly’ in
  street railways became first lukewarm, then indifferent, then
  apologetic, and finally strenuous supporters of Monopoly with
  the biggest ‘M’ in the printer’s upper case. Most of the Noble
  Thirteen have gone to a better world, which is a good thing for
  them, because if they were still in the Council, they would miss
  the old admiration dreadfully.”

The city charter was recast in 1898 and the work was confided to
the mayor, Raymond Préfontaine, Aldermen Rainville, Beausoleil,
Martineau, Laporte, McBride, Ames and Archambault, aided by the
city law officers and the heads of departments. This commission
revised and examined clause by clause the preliminary draft
prepared by Messrs. Choquette and Weir, appointed revising
advocates in conjunction with the city clerk and the city
attorneys. The new charter, a progressive document, was
sanctioned on the 10th of March, 1899. By it Montreal was divided
into seventeen wards called respectively East, Center, West, St.
Ann, St. Antoine South, St. Antoine West, St. Antoine East, St.
Lawrence, St. Louis, St. James South, St. James North, St. Mary
West, St. Mary East, Hochelaga, St. Jean Baptiste, St. Gabriel
and St. Denis. In 1903 Duvernay Ward was formed with a part of
St. Jean Baptiste Ward. Among the clauses of this charter was one
giving power to the council to extend the limits of the city and
to annex municipalities. The elections now began to take place
every two years instead of annually. The mayor’s qualifications
required that he should possess real estate in the city under his
own name to the value of $10,000. His yearly salary was not to
exceed four thousand dollars. The property qualification for an
alderman was fixed at $2,000 and his yearly indemnity at $600,
with an additional sum of $200 for every chairman of a permanent
committee. These permanent committees were appointed at the
first monthly meeting in February for the year and apportioned
the general superintendents and administration of the various
city departments among themselves. These were supplemented by an
occasional special committee. The council assembled once a month,
on the second Monday, but the mayor could convoke a special
meeting on notice given to each alderman. Five members of the
council could also call a special meeting. The mayor could only
cast his vote when there was an equality of votes.

The fault of the civic administration under this charter was
in the ever-growing abuses arising from the system of standing
committees of aldermen conflicting with one another, delaying
the course of business. Towards its close corruption and
inefficiency were rampant under the monopoly of a few who became
stigmatized in the mouths of the citizens as the “23.” In 1909 a
royal commission was appointed to examine into the malversations
under the late administration. On December 12, 1909, Mr. Justice
Cannon presented his report, in which he named twenty-three of
the aldermen as guilty of malpractices. Twenty-two of these were
not returned in the subsequent elections. The following general
conclusion may be taken as a summary of his recommendations and
findings:

1. The administration of the affairs of the city of Montreal
by its Council has, since 1892, been saturated with corruption
arising especially from the patronage plague.

2. The majority of the aldermen have administered the committees
and the council in such a manner as to favor the private
interests of their relatives and friends, to whom contracts
and positions were distributed to the detriment of the general
interests of the city and of the taxpayers.

3. As a result of this administration, the annual revenue of
$5,000,000 has been spent as follows: 25 per cent in bribes and
malversation of all kinds; as for the balance, the greater part
has been employed in works of which the permanence has very often
been ephemeral.

6. As for the division and the representation of the city by
wards, all agree in condemning this system, which gave rise
to patronage and to its abuses. I recommend to the citizens
of Montreal, after a serious study of this question, to
adopt another system creating a council composed of aldermen
representing the entire city and working in unity for its growth
and prosperity.

7. The council of today is composed of groups and coteries
struggling one with another with such bitterness that they
necessarily lose sight of the high interests of the community.

Meanwhile many of the prominent citizens, about 1908, began to
prepare for a charter reform. In 1909 the “Citizens’ Association”
was formed for governmental reform. Its president was an
ex-mayor, Mr. Hormisdas Laporte, and the honorary treasurer
was Mr. James Morgan, a prominent merchant and a good citizen,
who personally contributed to the funds of the campaign, begun
then and carried on for some years, very substantial sums
of money and its other adherents, men of solid and approved
citizenship. The object of the charter reformers was to remedy
the prevalent abuses by a reduction of the number of aldermen
to one representative to each ward, making thirty-one in the
council, and by a curtailment of their powers, reducing them to
a purely legislative body, with no executive power in financial
matters. This latter function was to be held by a body of four
commissioners or “controllers” and the mayor elected from the
city at large. It was hoped that by this adaptation of the
“commission” form of government, then obtaining great prominence
in muncipal literature in the United States, where the method was
being practiced, that the waste of civic energy, time and money
would be best secured by a small executive board elected by the
people at large and uninfluenced by ward politics. The charter
for the Board of Control, (9 Edw. Chap. 82) of 1909, at the
request of Farquhar Robertson, Charles Chaput, Victor Morin, S.D.
Vallières and others, was accordingly secured from the provincial
government after a plebiscite had been previously taken in favour
of this great radical change of government, the most important
since the original municipal charter in 1831. The new form had
already been foreseen by Mayor Wilson Smith in his valedictory
address in 1896. He said:

“The question has been frequently discussed, both in the Council
and outside of it, as to whether the aldermen should be paid
for their services. I have to acknowledge that one result of my
experience has been to change my mind on this subject. I am now
decidedly of the opinion that not only should the aldermen be
remunerated for their services, but that they should be relieved,
as far as possible, of attending to purely administrative duties.
And it is worthy of serious consideration whether it would not be
in the best interests of the city to appoint paid Commissioners
to superintend all details, in connection with the civic
administration. These Commissioners might have associated with
them the heads of the departments, with the Mayor as chairman,
who might form an Advisory Board, and submit all matters to the
City Council, which would act as a legislative body, but their
recommendations should be subject to a veto of a two-thirds vote
of the Council. The Commissioners might be three in number, one
of whom could be elected by the rate-payers generally, one by
the real estate owners, and one by a two-thirds vote of the City
Council; said Commissioners to be under the control of the City
Council, and subject to dismissal for cause, by a two-thirds vote
of the Council.”

In virtue of the recent change in the charter, the new Board of
Control was invested with the following powers:

1. To prepare the annual budget and to submit it to the council;

2. To recommend every expense, no expense or matter referring to
city finances being able to be adopted unless recommended by the
controllers;

3. The council on the report of the controllers to be charged with
the granting of franchises and privileges by regulation, resolutions,
contracts, by the issue of debentures and contraction of loans;

4. The controllers were further to prepare contracts and plans,
to ask for tenders, to decide all formalities relating to the
latter, to receive and to open such;

5. To inspect or oversee public works;

6. To employ the money voted by the council for the purpose
designed;

7. To nominate and suspend all employees, except those nominated
by the council whose nomination, suspension and dismissal should
be made by the council on the recommendation of the controllers;

8. No report or recommendation made by the controllers to be
executed without the acceptation of the majority of the council;

9. No amendment to a report or recommendation of the controllers
to be made without the approbation of two-thirds of the members
of the council present at the meeting.

The work now to be given to the Board of Control was that
hitherto done by eleven committees of the aldermen of seven
members in each.

The Citizens’ Association undertaking the campaign for good
government and the conduct of the forthcoming elections formed
up in the middle of 1909, and was hailed by all good citizens,
receiving the support of all public and volunteer associations
having a civic tendency. About this time an important association
was formally inaugurated on April 12, 1909, by His Excellency
Earl Grey entitled the “City Improvement League,” and lent its
aid in the campaign of education on good government and civic
progress. Other societies also cooperated. The women associations
under the local Council of Women on the English-speaking side,
and La Fédération Nationale St. Jean Baptiste on the French,
entered more largely than ever before into the movement for civic
progress and influenced the women voters for clean government.
The choice of the people for the new officers was made on
February 1, 1910, when the “whole slate for the board” prepared
by the Citizens’ Association was unanimously adopted at the
polls as follows: Mayor, J.J. Guerin, M.D.; controllers, E.P.
Lachapelle, M.D., president of the Provincial Board of Health;
L.N. Dupuis, merchant; Joseph Ainey, labour candidate; and F.L.
Wanklyn, a civil engineer and former manager of the Montreal
Street Railway. (The latter resigned in the fall of 1911 and
was succeeded by the election in the spring of 1912 of Mr. C.H.
Godfrey.) The thirty-one wards were represented as follows:

  East                      L.A. Lapointe
  Centre                    J.Z. Resther
  West                      S.J. Carter *
  St. Ann                   T. O’Connell *
  St. Joseph                U.H. Dandurand
  St. Andrew                Joseph Ward *
  St. George                Leslie H. Boyd, K.C. *
  St. Louis                 Jean B. Lamoureaux
  St. Laurent               James Robinson *
  Papineau                  J.A.E. Gauvin
  St. Mary                  J.P. Roux, M.D.
  St. Jacques               A.N. Brodeur
  Lafontaine                Eudore Dubeau
  Hochelaga                 J.H. Garceau, M.D.
  St. Jean Baptiste         Noé Leclaire
  St. Gabriel               Patrick Monahan *
  St. Denis                 Ernest D. Tétreau
  Duvernay                  Ludger Clément
  St. Henry                 O. Letourneau, M.D.
  St. Cunegonde             N. Lapointe
  Mount Royal               A.E. Prud’homme, N.P.
  De Lorimier               George Mayrand, N.P.
  Laurier                   N. Turcot
  Notre Dame de Graces      George Marcil
  St. Paul                  M. Judge
  Ahuntsic                  T. Bastien
  Emard                     J.U. Emard, K.C.
  Longue Pointe             E. Larivière
  Bordeaux                  E. Lussier
  Cote des Neiges           A.S. Deguire
  Rosemount                 J.N. Drummond *

  * English-Speaking.

The consequent dispatch in city business, the improvement in
public works, the strengthening of heads of departments in the
city hall, hitherto hampered by aldermanic interference, and the
abolition of patronage secured universal approbation of the new
form of civic government. After awhile the spirit of opposition
among a certain number of the aldermen began to jeopardize the
early universal acceptance of the board of control system.
Again the Citizens’ Association, with its backing, had to seek
to strengthen the hands of the Board of Control. The following
extracts from the Secretary of the Board of Trade’s annual report
(Mr. George Hadrill) will indicate the new phase:

“In 1908, it being evident that the City Council, while
comprising some good and capable men, was sadly misgoverning this
city, your Council, with representatives of other organizations,
endeavoured to secure such amendment of the City Charter as
would provide for a reduction in the number of Aldermen and for
the election of a Board of Commissioners. This effort resulted
successfully in 1909, but unfortunately the amendments to the
Charter submitted by the Citizens Committee were so changed
in their passage through the Legislature that the Board of
Commissioners did not possess the full powers it was intended to
give them, and the result has been that, while the Commissioners
have done much for the City, many of their plans for its
advantage have been frustrated by the City Council and hence the
hope for improvement in the condition of the City has been only
partially realized. Your Council, therefore, in October last,
joined with the following other organizations in an endeavour
to secure such further amendments to the City Charter as would
give the Board of Commissioners all executive powers, leaving
with the City Council the general legislative powers and the
making of by-laws: Montreal Trades and Labour Council, Canadian
Manufacturers’ Association, La Chambre de Commerce, Montreal
Citizens’ Association, Association Immobilière Montréal, Montreal
Business Men’s League.

The substance of these amendments was as follows:

“That the Commissioners shall prepare the annual budget and the
supplementary budget, and submit each to the City Council, which
shall have the power to amend them by a two-thirds majority, or
to reject them by a majority.

“That in the event of the budget not being adopted, amended or
rejected within a certain period, it would be considered adopted.

“That once the budget is adopted, with or without amendment, the
entire control of the expenditure, within the limits prescribed
by the budget, would be left to the Board of Commissioners.

“That the Board of Commissioners shall have the appointment,
suspension, dismissal and full control in all respects of all
employees, including the heads of departments.

“That the initiative as to loans and franchises shall be with the
Board of Commissioners, subject to approval by the City Council,
who could amend or reject by a two-thirds majority.

“That the general legislative power and the making of by-laws
shall be with the City Council, but the Board of Commissioners
shall have all executive powers.

“That if any change in the composition of the City Council is
decided upon, it would best be obtained by dividing the city into
five wards (each to elect three aldermen), such division to be
made equitably in proportion to population, assessed value and
possible growth.

“Amendments to the City Charter Bill, based upon the foregoing,
were presented to the Private Bills Committee at Quebec by the
Citizens Association, the Board of Trade and other leading
associations resulted in their adoption, with a slight change
and thus the Board of Commissioners is now in possession of the
powers necessary for the proper discharge of its duties.”

It is to be noted that, by a strange oversight of the framers
of the amended charter, the following important clause in the
original charter for the Board of Control was omitted: “To make
all recommendations involving the expenditure of money. No
recommendation involving the expenditure of money, and affecting
in any manner whatever the finances of the city shall be adopted
by the Council without it having been previously submitted to the
Board of Commissioners and approved by them.” There was, however,
added the power to conclude without tender, urgent purchase of
materials not exceeding the value of $2,500.

The elections of 1912, in which the four controllers, who had
completed their term of four years, did not compete, resulted
in the election of Mr. L.A. Lavallée, K.C., as the next mayor.
Among the new aldermen elected were several of those who had
been scored in Judge Cannon’s report, so short-lived is a city’s
remembrance. During the next two years the position of the Board
of Control was further jeopardized by organized opposition from
the part of the council, but the evident value of the system
still retained the favour of the people.

In preparation for the campaign of 1914 the chief civic bodies of
the city called together by the Citizens Association sought to
diminish the number of the aldermen further by a redistribution
of the city into five districts with three aldermen to each,
with the object of the abolition of the small ward system
as such. An amendment to the charter was prepared for five
districts with three aldermen to each, and presented to the
legislative committee of the Provincial Government at Quebec.
Its delegation obtained a lukewarm reception as its opponents,
within the Council, fearing to be reduced in number in the
city hall, had forestalled the deputation by previous action.
In addition it was thought that the redistribution demanded
was premature. The “status quo” therefore remained, and at the
municipal elections of 1914 the organized reaction against
the Citizens Association leading the reform party was very
clearly marked in the results of the poll. An attempt was made
to vilify the Citizens Association for its efforts to provide
a harmonious “slate” representative of the different elements
in the city; disorganization and want of cohesion reigned among
those otherwise interested in good government, and the unwritten
law which should have offered the mayoralty this year to an
English-speaking citizen was broken.

This election was the most important of recent years, the
positions of mayor, four controllers and thirty-two aldermen
being vacant. The mayor elected was the Mr. Médéric Martin, the
controllers being Mr. Joseph Ainey, E. Napoléon Hébert, Thomas
Coté and Duncan McDonald. The personnel of the Council was
likewise overwhelmingly French Canadian.

This Government is now under trial. Let us repeat the city’s
motto “Concordia Salus.”

There are not wanting signs in forecast that the reduction of the
number of wards will take place on the lines above indicated.
Montreal civic students of this period, seeing the growth of the
Greater Montreal, are groping towards some coherent system, which
will eventually embrace the whole island while securing the local
government of its various subdistricts or municipality. Another
movement of the future connected with the foregoing will be a
larger measure of Civic Home Rule, than is at present allowed by
the Province of Quebec.

The system of the financial government of the city by the Board
of Control is not, however, universally approved of, especially
by the aldermen. The fault lies in the manner of election of
the mayor, aldermen and the controllers, all being elected by
the people on a Democratic basis of public favour; hence there
is likelihood of temporary popularity rather than special
professional ability being the criterion in the selection of
controllers and the mayor, who is, by his office, chairman of
their board.

There are, therefore, at present several theories under
discussion which will influence a further change of the latest
charter amendments.

Among these are the following:

(1) The appointment by the Provincial Legislature of a Board
of Control. This militates against the upholders of Civic Home
Rule and is a partial recurrence to the old system of Justices
of the Peace, appointed by Government before the erection of the
municipality.

(2) The removal of the Board of Control and the restitution
of the standing committees as hitherto. This has not proved
successful in the past.

(3) The aldermen to be elected by the city at large through five
or six great divisions.

(4) The election of the councillors by the city at large with the
establishment of a permanent “Board of Works” with at least a
fair proportion of professional men, such as engineers, who shall
be appointed by the people for a long term of usefulness so as
to encourage the best men to devote a life service in the city’s
employ.

(5) The mayor to be elected by the people but not to sit as
chairman of the Board of Control. This Board to be elected only
by the votes of the electors entered as “proprietors” on the
voters list. Thus, with property qualifications for controllers
added perhaps, a more judicious choice could be made. The
election of alderman to be as before or by larger divisions.

Of these modifications the last compromise has more weight.


                             NOTE 1

                       MAYORS OF MONTREAL

  Term.                 Name.                             Elected by.

  1833-36             Jacques Viger                     The Council
    (The interval was filled again by the Justices of the Peace.)
  1840                Hon. Peter McGill                 Governor General
  1841-42             Hon. Peter McGill (2 terms)       The Council
  1843-44             Joseph Bourret (2 terms)          The Council
  1845-46             Hon. James Ferrier                The Council
  1847                John E. Mills (died in November,
                        was replaced by Joseph Bourret) The Council
  1848                Joseph Bourret                    The Council
  1849-50             E.R. Fabre                        The Council
  1851-52-53          Hon. Charles Wilson (3 terms)     The People
  1854-55             Wolfred Nelson                    The People
  1856-57             Hon. Henry Starnes (2 terms)      The People
  1858-59-60-61       Hon. Charles S. Rodier (4 terms)  The People
  1862-63-64-65       Hon. J.L. Beaudry (4 terms)       The People
  1866-67             Hon. Henry Starnes (2 terms)      The People
  1867-68-69          William Workman (3 terms)         The People
  1871-72             Charles J. Coursol (2 terms)      The People
  1873                Francis Cassidy (died in June,
                        1873, being replaced by Aldis
                        Bernard)                        The People
  1874                Aldis Bernard                     The People
  1875-76             Sir William Hingston (2 terms)    The People
  1877-78             Hon. J.L. Beaudry (2 terms)       The People
  1879-80             Hon. Severe Rivard (2 terms)      The People
  1881-82-83-84       Hon. J.L. Beaudry (4 terms)       The People
  1885-86             H. Beaugrand (2 terms)            The People
  1887-88             Sir J.J.C. Abbott (2 terms)       The People
  1889-90             Jacques Grenier (2 terms)         The People
  1891-92             Hon. James McShane (2 terms)      The People
  1893                Alphonse Desjardins               The People
  1894-95             Hon. J.O. Villeneuve (2 terms)    The People
  1896-97             R. Wilson Smith (2 terms)         The People
  1898-99-1900-01[A]  Hon. Raymond Préfontaine
                        (3 terms)                       The People
  1902-03             James Cochrane                    The People
  1904-05             H. Laporte                        The People
  1906-07             H.A. Ekers                        The People
  1908-09             L. Payette                        The People
  1910-11             Hon. J.J. Guerin                  The People
  1912-13             L.A. Lavallée                     The People
  1913-14             Médéric Martin                    The People

  [A] By the new charter to begin with 1900 the term of mayor was
  now increased to two years.


                                 NOTE II

        COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF GENERAL REVENUE OF THE CITY OF MONTREAL,
                            FROM 1880 TO 1912

          Assessment on real                               Business and personal
              estate.                   Water rate.                tax.

          Current                  Current                  Current
  Year      year        Arrears      year         Arrears     year       Arrears

  1880 $ 582,100.31 $ 190,866.89 $ 327,104.61 $ 37,846.38 $146,148.23 $14,726.00
  1881   612,255.49   239,469.45   364,797.47   33,640.71  145,957.06  13,690.77
  1882   643,687.06   190,534.03   384,936.51   25,820.51  147,949.57  14,409.82
  1883   676,613.03   187,408.78   395,768.74   27,301.43  150,578.69  15,941.73
  1884   708,134.15   155,180.45   424,014.38   34,126.87  156,552.32  23,523.55
  1885   748,507.00   142,092.33   412,660.04   27,739.88  164,872.65  27,181.73
  1886   798,041.29   192,874.42   468,398.72   49,712.67  167,052.18  19,132.84
  1887   842,852.25   109,218.52   502,408.72   35,657.91  175,320.72  26,255.86
  1888   895,298.75   137,475.38   533,614.60   48,638.03  183,394.44  29,968.13
  1889   936,528.54   139,897.14   578,312.19   56,617.51  188,181.97  31,547.90
  1890   991,620.11   154,769.43   539,917.37   48,489.27  187,383.57  43,583.58
  1891 1,027,719.09   174,498.63   610,401.75  115,879.28  188,398.82  44,661.04
  1892 1,129,198.38   208,519.69   532,699.00   76,086.76  190,375.42  49,987.64
  1893 1,238,494.32   218,969.31   559,666.06   80,509.28  204,052.81  51,332.26
  1894 1,257,092.01   312,836.50   544,739.91   76,061.81  200,414.69  48,692.44
  1895 1,270,846.41   307,656.66   524,930.94   81,914.08  194,972.07  55,850.02
  1896 1,271,628.00   384,043.97   539,740.82   98,472.93  190,191.66  63,607.71
  1897 1,290,911.32   386,608.08   546,515.51  101,250.89  202,234.84  66,407.16
  1898 1,313,352.17   394,688.51   589,188.08  183,163.07  204,464.48  56,453.88
  1899 1,277,513.19   388,715.13   596,851.18  119,868.04  205,471.49  63,398.28
  1900 1,250,163.18   524,900.81   565,239.23  139,196.59  199.447.86  64,879.10
  1901 1,304,407.26   580,162.53   663,767.73  140,590.76  233,329.61  71,463.20
  1902 1,319,782.89   536,518.81   662,467.11   82,253.19  240,932.44  49,114.44
  1903 1,386,212.56   564,227.48   706,285.49   93,339.97  275,618.26  57,703.28
  1904 1,486,917.48   531,599.76   737,518.15   92,634.46  272,081.82 42,599.27
  1905 1,672,867.93   613,298.99   792,649.33   110,868.30 310,909.06  46,218.33
  1906 1,933,357.09   539,999.99   849,222.70   114,373.15 347,924.80  42,512.48
  1907 1,979,426.63   721,218.19   885,686.24   131,719.63 364,117.27  48,306.12
  1908 2,160,037.12   864,946.19   786,825.16   148,894.53 413,888.74  59,813.81
  1909 2,542,513.68   962,555.19   860,925.60   113,733.26 473,248.26  64,269.42
  1910 2,915,396.10 1,026,172.07   934,362.14   104,250.34 538,678.14  51,383.66
  1911 3,344,172.04 1,328,208.87 1,037,436.56   114,608.06 619,855.08  58,105.94
  1912 4,176,083.47 1,547,827.75 1,174,773.84   132,365.69 739,384.95  66,028.93

        COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF GENERAL REVENUE OF THE CITY OF MONTREAL,
                           FROM 1880 TO 1912 CONTINUED

  Year   Markets     Licenses   Recorder’s  Miscellaneous  Interest     Yearly
                                  Court                                 totals

  1880 $ 30,366.85 $ 43,635.35 $ 7,770.57 $ 40,008.23 $ 24,956.94 $1,495,616.39
  1881   77,709.42   45,001.32  12,665.03   35,824.04   35,706.65  1,617,117.41
  1882   80,364.50   48,275.30  14,380.72   35,982.90   26,940.95  1,618,221.87
  1883   81,777.71   50,968.15  11,130.62   42,307.44   30,474.54  1,670,270.91
  1884   86,853.04   54,077.70  12,019.15   47,597.39   39,541.19  1,732,620.69
  1885   85,242.01   60,006.80  11,547.08   41,179.60   24,991.31  1,746,020.43
  1886   89,086.77   65,579.00  18,003.98   57,259.56   33,717.82  1,908,859.25
  1887   89,279.69   70,264.82  25,053.06   39,491.95   32,589.57  1,948,393.07
  1888   88,336.37   74,269.48  26,097.64   33,404.47   45,913.48  2,095,411.27
  1889   83,308.64   76,475.15  22,883.41   41,081.31   67,263.63  2,222,097.39
  1890   82,705.63   81,365.85  26,269.59   42,269.33   42,557.56  2,240,931.29
  1891   85,533.93   81,370.00  23,445.91   53,196.77   34,971.51  2,440,076.73
  1892   80,470.91   66,627.00  22,412.25   57,650.17   44,925.52  2,458,952.74
  1893   80,686.81   66,654.25  16,314.49   94,004.66   40,471.31  2,651,155.56
  1894   76,970.59   66,823.91  17,356.02   92,052.64   56,295.23  2,743,335.75
  1895   78,697.98   72,755.23  14,506.19   98,740.43   56,790.92  2,757,660.93
  1896   77,362.82   70,767.50  14,372.98   91,194.69   64,678.40  2,866,061.48
  1897   77,599.25   79,555.25  17,341.68   99,197.85   54,303.55  2,921,925.38
  1898   76,190.41   78,546.00  13,961.57  115,985.25   52,845.73  3,078,839.15
  1899   74,419.99  101,009.80  20,569.05  105,263.48   51,649.09  3,004,728.72
  1900   75,363.96  121,348.00  31,578.77  121,854.76   63,642.07  3,157,614.33
  1901   86,190.48  132,064.77  26,957.69  124,309.24   69,992.61  3,433,235.88
  1902   84,790.51  140,955.75  26,032.01  144,287.28   92,085.47  3,379,219.90
  1903   90,384.42  151,957.00  25,827.64  144,721.60   58,150.26  3,554,428.96
  1904   97,451.78  179,706.50  33,431.38  178,180.65   43,135.00  3,695,256.25
  1905  100,761.59  204,688.75  43,186.37  208,713.78   45,399.61  4,149,562.04
  1906  102,305.08  223,008.15  38,851.88  293,499.54   56,001.63  4,541,056.49
  1907  108,801.41  244,618.07  38,927.38  306,511.29   68,943.86  4,898,276.09
  1908  111,260.20  243,418.25  47,944.03  353,515.93   67,700.39  5,258,244.35
  1909  112,555.26  261,789.00  37,352.83  361,658.19  107,393.45  5,897,994.14
  1910  106,690.76  315,447.50  57,278.12  435,478.08  130,564.67  6,615,701.58
  1911  109,407.42  371,252.50  68,100.61  445,024.90  160,661.26  7,656,833.24
  1912  112,167.43  422,013.57  80,150.35  566,092.70  173,767.81  9,190,656.49

The annexation of the suburban municipalities, begun in 1883, has
added partially to the revenue.


FOOTNOTES:

[1] Before 1815 Commander Jacques Viger had introduced the beaver
into a fancy coat of arms.

[2] In 1844 the council which hitherto sat in a house belonging
to Madame de Beaujeiu, situated between St. Francois Xavier and
St. John streets on Notre Dame Street, and demolished in 1858
on the enlargement of the latter street, was moved to the Hayes
Acqueduct House and sat below the reservoir. In 1852 it held its
first sessions in the Bonsecours Market.

[3] Mr. Henry Dalby, Herald Centennary number, 1913.




                           CHAPTER XXI

SUPPLEMENTAL ANNALS AND SIDELIGHTS OF SOCIAL LIFE UNDER THE UNION

  FOREWORD--MARKED PROGRESS GENERAL--THE EMBRYONIC
    COSMOPOLIS--THE DEEPENING OF LAKE ST. PETER--FOUNDATION OF
    PHILANTHROPIES--LIVING CHEAP--THE MONTREAL DISPENSARY--RASCO’S
    HOTEL AND CHARLES DICKENS--PRIVATE THEATRICALS--MONTREAL
    AS SEEN BY “BOZ”--DOLLY’S AND THE GOSSIPS--THE MUNICIPAL
    ACT--ELECTION RIOTS--LITERARY AND UPLIFT MOVEMENTS--THE
    RAILWAY ERA COMMENCES--THE SHIP FEVER--A RUN ON THE SAVINGS’
    BANK--THE REBELLION LOSSES BILL AND THE BURNING OF PARLIAMENT
    HOUSE--RELIGIOUS FANATICISM--GENERAL D’URBAN’S FUNERAL--A
    CHARITY BALL--THE GRAND TRUNK INCORPORATORS--EDUCATIONAL
    MOVEMENTS--THE “BLOOMERS” APPEAR--M’GILL UNIVERSITY
    REVIVAL--THE GREAT FIRE OF 1852--THE GAVAZZI RIOTS--PROGRESS
    IN 1853--THE CRIMEAN WAR OF 1854--THE PATRIOTIC FUND--THE
    ASIATIC CHOLERA--THE ATLANTIC SERVICE FROM MONTREAL--ADMIRAL
    BELVEZE’S VISIT--PARIS EXHIBITION PREPARATIONS--“S.S.
    MONTREAL” DISASTER--THE INDIAN MUTINY--THE FIRST OVERSEAS
    CONTINGENT--THE ATLANTIC CABLE CELEBRATED--A MAYOR OF THE
    PERIOD--THE RECEPTION OF ALBERT EDWARD, PRINCE OF WALES--FORMAL
    OPENING OF THE VICTORIA BRIDGE--THE GREAT BALL--“EDWARD
    THE PEACEMAKER”--THE AMERICAN CIVIL WAR--MONTREAL FOR THE
    SOUTH--FEAR OF WAR--CITIZEN RECRUITING--THE MILITARY--OFFICERS
    OF THE PERIOD--PEACE--THE SOUTHERNERS--THE WAR SCARE THE
    BIRTH OF MODERN MILITIA SYSTEM--THE MILITARY FETED--CIVIC
    PROGRESS--FENIAN THREATS--D’ARCY McGEE--SHAKESPEARE
    CENTENARY--GERMAN IMMIGRANTS’ DISASTER--ST. ALBAN’S
    RAIDERS--RECIPROCITY WITH THE UNITED STATES TO END--ABRAHAM
    LINCOLN AND THE CITY COUNCIL--THE FIRST FENIAN RAID--MONTREAL
    ACTION--MILITARY ENTHUSIASM--THE DRILL HALL--A RETROSPECT AND
    AN APPRECIATION OF THE LATTER DAYS OF THE UNION.


“Annals and sidelights” best suits the title of this chapter,
and as such are necessarily disjointed, the events recorded
reflect a corresponding note. Therefore, origins and seeds are
only indicated, of many movements which have since grown to great
proportions. These latter, such as primary, secondary, technical,
and university education, the public services of fire, water,
lighting, health, law and order; the commencements of commercial
and financial bodies; the growth of the municipal life, as such;
the development and modernization of the harbour and of our
public places; the progress of general city improvement; the
development of our transportation system by canal, river and
roads by rail and by carriage; the charitable, the religious,
the national, the literary, the intellectual and the artistic
institutions of the city, etc., are left for special historical
treatment in the second part of this volume.

In this place the general social aspect of the life of the city
is chronologically treated, with partial reference at times to
the above as they make their first bow to the public under the
Union. A similar foreword might preface a subsequent chapter of
annals of social life under the Confederation.

The picture presented by Montreal at the beginning of the
Union was one of hopeful promise. The bill, when understood,
was acceptable to most, and it soon became seen, that with
responsible government,--though a daring experiment,--in working
order, peace and prosperity would be assured. The re-birth of
municipal life insured by the new charter was also gratifying.
The mayor and corporation and the institution of the recorder’s
court gave a dignity soothing to civic “amour propre.” City
development in municipal functions, in the public services and
physical embellishments, began to be marked. Trade began to raise
its head, for Montreal was becoming recognized as the commercial
metropolis of Canada. The meeting of April 6, 1841, to organize
the new board of trade, was a significant fact of the period
of progress now anticipated. The improvement in the harbour
facilities, of the water transportation system, and the advent of
the railway era soon to be celebrated, also marked the beginning
of a new period of progress.

The city, too, was coming to be recognized as an embryonic
cosmopolis. It was already beginning to have a mixed population.
Sir Richard Bonnycastle, who visited Montreal in the year before
the Union, has described this in “The Canadas in 1841” (Volume
I, pp. 76-77). “In this city, one is amused by seeing the never
changing lineaments of the long _queue_, the _bonnet rouge_ and
the incessant garrulity of Jean Baptiste, mingling with the
sober demeanour, the equally unchanging feature and the national
plaid of the Highlander, while the untutored sons of labour,
from the green isle of the ocean, are here as thoughtless, as
ragged and as numerous as at Quebec. Amongst all these the shrewd
and calculating citizen from the neighbouring republic drives
his hard bargain with all his wonted zeal and industry, amid
the fumes of Jamaica and gin sling. These remarks apply to the
streets only. In the counting houses, although the races remain
the same, the advantages of situation and of education make the
same differences as in other countries. I cannot, however, help
thinking that the descendant of the Gaul has not gained by being
transplanted; and the vastly absurd notions which a few turbulent
spirits have of late engendered and endeavoured to instil into
the unsophisticated and naturally good mind of the Canadian,
tilling the soil, have tended to restrict the exercise of that
inborn urbanity and suavity which are the Frenchman’s proudest
boast after those of ‘_l’amour et la gloire_.’”

At the beginning of this period great ideas are reflected in the
newspapers, such as the Herald and the Times.

The deepening of Lake St. Peter was a burning theme at the time;
and there is abundant editorial comment in the connection.

  “The governor-general has sanctioned the immediate deepening of
  Lake St. Peter,” says the editor; “but it appears that there
  was great difficulty in getting the proper dredging machines
  manufactured.”

  “We have other resources at our command,” exclaimed the editor;
  “and the manufacturers of New York or Great Britain would gladly
  accept orders to any extent. The aid of steam, all powerful
  steam, must be invoked. We have no hesitation in saying that the
  expenditure of £100,000, if that sum would suffice to deepen Lake
  St. Peter, would be submitted to with perfect prudence.

  “Few will be dogmatical enough to deny that when the navigation
  is free, ships descending the river may avoid the use of steam
  tugs; and if we calculate the saving thus effected upon 200
  vessels annually at £30 each, the amount thus realized would
  suffice to pay the interest on a loan at 6 per cent.

  “A brisk, fair, and continuous breeze would ensure the speedy,
  safe and cheap progress of ships up the St. Lawrence, and augment
  the extent of our commercial marine.”

Referring, in another part of the paper, to the actual
commencement of the work of deepening Lake St. Peter, which only
gave eleven feet of water, the Times says:

  “Improvements thus disseminating the germs of future wealth and
  prosperity command the applause of every colonist. The spirit of
  patriotism must be dormant, indeed, in the breasts of those who
  would thwart the efforts of a governor, who has thus identified
  himself with the system of internal navigation.

  “The repose of the colony has been too long disturbed by those
  theoretical revolutions which sprang from the fluctuating
  councils of the late Viceroy. A healthier tone of feeling has
  been produced; and the practical labours of Sir Charles Bagot bid
  fair to soothe the asperities of political warfare. Under his
  auspices the deepening of Lake St. Peter has been commenced and
  ere his departure, we trust the undertaking will be brought to
  maturity.”

Since then something in the neighborhood of $20,000,000 have been
spent between the work of deepening and lighting and buoying
the channel, and the extension and improvement of the port of
Montreal.

The editors of these days had to burn the midnight oil or tallow
candle, for then gas was not general. As for matches, the old
tinder chips dipped in sulphur ind ignited by use of the flint
still prevailed. The rich used wax candles or lamps, but the poor
made their own “dips,” or for the nonce, even small improvised
lamps out of spoons filled with oil. Tallow candle moulds were
the prized possession of many poor houses before the manufactured
candles became cheap on the market. When coal oil came, it was
looked on as a miracle.

The town was inadequately provided with water works, as it was
not till 1845 that the municipality took over the old-fashioned
plant in Montreal, and the old puncheons, driven by horses still
went from door to door distributing the water taken from the
river.

Place d’Armes was still a poor straggling square, though it was
faced by the handsome new Notre Dame Church, opened in 1829. At
this time there still stood the bell tower of the old Parish
Church, standing solitary like a lighthouse till 1843. Crossing
the square the genteel folk, the wives of doctors, lawyers, and
merchants, would come from their residences on St. James and
Craig streets to the Bonsecours Market, not ashamed to carry
their baskets. There the “habitants” from the country could be
seen dressed in blue or gray homespun cloth suits, with their
picturesque, heavy knitted sashes and wearing the tuque and
moccasins in winter.

For as yet, the city was in truth of small size. A four-paged,
demi-zinc copy of the Times and Commercial Advertiser, the first
daily to be printed in Montreal, of the issue of March 3, 1842,
gives a glimpse of this. An advertisement announces that a
three-storey stone house at the head of Coté Street, “enjoys a
commanding situation in a most quiet and healthy part of Montreal
and which nevertheless is within five minutes walk of the
business part of the city.” Splendid dwelling houses are for rent
on Great St. James Street suitable for genteel families.

Yet life was intense and earnest and the bases of many of the
present educational, philanthropic and artistic associations were
being laid. This same number of the Times mentions that the

  “The Montreal Provident and Savings Bank, which has just been
  projected, under the patronage of the governor-general, and which
  is to receive deposits of from one shilling and upwards, is a
  patriotic institution, as the directors and all concerned have
  only the advantage of the entire community at heart, receiving
  nothing for their services, and desiring, chiefly, to extend,
  by this means, the basis of social order and morality, and
  religion. For these reasons the directors respectfully entreat
  the ministers of religion, masters employing numerous bodies
  of workmen, and all having influence, to exert the same; and
  by the sanction of their names, and the moral weight of their
  advice, to induce the numerous classes, for whose use it is
  chiefly intended, to avail themselves of the benefits which the
  institution holds out for their acceptance.”

Living was cheap and quite a good deal could be bought with
but a little money. Money, however, was scarce and wages were
small. Twenty-five cents would buy a pair of chickens, 15 cents
a pound of butter, 10 cents a dozen eggs and 5 cents a pound of
beef. A man would work for 50 cents a day and walk many miles to
his job. A mechanic who got $1, earned good wages. Clothing was
expensive, and consequently simplicity ruled. Yet furs were cheap
in comparison with the present date. Ladies would wear very large
muffs, capable of holding in their mysterious interiors a week’s
supply of groceries. Long boas were worn twice wound around the
neck, and reaching to the toes. The dresses of the middle class
of women and girls were for the most part print, with thick
homespun for winter wear. Boys would go to the few schools in the
town in “moleskins” as woolen was expensive. They would often
come home on a rainy afternoon with their moleskin trousers
shrunk up to their knees.

The houses of the ordinary working class were built for the most
part of wood and consisted of one storey and a garret. Rents ran
from about two dollars to four dollars a month.

In 1843 a dispensary which is still flourishing today was started
and came as a great supplementary aid to the hospitals of the
city. This was the Montreal Dispensary with which so many of our
best citizens have been connected.

The memory of Rasco’s suggests that of the famous “Dolly,”
J.H. Isaacson, who came out from England as a waiter here in
1838, but afterwards started for himself in a restaurant on St.
François Xavier Street overlooking the Garden of the Seminary.
He later moved to St. James Street, close to St. Lawrence Hall,
a famous hostelry of this period, built in 1851, on the site
where the Royal Bank now stands. His chop house became famous
as “Dolly’s” from the original “Dolly’s” in London. Dolly, a
little typical old John Bull of a Boniface, with shining face
beaming benevolence, with a ready fund of repartee and trenchant
criticism, and resplendent in velvet coat, knee breeches and
irreproachable calves, white silk stockings and silver buckles on
his shoes, was in great favour with the military.

The social life of the period found one of its highest points
of reflex in Rasco’s Hotel, on Bonsecours Street, which still
stands, though with diminished glory. But when it was opened on
May 1, 1836, it was, during the Union, the resort of the fine
people of the time. It had the politicians gathered together
during the rebellion of 1837 and it was for long the home for
banquets. It expressed the social life of the time. The garrison
officers knew it well. Distinguished strangers put up there
as did Charles Dickens, who arrived from Niagara Falls in the
spring of 1842. As private theatricals were then the rage, and
were greatly promoted by the officers to while away the time,
the histrionic ability of the great novelist was called into
requisition at the first Theatre Royal, standing nearly opposite
until it was pulled down to make room for the Bonsecours Market.

In one of the author’s letters from Montreal quoted in Forster’s
“Life of Charles Dickens,” he says: “The theatricals, I think
I told you I had been invited to play with the officers of the
Coldstream Guards here, are ‘A Roland for an Oliver,’ ‘Two
O’Clock in the Morning,’ and either ‘The Young Widow,’ or ‘Deaf
as a Post,’ Ladies (unprofessional) are going to play for the
first time.”

His last letter, dated from Rasco’s Hotel, Montreal, Canada, 26th
of May, 1842, described the private theatricals and inclosed a
bill of the play:

“The play came off last night, the audience, between five and
six hundred strong, were invited as to a party, a regular table
with refreshments being spread in the lobby and saloon. We had
the band of the 23d (one of the finest in the service) in the
orchestra; the theatre was lighted with gas, the scenery was
excellent and the properties were all brought from the private
houses. Sir Charles Bagot, Sir Richard Jackson and their staffs
were present, and as the military portion of the audience were
all in uniform it was really a splendid scene.

“I really believe I was really funny; at least, I know that I
laughed heartily myself and made the part a character such as you
and I know very well--a mixture of F. Harley Yates, Keeley and
‘Jerry Sneak.’ It went with a vim all the way through; and as I
am closing, they have told me that I was so well made up that Sir
Charles Bagot, who sat in the stage box, had no idea who played
‘Mr. Snobbington’ until the piece was over. * * *

“All the ladies were capital and we had no wait or hitch for
an instant. You may suppose this when I tell you that we began
at eight and had the curtain down at eleven. * * * It is their
custom here to prevent heart-burnings, in a very heart-burning
town, whenever they have played in private, to repeat the
performance in public, so on Saturday (substituting, of course,
real actresses for the ladies) we repeat the two first pieces to
a paying audience, for the manager’s benefit. * * * I send you a
bill to which I have appended a key.”

       *       *       *       *       *

The programme was as follows:


                      PRIVATE THEATRICALS.

                            Committee

           Mrs. Torrens                 W.E. Ermatinger, Esq.
           Mrs. Berry                   Capt. Torrens
                      The Earl of Mulgrave.
          Stage Manager                 Charles Dickens

                   Queen’s Theatre, Montreal,
                Wednesday Evening, May 25, 1842.
                        Will Be Performed

                     A ROLAND FOR AN OLIVER.

           Mrs. Selborne               Mrs. Torrens
           Maria Darlington            Miss Griffin
           Mrs. Fixture                Miss Ermatinger
           Mr. Selborne                Lord Mulgrave
           Alfred Highflyer            Mr. Charles Dickens
           Sir Mark Chase              Hon. Mr. Methuen
           Fixture                     Captain Willoughby
           Gamekeeper                  Captain Granville

               After the Interlude, in one scene,
                    (from the French) called

                 PAST TWO O’CLOCK IN THE MORNING

           The Stranger                Captain Granville
           Mr. Snobbington             Mr. Charles Dickens

        To conclude with the farce, in one act, entitled

                         DEAF AS A POST.

           Mrs. Plumpley               Mrs. Torrens
           Amy Templeton               Mrs. Charles Dickens
           Sophy Walton                Mrs. Perry
           Sally Maggs                 Miss Griffin
           Captain Templeton           Captain Torrens
           Mr. Walton                  Captain Willoughby
           Tristram Sappy              Doctor Griffin
           Crupper                     Lord Mulgrave
           Gallop                      Mr. Charles Dickens

                                         Montreal, May 24, 1842.
                                       Gazette Office.

[Illustration: RASCO’S HOTEL OPENED IN 1836, ST. PAUL STREET The
leading hotel in the ’30s, standing on site of former palace of
Gov. Gen. Vaudreuil. This building, with original name on it, can
be seen today although changed on lower floors.]

[Illustration: THEATRE ROYAL, AT EASTERN EXTREMITY OF ST. PAUL
STREET Built by subscription in 1825, afterwards owned by Mr.
John Molson.]

[Illustration: PROGRAMME OF DICKENS’ PLAYS GIVEN AT THEATRE ROYAL
DURING THE AUTHOR’S VISIT.]

[Illustration: CHARLES DICKENS]

Dickens visited the Bonsecours Church hard by, and met the
leading citizens in the News Room on St. Sulpice Street, and
cantered with the officers over the mountain or rode out to
Lachine and the Back River. “All the rides in the vicinity,” he
says in his American Notes, “were made doubly interesting by
the bursting out of spring which is here so rapid that it is
but a day’s leap from barren winter to the blooming youth of
summer.” In the same recollections he refers to the quiet manners
of the Canadian people, their self-respect, their hospitality
in Montreal and the unassuming manners of their life. He notes
the modernizing spirit even of that day. “There is a very large
cathedral here, recently erected with two small spires, of
which one is as yet unfinished. In the open space in front of
this edifice stands a solitary, grim-looking square brick tower
which has a quaint and remarkable appearance and which the
wiseacres of this place have consequently determined to pull down
immediately.” This the vandals did in 1843.

Walking along the quays he admired “the granite quays” which are
remarkable for their beauty, solidity and extent. Referring to
his walk here and his interest in the immigrants, he says: “In
the spring time of the year vast numbers of emigrants who have
newly arrived from England or from Ireland pass between Quebec
and Montreal on their way to the back woods and new settlements
of Canada. If it be an entertaining lounge, as I have found it,
to take a morning stroll upon the quays of Montreal and see the
groups in hundreds on the public wharfs about their chests and
boxes, it is matter of deep interest to be their fellow passenger
on one of these steamboats and, mingling with the concourse, see
and hear them unobserved.”

Then follows a characteristic digression of the Master’s
sympathetic pleading for the poor.

At the above meeting places the events of the day would have
been discussed by the gossips, such as the marriage of Queen
Victoria on February 10, 1840, the shooting at of the young
Queen Victoria and Prince Albert on June 10, 1841, Her Majesty’s
coronation of June 28th, the birth of Albert Edward, Prince of
Wales, on November 9th, and the progress of preparations for the
union proclaimed on February 10th in Montreal by Lord Sydenham.
Municipal politics would have become an absorbing topic of
conversation on January 1, 1842, when the municipal act went
into force. On March 11th when the Montreal Board of Trade was
incorporated, and on July 9th when the Shamrock was lost in
the St. Lawrence, with its many immigrants there was plenty to
discuss. Montreal, in 1843, talked of the birth of Princess Alice
on April 25th, the visit to Montreal of the new governor general,
Lord Metcalfe, on June 12th, while the “Nolle Sequi” against
Wolfred Nelson, Dr. E.B. O’Callaghan and T.S. Brown renewed the
painful memories of the revolt of 1837. This year the scientists
and educationalists rejoiced at the Museum of Geological Survey
then opened in the city. And again when, in 1844, the Mercantile
Library Association purchased the Montreal Library and the
Institut Canadien was formed.

Great interest prevailed in political circles when the seat of
government was removed to Montreal on March 5th of this year, and
the House met on July 1st.

On November 12th, such an election was held that many of the
oldest inhabitants remember it still. It was the days of open
voting and sometimes lasted for weeks. Axe handles were used,
heads were broken, the “claret” flowed, and the opposing
parties used to keep men drunk in the taverns so that the
other side could not get their men to the polls. Such scenes
were long repeated, notably in the “Barney” Devlin and D’Arcy
McGee election contests. The fight on this occasion was between
Drummond and Molson. Drummond was Irish and it was recalled that
he had been the defending lawyer for the rebels in 1837. The
French-Canadians, therefore, rallied to his support and Molson
was beaten. Parliament met on November 28th.

On March 27, 1845, Parliament was prorogued and on July 1st
the new governor, Lord Cathcart, arrived. This year various
educational movements were furthered. Bishop’s College,
Lennoxville, was opened and the Mechanics’ Institute, so long
in existence as an educational force, was incorporated. In
December, John Dougall issued his specimen Witness and the first
weekly Witness was published on January 5, 1846. Meanwhile the
commission appointed in 1845 to investigate the rebellion losses
indemnities was sitting and on April 18, 1846, it presented
its report that the sum of £100,000 would be sufficient to
pay all real losses. Already bitter feeling was being aroused
among the English on this point. But the railway era, then
commencing, diverted some attention from their grievances. In
June, James Ferrier and others sought a charter for a railway
from Kingston to Prescott and John A. Macdonald, then beginning
his parliamentary career, and others, sought one from Montreal to
Kingston, John Molson and others demanding one from St. Johns to
the international boundary. On August 10th, on the Champ de Mars,
a gathering of 2,000 Montrealers resolved to have a railway to
the sea. Men were seeing visions and the Hon. John Young wrote
this year to the Economist, advocating a bridge across the St.
Lawrence. His dream was to come true.

The year 1847 saw the line from Montreal to Lachine opened.
Otherwise the year was one of disaster--that of the ship fever.
In this year 100,000 emigrants, mostly from Ireland, escaping the
scourge of typhus fever and famine, came to Canada, but being
exposed to ship fever nearly 10,000 became its victims; hundreds
and hundreds died. The quarantine station of Grosse Isle was the
most pestilential spot in the country. Every ship that could be
chartered, good, bad and indifferent, was engaged in transporting
emigrants. They were all slow-going vessels. Through want of
sufficient room, neglect of ventilation, need of eatable food and
cleanliness, the worst form of typhus soon appeared. “On the 8th
day of May,” says Maguire’s “Irish in America,” “on the arrival
of the ‘Urania’ from Cork, with several hundred immigrants on
board, a large proportion of them sick and dying of the ship
fever, it was put into quarantine at Grosse Isle, thirty miles
below Quebec. This was the first of the plague-smitten ships from
Ireland which that year sailed up the St. Lawrence. But before
the first week of June as many as eighty-four ships of various
tonnage were driven in by easterly gales. Of all the vessels
there was not one free from the taint of malignant typhus, the
offspring of famine and of the foul ship-hold.”

Montreal suffered terribly, also. There the Government caused to
be erected three sheds of provisory hospitals from 100 to 150
feet in length and from 40 to 50 feet in width on the river banks
at Point St. Charles. Soon eleven sheds had to be erected to
receive the sick. In June, the city was in consternation and many
fled to the country. But there were many who did noble service.
The governor general, Lord Elgin, who had made his first coming
to Montreal on January 29th, visited the sheds; the mayor, John
E. Mills, also made frequent visits and in November his assiduous
devotion brought him low in death, a martyr to civic duty. The
clergy, the doctors and the women of the city, Catholic and
Protestants, were heroic in their services. The priests hurried
down to the sick who were mostly Catholics, but only a few,
two Sulpicians and a Jesuit, du Ranquet, could speak English
adequately. In this extremity the rector of the Jesuits, who had
returned to the city since 1842, sent to Fordham University,
and two priests, Fathers du Merle and Michael Driscoll, were
sent to assist Father du Ranquet, who was the first of the
Montreal priests on the ground. This devoted man found the sick
or dead lying in rows stretched on the bare ground, and there he
ministered till 3 o’clock in the morning.

Conditions were soon improved by the municipal authorities.
Wooden bunks were built to hold two patients; there were no
mattresses but only straw strewn under them. Oftentimes the
living lay side by side with the dead. To add to the horror, the
letters of this period tell us that “after a few weeks’ service
these wooden structures contained colonies of bugs in every
cranny; the wool, the cotton, the wood were black with them.
Double the number of nurses and servants would not have sufficed
to keep this monstrous hospital clean.”

Things were better when the tents to be given to those who,
unable to find shelter in the sheds, were placed on the banks
of the St. Lawrence with a blanket over them, under the trees.
Fortunately it was summertime.

Bishop Bourget called upon the nuns to act as nurses. The
Providence Sisters were the first approached, on June 24th. Each
one answered simply, “I am ready.” Next morning twelve of these
brave women were driven in carriages to the sheds. There they
found hundreds of the sick crouched upon straw, wrestling in the
agony of death; little children weeping in the arms of their
dead mothers; women, themselves stricken, seeking for a beloved
husband, amid a doleful chaos of suffering and evil odours. Other
nuns were called out; even the enclosed Sisters of the Hôtel Dieu
were allowed to leave their cloisters for the sad work of tending
the dying and burying the dead in their hastily constructed, rude
coffins of planks. Fifty or sixty died each day and their bodies,
awaiting burial, were placed in an immense charnel house erected
on the river banks. In this were some that were buried alive.
Many of the orphans were adopted in the city or cared for by the
nuns. For this the Irish population of Montreal love the city
with a personal love.

Not only did the mayor die, but numerous others, physicians,
clergy and nurses, and the police officers of the city.

The events of 1848 include the flooding, on January 15th, of
Wellington and Commissioners streets, and the run on the Savings
Bank of the city on July 15th, which was shortly followed by a
re-deposit. Educationalists will note the opening of the Jesuits’
College on September 20th in the improvised school at the corner
of Alexander and Dorchester streets.

The year 1849 was one of political turmoil already recorded,
centering around the rebellion losses bill and resulting in the
burning of the Parliament house and the removal of the seat of
government from the city, a loss to its social life.

An aspect of the burning of the Parliament house was that, with
the political rancour there was mixed, in certain misguided
quarters, a fanatical religious frenzy. It was planned to burn
the “Grey Nuns,” near at hand, as well as the Jesuits’ residence
and St. Patrick’s Church. The menaces came to nothing, owing
to the guards of Irish watchers. Yet at the time, according to
a letter written from Montreal in August, 1849, by the Jesuit
Father Havequez to a friend in France, the Grey Nuns hard by were
likely to become a prey to the fire “had not the brave Irish run
to the rescue and succeeded, after extraordinary efforts, in
mastering the flames.”

The imposing public ceremony this year was the funeral, in the
military cemetery on Papineau Road, of Sir Benjamin D’Urban, from
whom Durban, in South Africa, bears its name, the charger of the
deceased soldier being led through the streets in the procession
by the groom, carrying the reversed boots of this companion of
Wellington. It was long a remembered incident.

The next year, 1850, saw the first meeting of the Mount Royal
Cemetery Company for the burial of non-Catholics and the
consecration of the Rev. Francis Fulford in Westminster Abbey as
the first Bishop of Montreal, both signs of the growth of the
English-speaking population.

This year there was a great charity ball and it is interesting
to note that among the subscribers to this ball were the Earl
and Countess of Errol; Sir George and Lady Simpson (who lived
at Lachine in a big stone mansion, standing on the present site
of the Lachine Convent); the Chief Justice and Madame Rolland,
Sir James and Lady Alexander, Colonel and Mrs. Dyley, Honorable
Mr. and Mrs. Moffatt, Honorable Mr. Justice and Madame Mondelet,
Honorable Mr. and Mrs. Drummond, Madame Rochblave, Mr. and Mrs.
John Molson, the Commissary General and Mrs. Filder, Honorable
Mr. and Madame Rolland, Mr. and Madame de Beaujeau, Honorable
Mr. Justice and Mrs. Smith, Mr. Sheriff and Mrs. Coffin, Mr. and
Mrs. Ogilvy Moffatt, Captain and Mrs. Claremont, Major and Mrs.
MacDougall, Lieut.-Col. Sir Howard Dalrymple, Honorable McCall,
Major Chester, Major Colley, Mr. and Mrs. Collingwood, Mr. Arthur
Mondelet, Mr. Arthur Lamothe and many others.

The band of the Nineteenth Regiment also attended by kind
permission of Lieutenant-Colonel Hay.

The Grand Trunk was formed in 1851. The name of the incorporators
which follow are also those of familiar families in the city of
today: Thomas Allan Stayber, William Collins Meredith, Sir George
Simpson, William Macdonald, David Davidson, J.G. McTavish, N.
Finlayson, John Rawand, Edward B. Wilgress, John Boston, Theodore
Hart, T. McCullough, John Matthewson, John M. Tobin, E.H. Mount,
Wilkinson John Torrance, Isaac Gibb, Donald P. Ross, Robert
Morris, James Henderson, Aaron H. David, John Ostell, J.H. Birss,
William Lunn, Dougall Stewart, C. Wilgress, William Molson, W.S.
McFarlane, A. Dow, John Lavanston, Peter McKenzie, D. McKenzie,
John McKenzie, Hector McKenzie, William Foster Coffin, Hon. James
Ferrier, William Molson, George Crawford, Duncan Finlayson,
John Silveright, John Ballenden, Allen Macdonnell, Samuel Gall,
Benjamin Hart, John Carter, Andrew Cowan, Walter Benny, John
H. Evans, James H. Lamb, W. Watson, Charles H. Castle, J.B.
McKenzie, James Crawford, W. Murray, M. McCullough, M.E. David,
J.F. Dickson, John Leeming, Jesse Joseph, D.L. Macpherson,
James Cormac, Archibald Hall, Hugh Taylor, Colin Campbell, John
Simpson, Thomas Taylor, E.M. Hopkins, John Miles, Charles Geddes,
John Macdonald, E.T. Renaud, J.D. Watson, and William Cunningham.

Educational movement also began to gain strength in 1851. The
College Ste. Marie on Bleury Street the Young Men’s Christian
Association and the new Theatre Royal were opened, while this
year the first external signs of the modern movement for woman’s
emancipation was strikingly illustrated in July in the streets
of Montreal by the appearance for the first time of the “bloomer
costume,” made famous at the time by the cartoons of Punch.

Times of commercial prosperity seemed now promised.

The next year, 1852, McGill received its new lease of life,
obtaining its new charter, and from this date its success was
assured.

The great fire of 1852 started on July 8th; it is said to have
burnt 11,000 houses, while thousands were rendered homeless.
Money, however, was not scarce, for this year in December £5,000
was raised by merchants for a Merchants’ Exchange. Another
financial sidelight is that in October of this year the Bank
of Montreal issued its first notes like those of the Bank of
England, the denominations being water-marked.

The Gavazzi riot, already described, with the investigations into
its cause, was the social excitement for the year 1853, as well
as the preparations for the Atlantic service between Montreal and
England, secured by the first charter of May 23d.

On July 22d Pier No. 1 of the Victoria Bridge was begun, and on
August 24th Lake St. Peter was deepened four feet, two inches.
On July 20th of the next year, 1854, the first stone of the
Victoria Bridge was laid and on August 2d the first cofferdam was
ready for masonry. On October 11th the St. Lawrence and Atlantic
Railway was opened from Longueuil to Richmond. These facts
illustrate the early movement of the era of progress by land and
water, then beginning.

Among other events of this year it was announced that accounts
could be kept from September 1st to the end of the year, either
in pounds, shillings, or pence, or in dollars and cents, the
decimal currency being expected to be generally in use by
January 1st following. Money order offices were first opened on
December 1st; reciprocity was established between Canada and
the United States; the seigneurial tenure was abolished and the
secularization of clergy reserves was brought about.

The year 1854 was memorable as that of the Crimean War, when the
English and French were allied against the Russians. In 1914
all three are allied against a common foe. The social life was
invaded by the spirit of patriotism. An appropriation of £20,000
sterling was made by the Canadian Government “in favour of the
widows and orphans of England and France.” It was the gift of
the people of both French and English descent and the Emperor of
the French, in acknowledging the gift, commented on the union of
races it implied. A patriotic fund was organized in Montreal by
concerts and other forms of charity as in 1914.

The year 1854 is also sadly memorable by the Asiatic cholera
which carried off 1,186 persons.

After the commercial depression of 1854, due to the Crimean War,
the spring of 1855 saw brighter prosperity.

The annals of this year record as signs of general progress the
first issue, in February, of money orders in Canada, the coming
into force of the reciprocity act with the United States, the
establishment by the H. & A. Allan Company of the Montreal Ocean
Steamship Company with four steamers fortnightly, the completion
of the general postoffice, the new building of the Mechanics’
Institute, the incorporation of Molson’s bank, and the opening of
a new industry through the completion of Redpath’s sugar refinery.

In March the Industrial Exhibition, promoted to select articles
to be sent to the coming Paris Exhibition was formally opened by
the governor general, Sir Edmund Head, who made his first visit
to Montreal on this occasion.

On July 27th the first French ship to sail the St. Lawrence
since the conquest reached Montreal under Commander de Belvèze.
The object was to obtain information to extend the commercial
relations between Canada and France. The occasion, coming so
soon after the fall of Sebastopol, was one of great public
demonstration, illuminations and torchlight processions, the like
of which the city had never yet beheld. The arrival of Admiral
Belvèze’s warship, with dinners and receptions, especially among
the French citizens, also made 1855 a memorable social year.

In 1856 Montreal was filled with preparations for the great Paris
Exhibition and Alfred Perry was voted £500 to represent Montreal.
It is remembered that at this exhibition he had a fire fighting
invention on show which was lucky enough to be in readiness to
stop a conflagration in the exhibition, a fact largely noticed
in the continental papers and illustrated journals. A balloon
ascension on September 16th in Griffintown, in the “Canada,” is
seriously chronicled by the annalists as a striking novelty of
the year.

On June 11, 1856, thirty-five lives were lost in the Grand Trunk
ferry boat to Longueuil by the explosion of the boiler, through
the carelessness of the engineer. The burning of the steamer
Montreal off Quebec on June 27, 1857, which was carrying to
Montreal about five hundred emigrants who had just arrived from
the John McKenzie, caused great excitement in the city and was
the occasion of much hospitality. As the immigrants it carried
were mostly Scotch, the activities of St. Andrew’s National
Society were largely engaged.

On June 18, 1856, the Thirty-ninth Regiment which had fought in
the Crimea reached Montreal transported by the John Munn and
Quebec. A civic dinner closed the day in the City Concert Hall
with covers laid for 1,200 guests.

The 12th and 13th of November saw the city again en fète to
celebrate the opening of the Grand Trunk between Toronto and
Montreal, which terminated on the 12th in a banquet at Point St.
Charles with 4,000 present. The evening of the 13th closed with a
promenade through the brilliantly illuminated city with the roar
of cannon at intervals and a great ball.

On November 5th a violent hurricane swept over Montreal and on
December 10th Christ Church Cathedral was burnt down.

This year the additions and new works of Montreal waterworks were
being made ready for use.

The cause of science received a great impetus in the city by the
convention which started on Wednesday, August 12, 1857, of the
American Association for the Advancement of Science, and was
continued for a week, during which the University of McGill,
the Natural History Society and other learned organizations
entertained their distinguished guests. In September of the same
year the Agricultural and Industrial Exhibition was successfully
held.

On September 7th 500 of the Thirty-ninth Regiment left Montreal
for active service, for this was the year of the Indian mutiny.

Educational circles remember the year of the meeting in Montreal
of the American Association for the Advancement of Learning
and as the opening of the Jacques Cartier and the McGill
Normal schools for teachers. This was practically the earliest
converging point of the two boards of school commissioners in the
building up of their educational system.

January 1, 1858, marks the supplanting of the L.S.D. system by
the decimal coinage; January 5th, the purchase of the Montreal
and Bytown (Ottawa) Railway for £5,300 by Mr. (afterward Sir
John) J.J.C. Abbott.

On February 26th, Griffintown was flooded and beds stood three
feet in water, being one of the annual spring floods.

The martial enthusiasm of the citizens was evoked in the city in
the early part of 1858 by the Indian mutiny, when the Imperial
Government accepted the offer of a regiment to be raised in
Canada for service abroad under the title of the “One Hundredth
Prince of Wales Royal Canadian Regiment.” The recruiting
sergeant, with his flying ribbons, fife and drum band and his cry
of “Come, boys, and join the war,” was a novelty then. Montreal
contributed for the first overseas contingent 110 young men, who
drilled with the detachment of 500 men on St. Helen’s Island
previous to being embarked for England in July following. This
was the first contingent raised for the front, but it did not
get as far as India, doing duty at Malta and Gibraltar. None the
less, as the old ballad says, “Their will was good to do the
deed, that is if they’d have let ’em, with a ‘Re fol de roy,
etc.’”

On September 1st the laying of the first Atlantic telegraph cable
was celebrated in the city by trades, military and torchlight
processions, the latter being two miles long on the average of
six abreast. A bonfire on the mountain signalized this occasion.

Next year, 1859, the Prince of Wales presented the One Hundredth
Regiment with its colours at Shorncliffe.

On December 12th, the Victoria Bridge was at last opened and on
the 17th the first passenger train went through. It was called
the “Victoria” after the revered Queen of that name and it was
hoped to have had Her Majesty formally open it.

Before leaving the construction works the men engaged placed the
great boulder over the resting place of the many victims of the
ship fever of 1847. The words of a Montreal lady, Mrs. Leprohon,
commemorate the event thus:

    “Long since forgotten, here they rest,
    Sons of a distant shore
    The epoch of their short career
    These footprints on life’s sand,
    But this stone will tell through many a year
    They died on our shores and slumber here.”

This year Mr. Charles S. Rodier was mayor. A picture worth
preserving has lately been given of the city hall life of that
time. The city was then very small and the questions were
comparatively parochial and the revenue was negligible in
comparison with today’s, yet the meetings were very important
and very dignified and probably more eloquence flowed than now.
The English were then predominant and Mr. Rodden was the leader
of the council. The mayor, Mr. Rodier, was, as a contemporary
has recently described him, “a man of much eccentricity, but a
man also of education and ability. He was what you might call
an aesthete--well groomed, neat, and polished, to the finger
nails; always with his frock coat and silk hat; always ready to
make a sweeping bow; always on the watch to assist a lady from
her carriage--a lady who might be shopping on Notre Dame Street,
which was the great retail street of the city in my young days.
It didn’t matter that His Worship was not always acquainted with
the ladies; he was naturally a gallant and, anyway, there was
less formality in those days than now.”

As he was the first mayor to receive royalty this description
will serve as an introduction. Mr. Rodier’s home was at the
corner of Guy and St. Antoine streets and was afterward purchased
by the Dominion Immigration Agency for its offices.

The next great social event was the reception of Albert Edward,
Prince of Wales, afterwards Edward VII, the Peacemaker, and the
preparation of the exhibition which was to be opened by him,
both in connection with the formal opening of the great Victoria
Bridge, marking the era of railways now prevailing.

In preparation for this event the Board of Arts and Manufactures,
in March, 1860, decided upon and took immediate steps for the
erection of a Crystal Palace for a permanent exhibition on
land purchased by them on Peel Street, above St. Catherine
Street. On Tuesday, May 22d, a public meeting was held to form
the “reception committee fund.” A programme of festivities
and functions was drawn up in June. Triumphal arches and
illuminations were prepared, the house of the Hon. John Rose,
afterward owned by the Ogilvie family, was decorated for the stay
of the young prince therein and on Friday, August 24th, the royal
visitor, described as a Prince of Romance, under the escort of
the austere Duke of Newcastle, arrived by river from Quebec in a
perfect deluge of rain. But he did not land till next day and all
went well. The mayor, Mr. Rodier, the council, magistrates, the
clergy, the heads of national and other societies with regalia,
received him under a superb pavilion. Then followed the great
procession, headed by the Caughnawaga Indians in full native
costume. The scene was wild, with church bells ringing and the
shouting of enthusiasm and loyalty. All the society of Canada
had come to the city to be present. The royal party visited the
Crystal Palace, where an address was presented by the governor
general, Sir E.W. Head, and the Prince declared the Palace open.

In the afternoon took place the ceremony of the laying of the
last stone by the Prince of the Victoria Bridge. The royal
party entered the car of state and proceeded to the centre of
the bridge and the Prince drove in the last--a silver--rivet.
The party then proceeded to the other side of the river, where
Mr. Blackwell, in the name of the Grand Trunk, presented the
Prince with a gold medal, executed by Wyon, commemorative of
the occasion, the suite receiving similar ones, but in silver.
The royal car then returned to the city. A great lunch took
place and the city and the harbour were given over that evening
to wonderful illuminations, when the Prince rode through the
streets. On Sunday the Prince and royal party attended divine
service at the recently rebuilt Christ Church Cathedral on St.
Catherine Street and were received at the door by Sir Fenwick
Williams and Sir A. Milne. Bishop Fulford officiated and Reverend
Mr. Wood read the sermon. In commemoration of this visit His
Royal Highness presented to the Cathedral a magnificent Bible
with an autograph inscription.

In the evening the Montreal Oratorio Society of 400 voices
performed a grand cantata especially written by a Mr. Semper and
composed by M. Sabatier, in commemoration of the royal visit. On
this occasion Marie Louise Lajeunesse, afterward Madame Albani,
sang. She was then unknown, although she had made her debut as
a piano player at the Mechanics’ Institute about 1854, when but
seven years of age.

The great ball, at which the young Prince danced with the ladies
of the charmed circle chosen by the committee of reception,
took place later in the completed Crystal Palace, a building of
colossal dimensions for the time, being nearly three hundred feet
in diameter. It was then thought to be in the fields.

A recent reminiscence of the time describes the scene:

  “But the grand ball in Montreal was the climax of the Prince’s
  visit. A special pavilion had been built for the occasion, and
  here the élite of the city, the province, the whole country it
  might be said, had assembled. The Prince with his suite appeared
  about ten o’clock and opened the ball. The Duke of Newcastle
  presented the Hon. Mrs. Young, and the ball was opened by the
  Prince dancing with that lady. He had on his right the Hon. Mr.
  Cartier with Mrs. Dumas, on his left Major Teesdale and Miss
  Rodgers. On the Prince’s right were Governor Bruce and Mrs.
  Denny, Captain Connolly, and Miss Penn; and on his left the Earl
  of Mulgrave, and Miss de Lisle, and Captain De Winton and Miss
  Tyre. His Royal Highness danced incessantly from half-past four
  in the morning, with a large number of ladies, most of whom are
  dead and gone.

  “Among the ladies who had the honour of dancing with the Prince
  were Miss de Lisle, Miss Tyre, Mrs. F. Brown, Miss Leach, Miss
  Fisher, of Halifax, Mrs. Sicotte, Miss de Rocheblave, Mrs. C.
  Freer, Miss Laura Johnson, Miss Belson, Miss Napier, Miss King,
  Mrs. Forsythe, Miss Sophia Stewart, the Hon. Mrs. J.S. Macdonald,
  Miss Servorte, Lady Milne, Mrs. King, Miss E. Smith.

  Although all the ladies, or most of them, are dead, they have
  relatives who might be interested in recalling the brilliant
  scene, which was witnessed at the famous ball, which was
  described with great particularity, even by the United States
  press, which sent over many representatives.”

On Wednesday morning there was a review at Logan’s Farm,
now Lafontaine Park, the property of Sir William Logan, the
geologist, who was knighted about 1856, and the Prince appeared
in his uniform as colonel of the One Hundred Prince of Wales
Royal Canadian Regiment. In the evening the firemen had a
torchlight procession, each fire fighter carrying a torch or
Roman candle. On Thursday night the “peoples’ ball” took place
in the new ballroom, with the Prince present. That night the
foot of the mountain was illuminated with fireworks. Next day
the royal party proceeded to Ottawa. The visit to Montreal was
a great success. Its cost to the citizens’ reception committee
was $43,031, not including the decorations of public buildings
which cannot have been less than ten to twenty thousand dollars
more. One of the permanent mementos of the visit is the name of
Victoria Square, which a by-law of the city changed from its
former title of Haymarket and Commissioners Square.

One of the acts of the young Edward, the Peacemaker, was on this
occasion of his visit, to establish uniformity and harmony in
the various companies comprising the Prince of Wales Regiment,
which had heretofore turned out on parade in different facings
and different racial emblems according to the company. This had
always been provocative of rivalry, but henceforth uniformity
ruled.

Two events of artistic and literary interest marked this period.
On the 23d of April the Art Association of Montreal was formed
and on August 13th the first number of the Daily Witness appeared.

The year 1861 stands out preeminently in the military history of
the city, for it was that of the Civil War between the northern
and the southern states of the adjoining republic, and Montreal
reflected the general turmoil. The Civil War began on January
9th, when the Southern Confederacy fired into the Federal steamer
Star of the West. It was early feared that there might be war
between Great Britain and the United States and the North British
troops were ordered to Canada in January. Meanwhile, in January,
the city was excited over the case of a fugitive slave named
Anderson charged with murder, whose extradition was demanded.
A meeting was held and addressed by Messrs. Dorion, Drummond,
Holton, Benjamin Holmes and John Dougall, Dr. W.H. Hingston and
the Rev. Messrs. W. Bond and Cordner, opposing surrender. In
February it was decided that Anderson was not to be delivered
without instructions from England. Finally he reached England in
June.

Montreal sympathies were with the Southerners, but as yet
according to instructions from Queen Victoria on May 13th, strict
neutrality was to be observed. The position became, however,
acute after November 8th, when Captain Wilkes, of the United
States warship San Jacinto, took from the British mailship Trent
the Confederates John Slidell and John G. Mason, Confederate
commissioners to the Imperial Government. On the refusal of the
American Government to hand them over, war was anticipated and
there was extreme tension. Six steamers were chartered to bring
troops to Canada. Reinforcements of regulars were sent from
England and in Montreal, space being inadequate to receive them,
the Molson College on St. Mary Street, the Collège de Montreal
on College Street and the stores at the northeast corner of St.
Sulpice and Notre Dame streets, then recently erected on the
site of the property of Hôtel Dieu, which had been also recently
transferred to Pine Avenue, were leased and known as Victoria
Barracks. Canada was prepared to share the troubles of the Empire
should war break out, and in consequence Montreal saw a hurrying
to and fro of citizen soldiers. Recruiting in every arm of the
service and drilling went on everywhere. “Stand to your arms,”
“Defense not defiance” and such mottoes are to be found in
newspapers of the period, in the exercise of their duty of making
public opinion.

For two weeks the tension was great in the city. One of the
soldiers has recently given his reminiscences of this time as
follows:

  “We marched to Molson’s College in the east end. Yes, it was
  called a college then, and had originally been built for some
  educational purpose. It was at the back of St. Thomas’ Church, or
  rather, this church, at the time, formed part of the building.
  Back of this again, and close to the river, was Molson’s
  Terrace, which is a pretty tawdry place today but which, when
  I was stationed in the city with my regiment, was most select.
  Why, the Molson’s themselves lived in the Terrace--that is, the
  founders of the brewery and of the college. The houses were then
  considered elegant, and that part of the city had a reputation
  which it does not now possess.

  “At the time I am speaking of, the total military strength of
  Montreal was considerable. There was the First Battalion of
  the Sixteenth Bedfordshire Regiment, to which I belonged. The
  Forty-seventh Lancashire; the Fourth Battalion; Sixtieth Rifles,
  which latter was quartered in the College Street Barracks; the
  Second Battalion of the Guards; the Second Battalion of the
  Scotch Fusiliers; three field batteries of Artillery, which later
  were stationed at the Quebec Gate Barracks where the Dalhousie
  Square depot is now, and the Forty-seventh Regiment.

  “This Quebec Gate Barracks had two entrances--one on Water Street
  for the men, and one on Notre Dame Street for the officers. In
  that same barracks were two companies of the Royal Engineers. The
  commissariat and two troops of the Military Train were stationed
  at Hochelaga.

  “The city was full of troops at the time. There was every belief
  that we would speedily be at war with the North, but the ill
  feeling passed over. Nothing happened. We remained, and lived the
  lives of soldiers. We had good times; we had no care; we had our
  beer; we had a brisk time in Montreal.”

His recollection of the officers is as follows:

  “At that time the sons of noblemen thought it an honour to
  belong to the army, and the officers in Montreal were, for the
  most part, highly connected. Now the commission is obtained by
  competitive examination; but the old soldiers like to be under
  gentlemen born. Some of the officers stayed at the Donegana
  Hotel, and many of them messed in the building opposite Dalhousie
  Square, where the band played in the evening; but the bulk of the
  higher officers put up at the St. Lawrence Hall. The officer of
  the day, and the subaltern of the day, always lived in Molson’s
  Terrace, to be near the scene of their duties.

  “Several of the officers, I remember, put up at the Cosmopolitan
  Hotel, which stood on the present site of the New York Life
  Building. Opposite Molson’s brewery was the regimental hospital,
  while the Garrison Hospital was on Water Street. Each regiment
  had its own hospital.”[1]

At the time the hero of Kars, Lieut.-Gen. Sir William Fenwick
Williams, Bart., K.C.B.; commander of the forces in British North
America; Lord Paulet, in charge of the Guards; Sir William Muir,
chief medical officer of the forces; Major Penn, of Crimean fame,
in command of the gallant Grey Battery; Colonel Peacock, of the
Sixteenth Bedfordshire; and others, were among the officers then
in Montreal.

In its midst news came of the death of Queen Victoria’s husband,
the Prince Consort. A loyal city sent its message of condolence
to their beloved Queen. But on the release of Slidell and Mason
the war alarms were over. This good news came on December 28th,
and on Sunday the continuance of peace between the Empire and the
United States was devoutly and thankfully blessed. The outburst
of militarism served to keep the companies as already organized
on a permanent basis. On January 1st, Slidell and Mason were
released by the United States, but on January 4th Victoria Bridge
had still to be guarded for fear of destruction by marauders from
across the boundary.

“The alarm, which soon subsided, was really the birth of modern
militia movement in Canada. I remember well,” says Lieut.-Col.
Robert Gardner, in a reminiscence, “the excitement that ruled
everywhere. I can recollect the time when the business men and
merchants of Montreal were all imbued with the necessity of
defending their country. So enthusiastic were they that drilling
was going on practically all the time. Everyone expected war, and
patriotic feelings ran high. Business men would slip out in the
morning and put in an hour at drill, another drill would be held
after lunch, and more in the evening. It was that war scare of
1861-2 which really showed the necessity of a defensive force,
and proved the forerunner of our militia system of today.”

During the war there were, however, merry times at the hotels and
at Dolly’s restaurant. A reminiscence relates:

  “That was a merry time in Montreal. The Americans had plenty of
  money, and were not afraid to spend it. The officers, too, were
  well supplied, and they, too, were prodigal with it. St. James
  Street was always busy, what with the soldiers and officers,
  the Southerners, the local military, the excitement attending
  the events of the war, and which were reflected in the city
  in the matter of sentiment, as well as the matter of money. I
  recollect very well that the feeling of our people was in favour
  of the South in the struggle. As time went on, the conviction
  gained ground that the South would be defeated; but the general
  feeling was in its favour. This made life for the Southerners
  very pleasant. They fraternized with the people; they spent their
  money; they made life merry in and about the old St. Lawrence
  Hall.”

Greenbacks, however, were looked askance at till the fortunes of
war were with the North, so that silver was in demand. The Civil
War meant good times for Canada for the farmers’ produce and
stock were readily bought by the United States.

The military troops in town came in for a great recognition on
the 6th, 7th and 8th of May, 1862, when they were feasted in
sections on these days. It is recorded that among the items for
the festivities there were ordered 3,200 pounds of sandwiches,
5,000 tarts, 3,700 pounds of cake, 50 barrels of fruit, besides
an abundant supply of tea and coffee, the entertainments being on
strictly temperance principles.

Montreal’s generosity was also that year shown to the destitute
operatives in the manufacturing districts of England, when in
consequence of a meeting in the Merchants’ Exchange $30,000 was
subscribed for their relief.

The Civil War over, the arts of peace were resumed. The Montreal
Street Railway, started in the year previous, was making its
humble beginnings with its few horse-drawn cars. On April 2d
there was a municipal by-law to establish the fire brigade. On
May 20th, the Montreal waterworks were enlarged and improved as
a result of the dearth of water at this time which had caused
the ancient custom of providing water in puncheons again to be
resorted to.

This year the Numismatic and Antiquarian Society was founded and
the Corn Exchange organized, being incorporated the next year,
when eight floating elevators were proudly said to be discharging
hourly 24,000 bushels.

1863 saw the fire alarm established on January 19th, indicating
the progress of our fire service.

On July 15th, the Corvette Oernen, the first Norwegian vessel
to visit the St. Lawrence, sailed up to Montreal and civic
hospitality was again displayed as previously to the French
vessel.

The Provincial Exhibition, held on the 9th of September of this
year, was superior to any other. A grand rifle tournament was
opened by Sir William Fenwick Williams and lasted over ten days.

On April 21, 1864, there appeared a published letter of D’Arcy
McGee, the Irish poet, litterateur and politician, in which he
said: “Even the threat of assassination covertly conveyed and
so eminently in keeping with the entire humbug has no terrors
for me. I trust I shall outlive these threats,” indicates that
there was a ring of organized Fenianism in the city in sympathy
with the movement now looming large in the United States. About
this time he exposed the dangers and sophisms of those seducing
the young Irish of the city and moreover told some of his young,
hotheaded auditors at several meetings, then and subsequently,
that he held in his pocket evidence enough to hang some of them.
“I ask you,” he said, “to frown upon this thing. I ask you to
have nothing to do with it. I tell you that I know many of the
men who are associated with Fenianism. And I say this, that if
they do not separate themselves from the organization, I will
denounce them to the Government. Come out from among them. The
organization will bring you to ruin. There are some who think
they are secure; that they can go on and that they cannot be
found out. I tell you I know such, and will denounce them if they
do not mend their ways.”

At this time McGee was told that his days were numbered. Thus
coming events cast their shadows before. But Confederation was in
the air and its discussion was uppermost.

The Shakespeare centenary of 1864 was brilliantly celebrated
at Montreal in April at the Crystal Palace. But sad news fell
upon the city when, on June 29th, a train of eleven cars, having
aboard 354 German emigrants leaving St. Hilaire for Montreal,
was precipitated through an open drawbridge into the river at
Beloeil. Ninety were killed and a very large number were drowned.
The hospitable city opened its hospitals and public institutions
for the sufferers and the bodies of the dead were brought to the
city and buried in the Protestant cemeteries.

In September, 1864, the city saw the departure of six companies
of the Scotch Fusileers and other military.

In November there was excitement in the city over the St. Alban’s
raiders who had been captured and brought to the city for
examination. On the 19th of October some southern raiders from
Canada had made a descent on the St. Alban’s bank, compelling
Mr. Sowles, the cashier, to surrender the bank’s money, and
after intimidating the citizens, saying that “we represent the
Confederate States of America and we come here to retaliate
outrages committed by General Sherman,” they had returned to
Canada on captured horses.

On March 30th of the next year, the St. Alban raiders were
discharged. On this occasion Mr. Bernard Devlin had an opportunity
of airing his forensic eloquence, being employed to defend certain
of the prisoners. It is said that the motive behind the raid was
to make a diversion in favour of the South by means of the raid
which was to bring Federal troops from southern points to defend
the invaded territory of the North.

The year 1865, which opened with the usual spring floods in
April, was otherwise an interesting and exciting time to the
merchants of the town, for Mr. Adams, the American minister
in London, gave the requisite notice to terminate reciprocity
between the United States and Canada on March 17, 1866. In
July there was a convention at Detroit, from the 11th to the
14th, which promoted the forming of a new reciprocity treaty.
At this several Montrealers attended, but only to give desired
information. In September there was a delegation to Montreal to
form an International Board of Trade. This year the Board of
Trade Building, erected in 1855, was burnt down.

The following resolution, passed unanimously on April 19th by
the city council, on the motion of Alderman Grenier, seconded
by Alderman Rodden, on the occasion of the assassination of the
President of the United States, shows the gloom and commiseration
of the city which went into mourning on the day of the funeral:

“Resolved, That in respect to the memory of the late President
of the United States and sympathy with the people in the great
calamity which has befallen them, and also as an expression of
the regret and horror felt at the crime perpetrated upon the
person of President Lincoln, this council do now adjourn.”

This allows us to cast a glance at our peaceful municipal life.
One[2] who knew it well has recently recorded his reminiscences:

  “Citizens criticized the council then as they do today and on
  one particular occasion they manifested their disapprobation on
  some burning question by gathering in front of the council room,
  and, after due oratory from their leader, sent a volley of stones
  through the windows, to show the depth of their feelings. This
  stirred up the members most effectively, and if the celerity
  with which they jumped from one place to another, to avoid the
  ‘arguments’ was any indication of the attention they would
  give to the cause in question, it would not have remained long
  unattended to.

  “One member, however, more courageous than the others, kept his
  seat with contemptuous indifference until he saw a missile coming
  direct for his desk, when he cleverly caught it in his hands,
  and called on the mayor to maintain order. His Worship looked
  unutterable things, and told Darcy to do it. The latter, however,
  disappeared, and was not seen more that night. It was suspected
  he went over to the enemy, and when he told me next morning
  that it was ‘the best bit of fun he had seen for many a day,’ I
  thought there was ground for the suspicion.

  “But criticisms of the council were not confined to
  demonstrations of this kind. The press was not backward in saying
  what it thought, although in a more refined and cultured way. One
  editor, for instance, gave a free notice of a meeting of council
  in the following words, in large type:

  “‘The Municipal Banditti meet in their den at the City Hall at 8
  o’clock this evening.’

  “We were more deliberate in those days than at the present. We
  were deliberate in all things. We did not hurry away the snow as
  we do now. We thought it cheaper to let the sun do that. Now in
  this advanced age we think nothing of spending $10,000 to beat
  the sun by twenty-four hours; but speed is everything today. At
  the time of speaking our whole revenue was not one-fourth of the
  interest on our debt today.

  “I have enumerated the personnel to show the speed of time, for
  at the present time not one of those mentioned, except myself,
  remain. They have all passed to the ‘majority.’

  “Prominently among the aldermen of that period were Ferdinand
  David, and William Rodden; the former as chairman of the roads
  committee, may be regarded as having been the father of our
  expropriation system, and the latter, as chairman of finance, was
  regarded as the father of our 7 per cent consolidation. Were both
  these men alive today they would be appalled at the outcome of
  their pet schemes. In those days we spoke with bated breath of
  $100,000, now we play with the millions as a very little thing.
  Then our 6 per cent securities sold at a heavy discount, since
  then our 3 per cent securities have sold over par.

  “An orator about this time, haranguing the taxpayers from the
  steps of the Nelson Monument, assured them that if they should
  elect him as their representative, he would reduce their taxes
  150 per cent. Poor fellow, he meant well, but he was allowed to
  sink, with his invaluable arithmetical genius, into oblivion,
  while the other one, who was able to rouse another mob, occupies
  a seat on the king’s bench. This shows that it is better to break
  people’s windows than to abolish their taxes and give them a 50
  per cent bonus beside. O, tempora, O, mores.”

This year (1865) Sir John Michel was sworn in as administrator
of the governor general, then absent in England. As he took up
his residence in the city and during his administration the
executive council met here twice in each month, this event may be
chronicled in the series of social events.

The peaceful progress of the inhabitants was again thrown into
confusion and the military spirit reincarnated when news came the
latter part of this year, 1865, that the threatened invasion of
Canada by the Irish Fenian Brotherhood, led by “General” O’Neil,
were at last becoming actual. They made use of the ill-feeling
aroused between the United States and Britain by an element
discontented through hard times, to strike a long premeditated
blow. The first Fenian invasion eventually came to nothing at all
of importance, but it was a great scare. Montreal was on the _qui
vive_ for a while, fearing the invasion, for the supineness of
the American Government in allowing the invasion to be planned
and provided for by filibusters, gave an unpleasant impression,
suggesting that there might, possibly, be serious consequence if
a strong front were not presented to the audacious attempt. The
feeling, too, at the time, was not too friendly to Canada, which,
with Great Britain, was supposed to sympathize with the South
during the Civil War.

On Monday, March 13, 1866, a company of the Prince of Wales
regiment and a battery of artillery were reviewed at 5 P.M. and
by 9 P.M. were sent to the threatened frontier. A patriotic
“relief” fund was started on March 26th. On June 2d, on account
of news arriving on June 1st, the Fenians being already at Fort
Erie, a further detachment of four more companies were sent to
the west, viz., Nos. 3 and 8 batteries of the Brigade of the
Montreal Garrison Artillery, under Captains Brown and Hobbes; a
company of Prince of Wales Rifles, under Captain Bond; Victoria
Rifles, under Captain Bacon; Royal Light Infantry, under Capt.
K. Campbell; and the Chasseurs Canadiens, under Captain Labelle,
who all left by special train for Point St. Charles for St. Johns
and Isle aux Noix. The same evening a strong reinforcement of
regulars left for the same stations, and on the 4th, several
additional companies of volunteers were dispatched to Hemingford
and other places along the frontier. Among those going to the
front were the famous “Barney” Devlin, the great criminal lawyer
and the political opponent of D’Arcy McGee, and the Rev. Father
James Hogan of St. Patrick’s, who acted as chaplain.

The chief fight in Lower Canada was at Pigeon Hill, in the
Township of St. Armand, adjoining the State of Vermont, which was
attacked by the Fenians on June 17th, but from which, after a
brief skirmish, they retired, not without several of their party
being secured as prisoners by the “Montreal Guides,” and being
brought, a sorry and ragged crowd, to the city gaol.

On June 18th, the volunteer companies returned, being welcomed
enthusiastically by their fellow citizens, and June 23d was
observed as a day of general rejoicing and inspection. The mayor,
on behalf of the civic authorities, tendered an address to the
troops, offering sincere expressions of gratitude and thanks
for their devotion, loyalty and courage in the late emergency,
and bidding them a hearty welcome back to the city and to
their happy homes and beloved and expectant families. This was
responded to by Major-General Lindsay.

The loyalty of all sections of the community had again been
proved against a common enemy. Every section had answered
the call to arms, for Fenianism, after all, had few weighty
supporters in Montreal.

The military enthusiasm, however, evoked by the late events had
an immediate effect in determining the city council and other
authorities already considering the point, to open a drill hall
capable of meeting the increased demands, and in May, 1867, the
contract for the armory on Craig Street, opposite the Champ de
Mars, was given to Foster & Roy.

The confederation of the provinces was now in the air. It was
not universally understood at the time and it was feared, and
somewhat actively combatted, especially by the group of young
French-Canadians opposed to Cartier in their new journal the
Union Nationale, as likely to absorb them so that they might lose
their political identity.

Confederation was, however, to mark a great period of progress
and to see Montreal emerge from provincial citydom to the
great metropolis of today. Before passing to the story of its
achievement, a glance back will show that Montreal was a very
quiet place under the Union. Yet it produced strong-minded and
able men, even if the racial, religious and political rancours
of a “heart burning town” showed themselves in no equivocal
colours. The foundations of our present artistic, literary,
religious, charitable and financial associations were also
already being well laid. The life was simple; there was not much
society but great heartiness. There were no millionaires, but the
people spent freely. Public amusements were fewer, but private
hospitality greater. The city hall was decorous, there were no
emoluments for service, and the best men of the time thought it
an honour to represent their wards.

Into the simplicity of the life there entered the society
centering around the military. At the close of the Union there
were about a hundred officers generally stationed here, many
of them distinguished men of high rank and fame. There were
often four or five regiments in the town, and the soldiery
fraternized with the citizens. Pranks there were, the ringing of
bells, the wrenching off of knockers and signs, and more serious
peccadillos, but the indulgent public was not censorious. The
officers gave many parties, balls, receptions, dances and hunts,
all of which the prominent citizens participated in and returned.
There were not highly organized kennel or hunt clubs, but they
ranged the country far and wide. The officers were good judges of
horse flesh as were the humbler citizens and Tattersalls, on St.
James Street, opposite the present Star offices, was a busy place
for such. It was no infrequent sight to see the horses being
trotted up and down past Dolly’s, St. Lawrence Hall and Banque
du Peuple for inspection along the street which is today’s busy
financial thoroughfare, lined with banks and insurance buildings.

The ordinary people participated indirectly in the gaiety of the
military régime through the brisk, lively trade with the officers
and soldiery, who spent freely.

The life, colour, and zest they gave were also a free
entertainment. Not only were the streets bright with the uniforms
of the soldiers and gay with the sound of fife, drum and brass,
but the people would make their way to the Champ de Mars during
the day to see the evolutions of the military, where the firing
of the cannon frightened the timid boys and girls, or in the
early evening the young folk would stroll sweethearting to
Dalhousie Square (now the Viger Station tracks) to hear the
regimental bands in Barrack Square, and the boys and girls, now
no way shy, would peep in at the mysteries of the officers’ mess,
which was in plain view. The music would last for hours and the
square would resound with laughter till the sun-down gun from St.
Helen’s Island proclaimed the time for early bed.

Art, literature and music were cultivated by associations at the
time and to these the military officers contributed no little
initiative. The scholastic system of the two boards of school
commissioners was being solidified and Montreal at the end of
the Union was progressing substantially, but not so dramatically
or so visibly as after the next few decades when bustle began to
rule. Life was then more leisurely, more reposeful and at least
quite as happy and more contented.


FOOTNOTES:

[1] Reminiscences of Private Fitzgerald, who came out with the
Sixteenth Bedfordshire Regiment in 1861. Cf. “I Remember” series
of the Star, 1913.

[2] Mr. William Robb, recently city treasurer. Cf. I Remember
Series, The Star, 1913.




                          CHAPTER XXII

             CONSTITUTIONAL LIFE UNDER CONFEDERATION

                FEDERAL AND PROVINCIAL INFLUENCE

  MONTREAL AN IMPORTANT FACTOR IN FEDERAL AND PROVINCIAL
    POLITICS--CONFEDERATION TESTED--CARTIER AND THE PARTI ROUGE
    AT MONTREAL--ASSASSINATION OF THOMAS D’ARCY M’GEE--THE
    HUDSON’S BAY TRANSFER--THE METIS AND THE RIEL REBELLION--LORD
    STRATHCONA--THE CANADIAN PACIFIC RAILWAY BILL--RESIGNATION
    OF SIR JOHN A. MACDONALD--SECOND FENIAN RAID--THE “NATIONAL
    POLICY”--VOTING REFORM--TEMPERANCE BILL--ORANGE RIOTS--SECOND
    NORTH WEST REBELLION--THE “SIXTY-FIFTH REGIMENT”--THE
    MANITOBA SCHOOL QUESTION--PROMINENT CITIZENS--BRITISH
    PREFERENTIAL TARIFF--BOER WAR--“STRATHCONA HORSE”--THE
    NATIONALIST LEAGUE--RECIPROCITY AND FEAR OF ANNEXATION--THE
    ELECTIONS OF 1911--NAVAL BILL--PROVINCIAL POLITICS--MONTREAL
    MEMBERS--PROVINCIAL OVERSIGHT OVER MONTREAL--HOME RULE--THE
    INTERNATIONAL WAR OF 1914--THE FIRST CONTINGENT--MONTREAL’S
    ACTION.


Constitutionally Montreal has always been an influence in the
moulding of the Dominion. This has been brought about by its
geographical situation and its public men. From the first the
city has been favored in its sons--men who have controlled the
destinies of the growing country, and who in turn have been
influenced by their closer environments. This is seen in the
constitutional acts of both the Province and the Dominion, for
practically most public events, particularly since Confederation,
have been shaped to meet the requirements of the commercial
metropolis.

Confederation had its opponents, particularly amongst the younger
members of the “parti rouge” or democratic party, who in Lower
Canada, but now the Province of Quebec, had been waiting for an
opportunity to break the power of Sir George Etienne Cartier,
the great French Canadian leader in the confederation movement,
so that in the elections called for to ratify the British North
America Act, they determined, in spite of the advice to the
contrary, of their brilliant leader (Dorion), to give Cartier
the fight of his life. The new Federal government realized that
the permanency of the constitution depended largely on the
attitude of Quebec and much anxiety was felt as to the results of
the elections which were to be held in the autumn of 1867--the
British North America Act having come into force on July 1st.

Cartier particularly realized the crisis, and put his whole
energy into the fight. He personally contested Montreal East,
now St. James Division, having as opponent Médéric Lanctot,
a popular labour leader. Every division in the Province was
contested, but thanks to the strong stand made by the Roman
Catholic[1] church in approving Confederation, the party headed
by Cartier, who beat his opponent, won and the new constitution
was confirmed in the Province of Quebec forty-three out of
sixty-five seats. In Ontario the government won sixty-eight
out of eighty-five seats and in New Brunswick twelve out of
fifteen seats, but in Nova Scotia, owing to the opposition of
Joseph Howe, only one government supporter, Charles Tupper, was
returned. On the whole, Confederation was confirmed by the people.

Practically this most momentous election--upon which depended the
future of Canada’s national life--was decided in Montreal, for
had Cartier failed in winning his own seat, the impetus given to
the “parti rouge” would have been strong enough to have wrecked
the government and consequently the British North America Act.
The Provincial legislature returns showed a similar result, the
first provincial premier being that brilliant Montreal writer and
orator, the Hon. P.J.O. Chauveau, who held office until 1873, his
two immediate successors in the premiership being Montrealers
also, the Hon. G. Ouimet and Sir Charles E.B. de Boucherville.
The last named is still living, in the best of health, though in
his ninety-fourth year, and enjoying the dual offices of Senator
for Canada, and member of the Legislative Council of Quebec. Sir
Charles is the last of the dual office men.

During the adjourned session of the first Dominion parliament
which had met in Ottawa in March, 1868, the Hon. Thomas D’Arcy
McGee, who represented Montreal West, was assassinated just
outside his Ottawa lodging. There is no doubt that this dastardly
outrage was the consequence of Mr. McGee’s condemnation of the
Fenian movement against Canada, and though one man, Whelan, an
ex-soldier and tailor, suffered the extreme penalty for being the
instrument, the real miscreants got away. The murder of D’Arcy
McGee robbed this country of one of her best sons. Brilliant
and large minded he had risen to cabinet rank before he was
thirty-eight years of age and in the last government under the
Union he held the port-folio of Agriculture. Always a believer
in the closest union between the component parts of British
North America, he was an eloquent advocate for Confederation and
on the formation by Sir J.A. Macdonald of the first Dominion
government (1868) McGee’s eminent services gave him every right
to be included, but his sense of loyalty made him stand aside so
as to allow Sir John to form his cabinet on territorial lines.
This great man, whose remains rest in Cote de Neiges Cemetery, is
still--forty-six years after his death--the outstanding figure of
Irish Canadianism--an example in broad mindedness and patriotism.

Another Father of Confederation was the Hon. A.T. Galt, whose
representation of Sherbrooke, P.Q., and his years of residence
here, made him a local figure. Mr. Galt’s great financial
ability was very helpful in making equitable arrangements in the
consolidation of the Dominion. To commemorate the consummation
of confederation the Hon. J.A. Macdonald received the honour of
Knight Commander of the Bath, while his co-workers, including
Cartier and Galt, received companionships of the Bath. The title
was refused by both Cartier and Galt for the reason that being
representatives of Lower Canada they could not accept a lesser
title than Sir John Macdonald. The difficulty was overcome by a
baronetcy conferred on Cartier and a K.C.M.G. on Galt.

In 1868 Cartier and William McDougall went to England on
behalf of the Canadian government to negotiate the transfer of
the Western territories from the Hudson’s Bay Company to the
Dominion. The Hudson’s Bay Company asked the sum of $5,000,000
for the cession of its rights but had to be satisfied with
$1,500,000 and a reservation of one-twentieth of the fertile
belt. But a new difficulty had arisen in the transfer--in the
territory itself--for in 1870 the half-breed settlers, who
had the distinctive title of the “Metis,” feeling that they
and their holdings had not been affected--stopped the new
lieutenant-governor, the Hon. William McDougall at the border,
and under Louis Riel the first North West rebellion was started,
soon, however, to be broken. It was in this rebellion that
the late Lord Strathcona, as chief officer of the Hudson’s
Bay Company, was first brought into the public limelight. Mr.
Donald Smith, as he was then known, and whose headquarters were
at Montreal, was asked to go to Fort Garry (now Winnipeg) with
Col. de Salaberry and Abbé Thibault with the object of pacifying
the settlers, but the mission failed. On the breakdown of the
rebellion Donald Smith administered the affairs of the territory
until the arrival of Lieutenant-Governor Archibald.

Around this time (1870) the home government withdrew the Imperial
troops from Canada--with the exception of a garrison left at
Halifax--which was a blow to the social life of the commercial
metropolis. The officers of the local garrison with their bright
uniforms and gentlemanly manners and their cultivated entourage
had been an acquisition to Montreal society, literary, social and
artistic.

The material building up of Canada, and particularly Montreal,
has been made possible by the splendid transportation facilities,
both by stream, canal and rail, engineered by the big men of the
time. During the ’70s and ’80s Montreal was well represented by
names like Cartier, Dorion, and Sir John Rose, who though in
separate political camps fought hard together for the Grand Trunk
in parliament, and won.

Cartier in introducing the Victoria Bridge Bill met much
opposition; the principal objection being that it would take
the trade out of the country. His reply, which proved correct,
was that the bridge would bring trade into the country. In the
agitation for the Intercolonial Railway with its terminus at
Montreal, Cartier was the leader. He was also the introducer into
the parliament of 1872 of the first Canadian Pacific Bill. Both
of these undertakings were urged as the best and most practical
means of consolidating the new Dominion.

One cannot leave railway legislation without referring to what
is known as the Canadian Pacific scandals, though Sir Charles
Tupper in his “Reminiscences of Sixty Years” writes of it as the
“Canadian Pacific Slanders,” because two of the principal actors
were Montrealers and the place, Montreal. The bare facts are: Two
companies, one of which was under the control of Sir Hugh Allan
of Montreal, had competed for the construction of the railroad,
the bill for which the Government, through Cartier, had passed in
parliament. Owing to disputes an effort was made to amalgamate
the companies but without avail, so that Sir Hugh formed a new
company under the title of the Canadian Pacific Railway Company.
This Company obtained a charter on February 19, 1873, to build
the railway, and it was in connection with the granting of this
charter that in the following April a Mr. L.A. Huntingdon charged
the government with making a corrupt bargain with Sir Hugh Allan;
in other words, that the Montreal promoter and his company had
advanced large sums of money to the Conservative fund to secure
the returns of candidates favourable to their obtaining the
charter. The receiving of the money was neither contradicted
by the government nor the contractors, and on behalf of the
government it was offered as an extenuating circumstance that it
was only in accordance with the “invariable custom,” and before
a Royal Commission the ministers denied any corrupt bargain
having been made. But the whole country was up in arms, and Sir
John Macdonald, seeing inevitable defeat for his government,
placed his resignation in the hands of the Governor-General.
In the elections which followed, the new government, under the
leadership of the new premier, the Hon. Alexander McKenzie, was
sustained by a large majority.

When in 1870 the Fenians for the second time under “General”
O’Neill made a raid into Canada, crossing the border at Trout
Lake in the Eastern Townships, a flutter was caused at Montreal,
but the “general” was soon routed by a small contingent made up
largely by volunteers from Montreal.

Owing to a depression in trade, which set in about the fall of
1873 and which gradually grew worse in centres like Montreal
as the years rolled by, Sir John A. Macdonald’s appeal to the
country that it should protect its own industries by placing
heavy duties against goods imported from other countries, met
with success and he was returned at the elections of 1878 by a
large majority. This became known as the “National Policy” and
though immediate prosperity was the outcome, there is no doubt
that the same policy has made possible the formation of trusts,
which in this country go under the name of mergers.

The next constitutional act of importance that affected Montreal
was the passing of an act which relieved the elections from the
old time voting. On May 26, 1876, a Federal bill was passed
introducing the vote by ballot, simultaneous elections, the
abolition of property qualifications for members of the House of
Commons and making stringent enactments against corrupt practices
at elections.

The Canada Temperance Bill of 1878 (usually called the Scott Act)
was the result of a great temperance movement that spread over
the whole of Canada and has been the foundation in Montreal of
scores of temperance societies. Practically all the churches have
joined in lessening the drink evil and on the same platforms will
be found the Roman Catholic and Anglican bishops of Montreal, as
well as the ministers of other denominations. Montreal is a much
more temperate city today than it was thirty years ago, in spite
of a rapidly growing cosmopolitan population.

About this time (1878) there occurred in Montreal the Orange
riots, which resulted in the death of one of the citizens named
Hackett by shooting, an event of no importance, though magnified
by certain writers.

In 1885 occurred the second North West rebellion. This was felt
very deeply in Montreal for the reason that, the insurgents
being French half-breeds, charges of disloyalty were made
against the whole French speaking people. To show its sense of
loyalty Montreal despatched a large contingent to the scene of
the disturbance, including the French-Canadian regiment--The
Mount Royal Rifles, now known as the Sixty-fifth Regiment. This
regiment did some remarkable work, marching as many as forty-five
miles a day through brush and muskeg and arriving in time to take
part in the routing out at Frog Lake of Big Bear, the Cree Chief
who was supporting Riel, the rebel leader. The spirit of loyalty
underlying this splendid achievement was sufficient evidence of
the patriotism of French Canadianism, even to satisfy the most
rabid of partisans.

The execution of Riel, which took place in Regina in the
latter part of the year, again raised the racial cry and many
demonstrations were held in Montreal by both French and English
partisans. To exaggerate the feeling of bitterness, about
this time small-pox had broken out and the heads of the local
industries having insisted on vaccination and the bulk of the
employees being French Canadian, the cry was raised that the
employers were interfering with the work of Providence.

Montreal has not been directly affected by what is commonly known
as the “school question,” that has at different times raised so
much bitterness in other parts of Canada, particularly in New
Brunswick and Manitoba, but because the majority of its citizens
are Roman Catholics, and the fact of its own separate school
system working satisfactorily, the local political parties have
always taken a keen interest in the school problem in the other
provinces, and every government when dealing with it has to
take Montreal sentiment into account. This Cartier found to his
cost in the 1872 elections, when, because his government sided,
though only on legal grounds, with the New Brunswick Provincial
government in its determination not to have separate schools,
he lost his seat to Mr. L.A. Jetté, who afterwards became
Lieutenant-Governor of the Province. Again because in Manitoba
in 1890 the provincial legislature, by adopting nonsectarian
schools, had in the minds of Roman Catholics broken the clause of
the Manitoba Act of 1870, which secured to the religious minority
the right in respect to denominational schools, much bitterness
was caused in Montreal. To this vexed question a settlement was
brought about in 1896 by the Laurier government, by which the
Manitoba Government while adhering to the principle of a national
school system under provincial control, agreed to make provision
for religious teaching during certain school hours.

In the year 1888 two Montrealers of cabinet rank died, Sir John
Rose, a former cabinet member, and Hon. Thomas White, M.P.,
Minister of the Interior.

Montreal in 1891 was particularly honoured in one of its citizens
in the person of Hon. J.J.C. Abbott, who had twice been mayor,
becoming Premier of Canada on the death of Sir John A. Macdonald,
though he only held office for little more than a year, resigning
November, 1892, on account of ill-health. In this year also died
Sir A.A. Dorion, Chief Justice of Queen’s Bench, Montreal, who
had been a big factor in the public life of Canada. As leader of
the Liberals, or “patri rouge,” he was Sir G.E. Cartier’s chief
opponent, and on the formation of the Liberal Government of 1873,
he was appointed Minister of Justice, which office he resigned on
June 1, 1874, to become Chief Justice of Montreal.

On August 15, 1893, the Behring Sea Tribunal of Arbitration, of
which Canada’s Prime Minister was a member, gave the decision
that the Behring Sea was to be kept open and that seals be
protected. At a banquet given in his honour by the citizens
of Montreal, the Premier in a great speech explained Canada’s
advantage by the arbitration.

In 1895 a treaty was made between this country and France which
largely affected the trade of Montreal, because of the impetus
given by the agreement to the importation of wines.

When the Liberals came into power in 1896, very largely on a
Free Trade policy, it was found inexpedient by the government
to change the general tariff of the country, but it made a
compromise in 1899 by giving a preferential tariff of 25% to
British made goods, which in 1901 was increased to 33⅓%. This was
a popular move and no doubt, together with the wave of prosperity
which spread itself over the country and in which Montreal
largely participated, did much to keep the Liberals in power for
fifteen years.

In 1898 the Boer war broke out, when the country as a whole
demanded that the Federal government on behalf of Canada should
take its share of the burden, although there was a certain
contra agitation amongst a section of French Canadians, led by
the eloquent and versatile grandson of Louis Joseph Papineau M.
Henri Bourassa, who afterwards became the Chief of the young
Nationalist Party.

In October of 1899, Mr. Bourassa gave up his seat for St.
Hyacinthe in the Federal House in order to vindicate his position
on the constitutional aspect of the participation of Canada in
the South African war, contending that such participation, as
contemplated and organized by the British Government and its
representative in Canada, meant a deep change in our relations
with Great Britain upon which the people of Canada should be
thoroughly enlightened and directly consulted. In January of the
following year he was returned by acclamation.

Though the attitude taken by Mr. Bourassa was mostly academic
yet, like his renewal in 1914 of a similar obstructional and
dialectical position, not always understood by the general public
especially in time of war, it helped to encourage demonstrations
of loyalty and patriotism throughout the Dominion, which forced
the government to raise an expeditionary force. The first
contingent embarked for the Transvaal October 30, 1899. At
the beginning of the following year, Lord Strathcona equipped
a mounted infantry regiment of 500, which became famous as
“Strathcona’s Horse.” This body was despatched to South Africa
with the second contingent. The Canadian regiments throughout
the war did splendid service, particularly at Paardeburg, when
the Boer general Cronje was completely surrounded and defeated.
Montreal itself contributed largely to the contingent which
represented Canada.

In 1902 the Nationalist League was organized by Mr. J.T. Olivar
Asselin, who became president of the Montreal branch and Mr.
Henri Bourassa became recognized as the outstanding leader. The
Nationaliste was founded as the party organ in 1904 by its editor
Mr. Asselin who, on its lapse, became a writer on the Devoir
founded by Mr. Henri Bourassa.

A political event of far reaching importance took place in
1910 when the Hon. William Fielding and the late Hon. William
Patterson on behalf of the Canadian Government signed an
agreement with the government of the United States by which
certain goods, principally food-stuffs, were to pass from one
country to the other free of duty. Since 1866 the United States
had steadily refused all offers to negotiate for reciprocal
relations, but in the spring of 1910 they veered around and sent
plenipotentiaries to Ottawa. The Dominion Government received
them courteously and sent Messrs. Fielding and Patterson to
Washington to carry on the negotiations, which resulted in what
became known as the “Reciprocity Pact.” But in submitting the
agreement to the country for ratification in the election of 1911
the government was badly defeated. It should be stated though
that the main issue itself throughout the country, and especially
in Montreal, had become involved, from a question originally of
purely commercial reciprocity, into one also of fear of danger
of annexation to the United States. This was sufficient to bring
out the latent patriotism of the electors, who gave a very
decided answer to those across the line who had any belief in the
American slogan that reciprocity was to be but the first step
to annexation. The Montreal election returns showed this very
strongly, not in the change of representatives, for there was
none, but in the comparison of the votes. In the country parts of
the Province the Navy Bill of 1910, which was unpopular with the
French Canadians, gave an opportunity to the Nationalists, who
by joining forces with the opposition were enabled to reduce the
Federal Government’s majority sufficiently to cause its downfall.

[Illustration: THE STRATHCONA HORSE (From the plaque on the
Strathcona Monument, Dominion Square)]

The defeat of the Federal Government ended the lengthy
premiership of Sir Wilfrid Laurier, one of the Empire’s great
statesmen. Sir Wilfrid has many associations with Montreal and
many of his triumphs, national as well as political, have taken
place in the city. The new government in 1911 introduced a bill
into Parliament giving a contribution of $35,000,000 to the
British admiralty to represent Canada’s naval contribution to the
Empire. The bill passed the Commons but failed in the Senate.
It was in connection with this naval contribution that the late
Hon. F.D. Monk, the member for the Jacques Cartier division of
the city, and one of Montreal’s brightest and most upright minds,
resigned from the government, his reason being that a plebiscite
of the people should have been made on the naval question. His
death following hard upon his departure from politics made the
latter the more deplored.

Of importance to the Port of Montreal is the West Indian
commercial agreement made in 1913 between Canada and the British
West Indies. By this reciprocal pact Canada secured a new market
on advantageous terms, and the principal factor in bringing it
about was the Canadian West Indian League with its headquarters
in Montreal.

As in Federal politics, so also in the life of the Provincial
parliament, Montreal has also been a large factor, the principal
reason being that it supplies the biggest share of the income of
the Province, and also because the city’s representatives have
usually been leaders of thought and probity. Practically all the
premiers, from confederation to the present holder of the office,
have been either citizens of Montreal or largely connected with
the city. In the first legislative assembly of 1867 Montreal had
four members; they being Sir George E. Cartier, Edward Cartier,
his brother, and law partner, and who Sir George always said
was the legal brains of the firm; A.W. Ogilvie, a prominent
member of one of Montreal’s best known families; and the Hon.
Louis Beaubien, who became Commissioner of Agriculture in the de
Boucherville and Flinn administrations. Since that time Montreal
has been represented at Quebec by such men as the Hon. L.O.
Taillon (1875-1887) who became Premier in 1887, and afterwards
joined the Federal government as Postmaster General; to-day
he is Postmaster of Montreal; Hon. James McShane (1878-1891),
who became in turn Provincial Minister of Public Works, Mayor
of Montreal and Harbour Master of the Port; Hon. L.O. David
(1886-1890), now Senator of Canada and City Clerk of Montreal;
Dr. G. A. Lacombe (1897-1908), the author of the famous Lacombe
Law of 1906, by which a debtor upon being too hard pressed by his
creditors could come under the protection of the courts without
any extra cost to himself; Sir Lomer Gouin, the present Premier,
who first entered the legislature as member for St. James in
1897; Henri Bourassa (1908-1909); D.J. Decarie (1897-1904),
and his son, the Hon. Jérémie Decarie, Provincial Secretary,
who succeeded his father in the latter year; Hon. Dr. J.J.E.
Guerin (1895-1904), Cabinet minister and Mayor of Montreal;
Robert Bickerdike (1897-1900), the present federal member for
St. Lawrence division of the city; the Hon. H.B. Rainville and
the two George Washington Stephens--father and son--the one
representing Montreal Centre from 1881 to 1886 and the other the
St. Lawrence division, 1904 to 1908, being afterwards Chairman of
the Harbour Commission.

The work of the Provincial legislature being largely of a
constructive nature, such as the raising of taxes for the
building of roads and the conserving of its vast resources, its
principal effect on the city of Montreal itself is the oversight
of the legislative work of the city council, and if acceptable
to make it legal by passing it in the form of amendments to the
city charter. In this respect a very important amendment to
the charter was made in 1910 as a result of the report of the
Cannon inquiry, which condemned the city administration of the
period. Under the amendment the Council is cut in half by each
ward having one instead of two representatives, and its work is
of a legislative nature only, leaving the administration subject
to the ratification of the council, in the hands of a board of
control composed of four members, who with the mayor is elected
by the city as a whole.

For a long time there has been a strong feeling that Montreal
should have more freedom and a large measure of Home Rule in its
local affairs, some even going so far as to urge that the island
of Montreal should be a separate Province. At present, there is
certainly a groping toward some such autonomy.


      MONTREAL REPRESENTATIVES IN THE SENATE OF CANADA FROM
                          CONFEDERATION

  The Honourable:
    Jacques Bureau
    Louis Renaud
    John Hamilton
    James Ferrier
    Thomas Ryan
    F.X.A. Trudel
    E.G. Penny
    Hector Fabre
    J.R. Thibaudeau
    A.W. Ogilvie
    A. Lacoste
    L.A. Senecal
    Sir J.J.C. Abbott
    J.B. Rolland
    Sir George A. Drummond
    C.S. Rodier
    E. Murphy
    A. Desjardins
    James O’Brien
    J.C. Villeneuve
    William Owens
    Sir W.H. Hingston
    L.J. Forget
    A.A. Thibaudeau
    Raoul Dandurand
    J.P.B. Casgrain
    Robert McKay
    Frédéric L. Beique
    Laurent O. David
    Henry J. Cloran
    Arthur Boyer
    Joseph Marcellin Wilson


         MEMBERS OF THE FEDERAL PARLIAMENT FOR MONTREAL
                       SINCE CONFEDERATION

  Date of Election.      District.                 Member.

  1867                 Montreal City
                                West             Hon. T. D’Arcy McGee
                                Centre           T. Workman
                                East             Hon. G.E. Cartier

  1868, April 30th              West             M.P. Ryan, vice Hon.
                                                   T.D. McGee, deceased.
  1872                 Montreal City
                                West             Hon. J. Young
                                Centre           M.P. Ryan
                                East             L.A. Jetté

  1874                 Montreal City
                                West             F. McKenzie
                                Centre           M.P. Ryan
                                East             L.A. Jetté

  1874, December       Montreal City             F. McKenzie (re-elected,
                                                   former election being
                                                   voided)

  1875                 Montreal City
                                West             T. Workman, vice McKenzie
                                                   (election voided)

  1875, January 12th   Montreal City
                                Centre           B. Devlin (elected vice
                                                   Ryan, election voided)
        November 26th                            B. Devlin (re-elected,
                                                   former election declared
                                                   void)

  1878, November 21st  Montreal City
                                West             M.H. Gault
                                Centre           M.P. Ryan
                                East             C.J. Coursol

  1882                 Montreal City
                                West             M.H. Gault
                                Centre           J.J. Curran
                                East             C.J. Coursol

  1887                 Montreal City
                                West             Sir Donald A. Smith
                                Centre           J.J. Curran
                                East             C.J. Coursol

  1888                 Montreal City
                                East             A.T. Lepine, vice
                                                   Coursol (deceased)

  1891                 Montreal City
                                West             Sir Donald A. Smith,
                                                   K.C.M.G.
                                Centre           J.J. Curran
                                East             A.T. Lepine

  1892                 Montreal City
                                Centre           J.J. Curran (re-elected
                                                   on accepting office)

  1895                 Montreal City
                                Centre           James McShane
                                                 J.J. Curran (appt. Judge)

  1896                 Montreal (St. Anne)       M.J.F. Quinn
                                (St. Antoine)    T.G. Roddick
                                (St. James)      William Demarais
                                (St. Lawrence)   E.G. Penny
                                (St. Mary)       Hercule Dupré

  1900                 Montreal (St. Anne)       Daniel Gallery
                                (St. Antoine)    T.G. Roddick
                                (St. James)      William Demarais
                                (St. Lawrence)   Robert Bickerdike
                                (St. Mary)       Hon. J.J. Tarte

  1902, June           Montreal (St. James)      Joseph Brunet
                                                   (vice Demarais)
                                (St. James)      Brunet (unseated Dec.,
                                                   1902)

  1904                 Montreal (St. James)      H. Gervais

  1904                 Montreal (St. Anne)       D. Gallery
                                (St. Antoine)    H.B. Ames
                                (St. James)      H. Gervais
                                (St. Lawrence)   R. Bickerdike
                                (St. Mary)       C. Piché
  1906                 Montreal (St. Anne)       C.J. Walsh
                                (St. Mary)       Médéric Martin
  1908                 Montreal (St. Anne)       C.J. Doherty
                                (St. Antoine)    H.B. Ames
                                (St. James)      H. Gervais
                                (St. Lawrence)   R. Bickerdike
                                (St. Mary)       M. Martin
  1911                 Montreal (St. Anne)       Hon. C.J. Doherty
                                (St. Antoine)    H.B. Ames
                                (St. James)      L.A. Lapointe
                                (St. Lawrence)   R. Bickerdike
                                (St. Mary)       M. Martin


    MEMBERS OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY FOR MONTREAL FROM THE
               CONFEDERATION, 1867, TO THE PRESENT

                       (From 1867 to 1890)

  Date.            District.                   Name.

  1867-1871        Montreal Centre             Edward Cartier
  1871-1874        Montreal Centre             The Hon. Luther H. Holton
  1874-1875        Montreal Centre             Charles Alexander
  1875-1878        Montreal Centre             Alexander Walker Ogilvie
  1878-1881        Montreal Centre             Horatio Admiral Nelson
  1881-1886        Montreal Centre             George Washington Stephens
  1886-1890        Montreal Centre             James McShane
  1867-1871        Montreal East               Sir George Etienne Cartier
  1871-1875        Montreal East               Ferdinand David
  1875-1886        Montreal East               Louis Olivier Taillon
  1886-1890        Montreal East               Laurent Olivier David
  1867-1871        Montreal West               Alexander Walker Ogilvie
  1871-1873        Montreal West               Francis Cassidy
  1873-1878        Montreal West               John Wait McGauvran
  1878-1886        Montreal West               James McShane
  1886-1890        Montreal West               John Smythe Hall
  1867-1886        Hochelaga                   Louis Beaubien
  1886-1887        Hochelaga                   Joseph Octave Villeneuve
  1888-1890        Hochelaga                   Chas. Laplante dit Champagne

                       (From 1890 to 1912)

  1890-1891        Montreal Division No. 1     Joseph Béland
  1892-1897        Montreal Division No. 1     Francois Martineau
  1897-1908        Montreal Division No. 1     George Albini Lacombe
  1908-1912        Montreal Division No. 1     Napoleon Séguin
  1890-1891        Montreal Division No. 2     Joseph Brunet
  1892-1897        Montreal Division No. 2     Olivier Maurice Augé
  1897-1908        Montreal Division No. 2     Lomer Gouin
  1908-1909        Montreal Division No. 2     Henri Bourassa
  1909-1912        Montreal Division No. 2     Clément Robillard
  1890-1891        Montreal Division No. 3     Henri Benjamin Rainville
  1892-1897        Montreal Division No. 3     Damase Parizeau
  1897-1904        Montreal Division No. 3     Henri Benjamin Rainville
  1904-1912        Montreal Division No. 3     Godfroi Langlois
  1890-1891        Montreal Division No. 4     William Clendenning
  1892-1896        Montreal Division No. 4     Alexander Webb Morris
  1896-1900        Montreal Division No. 4     Albert William Atwater
  1900-1904        Montreal Division No. 4     James Cochrane
  1904-1908        Montreal Division No. 4     G.W. Stephens
  1908-1912        Montreal Division No. 4     John T. Finnie
  1890-1897        Montreal Division No. 5     John Smythe Hall
  1897-1900        Montreal Division No. 5     Robert Bickerdike
  1900-1904        Montreal Division No. 5     Matthew Hutchison
  1904-1906        Montreal Division No. 5     Christopher B. Carter
  1907-1912        Montreal Division No. 5     Ernest C. Gault
  1890-1891        Montreal Division No. 6     The Hon. James McShane
  1892-1895        Montreal Division No. 6     Patrick Kennedy
  1895-1904        Montreal Division No. 6     James John Edmund Guerin
  1904-1908        Montreal Division No. 6     Michael James Walsh
  1908-(election
     set aside)    Montreal Division No. 6     Denis Tansey
  1908-1912        Montreal Division No. 6     Michael James Walsh
  1890-1896        Hochelaga                   Joseph Octave Villeneuve
  1897-1904        Hochelaga                   Daniel Jerome Décarie
  1904-1912        Hochelaga                   Jérémie Décarie

                           (from 1912)

  1908            Jacques Cartier              Philémon Cousineau
  1908            Laval                        Joseph Wenceslas Lévesque
  1912            Maisonneuve                  The Hon. Jérémie Décarie
  1912            Montreal Dorion              Georges Mayrand
  1912            Montreal Hochelaga           Séverin Létourneau
  1912            Montreal Laurier             Napoléon Turcot
  1912            Montreal Ste. Anne           Denis Tansey
  1912            Montreal St. George          C. Ernest Gault
  1912            Montreal St. James           Clément Robillard
  1912            Montreal St. Lawrence        John T. Finnie
  1912            Montreal St. Louis           J.E. Godfroi Langlois
  1912            Montreal St. Mary            Napoléon Séguin
  1912            Westmount                    Charles Allan Smart

[Illustration: HON. LOMER GOUIN, K.C. Prime Minister of Province
of Quebec]

[Illustration: LORD STRATHCONA AND MOUNT ROYAL A High
Commissioner for Canada]

[Illustration: SIR WILFRID LAURIER A Prime Minister of Canada]

[Illustration: MONTREAL FOUNDED 1642 In 1905 this monument,
by Philippe Hébert, was erected to the memory of the first
Governor of Montreal, Paul de Chomedey, Sieur de Maisonneuve, and
commemorates, with its bas reliefs and supplementary statuary,
several of the principal personages and dramatic incidents in the
early days of the settlement.]


FOOTNOTES:

[1] Practically every bishop in the Province of Quebec issued an
amendment which tended to create Union and promote the acceptance
of Confederation. Cf. “The History of the Life and Times of Sir
George Etienne Cartier” by John Boyd (McMillan, Toronto, 1914),
pp. 288 et seq. The reader will find further interesting details
on the political life of Montreal of this period, in the above
work.




                          CHAPTER XXIII

        SUPPLEMENTAL ANNALS AND SIDELIGHTS OF SOCIAL LIFE

                       UNDER CONFEDERATION

                            1867-1914

  CONFEDERATION--IMPRESSIONS OF--FUNERAL OF D’ARCY M’GEE--PRINCE
    ARTHUR OF CONNAUGHT--THE SECOND FENIAN RAID--THE “SILVER”
    NUISANCE--ORGANIZATION OF CANADIAN PACIFIC RAILROAD--RUN ON
    A SAVINGS BANK--FUNERAL OF SIR GEORGE ETIENNE CARTIER--NEW
    BALLOT ACT--THE “BAD TIMES”--THE NATIONAL POLICY--THE ICE
    RAILWAY--THE CANADIAN PACIFIC RAILROAD CONTRACT--THE FORMATION
    OF THE ROYAL SOCIETY OF CANADA--OTHER CONGRESSES--THE
    FIRST WINTER CARNIVAL--FIFTIETH ANNIVERSARY OF ST. JEAN
    BAPTISTE ASSOCIATION--THE GREAT ALLEGORICAL PROCESSION AND
    CAVALCADE--THE MONUMENT NATIONAL--THE RIEL REBELLION--SMALLPOX
    EPIDEMIC AND RIOTS--THE FLOODS OF 1886--THE FIRST
    REVETMENT WALL--THE JESUITS ESTATES BILL AND THE EQUAL
    RIGHTS PARTY--LA GRIPPE--THE COMTE DE PARIS--ELECTRICAL
    CONVENTION--HISTORIC TABLETS PLACED--THE TWO HUNDRED AND
    FIFTIETH ANNIVERSARY OF VILLE MARIE--THE BOARD OF TRADE
    BUILDING BURNT--THE CITY RAILWAY ELECTRIFIED--HOME RULE FOR
    IRELAND--VILLA MARIA BURNT--THE “SANTA MARIA”--CHRISTIAN
    ENDEAVOURERS CONVENTION--THE CHATEAU DE RAMEZAY AS A PUBLIC
    MUSEUM--MAISONNEUVE MONUMENT--LAVAL UNIVERSITY--QUEEN
    VICTORIA’S DIAMOND JUBILEE--MONTREAL AND THE BOER WAR--THE
    VISIT OF THE DUKE AND DUCHESS OF CORNWALL--TURBINE STEAMERS--A
    JAPANESE LOAN COMPANY--FIRST AUTOMOBILE FATALITY--FIRES AT
    McGILL--ECLIPSE OF SUN--THE WINDSOR STATION ACCIDENT--THE
    “WITNESS” BUILDING BURNT--THE OPENING OF THE ROYAL EDWARD
    INSTITUTE--GREAT CIVIC REFORM--THE DEATH OF EDWARD VII--THE
    “HERALD” BUILDING BURNT--THE EUCHARISTIC CONGRESS--MONTREAL A
    WORLD CITY--THE DRY DOCK--THE “TITANIC DISASTER”--CHILD WELFARE
    EXHIBITION--MONTREAL AND THE WAR OF 1914.


The same foreword as that prefacing a preceding chapter is
similarly applicable here. The curious reader is warned to pursue
the history of the main movements indicated, in the second part
of special history.

Confederation was received with mixed feelings. There were
many of the _parti national_ who thought that Confederation
came too soon, that it had been hurried through without the
people thoroughly being instructed in the details and without
their being consulted, and that the French Canadians would be
politically annihilated, a foreboding never realized. It was
indeed the quietus to the _parti national_, who had opposed it
in their newspaper, the Union Nationale, established in 1865 by
Médéric Lanctot, which represented the views of the young blood
opposed to Cartier, such as Messrs. Joseph Loranger, Doutre,
Dorion, Judge Delorimier, Lanctot, Labelle, Laflamme and L.O.
David, then a brilliant writer on its staff. But in 1867 on the
advent of Confederation agitation ceased and the inevitable was
accepted with growing satisfaction. The country, however, was at
the time in a bad state, suffering from the abrogation of the
reciprocity treaty in 1866.

The year 1868 marks an important event in the French Canadian
life of the city, for it saw the Papal Zouaves leave Montreal on
February 7th, to fight in Italy against Garibaldi who wished to
curtail the temporal sovereignty of the papal throne. On February
15th the roof of St. Patrick’s Hall, the home of St. Patrick’s
National Society, at the south end of Craig Street, fell in. In
March the first 3-cent letter stamp was issued in Canada, and on
April 1st the first postoffice savings banks were opened. This
same month saw the assassination of D’Arcy McGee at Ottawa. His
funeral took place in Montreal on April 13th and was a great
public testimonial to his citizenship and to his devotion to his
adopted country.

Eighteen hundred and sixty-nine is remembered as the year the
present Governor General, H.R.H., the Duke of Connaught, then the
young Prince Arthur, a bright, frolicsome, light-hearted boy,
first came to the city, in August, to join his regiment, the
First Battalion of the Rifle Brigade. Rosemount, at the head of
Simpson Street, a house which was occupied by Sir John Rose, and
afterwards owned by the Ogilvie family, was set aside for him,
under the tutelage of Lord Elphinstone. His advent added to the
military and social gaiety of the small city. Among the brilliant
officers then in the city was Col. Garnett Wolseley, then known
only as a gallant officer who had served in the Crimea, who had
now gone on the Red River expedition to the Northwest to quiet
the first Riel rebellion, which occurred about this time, and who
lived, at this period, at 172 Havelock Terrace, Mountain Street,
above the Canadian Pacific Railway bridge. Another was General
Windham, who was buried in this city on February 12, 1870.

One of the acts of the young Prince was to open the Caledonia
skating rink on December 15th. A photograph of this represents
the Prince surrounded by such men as David Brown, A. McGibbon,
F. Gardner, Colonel Lord Russell, Mr. Hugh Allan, Mr. Andrew
Allan, Colonel Dyde, H. Hutchinson, the architect, and the Rev.
Dr. Robert Campbell. During his stay the Prince also opened the
Royal Arthur School on Workman Street, and conferred in the St.
Patrick’s Hall the order of St. Michael and St. George on Mr.
A.T. Galt,--a striking and unusual ceremony in those days.

The Sixth Art Exhibition was held in Montreal the next year on
March 8th and Prince Arthur was present.

The young Prince had more functions for he was soon to accompany
his regiment in repelling the second Fenian raid.

Meanwhile, about April 10, 1870, an intimation having been
received by the Dominion Government, from the British Minister
at Washington, of an intended Fenian raid into Canada, several
frontier corps were ordered to hold themselves in readiness for
immediate action. There was great military enthusiasm in the
city and by the end of the week all the battalions so ordered
were under arms. From Montreal, on the Monday following the
receipt of this information, Muir’s troop of cavalry was ordered
out and they arrived at Huntingdon on Tuesday afternoon, whither
also went Prince Arthur. Colonel Chamberlain had already gone
to Missisquoi to bring out the force under his command, whilst
a large force of the volunteers in Montreal was collected under
Lieutenant-Colonel Fletcher, the entire force being under Colonel
Lowry.

[Illustration: FUNERAL OF THOMAS D’ARCY McGEE]

[Illustration: FUNERAL OF THE LATE T.L. HACKETT AS SEEN COMING
DOWN ST. JAMES STREET]

The volunteer movement received an impetus and recruiting was
lively. During the following week the streets of Montreal
appeared gay with marching troops and sounds of martial music
from the many bands which were moving to and from the execution
of their military duties, now vividly recalled by the citizens of
that time who have lived to see the great call to arms of 1914.

The day after the Queen’s Birthday, May 25th, the band of 200
of these, misguided Fenians, under command of “General” O’Neil,
crossed the frontier and entered Canada, trying to effect a
lodgment at Pigeon Hill. A finely equipped little army of itself
in the shape of the Prince Consort’s Own Rifles (Regulars), 700
strong under command of Lord A. Russell and accompanied by our
present Governor-General, then Prince Arthur, went by special
train to St. Johns, where the volunteers had preceded them.

General Lindsay assumed command of the whole. The only fighting
that occurred was at Cook’s Corners, where the whole of the
Canadian troops did not exceed seventy men, though ample reserves
were in waiting at points near at hand. The actual fighting was
of no importance; it was a flash in the pan that made a great
scare.

On May 26th President Grant issued a proclamation against Fenian
raids into Canada and on May 30th in Montreal the mayor thanked
the volunteers for their services. Little had had to be done but
it was serious work mobilizing and there was much activity over
the city in preparation.

Several other events are to be recorded for this year, the
appearance of the Tyne Crew and the meeting to form the Dominion
Board of Trade. The Frazer Institute was incorporated in 1870 and
opened to the public in 1885 after a long delay from litigious
actions. This year the “silver” nuisance was lessened by the
export of $4,000,000 at a cost of $140,000, through the adoption
of the plan of Sir Francis Hincks and Mr. William Weir, afterward
president of the Ville Marie Bank.

In 1871 the first post cards issued by the Dominion postoffice
were welcomed in the city. In this year the fuller organization
of the Canadian Pacific Railway, organized by Montreal men, took
place and the preliminary surveys were made for which Parliament
had in 1870 appropriated $250,000.

On February 27, 1872, loyal Montreal observed the day as one of
thanksgiving for the recovery of the Prince of Wales. On April
27th the intense interest of Montrealers in the new railway
culminated in the voting on the million dollar railway subsidy.
October 2d of this year saw St. Patrick’s Hall burned down; a
run on the City and District Bank on the 7th, which was stopped
by a citizen’s large deposit and by the timely advice of the
Rev. Father Dowd, the pastor of St. Patrick’s parish; and on the
17th the city cars, then horse drawn, were stopped, owing to the
animals suffering from the epizooty. This year was marked by the
establishment of the first cotton mill at Hochelaga.

The memorable events of 1873 include the obtaining of the charter
of the Canadian Pacific Railway, the public funeral in Montreal,
on June 13th, of Sir George Etienne Cartier, who died in London
on May 20th at the age of fifty-nine years, the unveiling of the
statue of Queen Victoria by Lord Dufferin and the opening of the
Wesleyan Theological College and the new Y.M.C.A. building.

In 1874 the manifesto of the Canada First party was issued on
January 6th, preceding the general elections of January 29th.

In March the Queen’s Hall, the home of concerts and theatrical
entertainments, was burnt down.

In September, 1875, the reinterment of Guibord in the Catholic
cemetery took place under military escort.

On May 26th an act was passed that introduced vote by ballot,
simultaneous elections, the abolition of property qualifications
for members of the House of Commons and stringent enactments
against corrupt practices at elections. On June 6, 1876, the
Emperor and Empress of Brazil were entertained in this city.

This year was chiefly noticeable for trade depression and the
number of business failures. This was in consequence of the bad
times begun in 1874. On August 14th a great mass meeting was
called to consider the Montreal taxes. The country was in a poor
state after the abrogation of the reciprocity treaty with the
United States and was suffering from the reaction after the Civil
war.

In 1875 the Mechanics Bank and the Banque Jacques Cartier
suspended payment. The industries were very few and could not
compete with those of the States, and agriculture was feeble.
There were heavy duties to pay for the many goods coming from
the States. There was little population and many crossed the
border line. Work was scarce; there was great distress. People
were starving and free public soup kitchens were established for
poor relief by the charitable agencies. Funds were too low for
more liberal treatment. Politicians placed the blame on the free
trade policy of Mr. McKenzie’s party then in power. This was
opposed to the genius and the needs of a young country feeling
its industrial way. While the Americans had a duty at that time
of twenty to seventy per cent the Canadians for purely revenue
purposes had only something like fifteen per cent, and nothing
for protection. The occasion was one that demanded practical
relief and not finely strung political theories, built on the
experience of the custom prevailing in England. But nothing was
done so that the people became hopeless and gloomy and there was
a project about this time, as already recorded, for annexation,
encouraged by the American party in Montreal for business reasons.

Meanwhile the city saw, in June and July, of 1878, the Orange
troubles and the shooting of Hackett, a state of excitement no
doubt caused by the general unsettled state of affairs. The
great hope of this time was the national policy which Sir John
A. Macdonald began to make public. The effect was magical at
the start. In March, 1878, he expressed his opinion that to
be prosperous Canada must adopt a “national policy” for the
protection of home industries. It had to be fought out at the
polls. There was now hope in every breast. Financial men began
to look out for sites upon which to build mills and factories,
the sugar refineries were reopened, the people took heart and
when the policy carried at the polls in September by a tremendous
majority and was ratified by a formal vote in the house, and when
the national policy was introduced March 14, 1879, going into
effect next day, it was felt that Montreal and Canada were saved.
It was the remembrance of this that caused the older men to vote
against reciprocity when before the public in 1911.

A social event of this year was the investiture by the Marquis of
Lorne, Governor-General of Canada, authorized by Her Majesty, of
the six knights of the most distinguished Order of St. Michael
and St. Gregory.

On January 1, 1880, the South Eastern Railway began the
construction of a railway across the ice from the north side of
the river to the station between Bellerive Park and Longueuil
Ferry, across to Longueuil. The contractors were Auguste Laberge
& Son, who had built the city hall, its promoters being Mr.
Sénecal, A.B. Foster, Judge Mousseau, J.B. Renaud and others. On
the 29th of January loaded cars were drawn across to Montreal.
Next day an engine of 50,000 pounds avoirdupois crossed from
Montreal. On March 15th horses replaced the engines; on March
31st twenty cars were on the ice railway, when it began to be
found insecure so that the rails were removed from the ice on
April 1st.

In September the Governor General visited the exhibition at
Montreal, when 50,000 persons were present.

On October 1st the contract was signed for the Canadian Pacific
Railway, but at midnight on December 10th it was placed before
the House. On February 16th of the next year the company received
its letters patent and on May 2d broke the first ground for the
great transcontinental railway.

On December 23d of this year Sarah Bernhardt made her first
appearance here.

On January 5th, 1881, the South Eastern Railway laid a railway
again across the ice but it was shortly abandoned on the loss of
an engine by the freight train breaking through, without the loss
of life.

The next year, 1882, was one of intellectual progress in the city
for this year, on May 25th, the Royal Society of Montreal was
formed with Sir William Dawson, principal of McGill, as president.

On August 21st there were the meetings of the Forestry and
Agricultural congresses and on August 23d the American
Association for the Advancement of Learning again chose the city
for its convention after twenty-four years’ absence.

The first Montreal Winter Carnival was held in January, 1883,
and was the outgrowth of a suggestion by Mr. R.D. McGibbon, an
advocate of the city. One of the great features was the ice
palace, which was erected in Dominion Square, a mediaeval castle
of transparent crystal. The attack of 2,000 snowshoers, and the
defence by the volunteers, was a great scene amid the detonation
of bombshells and the interchange of pyrotechnic missles till
at last the castle capitulated. After this an immense line of
showshoers, each bearing aloft a blazing torch, scaled the
mountain in a seemingly endless trail of fire. This has been
repeated at more or less regular intervals but the fear that the
ice palace would harm prospective immigrants through unnecessary
fear of our bright, brisk and invigorating winter has caused the
carnival pageant to fall into desuetude. Yet the carnival is but
a development of the old frost fairs on the Thames, that most
known being on the occasion of the visit of Charles II and the
Royal Family to the Frost Fair of 1684, when the printers made a
souvenir as follows:

             Charles,   King       Mary,   Duchess
             James,     Duke       Anne,   Princess
             Katherine, Queen      George, Prince
                         Hans in Kilder
      London, printed by J. Croome on the ice on the River
                    Thames, Jan. 31st, 1684.

The month of June, 1884, was the scene of great festivity among
the French-Canadian population on the occasion of the fiftieth
anniversary of the foundation of the parent society of St.
Jean Baptiste Association of Montreal, being taken to hold a
national congress of French-Canadians from June 24th to the 28th,
to inaugurate the placing of the first stone of the Edifice
Nationale, which afterwards became the “Monument National.”
Outside of the literary, artistic and other intellectual sessions
of the congress there were public sports, balloon ascensions and
amusements, and a great procession of all the societies of St.
Jean Baptiste in Canada and the United States, when a magnificent
array of allegorical cars representing the chief features of
Canadian history passed through the principal streets of the city.

In addition there was a grand historical cavalcade representing
St. Louis, King of France, receiving the oriflamme of St. Denis
and departing for the Seventh Crusade. The dresses for this
dignified cavalcade cost about ten thousand dollars and the whole
spectacle was one that far surpassed any similar dramatic pageant
that had preceded it or has followed since in Canada.

On January 1, 1884, the River St. Lawrence again notably flooded
the lower part of Montreal as was usual in the spring.

On July 4, 1884, Louis Riel arrived at Duck Lake and began to
inflame the discontent in the half-breeds and Indians, who feared
dispossession of their lands by the incoming settlers and the
encroachment of the iron road of the Canadian Pacific Railroad.
This, together with the Soudan war then in progress, produced a
revival of the military spirit so that in the following year,
1885, Montreal sent the Sixty-fifth Regiment to suppress the
rebellion.

The Montreal contingent returned home at a critical juncture
and was employed to quell the anti-vaccination riots of 1885.
At this time a virulent epidemic of smallpox had broken out in
the city and a compulsory vaccination act had been passed which
was resented by a great portion of the people, many complaining
that the vaccine used had poisoned them, while others complained
on sentimental and medical grounds. It was a time of terror.
Mobs attacked the houses and even the persons of Larocque, Drs.
E. Persillier-Lachapelle, J.W. Mount, Hingston, and others, who
were before the public as the chief promoters of the vaccination
movement. Meanwhile the doctors appointed for each district had
their stations and went from door to door to vaccinate, while the
houses could be seen with their isolation papers posted on them
and with guards around and the yellow ambulances plying through
the streets, taking away the affected sick or the dead.

The friends of many of the victims refused to allow the patients
to be removed to the Exhibition grounds where a temporary
hospital had been arranged. All the local troops were called out.
The cavalry was there, too. A tremendous mob assembled at Mount
Royal and attacked it with stones. Many of the men received cuts
in the face. When the mob was at its worst, it was discovered
that there was no magistrate to read the riot act, and no
ammunition for the rifles, in case the rifles had to be used.
However, the cavalry rode through the crowds. A better feeling
finally prevailed, so that the patients were peaceably allowed to
be taken to the public hospital.

[Illustration: WINTER SPORTS IN MONTREAL: Skiing]

[Illustration: WINTER SPORTS IN MONTREAL: Snow shoeing]

[Illustration: WINTER SPORTS IN MONTREAL: The Ice Palace]

[Illustration: WINTER SPORTS IN MONTREAL: Hockey match at
Victoria Rink]

[Illustration: WINTER SPORTS IN MONTREAL: Toboggan slide on
Mount Royal]

The epidemic had important results in the effect it had on the
modernizing and reconstruction of the medical bureau of the city
hall.

The Montreal annals of 1886 for January 2d recall the meetings
of the famous evangelist, D.L. Moody. In the same month Sir John
A. MacDonald, while in England, defended French-Canadian loyalty
and affirmed at the same time that 40,000 of the best soldiers in
Canada were ready to leave to defend Imperial interests in Burmah
or Turkestan.

This year was signalized by Montreal’s worst inundation, so
that on April 17th from the foot of Beaver Hall Hill there was
a 5 cent ferry by boat and carts to St. James Street. The flood
abated on April 20th, after having been five feet, ten inches
above the revetment wall. A similar flood occurred next year and
a delegation went to Ottawa to arrange with the Government for
adequate protection. In consequence the following year a wooden
embankment, filled with cement, was built and pumping stations
were erected to protect Montreal from further inundations. This
revetment wall, however, gave place to the present one of stone.

On the 28th of June the first passenger train to the Pacific left
the city, reaching Vancouver on July 4th, a distance of 2,906
miles having been covered in 140 hours.

On May 12, 1888, the Quebec Parliament passed the Jesuits’
estates bill.

On September 3d the first labour day was celebrated in the city,
5,000 taking part in the procession.

During the next year, 1889, the Jesuits’ bill was contested by
the Equal Rights party; finally the Quebec Legislature paid
the Jesuits $400,000 which was further divided among Catholic
educational bodies and an additional sum of $60,000 was turned
over to the Protestant Board of Education.

The year 1890 opened with la grippe which was then prevalent in
the United States, Canada and Europe.

On May 6th the lunatic asylum at Longue Pointe was burnt down
with the loss of seventy lives, owing to the incendiarism of a
patient.

This year saw the reception of the Comte de Paris and his son.
The reception tendered them was a brilliant affair. Not only
the French population but the English also received them most
royally, although a counter demonstration was started by a few
revolutionary spirits, but they had no following and their
efforts came to nothing.

The annals of 1891 recall the arrival in the city, on August
21st, of the Continental Guards from New Orleans.

On September 8th there was the first electrical convention and
this was followed on September 18th by the Montreal Exhibition,
which took place on the former Guilbeault’s zoological and
pleasure grounds above Mount Royal Avenue, these having been
moved from the first location on Sherbrooke Street, the
attendance at the exhibition being 50,000, surpassing those of
1880, 1881, 1883 and 1884.

Lovers of the antiquities of the city will note the date of
October 21st, as that of the historic tablets being unveiled
under the auspices of the Numismatic and Antiquarian Society
of Montreal, the movement having been promoted by Messrs. W.D.
Lighthall with the aid of A.U. Beaudry, Gerald Hart and others of
a subsequent committee.

The fifth jubilee of the founding of Montreal occurred in 1892.
As early as April 17, 1888, a resolution was passed by the above
association to celebrate it by an international exhibition
in 1892. In October of 1888, Mr. Roswell Corse Lyman, one of
its members, wrote a pamphlet “Shall we have a World’s Fair
in Montreal in 1892 to celebrate the two hundred and fiftieth
anniversary of the founding of Ville Marie?” It never eventuated
in this city, but Montreal can rightly claim that through this
pamphlet and the Montreal initiation the wonderful Chicago
World’s Fair of 1893 had its origin.

In April many Jewish families left Montreal to colonize the
Northwest.

April of 1893 opened with three incendiary fires and on April 3d
Bonsecours Market was partially burnt with a loss of $20,000,
without insurance. On May 18th the cornerstone of the new Board
of Trade Building was laid by Sir Donald Smith, who humorously
remarked that he had come down from Ottawa as a common labourer,
but that his brother member of Parliament, Mr. J.J. Curran,
afterward the Hon. Mr. Justice Curran, had come to make a
speech. On May 28th the will of Mr. J.W. Tempest was published,
bequeathing the Art Association of Montreal about $80,000. One of
the first benefactors to this had been Mr. Benajah Gibb, a former
citizen.

At the second congress of the Chambers of Commerce of the Empire,
held in London from June 28th to July 1st, the Montreal Board
of Trade was represented by Mr. Donald A. Smith and Mr. Peter
Redpath.

On July 5th, Sir William Dawson welcomed the Teachers’
Association to the city.

This year the street railway of Montreal was electrified and city
planners saw the beginning of the present leap in the growth of
Montreal through its suburbs following on the annexations which
began in 1883.

On July 19th the city granted a thirty years’ franchise to the
Street Railway Company.

In 1893 the progress of McGill University since 1852 was made
manifest. University life was enlivened in this city on January
20th, when the students of the universities of Vermont and
McGill held a joint concert in the city. At this time McGill
had sixty-six professors. In April the chairs of pathology and
hygiene were founded by the chancellor, Sir Donald A. Smith.
McGill was benefited this year by the addition of the engineering
and physics building, the gift of (Sir) William C. Macdonald, by
the workshops, the gift of Thomas Workman, the library, by Peter
Redpath, and the new Aberdeen medal, given by the new Governor
General, Lord Aberdeen. But in the midst of the triumphs of this
year, McGill regretfully received the resignation of Sir William
Dawson, whom it had received as its principal in 1852, the year
of its second lease of life.

On February 23d the International Mining Association met in
Montreal.

On April 24, 1893, the interest of Montrealers in Imperial
politics was manifested by the telegram of St. Patrick’s Society
to the Canadian statesman, the Hon. E.S. Blake, a member of
Parliament for an English constituency, to congratulate Mr.
Gladstone and himself on the second reading of the Home Rule bill.

[Illustration: A GROUP OF MONTREAL RESIDENCES]

[Illustration: Residence of Sir William C. Van Horne]

[Illustration: Residence of the Hon. Dr. James J. Guerin,
Ex-Mayor of Montreal]

[Illustration: “Ravenscrag,” residence of Sir Hugh Montagu Allan]

[Illustration: Montreal residence of Lord Strathcona and Mount
Royal]

[Illustration: Residence of the late Hon. Sir William Hales
Hingston]

[Illustration: Residence of the late Charles M. Hays, Esq.]

On May 1st there was held the first meeting of the Corn Exchange
in its newly erected building. On the 23d Montreal was visited
by the tornado which passed over the province, but without much
injury or death.

On June 8th, Villa Maria, belonging to the “Congregation”
Sisters, one of the largest educational structures on the
American continent, was destroyed by fire.

On June 19th the three caravels, intended as the facsimiles of
the ships of Columbus, were at Montreal on their way to the
World’s Fair at Chicago. In the summer of 1914 one of them, the
Santa Maria, reappeared at Montreal on a long tour in preparation
for the Panama Exhibition at San Francisco in 1915.

The harbour also saw in July the arrival of the warship Etna.
July witnessed a great convention of many thousands of an
unsectarian body named the Christian Endeavourers. This year
the railways of Montreal were flourishing and the fact that
132 trains were daily entering by the Canadian Pacific and
Grand Trunk railways show the steady growth of the population
and commerce. The earnings of the Canadian Pacific Railway had
increased by almost five million dollars since 1887.

On October 30th the city mourned the loss by death of a great
Montrealer, the late Sir John Joseph Caldwell Abbott, K. C, M.G.,
a former mayor of the city and a prime minister of Canada. His
burial took place on November 2d and his remains were followed
by his successor, Sir John Thompson, and by many hundreds of the
leaders of Canada.

The most important event closing the year of 1893 was the
inauguration of the Royal Victoria Hospital in honour of Her
Majesty, Queen Victoria.

On November 27th, Montreal experienced a shock of earthquake
which was felt over Canada with no loss of life and little of
property.

In 1894, Sir William Van Horne, the president of the Canadian
Pacific Railway, and one of its pioneers, was knighted.

This year closed on December 31st with one of the greatest
windstorms ever recorded in the history of Montreal, the velocity
of the wind reaching eighty miles per hour, so that much damage
was done.

In 1894, the first attempt towards a public portrait gallery,
a museum of antiquities and the securing of the Château de
Ramezay as its permanent home originated with the members of the
Antiquarian Society of Montreal, the idea of the picture gallery
arising with Mr. de Léry MacDonald, that of saving the Château
from passing into private hands, with Mr. Roswell Lyman, and
the employment of it as a public historical museum by Mr. W.D.
Lighthall, which was promoted by a petition to the mayor and
aldermen organized by Mr. R.W. McLachlan and others and signed
by about three thousand principal citizens. The agitation was
successful and the first reception was given in the Château de
Ramezay on November 11, 1897.

The next year, 1895, was marked with the inauguration of other
public movements. On June 6th the statue of Sir John A. MacDonald
was unveiled in Dominion Square by Sir Donald A. Smith and the
Maisonneuve monument by Phillipe Hébert was unveiled on the
Place d’Armes on Monday, July 1st, by the Hon. J.A. Chapleau,
lieutenant governor of the Province of Quebec, the president of
the committee being M.S. Pagnuelo and the secretary being the
Vicomte H. de la Barthe. This was followed on October 8th by the
inauguration of the new edifice of the Montreal branch of Laval
University, but recently established in the city.

In 1896, Sir Donald A. Smith, later Lord Strathcona, was
appointed High Commissioner for Canada. Another prominent
Montreal citizen, Mr. Charles M. Hays, was appointed general
manager of the Grand Trunk Railway.

Among the notable city events of 1897 were the meeting, in
Montreal, of the Behring Sea Commissioners on June 16th, the
celebration of the first day of Queen Victoria’s Diamond Jubilee,
the consecration on June 30th of His Grace, Archbishop Bruchesi,
by the Apostolic delegate, Mgr. Merry del Val, and the great
meeting of the British Medical Society on August 31st.

In 1898 the public benefactions of a notable citizen, Sir William
C. MacDonald, were rewarded by a knighthood.

January 1, 1899, is memorable as the day when the reduction of
the 3 cent postage stamp to 2 cents came into force.

This year also marked the progress of the movement for the
higher education of women by the opening of the Royal Victoria
College for Women, being endowed with a gift of $1,000,000 by the
chancellor of the University of McGill, Lord Strathcona.

This year being that of the beginning of the Boer war, Montreal
again shared in the Imperial burden by providing a considerable
part of the Canadian contingents for service in South Africa,
it being represented in the first contingent by Company E,
which sailed on October 30, 1899, and more largely in the
second contingent which departed on January 4, 1900. The famous
Strathcona Horse of three squadrons with 597 of all ranks sailed
on March 1, 1900. During the progress of the war the citizens
were actively engaged in promoting the patriotic fund and in
works of providing comforts for the soldiers and those left
behind by them.

During the course of 1900 the statue of Queen Victoria by
Princess Louise was unveiled by the Governor General, Lord Minto.

The year 1901 was ushered in by the disastrous fire which
destroyed the Board of Trade and many other commercial buildings
on St. Paul Street to the extent of $2,500,000 loss. The new
building was raised on the same site and was taken possession of
on May 1, 1903.

On September 18, 1902, Montreal was honoured by the royal
visit of the Duke and Duchess of Cornwall, who are now happily
reigning as King George V and Queen Mary. The loyalty of the
city was manifested as on previous royal visits, the city being
magnificently decorated and illuminated.

The growing importance of Montreal as a factor in Imperial
commerce was demonstrated in the following year, 1903, when the
Chambers of Commerce of the Empire met in the city.

The destruction by fire of the Mount Royal Club, frequented by
the wealthiest and most important citizens, taking place this
year is another sidelight calling attention to the growth of
club life since the old Beaver Club days. Other clubs had, in
the meantime, been established in great numbers to cope with the
growth of its needs.

In 1905 the first turbine steamers to cross the Atlantic, the
Virginian and Victorian, of the Allan Line, were placed on the
St. Lawrence route, a fact showing that navigation methods at
Montreal have always kept abreast with the times. This same year
the value of new buildings erected was $5,590,698.

The year 1904 opened with a terrible conflagration at St.
Cunégonde on January 18th.

On June 4th, Lord Dundonald, on military service in Canada, made
his famous arraignment at the Windsor Hotel of his government,
for which he was recalled on June 14th. The harbour this year
showed the prevalent great commercial development when an
elevator capable of holding 1,000,000 bushels was erected. On the
22d of August the Manufacturers’ Association held a great banquet
at the Windsor Hotel. In November, Patti made her last appearance
in the city to be followed on January 5, 1905, by Rejanne, both
of these latter appearances chronicling the position of Montreal
as a musical and dramatic centre. Since then great singers, such
as Calvé, Albani, Caruso and others have each triumphed here, as
have the leading instrumental artists.

The Russo-Japanese war was the occasion of a subscription for
a Japanese loan being started on March 31st. On August 22d
Royalty again visited Montreal in the person of Prince Louis of
Battenberg.

In 1906 the Labour party in Montreal elected a labour
representative, M. Alphonse Verville, for Maisonneuve. This year
St. Helen’s Island was secured for the people of Montreal by a
purchase by the city from the Federal Government for $200,000.

In this year the advent of the automobile era is recorded at
Montreal by the first fatality occurring, on August 11th, in the
death of one named Toutant.

In 1907 the early months saw the burning of the Protestant school
at Hochelaga and the civil engineering and medical buildings of
McGill University. On April 1st the old Theatre Royal, which had
fallen from the high palmy days into flagrant spectacles of a low
class of vaudeville, was interdicted by the Archbishop Bruchesi
and its final doom occurred a few years later.

The Bremen, one of the first German cruisers to visit this port,
arrived on August 25, 1907. A significant sidelight of a phase
of the continued growth of Montreal is the signing, on November
7th, of the contract for the building of the new city prison at
Bordeaux. This year the temperance movement was greatly forwarded
by the foundation of the Anti-Alcoolique League on December 29th.

International trade expansion was demonstrated in Montreal on
February 5th, when the Marconi commercial telegraph service was
installed.

The eclipse of the sun of 1908 was visible at Montreal on July
22d.

In 1909 a great accident took place in the Windsor Station by
a train running off the tracks causing damage to the extent of
$200,000, but with the loss, however, of only four lives.

The shipping in the port this year was increased by the advent
of the White Star Liners, S.S. Laurentic on May 7th, and S.S.
Megantic on June 27th. On the 27th of August the steamship
Prescott was burnt in the harbour. The “Back to Montreal”
movement recalled citizens to their homes for the week beginning
September 13th, while the following day saw the closing of the
civic investigation into aldermanic scandals at the city hall to
be followed by the “Cannon Report.”

On September 23d the Witness Building was gutted by fire. In
October the Royal Edward Tuberculosis Institute, the first of
its kind in Canada, was opened by telegraph from England by His
Majesty, King Edward, who gave the name to the building. The last
day of the year ended with a gas explosion at Viger Station with
the loss of thirty-eight lives.

The year 1910 is memorable for the triumph of civic reform and
the establishment of the Board of Control, owing to a change in
the city charter, as the outcome of the referendum to the people
in 1909, to stop which an aldermanic delegation to the Provincial
Legislature had been fruitless.

In the year in question the electors were asked to vote on these
two vital questions:

Do you approve of the creation of a Board of Control?

Do you approve of one alderman a ward instead of two?

The answer given to both of the queries was overwhelmingly in the
affirmative. The following figures prove this beyond the question
of a doubt:

           SUMMARY OF THE VOTE

                                   Votes.

  For reduction of aldermen        19,585
  Against reduction                 1,640
                                   ------
      Majority in favor            17,945

  For Board of Control             18,528
  Against Board of Control          2,413
                                   ------
      Majority in favor            16,115

There was not a single ward, throughout the city, which did not
favour the proposed changes and no less than 34 per cent of the
entire vote was polled on this memorable occasion.

On May 6th, His Majesty, King Edward, died and loyal Montreal
grieved as a city with majestic and magnificent emblems of
sorrow over all the public buildings. On the occasion of the
royal funeral in Westminster Abbey the city was represented
by His Worship the mayor, Dr. J.J. Guerin. In preparation for
this event the high commissioner of Canada, Lord Strathcona, in
London, protested against the inferior position given to the
representatives of autonomous colonies of the Empire and his
timely intervention was generously acted upon.

The Montreal trade fleet again was reinforced in 1910 by the
advent on May 11th of the Royal Edward from Bristol, the first
of the Canadian Northern Railway steamers. On the 28th, of the
same month, transportation was effected by the inauguration of
the electric tramway between Longueuil and McGill streets via the
Victoria Bridge.

In June the Herald Building, facing Victoria Square was destroyed
by fire with the loss of thirty-three lives. During this month
M. de Lesseps, of aviation fame, was received in the city hall,
while on November 27th the city was visited by the Marquis de
Montcalm, a name honoured in the city from the general who made
Montreal his headquarters under the French régime.

In October a flight, however, has to be recorded--that of the
plausible financial gambler, Sheldon, who had ruined many widows
among his dupes. He was, however, captured in the following year
and sentenced to five years’ imprisonment.

But the Eucharistic Congress of 1910, held in Montreal, at the
choice of the Catholic world, was an event before which all
others of a social character have paled during recent years.
It was prepared for long in advance as a great civic occasion,
irrespective of its denominational character. The railway and
steamship companies, the civic authorities and public bodies
fitly put forth all their strength to make Montreal realize its
now acknowledged position as a world city, which its choice
connoted.

  All was in readiness when Cardinal Vincenzo Vannutelli, at
  the end of August, came to Quebec on the Empress of Britain,
  to represent His Holiness, Pius X. There in the old City of
  Champlain the eminent visitor was honourably and worthily
  entertained. After this the Government tugboat, the Lady Grey,
  and the Government steamboat Montmagny, with prominent members
  of the legislature and leading citizens, accompanied by other
  vessels, eighty yachts, motor boats, etc., went down to meet the
  delegate on the way up the river. Meanwhile great crowds were
  gathered to receive the party on the wharf, but the flotilla
  entered the port on Saturday afternoon, September 3d, in a
  downpour of torrential rain. At the foot of McGill Street, on
  the wharf, a splendid kiosk, topped with a handsome cupola,
  was crowded with the civic functionaries, who shortly left on
  receiving the Cardinal and the whole party were forced to adjourn
  to the city hall, where the ceremony of further reception by the
  mayor, Dr. James J. Guerin, was more worthily and comfortably
  performed. The rain, however, had not prevented the ringing
  of church bells and the shrill whistling of half a hundred
  steamships and numerous factories and the crowds of the expectant
  citizens from voicing a welcome. From the city hall, the Papal
  representative proceeded to the residence of Archbishop Bruchesi,
  who had organized the congress, to be held in Montreal, the first
  place in the new world to be so honoured by this national event,
  a sign of the growing recognition of the place of Montreal in the
  cities of the world. The Archbishop’s house was to be the home of
  the Minister for the week.

  On Tuesday evening the formal opening of the congress took
  place in St. James’ Church on Dominion Square, amid picturesque
  religious ceremonies and brilliant ecclesiastical functions that
  surpassed anything previous on this continent. The delegate
  opened his remarks by a recognition of the enthusiastic reception
  given him by the provincial and municipal authorities, as well as
  by all classes. Archbishop Bruchesi, in his address of welcome,
  recognized the kindly feelings which other creeds had manifested
  towards the congress, how many prominent non-Catholic citizens,
  such as Lord Strathcona, had given their help in various
  practical ways in demonstrations of a high spiritual belief
  in the Unseen which the congress portended for all. Various
  telegrams were sent to Pius X at Rome and to George V in London
  expressing gratitude for the recent modification made by him in
  the form of the royal declaration which had continued till then
  to contain obsolete and obnoxious discriminations against a loyal
  part of his subjects.

  It may also be noted here that at the luncheon given that day
  at the Windsor Hotel by Sir Lomer Gouin, prime minister of the
  Province of Quebec, the Cardinal, proposing the health of the
  King, congratulated the Canadians on the liberty that had been
  assured them under the British King who had shown how he could
  respect the legitimate susceptibilities of his Roman Catholic
  subjects throughout the Empire.

  In the evening of this day, September 7th, the representative of
  the Federal Government, the Hon. Charles Murphy, Secretary of
  State of Canada, gave his official reception, which was attended
  by the largest throng of citizens that ever had entered this
  hotel. That night, midnight high mass was celebrated at the Notre
  Dame Church, which commenced when the great bell in the west
  tower, weighing 24,600 pounds, pealed out the hour of midnight,
  and the files of thousands of the representatives of the secular
  clergy and of the religious orders, and the laity, with prelates
  of a dozen different nations, assisted at a memorable occasion.

  The practical work of the congress began on Thursday, September
  8th. There were thirteen sessions held in the various large halls
  of the city, and in addition there were three general meetings
  held, two at Notre Dame Church and one in the Arena, at which
  three the Cardinal Legate presided. On two successive evenings,
  September 8th and 9th, 15,000 people crowded into the great
  entrance of Notre Dame to hear the most distinguished French and
  English speakers of the congress. Among those who spoke were His
  Eminence, Cardinal Logue, Primate of Armagh, Ireland; Archbishop
  Bourne, of Westminster, England; Archbishop Ireland, of St.
  Paul, Minnesota; Monsignor Heylen, of Namur; Monsignor Touchet,
  of Orleans; Monsignor Rumeau, of Angers; Hon. Judge O’Sullivan,
  of New York; Sir Wilfrid Laurier, Sir Lomer Gouin, the Hon.
  Thomas Chapais, and the Hon. C.J. Doherty, Henri Bourassa and
  J.M. Tellier, members of the federal and provincial governments
  of Canada. The sacred edifice, capable of seating 15,000, was
  crammed to the utmost, hundreds upon hundreds standing for two or
  three hours.

  The enthusiasm was intense and the sacred edifice rang with
  unwonted applause. The sanctuary and the stalls were filled
  with brilliant ecclesiastical costumes and gay uniforms and
  the church was a mass of colour. Perhaps the most electrical
  moment of the evening was after the plea of the Archbishop of
  Westminster advocating, before this vast audience which was for
  the most part composed of French-Canadians of the Province of
  Quebec, a more general adoption of the English language to meet
  the changing conditions of Greater Canada, when Henri Bourassa,
  who had already been appointed to speak at this point, took the
  psychological opportunity of the occasion so temptingly offered
  him, to voice the aroused thoughts of his compatriots to whom
  their language, religion and racial traditions seemed inseparably
  bound. His words were punctuated with thundering applause and the
  waving of hats and hands amid a scence of vibrant national and
  religious feeling, the while the people hung upon the word of
  the speaker, who for the nonce was but the mouth-piece of their
  individual thoughts made a scene which the writer will never
  forget as an instance of a clever orator speaking under the best
  and most popular surroundings.

  The third meeting, at the Arena, was composed of about eight
  thousand young men who were addressed by the Cardinal,
  Archbishhop Langevin, of Manitoba, and by Mr. Henri Bourassa on
  “Noble Ideals and Inspirations.” Both speakers urged them to hold
  to their traditions and national rights. There was plenty of room
  for English and French in Canada. Both could work out a noble
  destiny in this young and growing country.

  Another, but one of the most appealing spectacles of the
  congress, was the procession of 30,000 school children who,
  wearing picturesque dresses and bearing emblems and banners,
  passed constantly before the Legate who was seated on the steps
  of St. James’ Cathedral and received their individual courtesy,
  the while he bestowed his blessing amid the thousands of
  spectators assembled around Dominion Square, the whole making a
  magnificent and unusual sight lasting for three hours, during
  which time all traffic in the neighbourhood was absolutely
  blocked.

  The historic Mount Royal has witnessed many picturesque scenes
  but none more so than the great open air mass celebrated on
  Saturday, September 10th, at the foot of the mountain on the
  great open space below Mount Royal Avenue, where a superb and
  ornate altar, open to the winds of heaven, had been placed.
  Around it were 100 bishops, 2,000 priests in their picturesque
  costumes, and 200,000 of the faithful. A choir of 1,000 voices
  responded to the chaunts of the celebrant, Monsignor Farley,
  Archbishop of New York. Monsignor O’Connell, of Boston, and a
  Dominican priest, Father Hage, preached to all who could hear
  their voices. During the solemn celebration the Cardinal Legate
  arrived at St. Patrick’s Church, where another function was
  being held, and on his way to the altar he had to walk over a
  path carpeted with flowers, and there pausing, he bestowed his
  blessing on the kneeling multitude.

  The supreme moment of the congress was to come in the great
  procession the following day. For weeks the long route from the
  Church of Notre Dame to the foot of Mount Royal, where stood the
  altar already described, had been given over to architects and
  workmen; tall handsome arches, things of beauty, had been raised
  here and there along the route, one of them being made of wheaten
  sheaves sent from the Western Canadian prairies. Thousands of
  Venetian columns, obelisks, pedestals and flag poles lined the
  streets; flags of all nations and innumerable electrical signs
  adorned the housefronts.

  The forenoon of Sunday was spent in completing the details of
  the procession and precisely at 1 o’clock files of men, six
  abreast, began to move past the doors of Notre Dame and, like
  the corps of an immense army, then swung into the route of the
  procession. Long before the route had been densely thronged, and
  the mountain slopes thickly covered with expectant onlookers, for
  the various railways centering in Montreal had reduced their
  passenger rates in every direction within a radius of hundreds
  of miles and trains laden with humanity had followed each other
  at close intervals and unloaded their thousands all day Saturday
  and during the early hours of Sunday. It is estimated by the
  railway authorities that 200,000 strangers entered Montreal in
  twenty-four hours to witness the procession. For hours before it
  began the whole route was lined with people patiently waiting,
  while at the foot of the mountain near the altar of repose at
  least 75,000 had gathered, 20,000 of whom had been there from
  early morning. It was an extraordinary spectacle to look from the
  top of the mountain and see the mass of human beings moving in
  every direction over the immense sward, all eventually turning
  towards the handsome repository with its overtopping dome, the
  whole a design of great architectural beauty. Downtown at 1
  o’clock began the greatest demonstration of any kind, civic or
  religious, that Canada ever witnessed. During four hours and a
  half, between fifty and sixty thousand men marched silently and
  prayerfully between at least half a million spectators lining
  the route. The demonstration was international in its widest
  extent. Citizens of the United States and Canada, together
  with Lithuanians, Chinese, Syrians, Iroquois Indians in their
  tribal costumes and feathers, Italians, Poles and a dozen other
  nationalities besides, carrying their distinctive banners and
  religious emblems, marched in one solid phalanx and in perfect
  order.

  But the most imposing spectacle of all was that following the
  lay sections at 4 o’clock, when 1,000 choir boys, clothed in red
  cassocks and surplices, followed by the Christian Brotherhoods,
  hundreds of seminarians and the various religious orders of
  the city took their place in the great procession; then came
  2,000 priests in sacerdotal vestments, followed in order of
  precedence by 100 bishops and archbishops, in cope and mitre. In
  the rear of the papal officers and chamberlains came the huge
  golden baldachino under which walked the tall majestic figure of
  Cardinal Vannutelli, carrying the Sacred Host and accompanied
  on both sides by ecclesiastical guards of honour and soldiers,
  with children busily swinging censers and strewing flowers in
  his path, the while the dense multitude, irrespective of creed,
  bowed in the reverential awe of the moment. Behind the baldachino
  walked Cardinals Logue and Gibbons, the prime minister of Canada,
  Sir Wilfrid Laurier, the speaker of the House of Commons, members
  of the federal and provincial governments, members of the
  legislative council, the mayor of Montreal, the chief justice
  and judges of the Superior Court of Canada, all in their robes
  of office, members of the city council and a long line of men
  belonging to the liberal professions. When these last bands
  accompanying the Legate arrived it was already growing dusk and
  the electric lights on the waiting altar glowed in the gloom. A
  thousand voices entoned the Tantum Ergo, the Cardinal ascended
  the steps, took the remonstrance containing the Sacred Host
  and, raising it aloft over the 200,000 men, women and children
  kneeling on the grass, gave the benediction of the congress.

  The congress was over. Lights went out and the bishops and their
  attendant clergy retired to the neighbouring convent of the Hôtel
  Dieu to doff their robes, marching down Pine Avenue chanting
  the Gregorian “Te Deum,” which sounded like the war song of the
  priests, and gradually the vast multitude dispersed to their
  homes.

The events of the succeeding year of 1911 recall the general
federal elections on July 11th on the question of a renewal of
reciprocity with the United States when, as has been said, it was
rejected by an overwhelming majority of the electorate, notably
in Montreal.

Harbour development was signalized this year by the signing of
the contract with the Canadian Vickers Company for the new dry
docks at the east end, and on October 4th in fitting recognition
to a great harbour builder, the monument of the Hon. John
Young was unveiled on the water front by Earl Grey. Meanwhile
the general city development and expansion had been steadily
increasing since the annexations of 1883. Its population and
religions were becoming increasingly cosmopolitan and domestic
troubles among the Mohammedans of the city on July 10th
sufficiently indicate this.

The year 1912 is memorable at Montreal through the sorrow caused
in the city by the loss of the White liner S.S. Titanic, a
huge vessel with a displacement of 60,000 tons, which struck
a submerged iceberg off Cape Race on April 14th with the loss
of 1,600 souls on board. While the whole world thrilled with
horror at the new revelation of the dangers of the sea to modern
leviathans, Montreal had its particular grief in the loss of some
of its respected citizens, Charles M. Hays, president of the
Grand Trunk Railway system, Markland Molson, Thornton Davidson,
Vivian Payne, Q. Baxter, R.J. Levy, Mr. and Mrs. H. Allison and
daughter, and Albert Malette.

The churches of the city universally mourned this world-wide
disaster at the services of April 21st.

The month of October is memorable as the occasion of the great
educational Child Welfare Exhibition held for a fortnight under
the auspices of the humanitarian societies of the city in the
Craig Street Drill Hall, and drawing immense crowds.

The year 1913 was remarkable for the extraordinary activity in
building operations. As elsewhere related in the special chapter
on City Improvement, Montreal gave more evidences of being a
modern New York rather than the Ville Marie of old. It may be
called the year of the great real estate boom.

But the last weeks of this year will stand out in civic history
as a serious warning of the possibility of a city being deprived
of its water supply for a long period with the additional terror
of fire and disease. For 193 hours, beginning with Christmas
night, the greater part of Montreal was deprived of water by the
breaking of the concrete conduit at Lachine. Its story is told
elsewhere.

The year 1914 has been one of the greatest gloom. Shortly before
3 o’clock early in the morning of May 29th the disquieting news
was flashed from Quebec to Commander J.T. Walsh, superintendent
of the Canadian Pacific Steamship Company, that about 2:30
o’clock its greatest steamer, the Empress of Ireland, had been
struck about thirty miles east of Farther Point, but without
further information. Shortly another report told that it had
been struck by the Storstad, a Norwegian collier bound for
Montreal, and was sinking rapidly in sight of Rimouski. At first
the news was not credited as possible, but it was too true. The
ship sank almost immediately, being struck in the bowels and
filling straightway with water. Montrealers felt the disaster
most keenly, as its sister ships have their headquarters here and
its officers were men personally known on the St. Lawrence and
the Montreal route. Of the total 1,367 souls on board, 959 lives
were lost and less than four hundred saved. The disaster was
faced with courage and sympathetic humanitarianism by the many
officers of the company who journeyed down to Quebec and spared
no effort by night or day to make the tragedy less painful to the
relatives of the survivors. The sailor institutions of Montreal
on this occasion were glad to cooperate with those of Quebec and
supervised the sad task of identifying the drowned and burying
the bodies of the sailors as they were rescued from the waters
or the shores of Rimouski and taken to the mournful morgues at
Quebec.

Towards the end of July, 1914, war was declared between Austria
and Servia. This involved Germany on the side of Austria, and
Russia and France on the side of Servia, and on August 30th
Great Britain because of Germany breaking the neutrality of
Belgium, entered what was to be the most devastating war in
the history of nations. Canada at once declared her loyalty to
the Motherland in a very practical way. The Federal government
presented 3,000,000 bags of flour and raised a contingent of
33,000 of her best men. The Provinces vied with each other in
contributing huge quantities of wheat, flour, apples, and in
the case of the Province of Quebec, 2,000,000 pounds of cheese.
A National Patriotic Fund was started with branches in every
municipality throughout the Dominion--Montreal’s contribution
totalling $2,000,000, in addition to which a Montreal citizen, A.
Hamilton Gault, gave $500,000 to raise a regiment to be composed
of veterans. This regiment of 1,000 picked men was named after
the daughter of the Governor-General, the Duke of Connaught,
the “Princess Patricia Light Infantry” and joined the first
contingent, which left Canada on October 2nd, in thirty-one
transports, principally vessels trading to Montreal, and under
eleven convoys. This armada, which was the largest that ever
sailed the Atlantic seas, reached Plymouth, October 16th, and
the contingent was immediately entrained to Salisbury Plain to
complete its training. Montreal contributed 3,200 men towards
this first contingent. Their arrival in England was the occasion
of much popular satisfaction at this great spectacle of Imperial
union.

[Illustration: HOMES OF PROMINENT MONTREAL CITIZENS]

[Illustration: “Rokeby,” the residence of A. Hamilton Gault.]

[Illustration: Residence of the Hon. Sir George A. Drummond,
K.C.M.G.]

[Illustration: Summer residence of Hon. J.A. Ouimet, St. Anne de
Bellevue]

[Illustration: Country residence of Sir Rodolphe Forget, M.P., at
Ste Irénée on the St. Lawrence]

[Illustration: “Villa des Epinettes,” summer residence of Isaie
Prefontaine, Belle Isle]

Whatever doubts there might have been in the minds of some people
as to the responsibility of Canada in the Boer war there was
absolutely none in this crisis. The spontaneity of the Canadian
people in rising to their privileges as British citizens has
never been so pronounced. Every man and every woman in the
Dominion, irrespective of national origin, wanted to do something
to aid the Motherland. And Montreal was in the van.

Immediately the first contingent embarked the government decided
on raising a second and recruiting started afresh. While the
French-Canadians of the country had contributed 2,146 to the
first contingent, being the more notable contribution of Canadian
born subjects, the majority of the volunteers were those who were
British born. But now the French-Canadians of the city determined
to raise a regiment composed entirely of their compatriots to
be called “Le Régiment Royal Canadien” and over three thousand
men applied for admission. The Irish-Canadians, too, raised a
regiment for home defense named the “Fifty-fifth Irish Canadian
Rangers” with the Minister of Justice, the Hon. Charles J.
Doherty, as Honorary Lieutenant Colonel. The neighbouring city of
Westmount, under the direction of the mayor and council, raised
the “Westmount Rifles” and even the suburban town of Outremont
raised an artillery battery of 105 men. A number of prominent
citizens of Montreal, on the initiative of Mr. J.N. Greenshields,
K.C., equipped and are sustaining a “Home Guard” of 3,000 at
their own expense. Towards the Patriotic Fund the local councils
contributed as follows: Montreal, $150,000; Westmount, $5,000;
Outremont, $5,000; Maisonneuve, $2,000; Verdun, $3,000; and the
smaller municipalities lesser but proportionate amounts. These
funds are being augumented daily.

The war affected Montreal in another way, industrially and
financially. On the declaration of war the banks called in
their loans and though the government came to their aid in the
negotiation of their collateral the fact of the stoppage of
capital from Great Britain disorganized the industrial machinery
of the country and thousands were thrown out of employment.
In addition to this the forcible internment of the Germans
and Austrians, of which 3,400 were in Montreal alone, caused
much anxiety to the authorities, for none would employ them.
A delegation from Montreal waited upon the acting premier,
Sir George Foster, November 2d, asking for the cooperation of
the Government in alleviating the general distress. This Sir
George promised as far as the interned enemies were concerned,
but thought each municipality should take the responsibility of
looking after its own unemployed.

Montreal at this period was like a huge garrison town. Recruits,
with and without uniforms, university professors and students,
rich and poor alike, were being drilled in every open space
and many public and private halls. For barracks the dismantled
Protestant High School on Peel Street and other buildings were
used for the young men of the second contingent.

Not only were the canals, bridges, wharves and public buildings
patrolled by soldiers in uniform, since the first news of the
outbreak of the war, but the streets of Montreal and the suburbs
have been the constant scenes of much militarism. A lasting
memory will survive in numerous streets and avenues, either
being opened or bearing names already employed elsewhere, being
appointed henceforth to bear the names of generals and towns
connected with the war, such as Joffre, Pau, Liège, Namur and
Aisne.

About the city committees of devoted women of all national
origins and of all the numerous charitable associations, were
patriotically visiting the wives and dependents of volunteers
for the front and administering the allowances granted by the
Patriotic Fund, the headquarters of which were in the new
Drummond Building at the corner of St. Catherine and Peel
streets. And in this central room a busy committee was engaged
all day on the careful systematic organization of the relief
fund. Over the city in church, school, club and private rooms,
groups were busily knitting and sewing and fashioning all sorts
of comforts and necessities for those who had heard the call to
fight for the maintenance of the Empire. The city has become a
busy loom of patriotic charity.

All honour to the loyal women of Montreal in this moment of the
world’s greatest war.

[Illustration: CANADIAN AID FOR BELGIAN SUFFERERS]




UNDER ENGLISH RULE


PART II

SPECIAL PROGRESS


  CHAPTER

  XXIV     THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.
  XXV      OTHER RELIGIOUS DENOMINATIONS.
  XXVI     SCHOOL SYSTEM OF MONTREAL BEFORE THE CESSION.
  XXVII    SCHOOL SYSTEM OF MONTREAL AFTER THE UNION.
  XXVIII   UNIVERSITY DEVELOPMENT.
  XXIX     LITERATURE--DRAMA--MUSIC--ART.
  XXX      NATIONAL SOCIETIES AND POPULATION.
  XXXI     FIRE, LIGHTING, WATER.
  XXXII    LAW AND ORDER.
  XXXIII   HOSPITALS.
  XXXIV    SOCIOLOGICAL MOVEMENTS.
  XXXV     BEFORE THE UNION.
  XXXVI    SINCE THE UNION.
  XXXVII   BANKING AND INSURANCE.
  XXXVIII  SHIPPING: EARLY AND MODERN.
  XXXIX    THE PORT AND HARBOUR.
  XL       RAILROADS.
  XLI      POST ROADS AND STREET RAILWAY.
  XLII     FROM THE CESSION.
  XLIII    UNDER THE UNION.
  XLIV     SINCE CONFEDERATION.




                          CHAPTER XXIV

                     RELIGIOUS DENOMINATIONS


                                I

                       THE CATHOLIC CHURCH

  EARLY CHAPELS AND CHURCHES--THE FIRST PARISH CHURCH--OTHER
    CHURCHES STANDING AT THE FALL OF MONTREAL--NOTRE DAME DE
    VICTOIRE--NOTRE DAME DE PITIE--THE “RECOLLET”--THE PRESENT
    NOTRE DAME CHURCH--ERECTION AND OPENING--THE “OLD AND
    NEW”--THE TOWERS AND BELLS--THE ECCLESIASTICAL DIOCESE OF
    QUEBEC--THE BISHOPS OF MONTREAL--THE DIVISION OF THE CITY
    INTO PARISHES--THE CHURCHES AND “RELIGIOUS”--ENGLISH-SPEAKING
    CATHOLICS--ST. PATRICK’S, IRISH NATIONAL CHURCH, ETC. NOTE: THE
    “RELIGIOUS” COMMUNITIES OF MEN AND WOMEN.


The history of the Catholic Church in Montreal is largely that of
its churches and its religious orders or congregations.

Its history commences with the date of the first mass on the
common on September 8, 1642, in the open air, the day of the
arrival of M. de Maisonneuve and the first colonists, though
mass had already been said on the island as far back as 1615 in
Champlain’s presence at the Rivière des Prairies, by the first
Recollect fathers, Joseph le Caron and Denis Jamay.

From 1642 to 1657 the Jesuit missionaries served the small group
of colonists, at which dates these were succeeded by the priests
of the congregation of St. Sulpice, founded in Paris by M. Jean
Jacques Olier, at Vaugirard in January, 1649, a main purpose of
which was to supply priests for the mission founded at Montreal
by the Compagnie de Notre Dame de Montréal.

The first chapel “of the fort” was one of bark, which was
succeeded shortly by a frame building which served adequately
till 1656. In this year a new chapel building in wood was
adjoined to the Hotel Dieu at the corner of St. Paul and St.
Joseph (St. Sulpice) and served as the church of St. Joseph for
the hospital and the citizens till 1678 on the completion of the
first parish church of Notre Dame, begun in 1672.

This church was regarded as a wondrous monument in its time, and
as it was standing at the time of the fall of Montreal, and was
not entirely demolished till 1843, its history forms part of
that of Montreal under British rule, serving to connect the two
regimes.

It stood on the top of St. Sulpice Street, then St. Joseph, and
its front was placed on the axis of Notre Dame Street and Place
d’Armes, in front of the site of the modern Notre Dame church.
It was raised by subscriptions assisted by the Gentlemen of the
Seminary.

The original church begun in 1672 was gradually enlarged. From
1720 to 1724 there were discussions among the _Marguilliers_
or church wardens on the building of an imposing bell tower
capable of holding four bells, as well as on the construction of
a portail as an imposing entrance facade to the church. In 1722
discussions arose as to whether it should be placed southeast or
northwest of the church. The new tower on the northwest was built
about 1725. This served as a belfry for various bells cast in
Montreal till that named Thomas Marguerite came from London in
1773, being one of the old ones recast, and was blessed on July
4th by M. Montgolfier, superior of the seminary. It received its
name after Thomas Dufy Desaulniers and Marguerite, probably the
name of Madame Le Moyne, the other godparent. The belfry proper
was erected in 1777, the iron cross surmounting it in 1778, the
copper gilt cock bought in London being placed in 1782.

Before relating the history of the Notre Dame church of today
it will be proper to account for the other churches of Montreal
erected before the capitulation in 1760, and bridging over the
two periods of rule.

The Church of Notre Dame de Bonsecours was not standing on the
arrival of the British. The first church of this name was built
in wood by Marguerite Bourgeoys, the first stone being laid
in 1657 by the famous Jesuit missionary among the Onondagas,
Father Simon Le Moyne, the building being finished in 1659. The
second building, also erected by Marguerite Bourgeoys, was the
first stone church in Montreal. It was given to the Fabrique in
1678. It was reduced to ashes in the fire of 1754 and the third
church was built between 1771 and 1773. In 1847-48 the church was
decorated and on October 6, 1840, there was held a procession of
the boats on the river and there took place, with Bishop Bourget
presiding, the solemn translation of the new statue of Our Lady
of Bonsecours specially destined for voyagers and sailors and
placed on the exterior to dominate the port. It had been known
as the Sailors’ Chapel, being on the quay. It was remodeled
in 1889, according to critics, at the expense of many of its
Breton-like attractive features. On the apse of the chapel is a
colossal statue of the Blessed Virgin with outstretched arms to
protect the sea-going vessels and sailors. On the roof is another
chapel, a facsimile of the Holy House of Loretto. The church
itself possesses a miraculous statue of Our Lady. The sanctuary
is all marble, there are handsome stained glass windows and many
historic pictures and votive offerings.

Until recently there stood off Notre Dame Street at the
northwest entrance to the garden of the “Congregation” the
quaint and picturesque church of Notre Dame de Pitié. Its
original predecessor was commenced in 1693 and finished in
1695, principally through the benefactions of the recluse,
Jeanne LeBer, daughter of the famous merchant, Jacques LeBer,
who dwelt for twenty years (from 1694 to her death in 1714) in
a little cell behind the altar. After the cession it was burnt
down on April 11, 1768, and was rebuilt many years afterwards,
the first mass being said in 1786. In 1856 this church of the
“Congregation” (60 feet ×30) was demolished to make room for the
Notre Dame de Pitié (108 feet ×46). This was built to receive
a wooden, miraculous statue of Notre Dame de Pitié, which
originally was placed in the Church of St. Didier in Avignon,
France, in the fourteenth century. In 1789 this church was
demolished during the French revolution and the statue came into
the possession of a Madame Paladére, who gave it to the clergy.
In 1852 it came into the hands of the Rev. M. Fabris, who, at
the request of the Abbé Faillon, the historian, gave it to the
Congregation at Montreal. It reached Montreal on July 1, 1855,
and, pending the completion of the Church of Notre Dame de Pitié,
was kept in the convent hard by, its solemn transference to the
church, by Bishop Bourget, taking place on August 15, 1860. In
1912 it was demolished to make room for the projected extension
of St. Lawrence Main Street to the wharves, at which time the
adjoining historic convent of the Congregation nuns also suffered
the same fate.

[Illustration: NOTRE DAME DE PITIE (REAR VIEW)]

[Illustration: NOTRE DAME DE PITIE CHURCH (Demolished)]

In 1718 there was built near the church of Notre Dame de Pitié,
and on the grounds of the Congregation, the chapel of Notre
Dame de la Victoire. This was erected by the ladies of a pious
sodality entitled Les Demoiselles de la Congregation Externe, in
accordance with a vow made by them in 1711 on the occasion of the
safety of Canada by the destruction of the fleet of Sir Hovenden
Walker. It was burnt down on April 11, 1768, at the same time
as the Mother House but rebuilt the same year. It was finally
demolished in 1900. Other chapels connecting the old with the new
Montreal were the Convent Chapel of the Charron Brothers, which
became that of the Grey Nuns Hospital, and the Convent Chapel of
the Hotel Dieu, on St. Paul Street. Their history is coincident
with that of the buildings described elsewhere.

Two other churches built in the French régime were still standing
at the capitulation during the early British period, the Jesuits’
church, which was commenced in 1692 and finished in 1694, being
rebuilt and enlarged in 1742. After the capitulation of Montreal
and the subsequent suppression of the Society of Jesuits, it
became through the favour of the government the church of the
Anglicans till 1803, when it was burnt down in the great fire of
that year. The other church bridging over the two periods was
that of the Recollects, which was built and finished between 1693
and 1700. There was also the Recollect Chapel, for towards 1709
there took place the blessing of M. de Belmont and the placing
of the first stone of the Recollect Chapel by M. le Baron de
Longueuil, major governor of Montreal. In the early days of the
British rule the Recollects lent their church or chapel to the
Anglicans and Presbyterians for service;

Their original grounds extended on the north from Notre Dame west
to Lemoine Street on the south, and from McGill Street on the
west to St. Peter Street on the east.

The “Récollet” began to fall on evil times, for before 1818 the
Recollect property had passed into the hands of the Hon. Charles
William Grant; the church, the house and part of the convent was
purchased by the Fabrique of Notre Dame on August 28, 1818, from
him. Collections were then taken up for its repairs, which were
undertaken next year, according to the plan of M. Delorme in
order to fit it for divine service. In 1822 the Rev. John Richard
(or Richards) Jackson was permitted to occupy the lower part of
the house by putting a schoolmaster there for the children of the
Irish immigrants then beginning to arrive. About 1830 it became
the recognized chapel for the Irish immigrants and at this time
it became considerably improved by the gift of the portail of
the old Notre Dame. On March 9, 1867, the church on the corner
of Récollet and Notre Dame streets with its land was sold to
Messrs. Lewis, Kay & Company for the sum of $85,000, or $4.00 a
foot, and was demolished. The successors of the Recollects, the
Franciscans, O.F.M. (Order of Friars Minor) returned to the city
and established themselves on Dorchester Street West about 1900.


                    NOTRE DAME PARISH CHURCH

We may now trace the history of the present Notre Dame parish
church. By 1757 the parish church begun in 1672 being already
too small, it was determined to buy land to build one 300 feet
in length, and by 1823 land was bought for this purpose and the
church commenced this year. This included the land on Place
d’Armes on which there was the public library in Montreal. This
eventually was not built on for the war ending in the cession
took place. The Place d’Armes property bought, according to the
description made in 1824 by Roy Portelance, Toussaint Peltier,
père, and Charles Coté, père, was “L’Emplacement, situé sur
la place d’armes contenait 180 pds de front sur 94 pds de
profondeur, tenant pardevant a la place d’armes derrière à la
ruelle des fortifications, d’un coté au Sieur Dillon et de
l’autre coté au Docteur Leodel; sur lequel etaint construits une
maison en pierre à deux etages converte en ferblanc de 60 pds de
front sur 62 pds de profondeur, et autres bâtiments en bois.”

The Place d’Armes commenced in the middle of Great St. James
Street and occupied the position now filled by the Bank of
Montreal and the Royal Trust Building. It was thought then--in
1757--proper to build here and to transfer the Place d’Armes to
some other position, the ground in front of the Jesuit residence
being thought suitable. Subscriptions began in 1823 for the
new church by a minute of the church warden on July 20th. The
building committee appointed was M. le Curé; Le Saulnier,
president; M.M. Louis Guy, J.P. Leprohon, F.A. Larocque, N.B.
Doucet, T. Bouthillier and A. Laframboise, to whom later were
added M. Olivier Berthelet in place of M. Doucet, and the
following new church wardens, viz., M.M.C.S. Delorme, Pierre
Pomminville, Pascal Comte, Jules Quesnel, Joseph Chevalier and
Pascal Persillier-LaChapelle. Messrs. Francis Desrivieres and P.
de Rocheblave (Marguilliers) were named treasurers in February,
1824.

The land bought for the new church included the houses and
grounds of Messrs. Gerrard, Starnes, the estate, Perrault and
Fisher, situated on St. Joseph Street (St. Sulpice), and also
that proposed to be ceded to the Fabrique by the Gentlemen of
the Seminary. The value of the land was estimated at £24,000.
On October 5th the blessing of the cross marking the site was
conducted by Mgr. B.C. Panet, coadjutor bishop of Quebec. In
September, 1824, the first stone was blessed by M. Roux, superior
of the seminary. The following minute tells of the blessing of
the new church. “1829, June 7. Pentecost Day, at seven o’clock in
the morning. The new parish church has been blessed according to
the usage and custom of Holy Church under the invocation of the
Holy Name of Mary by Messire Jean Henry Auguste Roux, superior
of the seminary, curé of the parish and vicar general of the
diocese, in presence of the undersigned priests and of several
church wardens and other parishioners:

“Roux, Vic. Gen., Malard, ptre., Sattin, ptre., Sauvage,
ptre., Richard, ptre., F. ant. LaRocque, T. Bouthillier, P. de
Rocheblave, P. Jos. Lacroix, Joseph Masson, O. Berthelet, Alexis
Laframboise, Jules Quesnel, F. Souligny, Pierre Baudry, N.B.
Doucet.”

[Illustration: BONSECOURS CHURCH]

[Illustration: BONSECOURS CHURCH AT AN EARLY PERIOD]

[Illustration: BONSECOURS CHURCH WITH ITS BARNACLES, SHORTLY
BEFORE ITS RECONSTRUCTION]

The first mass said in the new parish church was by the Rev. Mr.
Richards-Jackson, an English convert who died at Montreal of
typhus on July 21, 1849, beloved by the Irish population. The
celebration of the formal opening took place on July 15th when
High Mass was sung by Mgr. J.J. Lartigue, bishop of Telmesse, and
the first sermon delivered by M.J.V. Quiblier. A distinguished
congregation was present, including the administrator of the
province of Lower Canada, Sir James Kempt, his suite and the
representatives of the different corporations of the city.

Meanwhile the old church of 1672 stood in front of the new one
but not for long. The bodies of the dead were reverently removed
to the vaults under the new church. On June 6, 1830, it was
resolved by the Fabrique to give the Irish of the city, for the
enlargement of the Récollet Church in which they now worshiped,
the cut stone of the _portail_ in front of the old church,
together with other church objects from within. Then the church
was demolished in August, 1830, but the belfry tower stood till
1843, a curious old-time relic blocking the passage on Notre
Dame Street. The four bells were taken down on August 23d and
the old tower pulled down on August 24th, about 4:30 P.M. Two of
the bells, one of them the Charlotte, cast in Canada in 1774 and
weighing, without the hammer, 2,167 pounds, were given later to
St. Patrick’s Church. The architect of the new parish church died
on January 30th, of the same year. He was a Mr. James O’Donnell,
a native of Wexford, in Ireland. At his request his remains were
buried in the new church.

The towers of the new church were not constructed till later.
That on the Epistle side (west) called the Tower of Perseverence,
was constructed in 1841 and blessed by the Bishop of Nancy, in
November of the same year. That on the Gospel side (east), the
Tower of Temperance, was not finished till 1842. Each tower is
227 feet high. The ten bells in the Tower of Temperance arrived
at Montreal on May 24, 1843, and were blessed on June 29th by
Bishop Bourget. They were cast in London by Mears & Company and
were sounded for the first time on June 19th, at midday, from
their position in the eastern tower. The history of the bells is
as follows:

        Name.                      Pounds.            Donor.

   1. Maria Victoria                6,041     The Seminary.
   2. Edwardus-Albertus-Ludovicus   3,633     Albert Turniss and Edward
                                                Dowling.
   3. Joannes Genovefa              2,730     John Donegani and wife.
   4. Olivarius-Amelia              2,114     O. Berthelet and wife.
   5. Julius-Josepha                1,631     Hon. Jules Quesnel.
   6. Hubertus Justinin             1,463     Hubert Paré and wife.
   7. Ludovicus                     1,290     Louis, Ant. Parent, priest.
   8. Joannes-Maria                 1,093     Jean Bruneau.
   9. Tancredes Genovefa              924     T. Bouthillier and wife.
  10. Augustinus                      897     Auguste Perrault.

The first Gros Bourdon, cast in February, 1843, weighing 16,352
pounds and the largest bell on the continent, arrived from Mears
& Company, London, in October, 1843, the gift of merchants,
artisans and farmers. It was broken in the month of May, 1845,
and was sent to England to be recast. The second Gros Bourdon
weighed 24,780 pounds. It arrived in 1847 an was solemnly blessed
under the name of Jean Baptiste on June 18, 1848. The ascent
commenced at 3:30 P.M., June 21st, and about 7:30 P.M. it was
installed in its present position in the western tower.

The organ of the parish church, constructed in 1857 by Mr. S.
Warren, was inaugurated in its unfinished condition on June 24,
1858.

The church may be described as follows: “There are two immense
arcades (60 feet high) with three niches containing the statues
of the Blessed Virgin, St. Joseph and St. John the Baptist,
patrons of the City and of the Lower Province. A flight of stairs
or an elevator leads to the summit whence a splendid view may
be obtained over the City and the St. Lawrence. The interior
(including the sanctuary) is 255 feet long by 134 feet wide and
80 feet high. Two galleries extend 25 feet over the lower side
aisles. The architect was instructed to plan a building with a
seating capacity of 10,000 persons. The idea was to enable the
congregation to follow the sacred functions and to hear the
preacher without too much of an exertion. Notre Dame complies
with this twofold condition. Beauty had to be sacrificed to
practical use, and still the wealth of materials, the profusion
of paintings and decorations throughout, the numerous statues and
especially its imposing and well proportioned dimensions leave
a deep and lasting impression on the visitor. There are nine
chapels and altars in the body of the church. At the right: The
chapels of the Holy Face; Our Lady of Perpetual Help with a copy
of the Byzantine Virgin which is venerated in Rome; Saint Amable,
St. Joseph’s, and, at the foot of the aisle, the Blessed Virgin’s
chapel, with a painting by Del Sarto. On the tabernacle door is
a fine painting of ‘The Virgin and Child’ by Fra Angelico. The
cross and candlesticks on this altar were manufactured at Paris
and are of most exquisite workmanship. On the outer wall of the
sanctuary is a good copy of Mignard’s: ‘Saint Ignatius writing
the constitutions of his Order.’ The altar of the Sacred Heart is
on the other side of the sanctuary. To the right of this altar,
which, by the way, is an artistic gem, may be seen a noteworthy
old painting: ‘The Presentation in the Temple.’ Down the aisle,
other altars may be seen; St. Ann’s (Painting by Carnevalli),
the Souls in Purgatory and St. Roch’s. The pulpit is almost on a
level with the gallery. On its sounding board are several fine
statues and below the statues of two of the Prophets, the work
of P. Herbert, one of America’s most renowned sculptors. The
sanctuary is raised five steps above the nave and separated by
the chancel-rail. The latter is of most precious wood and so
are the chancel-seats and the monumental reredos. On the first
pillar to the right just outside the chancel, under a gilt dome,
is a white marble statue of the Madonna. It is the work of a
Bavarian artist and displays remarkable skill. Pius IX, who
prized it highly, presented it to the Rector of Notre Dame, Abbe
Rousselot. At the other extremity of the railing is a second
dome surmounting a bronze facsimile of the statue of St. Peter,
in St. Peter’s, Rome. The high altar is ornamented with numerous
sculptures of rare design and workmanship. ‘The Last Supper,’ in
bas-relief, is most artistic, and so are the ‘Choirs of Angels’
at each side of the tabernacle. The sanctuary is illuminated on
festal days with myriads of electric lights which produce
a dazzling effect. The organ is one of the most powerful in
America. It was manufactured by Casavant Bros., St. Hyacinthe.

“Behind the sanctuary is a richly adorned chapel of Our Lady of
the Sacred Heart. Its paintings are inestimable in value and
the work of Canadian artists. Over the main door is a copy of
Raphael’s: ‘Discussion on the Blessed Eucharist,’ by Larose.
From left to right: ‘Paradise Lost,’ ‘The Sybil of Tibur,’
‘The Annunciation,’ by Larose; ‘The Visitation,’ by Gill; ‘The
Adoration of the Magi,’ by Saint Charles; ‘The Virgin of the
Apocalypse,’ ‘The Transfiguration’ (above the high altar),
‘Christ the Consoler,’ by Franchere; ‘Dollard and his Sixteen
Companions,’ ‘The First Mass in Montreal,’ by Saint Charles; ‘The
Rock of Horeb,’ by Franchère; ‘The Wedding of Cana,’ by Beau; and
‘The Multiplication of the Loaves,’ by Franchère. The parochial
sodalities meet in this chapel, but more especially so, the male
and female members of the Association of Perpetual Adoration. In
the treasury may be seen gorgeous costly church-ornaments and
vestments, precious reliquaries, chalices, ciboriums of gold and
silver, the embroidery work of Jeanne LeBer, a massive monstrance
and the artistically arranged hangings or draperies of the grand
dais which is used once a year for the solemn procession of the
Blessed Sacrament through the streets of the City.”

[Illustration: NOTRE DAME CHURCH]

[Illustration: SACRED HEART CHAPEL]

[Illustration: INTERIOR OF NOTRE DAME]


                   THE ECCLESIASTICAL DIOCESE

Montreal was ecclesiastically in the jurisdiction of the diocese
of Quebec till 1836. At the fall of Montreal there was no bishop,
the occupant of the see, Henri Marie Dubreuil de Pontbriand,
having died on June 1, 1760. His successors in the see of Quebec
were:

Jean Olivier Briand, named January 21, 1766, consecrated March
16, 1766, resigned June 29, 1784, died November 25, 1784;
Louis-Philippe Mariauchau d’Esglis, consecrated July 12, 1772,
bishop of Quebec November 29, 1774, died June 4, 1788; Jean
François Hubert, consecrated November 29, 1786, bishop of Quebec
June 12, 1788, resigned September 1, 1797, died October, 1797;
Pierre Denaut, born at Montreal July 20, 1743, consecrated June
29, 1789, bishop of Quebec, September 1, 1797, died January 17,
1806; Joseph Octave Plessis, born at Montreal, March 3, 1763,
consecrated January 25, 1801, bishop of Quebec, January 17, 1806,
archbishop in 1819, died December 4, 1825; Bernard Claude Panet,
bishop-archbishop of Quebec December 4, 1825, died February 14,
1833; Joseph Signay, consecrated May 20, 1827, bishop of Quebec
February 14, 1833, archbishop Metropolitan July 13, 1844, died
October 3, 1850.

The first bishop of Montreal was Mgr. Jean Jacques Lartigue, who
was born in Montreal on June 20, 1777, was elected titular bishop
of Telmesse on February 1, 1820, and consecrated on January 21,
1821. He was elected bishop of the new diocese of Montreal on
May 13, 1836, and enthroned on September 8th following. He died
in the Hotel Dieu on April 30, 1849, before, therefore, the
incorporation of the diocese on May 30, 1849. His successor to
the see was Mgr. Ignace Bourget, born at Pointe Lévis on October
30, 1799. He was elected titular of Telmesse and coadjutor of
Montreal “cum futura successione” on March 10, 1837, and was
consecrated on July 25th following. He became bishop of Montreal
on April 19, 1840, and resigned on May 11, 1876, but was named
titular archbishop of Marianopolis in the month of July. He
died at Sault au Récollet June 8, 1885. His coadjutor bishop had
been Mgr. J.C. Prince from 1845 and Mgr. Joseph Larocque from
1852. His Grace, Mgr. Edouard Charles Fabre, born at Montreal
on February 28, 1827, succeeded him as bishop of Montreal on
May 11, 1876, and took possession of the seat on September 19th
following. He had been previously elected titular bishop of
Gratianopolis and coadjutor “cum futura successione” of Montreal
on April 1, 1873, being consecrated in the Church of the Gésu
on May 1st following. In 1886, on June 8th, Mgr. Fabre became
elected the first archbishop of Montreal, receiving the pallium
on July 27th of the same year. His death occurred on December
30, 1896. The present occupant of the see is His Grace, Mgr.
Paul Bruchesi, who was born at Montreal on October 29, 1855,
was elected Archbishop on June 25, 1897, and consecrated in the
Cathedral church on August 8th of the same year. Two years later,
on August 8th, he received the pallium.

There are two auxiliary bishops: Mgr. Francois Theophile Zotique
Racicot, born at Sault au Récollet on October 13, 1845, and
elected bishop of Poglia and coadjutor of Montreal on January 14,
1905, and consecrated on the following May 3d; and Mgr. George
Gauthier, born at Montreal on October 9, 1871, named titular
bishop of Philippolis and auxiliary of Mgr. Bruchesi on June 28,
1912, being consecrated on August 24th of the same year.

Until 1866 Notre Dame was the only parish church. From that date
other parishes began to be canonically erected as such. The
parish churches of Montreal in the year 1913 were as follows,
with the dates of foundation, but not of canonical erection.
Those various and numerous semi-public chapels, oratories, or
churches, attached to the religious congregations not recognized
as parish churches, are not included:

Notre Dame (first church, begun 1672, canonically erected 1678),
second, formally opened, 1829; Saint Jacques (first church,
1822-1825), (second, 1857), (third, 1860), constituted the second
parish church in 1866; Saint Enfant Jesus, founded in 1849,
erected canonically in 1867; Sacré Coeur de Jesus, 1874, 835
Ontario Street, East: Très Saint Nom de Jésus de Maisonneuve,
1888; Très Saint Rédempteur, 1913, Hochelaga; Immaculée
Conception, 1884; Nativité de la B.V.M. d’Hochelaga, 1875; Notre
Dame de Carmel, 1905, Italian; Notre Dame du Bon Conseil, 1881,
724 Craig Street, East; Notre Dame Della Difesa, 1910, Italian;
Notre Dame de Grâce, 1867; Notre Dame des Neiges, 1901; Notre
Dame de Perpétuel Secours, 1906; Notre Dame de Saint Rosaire
de Villeray, 1898; Notre Dame de Sept. Douleurs de Verdun,
1899; Notre Dame de Victoire, 1907; Saint Agnes, 1903 (E.)[1];
Saint Alphonse d’Youville, 1910; Saint Ann, 1854 (E.); Saint
Anselme, 1909; Saint Anthony’s, 1884 (E.); Saint Arsène, April
11, 1908; Sainte Brigide, 1867; Sainte Catherine d’Alexandre,
1912; Sainte Cécile, 1911; Sainte Charles, 1883; Sainte Claire
de Tétreauville, 1906; Sainte Clément, 1898; Sainte Clotilde,
1909; Sainte Cunégonde, 1874; Saint Denis, 1899; Saint Dominic,
December 23, 1912; Saint Edouard, 1896; Sainte Elizabeth du
Portugal, 1894; Sainte Etienne, 1912; Sainte Eusèbe de Verceil,
1897; Saint François d’Assise, Longue Pointe, 1770: Saint
Francois du Pari Lasalle, 1912; Saint Gabriel’s, 1875 (E.); Saint
Georges, June 27, 1908; Saint Hélène, 1902; Saint Henri, 1868;
Saint Jacques, 1866; Saint Jean Baptiste, 1874; Saint Jean
Baptiste de la Salle, 1913; Saint Jean Berchmans, April 24, 1908;
Saint Jean de la Croix, 1900; Saint Joseph, 1862; Saint Joseph de
Bordeaux, 1895, erected canonically, 1912; Saint Léon, Westmount,
1901 (E. and F.); Saint Louis de France, 1888; Saint Aloysius,
March 24, 1908 (E.); Sainte Madeleine d’Outremont, July 22, 1908;
Saint Marc, April 19, 1903; Saint Michael, May, 1902 (E.); Saint
Nicholas d’Ahuntsic; Saint Pascal Baylon, Cote des Neiges, 1910;
Saint Patrick’s, 1847 (E.); Saint Paul, 1874; Sainte Philomene
de Rosemont, 1905; Saint Pierre Apôtre, 1900; Saint Pierre aux
Liens, 1897; Saint Stanislaus de Kostka; Saint Thomas Aquinas,
June 18, 1908 (E.); Saint Viateur d’Outremont, 1902; Saint Victor
de la Terrace Vinet, 1912; Saint Vincent de Paul, 1867; Saint
Willibrod, June 6, 1913 (E.); Saint Zotique, 1909.

[Illustration: MGR. PAUL BRUCHESI Fourth bishop, second
archbishop of Montreal]

[Illustration: MGR. EDOUARD-CHARLES FABRE Third bishop, first
archbishop of Montreal, 1827-1896]

[Illustration: MGR. IGNACE BOURGET Second bishop of Montreal,
1799-1885]

[Illustration: MGR. JEAN-JACQUES LARTIQUE First bishop of
Montreal, 1777-1840]

In addition there are missions to Chinese (numbering 200),
Lithuanians (1,000), Poles (1,500), Ruthenians (5,000), Syrians
(3 rites), Pure Syrians, Syro-Maronites and Syro-Melchites
(1,000).

It would require a volume to give the history of all these
parishes or of their many beautiful churches, but we may
choose the following for historical reasons, viz.: the present
Cathedral of St. James, the seat of the Archbishop of Montreal;
the Church of St. James, the second parish and the site of the
first Cathedral; the Chapel of Our Lady of Lourdes, as a type of
several of the non-parish chapels in the city; the Gésu and St.
Peter’s, as an example of public churches conducted by religious
priests; and, as the English-speaking Catholic community is
an entity of its own, St. Patrick’s church and others will be
treated as affording an opportunity of reviewing the religious
history of the Irish in the city.


                       ST. JAMES CATHEDRAL

The Cathedral, one of the largest temples on the continent, is
admirably situated on Dominion Square, and its location adds to
the majestic loftiness of its monumental cupola. It is one third
the size and an adapted replica of St. Peter’s, Rome. When Mgr.
Lartigue became Bishop of Telmesse (1821) with jurisdiction over
the Church in Montreal, his residence was at the Seminary of
St. Sulpice, and Notre Dame was to all intents and purposes the
cathedral church of Montreal. He realized the disadvantages of
the situation and took up his quarters at the Hôtel Dieu. Its
modest chapel became the temporary Cathedral. In 1825, the people
petitioned the Bishop to sanction the erection of a Cathedral and
a residence in keeping with his exalted dignity. Their request
was granted and a site chosen at the corner of St. Catherine and
St. Denis streets, where St. James church stands today. The new
Cathedral was dedicated by Bishop Lartigue, in 1825. His house
was a very plain building. An episcopal residence soon replaced
it, and was considered one of the finest structures in Montreal.
Unfortunately, in 1852, the fire which consumed a great part
of the City reduced the Cathedral and the residence to ashes.
Mgr. Bourget, his successor, lived at St. Joseph’s Home, and
the humble chapel of the Providence Asylum became the fourth
Cathedral. The present site was then chosen. A modest brick
chapel was erected by the side of the episcopal residence which
for over forty years has been the home of the Bishops of Montreal
and of their assistants in the administration of diocesan
affairs.

July 25th, 1857, a cross was planted to mark the site of the
future Cathedral. Mgr. Bourget, conceived the bold idea of
erecting a duplicate of St. Peter’s Rome, to symbolize the
union of the Church in Canada with the See of Peter, and he
instructed Victor Bourgeault, the architect, to prepare his
plans accordingly. The cornerstone was solemnly laid August 28,
1870. In 1878, the walls were raised to the height of thirty
feet. The columns to support the dome were built as high as
forty feet, and the other columns of the nave were elevated to
the same height. The front of the portico was completed as far
as the spandrel of the first arch, but the outer dome was left
unfinished. In 1885, Archbishop Fabre, his successor, resumed
operations which had been suspended for seven years. In 1894, the
Cathedral was opened for worship. In 1886, the dome was finished,
a noble adornment and a salient feature in the architecture of
Montreal. The cross, of gilded iron, is eighteen feet in length,
weighing sixteen hundred pounds, and was placed in position
during August of the same year. Over the portico are thirteen
bronze statues, donations of various parishes of the Diocese.
They are the statues of St. James, St. Joseph, St. Anthony of
Padua, St. Francis of Assisi, St. Vincent of Paul, St. John, St.
Paul, St. Thomas Aquinas, St. Patrick, St. Charles Borromeo, St.
John the Baptist, St. Hyacinth and St. Ignatius. The interior
is very imposing, with its rich white and gold decorations. The
graceful lines of its arches, the symmetry of its pillars and the
simplicity of its appointments inspire a sense of due reverence
and devotion. Under the dome there is a faithful reproduction
of Bernini’s baldachino. It was made at Rome by Victor Vincent
and donated to the Cathedral by the Seminary of St. Sulpice. It
cost about twelve thousand dollars. The main altar is under the
baldachino. Like the chancel-rail it is of marble and onyx. At
the Gospel side set against one of the pillars supporting the
dome is the archiepiscopal throne finely sculptured and inlaid
with ivory. Several interesting paintings recalling historical
facts and events connected with the foundation and establishment
of Montreal adorn the arcades of the transepts and the lower
walls. With one exception they are from the brush of G. Delfosse,
a gifted artist of Montreal, and under each is an inscription
explaining the different subjects. “The First Mass in Montreal”
was painted by Laurent, a French painter, and was presented to
Archbishop Bruchesi by the Government of the French Republic.
The most interesting chapel is the “Papal Zouaves.” There is an
exquisite painting over the altar of “Our Saviour revealing to
Blessed Margaret Mary the treasures of His Sacred Heart.” The
names of the 507 Knights, who took part in the nineteenth century
crusade, are inscribed in letters of gold on four large marble
tablets. In the chapel are the Regiment’s military colors; a
painting of St. Gregory the Great, a gift of Pope Pius IX, to
the Union Allet; a silver statuette, a gift of General Charette;
a copy of “St. John the Baptist,” the original of which hangs
in the Zouaves headquarters at Rome; a silver vessel used as a
sanctuary lamp, a facsimile of the votive offering which the
Zouaves made to the Shrine of Notre Dame de Bonsecours.

At the north entrance is a fine bronze statue to the memory of
Bishop Bourget. Adjoining the vestry and communicating with it is
“The Bishop’s Palace,” a palace in name only. In the near future
this huge brick building will be replaced by an edifice worthy
the Diocese.

[Illustration: PRESENTATION OF PLANS OF ST. JAMES CATHEDRAL]

[Illustration: INTERIOR OF ST. JAMES CATHEDRAL]

[Illustration: ST. JAMES CATHEDRAL]


                            ST. JAMES

             (St. Catherine and St. Denis Streets.)

In 1822-25 the first church of St. James (St. Jacques le Majeur)
was built by Mgr. Lartigue, who became the first bishop of
Montreal on January 21, 1821. He was a sulpician and lived until
1849. This church served as the Cathedral until 1852 when it was
destroyed by the terrible fire which consumed a great portion
of the City. Bishop Bourget, his successor, definitely left the
neighbourhood of St. James and took up his quarters on Mount
St. Joseph. In 1855, the Priests of the Seminary were placed in
charge of the parish. The church was scarcely built in 1857 when
it was destroyed by another fire. As the walls were uninjured
the damage was easily repaired, and, in 1860, the new church was
opened to the public. It is Gothic in style and the interior
consists of three naves. It has the form of an irregular cross.
The pulpit is a handsome design with its statues and turrets. In
the transept are four paintings, the work of E. Cabane, a French
artist: “Our Lady of the Rosary,” “The Education of the Virgin,”
“The Death of St. Joseph,” and “The Holy Family.” The steeple is
the bequest of the city and contains a very fine chime of bells.
The entrance on St. Catherine Street is a splendid piece of
architectural work and looks spacious in its framework of trees
and terraces.

When the parishes were created in 1866 to supplement the Parish
of Notre Dame, mother to the sole parish church, St. James became
the second parish church.


                       OUR LADY OF LOURDES

                     (St. Catherine Street)

Close by the Church of St. James is the chapel of Our Lady of
Lourdes dedicated to the Immaculate Virgin of Massabielle. It is
a charming specimen of Canadian religious art. It was built under
the supervision of the late Father Lenoir, with the generous
cooperation of the Seminary of St. Sulpice and the Catholics
of the City. The style of architecture is Byzantine and in art
it is of the Renaissance order. The gallery is divided by an
exquisitely beautiful rose-window. A nicely gilt statue of the
Blessed Virgin has been placed on the dome and the crown of
stars on its head is brilliantly lighted up at night by means
of an ingenious electrical device. The alternate layers of
white marble and grey stone give the front an attractive look.
The central dome, thirty-five feet in diameter and 120 feet in
height, looks down upon the nave and transept. There are two
chapels in the church. One is in the basement and is a good
reproduction of the Grotto of Lourdes, with an altar where Mass
may be celebrated. The upper chapel is very richly decorated. Mr.
N. Bourassa, the artist, has embodied in a series of beautiful
tableaux the arguments of Catholic belief in the dogma of the
Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin. Among the subjects
treated, there is a fine scroll above the high altar, at the
first arch, representing “The Annunciation;” there are also two
tableaux in the arcades at each side of the altar: “The Crowning
of the Virgin,” and “The Assumption;” the large compositions of
the transept: “The Adoration of the Magi” and “The Visit of
St. Elizabeth;” finally, “The Proclamation of the Dogma of the
Immaculate Conception,” which takes up the whole interior of the
dome.

Mass is celebrated and a sermon preached in this chapel every
Sunday of the academic year for the benefit of the students of
Laval University.

This chapel is the meeting place of four sodalities of men,
women, and young men and young women.


                       RELIGIOUS CHURCHES

                            THE GESU

The Gésu is the successor in order of time of the church built
in 1692 on the site of the present courthouse and city hall.
This was burned in 1803. The Jesuits had left the colony after
the capitulation and their property was held by the government,
but in 1842 they were invited to return by Mgr. Bourget and in
consequence there arrived soon the Fathers Pierre Chazelle, Felix
Martin, Remi Tellier, Paul Luiset, Joseph Hanipaux and Dominique
Duranquet. Several undertook the charge of the curé of La Prairie
and others were employed at the bishop’s house. In 1843 a
novitiate for future members was opened on July 31st in a little
house adjoining the church at La Prairie and on September 9th it
was transferred for five years to a house loaned by Lieut.-Col.
C.S. Rodier, who became mayor in 1858.

In 1845 a public meeting invited the Jesuits to build a residence
and college in the city and in 1846 the present lands on Bleury
Street were sold at a very liberal price by Mr. John Donegani.
But owing to the typhus epidemic intervening in 1847-48 the
building was delayed. In the meantime the Fathers worked in
the fever sheds for the suffering Irish with six fathers who
came from New York and afterwards founded with the Seminary the
first residence of St. Patricks, then situated at Nos. 57-59 St.
Alexander Street. In 1850 the first stone of their college of
Ste. Marie was laid and on July 31, 1851, the college, with its
public chapel attached, was blessed. In 1851 their noviceship
was transferred hither and on August 5, 1853, it was again
transplanted to its present position at Sault au Recollet,
outside the city.

In 1863, on October 22, M. Olivier Berthelet made a gift of an
arpent and a half (for which he had paid $20,000) for a church
to be built after the model of the Gésu in Rome. The work was
commenced in the following year.

The Gésu, as it became to be called, is one of the finest
specimens of its kind. It is 194 feet long, 96 feet wide, the
transept 144 feet, and the nave 95 feet high. The style of
architecture, Renaissance and Florentine, is fascinating and
gives the church an aspect of elegance and comfort. It is not
unlike the Gesu at Rome in its appointments. Its collection of
fine paintings and tableaux deserves a special mention. They
imitate or complete the plastic work of the sacred edifice. They
are, for the most part, copies of masterpieces of the modern
German School and are the work of Mr. Miller. Among its many rich
chapels, one in particular attracts the attention of the visitor,
on account of an old statue it possesses. It is under the gallery
to the right of the main altar and is known as the Chapel of
Our Lady of Liesse. A reliquary over the tabernacle contains
the ashes of the statue of Our Lady of Liesse, which was burned
during the French Revolution. Two large tableaux which are on
either side of the sanctuary represent St. Aloysius and St.
Stanislaus Kostka in the attitude of receiving Holy Communion,
the former from the hands of St. Charles Borromeo and the latter
from an Angel. There are two smaller paintings over the altars
of the Blessed Virgin and St. Joseph: “The Holy Family” and “The
Flight into Egypt.” These remarkable paintings are from the
studio of Cagliardi Bros., Rome.


                           ST. PETER’S

Montreal is the headquarters of several religious orders of men.
Besides the Jesuits there are numerous others who are devoted
either to the ministry or education, or to both. One of the first
communities to be invited were the Oblates of Mary Immaculate,
an order founded at Aix in Provence on January 25, 1816, by Mgr.
de Mazenod, bishop of Marseilles. In 1841 four Oblates reached
Montreal, Fathers Honorat (Superior), Telmont, Baudrand and
Lagier. Their settlement was first at St. Hilaire de Rouville,
then at Longueuil. In 1848 a provisory chapel in wood was built
in the Faubourg de Quebec (Quebec Suburbs). In 1851 the first
stone of the new church of St. Peter, on the same spot, on
Visitation Street, was laid. From this first home there went
forth the first missionaries of the modern Canadian Northwest.
To this order the Rev. Albert Lacombe, the northwest missionary,
became early attached.

St. Peter’s has three naves of equal height. The sanctuary is
lighted by large arched, stained-glass windows, which produce a
magnificent effect. The white marble altar is surmounted by a
turreted reredos and is shown to advantage by numberless electric
bulbs most ingeniously adapted. St. Peter’s is one of the best
proportioned churches of the City. The stained-glass windows of
the sanctuary and side aisles are most attractive. They are from
the factory of Champigneulle of Bar-le-Duc, France. The Sacred
Heart altar is a rare work of art with its handsome candlesticks
and its tabernacle door of gilded bronze.


                    ENGLISH CATHOLIC CHURCHES

                          ST. PATRICK’S

Especial notice should be given to the origin of the
English-speaking Catholics of the city. Although before 1800
a few Irish immigrants sought a home in the city, the history
proper of the Irish population of Montreal starts in 1817, when
a Sulpician, the Rev. Father Richards-Jackson, commonly known
as Rev. M. Richards, discovered a little band of worshipers
from the Emerald Isle, driven thence by poverty and privation,
gathering at Bonsecours church. A directory of 1819 only reveals
about thirty presumably Irish names.[2] In 1820 the number was
still so small that a visitor to Bonsecours Church stated that
“he could have covered with a good-sized parlour carpet all the
Irish Catholics worshipping there on Sundays.” Yet the number of
Irish orphans were so great that by 1823 the “Salle des Petites
Irlandaises” was opened in the Grey Nuns’ hospital and supported
by the Gentlemen of the Seminary. Soon the complement of forty
was reached. But by 1831, with the increase of immigration, the
old “Récollet” church on Notre Dame Street, being considerably
enlarged, was reopened for the use of the Irish Catholics of the
center and western portions of the city, those of the eastern
section still remaining attached to Notre Dame de Bonsecours.
The Rev. Patrick Phelan, afterwards bishop, was the first Irish
pastor. The Irish soldiers of the garrison met principally at the
new Notre Dame church opened in 1829. Soon the “Récollet” became
inadequate. On Sundays it was so overcrowded with devout Irish
that the overflow knelt in the rain or the sunshine on Notre Dame
Street or Dollard Lane. This was to be remedied by the steps
taken on May 20, 1843, to purchase land for a church to be named
St. Patrick’s, the present area of St. Patrick’s Church and the
St. Bridget’s Home being secured by the Fabrique of Notre Dame
from the Rocheblave family for £5,000. On the 26th of September
the cornerstones were blessed by Bishop Bourget. They were seven
in number and were laid by the following: First, by Bishop
Bourget; second, by the mayor; third, by the speaker of the
assembly; fourth, by the chief justice; fifth, by the president
of the Irish Temperance Association; sixth, by the president of
St. Patrick’s Society; seventh, by the president of the Hibernian
Benevolent Society.

On the 17th of March, St. Patrick’s Day, 1847, the church of St.
Patrick’s was dedicated. The first patron of St. Patrick’s was
the Rev. J.J. Connolly, who had succeeded Father Phelan at the
“Recollet” when the latter had been consecrated coadjutor bishop
of Kingston in 1843.

Father Connolly nobly served the typhus-stricken emigrants in
1847 for a period of six weeks or more, consigning to the silent
grave more than fifty adult persons a day. At this time Father
Richards and Father Morgan died martyrs of charity. In this
ministration, therefore, the Seminary called in the services of
five Jesuit Fathers who laboured at St. Patricks for some years
till the Seminary was able to provide its own members. The Rev.
J.J. Connolly left St. Patricks in 1860 for Boston, where he died
three years later, on the 16th of September, 1863, at the age
of forty-seven years. He was succeeded by Father Dowd, who had
been transferred with Rev. Father O’Brien, McCullough and others
for service here from Ireland about 1848 at the request of M.
Quiblier, superior of the Seminary.

In 1887, on the occasion of Father Dowd’s celebration of his
fiftieth year of priesthood, the occasion was taken by every
section of the community to testify its appreciation of his work
as the pastor of St. Patrick’s and as a good citizen.

He commenced the St. Patrick’s Orphan Asylum, opened in November,
1851. In 1863 he established St. Bridget’s Home for the Old and
Infirm and the Night Refuge for the Destitute, and in 1866-7
erected the building on Lagauchetière Street for a home and
refuge. In 1872 he established the St. Patrick’s School for Girls
on St. Alexander Street. In 1877 he organized the great Irish
Canadian pilgrimage to Rome.

[Illustration: FRANCISCAN CHURCH]

[Illustration: NOTRE DAME DE LOURDES CHURCH]

[Illustration: THE JESUITS CHURCH AND ST. MARY’S COLLEGE]

[Illustration: ST. PATRICK’S CHURCH]

[Illustration: ST. JACQUES CHURCH]

The position of St. Patrick’s as a national church for the Irish
was jeopardized in 1866, when the dismemberment of the ancient
parish of Notre Dame was proclaimed. St. Patrick’s would have
become in the new division a general district, one for use by
French-Canadians, but on the representations of Father Dowd to
the Holy See, the national privileges were confirmed to the
church. Each succeeding pastor of St. Patrick’s has done much to
the beautifying of this church, one of the purest specimens of
the Gothic style in Canada. Its outside dimensions are: Length,
233 feet; width, 105 feet; inside height from floor to ceiling,
85 feet. The steeple is 228 feet high. The work of renovation
of the interior of St. Patrick’s was carried out in 1893 under
the late Father Quinlivan, S.S. pastor. Under the present
pastor, the Rev. Gerald McShane, S.S., the parish has seen great
improvements, notably those at the Eucharistic Congress of 1910
when the grounds adjoining the church and partially occupied
hitherto by St. Bridget’s Orphanage were tastefully laid out
as a semi-public garden. At this same time there took place
the development of the chimes of St. Patrick’s. The following
reproduction of the inscriptions on the memorial tables placed in
the church tells its story:

                 AS A PERPETUAL MEMORIAL OF THE
             XXI INTERNATIONAL EUCHARISTIC CONGRESS,
               AT MONTREAL, SEPT 7-11, A.D. 1910,
     AND IN LASTING REMEMBRANCE OF THE SOLEMN CONGRESS MASS
           AND THE PRESENCE OF THE CARDINAL LEGATE IN
          SAINT PATRICK’S CHURCH, SEPT. 10, WAS ERECTED
                        A CHIME OF BELLS,
  BLESSED WITH IMPOSING LITURGICAL RITES, MAY 15, 1910, BY THE
                  MOST REVEREND PAUL BRUCHESI,
                     ARCHBISHOP OF MONTREAL.

      “Ring out, sweet chime, from Gothic tower!
        “A people’s faith thy belfry knells;
      “At Matins, Lauds, and Vesper Hour,
        “Peal forth our joy, sweet Congress Bells.”


            TO COMMEMORATE THE RESTORATION AND SOLEMN
                DEDICATION OF THE HISTORIC BELL,
                           CHARLOTTE,
          CAST IN WHITECHAPEL FOUNDRY, LONDON, ENGLAND,
                           A.D. 1774;
          FIRST PLACED IN NOTRE DAME, AND PRESENTED TO
                    ST. PATRICK’S, A.D. 1840.


   CHARLOTTE INJURED, WAS RE-CAST AT WHITECHAPEL, BLESSED WITH
        THE HOLY NAME BELL IN THIS CHURCH, DEC. 13, 1908,
                   AND RESTORED TO THE TOWER.

                     “VOX POPULI, VOX DEI.”


                        THE HISTORIC BELL
           “Charlotte,” Restored by the Parishioners.
        Note E.                               2,250 lbs.

                     FATHER QUINLIVAN’S BELL
                     “John, Martin, Thomas.”
      From Mr. Martin Egan, in memory of his beloved Wife.
        C. sharp.                               812 lbs.

                         THE POPE’S BELL
                    “Pius, Edward, Vincent.”
                     Mr. C.F. Smith, donor.
        F. sharp.                             1,615 lbs.

                      THE ARCHBISHOPS BELL
                     “Paul, Gerald, James.”
   Gift of Mrs. M.A. McCrory, in memory of her Daughter, May.
        G. sharp.                              1244 lbs.

                       THE HOLY NAME BELL
                    Blessed be His Holy Name.
                  From “The Holy Name Society.”
        Note A.                                1100 lbs.

                       FATHER DOWD’S BELL
                  “Patrick, Andrew, Cornelius.”
                     Gift of Mrs. M.P. Ryan.
        Note B.                                 951 lbs.

                        THE SEMINARY BELL
                  “Charles, George, Frederick.”
               Gift of Mr. and Mrs. Patrick Ryan.
        D. sharp.                               705 lbs.

                        THE CONGRESS BELL
              “Our Lady of the Blessed Sacrament.”
                     Mr. J.T. Davis, donor.
        Note E.                                 674 lbs.

                         THE CHOIR BELL
                   “Cecilia, Margaret, Mary.”
                     Presented by the Choir.
        F. sharp.                               582 lbs.

                       THE CHILDREN’S BELL
                “Aloysius, Francis, De La Salle.”
                   Presented by the Children.
        G. sharp.                               516 lbs.

In further commemoration of the Eucharistic Congress the Congress
hall was added in 1914 and the blessing and laying of the
foundation stone took place on Sunday, October 18th, of this year.

The interior of the church is most imposing with its beautiful
Gothic arches and the wealth of its appointments and decorations.
The walls are finished in imitation Venetian mosaic, after
the style of St. Mary’s, Venice; the sanctuary pillars are
imitations of Numidian marble, while those of the nave are
delicately colored like Sienna marble; the coloring of the
high altar resembles the tints of old ivory. The Celtic Cross
predominates in the decorations of the arches and walls. There
are some fine paintings in the sanctuary and on the side walls.
“The Annunciation” and the “Death of St. Joseph” are very fine.
Under St. Joseph’s altar is a life-sized figure of the Apostle
of Ireland, attired in the pontifical vestments of the sixth
century. The paintings of the Way of the Cross are works of art.
The stained-glass windows are admirable. A series of painted
panels ornaments the upper part of the wainscoting. The oak
confessionals and pews are pretty in design. The harmonious
combination is pleasing to the eye and gives the interior a
picturesqueness of original conception.


                            ST. ANN’S

St. Ann’s Parish, the fifth in point of age and the second Irish
parish of Montreal, was founded by the Sulpician Fathers. In
early days, mass was celebrated in a brick house which is still
standing and used as a tenement on the corner of Ottawa and
Murray streets. The present church was commenced in 1851, the
blessing and laying of the foundation stone being on August 3d
and the opening on December 8, 1854. The Redemptorist Fathers
took charge in 1884. The church which was found too small for the
congregation was lengthened thirty-two feet and a tower added to
the extension. In the tower is a fine chime of bells. Besides
parochial work, the Fathers give missions throughout Canada and
the United States. The origin of the name of St. Ann’s dates back
to 1698, when Pierre Le Ber, brother of the recluse, built a
chapel at Point St. Charles to St. Anne. The first mass was said
on November 12, 1698.

The ruins of the chapel were still to be seen in 1823.

The subsequent English-speaking Catholic churches that followed
St. Patrick’s were founded in the following order:

1854, St. Ann’s, 32 Basin Street, served by the Redemptorist
Fathers since 1884; 1875, St. Gabriel’s; 1884, St. Anthony’s;
1889, St. Mary (Our Lady of Good Counsel); 1902, St. Michael’s;
1903, St. Agnes’; 1908, St. Aloysius’; 1908, St. Thomas Aquinas’;
1912, St. Dominic’s; 1913, St. Willibrod’s.


                              NOTE

                      RELIGIOUS COMMUNITIES

Besides the Diocesan clergy composed of “Secular” priests, an
essential feature of Catholicism in Montreal is the number of
“Religious” orders or “Congregations” of men and women, Montreal
being in many cases, especially of women organizations, the
scene of the foundation and mother-house of numerous branch
establishments in various parts of the American continent.

The following lists will, therefore, be of value. The names are
those only of houses in Montreal or immediately close at hand:


                       COMMUNITIES OF MEN

Sulpician Fathers (1657): Notre Dame, St. James Church, Grand
Seminary, Seminary of Philosophy, Petit Séminaire, St. Jean
l’Evangeliste’s School (Montreal), Lac des Deux Montagnes.

Oblate Fathers: (1848) St. Peter’s Church (Novitiate at Lachine).

Jesuit Fathers (1642 and 1842): Immaculate Conception, N.D. du
Mont Carmel Church, Immaculate Conception, The Gésu, Ste. Mary
and Loyola College (Montreal, Caughnawaga, Sault-au-Recollet).

Redemptorist Fathers (Belgian Province), took charge of St. Ann’s
in 1884: House and Novitiate, St. Ann’s, St. Alphonse de Ligouri,
d’Youville, Our Lady of the Sacred Heart Churches (Montreal).

Clerics of St. Viateur (Outremont, Montreal): Academy St. John
the Baptist, Scholasticate Sacristy of Church (Montreal), Chapel,
Parochial School (Bordeaux), Provincial House, Juvenate, Church,
Parochial School (Outremont), Catholic Institute for Deaf Mutes,
Parochial School, Patronage of St. Francis de Sales, Patronage
of St. George, St. Jean de la Croix (Montreal, Boucherville, St.
Eustache, St. Lambert’s, St. Remi, Sault-au-Recollet, Terrebonne).

Congregation of The Holy Cross, founded from Notre Dame, Indiana,
U.S. A., came to Montreal in 1897: Scholasticate and Notre Dame
des Neiges College, Hochelaga Parish, St. Joseph’s Commercial
College (Hochelaga, Pointe Claire, St. Genevieve, St. Laurent).

Company of Mary (Montreal).

Congregation of the Blessed Sacrament, originally at Rome, called
to Montreal in 1890: (Montreal, Terrebonne.)

Franciscan Fathers (1692 and 1890): St. Joseph’s Convent, Parc
Lasalle residence, Church on Dorchester Street West.

Dominican Fathers (new quarters at St. Hyacinthe, P.Q.): Notre
Dame de Grace.

Fathers of St. Vincent de Paul (Tournai, Belgium): St. Georgés.

Brothers of the Christian Schools, came to Montreal in 1837:
Motherhouse and School, Maisonneuve, Pensionnat Mt. St. Louis,
Archbishop’s Academy, Ste. Ann’s School, St. Bridget’s School,
St. Gabriel’s School, St. James’ School, St. Joseph’s School, St.
Laurent’s School, St. Patrick’s School, St. Henri des Tanneries,
St. Leon (Westmount), Salaberry and Sacred Heart Schools
(Lachine, Longueuil, St. Cunégonde, St. Jerome), St. Paul’s
College (Varennes, Viauville, Oka).

Brothers of Charity of St. Vincent de Paul, called to Montreal in
1865: (Montreal, Longue Pointe).

Brothers of the Sacred Heart: St. Eusèbe, Notre Dame de Grace
(Verdun, Pointe-aux-Trembles).

Marist Brothers, from Iberville, P.Q.: St. Peter’s School, St.
Michael’s School, St. Vincent de Paul.

Brothers of the Christian Instruction, La Prairie, P.Q.: St.
Edward’s College, St. Elizabeth du Portugal School, St. Mary’s,
St. Gregory’s, St. Stanislaus Schools (Chambly, La Trappe,
Napierville, St. Scholastique, St. Anne de Bellevue, Vercheres),
Coté St. Paul, St. John College.

Brothers of St. Gabriel: College and Patronage St. Vincent
de Paul and School, St. Hélène, St. Claire de Tetreaultville
Schools, St. Arsène’s School and Orphanage (La Assomption, St.
Martin, Ste. Rose, St. Therese).

Brothers of the Presentation: (1910) High School, Durocher
Street, for boys; St. Gabriel’s, school for boys.


                      COMMUNITIES OF WOMEN

Sisters of the Congregation of Notre Dame, founded by Marguerite
Bourgeoys: Mother House, School of Higher Education for women,
affiliated with Laval University, Villa-Maria, Pensionnats, Mt.
St. Mary and St. Catherine’s Pensionnats, Visitation School, Ste.
Ann’s School, St. Agnes’ School, St. Denis’ School, St. Anthony’s
School, St. Hélène’s School, St. Joseph’s School, St. Stanislaus
School, Notre Dame des Anges School, Notre Dame du Perpetuel
Secours School, Notre Dame de Bonsecours School, Bourgeoys’
School, St. Leo’s School, St. Urbain’s School, Notre Dame du Bon
Conseil School, St. Laurent’s School, St. Anthony’s School, St.
Eusèbe School, St. Patrick’s School, St. Louis’ School, Jeanne
Le Ber School, St. Alphonsus’ School, St. Claire de Tetreauville
School, St. Vincent de Paul’s School, Our Lady of the Seven
Dolors (Verdun), St. Ann’s Schools.

Hospital Nuns of St. Joseph, founded for Montreal by M. de la
Dauversière and erected as a community in 1659. Hôtel Dieu first
administrated by Jeanne Mance (1642).

Grey Nuns Hospital Général, founded in Montreal by Madame
d’Youville in 1747: St. Patrick’s Asylum, St. Joseph’s Hospice,
St. Bridget’s Home, Nazareth Asylum, Bethlehem Asylum, Notre
Dame Hospital, Patronage d’Youville, Catholic Orphanage, St.
Paul’s Hospital, St. Cunégonde Asylum, Hospice St. Antoine.

Religious of the Sacred Heart came to Montreal in 1842: St.
Alexandra Street 1860, Secondary Education (School).

Sisters of Charity of Providence, founded in Montreal by Madame
Gamelin: Mother House, Gamelin Asylum, Providence Asylum.
Institution for Deaf Mutes, St. Alexis Orphan Asylum, St.
Vincent de Paul Asylum, Hospital des Incurables, Providence Ste.
Geneviève, Hospice Auclair, Hospice Bourget, Holy Child Jesus.

Sisters of the Most Holy Names of Jesus and Mary, founded at
Longueuil in 1844 by Eulalie Durocher (Sister Marie Rose): Mother
House, Pensionnat, Academy Marie-Rose, Academy of the Most Holy
Names, Hochelaga Parish School, St. Clement School (Viauville).

Sisters of Notre Dame of Charity of the Good Shepherd, came to
Montreal in 1841: Provincial Monastery, Ste. Marie Asylum, St.
Louis de Gonzaga Academy.

Sisters of the Holy Cross and of the Seven Dolours, came in 1847:
Mother House, Novitiate, Academy and School, St. Laurent School,
St. Bridget’s School, St. Gabriel’s School, St. Denis’ School.
Our Lady of the Holy Rosary (Villeray): St. Edouard’s School, St.
Paschal’s School, St. Ignatius and St. Basil’s Academies.

Sisters of Miséricorde, founded in Montreal by Madame Jetté in
1845: Mother House, Hospital and Foundling Asylum, Maternity
Hospital.

Sisters of Ste. Anne, founded at Vaudreuil, 1850, by Esther
Sureau dit Blondin: St. Arsène School, Ste. Cunégonde School, St.
George School, St. Henry School, St. Jean de la Croix School, St.
Michael School, Ste. Elizabeth of Portugal School, Holy Child
Jesus School, St. Pierre aux Liens School, Three other Academies.

Sisters of the Precious Blood (Contemplative order), founded at
St. Hyacinthe in 1861, came to Montreal district in 1874: Notre
Dame de Grâce.

Carmelite Sisters: (Contemplative) established at Hochelaga in
1875.

Daughters of Wisdom: (Founded at La Vendèe), came to Montreal in
1910.

Little Sisters of the Poor (care of poor), came to Montreal in
1887.

Little Daughters of St. Joseph, founded in Montreal in 1857 by
the Rev. M. Antoine Mercier.

Little Sisters of the Holy Family, founded at Sherbrooke: Notre
Dame des Neiges (1877), Notre Dame College, St. Peter’s Church,
St. John the Evangelist School, Archevêché de Montréal.

Soeurs de L’Espérance (Nursery Sisters), came to Montreal in
1901: Rue Sherbrooke.

Sisters of Immaculate Conception, erected in 1904 as an order by
Mgr. Bruchesi: Montreal (Outremont).

Sociéte de Marie Réparatrue, came to Montreal in 1911.


FOOTNOTES:

[1] These marked E have English-speaking congregations. The rest
have French.

[2] The names, however, of the students at the College de
Montreal show many unmistakable Irish names. See the note in the
chapter dealing with the history of Laval University.




                           CHAPTER XXV

                  OTHER RELIGIOUS DENOMINATIONS

  ANGLICANISM--EARLY BEGINNINGS--FIRST “CHRIST CHURCH”--THE BISHOPS
    OF MONTREAL--HISTORY OF EARLY ANGLICAN CHURCHES.

  PRESBYTERIANISM--ST. GABRIEL’S STREET CHURCH--ITS OFFSHOOTS--THE
    FREE KIRK MOVEMENT--THE CHURCH OF TODAY.

  METHODISM--FIRST CHAPEL ON ST. SULPICE, 1809--THE DEVELOPMENT OF
    METHODIST CHURCHES.

  THE BAPTISTS--FIRST CHAPEL OF ST. HELEN STREET--FURTHER GROWTH
    AND DEVELOPMENT--PRESENT CHURCHES.

  CONGREGATIONALISM--CANADA EDUCATION AND HOME MISSIONARY
    SOCIETY--FIRST CHURCH ON ST. MAURICE STREET--CHURCHES OF TODAY.

  UNITARIANISM--FIRST SERMON IN CANADA, 1832--ST. JOSEPH STREET
    CHAPEL--THE CHURCHES OF THE MESSIAH.

  HEBREWS--SHEARITH ISRAEL--SHAAC HASHOMOYIM AND OTHER
    CONGREGATIONS.

  SALVATION ARMY--ITS GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT.

  OTHER DENOMINATIONS.

  A RELIGIOUS CENSUS OF MONTREAL FOR 1911.


                           ANGLICANISM

Some notes written about 1790 on the “state of religion”
(Canadian Archives, Series Q, Volume XLX, page 343) help us to
see the beginnings of the Anglican church in Montreal. This
document appears to be issued by the “Society for Propagating
the Gospel” on England. After the peace of 1762 it was thought
advisable by the English government to send some French
Protestant clergymen who could minister to French Protestants,
whose number were greatly exaggerated. Accordingly, while M. de
Montmolten was sent to Quebec and M. Veyssiere to Three Rivers,
M. De Lisle came to Montreal. There was, of course, no church as
the account proceeds to say:

“The minister at Montreal (who is also chaplain for the garrison)
when he does officiate it is in the chapel of the Recollects
Convent on Sunday mornings only and on Christmas day and Good
Friday.” Again, “there is not a single Protestant church in the
whole province. The greater part of the inhabitants of Montreal
are Presbyterians of the church of Scotland. These being weary of
attending a minister (M. de Lisle) whom they did not understand
and for other reasons, have established a Presbyterian minister
and subscribed liberally to his support. His name is Bethune and
he was late chaplain of the Eighty-fourth Regiment, and while Mr.
Stuart assisted Mr. de Lisle (which he did for a short time) he
used constantly to attend the service of our church.”

Even on the arrival of the first Protestant bishop for the
country, Doctor Mountain, who was made Bishop of Quebec about
1793, there were but nine Protestant clergymen in Canada. In the
first years the duty was performed by the military and naval
chaplains. In 1766 the Rev. D.C. De Lisle, a Swiss Protestant,
was appointed rector of Montreal; hitherto, as said, he had acted
as chaplain for the regiment. A minister was appointed for Three
Rivers in 1768 and one for Sorel in 1783. In 1784 the Loyalists,
establishing themselves in the north of the St. Lawrence and
founding the Modern Ontario, chaplains were appointed for New
Oswegatchie (Prescott), New Johnstone (Cornwall), and Kingston
(Cataraqui).

The first Episcopal visitation of an Anglican prelate took place
in Canada in 1787, Dr. Inglis, the first bishop of Nova Scotia,
and then the only bishop in Canada, being appointed on August
12, 1787. He arrived at Quebec on June 11th. After a fortnight’s
visitation he ascended the river, visiting Three Rivers, Sorel
and Montreal. At Montreal he found that a part of the Récollect
Church was kindly loaned at certain hours for the Protestant
services. The city Protestants urged the Bishop to obtain
permission from the government for the Jesuits church, now in its
hands, the order being suppressed and the church falling into
disrepair. The Governor, Lord Dorchester, agreed to place the
building in good repair, but the interior of the pews were to be
fitted up by the congregation. He proposed that the church be
called Christ Church. We may call this the establishment of the
Church of England in Montreal.

Christ Church was opened for service on December 20, 1789, when
the sermon was preached by Mr. De Lisle. Mr. De Lisle died
in 1794, being succeeded by the Rev. James Tunstall, who was
followed in 1801 by the Reverend Dr. Mountain, brother of the
Rev. Jacob Mountain, who had been appointed in 1793 to the new
Anglican see of Quebec. In June, 1803, the church was destroyed
by fire. A building committee was appointed, consisting of Doctor
Mountain, the Hon. James McGill, George Ogden and the Messrs.
Ross, Gray, Frobisher and Sewell. The site of the old French
prison (about where No. 23 Notre Dame Street, West, now stands)
was granted by the government. The cornerstone was laid in 1805.
Meanwhile the Scotch Presbyterian Church of St. Gabriel’s, which
had been erected since 1792, was loaned for services. On the 9th
of October, 1814, after much delay, the new Christ Church was
opened and dedicated. Doctor Mountain died in 1816 and the Rev.
John Leeds succeeded. On his resignation in 1818 the Rev. John
Bethune was presented by the king as rector under letters patent,
which created a rectory and defined the limits of the parish.
Thus Christ Church became the Anglican Mother Church of the city.

In 1850 Montreal was made a diocesan see and the Rev. Francis
Fulford was appointed by letters patent the first bishop, and
Christ Church was named his cathedral. These two seats of letters
patent were the beginning of a long dispute as to the limitations
of authority within the cathedral. Bishop Fulford was enthroned
in Christ Church on September 15th of that year. In 1853 Doctor
Bethune became the first dean of Montreal. In 1856, on the night
of December 10th, the first cathedral was totally destroyed by
fire; the tablets to the memory of the Hon. John Richardson,
now in the east transept of the present edifice, and the copy
of Leonardo da Vinci’s Last Supper, now hung on the south wall,
being among the few objects saved. A new building committee,
of which the Hon. George Moffatt and Chief Justice McCord were
leading members, then set to work. The present site of the
cathedral was chosen, in spite of those who thought it was too
far from the city, and in 1859, on November 27th, the beautiful
Gothic cathedral, one of the most handsome of its kind on the
continent, was opened for worship. In the interval, Gosford
Street church was appropriated for worship under the name of
St. John’s Chapel. In 1867 the Cathedral was consecrated by the
Metropolitan Bishop Fulford. The rectory house was completed in
1877. In 1901 the cathedral act was promoted defining the rights
of the rector, the bishop, the archbishop and the primate within
the cathedral, and the duties of the cathedral chapter. The
following is a list of the rectors of Christ Church and Christ
Church Cathedral: 1789, Rev. D.C. De Lisle; 1791, Rev. James
Tunstall; 1801, Rev. Dr. Mountain; 1815, Rev. John Leeds; 1818,
Rev. John Bethune, afterwards dean; 1872, Rev. Maurice Baldwin,
afterwards dean of Montreal and subsequently bishop of Huron;
1884, Rev. J.G. Norton, subsequently archdeacon of Montreal;
vicars in charge of the parish, 1902, Rev. F.J. Steen; 1903, Rev.
Herbert Symonds.

The Anglican Bishopric of Montreal has its origin as follows:

In 1787 His Majesty, George III, had created Nova Scotia into
an Episcopal see, the bishop of the diocese being also granted
jurisdiction, spiritual and ecclesiastical, over the province of
Quebec as it then existed. In 1793 the bishopric of Quebec was
created and curtailed the jurisdiction of Nova Scotia. The first
bishop was the Rev. Dr. Jacob Mountain who was succeeded on his
death, in 1826, by Bishop Stewart, a younger son of the Earl
of Galloway, and when he died, in 1837, Dr. George Jehoshaphat
Mountain took charge of the extensive diocese. Dr. G.J. Mountain
had been appointed to assist the bishop of Quebec under the title
of Bishop of Montreal, but he had no separate jurisdiction nor
was any see erected at Montreal. This was divided in 1839 by the
creation of a diocese of Toronto, in 1845 by that of Fredericton
and by that of Montreal in 1850. The bishops of the diocese of
Montreal from this date are: Francis Fulford, September 15, 1850,
to September 9, 1868; Ashton Oxenden, August 31, 1869, to May 7,
1878; William Bennett Bond, January 25, 1879, to October 9, 1906;
James Carmichael, November 4, 1906, to September 21, 1908; John
Farthing, consecrated January 6, 1909.

Of the earliest Anglican churches of the city, the Gosford
Street Church, now no longer existent, served as a temporary
place of worship for the Christ Church Cathedral congregation
between 1856 and 1859 after the fire on Notre Dame Street and
saw many vicissitudes. It was purchased by Trinity Church
Congregation in 1860 and used for worship till 1865. It then
afterwards became the Dominion Theatre. Here Miss Emma Lajeunes
of Chambly, afterwards famous as Madame Albani, made a debut
as a plain piano player, for as yet she had not discovered the
powers of her beautiful voice. In 1871 it was changed to “Debars
Opera.” The Cercle Jacques Cartier, a dramatic organization of
French-Canadian amateurs, who were the pioneers of the French
theatre in America, presented a number of plays there. In
1889, the building passed into the hands of Mgr. Bourget, who
placed the property at the disposition of the Union Allet, an
organization of Canadian Zouaves, who had fought for the temporal
power of Pius IX. It then became a vinegar factory, and when
demolished was a carriage depot, and the site has now become, in
1914, that of the City Hall Annex.

The original Trinity Church was built in 1840 on St. Paul Street,
immediately opposite the center of Bonsecours Market, at the
personal expense of Major William Plenderleath Christie, a son
of General Christie of the “Royal Americans,” subsequently
designated the Sixtieth Rifles. It was built on a lot 75 feet 6
inches, more or less, in front, by 174 feet, more or less, in
depth. This church and its successor are proud of the military
associations surrounding it. The edifice is described as an
elegant structure, built in the Gothic style, 75 feet long by
44 wide. The first incumbent of the church was the Rev. Mark
Willoughby. In 1860 the congregation of Trinity purchased the
Gosford Street Church, lately used by the Congregation of Christ
Church, under the title of St. John’s Chapel, and worshipped
there for five years. The old building on St. Paul Street
was torn down and the lot sold. In 1864 the Trinity Church
congregation secured the present site of the church at the
northwest corner of Viger Square and St. Denis Street. The corner
stone was laid on Thursday, June 23, 1864, by the Lord Bishop
Metropolitan, Bishop Fulford. It was opened for public worship
September 17, 1865. It was consecrated on January 13, 1908, by
Bishop Farthing, being his first official act.

The predecessor of St. George’s Church was opened as a
proprietary chapel on St. Joseph Street on June 30, 1843, with
St. George’s Society present in force. The present St. George’s
Church was built in 1870 at the corner of the streets then named
St. François de Sales and St. Janvier (now facing Dominion
Square). It was opened on October 9th of the same year.

St. Stephen’s Church on Dalhousie Street, Griffintown, was
consumed by the great fire of 1850. St. Luke’s Church, at the
corner of Champlain Street and Dorchester Street, East, was
opened in 1854 and enlarged in 1864. The church of St. James,
the Apostle, had its foundation stone laid on July 4, 1853. Its
congregation was formed partly of that originally belonging to
St. Stephen’s church. St. John, the Evangelist, on Ontario and
St. Urbain streets, was built in 1860 and opened in 1861. St.
Thomas Church, corner of Sherbrooke, East, and Delorme Avenue,
succeeded the former church of the same name on Notre Dame and
was conducted by a clergyman of the Countess of Huntingdon’s
Connexion, but opened for the regular Anglican clergy in 1866.
St. Mary’s Church (Hochelaga) dates from 1828, when a stone
church was erected on Marlborough Street on a lot presented by a
farmer to the Rev. John Bethune, then rector of Christ Church.
Shortly after 1851 the church was closed, but was reopened in
1861. In 1889 it was torn down and in 1891 the present church on
the corner of Préfontaine and Rouville streets was built. In the
meantime the congregation worshipped in a building at 321 Notre
Dame Street.

Other Anglican churches are: St. Stephen’s Church, Weredale
Park; St. Edward’s Church, corner of St. Paul and the Haymarket;
St. Martin’s Church, corner of St. Urbain and Prince Arthur
streets; St. Jude’s Church, corner of Coursol and Vinet streets;
All Saints Church, corner of St. Denis and Marie Anne streets,
East; St. Simon’s Church, corner of Courcelles Street and Notre
Dame Street. West: Eglise du Rédempteur, corner Sherbrooke and
Cartier streets; Grace Church, 715 Wellington Street; Church
of the Advent, corner of Wood Avenue and Western Avenue,
Westmount; Church of the Redeemer; St. Clement’s Belcher
Memorial Church, Gordon Avenue and Wellington Street, Verdun;
the Bishop Carmichael Memorial Church, corner of St. Zotique and
Chateaubriand streets; Church of the Good Shepherd, corner of
Claremont and Sherbrooke Street; St. Cyprian’s Church, corner Pie
IX Avenue and Adam Street, Maisonneauve; St. Augustine’s Church,
corner of Dandereau Street and Fourth Avenue, Westmount; St.
Margaret’s Church, Longue Pointe Ward.

[Illustration: CHRIST CHURCH CATHEDRAL]

[Illustration: ST. ANDREWS CHURCH]

[Illustration: SPANISH AND PORTUGESE JEWISH SYNAGOGUE]

[Illustration: OLIVET BAPTIST CHURCH]

The Anglican Missions are as follows: St. Thomas Mission, held in
Delorme schoolroom; St. Cuthbert’s Mission, corner of Beaumont
and King Edward Boulevard; St. Hilda’s Mission, Marquette Street;
St. Aidan’s Mission, Hamilton Avenue.


                          PRESBYTERIANS

Presbyterianism, according to the Rev. Dr. Robert Campbell,
in his history of St. Gabriel’s Street Church, started in
Montreal in a room in St. Lawrence Suburbs on March 12, 1786,
when the meeting for the organization of the first Presbyterian
congregation took place. Most of those present were Scotch
soldiers of the old Seventy-Eighth, or Fraser Highlanders, who
had fought the campaign leading to the conquest of Canada at the
capitulation of Montreal in 1760. After the peace of 1763 a large
proportion of the Highlanders elected to stay in the country,
many settling round Montreal and its district. When the North
West Company was organized these men were of the same metal as
that adventurous Gaelic band, and of the men now gathered, some
“as youths had been actually engaged in the fight at Culloden
in 1745, while several were the children or the descendants of
those brave men who had stood on the side of ‘Prince Charlie’
on that fated field.” The organizer was the Rev. John Bethune,
an ex-chaplain of the Eighty-Fourth Regiment who, however, left
Montreal in 1787. His son, the Rev. John Bethune, an Anglican,
became afterwards famous as the first principal of McGill
University, from 1835 to 1852.

From May, 1787, till 1790 there exists no records of services
held according to Presbyterian forms. They seem as said to have
followed those of the “Rector of the Parish of Montreal and
Chaplain of the Garrison,” the Rev. David Chatbrand De Lisle,
a Swiss who spoke English indifferently. The first regular
Presbyterian minister was the Rev. John Young, from Schenectady,
who was a stormy petrel, but he did good work for eleven years at
Montreal. It was he who organized the erection of St. Gabriel’s
Street Church, the first regular Protestant Church in Old
Canada, prior to 1867, for that chapel erected at Berthier six
years earlier by James Cuthbert, seigneur of Berthier, a Scotch
Presbyterian, is claimed to have been only in the nature of a
private domestic chapel attached to his seigneurial manor. In the
interval between 1786 and 1792, occasional services were held in
the government property known as the old Jesuit Church, which was
also being shared by the Anglicans prior to the erection of the
first Christ Church.

The land was bought on St. Gabriel Street on April 2, 1792.
Until the church was built the Récollet Fathers allowed the
use of their church to the “Society of Presbyterians,” also
for occasional services. The fathers refused any remuneration,
but were induced to accept a present of two hogsheads of
Spanish wine, containing sixty-odd gallons, each, and a box of
candles, amounting in all to £14-2-4. The “Scotch Church,” “the
Protestant Presbyterian Church” or “the Presbyterian Church of
Montreal,” as it was variously called at the time, was built in
1792, Messrs. Telfer and McIntosh executing the mason work and
Mr. Joseph Perrault the carpentry work.

The Rev. Mr. Young’s committee were elected on May 8, 1791, to
arrange the “temporals” of the congregation, and were mostly good
Scotch traders, viz.: Messrs. Richard Dobie, Alex. Henry, Adam
Scott, William Stewart, Alex. Fisher, John Lilly, William Hunter,
Duncan Fisher, William England, Alex. Hannah, Peter McFarlane,
George Kay, John Robb, Thomas Baker, John Empey, John Russell. Of
these nine were to be sufficient to form a quorum.

The list of subscribers to the church building fund reveals the
names of most of the principal merchants at this time, as well as
those of the “Gentlemen of the North West,” so that St. Gabriel’s
was a weighty congregation. But although Protestants, the
worshippers were not all Scotch or Presbyterians. Doctor Campbell
points out John Gregory, Joseph Frobisher, Benaiah Gibb, Thomas
Baker, John Molson, James Woolrich, J.A. Gray, Thomas Busby, R.
Brooks and John Gray, as Englishmen; Sir John Johnson, Andrew
Todd, Thomas Sullivan, Isaac Todd and John Neagles, Irishmen;
John J. Deihl and Andrew Winclefoss, Germans; J.H. Germain and
François Deslard, Frenchmen; Hannah Empey and Peter Pangman, New
England Loyalists, the others being Scots either by birth or
descent, some Highlanders, others Lowlanders.

A portion separated from the Mother Church and formed a
congregation for themselves on St. Peter Street in 1804, building
a church in 1807 opposite to St. Sacrament Street. This was
continued by St. Andrew’s (Beaver Hall Hill) Church, opened in
1851. It was then thought to be a long way from the city. It was
burnt down in 1869, but was shortly afterwards restored to the
original plan.

The next off-shoot from St. Gabriel’s was the predecessor of the
present church of St. Paul, erected in 1834 in St. Helen Street,
at the corner of Récollet Street, which in 1867 was sold and
taken down, and a new church built on the corner of Dorchester
Street and St. Geneviève Street. During the interval the
congregation worshipped in the Belmont Street Normal School below.

The above scissions had been merely local and physical. But the
greatest crisis in the history of the old church of St. Gabriel
was caused by the great constitutional Free Church controversy,
being agitatedly carried on in the parent church of Scotland
and necessarily duplicated in the loyal colonial presbytery of
Montreal. So that from 1830 bitter and personal rancours cleft
the community.

The crisis was brought about by the Rev. Henry Esson, of St.
Gabriel’s Street Church, who seceded about 1844 from the Synod
of Canada in connection with the church of Scotland. The
members who desired to remain with St. Gabriel’s still clave
to the old ways and claimed the Church property, but did not
gain possession of it till 1864, but those who followed the
Rev. Henry Esson, being the majority--claimed and occupied the
temporals on the ground that St. Gabriel’s had never been held
in connection with the Established Church of Scotland. But this
contention finally failed, for in 1864 St. Gabriel’s reverted to
the Church of Scotland on the decision of Government. At this
time of the scission of 1843-4 the “Free Church Committee,”
which had been formed in the city from different Presbyterian
churches, consisted of John Redpath, chairman: James R. Orr,
David and Archibald Ferguson, A. McGown, James Morrison, William
Hutchison, Alexander Fraser, Donald Fraser, Evander McIvor,
William Bethune and William McIntosh. The object was to form a
church in connection with the Free Church of Scotland.

Writing in 1893, Mr. John Sterling, an adherent of the Free Kirk
movement, speaks of the memorable conflict in the Established
Church of Scotland, or the non-intrusion question and its
relation to the movement in Montreal which resulted in the Coté
Street Free Church.

  This conflict lasted for about ten years, and culminated in the
  disruption of the church, on the 18th day of May, 1843, when 474
  of its ministers and missionaries, for conscience sake, severed
  their connection with it, and constituted themselves into a body
  called the “Free Church of Scotland,” giving up their churches,
  their manses, their livings, and risking every worldly prospect,
  going forth with their wives and families, not knowing what might
  befall them, but with a clear conscience, trusting in God for the
  future, whatever it might be--one of the noblest sacrifices for
  principle that the world has ever seen.

  During all the time of the conflict, many of the members of
  the Presbyterian churches of this city, in connection with the
  Established Church of Scotland, strongly sympathized with the
  non-intrusion movement, and on the disruption taking place,
  considered it their duty to manifest their sympathy with the
  Free Church principles. At that time (1843-44) there were five
  Presbyterian Churches in this city, viz.: St. Gabriel’s Street
  Church, St. Andrew’s Church, St. Paul’s Church, Lagauchetiere
  Street Church, and the American Presbyterian Church, the first
  three of which were in connection with the Established Church of
  Scotland. The first concerted movement in this direction took
  place on the 10th day of January, 1844, when twelve ardent and
  good men, who might well be called the twelve apostles of the
  Free Church in Canada, met together and called themselves the
  Free Church Committee, others joining them afterwards, their
  object being to extend and propagate Free Church principles. The
  ultimate result of the work of this committee was that in May,
  1845, a new Presbyterian congregation was formed in Montreal,
  which worshipped for a time in a wooden building on Lagauchetiere
  Street, near the head of Cote Street, which had been hastily
  and cheaply erected, being only intended to accommodate the
  congregation temporarily, until the projected new church to be
  built on Cote Street should be ready for occupation.

  At this time (1845) this locality was most respectable and quite
  uptown, and the new church which was proposed to be erected
  there, turned out to be the largest and finest Presbyterian
  church building of its day in the city. It was opened for public
  worship on Sabbath, the 16th day of May, 1848, and the name
  chosen for it was the “Free Church, Coté Street.”

  The population of the city had increased threefold, and the
  character of the locality by 1877 had entirely changed. The
  Protestant part of the population had mostly removed westwards to
  an inconvenient distance from the church, and the remnant were
  gradually moving away in the same direction, and the consequent
  dropping off of families and members, who were joining churches
  much more convenient to their dwellings, made the absolute
  necessity of the removing the church building westwards, quite
  apparent.

  Consequently it was then decided to build uptown and the Crescent
  Street Presbyterian Church was commenced early in the fall of
  1876, the corner-stone being laid on May 5, 1877, and the church
  being opened for service on March 10, 1878.

Beside the Coté Street secession from St. Gabriel’s which is
now continued by the Crescent Street Church, the Knox Church
organization is now to be described: The free church movement in
Canada ended in a secession, not a disruption. Accordingly after
the dispute relating to the temporals of St. Gabriel’s Street
Church the seceding body in 1864 agreed to retire and formed
the session of Knox church. This held its last meeting in St.
Gabriel’s Street Church on July 31, 1865, and the last meeting of
the Knox congregation for worship there was on October 31, 1865.
The Knox Church at the corner of Mansfield and Dorchester Street
was opened for divine service December 3, 1865. According to the
Reverend Doctor Campbell this church represents _de facto_, but
not _de jure_, the original congregation established in 1786.

The St. Gabriel’s Street Church was sold to the Government in
1886 and the congregation migrated to the New St. Gabriel’s
Church on St. Catherine Street opposite the present St. James
Methodist Church. This was demolished in 1909. St. Gabriel’s
legitimate successor is the First Presbyterian Church at the
corner of Prince Arthur and Mance streets.

Intervening between the Presbyterian Church of Scotland and
the Free Kirk Secession, there remains to be chronicled the
settlement of the American Presbyterian church in Montreal which
arose originally through the secession from St. Gabriel’s Street
Church in 1803, and later through a succession from Mr. Easton’s
church on St. Peter Street which by a change of name in 1824
became the first St. Andrew’s Church.

The American Presbyterian Church was the result of the minority
of Mr. Easton’s church on St. Peter Street becoming offended
at the resolution of the majority to procure a minister of the
Established Church of Scotland, withdrawing from what henceforth
became St. Andrew’s Church, so that a new congregation was formed
on December 15, 1822. This organized the first church at the
corner of St. James Street and Victoria Square, which was opened
on December 1, 1826. It was called “American” because it was
recognized by the Presbytery of New York, as under its care on
March 23, 1823; otherwise it was Canadian in the composition of
its membership. The second church, that of today, on Dorchester
Street, was opened on June 24, 1866.

It is not necessary to pursue further the story of the various
off-shoots of the Presbyterian churches. Suffice it to say that
in June, 1875, in Montreal the Presbyterian church of Canada, in
connection with the Church of Scotland, the Canada Presbyterian
Church of the Lower provinces, the Presbyterian Church of the
Maritime provinces, in connection with the Church of Scotland,
united and became the General Assembly of the Presbyterian
Church in Canada. The St. Andrew’s Church remained, however, in
connection with the Church of Scotland.

The Presbyterian churches in the city today are: St. Andrew’s
Church (Church of Scotland), Beaver Hall Hill; St. Paul’s Church,
corner of Dorchester West and St. Monique Street; the American
Presbyterian Church, corner of Dorchester and Drummond streets;
Knox Church, Dorchester Street, West, corner of Mansfield
Street; St. John’s Church (French Presbyterian), St. Catherine
and Cadieux streets; St. Mathew’s Church, corner of Bourgeoys
and Wellington streets; Calvin Presbyterian Church, 946 Notre
Dame West; First Presbyterian Church, corner of Prince Arthur
and St. Lawrence Boulevard; Erskine Church, Sherbrooke Street,
West, corner of Ontario Avenue; Crescent Street Presbyterian
Church, corner of Dorchester Street, West and Crescent Street;
Stanley Street Church, 96 Stanley Street, near Windsor Hotel;
St. Mark’s Presbyterian Church, William and Dalhousie streets;
Taylor Church, Papineau Avenue and Logan Street; St. Giles
Presbyterian Church, St. Denis, corner of St. Joseph Boulevard;
Victoria Church, corner of Conway and Menai streets; Westminster
Presbyterian Church, Atwater Avenue, Westmount; Montreal West
Presbyterian Church; Melville Presbyterian Church, Elgin Avenue,
Westmount Park; St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church, Stanton Street
and Coté St. Antoine Road; Maisonneuve Presbyterian Church,
corner of Letourneux Avenue and Adam Street, Maisonneuve; Salem
Welsh Presbyterian Church, Alexandra Rooms, 314 St. Catherine,
West; Fairmount Presbyterian Church, corner of Masson and
Papineau streets; McVicar Memorial Church, St. Viateur Avenue,
West, corner of Hutchinson Street; Verdun Presbyterian Church, 47
Ross Street, Verdun.

[Illustration: AMERICAN PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH]

[Illustration: EMANUEL CONGREGATIONAL CHURCH]

[Illustration: ST. JAMES METHODIST CHURCH]

[Illustration: ST. GEORGE’S CHURCH (EPISCOPAL)]

Presbyterian missions are: Nazareth Street Mission, corner of
Wellington and Nazareth streets; St. Paul’s Mission, 184 St.
Charles Street.


                         THE METHODISTS

The first chapel of the Wesleyan Methodists, opened in 1809, was
situated on St. Joseph Street, afterwards called St. Sulpice. In
1821 the Congregation moved to the corner of St. François Xavier
and St. James streets, when the old chapel became the first
public newsroom of Montreal. In 1845 the Great St. James Street
Methodist Church was erected with an entrance on St. James Street
and two on Fortification Lane. This church was burnt down. In
the meantime a Methodist church had been erected in Griffintown,
called the Ottawa Street Church, on Wellington Street, close
to where Duke Street now stands. This was also burnt down and
it was replaced in 1846 by the church on the corner of St.
Ann and Ottawa streets. In 1845 another church was opened on
Lagauchetière Street, at the corner of Durham Street. In 1857, in
August, the new Connexion Methodist Salem Chapel on Panet Street
was opened, followed on September 26, 1858, by Ebenezer Chapel,
on Dupré Street. In 1864, there was a movement, for expansion
among the Wesleyan Methodist body, which had for its result the
Sherbrooke Street Church, corner of St. Charles Borromee and
Sherbrooke Street, West, of which the foundation stone was laid
on July 5, 1864, and the opening occurred on May 21, 1865. The
foundation stone of the Dorchester Street Church, corner of
Windsor Street and the Point St. Charles Church on Wellington
Street, were laid on Saturday, October 1, 1864. The Centenary
Methodist Church was built in 1865 at the corner of Wellington
Street and was rebuilt in 1891 at the corner of Charron and
Wellington streets.

The other Methodist churches in the city are, St. James Methodist
Church (St. Catherine Street, corner of St. Alexander Street);
Mountain Street Methodist Church (corner of Mountain and Torrance
Street); Douglas Methodist Church (corner of Chomedy and St.
Catherine Street, West); Dominion Square Methodist Church
(Dorchester Street, corner of Windsor); West End Methodist Church
(corner of Canning and Coursel Street); East End Methodist
Church (corner Cartier and DeMartigny streets); Fairmount Avenue
Methodist Church (corner of Hutchison Street and Fairmount
Avenue, West); Marlborough Street Methodist Church; Mount Royal
Avenue Methodist Church; Ebenezer Methodist Church (corner of St.
Antoine and Convent streets); Westmount Methodist Church (corner
of Lansdowne Avenue and Western Avenue); Verdun Methodist Church
(86 Gordon Avenue, Verdun); Huntley Street Methodist Church
(Huntley Street near St. Zotique Street); First French Methodist
Church (services held in the lecture room of St. James Methodist
Church); and Eglise Méthodiste Française (De Lisle Street).

In giving the above list of churches it has not been thought
necessary to pursue the later history of their separate cessions,
or off-shoots from the parent churches. It is sufficient to note
that on August 29, 1883, at Belleville, Ontario, the Methodist
Church of Canada, the Methodist Episcopal Church in Canada, the
Protestant Methodist Church in Canada and the Bible Christian
church of Canada, united and became the Methodist Church of
Canada.


                        BAPTIST CHURCHES

As early as 1820,[1] a number of Baptists in the city met in the
parlour of the residence of Mr. Ebenezer Muir “for the worship of
God and mutual edification” each Lord’s day for ten consecutive
years. In 1830, they invited the Rev. John Gilmour of Aberdeen,
Scotland, to come to Canada and lead the little flock into larger
fields.

On the 12th day of September of the same year, two days after
landing, Mr. Gilmour, missionary of God, preached his first
sermon to his new charge in this new land in what was then known
as the Bruce Schoolroom on McGill Street.

This little band opened their new chapel, situated on St. Helen
Street and completed at the cost of £935-0-1 of which £572-10-9
were paid before its opening, leaving a debt of £362-9-4 due to
two of their own members, John Fry and Ebenezer Muir, in equal
parts of £181-4-8 each. On the 13th day of November, 1831, the
First Baptist Church was regularly organized in this building
with twenty-five constituent members. A marble tablet placed on
the wall of Gault Bros’ wholesale establishment on St. Helen
Street bears the following inscription:--

                           Here Stood
              The First Baptist Chapel of Montreal,
                              1831.
                 The Rev. John Gilmour, Pastor.
                        Abandoned, 1860.

Immediately underneath this tablet there is another which
illustrates the spirit of Christian enterprise and helpfulness
that characterized this mother church in her early days, as
follows:

                           This Tablet
        Commemorates the Organization on this Site of the
             First Young Men’s Christian Association
                   on the American Continent.
                         November, 1851,
       Erected on the Occasion of the Jubilee Celebration,
                          June 8, 1901.

It may not be very widely known that the first Young Men’s
Christian Association on this continent was organized by a member
of the First Baptist Church, Mr. T.J. Claxton, in the First
Baptist Church and especially for the young men who were members
of this church and their Christian associates in the city.

The period from Mr. Gilmour’s resignation in 1835 to the building
of the Beaver Hall Hill Chapel, was one of trial and testing
but finally of establishment and triumph. The following are the
names of the pastors who served the church during this time,
with the dates on which they took charge:--Rev. Newton Bosworth,
September 29, 1835; Rev. John Hatch Waldon, September 19, 1837;
Rev. Beniah Hoe, September 18, 1839; Rev. John Girdwood, June
21, 1841; Rev. Thomas Spalding, April 19, 1851; Rev. Phaucellus
Church, January 5, 1853; Rev. James Lillie, D.D., November 29,
1853; Rev. J.N. Williams, April 20, 1856; Rev. John Goadby, D.D.,
May 1, 1859--nine pastors in twenty-six years, or an average of a
little less than three years each, indicating an unsettled period
in the history of the church, yet one that laid solid foundation
for future work.

With the advent of Doctor Goadby, May 1, 1859, the church entered
upon a second stage or epoch in her history which we can properly
designate the growing and multiplying period.

The church, under the leadership of Doctor Goadby, with a
membership of 160, decided to build a house of worship in a
more residential and convenient location than St. Helen Street
was. With this end in view a site was secured at the corner of
Beaver Hall Hill and Lagauchetiere Street on which a beautiful
and up-to-date church home, with excellent equipment for
Sunday-school work and other departments of Christian activity,
was erected at the cost of $25,000. This was opened in January,
1862, and sold in 1878 to the Reformed Episcopal Church. On
the twenty-seventh day of March, 1863, the Rev. John Alexander
accepted the pastorate of this church. During his incumbency
the church entered upon a period of uninterrupted prosperity;
constant accessions were made to its membership.

In 1864 a mission was started in the East end of the city in
the lecture room of the German Lutheran Church on St. Dominique
Street, with a Sunday-school of twenty-eight scholars and eight
teachers. Shortly after the starting of this school a Thursday
evening prayer meeting and a Sunday evening service were
commenced. These, after the lapse of some time, outgrew their
accommodation and in 1868 Mr. T.J. Claxton and other members of
the church erected a commodious building on the corner of St.
Catherine and St. Justin streets, afterwards known as Russell
Hall, for the accommodation of this mission. This building was
called Russell Hall in honor of Major General Russell of the
British Army, a loyal Baptist, who at the time resided in this
city and who in every possible way supported the work of this
mission.

Russell Hall Sunday-school, under the leadership of Mr. T.J.
Claxton, was for some years, from the numerical standpoint at
least, one of the most successful in connection with the Baptist
denomination, the enrollment reaching 600 and the average
attendance 500. On September 3, 1869, through the advice of a
large council called for the purpose, this mission was organized
into a regular Baptist church of which Rev. Robert Cade, ordained
by the same council, was chosen pastor.

In 1875 building on St. Catherine Street, at present occupied by
the First Baptist Church, was erected as the house of worship
for the St. Catherine Street Church, at the cost of about
$60,000, in which they continued to worship in their separate
capacity for three years. During the period between 1869 and
1878 the following were the pastors:--Rev. Robert Cade, 1869-70;
Rev. J. Denovan, afterwards Doctor Denovan, 1870-77; Rev. J.L.
Campbell, now Doctor Campbell of the First Church, Cambridge,
Massachusetts, 1877-78; during his pastorate the union between
the St. Catherine Street and First Churches was consummated.

Going back now to the point, in 1864, at which we diverged from
the history of the First Baptist Church, in tracing the story of
Russell Hall Mission and St. Catherine Street Church, we find
that after the lapse of about two years, in 1866, another mission
was started at Point St. Charles which shortly afterwards was
organized into an independent church that gave great promise of
usefulness in that interesting community, with Rev. Thomas Gale
as its pastor. Mr. T.J. Claxton of the First Church erected a
building for the accommodation of the Point St. Charles interest.
We find, however, that this church disbanded, the cause for
which, owing to lack of information, we are unable to state nor
are we able to say what disposition was made of the building nor
with what church did the remnant of the membership unite.

In the year 1875 eighty-five members withdrew from the First
Church in order to organize the Olivet Baptist Church. In after
years many other members withdrew and united with this church.
While the First Church and its affiliated institutions suffered
greatly by this movement yet the after history of both the First
and Olivet Churches clearly shows that no single Baptist church
could, in the City of Montreal, be as strong and influential as
the two have been and are now.

In 1878 the First Baptist Church worshipping in the house of
Beaver Hall Hill and the St. Catherine Street Church worshipping
in the building on the corner of St. Catherine and City
Councillor streets united, this united body to be known as the
First Baptist Church, making the house on St. Catherine Street,
in which they now worship, their church home. The house on Beaver
Hall Hill was at that time sold to the Reformed Episcopal church
for the sum of $25,000. The Rev. J.L. Campbell, pastor of the St.
Catherine Street Church, retiring, the Rev. A.H. Munroe, pastor
of the First Church continued to shepherd the united flock.

During this interesting section of the growing and multiplying
period of the church’s history, lying between the erection of the
Beaver Hall Hill house of worship and the union of the First and
St. Catherine Street Churches, the following were the pastors of
the First Church:--Rev. John Goadby, D.D., May 1, 1859; Rev. John
Alexander, March 27, 1863; Rev. William Cheetham, 1870; Rev. A.H.
Munroe, 1876.

Between the years 1881 and 1886 two missions were started by
individual members of the church, one at Cote St. Louis and the
other at St. Louis de Mile End, both of which continued for some
time and gave promise of considerable success. Owing, however, to
the lack of helpers, the former was by the discouraged workers
handed over to Canon Evans of the Anglican Church who had a
mission in that neighborhood, and so has become the nucleus
of that which is now All Saints’ Church; and the latter was
closed because the workers united with the band that withdrew to
organize Grace Baptist Church.

In the year 1888 the Gain Street Church was started as another
mission and Sunday-school in the East End of the city to which in
1897 a number of members were dismissed to organize it into an
independent church.

In 1890, during the months of March and April, thirty-four
members of the First Baptist Church were dismissed in order
to organize with the St. Louis de Mile End workers, the Grace
Baptist Church, now known as the Westmount Baptist Church. In
1902 the First Church assumed charge of the North Baptist Mission
on St. Urbain Street and Duluth Avenue. About this time another
mission was started on Berri Street, not under the auspices
of this church, but successfully carried on by one of its
deacons--Mr. John Ede, who had associated with him a number of
the members of this church and other workers.

More recently the North Mission property was sold to the
Protestant school commissioners. On the completion of the
Temple Baptist Church (corner of Park and Laurier avenues) the
Berri Street Mission lapsed and its workers returned to the
First Baptist Church or to the Temple Church, the Rev. Mr. Ede
afterwards being called to the Tabernacle Church. The latest
church added is the Verdun Baptist Church on Rockland Avenue.
Mention must be made of the French Baptist Church L’Oratoire at
14 Mance Street, above Sherbrooke Street.


                      CONGREGATIONAL CHURCH

Organized Canadian Congregationalism began in Montreal in 1829
when the Canada Education and Home Missionary Society was founded
in Montreal with Mr. Henry Wilkes, then a young man in business,
as its first secretary. This society was designed to support
pioneer Presbyterian, Baptist or Congregational ministers. There
had been, however, previous sporadic and unorganized attempts
at church establishment in upper Canada. One such was that
founded in 1817 by a Congregational minister, the Rev. Joseph
Silcox, bearing the extraordinary title of “The Congregational
Presbyterian Prince of Peace Society.” Mr. Wilkes went to
Scotland shortly after the formation of the Montreal society
and while a church student in Glasgow induced some ministers,
among them the Rev. Richard Miles, to come to Canada. The Rev.
Richard Miles came to Montreal in 1831, while Rev. Adam Lillie
went to Brantford in 1833. The visit of the Reverend Doctors Reed
and Matheson, delegates from England to the American churches
in 1834, who also made a trip through Canada, led the foreign
missionary society to send out some missionaries here, and in
1836, under Mr. Wilkes’ leadership, the Colonial Missonary
Society, still the foster mother of Canadian Congregationalism,
was organized in Montreal. The Rev. Mr. Wilkes became the agent
in Montreal and the Rev. Mr. Roaf in Toronto.

The first Congregational Church was opened for service on St.
Maurice Street on the second Sabbath of February, 1833. This
was sold and in 1846 Zion Church was erected. The third church
dates to 1868 and was erected at the corner of Amherst and Craig
streets. Other churches of a later date are Calvary Church (302
Guy Street), Emanuel Church (Drummond Street, near Sherbrooke
Street, West), Zion Congregational Church, Point St. Charles (185
Congregation Street), Bethlehem Congregational Church, corner of
Western Avenue and Clark Avenue.


                            UNITARIAN

The history of the Unitarian movement in Montreal dates from the
year 1832, when on the 29th of July the Rev. David Hughes of
England preached in the Union School Room at the corner of St.
Sacrament and St. Nicholas streets the first Unitarian sermon
ever delivered, it is believed, anywhere in Canada. This was the
year in which Montreal was devastated by the Asiatic cholera,
1,900 persons dying in four months, out of a population of
little more than thirty thousand. Mr. Hughes was one of these
victims of the plague, but the work which he had inaugurated
survived him. A small band of Unitarian believers secured a place
to hold services in a building which was known on account of its
location as St. Joseph Street Chapel. Here the Rev. Mr. Angier,
an American minister, took charge of the services, and a Sunday
School was inaugurated by Mr. Benjamin Workman. A movement was
begun by the infant society to acquire land, and erect a church,
but the times were unpropitious. A return of the cholera in 1834,
together with the subsequent depression of business and the
political disturbances which culminated in the Riel Rebellion
of 1837, caused so much discouragement that interest flagged,
and for a while even the regular services were discontinued.
Occasional meetings were, however, held until, in 1841, the
movement was definitely renewed under the inspiration chiefly of
a few devoted women, prominent among whom were Mrs. Cushing and
Mrs. Hedge, whose conviction that the time had come for a new
and more vigorous Unitarian propaganda was shared by a group of
men whose names have been synonymous with good citizenship and
philanthropy in Montreal during more than one generation. Mr.
John Frothingham, Mr. Benjamin Workman, Mr. Luther Holton, Mr.
William Molson, and Doctor Cushing, were actively interested in
the formation of the second Unitarian congregation of Montreal,
and their efforts were stimulated by the eloquent preaching of
an English minister, the Rev. Mr. Giles, who for several months
conducted services in a small building situated at the corner
of Fortification Lane and Haymarket Square. Subsequently an
invitation was extended by this small company of worshippers to
the Rev. John Cordner, of Belfast, Ireland, to become their first
settled pastor. Mr. Cordner, who preached his first sermon in
Montreal in November, 1843, had been ordained by the Remonstrant
Synod of Ulster, and his congregation remained for several years
in official relation with the Irish Synod. In 1858 this alliance
was dissolved, and the Montreal Church united in fellowship with
its nearest neighbor, the American Unitarian Association, having
headquarters in Boston, Massachusetts. During its early years
of struggle financial aid, as well as friendly interest and the
service of visiting ministers, had been given by this Association
to the Montreal congregation, and it was with their assistance
that, in 1844, a piece of land was purchased and a church
building erected on Beaver Hall Hill on a site once occupied by
the old Frobisher mansion, historically connected with the early
development of the fur-trade in Canada, and with the pioneer days
of the North West Company. In the following year the Unitarian
congregation received legal status by Act of Parliament, and its
ministers were authorized to keep record of civil acts required
of all settled pastors under the laws of the Province. By 1857
the congregation had outgrown its first building, and a new
place of worship was erected which, with its simple dignified
architecture, and beautiful spire, remained for fifty years a
well-known landmark of the city, under the name at this time
adopted, the Church of the Messiah.

In 1869 this building was seriously damaged by fire, and during
the time when it was undergoing repairs its congregation
worshiped in the hall of the St. Patrick’s Association in
response to the generous invitation of the Rev. Father Dowd.

Towards the end of his long pastorate of thirty-six years Doctor
Cordner was assisted, first by the Rev. Edward Hayward for a
period of one year, and afterwards, by the Rev. J.B. Green,
during three years. In 1879 when Doctor Cordner’s advancing years
made it desirable for him to retire from the active duties of
the ministry he was succeeded by the Rev. William S. Barnes, of
Boston.

Like his predecessor Mr. Barnes enjoyed a long pastorate, serving
his congregation faithfully for thirty years. Of each of these
ministers it may truly be said that he gained a unique place in
the affection of his congregation, combined with one of honor
and respect from the community at large. Each was distinguished
by a life of constant devotion to the service of his ideals, and
the duties of his pastorate, by unusual intellectual gifts, and
by great pulpit eloquence. The University of McGill recognized
the ability and public services of both ministers by awarding to
them the degree of LL. D. The story of the growth and unification
of the Church of the Messiah is largely the story of the devoted
lives of the two ministers who occupied its pulpit for a combined
period of nearly seventy years.

In 1905 the congregation decided that, owing to the movement
of the population uptown, and away from the old-time centers,
the situation of its place of worship had become inconveniently
remote, and the property was therefore sold, and a new church
building erected at the corner of Sherbrooke West and Simpson
streets. The new building, considered to be architecturally one
of the most successful erections of the city, owes much of its
harmony of design and execution to the artistic taste and culture
of Dr. Barnes, who felt its erection to be the culmination of his
life-work.


                        HEBREW SYNAGOGUES

Jewish settlers arrived in Canada towards the close of the period
of French rule. Among the officers and soldiers who fought in the
armies of Amherst and Wolfe were a number of men of the Hebrew
race who did their modest share towards assisting in the conquest
of the country and making it a part of the British Empire. When
they became sufficiently numerous to establish their first
Jewish congregation in Montreal, Canada, in 1768, they followed
the ritual of the Spanish and Portuguese or Sephardic Jews.
This congregation took the name of the Spanish and Portuguese
Jews, “Shearith Israel,” and the Congregation has continued ever
since in existence, being one of the most ancient of the Jewish
congregations in America. It at present worships on Stanley
Street above St. Catherine. The first place of worship was in a
room or hall on St. James Street, but in 1777 there was built
the first regular synagogue building on a lot of land belonging
to David David, son of Lazarus David, the first Jewish settler
in this city. The building was described as a low walled edifice
of stone with a red roof and high white-washed wall enclosing
it. It stood on Notre Dame Street at the junction of St. James
Street adjoining the present Court House and had an entrance on
either side. Shortly after the erection of this synagogue the
Congregation bought its first lot of land for a cemetery on St.
Janvier Street near what is now known as Dominion Square.

The first synagogue built near the Court House had to be
abandoned on account of the land on which it was built reverting
to the David family after the death of David David, and after
worshipping temporarily at the south-west corner of St. Helen and
Recollet streets, the second synagogue building of the Spanish
and Portuguese Congregation was erected on Chenneville Street in
1835 and completed in 1838. It was a small but dignified stone
building with a Doric portico and quasi-Egyptian interior. The
work was mainly carried out under the direction of Moses J. Hays,
a son of Andrew Hays, one of the earliest Jewish colonists, and
he was at that time a trustee of the Congregation.

When the Spanish and Portuguese Synagogue was founded its first
rabbi was the Rev. Jacob Raphael Cohen, who came to Montreal in
1778, and held office for a number of years. He was succeeded by
M. Levy, and after him came Isaac Valentine. Rev. David Piza was
appointed minister of the Congregation in 1840 and held office
for six years, when he returned to London and became one of the
ministers of the Sephardic congregation there.

In 1846 the Rev. Abraham de Sola, LL. D., of London, England,
was elected rabbi and arrived in Canada early in the following
year. Dr. Abraham de Sola belonged to a family that had long
been prominent in the annals of the Jewish people in Spain and
afterwards in Holland and in England. His mother was of the
equally distinguished Meldola family. For over thirty-five years
he remained the spiritual chief of the Sephardic Jews in this
country. He died in 1882 and was succeeded by his eldest son,
Rev. Meldola de Sola.

In 1890 the Spanish and Portuguese Jewish Congregation removed to
a new synagogue building which they had erected on Stanley Street
above St. Catherine. The corner stone had been laid three years
previously. Its architectural features are interesting as being a
conscientious attempt to carry out a pseudo Judeo-Egyptian style
with considerable success. Its design was due to Mr. Clarence I.
de Sola, one of the sons of Dr. Abraham de Sola, who directed
its erection and who had much to do with the carrying out of the
undertaking.

In the same year the Spanish and Portuguese Jews obtained a new
act of incorporation from the Provincial Parliament, its earlier
act of incorporation proving now inadequate to the needs of the
growing body.

Up to the year 1846 the Spanish and Portuguese Congregation,
“Shearith Israel” had remained the only Jewish Congregation in
Montreal, but during that year a number of recently arrived
German and Polish Jews established a second synagogue, and in
consequence of this a joint act of Parliament had been secured
for the two congregations. The second congregation, however,
existed only for a very short time, as its members were very
few in number so that they disbanded and joined the original
Spanish and Portuguese Congregation. In 1857-58, however, a
number of new arrivals of Jews from Poland, availing themselves
of the act of incorporation that had been obtained by their
predecessors, organized in 1858, what is now known as the
Congregation of German and Polish Jews, “Shaar Hashamoyim.” They
gathered regularly for worship about 1860 and erected their
first synagogue on St. Constant Street, now known as Cadieux
Street. Among the founders of the congregation were A. Hoffmann,
M.A. Olandorff, Edward Hymes and Lewis Anthony and were shortly
afterwards joined by David Moss, Edward Moss, Lawrence Moss and
Solomon Silvermann. The members of the Moss family were long
among the most prominent of the leaders in this synagogue and
were active here in Jewish communal affairs for two generations.
Among those of the younger generation of this family were Samuel
D. Moss, Hyman D. Moss and John Moss, who all in turn held office
in “Shaar Hashamoyim.” Among others who occupied the office
of president of this congregation were Lyon Silverman, Moses
Vineberg and D.A. Ansell. In 1887 the congregation built a new
synagogue in McGill College Avenue. During recent years it has
grown immensely in membership. This has been notably the case
under the administration of its late president, Mr. Lazarus
Cohen, as well as during the administration of his son, Mr. Lyon
Cohen, both of whom have been very active and capable workers
in the Jewish community of to-day. So well, indeed, have these
men and their associates managed the affairs of the Congregation
that they have already acquired land near Atwater Avenue and
St. Luke Street to put up a much larger synagogue to meet the
demands of its ever-growing membership. The first regular rabbi
of Congregation “Shaar Hashamoyim” was the Rev. Mr. Foss and
among his successors were the Rev. I.M. Cohen, Rev. E.M. Myers,
Rev. L. Friedlander, Rev. Isador Myers and the Rev. B. Kaplan.
The present incumbent of the office is the Rev. Dr. Hermann
Abramowitz.

Up to the year 1881 the Jewish population of Montreal was not
large, and the membership of the two congregations which then
existed was, in consequence, limited; but the terrible outbreak
of persecution of Jews in Russia in 1881 and the recurrence of
these outbreaks periodically in the following decades resulted
in immense numbers of Jews immigrating from Russia to Canada and
other countries. As a result the Jewish population of Montreal
increased by tens of thousands in a very short time, and it is
estimated that to-day there are in this city alone fully 60,000
Jews. One of the results was the formation of a large number
of new Jewish congregations and the erection of quite a number
of commodious synagogues. Among these are the Congregation of
“B’Nai Jacob,” which erected a new building on the site of the
old one in Cadieux Street. Among its founders were L. Aaronson
and L. Lazarus. The Roumanian Jews formed the Congregation “Beth
David,” and purchased the Chenneville Street building from its
former occupants after they had altered it considerably. Shortly
afterwards the Congregation “Chevra Kadisha” was formed, and they
erected their present handsome building on St. Urbain Street,
while the Austrian Jews erected a large synagogue on Milton
Street. The building of new synagogues has continued apace,
and the formation of new congregations of Hebrews is a common
occurrence.

All the congregations referred to above follow the customs of
traditional or orthodox Judaism, but in 1882 a small number of
gentlemen who favored the principles of American Reform Judaism
met in the old Lindsay Building on St. Catherine Street to form
a “Reform” congregation, and thus was founded what is now known
as Congregation Temple Emanuel. They held their first services in
the autumn of 1882 and obtained an act of incorporation in March,
1883. Among the founders of this congregation were B.A. Boas, B.
Kortosk, Leopold Isaacs, L. Abrahams, E. Lichtenhein, S. Fishel,
and A. Goldstein. They were soon afterwards joined by Samuel
Davis, who for a number of years held office as president and who
was a popular member of the reform community. They first rented
a building but afterwards erected a temple on Stanley Street,
in the rear of the Windsor Hotel. On September 17, 1911, they
dedicated their new temple building on Sherbrooke Street, West,
near Westmount. This Congregation is up to the present the only
one following the Reform ritual in Canada, and although they form
but a small minority of the total community, they have adhered to
their views in a typical manner. Their present president is Mr.
Maxwell Goldstein, K.C. Their first minister was the Rev. Samuel
Marks, who was followed among others by the Rev. H. Veld, and
Rev. Isaac Landman. Their present rabbi is the Rev. Nathan Gordon.


                       THE SALVATION ARMY

The religious work of the Salvation Army began in Montreal on the
13th of November, 1884, with the following as the first corps
of officers: Commissioner T.B. Combs, territorial commander,
in charge of the work throughout Canada; Staff Commander
Madden, divisional commander; Captain and Mrs. “Happy Bill”
Cooper, corps officers; assisted by Lieutenant Eva Lewis. It
met initial difficulties, principally in the injunction that
forbade the holding of meetings unless they kept moving, which
was circumvented by moving around in a circle at the same spot, a
necessity which was finally allowed to drop.

The first corps held its meetings for the first two years in
Webber’s Hall, which stood on the site of the present Canadian
Northern Steamship Company’s building on Dollard Lane and St.
James Street. Next the Mechanic’s Hall, on St. James and St.
Peter streets was used as a meeting place for six months. The
next location was the basement of Leggett’s boot and shoe factory
at the corner of Craig and Victoria streets, where the present
Greenshield’s building stands, until the St. Alexander Street
building was erected.

This was the citadel and training home for officers and the main
corps of the army. The fine structure on University Street, the
divisional headquarters, was erected in 1903, and the building
on St. Alexander Street was altered entirely to become the
present “Metropole” for social relief work. The University Street
building, in addition to serving as the divisional headquarters
of the Army also houses the finance and immigration departments
and is the home of Corps No. 1, and includes the Young Women’s
Lodge.

Following the opening of the work by Corps No. 1, Corps No. 2 was
organized in Point St. Charles on March 15, 1885.

Corps No. 3, the French Corps, opened its work on the 9th of
December, 1887, in a little store on St. Lawrence Main and St.
Viateur streets. French-speaking officers, brought over from
Paris, organized the work and still continue in charge of its
affairs. This little home was at first the scene of much turmoil,
many serious fights occurring in which chairs and other weapons
were freely used, but out of this grew, with the passing of the
years, the present strong, harmonious body.

On the 30th of June, 1890, Corps No. 4 was formed in the East
End, and on April 5, 1905, Corps No. 5 on St. Alexander Street,
which is the Men’s Social Corps. Corps No. 6, the most recent to
be organized, began its work on June 25, 1914, in Verdun.

It is difficult to account fully for the origin of other
religious bodies in the city. The German Lutherans established
their church in 1858 on St. Dominique Street, immediately in the
rear of St. Lawrence market. It is now occupied by the “Temple
of Labour.” The Swedenborgians were established on Dorchester
Street, corner of Hanover, in 1862. The Assembly of Christians,
at the corner of St. George Street and Fortification Lane, about
the same period. The French Evangelical Church, on Craig Street,
was established in 1864. Lovell’s directory of today gives the
location of the following churches: Christian Science--First
Church of Christ Scientist--41 and 43 Closse Street, Western
Square: New Jerusalem Church, corner of Dorchester West and
Hanover Street; Lutheran Churches--St. John’s Church (German
Lutheran), corner of Mance and Prince Arthur Street; Church
of the Redeemer (Evangelical Lutheran), 365 Mountain Street;
Catholic Apostolic Church, 314 St. Catherine Street, West; Church
of Christ (Disciples), 109 Fairmount, corner of Mance Street;
Seventh Day Adventist Church, corner of Villeneuve, West, and
Hutchison streets; Montreal Chinese Mission (Protestant), 336
Lagauchitiere Street, West; Undenominational Mission (City),
294-296 Cadieux Street; Desrivières Street Mission; Italian
Methodist Mission, corner of Dorchester Street, West, and St.
Urbain. The following charts will provide the curious student the
religious origins of our population as revealed by the census of
1911.


     RELIGIONS OF THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF MONTREAL, 1911.

                        |Total
                        |Population
                        |       |Adventists
                        |       |   |Anglicans
                        |       |   |      |Baptists
                        |       |   |      |     |Brethren
                        |       |   |      |     |  |Christians
                        |       |   |      |     |  |  |Congregationalists
          Districts     |       |   |      |     |  |  |   |Disciples
             and        |       |   |      |     |  |  |   |   |Friends
         Sub-districts  |       |   |      |     |  |  |   |   |   |Greek
                        |       |   |      |     |  |  |   |   |   | Church
                        |       |   |      |     |  |  |   |   |   |    |Jews
  MONTREAL-STE. ANNE    | 21,676| --| 2,385|  174|--|--| 67| --| --| 122|   841
    Centre ward         |    458| --|     7|  -- |--|--| --| --| --|  22|    --
    Ste. Anne ward      | 20,992| --| 2,334|  173|--|--| 67| --| --| 100|   833
    West ward           |    226| --|    44|    1|--|--| --| --| --| -- |     8
                        |       |   |      |     |  |  |   |   |   |    |
  MONTREAL-ST. ANTOINE  | 48,638|  6|10,653|  840|18| 9|453| 10|  4| 111| 1,247
    St. Joseph ward     | 17,879| --| 2,241|  340|--| 1| 40| --|  1|  61|   483
    St. Georges ward    | 13,844|  1| 4,373|  241|18| 8|186|  2|  3|  45|   419
    St. Andrews ward    | 16,915|  5| 4,039|  259|--|--|227|  8| --|   5|   345
                        |       |   |      |     |  |  |   |   |   |    |
  MONTREAL-ST. JACQUES  | 44,057|  1|   429|   45| 2| 3| 15| --| --| 188|   547
    East ward           |  3,561| --|    17|  -- |--|--|  1| --| --| 118|     1
    Lafontaine ward     | 25,026| --|   348|   37|--| 3| 11| --| --|  13|   409
    St. James ward      | 15,470|  1|    64|    8| 2|--|  3| --| --|  57|   137
                        |       |   |      |     |  |  |   |   |   |    |
  MONTREAL-ST. LAURENT  | 55,860|  2| 4,109|  280|23|14|205|  2|  4| 411|19,193
    St. Laurent ward    | 25,039|  2| 3,342|  197|12| 1|170|  2|  4| 165| 7,712
    St. Louis ward      | 30,821| --|   767|   83|11|13| 35| --| --| 246|11,481
                        |       |   |      |     |  |  |   |   |   |    |
  MONTREAL-STE. MARIE   | 54,910| --| 1,651|  113|--|11| 12| --| --|  42|   326
    Papineau ward       | 39,079| --| 1,409|   67|--|--| 12| --| --|  39|   292
    Ste. Marie ward     | 15,831| --|   242|   46|--|11| --| --| --|   3|    34
                        |       |   |      |     |  |  |   |   |   |    |
  HOCHELAGA             | 75,049|  3| 9,302|  954|48|--|698|  3|  1|  44|   580
    Ste. Cunégonde ward | 11,174|  3|   658|   44| 1|--| 31| --| --|   9|   102
    St. Gabriel ward    | 18,961| --| 2,855|  278| 8|--|323| --| --|  11|    54
    St. Henri ward      | 30,335| --| 1,560|  113| 4|--| 19|  3| --|  15|    50
    Westmount           | 14,579| --| 4,229|  519|35|--|325| --|  1|   9|   374
                        |       |   |      |     |  |  |   |   |   |    |
  JACQUES-CARTIER       | 65,023|  4| 8,905|  511|63| 8|201|  2| --| 236|   541
    Côte St. Paul       |  3,421| --|   732|   16| 4|--| 10| --| --| -- |     6
    Notre-Dame des      |       |   |      |     |  |  |   |   |   |    |
         Neiges         |    912| --|    46|  -- |--| 4| --| --| --| -- |     8
    Présentation de la  |       |   |      |     |  |  |   |   |   |    |
        Ste. Vierge     |    221| --|   -- |    3|--|--| --| --| --| -- |    --
    Saints-Anges de     |       |   |      |     |  |  |   |   |   |    |
        Lachine         |    828| --|   106|   18|--|--| --| --| --| -- |    13
    Ste. Anne du Bout de|       |   |      |     |  |  |   |   |   |    |
        l’Ile           |    813| --|    98|    1|--|--| --| --| --| -- |     8
    Ste. Geneviève      |  1,075| --|   -- |  -- |--|--| --| --| --| -- |    --
    St. Joachim de la   |       |   |      |     |  |  |   |   |   |    |
        Pointe Claire   |    805| --|    91|   4 |--|--| --| --| --| -- |    --
    St. Laurent         |  2,228| --|   258|  10 | 7|--| --| --| --| -- |     9
    St. Raphaël de l’Ile|       |   |      |     |  |  |   |   |   |    |
        Bizard          |    586| --|     1|  -- |--|--| --| --| --| -- |    --
    Summerlea           |    161| --|    33|  -- |--|--| --| --| --| -- |     3
    Beaconsfield        |    375| --|    70|  -- |--|--|  2| --| --| -- |     2
    Dorval              |  1,006| --|   184|   6 |--|--| 12| --| --| -- |    11
    Lachine             | 10,699| --| 1,600|  43 |--| 4|  4|  2| --| 57 |   322
    Montréal            |    703|  1|   205|   6 |--|--| 14| --| --| -- |    --
    Notre-Dame de Grâce |  5,217| --|   978|  64 |--|--| 17| --| --| 80 |     2
    Outremont           |  4,820| --|   917| 129 |21|--| 57| --| --| -- |    41
    Pointe Claire       |    793| --|   116|   2 |--|--| --| --| --| -- |    --
    Ste. Anne de        |       |   |      |     |  |  |   |   |   |    |
        Bellevue        |  1,416| --|    76|   9 |--|--|  7| --| --| -- |     9
    St. Laurent         |  1,860| --|    24|  -- |--|--| --| --| --| -- |    --
    Verdun              | 11,629| --| 2,309|  154|15|--| 67| --| --|  8 |    67
    Ville Emard         |  6,179| --|   418|   24|--|--| --| --| --|  1 |    --
    Youville            |  2,394|  3|   134|    6|16|--|  5| --| --|  2 |     2
    Cartierville        |    905| --|     1|  -- |--|--| --| --| --| -- |    10
    Côte des Neiges     |  2,444| --|   254|    3|--|--|  6| --| --| -- |    23
    Côte St. Luc        |    303| --|    22|  -- |--|--| --| --| --| -- |    --
    Ste. Geneviève      |    612| --|   -- |  -- |--|--| --| --| --| -- |    --
    St Pierre aux Liens |  2,201| --|   192|   12|--|--| --| --| --| 88 |     5
    Senneville          |    418| --|    40|    1|--|--| --| --| --| -- |    --
                        |       |   |      |     |  |  |   |   |   |    |
  MAISONNEUVE           |170,978| 33|11,642|1,176|52|21|309|  5|  1| 272| 5,227
   De Lorimier ward     | 10,453| --|   745|  232|--| 6|  2| --| --|   1|     3
   Duvernay ward        | 13,445|  1|   188|    4|--| 4|  5| --| --|  12|    37
   Hochelaga ward       | 20,986| --| 1,236|  133|--|--|  7| --| --| -- |    42
   Laurier ward         | 37,000| 17| 4,608|  379|48| 6|190|  5|  1|  23| 1,204
   Maisonneuve          | 18,684|  2|   970|   51|--| 5|  2| --| --|  45|     8
   Rosemont ward        |  1,319| --|    58|   51|--|--| --| --| --| -- |    --
   St. Denis ward       | 40,364| 13| 2,284|  187| 4|--| 69| --| --|  31| 1,015
   St. Jean Baptiste    |       |   |      |     |  |  |   |   |   |    |
        ward            | 21,116| --| 1,121|  123|--|--| 26| --| --|  30| 2,918
   Ste. Marie ward      |  7,611| --|   432|   16|--|--|  8| --| --|    |    --

     RELIGIONS OF THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF MONTREAL, 1911.

                      |Lutherans
                      |   |Mennonites
                      |   |   |Methodists
                      |   |   |     |Mormons
                      |   |   |     |  |Presbyterians
                      |   |   |     |  |     |Roman Catholics
       Districts      |   |   |     |  |     |       |Salvation Army
         and          |   |   |     |  |     |       |   |Protestants
     Sub-districts    |   |   |     |  |     |       |   |   |Pagans
                      |   |   |     |  |     |       |   |   |  |Various Sects
                      |   |   |     |  |     |       |   |   |  |   |Unspecified
  --------------------+---+---+-----+--+-----+-------+---+---+--+---+----
  MONTREAL-STE. ANNE  |101|  8|  526|--|1,719| 14,835| 28|799|11| 33| 27
    Centre ward       | --| --|    3|--|   17|    409| --| --|--| --| --
    Ste. Anne ward    | 99|  8|  507|--|1,675| 14,318| 24|798| 5| 33| 18
    West ward         |  2| --|   16|--|   27|    108|  4|  1| 6| --|  9
                      |   |   |     |  |     |       |   |   |  |   |
  MONTREAL-ST. ANTOINE|294| --|2,305|--|7,117| 24,774| 46|399| 8|255| 89
    St. Joseph ward   | 76| --|  467|--|1,030| 13,029|  6| 37|--| 53| 14
    St. Georges ward  |110| --|  825|--|2,732|  4,489| 30| 78| 8|202| 74
    St. Andrews ward  |108| --|1,013|--|3,355|  7,256| 10|284|--| --|  1
                      |   |   |     |--|     |       |   |   |  |   |
  MONTREAL-ST. JACQUES| 39|  1|  108|--|  349| 41,832| --|315| 9| 63|111
    East ward         | --| --|   11|--|   41|  3,311| --|   |--| 13| 48
    Lafontaine ward   | 26| --|   84|--|  252| 23,601| --|165|--| 23| 54
    St. James ward    | 13|  1|   13|--|   56| 14,920| --|150| 9| 27|  9
                      |   |   |     |  |     |       |   |   |  |   |
  MONTREAL-ST. LAURENT|178|  1|1,412|--|2,772| 25,831| 30|754| 6|426|207
    St. Laurent ward  |149| --|1,149|--|2,166|  9,272| 25|202| 6|334|129
    St. Louis ward    | 29|  1|  263|--|  606| 16,559|  5|552|--| 92| 78
                      |   |   |     |  |     |       |   |   |  |   |
  MONTREAL-STE. MARIE | 33| --|  366|--|1,130| 50,082| 46|995|--| 39| 64
    Papineau ward     | 23| --|  238|--|  796| 35,454| 30|644|--| 28| 47
    Ste. Marie ward   | 10| --|  128|--|  334| 14,628| 16|351|--| 11| 17
                      |   |   |     |  |     |       |   |   |  |   |
  HOCHELAGA           |226| --|3,598|--|7,677| 50,745|112|637| 5|375| 41
    Ste. Cunégonde    | 23| --|  230|--|  424|  9,498|  8| 88|--| 52|  3
    St. Gabriel ward  | 68| --|1,206|--|2,104| 11,815| 94| 71|--| 61| 13
    St. Henri ward    | 12| --|  535|--|  723| 26,828|  8|417| 4| 34| 10
    Westmount         |123| --|1,627|--|4,426|  2,604|  2| 61| 1|228| 15
                      |   |   |     |  |     |       |   |   |  |   |
  JACQUES-CARTIER     |127| --|2,441|--|5,073| 46,085| 41|592| 3|173|  17
    Côte St. Paul     | 31| --|  235|--|   30|  2,331| --| 26|--| --|  --
    Notre-Dame des    |   |   |     |  |     |       |   |   |  |   |
        Neiges        |  1| --|    9|--|   22|    822| --| --|--| --|  --
                      |   |   |     |  |     |       |   |   |  |   |
    Présentation de   |   |   |     |  |     |       |   |   |  |   |
        la Ste. Vièrge| --| --|   --|--|    1|    217| --| --|--| --|  --
    Saints-Anges de   |   |   |     |  |     |       |   |   |  |   |
        Lachine       |  5| --|   22|--|  108|    556| --| --|--| --|  --
    Ste. Anne du      |   |   |     |  |     |       |   |   |  |   |
        Bout de l’Ile | --| --|    3|--|   76|    587| --| 40|--| --|  --
    Ste. Geneviève    | --| --|   --|--|   --|  1,063| --| 12|--| --|  --
    St. Joachim de la |   |   |     |  |     |       |   |   |  |   |
        Pointe Claire | --| --|    8|--|   38|    662| --|  2|--| --|  --
    St. Laurent       | --| --|   35|--|  224|  1,670|  8|  6|--| --|   1
    St. Raphaël de    |   |   |     |  |     |       |   |   |  |   |
        l’Ile Bizard  | --| --|   --|--|   --|    585| --| --|--| --|  --
    Summerlea         | --| --|    9|--|   39|     77| --| --|--| --|  --
    Beaconsfield      |  2| --|   36|--|   20|    225|  3| 10|--|  5|  --
    Dorval            |  1| --|   18|--|  179|    585| --|  8|--| --|   1
    Lachine           |  9| --|  373|--|  673|  7,288| --|287|--| 33|   4
    Montréal          |  3| --|  119|--|  272|     74| --| --|--|  9|  --
    Notre-Dame de     |   |   |     |  |     |       |   |   |  |   |
        Grâce         |  3| --|  254|--|  432|  3,344|  1| 16|--| 26|  --
    Outremont         | 11| --|  389|--|  768|  2,425| --| 16| 3| 39|   4
    Pointe Claire     |  3| --|    6|--|   70|    580| --| 15|--|  1|  --
    Ste. Anne de      |   |   |     |  |     |       |   |   |  |   |
    Bellevue          | --| --|   43|--|   73|  1,188| --|  7|--|  4|  --
    St. Laurent       | --| --|    1|--|   19|  1,812| --|  1|--|  3|  --
    Verdun            | 40| --|  723|--|1,530|  6,631| 27| 26|--| 29|   3
    Ville Emard       |  6| --|   86|--|   77|  5,526| --| 37|--| --|   4
    Youville          |  5| --|    1|--|  117|  2,102|  1| --|--| --|  --
    Cartierville      | --| --|    4|--|   20|    838| --| 32|--| --|  --
    Côte des Neiges   |  6| --|   41|--|  122|  1,971|  1| --|--| 17|  --
    Côte St. Luc      | --| --|   --|--|   --|    245| --| 36|--| --|  --
    Ste. Geneviève    | --| --|   --|--|   --|    612| --| --|--| --|  --
    St. Pierre aux    |   |   |     |  |     |       |   |   |  |   |
        Liens         |  1| --|   26|--|  156|  1,720| --| --|--|  1|  --
    Senneville        | --| --|   --|--|    7|    349| --| 15|--|  6|  --
                      |   |   |     |  |     |       |   |   |  |   |
  MAISONNEUVE         |289|  1|3,550|--|7,300|139,708| 53|767| 2|486|  84
    De Lorimier ward  | 10| --|  346|--|  654|  8,289|  6|116| 2| 39|   2
    Duvernay ward     |  1| --|   36|--|   94| 13,003| --| 40|--| 15|   5
    Hochelaga ward    | 40|  1|  268|--|  445| 18,604| --| 35|--| 47|   1
    Laurier ward      |121| --|1,546|--|3,073| 25,447| 20|102|--|179|  31
    Maisonneuve       | 24| --|  288|--|  861| 16,277|  3| 77|--| 61|  10
    Rosemont ward     |  2| --|   52|--|  152|    988| --| --|--| 16|  --
    St. Denis ward    | 63| --|  522|--|1,266| 34,627| 12|227|--| 40|   4
    St. Jean Baptiste |   |   |     |  |     |       |   |   |  |   |
        ward          | 21| --|  335|--|  587| 15,749| 11|104|--| 60|  31
    Ste. Marie ward   |  7| --|  157|--|  168|  6,724|  1| 66|--| 29|  --


FOOTNOTES:

[1] The sketch by the Rev. J.A. Gordon written in 1906 has been
used.




                          CHAPTER XXVI

                            1760-1841

          SCHOOL SYSTEM OF MONTREAL BEFORE THE CESSION

  NEW MOVEMENT FOR BOYS--THE COLLEGE DE MONTREAL--THE BEGINNINGS
    OF ENGLISH EDUCATION--THE FIRST ENGLISH SCHOOLMASTERS BEFORE
    1790--A REPORT OF 1790 FOR THE SCHOOLS OF CANADA--THE DESIRE
    TO REAR UP A SYSTEM OF PUBLIC EDUCATION--THE JESUITS’
    ESTATES--THE “CASE” AGAINST AMHERST’S CLAIM TO THE JESUITS’
    ESTATES AND FOR THEIR DIVERGENCE TO PUBLIC EDUCATION--NEW
    ENGLISH MOVEMENT FOR A GENERAL SYSTEM OF EDUCATION--THE
    ACT OF 1801--THE ROYAL INSTITUTION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF
    LEARNING--NEVER A POPULAR SUCCESS--ITS REFORM IN 1818--A
    COUNTERPOISE--THE FABRIQUE ACT OF 1824--REVIEW OF SCHOOLS UNDER
    THE ROYAL INSTITUTION--SUBSIDIZED SCHOOLS--REVIEW OF CATHOLIC
    SCHOOLS--LAY SCHOOLS--LORD DURHAM’S REPORT ON EDUCATION. NOTE:
    THE JESUITS’ ESTATES.


Under the English Rule the system of primary education carried on
by the Sulpicians for boys and Marguerite Bourgeoys’ congregation
for girls was continued as before the session. That for boys
began when the Sulpician Souart, the first schoolmaster of
Montreal, commenced his school teaching about 1669, after he had
finished the first term as superior of the seminary.

The earliest new movement for boys after the English possession
was made as follows:

In 1773 the stables and poultry house of the old Château de
Vaudreuil became a school for little boys for elementary
education, and from this date the château became known as the
Collège de St. Raphael, the successor of the Pétit Seminaire
established in 1767 by M. Curatteau in his presbytery at Longue
Pointe.

In 1776 the Collège de St. Raphael was formerly inaugurated for
the purpose of higher education, but it continued its elementary
classes or petites écoles.

On October 11, 1790, in answer to a request of Lord Dorchester
of the sixth of the same month, a catalogue of the professors of
the College of Montreal for 1790 was sent with some remarks on
the college and on the schools. The latter are as follows: “The
schools which the ecclesiastics of the Seminary of Montreal keep
are nearly as old as the establishment of the town. They teach
only reading and writing in Latin and in French. The Seminary
undertakes all the expense, furnishes the wood and the books,
pays the masters’ board and lodges them. These schools are
divided into ‘grandes’ and ‘petites.’ The petites écoles are for
children who are only beginning to learn to read. The grandes
écoles are for those who commence already to know how to read and
who are learning to write. The parents who are able, pay five
shillings a year for each scholar. The poor pay nothing at all.”

The first English schoolmaster in Montreal would seem to
be a John Pullman, who came from New York in 1773 by the
recommendation of the Rev. Dr. Ogilvie to try to establish a
school in Montreal in consequence of an application to him from
gentlemen of that city. He worked under a committee. This above
information is told in the memorial of 1779, in which he applied
for a license of Protestant schoolmaster similar to the position
that Tanswell then possessed in Quebec. His recommendation
was signed by the leading men of Montreal. But his scholars
dwindling through competition, doubtless, his poverty forced him
to apply, in 1782, for any small employment as a clerk and for
a subscription to a work he had prepared, the short title of
which was “Cash Clerks’ Assistant.” Finlay Fisher opened a school
about 1778 which he said was well attended and flourishing. The
Rev. Mr. John Stuart opened an academy for youth in Montreal in
1781. Mr. Stuart was born in the province of Virginia in 1736 or
1740, was ordained in England, returning in 1770 to Philadelphia,
whence he went as a missionary to the Mohawk valley. On the
outbreak of the American revolution he had been made a prisoner
for his loyalty. He seems to have escaped and made his way to
Montreal. He prepared his advertisement and sent it to Governor
Haldimand, who offered to give him every encouragement and
appropriated to the undertaking part of the bounty allowed
by government, adding “Your advertisement will be published
tomorrow, but I directed the words ‘principally intended for the
children of Protestants’ to be left out as it is a distinction
which could not fail to create jealousies at all times improper
but more particularly so at present.” His Excellency desired that
all classes should be received. Mr. Stuart in complying said that
he had already admitted any persons that offered, Protestants,
Catholics, Jews, etc.

It was difficult to get schoolmasters in the early days. Mr.
Stuart’s assistant was a Mr. Christie. He was incapable of
teaching even the lowest branches of arithmetic and language.
Mr. Stuart on November 27, 1782, reported in all simplicity
to Haldimand: “I could have dispensed with his ignorance of
the English language and faulty accent, but when I found him
unacquainted with the rules of common arithmetic and often
obliged to apply to me (in presence of the pupils) for the
solution of the most simple question, I could no longer doubt
of his inefficiency.” A new assistant was engaged and shortly
afterward Christie left the province. Finlay Fisher in 1783 in
his memorial applied for Christie’s salary, £25 a year, to be
added to his own; he did not receive it, however, till May 1,
1786, when it came due for the first time for the preceding six
months. Mr. Stuart’s last salary at Montreal was for the six
months between November 1, 1785, to April 30, 1786. He then went
to Kingston on which his gaze had been fixed for some time. He
became the first Anglican clergyman there. In 1789 he established
a classical school there, the first school of the kind in Upper
Canada.

An early report issued in England before 1790 by the “Society for
the Propagation,” speaking of the early struggles, mentions that
“there is not a single Protestant church in the whole province.
* * * There are two schools, to each of which a salary of £100
a year is allotted by the government, the one at Quebec and the
other at Montreal. The schoolmaster’s name at Quebec is Tanswell.
The Rev. Mr. Stuart had the school at Montreal for a short time
(after his flight from Fort Hunter, where he was a missionary)
until, about two years ago, the government thought proper to take
half his salary away and divide it between a Mr. Fisher and Mr.
Christie, both Presbyterians. * * * But besides the division of
the salary there is neither a schoolhouse nor land appropriated
nor trustees appointed, nor any regularities made respecting the
application of the £100 salary. The inhabitants are opulent and
generous and only want a proper person to place and establish
a seminary. In that case the income cannot fail of being
considerable. The prices for tuition have been for Latin, half a
guinea, for English and arithmetic, $2 per month. There is not an
English school in the place.”

[Illustration: STUDIES FROM THE CARTIER MONUMENT: Law]

[Illustration: STUDIES FROM THE CARTIER MONUMENT: Education]

In 1790, however, a memorandum was made of the ecclesiastical and
educational aspects of the country which gives us an insight into
the growing life of the English colony in Canada and Montreal,
occasioned, no doubt, by the influx of the United Empire
Loyalists migrating into the country:


                        PROTESTANT CLERGY

                   Episcopal or English Church

                                                             Salaries.
  M. de Lisle, Montreal                                       £ 200
  Tunstall                                                      100
  De Montmolten, Quebec                                         200
  Toosey                                                        200
  Veyssiere, Three Rivers                                       200
  Doty, William Henry                                           100
  Stuart, Kingston                                              100
  Bryan, Cornwall                                                50
  Langhorn, near Kingston (missionary from ye society for
    propagating ye gospel with £50 and from government £100)    150

                       Church of Scotland

  Messrs. Henry and Spark, Quebec; Bethune near Oswegatchie      50
                                                             ------
                                                             £1,350


                       PROTESTANT SCHOOLS

                             Quebec

            Scholars.             Teachers.                Salary.
             25                   Tanswell                  £100
             18                   Fraser
             32                   Keith
             53                   Jones
             11                   Sargeant
             41                   Burrows
            ----
            180

                            Montreal

             42                   Fisher                    £ 50
             48                   Nelson
             39                   Bowen
             17                   Gunn
            ----
            146

                          Three Rivers
             11        Brown
             15        Morris
            ----
             26

                          William Henry
             17        Biset

                              Gaspe
                       Hobson                               £ 25

No returns yet made up of ye Protestant schools in ye counties of
Gaspe, Lunenberg, Mechlenburg, Naysau and Hesse.

       *       *       *       *       *

Although, therefore, the educational outlook was not very
great[1] in 1790, yet already there was foreseen the necessity of
an established system of public education in connection with the
government. For this funds were badly needed.

In pursuing the history of the educational movement in which
Montreal shares, notice must be now taken of the Jesuit estates,
for upon the funds accruing from these, an early movement
started to rear the means of an educational system in Canada.
After the suppression of the Society of Jesus in 1774 in Canada
these estates had been promised to Lord Amherst as a recognition
of his services. This met with consistent opposition, and a
contra-movement arose to secure the estates as a means of rearing
up a public educational system. A petition of November 19, 1787,
was signed at Quebec by 195 inhabitants transmitting a “case” in
which it was claimed that “as Canadians and citizens they had a
right therein by title, and law, the College of Quebec having
been founded for their education. It is their patrimony which
they have cleared and cultivated. Even as subjects they have a
right to public education which exists in every government.” The
“case” insists that the Jesuits were only the rectors, professors
and managers: that the Hundred Associates and others had founded
the colleges for educational purposes. The petitioners demand
that the troops then using the college as a barracks should
be dislodged and pray the government “to restore the antient
professors of the college or to name others and regulate the
recompense due to their talents and attentions.” It is but
just to note that the Jesuits never ceded their claims to the
complete possession of their estates, nor recognized a mere
trusteeship.

A similar petition to that of 1787 was addressed by the
inhabitants of Montreal in 1793, and again in 1800, praying that
on reversion of the Jesuit estates the revenue should be diverted
to the education of youth. Three Rivers similarly protested
against the policy of the Amherst grant. At the first legislative
assembly a recommendation was made for the divergence of the
Jesuit funds to popular education. Thus Amherst’s patent was
not signed. The death of Perè Casot, the last surviving Jesuit
of the old régime, occurring in 1801, the governor claimed the
estates for the crown, which hitherto had been administered by
the Society. A majority in the house preferred that they should
be devoted to educational purposes and demanded the titles. But
it was not till 1831 that they were finally ceded, with the
exception of the Jesuit College at Quebec which became converted
into a barracks. Meanwhile the Anglican bishop of the diocese and
other English leaders, especially the merchants, deploring the
lack of educational facilities, agitated for a _general_ school
system, one of the arguments being the usefulness this would have
of encouraging the English language through the province. At
this time three classes of schools were in contemplation: parish
schools (elementary), grammar schools and superior seminaries
or universities, schools on the line of Westminster, Winchester
and Eton. With regard to a university the committee of the
executive council thought it premature to formulate any plan, but
recommended that an appropriation should be made to cover any
plan that might be adopted.

The future of education was reported on in answer to the
following questions: “The establishing of schools and seminaries
for the education of youth from those funds now unemployed
as well in England as in this province and particularly a
respectable college in this city with able professors and
erecting free schools at convenient distances throughout this
extensive province for the purpose of opening and enlarging the
human mind, conciliating the affections of all His Majesty’s
subjects and having a tendency to render this a happy and
flourishing province.” Observation: “There remains for us to
advert to a subject which we consider as the surest and best
means of obtaining a cheerful and dutiful obedience to the
laws and government from subjects in general, and that is by
establishing throughout the province at proper distances public
schools for the education of youth. We hardly know of a single
school in any country part of the district for teaching boys
and it is to the zeal of the few sisters of the congregation
that we are indebted for all the little which is taught to
girls throughout the country. The captains of militia who are
frequently called upon to enforce law and order are so illiterate
that not one in three can write or even read. The consequence is
confusion and disorder and frequent suits and complaints between
them and the militiamen.” They then suggest that for funds the
estates of the Jesuits, which they understood likely to revert to
the crown, could be conveniently applied for the purpose; that
also, owing to the separation of the American states, there might
be some unappropriated funds in England which could be applied
for. The report reverts to the former petition of 1785 for a
house of assembly, suggesting this as the only way to promote the
welfare of the province as a British colony. In 1793, therefore,
a further recommendation was made to the legislative assembly
which presented an address to the governor urging upon the crown
the propriety of devoting the Jesuit estates for educational
purposes. No answer having been given, another on the same
subject was presented to the governor in 1800.

In reply to this the governor, in a speech to the legislature,
intimated the intention of the government “to set apart a portion
of the crown domain instead for the establishment of a competent
number of free schools for the instruction of their children
in the first rudiments of useful learning and in the English
tongue; and also as occasion may require for foundations of a
more enlarged and comprehensive nature.” In 1801, therefore,
an act entitled “an act for the establishment of free schools
and the advancement of learning in the province” was passed by
the provincial legislature to give effect to these promises. It
provided also for “the establishment of a Royal Institution for
the Advancement of Learning.” To this corporation was entrusted
the entire management of all schools and institutions of royal
foundation in the province as well as the administration of all
estates and property appropriated to these schools.

This act remained practically a dead letter, since no grants
were ever made. What rendered the scheme a failure was the
additional reason of its unpopularity with the majority. Of the
eighteen trustees of the Royal Institution, four only were Roman
Catholics; and of the fourteen Protestants, three were prominent
officials in Upper Canada. The teachers, too, were principally
from Britain, unacquainted with the French language and generally
ignorant of the habits of the people.

In 1818 in order to give practical effect to the act of 1801 all
the government schools then receiving government aid were placed
under the Royal Institution. The question of representative
trusteeship was made more simple and more equitable, but the
Protestant Lord Bishop of Quebec was named principal. This again
kept the Catholics from participating, the movement being still
looked upon as Protestant and Anglicizing. So that Lord Dalhousie
wrote from Quebec on the 10th of June, 1821, to Lord Bathurst,
asking that His Majesty would sanction the establishment
of a Catholic institution precisely similar to that of the
Protestants for the government of their schools. “The Catholic
religion in this province,” he said, “is certainly the most sure
defense yet against our neighbours and every fair encouragement
should be given to it in promoting education and learning. One
great objection complained of is the being subjected to the
superintendence of the Royal Institution, of which the Protestant
bishop is president. That objection is natural in a country where
the Catholic religion prevails as to numbers and is guarded by
ministers always watchful and perhaps jealous of the Protestant
church.”

The Royal Institution was never popular because of its want of
sympathy with the people whom it wished to benefit. It cannot be
said to have been a success, owing to the peculiar denominational
constitution of its charter and the apathy in its own council.
Still it pointed the way to a general scheme of public education
which afterwards bore fruit. Its greatest success is in the
present day McGill University, whose official title is still the
“Royal Institution for the Advancement of Learning.”

Various attempts were made by the legislature to introduce a more
popular system of management in the schools. In 1824, on the
elaborate report of a special committee of the province which
represented that in many parishes not more than five or six of
the inhabitants could write; that generally not above one-fourth
of the entire population could read and that not above one-tenth
of the entire population could write, a counterpoise measure
to the royal institution was passed for the Catholics entitled
the “Fabrique act” by which the Fabriques or corporations of
the parish churches consisting of the curé and church wardens
as school commissioners, could hold and acquire property, etc.,
to found and carry on elementary schools, one for every one
hundred families. One of the great reasons for the failure of
educational legislation down to 1836 was the want of permanency
about it all. Another was the jobbery of politicians in a time
of seething turmoil. Arthur Buller, commissioner, appointed by
Lord Durham in 1838, reports clearly on this. “In short, the
moment that they found that their educational provisions could be
turned to political account, from that moment those provisions
were formed with a view to promote party rather than education.
This was their essential fault. This, it was, that pervaded and
contaminated the whole system and paralyzed all good that was
otherwise in it.” There were about one thousand, six hundred
schools in Canada and these had to be closed.

It is now in place to review the state of education in Montreal
under the Royal Institution. When finally funds were forthcoming
they were supplied by an annual vote of the provincial parliament
of £2,000, but under an authority from Lord Bathurst, dated
January 24, 1817, a grant was made from the revenues of the
Jesuit estate confined to the grammar schools of Quebec and
Montreal. The latter received £200 a year with £52 a year for
the rent of the schoolhouse. By the rules of the foundation
twenty free scholars were to be admitted. At this date there were
fifteen all told who paid for their education as day scholars.
The terms for instruction in the higher education were £10 a year
and £8 for the lower.

There were also two elementary schools at Montreal which received
appropriations from the government, viz., the British and
Canadian schools (£300) and the National free school (£200). With
regard to the schools under the institution a memorandum of Sir
John Kempt states that “by a return made in the year 1818 the
number of schools in this province was stated to be thirty-seven
attended by only 1,048 scholars and maintained at an expense to
the public of £1,883 10 strg.”

In 1829 he also states the number of schools up to July 1st
as seventy-eight and the number of scholars 3,772. Up to this
date Catholics had no connection with the institution. In Lord
Aylmer’s report of 1832 the schools under the royal institution
of which the names are given as well as those of the teachers and
their salaries, number seventy. The schools of Montreal given
among the list of “society or private” institutions receiving
occasional aid from public funds are given thus:

  Place.             Establishment.         Name of Professor
                                            or Teacher.          Salary.

  City of Montreal   Grammar School         A. Skakel             £200
  City of Montreal   National School        W. Greene               65
                                            Miss Meredith           45
  City of Montreal   British and Canadian
                        School              Male Teacher            90
                                            Female Teacher          60
  City of Montreal   St. Jacques School
                        (French)            M. Archambault        28-15
                        (English)           Mr. Ryden             28-15
                        (Female)            I. Lauzon             15-5
                        (Evening)           M. Ducharme           12-10
  City of Montreal   Recollect School       Masters--Two          63
                                            Mistresses--Two       27
  City of Montreal   Infants’ School        Two Teachers          54
  City of Montreal   Experimental School    J. Lancaster          90

There were in addition many private Catholic and Protestant
schools. We may note the origins of some of the most important
public schools. The Royal Grammar school was founded in Montreal
in 1816, with Mr. Alexander Skakel, M.A., who came out from
England as head master. A writer in the Montreal Daily Herald of
Saturday, March 15, 1913, writes:

“This may be said to have been the first ambitious attempt to put
Protestant education in Montreal on a substantial and efficient
footing. Mr. Skakel came out under, as he was wont to say, the
pleasing illusion that the new world would offer him prospects
denied him in the old. He was disillusionized, for the colony was
not only young and raw, but the political and social conditions
of the time were anything but congenial, while the emoluments
were slender, and the life, generally, wholly different to that
to which he had been accustomed. However, Mr. Skakel--whose
portrait hangs in the High School--did not complain, but went
straight on, developing the school which met, first of all, in
the old Belmont Park building, and afterwards in the Fraser
building at the corner of Dorchester Street and Union Avenue.”

Mr. Skakel was succeeded by the Rev. John Leeds and the Rev.
George Simpson. The Royal grammar school was merged with the
high school shortly after the organization of the latter in
1845. The Lancaster School took its name from Messrs. Lancaster
and Bell, who came out from England, having been instrumental
in establishing popular schools there, and they interested
themselves in the formation of the British Canadian school. The
early days of education were those of sacrifice for the teachers,
ill paid, with inadequate teaching facilities, both in materials
and buildings, overwork, and for the treasury which had to depend
on voluntary gifts and collecting cards. Things are better now,
but one wonders whether the teaching profession will ever come to
its own.

The National School was founded in 1816 under the auspices of
the Montreal district committee of the Society for Promoting
Christian Knowledge. In 1839 the number of boys was 36 French and
120 English, and of girls 20 French and 84 English.

The British and Canadian School Society, which was opened in
a building belonging formerly to the Montreal Hospital, was
instituted on the 21st of September, 1822, to maintain on
an extensive scale a school to promote the education of the
labouring classes, and secondly, as a model school to train up
teachers under Mr. Lancaster and a committee of gentlemen for
future schools to follow the British system. It was meant to be
undenominational. Its early success enabled it to build by funds
from voluntary sources and from the provincial government a more
commodious schoolhouse on Lagauchetière Street, the foundation
being laid on the 17th of October, 1826. It was designed to
school 414 boys and 232 girls. In 1826 the number of attendance
was:

                       Boys  Girls
  Roman Catholics       97    38
  Episcopal Church      27     9
  Presbyterian          42    21
  Methodists            30    11
                      ----   ----
                       196    79
      Total, 275.

This school lapsed in 1837, the year of the rebellion, which
proved so fatal to education. There were 1,600 schools in the
province, teaching 40,000 children, and these had to be closed.
The Brothers of the Christian Schools made their entry into
Montreal in 1837. Their important work, of which humble seeds
were now laid, developed greatly under the Union, its story being
therefore left to a later chapter.

A summary of the schools of 1839 is presented by Bosworth
in “Hochelaga Depicta.” Besides the “New College” or “pétit
seminaire,” there were “several respectable academies in the
city, as the Royal Grammar School in Little St. James Street,
conducted by A. Skakel, Esq.; the Rev. Dr. Black’s, adjoining
St. Paul Church; Rev. J. Ramsay’s, Main Street, St. Lawrence
suburbs; Messrs. Howden & Taggart’s, Craig Street; Mr. Workman’s,
in Hospital Street; and Mr. Bruce’s, in McGill Street. There are
also young ladies’ schools of high reputation, as Miss Easton’s,
in Bonaventure Street; Miss Felton’s, in St. Gabriel Street; and
Mrs. Fitzgerald’s, in Notre Dame Street. The total number of
schools it would be impossible to assign. A few years since two
gentlemen of the city made personal inquiry throughout the place
with a view to determining the point. They found fifty-nine of
different classes, but it is probable not only that some were
overlooked, but that the number is greater now than it was then.
There was also much private tuition in the families of the more
wealthy inhabitants.”

The writer probably includes in the fifty-nine or more among
the unnamed schools those of the Catholics, which were under
the auspices of the Sulpicians, the teaching orders of the
Congregational Nuns and the Brothers of the Christian Schools,
and those conducted by lay people. A review of the schools for
Catholics up to the Union may be now presented.

The early movement under the Sulpicians up to 1790 has already
been stated. About 1796, as the city was beginning to expand,
M. Roux, the superior of the seminary, opened a new school for
children in the St. Lawrence district under the control of a
layman. Later he established other schools at Bonsecours, St.
Lawrence, St. Antoine, St. Mary (or the Faubourg de Quebec), and
St. Joseph, all these schools with the exception of the seminary
receiving children of both sexes. M. Quiblier, succeeding M.
Roux, determined to erect separate schools or boys and girls,
the latter to be under the direction of the Congregation Nuns.
These, therefore, opened successively a great number of classes,
three at the Faubourg, St. Lawrence; six at that of Quebec
(St. Mary’s), two of which were for the Irish; three classes at
St. Antoine, and three at St. Joseph, and two classes at the
Recollects for the Irish.

The Seminary provided the schools, their furniture and upkeep,
and undertook to convey the nuns to and fro morning and evening.
About fifteen hundred children were instructed and educated
gratuitously in these schools. In addition the Congregation
maintained in its own motherhouse, the pensionat, composed of
six classes; the “great school,” with its three classes; and the
“small school,” with two.[2] What he had done for the education
of the girls M. Quiblier would do for the boys, and it is due to
him that he succeeded in bringing the Brothers of the Christian
Schools to Montreal in 1837. A tribute paid by the Hon. Jacques
Viger to M. Quiblier and the Sulpicians may be quoted from a
Précis Historique which he composed. “Sur les petites écoles
de la paroisse de Montréal pour les garçons.” “Should the time
come,” he says, “when the Gentlemen of the Seminary might have no
other right to public recognition than that of having constantly
exercised their generous zeal for education undying blessings
should be their desert; and if M. Quiblier had no other title of
glory beyond that of having surpassed his predecessors in that
respect that title would be fine enough. * * * Such are, among
the other good works of the house of St. Sulpice, those which it
has never ceased to lavish on the progress of education in a town
of which it can, with good cause, be called the foundress and the
mother.”

Mr. Huguet-Latour, in his “Annuaire de Ville Marie,” notes some
of the schools of this period as follows. It is interesting as
showing the part then being played by the laity:

“On May 1, 1813, a school was founded for young girls by Mrs.
Richard O’Keefe.

“About 1819 a school was founded by a Mr. Ryan in the house of
the ‘Recollets.’

“In 1825 a school for boys was established by Mgr. Lartigue, on
October 1st, on the ground floor of his Episcopal residence at
St. James Church, and another for girls, on January 3, 1827,
under the direction of his secretary, afterwards Bishop Bourget,
in a house hired for the purpose. In 1828 the sewing classes
began in this school under the direction of the ‘Association
Bienveillante des Dames de St. Jacques.’ These lasted till 1853.
In 1831 these ladies, while still maintaining the supervision,
hired a mistress to teach the school. On October 1st of the same
year, Mgr. Lartigue opened a school for English boys, in the
basement of the Sacristy of his cathedral.

“In 1830 a third class for boys was added. The first schoolhouse
of St. James (75 by 40 feet, with three stories) was built in
1831 on land given by Mgr. Lartigue in 1831. Thither the various
classes connected with St. James were transferred in 1831 and
1832. This school suffered, with the Cathedral, destruction in
the great fire of July 8, 1852. The school, which commenced in
1825 with sixty children, had reached 400.

“On July 7, 1834, a school was founded at No. 31 Beaudry Street
by Mr. Joseph Bourgoin.”

As a summary of the general outlook on Canadian education in the
Province of Quebec[3] at the time of the rebellion we may use
Lord Durham’s own summing up in his famous report in preparation
for the Union. “The bulk of the population is composed of the
hard-working yeomanry of the country district commonly called
habitants. * * * It is impossible to exaggerate the want of
education among them; no means of instruction have been provided
for them and they are almost universally destitute of the
qualifications even of reading and writing. * * * The common
assertion that all classes of Canadians are equally ignorant is
perfectly erroneous; for I know of no people among whom a larger
provision exists for the higher kinds of elementary education
or among whom such education is really extended to a larger
proportion of the population. The piety and benevolence of the
early possessors of the country founded in the seminaries that
exist in the different parts of the province, institutions of
which the funds have long been directed to the promotion of
education. Seminaries and colleges have been by these bodies
established in the cities and in other central points. The
education given in these establishments greatly resembles the
kind given in the English public schools, though it is more
varied. It is entirely in the hands of the Catholic clergy. The
number of pupils in this establishment was estimated altogether
at 1,000 and they turn out as far as I could ascertain between
two and three hundred young men thus educted.”

Thus at the time of the rebellion of 1837, at least in the towns
such as Montreal, the outlook on education was not so depressing
as it is generally painted.


                              NOTE

The long drawn out question of the Jesuits’ estates was settled
in 1888. Its history may now be recapituated. After the
suppresssion of the society in 1773, the government waited until
the death, in 1801, of Father Casot, the last Canadian Jesuit
to claim them. Amherst had been promised them, but the public
sentiment was against this, and they were demanded for the cause
of public education. The Jesuits meanwhile always maintained that
there was an implicit contract on the part of the government to
restore them. Up to 1888 the yearly revenues accruing had become
very great. In 1800 these reached the sum of $7,800; in 1812 that
of more than $9,000; in 1822, $6,000; in 1831, $15,000; in 1840,
$27,000; in 1852, $45,000; during the other years more or less
considerable sums. The total is about $960,000. If there is added
to that the use of the lands of Champ de Mars, the courthouse and
the city hall, and the land of the college at Quebec, it will be
seen that the amount reached nearly two million dollars’ revenue.
The value of the estates themselves resulting from the donations
made by the kings of France and rich individuals was about four
to five millions. Evidently all this could not all be returned.
It became a question of indemnity. In 1874 the Jesuits demanded
such. Father Braun composed a memorial to Rome on the point,
and Father Chazaux, then superior, addressed a request to the
government in the name of the Holy See which had consented to the
demand for the indemnity.

There was delay until May 12, 1887, when the Quebec government
incorporated the Society of Jesus, and on July 12, 1888, passed
the Jesuit estates bill, partially compensating the Society of
Jesus for their loss. On March 3d of the following year the
Commons sustained the act respecting the Jesuit estates by a vote
of 188 to 13. On June 11th the Equal Rights party formed up to
protest. On June 19th the Presbyterian Assembly denounced the act
of incorporation of the Jesuits and the Jesuits estate act, and
the Anglican Synod did the same this month. In July a general
meeting in Queen’s Hall in Montreal also protested.

A petition was at this time presented to the Governor-General,
Lord Stanley, requesting the disallowance of the act of March 3,
1888, and in answer, on August 2d, he replied that the adverse
advice of his ministers, which he deemed sound, bound him to
uphold it.

On November 5, 1889, the Hon. Honoré Mercier, the premier of the
province of Quebec, paid to the Jesuits the sum of $400,000, of
which $60,000 was turned over at once to the Protestant Board of
School Commissioners for the province. The balance did not go
solely to the Jesuits, for Rome decided that of this the claims
for a share made by other Catholic-teaching bodies should be
maintained, so that eventually the Society of Jesus received
barely one-third of the indemnity. It is now clearly recognized
that an elemental act of justice was at last completed.


FOOTNOTES:

[1] See Haldimand’s remarks, Chapter X, Part 1.

[2] “Mémoires particuliers pour servir a l’histoire de l’eglise
de L’Amerique du Nord,” Tome 2 (vie de la Sœur Bourgeoys).

[3] The census of 1911 revealed the interesting fact, that in
view of some popular impressions erroneously entertained the
greatest proportion of children attending school for over six
months in the year was noted in Quebec. It was 76.47 per cent.,
and compares with 74.43 per cent. in Ontario, which comes next in
order. In the Maritime Provinces the ratio was under 70 per cent.




                          CHAPTER XXVII

                            1841-1914

                THE SCHOOL SYSTEM AFTER THE UNION

        THE RISE OF THE “SCHOOL COMMISSIONS OF MONTREAL”

  EDUCATION AFTER THE REBELLION--THE EDUCATIONAL ACT OF
    1846--THE PERSONNEL OF THE FIRST CATHOLIC AND PROTESTANT
    COMMISSIONERS--NORMAL SCHOOLS--THE AMENDED SCHOOL ACT OF
    1868-69--THE CHARTER--THE PROTESTANT HIGH SCHOOL--THE
    PROTESTANT COMMISSIONERS, 1869-1914--HISTORY OF
    SCHOOLS--LIST OF CATHOLIC COMMISSIONERS, 1869-1914--PRESENT
    SCHOOLS UNDER COMMISSION--INDEPENDENT CATHOLIC SCHOOL
    COMMISSIONS--THE ORGANIZATIONS COOPERATING WITH THE CENTRAL
    COMMISSION--“NUNS”--“BROTHERS”--“LAITY.”

   NOTE: SECONDARY EDUCATION--TECHNICAL AND COMMERCIAL--VOCATIONAL.


The events of 1837 paralyzed education and the educational
system became disorganized so that no attempt was made to
reconstruct it till the question of union was settled. In 1841
the first parliament of United Canada passed an act embodying
many of Buller’s suggestions, providing for the establishment
and maintenance of public education. An ex-officio chief
superintendent of education was appointed for the united province
with working superintendents for its eastern and western
sections. The executive educational officer, therefore, for lower
Canada, was the Hon. Dr. J.B. Meilleur, an active educationalist
and a former member of the legislature, who had been the
principal author of the projected school act of 1836.

In 1843 the school act of 1841 was repealed as far as Upper
Canada was concerned and in 1845 as far as it applied to Lower
Canada. This was on account of the working experience gained by
the two superintendents. In 1846 the office of the ex-officio
chief superintendent was abolished and each of the eastern and
western executive officers now administered the school law which
was adopted by the act of 1846 to suit the needs of each section
of the United Province. A very important principle--that of local
taxation for the support of education--introduced with success in
Upper Canada--was substituted for that of voluntary contributions
as an experiment. This was repealed in 1849, owing to strong
opposition, and local assessment was rendered permissive, not
compulsory as before, and the system of voluntary contribution
restored.

The year 1846 marks the origin of the modern Protestant and
Catholic school commissioners of the city of Montreal appointed
by the provincial parliament (9 Victoria, Cap. 27).


                      THE PROTESTANT BOARD

The Protestant Board at its inception was not incorporated by act
of parliament and had little recognized status. It had no funds
to administer except a small grant from the city council. It had
no school buildings to superintend. The early practice was to
subsidize the existing schools. But the idea of the board grew.
It received doles occasionally from the city council and it made
headway. Its first school was the Ann Street School, established
in a rented building, in 1850. It was afterward named the
“William Lunn” after the first secretary-treasurer of the board,
an ardent educationalist and one of the founders of the British
and Canadian School.

The first meeting of the board of commissioners under the act
of 1846 was held on December 10, 1846. Its commissioners up to
1868-69 were:

Rev. Charles Bancroft, chairman, 1846 to 1848; Rev. Caleb Strong,
1846 to ----; Rev. J.M. Cramp, 1846 to----; Mr. William Lunn,
who acted as secretary-treasurer from 1846 to 1871; Mr. Andrew
Watson, 1846 to----; Mr. John Dougall, 1846 to----; Reverend Dr.
Falloon, chairman, February, 1848, to October, 1848; Reverend
Dr. McGill, chairman, October, 1848 to 1856; Ven. Arch-deacon
Gilson, 1854 to 1856, chairman, 1856 to 1861; Rev. William
Snodgrass, chairman, 1861 to 1865; Mr. Kemp,---- to 1865; Rev.
John Jenkins, D.D., chairman, 1865 to 1868; chairman, February,
1868, to February, 1869; Rev. D.H. MacVicar, D.D., LL. D., 1865
to February, 1869; Hon. James Ferrier, senator, 1865 to February,
1869; Mr. Hector Munro, 1865 to February, 1869.


                       THE CATHOLIC BOARD

The Catholic board, also appointed in 1846, had similar
difficulties. The organization of the schools was small. The work
done was sincere, but woefully limited. The schools were small
and not modern in structure and character. The teachers were few
and sadly handicapped in every way, for at that time the chief
thought was how to struggle along in a material way. The cause
of Catholic education was greatly helped at this period by the
advent of the Christian Brothers in 1837, the Brothers of St.
Joseph in 1841, and the religious bodies of women, including the
Ladies of the Sacred Heart in 1842, the Sisters of Providence in
1844, the Ladies of St. Croix in 1847, and others, such as the
Sisters of the Holy Name of Jesus, the Sisters of Charity, etc.

The Catholic school commissioners from 1846 to 1868 were:

Very Rev. A.F. Truteau, V.G., canon, 1846-1848; Rev. Francis A.U.
de Charbonnel, P.S.S. (late bishop of Toronto), 1846-1848; Albert
Furniss, 1846-1849; P.S. Letourneux, 1846-1849; Pierre Beaubien,
physician, 1846-1849; J.U. Beaubry, advocate (later judge of
supreme court), 1848-1862; Rev. A. Pinxsonnault (late bishop
of London), 1848-1850, 1851-1853; Rev. F.R. Mercier, canon,
1848-1849; Rev. J.H. Prevost, P.S.S., pastor of Notre Dame,
1849-1864; A.M. Delisle, 1849-1852; W.C.F. Coffin, prothonotary,
1849-1851; André Ouimet, advocate, 1849-1851; Rev. E.C. Fabre
(afterwards archbishop of Montreal), 1850-1851, 1861-1865;
G. d’Eschambault, physician, 1851-1856; P. Garnot, professor,
1857-1861; Very Rev. H. Moreau, V.G., canon, 1853-1861; J.F.
Pelletier, advocate, 1853-1854; Louis Giard, physician,
1855-1857, 1858-1860, 1861-1868; C.S. Cherrier, advocate,
1857-1859; Gedeon Ouimet (afterward superintendent of public
instruction), 1859-1861; H. Kavanagh, inspector of customs,
1860-1868; Edward Murphy, merchant (later senator), 1861-1865,
1869-1880; Alfred Larocque, 1862-1865; Rev. A. Giband, P.S.S.,
1864-1866; Rev. P.L. Leblanc, canon, 1865-1876; Louis Belanger,
advocate (later judge supreme court), 1865-1874; P.S. Murphy
(later member of the council of public instruction), 1865-1884;
Rev. V. Rousselot, P.S.S., pastor of Notre Dame, 1866-1886;
E.H. Trudel, physician, 1868-1869; Francis Cassidy, advocate,
1868-1869.


                  THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE BOARDS

From 1846 to 1869 the school commissioners were appointed by the
corporation of Montreal to hold office for two years. Since 1869
three are appointed by the provincial government and three by the
corporation for three years.

In 1856 two bills, regarding higher and elementary education,
became law on the report of Doctor Meilleur. They provided, among
other things, for the distribution, through the superintendent
of education and on his report, of the Lower Canada superior
education fund among the various universities, colleges,
academies, and model schools; for the establishment of three
model schools instead of one; the appointment of a council of
public instruction for Lower Canada; the publication of journals
of education in English and French and the creation, as in Upper
Canada, of a superannuated common school teachers’ fund.

In 1857 the long delayed establishment by government of normal
schools at length took place. On the 2d of March the Jacques
Cartier and the McGill Normal Schools[1] were inaugurated with
fitting ceremonies at Montreal, to be followed in May by the
Laval Normal School at Quebec. The Protestant Normal School at
Montreal was established in the Belmont Street School until the
Macdonald College Normal School was opened. Several private
attempts to provide normal schools had been made, however, before
this date. In 1854 a model school was opened on Bonaventure
Street (St. James), maintained by the Colonial Church and School
Society as one of a group of Protestant schools throughout the
Dominion. This society (formerly the “Church Colonial Society”
and the “Newfoundland School Society”), in connection with the
Church of England, originated in London in 1823; it extended to
Canada in 1838. In January, 1851, the two societies were united
and became the “Colonial Church and School Society.” In May,
1861, it became the “Continental Church and School Society.” In
1863, 105 schools had been established, or at one time aided, by
this society.

The school laws relating to the city of Montreal were amended by
the act of 1868-69, and the present system firmly established
by charters of incorporation being granted to both Protestant
and Catholic boards to the effect that the Roman Catholic and
Protestant boards of school commissioners of the city of Montreal
have always been and now are bodies politic and corporate, and
as such have always enjoyed and now enjoy all the rights and
privileges of corporation under the respective names of “the
Roman Catholic board of school commissioners of the city of
Montreal” and the “Protestant board of school commissioners of
the city of Montreal,” as the case may be. The commissioners
were to have a right to hold real estate to any amount. The
annual revenue to be paid by the government was to be according
to the relative proportion of the Roman Catholic and Protestant
populations in the city. In addition there was to be a special
city school tax collected by the city so that the corporation
should pay for division among both boards, a tax assessable on
real estate payable by the proprietors equal to a stated per
cent on the dollar.[2] The proprietors were placed under four
panels, Roman Catholics, Protestants, neutral school tax from
corporations or incorporated companies, or of those that have not
declared in writing their desires to be inscribed on panels 1 or
2, and owners of real estate exempted from taxation. The neutral
tax to be paid by corporations in proportion to the value of the
property inscribed on panel 3 was to be divided between the Roman
Catholic and Protestant boards according to the relative ratio
of the Roman Catholic and Protestant population in the city, and
the remainder in the relative ratio of the value of the property
inscribed on panels 1 and 2 respectively. Jews[3] were empowered
to inscribe on either of panels 1 or 2. Further source of revenue
might come from additional amounts granted by the corporation of
the city or from monthly school fees according to the nature of
the schools, elementary, normal or academic, and from the issue
of debentures, bonds, etc.

Since the passing of this act the progress in education has been
very great, the number and dignity of the school buildings being
marked.

Gradually most of the private schools came under the various
commissions.

In 1870 the “old” Protestant high school came under the new
board. Its history as the fostering ground of so many prominent
citizens deserves special mention. The school opened September
25, 1843, with sixty-five pupils, in the Bigham building on St.
Denis Street, near Notre Dame Street. It was founded about 1843,
and shortly after its organization the Royal Grammar School was
merged into it. The next home was in the semi-ecclesiastical
buildings on Belmont Street, the cornerstone of this erection
having been laid by Lord Metcalfe Governor-General, on July 11,
1845, after the act of incorporation in the same year.[4] Shortly
before 1857 the high school was transferred to the premises now
used by the Fraser Library and Institute. Its first principal
was the Rev. George Foster Simpson. On his resignation Reverend
Dr. Howe succeeded in 1848, and on his retirement in 1891 he was
followed by the Rev. Dr. Elson S. Rexford, to be succeeded in
1904 by the present principal, Mr. Wellington Dixon.

“This school was in many respects,” said one who remembers it
well, “a worthy example of this type. The masters whom I recall
were the rector, Dr. H. Aspinwall Howe, brisk, alert, competent,
self-possessed, showing many of the qualities of an English
parsonage and of an Irish breeding; Mr. Rodger, stern, just,
a Scotchman of serious type, an aquamarine set in steel, was
highly regarded by his pupils for his unswerving uprightness;
Mr. Gibson, tall, spare, peering, of classical proclivities;
Mr. (later Doctor) Murray, a short, rotund Englishman, whose
strong point was not discipline and whose pupils in their noisy
acclamation wore with their heels a long, deep trench in front
of their recitation form; Mr. Tronteau, instructor in French,
who lacked that final something which commands the respect of
British boys. Disciplinary trouble caused his retirement shortly
afterward.” Other contemporaries and pupils of Doctor Murray
remember him as a most lovable man, a lover of his kind, a
deep scholar, a thinker with a brilliant pen and a high poetic
and critical faculty. Another teacher closely connected with
Doctor Howe was Dr. S.P. Robins, who became one of the foremost
educationalists in Canada. The old high school, the scholarly
gentlemen who taught this and its other memories are regarded
with veneration by the Protestant grandfathers of Montreal of
today who gathered there their love of culture and their upright
principles under its successive roofs.

The next location of the high school was on Peel Street. It was
handed over to the school commissioners in 1870.[5]

In 1890 it was destroyed by the act of foolish boy incendiaries.
But a more commodious building was erected on the same site and
continued its progressive work till 1914, when it was sold. In
the meantime the new high school, a handsome building, being
prepared on University Street, above Sherbrooke Street, was
opened on September 8, 1914, to receive its new generation.

The past commissioners under the act of 1868-69 are as follows:

Rev. John Jenkins, D.D., chairman, February, 1869, to June,
1884; Rev. Canon Bancroft, D.D., LL.D., February, 1869, to June,
1877; Rev. D.H. MacVicar, D.D., LL.D., February, 1869, to June,
1876; June, 1878, to June, 1879; June, 1884, to December, 1902;
William Lunn, February, 1869, to July, 1883; Hon. James Ferrier,
senator, February, 1869, to July, 1872; T.M. Thompson, city
councillor, February, 1869, to April, 1872; Principal William J.
Dawson, LL. D., F.R.S., F.G.S., April, 1872, to August, 1883;
W. Frederick Kay, alderman, July, 1872, to July, 1875; G.W.
Stephens, B.C.L., alderman, July, 1875, to June, 1884; Samuel
E. Dawson, June, 1876, to June, 1878; Rev. J.F. Stevenson, LL.
D., June, 1877, to June, 1887; Rev. Canon Norman, M.A., D.C.L.,
June, 1879, to February, 1888; Richard Holland, alderman, August,
1883, to June, 1891; J.H. Mooney, alderman, June, 1883, to June,
1889; J.C. Wilson, alderman, June, 1884, to June, 1887; Rev. A.G.
Upham, June, 1887, to November, 1890; J.S. Archibald, D.C.L., Q.
C, alderman, June, 1887, to June, 1890; E. Thompson, alderman,
June, 1891, to June, 1894; D. Wilson, alderman, June, 1889, to
June, 1895; R. Wilson-Smith, alderman and mayor, June, 1895, to
June, 1898; R. Costigan, alderman, June, 1894, to June, 1900;
James McBride, alderman, June, 1890, to June, 1902; Very Rev.
Dean Evans, D.D., D.C.L., February, 1888, to June, 1906; H.A.
Ekers, alderman and mayor, June, 1898, to June, 1906; Farquhar
Robertson, alderman, June, 1900, to June, 1906; G.W. Stephens,
M.P.P., June, 1906, to August, 1907; H.B. Yates, M.D., alderman,
June, 1906, to June, 1910; Rev. W.I. Shaw, D.D., LL. D., D.C.L.,
November, 1890, to March, 1911; I.H. Stearns, alderman, June,
1902, to June, 1911; Rev. James Barclay, January, 1903, to June,
1914; R. Turner, alderman, June, 1906, to June, 1912; Rev. H.
Symonds, D.D., LL. D., June, 1907, to June, 1912; James Robinson,
alderman, June, 1910, to June, 1913; Rev. W.R. Young, D.D.,
May, 1911, to June, 1913; Joseph Ward, alderman, August, 1911,
to June, 1914; Rev. J. Scrimger, August, 1912; W.S. Weldon,
alderman, July 1, 1914.


  SCHOOLS PAST AND PRESENT UNDER THE PROTESTANT BOARD OF SCHOOL
              COMMISSIONERS OF THE CITY OF MONTREAL

  HIGH SCHOOL OF MONTREAL.--Founded in 1845 and transferred to the
    Board September 1, 1870. Moved to new building in Peel Street.
    Destroyed by fire, November 28, 1890. Rebuilt and officially
    opened, June 20, 1892. Iron Fire Escapes erected in 1909. New
    site purchased in 1911 on University Street. Building opened on
    September 8, 1914.
      Preparatory High School.--Opened, September, 1870.
        Transferred to the High School of Montreal, September, 1891.

  HIGH SCHOOL FOR GIRLS.--Opened in private dwellings, 131 and 133
    Metcalfe Street, in September, 1875, and transferred to High
    School buildings in Peel Street, 1892. Cookery Room equipped in
    1908. Iron Fire Escapes erected in 1909.

  COMMERCIAL AND TECHNICAL HIGH SCHOOL.--Opened, September, 1906.
      Senior school. Opened in leased premises in Ontario Street,
        September 1877. Afterwards removed to Burnside Hall, and
        subsequently transferred to new premises in Metcalfe
        Street. Transferred to Commercial and Technical High
        School, September, 1906.

  ABERDEEN SCHOOL.--Opened, September, 1896. Enlarged by twelve
    rooms, February, 1906. Assembly Hall converted into four class
    rooms, September, 1908. Ventilation remodeled, 1908. Iron Fire
    Escapes erected in 1909.
      Sherbrooke Street School.--Opened, September 1, 1874. Closed
        and pupils transferred to Aberdeen School, September, 1896.
      St. Lawrence Street School.--Opened in a rented building in
        1871. Transferred to Sherbrooke Street School, September 1,
        1874.

  ALEXANDRA SCHOOL.--Site purchased and building erected in 1910.
    Opened in February, 1911.
      Trinity School.--Opened in the basement of Trinity Church,
        St. Denis Street, September, 1909. Closed and pupils
        transferred to the Alexandra School, February, 1911.

  AMHERST PARK SCHOOL.--Transferred to the Board, July 1, 1913.

  BELMONT STREET SCHOOL.--Opened in September, 1907, in the McGill
    Normal School Buildings, leased from the Provincial Government.
    Lease renewed for a period of five years from July 1, 1911.
      Baron de Hirsch Day School, St. Elizabeth Street.--Subsidized
        by the Board 18--to 1904. Moved to new building, 250 Bleury
        Street, and conducted under the management of the Board
        from September, 1904, to June, 1907. Agreement terminated
        June, 1907, and accommodation for pupils provided in the
        Belmont Street School in September, 1907.

  BERTHELET STREET SCHOOL.--37 Berthelet Street.--Opened in
    September, 1886. Iron Fire Escapes erected in 1909.
      Ontario Street School.--Opened in leased premises in 1876.
        Closed and pupils transferred to Berthelet Street School.
      St. George’s School.--Maintained by Colonial and Continental
        Church and School Society. (Subsidized, 1878.) Discontinued
        after June, 1886.

  BORDEAUX SCHOOL.--Territory annexed to that of the Board, July 1,
    1913. Dwelling house purchased and converted into a two-roomed
    school. School opened, September 2, 1913.

  BRITANNIA STREET SCHOOL.--Opened, October 1, 1887. Janitor’s
    apartments and the basement of the school building remodeled,
    1909.
      Mill Street School.--Opened in Government Immigration
        Building in Britannia Street, September, 1877. Transferred
        to Britannia Street School, October, 1887.

  CÔTE DES NEIGES SCHOOL.--Transferred to the Board, July 1, 1911

  DELORIMIER SCHOOL.--Transferred to the board, July 1, 1910. Site
    enlarged by purchase of adjoining lots, 1911.

  DUFFERIN SCHOOL.--Opened, March 5, 1894. Enlarged by addition of
    nine rooms, February, 1906. Assembly Hall converted into four
    class-rooms September, 1907. Fire Tower erected in 1908. Iron
    Fire Escapes erected in 1909. Lavatories remodeled, 1912.
      British and Canadian School.--Established in 1822.
        Transferred to the Board in 1866. New storey added and
        interior rearranged September 15, 1873. Closed and pupils
        transferred to Dufferin School, March 4, 1894.
      Dorchester Street School.--Opened at 381 Dorchester Street in
        September, 1874. Closed and pupils transferred to Dufferin
        School, March 4, 1894.
      French Protestant School.--Opened, October, 1875, and shortly
        afterwards transferred to Dorchester Street School.

  EARL GREY SCHOOL.--School site purchased 1907. School opened
    September 1908. Enlarged by the addition of eight rooms
    September, 1910.
      Boulevard School.--Transferred to the Board in 1906. School
        building closed and pupils transferred to the Earl Grey
        School, corner Comte and Amherst streets, September, 1908.

  EDWARD VII SCHOOL.--Site purchased, 1911. School erected, 1912.
    School opened for reception of pupils, November, 1912.

  FAIRMOUNT SCHOOL.--Transferred to the Board, July 1, 1910.
    Heating and ventilation remodeled and the building enlarged by
    the addition of twelve rooms, September, 1911.

  LANSDOWNE SCHOOL.--Opened, September, 1891. Enlarged by six
    rooms, February, 1906. Iron Fire Escapes erected in 1909.
      Panet Street School.--Opened, 1860. Closed and pupils
        transferred to Lansdowne School, September, 1891.
      Quebec Suburbs School.--Opened in a private house on Papineau
        Square in April, 1850. Destroyed by fire, July 8, 1852.
        School continued in Colborne Avenue. Closed and pupils
        transferred to the Panet Street School, 1860.
      De Salaberry Street School.--Opened in 1870. Closed
        September, 1891. Pupils transferred to Lansdowne School,
        1891.

  LORNE SCHOOL.--Opened, September, 1891. Assembly Hall converted
    into three class-rooms September, 1907. Entrances remodeled,
    and Fire Escapes built, 1908. Iron Fire Escapes erected 1909.
      St. Gabriel School.--Transferred to the Board in 1878.
        Transferred to Lorne School, September, 1891.

  MOUNT ROYAL SCHOOL, formerly St. Urbian St or St. Jean
    Baptiste.--Renamed 1893-94. Enlarged in 1898. Enlarged by
    twelve rooms, February, 1906 Enlarged by two rooms, September,
    1907. Ventilation remodeled in 1908. Assembly Hall converted
    into four class-rooms, 1909. Fire Escapes built, 1909.
    Mission Hall adjoining purchased, January, 1911, and converted
    into a Kindergarten Class Room, February, 1911.
      St. Jean Baptiste School. Transferred to the Board in 1886.
        Removed to new building in St. Urbain Street, April, 1889.
        Enlarged and renamed Mount Royal School, September, 1894.

  RIVERSIDE SCHOOL, formerly Point St. Charles School.--Renamed.
    Enlarged in 1894. Enlarged by addition of eight class rooms,
    September, 1908, and ventilation remodelled; entrances
    remodelled. Two Fire Towers built on school building, 1908. Two
    Iron Fire Escapes built, 1909.
      Point St. Charles School on Favard Street.--Opened, January,
        1876. Renamed Riverside.
      Grace Church School.--Opened in the school room of Grace
        Church, September, 1872. Closed, January, 1876; re-opened,
        March, 1887. Closed, September, 1891.
      St. Matthew’s School.--Opened in school room of St. Matthew’s
        Church, January, 1874. Closed, September, 1891.

  ROSEMOUNT SCHOOL.--Transferred to the Board, July 1st, 1911.
    Assembly Hall Converted into two class rooms, September, 1911.
    Boardroom converted into a class room, September, 1913.

  ROYAL ARTHUR SCHOOL.--Opened, February 11th, 1870, by H.R.H.
    Prince Arthur. Remodelled in 1888. Partially destroyed by fire,
    January 18th, 1909. New building erected on former site during
    1909-10 and opened in September, 1910.

  SARAH MAXWELL MEMORIAL SCHOOL.--Erected on the site of the former
    Hochelaga School. Opened, April 6th, 1908. Enlarged by addition
    of four rooms, 1912.
      Hochelaga School.--Transferred to the Board in April, 1884.
        Removed to new building in Prefontaine Street, November
        17th, 1890. School burned, February 26th, 1907. Replaced by
        the Sarah Maxwell Memorial School, 1908.

  SHAW MEMORIAL CHURCH SCHOOL.--Opened in rented basement of Shaw
    Memorial Church, September, 1913.

  STRATHEARN SCHOOL.--Site purchased, and plans prepared, 1912.
    Building erected 1912-13 and opened for the reception of
    pupils, September 2nd, 1913.

  VICTORIA SCHOOL.--Corner Stone laid June 20th, 1887. School
    opened September 1st, 1888. Fire escapes built in 1909.
    Enlarged by addition of Gymnasium Sloyd and Cookery Rooms, in
    1911.

  WILLIAM DAWSON SCHOOL.--Site purchased June, 1908. Building
    erected in 1910-11. Opened, April, 1911.
      Berri Street School.--Transferred to the Board in 1905. New
        site purchased in June, 1908. Building closed and pupils
        transferred to the William Dawson School, April, 1911.

  WILLIAM LUNN SCHOOL.--Erected on the site of the former Ann
    Street School. Opened, October 6th, 1908.
      Ann Street School.--Established 1850 in a rented building.
        Property purchased in 1853. Wing added to building in 1864.
        Transferred to new building in Ann Street in April, 1872.
        Heating and ventilation remodelled in 1890. Destroyed
        by fire, August 26th, 1907. Rebuilt in 1908 and renamed
        the William Lunn School. Pupils transferred to the new
        building, October 6th, 1908.

  YOUVILLE SCHOOL.--Transferred to the Board, July 1st, 1913.

[Illustration: A GROUP OF SCHOOLS UNDER THE PROTESTANT
COMMISSIONERS]

[Illustration: Royal Arthur--Erected 1910]

[Illustration: Montreal high school]

[Illustration: Edward VII--Erected 1912]

[Illustration: Fairmount--Enlarged 1911]

[Illustration: Alexandra--Erected 1910]

[Illustration: Strathearn--Erected 1913]

                 THE CATHOLIC SCHOOL COMMISSION

The board of the Catholic schools commissioners under the act of
1868-9 has been served by:

The Rev. V. Rousselot, P.S.S., 1868-1886; Rev. P.L. Leblanc,
canon, 1868-1876; P.S. Murphy, 1868-1884; Louis Belanger,
1868-1874; Edward Murphy, 1868-1869; Narcisee Valois, alderman,
1869-1870; Severe Rivard, advocate, 1870-1878; J.A. Ouimet,
advocate (later minister of public works), 1874-1879; Rev. E.
Moreau, canon, 1876-1880; Jacques Grenier, alderman, 1878-1887;
E.C. Monk, advocate, 1879-1883; Rev. P.C. Dufresne, canon,
1880-1881; L.O. Hetu, notary, 1880-1883; Very Rev. N.Z. Lorrain,
V.G., 1881-1882; Very Rev. L.D.A. Maréchal, V.G., canon,
1883-1892; H.B. Rainville, alderman, 1883-1886; F.D. Monk,
advocate, 1883-1891; Rev. A.L. Sentenne, P.S.S., pastor of Notre
Dame, 1886-1894; R. Préfontaine, M.P., alderman, 1886-1903:
A.S. Hamelin, ex-alderman, 1887-1893; J.H. Semple, merchant,
1887-1892; F.L. Beique, advocate, 1891-1893; Rev. A.P. Dubuc,
1892-1894; F.J. Hart, merchant, 1893-1894;[6] C. Beausoleil,
M.P., alderman, 1895-1902; W. Farrell, merchant, 1893-1901; M.T.
Brennan, M.D., 1891-1896; L.E. Desjardins, M.D., 1894-1895;
Rev. J. Quinlivan, P.S.S., 1894-1897; Rev. J.W. Leclaire, P.P.,
1894-1902; Rev. P.M. Bruchesi, canon, 1894-1897, 1894-1900 (now
archbishop of Montreal); C.S. de Lorimier, judge, Superior Court,
1895-1896; B. Connaughton, judge, Superior Court, 1896-1899;
Mgr. Z. Racicot, P.A., vicar general (became auxiliary bishop
of Montreal), 1897-1905; P.J. Martineau, advocate, 1897-1907;
L.P. Demers, advocate, M.P., 1898-1904, 1899-1911 (now judge of
Superior Court), 1899-1911; Daniel Gallery, alderman, 1900-1904;
Rev. C. Larocque, P.P., 1901-1904; J.R. Savignac, 1901-1904;
A.S. Hamelin, ex-alderman, 1902-1908; Martin Callaghan, P.P.,
1902-1905; H. Laporte, alderman (afterward mayor), 1903-1906;
N.A. Troie, P.S.S., P.P. Notre Dame, 1904-1906; C. Piché, K.C.,
M.P., 1904-1908: S.D. Vallières, alderman, 1904-1907; L. Abbé
P. Perrier, March 23, 1905-December 15, 1905; G. Dauth, canon,
December 15, 1905-1910; W. O’Meara, canon, P.P., 1905----; F.L.T.
Adam, canon, P.P., 1906-1909; L. Payette, alderman (afterwards
mayor), 1907-1910: L.A. Lapointe, alderman, 1907----; E.
Lafontaine, judge, Superior Court, 1907----; J.P. Décarie, M.D.,
1908----; J.M. Demers, P.P., 1909-1910; Joseph McLaughlin,
1909-1910; Mgr. Emile Roy, V.G., P.A., 1910----; Anthime Corbeil,
P.P., St. Joseph, 1910----; Napoleon Giroux, alderman, 1910----;
L. A. Lavallée, K. C, mayor, 1911-1914; Emery Larivière,
alderman, 1914----.

The following is the history of some of the earlier schools of
the Commission:

The “Plateau” school in 1871 became the headquarters of the
new board of Catholic school commissioners. Its situation on a
plateau, between St. Catherine, St. Urbain and Ontario streets,
gives it its popular name. Its official title is the Commercial
Academy, which was founded in 1853 on Cote Street and which
was transferred to the plateau in 1871. The Montcalm School
dates back to 1860 when it was formerly known as the Académie
Sainte Marie; this was on Craig Street, 157. It is the oldest
institution under the board. The Champlain School formerly the
Ecole St. Vincent, was built in 1870 and rebuilt in 1890 at 164
Fullum Street. Belmont School, 245 Guy Street, was founded in
1878. Its first principal was P.L. O’Donaghue. Olier School, 216
Roy Street (now 282), was formerly the St. Denis Academy under
the direction of Mr. Primeau, and was founded in 1875. In 1878 it
was moved to Roy Street. Sarsfield School was built in 1870, at
97 Grand Trunk Street. Plessis Street School, 383 Plessis Street
(now 505), was founded in 1878 and was entrusted to the Brothers
of the Christian Schools. St. Gabriel School, 350 Centre Street.
St. Alphonsus, 120 Conway Street, was built in 1890.

The names and addresses of schools controlled by the Board at
present are as follows:

  Names of Schools.      Where Situated.           By Whom Directed.

  Commercial Academy     Plateau Avenue             Lay teachers
  Montcalm School        408, de Montigny Street    Lay teachers
  Champlain School       224, Fullum Street         Lay teachers
  Sarsfield School        97, Grand Trunk Street    Lay teachers
  Belmont School         245, Guy Street            Lay teachers
  Olier School           282, Roy Street            Lay teachers
  Edward Murphy School   680, Craig East Street     Lay teachers
  Salaberry School        26, Robin Street          Bros. of the Christian
                                                      Shls.
  St. Joseph School      141, St. Martin Street     Bros. of the Christian
                                                      Shls.
  St. Bridget’s School    50, St. Rose Street       Bros. of the Christian
                                                      Shls.
  Plessis School         505, Plessis Street        Bros. of the Christian
                                                      Shls.
  St. Ann’s School       127, Young Street          Bros. of the Christian
    (Boys)                                            Shls.
  St. Patrick’s School   371, Lagauchetière W. St.  Bros. of the Christian
    (Boys)                                            Shls.
  St. Charles’ School    220, Island Street         Bros. of the Christian
                                                      Shls.
  Meilleur School        695, Fullum Street         “Sacred Heart” Brothers
  Chauveau School        134, Laprairie Street      Presentation Brothers
  St. Helen’s School     727, St. Paul Street       St. Gabriel Brothers
    (Boys)
  St. Peter’s School     220, Panet Street          Marist Brothers
  Italian School         479, Dorchester E. St      Italians
  N.D. des Anges          15, Mullins Street        Congr. Notre-Dame
    School
  St. Catherine School  1298, St. Catherine E.      Congr. Notre-Dame
  Bourgeoys School       490, Plessis Street        Congr. Notre-Dame
  Visitation School      703, Craig East Street     Congr. Notre-Dame
  St. Joseph’s School    739, Notre-Dame West       Congr. Notre-Dame
    (Girls)
  St. Ann’s School       102, McCord Street         Congr. Notre-Dame
    (Girls)
  St. Louis School       101, Roy Street            Congr. Notre-Dame
  N.-D. du Bon           714, Craig East Street     Congr. Notre-Dame
    Conseil Schl
  Jeanne LeBer School    740, Wellington Street     Congr. Notre-Dame
  St. Agnès’ School      357, St. Antoine Street    Congr. Notre-Dame
  St. Patrick’s Schl.     79, St-Alexander Street   Congr. Notre-Dame
    (Girls)
  St. Stanislaus         321, Sanguinet Street      Congr. Notre-Dame
    School
  St. Antoine School     434, Lagauchetière W.      Congr. Notre-Dame
  St. Eusebius School    711, Fullum Street         Congr. Notre-Dame
  St. Helen’s School       5, Chaboillez Street     Congr. Notre-Dame
    (Girls)
  St. Alphonsus School   120, Conway Street         Congr. Notre-Dame
  St. John the           495, Centre Street         Sisters of the Holy Cross
    Evangelist
  St. Bridget’s School   111, Papineau Street       Sisters of the Holy Cross
  St. Gabriel School     478, Centre Street         Sisters of the Holy Cross
  St. Alexis Orphanage   247, St. Denis Street      Sisters of Providence
  Jardin de l’Enfance    110, Visitation Street     Sisters of Providence
  St. Vincent-de-Paul    247, St. Denis Street      Sisters of Providence
  Institut. for the       95, St. Catherine W. St.  Grey Nuns (S. of Charity)
    Blind
  Bethlehem Asylum.        1, Richmond Square       Grey Nuns (S. of Charity)
  Marchand Academy       356, Dorchester E. St      Lady lay teachers
  Garneau School         463, Visitation Street     Lady lay teachers
  Mrs. Mackay             58, Ontario West Street   Lady lay teachers
    Wolff’s Schl
  Miss Viger’s School    440, St. Hubert Street     Lady lay teachers
  St. Joseph,            156, Charlemagne St        Lady lay teachers
    Longue Pointe
  Vinet Longue Pointe    139, Lepailleur Street     Lady lay teachers
  Ecole St. Croix          In Edmard Ward           Lay teachers
    (Boys)
  Notre Dame du Perpétuel  In Edmard Ward           Congregation N.D.
    Secours (Girls)

The commission is at present building six new buildings and four
of them will be completed during the present year.

It should be borne in mind that the above list does not represent
the full number of Catholic schools in Montreal in 1914, in a
population of over four hundred and sixty-six thousand, of which
over two-thirds are Catholics. The above are only those schools
controlled by the “Montreal Catholic school board” which is no
longer an exact expression.

For it must be understood that while from a municipal point of
view, the City of Montreal has grown by successive annexations
which have considerably enlarged its territory and the number of
its inhabitants, nevertheless the Catholic School Board has not
enlarged its domain. Its jurisdiction is exercised only within
the limits of the old city before annexations. The towns and
villages lately annexed have preserved their school autonomy, so
that what with the towns or villages annexed for municipal, but
not for school purposes, and those not in any way annexed, there
are altogether about thirty-two different school boards in what
is considered the metropolis of Montreal.

There are now more pupils in the many schools of the territory
outside the scope of the Central Commission than are under its
regulation. This should be carefully understood, else the
above list would indeed look small for so large a Catholic city.

[Illustration: THE OLD “BLACK” NUNNERY The northeast portion of
the garden of the convent of the “Congregation de Notre Dame,”
founded by Marguerite Bourgeoys in 1659. The present buildings
are those of the third convent, the previous two having been
burned. The projected extension of St. Lawrence Boulevard to
the harbor necessitates the demolition of the convent and the
adjoining church of Notre Dame de Pitie.]


        WOMEN TEACHING ORGANIZATIONS--THE “CONGREGATION”

The chief women organizations at present cooperating with the
Catholic school commission have an interesting history. The early
history of the pioneering work for education in Montreal by the
Congregation Nuns has been told in the first volume. To resume in
brief, on November 25, 1657, Marguerite Bourgeoys, with Madame
Marguerite Pacaud, opened the first school proper, in Montreal
in a stable (36 by 18 feet) given by M. de Maisonneuve, facing
the Hôtel Diéu on St. Paul Street. In 1666 a boarding school
for young girls was opened by her. In 1670, the stable being
insufficient, a large house in stone was built. In 1683 the house
was burnt down and two of her community, Géneviève Durosoy and
Marguerite Soumillard perished. The Congregation immediately
commenced, with only 40 sols, to build their house in the “haut
ville,” on ground donated to them adjoining the Hôtel Diéu. This
was the site on which the subsequent convent additions were built
and which has recently, in 1912, been purchased by the city for
the elongation of St. Lawrence Boulevard. In 1713 the northeast
wing of the convent was commenced for a “pensionnat” which
received a foundation of 13,000 _livres_ from Jeanne Le Ber, the
recluse of Notre Dame de Pitié church, erected since 1693 in the
convent grounds. The revenue from this sum was to educate and
board gratuitously seven young girls. In 1768, on April 11th, a
second fire destroyed all the buildings of the convent. In 1823
the Sisters added to their establishment a three-story building.
When the great movement for popular education was promoted in
1833 by M. Quiblier, superior of the Seminary, some of the
Sisters left their convent to open extern free day schools,
first, Externat Ste. Marie, opened September 21, 1833, on Craig
and Visitation streets, and, second, Externat St. Laurent, 324
St. Catherine Street, to be followed, in successive years till
today, by other “externats,” a course which has entitled them to
much public recognition. In 1845 the nuns adjoined the annex to
the _pensionnat_--a building 300 by 57 feet, erected on St. Jean
Baptiste Street. In 1854 a second _pensionnat_ was added, called
“Villa Maria” by the purchase of Monklands, a residence southwest
of Mountain, the original home of the “Monk” family, which became
the official residence of the governor general. It was there that
Lord Elgin retired after signing the rebellion losses bill. In
1860 the original pensionnat, dating from 1666, was removed from
the old site to Mount St. Mary, to the building used as the St.
Patrick’s Hospital for the Irish from 1852 to 1860, and before
that as a Baptist college.

In 1880 the mother house and the novitiate were transferred
to the western slope of Mount Royal, near Villa Maria. The
handsome new building was burnt to the ground on June 8, 1893.
The community returned to their old home on St. Jean Baptiste
Street, which in the meantime had been used as the normal school
entrusted to the nuns, since 1898, for the education of female
bodies for the Province. But a new mother house was preparing;
which they entered in July, 1908. It is an immense building, one
of the largest in the world devoted to religious purposes. It is
built in the Romanesque style. This building is the home of the
college for the higher education of women in affiliation with
Laval University.

The Normal School for girls to be trained for Catholic teachers
for the Province of Quebec has been connected with their
organization since its foundation, on September 14, 1898.


           SISTERS OF THE HOLY NAMES OF JESUS AND MARY

The institution of the Sisters of the Holy Names of Jesus and
Mary is a Montreal foundation which has spread over Canada,
Oregon, California, and many parts of the United States. It
had for its foundress Mlles. Eulalie Durocher (afterwards, in
religion, Mother Maria Rose), Melodie Dufresne and Henriette
Céré, who began their work of teaching the young in October,
1843, in a modest house in Longueuil. In 1844 it was formed into
a religious community and the Sisters took possession of their
convent there. On December 8th the foundresses took their first
religious vows and on August 15, 1846, their final vows. The work
of teaching may be said to be definitely founded in 1845. It has
steadily progressed. The Sisters have about 27,470 children who
attended school under their charge in 1913. They have fifty-six
establishments and direct twenty-five parochial schools in Canada
alone.

Its principal schools are the Hochelaga Convent and the imposing
convent at Outremont, on St. Catherine Road.

On the Eastern slope of Mount Royal, built on one of the
choicest sites of Montreal, is the Outremont boarding-school. A
magnificent panorama of the surrounding country may be seen from
the upper steps of the Convent. The immense cutstone building, of
modern architecture, is surrounded by verdant lawns and gravel
walks, whereon the pupils may indulge in all the pastimes of
convent life. The course of studies is the same as at Hochelaga,
although the appointments may be more modern. A beautiful white
chapel, with its marble altars, burnished brass communion-table
and stained glass windows, is worthy of attention. A museum is
located in the dome which overtops the building.


                    SISTERS OF THE HOLY CROSS

Another body cooperating with the Catholic School Commission,
is that of the Congregation of the Sisters of the Holy Cross,
founded in 1841, at Mans, France, by Father Anthony Moreau and
Mother Mary of the Seven Dolors, née Leocadie Gascoin. In May,
1847, at the formal request of Rev. J.B. Saint Germain, Pastor
of St. Laurent, Bishop Bourget, on his return from Europe,
brought three nuns from this recently organized institute to
establish a branch in Canada. Its beginnings were very humble
and, perhaps on account of its distance from the mother-house, it
made little progress during the first thirty-five years of its
existence. After this ordeal, it suddenly underwent a wonderful
transformation and now numbers 623 members, 530 professed and
98 novices, and owns 40 prosperous houses situated in three
provinces, wherein upwards of 14,000 children are educated. The
Convent still occupies its original site, but has undergone so
many improvements that it is now as fine and massive a structure
as any of the more modern buildings. The boarding-school,
attached to the mother-house and novitiate, Notre Dame Des
Anges, offers every facility for the physical and intellectual
development of youth. The course comprises a term of nine
years. There are 250 pupils under tuition. The house confers
diplomas on such as graduate with honors. Its fine museum is
noted for its rare collections and for their intelligent and
scientific classification; its physical-culture class caters to
the requirements of modern ideas; its vast library contains 4,500
volumes, the best works of French and English authors.

[Illustration: HIGHER EDUCATION FOR WOMEN: Royal Victoria College]

[Illustration: HIGHER EDUCATION FOR WOMEN: Mother House of the
Congregation De Notre Dame]


St. Basil’s Boarding School was erected in 1895, and opened the
following year under the supervision of the Sisters of the Holy
Cross. More than 350 pupils take the full English and French
course, and are eventually awarded the diploma of the house,
or the academic, if they pass the examination of the Board of
Catholic Examiners of the Province of Quebec.


                       SISTERS OF ST. ANNE

The Sisters of St. Anne is another teaching congregation
assisting the Catholic School Commission. It was founded at
Vaudreuil in 1850 by Miss Esther Lureau dit Blondin. The order
now extends over four provinces of which two are in Canada,
with 54 houses of which 21 are at the diocese of Montreal.
The convent at Lachine, formerly the residence of Sir George
Simpson, governor of the Hudson’s Bay Company, is their chief
establishment in Montreal; another is the large boarding-house at
St. Henri.


                       OTHER CONGREGATIONS

Among the congregations not primarily teaching organizations, but
charitable institutions with schools attached to the Board, the
Sisters of Providence conducting the schools of the orphanage of
St. Alexis founded in 1864, and schools of St. Vincent de Paul,
and of the Jardin de L’Enfance founded in 1881. This congregation
accepts a subsidy from the School Commission. It also teaches the
School of the Deaf Mutes, but not under the Commission as in the
other case.

The Grey Nuns also receive subsidies under the Commission for
their instruction in the classes of l’Asyle Bethlehem on Richmond
Square, founded by the Hon. C.S. Rodier and “Nazareth” Asylum on
St. Catherine Street, founded in 1860, for the blind. The history
of these organizations will be found in another section.


                  MEN’S TEACHING ORGANIZATIONS

The coming of the Brothers of the Christian Schools to Montreal
in 1837 must be chronicled at some length since the modern
Catholic primary educational system for the boys of the city
has been so largely under their hands. The first project of the
establishment in Canada of the “Christian” Brothers, as they are
now popularly called, dates back as far as the year before the
death of the founder of the institute, St. Jean Baptiste de la
Salle, 1718, but negotiations were broken off. In 1733 Brothers
Denis and Pacificus were sent to Montreal to study the situation,
but with no results. Nearly a century later, in 1830, the
superior of the seminary and vicar general of the diocese, Abbé
Quiblier, made overtures to Brother Anacletus, who then governed
the institute, for a settlement for the brothers to teach the
boys whose education had never been so systematically organized
as that of the girls. Numbers being small, it was not till 1837,
on November 7th, that three brothers, the first to visit America,
arrived at the seminary, where they were entertained as guests
for six months, till they were installed in their first novitiate
on St. Francois Xavier Street, the gift of the Sulpicians, in a
house adjoining the school. On December 23, 1837, they commenced
their classes in the seminary building. Two classes were
immediately filled, to be quickly succeeded by a third.

As the scholars grew M. Quiblier acquired for the brothers an
old country house of one of the governors of Montreal in Coté
Street, which formed a second novitiate and a temporary school.
In 1840 there was added, parallel to the novitiate, a new school
(St. Lawrence) built in stone and in 1841 there were in the two
schools eight classes with 860 scholars who were visited by a
Lord Sydenham. In 1842 the brothers began to wear the three
cornered caps of their congregation, now so familiar on the
streets in Montreal. Up to this they had not been permitted
this privilege. The prejudice against the body of religious not
priests wearing a religious habit will be remembered by those
familiar with the history of the Charron Brothers before the
English regime.

Further French classes were opened by them. In 1843 two special
classes for the Irish children were begun in the old convent
of the Récollets. In 1843, also, the Brothers were invited to
Quebec and later to other places in Canada and in America.
Again Montreal is seen as the distributing point of influence
through education. A French-Canadian journal has said: “Ce grain
de senevé, jeté sur les rives du St. Laurent a donné naissance
à un arbre magnifique dort les rameaux bienfaisants ombrageat
les principaux centres du Canada et des Etats Unis.” The
numerous homes of education of this body and the lists of their
educational output of school text-books deserve a more prolonged
study than space permits here. The Brothers have done for the
boys the work that the Congregation of Marguerite Bourgeoys has
done for the girls. At present, around Montreal alone, these have
over twenty communities presiding over colleges or schools.

Besides their many elementary schools, the Brothers of the
Christian Schools have the large “Collège de Mont St. Louis”
on Sherbrooke Street, which being divided into three courses,
elementary, commercial and scientific, prepares its pupils for
the polytechnical schools and the different university courses.


                       OTHER ORGANIZATIONS

Of the male teaching religious organizations acting under the
Commission there are the “Sacred Heart,” the “Marist,” the St.
Gabriel, and the “Presentation” Brothers, and the Brothers of the
Christian Schools.


                         --LAY TEACHERS

A third class of those cooperating with the board are the
layteachers. The early teachers especially are deserving of
every praise for their efforts to meet the call for education.
We have already indicated the names of some of those who taught
school before the Union, a partial list of others who worked for
the most part independently of any support chiefly during the
first School Act between 1846 and 1868 may be a fitting tribute.
The dates subjoined give the official opening of school, the
name being the principal. (Cf. “Annuaire de Ville Marie” by
Hugues-Latour):

May 1, 1843, Mlle. Portias; May 1, 1844, Mlle. Sophie Godaire;
September 1, 1853, The Academie Commercial Catholique, founded
by the Catholic Commissioners; August 1, 1856, Mrs. Mary Mullin,
No. 13 St. Alexander Street; September 1, 1852, Mlle. Caroline
Gibeau; October 4, 1852, Mlle. A. Lefebre; September 1, 1854,
Mlle. Sophia Casson; September 1, 1857, School for Boys and
Girls, under the direction of Mr. and Mrs. Clark, Mlle. Lacombe
and Mr. Octave Clark; September 1, 1857, St. Ann’s Male School,
McCord Street, founded by Mr. Andrew Keegan; October 11, 1858,
Mlle. Richard; May 1, 1859, Montreal Select Model School, founded
by Mr. W. Doran; June 11, 1859, Mme. Lafontaine; July, 1859,
Mlles. Lesage; August 1, 1859, Mlle. Louise Larivière; August
15, 1859, St. Ann’s Female School, founded by Miss Marguerite
Lawless; May 1, 1861, Mlle. Varin, for English and French; May
1, 1861, Académie St. Marie, founded by School of Christian
Brothers; September 1, 1861, M. Charles Lafontaine; July 14,
1862, St. Patrick’s Model School, English and French (Girls),
School Commissioners, Wellington Street; September 1, 1862, Mlle.
A.M. Clark, English and French (Girls); September 1, 1862, Mlle.
Corinne Boudreau, English and French (Girls); January 23, 1863,
Académie St. Joseph, M. Joseph Mauffet, and evening school for
men, M. and Madame Mauffet; May 16, 1863, Model School for Boys,
French, School Commissioners; August 1, 1863, St. Patrick’s Model
School, School Commissioners; August 1, 1863, St. Patrick’s
Model School, School Commissioners; April 5, 1863, Mlles. Louise
Lafricain and Jessie Lengley, English and French (Girls); May 1,
1863, Mlle. Josephine Cassant; April 4, 1863, Mrs. Jane Curran;
July 1, 1863, Mlle. Aurélie Valade; September 1, 1863, Miss A.L.
Cronin; September 1, 1863, Mlle. Louise Gingras; October 19,
1863, Mlle. Ida Labelle.


                             NOTE I

                       SECONDARY EDUCATION

In addition to the Elementary schools, there are many Catholic
and Protestant schools and colleges which, in or around the
city, provide for Secondary education mostly in preparation
for a further University course. These are supplied by private
citizens or corporate bodies; among them may be mentioned: Miss
Edgar’s School, 507 Guy Street; Lower Canada College, Notre Dame
de Grâce; the Catholic High School (Presentation Brothers),
Durocher Street; Lyola College, Drummond Street; St. Marie’s
College, Bleury Street; the Convent of the Ladies of the Sacred
Heart, St. Alexander Street and Sault au Récollet; St. Laurent’s
College (Holy Cross Brothers); Mort St. Louis College (Christian
Brothers), Sherbrooke Street; and the academies for advanced
education in connection with the different teaching Brotherhoods
and Sisterhoods.

There are also many business schools.


                             NOTE II

   TECHNICAL, COMMERCIAL AND VOCATIONAL EDUCATION IN MONTREAL

The earliest attempt at technical education before the
capitulation of 1760 will be found in Vol. I, Under The French
Régime. The modern movement remains to be chronicled.


                                I

               THE BOARD OF ARTS AND MANUFACTURES

In 1859 the Board of Arts and Manufactures of Lower Canada
established a central school at Montreal.

In 1872, the Council of Arts and Manufactures made an attempt
to put technical education on its feet. Hitherto the progress
of industry had not been sufficiently perceived. The growth
of manufactures following upon the National policy made the
experiment more necessary. The early equipment was meager, the
means small, and there were but few classes and few pupils.
Still steady progress was made. In 1898 Mr. Thomas Gauthier
became president and long steps in advance were made. There are
now nearly three thousand pupils over the Province of Quebec,
in Montreal, Quebec, St. Hyacinthe, Sherbrooke, Three Rivers,
St. Jean, Lachine, Valleyfield, Sorel, Fraserville, Charny, St.
Romuald, and Chicoutimi.

In Montreal alone there are over one thousand five hundred and
ten pupils in four schools, of which the Monument National is the
most important.


              COMMERCIAL AND TECHNICAL HIGH SCHOOL

Technical night schools are also provided at the Commercial and
Technical High School, the successor of the Montreal Senior
School. This latter school was organized by the Protestant Board
of School Commissioners in September, 1877, to accommodate the
classes of what was then known as the second senior grade of
the public elementary schools. For a year the school met in a
building on Ontario Street, between Bleury and Mance streets,
and in 1878 was transferred to the old high school building at
the corner of Dorchester and University streets, now the Fraser
Institute, and in 1883 to the building on Burnside Place between
Metcalfe and Peel streets.

In 1906 the course of study of the Montreal Senior School was
revised, its name changed to the Commercial and Technical High
School, and the school moved to its new building at 53 Sherbrooke
Street West.

The former principals of the Montreal Senior School have been:
F.S. Haight, M.A., 1877-1883; Alexander Pearson, 1883-1884; J.
MacKercher, M.A., LL. D., 1884-1906.

Since becoming the Commercial and Technical High School they
have been: J. MacKercher, M.A., LL. D., 1906-1914; E. Montgomery
Campbell, B.A., 1914.


                    MONTREAL TECHNICAL SCHOOL

In 1911 the “Ecole Technique,” or the Montreal Technical School,
maintained partly by the provincial and municipal governments by
a contribution of $40,000, each, opened its courses in September.
Its buildings, covering a space of 150,000 square feet, are on
Sherbrooke Street, facing St. Famille Street. It is claimed with
justice that it is equipped as well as any technical building of
modern times. It is undenominational and it has also a French and
an English side. There is in addition a further training school
in the applied sciences, the “Polytechnique,” founded in 1874,
which, having become affiliated, 1887, with Laval University is
described elsewhere.

[Illustration: HAUTES ETUDES COMMERCIALES]

[Illustration: MONTREAL TECHNICAL SCHOOL]

[Illustration: COMMERCIAL AND TECHNICAL HIGH SCHOOL]


                               II

              ECOLE DES HAUTES ETUDES COMMERCIALES

A further school of a university character, but not affiliated
with Laval or McGill universities, is the “Ecole des Hautes
Etudes Commerciales.” It was established in 1910, being opened
on October 4th of that year, in its imposing buildings on Place
Viger under the protection of the government of the province by
the Premier, Sir Lomer Gouin, the first stone having been placed
in October, 1908. The building cost $100,000 and was erected by
MM. Gauthier and Daoust.

The object was to give a university college course in commerce
leading up to a doctorate in commercial science such as is
given in Europe under the title of “Ecoles des Hautes Etudes
Commerciales,” the English translation of which is a misnomer, as
it leaves the impression of the college being a mere “business
school.” It is distinctly a forward movement for Canada. The
tuition extends over a period of three years and includes
instruction in general commercial affairs, banking, stock
exchange and insurance business, and in the third year industrial
and maritime business. There are numerous laboratories in which
the chemistry of fabrics and other forms of analyses are taught.

The first board of administration was composed of: Isaie
Prefontaine, president; Honoré Mercier, M.P.P.; J. Contant;
H. Gervais, M.P.; C.F. Smith; and A.J. de Bray, the latter
being the principal. The first professorial staff consisted
of A.J. de Bray; Honorable Justice Laurendeau (civil law); E.
Montpetit (political economy); J. Contant, C. Martin and J.
Quintal (commercial science); Rev. Pére Bellevance (French);
Rev. M. Desrosiers (history); W.H. Atherton (English); A. Duval
(mathematics); H. Laureys (geography); C. Lechien (chemistry).


                               III

                       VOCATIONAL TRAINING

Vocational training for the blind, deaf, dumb and maimed, and
industrial training given to delinquents are both treated in the
section devoted to charitable works.


FOOTNOTES:

[1] The principal of Jacques Cartier Normal School was the Rev.
Hospice Verreau and of McGill Normal, Dr. William Dawson.

[2] The tax has by various amendments been increased until, at
present, it is ½ cent on the dollar for Protestants and ⅖ cent
for Catholics.

[3] Secular education of Montreal Jewish children is provided
for in the public schools. There was no provision specially
made for their education in the earlier education acts, but
they were admitted into the schools of either the Protestant or
the Catholic panels without question, so long as they remained
few in number. When, however, the Jewish children began to form
a very large percentage of those attending the public schools
difficulties arose, owing to the claim being made that the
taxes were not sufficient to cover the expense entailed. The
problem gave rise to considerable agitation, but eventually the
difficulty was overcome by an act passed through the Quebec
Legislature in 1903 by which the rights of Jewish children to
education in public schools on exactly the same footing as
the children of Catholic and Protestant fellow-citizens were
recognized, and for educational purposes the Jewish taxpayers
were joined to the taxpayers of the Protestant panel, and all
schools under this panel opened to them. These rights were
secured largely through the work of the Jewish Educational Rights
Movement Committee, which included a large number of the leading
Jewish citizens of Montreal and which intrusted the legislative
work to Mr. S.W. Jacobs, K. C, and Mr. Maxwell Goldstein, K. C.

Education in the Hebrew language and literature, as well as
religious education, is attended to by special schools organized
by the Jews of Montreal. The most important body for the study of
these branches is the Talmud Torah Association, which supports a
very large and important school.

[4] The Royal Grammer School was merged into the High School
about this time. Its master, Mr. Skakel, died in 1848.

[5] The first chairman of the High School under the newly
created Board of Commissioners was Rev. John Jenkins. The
secretary-treasurer was Mr. William Lunn. The commissioners were
Rev. Canon Bancroft, Rev. Professor MacVicar, the Hon. James
Ferrier, Mr. Alderman Thomson. Mr. W.C. Baynes was the secretary.
The head-masters were Professor Howe, Mr. D. Rodgers, Mr. S.P.
Robins; assistant masters, Mr. George Murray, Mr. J. Green, Prof.
Darey, Mr. J. Andrew; assistants in the preparatory department,
Miss A. Cairns, Miss Sicotte; infant class, Miss Dougall.

[6] Since 1894 nine members have been acting on the commission.




                         CHAPTER XXVIII

                     UNIVERSITY DEVELOPMENT

                      I. M’GILL UNIVERSITY

  THE ROYAL INSTITUTION--JAMES M’GILL--CHARTER OBTAINED--THE
    “MONTREAL MEDICAL INSTITUTE” SAVES M’GILL--NEW LIFE IN
    1829--THE RECTOR OF MONTREAL--THE MERCHANTS’ COMMITTEE--M’GILL
    IN 1852--THE HISTORY OF THE FACULTIES--BUILDINGS--DEVELOPMENT
    SINCE 1895--RECENT BENEFACTORS--MACDONALD COLLEGE--THE
    STRATHCONA ROYAL VICTORIA COLLEGE FOR WOMEN. NOTE: THE UNION
    THEOLOGICAL MOVEMENT--THE JOINT BOARDS OF THE CONGREGATIONAL,
    ANGLICAN, PRESBYTERIAN AND WESLEYAN AFFILIATED COLLEGES.

            II. LAVAL UNIVERSITY (MONTREAL DISTRICT)

  THE STORY OF ITS COMPONENT PARTS--EVOLUTION FROM THE “ECOLES
  DE LATIN”--COLLEGE DE ST. RAPHAEL--ENGLISH STUDENTS--COLLEGE
  DECLAMATIONS--THE PETIT SEMINAIRE ON COLLEGE STREET--THE
  COLLEGE DE MONTREAL--THE SCHOOLS OF THEOLOGY AND PHILOSOPHY,
  CLASSICS, LAW AND MEDICINE--THE APOSTOLIC CONSTITUTION “JAM
  DUDUM”--DESCRIPTION OF THE UNIVERSITY BUILDINGS--AFFILIATED
  BODIES--THE FACULTIES AND SCHOOLS. NOTE: NAMES OF EARLY “ENGLISH”
  STUDENTS AT THE “COLLEGE.”


                                I

                        M’GILL UNIVERSITY

As already said, the most important success of the “Royal
Institution for the Advancement of Learning” was the McGill
University, which still carries the official title. Its founder,
Mr. James McGill, who was one of the apostles of higher education
in Canada, was born on October 6, 1744, at Glasgow, Scotland. He
came to Montreal before the American Revolution with his brother
Andrew, and became connected with the North West Company. He
married Madame Desrivières, the widow of a French-Canadian. As a
citizen his name stands well, having represented the west ward
in the assembly and having been appointed also a member of the
legislative council. At the outbreak of the War of 1812, he was a
militia colonel and then, an old man, was made brigadier general.
By his will of January 8, 1811, Mr. James McGill, not having any
children, had bequeathed his landed estate, consisting of about
forty-six acres, on Burnside and University streets, to the value
then of £10,000,[1] and a like sum of money, for a university,
but although the college bearing his name was incorporated by a
royal charter in the year 1821, the bequest could not be used,
its validity being disputed by his relatives.

The object of the gift was to found an Anglican college in a
future provincial university, the erection of which had already
been promised by the British government. Indeed, the citizens
were led to believe that such a university was to be established
by George III and endowed with Crown lands.

The four trustees appointed under the will were directed to
convey the property of the bequest to the “Royal Institution
for the Advancement of Learning.” The conditions upon which the
property was to be transferred were that the Royal Institution
would, within ten years after the testator’s decease, erect and
establish on his estate on Burnside and University streets, a
college for the purpose of education and the advancement of
learning in this province and that the college, or one of the
colleges in the university, if established, should be named and
perpetually be known and distinguished by the appellation of
“McGill College.” Owing to persistent opposition by the leaders
of one section of the people to any system of governmental
education and to the refusal by the legislature to make the
grants of land and money which had been promised, the proposed
establishment of a provincial university by the British
government was abandoned.

In so far as the McGill College was concerned, however, the Royal
Institution at once took action by applying for a royal charter.
Such was granted in 1821 and the Royal Institution prepared to
take possession of the estate. But owing to protracted litigation
this was not surrendered to them till 1829, when the work of
teaching was begun in the incipient arts course and the faculty
of medicine. That of medicine, however, had been in existence
five years previously as a teaching body under the name of the
Montreal Medical Institution, with power to admit to practice but
not to confer degrees.

Since this body afterwards became the medical faculty of McGill
and saved the projected university from dying of inanition
it is entitled to special recognition. Its origin is closely
connected with the founding of the general hospital. When this
great charity was accomplished the attending medical staff was
composed of the most prominent and ablest men in the city,
Drs. W. Robertson, W. Caldwell, A.F. Holmes, J. Stephenson and
H.P. Loedel. On October 20, 1822, these men met together “for
the purpose of taking into consideration the expediency of
establishing a medical school in this city,” and it was resolved
“that the considerations which seemed to warrant so desirable an
object should be drawn out and laid before the next meeting of
the Board, to be held on the 27th of the same month, and that
Drs. Stephenson and Holmes be appointed a committee for the said
purpose.” Thus was started the first Canadian medical school,
which afterwards, as we shall see, became the medical faculty of
McGill University. The school was called the “Montreal Medical
Institution,” and received the approval of Lord Dalhousie, the
Governor-in-Chief of Lower Canada, and he appointed the members
of the Institution a Board of Examiners for the district of
Montreal. Formerly these examinations had been conducted by a
board of army medical officers, appointed by the Governor.

The first course of lectures was given in 1824, in a small wooden
house in Place d’Armes, the site of which is now occupied by
the Bank of Montreal. Twenty-five students attended the first
session, and for some years there was no increase in the number.

The following is the advertisement of the lectures:

Anatomy and Physiology, J. Stephenson, M.D.; Chemistry and
Pharmacy, A.F. Holmes, M.D.; Practice of Physic, W. Caldwell,
M.D.; Midwifery and Diseases of Women, W. Robertson, Esq.;
Materia Medica, H.P. Loedel, Esq.;[2] Surgery, J. Stephenson,
M.D. In the course of the summer, 1825: Botany, A. F. Holmes.

The leading spirits of the school were Stephenson and Holmes,
both Canadians, Stephenson by birth and Holmes by adoption, for
he arrived in the country when only four years of age. They
both received their preliminary education here and then went to
Edinburgh, where they took their doctor’s degree. The Montreal
Medical Institution, which afterwards became the Medical faculty
of McGill University, was modelled on the lines of the Edinburgh
University, and to this day the McGill Medical faculty bears the
marks of its relationship to the Alma Mater of its founders.

For four years the Medical Institution continued its work, when,
in 1828, to prevent the lapse of the McGill bequest to the
residuary legatees, the Montreal Medical Institution became the
Faculty of Medicine of McGill University in this wise.

Owing, as said, to litigation the Royal Institution could
not get possession of Mr. McGill’s’ bequest until 1829. Also
it was a condition of the gift that lectures should be given
within a certain number of years or the bequest would lapse
and the property revert to the Desrivières family. Only one
year remained, and no arrangement having been made for the
establishment of a faculty of arts, in fact, no money being
available for that purpose, the Montreal Medical Institution was
constituted a faculty of the University and this was chiefly
accomplished by the exertions of Doctor Stephenson, to whom the
University, in a large measure, owes the preservation of the
bequest of the Hon. James McGill.

The governors of the Royal Institution held a meeting 29th
January, 1829, with the members of the medical school, and the
following minute occurs:

After public business was over, the governors of the Corporation
held an interview with the members of the Medical Institution
(Drs. Caldwell, Stephenson, Robertson, and Holmes), who had been
requested to attend a meeting for that purpose. Owing to this
interview it was resolved by the governors of the Corporation
that the members of the Montreal Medical Institution be engrafted
in the College as its Medical faculty, it being understood and
agreed upon between the contracting parties that, until the
powers of the charter would be altered, one of their number only
should be university professor and the others lecturers. That
they should immediately enter upon the duties of their respective
offices, all of which arrangements were agreed to. The first
session of the new Medical Faculty of McGill College was held in
1829, with thirty-five students on the register. Thus the Medical
saved McGill University.

The staff of the university in 1829 was: Divinity, Rev. J.G.
Mountain, D.D. (Cambridge), principal; moral philosophy and
learned languages, Rev. J.L. Mills, D.D. (Oxford); history and
civil law, Rev. J. Strachan, D.D. (Aberdeen); mathematics and
natural philosophy, Rev. J. Wilson, A.N. (Oxford). The staff of
the Montreal Medical Institution, now become the Medical Faculty,
in 1829 was: Lecturers, A.F. Holmes, M.D.; W. Caldwell, M.D.; J.
Stephenson, M.D.; and W. Robertson, M.D.

After 1829 McGill College, rich in a charter, but poor in
students and educational facilities, struggled on, unsupported
by government amidst political rancour, financial embarrassment,
and internal administrative difficulties, and almost extinct as
a body with university pretensions with the exception of its
medical and its art faculty, the latter being erected as such in
1843 under the Rev. Dr. John Bethune, so long Rector of Montreal,
then acting as principal, till a number of citizens came to its
support.

Doctor Bethune’s dual position of principal and Rector of
Montreal was not a happy one, especially in 1845, when he was
in front of a movement to affix to the University a distinctly
Anglican denominational stamp. The appointment of the principal
was consequently disallowed upon the advice of Mr. Gladstone.
An extract from his letter to Earl Cathcart is of interest and
shows how desperate were its straits to merit such a complicated
utterance:

“Into the various and somewhat complicated charges which have
been brought against Doctor Bethune, in his capacity as principal
of the College, I do not find it necessary to enter; nor do I
wish to state at the present moment any decided opinion as to
the extent to which the present condition of the Institution
is, owing to the character and position of its principal. My
decisions are founded upon reasons which are not open to dispute:
the first, the weight of the Bishop’s authority together with
your own, independently of any reference to that of the Board
of Visitors, which may be considered to be to some extent, at
this moment in dispute; next, the fact that Doctor Bethune did
not himself receive an university education, which I must hold
to be, unless under circumstances of the rarest occurrence,
an indispensable requisite of such a position as he occupies.
To these I am disposed to add, although I express the opinion
without having had the advantage of learning what may be the view
of the Lord Bishop in this particular, that I cannot think it
expedient that the offices of principal and professor of divinity
in McGill College should be combined with that of Rector of
Montreal. This circumstance is not much adverted to in the papers
before me; but I am strongly impressed that the incongruity
of this junction of important collegiate appointments with a
no less important pastoral charge in the same person; either
the former or the latter of which, especially considering the
large population of the town of Montreal, I must, as at present
advised, hold to be enough to occupy his individual attention.”

In 1851 its total income was only £540 per annum and even with
the small staff employed, the expenditure was £742, consequently
a large debt accumulated. A committee of Montreal merchants arose
and relieved the stringency, an example which has never failed
to be followed with like success in succeeding crises of its
growth.

[Illustration: McGILL UNIVERSITY BUILDINGS]

[Illustration: Engineering Building]

[Illustration: Medical Building]

[Illustration: Art Building]

[Illustration: Mining and Chemistry Building]

In 1852 an amended and favourable charter was secured. Its new
era of progress was assured in 1855 by the advent of Dr. William
Dawson as the new principal, invited by the Hon. John Day,
the president of the board of governors, and backed up by the
personal solicitation of Sir Edward Head, the governor-general.
He was a young man, having been born at Pictou, Nova Scotia, on
October 13, 1820. His studies were commenced at Pictou College
and continued at the University of Edinburgh. In 1850 he was
appointed superintendent of education for Nova Scotia and became
soon distinguished as a geologist and educationalist. On his
appointment to McGill he found the little, feeble, struggling
college with about eighty students, with two faculties, those of
arts and medicine, and the nucleus of a faculty of law begun in
1853. The School of Medicine of this period sent out, however,
such men as Duncan McCallum, George E. Fenwick, Robert Palmer
Howard, William Wright, Sir James Grant, Robert Clark, and Sir
William Hingston of a later period.

Dr. Dawson has described his first impressions, which were
anything but agreeable, in the following words: “Materially, the
University was represented by two blocks of unfinished and partly
ruined buildings, standing amid a wilderness of excavators and
masons’ rubbish; overgrown with weeds and bushes. The grounds
were unfenced, and pastured at will by herds of cattle, which,
not only cropped the grass, but browsed in the shrubs, leaving
unhurt only one great elm, which still stands as the founder’s
tree, and a few old oak and butternut trees, most of which have
had to give place to our new buildings. The only access from
the town was by a circuitous and ungraded car track, almost
impassable at night. The buildings had been abandoned by the new
board, and the classes of the Faculty of Arts were held in the
upper story of a brick building in the town, the lowest part
of which was occupied by the High School. I had been promised
a residence, and this I found was to be a portion of one of
the detached buildings aforesaid, the present eastern wing. It
had been imperfectly furnished, was destitute of nearly every
requisite of civilized life, and in front of it was a bank of
rubbish and loose stone with a swamp below, while the interior
was in an indescribable state of dust and disrepair. Still, the
governors had done the best they could in the circumstances.”

In 1892, when Sir William Dawson retired, he left it a university
of the world, with about one thousand students and almost
eighty professors and lecturers. He added the faculties of
applied science, which, though instituted in 1870, was regularly
organized in 1878, comparative medicine and veterinary science.
As far back as 1870 he began to plan for the higher education
of women, founding the Ladies’ Educational Association and the
Girls’ High School. In 1883 he opened the Donalda department in
the faculty of arts, which after his resignation, developed into
the Royal Victoria College. During his régime the university
buildings began to appear on the campus, then a bare, almost
treeless, weedy, partly swampy field, bearing but small likeness
to the present noble campus with its imposing piles of buildings
and its fine avenue of Canadian trees.

The course in law begun in connection with the faculty of arts
was made a separate faculty in 1853. The course of applied
science was organized in 1856 in connection with the faculty of
arts. It did not become a special faculty till 1893. In 1855 two
detached stone erections, an arts building with a residence for
the principal about sixty feet to the east, stood there alone.
The medical building, in existence before the university was
established in 1829, still stood downtown, its first location,
the original home of the Montreal Medical Institute, being No.
22 St. James Street, within reasonable distance of the General
Hospital on Dorchester Street, with which its staff were closely
connected as its earliest physicians. Subsequently it moved to
the corner of Craig Street and St. George and again to Coté
Street. Shortly after 1855 the west wing of the present arts
building was added by Mr. William Molson for the purposes of a
library and convocation hall, and in the course of a few years
both these wings (the Molson Hall on the west and the principal’s
residence on the east) were joined to the center block. The
west wing was used as a university museum and the east for the
chemical and natural science rooms and laboratories. All four
parts are now devoted to entirely different uses. The Molson Hall
serves chiefly as an examination room for arts students (having
long ago proved wholly inadequate for meetings of convocation),
and when the Peter Redpath Library was erected in 1893 the
library portion of it became available for class-rooms. Both
wings, with a story added, now contain only the regular lecture
rooms of the Faculty of Arts and the principal’s residence serves
several purposes--for the offices of the administration, the
Zoological department and the Faculty of Law.

It was not until 1872 that a medical building was provided on
the University campus. This building was enlarged in 1885 and
again in 1895--this time chiefly through the generosity of the
late Mr. John H.R. Molson. Further enlargement was found to be
necessary within two or three years afterward, and in 1895,
through the bounty of Lord Strathcona, who remained during his
life, the mainstay of the Medical Faculty financially, extensions
and alterations were made, at a cost of at least one hundred
thousand dollars. The Faculty were thus enabled to provide for
the increasing demands upon them. The fire of 1907 destroyed the
original building. The newer portion was, however, saved and
the work of the departments of medical chemistry, physiology
and histology are still being carried on therein. To complete
the story of the Faculty it must be added that the fire was
not after all the worst thing that could have happened, for it
necessitated the erection of a new building. This has been placed
at the corner of University Street and Pine Avenue (some distance
north of the old site), on ground donated by Lord Strathcona, who
also generously contributed over half a million dollars towards
its erection and equipment. It is one of the finest and most
up-to-date structures for the purpose of medical education on the
continent.

In 1905 the medical faculty of Bishop’s College, Lennoxville,
established in 1871 by Drs. Charles Smallwood, A.D. David, Sir
W.H. Hingston, E.H. Trenholme and Francis W. Trenholme, was
absorbed into that of McGill.

Beyond the eminent men already mentioned McGill Medical Faculty
has had associated with it as professors men of wide European
reputation, honoured by other universities. Among them have
been Drs. Racey, Archibald Hall, O.T. Bruneau, S.E. Sewell,
MacCallum, Fraser, Sutherland, Drake A. Hall, I. Crawford,
William Fraser, W.E. Scott, William Wright, Robert MacDonnell,
Robert Palmer Howard, George Ross, George E. Fenwick, T.A.
Starkey, Sir William Osler, W. Gardner, Sir T.G. Roddick, G.P.
Girdwood, A.D. Blackader, H.A. La Fleur, H.S. Berkett, George
Armstrong, F.E. Fenley, C.S. Martin, F.J. Shepherd, dean, and
J.G. Adami, Strathcona professor of bacteriology, the holder of
the Fothergill medal in 1914.

The third building on the campus, in what may be called the Greek
style, was added in 1882--the Peter Redpath Museum. In 1889 a
bequest of $57,137 by Thomas Workman enabled the Thomas Workman
mechanical shops to be undertaken. In 1892 there followed the
first Macdonald engineering building, with its annex, the Thomas
Workman shops, the Macdonald physics building and the Peter
Redpath library building for the university library which had
already been organized in 1857.

The Faculty of Applied Science is perhaps the most striking
example of growth in connection with the University. Organized
first as a department of the Faculty of Arts in 1856, it
developed rapidly, not however, “coming into its kingdom” until
it was provided with a home of its own in 1893 by Sir William
Macdonald, that most generous friend of scientific education in
Canada. At that date there were 165 students in the Faculty,
today there were 612 before the war of 1914 affected the
attendance. The progress within the last few years under the able
administration of Dean Adams has been especially marked, the
number of students having increased since his appointment, six
years ago, by 40 per cent.

As an expert in geology Dr. Frank D. Adams has an international
reputation.

In 1895 Dr. William Peterson, who had recently resigned the post
of principal of the University of Dundee, succeeded Sir William
Dawson and has maintained the high intellectual and material
ideals of his predecessor, while he has brought the university
to be well esteemed among the universities of the world. The
material progress of the university has continued. Six new
buildings have been added to the above group, the Chemistry and
Mining Building in 1898, the Conservatorium of Music in 1904,
Strathcona Hall, the home of the McGill Y.M. C.A. (strictly
speaking, however, not a University building) in 1905, the
McGill Union in 1906, and the New Medical Building in 1911. In
this list no account is taken of the imposing pile of buildings
erected by Sir William Macdonald at Ste. Anne de Bellevue for
the purposes of education in agriculture and domestic science
and for the training of teachers. The original property there
comprises 560 acres and the probable cost was two millions of
dollars. Since then 228 acres were added in 1913 by the same
benefactor. Nor is account taken of the addition to the campus of
the Joseph property, the gift of Sir William Macdonald, at a cost
of $142,500, nor of that other notable addition, forming indeed a
new campus of about twenty-five acres in extent (the Molson and
Law Properties), which Sir William conveyed to the University
in 1911, having purchased it for this purpose for no less a sum
than one million dollars. This magnificent donation insures the
future of the University, providing as it does for the greatest
possible expansion. It is even now being converted into a site
for a gymnasium and a second campus.

To resume, in 1893 there were but five faculties; today,
in reality, there are eight, a Faculty of Agriculture, a
Department of Music, a Dental Department and a Graduate School
having been established in the interval, whilst on the other
hand, one--the Faculty of Comparative Medicine and Veterinary
Science, established in 1889, as the result of the amalgamation
of the Montreal Veterinary College, founded in 1866--has been
discontinued since 1903, but it is likely to be resurrected in
connection with the Faculty of Agriculture at Macdonald College
within a year or two. In 1893 the different Faculties were
almost separate entities, bound to the University by a slender
cord, indeed. The Faculty of Medicine was almost an independent
institution, so was the Faculty of Veterinary Science and to a
less degree also the Faculty of Law.

The faculty of agriculture mentioned, at St. Anne de Bellevue,
dates from 1907. The department of music, as conducted in the
conservatorium of music, was established in 1904. The Graduate
school for advanced students was established in 1906. In 1907 a
course in military science, a school of commerce, and several
summer schools were added, and several extension courses have
been added, notably in political economy, commercial law and
accountancy.

The Donalda movement for higher education of women, which,
as stated, was promoted by Sir William Dawson, was furthered
by the chancellor, Lord Strathcona, who made it possible to
establish, in 1884, courses leading to a degree, and to whose
further generosity it was that the Royal Victoria College was
opened in 1899, being founded and endowed by him at the cost of
$1,000,000. His object was to establish an institution which
should afford the opportunity of residence and college life to
women students of McGill University, working in accordance with
the system previously organized in a special course in arts, but
under greatly improved conditions. By his recent death McGill
University has lost a great patron.

There is no theological faculty as such, though four of
the leading Protestant denominations, the Presbyterian and
Congregationalists on the one hand, and the Episcopalians and
Wesleyans on the other, are affiliated in the arts course. A
further movement among these four bodies in cooperation within
the last year or two has resulted in a Union Theological College.

McGill University has a great influence on the life of the city.
Its professors keep in touch with civic affairs. In consequence
the relations of town and gown are amicable. The merchants are
proud of the city’s world-famous university and generally came
forward to relieve it in its growing pains.

The following table of 1913 shows its growth:


                M’GILL UNIVERSITY (FOUNDED 1821)

Chancellor--The Right Hon. Lord Strathcona and Mount Royal,
G.C.M.G., LL. D.

Principal and Vice Chancellor--William Peterson, M.A., LL. D.,
C.M.G.

Number of students, 1,644.

                        No. of                           Non-
  Faculties.          Students.    Matriculation.    Matriculation.
  Arts                   490           391                99
  Applied Science        558           521                37
  Agriculture             95            95                --
  Graduate School        112           112                --
  Law                     64            64                --
  Medicine               304           287                17
  Music                   21             8                13

Number of Professors, 115; number of Lecturers, 74; number of
Demonstrators, 60.

Total Revenue, $859,825.37, made up of: Government and Municipal
Grants, $45,000.00; Income from Endowments, $348,962.67; Fees,
$216,079.63; Other Sources, $249,783.37.


                              NOTE

   THE JOINT BOARD OF THE THEOLOGICAL COLLEGES AFFILIATED WITH
                        M’GILL UNIVERSITY

Four Theological Colleges are affiliated with McGill University,
namely, the Congregational, the Diocesan, the Presbyterian and
the Wesleyan. Ever since their foundation these Colleges have
taken advantage of the classes in the University for training
their students in the Arts subjects required of candidates for
the Ministry, and the results have been so satisfactory as to
encourage the idea of extending the sphere of cooperation.

Early in the year 1912 careful investigation was made by
representatives of the four Colleges into the requirements of
their several Theological Curricula, with a view to ascertaining
what subjects, if any, could be taken in common classes. As
the result of prolonged consideration and negotiations, it was
unanimously agreed that a large portion of the work which had
hitherto been done separately by each of the Colleges could be
taken profitably in joint classes, without prejudice to the
principles of the Communions represented and with increased
efficiency in the work.

The authorities of the four Colleges accordingly offered for
the Session 1912-1913 a series of Inter-Collegiate Lecture
Courses, from which each College might select according to the
requirements of its own curriculum. The cooperative plan, which
was inaugurated in October, 1912, with lectures and addresses by
the Rt. Rev. Dr. Boyd Carpenter, formerly Bishop of Ripon, and
Dr. Robert E. Speer, of New York, has been abundantly justified
by the results.

During the second session of 1913-1914 an effort was made to
obtain funds with which to carry on the work of cooperation.
This effort was met by a generous response on the part of those
sympathetic with the scheme. More than five hundred thousand
dollars has been subscribed. With part of this sum the Board
of Governors purpose to erect a central building where all
inter-collegiate lectures will be given and where a well-equipped
library will be available to all students in Theology.

The advantages of affiliation with a great institution of
Continental reputation such as McGill University are obvious.
In the first place, a College is able to devote practically its
whole income to strictly theological work, thus assuring the
efficiency and thoroughness of the course. Secondly, the immense
resources and the high educational standard of a University
such as McGill afford theological students a liberal education
that could hardly be looked for under other circumstances. In
the third place, the broadening influence of life in so large a
University world, and contact with men of such widely different
views, aims, and pursuits are of inestimable advantage to every
student, and to none more than to the student in theology.
Affiliation also gives the Colleges representation on the
Corporation of McGill, and consequently a voice and influence in
University affairs.

The following Act of Incorporation was also secured from the
Provincial Legislature:

An Act to incorporate “The Joint Board of the Theological
Colleges affiliated with McGill University.”

  Whereas the voluntary association known as “The Joint Board of
  the Theological Colleges affiliated with McGill University” and
  “The Board of Cooperation of the Theological Colleges affiliated
  with McGill University” have, by their petition, represented as
  follows:

  That the theological colleges affiliated with McGill University
  have found it advantageous to cooperate for the training of
  students for the Christian ministry, and have actually so
  cooperated for some time with success; that in consequence,
  considerable sums of money have been subscribed by friends of
  the movement for the purpose of furnishing means and equipment;
  that a temporary joint board of managers (to-wit the petitioners)
  representing each of the colleges concerned, has been in
  existence for some time, engaged in organizing the work of this
  cooperation; said joint board being composed as follows:

  The Reverend Principal Hill, D.D., Rev. Hugh Pedley, D.D.,
  Charles Gurd, Esq., Alexander M. Murphy, Esq., William D.
  Lighthall, Esq., K.C., Thomas B. Macaulay, Esq., all representing
  the Congregational College of Canada; the Reverend Principal
  Rexford, D.D., Rev. Allan P. Shatford, M.A., George E. Drummond,
  Esq., George G. Foster, Esq., K.C., Lieutenant-Colonel Carson,
  Lansing Lewis, Esq., D.C.L., all representing the Montreal
  Diocesan Theological College; the Reverend Principal Scrimger,
  D.D., Rev. R. Bruce Taylor, D.D., David Morrice, Esq., John
  W. Ross, Esq., William M. Birks, Esq., William Yuile, Esq.,
  all representing the Presbyterian Theological College; the
  Reverend Principal Smyth, D.D., Rev. W.R. Young, D.D., George F.
  Johnson, Esq., Charles C. Holland, Esq., William Hanson, Esq.,
  J.W. McConnell, Esq., all representing the Wesleyan Theological
  College; the said persons being also the Board of Governors of
  the said Voluntary Association; etc.

  The Faculty for 1914-15 is as follows:

  Rev. Principal E. Munson Hill, M.A., D.D., Professor of
  Homiletics and Practical Theology; Rev. Principal Elson I.
  Rexford, M.A., LL. D., D.C.L., John Duncan Professor of Dogmatic
  Theology; Rev. Principal John Scrimger, M.A., D.D., Professor
  of Systematic Theology; Rev. Principal James Smyth, B.A., LL.
  D., Webber-Franklin Professor of New Testament Language and
  Literature; Rev. G. Abbott-Smith, M.A., D.D., Archbishop Bond
  Professor of New Testament Literature; Rev. Charles Bieler,
  B.A., D.D., O.I.P., Professor of French Theological Subjects;
  Rev. E. Albert Cook, B.D., Ph. D., Professor of Systematic
  Theology and Philosophy of Religion; Rev. D.J. Fraser, M.A.,
  D.D., LL. D., Professor of New Testament Literature and Exegesis;
  Rev. Alex R. Gordon, M.A., D. Litt., D.D., Professor of Old
  Testament Literature and Exegesis; Rev. Oswald W. Howard, B.A.,
  D.D., Professor of Apologetics and Ecclesiastical History; Rev.
  P.L. Richardson, B.A., B.D., Douglas Professor of Systematic
  Theology; Rev. J. H, Robinson, M.A., B.D., Professor of Church
  History; Rev. Paul Villard, M.A., M.D., O.A., Professor of French
  Literature and Apologetics; Rev. W.H. Warriner, M, A., D.D.,
  Professor of New Testament Literature and Exegesis; Rev. R.E.
  Welsh, M.A., D.D., Professor of Apologetics and Church History.

  Dean: Rev. Principal John Scrimger.

  Secretary: Rev. Professor D.J. Fraser.


              THE CONGREGATIONAL COLLEGE OF CANADA.

The Congressional College of Canada dates its history from a
class of four students who studied under Rev. Adam Lillie, at
Dundas, Ontario, in 1839. Mr. Lillie was educated in Glasgow
University. He went to India under the London Missionary
Society, but the climate did not permit him to stay. Returning
to Scotland, he was persuaded by Doctor Wilkes to come to Canada
and organized the Church in Brantford. He soon removed to Dundas
and began the instruction of young men for the ministry at the
urgency of Rev. John Roaf, on behalf of the Colonial Missionary
Society. From the beginning until 1869, Adam Lillie was the
presiding genius, with Doctor Wickson as his strong co-laborer.
Thus, Congregational Christians were the first Protestants in
Canada to make regular provision for education of the ministry.

In 1840, this gathering of students was moved to Toronto, and
called “The Congregational Academy.” This was an historic name,
coming from the time when “Dissenters,” in the seventeenth
century in England, were under the ban and their ministers
forbidden to come within five miles of any town, or to teach any
public or private school. But many of these men were eminent
scholars who braved the harsh law, and taught youth. When the
times of toleration came these groups grew into “academies.”

In 1842, a similar institution was opened in Montreal through
the pressure of Rev. Henry Wilkes, of Zion Church. Rev. J.J.
Carruthers, of the universities of St. Andrews and Edinburgh,
was brought out to conduct the Theological, Biblical, and
Classical courses. This was done with the sanction and help of
the Colonial Missionary Society. But funds fell short, and it was
decided in 1845 to unite the Montreal and Toronto Congregational
Institutions. This was done, and the name “Congregational
Theological Institute” was chosen, and its control was changed
from the Unions to the subscribers.

In 1848, a Congregational institution was opened in Liverpool,
Nova Scotia, the result of a bequest of Mr. James Gorham, and was
called Gorham College. But the building was burned in 1854, and
the Maritime Churches were unable to maintain it more than three
years. Its good-will and its library were given to the Toronto
Institute. Another advantage accrued to the common cause by
leading to the use of the name “College,” and making it possible
to adopt the comprehensive title “Congregational College of
British North America,” in 1860. And still greater was the fact
that Prof. George Cornish, who had come from English colleges
to teach in the Gorham College, became professor of Greek in
McGill, and was ready to teach in this college if it should go to
Montreal.

In Toronto the preparatory courses were taken with much
difficulty in King’s College. This was established in 1842, and
was under strong Anglican control perpetuating the old country
attitude toward Free Churches. In 1849 this College became
the University of Toronto, with a broader foundation. But no
affiliation was offered, and interest in the College was growing
less with consequent decrease of funds.

Stronger supporters were coming forward in Montreal, affiliation
could be secured with McGill, Professor Cornish would be a great
help, and church life in Montreal was vigorous and united. “The
movement for removal was prompted by western men and largely
carried by them. Montreal did not propose or vote for it,” says
Doctor Marling. After the final discussion by the corporation
of subscribers in Brantford in 1864, the vote for removal was
unanimous.

In 1864, the session opened in the rooms of Zion Church, on
Beaver Hall Hill, and the first Act of Incorporation was secured
from the Dominion Parliament. Then, from 1880 to 1884, the
library and recitation rooms were in Emmanuel Church. On coming
to Montreal the College was admitted to affiliation with McGill,
the first of the Theological Colleges to enjoy that privilege.

A great loss was suffered in the death of Doctor Lillie in 1869.
A memorial fund of $1,000 was raised, which was the nucleus of
the Endowment Fund. Doctor Wilkes was chosen Principal and gave
his great energy and business skill and his influence among the
British churches to the College.

In 1884, certain friends, chiefly in Montreal, generously erected
and presented to the College the building on McTavish Street,
which it now occupies, together with the ground on which the
Principal’s residence was afterward built. At that time an
amendment to the Act of Incorporation changed the name to “The
Congregational College of Canada.”

The Colonial Missionary Society of England was a large factor
in beginning the work of the College, and has stood by it in
all times of distress with generous financial aid. It will ever
remain first on the roll of the benefactors. Mr. and Mrs. S.H.C.
Miner have been the largest donors to the Endowment Fund and to
current expenses. The Endowment Fund now stands at $110,000.

The Principals have been as follows:

Rev. Adam Lillie, D.D., 1839-69; Rev. Henry Wilkes, D.D., LL. D.,
1870-83; Rev. John Frederick Stevenson, LL. B., D.D., 1883-86;
Rev. William M. Barbour, D.D., 1887-97; Rev. Joseph Henry George,
Ph. D., D.D., 1898-1901; Rev. Edward Munson Hill, M.A., D.D.,
1901-.

The Professors and Lecturers have been:

Rev. J.J. Carruthers, D.D., 1842-45; Rev. Arthur Wickson, LL. D.,
1850-62; Rev. Henry Wilkes, D.D., LL. D., 1841-86; Rev. George
Cornish, M.A., LL. D., 1864-91; Rev. Charles Chapman, M.A., LL.
D., 1871-76; Rev. Archibald Duff, Jr., M.A., 1875-76; Rev. K.M.
Fenwick, 1872-84; Rev. J. F, Stevenson, LL. B., D.D., 1877-86;
Rev. Edward Munson Hill, M.A., 1883; Rev. John Burton, B.D.,
1883-88; Rev. S.N. Jackson, M.D., 1884-93; Rev. W.H. Warriner,
M.A., D.D., 1886; Rev. E.C. Evans, D.D., 1898-1900; Rev. D.S.
Hamilton, B.A., 1899-1901; Rev. Harlan Creelman, B.D., Ph. D.,
1899-1908; Rev. Eugene W. Lyman, B.A., B.D., 1904-05; Rev.
Herbert A. Youtz, B.D., Ph. D., 1905-08; Rev. E. Albert Cook, Ph.
D., 1908-.

The office of Chairman of the Board was created in 1864, the
incumbents of that office since that date having been:

Rev. Henry Wilkes, D.D., 1864-71; Rev. Charles Chapman, M.A.,
LL. D., 1871-76; Rev. J.F. Stevenson, LL. B., D.D., 1876-83;
George Hague, Esq., 1883-91; Rev. George Cornish, M.A., LL. D.,
1891-96; J. Redpath Dougall, M.A., 1896-1902, S. Henderson Miner,
Esq., 1902-11; Charles Gurd, Esq., 1911-.

The following have filled the office of treasurer:

Rev. John Roaf, 1839-55; Mr. Patrick Freeland, 1855-64; Mr. T.M.
Taylor, 1864-66; Mr. J.P. Clarke, 1866-73; Mr. R.C. Jamieson,
1873-88; Mr. C.R. Black, 1889-92; Mr. T. Moodie, 1892-.

The Secretaries have been:

Rev. T. Machin, 1841-45; Mr. R. Beekman, 1845-48; Rev. Edward
Ebbs, 1848-50, Joint Secretary, 1854-5, 1857-58; Mr. Patrick
Freeland, 1850-55; Rev. F.H. Marling, 1855-64; Rev. George
Cornish, LL. D., 1864-91; Prof. W.H. Warriner, D.D., 1891-98;
Rev. E. Munson Hill, M.A., 1899-1902; Mr. A. McA. Murphy, 1903-.


              MONTREAL DIOCESAN THEOLOGICAL COLLEGE

This College was founded in the year 1873, by the late Rt. Rev.
Ashton Oxenden, D.D., then Bishop of Montreal and Metropolitan
of Canada. He makes the following reference to it in his
autobiography:

  “I, at length, felt justified in taking a step for the good
  of my own Diocese. I decided on establishing a Theological
  College in Montreal, for the training of our candidates for
  Holy Orders. With this view, I procured from England, the aid
  of a first-rate man, Mr. Lobley, a late Fellow of Trinity
  College, Cambridge, who undertook the office of Principal. He
  was a good and able man, and, in the face of many difficulties
  which he fearlessly surmounted, he started the College, which
  has now become a prominent and useful feature in the Diocese.
  On his subsequent promotion to the Principalship of Bishop’s
  College, Lennoxville, he was succeeded by Doctor Henderson, under
  whose steady and unflagging superintendence the College still
  flourishes.”--(Extract from “History of My Life,” 1891.)

The step was forced upon Bishop Oxenden by the rapid growth of
the Church in the Diocese, and the impossibility of securing
in any other way a satisfactory supply of clergy to meet the
increasing needs of his Diocese.

The work of the College began in the Library of the Synod Hall,
and was carried on there for eight years, when a more suitable
building was provided by the munificence of the late A.F. Gault,
who purchased the property, 896 Dorchester Street, now occupied
by the Young Women’s Christian Association, at a cost of $23,000,
and presented it to the College in trust.

There the work was continued under much more favorable
conditions, as a permanent home was provided for both Principal
and Students. Additional funds were raised which secured the
appointment of a resident Tutor to assist the Principal, and
provided remuneration for different clergy of the city who
lectured regularly in the College. Among the first lecturers were
the late Most Rev. W.B. Bond, Archbishop of Montreal; the late
Rt. Rev. James Carmichael, D.D., Coadjutor Bishop of Montreal;
the late Rt. Rev. E. Sullivan, D.D., formerly Bishop of Algoma,
and afterwards Rector of St. James Cathedral, Toronto; the late
Rt. Rev. Maurice S. Baldwin, D.D., Bishop of Huron; Rt. Rev. J.P.
Du Moulin, D.D., Bishop of Niagara.

While its internal growth was thus satisfactory, the position of
the College as a Church institution was more clearly defined,
and its relations with the educational world were extended. In
1879, an act of incorporation was obtained from the Legislature
of Quebec, and in 1880, it was affiliated with the University of
McGill College.

In 1891, by the Canon relating to Degrees in Divinity, the
Diocesan Theological College, with the five other theological
colleges of this ecclesiastical province, was duly recognized by
the Provincial Synod of Canada, and entitled to representation on
the Board of Examiners for degrees in Divinity.

In 1895, owing to the increasing influence and needs of the
College, the late A.F. Gault announced his intention of
presenting a more suitable building and of adding to the
endowment of the College. The “Holland” property on University
Street was purchased for that purpose, and a very handsome and
commodious building erected. The building, which is in the
collegiate gothic style, includes a semi-detached residence
for the Principal, a chapel with a seating capacity for fifty
students, a convocation hall capable of holding 500 persons,
commodious lecture rooms, dining room, library, gymnasium and
accommodation for about thirty-five resident students. The whole
was also magnificently furnished by the same generous donor, and
the sum of $50,000 was added to the endowment.

The buildings and additional endowment were formally handed over
to the Bishop of the Diocese on the occasion of the opening
of the College, on October 21, 1906, in the presence of His
Grace the Primate of all Canada, and a number of other bishops,
clergy, and visitors, and these were given in perpetuity without
conditions of any kind in trust to the Bishop of Montreal and his
successors.

While the College was originally founded for, and has always
served to supply the needs of the Diocese, which has a first
claim upon it, its name Diocesan is not to be interpreted in a
strictly local sense. The aim of the College is to furnish a
supply of capable men, primarily for the Diocese of Montreal,
then for the wider field of the whole Dominion, and in some
degree also for the boundless field beyond--the harvest field of
the world.

The present principal, the Rev. Elson I. Rexford, M.A., LL. D.,
D.C.L., was appointed in 1903.


               THE PRESBYTERIAN COLLEGE, MONTREAL

The Presbyterian College, Montreal, is an institution solely
for the training of ministers. Its establishment was authorized
by the Synod of the Canada Presbyterian Church in 1864, at the
request of a number of ministers and prominent laymen in the city
of Montreal, with a special view to supplying the pressing needs
of the congregations and missions in the valleys of the Ottawa
and Lower St. Lawrence, for which it was found difficult to
secure a sufficiency of trained men. A charter of incorporation
was obtained in 1865, but work was actually begun only in
October, 1867, when classes were opened in the Lecture Hall of
Erskine Church, under the instruction of the Rev. Wm. Gregg, of
Toronto, and of Rev. Wm. Aitken, of Smith’s Falls, as lecturers
for the session. In 1868 the Rev. D.H. MacVicar was appointed
sole professor of Divinity. On the addition of other members to
the permanent staff, he was made Principal, and occupied this
position until his death in 1902. The Rev. Dr. Robert Campbell
exercised the function till the appointment of the present
principal, the Rev. John Scrimger, appointed in 1904.

The first building for the use of the College was erected in
1873, on a site immediately adjoining the grounds of McGill
University. This building soon became insufficient, and in 1882
it was greatly enlarged through the liberality of Mr. David
Morrice, the Chairman of the Board of Management.

The College is controlled entirely by the Presbyterian Church in
Canada, the General Assembly appointing its Board of Management
and Senate each year, as well as filling all vacancies on the
staff. For educational purposes it is affiliated to McGill
University, and maintains the closest relations with that
institution. The students receive practically all their literary
training in the University classes.


                THE WESLEYAN THEOLOGICAL COLLEGE

This institution was founded in the year 1872, by the Wesleyan
Methodist Church of Canada, for the training of candidates for
the Ministry, and began its educational work, September 29,
1873. In 1879, by direction of the General Conference of the
Methodist Church of Canada, an act of Incorporation was obtained
from the Legislature of the Province of Quebec, and the College
was affiliated to McGill University. At the Union, in 1883,
of the several Methodist bodies in Canada, constituting “The
Methodist Church,” it was recognized as having the same relation
which it previously held as one of the Connexional Educational
Institutions of the Church. In 1887 the Charter was so amended
by the Legislature of the Province of Quebec as to give to the
Institution the power to confer degrees in Divinity.

The present buildings, which were erected in 1914, on the site
formerly occupied in part by the old building were formally
opened on Saturday, October 3, 1914, and are situated on
University Street, near Mount Royal, at the eastern entrance to
the University grounds and accommodate about one hundred students.

Rev. George Douglas, D.D., LL. D., the first Principal, held
that position for twenty-one years, and the late Reverend Doctor
Shaw was connected with the Institution, first as Professor and
afterwards as Principal, from its foundation till 1910.

The present Principal, Rev. James Smyth, B.A., LL. D., of
Belfast, Ireland, was appointed in 1911.


                               II

                        LAVAL UNIVERSITY

While the history of the University of McGill is largely
that of a small germinal University gradually developing the
potentialities of its charter, that of the University of Laval
at Montreal is one of a gradual evolution from the preexisting
embryonic schools of arts, philosophy, theology, law and
medicine which arose in due course, as the higher education of
Catholics, principally of the French Canadian population, became
gradually organized. In due course all these elements, when well
advanced, were absorbed into the university proper when founded
in 1876. Its story, therefore, involves the description of the
component parts of its constitution, and the first dates of
interest connected with the foundation of the predecessors are
those of the present “Montreal College.”

The “Collège de Montreal,” which would seem to be the logical
continuation of the _écoles de Latin_ in existence up to the
capitulation, and had supplemented the _petits écoles_ started
early in 1657, after the arrival of the Sulpicians, was founded
about 1767 in the presbytery of the Curé of Longue Pointe by
M.J. Baptiste Curatteau de Blaisérie, a Sulpician priest. He had
a decided taste for education and the direction of youth. To
provide the beginning of a classical education for pious citizens
and for the needs of the future aspirants of the clergy he had
added an annex to his presbytery, and rapidly a small boarding
school arose which became known as the “_Petit Séminaire_” or
“_Collège_.” He was assisted in his work by two ecclesiastical
students, Mm. J.B. Dumouchel and J.B. Huet d’Alude.

The success attending this venture encouraged the citizens to
establish a regular college at Montreal similar to that at
Quebec. Accordingly the church wardens of Notre Dame came to
the assistance of M. Curatteau to place him in charge of an
establishment at the Château Vaudreuil, the palace of the late
governor general, then for sale, buying it, and thus, in 1773,
the College of St. Raphael was installed on October 1st. The
college started with about fifty-two _pensionnaires_ and a like
number of _externes_. The prize list of 1774, proclaimed in
Latin, reveals six classes, the highest of which was called the
“Schola Humanitatis.”

The memory prize of this class was awarded to Franciscus Papineau
and Petrus Amabilis de Bonne de Missede, the future Judge of
Common Pleas (_Ex aequo_), while the first prize for French into
Latin fell to F. Papineau and the second to Ludovicus Bonnet.
In 1789 at the term composition proclaimed in January we find
the highest class named Rhetoric, the first boy called the
“Imperator” being Joannes Baptista Curot. Benjamin Dys Viger
comes second as “Cæsar,” and Ambrosius Sanguinet as “Consul.” In
Scholâ Tertia the Imperator is Jacobus Lartigue, the future first
bishop of Montreal.

M. Curatteau died in Montreal on February 11, 1790, at the age
of sixty years. His will of January 29, 1774, leaves all his
property to the college and should it fail, his estate should be
revertible, two-thirds to the General Hospital and a third to
the Hôtel Dieu. He was succeeded as principal in 1790 by M.J.B.
Marchand, a priest, with seven other professors, of whom five
were ecclesiastics, one a layman and the seventh a priest. M.
Ignace Leclerc, the professor of the philosophy class, started
his course this year. The terms about this time were for the
“_pensionnaires_” £14-11-8, and for the externes one guinea for
entrance and nothing more. The catalogue of students for 1790
reveals there were about ninety scholars, the ages varying from
twenty-one, in Philosophy (although one there is twenty-nine)
to eight, in the lowest class, with one of six years of age.
There do not appear many English names.[3] In the last class,
however, there are some beginning to enter, viz., Jean O’Sullivan
(aged nine years) and Nicholas Hamilton (aged eight years).
In the prize list of 1792 there is a “Patricius Smith” who
receives honourable mention for arithmetic. An English class
for French students was begun in 1789. This dual instruction was
then apparently developed in the colony. In later years it has
somewhat lapsed.

[Illustration: LAVAL UNIVERSITY]

[Illustration: MONTREAL COLLEGE]

Three years after its inauguration the Collége de St. Raphaël in
1773 staged a tragedy in three acts, presented by its scholars.
It was printed in 1776, “Chez Fleury Mesplet et Ch. Berger,
Imprimeurs et Libraires” and was entitled “Jonathan et David, ou
Le Triomphe de L’Amitié.” Declamations, little pieces, lyrical or
tragical, formal compliments to the students or the professors
used to take place at the end of the distribution of prizes or on
the _jour de fête_ of the principal.

M. Montgolfier wrote on August 25, 1778, to Bishop Briand
acquainting him that “His Excellency, Sir Frederick Haldimand,
had been present at the little tragedy of the Sacrifice of
Abraham at the completion of the classes; at the end of the
distribution of prizes he has given much praise to this
establishment and, having learnt from me that this house has no
fixed revenue he sent me next day a present of 100 guineas for
the college and at the same time, 50 guineas for the Hospital
General ‘for the work of the foundlings there.’”

In the great fire of 1803, the Collége of St. Raphaël was
destroyed in June 6th. It was rebuilt in 1804, at the expense of
the Seminary of St. Sulpice, on College Street, not far from the
“little river” and was opened on October, 1804, under the name of
the “_Collège or the Petit Séminaire de Montréal_.” The seminary
remained on College Street till it was transferred to a portion
of the fine establishment of the Grand Seminary which was built
between 1854-1857 by the Seminary at the old Mountain Fort or the
“Fort des Messieurs,” being opened the 18th of January, 1862. The
old college was rented to the British government for a barracks
for the soldiers who entered the city on December, 1861. The
Collège de Montréal has remained on its present site ever since.

The school of theology was founded in 1825 by Mgr. Lartigue in
his Episcopal residence at St. James church on St. Denis Street.
In 1840 it was transferred, having about fifteen students, to the
Collège de Montréal on College Street and took the name of the
“_Grand Séminaire_.” In 1857 it was again transferred, to the
present site at the old “_Fort des Messieurs_,” the new building
being commenced on September 8, 1854, and blessed on September 8,
1857. The superiors of the Grand Séminaire since its foundation
have been:

Pierre Louis Billaudèle, 1840-1846; Joseph Alexandre Baile,
1846-1866; Jean Baptiste Benoit Larue, 1866-1871; Jules Claude
Delavigne, 1871-1872; Frederic Louis Colin, 1872-1881; Isaie
Marie Charles Lecoq, 1881-1903; Ferdinand Louis Lelandais, 1903.

The Collège de Ste. Marie is the successor of the attempt made
in 1694 to establish a classical college in Montreal. After the
return of the Jesuits to Montreal on May 31, 1842, an early
invitation came from the citizens to commence a college. On
August 20, 1846, land was bought at a very favourable price from
M. John Donegani, but before the work was in hand the typhus
outbreak intervened. It was not till September 20, 1848, that
the school was opened with thirteen pupils in two classes in a
temporary frame building still standing at the corner of St.
Alexander and Dorchester streets. In May, 1850, the building of
the college was renewed and on July 31st the finished college was
blessed by Bishop Bourget with the public chapel attached. The
Gésu was not built till 1864. The classes to be given were the
usual classical course to be followed by a philosophical course.

In 1889 Loyola College was founded as an offshoot of the Collège
Ste. Marie, to conduct classical and philosophical courses in
English. Its first home was at the southeast corner of St.
Catherine and Bleury streets. Fire compelled these premises to
be vacated and in 1898 it was transferred to 68 Drummond Street,
hitherto known as Doctor Tucker’s School. In 1914 a large college
at Notre Dame de Grace is being built to be the future home of
the Loyola college.

The next educational venture was the foundation of the Ecole de
Médicine et de Chirurgie, founded in 1843 and incorporated in
March, 1845.

This was followed by the foundation of a school of law on May 1,
1851. It was named the Ecole de Droit and was conducted under the
deanship of the M. Maximilien Bibaud, LL. D., doctor in civil and
canon law, the classes being held at the Collège de Ste. Marie.

In 1876 the Seminary of Philosophy had become a separate body
from the Grand Seminary of Theology, but into which the students
graduated after three years of scholastic philosophy. The
superiors of the Seminaire de Philosophie have been:

Isaie Marie Charles Lecoq, 1876-1880; Jules Claude Delavigne,
1880-1900; Louis Marie Lepoupon, 1900.

These elements as chronologically stated were then ready to be
correlated into a university as a branch of the Laval University
already established at Quebec since 1852. In 1876 in consequence
of the petition of Mgr. Bourget, then bishop of Montreal, the
Sacred Congregation of Propaganda ordered its establishment at
Montreal. It was recognized by the civil law of the province of
Quebec in 1881.

In 1878 the schools of law and theology already described as
existing were inaugurated, to be followed in 1879 by that of
medicine also already organized. In 1887 the faculty of arts was
added.

The Apostolic Constitution “Jam dudum” of Leo XIII, of February
2, 1889, obtained through M. Colin, the superior of the seminary
of St. Sulpice, and Archbishop Fabre, gave the administrative
body at Montreal its practical autonomy under a vice rector,
while still requiring its degrees to be conferred through the
council of the University of Laval at Quebec.

The inauguration of the university buildings on St. Denis Street
took place on October 8, 1895.

The main building of the university, which was largely raised
through the generosity of the Sulpicians, who have always
patronized forward movements in education, may be described as
follows:

The style of architecture of the building is a modern
adaptation of the Renaissance. It has been devised for the use
of two faculties for the present, with room for the general
administration. The cellar contains, as is usual in such
structures, all the necessary appliances, and in the most
recent and approved styles, for steam-heating, electric and
gas-lighting. The ground floor is occupied by lecture rooms,
museums of anatomy and the library of the School of Comparative
Medicine and Veterinary Science, and it has also large recreation
and club rooms, a large and commodious reading room for students,
and the janitor’s quarters. The first floor is devoted to the
Law Faculty, the reception parlors, the rector’s apartments, and
a suite of study rooms for the professors. There are on this
floor two amphitheatres, with a capacity of two hundred to three
hundred seats respectively, for the use of the Law Faculty. The
Peristyle, which is an imposing feature of the exterior, leads
to this story. The second floor is entirely occupied by the
Faculty of Medicine, and contains a general professor’s parlour,
laboratories and lecture rooms, also a library, and quarters
for the treasurer and secretary of the Faculty. The finest
rooms are perhaps a large laboratory of histology, perfectly
lighted, and provided with modern apparatus for the practical
teaching of normal and morbid histology. The amphitheatre of
the primary course, can accommodate 300 students. It can be put
into direct connection with the laboratory of chemistry. The
amphitheatre for the final course accommodates 400 students.
The Promotion Hall (third story) has a seating capacity of
nearly two thousand and has been much used of late for public
lectures. It is profusely lighted by electricity, and the day
light is also abundant. Its acoustic and visual qualities are
perfect. The proscenium is so constructed that it can be used
for concerts and other spectacular performances by the students.
Six large rooms, averaging 35 × 50 feet, are reserved for
museums and for collections of documents. The amphitheatre of
anatomy, accommodating 300 students, is in the last story and
in connection with the dissecting room, which is very spacious.
The disposal of the rooms, stairways, elevator, lavatories, and,
other necessary conveniences is very good, and there is not a
single room in the whole building which is not well-lighted. The
architecture of the interior is very simple, but quite effective,
especially that of the Promotion Hall.

There are affiliated with it several colleges and schools: the
Ecole Polytechnique, l’Ecole de Medicine, Comparee et de Science
vétérinaire de Montreal, l’Ecole de Chirurgie Dentaire, l’Ecole
de Pharmacie Laval, l’Institut Agricole d’Oka, l’Institut des
Frères Maristes et l’Institut des Frères de l’Instruction
Chrétienne, l’Institut des Frères de Sainte-Croix, the arts and
philosophical courses at St. Marys, Loyola and other classical
colleges and seminaries, as well as the College of Higher
Education for Young Women, conducted in French and English at the
Mother House of the Congregation on Sherbrooke Street.

The faculty of theology is constituted by the Grand Seminary
which was established in 1840. Its courses last for three years
and three months with a further six months for those preparing
for the doctorate. A great number of the students who come from
all quarters to this faculty, after having taken their courses
at Montreal proceed to Rome to the now famous Canadian College,
which is an offshoot of the Grand Seminaire of Montreal, being
founded in 1888 through the labours of M. Colin, who was superior
of the Sulpicians at Montreal from 1881 to 1902. In connection
with this latter faculty may be mentioned the Seminary of
Philosophy which has been a separate body since 1876.

While the medical faculty of McGill saved the fortunes of that
university from extinction, it is to the credit of the pioneers
of the medical faculty of the Montreal branch of Laval University
that the university movement received its inception. Before its
establishment a body of the medical men who had retired from
their connection with the medical faculty of the University of
Coburg agitated for the foundation of an independent university
in the city. Among these were Dr. Rottot, Brosseau, La Marche
and E. Persillier-Lachapelle, who acted as the secretary. On
approaching the gentlemen of the seminary it was pointed out
that it would be unwise and also against prearranged conditions
to establish a rival university to that of Laval at Quebec, but
that a branch was possible. This solved the difficulty and the
necessary steps were taken. The first medical faculty of Laval
at Montreal, soon to be formed, was composed of Dr. Rottot as
dean, with Drs. E. Persillier-Lachapelle, La Marche, Brosseau,
Desrosiers, Berthelot, Fafard, Filiatrault, Duval, Foucher,
Bienvenu and others.

Among the first members of the faculty of law was Mr. C.S.
Cherrier, Hon. J.P.O. Chauveau, Sir Louis Jetté, Sir Alexander
Lacoste, Judge Alphonse Ouimet and Sir H. Archambault.

The dean of the faculty of Science and Belles Lettres was the
Abbé Colin.

The faculty of medicine is a continuation of the L’Ecole de
Medicine et de Chirurgie de Montreal (the Alma Mater of our older
Montreal physicians) founded in 1843 and incorporated in 1845,
affiliated at first to the Victoria University of Coburg, in
Ontario, and from which it received its degrees up to 1890. At
this time the above medical school received a modified charter
from the government of Quebec and was allied to the faculty of
medicine of the University of Laval, with which it forms today
one body.

The faculty of Medicine is installed with that of Law in the main
building on St. Denis Street. There are large lecture halls and
sectional libraries. The Faculty of Medicine has an addition,
a dissecting hall and laboratories for chemistry, histology,
bacteriology, therapeutical electricity, etc.

The faculty of arts has not yet reached its fullest development.
As scientific and literary instruction which form the ordinary
courses of this faculty in English universities is carried out by
the classical colleges and petit seminaires, affiliated to Laval
University, in which students may obtain the degrees of Bachelor
of Letters, of science and of arts, it is unnecessary for the
university itself to undertake full instruction of this nature.

Three courses are, however, given in the faculty. The first,
that of French literature, founded in 1898 by the late M. l’Abbé
Colin, superior of the seminary of St. Sulpice, in Montreal, is
entrusted to a Fellow of the University of Paris. The second
course is upon public ecclesiastical law and the third is upon
aesthetics and the history of art. The other professors, whether
ecclesiastics or laymen, of the faculty of arts, conduct the
regular courses in the colleges affiliated with the university,
in addition to which they occasionally give public lectures in
the university itself. The library of the faculty contributes
generously to the intellectual development of the students and
the public in general. Large annual expenditures secure for it
the best current publications. The higher education of women is
encouraged by this faculty through the “Ecole d’Enseignement
Supérieur pourlles Jeunes Filles” which has its courses in the
handsome college on Sherbrooke Street in the Mother House of the
Congregation of Notre Dame, founded by Marguerite Bourgeoys, the
first teacher in Montreal. It was opened on October 8, 1908,
under the presidency of the vice rector of Laval University.
The following sections are taught in French and in English
by university professors and the ladies of the Congregation:
letters, science, arts, commerce and domestic economy. These lead
up to a degree in the faculty of arts. Already this school for
the higher education of women has shown very substantial results.

Another arm of the faculty of arts has been established in
certain congregations of brothers where a university course has
been organized modeled on the French system of modern secondary
education. The Marist Brothers were the first congregation
affiliated on December 15, 1909, being followed later by the
Brothers of Christian Instruction of Montreal and the Brothers
of the Cross of Jesus of the diocese of Rimouski. In 1912, the
same privilege was granted to the Brothers of Holy-Cross.

[Illustration: SCHOOLS AFFILIATED WITH LAVAL UNIVERSITY: School
of Dentistry]

[Illustration: SCHOOLS AFFILIATED WITH LAVAL UNIVERSITY:
Agricultural School at Oka]

[Illustration: SCHOOLS AFFILIATED WITH LAVAL UNIVERSITY:
Polytechnic School]

[Illustration: SCHOOLS AFFILIATED WITH LAVAL UNIVERSITY: School
of Theology]

The school of Dental Surgery, which is a continuation of the
French section of the Dentistry College of the province of
Quebec, founded in 1894, was affiliated to the university of
Laval in February, 1904, and obtained its civil status from
the legislature in May of the same year. This school, which is
intended primarily for young French Canadians, was rendered
necessary by the rapid progress which has been made latterly in
dental surgery. It started relying solely on its own resources
and upon the devotion of its professors. It has grown rapidly and
its courses annually attract a certain number of students from
Europe. Instruction covers a period of four years and leads to
the degree of Doctor of Dental Surgery. The theoretical courses,
clinics and demonstrations are given in the spacious buildings
opened on St. Hubert Street in 1913. In it are also magnificent
operating rooms with dental chairs and thoroughly equipped
laboratories. The infirmary in the same building is open every
day from 9 A.M. till noon, and in it those who cannot afford to
pay the full fee are treated by competent practitioners at rates
merely sufficient to reimburse the institution for the cost of
material supplied.

The Laval School of Pharmacy, incorporated by a special act
of the legislature of Quebec, adopted on March 9, 1906, was
affiliated to the university in the same year, on May 11th.
It aims to give instruction in and to promote all branches
of pharmaceutical science. The school is entitled to grant
university degrees. The courses are given in the university
buildings and last from the beginning of October to the
beginning of April. What corresponds in American universities
to the faculty of applied science is conducted by the “Ecole
Polytechnique” which was founded in 1874. A department of
architecture was added in 1908. This school has been annexed
to the faculty of arts since 1887. It has been generously
subsidized by the provincial government and the principal
railway companies. It prepares students for the several branches
of civil and industrial engineering, such as public roads,
railways, mechanical and mining engineering, bridge-building
and metal construction. The Polytechnic is housed on St. Denis
Street in large buildings suited to its special needs, in which
an equipment admirably adapted to scientific training, both
theoretical and practical, places it in the front rank of similar
institutions.

The School of Comparative Medicine and Veterinary Science which
was installed in 1913 in a handsome building on De Montigny
Street has existed since 1886. Although affiliated with the
university it is under the control and subject to the inspection
of the minister of agriculture of the Quebec government, from
which it receives a subsidy. The courses extend over three years
and lead to a doctorate. It includes numerous clinics, which are
held at the infirmary of the school. The school possesses fine
lecture rooms, an interesting pathological museum, a laboratory
of bacteriology, a laboratory of chemistry and other departments.
The number of students who are almost all from the province of
Quebec is as yet small, but it is increasing inasmuch as farmers
are beginning to understand the value of the services which well
trained veterinary surgeons can render them.

The science of agriculture is provided by the university through
the Agricultural Institute at Oka, which was affiliated to Laval
University on March 26, 1908. It had, however, been in existence
for several years, its regular activities dating from March 8,
1893, when it was opened by the Trappist Fathers of Notre Dame
du Lac at the request, and with the liberal support, of the
provincial government. Under the more modest name of the School
of Agriculture it had been increasingly successful until, during
the winter of 1907, it was completely reorganized, its equipment
was modernized and improved and its courses of study extended.
In addition to a preparatory course lasting for one year the
Institute offers a three-years’ course leading to academic
degrees. Special instruction, which includes several partial
courses, has also been arranged for in favour of persons who are
prevented from taking the full regular courses. The Institute
is liberally provided with books, museums and laboratories. The
grounds cover an area of 1,800 acres and are situated about
thirty miles from Montreal on the Lake of the Two Mountains.

All the faculties and schools above mentioned enjoy great
liberty of initiative and action in everything which concerns
their regular internal regulations and their courses of study.
The archibishop of Montreal in his quality as vice-chancellor,
controls the appointment and removal of professors and exercises
general supervision in matters of doctrine and discipline. He
is ex-officio president of the administrative board, which
holds the university properties and directs its finances. The
suffragan bishops of the ecclesiastical province of Montreal,
representatives and affiliated seminaries of the same province,
representatives of faculties and of graduates, also have a seat
in this body, which, as a general rule, acts through the board of
governors, composed of eminent financiers and professional men. A
vice rector, chosen by the bishops of the province of Montreal,
represents the university’s council, the administrative board
and the board of governors in matters of discipline and general
administration. An executive committee, appointed by the latter
board, assists him in regard to current financial questions.

The following statistics for 1912-1913 will give an idea of the
activities of the Montreal Branch University of Laval:

                                           Professors.  Students.

  Faculté de Théologie (Theology)               12        251
  Faculté de Droit (Law)                        17        157
  Faculté de Médecine (Medicine)                70        144
  Faculté des Arts (Littér. Française)          22         36
  Ecole Polytechnique                           27        163
  Ecole de Médecine Comparée et de Science
    Vétérinaire                                 10         50
  Ecole de Chirurgie Dentaire                   13        119
  Ecole de Pharmacie Laval                      11         93
  Institut Agricole d’Oka                       12*       115
  Ecole d’Enseignement Supérieur pour les
    Jeunes Filles (Higher Education for
    Women)                                      53  247   496 1,624
                                               ---        ---
    Modern Secondary Teaching:
  Institut des Frères Maristes                  10         16
  Frères de l’Instruction Chrétienne            10         43
  Frères de Saint-Croix                         10   30    15   74
                                               ---        ---

    Affiliated Colleges:
  Séminaire de Sainte-Thérèse                   35        400
  Séminaire Saint-Charles-Borromée              38        428
  Collège de L’Assomption                       36        370
  Collège de Saint-Laurent                      52        525
  Séminaire de Joliette                         39        402
  Séminaire de Saint-Hyacinthe                  36        476
  Collège Bourget                               31        371
  Séminaire de Montréal                         29        350
  Collège de Valleyfield                        35        302
  Collège de Saint-Jean                         22  353   195  3,819
                                                -------   ----------
                                                    630        5,517

  * With the addition of 22 practical instructors.


                              NOTE

Looking through the prize lists of scholars from 1773 to 1803 the
following names are found which will interest English readers,
the spelling being retained as found, latinized or wrongly
spelt: 1773, Aeneas McDonnell, Franciscus Mackaye; 1776, Aeneas
MagDonelle, Jacobus MagDonelle, Franciscus Mackaye, Hugonus
MagDonelle; 1775, Samuel Mackaye, John Mackay; 1779, Joannes
Mackaye; 1780, Joannes Jones; 1783, Laurentius Sylvain;[4] 1790,
Benjamin Kery; 1791, Petrus Christy, Nicholaus Hamilton; 1792,
Patricius Smith, Nicholaus Hamilton; 1793, Bernardus Bender,
Franciscus Bender, J. Baptista O’Sullivan; 1794, Franciscus
Bender, Nicholaus Hamilton, Gulielmus Sheppard, Joannes Dease,
Gulielmus Green, Carolus Davis, Paulus Green, Joannes Spearman;
1796, Gulielmus Sheppard, Gulielmus Fleming, Jacobus Taylor,
Carolus Daly, J. Baptista Connolly, Gulielmus Selby, Joannes
Pickle, Richardus Dillon; 1797, Joannes O’Sullivan, Gulielmus
Fleming, Carolus Daly, Lazarus Hays, Jacobus Stephenson, Jacobus
Milloy, Jacobus Fleming, Richardus Dillon; 1798, Hubertus
Heney, Gulielmus Fleming, Gulielmus Connoly, Gulielmus Wallace,
Jacobus Robinson, Joannes Turner, Jacobus Milloy,---- Macdonell,
Joannes Pickle, Samuel Hughes, Joannes Reeves, Gulielmus Reeves,
Gulielmus Dalton; 1799, Ignatius Macdonald, Gulielmus Fleming,
Carolus Daly, Jacobus Milloy, Thomas Seers, Jacobus Macdonald,
Gulielmus Hale, Joannes Turner, Gulielmus Reeves, Hugo Henry,
Jacobus Fleming, Joannes Pickle, Joannes Gordon, Gulielmus
Wallace, Joannes Burk; 1800, Ignatius Macdonald, Hugo Heney,
Jacobus Milloy, Jacobus Fleming, Allan Macdonald, Franciscus
Grant, Henricus Hybart, Gulielmus Seers, Ignatius Macdonald,
Ludovicus Maccoy, Joannes Turner, Franciscus Liemont, Alexander
McEnnis, Eduardus Cartwright, Richardus McEnnis, Fredericus
Lehn, Jacobus MacDonald; 1801, Ignatius MacDonald, Gulielmus
Selby, Hugo Heney, Ludovicus Willcoks, Hugo Fraser, James Molloy,
Guillelmus Seer, Alexander McEnnis, Joannes Gordon, Eustachius
Maccoy, Richardus Ennis, Jacobus Muir, Joannes Reeves, Ludovicus
Maccoy, Eduardus Sterns; 1802, Ignatius McDonel, Hugo Fraser,
Nicholaus Power, Alexander McEnnis, Gulielmus Reeves, Guillelmus
Murry, Georgius Gordon, Adrian Dow, Zephyrimus Kimbert,
Guillelmus Clark, Samuel White, Flavianus Fison, Edwardus
Kenderson, Josephus White, Arturius Kenderson, Joannes Wallace;
1803, Hugo Heney, Michael O’Sullivan, Nicholaus Power, Renatus
Josephus Kimbert, Guillaume Hall, Richardus Macgennis, Guillelmus
Reeves, Guillaume Murray, Henry Fison, Guillaume Clark, Adrien
Dow, Jean Wallace, David Flynn, George Gordon, Edouard Henderson;
1804, Michael O’Sullivan, Ignatius McDonald, Renatus Kimber,
Joannes McDonald, Guillaume Murry, Richard McGenis, Guillaume
Reeves, Edouard Kenderson, Charles Smallwood, Robert Magenis,
Guillaume Belcher, Jean Larkin; 1805, Renatus Joseph Kimber,
Nicholaus Power, Howard Tillotson; 1806, Arthur Kenderson,
Christin Deeze, Henri Conneloi, Edouard Kenderson.


FOOTNOTES:

[1] Owing to the exigencies of pecuniary pressure, the greater
part of this estate which extended to Sherbrooke Street was
gradually parted with. Its valuation today would be indeed great.

[2] Dr. Lyons, one of the staff of the hospital, on Mr. Loedel’s
relievement a year or two later, received the appointment of
lecturer. (F.J.S., 1897.)

[3] See, however, the note at the end of the chapter for other
names in subsequent years.

[4] Probably Sullivan. Timothée Sylvain or de Sylvain, a doctor
of Montreal, who served the Hôtel Dieu Hospital shortly before
the fall of Montreal in 1760 was certainly a good Irishman,
originally Sullivan.




                          CHAPTER XXIX

                         GENERAL CULTURE

                     I. THE LIBRARY MOVEMENT

  FRENCH:--L’OEUVRE DES BONS LIVRES, 1844--THE CABINET DE LECTURE
    PAROISSIAL, 1857.

  ENGLISH:--“MONTREAL LIBRARY” AND MONTREAL NEWS ROOM,
    1821--MERCANTILE LIBRARY ASSOCIATION, 1844--THE FRASER
    INSTITUTE, INCORPORATED 1870--ITS EARLY LITIGATIONS--ITS PUBLIC
    OPENING IN 1885--OTHER LIBRARIES.

               II. LITERARY AND LEARNED SOCIETIES

  THE NATURAL HISTORY SOCIETY, 1827--THE MECHANICS INSTITUTE,
    1828--LA SOCIETE HISTORIQUE, 1856--CONFERENCE DES INSTITUTEURS,
    1857--THE “INSTITUT CANADIEN”--CERCLE LITTERAIRE DE VILLE
    MARIE, 1857--UNION CATHOLIQUE, 1858--(THE GUIBORD CASE)--THE
    ANTIQUARIAN AND NUMISMATIC ASSOCIATION, 1862--THE “ECOLE
    LITTERAIRE” 1892--ST. JAMES LITERARY SOCIETY, 1898--THE
    “DICKENS’ FELLOWSHIP” 1909--OTHER LITERARY ASSOCIATIONS--THE
    “BURNS SOCIETY”--THE ALLIANCE FRANCAISE--THE CANADIAN CLUB,
    1905.

                   III. ARTISTIC ASSOCIATIONS

  FOREWORD:--INTELLECTUAL AND ARTISTIC EXCLUSIVENESS.

  ART:--EARLY ART IN CANADA--THE MODERN MOVEMENT--THE MONTREAL
    SOCIETY OF ARTISTS--THE ART ASSOCIATION OF MONTREAL--ITS
    HISTORY--ITS PAINTINGS--MONTREAL ART COLLECTIONS--THE ART
    SCHOOL--MONTREAL ARTISTS--THE WOMAN’S ART SOCIETY--THE CHATEAU
    DE RAMEZAY--THE ROYAL ACADEMY OF ARTS--THE ROYAL SOCIETY OF
    CANADA--OUTSTANDING ARTISTS.

  THE DRAMA:--PLAYS IN 1804--THE FIRST THEATRE ROYAL BUILT IN
    1825--THE SECOND OPENED IN 1850--OTHER THEATRES TO THE
    PRESENT--AMATEUR THEATRICAL ASSOCIATIONS--THE DRAMATIC LEAGUE.

  MUSIC:--MODERN SOCIETIES--SOCIETE DE STE CECILE--SOCIETE
    DE MONTAGNARDS--AMATEUR MUSICAL LEAGUE--MENDELSSOHN
    CHOIR--MONTREAL PHILHARMONIC--INSTRUMENTAL MUSIC.

  NEWSPAPERS:--MONTREAL HISTORIES.


The analysis of a city is not complete without a record of its
attempts through its educational, library, literary, artistic and
intellectual associations and its publications of newspapers,
journals, and books to realize its fuller life.

The educational attempts of Montreal, through the schools and
universities, have been told, but those further movements, so
necessary for all who would continue to learn through the above
associations, remain to be narrated.


                     I. THE LIBRARY MOVEMENT

In 1773 the Sulpicians of Montréal opened the Collège de St.
Raphael to teach the youth of the city, and its curriculum made
a feature of Belles Lettres. From those graduating from this
school sprang the societies and the great library associated with
the name of the Seminary of St. Sulpice. There had been small
libraries here and there but this first great French library was
formed in July, 1844, by the two congregations or sodalities
of men and women attached to Notre Dame parish, offering their
libraries, one of 600 and the other of 700 volumes, to form the
nucleus of a larger library. This was supplemented by 800 books
from the Séminaire St. Sulpice and some good books from other
sources, making a total of 2,200. The new library was called
“L’Oeuvre des bons livres de Ville-Marie” and was conducted
along the same lines as, and affiliated with, the famous library
at Bordeaux, France, which had been started about twenty years
before. This library was formally opened in September, 1845,
by M. Bourget, bishop of Montreal, when 200 more volumes were
added. The books were first housed in a building on Place d’Armes
belonging to the seminary, then afterwards in a building on
St. Sulpice Street loaned by the Hôtel Dieu Nuns and thence,
in 1860, it was moved to a house at 197 Notre Dame Street, the
building being that of the Cabinet de Lecture paroissial, then
completed and finally to its present home recently erected as the
Bibliotheque St. Sulpice at 340 Denis Street.

Early after the housing of the Cabinet de Lecture in 1860 a
lecture bureau was incorporated in connection with the library
and under the direction of the superior of the seminary. This
bureau published the principal papers in a monthly journal.

The first mention of an English library was in 1796 when the
“Montreal Library” was incorporated as a joint stock association
of 120 shares at $50 per share. The library had no permanent home
until 1821 when the upper part of the old Wesleyan Chapel on
St. Sulpice Street was taken, where for the next sixteen years
it served the English speaking population. In 1837 new quarters
were found in the Natural History Society, then on Little St.
James Street. In 1844 the Montreal Library was purchased by the
Mercantile Library Association which had been established three
years earlier by a number of merchants, the number of books of
the amalgamated library at this date being about 4,000. For many
years the Mercantile Association, at its headquarters at the
corner of Bonaventure and St. Joseph streets, was the meeting
place of the élite of the city. With new associations and clubs
coming into existence the popularity of the Mercantile waned
until the library was handed over to the Fraser Institute,
incorporated in 1870 by the Hon. J.J.C. Abbott, F.W. Torrance,
T. Workman, A. Molson and P. Redpath, which is the only public
library, besides the small Civic Library, in Montreal, with its
valuable Gagnon collection of Canadiana. Both libraries are very
popular and considering their limitations are doing useful work.
In addition might be mentioned the other valuable libraries
frequented by scholars and students, such as the Redpath
Library, built and given by Mr. Peter Redpath in 1893 to McGill
University, the library belonging to Laval University, the Ecole
Normale, the Bibliotheque St. Sulpice, under the auspices of
the Sulpicians, and the semi-public collections attached to the
many churches, colleges, schools and institutions, literary and
social, scattered throughout the city and suburban municipalities
such as the model one at Westmount.

There are some public libraries in the adjoining municipalities,
that at Westmount being a model one.

Thus Montreal is not so badly off in regard to the number of its
books, even in comparison to its large population. But what is
certainly wanted in some centralizing system by which they can
be utilized through the cataloguing, interchange and circulation
of the volumes. The city council is contemplating building a
large central building to house many of the smaller libraries,
which will again popularize the reading of good literature by
the masses, which for some time has fallen into disuse. But the
first step to be taken should be the harmonizing, if possible, of
the existing library systems in the city through an intellectual
central library organization bureau being formed. Such is more
immediately needed then a central library building to house books.

The early history of the Fraser Library is one of litigation.
Mr. Hugh Fraser, an unmarried man, but with several brothers and
sisters, about six months before his death, in 1870, conceived
the idea of an institute in the interests of literature, science
and art,--“of a free public library, museum and gallery to be
open to all honest and respectable persons whomsoever, of every
rank in life without distinction and without fee or reward of any
kind.”

His will, dated April 23, 1870, after making bequests to the
amount of $20,000 to his relatives and settling an annuity
of £5,000 on a brother for the life of himself and his wife,
bequeathed the bulk of his property to establish in Montreal the
“Fraser Institute.” He named as his trustees the Hon. J.J.C.
Abbott and Judge Torrance and authorized these to procure an act
of incorporation to carry out his ideas. On May 15, 1870, he
died. The executors immediately took possession of the estate and
commenced the administration.

But on June 15th the heirs commenced an action to set aside the
bequest as contrary to the laws of mortmain--which finally was
carried to the privy council in England, who rendered their
decision on the validity of the bequest on November 26, 1874.
Arrangements were then made to carry out the intentions of the
donor, but in 1875 an attempt was made by a bill in the Quebec
Legislature to be allowed to bring the action up again, on the
ground that the privy council had erred in the interpretation of
the law. This failing, a second attempt was made on January 5,
1876, on the ground that the testator of the will was _non compos
mentis_ at the time of execution. This also failed. Until 1883
further litigations embarrassing to the governors were carried
on, when at last they were able to take some steps.

Meanwhile, in 1882, the property lately used as the high school
was offered for sale by the school commissioners. This was a
desirable opportunity for establishing the Fraser Institute
by way of a free library and the Hon. J.J.C. Abbott bought
the property for $30,000. Arrangements for taking over and
shelving two libraries of about 15,000 volumes, the Mercantile
Library Association and the Institut Canadien, were made through
Messrs. Frederick Mathews, Theodore Lyman and Joseph Doutre
and there were added valuable engravings from France, the gift
of Prince Jerome Bonaparte. It was hoped to include as part
of the institute the museum of the Natural History Society.
The Free Library, then a novelty in Canada, was opened to the
public on October 5, 1885, when the Honorable Mr. Abbott, as
trustee, explained the long delay, owing to the above mentioned
litigations. Among the other speakers hailing the new movement
were: the Honorable Mr. Justice Torrance, Mr. Thomas Workman,
Sir William Dawson, Mr. Justice Jetté, Mr. Justice Mathieu, Mr.
Hugh McLennan, Mr. Justice Mackay, Principal McVicar, Reverend
Mr. Larose, a former director of the Institut Canadien, Professor
Coussirat, Mr. Henry Lyman and Lieutenant-Colonel Lyman, as a
member of the Mercantile Library. The mayor, M. Henri Beaugrand,
himself a littérateur, fitly declared the library open to the
public.

As a library the Fraser Institute has fulfilled a popular
service. It has a very valuable collection of French books, in
addition to the original nucleus of the French library, and
has rare volumes of English, French, Latin, etc. It has also
a very valuable collection of “Canadiana.” The library made
great progress during the presidency of Mr. McLennan, which has
continued during that of Mr. Joseph Rielle. Up to 1901 it had
increased from 40,000 to 70,000 volumes. The first librarian was
Mr. Boodle, and since 1901 Mr. P.B. de Crèvecoeur has served in
that capacity.

The Fraser Free Library during its long and useful career has not
yet realized the desire of the founder and the first governors
to become also a “museum and gallery, to be open to all honest
and respectable persons.” Certainly such is needed in the city
now. The future of the institute if it follows out its original
intention, is still before it, with the help of a generous public.


               II. LITERARY AND LEARNED SOCIETIES

One of the earliest learned societies is the Natural History
Society which was founded in 1827 and the difficulty of its
founders in bringing it about is best shown in the following
extract taken from the first annual report, 1828:

  “It is now only twelve months since a few gentlemen, who
  casually, met together, proposed the establishment of this
  society. They were not unaware of the difficulties they would
  have to encounter. In all communities such as this where wealth
  is comparatively little, where no opulent endowments take off
  the necessity of attention to securing a livelihood, and where
  as a consequence, the attention is directed into other channels,
  very different from those of scientific research, not many can
  be expected to join in assisting this society by their personal
  exertions, however pleased they might be to see it arise.

  “Anticipating therefore, but a small list of members, and where
  also that at different times associations have been founded
  for literary purposes, which have gradually been dissolved,
  the founders of this society saw the necessity of a bond of
  union, independent of this personal characteristic of the
  first members. As a visible sign of the existence and utility
  of the institution, and around which the members might at all
  times rally, with a view there to afford this bond, to prevent
  this tendency to devolution, the proposers of this Natural
  History Society resolved to found a museum, an institution
  which experience has proved to have great power in calling
  the attention to scientific pursuits and the wants of which
  was firstly felt by several members, who looked back upon the
  various causes which in their younger days retarded their own
  improvement. But the new collections of the productions of nature
  would leave the design of the society imperfect without the
  possession of books, that treat of such subjects. One without the
  other would leave the work half done, but both connected give the
  greatest facilities for instruction which can be afforded. In
  addition therefore to the possession of a museum, it was one of
  the first objects of the society to secure a library of books on
  science in general. On these principles and with these views the
  Natural History Society was founded.”

This body holds a bequest, though slight, for providing
annually a lecture course for the public. It is known as the
Somerville Foundation. This unique distinction is credited to the
association, but it is also a sad commentary on the dearth of
provision for the general education of the public.

The institution is still with us and after having fulfilled a
valuable and no mean role in the past, may rise to the larger
demands and opportunities that the larger city which, at present,
still has no other museum of its kind, now offers to it to embark
on a larger venture than of old.

One of the earliest and more important factors in the
intellectual life of the city and in the creation of a real
love for the best in the existence of the working man has been
the Mechanic’s Institute which was founded in November, 1828,
by a body of earnest men, who felt that the worker should have
a chance to educate himself not only in science, but in art
and literature. The first meetings were held in the house of
the Reverend Mr. Esson, who with Judge Gugy, L.J. Papineau and
John Molson formed the executive. In its early years, not much
progress was made, but on its incorporation in 1845 new life was
put into the work. Seven years afterwards land was secured on St.
James Street for a permanent building which was opened in 1855.
In 1862 the building was enlarged by the addition of a large hall
to hold 800 people. For twenty-five years the institute was the
principal hall for meetings until the city spread more north when
it was divided into offices. Today its reading room and library
are but very little used in comparison with the past.

In 1857 the Hon. P.J.O. Chauneau, LL. D., the provincial minister
of public works, who took a keen interest in educational affairs,
founded the “Conferences des Instituteurs de L’Ecole Normale
Jacques-Cartier,” and in October of the same year a literary
society, under the patronage of the Séminaire St. Sulpice was
founded under the title of “Cercle Littéraire” by Joseph Royal.

La Société Historique de Montreal, was founded in 1857, but was
not definitely organized until 1858, under the presidency of
Commander Jacques Viger, being incorporated by an act of the
Legislature in 1859. The headquarters of this society had always
been held in the Ecole Normale Jacques Cartier. This society has
published important _memoires_ relative to the history of Canada,
and possesses valuable manuscripts which for want of funds it is
unable at present to publish. It was on its initiative that in
1894 the monolith near Place Royale, formerly Pointe a Callières
was erected to commemorate the precise spot of the landing of the
first colonists in 1642. Its presidents have been as follows:
Commander Jacques Viger, April 11, 1858; M. L’Abbe H.A. Verreau,
January 14, 1859; M. Judge George Baby, May 18, 1904; M. Judge
L.W. Sicotte, January 23, 1909; M. L’Abbe N. Dubois, May 6, 1912.

On May 3, 1858, the Institut Canadien-Francais came into
existence, having as secretary L.O. David, now Senator David,
historian and litterateur. The society which had its home on
Little St. James Street was very active and many of its members
occupied in after life responsible public positions. It began
well with bright, eager students, but finally fell on evil days
when owing to a tendency to liberalism it came under the ban of
Bishop Bourget so that many of its members left and formed the
Societé des Artisans Français-Canadiens and the Union Nationale.
About the same time two others were formed, active literary
bodies of today, the Cercle Littéraire de Ville Marie (1857)
under the auspices of the Sulpicians, and the Union Catholique
(1858) under the auspices of the Jesuits.

The Institut Canadien Library, which afterwards was held by the
Club Canadien in trust, was finally transferred by arrangement to
the Fraser Institute in 1885.

The suppression of the Institut Canadien is remembered by the
Guibord case. M. Guibord, one of the condemned members, though
not mentioned by name, after his death was refused burial in the
Catholic cemetery, although he had owned a burial plot there.
An action which finally was taken to the privy council by his
widow was settled in her favour and the body was transferred
from the Mount Royal Protestant Cemetery to that of Cote des
Neiges. Fearing an _émeute_ the police and military were present,
but owing to the discretion of the mayor, Dr. William Hingston,
nothing serious happened. A large boulder, unnamed, marks the
spot of burial. Later the ground was deconsecrated and the
wording of the law was changed so that burial in the Catholic
cemetery may not take place, even with the prior possession of
land, without the consent of the Catholic authorities.

The name of the Antiquarian and Numismatic Society is closely
associated with the old Château de Ramezay, for it was through
the initiative, beginning in 1894, of its members that the
Château became, in 1897, its museum and consequently was saved
from the hand of the vandal. The society was, however, first
formed in 1862 by the juncture of two little groups, one French
and one English, of numismatists who used to meet at the members’
homes to study the finds and histories of old coins and medals.
Recognizing that the study of numismatics was largely connected
with the broader subject of antiquities, it was decided to change
the name of the society to the “Numismatic and Antiquarian
Society of Montreal.” In 1912 a new charter under the title of
“The Antiquarian and Numismatic Society of Montreal” was granted.
Some of the earliest members were A.J. Boucher, Stanley Bagg,
James Ferrier, L.A. Huguet-Latour, James Rattray, Dr. Hector
Pelletier, Daniel Rose, J.E. Guilbault, Lavens Mathewson, J.L.
Bronsdon, and since the society has included amongst its members
a number of historical authorities of distinction, such as
William Kingsford, William McLennan, Alfred Sandham, Dr. Samuel
Dawson, Gerald Hart, Judge Baby, Sir James Lemoine, Henry Mott,
Hon. P.J.O. Chauveau, M. l’Abbé Verreau, Judge L.W. Sicotte,
Senator Edward Murphy, P.S. Murphy, I.B. Learmont, H.H. Lyman,
Henry J. Tiffin, and M. l’Abbé N. Dubois; and such numismatic
or antiquarian authorities as E.Z. Massicotte, P.O. Tremblay,
R.W. McLachlan and W.D. Lighthall. The society, through its
journal “The Canadian Antiquarian and Numismatic Journal,” which
was first published in 1872 and which, notwithstanding several
interruptions, has now reached its twenty-seventh volume, has
gathered together and conserved for future generations invaluable
records of Canadian history, while in its museum at the Château
de Ramezay it has a collection of old portraits, antiquities,
documents and books vying, according to Mr. J. Ross Robertson,
with the richest of its kind on the continent of America. Amongst
the contributors to its journal might be noted, in addition to
those mentioned, such authorities as Henry Mott, Samuel Baylis,
its present editor, Lapalice, Victor Morin, Thomas O’Leary, and
others. Two very active members of the society have been De Léry
Macdonald, whose extensive acquaintance with French-Canadian
portraits and genealogy gave him the idea of the portrait gallery
which is now part of the society’s collection, and Roswell Corse
Lyman, who did so much in the saving of the Château. The present
president, to whom is due the idea of the Château becoming the
home of the museum, is Mr. W.D. Lighthall.

About 1892 a strong school of French litterateurs, still
existing, sprang up with the Ecole Littéraire, which held its
meetings in the Château de Ramezay. This produced a number of the
best poets of the time, including Charles Gill, Jean Charbonneau,
Doucet, A. Lozeau, Albert Ferland, Demers, Gonzalve Desaulniers
and others. It published in 1900 the Soirées de Château de
Ramezay, which was much praised in Europe and received special
encomium from Ab der Halsen, a distinguished Alsatian critic.

Amongst the present English literary and debating societies, St.
James’ Literary Society stands out because of the high standard
of the papers and features given each session by the most able
men in the city and Canada.

The society, which had its inception in the autumn of 1898, began
with a gathering of twelve men, who met more or less casually
for mutual intercourse and improvement in connection with St.
James’ Church. As the society grew in numbers it was felt that a
definite constitution should be drawn up and it became henceforth
one of acknowledged force in the literary life of the city. Its
motto _Permitte lucem_ and its emblem the “Lamp of Literature”
indicate its mission. The original name has been retained, but
its membership is broadened for general acceptance. The addresses
given during the season are kept on record for reference and
perhaps for future publication.

Its presidents have been: Rev. C.G. Rollit, 1898-99-1900; J.H.
Shaw, 1900-01; John Barrett, 1901-02; W.C. Wonham, 1902-03;
F.W. Hibbard, K.C., 1903-04; J.S. Archibald, 1904-05; M. McD.
Duff, 1905-06; Rev. H. Symonds, D.D., 1906-07; Maxwell Murdock,
1907-08; W.T. Castle, 1908-09; E.G. Place, 1909-10; J. Armitage
Ewing, K. C, 1910-11; George Hale, M.D., 1911-12; H.A. Jones,
1912-13; James G. Gray, 1913-14; J.H. Shaw, 1914-15.

An interesting and flourishing literary society with a very
large active membership is the Dickens Fellowship, which was
established in 1909 as a branch of the parent English society of
the same name, its object being to study the works and the social
lessons of Charles Dickens and to apply his teachings as far as
possible.

Its presidents have been: J. Portcous Arnold, 1909-10; J.A.
Huchinson, M.D., 1911; W.H. Atherton, Ph. D., 1912-13; W. Godbee
Brown, 1914.

At intervals there have been societies for special literary
purposes, such as Shakespeare, Browning and Burns societies. Of
these one of the most prominent was the Burns Society, which was
started about 1857 and only lapsed recently.

Societies along national lines have been formed of late years.
The first established in Montreal is the Alliance Française,
being a branch of L’Alliance Française established in France
in 1883. This latter was approved by an act of the minister
of the interior on January 14, 1884, and was recognized as an
establishment of practical utility by a decree of the republic on
October 23, 1886. The end which the Alliance proposes to itself
is two-fold: (1) in the French colonies and protectorates to make
the language known and loved by the conquered people, to use it
for social and commercial purposes and to induce colonists to go
from France to a country where French is spoken; (2) elsewhere
to maintain relations, (a) with the French-speaking settlers
or groups away among strangers by encouraging them to maintain
the cult of their national tongue, and (b) with friends of the
French language and literature whatever their nationality, race
or creed, so as to draw closer the bonds of a literary and moral
sympathy which unites France to other peoples and to second in
the East, or in countries still uncivilized, French missionaries
of every denomination, and French lay teachers for the foundation
and maintenance of schools, teaching the French language. A
propaganda is carried out for this purpose with the result that
there has been formed more than four hundred and fifty committees
in France and other lands.

Among other general literary and debating societies of men
of today are the “Nomads,” and those in connection with the
universities and colleges, the Y.M. C.A. and other organizations
of a religious, fraternal or social character.

Literature is similarly carried on in women circles; the Montreal
Women’s Club, founded in 1893, being the most representative.

The club or society broadest in its conception in the topics
dealt with and in the cosmopolitan character of its speakers
at its weekly lunch is the Canadian Club, which was originally
organized in the city of Hamilton, Ontario, in 1892 with the
object “To foster patriotism by encouraging the study of the
Institutions, Arts, Literature, and Resources of Canada and by
endeavouring to unite Canadians in such work for the welfare and
progress of the Dominion.”

The Montreal branch, which was organized in 1905, has now a
membership of about two thousand, comprising representatives of
every race living in the city. Practically every person of note
who has visited Montreal since its incorporation has addressed
the club, including prominent men such as Jerome K. Jerome who
delivered the first address in 1905, Booker T. Washington, the
well known leader of the American negroes; W.T. Stead, the great
English journalist; Rudyard Kipling, the poet, who gave an
address on “Journalism and Literature”; Rt. Hon. James Bryce, the
English historian, man of letters and statesman; Lord Milner,
the great pro-consul; Lord Grey; Lord Balfour of Burleigh,
chairman of the commission on Canadian-West Indian reciprocity;
Lord Northcliffe, the principal owner of the London Times and
Daily Mail; Hon. C.J. Bonaparte, member of President Roosevelt’s
cabinet and direct descendant of the great Napoleon; Sir Andrew
Fraser, one of India’s public servants; Consul Nakamura of Japan;
Commissioner Coombs of the Salvation Army; and the Hon. W.J.
Bryan, American silver-tongued orator and secretary of state of
the United States, etc.

The Canadian speakers have included Sir Robert Borden, prime
minister; Sir George Foster; Hon. Rodolphe Lemieux; Dr. W.T.
Grenfell, the missionary of the Labrador coast; Captain Bernier,
the French-Canadian explorer; President Falconer of Toronto
University; Armand Lavergne, a strong advocate of French-Canadian
nationalism; the local speakers including Henri Bourassa, Doctor
Macphail, the writer; Sir Alexander Lacoste; Doctor Colby;
Principal Peterson of McGill University; Hon. J.I. Tarte of
La Patrie; Hon. L.O. David; Prof. Stephen Leacock; and Judge
Choquet, who spoke on the Juvenile Court in Montreal.

As the Canadian clubs were originally designed for men, the women
of Montreal, in 1907, determined to organize a “Women’s Canadian
Club.” This has proved successful, the subjects treated being
specially applicable to the women and the idea had spread to
thirteen other Canadian cities.

There is no doubt but that the idea of Canadian clubs has been
wonderfully successful, for they have given the busy business
men one day in each week to enjoy lunch at a reasonable price
and then listen for twenty or thirty minutes to the best man
who happened to be in the city at that moment or to have been
specially invited for the purpose. It has brought its members
into personal touch with the great leaders of thought and those
who control the destinies of the British Empire, and because of
its national character it has been a large factor in breaking
down class and racial prejudices that have too often been a
jarring note in the progress of Montreal.


                   III. ARTISTIC ASSOCIATIONS

A great influence in the intellectual and artistic life of the
City of Montreal has been gradually brought about by the church
amongst the French section, and amongst the English by little
coteries of friends meeting first at private houses and as the
circles became larger, in more public places. In this way the
Cultural Associations of Montreal arose.

In a number of the societies, such as the Antiquarian and
Numismatic Society, the two races have been brought together,
but generally speaking each race has developed mentally and
socially along its own lines, insufficiently co-mingling even on
intellectual and artistic grounds.

But while there is no amalgamation of the two races there is
great respect and harmony, mutual admiration, imitation and
assimilation, unless this state is upset by self-interested
demagogues, and it is in this tacit understanding that they
have built up side by side many French and English libraries,
and literary, artistic and musical societies, the influence of
which has considerably raised the mental standard of Canada’s
commercial metropolis. While, however, there is to be deplored
a certain weakness through the want of concentration, yet it is
somewhat productive of a healthy rivalry and a varied viewpoint.
More fusion, however, would be mutually advantageous, to gain the
fullest advantage from the juxtaposition of the heritors of two
great racial civilizations in one city.


                               ART

Art in Montreal can be divided into four periods, each having
its own influence, not only on the people of the time and on
the private collections, but on the work of local artists, many
of whom, until late years, were never able to study the great
collections of Europe. The first period might be termed the
church influence, for during the earliest part of the French
régime the Jesuit records indicate the fact that a number of
the earliest missionaries, men of learning and culture, did not
neglect art or music in bringing their Indian neophytes under the
spell of Christianity. Several of the Montreal Jesuits were no
mean artists or musicians. The members of the earliest religious
corporations also brought out works of art in furniture and
altar ornaments. Thus in the Catholic churches of the provinces
there are many fine pieces of decoration which were designed in
Europe of the sixteenth century. Later when the French became
more settled in New France, the officers, both military and
civil, brought out their families, who in addition to bringing
out the family paintings and decorations introduced the culture
of old France. In addition art began to be taught in the earliest
technical schools, one of which, the classes of the Fréres
Charron of Montreal followed somewhat the example of the first
technical school established by Bishop Laval outside Quebec. This
might be termed the second period. The third began soon after the
conquest, 1670, when, with the arrival of British officers and
officials, British art was introduced, not in specimens alone,
for it was found that amongst the officers of the engineers
and artillery there were a number of good artists who soon
mixed with the local art lovers. Thus they helped in forming in
1847 an art society under the name of the “Montreal Society of
Artists” which gave a modest exhibition to initiate the “Montreal
Gallery of Pictures.” The second exhibition was held in 1857 in
the Bonaventure Hall under the auspices and direction of the
Mercantile Library Association. The artists represented at this
exhibition were Cooper, David Cox, Kneller, Guido, Jan, Steen,
Reynolds, Raphael, Vinci, Rubens, Van Dyke, Titian, Lawrence and
Watteau. This being from local collections shows something of the
love of good pictures by the wealthy Montrealers of that day even
if only copies of these masters were available.

The fourth period is now with us.

The Society of Artists in 1860 believing that the time had come
for broadening its sphere of usefulness invited lovers of art
as well as artists to join them and “The Art Association of
Montreal” thus became formed. The act to incorporate this new
venture was assented to on April 23, 1860, at the request of
the Rt. Rev. Francis Fulford, Lord Bishop of Montreal, the Rev.
William T. Leach, William H.A. Davies, Thomas D. King, Esquires,
and others. Five years afterwards the association formed itself
into an Art Union, and in the same year published a catalogue
with articles on Oil Painting, Water Colours and Engraving, by
F.T. Palgrave, reduced from the art catalogue of the great London
Exhibition of 1862. The principal feature of the exhibition held
in 1867 was a number of water colours by the Montreal Sketching
Club, including two by Alfred Rimmer who afterwards made a
reputation by his beautiful book illustrations of English country
life. In the following year the Society of Canadian Artists held
its first exhibition in the Gallery of the Art Association,
then in a large room at the Mercantile Library Building. The
seventh exhibition of the association in 1872 was also held
in the same building, while in 1878 the eighth was held in the
Windsor Hotel. By the magnificent gift of Benaiah Gibb the Art
Association was enabled to have its own building on Phillip’s
Square. On the completion of the building in 1879 an exhibition
was held to celebrate the opening. Mr. Gibb’s munificence gave
a great impetus to art in Montreal both then and when he died
in the following year, bequeathing his valuable collection,
consisting of seventy-two pictures and four bronzes to the Art
Association in trust for the citizens of Montreal. In the earlier
part of the same year (1880) a loan collection of oil paintings
had been held including two sketches by H.R.H. Princess Louise,
wife of the governor general who had opened the art gallery. The
J.W. Tempest bequest in 1892 of $80,000 has also been one of
the God-sends to the association. He also left a very valuable
collection of pictures containing some very fine work.

[Illustration: ART GALLERY]

The first black and white exhibition was held in 1881, and
included the work of Durer, Bartolozzi, S.W. Reynolds, Charles
Turner and J.M. Turner. At this exhibition a paper was read by
Mr. McLennan on “Engraving” which was illustrated by woodcuts
and specimens of engraving on metal, and in the same year a
collection was held of the works of Canadian artists.

Since that time all kinds of exhibitions have been held in the
galleries of the Art Association, each one growing more popular
as the public taste in art has increased. So much so that the
association, finding the quarters on Phillip’s Square too small
to meet the increased attendances, determined to sell the
building which had been the home of art for so many years and,
with the proceeds together with the result of a special campaign
which netted over two hundred and sixty thousand dollars, to
build an art gallery worthy of the great City of Montreal. Such
is the present beautiful Art Gallery Building on Sherbrooke
Street, opened by H.R.H., the Duke of Connaught on December 9,
1912. Its architects were Edward and William S. Maxwell of this
city.

The late Mr. James Ross, besides contributing $125,000 during
his life time, bequeathed $100,000 to the association and the
late Mr. Learmont and his sister bequeathed between them their
splendid collection of paintings and china. The president of the
Art Association is Mr. H.V. Meredith, president of the Bank of
Montreal, and the membership is around two thousand; the curator
and secretary being Mr. J.B. Abbott, son of the late Sir John
Abbott, prime minister of Canada.

The permanent collection of the new art gallery consists of
626 pieces, including oil paintings, watercolours, etchings,
statuary, casts and bronzes, with the Learmont collection, the
donation of rare china and pottery consisting of 170 pieces, and
a number of pictures filling one of the rooms, among which are
works by Turner, Swan, Gainsborough and Reynolds. Among the other
artists represented in the gallery, are Bougeaureau, Constant,
Corot, Diaz of Peña, Goya, Henner, Monticelli, Millet, Pasini,
Raeburn, Soest, Tholen, Treyon, Van Goyen, Van de Velde, Van
Dyck, Whistler and Wilkie. There are also copies after Sarto,
Titian and Salvator Rosa; bronzes by Clesinger, Guillemin, Rodin
and Tout Mackenzie, and statuary by Benzoni, Bosio, Hébert and
Romanelli. The library of the association has, through the
generosity of its members, become one of the most complete
collections of reference books on art in Canada.

It has been said that Montreal has some of the finest private
collections of masters on this continent and that if all were on
exhibition under one roof, the artistic wealth of the community
would be found to be very considerable.

Among the notable collections of private citizens, the possession
of the following, among others, may be ascribed to the possession
of: The late _Lord Strathcona_: works by Turner, Henner, Jules
Bréton, etc.; _Sir William Van Horne_: Monticelli, Rousseau,
Daubigny, Corot, Delacroix, Rubens, Turner, Cuyp, Ruysdal,
Raeburn, as well as examples by the advanced modern painters of
the French post impressionist school; _Lady Drummond_: Reynolds,
Franz Hals, Rosetti, Turner, Ruysdal, Troyon, Daubigny, Duprès,
Peter de Hooge, etc.; _R. B. Angus_: Gainsborough, Romney,
Rembrandt, Dagnan-Bouveret, Swan, Reynolds, Monticelli, Ruysdal,
Hoppner, Aumier; the _late James Ross_: Rembrandt, Corot, Troyon,
Millet, Fortuny, Teniers, Turner, Cuyp, Joseph Israels, Romney,
Franz Hals; _E.B. Greenshields_: Turner, Ryder, etc., and a
number of the modern Dutch school including Joseph Israels,
Jacob, William and Maris; Mauve, Weissenbruch, etc.

All the owners mentioned above, as well as many others with
smaller collections, have been very generous subscribers to the
art gallery, both in pictures and money.

A special branch of the association is the art school under the
direction of Mr. William Brymner, president of the Royal Canadian
Academy, who has associated with him Maurice Cullen, R.C.A.,
and Miss Alberta Cleland. In addition might be added the series
of lectures that are given each season by specialists on the
different branches of art. Outside the convents, the principal
school of art attended by French pupils is the School of Arts and
Manufactures which is held in the Monument National. This school
was founded by the Abbé Chabert in 1860, who at one time had been
a successful professor of arts at the Ottawa College. He made the
school one of the best in Canada and many well known artists of
today received their first instruction in this school.

Coming to the personnel of art, Montreal has in Louis Philippe
Hébert one who takes a high place among Canadian sculptors. His
work, many examples of which are on the public squares of the
city, is equally a monument to his genius as to those whom he
portrayed in bronze and stone. When the honour of C.M.G. was
conferred upon him by King Edward in 1903 it was felt that the
representative of Canadian art was well chosen. Another fine
Canadian artist who has for many years made Montreal his home
is Mr. Robert Harris, also a C.M.G., a former president of the
R.C.A. Among other Montreal artists are Napoleon Bourassa,
decorator and architect of the Church of Notre Dame de Lourdes
and others; George William Hill, the designer and sculptor of the
Cartier memorial and many other monuments.

Among other artistic associations is the Woman’s Art Society,
which was founded in 1893 to encourage art amongst its members
and to assist kindred societies. Thus it presented a scholarship
to the Art Association for competition in the schools, and
cooperates with the Canadian Handicrafts Guild, which was
established in 1906 to encourage, retain, revive and develop
handicrafts and home art industries throughout the Dominion.
This guild with headquarters in Montreal, has as patrons T.R.H.
the Duke and Duchess of Connaught with a large general committee
and honorary council of men and women who give their time
ungrudgingly in the interests of homely crafts which are in these
days of materialism and utilitarism in danger of extinction.

The Château de Ramezay, as the home of the Antiquarian Society,
has many historical records of the art of the past, the chief
features being in the Elgin room, where are many historical
portraits and relics, including the bell of Louisburg and the
“Montreal” Room, where a valuable series of historical maps and
pictures of the city is preserved; while the council chamber, the
salon, the parloir, the vaults, the kitchen, and the bakery are
all reminiscent of the early days of the city.

There is also the valuable private collection of Mr. R. McCord at
Templegrove, known as McCord’s National Museum. It is to be hoped
that such collections will be gradually acquired for the public.

The Royal Academy of Arts, of which the director of the school
attached to the Art Association is president, has an exhibition
of paintings every four years in Montreal.

We may here mention the Royal Society of Canada, which has a
literary and scientific, as well as an artistic, scope and which
held its meetings in Montreal this year (1914), being largely
associated with the city because of its first meeting in 1882
taking place here and the first executive being principally
residents of Montreal. Its first president was the late Sir
William Dawson of McGill, and the first vice president the Hon.
Dr. P.J.O. Chauveau, LL. D., and amongst the charter members
appear the names of N. Bourassa, Louis Frechette, LL. D., John
L’Esperance, John Reade, J. Clark Murray, Sir A.B. Routhier and
other Montrealers. This year’s president is Dr. Adams of McGill.

In reviewing this chapter one would say that the City of
Montreal since it became the home of civilization has had great
opportunities to enrich itself artistically and mentally,
because of the environments of romance that surround it and the
atmosphere of cultured men and women, who in each generation
have breathed its air. The citizens are essentially lovers of
everything that will raise the standard of intellectual living,
but the temptation to the present generation to pursue more
seriously material success, has detracted somewhat from the
claims of literature and art as a valuable possession and a title
to distinction. Art, literature and culture have too few patrons
to endow struggling works which, if fostered, would be a lasting
memorial and satisfaction to their donors and benefactors. Yet
this failing is but temporary for with the passing away of the
false opulence begotten of real estate booms and financial
speculations, the people will come back to their real love, and
art and literature with the love of the true, the good, and the
beautiful in life, will take their proper place in the composite
life of Montreal.

For the sake of recording the names of those who have left a
reputation as artists at Montreal and Quebec the following notes
may be preserved:

Père André Pierron, S.J., before 1673; Frère Luc, a Récollet;
Père Pommier, about the same time; Pierre Leber; Jean Antoine
Créque, born 1749, died 1780; * De Beaucourt, born about 1735;
* Louis Dulogpré, worked in Montreal and Quebec from about
1790-1830; * William Van Moll Berczy, painted in Montreal from
about 1800-1818;---- Audy, from about 1804-1830; Joseph Legare,
born 1795, was working in 1826; * Antoine Plamandon, born about
1800, lived nearly through the century; * Cornelius Kreighoff,
born 1814, died 1872; James Duncan, born 1806, died 1881; *
William Sawyer, born 1820, died 1889; * Théophile Hamel, born
1814, died 1870; * Adolphe Vogt, born 1842, died 1870; * Allan
Edson, born 1846, died 1888; * Wyatt Eaton, born 1849, died 1896;
* O. R. Jacobi, born 1812, died 1901;---- Hawksett; * William
Raphael, died 1914; * John Pinhey, died about 1911; * Henry
Sandham, born 1842, died 1910; * Henri Julien, born 1846, died
1908.

Of artists now living and in most cases exhibiting regularly in
Montreal there are the following:

Napoleon Bourassa, born 1827; Robert Harris, born 1849; William
Brymner, born 1855; Edmond Dyonnet; Auréle Suzor Cote, born
1870; Maurice Cullen, born 1866; James W. Morrice, born 1864;
(Clarence) Gagnon; F. St. Charles; J.C. Franchere; Charles Gill;
William Hope; John Hammond; Horne Russell; Laura Muntz; G.
Delfosse. There are also many other artists in Montreal, but the
above are certainly all names which are well known to art lovers
here and have been for some time identified with the art we have
of the city.


                            THE DRAMA

Amateur theatricals have been in vogue in Montreal for many
years. Among the officers of the garrison under the French
régime, doubtless and certainly among the young scholars taught
by the “Congregation” and the Sulpicians, whose students of the
College de Montréal performed early in the British Rule the play
“David and Jonathan or The Triumph of Friendship.”

However the drama proper in Montreal dates especially from
1804, when a Mr. Ormsby, from the Theatre Royal, Edinborough,
established a company of comedians to perform a play in five
acts called “The Busy Body” and a farce entitled “The Sultan.” A
building next to the old postoffice was fitted up and the charges
were: boxes, 5s. and gallery, 2s. 6d. Circuses came and went, a
notable one taking place in 1812. In the early ’40s there was
still standing the Theatre Royal, built in 1825 and situated
opposite Rasco’s Hotel on Bonsecours Street, then the great hotel
of the city and it was in this house that Charles Dickens acted
during his visit in 1842. The second Theatre Royal, in Coté
Street was opened in 1850, and which after a long, splendid and
eventful career, closed its doors ignominiously in 1913. One of
its early lessees was J.W. Buckland, who engaged a good stock
company, which gave such plays as “Peg Woffington,” “Rob Roy” and
“The Cricket on the Hearth.” This theatre in its palmiest days
enjoyed the patronage of the élite and military of the city and
when any stars visited Montreal, such as Jenny Lind, Patti and
Kean, the Theatre Royal was the scene of their triumphs.[1]

The present City Hall Annex on Gosford Street is built on the
site of the old Dominion Theatre, which up to 1864 had been an
Anglican church, then a vinegar factory, before being turned
into what the proprietors claimed to be the largest and most
up-to-date theatre in the city. But it did not have a very long
life. One of the first plays to be given on its stage was the
“Commune,” a sensational melodrama of the French Commune. Kate
Quinton, who in her day had somewhat of a reputation, was the
star of the play. After one year of melodrama the proprietors
tried vaudeville, principally using local talent. It was at this
theatre that Madame Albani, then Miss Emma Lejeunesse of Chambly,
whose father was a music teacher, made one of her earliest
appearances as a pianist. In those early days the great singer
did not know that she possessed the wonderful voice which has
since entranced the world with its beauty. In 1871 the Dominion
changed the character of its bill of fare again, this time to
opera, under the name of Debar’s Opera House, though dramatic
plays were given at times as a change. It was at this theatre
that L. Guyon, in 1878, tried his prentice hand as a dramatist
in the play “Le Secret de la Roche Noire.” The following year
another play from his pen was produced “La Fleur de Lys.” The
plays were staged by the local Cercle Dramatique Jacques Cartier.
This society continued to produce plays until 1889 when the
theatre, which had been its home was sold. Since that date many
French Canadian dramatic societies, such as those at the Theâtre
National Français and the Theâtre des Nouveautés, have come into
being most of them being very successful, indeed it has been said
by the critics that the standing of these amateur productions is
often higher than that of visiting professional companies.

As the residential part of the city spread northwards the Queen’s
Hall appeared on St. Catherine Street, between University and
Victoria streets, being burnt down in 1874, about which time a
new theatre was built called “The Academy of Music,” on Victoria
Street, which in a short time took the place of the Theatre
Royal as the fashionable place of amusement. On its stage many
famous actors have appeared--Irving, Terry, Bancroft, Wyndham,
Toole--etc. In time “His Majesty’s Theatre” became the leading
English theatre and about the same time the “Français” was
opened, first for the production of French plays and afterward
for melodrama, as well as a number of small French theatres.
The position of the English theatres in 1908 stood as follows:
leading theatre, “His Majesty’s”; for musical comedy, “Academy of
Music”; for melodrama, the “Français”; for burlesque, the “Royal”
and the “Theatre Royal.” The “Princess” for general purposes
followed immediately.

Until recently, with an occasional visit by an English company,
most of the plays put on the Montreal boards were by companies
from the United States, but during the last four years England’s
best companies have visited Montreal, including Marie Tempest,
Sir Beerbohm Tree, Sir Forbes Robertson, Sir Charles Wyndham,
Horniman Players, Charles Harvey, etc. To-day there are catering
to the English public, two first class theatres (“His Majesty’s”
and “Princess”), one vaudeville (“Orpheum”), one burlesque
(“Gaiety”), and 200 moving picture theatres, headed by the
“Imperial,” which holds about 2,500 people.

There are a number of small French theatres, one or two
running stock, but most of them are the home of amateur
dramatic companies, and consequently circumscribed in doing
really ambitious work, but as already stated, very creditable
performances are to be seen at these theatres. Sarah Bernhardt,
the great French actress, has played in Montreal several times
and her art has always been equally acceptable to English
and French, thus drawing full houses in the largest theatre
available. Of late years the “Arena,” a skating rink, has been
the scene of the greatest gatherings for concerts, horse shows
and motor shows.

The Monument National has been the scene of many ambitious and
successful French dramas and comedies. There also are given, from
time to time, good dramas in Hebrew by competent artists and
these plays, mostly of a serious nature, are much appreciated by
the Jewish residents of Montreal.

Among the amateur dramatic societies there is La Section
Littéraire et Dramatique du Cercle Jeanne D’Arc, while many of
the churches, colleges and schools have their own societies,
the best known of which, that attached to Trinity Church, which
under the well known Montreal actor, W.A. Tremayne, gives, during
the season, a production of a very high order each month. The
Dickens’ Fellowship also gives each season representations of the
dramatized works of the great master.

The amateur drama has not fared ill in Montreal. It was in
Montreal that the great Canadian actress, Margaret Anglin,
received her education in a convent of this city; other artists
educated here being Maxine Elliot, Gertrude Elliot, the wife of
Sir Forbes Robertson; Miss Marie Tempest, and Madame Donalda, the
Canadian singer.

As a sign of the interest being awakened in the drama in
Montreal, it is pleasing to record the birth, during the last two
years, of the Drama League for the purposes of promoting the true
interests of the theatre and the cultivation of a right drama in
the city.


                              MUSIC

Music naturally came into this country with the French, who are
essentially musical, for the church encouraged this trait by
affording many occasions for the best music. Good voices were
easily procurable and every encouragement was also given to
orchestral music, both in the churches and in the home. From
this there spread out the desire for musical associations. Among
modern societies that of the Société de Ste. Cécile was founded
by A.J. Boucher on November 11, 1860, and there followed in
1861 the Société Musicale des Montaguards Canadiens founded by
François Benoit. The English also did not neglect musical culture
and about this time the “Amateur Musical League of Montreal” was
founded by a Mr. Torrington who was organist of the St. James
Methodist Church.

Perhaps the most noted musical organization which Montreal has
ever possessed was the Mendelssohn Choir, a private society
initiated in 1884 by the late Mr. Joseph Gould, who during its
whole musical life of thirty years, acted as its sole business
manager and conductor. The Choir was composed of picked voices,
to the number, in its later years, of about one hundred and
twenty-five. Its _forte_ lay in its remarkable unaccompanied
part-singing which was compared by competent judges with the best
performances of Henry Leslie’s choir in London, in those days,
perhaps the most famous body of its kind in the world.

The first Mendelssohn Choir concerts were given in Mr. Gould’s
piano warerooms on St. James’ Street, admission being exclusively
by invitation. After a few years, subscribing annual members were
received, in addition to the active members. The concerts thus
became, and thereafter continued to be, subscription concerts;
and were given in the principal public halls, the Mechanics’
Hall, the Queen’s Hall, and others being successively used.
Many of the most celebrated artists, both instrumentalists
and vocalists, who have visited Montreal, were introduced to
the public at Mendelssohn Choir concerts, although the chief
attraction always continued to be the singing of the Choir
itself, whose reputation gradually extended throughout Canada to
the United States and even to Europe.

In 1894 Mr. Gould, owing chiefly to failing health, resigned his
position as conductor and director, and the Choir, unwilling to
sing under any other leader, voluntarily disbanded.

Two other contemporary musical societies at this period have
also left a void in the city. The Handel and Hayden Society and
the Philharmonic, the former being led by Professor Rayner, and
the latter organization as notable as the Mendelssohn Choir,
by Professor Couture. The rôle of the Philharmonic, however,
was oratorio with orchestral accompaniment. The first steps for
organization were taken in 1877 by three concerts given under
the name of the Montreal Musical Festival held in the Victoria
Skating Rink. The object was to produce in Montreal two of the
grand musical productions with first class soloists, choir and
orchestra, after the manner of the great English festivals.

The name of the “Montreal Philharmonic” appeared on December
17, 1877, on the first programme of the new combination, at
the concert held in the Academy of Music, then new. Its first
president and conductor was Dr. McLagan, who was followed in 1879
by Mr. F.E. Lucy-Barnes, and by Mr. Couture, who undertook his
first concert on December 9, 1880, and who directed his large
choirs, averaging two hundred and fifty voices, till the lapse
of the Philharmonic in 1899. From its inception most of the
great oratorios including the works of Wagner were excellently
rendered, supplemented by the Boston Symphony Orchestra and
others of a continental reputation. The soloists were the best
available artists before the public on the continent, including
Emma Thursby, Max Heinrich, Prehn, W. Ludwig, W.H. Regia, Emma
Juch, Martens, Conrad Behrens, Emma Poole King, Frangcon Davies,
Irene Devny, Etalka Gerster and others, the work of inviting
these falling for the last eleven years on the secretary, Mr.
Arthur H. Browning. The presidents of the association have been
Messrs. Arthur W. Perkins, Hector McKenzie, Angus W. Hooper and
Charles Cassels.

Since the cessation of these associations, which fell because
of insufficient support and suitable concert halls, nothing has
replaced them adequately. The most notable body of today is the
“Chorale St. Louis de France,” attached to the church of that
name. Other churches produce oratorios but without the same
resources as the combinations of the past. Although in the more
modern city the great European and American soloists are brought
there is not the same degree of musical education for the people
as in the more quiet and studious times of a quarter of a century
ago.

Miller’s Band, attached to the British regiments stationed in
Montreal, was a most popular musical institution for many years.
It played often at the Viger Gardens and was instrumental in
creating a taste for good music among the residents of the city.
The band remained here until the military left in the fall of
1869, returning to England with the regiments. After it left,
things were somewhat dull in Montreal until a number of the Grand
Trunk employees organized a band made up of the musicians of the
disbanded regiments who preferred to stay in Montreal rather than
go back to England. The conductor was a man named Zeiglar. Early
in the ’70s the Boston Symphony Orchestra began to come and small
opera troupes of Italian singers about the same time who gave
concerts in the Mechanics’ Hall. Christine Neilson was heard in
the Victoria Skating Rink.

In 1871, a season of grand opera was given in Montreal by Sig.
Enrico Corana, the company including the following stars: Madame
Elena Corani, Madle, Caterani Lami, Sigs. Pietro Baccei, G.
Reina, G. Pauliny, Nicolini and Nicolao. The operas included
Donizetti’s Lucretia Borgia and Flotow’s Martha, but it was not
until about four years ago that a full season was given in the
city by the Montreal Grand Opera Company which, after running two
seasons, was disbanded because of the great financial deficit. It
was found that to make grand opera pay in Montreal a much larger
theatre was required to hold a sufficiently big audience to pay
for the elaborate production required today. Practically every
modern musical genius of the world has visited Montreal and since
orchestral music has taken hold of the public, both New York and
Boston having sent their best organizations to the city.

The bands attached to the four local regiments and the St.
Louis Cadets are well trained musicians who periodically, but
not often, give concerts in the parks of the city. A number of
private bands, both orchestral and military are also doing good
work.

Educationally Montreal has made great advances in music during
this last ten years. McGill University has added to its
curriculum courses in instrumental and vocal music through its
Conservatorium of Music, under the directorship of Doctor Perrin
(late organist of Canterbury Cathedral, England) and gives
degrees to its successful pupils, and both the Royal Academy of
Music and the London College of Music have branches in the city.

But for a large city, where there is as much instrumental talent,
there is a singular lack of orchestral entertainment for the
public. The appetite for culture grows on what it feeds; the food
being scanty the growth is small.


                 NEWSPAPERS--MONTREAL HISTORIES

The newspapers and periodicals of a city being among the chief
means of popular education and also a running historical
commentary of the times, a brief synopsis of the present
situation may now be given:

At present there are the following newspapers:


                             ENGLISH

The Gazette, originally published by Fleury Mesplet in French
on June 3, 1778, under the title of “Gazette der Commerce et
Littéraire.”

(The Quebec Gazette appeared in French and English from June
21, 1764, to October 30, 1874.) The Gazette in Montreal quickly
became English. Curiously enough there have been others of the
same name. There was the Montreal Gazette, started on August
3, 1795, published by Edwards in both languages, till 1801.
Another of the same name appeared in 1796, by Joseph Roy, but its
existence was short.

The Montreal Herald was founded on October 19, 1811, and was
printed by William Gray.

The Montreal Evening Star was founded as a daily in 1869 by (Sir)
Hugh Graham. (The Weekly Star also appears.)

The Weekly Witness (the sequent of the Montreal Witness) was
established as a weekly in 1846 and as a daily in 1860.

[Illustration: MONUMENT TO JACQUES CARTIER, DISCOVERER OF
MONTREAL, ERECTED AT ST. HENRI, MONTREAL]

The Weekly Standard appeared first September 23, 1905.

The Daily Mail, published by the Daily Mail Publishing Company,
appeared on October 5, 1913.

The Evening News, published by the News Publishing Company at
Montreal (M.E. Nichols and B.A. Macnab editors and managers),
appeared on May 27, 1914.

Beck’s Weekly, published by Edward Beck, appeared March 21, 1914.


                             FRENCH

La Patrie was founded on February 24, 1879.

La Presse was founded by T. Berthiaume in 1884. (A paper of the
same name appeared with one issue only in the previous year, on
May 1st.)

Le Canada was founded in April, 1903.

Le Devoir, founded by Henri Bourassa, appeared first on January
11, 1910. There are also the following weeklies: Le Pays, Le
Bullétin, Le Canard (illustrated), La Croix, L’Opinion, Le Prix
Courant and Le Samedi.

There are other racial papers, the Jewish Chronicle in English
and Der Adler (The Eagle) in Yiddish, and two Italian papers.
Commercial Montreal has a daily newspaper under the name of the
Journal of Commerce, an amalgamation of the Journal of Commerce,
established in 1852, the Shareholder, established in 1856, and
the following weeklies: The Financial Times; Trade Bulletin,
1882; Le Moniteur de Commerce, 1880.

There are also published in the city a number of educational,
technical, religious and trade periodicals, and the following
monthlies: the Canada West Indian Magazine, the Canadian
Municipal Journal, La Revue Populaire, La Revue Canadienne, etc.

It would be a fascinating study to pursue the history of defunct
newspapers, but, since up to 1904 Dr. Dionne made his abstract of
the names and numbers of 800 newspapers, journals, etc., printed
at one time or another in French in the Province of Quebec,
and 681 in English, of both of which so many have appeared at
Montreal, the treatment to be given would outrun this present
purpose. The same is to be said of the history of publications of
a general character which in 1906 amounted to 2,921 in English
and 3,092 in French, registered and published in the Province of
Quebec.

Montreal has taken a great part as the publication centre of the
above. As, however, the treatment adopted has been the record
of institutions rather than personal works, the appreciation of
Montreal writers in French and English is here foregone. A note
may be placed on our historians.


                       MONTREAL HISTORIES

The literature of Montreal begins with Jacques Cartier,[2] who
wrote a full description of his visit to Hochelaga in 1535 and
described the people there. The next writer was Samuel de
Champlain in the beginning of the seventeenth century, who made
his map of the island and described his trading post at Place
Royale. After the foundation of Montreal in 1642 the Jesuits in
their “Relations” have given us sidelights of its progress and
after the coming of the Sulpicians in 1657 and Dollier de Casson,
the soldier Sulpician, wrote the first “Histoire de Montreal.”
Another contemporary Sulpician of Montreal, the Abbé de Belmont,
wrote a history of Canada. The Jesuit Charlevoix, who wrote his
history of Canada later, at the end of the first quarter of the
eighteenth century, penned much of his work at Montreal. Peter
Kalm, the Swiss traveller, has left us a valuable picture of
1749. Later writers who have contributed to our knowledge of
Montreal are Montcalm and De Levis, the soldiers who had their
headquarters in this city and whose letters and journals contain
much history leading to the fall of Montreal in 1760.

Under the English rule the French writers, who have contributed
to our knowledge of the history of Montreal have been the
following: The Montreal historian, Michel Bibaud, who in 1837
published the first volume of his “Histoire du Canada Sous
la Domination Française.” Jacques Viger, the first Mayor of
Montreal, began publishing his various archaeological and
historical studies of the city about 1840. Between 1852 and 1865
the Abbé Fallon published the lives of Marguerite Bourgeoys,
Jeanne Mance and Madame d’Youville, and his lengthy work of
the “Histoire de La Colonie Française,” which only went as far
as 1672 but contains valuable Montreal history. The same is to
be said of the history of F.X. Garneau, who, however, is to
be more closely connected with Quebec. The Montreal Societe
Historique and the Numismatic and Antiquarian Society have
each produced writers already named who have surveyed Montreal
under the historical or archaeological aspect. The “Annuaire de
Ville Marie,” by Huguet-Latour, is one of such contributions. A
“Histoire Populaire de Montreal” was published by M. le Bloud
Brumath in 1890.

With reference to English historians of Montreal outside the
fugitive references in works by Heriot, Weld, Lambert and
others, no important specific history of the city appeared
until “Hochelaga Depicta” by Newton Bosworth in 1839, followed
in 1870 by Alfred Sandham’s “Ville Marie, Past and Present,”
which later was succeeded by the Rev. J. Bosworth’s Studies of
Montreal, the History of Montreal (in 1875), that of the prisons
(1886), and others later. In 1887 the Rev. Robert Campbell, D.D.,
published his History of St. Gabriel Street Church, which was
a valuable contribution to the “Scotch” history of the city.
“Lights and Shrines” and “Montreal after 250 Years,” appeared by
W.D. Lighthall in 1892 to celebrate the two hundred and fiftieth
anniversary of the foundation of the city. Terrill’s “Chronology
of Montreal and Canada” appeared in 1893. Of late years there
have also been several sketches and semi-advertising ventures
of a historical nature. In addition there have been numerous
gazeteers and studies, in French and English, of Montreal
personages, the last to appear being that of the History and
Times of George Etienne Cartier by John Boyd.

The occasion of the international war of 1914 affords a suitable
opportunity for the publication of the present work, to fill in
the gaps left by earlier works on Montreal.


FOOTNOTES:

[1] One of the best known of Montreal dramatic writers was
Charles Heavysege whose dramas of Saul, Count Felipo and Jeptha’s
Daughter, published in the early ’60s, gave him an international
reputation.

[2] See the History of Montreal, Volume I Under the French
Regime. (1535-1914.)




                           CHAPTER XXX

               NATIONAL ORIGINS OF THE POPULATION

  1834, THE YEAR OF THE SIMULTANEOUS ORIGIN OF THE EARLIEST
    NATIONAL SOCIETIES.

  ST. JEAN BAPTISTE ASSOCIATION--REORGANIZATION IN 1843--THE
    “MONUMENT NATIONAL”--EDUCATION AND SOCIAL AMELIORATIONS--THE
    FRENCH-CANADIAN SPIRIT--PRESIDENTS.

  ST. GEORGE’S SOCIETY--A CELEBRATION IN 1821--OBJECT--EARLIEST
    OFFICERS--THE HISTORY OF ST. GEORGE’S HOME--PRESIDENTS.

  ST. ANDREW’S SOCIETY--ORGANIZATION AND FIRST OFFICERS--JOINT
    PROCESSIONS OF NATIONAL SOCIETIES--EARLIEST CHARITABLE
    ACTIVITIES--THE HEALTH OF THE POPE--THE LORD ELGIN
    INCIDENT--THE CRIMEAN WAR--SUBSCRIPTION TO A PATRIOTIC
    FUND--THE HISTORY OF ST. ANDREW’S HOME BEGINS--THE HISTORY
    OF ST. ANDREW’S HALL--CONDOLENCE ON DEATH OF D’ARCY
    MCGEE--PRESIDENTS.

  ST. PATRICK’S SOCIETY--ORIGINALLY NON-DENOMINATIONAL--EARLY
    PRESIDENTS--THE REORGANIZATION IN 1856--FIRST OFFICERS--FIRST
    SOIREE--FIRST ANNIVERSARY DINNER--NATIONAL SOCIETIES
    PRESENT--THE TOASTS--IRISH COMPANIES IN CORPUS CHRISTI
    PROCESSION--IRISH PARLIAMENTARY REPRESENTATION--T. D’ARCY
    M’GEE--EMIGRATION WORK--ST. PATRICK’S HALL--PRESIDENTS.

  IRISH PROTESTANT BENEVOLENT SOCIETY--EARLY
    MEMBERS--WORKS--PRESIDENTS.

  GERMAN SOCIETY--HISTORY AND PRESIDENTS.

  WELSH SOCIETY--ORIGINALLY THE “WELSH UNION OF
    MONTREAL”--AFTERWARD--ITS OBJECT--PRESIDENTS.

  NEWFOUNDLAND SOCIETY--ORIGIN--PRESIDENTS.

  THE ZIONIST MOVEMENT--- THE JEWISH COMMUNITY.

  OTHER NATIONAL ASSOCIATIONS AND CENSUS OF POPULATION FOR 1911.

The history of the diverse elements of the population may
be best told through that of their representative national
societies. About 1834 the peculiar political crisis through
which the country was passing turned the thoughts of the racial
leaders of the various component parts of the city towards
self-preservation. Politically there were the two camps, the
Anglo-Saxon Community and the Franco-Canadians. Already there was
in existence for the Anglo-Canadian party the “Constitutional
Association,” but this was not felt to be adequate without the
additional strength of strictly national societies on patriotic
lines. Hence the St. George’s, St. Patrick’s, St. Andrew’s
and the German Societies were formed almost simultaneously.
Racially the motive of self-preservation was stimulated by the
necessity of meeting the needs of the now increasing flow of
immigrants from their respective fatherlands, who looked for
some institution to give them a welcoming hand on reaching the
city. The association of St. Jean Baptiste representing French
Canadian interests had the same dual object, fraternity and
benevolence, and the charters of all resemble one another very
much in this last respect. Latterly other associations have been
formed and cooperate in the welfare of the city. All of these
associations representing the diverse sections of the community,
are in harmony with one another and preserve the principles of
“Concordia Salus.”


                    ST. JEAN BAPTISTE SOCIETY

The basis of the association of St. Jean Baptiste was laid by
Ludger Duvernay on June 24, 1834, in the critical period when
the seeds were being sown to fructify in the years of rebellion
of 1837-38. The date named was the occasion of a banquet which
was held in Mr. John McDonnell’s garden on St. Antoine Street,
under the chairmanship of the Hon. Jacques Viger, then mayor
of Montreal. The basis of a French Canadian National Society
was then laid. The ends of the society were to unite all French
Canadians for fraternal purposes, for union, and for the
promotion of the national and industrial interests of all French
Canadians and the members of the Association in particular. The
annual subscriptions were to be employed in works of beneficence,
assisting members affected by adversity or sickness, and burying
those who died in poverty.

The sorrows of 1837 suspended the annual celebration of the
national fête and, owing to the exile of M. Ludger Duvernay
and several of the others who had been proscribed, the work of
reorganization did not recommence until the former’s return
in 1842. On June 9, 1843, the first general assembly met
for reorganization in a hall in St. Ann’s market, under the
chairmanship of the Hon. D.B. Viger, with George Etienne Cartier
as secretary.

The city was divided into four sections for the operation of
their works of beneficence. Each section was to have, subject
to annual elections, three vice presidents, a treasurer, two
secretaries and four teachers. In addition the association was to
have the following officers elected annually: A president, four
vice presidents, a treasurer, four secretaries, four teachers and
a “commissaire ordinateur.” The minutes of this meeting of 1843
reveal the following elections:

  1. Section de La Ville (embracing the limits of the city as then
     known).
       President: The Hon. D.B. Viger.
       Vice Presidents: Joseph Roy, E.R. Fabre, James McGill
         Desrivières, Jean Bruneau.
       General Treasurer: Joseph Boulanger.
       Secretaries: Joseph Belle, L.O. Lamoureux, M. Martel C. Roy.
       Commissaire Ordonnateur: General manager, Ludger Duvernay.

  2. Section St. Antoine (comprising St. Ann, St. Joseph and St.
     Antoine suburbs and the adjoining districts).
       Vice Presidents: John Donegani, E.M. Leprohon, O. Frechette.
       Treasurer: Damase Masson.
       Secretary: Agapit Morin.

  3. Section St. Laurent (comprising the St. Lawrence suburb and
     adjoining district).
       Vice Presidents: Augustin Perrault, Joseph Vallée, Fleury
         St. Jean.
       Treasurer: Meneclier de Monochon.
       Secretaries: A. Gauthier, M. Pommainville.

  4. Ste. Marie (comprising the St. Louis and Quebec suburbs and
     the adjoining districts).
       Vice Presidents: L.M. Viger, Joseph Grenier, Pierre Damour.
       Treasurer: Louis Boyer.
       Secretaries: J.P.A. Poitras, C.A. Leblanc.

In addition a general committee was appointed for the association
of the following: Joseph Bourret, C.S. Cherrier, B.H. LeMoyne,
A.M. Deslisle, Jacques Viger, P. Beaubien, C.S. Rodier, G.E.
Cartier, J.D. Bernard, John Jordan, P. Lacombe, François Perrin,
O. Berthelet, J.G. Barthe, A. Laframboise, John McDonnell, Louis
Comte, J.A. Berthelet, N. Dumas, J.A. Labadie, P. Jodoin, R.
Trudeau, J.L. Beaudry, Hubert Lepage.

[Illustration: THE OLD BANK OF MONTREAL. AFTERWARDS THE BANQUE
DU PEUPLE. The above picture was taken in 1872 by W. Raphael and
represents a St. Jean Baptiste procession. The “Flaxman” bas
reliefs on the exterior are now inserted in the portion of the
present General Post Office, which marks the old site of the
above bank.]

On the 24th of June of the following year, 1844, the feast of St.
Jean Baptiste, the national fête, was celebrated in the manner
now customary, a solemn high mass at Notre Dame Parish Church was
followed by an imposing procession and succeeded by patriotic
discourses on love of country and brotherhood. The association
has continued with success to the present day.[1]

Some of the developments of the association may be recorded.

In 1873 Mr. L.O. David took the lead in inviting the French
National Societies of Canada and the United States to join that
of the St. Jean Baptiste Society at Montreal on the 24th of
June of 1874 in a striking demonstration. This was realized. It
was the occasion of many fruitful ideas for further development
which were to bear fruit in time. Thus when there was question
in 1884 of celebrating the fiftieth anniversary, Mr. L.O.
David proposed the foundation of a national headquarters for
French-Canadians. As a result land was bought for the purpose
at the corner of Craig and Gosford streets, and the celebration
of the 24th of June, 1884, included the laying of a foundation
stone of the new building. Financial difficulties delayed further
progress, but in 1886 Dr. E.P. Lachapelle, the president, took
up the project anew. In the following year Mr. L.O. David, who
was a member of the legislative assembly at Quebec, obtained a
new charter and prevailed upon the Mercier government to give
$10,000 for the construction of the building. Further money was
raised by bazaars, concerts and by shares, till the money reached
the round sum of $50,000. In 1890 the land on the present site
of the “Monument National” was purchased on St. Lawrence Main
Street. The foundations of the edifice were laid in the spring
of 1901 and the work was completed in 1903. The name desired by
its founders was the “Académie Nationale,” but popular desire
centered on “Monument National” as the name which best expressed
the demonstration of the sentiment of French-Canadian patriotism
underlying the movement. Before completion, the cost of the
building, apart from the purchase money for the site, rose to
$200,000. The resources of the financial committee and of the
two treasurers of the association, MM. A.S. Hamelin and J.C.
Beauchamp, were highly taxed for a long period. It will be seen
that in the early conception of the functions of the association
popular education held a foremost part, hence the constitutions
provided for “Precépteurs.” The first move, therefore, was to
establish the public free courses in instruction which are
maintained today with such efficiency of development.

The following courses were first instituted: Mines and
metallurgy; industrial mechanics; architecture and building;
electricity; universal history; commerce; elocution; agriculture
and colonization; and Grammaire Parlée. A dramatic section to
promote a taste for the purity of French was early added and
under the name of “Soirée de famille” represented most of the
masterpieces of the French drama. These are now discontinued,
the movement being taken up elsewhere, but the courses have been
continually improved and modernized to meet the requirements
of the hour. The association has pioneered many progressive
educational movements.

At present it is concentrating its attention on the amelioration
of the social conditions of the French-Canadian population. In
1912 it played a leading part in the organization of the very
successful Child Welfare exhibition, the first of its kind in
Canada. The seal of the association “Rendre le peuple meilleur”
indicates its national scope. The chief philanthropic work of
a national description, founded by the association about 1899,
has been the “Caisse Nationale d’Economie,” by which, through
the means of an annual subscription and slight monthly payments,
a system of old-age pensions or funds to meet emergencies of
disablement has been elaborated and has proved wonderfully
successful under the management of Mr. Arthur Gagnon.

Outside the material and intellectual functions indicated, the
aim of the association has always been the preservation of the
French-Canadian spirit. An extract from a speech delivered on
the occasion of a St. Jean Baptiste day celebration about 1901,
by the Hon. Israël Tarte, then minister of public works, will
indicate this: “This manifestation,” he said, “of our patriotism
cannot surely cause umbrage to our fellow citizens of diverse
national origin surrounding us. Moreover our enemies are becoming
scarcer. Today the assimilation of races is out of the question.
No one any longer dreams of it, for the assimilation would
deprive the country of a stimulus of the first importance, an
interesting characteristic. It would cause the healthy (_bien
entendu_) rivalry to disappear between the two races in the
domain of study, the arts, commerce, industry and all that
appertains to the intellectual and material advancement of our
beautiful country. I am a partisan of the union of hearts and
minds for the development of our Canadian, fatherland. Whatever
the language we speak, whatever the altar we kneel at in prayer
and adoration to God, we ought all to practice the cult of
country. The English represent the genius of commerce, the art
of making a fortune, the distinctive characteristics of the
Anglo-Saxon race. We, on this continent, represent some of the
virtues which have distinguished the French race from all time,
generosity, the love of _belles lettres_ and of good taste and
Gallic gaiety and enthusiasm which are the heritage of France and
have been the inspiring cause of so many noble actions inscribed
in the annals of history.” In conclusion he said: “I know no
country more beautiful than our own; I know no happier people in
the world than the French-Canadians: remain such! Let us proclaim
it on high, for our race is the equal of any at present existing
under the sun. There is my last word.”

The original charter has been modified.

In 1903, on St. Jean Baptiste day, a national religious banner
was adopted, recalling the memories of Carillon. It has a blue
background, _fleurdelisé_, and bearing a large white cross with
the emblem of the Sacred Heart in the middle of maple leaves.
This was prepared by the Rev. E. Filiatrault and adopted by
many of St. Jean Baptiste Association. It was a protest against
those who, while desiring a flag to recall their French origin
and their national sentiments, had used the tri-colored flag
of modern France _faute de mieux_, although the ideas conveyed
by it did not represent the ancient regime under which the
French-Canadians had sprung. The _fleur de lys_ of the past
represents the sentiment of their descendants today, rather than
does the modern tri-color.

The list of presidents contains many distinguished names.

  1834      Jacques Viger
  1843-44   Hon. D.B. Viger
  1845      Hon. M. Masson
  1846-47   Hon. A.M. Morin
  1848-49   Hon. M. Bourret
  1850      E.R. Fabre
  1851-52   Ludger Duvernay
  1853      C.S. Cherrier
  1854-55   Sir G.E. Cartier
  1856-57   J.B. Meilleur
  1858      Damase Masson
  1859      Dr. P. Beaubien
  1860      Hon. J.A. Quesnel
  1861      R. Trudeau
  1862      Hon. de Beaujeu
  1863      Olivier Berthelet
  1864      T. Bouthillier
  1865-66   Hon. P.J.O. Chauveau
  1867-68   C.E. Leblanc
  1869-70   Hon. G. Ouimet
  1871      C.S. Rodier
  1872-73   Hon. J. Coursol
  1874      Sir A.A. Dorion
  1875      Jacques Grenier
  1876      Louis Archambault
  1877-78   T.P. Rottot
  1879      Hon. J.B. Rolland
  1880      Hon. T.J.D. Loranger
  1881      N. Bourassa
  1882      Hon. L. Beaubien
  1883      Jérémie Perrault
  1884      Hon. T.J.D. Loranger
  1885-86   A. Ouimet
  1887      E.P. Lachapelle
  1888-94   L.O. David
  1895-98   Honorable Loranger
  1899-1903 Hon. F.L. Beique
  1905      H. Laporte
  1907-10   J.C. Beauchamp
  1910      Thomas Gauthier
  1912      Olivar Asselin


                  ST. GEORGE’S NATIONAL SOCIETY

St. George’s National Society became such in 1834. But previously
Englishmen good and true had rallied together on St. George’s day
years before. The following account of a celebration in 1821 will
therefore be interesting:

“Monday last being the day consecrated to the titular Saint
of old England, and, what bestows on it nearly as great a
distinction, being that appointed for the celebration of our
most gracious Sovereign’s Nativity, a royal salute was at one
o’clock fired on the Champ de Mars by the troops in Garrison, and
a holiday was observed at both the Banks. (_Montreal Bank_, and
_Bank of Canada_.)

“In the evening, natives of the Mistress of the Ocean joined at
the Neptune Inn, when the evening was passed in social festivity
in the expression of the loyal sentiments stamped in the bosom of
every Briton, in toasts to the prosperity of the British Empire,
and to the happiness of the illustrious family at its head.

“The dinner given at the Neptune Inn, kept by Geo. Casser,
situate at the corner of St. Joseph Street, (_now St. Sulpice_)
opposite the Montreal Steamboat landing place, was an excellent
one provided for the occasion, to which the Sons of St. George,
in large numbers, sat down precisely at 5 o’clock p. m.

“The utmost harmony and decorum prevailed throughout. A
transparent painting ‘Combating the Dragon,’ done by Mr. Thomas
Honey, was among the most conspicuous decorations of the room.
In the course of the evening, when the circling glass had
excited a high degree of hilarity, the gaiety of the moment was
increased by a few well-selected songs accompanied by appropriate
and patriotic toasts, among which the following few were given
and received with enthusiasm:--The King, God bless him; Queen
Caroline; The Duke of York and the Royal Family; England and the
Day we celebrate; Our worthy Governor, the Earl of Dalhousie;
Sir Peregrine Maitland and our Sister Province (_Upper Canada_);
Lady Dalhousie and the Canadian Fair; may the Rose, Thistle and
Shamrock ever entwine; the Duke of Wellington and the Army of
Great Britain; Capt. Byner and our Navy; Trade and prosperity
to the Canadas; Colonel De Salaberry and the surviving heroes
of Chateauguay; Colonel Burer and the Garrison of Montreal; May
the seeds of dissention never find growth in the soil of Great
Britain; the immortal memory of Nelson (in silence); Colonel
Morrison and the surviving heroes of Chrysler’s farm; Captain
Broke and the surviving tars of the ‘Shannon’; the liberal heart
that gives, and the tender heart that forgives; may the sins of
our forefathers descend upon our foes; firmness in the Senate,
valour in the field and fortitude on the waves; The Constitution
of Great Britain--a pattern to the world.

“At a late hour the company separated, highly gratified with
their entertainment.”

Although therefore Britishers had naturally, since the beginning
of the English régime often combined, the St. George’s National
Society as such was also born at a time when racial feeling ran
high, and preceded the rebellion of 1837, being founded in 1834.
Its first quarterly meeting was held on January 10, 1835, with
a membership of forty-eight. On the cover of its first printed
constitution and by-laws it is stated that the society was
organized in the city of Montreal for the purpose of relieving
brethren in distress, and in the introduction thereto feelings
are expressed which indicate that the founders were indeed
animated by the keenest sympathies and sincerest desires to aid
unfortunate English people in the city at the time, expressing
sentiments of intense patriotism. In an original introduction,
dated December 19, 1834, it can be seen that its intention was to
uphold in Canada a union of Britons to cherish in the descendants
of Englishmen, Scotchmen and Irishmen born in the colony their
veneration for everything British and their attachment for
British laws and British rule and of holding out the hand of
welcome and of brotherly love and charity to those numerous
and frequently distressed countrymen whom the pressure of a
superabundant population is annually forcing to emigrate to this
distant land.

A pamphlet published in 1855 gives a list of the earliest
officers at the foundation of St. George’s Society as follows:
President, Hon. George Moffatt; first vice president, George
Gregory, Esq.; second vice president, John Molson, Jr., Esq.;
treasurer, Frederick Griffin; secretary, Samuel Tubby; assistant
secretary, Arthur C. Webster; first physician, Thomas Walter
Jones, M.D.; stewards, James Holmes, Edward S. Maitland, Charles
Penner, Teavill Appleton, Isaac Valentine, William Snaith;
charitable committee, Benjamin Hall, George Weatherel, Henry
Corse, John Platt, Turton Penn; committee of accounts, Albert
Furness, Benjamin Smith, Joseph Shuter, Hon. G. Moffatt, S.
Gerrard, George Gregory, A.H. Griffin, Joseph Shuter, John
Molson, Jr., George Crew Davies, H.W. Jackson, Benjamin Hale, W.
Badgely, J. Henry Lambe, Edward J.S. Maitland, John P. Ashton,
William Bradbury, W. Hall, George Weatherit, H.G. Webster,
Chilion Ford, William Sharp, Thomas W. Jones, M.D., Isaac
Valentine, Albert Furness, John Platt, Samuel Tubby, Charles B.
Radenhurst, F. Griffin, James Duncan Gibb, T. Appleton, William
Stephens, Thomas Philips, Hon. John Molson, John Jones, Thomas
B. Wragg, Charles Penney, John Carter, Turton Penn, M. Radiger,
Benjamin Ansell, James Holmes, William Pring, John Millichap,
Henry Dyer, R.H. Hamilton, William Snaith, Henry Corse, Benjamin
Smith.

The records of the first twenty years were destroyed by fire. By
1856 it had a membership of 147 and in the year of incorporation,
1861, it was increased to 170. During the presidency of Mr. John
Leeming, 1867-8-9, the home on St. Antoine Street was built at
a cost of $14,000. The Society has steadily kept to its purpose
as a national society and has treated the immigration question
theoretically and practically during its long career having
demonstrated beyond dispute that the society has lived up to its
original principles. In 19--the Society purchased a new home
on Lagauchetière and Cathedral streets to meet the increasing
demands on its charitable usefulness. It has two days in the year
especially observed, that of Christmas eve, when a distribution
of good things for the poor takes place, and that of April
23d, the feast of St. George, when conviviality reigns at the
annual banquet to which the official representative of the other
National Societies is invited.

The following gentlemen have served as president for the Society
since its formation:

  1834-35-36-37  The Hon. George Moffat
  1838           The Hon. John Molson
  1839-40-41     The Hon. George Moffat
  1842-43        The Hon. Wm. Badgley
  1844-45        Henry Griffin
  1846-47        Charles Penner
  1848           C.H. Cassels
  1849-50        W.F. Coffin
  1851           John Jones
  1852-53        John Dyde
  1854-55        T. W, Jones, M.D.
  1856           H.H. Whitney
  1857           Henry Bulmer
  1858           James Parkin
  1859-60        Robert Hart Hamilton
  1861           John Lewis
  1862-63        The Hon. George Moffat
  1864-65-66     J.J. Day, Q.C.
  1867-68-69     John Leeming
  1870-71        W.H. Clare
  1872-73        C.J. Brydges
  1874-75        Nathan Mercer
  1876-77-78     John Kerry
  1879-80        Edward Rawlings
  1881-82        T.H. Hodgson
  1883-84-85     The Hon. J.K. Ward
  1886-87        W.D. Stroud
  1888-89        J.H. Redfern
  1890-91        C.P. Sclater
  1892-93        F. Stancliffe
  1894-95        F. Wolferstan Thomas
  1896-97        Joseph Richards
  1898-99        William Nivin
  1900-01-02     H.A. Hodgson
  1903-04        A.W. Grant
  1905-06        A.W. Abater
  1907           R.S. Clift
  1908           W.H. Trenholme

        ------

  1909           R. Meredith
  1910           James Mitchell
  1911           James Mitchell
  1912           Robert Beckerdike
  1913           F.W. Mitchell
  1914           C A. Jacques


                      ST. ANDREW’S SOCIETY

Scotchmen have ever been clannish. They early formed their Scotch
church on St. Gabriel’s Street and were a distinct national
factor in the community, as the lists of names of the North West
Company will attest, but their National Association, St. Andrew’s
Society, arose thus:

On Monday, December 1, 1834, upwards of one hundred leading
Scotchmen met at the Albion Hotel in the rear of the theatre
to celebrate St. Andrew’s day, the ecclesiastical feast having
been celebrated on the Sabbath previously. During the dinner, in
consequence of strong national feeling, it was resolved to form a
national society for fraternity and benevolence. The stewards of
this meeting met on January 17th and a sub-committee of Messrs.
Adam Ferrie, William Ritchie, William Edmonstone, Archibald Hume,
Robert Armour, Jr., and William Wilson, Jr., was appointed to
draw up a constitution. That of St. Andrew’s Society of New York
became the model. A general gathering of the Scotch of the town
was then called to attend a meeting in the North West building on
St. Gabriel Street on the 6th of February, 1835. The chair was
taken by the Hon. Peter McGill and a constitution was adopted. On
March 9th a meeting was held in Mr. John Fisher’s premises on St.
Paul Street, when the following office bearers were elected to
serve till November 30, 1835: President, Hon. Peter McGill; first
vice president, Adam Ferrie; second vice president, John Boston;
treasurer, Charles Tait; secretary, William Edmonstone; chairman
committee of management, J. Redpath.

The members in the first year numbered nearly three hundred.
One of the first public acts of the association was to accept
the invitation of the German Society to march in procession
with them, and St. George’s and St. Patrick’s societies, to
the Protestant Episcopal church on August 3d, it being “their
anniversary.”

At this time an arrangement was entered into by these four
national societies for a general procession on each national
festival day. At the anniversary meeting of November 30th, held
in the morning, the Earl of Selkirk was, at his own request,
proposed and elected a life member. The society, followed by the
other national societies, then marched to St. Gabriel’s Church,
where the sermon was preached by the Reverend Mr. Esson. In the
evening the banquet took place at Rasco’s Hotel, when 150 members
and guests dined together. The annual dinner and the public
procession of November 30, 1837, were omitted, this being the
year of the civil rebellion of which the first act took place
on November 6th, in the collision of “Fils de la Liberté” and
the British residents of Montreal. The members of St. Andrew’s
Society being all Loyalists, were immediately put under arms and
performed military duty. At the magistrates’ request that the
usual procession should be omitted in the disturbed portion of
the country and in the excited state of the public mind, this was
done, but it was hoped to hold the annual dinner. This was also
found impossible, since on account of the regular military being
withdrawn from the city, most of the members were on guard. About
thirty, however, made arrangements for supper, at Orr’s Hotel,
which took place.

Although another rebellion broke out on November 3, 1838, much
less danger was anticipated, so the anniversary festival was
observed, both with a procession and the annual dinner, but
after the commencement of the rebellion of 1837 the custom of
the national association of joining in each other’s anniversary
processions was discontinued.

At the quarterly meeting of February, 1839, the Right Reverend
Mr. McDonnell, Roman Catholic bishop of Kingston, was elected an
honorary member.

In 1841, the first opportunity was offered of assisting destitute
Scotchmen, outside the city. In September an application from Mr.
Morris, president of the emigrant association of the district
of St. Francis, applied for pecuniary aid for a body of 229
utterly destitute immigrants recently arrived from the island of
Lewis (Scotland). A collection of £234 14s. 6d. was accordingly
forwarded. The following year relief was granted to the Rev.
John Taylor of Lachine to assist the Scotch immigrants who
survived the very sad accident on Lake St. Louis when a small
high pressure steamer, called the “Shamrock,” having burst her
boiler shortly after leaving Lachine, sank almost immediately on
account of the force of the steam which blew the bow completely
out of the boat. Another opportunity for developing their
charitable work was afforded in 1846 when, owing to the severity
of this winter, a special collection was taken up to relieve
the necessities of the poor. The Society identified itself with
public movements thus:

On the 8th of August it took part on the Champ de Mars in the
celebration of the opening of the Atlantic Railway, and in 1847
the Society joined the other national societies in a procession
in honour of the entry of the Earl of Elgin into Montreal as
governor-general on the 29th of January.

The relations of St. Andrew’s with others of diverse national
origin have always been cordial.

On the 11th of February resolutions were passed to open a
subscription for the destitute inhabitants of the Highlands
of Scotland, while another read “that this meeting deeply
sympathizes with the distress caused by famine in Ireland as
well as that affecting their own native land, and are ready to
admit that next to the claims of their own countrymen the poor
of Ireland have the greatest right to consideration, yet in the
belief that more money will be raised by two separate committees
than by a united one, as proposed, they recommend that this
junction be not entered into.”

At the annual banquet held at Donegana’s Hotel, among the guests
were the Hon. A.N. Morin, president of St. Jean Baptiste’s
Association, His Worship, the Mayor, the Hon. Messrs. Molson and
Badgeley, both past presidents of St. George’s Society, thus
showing that the racial hatchet was being buried.

The following record throws an interesting sidelight on the
political state of the country and the keen interest which public
events evoked: In 1849, at a special meeting held April 28th,
three days after the signing of the Rebellion Losses bill by Lord
Elgin, under the presidency of Mr. Hugh Allan with seventy-one
members present, Mr. Andrew McGill moved the following resolution
which, having been seconded by Mr. Robert Esdaile, was put to the
meeting from the chair and unanimously adopted:

“Resolved, That the Earl of Elgin, having so conducted himself
as to insult and outrage the feelings of every British subject
in Canada, and to disgrace the Scottish name, this society with
the deepest regret considers him unworthy to continue longer its
patron and that he be, therefore, from henceforth, removed from
that office.”

John Boston, Esq., having entered the room and finding that the
previous resolution had been carried, left the meeting. Mr.
John Auld, seconded by Mr. George Macrae, moved the following
resolution which was unanimously adopted:

“Resolved, That the name of the Earl of Elgin be erased from the
list of honorary members of St. Andrew’s Society.”

Mr. E.P. Taylor, seconded by Mr. John Armour, submitted the
following resolution, which was also unanimously adopted:

“Resolved, That the secretary be instructed to intimate the above
resolutions to his Lordship.”

In preparation for the annual banquet of 1850 the office
bearers resolved by a majority to omit from the list of toasts
“the governor general.” In consequence as the presence of the
band of the Twentieth Regiment had been previously sanctioned
for the occasion, its commander, Lieut.-Col. Frederick Horn,
countermanded the permission. At a subsequent meeting of office
bearers it was resolved to place on the programme the toast of
the governor general, though the services of the band were not
required. This year the annual banquet was held at Corse’s Hotel
on St. James Street, the governor general’s toast being received
with groans, hisses, reversing of glasses and other marks of
disapprobation. In 1851 a significant resolution proposed by Mr.
Edmonstone and seconded by Mr. Alexander reads: “That those who
had left the society from conscientious scruples and who might
wish to join again be readmitted without entrance fee.” This was
carried unanimously.

Not only politics but religious matters were serious matters at
this period.

A more pleasing incident is the following:

At a special meeting called on November 15, 1852, to consider
what part the society should take in the approaching funeral
solemnities of the late Duke of Wellington, it was unanimously
resolved:

“That the St. Andrew’s Society as a society do proceed, with
their banners and badges, with their brethren of St. George’s
Society to the Cathedral.”

In November, 1854, during the Crimean war, the Society raised
a subscription for the widows and orphans of those “who may
fall during the present war.” Out of sympathy the annual social
gathering was omitted, the amount to be devoted to the patriotic
fund. This reached the sum of £305 15s. 2d. (equal to £372 0s.
1d. currency).

The history of St. Andrew’s Home is now to be told.

On April 24, 1857, a committee reported that the experiment of
maintaining a home for emigrants and other homeless Scots had
been successfully tried for six months in Hermine Street, a
house having been rented for the purpose. The lease of a house
was taken on St. George Street for seven years. This home was
opened on June 11th, Mr. Norman Macdonald being appointed the
first superintendent. In the same month, the new St. Andrew’s
Home received seventy-six of the survivors of the steamer
“Montreal,” burned at the water’s edge opposite Cape Rouge on the
way from Quebec, out of whose 450 passengers 320 were Scotch. A
subscription was raised by the committee of £1,182 5s. 11d. The
disaster caused deepest sympathy and cooperation in Montreal’s
ever charitable circles. It was one of the disasters of this
terrible year of 1857. The social event of the year was omitted
and the money devoted to the enlargement of the home.

Meanwhile other Scotch societies were growing up. On September 1,
1858, the mayor having requested the different national societies
in the city to join a procession to commemorate the successful
laying of the Atlantic telegraph cable, the Society marched to
the Champ de Mars, accompanied by the Caledonians and Thistle
societies, which had grown up of recent years. The “Burns”
Society being then organized, it was agreed that the St. Andrew’s
Society should cooperate with it in the celebration of Burns’
centenary.

The next events chronologically are:

In 1859 the Society assisted the people of the townships of
Bruce and Kinloss, C.W., distressed by the failure of their
crops. On August 25, 1860, the society joined in the procession
in honour of H.R.H. the Prince of Wales, on the occasion of his
arrival in Montreal. A committee of ladies was appointed on
November 16, 1861, to cooperate with the charitable committee
in the management of St. Andrew’s Home. The Hon. Mrs. Rollo was
appointed its president. On December 1, 1862, the thanks of
the committee were given to Miss Edmonstone, of Scotland, for
twenty-five years’ supply of heather on St. Andrew’s day. On
September 22, 1863, the secretary was instructed to subscribe
$25 to the funds of the House of Industry and Refuge, so as
to secure for St. Andrew’s Society the privilege of electing
a representative in this governorship. Mr. J.C. Becket was so
chosen. A committee was held on January 18, 1864, to confer with
the St. George’s and the Irish Protestant Benevolent Societies
regarding a proposal to establish a United Protestant Immigration
Home. In April, 1866, $2,000 having been subscribed for a St.
Andrew’s Home on Dorchester Street, arrangements were made for
completing the deed.

St. Andrew’s Society has wide sympathies, as the following will
show:

In April, 1868, at a special general meeting, the following
resolutions, moved by T.K. Ramsay, seconded by Andrew Wilson,
were passed:

“That the members of St. Andrew’s Society of Montreal have
learned with deep regret of the death of Hon. Thomas D’Arcy McGee
by assassination.”

Moved by Mr. McKay, seconded by A. McGibbon:

“That the St. Andrew’s Society, feeling their deep obligation
to the late T.D. McGee for his many acts of kindness, deem the
present a suitable occasion to acknowledge the same, as well
as their utter abhorrence of the dastardly deed by which the
Dominion and the world have lost one of our most enlightened
philanthropic and able statesmen, our national and benevolent
societies a liberal contributor and a respected family its loving
and affectionate head, desire to mingle their sympathy with
the entire Dominion who mourn his death, and would offer the
widow and bereaved family cordial and deep sympathy for their
irreparable loss.”

Moved by Mr. McLennan, seconded by Mr. Burnett:

“That in order to show the appreciation of this society of
Mr. McGee’s worth as a public man and a statesman, and their
gratitude for the sympathy and assistance he extended to it on so
many occasions, it was resolved that this society do attend his
funeral in a body, wearing suitable mourning badges.”

In May, 1869, on the occasion of the departure from the city
of the Seventy-eighth Highlanders, an address was presented
to Lieutenant Colonel Mackenzie and his men. The St. Andrew’s
Society and the Caledonia Society, the latter having since its
formation about 1855 been closely connected with the National
Society, sent addresses to England on the happy marriage of
Princess Louise Caroline Alberta with the Marquis of Lorne. On
the occasion of the destruction of St. Patrick’s Hall by fire
a resolution was passed on November 7th, sympathizing with St.
Patrick’s Society.

In February, 1873, funeral of Sir George Etienne Cartier was
attended by the body as a National Society. On November 2, 1876,
a resolution was passed “that the annual procession on St.
Andrew’s day be discontinued.”

The history of “St. Andrew’s Ball” may now be told:

In 1878 the presence of the new governor general, the son of
MacCallain More, His Excellency, the Marquis of Lorne, and his
royal consort, Princess Louise, was the occasion of a brilliant
ball on St. Andrew’s day in the Windsor Hotel. As the annual St.
Andrew’s ball has become one of the great social events of the
city we may chronicle that the first quadrille was formed as
follows:

  His Excellency and Lady Macdonald,
  Lieutenant-Colonel Stevenson and H.R.H. the Princess,
  Captain Charter, A.D.C., and Lady Sophia MacNamara,
  Hon. T. Harbord, A.D.C., and Hon. Mrs. Moreton,
  Colonel McNeil and Miss Dow,
  Hon. M. Moreton and Miss Gordon,
  Mr. Hector Mackenzie and Mrs. Daglish,
  Mr. McCrae, Q.C., and Mrs. Hickson,
  Mr. J. Johnson and Mrs. Ewing,
  Hugh McKay and Mrs. Rose.

The Scotch reel was then danced by His Excellency and Miss
Ogilvie and afterwards with Miss McGibbon, while the Princess
danced the reel with Mr. Ewan McLennan, the president. The ladies
who had the honor of dancing with His Excellency were: Lady
Macdonald, Miss Ogilvie, Miss Allan, Miss Greenshields, Miss
Campbell, Miss McFarlane, Miss Robertson and Miss McGibbon.

In 1881 the Society adopted a revised constitution. In 1883
an address was presented to His Excellency, the Marquis of
Lansdowne, Governor-General, on his first visit to Montreal.
The year 1887 saw the completion of the purchase of the Gould
property on Mountain Street from the Canadian Pacific Railway
Company for $22,500, as the site of the new St. Andrew’s Home.
The same year an address was presented for the Society to Queen
Victoria on her Jubilee by the Reverend Dr. Barclay, who had the
honour to be commanded to preach at Balmoral on June 12th. As Her
Majesty was ill the petition was presented through the ordinary
official channel. On September 28, 1893, an address of welcome
was presented to the governor general, Lord Aberdeen, and Lady
Aberdeen on the occasion of their first visit to the city. St.
Andrew’s day, 1895, saw a return after twelve years to the
banquet instead of the annual ball. In 1896 McDonald Campbell,
the chairman of the charitable committee, died, having been
preceded in 1895 by the decease of his wife. For over a quarter
of a century these two had faithfully managed the “Home.” The
annual ball was revived in 1896.

The death of Queen Victoria in January, 1901, caused the loyal
Scots of Montreal to send a resolution of sympathy to His
Majesty, Edward VII. On the occasion of the official visit of
their Royal Highnesses the Duke and Duchess of Cornwall to
the city in the fall of the same year, the Society erected a
grandstand and a triumphal arch in the Scottish baronial style.
In June, 1902, an address was forwarded to King Edward on the
occasion of his coronation. At the annual ball the governor
general, Lord Minto, and the Countess of Minto were present.

During the last decade the Society has continued to carry on its
various works and public functions so happily inaugurated as
described.

The past presidents of St. Andrew’s Society have been:

  1835-41    Hon. Peter McGill
  1841-43    Sheriff John Boston
  1844-45    Hon. Peter McGill
  1846       Hon. William Morris
  1847       Hon. James Ferrier
  1848-49    Sir Hugh Allan
  1850       William Edmonstone
  1851       James Gilmour
  1852-54    Hon. John Rose (afterwards Sir John Rose, Bart.)
  1855-56    William Murray
  1857-58    Alexander Morris
  1859-60    John Greenshields
  1861       David Brown
  1862-63    Hon. James Ferrier
  1864-65    Hon. John Young
  1866       J.C. Becket
  1867       Walter Macfarlan
  1868-69    Andrew Robertson
  1870       Hon. A.W. Ogilvie, M.P.P.
  1871-72    Alexander McGibbon
  1873-74    Sir Alexander T. Galt
  1875       David Mackay
  1876-77    Ewan McLennan
  1879       Lieut.-Col. A.A. Stevenson
  1879       John C. Watson
  1880       Hugh Mackay
  1881       James Stewart
  1882       George Macrae, Q.C.
  1883-84    W.W. Ogilvie
  1885-86    Hugh McLennan
  1887-88    R.B. Angus
  1889-90    Sir Donald A. Smith (afterwards Lord Strathcona
                and Mount Royal, G.C.M.G.)
  1891-92    Duncan McIntyre
  1893-94    Hon. Robert Mackay
  1895-96    Donald Macmaster, K.C. (M.P. England)
  1897-98    Hugh Paton
  1899-1900  James Stewart, M.P.
  1901-02    A.F. Riddell
  1903       Principal William Peterson, C.M.G.
  1904-06    W.M. Ramsay
  1907-08    Charles Cassils
  1909-10    Lieut.-Col. Robert Gardner
  1911-12    Sir Hugh Montagu Allan, C.V.O.
  1913       Farquhar Robertson (present president)


                      ST. PATRICK’S SOCIETY

St. Patrick’s Society was originally organized in 1834 as a
society for benevolent and national purposes and included
Irishmen of all religious denominations. At the time of its
formation Irishmen were beginning to be a force in the community
and the mention of the names of J. Holmes, William Workman, and
Sir Francis Hincks bears this out.

The records of the transactions of this period until 1856 and
long after are not to be found, but other information of the year
1856 is ample and enables us to trace the separation of the joint
association into two, the St. Patrick’s Society of today and the
Irish Protestant Benevolent Association.

The events leading to the reorganization of St. Patrick’s Society
are as follows:

On February 12, 1856, a special meeting of the Society was held
at St. Patrick’s Hall to consider the propriety of dissolving
the Society. This was to allow an amalgamation of the Catholic
portion of the original St. Patrick’s Society with the Catholic
Hibernian Association, thus forming a new St. Patrick’s Society
and to allow the Protestant members of the original St. Patrick’s
to form one of their own which, in fact, they did, now known
as the Irish Protestant Benevolent Society. After a series of
resolutions in which there was recognition paid to the fact
that the St. Patrick’s Society of Montreal, since it foundation
in 1834, had carried out its prime objects according to its
constitution, and recognizing that there was a move to allow
the formation of other societies which would “embrace elements”
now divided and in which jealous feelings would be extinguished
amidst conflicting opinions and opposing parties among the Irish
inhabitants of this city, it was moved by Mr. James Flynn and
seconded by John McCloskey, that consequently this society do now
decide to dissolve unequivocally and unreservedly and that on
the termination of the proceedings this Society do adjourn _sine
die_. The motion so moved was carried; and an acknowledgement
made of the services of W.P. Bartley, Esq., for his conduct as
president during the last two years.

Showing how easy was transition from one side to the other, it
was moved by James Donnelly and Francis Dolan, recommending “that
the paying members of this Society be admitted into the new
organization without initiation fees,” and the resolution further
expressed a hope that from the dissolution of the present may
spring the germ of life of another organization on such a basis
that sectional and petty rivalries may be merged.

It is pleasing to note that ever since the separation of St.
Patrick’s Society into the two component parts, St. Patrick’s
Society and the Irish Benevolent Society, there has never been
any rift.

The first officers after reorganization in 1856 were: Henry
Howard, president; Hon. Marcus Doherty, first vice president;
Thomas McGrath, second vice president; James E. Mullins,
treasurer; James Daly, corresponding secretary; Thomas C.
Collins, recording secretary; W. Wallace O’Brien, assistant
recording secretary; John McDonald, chief marshal; Rev. J.J.
Connolly, P.P., chaplain.

The early minutes of St. Patrick’s Society having been burnt
in the fires of St. Patrick’s Hall in 1872 we find from other
sources that the new St. Patrick’s Society held its first soirée
at the latter end of 1856 with the National Benevolent Societies
present; it was followed by dancing to an advanced hour. The
president was then Doctor Howard.

A meeting was held, February 8, 1857, in the Bishop’s Chapel
of the Catholic citizens with the Catholic societies present,
when it was moved by Doctor Howard, president of St. Patrick’s
Society, and seconded by Mr. John Kelly, to the effect that “in
order that the new cathedral may be a monument worthy of the size
and wealth of this extensive diocese it should be built so as
to meet not only the wants of the diocese, but those which may
arise in the future from the rapid and constant increase of the
population, both of the city and rural districts.”

On March 17, 1857, at John O’Meara’s Hotel, the first anniversary
dinner was held. Presidents of numerous national societies and
representatives of the city press were guests. The Hon. Mr.
Marcus Doherty was in the chair. The following toasts were
proposed: “The Day and All Who Honour It,” “The Pope,” “The
Queen,” “The Emperor of France,” “The President of the United
States,” “The Preacher of the Day,” “The Army and Navy, as
Composed of Saxon and Celt,” “Irishmen at Home and Abroad,” “The
Memory of Father Matthew,” “The Memory of O’Connell,” “The Mayor
and Corporations,” “The National Association,” “The Press,”
and finally “The Ladies.” Between the toast to the President
of the United States and the Preacher of the Day the health
of the Governor General was proposed and drunk by some of the
party present, the “Orange” governor, Sir Edward Head, not being
popular.

These were days of bitter animosities which a wiser generation
has drowned.

On June 14, 1857, at the Corpus Christi procession, citizens,
soldiers of Captains Devlin’s, Bartley’s, Bell’s and Latour’s
Volunteer Montreal Rifles Companies, marched with St. Patrick’s
Society and St. Jean Baptiste Society.

This was opposed by the Montreal Witness, but answered by the
True Witness that it was the custom enjoyed by the French
subjects and its legality had been formally recognized by the
British government, which till a few years ago furnished in the
persons of its soldiers a Guard of Honour for the procession.
This is interesting in view of the recent attempt at disallowing
the Sixty-fifth Regiment of Militia from continuing the
time-honoured custom.

On December 1, 1857, a public meeting of Irish Catholics was held
for the election of an Irish representative, being the first
movement for such. Doctor Howard took the chair. Marcus Doherty,
Esq., barrister, moved that the Irish, according to the last
census, were entitled to name one of the three members allowed by
law to represent this city in parliament. He was seconded by P.
Ronayne. Barney Devlin, Esq., barrister, moved “as the unanimous
sense of this meeting Thomas D’Arcy McGee, Esq., be requested
to allow himself to be put in nomination as our candidate for
Montreal in the approaching contest.” Seconded by Mr. Lanigan.
Mr. McGee who had been brought to the city some time before for
this purpose and had fulfilled the conditions of domicile was
then brought into the room and introduced to the chairman as “our
candidate.” Mr. McGee responded with wit and humour and sagacity
and was most vociferously cheered. A resolution was moved by
Mr. James Sadlier to form a committee to work the wards for the
election, which was seconded by Mr. Henry Kavanagh. Mr. Henry
Kavanagh was next called to the chair and a vote of thanks was
moved to Doctor Howard for his able conduct therein. Seconded by
Mr. McGee. The meeting then separated. “On reaching the street
they made the welkin ring three times three cheers for ‘our
candidate.’” Mr. McGee as told elsewhere was elected.

In later contests he was to be opposed by his proposer, Mr.
Devlin, the lively remembrances of which still live.

The True Witness on June 12, 1857, announced an emigrant agency
for St. Patrick’s Society opened at 35 Common Street under
Doctor McKeon. This work had interested the Society for many
years. Hence it is also that it took great interest in the
establishment of St. Bridget’s Home and St. Patrick’s Orphanage
and other similar charities.

The meeting place of St. Patrick’s Society, according to an
advertisement of September 18, 1857, was the new hall on Place
d’Armes Hill. The next move was to a hall over Donnelly and
O’Brien’s store at the corner of McGill and Recollet streets,
with the entrance on Recollet (N). This meeting was on May 3,
1858.

The next meeting place was a room in Bonaventure Hall, built at
the northwest corner of St. James Street and Victoria Square,
facing the Square. When this building was remodeled under the
name of St. James Hotel[2] the Society remained there.

The Coffee House at the northeast corner of Craig and St.
Alexander streets was then the meeting place until the new St.
Patrick’s Hall was erected at the corner of Craig and McGill
streets, facing Victoria Square and bounded on the north by
Fortification Lane. It was a large and handsome building. The
foundation stone was laid on March 18, 1867, and in it was placed
a plate[3] recording the event as follows:

  The Revd. P. Dowd, chief pastor of St. Patrick’s Church, on the
  18th of March, 1867, in the 30th year of the reign of her Most
  Gracious Majesty,

                         Queen Victoria.

  The Rt. Hon. Charles Stanley Viscount Monck, Baron Monck
  of Balling Trimmon, Governor-General of British America,
  Lieutenant-General Sir J. Michel, Bart., K.C.B., Commander of the
  Forces. Administrator of the Government of Canada, Henry Starns,
  commissioner of Montreal.

  DIRECTORS (Ab Initio)

  Bernard Devlin, Hon. T.D. McGee, Hon. Thos. Ryan, W.H. Hingston,
  M.D., M.P. Ryan, Edward Murphy, J.W. McGovern, Luke Moore, C.J.
  Cusack, Neil Shannon, J.W. Hopkins, architect, Howley & Sheriden,
  builders, E.J. Gilbert, iron founder, etc.

  “Then praise to the Highest, in the Height and in the Depth be
  Praised.”

This fine building met with disaster, its roof fell in shortly
afterward and finally it was burned down on October 2, 1872,
after which the affairs of St. Patrick’s Hall Association were
wound up and left the stockholders with 55% of their shares. In
1863 it was incorporated, its charter in part running as follows:

   “WHEREAS, Thomas McKenna, Edw. McKeown, Dennis Downey, Wm.
   P. McGuire, J.J. Curran, Patrick O’Meara, M. Cuddihy, Daniel
   Lyons, P. Jordan, John H. Duggan, F.B. McNamee, O.J. Devlin,
   A. Brogan, Richard McShane, P. Mullin, J.E. Mullin, B. Devlin,
   Wm. Mansfield, M. Doherty and others have by their petition to
   the legislature represented that the Society of which they are
   members, known as the ‘St. Patrick’s Society of Montreal,’ has
   for many years been organized for benevolent and other purposes,
   and

   “WHEREAS, They have prayed by the said petition that for the
   better attainment of the object of the said Society it may
   be invested with corporate powers, and by reason of the good
   effected by the said Society it is expedient to grant the prayer
   of the said petition;

   “THEREFORE Her Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the
   legislative council and assembly of Canada, enact as follows:”

Since this time St. Patrick’s Society has carried on its good
work, but it has never had a permanent building of its own. It
has continued its interest in Irish charities, caring for orphans
and immigrants. It has watched over the fortunes of Irishmen
in civic, provincial and federal life and has always promoted
Home Rule for Ireland. On April 24, 1893, St. Patrick’s Society
telegraphed, through the Hon. Edward Blake, then a member of
the English Parliament, congratulations to Mr. William Ewart
Gladstone and himself on the second reading of the bill. Of
recent years its activities in this line of similar promotion
of their national cause have been great. Their annual dinner
on St. Patrick’s day has seen the presence of some of the most
distinguished Irish orators from Ireland and the American
Continent.

The past presidents of the Society have been:

  1856-57           Henry Howard, M.D.
  1858-59           Hon. Marcus Doherty, J.S.C.
  1860-61           Hon. Edward Murphy
  1862-63           James A. Sadlier
  1864              Thos. McKenna
  1865-66-67        Bernard Devlin
  1868              J.E. Mullin
  1869              F.B. McNamee
  1870              Bernard Devlin
  1871              Francis Cassidy, Ex-Mayor
  1872              James Homley
  1873              Michael Donovan
  1874-75-76-77     Bernard Devlin
  1878              P.J. Coyle
  1879-80-81-82-83  F.B. McNamee
  1884-85-86-87-88  Hon. Denis Barry
  1889-90           Hon. Henry Cloran
  1891-92           Hon. J.J. Curran
  1893-94           Hon. James McShane
  1895-96-97        Hon. Jas. J. Guerin M.D.
  1898-99           E.J. Kennedy, M.D.
  1900-01           W.E. Doran
  1902-03           Hon. C.J. Doherty
  1904              F.E. Devlin, M.D.
  1905-06           Frank J. Curran, B.C.L.
  1907-08           W.P. Kearney
  1909-10           Henry Kavanagh, K.C.
  1911-12           J. C Walsh
  1913-14           Walter G. Kennedy


               IRISH PROTESTANT BENEVOLENT SOCIETY

The Irish Protestant Benevolent Society of Montreal was formed
in 1856, after having separated from the joint St. Patrick’s
Society. In that year an act of incorporation was granted, on
March 18th, on the petition of a certain number of petitioners
“and others of Irish birth or extraction, residents of Montreal
(who) have maintained by voluntary contributions a certain
charitable association whereof they are members, for the relief
of distressed immigrants and others from Ireland or of Irish
descent, under the name of the Irish Protestant Benevolent
Society of Montreal.”

The incorporators’ names appended are James L. Mathewson,
William A. Merry, W.H. Gault, Hugh Mathewson, George Horne,
George Armstrong, William Rodden, Richard Holland, J.J. Arnton,
Campbell Bryson, William Clendenning, George S. Scott, Robert
Miller, William Middleton, James Parker, Richard Thomas, W.S.
Davenport, Howard Ransom, John Shinnick, Thomas Workman, William
McWalters, the Rev. John Cordner, the Rev. John Irwin, Dr.
Robert L. Macdonell, Dr. John Reddy, Dr. William P. Howard,
etc. The Society was instituted to advance the welfare of
Irish Protestants in Canada, to afford advice, information
and assistance to those immigrating hither, to promote their
settlement within the province, to protect their widows and
orphans and to afford pecuniary aid to those in need.

A great work has been the maintenance of the Irish Protestant
Benevolent Home in Belmont Park. Its activities along Irish
patriotic lines have also been similar to those of St. Patrick’s
Society.

The presidents of the Society since its formation have been as
follows:

  1856         *Benjamin Workman, M.D.
  1857-59      *Hugh Mathewson
  1859-61      *R.D. Collis
  1861         *M.H. Gault
  1862         *W.A. Merry
  1863-65      *J.L. Mathewson
  1865-67      *Thos. Workman
  1867-69      *William Workman
  1869         *John Lovell
  1870         *Geo. S. Scott
  1871         *Robert Miller
  1872         *Thomas Simpson
  1873         *Wm. Rodden
  1874         *Sir Francis Hincks, K.C.M., G.C.B.
  1875         William Clendenning
  1876-78      W.J. McMaster
  1878-80      *J.C. Sinton
  1880-82      *John J. Arnton
  1882         *James Moore
  1883-85      *J.C. Wilson
  1885-87      *Richard Thomas
  1887-89      *D.H. Henderson
  1889-91      *W.H. Arnton
  1891         *Richard White
  1892-94      *James Wilson
  1894-96      *Moses Parker
  1896-98      James H. McKeown
  1898-00      J. Hamilton Ferns
  1900-02      *Charles Byrd
  1902-04      MacDuff Lamb
  1904-05      William Henry
  1906-07      Thos. Gilday
  1908-09      J.W. Percival
  1910-11      Wm. Rodden
  1912-13      J.A. Mathewson
  1914         F. Gilday, M.D.

  * Deceased.


                       THE GERMAN SOCIETY

Of the other societies the German Society is the oldest, being
contemporaneous in its birth with the former. A consultation
of the lists of citizens at this early period will show that
the German community then had some very notable names among its
members.

The German Society was started in April, 1835, for the purpose
of assisting poor German immigrants, without regard to creed,
in order to prevent them from being a charge to the community;
it has also often assisted Austrian, Swiss, Russian and other
immigrants of German descent. It is a purely benevolent
association, being supported entirely by voluntary contributions.

Its presidents since 1835 have been:

  1835-39         Louis Gugy
  1839-49         Dr. Daniel Arnoldi
  1849-55         Heinrich Meyer
  1855-58         Ernst Idler
  1859-60         Gottlieb Reinhardt
  1860-65         Gerhard Lomer
  1865-66         Heinrich Drescher
  1866-67, 70-73  Emanuel Häusgen
  1867-70         Wilhelm Wagner
  1873-77, 81-93  Wilhelm C. Munderloh
  1877-81         Freidrich Geriken
  1893            Eugen von Rappard
  1893            *Edward Schultze

  * Still in office.


                    ST. DAVID’S WELSH SOCIETY

It was about the years 1884-5, that the first society to weld
together the various members of the Welsh Colony of Montreal was
established, and the moving spirit in this matter, was the late
Mr. Jabez Jones, a native of Mold, Flintshire, North Wales, an
energetic and enterprising organizer.

The society was called the “Welsh Union of Montreal.” Its first
president was the late Mr. John Lewis, surveyor of customs, for
the port of Montreal. He continued to fill the office until his
death, and, with his distinguished and delightful personality and
support, helped materially to make it a success.

The first vice-president, was the late Mr. Thomas Harries, who at
the time was the senior commercial traveller in Canada, a man of
strong convictions and noble character.

The nature of the Society in its early years was largely
religious and most of its gatherings were held on Sundays. Its
rooms were in the old Y.M.C.A. Building on Victoria Square.
This edifice was considered one of the landmarks both for
architectural beauty and position among the great buildings of
the city in those days. The Society justified its existence
in many ways, and proved a necessary and helpful anchorage,
particularly in bringing together the sons and daughters of
Wales, more especially at such times as the Patron’s Saint Day,
an event of importance, and a day dear to the Welshman’s heart,
all over the world, known as “St. David’s Day,” always held on
the first day of March; the time of the “Congresses of Bards and
Contests of Minstrels,” and the feast day of one of the guardians
of the nation’s ideals and inspirer of its genius.

However, the element of decay entered into the vitals of the old
Society and it ceased to exist for some time.

About twelve years ago, the present Welsh Society was founded,
known as the “St. David’s Welsh Society.” It was incorporated in
1910 on a far broader basis than the old Society. Its aims are,
the bringing together of men and women of Welsh parentage or
associated by marriage with Welsh people, to create an interest
in the study of Welsh music, literature, folklore, poetry and all
subjects of interest to the race and a culture of a true Canadian
nationality among the descendants of this ancient and historic
people.

The honorary president since its inception, with the exception of
one year, is Mr. Lansing Lewis, D.C.L., a son of the president of
the old Welsh Union, the exception being the year the late Mr.
Samuel Carsley held the office.

The first president was Mr. Richard Roberts, L. Mus., the first
vice president, Mr. James Kirkham (Iago Tegai), the latter, in
consort with Mr. Evan Jones and Mr. Jos. Jenkins, B.A., being
among the most important moving spirits in the organization of
the Society.

The following gentlemen filled the position of president:

Mr. Evan Jones, Mr. Jos. Jenkins, B.A., B.C.L., Mr. M.E.
Pritchard, Mr. W.G. Bithell, and the present holder of the
position is Mr. Wm. Evans, merchant.

The Welsh people are renowned for their intense patriotism and
loyalty, and by training and temperament make good citizens,
invariably lending their influence and support to every effort to
advance the interests of the cities and towns wherein they may
chance to reside and it is estimated that there are in Montreal,
at the present time, from one to two thousand Welsh people.
Some of them are large employers of Canadian labor, and the
majority of them are interested in the manifold forces at work
of beautifying and making known the varied advantages, present
and prospective of this regal and beautiful metropolis of the
Dominion of Canada.


                    THE NEWFOUNDLAND SOCIETY

The youngest National Society formed on lines similar to the
foregoing was founded in September, 1911.

Its presidents have been as follows:

  1911-12 F.M. Renouf
  1913    C.A. Peters, M.D.
  1914    W.A. Gaden

The object of the Society was to encourage Newfoundlanders
who were migrating to other lands to settle in Canada under
the British flag and to welcome them when in the city with
information to enable them to succeed here.

A great opportunity offered itself to the members in 1914, when
on the occasion of the great Newfoundland sealing disaster in
March of that year, it organized a relief fund in the city
and realized a sum of $13,000, which was forwarded to the
Newfoundland Government.


                      THE ZIONIST MOVEMENT

The Jewish community, whose earliest settlers and prominent
citizens will be noticed elsewhere, has not been regarded as
possessing a national society as such, although the Baron de
Hirsch Institute, now long founded, has been the centre of
charitable activities for Jewish immigrants. Of late years,
however, there has arisen a movement which may have a place here.

Montreal is the head centre of the Zionist Movement in the
Dominion, and the executive offices of the Federation of Zionist
Societies of Canada are situated in this city. No Jewish body in
this country counts as large a membership or is as thoroughly
representative of the entire Jewish population of Canada as
the Zionist Movement, for it has its branches in every city,
town and village from the Atlantic to the Pacific. The first
Zionist society was founded in Montreal in January, 1898. Among
its founders were Clarence I. de Sola, Rev. A. Ashinsky, H.
Bernstein, L. Aronson, Lazarus Cohen, Jacob Cohen, Leon Goldman,
J.S. Leo, Rev. Meldola de Sola, Dr. D.A. Hart and Moses Shapiro.
From small beginnings this movement, having for its object the
re-establishment of the Hebrew nation in Palestine, spread with
phenomenal rapidity, and within one year from its foundation
so numerous had the branches become that they were formed into
a federation under a central federal executive. This was in
December, 1899. The enormous strides which the organization has
made is shown in its ever-increasing revenue and membership from
year to year. Its conventions have become one of the striking
events of Jewish communal life in this country. At the eleventh
convention, held in Toronto in December, 1910, the Canadian
Zionist Federation started the undertaking of establishing a
Jewish agricultural colony in Palestine with funds entirely
contributed by members of the movement in Canada. This enterprise
was carried through so successfully that at the thirteenth
convention, held in Montreal in 1913, the president was able to
announce that the establishment of the first colony had been
completed and the work of establishing a second colony was
begun. This convention was also rendered noteworthy by President
de Sola’s plea for the restoration of the Jewish Sanhedrin in
Palestine, a plea which attracted world-wide notice and received
the approval of many of the leading Jews throughout the world.
The present executive of the Zionist Federation counts among
its officers some of the most capable and active workers in the
Jewish community of Canada. To mention them all would entail the
giving of a long list, but among the Montrealers, in addition to
those already mentioned above, are A. Levin, who is treasurer; M.
Markus, Rev. Nathan Gordon, Rev. H. Abramowitz, Joseph Fineberg,
L. Heillig, Mrs. Clarence de Sola, Mrs. J.S. Leo, and H. Lang.

  The first Jew known to have settled in Montreal was Lazarus
  David, who came to this city in 1759. He was connected with the
  army, but on the close of the war settled in Montreal and became
  an extensive owner of real estate. He was a man of public spirit
  who took a prominent part in civic affairs in those early days.
  He was born in Swansea, Wales, in 1734 and his name appears in
  a list of residents published in Montreal in 1763. He continued
  to play a prominent part, in what was then but a little town,
  until his death on the 22d of October, 1776, and the headstone
  which marks the place of his interment is still to be seen in
  the cemetery of the Spanish and Portuguese Jews on Mount Royal.
  Very shortly after the arrival of Lazarus David there also
  came to Montreal Uriah Judah and other members of the Judah
  family, Emanuel de Cordova, Hananiel Garcia, Isaac Miranda,
  Judah Elvada, Uriel Moresco, Abraham Franks, Simon Levy, Levy
  Solomons and Fernandez da Fonseca. They were joined by another
  band of settlers, among whom were included Abram Franks, David
  Salesby Franks, Isaac Miranda, Jacob de Maurera, Andrew Hays,
  Levy Solomons and Joseph Bindona. De Cordova, Garcia and Miranda
  held military offices. Nearly all of these men belonged to
  distinguished families of Jews who had come to America originally
  from Spain and Portugal and known among the Hebrews as Sephardin
  and were members of the first Jewish Synagogue.

  Although the members of this congregation were in those days but
  small in number, they produced a remarkably large number of men
  who took a very prominent part in public affairs. At the time
  that Lazarus David was settling in Montreal there had arrived in
  Canada Commissary General Aaron Hart, who was on the staff of
  General Amherst’s invading army and who took an important part
  in the operations which led to the British Conquest. He was born
  in London in 1724 and had married a member of the Judah family,
  and after serving under Amherst he afterwards joined the troops
  under General Haldimand, stationed at Three Rivers, and when that
  city fell into the hands of the British he took up his residence
  there. After the war he was created seigneur of Bécancour for his
  services, and became the owner of six other seigneuries. Another
  man of prominence was David Salesby Franks. He and his father,
  Abraham Franks, first appear as residents of Quebec in 1767 and
  afterwards they settled in Montreal. David Salesby Franks was
  president of the Spanish and Portuguese Synagogue previous to
  1775. He agitated for the establishment of a House of Assembly
  and the establishment of representative government in Canada.
  Business affairs, however, drew him to Philadelphia and New York
  and when the American Revolutionary War broke out he espoused the
  cause of the American colonists and became major of a regiment.
  In May, 1778, he became aide-de-camp to Major Benedict Arnold.
  When in 1780 the affair of West Point occurred and Arnold fled
  to escape punishment for his treason to the Revolutionary cause,
  Major Franks was arrested on suspicion and courtmartialed, but
  was honourably acquitted and was afterwards placed on the staff
  of George Washington, under whom he fought during the rest of
  the war. He played a prominent part in the negotiations for
  peace between the American colonists and Great Britain and was
  sent on a mission in this connection to Europe in 1781, and in
  1784 he was again sent to Europe by the United States Congress
  with the triplicate copies for the ratification of the definite
  treaty of peace. He assisted Benjamin Franklin and Mr. Jay in
  these negotiations. He was afterwards appointed American consul
  at Marseilles and he was one of the commissioners of the American
  Government who negotiated a treaty of peace and commerce with
  Morocco in 1787. He was one of the marshals who inaugurated
  George Washington as first President of the United States.
  There were other members of the Franks family who remained in
  Montreal and who fought on the side of the British against the
  American colonists. A sister of David Salesby Franks married the
  Levy Solomons who is mentioned above and who was at that time
  president of the Montreal Jewish Congregation “Shearith Israel.”
  One of their daughters, Rachel Solomon, became the wife of Henry
  Joseph, who in his day was one of the most prominent Jews in
  Canada. Henry Joseph was born in England in the latter part of
  the eighteenth century. He was nephew of Commissary General Aaron
  Hart and came to Canada when but a youth and entered the army,
  being attached to the troops that formed the garrison of Fort
  William Henry at the mouth of the Richelieu River. He afterwards
  became interested in the Northwest Trading Company and eventually
  retired from the army to develop trade from Hudson’s Bay to
  Quebec and Montreal. His headquarters were for a long while at
  Berthier, but he perceived even in that early day that Montreal
  was destined to become a place of importance, and he removed
  his home to this city in his latter days. It is claimed that
  he was the actual founder of Canada’s merchant marine service,
  for he was the owner of a line of ships that were the first to
  be registered as Canadian vessels engaged exclusively in direct
  traffic between Canada and England. He rejoined the army when
  the War of 1812-14 broke out between England and the United
  States and fought for the British crown in many engagements.
  Associated with him as a Hudson’s Bay trader was Jacob Franks, a
  member of the family above mentioned, who had married a sister of
  Mrs. Henry Joseph and who was also noted as a very enterprising
  northwest and Hudson’s Bay trader. He was the founder of Green
  Bay, Wisconsin, and Jacob Astor was originally employed by him
  there. Another very influential member of the early Jewish
  community in this city was David David, the eldest son of Lazarus
  David. He was born in Montreal in 1764 and took a prominent part
  in almost everything which affected the interests of Montreal in
  his day. Possessed of considerable wealth he employed his means
  in works of benevolence, and his generous assistance to the early
  philanthropic societies of Montreal is on record. He was either
  president or director of a number of institutions. It was due
  largely to his initiative that the Bank of Montreal was founded
  in 1817, and he was elected a director on its first regular
  board on the 27th of February, 1818, and continued to hold this
  office until his death in 1824. He was also president of the
  Spanish and Portuguese Synagogue in Montreal for many years.

  In addition to members of the David and Joseph families already
  mentioned, who fought for the British flag in the War of 1812-14,
  the names of a number of other Hebrew citizens are to be found
  also participating on the British side in that struggle, and
  there was also a large number of Canadian Jews who fought on the
  loyalist side in the rebellion of 1837-38, notably Colonel David,
  Aaron Philip Hart, Jacob Henry Joseph and several members of the
  Hays family.

  The exact legal status of the Jews in Canada was not made very
  clear at an early date by any definite enactments, and for long
  they labored under the disability of not having the right of
  sitting in Parliament. This question was brought to a definite
  test by the election in 1807 of Mr. Ezekiel Hart, second son of
  Commissariat General Hart, as member of the Legislative Assembly
  for Three Rivers. When he entered the House he was required
  to take the oath in the usual form “on the true faith of a
  Christian” and upon his declining to do this on account of his
  Jewish faith the majority of the members objected to his taking
  his seat and declared the seat vacant. Appealing again to his
  constituents he was once more elected by a heavy majority, but
  again the House refused to permit him to take his seat, and after
  a stormy session a bill was pushed through to its second reading
  to disqualify Jews from being eligible to sit as members of the
  House of Assembly. This aroused the indignation of Sir James
  Craig, who was then governor, and he angrily dissolved the House
  and prevented the bill from passing. After a long struggle an act
  was introduced and passed in 1831 by which Jews were accorded
  the fullest civil rights in Canada and were placed upon an equal
  footing with all other citizens of the land. Ezekiel Hart was
  deservedly popular and it is stated that the opposition which
  was shown to his taking his seat was due more to the political
  partisanship of his political opponents than to any real feeling
  of religious intolerance. It is worthy of note that Canada
  extended full political rights to the Jews more than a quarter of
  a century earlier than the mother country.

  Of the later Hebrews may be mentioned Moses J. Hays, who was one
  of the most active men engaged in municipal affairs in Montreal
  in the early part of the nineteenth century, and to his energy
  the city was indebted for many civic improvements. It was he who
  established the first Montreal waterworks. He also reorganized
  Montreal’s police force, of which he was the chief commissioner,
  and he was the builder of the Hays House, the leading hotel of
  Montreal in its day, situated on what was then known as Dalhousie
  Square, but which has since been swept away to make room for the
  Place Viger entrance of the Canadian Pacific Railway.

  Abraham de Sola, the rabbi attached to the Shearith Israel
  Congregation, was recognized as in the first rank of Jewish
  leaders in the cabinet. He was elected in 1848 professor
  of Semitic literature and oriental languages of the McGill
  University.

  During the period of Doctor De Sola’s administration the Spanish
  and Portuguese Jewish Congregation of the Shearith Israel
  Synagogue, formed by the first Jew settlers in 1768, counted
  among its members a number of men who were very prominent in
  Montreal’s social, intellectual and commercial life. Amongst
  these was Dr. A.H. David, a grandson of Lazarus David, who,
  besides being a prominent physician, was dean of the medical
  faculty of Bishop’s College. Samuel Benjamin, Goodman Benjamin
  and William Benjamin were three brothers who were all very well
  known in Montreal between the ’40s and ’60s in the past century.
  Samuel Benjamin took a very prominent part in civic affairs and
  was for a long while member of the city council, being the first
  Israelite to attain that position in Montreal. Four sons of
  Henry Joseph, Jacob Henry, Abraham, Jesse and Gershom, were all
  prominent. Probably there was no citizen of Montreal better known
  in his day and associated with more of our public activities than
  Jesse Joseph. He was either president or director of over fifteen
  different companies or institutions.

  Another member of the Congregation of Shearith Israel was Isidor
  Ascher, who earned a respectable reputation as a poet. He was the
  author of “Voices from the Hearth” which Longfellow so highly
  commended, and of a number of other works, both in verse and
  in prose. His father, G.I. Ascher, was long a patriarchial and
  familiar figure in Montreal life in the nineteenth century, for
  he reached the venerable age of ninety-six years. Alexander
  Levy, Jacob Levy, Samuel Israel Rubenstein, Edward Cohen and
  Lewis A. Hart were well-known officers of the congregation in
  more recent years. The last mentioned was for some years lecturer
  on notarial practice at McGill University.

  Dr. Abraham de Sola died in 1882, and was succeeded by his eldest
  son, Meldola de Sola.

  The Jews have always shown an interest in both civic and national
  politics, and at the present moment there are two Jewish citizens
  who are members of the city council.


              OTHER NATIONAL ORIGINS OF THE PEOPLE

The foregoing do not exhaust the list of Societies for national
and racial conservation. There are others such as the “Société
Suisse de Montréal,” “The Scandinavian National Society,” “The
Jersey (Channel Island) Society of Canada” and others. Suffice it
to say that Montreal is now veritably cosmopolitan as the census
of 1911 will demonstrate.


                       CENSUS OF MONTREAL

 ORIGINS OF THE PEOPLE BY SUB-DISTRICTS OF THE CITY OF MONTREAL
                            FOR 1911

  LEGEND:

  British
    E = English;
    I = Irish;
    S = Scotch;
    O = Other.

  Fr. = French
  Ge. = German
  A-H. = Austro-Hungarian
  Be. = Belgian
  BR. = Bulgarian and Rumanian
  Ch. = Chinese

   Districts and                   British
      Sub-districts          /--------^----------\
                              En.   Ir.    Sc.  Oth.   Fr. Ge. A-H  Be. B.R. Ch.
   St. Raphaël de l’Ile
       Bizard                  36     1     --   --    549  --  --   --  --   --
   Summerlea t                 51     8     13   --     82  --  --   --  --   --
   Beaconsfield t             129    16     16   --    206   1   2   --  --   --
   Dorval t                   220   101    139    1    479   8   1    1  --   --
   Lachine t                2,316   364    554  163  6,593  35  21    7  13   15
   Montreal W-O t             302   121    212    4     44  11  --   --  --   --
   Notre-Dame de Grâces     1,538   310    257   --  2,735  23 136    5   1   --
   Outremont t              1,593   447    575   25  1,911  40   2    5   3    8
   Pointe Claire t            147    22     55    2    549   5  --   --  --    1
   Ste. Anne de Bellevue t    127    46     77    3  1,141  --  --    1  --    3
   St. Laurent t               29    10     36   --  1,759   1  --   10  --    3
   Verdun t                 3,860   892    922   10  5,534  72  --   95  --   10
   Ville Emard                674    69     41    3  5,119  16  --   44  --    1
   Youville                   197    60     74   --  1,962  11   7    4   8   --
   Cartierville v              41    24      4   --    817   3  --   --  --   --
   Côte des Neiges            351   129    104    1  1,797   9   1   --  --    2
   Côte St. Luc v              58    --     --   --    237  --  --   --  --   --
   Ste. Geneviève v             3    --     --   --    609  --  --   --  --   --
   St. Pierre aux Liens       208   120    178    2  1,480   4  49   --  88    3
   Senneville v                48    12     23    1    326  --  --    6  --   --

   MONTREAL-STE. ANNE       4,846 6,549  1,311   51  6,539 136 155    8   6   47
     Centre ward               17    19      8   --    395  -- --    --  --    1
     Ste. Anne ward         4,773 6,466  1,288   48  6,082 134 155    8   6   39
     West ward                 56    64     15    3     62   2  --   --  --    7

   MONTREAL-ST. ANTOINE    13,355 8,996  6,974  166 14,230 696  37   75   6  236
     St. Joseph ward        3,184 3,042  1,128   13  8,636 178   7   26  --   34
     St. Georges ward       4,741 2,975  2,855   70  1,688 259  11   29   2  137
     St. Andrews ward       5,430 2,979  2,991   83  3,906 259  19   20   4   65

   MONTREAL-ST. JACQUES     1,246   915    414    2 38,384 117  10  163   11  87
     East ward                141    69     19   --  2,785   1  --    3   --  13
     Lafontaine ward          802   565    306   -- 21,620  76   5   84   11  40
     St. Jacques ward         303   281     89    2 13,979  40   5   76   --  34

   MONTREAL-ST. LAURENT     6,751 4,996  2,791   77 18,307 400 240  141  61  460
     St. Laurent ward       4,507 3,792  2,353   74  4,785 279 145   31  53  334
     St. Louis ward         2,244 1,204    438    3 13,522 121  95  110   8  126

   MONTREAL-ST. MARIE       3,500 2,642    997    5 45,941 133  34   35  11   42
     Papineau ward          2,697 2,086    732    4 32,420 102  12   22   1   30
     Ste. Marie ward          803   556    265    1 13,521  31  22   13  10   12

   HOCHELAGA               15,837 6,217  6,729  108 43,032 524  63   20   7  148
     Ste. Cunégonde ward    1,519   581    390   --  8,285  18  10   --  --   25
     St. Gabriel ward       4,875 2,625  1,888   35  8,690 160  37    4  --   26
     St. Henri ward         3,463   804    640    1 24,734  95   4   10   7   28
     Westmount c            5,980 2,207  3,811   72  1,323 251  12    6  --   69

   JACQUES-CARTIER         14,001 3,303  3,606  216 40,920 289 236  215  118  --
     Côte St. Paul            996   155     54   --  2,069  21  --    6   --  --
     Notre Dame des            71   221      7   --    593   2  --    6   --  --
       Neiges W
     Présentation de la
       Ste. Vierge              8     1      1   --    210  --  --   --   --  --
     Saints-Anges de Lachine  195    82     83   --    415  15  --    8   --  --
     Ste. Anne du Bout de
       l’Ile                  151    25     51   --    557  3   --   --   --  --
     Ste. Geneviève            18     3      1   --  1,045  7   --   --   --  --
     St. Joachim de la
       Pointe Claire          142     8      7   --    647 --   --   --   --  --
     St. Laurent              492    56    122    1  1,455  2   17   17    5   4


                       CENSUS OF MONTREAL

 ORIGINS OF THE PEOPLE BY SUB-DISTRICTS OF THE CITY OF MONTREAL
                            FOR 1911

  Dutch        = Du.
  Greek        = Gr.
  Hindu        = Hi.
  Indian       = In.
  Italian      = Ital.
  Japanese     = Jp.
  Jewish       = Jew.

  Districts and
    Sub-districts               Du.   Gr.  Hi. In.  Ital.  Jp.   Jew.

  MONTREAL-ST. ANNE              5    18   --   1     201   2     913

  MONTREAL-ST. ANTOINE          61   114   --   7   1,116   2   1,288
    Centre ward                 --    --   --  --      --  --      --
    Ste. Anne ward               5    18   --   1     201   2     905
    West ward                   --    --   --  --      --  --       8
    St. Joseph ward             19    54   --   1     688  --     504
    St. Georges ward            26    58   --   4     271   2     436
    St. Andrews ward            16     2   --   2     157  --     348

  MONTREAL-ST. JACQUES           7    45   --   3   1,115  --     549
    East ward                    1     5   --  --      48  --       1

  MONTREAL-ST. JACQUES
    Lafontaine ward              5     8   --   2     857  --     408
    St. Jacques ward             1    32   --   1     210  --     140

  MONTREAL-ST. LAURENT          19   292   --   3     837  --  19,256
    St. Laurent ward            13   179   --   2     205  --   7,733
    St. Louis ward               6   113   --   1     632  --  11,523

  MONTREAL STE. MARIE            4    24   --   2     439  --     356
    Papineau ward               --    21   --  --     400  --     306
    Ste. Marie ward              4     3   --   2      39  --      50

  HOCHELAGA                     79    17   --   11    315  --     589
    Ste. Cunégonde ward         12     7   --    3    163  --     102
    St. Gabriel ward            23    --   --   --      8  --      56
    St. Henri ward               4    10   --    8    143  --      50
    Westmount c.                40    --   --   --      1  --     381

  JACQUES-CARTIER               --   --   --   --    7     --      --
    Côte St. Paul               --   --   --   --   --     --      --
    Notre Dame des Neiges W     --   --   --   --   --     --      --
    Présentation de la Ste.
      Vierge                    --   --   --   --   --     --      --
    Saints-Anges de Lachine     --   --   --    2    9     --      13
    Ste. Anne du Bout de l’Ile  --   --   --   --   --     --       8
    Ste. Geneviève              --   --   --   --   --     --      --
    St. Joachim de la Pointe
      Claire                    --   --   --   --   --     --      --
    St Laurent                   7   --    2    6   --      9       4
    St. Raphaël de l’Ile Bizard --   --   --   --   --     --      --
    Summerlea t                 --   --   --   --    2     --       3
    Beaconsfield t              --   --   --   --   --     --       2
    Dorval t                    --   --   --   --   15     --      11
    Lachine t                    1   14   --    1  134     --     342
    Montréal W-O t               1   --   --   --   --     --      --
    Notre-Dame de Grâces        --   --   --    1  130     --       4
    Outremont t                  3   --   --   --   63     --      41
    Pointe Claire t             --   --   --   --   --     --      --
    Ste. Anne de Bellevue t     --    1   --   --   --     --       9
    St. Laurent t               --   --   --   --   --     --      --
    Verdun t                     3    1   --   --    3     --      67
    Ville Emard                  5    5   --   --  158     --      --
    Youville                    --    2   --   --   56     --       2
    Cartierville v              --   --    1   --   --     --      10
    Côte des Neiges              2   --   --   --    9     --      23
    Côte St. Luc v              --   --   --   --    8     --      --
    Ste. Geneviève v            --   --   --   --   --     --      --
    St. Pierre aux Liens v       1   --   --   --    3     --       5
    Senneville v                 2   --   --   --   --     --      --


                       CENSUS OF MONTREAL

 ORIGINS OF THE PEOPLE BY SUB-DISTRICTS OF THE CITY OF MONTREAL
                            FOR 1911

  Negro        = Ne.
  Polish       = Po.
  Russian      = Ru.
  Scandinavian = Sc.
  Swiss        = Sw.
  Unspecified  = Unsp.

  Districts and
    Sub-districts                 Ne.   Po.   Ru.   Sc.   SW.   Unsp.

  MONTREAL-ST. ANNE                 1   496   243    58     4     86

  MONTREAL-ST. ANTOINE            189    84    62   156    53    735
    Centre ward                    --    --    17    --    --      1
    Ste. Anne ward                  1   496   226    57     4     77
    West ward                      --    --   --      1    --      8
    St. Joseph ward               133    53    13    38     2    126
    St. Georges ward                2     6     4    50    34    184
    St. Andrews ward               54    25    45    68    17    425

  MONTREAL-ST. JACQUES              2    25    63    37    24    838
    East ward                      --    --     8     7     2    458

  MONTREAL-ST. JACQUES
    Lafontaine ward                 2     5    40     7    13    170
    St. Jacques ward               --    20    15    23     9    210

  MONTREAL-ST. LAURENT             19    94   109   106    36    865
    St. Laurent ward               14    32    84    83    17    324
    St. Louis ward                  5    62    25    23    19    541

  MONTREAL STE. MARIE               4   271   280    16    12    162
    Papineau ward                  --    85    50     9    7      95
    Ste. Marie ward                 4   186   230     7    5      67

  HOCHELAGA                        47   318   100   127   55     706
    Ste. Cunégonde ward             2     2     8     5   10      32
    St. Gabriel ward               --   237    63    48   13     173
    St. Henri ward                 38    77    23    38    2     156
    Westmount c.                    7     2     6    36   20     345

  JACQUES-CARTIER                --    --    --      6     --      5
    Côte St. Paul                --    --    --     --     --     --
    Notre Dame des Neiges W      --    --    --     --     --     --
    Présentation de la Ste.
      Vierge                     --     1    --     --     --     --
    Saints-Anges de Lachine      --     2     1      1      2     --
    Ste. Anne du Bout de l’Ile   --    10    --     --     --      8
    Ste. Geneviève               --    --    --     --     --      1
    St. Joachim de la Pointe
      Claire                     --    --    --     --     --      1
    St Laurent                    4    16     5     --     --      8
    St. Raphaël de l’Ile Bizard  --    --    --     --     --     --
    Summerlea t                  --    --     2     --     --     --
    Beaconsfield t               --    --    --      2     --      1
    Dorval t                     --    --    --      8     --     21
    Lachine t                     1    34    18      6      1     66
    Montréal W-O t               --    --    --     --     --      8
    Notre-Dame de Grâces         --     8    11     11     --     47
    Outremont t                  --     1     8      7     16     72
    Pointe Claire t              --    --    --      4      2      6
    Ste. Anne de Bellevue t      --    --    --     --     --      8
    St. Laurent t                --    --    --     --     --     12
    Verdun t                      1    15     2     51      8     83
    Ville Emard                  --    10    10      5     --     19
    Youville                     --    --     1      5     --      5
    Cartierville v               --    --    --     --      1      4
    Côte des Neiges              --    --    --      2      2     12
    Côte St. Luc v               --    --    --     --     --     --
    Ste. Geneviève v             --    --    --     --     --     --
    St. Pierre aux Liens v        2    33    15      3     --      7
    Senneville v                 --    --    --     --     --     --


FOOTNOTES:

[1] January 24, 1858, St. Jean Baptiste Festival was kept as a
national fête in Toronto by French-Canadians

[2] This hotel was finally burnt on March 17, 1873.

[3] This plate with the documents contained in the box of the
corner-stone, was taken out of the ruins of St. Patrick’s Hall by
Mr. B. Tansey in 1872 and is now in his possession.




                          CHAPTER XXXI

                     PUBLIC SAFETY SERVICES

            FIGHTING FIRE--DARKNESS--FLOODS--DROUGHT

  1. FIRE FIGHTING--THE FIRE OF 1765--“THE CASE OF THE CANADIANS
    OF MONTREAL”--THE EXTENT OF THE FIRE--FIRE PRECAUTIONS
    SUGGESTED--OTHER HISTORICAL FORCES--THE MONTREAL FIRE FORCES OF
    THE PAST AND PRESENT.

  2. THE LIGHTING OF MONTREAL--OIL LAMPS, 1815--GAS,
    1836--ELECTRICITY--FIRST EXPERIMENTS IN THE STREETS, 1879--THE
    ELECTRIC LIGHTING COMPANIES--NOTES ON INTRODUCTION OF THE
    TELEGRAPH--FIRE ALARM--ELECTRIC RAILWAY.

  3. FLOODS, EARLY AND MODERN, 1848, 1857, 1861, 1865, 1886--THE
    PRACTICAL CESSATION IN 1888.

  4. THE CITY WATER SUPPLY--THE MONTREAL WATER WORKS--PRIVATE
    COMPANIES--THE MUNICIPAL WATER WORKS--THE PUMPING PLANTS--THE
    WATER FAMINE OF 1913.


                          FIGHTING FIRE

Hardly had the English rule started in Montreal when on
Saturday, May 18, 1765, a great fire raged for three hours,
nearly endangering the safety of the whole city. There is in
the McGill University Library bound up with sermons and essays,
the first being an essay concerning the human rational soul, a
rare pamphlet bearing the title, “The case of the Canadians of
Montreal, distressed by fire.” There is no date of publication or
publisher’s name. It is marked “Second Edition” and a postscript
in it shows that this second edition was printed after March
20, 1766; probably in London. The second page has the following
sub-title:

                            “Motives
                              for a
                          Subscription
             Towards the relief of the sufferers at
                       Montreal in Canada

“by a dreadful fire on the 18th of May, 1765, in which 108 houses
          (containing 125 families, chiefly Canadians)
     were destroyed; and the greater part of the inhabitants
     exposed to all the miseries attending such misfortunes.
            The whole loss in buildings, merchandise,
                      furniture and apparel
                   amounted to £87,580 8. 10d.
          sterling; no part of which could be insured.”

Underneath there is a wood cut of Canada kneeling before
Britannia pointing with her left hand to the burning blocks and
appealing for relief. Underneath are the words: MONTREAL MAY
MDCCLXV. By consulting the concluding pages of “The case for the
Canadians” we see that the pamphlet is the appeal of a committee
of trustees in London “who meet at the New York Coffee House
every Thursday at 11 o’clock and will be glad to be favored
with the assistance of any subscriber.” The treasurer was John
Thornton, Esq., and there were twenty-three members, of whom
Edward Green, secretary, concludes the list. There follows a list
of firms of merchants and others in the city to the number of
twenty who would take subscriptions.

The motives as eloquently expressed in the opening part of the
appeal are firstly those of common humanity; secondly, the
“Canadians are our fellow subjects.” “The consideration of
distance ought to make no difference in the minds of a people
whose EMPIRE is extended to so many places over the earth.”
“There are other weighty considerations: much the greater part
of these sufferers are _strangers_ who, to use the language of
liberty, the fortune of war has put under _our_ protection;
and those who have not seen them may form some idea of them
by report. They are _stout_, _comely_ and _intrepid_, of a
vigilant, laborious, and _obedient_ disposition. They have given
proof of their discernment as well as of the _necessity_ of
their situation by the preference they have shown to _British
Sovereignty_ when they were at their liberty to have gone to
_Old France_, and though military government, which took place,
is seldom the most favourable to a commercial people, they had
reason to be sensible of the advantageous change. There is now
a form of _Civil Oeconomy_: if it is duly administered and not
tinctured with military power it will be the most grateful to
a brave and intelligent people. It is our wisdom and our duty
to show them in every instance that we are as willing to be
_Their_ friends as _They can be Ours_, and let us endeavour to
secure their fidelity to the crown of the realm by engaging their
_Hearts_ as well as their _tongues_. They profess allegiance
to the _King_, let us engage them by every tye to render that
allegiance inviolable.”

The details of the disaster are then given. The concluding words
of the appeal, after an allusion to the “Most Awful Gratitude”
to “_Divine Providence_” which has blessed His Majesty’s arms
and given him “the possession of the country of which the city
in question is in several respects the principal” are: “In
these several views we present the cause of the sufferers in
_Montreal_. It is meant that no circumstance which religion,
humanity or True Policy can suggest shall be omitted. Thus
shall we conciliate their minds to the British Government and
render the oeconomy of it in that quarter of the world so much
the _safer_. In proportion to the encouragement afforded by the
promotion of useful industry and labour it is to be presumed
their attachment to their country will increase by such means
we shall also show them that _Our Protestantism_ inspirs the
most essential part of Christianity: We shall show them that the
_British_ nation is not more to be dreaded for their _valor_
and _intrepidity_ than beloved, for the exercise of the _social
virtues_; and these qualities, displayed on this occasion, will
in their natural tendency promote that harmony on which the
prosperity of the state depends. Thus shall we behold commerce
and navigation, _Fixed on the securest basis_; benevolence
cherished; the hearts of all the subjects of the _British Empire_
united by a concordance of sentiment; a just discernment of
what is right and fit for the common good; and a resolution to
adhere to such right. And being thus bound by a sincere and
mutual affection, even the most adverse events may in the issue
contribute to give permanancy to the state and uninterrupted
happiness to the _King_ and his people.”

This committee by March 20, 1766, had collected £1,818 16s 8d, of
which His Majesty contributed £500. The “case of the Canadians”
is worth quoting further, since it gives a picture of the city
at this period from an English point of view. “Montreal contains
about seven thousand inhabitants. It is here that the French
Canadians were most desirous of retreating when they had acquired
a subsistence; the adjacent country where they had many seats and
farms on the banks of the river being delightfully pleasant and
the climate more agreeable than at Quebec.” It was computed that
one-fourth of the city was consumed and about one-third part in
value. The loss sustained by the “dreadful fire” was carefully
attested by His Excellency, the Honourable James Murray. An
abstract is given:

  Value in Buildings (an exact survey being made
    by masons and carpenters)                     £31,980  0  0
  Value in Merchandise                             54,718  5  9
  Value in Furniture and Apparel                   25,261 12  6
  Value in Cash, plate and Bills                    4,814  0  3
                                                  ------- -- --

      Their currency                             £116,773 18  6
    Equal to sterling                              87,580  8 10

“It is worthy of notice that these people were so tender of what
they evidenced on oath that great numbers declared, some time
after, that they found their loss considerably greater than the
account they had sworn to.

                                                                 Families.
  In St. François Street were burnt out                             54
  In St. Paul Street were burnt out                                 87
  In the Market Place were burnt out                                26
  In Hospital Street were burnt out                                  1
  In St. Louis Street were burnt out                                15
  In St. Eloit Street were burnt out                                 6
  In St. Sacrement Street were burnt out                             6
  In St. Nicholas Street were burnt out                              1
  In St. Ann Street were burnt out                                   1
  In St. Ann Suburbs were burnt out                                 10
  Grey Sisters Hospital, Suburbs and houses nearest were burnt out   8

  In all 215 families, of whom much the greater part were
  Canadians newly become subjects.”

An extract from “A genuine letter written the 20th of May
from the city two days after the fire” is quoted: “The fire
began in the garret of Mr. Levington (a person of reputation)
occasioned by hot ashes carried thither to make soap. It broke
out at the roof and in an instant the whole was in a flame which
communicated to the neighboring houses on both sides of St.
Francis Street. The confusion and distress of the inhabitants
is not to be exprest. Many of them were in the country and
those who were present had not any time to save any part of
their merchandize or household goods. Others lost all, even to
their books, papers, plate, money. This misfortune has fallen
on the richest and most trading part of the city, where the
buildings were the best and most filled with merchandize. But
the far greater part of the sufferers have now only the cloths
on their backs. Many who had the fortune to save the few goods
out of their houses and lay them on rafts or by the riverside
lost them again, either by the flames or theft. The fire was
stopt by uncovering Mons. Landrieve’s house, one end of the
hospital and two small houses between Mons. St. Germain’s and
the corner opposite Mons. Reaume’s. The wind, which, when the
fire began, was at N.N.W., turned suddenly to N.E. which, with
these precautions and the united efforts of the soldiers and the
inhabitants, saved the rest of the town. For, had it gone up that
street which leads to the parish church or fired the hospital
_des Soeurs_ it would have been difficult, if not impossible, to
have saved any part of the town. There are 110 principal houses
burnt.”

From footnotes we learn that though the houses destroyed were
made of limestone they were either covered with shingles
made of white cedar in the manner of tyle or with boards;
and they had not at this time any fire engines. Last summer
two of these useful machines were sent over to them. It must
also be considered that the houses were inclosed within the
fortifications and some so near that one of the city gates
was burnt as well as the General Hospital without the gates.
A postscript of 11th of February, 1766, adds: “It should be
observed that the rooms of their houses at Montreal are floored
with clay and stones laid on them in order to prevent fire;
but as the French in Europe are much behind us in the mechanic
arts which contribute to the safety and convenience of life
they are still more so in their colonies; to which cause we may
attribute these Canadians having been without fire engines on
this occasion. This misfortune will be remedied hereafter and it
may be hoped every other conveniency will be introduced among
them and especially the conveyance of water to reservoirs which
is much wanted there. This defect, indeed, is the more pardonable
when it is considered that in so vast and opulent a city as
London it is but the other day it was attended by very fatal
consequences.” “It is hoped,” concludes the postscript, “every
expedient that reason and experience can suggest will hereafter
be brought into use now that they have such able instructors as
ourselves.”

Then, various devices for roofing and covering the houses are
suggested. “Iron plate coverings are certainly the best as
practiced in Sweden and in Russia. Two layers of brown paper dipt
in hot tar placed over the wooden roof and under layers of iron
plates will probably answer better. Some of the persons now going
to Canada intend to try if slate will not stand the frost.”

The practical genius of the English was to be devoted to Montreal
and Canada. Thus during the early part of British rule, as
in that of the recent French régime, Montreal being built so
largely of wood, was in constant danger of fire. The English
governors early saw this and some of Gage’s earliest acts were
to fight this peril. Another fire in 1768 destroyed more than
a hundred houses. In 1777 an act was promulgated by Governor
Carleton providing for the appointment of an inspector to prevent
accidents by fire in each of the towns of Quebec, Montreal and
Three Rivers. The inspectors were to see that the chimneys were
swept once a month and each tenant was obliged to take certain
precautions against fire under penalty of a fine. Under the
French régime regulations were issued that buckets of water
should be kept in readiness and should be carried to the scene
of fire when the signal was given. The carpenters were to carry
their axes.

Early after the conquest “Fire Club No. 1” was formed by a body
of fifteen merchants apparently for mutual self protection. Fires
were still constant, some of them threatening the very existence
of the city.

On the 6th of June, 1803, a destructive fire took place in
Montreal. It broke out in the house of a man named Chevalier in
St. Lawrence Main Street on the northeast side towards the upper
end. As the wind was high and variable, the outhouses on both
sides of the street soon took fire. At a quarter to four the roof
of the jail was burning, soon followed by the English church on
the northeast and the Roman Catholic chapel on the southwest
side. These, to use the words of the reports by the magistrate
were “instantaneously consumed.” It was with difficulty the
courthouse was saved. Besides the jail and two church buildings
the old church of the Jesuits, the Roman Catholic College (St.
Raphael) and eleven houses were burnt in the lower part of the
town. About 10 o’clock at night the fire was under control at
the house adjoining that occupied by Mr. Justice Ogden. In the
suburbs, where it originated, the fire was extinguished by
sunset, after destroying thirteen houses besides outhouses,
stables, etc.

Other fires followed during the summer of so alarming a character
that it seemed evident they did not arise from accident, but from
design, and a reward of £500 was offered for the apprehension of
the offenders. With the exception of the first, which took place
in June, these fires broke out during the first week in August
and the magistrates offered a reward of £250, making with that
offered by the governor £750 for the detection of the criminal.
The succession of fires is thus reported. On Monday, August 1st,
a little after 1 o’clock in the morning, fire broke out and
consumed two houses; on Tuesday morning, at 6 o’clock, a stable
was discovered to be on fire but was pulled down and the fire
extinguished; on Wednesday several houses were burnt, one man
killed and a number more or less seriously wounded; on Friday
other fires broke out entirely destroying a number of houses, and
it was with difficulty the lower part of the town was saved from
a serious conflagration. Patrols were established and precautions
taken to guard against the repetition of the fires.[1]

In 1824 a volunteer fire association of 100 was formed under
M. Antoine Lepage, assisted by Doctor Berthelet, with its
station near Notre Dame Church. In 1825 the Property Protection
Fire Company was organized by Captain John Lukin. On the 7th
of September, 1825, a fire broke out in an outhouse belonging
to a cooper of the name of Dumaine, situated in the rear of a
house forming the corner of St. Mary and Campeau streets. Over
eighty dwellings and outhouses were consumed. Had it not been
that there was no wind during the time and that the services of
the Seventieth Regiment were at hand the fire might have been
extremely disastrous to the town.

The new municipal fathers took early steps by a regulation of the
3d of June, 1841, to create a fire department. It was to consist
of an inspector, superintendent, a chief engineer, a captain
and a lieutenant for each company of firemen. When the Oregon
boundary dispute with the slogan of its agitators “Fifty-four
forty or fight,” was creating anti-British feeling in 1846, the
Montreal fire brigade was formed into a battalion of militia
under the command of the mayor, the Honourable James Ferrier,
Mr. John Fletcher, afterwards Lieutenant-Colonel Fletcher, being
appointed adjutant. The battalion drilled, but without arms, in
the market hall for several years, even after the excitement
of the Oregon incident had died away. On the breaking out of
the Crimean war, Captain Fletcher offered authoritatively the
services of 100 men of the Montreal fire brigade as volunteers
for the war and received the thanks of the secretary of war for
their patriotism.

The voluntary system of firemen continued to the 30th of April,
1863, when the last companies, then ten, received their last
payment. On the 1st of May, 1863, the system of the telegraph
alarm was introduced as well as No. 1 fire station at the corner
of Chenneville and Craig streets. The new firemen, to the number
of thirty, with salaries varying from the equivalent of two
hundred and forty dollars to three hundred and sixty-five dollars
a year, were supplemented by a certain number of volunteers with
an honorarium of about twenty dollars annually until 1867. Until
1868 the duties included the watering of the streets. Hand pumps
were then in vogue, the steam pump not being used until 1871.

In 1863, therefore, the fire department was more fully organized
and has developed to its present efficiency.

Under a by-law passed May 10, 1865, the fire department was
reorganized in two sections; the “City Fire Police,” consisting
of a chief engineer, an assistant engineer, a hosewasher and
cleaner, eight guardians, eight assistant guardians, and eight
drivers, with eight stations; and the “City Fire Company,”
composed of such members of the former fire department as chose
to offer their services, not to exceed thirty-six in number, with
the right to enroll eighteen supernumerary members to supply
the places of absentees. They were to be under the immediate
command of a captain and two lieutenants. The fire department
had to operate the fire engines, hose, hooks and ladders, axes,
etc., and the city fire company was for the purpose of operating
fire engines, working hose, placing ladders and any other duty
required of them in aid to the fire police. The members enjoyed
all the privileges and immunities of firemen; the thirty-six
men had salaries of $20.00 a year, subject to draw-back for
nonattendance and the Supernumerary members were entitled to pay
only when supplying the place of absentee members. The captain
was paid $50.00 a year and the lieutenants got $40.00 each. The
members of the city fire police got salaries ranging from $800.00
a year for the chief engineer, down to $240.00 a year for the
drivers.

The day’s work for the fire police was divided into four watches
of six hours each and it was provided that “when not on watch
or engaged in street-watering as is hereafter provided, the
guardians and drivers may be absent for meals, and if married,
for the purpose of attending to their families; but with the
exception of the first, leave of absence shall first be obtained.”

In 1910 the fire brigade consisted of 1 chief, 1 deputy chief,
6 district chiefs, 29 captains, 38 lieutenants, 19 engineers,
100 first class firemen at $800 a year, 103 second class firemen
at $725, 26 third class firemen at $675, and 100 fourth class
firemen at $625, and 27 other members with various duties.

The apparatus was composed of 90 pieces, including 29 hose
wagons, 2 Siamese wagons, 6 aerial ladder trucks, 16 hook and
ladder trucks, 3 salvage wagons, 2 water towers, 2 chemical
engines, 1 hose and chemical wagon, 6 coal wagons, 1 automobile
and 9 buggies for officers. The brigade was called out 2,143
times.

[Illustration: MONTREAL’S AUTOMOBILE FIRE-FIGHTING APPARATUS]

During the last two years automobiles for the various officers
have increased in number. In the summer of 1912 an automobile
fire hose apparatus was ordered for No. 20 station and two
automobile tractors, one for the aerial ladder truck and
the other for the 1200 steam fire engine. These proving
successful, on the recommendation of the fire chief the Board of
Commissioners ordered three more of the latter in December, 1913,
and a large order was placed for more at the beginning of 1914,
so that now twelve motor power apparatuses are employed with more
to follow. The day of the horse seems to be doomed for the city
fire stations as too slow.

The fire chiefs of Montreal since 1863 have been:

  Alexander Bertram    1863-1873
  William Patton       1873-1888
  Zephyrin Benoit      1888-1908
  J. Tremblay          1909-


                        FIGHTING DARKNESS

The lighting of Montreal dates from 1815. Up to this no public
provision had been made. Darkness is the friend of vice, and
burglaries were numerous. In November, 1815, through the
exertions of Mr. Samuel Dawson and others, that portion of
St. Paul Street west of the old market (now Place Royale) was
handsomely lighted by twenty-two oil lamps fixed at a distance
of fifty-four feet from each other, each costing when ready
for use $7.00 each. The east side of St. Paul Street raised a
subscription “not to be outshown by their neighbours!” Notre Dame
shortly followed the “bright example set.” This activity led on
the citizens to petition parliament to provide night watches and
street lamps for the town. In April, 1818, an act was passed
providing for this. The number of men appointed was twenty-four,
their duties being to attend to the trimming and lighting of the
lamps and to act as guardians of the city. They used to call out
the hours of the night, such as “Past 12 o’clock and a starlit
night” through the drowsy streets. Within the homes the humble
candle was still used and each household had its implements to
make these simple dips or rush lights. Afterwards ready-made
candles from England were sold. When candles were first
introduced they were thought miraculous, but there are still
some living in Montreal who remember how, in their youth, before
candles, grease or oil would be put in a spoon, and carried
through the house at night to light the way from room to room.
Lucifer matches of the modern type were a wonder. The flint was
used with tinders half a century ago.

The first gas works were built in 1836 at the Cross, then about
one mile from the city, and some shops were lighted on the 23d of
November, 1837. The proprietors were incorporated by an act of
the provincial legislature in April, 1836. Mr. Armstrong was the
proprietor and Mr. E.A. Furness was the principal stockholder and
manager. The city was dilatory in making use of their services.

The New City Gas Company was established in 1847. In 1848 it was
able to announce to its patrons that it had reduced the charge
per 1,000 cubic feet from 25 shillings to 12 shillings, 6 pence.
This is a far cry to the present rate. The New City Gas Company
changed its name in 1879 to the Montreal Gas Company which was
amalgamated in the Montreal Light, Heat and Power Company in 1901.

The origin of the lighting of Montreal by electricity may be
briefly told. In 1878 Mr. J.I. Craig, of Montreal, returning from
the Paris exhibition, determined to work out some experiments
in electric lighting following on demonstrations seen in Paris.
Accordingly he built himself Gramme bipolars, four polar machines
and a Gramme alternation to supply current for Gablacoff candles.
In 1879 he was allowed to give a demonstration by fixing up
lamps on Bonaventure Street (now St. James), between Seigneurs
and Guy streets. Another exhibition was given facing the Champ
de Mars, having its generators in the building of the “Le Monde”
newspaper, and his lamps on that now occupied by the “Chambre
de Commerce” on St. Gabriel Street. At the midnight mass on
Christmas eve, 1879, at St. Joseph’s Church, Richmond Street, he
gave an illustration of its services in interior illumination.
In 1882 a company called the “Phoenix” was formed to promote the
commercial utility of Mr. Craig’s inventions, which consisted
of dynamos, arc lamps and storage batteries. In the same year
the harbour commissioners purchased a Brush generator with arc
lights and were thus the first to adopt the new light. In 1884
the firm of Thompson & Houston, which became the Royal Electric
Company, secured the contract to light some of the streets,
commencing with St. James. In 1885 the Phoenix Company going
into liquidation, the estate was purchased by Mr. J.I. Craig,
who put up several plants in the province of Quebec and between
1887 and 1890 secured the contracts for St. Henri, St. Cunégonde
and Coté St. Antoine. The first alternating current in the city
was installed in 1890 by the Royal Electric Company. In 1895
the Royal Electric was merged with the Montreal Gas Company
and the St. Lawrence Electric Company which was exploiting
a hydro-electric plant at Chambly. Later the Lachine Rapids
Hydraulic & Land Company, the Provincial Light, Heat & Power
Company, the Standard Light, Heat & Power Company, the Citizens
Light, Heat & Power Company and the Temple Electric Company were
also added. The whole combination is now known as the Montreal
Light, Heat & Power Company of today, which has its head offices
at the Power Building on Craig Street.

Another body entitled the “Montreal Public Service Company,”
a merger, which obtained its charter about 1912, controls the
Canadian Light, Heat & Power, the Montreal Electric, the Saraguay
and the Dominion Central Electric Company. The offices of this
second corporation are in the Eastern Townships Building. Between
these two companies Montreal is lighted in 1914.

We may add the following notes of the origin of our electric
fire alarm, telephone service and other electric developments in
Montreal:

The first telegraph wire connecting Quebec and Montreal was
installed in 1847. But the first wire strung in the Dominion was
put up in the same year by the Toronto, Hamilton, Niagara and St.
Catherine’s Telegraph Company. The Montreal Telegraph Company
was organized in 1846, and was incorporated by a special act
of the legislature of Canada in 1847, and first opened between
Quebec and Toronto. A message from Toronto to Montreal cost
3s. 9d., in Halifax currency, for ten words. The Montreal fire
alarm telegraph, with which is connected the police telegraph
and the telegraph in connection with the water department,
was built by Messrs. J.F. Kennard & Company, of Boston. The work
was commenced on the 2d of September and completed on the 26th
of December, 1862, at a cost of $20,000. This line went into
operation on the 19th of January, 1863, and “entered on its
duties by striking the hour of 12 noon,” as is announced in a
handbook issued in 1863 by the London & Liverpool Fire & Light
Insurance Company. Electricity was first used as a motive power
in Canada in 1883, when a short piece of track was laid on the
grounds of the Toronto Industrial Exhibition. The first practical
road was laid in 1884. In 1885 the track was lengthened and the
overhead wire and trolley arm used. The possibility of combating
the snow was demonstrated successfully in 1891 by the Ottawa
Electric Railway Company. Montreal followed in 1892, when the
city passenger rails were electrified. Quebec followed in 1897.

[Illustration: THE POWER HOUSE]


                         FIGHTING FLOODS

Floods in the early days of Maisonneuve had threatened the
old stockade fort and till modern days the lower part of the
city has constantly been inundated. On Thursday, the 14th of
January, 1848, the waters of the St. Lawrence rose for three
days and flooded, to a depth of from two to six feet, the
lower part of the city, Griffintown and the emigrant sheds at
Point St. Charles, where the sick from the fever were lying.
In February, 1857, Griffintown was the scene of another and
similar inundation. The lower part was like a series of canals
and communication between the houses was by small boats. More
important was the inundation of 1861 when the flood extended
over one-fourth of the city. Griffintown was again submerged.
The trains from the west and from Lachine were unable to enter
the city and passengers had to find their way to the city by
Sherbrooke Street. “The extent of the inundation,” says Sandham,
“may be conceived from the fact that the river rose about
twenty-four feet above its average level. The whole of St. Paul
Street and up McGill Street to St. Maurice Street, and from
thence to the limits of the city was entirely submerged and boats
ascended McGill Street as far as St. Paul Street. To add to
the suffering of the people the thermometer sank rapidly and a
violent and bitter snowstorm set in on Tuesday, April 15th, and
continued to rage with great fury all night.” Another flood in
the lower town, second only to that of 1861, occurred in April,
1865. The damage done was not so great owing to the gradual rise
of the waters, the inhabitants being able to remove their effects.

In the flood of April 17th, 18th and 19th, 1886, it inundated
nearly one-half of what then constituted Montreal. The “Witness”
of the above dates contained a long account of the flood.

According to this, the conditions became really serious on Sunday
morning, April 18, while the people were at church. A big ice
shove occurred in the river, and ice was soon piled up twenty or
thirty feet high on St. Helen’s Island. * * * But there was yet
no break in the Longueuil and Hochelaga ice, and the crushing,
grumbling ice in the channel commenced to pack more thickly and
to rear pyramids more profusely than before. At the last the mass
stopped moving altogether.

When the water rushed backward, finding no sufficient outlet in
the channel, Chaboillez Square, St. James Street West, Craig
Street to Chenneville Street, and then to Cote Street, all were
soon covered, and those who had gone from the lower levels to
uptown churches, or who had come down to churches on St. James
Street, and elsewhere, found that they had to make a detour as
far east as St. Urbain and St. Charles Borromee streets, in order
to get past the flood. Higher it slowly came up, and was into
St. Urbain Street. It was also a few inches deep in St. Germain
Street. And the cellars were full almost from one end to the
other of Craig Street.

At Victoria Square, several teamsters with express wagons
commenced a ferry service which was of great value to themselves
and the public, for they charged 5, and in some cases 10 cents,
to carry one across “the raging Victoria Canal.”

The eastern limit of the flood was just beyond Bonsecours Market,
and Vitre Street was the farthest north. At Bonsecours Market the
dealers could not get into their cellars at all.

At Jacques Cartier Square, the water was nearly to the corner
of St. Paul Street, and the lamp posts at the corner of
Jacques Cartier Square stood about half out of the water. The
water washed through the pillar letter box at the corner of
Commissioners Street. St. Paul Street west from Custom House
Square was flooded. It was partly up St. Nicholas and St.
François Xavier, but had not reached St. Sacrament.

Turning down St. Peter, pedestrians were brought to a sudden halt
just north of Lemoine Street. The wrecking in the warehouses
along Lemoine Street was described as “disheartening and the
destruction appalling.”

On McGill Street, the wide space permitted any amount of boating,
and skiffs and rafts were plying in all directions. McGill, above
Lemoine, was entirely under water.

“A walk to Victoria Square opened the vista of St. James Street
West, which street, from St. Michael Lane West, was a sheet of
water as far as the eye could reach, the cars on the sidings at
the Bonaventure station standing in the flood.”

The City Passenger Railway had ceased to be able to get through
to St. Alexander Street, and were almost cut off from proceeding
up Bleury. Later on the Bleury Street route was also impassable,
the water flowing up Craig to the foot of Place d’Armes Hill.

The fires of the Montreal Gas Company’s works on Ottawa Street
were extinguished by water, and consequently the supply was cut
off from the whole of the lower portion of the city. Fortunately
the company had another plant at Hochelaga which was not flooded.

On the south shore fields of ice swept over the country, knocking
down fences, barns, and portions of dwelling houses. Some of the
inhabitants who had spent fifty or sixty years in St. Lambert
said they had never seen the water reach the height it did this
time. At Longueuil the fine old Catholic church had four feet of
water in it and nearly the whole village was more or less under
water.

The following is a record made at the time by the city surveyor
of the highest level reached by the water at the lowest points on
various streets.

                                       Feet.  Inches.

  Mill Street                            10      --
  Common Street                           2       6
  Commissioners Street                    6      --
  Youville Street                         5      --
  St. Paul Street                         2      --
  St. Francois Xavier                     3       6
  McGill Street                           4       6
  Wellington Street                       5       7
  Ottawa Street                           6      --
  Inspector Street                        6      --
  Chaboillez Square                       5      --
  Grand Trunk depot on Albert Street      6       9
  St. James Street                        6       8
  Little St. Antoine                      4      --
  Wellington Bridge                      10      --
  Conde                                   7      --
  Manufacturers                           4      --
  Centre                                  8      --
  St. Patrick                             7      --

In 1887, on April 2, the water rose 4 feet 7 inches above the
revetment wall. In 1888 an embankment was made to prevent floods,
since when there has not been much trouble.

[Illustration: THE FLOOD OF 1886]

[Illustration: ICE SHOVES]

[Illustration: THE WATER FAMINE]


                        FIGHTING DROUGHT

Floods are bad but droughts are an evil, also, which a city has
to forestall. How this has been done may be exemplified by the
story of the city’s waterworks. As this has been recently told
again by Mr. F. Clifford Smith, we shall largely follow his
excellent resumé prepared for the City Council last year.

At the beginning of the present century, when Montreal was a
town of about nine thousand inhabitants, who lived mainly within
the old fortifications, or, in other words, within the area
bounded by the sites of McGill Street, Fortification Lane, Berri
Street and the St. Lawrence, the only means provided by the
municipality for the supply of water consisted of public pumps
at Place d’Armes, the Market Place (now Place Royale), Notre
Dame Street near the Courthouse, St. Jean Baptiste near St. Paul
Street, and a couple of other points. For the rest the citizens
supplied themselves with water from private wells and cisterns,
and by watering carts from the St. Lawrence, and the creeks, the
principal of which was the Petite Rivière which ran where Craig
Street now is. The pedding of water in big puncheons was a common
and quaint custom of these early days. The water cart would be
driven into the river and filled. The poor women washed their
linen on the banks.

In 1800, after considerable talk about forming a waterworks,
an act was passed incorporating Joseph Frobisher (one of the
founders of the Northwest Trading Company and builder of Beaver
Hall) and his associates[2] under the title of the Company of
Proprietors of the Montreal Waterworks. The capital invested was
£6,000 with power to increase to £48,000. An exclusive franchise
was given for fifty years. The system decided upon was that
of gravitation. Water was obtained from a pond in the rear of
the present Cote des Neiges village, and was brought to the
city through wooden pipes laid around the southern slope of the
mountain, via Monklands and Cote St. Antoine Road, to cisterns
which were placed one on the corner of Guy and Dorchester
streets, and the other on Notre Dame Street, just west of
Dalhousie Square.

The company’s trouble soon began. The supply, which was from
a well, was most precarious, while the frequent bursting of
the wooden pipes finally resulted in the enterprise becoming a
failure.

In 1816, the waterworks, and unexpired franchise of thirty-five
years, were offered for sale; and in the year 1819 they were
purchased by a new company under the management of Mr. Thomas
Porteous for £5,000. This company abandoned the gravitation
supply from the spring and instituted a steam pumping plant,
the engines, of course, being very primitive. The supply was
got from the St. Lawrence in the near vicinity of the city.
Instead of wooden pipes, four-inch iron pipes were substituted,
and wooden cisterns were then erected on Notre Dame Street east
of Bonsecours Street. The cisterns were found to be very weak
and were finally replaced with other wooden cisterns, but they
were lined with lead. The capacity of the cisterns was 240,000
gallons. The pumping engine was placed on the west corner of
Water and Friponne streets. The amount expended by Mr. Porteous
was about forty thousand[3] pounds. The four-inch pipes put down
soon proved insufficient; other troubles ensuing, this company
also sold out. The plant was advertised for sale and was bought
in by Mr. J. Haynes for $60,000. Mr. Haynes quickly floated a new
company which replaced the small pipes in the streets by pipes
of ten inches diameter and installed a more powerful engine. In
1843 two engines were at work with a pumping capacity of 93,000
gallons. By this time there were laid in the streets fourteen
miles of pipes.

In 1843 also the first agitation was started for the city to own
the waterworks. It was kept up till 1845, when the municipality
made an offer of £50,000 for the plant, which was accepted.


                   HISTORY UNDER CIVIC CONTROL

In 1847, two years after the civic authorities of Montreal had
taken over the primitive plant, the water committee made a report
to the city council suggesting that a premium be offered for the
best plan to force water from the St. Lawrence into a reservoir
on the mountain. The idea was to get water power from the Lachine
Canal. The suggestion was deemed impracticable and not acted upon.

In the year 1849 the city constructed a reservoir on what now is
St. Louis Square. Its height was 130 feet above the St. Lawrence
and its cost was £3,000. By the year 1850 the corporation had
laid nineteen miles of iron pipe and six miles of lead pipes. The
reservoir had a capacity of 3,000,000 gallons.

In the year 1852, the year of the great fire when much of the
waterworks system had been destroyed, the services of Mr. Thomas
C. Keefer were procured by the city to draft a plan whereby
the city could get an entirely new water supply. The plan he
proposed was adopted and has practically been in operation up to
the present, when it is being drastically changed. The system
consisted in an open canal having the entrance about a mile and
a half above the Lachine Rapids. The canal, or aqueduct, which
was four and three-quarters miles long, ended at a building
called the Wheel House. This building contained two vertical
hydraulic wheels operating a set of six pumps having a capacity
of 4,000,000 gallons a day. The water was raised through a main
of twenty-four-inch diameter, and ended at a reservoir where the
present McTavish reservoir stands. The construction of these
works lasted until 1856 and cost $280,236.53. The elevation
of the aqueduct was thirty-seven feet above the level of the
harbour. The dimensions of the aqueduct were forty feet wide at
the water surface and eight feet deep. The canal furnished more
than sufficient power to develop 300 horsepower, and to raise
200 feet above the level of the water, in the harbor, 5,000,000
imperial gallons of water, being at the rate of forty imperial
gallons per capita. The hydraulic motive power was utilized by
two breast wheels working six pumps. The old works were, of
course, abandoned, and the pumping engines and reservoir on Notre
Dame Street, with their sites, were sold for the very modest sum
of $23,320. The whole new system had been well devised and the
supply of water, indeed, was sufficient for a population twice as
large as it was then; but troubles soon cropped up. Owing to the
blocking up of the ice in the aqueduct, the formation of frasil
and the annoyance caused by the backing up of water in the Little
St. Pierre River, the supply in winter frequently only averaged
three million gallons. The channel of the Little River St. Pierre
was deepened in 1857 and 1858, but not sufficiently to get rid
of the back water in question. In the winter of 1863 a tailrace
was cut to the river which greatly ameliorated conditions. In
1862 and 1863, owing to increased population and ice blocks at
the entrance of the intake, again the supply of water became
so uncertain that the ancient custom of supplying water in
puncheons had to be resorted to. This state of things naturally
caused a great deal of trouble and annoyance, to say nothing
of the additional expense to the city. In 1866 the consumption
had actually reached 5,000,000 gallons a day, with the result
that the supply was once more quite inadequate. In this year the
superintendent of the water department made a strong plea for
the purchase of steam engines; he held it was the only way that
the water famines, through which the city was passing, could
be prevented. Had there been a sufficient head of water in the
aqueduct to get enough power, the plea for steam would not have
been made, owing to its very heavy cost.

It was in 1868 that the first steam engine was installed, and
some relief was experienced.

Little by little other steam pumps were added, but so steady was
the growth of population that there were constant fears of a
shortage of water.


                 CONSTRUCTION OF THE RESERVOIRS

The pressure on the pipes having been constantly unsatisfactory,
and owing to the city expanding towards the higher levels, the
construction of the present reservoirs had been decided upon.
The reservoir, called the McTavish reservoir, is of oblong shape
with semi-circular ends, and so placed in the mountain slope that
the surface of the rock is about level with the water surface on
one side, and with its bottom on the other. The natural rock
was used as a wall on the upper side, but on the lower side the
water is maintained by a masonry wall which is solidly banked.
The reservoir was divided transversely into two equal parts by a
masonry wall, and when first completed contained thirteen and a
half million gallons. Later on extensive enlargements were made,
until today its capacity is 37,000,000 gallons. Its elevation
when full is 204 feet above the harbour. The entire cost of the
reservoir is about one million dollars. Under the gatehouse,
which stands on the reservoir wall, is a well or distributing
chamber. Into the bottom of this well the main pipes from the
pumps are led, and opposite to them is a separate passage to
each division of the reservoir. The pipes and passages are all
controlled by gates, and by their means the water is turned
off and on each division or main pipe, as may be desired. The
water from the pumps at the Wheel House does not go first to the
reservoir and thence to the city; the reservoir merely takes the
overflow water from the pumps at the Wheel House and stores it
for further use. In other words, it is a safety supply which the
city can depend upon in the event of sudden breakdown of pumps.
But the big reservoir, even when full, could not supply the city
now for two days.

What is termed the High Level reservoir is considerably farther
up the mountain than the McTavish reservoir. It was found
necessary to construct this in order to supply the district
above Sherbrooke Street; as the McTavish reservoir was at such
an altitude that it could not give the required pressure for the
more elevated districts of the city. The High Level reservoir
draws its supply from the McTavish reservoir. Its pumping station
is at the McTavish, and it is equipped with one 5,000,000 and
one 2,000,000 gallon pump. At the pumping station at the Wheel
House there are six steam pumps. The High Level reservoir is 212
feet higher than the McTavish, or 413 feet above the harbour. Its
capacity is one and three-quarter million of gallons. Like the
McTavish it is built in the solid rock and is a most substantial
structure.


                      PUMPING PLANT IN 1912

As it is now the city’s intent to do all of the pumping by
hydro-electric power, it will be of interest to note, especially
for the future, what is the steam pumping plant of today.

The plant situated at the low level pumping station, Point St.
Charles, is here seen:

  Engine No. 1, erected in 1886, ten million gallons, high duty,
  Worthington.

  Engine No. 2, erected in 1894, ten million gallons, high duty,
  Worthington.

  Engine No. 3, erected in 1895, eight million gallons, low duty,
  Worthington.

  Engine No. 4, erected in 1905, twelve million gallons, high duty,
  Worthington.

  Engine No. 5, erected in 1909, twelve million gallons, turbine
  with Bellis-Marcum engine.

  Engine No. 6, erected in 1912, twelve million gallons, turbine
  with Bellis-Marcum engine.

The plant at the High Level reservoir is as follows:

  McTavish St. engine No. 1, erected in 1889, three million
  gallons, Gilbert steam pump.

  McTavish St. engine No. 2, erected in 1906, five million gallons,
  Electric turbine.

  Papineau St. engine No. 1, erected in 1911, six million gallons,
  Electric turbine.

[Illustration: ANCIENT AQUEDUCT]

[Illustration: SHOPS OF ANCIENT AQUEDUCT]

The story of the water supply would be inadequate without an
account of the great drought that fell upon the city in the last
weeks of 1913, caused by a break in the concrete conduit which
occurred after dark on Christmas night. For 193 hours the city
was without an adequate water supply. It was in great alarm lest
a typhoid epidemic or fires should start. Luckily fires were
few, but one on St. Louis Square occurred when the want of water
caused a whole block to be burned down. The city authorities had
water carried round in the water carts and distributed to the
people, who besides this scanty service had to melt the snow,
then abundant, for culinary purposes. The danger of typhoid was
averted by careful attention of the people to the directions of
the city health officers and other physicians. The event caused
great excitement and much criticism. As a warning note of the
dangers that may befall a modern city, the following adapted
account, published at the time, is chronicled here.[4]

  Montreal’s 193-hour water famine, it is hoped, has passed and
  gone, but that a city of its size should be so absolutely thrown
  out of gear by the bursting of a single water conduit was such a
  shock to the citizens, that they will want the facts of the case
  to go down to posterity engraved in tables of stone--or concrete.

  Shortly after dark on the evening of December 25th, a break
  nearly sixty feet long appeared in the water supply conduit at
  a point directly behind the Protestant Hospital for the Insane,
  on La Salle road. It was claimed the cause of the breakage was
  the digging away of the earth surrounding the conduit on the
  one side, adjacent to the old aqueduct, and the piling of it up
  on the other side, in connection with the widening of the old
  channel.

  It is stated that the pipe was thus caused to sag, crack and
  eventually under the water pressure to break.

  The rush of water carried away most of the earth left between
  the conduit and the aqueduct, and it was into the latter,
  fortunately, that the water flowed. If there can be a fortunate
  side to the accident, it is that it occurred where it did, within
  a couple of rods of the shack used by the construction company,
  whose men were at work on the aqueduct, and where there was a
  telephone, which greatly facilitated the ordering of supplies and
  men.

  By early morning on the 26th, a steel pipe, of six sections, and
  slightly smaller in diameter than the conduit, had been ordered,
  and Controller Godfrey had appeared on the scene, from which he
  was thereafter never absent for more than a few hours.

  But before the pipe could be placed, all the earth on the top of,
  and to the north of the pipe had to be removed, and the remaining
  and unbroken sides of the conduit demolished. While this work was
  in progress, sections of the steel tube began to arrive and were
  bolted together, so as to be ready to be swung into position as
  soon as the place was cleared.

  In the clearing operations, the engineers were also lucky, owing
  to the close proximity of one of the Cooke Company’s derrick
  steam shovels, which not only did the hard work of clearing the
  ground expeditiously, but later supplied hot water for mixing the
  cement, and steam to keep it warm while drying.

  With Controller Godfrey either at work or bustling up the makers
  of the steel tube, and City Engineer George Janin, and Waterworks
  Engineer Lesage, continually at the scene of operations, by
  Monday, December 29th, the background was cleared and the steel
  pipe nearly completed.

  By Tuesday, the latter had been swung into place, concrete had
  been run in to fill the joints and workmen had been lowered into
  the conduit, with buckets of blazing tar, to seal them inside.

  On Wednesday, the 31st, at 4.45 A.M., the water was let into the
  conduit and the pumps were started. They ran a few minutes when
  the engineers were compelled to close them down because there
  was not a sufficient depth of water in the conduit for them to
  operate successfully. It was then found that the water had blown
  out some of the filling of concrete, wood and tar, near the top
  of the steel tube, and that a large leak had been formed which
  would keep the city waterless over New Year’s Day.

  Meanwhile various serious fires had occurred in the city, in
  spite of the extra precautions taken by the fire commissioners
  and the police, and Chief Tremblay of the fire department is
  reported to have demanded at the City Hall that he be given
  water, and to have stated that there was but enough water
  remaining in the reservoirs for one big fire.

  At the same time a number of foolish rumours gained credence,
  such as that should the water not be forthcoming from the conduit
  at once, the dam which holds the River St. Lawrence out from the
  old aqueduct would be dynamited, and an even more destructive
  rumor that the said dam was about to burst at any minute. Had
  either of these eventualities occurred, as various engineers
  pointed out, the whole of Point St. Charles would have been
  flooded.

  On Wednesday afternoon, about 4 o’clock, hot concrete was run
  into the joints at both ends of the steel tube, and it was
  announced that after allowing four hours for pouring and fifteen
  hours for drying, the water would be let into the conduit and all
  would be well.

  Thursday, however, still saw the engineers waiting all day for
  the concrete to set, while a pipe from the derrick up on the
  embankment above discharged steam into a canvas outer covering to
  the joint, and through a man-hole in the tube into the interior
  of the conduit.

  On Friday morning, the eighth day from the break, Controller
  Godfrey, City Engineers Janin and Lesage, Engineer Herlihy, of
  the Cooke Construction Company, and J.E. Jamieson, of grain
  elevator fame, who had also been called in by the city for
  consultation, made an inspection of the repairs, and were at
  first inclined to the belief that all was well, and, in fact,
  issued a statement that water should be in the city by noon or 1
  o’clock.

  But a close internal examination revealed the fact that the
  concrete was yet not dry, so in order to prevent the waste of
  more time waiting for it, it was decided to cover it with oakum
  and pitch, and then to erect a wooden bulkhead or flange around
  the end of the steel tube inside the conduit to prevent the water
  from getting at the concrete with any force. It was here that the
  advantage of the telephone so near the work was evidenced, for a
  very short time only elapsed between the ordering of the oakum
  and its delivery.

  The process of covering the soft concrete with its protection and
  erecting the bulkhead occupied most of Friday, and it was with
  some degree of fear and trembling that the engineers in charge
  ordered the water turned on at the intake at 6.45 P.M. This was
  done very, very gently, and so prepared were those responsible
  for another breakdown that it was definitely stated that should
  it occur, the pipe would be opened and the water allowed to flow
  into the old aqueduct.

  However, all went well, and the first water reached the pumping
  station at Point St. Charles at a few minutes past 8 P.M. Within
  half an hour the first pump was started up, and at 9.50 the
  pressure was reported to be seventy pounds. By 11 o’clock the
  water was up to the Milton Street level, and three-quarters of an
  hour after 6, seven of the pumps were hard at work, and pumping
  at the rate of 56,000,000 gallons a day. Before breakfast on
  Saturday morning the McTavish reservoir was full, and every house
  had its full complement of water.

  During the period of stress, there is not a doubt everyone
  connected with the repair work, and, for that matter, all those
  engaged in supplying the water to householders from sleighs,
  worked to their utmost capacity, in spite of considerable
  external difficulties.

  At present Montreal’s city waterworks are supplied by a
  very-much-criticised concrete conduit, with a 60-foot length of
  steel tube of a considerably smaller diameter let into it where
  the break occurred. But at the time of writing, at least, the
  city has got water.


FOOTNOTES:

[1] The Précis in Doctor Brymner’s Archivist’s report for 1892
has been used above.

[2] These were John Gray, Daniel Sutherland, Thomas Schieffelin
and Stephen Sewell.

[3] Writing in 1839, the author of “Hochelaga Depicta” says,
“Montreal is better supplied with water than any other city on
this continent with the exception of Philadelphia.”

[4] Montreal Daily Star, January 5, 1914.




                          CHAPTER XXXII

                          LAW AND ORDER

        JAILS--POLICE SERVICES--COURTHOUSE--LAW OFFICERS

  EARLY PUNISHMENTS--FIRST CASES OF THE MAGISTRATES--GEORGE THE
    “NAGRE”--“EXECUTION FOR MURDER”--OTHER CRIMES PUNISHED BY
    DEATH--SOLDIER DESERTIONS--A PUBLIC EXECUTION--THE JAILS--THE
    JAIL TAX TROUBLES--OBNOXIOUS TOASTS--THE NEW JAIL OF 1836--ITS
    POPULATIONS--THE NEW BORDEAUX PRISON--OTHER SUPPLEMENTARY
    PRISONS--THE EARLY POLICING OF MONTREAL--THE LOCAL POLICE
    FORCE OF 1815--THE POLICE FORCE AFTER THE REBELLION OF
    1837-1838--POLICE CHIEFS--MODERN LAW COURTS AND JUDGES--THE
    HISTORY OF THE BAR--THE BAR ASSOCIATIONS OF MONTREAL--THE
    RECORDERS--THE ARCHIVES.

  SUPPLEMENT--THE JUDGES OF THE HIGHER COURTS FROM 1764 TO
    1914--THE SHERIFFS OF MONTREAL--THE PROTHONOTARIES--THE
    COURTHOUSE SITES--THE BATONNIERS.


The early execution of the law in Montreal under British rule has
been indicated in the chapters on the military government which
lasted until 1764, when the magistrates or justices of the peace
ruled the city till nearly up to the Union. Their first case was
one of battery and assault.

At the May meeting of 1765 the first felony case was adjudicated.
A man and his wife and a negro had been stealing. The sentence
of “William and Elinor March and George, the Nagre” is thus
recorded: “They are to go back to the place of their confinement,
the said William to be stripped to the waist and Elinor March to
have her back only stripped, and the said George the Nagre and
each tyed to the carttail and beginning at the jail or prison
between the hours of 8 and 9 o’clock in the forenoon on Friday
next, are to proceed along around by the Intendant’s and then go
to Market Place and round by St. Francis Street and through the
Parade to place begun at, during which round they are to receive
twenty-five stripes each on the naked back, besides twenty-five
each on the naked back when at the market place.”

Next month “George, the Nagre,” was up again for stealing two
pieces of silk ribbon, the justices being John Dumas, Daniel
Robertson and Isaac Todd. He was sentenced again to be flogged
with a cat of nine tails on his march around at the carttail six
times with ten stripes each.

At the sitting of the court for August 2, 1765, a French woman
named Margaret Tourangeau was “Set for an hour in the stocks for
stealing a piece of camblet.”

“It is remarkable,” quotes Borthwick (History and Gazetteer,
page 17), “that in the records of courts of sessions for years
after the conquest of the country as natural there are very few
French names before the magistrates for those crimes for which
punishment by whipping, the stocks or the pillory or branding
on the hand was meted out. This shows how thoroughly they
obeyed their curés to respect the laws and be faithful to their
allegiance.”

In the Court of King’s Bench, September, 1781, is recorded the
first murderer to be hanged in the history of this Province since
the cession, William Blunt.

Being placed in the stocks with a paper label on the breast and
“burning in the hand” were common forms of punishment during this
period.

The latter punishment was thus inflicted: The prisoner was
brought from the gaol into the courtroom, and made firm by an
iron hand at the back of the dock, the palm part of his own hand
being opened tightly. The red hot iron, sometimes ending either
in a crown or some other device, was held ready by the common
hangman, and the punishment was inflicted in the center of the
palm. The instrument being ready, the prisoner is informed that
the moment it touches his flesh he can repeat as fast as he can
these words in French, “Vive le Roi” three times, and at the end
of the third repetition, the punishment would cease, or the words
“God Save the King” if he were an English prisoner.

Even in this short time the hot iron has hissed into the flesh,
and made such a mark that all the waters of the St. Lawrence
could not efface it. (Cf. Borthwick’s Gazetteer.)

The Montreal prisons of the past, especially before 1840, saw
many sad men who were condemned to death for crimes not so
punished today, as a glance at some of the principal events
recorded in the Court of King’s and Queen’s Bench from 1812 to
1838 will show.

Cases of executions for (1) stealing, larceny, shop lifting,
burglary, 20; (2) horsestealing, 10; (3) rape, 3; (4) highway
robbery, 1; (5) sacrilege, 1; (6) forgery, 1.

After 1821, although the records give the sentence of hanging for
the above crimes, we find that although it is often executed, yet
there is frequent mention of “pardoned by the king,” “respited,”
“transported (so many) years in prison,” “pillory,” and “lashes.”
One burglar sentenced to be hanged is respited and sent for
five years to Quebec! It is strange to find cases of murder and
manslaughter punished thus: “Murder, to be burned in the hand;”
“drowning a man, six months in jail and to be burned in the hand
in open court.” One of those executed in 1813 for stealing a cow
was B. Clement, a boy of thirteen and a half years of age.

In 1818, March term, L. Bourguignon, convicted of grand larceny
and condemned to be hanged, “prays for the benefit of the
clergy,” which being granted by the court, he is sentenced to
two-years’ House of Correction.

Desertion or attempt at desertion among the soldiers stationed
in the Montreal district was not uncommon in 1838, after the
first curl revolt of 1837. Transportation for a term of fourteen,
twenty-one years, or “for the period of his natural life” was the
sentence meted out to the “felon” who was marked with a D for
deserter. A few records of deserting will suffice:

Fifteenth of May, 1838: Fourteen soldiers, deserters, under
sentence of transportation, sent to Mr. Waud, Jailor, under
charge of officer of Thirty-fourth Regiment.

Eleventh July: Three soldiers sentenced to fourteen, twenty-one,
and twenty-one years’ transportation by G.A. Wetherall,
commanding officer of the Second Battalion, “The Royal.” Three
for a term of “natural life”--the Seventy-first Regiment.

Fifth of August: Five soldiers of the Seventy-first Regiment,
fourteen years.

Third of September: Two of the Fifteenth Regiment, fourteen and
seven years. Three of the Seventy-first Regiment, fourteen years
and all marked D.

In May, 1839, no less than twenty-four soldiers were committed
at one time for desertion, by order of the town major; five were
discharged, the remainder were transported. These belonged to the
Eighty-fifth and Thirty-second Regiments.

It is not our purpose to record the gruesome punishments further.
There are, however, living with us those who have heard from
their fathers the days in the ’20s when hangings were conducted
in public in the yard of the old jail close to the Champ de Mars.
The following description is from a lady eyewitness still living
in 1914:

“You know, Mr. Robert Watson, a flour inspector, and a fine
gentleman, was shot dead in his own house by a man whose name I
cannot recall. That was, I think, in the twenties. The man was
arrested, tried and found guilty on circumstantial evidence,
which was principally the fact that his boots corresponded to the
footmarks found in the snow leading to Mr. Watson’s residence. At
the same time there was a French-Canadian tried and sentenced to
death for forgery, and sheep stealing, which were then capital
offenses. I determined to see the hangings. I know you will think
me queer, but I had a desire to go. Hangings were then conducted
in public. I remember the crowd in the jail yard as well as
if it was yesterday--men and women and girls like myself. The
authorities had allowed as many as the yard would hold, but there
were hundreds outside who could see nearly as well.

“The Irishman asked for three cheers for the Irish, and said,
‘Take off your hats for the Irishman.’ The people did as he
asked. The Frenchman said he had sold his body to the students,
and that he was ready to die like a man. He asked the women to
come up that he might pull their ears off, for when he began to
steal his mother never corrected him, and therefore he was on the
scaffold. Then I fainted, the first and only time in my life. I
was sorry I went.”


                              JAILS

The jail[1] used in the latter part of French régime and the
early portion of English rule was situated on the site formerly
known as the Crystal Block (now represented by the second
building northwest of St. Lawrence Street), on Notre Dame Street.
On the occupation of the British, the Jesuits’ residence, on
Notre Dame Street, on the site facing what is now Jacques
Cartier Square, was confiscated and in 1773 used as a jail as
well as a courthouse. Not being designed for a jail, it is not
surprising that the grand jury at the Court of King’s Bench
held on the 2d of September, 1782, presented in their statement
that the jail “is very insufficient for the purpose of a civil
prison, is in a ruinous condition and is becoming a nuisance to
the public and dangerous to the health and lives as well of the
persons confined therein as others, his Majesty’s subjects. That
it is insufficient for the purposes of a civil prison will appear
on considering that there are but three small apartments into
which are put prisoners of both sexes, and every denomination,
whether for debt, breaches of the peace or the most flagrant
crimes, and on the representation of the sheriff of the district
to their honours, the judges of the court of common pleas, on
the insufficiency of the prison, they have thought proper to
order that executions should not issue against the persons of
debtors who, by the laws of the Province, may become subject to
imprisonment.”

In 1787 a committee of the legislative council was appointed by
Lord Dorchester to investigate into the past administration of
justice in the Province of Quebec. A committee of merchants of
Montreal in a report to this commission, dated the 23d of June,
1787, stated in Article 8: “The want of a proper jail for the
district has long been complained of, and at divers times has
been represented by different grand juries, as well as at the
courts of oyer and terminer and in the inferior courts of quarter
sessions; but hitherto no remedy has been applied. The house
which at present serves for a jail consists of four very small
rooms in which are frequently confined promiscuously persons of
different sexes and for very different degrees of crime. The
unfortunate debtor cannot have a room to himself, nor can the
malefactor, when preparing for the other world, be accommodated
with a place of retirement to deprecate the wrath of the offended
Deity. The insufficiency of the jail, in point of security,
occasions a guard of soldiers to be kept in the lower part of
it and even with that precaution many atrocious offenders have
escaped, insomuch that the sheriff of the district has refused to
confine debtors, unless the prosecutor offer to take upon himself
the risk of an escape. The situation of this insufficient jail
heightens the sufferings of the persons whom the law dooms to
imprisonment, offends every passerby in the warm season and is a
nuisance to the neighbourhood.”

The fire in 1803, which swept this portion of the city, partially
destroyed the jail, and pending repairs a building was leased for
a temporary jail. Still procrastination prevailed.

In 1804 the grand jury of Montreal made another presentment
stating: “that the present gaol is only the ruins of the former
one, which was burned, repaired and patched up in such a manner
that the prisoners are sheltered from the inclemency of the
weather, but by no means prevented from going out whenever they
feel so inclined.” A report of the sheriff, Gray, shows that
the same building had existed under the French rule, that it
had then, as subsequently, suffered from fire and that although
recently the sum of £615 had been expended on repairs it was
still inadequate for the security of prisoners.

In 1805 an act was passed in the house of assembly by which
commissioners were appointed to have a jail erected in Montreal
and Quebec, the cost to be restricted to £9,000 currency in each
case. It was high time. The act of 1805 was the result of these
representations.

But a discussion arose at once concerning the ways and means of
raising the funds. The bill as prepared embodied a proposal for
the raising of funds through a tax on imports.[2] The merchants
opposed this as directed against commerce and urged a land tax
which the landholders in turn combatted. Petitions were sent by
the merchants against the bill and they asked to plead at the
bar of the house. This was refused and the bill in its original
form passed the upper house unanimously. The bill became law.
The merchants trading from London also intervened in a memorial
protesting against the import tax. Altogether there was a
strenuous fight. The feelings at Montreal rose high.

The Montreal Gazette of the period reported a meeting at Dillon’s
tavern, Mr. Isaac Todd, a principal merchant, took the chair at a
dinner and among others certain toasts were proposed which were
thought by some members of the legislature to reflect on them,
scandalously and libellously, and Mr. Todd and the printer of
the Gazette were declared by the session of 1806 to have been
guilty of a high breach of the privileges of the house. The
sergeant-at-arms on attempting to make an arrest in Montreal
found both of them absent, and the matter dropped. Some of the
obnoxious toasts were as follows:

“Our representatives in the provincial parliament, who proposed
a constitutional and proper mode of taxation for building gaols,
and who opposed a tax on commerce for that purpose as contrary to
the sound practice of the parent state;”

“May our representatives be actuated by a patriotic spirit for
the good of the Province as dependent on the British Empire and
be divested of local prejudices;”

“May the city of Montreal be enabled to support a new paper,
though deprived of its natural and useful advantages, apparently
for the benefit of an _individual_” (sic);

“May the commercial interest of this Province have its
due influence on the administration of its government.”
(Christie--“History of Canada,” p. 239.)

The next jail was finally built in 1808 adjoining the east side
of the courthouse erected in 1800, but becoming too small a more
suitable one was commenced in 1831 at the foot of St. Mary’s
current on ground purchased from the heirs of Sir John Johnson.
It was not taken possession of by the sheriff till 1836. It
was not built on hygienic or practical lines and in 1852 the
northeast wing had to be demolished. It soon became very much
occupied by the rebels and political prisoners of 1837 and
1838.[3]

The former prison was occupied as a house of industry from 1836
to 1838, when it became the government barracks. In the summer
of 1849 the old jail built like the courthouse on the site of
the Jesuits’ estate was pulled down. The cornerstone was found
with two plates, the first recording the laying of the foundation
stone of the Jesuit residence in 1742 by M. Normand, superior
of the seminary, and the other recording that of the prison by
Peter Panet, Isaac Ogden, “_honorabiles judices_,” and Joseph
Frobisher, _armiger_.

In 1870, the prison, opened in 1836, was already being found too
small and its overcrowded state had been frequently protested
against by many grand juries. The theoretic capacity for this
prison was 225 persons. It managed to hold 552 at one time.
In 1876 the women prisoners were removed. It continued to be
used for its original purpose till lately when the new prison
at Bordeaux was opened in 1912, the last contingent being
transferred from the old prison in August, 1913.

The following is a table of the population of the prisoners in
the old prison:

  1836 Men and women      162
  1846 Men and women    1,275
  1856 Men and women    1,792
  1866 Men and women    4,410
  1876 Men and women    3,969
  1886 Men only         2,156
  1896 Men only         4,132
  1906 Men only         3,130
  1908 Men only         4,854
  1909 Men only         4,287
  1910 Men only         4,702
  1911 Men only         5,344

In November, 1912, the transmigration to Bordeaux began and the
congestion was relieved. The site of the new prison comprises a
superficies of twenty arpents, and the buildings are eminently
well fitted for their purpose, hygienic and spacious, with none
of the faults so bitterly deplored in the old jails.

The supplementary prisons, in 1914, are the women’s jail at
Fullum Street, established about 1876, under the “Good Shepherd”
community, which has sections for Catholics and Protestants
(four non-Catholics), the detention house for juvenile delinquents,
in connection with the Juvenile Court, erected by the Juvenile
Delinquent act of 1910, established March 12, 1912, the reformatory
school at De Montigny Street undertaken by Brothers of St. Vincent
de Paul, the boys’ farm reformatory at Shawbridge for Protestants,
that for Catholic girls at the House of the “Good Shepherd” on
Sherbrooke Street, and another for Protestants, commenced at St.
Lambert’s about 1912. There is also for long terms of two years
and over a large penitentiary under the Federal Government at St.
Vincent de Paul.


                        THE POLICE FORCES

The policing or the control of law and order in general
of Montreal dates back to the 27th of January, 1663, when
Maisonneuve founded a voluntary association under the name of
the “Police de la Sainte Famille de Jésus, Marie and Joseph,”
which was divided into twenty companies of seven men each. In
1667 Maisonneuve organized a more formal police force under the
direction of five important citizens who also acted as justices
of the peace. In the early times it was also customary to
choose two or more citizens in each district of the town to act
as constables.

[Illustration: THE OLD JAIL]

[Illustration: PRISON AT BORDEAUX]

In 1815 the legislature authorized the organization of a local
police force. It was composed of twenty-five to thirty men who
carried a long baton painted blue, a lantern at their girdle, and
a bell to summon assistance. At night the watchmen called out
the hour and other, cheerful news such as “All’s well--past 1
o’clock and a starlit night.” When lamps were introduced it was
their business to light them. They had multifarious duties, such
as looking after the health regulations, the removal of snow,
the quelling of riots, especially at elections, when frequently
the military had to be called out to assist them. Even then a
policeman’s lot was not a happy one, being also very inadequately
remunerated.

After the troubles of 1837-8 the special council of the
legislature of Lower Canada passed an ordinance to authorize the
governor to name an inspector or a superintendent of police for
the city of Montreal. This superintendent was similar in power to
a justice of the peace. He had, in addition, the charge of the
composition and the control of the police force, subject to the
provincial secretary. The force consisted of thirty constables,
paid by the government. They were supplemented by a special force
from the police appointed by the governor and paid by the harbour
commissioners. That the new police was badly needed, a picture
from “Hochelaga Depicta,” written in 1839, makes clear. “The
passions drawn forth by the rebellion have disturbed the repose
of many, and military habits and pursuits have not only diverted
them from their regular course of action, but have introduced
a martial and unsettled spirit which has operated unfavourably
upon a large portion of the community. It is to be regretted that
many of the regular troops are from time to time seen reeling in
the streets, to the interruption of that good order which their
services are so efficient in promoting; and that intemperance
has increased among the volunteers since they received pay.”
(“Hochelaga Depicta,” p. 212.)

The police force was organized in consequence of an ordinance
issued during the administration of the Earl of Durham on the
28th of June, 1838. It consisted of 102 privates, four mounted
patrols, six sergeants and six corporals under the command of
four officers, viz., Capt. Alexander Comeau and Lieutenant Worth
for Division A, and Capt. William Brown and Lieut. William
Suter for Division B. The expenses were borne by the civil home
government and amounted “to at least six thousand pounds per
annum.” (Cf. “Hochelaga Depicta.” 181.)

After the rebellion in the early days of Queen Victoria’s reign
the office of superintendent was abolished and a “Fire Society”
was established by the special council, with power to create a
body of officers of the peace. The name suggests that protection
against fire was more important those days than against other
evils. The force consisted then of 102 men, four mounted patrols,
six sergeants, six corporals under the command of four officers.
The government supported this expense, which amounted annually
to about six thousand pounds. In 1851, after the burning of the
parliament house and the Gavazzi riots, the powers of the Fire
Society passed into operation under the municipal authorities.
The constables were increased to 100. The chief of police was
Mr. Hayes. The central station was in the basement of Bonsecours
Market and another post was the corner of Craig and Bleury
streets. The police had not an enviable reputation. The pay was
only 50 cents a day. Often recruits for the service were obtained
from the prisoners. Drunkenness was charged to them so that a
fine of 5 shillings was imposed on all who sold intoxicating
liquors to any of the force.

In 1861 Guillaume Lamothe became chief of police and after
some years’ agitation he succeeded in obtaining $1.00 a day
pay for his men. Mr. Lamothe, alarmed at the growth of houses
of prostitution at this period, suggested in his annual report
of 1863 the license of a certain number so as to regulate the
evil.[4] The recorder, De Montigny, supported this, but on the
protest of the religious authorities of the town the innovation
was discountenanced.

In 1870 the military were removed from the garrison and the
records show an improvement in the morality of the town.

Since 1850 the chiefs of police have been: H. Jérémie, 1850;
Thomas McGrath, 1851; E.O. Ermatinger, 1854; J.N. Hayes, 1854;
Guillaume Lamothe, 1861; P.W.L. Penton, 1865; H. Paradis, 1879;
G.A. Hughes, 1888; D. Legault, 1901; O. Campeau (November), 1905.


                    THE COURTS AND COURTHOUSE

The establishment of the higher courts has been treated in the
chapters dealing with the constitutional growth of the city. It
remains to indicate the present system as in vogue. Lawsuits in
purely civil matters involving less than one hundred dollars and
in which no future rights are involved, are settled by one of
the three judges of the circuit court or in a few cases of minor
importance by one of the City Recorders. The city recordership
is an office peculiar to the Province of Quebec. It is attached
to the City Hall and deals with minor offenses enforcing a part
of the criminal law, enforcing payment of city licenses and is
a court of appeal for assessment charges, actions for wages and
civil cases not exceeding one hundred dollars, and minor cases
of non-support and the duties of a domestic relations court. All
cases dealing with children under sixteen years of age have been
relegated to the recently established juvenile court.

Cases of litigation involving $100 or over are decided by one
of the judges of the superior court, from whose decision an
appeal may be made either to the court of review, which is
practically the first court of appeal (composed of three judges
of the superior court, other than the judge rendering the first
decision), or to the court of king’s bench, consisting of five
judges. There are now six judges of king’s bench, sixteen of the
superior court, and four of the circuit court for the district
of Montreal, which comprises the island of Montreal and the
counties of Laval, Soulanges, La Prairie, Chambly and Verchères.
The court of king’s bench is composed of six judges, one of whom
is the chief justice of the Province of Quebec and five of whom
hear appeals in civil and criminal matters for the Province for
two weeks every month in the cities of Montreal and Quebec,
alternately. They also preside over the sittings of the criminal
court for the cities of Montreal and Quebec. Of late years the
salaries of the judges of the king’s bench for Montreal and
Quebec are $8,000 for the chief justice and puisné judges at
$7,000; those of the superior court, $8,000 for the chief justice
and $7,000 each for the puisné judges, with a rider restricting
all judges to the exclusive practice of their profession as
judges. This limitation causes retirements after a number of
years for more remunerative posts. The bench is not a body
corporate, while the bar is. The first legislation was in 1785
(25 George III, C. 4), regarding the appointment of advocates,
attorneys, solicitors and notaries.

The first attempt of the bar of Montreal to acquire corporate
existence goes back to 1828, when on March 27th the members of
the bar, under the auspices of the court of king’s bench, then
composed of Chief Justice Reid and of Justices A.F. Uniacke,
George Pyke and L.C. Foucher, organized themselves into a library
association, the first board of management being composed of
Messrs. Stephen Sewell, Joseph Bedard, Frederick Griffin, and
Alexander Buchanan.

The association had a social circle as a scientific side and
partook of the nature of a club. The admission fee was $200 and
the annual subscription was $5.00. It appears to have flourished.

The next legislative provision enacted regarding the bar was the
enactment of 1836 (6 William IV, C. 10) regulating that those who
had followed a regular higher course of letters and had served
their clerkship in a law firm were fit to be admitted to practice
at the bar. The bar association of Montreal was incorporated
in 1840 and the bar of Lower Canada in 1849. The title of
_batonnier_ was given officially by act of 1849 to the president
of the corporation. It comes from days as far back as 1342, when
the president of the Sodality of Lawyers carried a bâton, the
emblem of St. Nicholas, their patron.

The act to incorporate the bar of Lower Canada was the gradual
dissolution of the Library Association so that about a quarter
of a century ago the library began to be considered by comity
the property of the bar. Since 1898 the Junior Bar Association
has been formed for the purpose of mutual information, interest
and friendly relations with similar bodies abroad. About 1907
the Montreal Bar Association was founded “for the purpose
of promoting the interest of the bar and of facilitating
professional labours and of fostering friendly relations among
its members.”


                         THE COURTHOUSES

The courthouse used after the conquest was held in the Jesuit
residence confiscated by the government. On the 3d of January,
1799, the sum of £5,000 was appropriated by the parliament for
the erection of a new courthouse and at the same time the ground
was granted by the government without any pecuniary indemnity. It
was built in 1800 at the cost of $25,000 upon part of the site
occupied partially before by the chapel and residence of the
Jesuits. It contained many large halls and six fine vaults in
which the notarial deeds and registers of births, marriages and
deaths were stored. In 1803 at the east end of this courthouse
there was built a prison which was partially demolished in 1849.

In 1844 the old courthouse was burnt. Until the present
courthouse was built the courts were held partially in the prison
adjoining the Château de Ramezay. The present courthouse was
opened for business in 1856 on the site of the old courthouse
and the prison. What was left of the latter was demolished in
1860 and a square was made between the garden of the government
fronting the Château de Ramezay and on this place between the
Champ de Mars and Notre Dame Street there was placed a fountain
with the statue of Neptune, since removed to Park Mance.

In the present courthouse there are kept the judiciary archives
of the district of Montreal, which are certainly the richest of
any district in the Dominion because nothing has been destroyed,
so that all the notarial deeds and official papers from the times
of Maisonneuve to our day are available. These archives occupy
a space on the basement floor of the courthouse of nearly three
hundred by one hundred and twenty-five feet and also nearly half
of the ground floor. Under the French régime the archives were
under the care of the governor and the seigneurs of the island.
Afterwards they were at the old French courthouse at the corner
of St. Francis Xavier and Notre Dame streets and they followed
the subsequent fortunes of the courthouse transmigrations. When
the courthouse was burnt in 1844 the only documents destroyed
were a part of the criminal court record. No systematic indexing
and classification of the documents were undertaken before Doctor
Lemieux was named sheriff in 1910. As this office in Montreal
embraces the administration and supervision of the courthouse
and prison, it was to this sheriff’s zeal that in 1911, after
many demands, he succeeded in having a staff named under Mr. E.Z.
Massicotte as the first archivist to put the archives department
on an efficient modern basis. This was done, comparing favourably
with the best kept contemporary archives in America. This was
attested to by the visitors of the Great American Bar Congress
held in Montreal in 1913. While the archives in the courthouse
represent the collection of all documents relating to the city
anterior to the period of English rule and of all the judiciary
courts of the Montreal district since, including the preservation
of the births, marriages, deaths and notarial deeds, there has
lately been established in the city hall a municipal bureau
of Archives under Mr. Beaudry, which preserves all documents
concerning the government of the city under the system of the
Justices of the Peace and the modern municipal corporation of
Montreal. The historians of the future will bless both these
forward movements of recent years.

[Illustration: THE OLD COURTHOUSE]

[Illustration: COURTHOUSE AT MONTREAL]

                           SUPPLEMENT

        JUDGES OF THE COURT OF KINGS BENCH, LOWER CANADA

  Date.            Place.        Name.

  Dec. 11, 1794    Montreal      John Fraser
  Dec. 15, 1794    Montreal      Jean Antoine Panet
  Dec. 16, 1794    Montreal      James Walker
  May 8, 1795      Montreal      Pierre Louis Panet
  June 22, 1796    Montreal      Isaac Ogden
  Feb. 1, 1800     Montreal      Arthur Davidson
  May 7, 1807      Montreal      James Reid
  Dec. 10, 1812    Montreal      Louis Charles Foucher
  May 1, 1820      Montreal      George Pyke
  Feb. 1, 1825     Montreal      Norman Fitzgerald Uniacke
  Dec. 6, 1828     Montreal      George Pyke
  Jan. 7, 1830     Montreal      Jean Roch Rolland
  Dec. 8, 1830     Montreal      George Pyke
  Dec. 9, 1830     Montreal      Norman Fitzgerald Uniacke
  Dec. 11, 1830    Montreal      Jean Roch Rolland
  Aug. 23, 1834    Montreal      Samuel Gale
  Aug. 30, 1838    Montreal      George Pyke
  Aug. 30, 1838    Montreal      Jean Roch Rolland
  Dec. 20, 1838    Montreal      George Pyke
  Dec. 20, 1838    Montreal      Jean Roch Rolland
  Dec. 20, 1838    Montreal      Samuel Gale


            JUDGES OF COURT OF THE COMMON PLEAS, P.Q.

  Date.                Place.                     Name.

  Dec. 11, 1764     Montreal and Quebec      Hon. Adam Mabane
  Dec. 11, 1764     Montreal and Quebec      Hon. Francis Munier
  Dec. 11, 1764     Montreal and Quebec      Hon. John Fraser
  July 14, 1769     Montreal and Quebec      Hon. Hector Theophilus Cramahé
  July 14, 1769     Montreal and Quebec      Hon. Adam Mabane
  July 14, 1769     Montreal and Quebec      Hon. John Fraser
  July 23, 1776     Montreal                 Peter Livius
  July 23, 1776     Montreal                 William Owen
  Aug. 22, 1776     Montreal                 Edward Southouse
  March 6, 1777     Montreal                 Peter Livius
  March 6, 1777     Montreal                 William Owen
  March 6, 1777     Montreal                 Gabriel Elzear Taschereau
  May  29, 1777     Montreal                 Edward Southouse
  May  29, 1777     Montreal                 Edward Southouse
  Feb. 18, 1779     Montreal                 Hon. Adam Mabane
  Feb. 18, 1779     Montreal                 Thos. Dunn
  Aug. 30, 1779     Montreal                 Hon. John Fraser
  Aug. 30, 1779     Montreal                 Hon. Hertel de Rouville
  Aug. 30, 1779     Montreal                 Edward Southouse
  Dec. 24, 1788     Montreal                 Adam Mabane
  Dec. 24, 1788     Montreal                 Thomas Dunn
  Dec. 24, 1788     Montreal                 Pierre Panet
  Dec. 24, 1788     Montreal                 William Dummer Powell
  Dec. 24, 1788     Montreal                 Simon Sanguinet
  Jan.  7, 1790     Quebec and Montreal      Adam Mabane
  Jan.  7, 1790     Quebec and Montreal      Thomas Dunn
  Jan.  7, 1790     Quebec and Montreal      Peter Panet
  Jan.  7, 1790     Quebec and Montreal      John Frazer
  Jan.  7, 1790     Quebec and Montreal      Hertel de Rouville


        JUDGES OF THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, LOWER CANADA

  Date.            Place.                                 Name.

  Jan. 12, 1792    Quebec, Montreal and Three Rivers      John Fraser
  Jan. 12, 1792    Quebec, Montreal and Three Rivers      Thomas Dunn
  Jan. 12, 1792    Quebec, Montreal and Three Rivers    Hertel de Rouville
  Jan. 12, 1792    Quebec, Montreal and Three Rivers    Jenkin Williams
  Jan. 12, 1793    Montreal                             Peter Panet
  Aug. 30, 1793    Montreal                             Peter Panet
  Jan. 28, 1794    Quebec, Montreal and Three Rivers    John A. Panet
  Feb. 8,  1794    Quebec, Montreal and Three Rivers    P.A. DeBonne
  Feb. 8,  1794    Quebec, Montreal and Three Rivers    James Walker


                JUDGES OF THE CIRCUIT COURT, P.Q.

  Date.            Place.      Name.

  June 15, 1770    Montreal    John Fraser
  June 15, 1770    Montreal    John Marteilhe
  Feb. 1,  1771    Montreal    John Marteilhe
  Feb. 1,  1771    Montreal    John Fraser
  July 1,  1771    Montreal    John Fraser
  July 1,  1771    Montreal    John Marteilhe
  Jan. 13, 1772    Montreal    John Marteilhe
  Jan. 13, 1772    Montreal    John Fraser
  June 23, 1772    Montreal    John Fraser
  June 23, 1772    Montreal    John Marteilhe


              JUDGES OF THE PREROGATIVE COURT, P.Q.

  Date.            Place.        Name.

  Nov. 25, 1779    Montreal      John Fraser
  Nov. 25, 1779    Montreal      Hertel de Rouville
  Nov. 25, 1779    Montreal      Edward Southouse


                  ASSISTANT JUDGE, LOWER CANADA

  Date.            Place.                   Name.

  June 1, 1818    District of Montreal      George Pyke


                         JUDGES CIRCUIT

  Date.              Place.      Name.

  April 22, 1844    Montreal District      Hypolite Guy
  April 24, 1844    Montreal District      Charles Joseph Elzear Mondelet
  April 27, 1844    Montreal District      John Samuel McCord
  April 29, 1844    Montreal District      William Badgley


                  JUDGES OF THE SUPERIOR COURT

  Date.            Place.                    Name.

  Jan. 26, 1877    District of Montreal      Hon. Vinceslas P. Wilfrid Dorion
  June 23, 1883    District of Montreal      Hon. Michel Mathieu
  April 12, 1886  District of Montreal      Hon. Charles Ignace Gill
  June  10, 1887  District of Montreal      Charles Peers Davidson
  April 15, 1889  District of Montreal      Charles Chamilly De Lorimier
  June   5, 1889  District of Montreal      Siméon Pagnuelo
  Oct.  19, 1891  District of Montreal      Charles Joseph Doherty
  Nov.  22, 1893  District of Montreal      John Sprott Archibald
  Oct.  18, 1895  District of Montreal      Hon. John Joseph Curran
  Jan.  14, 1898  District of Montreal      François Xavier Langelier
  June  25, 1901  District of Montreal      Norman William Trenholme
  Sept. 25, 1901  City of Montreal          Thomas Fortin
  June  11, 1902  District of Montreal      Henri-Césaire Saint Pierre
  Mar.  11, 1903  District of Montreal      Napoléon Charbonneau
  May    5, 1904  District of Montreal      John Dunlop
  Aug.  31, 1906  District of Montreal      Eugène Lafontaine
  Aug.  31, 1906  District of Montreal      Edmund Guerin


                     JUDGES OF CIRCUIT COURT

  Date.           Place.                    Name.

  Nov.  16, 1893  District of Montreal      Denis Barry
  Nov.  16, 1893  District of Montreal      Charles L. Champagne
  June   8, 1895  District of Montreal      John Daly Purcell
  July   7, 1898  District of Montreal      Achille Dorion
  Jan.  18, 1908  District of Montreal      Calixte Le Beuf
  Nov.  29, 1913  District of Montreal      Jean Baptiste Archambault


            CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE SUPERIOR COURT, P.Q.

  Date.            Place.                     Name.

  Oct.  27, 1894   District of Montreal       Melbourne M. Tait


             JUDGES OF THE SUPERIOR COURT FOR QUEBEC

  Date.           Place.                          Name.

  Jan.  11, 1910  District of Montreal            Charles Archer
  July   6, 1910  Residing at Montreal            Robert Alfred Ernest
                                                    Greenshields
  July   6, 1910  Residing at Montreal            Charles Laurendeau
  Jan.  14, 1912  Residing at Montreal            Simeon Beaudin
  July  16, 1912  Judicial District of Montreal   Campbell Lane
  Dec.   7, 1912  Judicial District of Montreal   Louis Edmond Panneton


      COURT OF QUEEN’S BENCH (SUPERIOR COURT), LOWER CANADA

                   From 1841 to 1849 Inclusive

  Judges.[5]                         From             To

                         Chief Justice.

  Sir Jas. Stuart, Bart              Feb. 10, 1841    Dec. 31, 1849
  J.R. Vallière de St. Réal (M.)     June  1, 1842    Feb. 17, 1847
  J.R. Rolland, (M.)                 Apr. 23, 1847    Dec. 31, 1849

                          Puisné Judges

  Edward Bowen (Q.)                  Feb. 10, 1841    Dec. 31, 1849
  Phi. Panet (Q.).                   Feb. 10, 1841    Dec. 31, 1849
  Elz. Bédard (Q.)                   Feb. 10, 1841    Apr. 25, 1848
  T.C. Aylwin (Q.)                   Apr. 26, 1848    Dec. 31, 1849
  Geo. Pyke (M.)                     Feb. 10, 1841    June 28, 1842
  J.R. Rolland (M.)                  Feb. 10, 1841    Apr. 22, 1847
  Saml. Gale (M.)                    Feb. 10, 1841    Apr. 25, 1848
  C.D. Day (M.)                      June 29, 1842    Dec. 31, 1849
  Jas. Smith (M.)                    Apr. 23, 1847    Dec. 31, 1849
  Elz. Bédard (M.)                   Apr. 26, 1848    Aug. 11, 1849


   COURT OF QUEEN’S BENCH (APPEAL AND CRIMINAL), LOWER CANADA

                   From 1850 to 1865 Inclusive

  Judges                                      From              To

  Chief Justice

  Sir Jas. Stuart, Bart (Q.)                Jan.   1, 1850    Died July 14, 1853
  Sir L.H. LaFontaine, Bart (M.)            Aug.  13, 1853    Died Feb. 26, 1864
  Hon. J.F.J. Duval (Q.)                    Mar.   5, 1864         --

  Puisné Judges

  Hon. J.R. Rolland (M.)                    Jan.   1, 1850         Jan. 26, 1855
  Hon. Phi. Panet (Q.)                      Jan.   1, 1850    Died Jan. 15, 1855
  Hon. T.C. Aylwin (Q.)                     Jan.   1, 1850           --
  Hon. J.F.J. Duval (Q.)                    Jan.  27, 1855         Mar.  4, 1864
  Hon. R.E. Caron (Q.)                      Jan.  27, 1855           --
  Hon. W.C. Meredith (M.)                   Mar.  12, 1859           --
  Hon. W. Badgley, Asst. Judge (M.)         Sept. 12, 1863         Dec. 31, 1864
  Hon. L.T. Drummond, Puisné Judge (M.)     Mar.   5, 1864           --
  Hon. C.J.E. Mondelet, Asst. Judge (M.)    Jan.   1, 1865           --


                  SUPERIOR COURT, LOWER CANADA

                   From 1850 to 1865 Inclusive

  Judges.                                   From             To

  Hon. Edw. Bowen, Chief Justice (Q.)       Jan.   1, 1850   Died Apr.  11, 1866
  Hon. D. Mondelet, Pusiné Judge (M.)       Jan.   1, 1850   Died in        1863
  Hon. C.D. Day, Puisné Judge (Q.)          Jan.   1, 1850        Sept. 30, 1862
  Hon. Jas. Smith, Puisné Judge (?)         Jan.   1, 1850          --
  Hon. Geo. Vanfelson, Puisné Judge (?)     Jan.   1, 1850        Jan.  26, 1856
  Hon. R.H. Gairdner, Puisné Judge (Q.)     Jan.   1, 1850        Sept. 30, 1852
  Hon. E. Bacquet, Puisné Judge (Q.)        Jan.   1, 1852   Died in        1853
  Hon. C.J.E. Mondelet, Puisné Judge (M.)   Jan.   1, 1852        Dec.  31, 1864
  Hon. J.F. Duval, Puisné Judge (Q.)        Jan.   1, 1852        Jan.  26, 1855
  Hon. W. C Meredith, Puisné Judge (M.)     Jan.   1, 1852        Mar.  11, 1859
  Hon. E. Short, Puisné Judge (?)           Nov.  12, 1852         --   --   --
  R.E. Caron, Puisné Judge (Q.)             Aug.  15, 1853        Jan.  26, 1855
  Hon. A.N. Marin, Puisné Judge (M.)        Jan.  27, 1855   Died July  27, 1865
  Hon. W. Badgley, Puisné Judge (M.)        Jan.  27, 1855        Sept. 11, 1863
  Hon. J. Chabot, Puisné Judge (Q.)         Sept. 20, 1856   Died in        1860
  Hon. Hyp. Guy, Puisné Judge (M.)          Nov.  25, 1857        Apr.  16, 1860
  Hon. J.S. McCord, Puisné Judge (M.)       Nov.  25, 1857        Mar.  --, 1865
  Hon. W.K. McCord, Puisné Judge (M.)       Nov.  25, 1857              --, 1858
  Hon. W. Power, Puisné Judge (Q.)          Nov.  25, 1857   Died in        1860
  Hon. J.C. Bruneau, Puisné Judge           Nov.  25, 1857        Sept.  4, 1863
  Hon. J.T. Taschereau, Puisné Judge (Q.)   Nov.  25, 1857         --   --   --
  Hon. D. Roy, Puisné Judge                 Nov.  25, 1857         --   --   --
  Hon. P. Winter, Puisné Judge              Mar.  29, 1858         --   --   --
  Hon. J.T. Taschereau, Asst. Judge (Q.)    Nov.   2, 1858        May    2, 1859
  Hon. J.T. Taschereau                      June   6, 1860        Aug.  --, 1865
  Hon. J.T. Taschereau, Puisné Judge (Q.)   Aug.    , 1865         --   --   --
  Hon. A. Stuart, Asst. Judge (Q.)          Feb.  10, 1859        June   6, 1860
  Hon. A. Stuart, Puisné Judge              June   6, 1860         --   --   --
  Hon. J.A. Berthelot, Asst. Judge (M.)     Feb.  10, 1859        Dec.  31, 1864
  Hon. J.A. Berthelot, Puisné Judge         Jan.   1, 1865         --   --   --
  Hon. J.G. Thompson, Puisné Judge (G.)     May   11, 1859         --   --   --
  Hon. A. Lafontaine, Puisné Judge          May   11, 1859         --   --   --
  Hon. S.C. Monk, Asst. Judge (M.)          June   4, 1859         --   --   --
  Hon. A. Polette, Puisné Judge (T.-R.)     Apr.  21, 1860         --   --   --
  Hon. F.O. Gauthier, Puisné Judge (?)      Nov.  14, 1860         --   --   --
  Hon. T.J.J. Loranger, Puisné Judge (M.)   Feb.  28, 1863         --   --   --
  Hon. L.V. Sicotte, Puisné Judge (M.?)     Sept.  5, 1863         --   --   --
  Hon. C.J. Laberge, Puisné Judge (M.)      Sept. 18, 1863        July   2, 1864
  Hon. F.G. Johnson, Puisné Judge (M.)      June   1, 1865         --   --   --

                 Deputy Judges, Superior Court.

  J.B. Parkin (M.?)                         Dec.  22, 1854        May   11, 1855
  Chas. Panet (Q.)                          May   16, 1855        July   6, 1855
  J.J.C. Abbott (M.)                        May   19, 1855        Aug.  25, 1855

             Assistant Judges Under Seigniorial Act.

  H. Driscoll (?)                           Sept.  3, 1855
  G.O. Stuart (Q.)                          Sept.  3, 1855
  F.O. Gauthier (?)                         Sept.  3, 1855
  J.T. Taschereau (Q.)                      Sept.  3, 1855
  J.B. Parkin (M.)                          Sept.  3, 1855
  S.C. Monk (M.)                            Sept. 14, 1855
  J.F. Pelletier (Q.)                       Sept. 14, 1855
  J.A. Berthelot (M.)                       Sept. 14, 1855


                COURT OF VICE-ADMIRALTY (QUEBEC)

                        From 1841 to 1865

  Hon. H. Black                             Feb.  10, 1841


      THE COURT OF QUEEN’S BENCH FOR THE PROVINCE OF QUEBEC

                   From 1867 to 1895 Inclusive

              Chief Justices of the Queen’s Bench.

  Name.                                       From                 To

  Hon. Jean François Joseph Duval (Q.)        Mar.  4, 1864        May  31, 1874
    (Retired June 1, 1874; died May 6, 1881.)
  Hon. Sir Antoine Aimé Dorion, Kt. (M.)      June  1,  1874       May  31, 1891
    (Knighted, 1877; died May 31, 1891.)
  Hon. Sir Alexandre Lacoste, Kt. (M.)        Sept. 14, 1891       --   --   --
    (Knighted June 15, 1892.)

               Puisné Judges of the Queen’s Bench.

  Name.                                       From                 To

  Hon. Thomas Cushing Aylwin (Q.)             Dec. 24, 1849        Aug. 24, 1868
    (Retired Aug. 25, 1868; died Oct. 14, 1871.)
  Hon. Réné Edouard Caron (Q.)                Jan. 27, 1855        Feb. 16, 1873

  Mr. Justice Caron assumed the office of Lieutenant-Governor of
    the Province of Quebec, February 17, 1873.
  Mr. Justice Mondelet, who was a Puisné Judge of the Superior
    Court, acted as Assistant Judge of the Court of Queen’s Bench
    for and during the time that Mr. Justice Caron continued to be
    a Commissioner for the codification of the laws of Lower Canada
    relative to civil matters and procedure.

  Hon. Charles Joseph Elzéar Mondelet, Asst.
    Judge (M.)                                May  30, 1859       Dec.  31, 1869
  Hon. Louis Thomas Drummond (M.)             Mar.  4, 1864       Oct.  31, 1873
    (Retired Nov. 1, 1873; died Nov. 24, 1882.)
  Hon. Wm. Badgley (M.)                       Aug. 17, 1866       Mar.   1, 1874
    (Retired Mar. 2, 1874; died Dec. 24, 1888.)
  Hon. Samuel Cornwallis Monk (M.)            Aug. 27, 1868       Sept. 19, 1888
    (Retired Sept. 20, 1888; died Oct. 29, 1888.)
  Hon. Jean Thomas Taschereau (Q.)            Feb. 11, 1873       Oct.   7, 1875
    Appointed Puisné Judge of the Supreme
    Court of Canada.                          Oct.  8, 1875
  Hon. Thomas Kennedy Ramsay (M.)             Oct. 30, 1873       Dec.  22, 1886
    (Died Dec. 22, 1886.)
  Hon. John Sewell Sanborn (?)                Mar. 6, 1874        July  17, 1877
    (Died July 17, 1877.)
  Hon. Ulric Joseph Tessier (Q.?)             Oct. 8, 1875        Sept. 11, 1891
    (Retired Sept. 12, 1891; died Apr. 7, 1892.)
  Hon. Alexander Cross (M.)                   Aug. 30, 1877       Oct. 3, 1892
    (Retired Oct. 4, 1892; died Oct. 17, 1895.)
  Hon. Louis François Geo. Baby (M.)          Apr. 29, 1881         --
  Hon. Levi Ruggles Church (M.)               Jan. 25, 1887       Jan. 6, 1892
    (Retired Jan. 7, 1892; died Aug. 30, 1892.)
  Hon, Joseph Guillaume Bossé (Q.)            Sept. 25, 1888        --
  Hon. Jean Blanchet (Q.)                     Sept. 19, 1891        --
  Hon. Robert Newton Hall (M.)                Jan. 11,  1892        --
  Hon. Jonathan S. Campbell Wurtele (M.)      Oct. 12, 1 892        --


                THE JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF MONTREAL

From 1867 to 1870, four Judges of the Superior Court had to
reside in the city of Montreal (C.S.L.C., Chap. 78, 1860); 1870
to 1872, five Judges (33 Vict. Q., Chap. 10); 1872 to 1882, six
Judges (35 Vict. Q., Chap. 6, and 36 Vict., Chap. 10); 1882 to
1883, seven Judges (43-44 Vict. Q., Chap. 5); 1883 to 1887,
eight Judges (46 Vict. Q., Chap. 13); 1887 to 1895, eleven
Judges, including the Judge to whom the district of Terrebonne is
assigned (49-50 Vict. Q., Chap. 7, 50 Vict. Q., Chap. 11, and 52
Vict. Q., Chap. 27).

  Judges.                                     From                   To

  Hon. James Smith                            Dec. 24, 1849       Aug. 24, 1868
    (Retired Aug. 25, 1868; died Nov. 29, 1868.)
  Hon. Chas. Jos. Elzéar Mondelet             Dec. 24, 1849       Dec. 31, 1876
  He was Assistant Judge of the Court of Queen’s Bench from May
    30, 1859, to December 31, 1869, during the time Mr. Justice R.E.
    Caron continued to be a Commissioner for the codification of the
    laws of Lower Canada relative to civil matters and procedure; he
    died December 31, 1876.
  Hon. Joseph Amable Berthelot                Nov. 30, 1860       Aug. 31, 1876
    (Retired Sept. 1, 1876.)
  Hon. Francis Godschall Johnson              July 18, 1865       Dec. 9, 1889
  He was Recorder of the Province of Manitoba from
    September 3, 1870, to June 1, 1872; appointed
    Chief Justice December 10, 1889.
  Hon. Samuel Cornwallis Monk                 Aug. 17, 1866       Aug. 26, 1868
    Appointed Puisné Judge, Court of
      Queens Bench August 27, 1868.
  Hon. Robert Mackay                          Aug. 27, 1868       Oct. 31, 1882
    (Retired Nov. 1, 1882; died Feb. 23, 1888.)
  Hon. Fred Wm. Torrance                      Aug. 27, 1868       Jan. 2,  1887
    (Died Jan. 2, 1887.)
  Hon. Jos. Ubalde Baudry, Asst. Judge
    during the absence of Mr. Justice         Dec. 5, 1868        June 30, 1869
     Mackay (Died Jan. 12, 1876.)
  Hon. Jos. Ubalde Baudry, Puisné Judge       Dec. 22, 1869       Jan. 12, 1876
  Hon. Henri Félix Rainville                  Feb. 3, 1876        Apr. 11, 1886
    (Retired Apr. 12, 1886; died Feb. 7, 1891.)
  Hon. Auguste Cyrille Papineau               Sept. 1, 1876       May 6, 1889
    (Retired May 17, 1889.)
  Hon. Vinceslas P. Wilfrid Dorion            Jan. 26, 1877       June 2, 1878
    (Transferred from the Judicial District of Quebec; died June 2, 1878.)
  Hon. Louis Amable Jetté                     Sept. 2, 1878        --  --  --
  Hon. Louis Onésime Loranger                 Aug. 5,  1882        --  --  --
  Hon. Marcus Doherty                         Nov. 2, 1882        Oct. 14, 1891
    (Transferred from Judicial District St. Francis; retired Oct. 15, 1891.)
  Hon. Mathieu                                June 23, 1883        --  --  --
    (Transferred from the Judicial District of Joliette.)
  Hon. Chas. Ignace Gill                      Apr. 12, 1886        --  --  --
    (Transferred from the Judicial District of Richelieu.)
  Hon. Chas. Peer Davidson                    June 10, 1887        --  --  --
  Hon. Henri Thomas Taschereau                Dec. 1, 1887         --  --  --
    (Transferred from the Judicial District of Joliette and assigned the
      Judicial District of Terrebonne.)
  Hon. Jonathan Saxton Campbell Wurtele       Sept. 20, 1888      Oct. 11, 1892
    (Transferred from the Judicial District of Ottawa; appointed Puisné Judge,
      Court of Queen’s Bench, Oct. 12, 1892.)
  Hon. Siméon Pagneulo                        June 5, 1889        --  --  --
  Hon. Melbourne McTaggart Tait               July 5, 1889        --  --  --
    (Transferred from the Judicial District of Bedford; appointed to perform
  the duties of Chief Justice in the District of Montreal, Oct. 27, 1894.)
  Hon. Charles Joseph Doherty                 Oct. 19, 1891        --  --  --
  Hon. John Sprott Archibald                  Nov. 22, 1893        --  --  --
  Hon. John Joseph Curran                     Oct. 18, 1895        --  --  --


 RECORDERS APPOINTED SINCE THE CREATION OF THE RECORDER’S COURT,
                             IN 1841

  Joseph Bourret            1841
  John P. Sexton            1859
  B.A.T. de Montigny        1881
  A.E. Poirier              1899
  R.S. Weir                 1899
  F.X. Dupuis               1907
  Amédée Geoffrion          1912


                      SHERIFFS OF MONTREAL

  John Turner, 23rd September, 1762.

  Edward Wm. Gray, May, 1776, 1770-1795.

  Frederick Wm. Ermatinger, 24th December, 1810, 1813-1820.

  Hon. L. Gugy, March 3, 1827.

  Hon. Roch de St. Ours, April 3, 1837-1839.

  Hon. Foussaint Pothier and Andrew Stuart, September 21, 1839 for
  five days.

  John Boston and Hugh Edmund Barron, September 26, 1839-1841.

  John Boston, March 4, 1841-1842.

  John Boston and Wm. Foster Coffin, February 16, 1842-1851.

  John Boston, May 17, 1851-1862.

  A.M. Delisle, March 12, 1862-1863.

  F. Bouthillier, December 19, 1863-1872.

  C.A. Leblanc, November 28, 1872-1877.

  Hon. P.J. O’Chauveau, September 10, 1877-1890.

  Hon. J.R. Thibaudeau, May 9, 1890-June 6, 1909.

  Dr. Louis Joseph Lemieux, 1909.


                         PROTHONOTARIES

  1780 John Burke and Charles Lepailleur.

  1788-1792 John Burke, John Reid and C. Lepailleur.

  1794 John Burke and John Reid.

  1795 John Reid, John Burke and Sauveuse de Beaujeu.

  1801-1813 Alexander Reid and Sauveuse de Beaujeu.

  1814-1815 John Reid and Louis Levesque.

  1816-1818 John Reid, L. Levesque and Samuel Wentworth Monk.

  1831 S.W. Monk and W.C.H. Coffin, and

  Afterwards C.A. Papineau; W.C.H. Coffin, C.A. Papineau and Honey;
  Hubert, Papineau and Honey; Hubert, Honey and Gendron; Honey and
  Gendron; Honey, Longprés and Cherrier.

  1866-1867 A.B. Longprés.

  1890 Hon. Arthur Turcotte.

  1895 (about) Hon. (now Justice) Monette.

  1908 A. Girard.


               THE BATONNIERS OF THE MONTREAL BAR

  1849-1852  Toussaint Pelletier.
  1852-1853  Sir Antoine Aimé Dorion.
  1855-1856  C.S. Cherrier, Q.C.
  1856-1858  Henry Stuart, Q.C.
  1859-1860  Strachan Bethune, K.C.
  1861-1862  Sir Antoine Aimé Dorion.
  1862-1863  Strachan Bethune, K.C.
  1864-1866  Hon. R. Laflamme, Q.C.
  1873-1875  Sir Antoine Aimé Dorion.
  1875-1879  W.H. Kerr, Q.C.
  1879-1881  Sir Alexander Lacoste, Q.C.
  1881-1883  W.W. Robertson, Q.C.
  1887-1889  Rouey Roy, Q.C.
  1890-1892  Hon. F.L. Beique, Q.C.
  1894-1896  Hon. J.G. Robidoux, Q.C.
  1896-1898  C.B. Carter, Q.C.
  1898-1900  Hon. J.A.C. Madore.
  1901-1902  W.J. White, K.C.*
  1902-1903  S. Beaudin, K.C.
  1903-1904  D. McMaster, K.C.
  1904-1905  Gustave Lamothe, K.C.
  1905-1906  Eugene Lefleur, K.C.
  1906-1907  P.S. Mignault, K.C.
  1907-1908  F.G. Meredith, K.C.
  1908-1909  Honoré Gervais, K.C.
  1909-1910  R.C. Smith, K.C.
  1910-1911  F.J. Bisaillon, K.C.
  1911-1912  A.J. Brown, K.C.
  1912-1913  J.L. Archambault.
  1913-1914  F. de Sales Bastien, K.C.

  * A one-year’s term of office was now resolved upon.


FOOTNOTES:

[1] The first jail under the French régime was situated,
according to documents found by Mr. Massicotte either on St. Paul
Street near St. Sulpice, or at Point a Callieres, i. e., either
at Maisonneuve’s château or in the original fort.

[2] An auction duty of 2½% was levied, with a tax on tea, varying
from twopence to sixpence a pound, likewise threepence a gallon
on spirits and twopence on molasses and syrup.

[3] In 1839, the date of the publication of Newton Bosworth’s
“History of Montreal,” the author writes, “There is no chaplain
attached to this gaol nor, we are sorry to learn, is there any
provision made for the moral and religious instruction of the
prisoners. Vice and immorality, we are informed, prevail to an
alarming extent and call loudly for the benevolent services
of all who feel it important to check the prevalence of these
enormous evils and to reclaim the sinner from the error of his
ways.” Vol. II--27

[4] The same suggestion has been made on several occasions since,
but always with the same result.

[5] The provincial appointments from 1841 to 1864, and from 1867
to 1895 are given for Lower Canada. It has been found impossible
to identify them all in time for the press. Those marked “M”
have been identified, as Montreal, “Q” as Quebec and “?” as
questioned.




                         CHAPTER XXXIII

                            HOSPITALS

  THE HOTEL DIEU: JEANNE MANCE--THE HOSPITALIERES OF LA FLECHE--THE
    HOTEL DIEU CHAPEL--ST. PATRICK’S HOSPITAL--THE MIGRATION TO
    PINE AVENUE--THE PRESENT MODERN HOSPITAL.

  THE GENERAL HOSPITAL: “THE LADIES BENEVOLENT SOCIETY”--THE HOUSE
    OF RECOVERY--THE MONTREAL GENERAL HOSPITAL--ITS BENEFACTORS AND
    ITS ADDITIONS--THE EARLY TRAINING OF NURSES--THE ANNEX OF 1913.

  THE NOTRE DAME HOSPITAL: THE LAVAL MEDICAL FACULTY--THE OLD
    DONEGANI HOTEL--THE LADY PATRONESSES--MODERN DEVELOPMENT.

  THE WESTERN HOSPITAL: THE BISHOPS COLLEGE MEDICAL FACULTY--THE
    WOMEN’S HOSPITAL.

  THE ROYAL VICTORIA HOSPITAL: IN MEMORY OF QUEEN VICTORIA--ITS
    DESCRIPTION--ITS INCORPORATION--ITS EQUIPMENT.

  THE HOMEOPATHIC HOSPITAL: FIRST ORGANIZED
    WORK--INCORPORATION--THE FIRST HOSPITAL--THE FURTHER
    DEVELOPMENTS--THE PHILLIPS TRAINING SCHOOL FOR NURSES.

  THE HOSPITALS FOR THE INSANE: EARLY TREATMENT OF INSANE--THE
    ORIGIN AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE HOSPITALS ST. JEAN DE DIEU AT
    LONGUE POINTE AND THE PROTESTANT ASYLUM AT VERDUN.

  CIVIC HOSPITALS: THE SMALLPOX HOSPITAL--“CONTAGIOUS”
    HOSPITALS--HOSPITAL ST. PAUL--ALEXANDRA HOSPITAL.

  TUBERCULOSIS DISPENSARIES: THE ROYAL EDWARD INSTITUTE--PIONEER
    TUBERCULOSIS CLINIC IN CANADA--PUBLIC HEALTH EXHIBITIONS--THE
    INSTITUTE BRUCHESI: ITS DEVELOPMENT--THE GRACE DART HOME--CIVIC
    AID.

  CHILDREN’S HOSPITALS: THE CHILDREN’S MEMORIAL HOSPITAL--STE.
    JUSTINE.

  OTHER HOSPITAL ADJUNCT ASSOCIATIONS.

  NOTE: MEDICAL BOARDS: PRIVATE, PROVINCIAL, MUNICIPAL.


Montreal is blessed in its charities and philanthropies. Those
for the sick have an interesting history, which may be told best
in chronological order:


                         THE HOTEL DIEU

The early history of the first hospital in Montreal has been told
in the first volume. To recapitulate its history to the beginning
of the English régime. It started on the first day of the
foundation of Montreal, May 17, 1642, when Jeanne Mance arrived
with the express purpose of founding a hospital, being helped
thereto by funds provided by Madame de Bullion. Her first home
adjoined to the château, shortly built in the fort inclosure, and
that little home, the Hôtel Dieu, built of logs, in 1644, at what
is the North East corner of St. Paul Street, became the first
of the infirmaries directed by her alone for seventeen years.
The Hôtel Dieu was not, however, completely founded until the
arrival, in October, 1659, of the three Hospitalier Sisters of
St. Joseph from La Flèche in Anjou, sent to her by M. Jerome de
la Dauversière. These were Judith Moreau de Brésoles, Catherine
Macé and Marie Maillet. This body had been established by de
la Dauversière and Mlle. de la Ferré in 1642 for Montreal, and
now when the hour had arrived its representatives were received
in the first Hôtel Dieu, the wooden building twenty-five feet
square, which lasted fifty years on St. Paul Street. In 1666
Louis XIV confirmed the establishment of the Hôtel Dieu by
letters patent. In 1695 the Hôtel Dieu was razed to the ground by
fire and the remains of Jeanne Mance consumed, but the hospital
was rebuilt on the same site. Fires again in 1721 and 1734
attacked it. Still it rose from its ruins. In 1760, owing to the
scarcity of barracks, Amherst’s troops took possession of the
west chapel, which had been commenced in 1656 and had served till
1678 as the only place of worship for citizens and sick alike.
It was dismantled and turned into a stable. Years afterward the
sister procureur of the Hôtel Dieu, came across the account of
the bill for the unpaid damages and sent it to Queen Victoria who
promptly sent a check for the amount due. In 1852 the Hôtel Dieu
established, in the college built originally by the Baptists and
bought for $16,020.00, the branch hospital of St. Patrick’s on
Guy Street, for the principal purpose of providing the Irish and
English Catholic population with English-speaking physicians and
sisters.

The first physicians were Doctor David, Doctor Howard and Dr.
(Sir William) W.H. Hingston. The work was discontinued about
1860, when preparations were being made to open the present Hôtel
Dieu on Pine Avenue, and the building was opened on September 8,
1860, by the Congregation Nuns as a convent school under the name
of the “Pensionnat du Mont St. Marie.”

On account of the disasters from fires the statistics of the
Hôtel Dieu for the first century of its work are incomplete, but
from 1760 to 1860 the exact number of cases of invalids admitted
is 82,121. By 1909, when the 250th anniversary of the arrival of
the three Hospitaliers was celebrated, the number had mounted to
119,352. In 1861 the Hôtel Dieu made its first great change, when
it was transported from the corner of St. Paul and St. Sulpice
Street to its present location, Mont St. Famille on Pine Avenue.
When it is remembered that the nuns are an inclosed order and
never leave their cloister or their grounds, to leave the old
Hôtel Dieu on St. Paul Street was like tearing themselves from
their home to journey to a far-off land. Their consolation was to
take with them the remains of their sisters, buried there during
the preceding 200 years. The stones of the old chapel on St.
Joseph (afterwards St. Sulpice Street) and St. Paul Street, were
taken to erect a little chapel dedicated to St. Joseph in the
new convent grounds. Since 1845 eight independent off-shoots of
the Hôtel Dieu have risen to carry on the work started in 1659,
viz., at Kingston, Tracadie, Chatham, Madawaska, Campbellton,
Arthabaska, Windsor and Winooski. From the house of Kingston the
Hôtel Dieus of Cornwall and Chicago have sprung.

Since the transition from St. Paul Street the Hôtel Dieu has
become more and more of the nature of a public hospital, fully
equipped and of the modern type. From 1857 to 1874 the Hospital
provided a home for old people of both sexes to the number
of thirty-seven to forty a year. This was then left to other
religious bodies established for the purpose.

[Illustration: ANCIENT HOTEL-DIEU UP TO 1821 (ST. PAUL ST.)]

[Illustration: HOTEL-DIEU IN 1861]

The care of young orphans was not relinquished till 1890. Ninety
to one hundred of these have been cared for annually. Outside
their patients the nuns now only continue the maintenance of
seventeen scholars who act as sanctuary boys in the services of
the chapel. Their functions are entirely occupied now with the
care of their sick. The next hospital in chronological order
would be the “Hôpital Général” originally founded by the Charron
Nères and reformed in 1747 by Madame d’Youville. But as this
institution, still existing, is rather an asylum for the aged as
well as an institution for foundlings with the baby hospital work
in connection, it will be treated elsewhere.


                      THE GENERAL HOSPITAL

The General Hospital, the first general hospital under British
rule, has, for many years, been perhaps the most popular of
Montreal’s numerous charities. It owed its inception to the
inspiration of Montreal ladies.

In the first annual report, it is stated that the increase of
population and the great influx of emigrants from the United
Kingdom, rendered the Hôtel Dieu inadequate for the care of
the indigent sick, and further it was desirable to accommodate
patients suffering from contagious diseases.

Its history is as follows:

About 1815 a band of ladies combined under the name of the
“Ladies Benevolent Society” to meet the cases of destitute
immigrants occurring. By 1818 a fund of £1,200 was raised. A
small house, thenceforth called the “House of Recovery,” was
hired. This with its four rooms was attended by Doctor Blackwood,
a young retired army surgeon, with the assistance of others.
Very soon a large house was secured on Craig Street, fitted
up with three wards and made capable of receiving twenty-four
patients. The movement now became popular. A public meeting was
called. The idea of a “General Hospital” took hold. The medical
department was first under the control of four professional men
in connection with the “Montréal Medical Institution,” which
afterwards became the first medical faculty of McGill University.

On May 1, 1819, the patients were removed from the “House of
Recovery” to the new building, which now assumed the name of
the Montreal General Hospital. About this time a site used as a
nursery, on Dorchester Street, was up for sale. This lot then
“in the suburbs, was chosen for its proximity to the town, and
the salubrity of the situation.” In view of erecting a hospital
thereon it was purchased on the joint credit of the Hon. J.
Richardson, the Honorable Mr. McGillivray and Mr. S. Gerrard. A
contract was signed for the new hospital early in January, 1821.
The Hon. J. Richardson, Rev. J. (Dean) Bethune, Doctor Robertson,
John Molson, D. Ross, John Fry and A. Skakel, Esqs., were
appointed a committee to superintend the work.

The corner-stone of the building was laid with Masonic ceremonies
on the 6th of June, 1821, and the building was opened for the
reception of patients on the 1st of May, 1822, the cost of the
erection being £4,556 currency. This building, which is now
represented by the entrance hall and rooms above, was designed to
accommodate seventy-two patients.

The subsequent history consists chiefly in the addition of block
after block of buildings to the original small stone central
edifice, each addition being named after a generous donor or
honoured citizen.

On the death of the Hon. John Richardson, the first president,
it was resolved to perpetuate his name and connection with
the Hospital by the addition of a wing to be named after him.
A generous response was made by the public, and in 1832 the
building attached to the east end of the original structure was
opened for the reception of patients.

In 1848 the widow of Chief Justice Reid signified her intention
of adding a wing corresponding with the first, to be named after
her deceased husband.

Special provision was made for the treatment of children by the
erection of the Morland wing, in rear of the Reid wing. This
building was added in memory of Mr. Thomas Morland, an active
member of the Committee of Management, and was opened in 1874. It
contained rooms afterwards utilized for outdoor patients, private
wards, and accommodation for servants, which was subsequently
transformed to a female ward.

In accordance with the views of the founders of the Hospital,
accommodation was long provided for patients suffering from
infectious fevers. Cases of smallpox, typhus, scarlatina,
diphtheria and measles, were for years accommodated in the
central building or its wings. During the great epidemic of
typhus or as it was better known, ship fever, brought to the
country chiefly by Irish immigrants, the Hospital capacity was
taxed to its utmost, and temporary sheds had to be erected for
the accommodation of the sufferers. In the years 1831-32, 1832-33
and 1847-48, 5,631 patients were admitted of whom 3,458 suffered
from fever. Doctor Howard, in his report, states that over half
the fever patients were cases of typhus.

Smallpox again, which in former years was very prevalent in
Montreal, was treated in special wards of the Hospital. Owing
to the disease spreading to other patients a brick building
afterwards used as a kitchen and laundry, was constructed in the
rear of the Richardson wing. Half the cost of this structure
was generously donated by Mr. Wm. Molson; the building was
used for infectious cases up to 1894. At that time, after many
applications and much pressure from the governors, the city
undertook to subscribe $6,000 annually to the Hospital to defray
the expense of providing for infectious disease. Two houses were
utilized for a year in the neighbourhood, and the department was
then moved to the Civic Hospital, on Moreau Street. Half this
building is controlled by the General Hospital and is supported
financially by the city.

Two surgical pavilions and a large operating theatre were opened
for use in December, 1892. Mr. George Stephen, afterwards Lord
Mount Stephen, one of the generous donors of the Royal Victoria
Hospital, contributed $50,000 in memory of the late Dr. G.W.
Campbell, formerly dean of McGill Medical Faculty, and a bequest
from Mr. David Greenshields of $40,000 was also utilised in
adding these wings. From that time accommodation for surgical
cases has been excellent. The old part of the Hospital was,
however, in a very unsatisfactory state. The wards were small and
the building antiquated. Lack of funds only had long prevented a
radical change being made in this block. The president, Mr. F.
Wolferstan Thomas, set himself the task of collecting funds to
renovate this part of the building and to render it in keeping
with the surgical side. As the outcome of his untiring work in
aid of the Hospital $100,000 was collected. The interior of the
old building was pulled down and it was skillfully remodelled,
under the direction of Mr. A.T. Taylor, for the accommodation of
medical, gynæcological and ophthalmic patients, the old operating
room being retained as a medical lecture, and gynæcological
operating theatre.

It was evidently the intention of the founders of the Hospital
to provide for proper nursing so far as was possible, before
the advent of Florence Nightingale. We read in the first annual
report, among other rules, that the nurse, on admission of a
patient, “shall immediately wash his or her face and hands, neck
and arms, feet and legs, with tepid water; she shall give him or
her (if he or she have none) an hospital shirt and night-cap.”
Again they are instructed to keep themselves clean and decently
clothed, and to be diligent in complying with the orders of
the medical officers, surgeon and matron. Surely we have here
inculcated two important duties of the modern nurse, cleanliness
and obedience.

In 1890 the present successful school of nurses was established
and in 1897 the Jubilee Nursing Home on the hospital grounds was
being erected, while in 1913 a large annex was added to meet the
growing demands of the population on the charity of the Hospital.


                     THE NOTRE DAME HOSPITAL

This institution is situated n Notre Dame Street, near the
eastern Canadian Pacific Railway station, in a populous
commercial and manufacturing centre, and in close proximity to
the harbour.

It was founded in 1880. The branch of the Laval Medical Faculty,
established in Montreal in 1877, had no hospital, its professors
and students being excluded from the Hôtel Dieu, on account of
the difficulties that had arisen between the Faculty and the
Montreal School of Medicine and Surgery, the latter holding the
Hôtel Dieu. Knowing that a hospital was greatly needed in the
commercial and manufacturing part of the city, and would afford
abundant clinical material, the professors undertook to found
Notre Dame Hospital.

Dr. E. Persillier-Lachapelle, taking the lead, obtained the
co-operation of the Rev. Victor Rousselot, of the Seminary of St.
Sulpice, who assumed half the financial responsibility of the
enterprise, the professors taking the other half.

The co-operation of the Sisters of Charity (Grey Nuns) was next
obtained to care for the sick and see to the internal economy of
the Hospital.

The old Donegani Hotel was rented, and the contracts for
repairing, renovating and furnishing the building granted; and
on the 1st of July, 1880, the Hospital, with fifty beds, was
inaugurated. In 1881 it was incorporated, the corporation being
under the direction of a Medical Board, a Board of Governors and
a Board of Management. Later on the Hospital became possessor
of the Donegana Hotel and the adjoining estates on each side,
and gradually completed the important repairs and renovations
requisite to adapt those buildings to the needs of the
institution.

Its presidents were successively: Hon. L.J. Forget, Hon. J.R.
Thibaudeau, Mr. C.P. Hébert, and Hon. L.O. Loranger.

The first superntendent and adviser of the Hospital was Dr.
E.P. Lachapelle, who filled the position for many years, being
succeeded by Dr. L. de Lothbinière Harwood.

The citizens of Montreal and the public generally have always
contributed liberally to the maintenance of the institution.
The ladies of Montreal, fully interested in the good work to be
done, founded an association--The Lady Patronesses of Notre Dame
Hospital--to co-operate more effectively with the directors.

The Hospital to-day contains 150 beds, the greater number of
which are devoted to the poor and unfortunate sick of all races
and creeds.

Besides the wards there is an outdoor department, comprising
dispensaries for general medicine, surgery, eye, nose, throat and
ear diseases, diseases of women, diseases of the skin, diseases
of children and nervous diseases.

In the Hospital proper, there are men’s and women’s wards for
surgery, medicine, ophthalmology and gynæcology. There is a
pathological laboratory in the hospital as well as an electrical
and radiological one. An ambulance service does active work,
succouring the sick and injured, and providing the Hospital with
abundant clinical cases. The whole of this varied and practical
clinical material is classified and utilized by the Faculty for
the graded and thorough instruction of its students. The medical
service is directed by a bureau of thirty-two physicians. The
Grey Nuns are in charge of the hospital nursing department. The
hospital has now an annex being constructed on Sherbrooke Street,
facing Park Lafontaine. By its side is the hospital of St. Paul
for contagious diseases.


                        WESTERN HOSPITAL

This hospital was first projected in 1871, the year in which
the Medical Faculty[1] of Bishops College was established. For
some time previously the want of a hospital in the West End had
been felt and spoken of, but further than this no action was
taken. When Bishops Medical Faculty was in its inception, it was
feared they might not get full facilities for their students in
the existing hospitals. Circumstances which occurred seemed to
indicate that this would be realized. As a result a friend of
Bishops College, Major Mills, offered to give $12,000 to build
a western hospital. This donation was put in writing by Doctor
Wilkins, then in Bishops, and signed by Major Mills, and an
active canvass commenced. In a short time $30,000 was subscribed,
the charter for incorporation was assented to on January 20,
1874, the present site purchased, and on the 29th June, 1876, the
foundation stone of the first building was laid with appropriate
ceremony. It is not required to notice the vicissitudes, which
the building met with, beyond stating that for several years it
remained unfinished. When at last completed, the Western Hospital
Corporation was not in position to commence hospital work. It
was leased, in 1884, by the Women’s Hospital, the charter of
which was owned by the Medical Faculty of Bishops and opened for
hospital work, there being two departments--a Gynæcological and
a Maternity. A most successful work was done by this hospital
when, in 1895, the marked growth of the city westward seemed to
indicate that the time had arrived for putting the building to
its original purpose, that of a general hospital. The lease with
the Women’s Hospital was therefore cancelled by mutual consent,
and in the fall of 1895, the Western Hospital, as a general
hospital, began its active work. The ground owned by the Hospital
Corporation is nearly three acres in extent, and is bounded by
four streets, one being an avenue of over one hundred feet wide.
This avenue leads directly to many of the large manufactories in
the West End, and they furnish the Hospital with a large amount
of its surgical work.

In 1907 the charter was altered and the new building was erected,
the old one becoming the nurse’s home. The late Mr. Peter Lyale
was the president at the time, having been in that office from
1906 to his death in 1912. He was succeeded by Mr. D. Lorne
McGibbon.


                   THE ROYAL VICTORIA HOSPITAL

The Royal Victoria Hospital received its name in commemoration of
the jubilee of Queen Victoria in 1887, in memory of which it was
founded in that year.

On the 2d of December, 1893, His Excellency the Governor General
assisted at the inauguration of the new hospital, which was
devoted, by Lord Mount Stephen and Sir Donald Smith, K.C.M.G.,
etc., to the cure of the sick, of whatever race or creed, to
the training of nurses, and to the furtherance of science. The
building is erected within a lot of eighteen acres, purchased
by the founders for $90,000, to which another five acres, held
under long lease from the city, make a convenient addition. It
stands on part of the Mountain Park and faces on Pine Avenue and
University Street.

The style of architecture is Scottish baronial, to which
the limestone of Montreal is well suited. The facade of the
administration block is after the style of F’yvie Castle,
in Aberdeenshire. Over the main arch of the doorway are the
monograms of Lord Mount Stephen and Sir Donald Smith. On the
western gable of the central block appear the coat of arms of
Lord Mount Stephen with his motto “Lippen,” an old Scotch word,
meaning to attend. Sir Donald’s coat of arms is on the eastern
gable, and bears the motto “Perseverance.” Both of these mottoes
are admirable motives to inspire service in the cause of the
sick. The building, begun in 1891, has employed 600 workmen and
cost nearly eight hundred thousand dollars. To construction,
furnishing and maintenance, the founders have devoted nearly
one million five hundred thousand dollars. Designed by H. Saxon
Snell, an English architect of eminence, whose specialty is
hospitals, the structure combines, with peculiarities of its own,
the best characteristics of Mr. Snell’s previous efforts.

The act of incorporation, passed in 1890, provides for fifteen
governors, of whom seven shall be the mayor of Montreal,
president of the Board of Trade, president of the Canadian
Pacific Railway, president of the Bank of Montreal, the chief
officer of the Grand Trunk Railway resident at Montreal, and the
principal and dean of the faculty of McGill College.

The other governors, expressly named in the act, were Sir Donald
Smith (afterwards Lord Strathcona), Lord Mount Stephen, Alexander
G. Patterson, W.J. Buchanan, Andrew Robertson and Thomas
Davidson, Esquires.

The act provided for branch convalescent hospitals at Banff, N.W.
Territories, and at Caledonia Springs.

Associates are constituted by paying $1,000 and $20, or more
annually, or $5,000 in all.

In an address read by R.B. Angus, chairman of the board, to
His Excellency, the Governor General was informed that he was
ex-officio a visitor of the institution, and would always be
welcome.

Replying, His Excellency declared that, out of consideration for
Sir Donald Smith, whom he had with difficulty induced to attend,
he would substitute, for praise of the founders, congratulations
of all concerned upon the happy conclusion of this magnificent
act of practical philanthropy and of Christian benevolence.

He announced that R.B. Angus, Esq., successor of the late Sir
John Abbott as chairman of the board, had promised $25,000
towards the support of the institution, and hoped that the
example would be followed in sums large and small.

Wishing the founders long life, to witness the happiness which
they have prepared, the Governor General called for and lead
three cheers for the founders and three for Her Majesty.

The Hospital consists of three really separate buildings,
connected together by stone bridges. Viewed from the front on
Pine Avenue, the hospital appears to form three sides of a
square, but it is in reality H-shaped. The central part is the
administration block, while the two wings contain the wards and
accessory rooms, the theatres and chemical laboratory, etc.

Regardless of expense, the best surgical inventions and
appliances have been collected from the chief seats of medical
science on two continents. Not only are the physicians, surgeons
and nurses elegantly housed, but even the servants are to be
envied their comfortable quarters. A training school for nurses
is attached to the hospital.

A fine bust of Her Majesty, in prominent position, reminds
visitors that the inception of this admirable institution
celebrates, in the name, and with the approval, of Her Majesty,
the fiftieth anniversary of her coming to the throne.


                    THE HOMŒOPATHIC HOSPITAL

The first records of Homœopathy in this city are contained in
a pamphlet by Dr. John Wanless, published in 1864, giving the
substance of a series of letters which had appeared in attempted
refutation of Homœopathy, and the doctor’s replies thereto as
they were printed in the Montreal “Transcript” of the time.

In his pamphlet the author mentions Doctor Rosenstein as one
of our first Homœopaths, and relates in detail the treatment
which that practitioner received while trying to conduct an
experimental case in the Montreal General Hospital. Dr. Arthur
Fisher was a contemporary.

On the 28th of June, 1863, Messrs. Thomas McGinn, F.E. Grafton,
James Baylis, James A. Mathewson, James Muir, E.L. Ransom, D.A.
Ansell, Fleck, and McCready, met in the Mechanics’ Hall and made
the first attempt to organize Homœopathy in Montreal.

A dispensary was established, which from unexplained causes was
discontinued after two years of apparent prosperity.

New names of adherents appear from time to time, among them
Hon. James Ferrier, G.A. Holland, Hon. L.S. Huntingdon, George
Washington Stephens, James Stewart, John S. McLachlan, Charles
Alexander, D. Drysdale, E. Lusher and Henry Lyman.

[Illustration: ROYAL VICTORIA HOSPITAL]

[Illustration: MONTREAL GENERAL HOSPITAL]

On March 18, 1865, Messrs. James A. Mathewson, James Baylis,
George A. Holland, James Muir, Thomas McGinn, John Wanless, M.D.,
and Francis E. Grafton, obtained from the Legislative Council and
Assembly of Canada a charter incorporating themselves and their
successors under the name and title of “The Montreal Homœopathic
Association,” with power to establish in Montreal a Dispensary
and a Hospital, to establish a College and appoint professors
to teach the principles and practice of medicine according to
the doctrines of Homœopathy, and to grant licenses to practice
medicine according to these doctrines within the Province of
Lower Canada. This charter was further amended, and the powers
amplified by the Legislative Council and Assembly of Canada,
September 14, 1865, and the Quebec Legislature on March 30, 1883.
Owing to a limited clientéle and paucity of resources, little was
done for many years beyond the _pro forma_ requirements of the
charter, and the very important powers granted thereunder lay
dormant, though carefully nursed and guarded by the old stalwarts
of those pioneer days. In 1893 the Association took a new lease
of life, and from that day on the story of Homœopathy has been
one of brilliant achievement and ever-widening influence. The
Association has recently established a public free dispensary
at the corner of St. Antoine and Inspector streets, and its
hoped-for career of usefulness will be watched with interest.

In March, 1893, a petition to the Governors of the newly
inaugurated Royal Victoria Hospital, asking for a Homœopathic
ward, was circulated, and within two months thirteen feet of
names of prominent citizens favouring Homœopathy were obtained.

On May 18, 1893, a deputation consisting of Doctor Wanless,
Reverend Dr. Barbour, Reverend Dr. Ross, Dr. H.M. Patton, Messrs.
Samuel Bell, James Baylis, John Torrance, James A. Gillespie,
James Ferrier, F.E. Grafton, Charles Alexander and E.G. O’Connor
met the Governors of the Royal Victoria Hospital in the board
room of the Bank of Montreal, and presented the petition. It
was courteously received, and compliance therewith promised,
if possible. On January 5, 1894, a formal reply was received,
stating that the petition could not be granted. On November 13,
1893, a similar request to the Montreal General Hospital was also
refused.

In 1893 negotiations for special accommodation in existing
hospitals having failed, and the demand for Homœopathic Hospital
facilities having become urgent, the board decided to take
the important step permitted in its charter, and to acquire a
hospital under its own control.

The property, No. 44 McGill College Avenue, consisting of a
four-story brick building and 3,300 square feet of land, was
purchased for $8,000, and in July, 1894, the deeds were signed
for the Association by Mr. Charles Alexander, president, and Dr.
H.M. Patton, the secretary. During the summer of 1894 the repairs
committee, with energy and excellent taste, transformed the old
residence into one of the most attractive and complete of small
hospitals.

On October 2, 1894, the Hospital was formally opened, the Lord
Bishop of Montreal and other representative clergymen conducting
an imposing inaugural ceremony in the presence of a large number
of prominent citizens; thus was launched into benevolent
activity the first Homœopathic Hospital in the Province of
Quebec, under the following management:

The first hospital officials, 1894, were: President, Samuel Bell;
vice president, Mr. Charles Morton; treasurer, Joseph Gould;
secretary, Dr. W.G. Nichol.

The committee of management was composed of Lady Van Horne, Mrs.
Hector Mackenzie, Mrs. W.B. Lindsay, Mrs. Henry Thomas, Mrs. T.
(Dr.) Nichol, Mrs. Roswell Fisher, Miss Ames, Dr. John Wanless,
Dr. H.M. Patton, James Baylis; Miss M.E. Baylis, secretary of
committee.

The medical superintendent was Dr. H.M. Patton and the lady
superintendent, Miss Thompson.

The consulting staff consisted of Dr. Arthur Fisher, Dr. George
Logan, Doctor McLaren, and Dr. George Gale, while the attending
physicians were Doctors Wanless, W.G. Nichol, Griffith, and T.
Scott Nichol.

The attending surgeon was Dr. H.M. Patton.

The first year’s work showed 158 patients occupying its beds, 135
of whom were public, and twenty-three private patients. The death
rate for the year is given as 2.5.

A new wing was soon required, while the maternity annex and
nurses’ home was next added by the Woman’s Auxiliary.

Once more the devoted ladies of the Woman’s Auxiliary nobly
responded to the growing demands of pressing hospital needs,
which included provision for laundry work under their own
supervision, better accommodation for their admirable little band
of pupil nurses, and the inauguration of a much-needed maternity
for ladies desiring private hospital accommodation. The adjoining
house, No. 46 McGill College Avenue, was leased from Mr. W.L.
Maltby on a long term, Miss Annie Moodie becoming personally
responsible for the rent. The basement was fitted up as a
laundry. The first floor given over to the nurses as a dormitory,
with sitting-room and locker accommodation. The bath-room was
remodelled and refitted, and four dainty, private wards equipped
and furnished for maternity patients. The whole Annex was handed
over complete to the Hospital management, practically free of
debt, on August 6, 1899.

The year 1900 is noteworthy from the fact of the Woman’s
Auxiliary relinquishing all share and responsibility for Hospital
_management_, which hitherto had been jointly controlled by the
committee and the auxiliary. The Committee of Management was
recast and consolidated, and large responsibility put upon the
chairman, Mr. S.M. Baylis being the incumbent of the office at
that time.

In 1904, after careful deliberation, the Homœopathic Association,
under whose charter of 1865 and amending acts the Hospital
had been instituted and maintained, formally authorized the
application for a special charter, and agreed to transfer all
real property, equipment, securities and effects hitherto held
under its title, and acquired for the use and benefit of the
Hospital, to the new corporation, on consideration of the latter
assuming all annuity and other obligations attaching thereto. In
May, 1904, the Quebec Legislature passed an act incorporating
“The Homœopathic Hospital of Montreal,” the following gentlemen
and their successors being constituted a body politic under that
name and title: James A. Mathewson, Francis E. Grafton, Charles
Alexander, Samuel Bell, John T. Hagar, Louis Barbeau, Roswell
C. Fisher, Edward G. O’Connor, Samuel M. Baylis, Thomas J.
Dawson, Edward M. Morgan, M.D., Hugh M. Patton, M.D., Arthur D.
Patton, M.D., Alexander R. Griffith, M.D., Arthur Fisher, M.D.,
John W. Hughes and George Durnford.

[Illustration: INSANE ASYLUM AT LONGUE POINT]

[Illustration: HOMEOPATHIC HOSPITAL]

[Illustration: WESTERN HOSPITAL]

[Illustration: PROTESTANT INSANE ASYLUM AT VERDUN]

The Jubilee Endowment was inaugurated in 1897, in commemoration
of the jubilee of beloved Queen Victoria, by the donation of
$10,000 by the late Alexander Clerk, and since augmented by
bequests from the late James Baylis, and other sources, to the
capital sum of $10,871.61.

The Phillips’ Training School for Nurses was founded
contemporaneously with the establishment of the Hospital, and
so named in honour of the first benefactress, Mrs. Georgina D.
Phillips; the school has done good work in training and launching
in professional careers so many graduates.

The College of Homœopathic Physicians and Surgeons of Montreal is
operated under the charter granted to the Homœopathic Association
in the Act of 1865, and amending acts. Since the relinquishment
to the new incorporation of its hospital work, the College is
now the main care of the Association. Applicants for its valued
license must be graduates of an approved Medical College, and
must pass the critical examination of its licensing board in the
special field of Homœopathic therapeutics.


                    HOSPITALS FOR THE INSANE

                 St. Jean de Dieu, Longue Pointe

The care of the insane was first entrusted as a special
department in this city to the Grey Nuns in 1793. The work was
relinquished by them in 1844.

The modern work is now undertaken for the Montreal district and
the Province of Quebec by the Sisters of Providence at Longue
Pointe and the Protestant Insane Asylum at Verdun. The history of
each is interesting.

The care of the insane was undertaken by the Providence Nuns
on the proposition of the Quebec government to them in 1873.
In 1889, Mother Theresa of Jesus visited the principal insane
asylums of Europe and America. She declared that the method of
dividing the asylum into annexed pavilions should be adopted
in the classification of various cerebral diseases, which was
accordingly done. At present, two rows of pavilions cover five
acres of land. Nine acres will be required to complete the Asylum
and the other detached dwellings which have been erected on
the 500-acre farm. On the first storey is an electric tramway
which operates over its 3,000-foot corridor, and is for the use
of the personnel of the Asylum. A railroad, 15,000 feet long,
owned by the Community, is used for transportation of goods,
coal, wood, lumber, etc., from the quays on the St. Lawrence to
the main building. The institution was visited by a disastrous
fire in 1890. Nevertheless, the Asylum prospered, and today it
compares favorably with similar asylums, either in America or
Europe. Twelve thousand seven hundred and eighty patients have
been admitted from the day it was formally opened. The medical
staff is composed of three house and three visiting physicians,
three inspectors, appointed by the Government, and a medical
superintendent.


                             VERDUN

The movement for a separate Protestant Insane Asylum originated
with Mr. Alfred Perry in 1880, who called a public meeting for
the purpose of promoting it. It was not upheld that year but,
having called a second meeting on February 21, 1881, a resolution
proposed by Mr. Henry Lyman and seconded by the Reverend Dr.
Sullivan was carried unanimously after considerable discussion:
“That it is expedient and extremely requisite that steps should
now be taken looking to the establishment of a Protestant Insane
Asylum in the Province of Quebec.”

On June 30, 1881, there was passed a bill entitled “An Act to
Incorporate the Protestant Hospital for the Insane.” Mr. Morrice
generously defrayed all expenses connected with the securing of
this charter.

The Rt. Rev. William B. Bond, LL. D., Lord Bishop of the Diocese
of Montreal; John Jenkins, D.D., LL. D.; Gavin Lang; George
Douglas, LL. D.; George H. Wells; Henry Wilkes, D.D.; A.H. Munro;
W.S. Barnes; William A. Hall, M.D.; Sir Hugh Allan; Andrew Allan;
George Macrae, Q.C.; Charles Alexander; Henry Lyman; M.H. Gault,
M.P.; Thomas White, M.P.; Peter Redpath; Adam Darling; Hugh
McLellan; James Coristine; S.H. May; T. James Claxton; James
Johnston; Alex McGibbon; Alfred Perry; Leo H. Davidson, and such
other persons, donors or subscribers, as might be or become
associated with them and their successors, by this act were
constituted a body corporate to found a Protestant institution
for the care, maintenance and cure of the insane of the several
Protestant denominations in the Province of Quebec.

In accordance with the provision of the act, and pursuant to
a notice published in the “Herald” and “Gazette,” as required
by law, a meeting of those interested was held in the Y.M.C.A.
rooms, on December 20, 1881, Mr. Morrice presiding. At the
request of the chairman, Doctor Davidson explained the act
of incorporation, and advised that a board of twenty-four
governors should be elected by subscribers of $10 each, who thus
constituted themselves members of the corporation, this step
being necessary to preserve the charter. The majority of those
present having paid the required sum, a vote was taken by ballot,
and the following gentlemen elected to the Board of Governors:
Mr. D. Morrice; Mr. M.H. Gault, M.P.; Rev. Gavin Lang; Dr. F.W.
Campbell; Dr. J.C. Cameron; Mr. Charles Alexander; Mr. Henry
Lyman; Reverend Dr. Sullivan; Dr. William Osler; Mr. Alfred
Perry; Mr. L.H. Davidson; Rev. William Hall; Mr. T.J. Claxton;
Mr. Thomas White, M.P.; Rev. A.B. Mackay; His Lordship Bishop
Bond; Rev. G.H. Wells; Mr. Warden King; Canon Baldwin; Mr. George
Macrae, Q. C; Mr. Peter Redpath; Mr. Adam Darling; Mr. Hugh
McLennan; and Mr. A.A. Ayer.

It was not till 1887 that a site was determined upon for the
projected asylum. Subscriptions, however, had been obtained which
amounted at the end of 1887 to a total of $68,139.82, which
includes a gift from the Provincial Government of $7,812.29.

At a meeting of governors held April 14, 1887, it was finally
resolved to purchase a portion of the Hadley farm, which had been
selected by the site committee in the spring of 1886, for the
sum of $18,000. Situated in the Municipality of Verdun (whence
the name Verdun Hospital by which the institution is often
designated) just at the foot of the Lachine Rapids, the location
chosen was an admirable and extremely picturesque one. The
mountain rising behind crowned with green woods, its lower slopes
dotted with villas, the mighty St. Lawrence, with its timbered
islands, stretching in front; and the dancing rapids, with their
musical roar, in such close proximity, made a prospect of scenic
beauty difficult to surpass.

By the spring of 1890, the administration building and west
wing were completed, the first patient being received on July
15, 1890, and before the end of the year there had been 139
admissions. The first medical superintendent was Dr. T.J.W.
Burgess, who has held the post ever since.

A new wing was added in 1894. On January 24, 1895, the
institution was honoured by a visit from their Excellencies, the
Governor General Lord Aberdeen and the Countess of Aberdeen.

By 1896 the “Annex” for imbecile and violent patients was begun
in the spring and completed in the autumn. The summer of 1897
saw its opening and the erection of an infirmary. On September
11th, the asylum was visited by the psychological section of the
British Medical Association that gathered in Montreal on the
occasion of the first meeting of the society outside the British
Isles.

In 1898 the pathological laboratory, donated by Mr. G.B. Burland,
was installed under the direction of Dr. Andrew McPhail. The
“East” house in contradistinction to the Annex or “West” house
was completed and opened. This summer the asylum was visited by
the Medico-Psychological Association, the oldest of American
Medical societies then holding its fifty-eighth annual meeting in
Montreal.

In 1907 the Hadley farm of sixty acres adjoining the hospital
was purchased and donated at the cost of $42,000 by a Canadian
gentleman, Dr. James Douglas, of New York. In the same year the
addition of a power house and other lighting and water supply
improvements cost the establishment about one hundred and
twenty-five thousand dollars.

In 1909 a new annex, known as the North West House, was opened
on September 16th. The capacity of the buildings in 1910 was
for a population of 680. The institution at the end of its
twenty-first year had 366 cases, of which nearly forty per cent
have been discharged as cured. The asylum which has acted for the
Protestants of the Province has certainly a good record to show.


                       THE CIVIC HOSPITALS

After the great epidemic of smallpox in 1885, when the sick were
isolated or treated in temporary buildings, erected on the old
exhibition grounds, the City Council on January 13, 1886, named a
commission to choose a site for the erection of a civic smallpox
hospital. In consequence of which, on May 25, 1886, the city
bought the Robert property situated in the Hochelaga Ward, north
of Moreau Street. This hospital was demolished and reconstructed
in 1912. It is administered by the hygiene department of the City
Hall for smallpox cases.

The steps leading to their erection follow:

Until 1904 there had been only the Civic Hospital on Moreau
Street for contagious diseases--a totally inadequate provision in
a large city. In 1901, on January 23d, the city council received
an offer by Sister Filiatrault, superior general of the Grey
Nuns, offering to contribute $50,000 for a contagious disease
hospital for Catholics on the condition that the city should
contribute a like amount with an annual subvertion of $10,000. A
week later the Montreal General Hospital and the Royal Victoria
Hospital made a similar offer for the general population.

This being accepted, the Catholic hospital, St. Paul’s, at 656
Maisonneuve Street, was in operation by 1904 under the direction
of the Notre Dame Hospital, but the Alexandra Hospital, owing
to several hitches, was not opened till July 9, 1906, its
incorporation being granted in 1903 to James Crathern, Richard B.
Angus and Charles F. Smith.

The hospital is erected at the foot of Charron Street and the
river bounds it on the south and east.

In 1906 Sir William Macdonald purchased and presented to the
hospital the triangular piece of land between it and the river
to the east, at a cost of $7,141.35. In 1908 the late Sir R.G.
Reid built and equipped a very necessary observatory pavilion
at the cost of $12,568.82. A nurses’ home is at present being
erected to the west of the administration building, of fireproof
construction, at a cost of about $56,000, including equipment,
which will bring the total expense of the hospital building up to
$360,000. The patients admitted from January 1, 1913, to December
31, 1913, numbered 1,036.

The Hôpital St. Paul, a section of Notre Dame Hospital, receives
Catholic and the Alexandra Hospital, Protestant patients. The
city pays each one of these institutions annually $35,000 for
thirty-five beds a day, and $1.00 a day in addition for each
patient above the contracted number.


                    TUBERCULOSIS DISPENSARIES

                   The Royal Edward Institute

In this city it is not quite twelve years ago since the first
organized effort against the ravages of the “white plague”
was initiated by the formation of the Montreal League for the
Prevention of Tuberculosis. At a meeting held in the Art Gallery
on November 29th, 1902, under the auspices of the Governor
General, Lord Minto, resolutions were passed calling for combined
effort on the part of the government, the city authorities, and
public-spirited citizens to relieve the miseries associated with
this infection and to check its spread. A committee was appointed
at that time, but not until June, 1903, was work actually
commenced in a small room in Bleury Street.

The establishment of a sanatorium in the near neighbourhood
for the treatment of incipient cases, and of a hospital for
the treatment of the more advanced and hopeless cases, was at
first proposed; but after consideration it was felt that the
expense of maintaining institutions sufficiently large to cope
with the requirements of the city would involve an expense
far beyond what the community could be reasonably expected at
that time to contribute, so a beginning of work was made by
the establishment of a dispensary, November 1, 1904, and the
employment of what has been termed the dispensary method for
reaching the tuberculous poor. It is a method which has been
gradually developed in Edinburgh under the guidance of Dr. R.W.
Phillip, and in France by Calmette, and which has been adopted
with much success in Philadelphia. The method emphasizes the
importance of disseminating a practical knowledge regarding the
spread, development, and course of the disease among the poor,
and is based upon two facts; first, that it is not necessary for
patients in the early stages of tuberculosis to leave their
homes to be healed, and, second, that patients can be educated
so to comport themselves as to be of little danger to those
around them. Montreal is one of the first pioneers in purely
tuberculosis clinical institutions, the first established by
Doctor Phillip in Edinburgh in 1887, being followed in 1903 by
Calmette in Lille, and by New York and Montreal in 1904. Making
use of this plan it has been the aim of the executive board
not only to attend to the wants of such cases as may apply to
the dispensary, but to co-operate with the medical profession
throughout the city, both in hospital and private practice. All
physicians are invited to report to a central station cases of
tuberculosis occurring in their practice which cannot be fully
treated by them. These cases are tabulated and arranged according
to the district in which they live; each patient is visited
at his home by an inspector or nurse; full instructions, both
written and verbal, are given regarding the mode of life to be
followed to secure the greatest advantage to the patient and the
greatest security to those around him.

An interesting exhibition dealing with all phases of the crusade
was organized in October, 1908, and was visited by over 50,000
persons, including the older children attending the public
schools. Addresses were given by eminent speakers and an attempt
was made to reach all clasess of our citizens and interest them
in the measures necessary to ensure health, and check the spread
of this infection. This movement in public education has led the
way to subsequent health exhibitions in the city, notably the
Child Welfare Exhibition of 1912.

Later an appeal was made to the Lieutenant-Governor-in-Council to
appoint a Royal Commission to inquire into the conditions in this
province favouring the spread of tuberculosis and to ascertain
the best methods of checking it.

With the growing work of the League, the urgent need of more
room to meet the necessities of its dispensary work, and the
desirability of a large central station, where a resident staff
of nurses could be continually in attendance, was forced upon
the executive. At this juncture, a philanthropic citizen, the
late Lieut.-Col. Jeffrey H. Burland, came forward with his very
generous offer of $50,000 from his sisters and himself as a
contribution in memory of their father and mother, to be applied
towards the purchase and equipment of a suitable building, on
the condition that the general public would contribute an equal
amount to serve as an endowment sufficient to cover the annual
expenses connected with the maintenance of its efficiency. This
condition has unfortunately not yet been fulfilled; as only
$36,000 has been subscribed, nevertheless, Colonel Burland
impressed with the urgency of the League’s need acquired in May,
1909, the very central and commodious detached building, No. 47
Belmont Park. This with much judgment and care he had altered
and enlarged to suit the possible requirements of the dispensary
work for many years to come, and to serve as the headquarters of
the League’s work in Montreal. No dispensary building like this
one with its bright sun parlours and large roof garden exists
anywhere; and it is hoped that its advantages may not only prove
to have much practical benefit for the consumptive patient, but
also have an educational value for the general public.

The whole equipment has been very carefully studied and all
the arrangements made with the view of securing the greatest
efficiency at the minimum of running expense.

By gracious permission of King Edward VII the organization became
known as the Royal Edward Institute.

Its work is one that Montreal has become proud of.


                     THE BRUCHESI INSTITUTE

The Bruchesi Institute is the tuberculosis hospital and
dispensary under French-speaking direction for patients of all
races and religions. It started humbly when at the request of Dr.
Eugène Grenier, granted on October 10th, 1910, the Sisters of
Providence Asylum, 369 St. Catherine Street, put aside a couple
of rooms for an anti-tuberculosis clinic. Dr. P.E. Bousquet
undertook the treatment of the superior respiratory tract, Dr.
B.E. Bourgeois that of surgical tuberculosis, and Doctor Grenier,
assisted by Drs. J.A. Jarry and Louis Verchelden, that of
pulmonary tuberculosis.

The first board of administration was completed on March 9, 1911,
as follows: honorary president, the Rt. Rev. Paul Bruchesi,
Archbishop of Montreal; president, J. Auguste Richard; vice
president, Abbé Tranchemontagne; treasurer, U.H. Dandurand;
secretary, Dr. Eugène Grenier; directors, Canon Adam, T. Bastien
and Dr. E. Dubé, who greatly promoted its formation. The same
names appear in the act of incorporation of the Bruchesi
Institute, November 10, 1911. A medical board was also formed
at the period, Dr. E. Dubé being elected president, Dr. Eugène
Grenier, secretary, the latter being succeeded by Dr. Gustave
Archambault.

The dispensary opened on February 27, 1911. On July 24, 1912,
this was moved to 340 St. Hubert Street, where the Sisters
of Providence placed at its disposition many large rooms. In
these new quarters the institute has eleven beds for private
tuberculosis persons; 316 have been received and treated in these
private rooms from August 18, 1912, to October 31, 1914.

Educational courses for public instruction through lectures and
a press campaign, and a post-graduate course for physicians
were in operation by July 15, 1913, the opening lectures of the
post-graduate course of 1914 being given by Prof. S.A. Knopp, of
New York. Thirteen physicians have already followed these special
courses on “early diagnosis and treatment of tuberculosis.”

With the aid of the Sisters of Providence the Bruchesi Institute
opened in 1911 a preventorium at Beloeil, but the lack of
financial support on the part of Montreal and the province caused
the institute to discontinue this branch of its work, after
one year. The Bruchesi Institute receives from the Sisters of
Providence the use of the building it occupies, including heating
and cleaning, the services of six sister-nurses, etc. It also
receives the services of thirty-two attending physicians, from
the City of Montreal $3,000, and from the Province of Quebec
$3,000, and material financial aid from the public. The institute
is affiliated to “The Canadian Association for the Prevention of
Tuberculosis.”


                       THE GRACE DART HOME

A supplementary aid for tuberculosis patients is supplied by
the Grace Dart Home, which was started about eight years ago
as a private institution by Mr. Henry J. Dart in memory of his
daughter, Grace Dart. Friends became interested and a provincial
charter of incorporation was obtained. About two years ago the
former house of Sir Francis Hincks on St. Antoine Street was
purchased and extensions made so that between thirty and forty
patients are provided for.


       CIVIC ASSISTANCE TO THE ANTI-TUBERCULOSIS MOVEMENT

The city has come to the relief of the tuberculosis movement. Its
assistance of recent years is as follows:

Amount paid for the maintenance of tuberculous patients in 1913,
$6,276.45. In 1912 the amount was $6,147.55.

The amount voted in 1913 for the treatment of cases of
tuberculosis amounted to $14,300.00, and the same was apportioned
as follows:

Hospital for incurables, $7,500.00; Royal Edward Institute,
$3,300.00; Grace Dart Home, $500.00; Bruchesi Institute,
$3,000.00. In 1912 it was $13,300.00 and in 1911, $11,300.00.

Supplementing the hospitals are the dispensaries connected
with the convents and the milk stations. One of the oldest now
existing is the Montreal Dispensary, established in 1853, the
Dispensaire of the Sisters of Providence being opened on June 1,
1863.


                THE CHILDREN’S MEMORIAL HOSPITAL

Of recent years the special hospital treatment of children has
been marked. The greatest development in infant care is to
be dated to the rise of the Children’s Memorial Hospital on
Pine Avenue. Not only is this institution to be credited with
efficiency in its general treatment of infants, but it especially
deserves the credit of being the pioneer in Canada of special
clinical treatment and the special vocational education for
crippled and deformed children in the school latterly erected
on its grounds and completed in September, 1914. This will be
treated later.

The first meeting of the committee for the founding of the
Children’s Memorial Hospital, of Montreal, was held on November
25, 1902. Nearly a year went by, however, before the committee
deemed it advisable, or even practical, to make tangible
advancement in this great undertaking.

November, 1903, marks a memorable epoch in the history of the
child cripples throughout Canada, for it was then--nearly a year
after their first meeting--that the committee procured temporary
quarters in the private dwelling, 500 Guy Street, where they
practically launched their noble enterprise, thus bringing
into being one of Canada’s greatest and long-felt needs, an
institution especially adapted for the treatment of deformities
of children and of the many diseases accruing from these
deformities.

To those temporary quarters children were brought from the East
and West, from the North and South of the Dominion to receive
surgical and medical treatment. In that small building, though
the accommodations were woefully limited, many and remarkable
cures have been effected.

The Children’s Memorial Hospital of today was opened April 6,
1909, its beautiful location and handsome and well equipped
buildings making it a credit to the city and to the Dominion.

From an institution, pitifully hampered at its beginning and
during the first five years of its existence, has evolved one
resplendent in its environments of sunshine and mountain air;
of foliage, flowers and birds. It occupies one of the most
delightful sites in or around the beautiful city of Montreal.
Situated on the upper slope of Cedar Avenue with the greater
height of Mount Royal for its background, the blue waters of the
grand St. Lawrence stretching before it, the busy city almost
encircling it, the Children’s Memorial Hospital of Montreal
stands, not merely an ornament to our city, but a benefit to
or land. Its wards, sun-parlors, operating rooms, out-door
department, nurses’ apartments, dining room, kitchens, corridors,
passages--all bear evidence of the great work carried on in the
institution.

It is a general hospital for all children’s diseases, with the
exception of those that are contagious, with wards for boys,
girls and infants, and there is surgical and medical treatment.
The officers from the inception have been: Sir Melbourne Tait,
president; Sir H. Graham, first vice president; Mr. G.H.
Smithers, second vice president and honorary treasurer; Dr. A.
McKenzie Forbes, third vice president and honorary secretary; Dr.
H.B. Cushing, fourth vice president and recording secretary; and
Mr. George J. Foster, honorary solicitor.


                    THE HOPITAL STE. JUSTINE

The Hôpital Ste. Justine, which is a corresponding institution
to the last named, was established as a hospital and dispensary
for children in November, 1907, at No. 740 St. Denis Street, in
a house loaned at a nominal price by Mr. Damien Rolland. The
next spring it was removed to 820 Delorimier Avenue. Meantime,
as the work was of great importance, steps were taken to rear a
worthy building which saw its first stone solemnly blessed on
St. Denis Street in April, 1914. The building was opened in May,
1914, and towards the end of June the patients were transferred
from Delorimier Avenue. The formal blessing of the Hospital by
Archbishop Bruchesi took place in November.

The hospital is well equipped with departments for general
medicine, surgery, diseases of the eye and skin diseases. For
the last three years the religious sisters, “Les Filles de
la Sagesse,” have directed the internal arrangements and the
nursing department. In connection with the hospital there is a
school of nurses for children’s diseases and the hospital is the
only body in the Dominion empowered to grant diplomas for such.
Arrangements are being made to connect the hospital with the
University of Laval as the children’s clinic.

The board of directors is composed of a committee of ladies and
medical men, the names of those applying for the charter being:
Mesdames Raoul Dandurand, Lady Lacoste, J.R. Thibaudeau, F.L.
Beique, A.A. Thibaudeau, F. D. Monk, D. Rolland, L. Beaubien,
F.X. Choquet, Jules Hamel, A. Berthiaume, F. Bruneau, J.A.
Leblanc, Gérin Normand, R. Masson, Henri Gerin-Lajoie, L. de G.
Beaubien, Mademoiselles Euphrosine Rolland, May Boyer, Blanche
Lareau and Thais Lacoste, and the following doctors: Joseph G.
Dubé, Zephyrin Lachapelle, R.G. Hervieux, Louis Joseph Gatelien
Cleroux, Telesphore Parizeau, Seraphin Boucher, Joseph Charles
Bourgoin, Benjamin Georges Bourgeois, Zephir Rheaume, Irma
Levasseur, Edouard Etienne Laurent and Raoul Masson.


               OTHER HOSPITAL ADJUNCT ASSOCIATIONS

Among the other supplemental hospitals in the city are: The
Samaritan Hospital for Women, the Montreal Foundling and Baby
Hospital, the foundling department of the Grey Nuns, the Montreal
Maternity Hospital, the Hôpital de la Miséricorde, the Women’s
Hospital, the St. Margaret’s Home, the various dispensaries, the
Association for Affording First Aid, the Pure Milk Depots or
_gouttes de lait_, the Créches, etc.

Nursing work in the homes of the people is carried on mostly by
the Victorian order of Nurses and the Soeurs de l’Esperance.

Several of these will be treated in the section on General
Humanitarian work, or in other places.


                     THE MONTREAL DISPENSARY

The Montreal Dispensary deserves special notice as it dates its
foundation to 1853. Its work has been progressively useful.

During the past twelve months the total number of applications
for advice and treatment made to the medical staff of the
dispensary by the sick poor of the city was 23,240.

These were classified as to their religions as follows: Roman
Catholics, 10,808; Protestants, 10,329; other creeds (mostly
Jews), 2,103.

This total may be again subdivided under the different
departments in which these patients were treated, viz.: General
department (medical), 7,250; general department (surgical),
1,170; department for diseases of eye, 1,768; department for
diseases of women, 1,404; department for diseases of ear, nose
and throat, 1,521; department for diseases of the skin, 1,989;
department for diseases of children, 7,334; department for
diseases of tuberculosis, 804.

A careful consideration of the above figures will impress one
with the fact that an institution which supplies free advice and
treatment to such numbers of poor people must of necessity be
doing a good work.


                 THE MONTREAL MATERNITY HOSPITAL

The Montreal Maternity Hospital was established in 1843, with
forty-three patients, the first physician being Dr. Michael
McCulloch and its first directress Mrs. W. Lunn. It was
incorporated in 1853. In 1913 its patients numbered 1,293. The
hospital provides a training school in obstetrics for McGill
University medical course and for nurses for the English
hospitals. Among the directresses succeeding have been: 1844-55,
Mrs. W. Lunn; 1855-66, Mrs. D. Ross; 1866-75, Mrs. J. Molson;
1875-82, Mrs. R. MacDonnell; 1882-85, Mrs. McCulloch; 1885-87,
Mrs. W. Gardner; 1887-88, Mrs. MacDonnell; 1888-89-91-93,
Mrs. W. Gardner; 1893-95, Mrs. W.R. Miller; 1895-96, Mrs.
Labatt; 1896-97, Mrs. R. MacDonnell; 1897-98, Mrs. W.R. Miller;
1908-1913, Mrs. R.W. Reford; 1914, Mrs. J.L. Cains.


                           INCURABLES

There is also a Home for Incurables at Notre Dame de Gràce. In
1898 several young ladies of the city inaugurated the work. Their
efforts elicited universal admiration, receiving especially the
assistance of Archbishop Bruchesi. In 1904 the former Monastery
of the Precious Blood was fitted up in the Hospital by its
new possessors, the Sisters of Providence. From the date of
establishment over two thousand persons have been cared for.


                       ST. MARGARET’S HOME

Another subsidiary hospital adjunct is the St. Margaret’s
Home for Incurables, under an Anglican sisterhood, which
was incorporated in 1890, although its foundation occurred
several years previous to that date. The head home is at
Grinstead, England, and its American headquarters are at
Boston, Massachusetts. The work of the home was originally of
a charitable nature and it has continued such in part to the
present time, caring for about twelve free patients continuously.
However, it has taken on more of the nature of an hospital
for chronic incurables, and as such deserves mention in this
department.

The pressing need for a convalescent home for Montrealers has
been met to some extent for about forty years by the Convalescent
Home at Murray Bay, situated at the Lower St. Lawrence. It
may, however, be ranked as a city charity for it is directed
and supported by Montrealers, its present president being
Mr. Sergeant P. Stearns, and the admission of patients being
regulated by the Charity Organization Society of Montreal. Last
year, 1913, the home received 121 cases, 13 from Quebec, 2 from
Murray Bay and the remainder from Montreal.


                       CONVALESCENT HOMES

The latest addition to the hospital service of the city is the
care of convalescents overflowing from the busy hospital wards.
This has been found an important need and has only been met
spasmodically till the present year, when the Loyola Convalescent
Home to receive patients of all denominations was formally opened
on April 25th, at 26 Overdale Avenue, under the auspices of the
“Ladies of Loyola Club.”


                              NOTE

                         MEDICAL BODIES

             THE MONTREAL MEDICO-CHIRURGICAL SOCIETY

On Saturday, September 23, 1843, nineteen medical men met at the
house of Dr. James Crawford, on Little St. James Street, and
resolved to found a society “for the purpose of communicating
together on subjects connected with their profession.” The
founders were:

A.F. Holmes, O.F. Bruneau, J.B.C. Trestler, Archibald Hall, Henry
Mount, William McNider, J.G. Bibaud, James Crawford, George W.
Campbell, C.S. Sewell, William Sutherland, Francis Badgley,
Arthur Fisher, David D. Logan, William Fraser, C.A. Campbell, M.
McCulloch, F.C.T. Arnoldi, Peter Munro.

The name chosen for the society was “The Medico-Chirurgical
Society of Montreal,” and at a meeting held the following week,
a code of by-laws was adopted providing for the holding of
fortnightly meetings from the first of October until the first of
May, and for monthly meetings during the rest of the year.

The officers consisted of a secretary-treasurer--Dr. Francis
Badgley for the first year--and a committee of management of
three, elected annually. The members, in the order in which
their names appeared on the roll, presided at the meetings and
the president for the evening was also expected to provide the
principal part of the programme.

In July, 1845, the constitution was altered to provide for a
president, two vice presidents, secretary-treasurer, and a
committee of management of three, and in August, Dr. A.F. Holmes
was elected the first president. During the autumn of the same
year an attempt was made to form an association of all the
licensed practitioners of the provinces of Canada, and delegates
from Toronto, Niagara, Quebec, Three Rivers and Montreal, met in
Montreal, but failed to come to any agreement.

A tariff of professional charges was adopted by the society in
February, 1846. All patients were divided into two classes and
the twenty-four hours were divided into three portions. Day
visits, 7 A.M. to 8 P.M.; evening visits, 8 P.M. to 10 P.M.;
night visits, 10 P.M. to 7 A.M.

In March, 1852, the meetings ceased to be held, but from what
cause is not now evidenced by the minutes.

Thirteen years later an attempt was made to carry on the
society, and a meeting of thirty French and English medical
men organized themselves into a society bearing the old name.
Dr. G.W. Campbell, dean of the faculty of medicine of McGill
University, was elected president. Two vice presidents, one
French and one English, were appointed, and two secretaries, who
kept the minutes, French and English, on opposite pages of the
minute book, a system which evidently did not prove successful,
the society lasting less than two years on this basis. Dr. W. H.
Hingston was president during the second year.

Four years later, on November 5, 1870, the old society was again
reorganized with twenty-five members; Dr. G.W. Campbell was again
chosen president and Dr. T.G. Roddick secretary-treasurer, a
position which he held for five years. Meetings were held every
alternate Saturday in the Natural History Society’s rooms.

From the date of the second reorganization the society has
grown rapidly and has now become established on a firm footing
financially, and exercises an ever increasing influence on all
matters, pertaining to medical science. The fiftieth anniversary
of its foundation was celebrated by a banquet at the Windsor
Hotel, on November 23, 1893. The meetings of this society are at
present held at 112 Mansfield Street.


                 LA SOCIETE MEDICALE DE MONTREAL

The present association for the French-speaking medical men in
the city is represented by “La Société Médicale de Montréal” and
was established in 1900 under this name by the adoption of its
statutes on June 19th. It had existed, however, since 1875 as
the “Comité d’Etude.” Its meetings are held at Laval University
and there are 200 members at present who meet twice a month. Its
principal officers have been Doctors Hervieux, Demers, Benoit,
Dubé, Boucher, Marien, Foucher, A. Lesage, Boulet, Parizeau, P.
Mercier and J. Décarie. Its present president is Dr. A.D. Aubry
and the secretary, G. Wilfred Derome.


             THE COLLEGE OF PHYSICIANS AND SURGEONS
                            (QUEBEC)

The College of Physicians and Surgeons is the corporate name of
all the registered practitioners of the province, each one of
whom is styled a member.

Its headquarters are at Montreal and its affairs are conducted
by a board of governors, forty-one in number, elected for four
years; thirteen from the district of Quebec, sixteen from the
district of Montreal, six from the district of Three Rivers, and
six from the district of St. Francis.

Of these forty-five, six are to be collegiate members: two from
Laval University, at Quebec, two from Laval University, at
Montreal, and two from McGill University.

This board of governors of the college is known as the Provincial
Medical Board, and meets twice a year to perform its functions.

This board has the power to regulate the study of medicine, by
making rules regarding the preliminary qualifications, duration
of study, and curriculum.

It appoints every third year four persons actually engaged in
education in the province as matriculation examiners, and persons
desiring the license must qualify before these examiners before
entering upon their professional studies.

By an amendment passed in 1890, holders of a degree of B.A.,
B.S.C., or B.L., conferred by any Canadian or British university,
are exempt from passing the preliminary examination.

As regards the professional requirements for the license,
holders of a degree in medicine from Laval University, McGill
University, and the Montreal School of Medicine, are entitled to
the license by virtue of such degrees, without examination. The
same privilege is granted to registered practitioners of Great
Britain, under the Imperial Medical Act of 1886. Other than the
graduates so mentioned, all candidates for the license, must pass
an examination before the board.

The Provincial Medical Board also has power to fix the tariff of
fees for professional services, and such tariff must have the
approval of the lieutenant-governor in council, and be published
in the Official Gazette six months before it becomes law.

No person may practise the profession of medicine in the province
who is not a member of the college, and he is liable to fine, and
even imprisonment, for repeated offence. If guilty of felony, his
name is removed from the register, and cannot again be registered.


          THE BOARD OF HEALTH OF THE PROVINCE OF QUEBEC

The Board of Health of the Province of Quebec has its seat in the
City of Montreal. The board was appointed in August, 1887, under
the authority of an act passed by the Legislature in 1886, the
year following the very severe epidemic of small-pox in Montreal.

Under the authority of the Quebec Public Health Act, the board
has made and enforces through all the municipalities of the
province by-laws relating to the prevention and limitation of
infectious diseases, the improvement of sanitation, the removal
of nuisances, the wholesomeness of food, the sanitary conditions
of habitations and factories, etc. Since 1894, no system of
waterworks and no sewerage system can be established without the
board having approved the plans thereof and this is also the case
for projected cemeteries. In 1893, the Legislature enacted the
law of statistics by which the data contained in the registers
of the civil status are made available to the board and this was
the origin of its division of vital statistics. In 1893, the
board established a bacteriological and chemical laboratory where
rural municipalities can have their analyses made free of cost,
as well as physicians the bacteriological diagnosis. In 1909, the
board organized a special division of sanitary-engineering for
the efficient betterment of the sanitation of water supplies and
sewerage systems. In 1910, the board requested the Government to
assent to the division of the province in ten sanitary districts
under “whole time” inspectors who possessed a diploma in public
health. The delay in securing these sanitarians was the cause
that this district service could only be organized in the year
1912.

The board has jurisdiction over the whole 1,164 municipalities
the province contains. It has power to require the organization
of a local board of health in every municipality. Municipal
councils are bound to execute all by-laws enacted by the
provincial board and whenever the latter find them too lax, it
may directly itself execute the by-laws at the expense of the
municipalities in fault.

The board is composed at present (1914) of ten members, one of
whom is made president. The other officers are: the executive
secretary, the chief inspector of health, the recorder of vital
statistics, the bacteriologist, the chemist, the sanitary
engineer and seven district inspectors. The president is Dr. E.
Persillier-Lachapelle, and the secretary, Dr. E. Elzear Pelletier.


                    THE CITY BOARD OF HEALTH

The Bureau of Health of Montreal came into effect through a
by-law passed in the city council on the 10th of May, 1865.
Subsequently, ten years later, this by-law was replaced by
another, No. 105, passed in 1876, under which the board now
operates.

The board has jurisdiction over all matters of public health
and is composed of the following sub-departments: contagious
diseases; medical inspection of schools: sanitary inspection;
food inspection; inspection of milk and dairy farms; statistics;
municipal laboratories; the municipal medical service. The
sanitary inspection department covers the general sanitation of
the dwellings, outhouses, lanes, etc.

The first health officer was Dr. Larocque, who served for about
twenty years, and was succeeded by Dr. Louis Laberge, who filled
the office for nearly thirty years. The present officer is Dr. S.
Boucher, who was appointed December 1, 1913.

The by-law governing the bureau calls for a board to consist of
the mayor, nine aldermen of the city and nine citizens outside
of the city council. This, however, has not been carried into
effect. The board now consists of nine members, including the
mayor and the health officer. The board is appointed by the city
council each year, in March, and the present board consists of
Mayor Martin, Alderman Letourneau, M.D., chairman; Alderman
Dubeau, Alderman Denis, M.D., Alderman Dubois, M.D., Alderman
O’Connell, Alderman Blumenthal, Alderman Turcot, and the medical
health officer, Dr. S. Boucher.


FOOTNOTES:

[1] The medical faculty of Bishop’s College has been abandoned
since 1905.




                          CHAPTER XXXIV

                     SOCIOLOGICAL MOVEMENTS


                                I

            CARE OF THE AGED, FOUNDLINGS AND INFANTS

  GREY NUNS--PROTESTANT ORPHAN ASYLUM--SISTERS OF PROVIDENCE--THE
    CHOLERA EPIDEMIC OF 1832--L’ASILE DE MONTREAL--MONTREAL
    LADIES BENEVOLENT SOCIETY--THE SHIP FEVER OF 1847--ST.
    PATRICK’S ORPHANAGE--HERVEY INSTITUTE--PROTESTANT
    INFANTS’ HOME--PROTESTANT INDUSTRIAL ROOMS--MONTREAL DAY
    NURSERY--L’ASSISTANCE PUBLIQUE--OTHER INSTITUTIONS.

A city’s life is not fully told unless the record of its
charitable, philanthropic and sociological progress is at least
indicated. That of Montreal will be found to be full, inspiring
and satisfactory. The following record is a study of movements
and origins rather. It is not a directory. Nor is it in any
way meant to be a comparative appreciation of the work done
by the various societies or institutions mentioned. Its scope
is historical. Innumerable obstacles stand in the way of the
preparation of such a chapter as that now offered, but it should
nevertheless be attempted if only to gather together as many as
possible of the early links of the many excellent social works
of the city and to bind them to those larger ones which have
been forged by the present day busy workers who in their active
present are working busily and wholeheartedly for the growing
needs of the hour and have not, through one cause or another,
the historical means of surveying the early humble beginnings of
works with which they or others have linked their names and their
self-sacrificing endeavours.

The first pioneer social movements of Montreal under British
rule were those embracing the care of the aged and that of
foundlings and abandoned children. These were found together
under one roof but in different departments in the Hôpital
Général of the “Grey Nuns” or the “Sisters of Charity” according
to their official title. At the time of the capitulation the
above, with the Hôtel Dieu, founded on May 17, 1642, since the
early days of the colony, sufficed for the charitable needs of
the small community; for although the “Congregation” established
in 1657 by Marguerite Bourgeoys, had cared for many orphans and
thus in some sense might be said to have been the forerunner
of the modern orphanages of the city and had shared in other
social experiments, its work must be considered to have become
specifically educational. Again although the Hôtel Dieu also
still maintained, as it did until recent years, a number of
aged persons and orphans, its special function had been mostly
exercised as a hospital for the sick. Its history having been
already told, that of the Grey Nunnery is now in place as the
peculiar pioneering institution for the aged, orphans and general
charity under British rule.


                          THE GREY NUNS

On taking possession of the Hôpital Général from the Charron
Frères, in 1747, Madame d’Youville and her companions devoted
themselves to works of charity of every kind, receiving into the
institution all classes of unfortunates without distinction of
age or sex, never refusing any. During several years the Sisters
cared for fallen women and had rooms for twelve. In 1756 a ward
was opened to receive English soldiers, sick and wounded, who
had been taken prisoners at Oswego under Shirley and Pepperel
and others during the “Seven Years’ War” before the capitulation
of Montreal. On September 7, 1760, the hospital being mistaken
by the English as an outwork of defence, was about to be reduced
by the cannon when a soldier ran to the general and on his knees
implored him to save the hospital where he and his companions
had been tended in the “Salle des Anglais.” The result was that
the officers went in and were hospitably received by Madame
d’Youville with biscuits and wine.

After the capitulation the hospital, as well as those of other
communities in the town, suffered by the depreciation of paper
money, receiving a very small percentage of its worth from the
French government, thereby losing more than a hundred thousand
francs.

The work of caring for abandoned children began on November 16,
1754, but was not developed till shortly after the conquest in
1760, when Madame d’Youville one day found the body of a little
child frozen in the ice with the dagger still in its throat and
its little hands raised as in supplication for justice. This
incident with others caused her to develop this work which was
then first undertaken systematically on this continent. Funds,
however, were wanting. Under the old régime certain moneys had
been appropriated for “enfants trouvés,” foundlings. The new
military government, approached by Madame d’Youville and the
Rev. M. Montgolfier, the brother of the inventor of the balloon,
and the superior of the Seminary, could only procure a sum of
288 francs. On September 13, 1771, Madame d’Youville approached
the sympathetic Governor Carleton, but with no good results.
Yet, in spite of the extreme poverty of the sisterhood the work
continued, supported by their needlework. Another contributing
cause for their poverty was the loss of their hospital in the
great fire of May 18, 1765, which devastated the lower part
of the town. This was more disastrous to them than the fire
of 1745, for it reduced their home to ashes. The children and
the aged poor were about to be transferred to the barns of the
farm belonging to the Grey Nuns at Point St. Charles when M.
Montgolfier came with an invitation from the nuns of the Hôtel
Dieu offering their hospitality. As, however, the number was too
considerable, the nuns of the “Congregation” shared the problem
of housing them. Not losing heart, Madame d’Youville dared, on
the 9th of June following, to begin rebuilding, relying on the
sum of 6,000 francs contributed by the Montreal faithful and the
Indians of the settlements of Caughnawaga and the Lake of Two
Mountains.

[Illustration: THE GREY NUNNERY OF TODAY]

[Illustration: THE OLD “GREY” NUNNERY As it looked from McGill
Street in the late ’60s before the new building was erected on
Dorchester Street. This site was that of the original General
Hospital, founded by M. Charron in 1692, and transferred to
Madame D’Youville in 1747. A portion of these buildings still
remains in 1912, being employed as warehouses. The new Custom
House is to be built on this spot.]

But the Seminary came to her aid with a loan of 15,000 francs.
By order of M. Montgolfier the workmen laboured constantly, even
on Sundays, so that by September 23d the part for the aged men
was ready. The Sisters entered their convent on December 5th
and the poor women on Christmas Day. The rest of the buildings
were not finished till 1767, the church being blessed on August
30th. Though housed, money was very scarce; yet Madame d’Youville
had dared even nineteen days after the fire of 1765 to complete
a contract already arranged since August 25, 1764, for the
acquistion of the seigneury of Chateauguay, originally accorded
in 1673 by Frontenac to M. Lemoyne of Longueuil, and then
belonging to the family of Robutel de Lanouë. The development
of this farm, which scarcely gave any revenue, was the object
of the zealous solicitude of Madame d’Youville and now is the
sanitarium and country house of the Grey Nuns for their different
foundations. The property of Point St. Charles was afterward
built upon for a country house for the children and the aged
poor. It was burnt down in 1842 but re-erected in the following
year. The death of this “mulier fortis” occurred at 8:30 P.M. on
December 23, 1771, at the age of seventy years after a life full
of fatigues, privations and sacrifices. The work undertaken by
her devoted followers has spread from Montreal far and wide. On
October 7, 1871, the Mother House was removed from its oldtime
position “down town” to the block bounded by Guy Street, St.
Catherine Street, Fort Street and Dorchester Street. The old
buildings were converted by merchants into warehouses, part of
which are still standing. The new custom house, being erected in
1914, marks the site of the southwest corner of their estate.

The following resumé of the work of the Grey Nuns is interesting:

  In 1801, at the request of the government officials, the insane
  were admitted and a special annex built. Previous to this, the
  sisters had already received twenty-three such patients and until
  this work was discontinued in 1839, the number received was 114.

  In 1823, the community undertook the care of Irish orphan girls.

  In 1846, at the request of the priests of the Seminary, a
  “dispensary” for the poor was opened and a system of house to
  house visitation was established.

  In 1847, the sisters nursed the poor Irish immigrants stricken
  with typhus fever.

  In the same year a temporary “home” was opened for the women left
  without resources after this terrible plague epidemic.

  In 1849, at the request of the mayor of Montreal, the sisters
  undertook the nursing of the cholera victims in the “sheds”
  constructed for the typhus patients.

  In 1851, St. Patrick’s Orphan Asylum was opened and the Grey Nuns
  took charge.

  In 1858, the first “kindergarten” conducted by the Grey Nuns in
  Montreal was founded on Bonaventure Street by the Rev. Father
  Rousselot, a Sulpician. It was known as Salle d’ Asile St.
  Joseph, but was ultimately closed, because its proximity to the
  railroad made it dangerous for the small children who came there
  to school.

  In 1861, the Nazareth Asylum for the Blind on St. Catherine
  Street was opened.

  In 1885, during an epidemic of small pox, forty Grey Nuns devoted
  themselves to the care of the victims in their homes and in the
  hospitals.

  Since the days of their foundress, the Sisters each year have
  provided for a certain number of poor students who board in the
  establishment.

  In the Mother House, on Guy Street, at present, the Grey Nuns
  care for foundlings, orphan boys and girls, poor and aged men and
  women, besides having an industrial school for young girls.


                         THE FOUNDLINGS

  The number of foundlings received annually is between four
  hundred and fifty and five hundred. Since the founding, 37,168
  infants have been admitted.

  The number of children averages between one hundred and one
  hundred and twenty. There are at present in the nursery 126.
  The children who survive, when not kept in the nursery, are
  either placed out to board or adopted by good families. In 1911,
  fifty-five were adopted.

  When about three years of age, the little children leave the
  nursery and are placed with the orphans. These foundlings come
  from all directions and belong to all nationalities.

  A course of lectures has been opened at the nursery for the
  training of children’s maids.

                           THE ORPHANS

  There are in the Grey Nunnery 300 orphans, of which 170 are boys
  from three years to twelve years of age, and 130 girls from three
  years to eighteen or twenty years of age.

  Since 1748, when the first orphan girl was received, there have
  been admitted 5,788 orphans, 2,875 boys and 2,913 girls.

  From 1823 to 1873, these children were almost exclusively of
  Irish origin. Since the latter date, the majority are from
  Montreal, though some few are from the suburbs. Almost all are
  French-Canadians, there being a few English speaking children and
  some Indians. The greater number are received gratuitiously, very
  few being able to pay their board.

  At the age of twelve, the boys who are not claimed by relatives,
  are placed at the orphanages of Montfort or of St. Arsène, or
  adopted by respectable families.

  The girls on leaving the orphanage enter the industrial school,
  where they are taught domestic economy.

  Those who have relatives wishing to claim them can leave. The
  others are adopted by good families or placed out to earn their
  living.

                      THE INDUSTRIAL SCHOOL

  The industrial school was opened in 1908. Since then 297 pupils
  have been received, 270 of these being Canadians, 19 English and
  8 Indians. There are at present 60 pupils in this department.

  These young girls are employed in the different departments and
  work rooms of the house.

  In the sewing room they are taught sewing and mending as well as
  knitting, embroidery, etc. In the kitchen, laundry, book bindery,
  printing office and pharmacy, they are trained to become useful
  members of society.

  Several hours are also spent each day in the schoolroom.

                       THE AGED AND INFIRM

  There are 195 aged poor and infirm at present at the Mother
  House, 95 men and 100 women.

  Since the founding of the institution in 1747, 6,250 aged poor
  and infirm have been received, of whom 2,952 were men and 3,298
  women.

  These comprise cripples of all kinds, and persons afflicted
  with epilepsy or cancer. The number of the latter cases has
  considerably diminished since the opening of the Hospital for
  Incurables in Montreal.

  Until 1910 the only grant from the provincial or municipal
  authorities was $105.00, but the provincial government now grants
  for the different works of charity an annual appropriation of
  $2,905.00, in which is included the $105.00 for the nursery, the
  expenses of which amount to $25,000.00 annually.

  In 1910 and in 1911, the City of Montreal allowed $1,000.00
  to the institution. In 1912, this allowance was increased to
  $1,200.00. The balance of $98,550.00, which is the amount of
  the annual expense for the support of the 660 inmates, must be
  provided by the community. The average cost per capita is 41
  cents a day.

  Although there is no dispensary at the Grey Nunnery for outside
  poor, these are continually assisted in many ways. Thus in 1911,
  1,200 meals were given, and 300 persons were assisted materially.

  Besides the Mother House, the Grey Nuns have in Montreal:

  Three hospitals with training-schools: Notre Dame Hospital, St.
  Paul’s Hospital, and the Ophthalmic Institute.

  Four kindergartens: Nazareth, Bethlehem, St. Henry’s, and Ste.
  Cunegonde’s.

  Five orphanages: St. Patrick’s, St. Henry’s, Ste. Cunegonde’s,
  Bethlehem, and St. Louis’.

  One institution for the education of blind pupils.

  Two homes for working girls: “Youville” and “Killarney.”

  Three homes for the aged poor: St. Bridget’s, Ste. Cunégonde’s,
  and St. Anthony’s.

  One industrial school: St. Joseph’s.

  In Canada, outside the City of Montreal they have:

  One school at Côte-des-Neiges, one at Chateauguay, and one at St.
  Benoit, with a home for infirm and aged women.

  Four homes: in Varennes, Beauharnois, Chambly and Longueuil,
  for aged and infirm women and orphans. A few lady boarders are
  received in these homes to help support the works of charity. The
  sisters visit the sick.

  One hospital at St. John’s, with a home for old men and women;
  also, a kindergarten.

  In Western Canada, the Grey Nuns direct twenty-five
  establishments, and in the United States, fourteen.


                  THE PROTESTANT ORPHAN ASYLUM

The next movement for orphan children was on the part of the
English ladies who formed before 1822 a Female Benevolent
Society. This was followed by the “Protestant Orphan Asylum,”
the connecting link being provided as follows by the following
extract from the original minutes.[1]

“Upon the dissolution of the Female Benevolent Society in
February, 1822, the officers and members of that institution
consigned their orphan proteges and their flourishing little
school to the care and maintenance of the Protestant churches of
the city. The rector of the English Episcopal and the ministers
of two Presbyterian churches accepted the charge.”

Founded therefore in 1822, without endowment the Protestant
Orphan Asylum trusted entirely to the generosity of interested
friends. The clergy of the city undertook to preach charity
sermons for its benefit, and a substantial sum was thus raised.
The constitution of the new charity was framed by the Rev. John
Bethune, D.D., Dean of Montreal, and the Rev. Henry Esson, D.D.,
Pastor of St. Gabriel’s Presbyterian Church.

The first building occupied as an asylum (in 1833) was situated
in St. Louis Street. The expenditure in this year was £211 10s
4d. In 1838 removal was made to more commodious premises in St.
Antoine Street, the expenditure that year being £248 4s 5d.

In 1848 the annual reports were first published, and in the
spring of the same year the foundations of a new home were laid,
on land generously donated by Judge Smith on St. Catherine Street
where Holland’s store now stands. This was sufficiently finished
to permit the taking possession thereof June 4, 1849. The present
building at 93 Côte des Neiges Road, was completed and occupied
1895.

It is interesting to compare the small beginnings of the earlier
years with present conditions. For instance, in 1833, as
previously stated, there was no endowment, and the expenditure
for the year was £211 10s 4d, about $846. In 1911 the market
value of its endowment fund amounted to $178,962, yielding a
revenue of $9,143.50, and this with the annual subscriptions
provided for the year, $10,109.80.

In the annual report for the year 1859 attention is called to
the remarkable sanitary fact that out of upwards of six hundred
children received into the home since its foundation, only
forty-seven had died, notwithstanding the epidemic of cholera and
typhus fever, at different times prevalent. And it may be added
that this record has been maintained, and even surpassed, in the
years that have followed.


             THE MONTREAL LADIES’ BENEVOLENT SOCIETY

On the occasion of the epidemic of cholera in 1832 there arose
a corresponding effort among the English Protestant ladies. The
Montreal Ladies’ Benevolent Society was then founded “for the
purpose of affording relief and support to destitute women and
children” and the work which its founders inaugurated eighty-two
years ago has been carried on ever since. The Society was
incorporated in 1841.

The list of its presidents previous to 1849 was destroyed by
fire. Since 1849 the following ladies have served it as president:

  1849--Mrs. Renaud.
  1850--Mrs. Davidson.
  1853--Mrs. Tulford.
  1855--Mrs. Geddes.
  1873--Mrs. Mackenzie.
  1875--Mrs. Molson.
  1876--Mrs. Vanneck.
  1877--Mrs. Wheeler.
  1882--Lady Galt.
  1883--Mrs. Cramp.
  1889--Mrs. Edwyn Evans.
  1890--Mrs. Cramp.
  1896--Mrs. John G. Savage.
  1907--Mrs. Lachlan Gibb.
  1910--Mrs. Alister Mitchell.
  Honorary President--Countess Grey.

Many names prominent in social and philanthropic work in Montreal
during that period are to be found on the roll of its past and
present committees.

The original building still stands with the added wings on
Ontario, formerly Berthelet, Street.

There are seven old women and ninety-eight children in the
home--fifty-two boys and forty-six girls between the ages of
six and fourteen years. Every effort is made to start these
children suitably in life. But unfortunately, when they reach a
wage-earning age, they are frequently taken away by their parents
or nearest relatives, who up to this period have, more often than
not, ignored their existence--whereas if the children were only
left long enough in the home, they could receive special and
individual instruction and better positions could be found for
them.

Fifty-five destitute children and children of delinquent parents
have for many years been sent in through the city for whom the
city pays $7 per month for girls and $8 per month for boys. The
cost of each child averages $13.75 per month.


                    THE SISTERS OF PROVIDENCE

The succeeding movement in the charity for the aged, orphans
and the poor was that started in 1828 by another Montreal lady,
Madame Gamelin, who founded the “Sisters of Providence,” a
religious congregation, in 1843, the Asile de la Providence
having been incorporated on September 11, 1841, and being erected
canonically in 1844.

By 1905 the congregation had spread over eighteen dioceses and
had seventy-seven houses. In 1913 it had ninety-seven houses. Its
foundress, Marie Emmeline Eugene Tavernier, was born on February
19, 1800. On June 4, 1823, she was married to Jean Baptiste
Gamelin, a man of fifty, described in the marrage register as a
“burgher,” the appellation then given to a proprietor living on
his income. Three children were born of the union. Two died three
months after birth. In 1827 Mr. Gamelin died and the following
year the third child also. The widow’s heart now turned to the
aged and poor. On March 4, 1828, she opened a modest refuge on
the ground floor of a small parochial school, directed by the
Sisters of the Congregation of Notre Dame, situated on the corner
of St. Lawrence and St. Catherine streets. The first beneficiary
was a widow named St. Onge, 102 years old. The refuge was shortly
removed to two houses rented on St. Philippe Street with her
charges, which soon reached the number of thirty, not always
over-grateful.

About this time Madame Gamelin formed a society of lady
auxiliaries, Mesdames François Tavernier, E.R. Fabre, Maurice
Nolan, Augustine Tullock, R. St. Jean, Paul Joseph LaCroix,
Joseph Gauvin, Simon Dalorme and Julien Tavernier. This society,
founded on December 13, 1827, and organized on December 18th
of the same year, still exists as the “Society of the Ladies
of Charity.” Each of these agreed to pay a monthly board for
one poor woman. During the cholera outbreak of 1832-1834
Madame Gamelin did not spare herself in visiting the sick. The
“yellow” house was secured for the growing needs of the refuge
by M. Olivier Berthelet, whose name is linked with Montreal’s
charities. It was a modest frame building, two stories in
height, standing on St. Catherine and Hubert streets. During the
political troubles of 1837-38 there commenced the work, still
pursued by her followers, of visiting the Montreal jails. Writing
in his “Patriots of 1837-38” Mr. L.O. David, afterwards city
clerk of Montreal, and a senator, said: “There are two names in
particular deserving of special mention and which the prisoners
have never forgotten, Madame Gamelin, who later became the
foundress of the Providence, and Madame Gauvin, mother of Doctor
Gauvin, who himself took part in the events of 1837.” In 1841
Madame Gamelin’s asylum obtained civil incorporation through a
measure, introduced by the Hon. D. Viger and the Hon. J. Quesnel,
under the name of “Corporation for Aged and Infirm Women of
Montreal.”

In 1841 the work was so well founded that to secure its
permanency as a constituted diocesan charity the ladies
associated with it, under the beautiful name of the Ladies of
Providence, determined to give it over to the Daughters of
Charity of St. Vincent de Paul, then lately visited in Paris
by Bishop Bourget. A new building was forthwith determined on
to receive them, and for the funds for this, the first bazaar
recorded in Montreal was organized, in Rasco’s Hotel on St.
Paul Street, on May 15, 16, 1842, and netted 500 louis. The
directresses were Mesdames Gamelin, Gauvin, St. Jean, Fabre,
Levesque, Boyer, Moreau and Lafontaine. Other sums were raised
and the corner stone of the house opposite the “yellow” house
was blessed on May 10, 1842. About the middle of June, 1842,
Bishop Bourget gave Madame Gamelin and the Ladies of Providence a
rule modelled upon that which St. Vincent de Paul had drawn up
for a society of ladies in Paris who had consecrated themselves
to the work. The Daughters of St. Vincent de Paul did not come,
after all, and Bishop Bourget determined to create a diocesan
order of the Sisters of Charity of Providence. On March 25,
1843, the first clothing took place of the first six postulants
in the “yellow” house, who were to obey Madame Gamelin as their
superior. As yet she was not herself a religious, but on July
8th, on one of the postulant’s returning to the world, Madame
Gamelin determined to take her place and she was accepted by the
Bishop as one of the new order of the Sisters of Providence, one
of whose early works was to carry on the work of the care of the
aged and infirm already begun by Madame Gamelin in 1827. In 1860
her institute established an asylum for “abandoned” children,
French Canadian and Irish, which was opened on September 25th.

The work for the insane at Longue Pointe, begun in 1849, is told
elsewhere.


                       L’ASILE DE MONTREAL

Meanwhile the year of the cholera, 1832, had seen the birth,
on July 18, of the “L’Asile de Mountréal pour les orphelins
Catholiques Romains” or “Les Orphelins des Récollets,” so called
because these orphans were first cared for in the convent
of the Récollets. The asylum received its incorporation in
September, 1841. The work was promoted by a Sulpician, the
Rev. P. Phelan, and a widow, Madame Gabriel Cotté, who became
its foundress and received her helpers from among the “Ladies
of Charity.” Among the Ladies of Charity under whose auspices
the new work was placed and still continues, were those of the
best society of Montreal. The first president was Madame Marie
Charles Joseph LeMoyne, Baroness de Longueuil, the wife of
Captain David Alexander Grant, of the Ninety-fourth Regiment,
who died on February 25, 1841. The vice presidents were Madame
de Lothbinidère and Madame de Beaujeu. On the death of the
Baroness de Longueuil she was succeeded as president by Madame
Berthelet, Madame D.B. Viger, Madame C.S. Cherrier and Madame
T. Bouthillier. Under the board of directors the asylum was
conducted successively by Madame Chalifoux and Madamoiselle
Morin. The present president is Madame J.O. Gravel and the vice
president is Madame Rosaire Thibaudeau, niece of the esteemed
foundress, Madame Cotté.

The institution has remained under lay control, although since
1889 the Grey Nuns have been invited to undertake the internal
management. Madame Cotté was its first treasurer, being succeeded
by her daughter, Madame Quesnel, who supported the work till her
death. The foundress, Madame Cotté, endowed the work with a gift
of land, that named “Pres de Ville,” on Lagauchetière Street, and
with a legacy in money. Her heirs exchanged the original land
for that on St. Catherine Street on which the institution stands
today, a part of which was built by the legacies in money left by
Madame Cotté and Madame Quesnel.

In 1913 the orphanage and grounds were sold and a spacious
property bought for the new orphanage site at Notre Dame de
Grâces. The new buildings have been commenced but have been
interrupted by the European war of 1914.

The dire year of 1847, that of typhus fever, saw great activity
among all these French and English institutions for charitable
works. As the incoming immigrants were mostly Catholics the
activities of the Catholic institutions of the period may
naturally be recalled. The “Providence Sisters,” lately erected
as a religious congregation, were called by Bishop Bourget to
second the Grey Nuns, the Nuns of the Congregation and the Nuns
of the Hôtel Dieu at the fever-stricken sheds at Point St.
Charles. The work of caring for the 600 or more orphans of the
emigrants was confided to the Sisters of Providence in the two
provisory hospitals. The religious of the Good Shepherd, who
had been called to Montreal in 1844, finally took charge of the
girls, and Madame Gamelin’s “Providence” Sisters took the boys
to Mrs. Nolan’s house on St. Catherine Street. Bishop Bourget’s
pastoral letter of 1848 describing the transference of the
children through the street states: “The spectacle of hundreds of
children famishing with hunger, covered with rags and in danger
of succumbing to the attacks of that terrible disease which had
deprived them of their parents was so poignant that it can never
be forgotten.” Twenty-seven of the “Providence” Sisters were
stricken with the plague and three died, and similar disaster
befell other charitable “Congregations” or lay associations of
all sections.

On the 1st of October the orphans were removed from their
temporary home in Mrs. Nolan’s house to the former convent of
the Good Shepherd, situated on Beaudry Street, then Black Horse
Street, the new Hospice of St. Jerome Emilianus. From the 11th
of July Mother Gamelin had received 650 orphans. Of that number
332 died and 188 were placed out or adopted. In the month of
March, 1848, 130 remained in addition to 99 who stayed in the
sheds at Point St. Charles. An appeal at this time was made by
Bishop Bourget and colleges, convents and lay people responded
in adopting the children. Sixty remained with the Sisters of
Providence and were distributed among the different houses or
apprenticed to trades. “In adopting these poor children,” says
the same pastoral, “they will become our companions in faith,
good priests, fervent religious, excellent citizens,” as, indeed,
they did.


                   THE ST. PATRICK’S ORPHANAGE

This leads up naturally to the history of the Irish Catholic
charities, and of the St. Patrick’s Orphanage, in particular.

Before 1800 few Irish reached the city, yet they came early in
the nineteenth century, so that by 1823 the number of orphan
children of Irish parentage was such that M. Roux, the superior
of the Sulpicians, arranged with the Grey Nuns[2] to receive the
first five of forty children in the “Salle des petites orphelines
Irlandaises” which was opened February 14, 1823. Until 1886 the
Sulpicians unostentatiously supported no less than 848 little
Irish orphans.

In the fall of the year of “Black ’47” the Rev. M. Pinsonneault
rented a house on Colborne Street of fifteen apartments, in which
he lodged fifty families of those who, though destitute, had
escaped the terrible ship fever. This was known as the “House.”
Mrs. Brown, a good Catholic Irishwoman, undertook to teach the
children and M. Pinsonneault founded a band of ladies for the
purposes of organizing bazaars for the support of the struggling
institution which was even vilified in the press. The “Ladies of
Charity” were organized in 1849 as a permanent body to assume the
upkeep of the work and to collect subscriptions.

Meanwhile during the visitation of 1847 it was rendered necessary
for 650 little Irish orphans to be taken from the pest sheds of
Point St. Charles and taken care of, as is told elsewhere, by
the religious daughters of Mother Gamelin, the foundress of the
Sisters of Providence.

On June 20, 1848, Father Dowd had arrived and, being appointed
in September almoner of the poor, he became superior of the
House. He quickly determined that a new asylum was needed. This
was secured in a small house on Craig Street, opposite the Champ
de Mars, generously loaned by M. Augustin Perreault, who added
numerous other benevolent gifts and services. In October, 1849,
the asylum was opened and Mrs. Brown was joined by Mrs. McMahon,
better known as Mrs. “Mack.” A fire on June 9, 1850, nearly
threatened the existence of the new house.

About 1850 a parishioner of St. Patrick’s church, M. Bartholomew
O’Brien, bequeathed a sum of £1,000 for an orphan asylum. Father
Dowd formed a building committee of Messrs. Charles T. Palgrave,
Francis McDonnell, Charles Curran, P. O’Meara, P. Lawlor, J.
McGovern, Patrick Brennan, Thomas O’Brien, Patrick Lynch and
Mathew Ryan. The latter acted as secretary till February, 1850,
when he was succeeded by Mr. Thomas Bell. A lot of ground, 100
feet by 10 in front on Dorchester Street, with 120 feet of rear,
was given, in trust for the building of an Irish orphan asylum by
the Fabrique of the parish of Montreal.

On November 21, 1851, the unfinished house was entered by the
orphans, two or three planks laid against the principal entrance
being the only door. The formal blessing of the building by the
bishop took place on February 2, 1852. In this same year the
treasurer, Mr. T.C. Palgrave, received a grant of £500 from the
provincial parliament. The act of incorporation received the
royal assent on May 30, 1855. In 1859 Father Dowd resigned his
directorship, leaving a balance to the poor of $157.39. He was
succeeded by the Rev. Michael O’Brien, who afterwards became the
first superior of St. Ann’s church. In 1861 Mr. Edward Murphy,
afterwards senator, joined the board of trustees, becoming
secretary in the place of Mr. Bell.

His Excellency, Viscount Monck, governor-general, visited the
orphan asylum on July 3, 1862, when an address was read by Mr.
Thomas Ryan, afterwards senator. On the death of Mr. Bell, in
1864, Mr. John Fitzpatrick became a trustee. Dying in the same
year, he made the orphanage his residuary legatee.

Through the efforts of the indefatigable Father O’Brien there
was acquired the property on Lagauchetière Street, where the
St. Bridget’s Refuge was afterwards built, the act of the
transference by the corporation of the asylum to the refuge by
resolution being dated June 24, 1866. In 1859 it was proposed
to build St. Bridget’s church for the Irish in the Quebec
suburbs and money was collected, but, as the bishop could not
be prevailed upon to permit its creation, at a meeting of
subscribers held on March 9, 1867, it was resolved unanimously
on the motion of Mr. B. Devlin, and seconded by Mr. M.P. Ryan,
that the money collected (about $8,000) by Fathers O’Brien
and O’Farrell (afterwards bishop of Trenton) be appropriated
as follows: “one-half to the Montreal St. Patrick’s Orphan
Asylum and the other half to the Rev. Father O’Farrell and
his successors for Irish Catholic charities in the St. Ann’s
suburbs, the whole to be invested by them in stock in the new St.
Patrick’s Hall, now in course of erection.”

The history of the ill-starred St. Patrick’s Hall, a magnificent
structure, a credit to the Irish people of the city, tells of
two disasters, in the last of which it perished by fire. The
association determined to wind up its affairs, which resulted in
the stockholders receiving 55% for their investment, the asylum
being, therefore, a considerable loser.

On the death of the Rev. Michael O’Brien in 1870 Father Dowd
was again appointed director by the bishop. In 1877 there was
terminated a long dispute which was settled in the ecclesiastical
court, resulting in the non-divergence of the funds, originally
collected for St. Bridget’s church and given with the consent
of the subscribers, half to the orphan asylum and half to the
Fabrique of St. Marys, who claimed the original gift for the
St. Bridget’s church, when permission to build this had been at
last granted by the bishop in 1873. The case for the asylum in
civil law was entrusted by the trustees to Mr. J.J. Curran, Q.C.,
M.P., afterwards the Hon. Justice Curran, his view in favour of
the asylum being endorsed by Mr. Lacoste, Q.C., afterwards Sir
Alexander Lacoste, chief justice, K.B.

In January, 1873, Lord Dufferin, the distinguished Irish governor
general, visited the asylum. On January 30, 1874, Sister Forbes,
who since 1853 had succeeded Sister Reed as superioress of the
asylum, celebrated her “golden wedding” as a nun. Mother Forbes
died three years later, on March 28, 1877, after her twenty-third
year in the superiority of the asylum, to the great grief of the
Irish population.

The last of the original trustees died on May 26, 1889, the
Hon. Thomas Ryan, senator for the Victoria division of the
province. On the 26th of December, 1889, the following gentlemen
were trustees, Edward Murphy, J.S. Mullin, W.H. Hingston, Owen
McGarvey, James O’Brien, John B. Murphy, Patrick Kennedy,
Hon. Judge Doherty, James McCready, J.J. Curran, Q.C., M.P.
In December, 1891, Father Dowd died. He was held in greatest
respect by all denominations in the city. The flag on the city
hall was placed at half mast and the funeral was a public
demonstration. He was succeeded by Father Quinlivan, who had
assisted him for some time before his death. In 1892 the Hon.
Senator Murphy died. His name deserves to be remembered among the
great philanthropists of the city. His memory is perpetuated in
the “Edward Murphy School” and the Edward Murphy medal given by
the Catholic School Commissioners. In 1902 the trustees of the
orphanage were Hon. Sir William Hingston, Hon. Marcus Doherty,
Hon. J.J. Curran, J.S.C., Mr. Michael Burke, Mr. Patrick Mullin,
Hon. James O’Brien, Mr. J.C. Collins, Mr. C.A. McDonnell and Mr.
P. McCrory.

In 1909 the orphanage, being declared unsafe, was removed to
the new asylum built under the direction of Mr. W.E. Doran,
architect, of gray stone, fireproof and three stories in height,
on St. Catherine Road, Outremont. The estate is a valuable farm
of forty-five acres, with its own orchards and vegetable gardens.
Its internal direction is still under the Grey Nuns. Its trustees
at the time of the change were the Rev. Gerald McShane, pastor of
St. Patrick’s church, the Hon. C.J. Doherty, Messrs. M. Burke, P.
Mullin, C.F. Smith, C.A. McDonnell, P. McCrory, J.A. Macdonald,
M.D., who has also given his services free for thirty years,
and Donald Hingston, M.D. At present Messrs. A.J. Trihey, H.J.
McKeon, T.W. McNulty, W.J. Rafferty, have joined the board since
the deaths of Messrs. M. Burke, C.F. Smith, C.A. McDonnell and P.
Mullin.

The names of Dr. H. Schmidt, Dr. Henry Howard, Dr. J.A.
Macdonald, Dr. Thomas J. Curran, should be remembered in
connection with the medical care of the orphans.

The great burden of sustaining the funds of the institution
fell during many years on the “Ladies of Charity.” The first
annual bazaar was held in 1849 under their auspices. The first
president was Mrs. Charles Wilson, the wife of the Hon. Charles
Wilson, mayor of the city. In 1850 she was succeeded by Madame
Vallières de St. Réal, the wife of the well known judge. This
Irish lady remained president till 1861. Mrs. O’Meara succeeded
but died in 1862, when Madame Vallières was recalled till 1866,
when she was made honorary life president. Mrs. M.P. Ryan
became president till 1882, when with Mrs. Campion she became
honorary life president. Mrs. Brennan took office in 1882, and
Mrs. Edward Murphy in 1883, remaining till 1900. In 1900 the
following ladies were installed in office: Mrs. M.P. Ryan, Mrs.
Campion and Mrs. E. Murphy, honorary life presidents; Mrs. E.C.
Monk, president; Mrs. E.C. Amos, vice president; Mrs. D. Boud,
second vice president; Mrs. Loye, third vice president; Mrs.
Whitney, secretary. Of late years this organization has not been
called upon for the same active services for the orphanage, but
their members individually have been foremost in other growing
English-speaking Catholic charities.


                      THE HERVEY INSTITUTE

Among non-Catholic charitable works called forth at the time of
the ship fever was the Hervey Institute, founded in 1847.

Its first home was on St. Antoine Street; two small houses
followed. Then the Home found itself at 215 Mountain Street,
in 1875. The new Home, opened by their Excellencies, Earl and
Countess Grey, on December 16, 1908, is situated at the corner of
Windsor and Claremont avenues, Westmount.

Like most similar organizations the Hervey Institute rose from
humble beginnings, little idea being in the minds of the group of
ladies who began the work of the magnitude of the scale of future
undertakings. It now has accommodation for eighty-five persons.

Miss Hervey, for whom the Home is named, was born in 1807 and
came to this city from Scotland in 1846. The following year she
started the home in a small way, calling it an industrial home.
She was led to do this by the extreme need for such among the
poor--for at that time there was little organized relief among
the Protestants other than that given by the churches--and the
mother left with her small children to support, owing to the
death of the father, was in a sad plight. Miss Hervey and her
associates gathered these children together, taught them to sew
and also the elementary subjects of education as well as the
performance of domestic duties.

Among well known names connected with the Home in those days were
Mrs. John Stirling, Mrs. John Redpath, Mrs. Neil MacIntosh, Mrs.
John McDougall, Mrs. Hannibal Whitney, Mrs. John Lovell--the last
mentioned still showing an active interest in the Home--Mrs.
(Doctor) Scott, another member of the original committee, worked
unceasingly to accomplish a piece of work desired by Miss Hervey,
that of a separate Home for the tiny children and young babies,
as it was found impossible to continue the reception of children
of all ages. Thus the Protestant Infants’ Home was established,
as an offshoot in 1870, by this same untiring worker, Miss Hervey.

The following ladies have been the presidents of the institution:

  1847-75      Miss Hervey
  1875-78      Mrs. H.L. Routh
  1878-81      Mrs. J. Ross
  1881-82      Mrs. James Tasker
  1882-86      Mrs. J.H. Moody
  1886-92      Mrs. Alex Murray
  1892-96      Mrs. Langlois
  1896-1904    Mrs. G. Summer
  1904         Mrs. J. Henderson

The Home was incorporated in 1875 when Mrs. J. Routh was
president, other signers of the charter were: Mrs. Holmes and
Mrs. M.L. Clarke, the last mentioned being at present on the
committee of management. The original intention of caring for,
teaching, and training in domestic duties half orphan girls,
has been carried on, but more than that, the special provision
made for boys in the comparatively new Home on Windsor Avenue,
Westmount, shows the result of many anxious thoughts directed to
the problem of the growing boy without a home. Boys as well as
girls are now trained for their work in the world; boys are kept
until fourteen years of age, girls until sixteen.

In receiving girls and boys into the Home, the idea is to keep
family life as nearly normal as possible, so the mother or father
may place their children in the same home knowing they are at
school and may play together.

Half-orphan children, between the ages of five and fourteen, are
received, qualified teachers are in attendance, one children’s
trained nurse and other nurses and over all a superintendent.

The parent pays whatever possible; all other cost of maintenance
is met by the voluntary subscriptions.

A development of late years has been the purchase of a summer
home at Morin Heights in the Laurentian Mountains, in healthy and
beautiful surroundings. It is owing to this annex, to which the
children have been sent for two months for nine years, that the
directors owe the wonderful record of no annual drug account over
$25.00. This for a home of seventy-five children is a record, as
is the fact there have been but four deaths in the sixty-eight
years in which the Home has been in operation.

Since the inception in 1847 many hundreds have passed through the
Home and have made successes. The girls have become efficient
nurses and teachers and the boys successful business men, while
two of the more recent inmates are doing their duty by their King
and Country in the Canadian overseas contingent.


                  THE PROTESTANT INFANTS’ HOME

As mentioned, it was through the energy of Miss Hervey and Miss
Scott that the Protestant Infants’ Home was established on
April 30, 1870, the by-laws being adopted on that date and the
constitution in May following. The first home of Miss Hervey’s
Institute was on St. Antoine Street. It was destined to receive
unmarried mothers, together with their babies from the Maternity
Hospital as well as destitute children and even those paid for.
The age for children admitted is between fourteen days and five
years.

Among the first directors were Mesdames Henry Baylis, J.M.
Gibson, G. Ferrier, F. Henshaw, B. Christie, T. Campbell, J.
Alexander, I. Harper, G. Brown, C. Hart, G. Aitken, Aikman, W.H.
Clare, Godfrey G. Shaw, C. Pelton, Scott, Wilk, and C. Brown.

The home was transferred from St. Antoine Street to different
places and is now located on Queen Mary’s Road.


                    THE MONTREAL DAY NURSERY

This was followed on the English side by the Montreal Day
Nursery, located at 50 Belmont Park, which was started in 1888
and incorporated in 1900.

The object of the Day Nursery is to take care of the children of
women who, for various reasons, are obliged to work by the day to
support their families. The Nursery is open every week day from
7 A.M. to 7 P.M. Children from three weeks to twelve years of
age are admitted by the day. They are fed, kept clean, medically
treated, and, when necessary, clothed. The younger children
are under the supervision of a resident governess, the older
ones are sent to the Belmont Street and St. Patrick’s schools.
The Nursery is non-sectarian, there are no restrictions as to
creed, nationality or colour, and it is supported by voluntary
contributions.

When the Nursery was first opened about ten children were taken
care of daily. The increase in numbers has been steady until now
there are from ninety-five to one hundred and ten cared for,
divided as follows: Infants, twenty; runabouts, between two and
four, forty; and about fifty between the ages of four and twelve.
A charge of ten cents is exacted for one child, and five cents
more for each additional child from the same family.

The Montreal Foundling and Baby Hospital was started in 1891 and
has admirably carried out its title.


                      L’ASSISTANCE PUBLIQUE

A modern form of charity for the old and sick and for children
was founded on October 30, 1903, by MM. L.H. Lesvesque, Joseph
Hoostetter, A. Rivet, Ludger Gravel, G. L’Archevesque, Leo
Fournier, Charlemagne Rodier, Dr. E. H. Desjardins, under the
name of L’Assistance Publique, situated on 338-340 Lagauchetière
Street. Its incorporation is dated January 28, 1907. Its
object is the protection, housing, boarding and clothing,
temporarily as long as the board shall see fit, of children,
women, old people, the sick and other afflicted persons (with
the exception of those suffering from incurable or contagious
diseases). It aims at finding employment, or placing those in
their charge into suitable charitable institutions. The work
is restricted to citizens of Montreal, of all nationalities.
The work has progressed so that it became necessary to build a
large wing, which was inaugurated on February 5, 1911. It has
four dormitories, an infirmary and three refectories. Over one
hundred and five aged and poor persons dwell permanently in
the hospital. The institution does not lodge casuals, this work
being abandoned on the erection of the Meurling Institute in
1913, but it serves dinners to needy unemployed. The society is
administrated by lay people, of whom the present officers are:
MM. Joseph Lamoureux, president; A.A. Labresque, vice president;
Trefflé Bastien, treasurer; and A. Godin, secretary. The internal
management of the home for ten years has been in the hands of
Mlle. Morache.


                              NOTE

The foregoing are types of the leading philanthropic institutions
concerned in the movement for the care of the aged, orphans and
children. There are others of great importance. The following
list indicates most of the other activities under the above head:

Homes for the Aged:

  Hospice Auclair (Sisters of Providence), Rachel and Sanguinet streets.
  Hospice Bourget (Sisters of Providence), 2200 Ontario Street.
  Hospice Gamelin (Sisters of Providence), 1281 St. Catherine, East Street.
  Hospice du Sacré Cœur (Sisters of Providence), 401 Pie IX Avenue.
  Sisters of Providence, 109 St. Dominique Street.
  Hospice St. Antoine (Grey Nuns), 76 St. Paul Street.
  Little Sisters of the Poor, Seigneur Street.
  Providence Asylum, 369 St. Catherine Street.
  St. Anthony’s Villa (Lay), 865 Dorchester Street.
  St. Bridget’s Home (Grey Nuns), 297 Lagauchetière Street.
  St. Cunegonde Home (Grey Nuns), corner Atwater Avenue and Albert Street.

Orphanages:

  Bethlehem Asylum (Grey Nuns), St. Antoine Street.
  Orphélinat Catholique (Grey Nuns).
  Grey Nunnery, 25 St. Mathew Street.
  Huberdeau (In the Laurentians) (Filles de la Sagesse).
  Maison Ste. Genevieve (Sisters of Providence), Dorion and Gauthier streets.
  Montfort (For Boys) (Fathers and Brothers of the Company of Mary).
  Orphélinat St. Arsene (Brothers of St. Gabriel).
  St. Alexis Orphanage (Sisters of Providence), 247 St. Denis Street.
  St. Cunégonde Asylum (Grey Nuns), St. Cunégonde.
  St. Henri Asylum (Grey Nuns), St. Henri ward.
  Hospice Auclair (Sisters of Providence).
  Hospice Bourget (Sisters of Providence).
  Hospice du Sacré Cœur (Sisters of Providence).
  St. Patrick’s Asylum (Lay Trustees and Grey Nuns).
  St. Vincent de Paul Orphanage (Grey Nuns), 110 Visitation Street.
  Filles de la Sagesse, 620 Notre Dame Street.

Infants:

  The Sœurs de Miséricorde (Maison St. Janvier), Sault au Récollet.

Day Nurseries and Créches:

  Bethlehem Asylum (Grey Nuns), 1 Richmond Square.
  Hospice St. Antoine (Grey Nuns), 76 St. Paul Street.
  Jardin L’Enfance (Grey Nuns), 110 Visitation Street.
  Nazareth (Grey Nuns), Mance and St. Catherine streets.
  Sisters of Providence, Mother House, 1271 St. Catherine Street.
  St. Cunegonde Home (Grey Nuns), Atwater Avenue.
  St. Henri Asylum (Grey Nuns), 63 College Street, St. Henri.
  French Protestant Home---Orphans and Children.


                               II

                        RELIEF MOVEMENTS

  THE PROTESTANT HOME OF INDUSTRY--ST. VINCENT DE PAUL SOCIETY--THE
    OLD BREWERY MISSION--THE SALVATION ARMY SOCIAL WORK--THE CHARITY
    ORGANIZATION SOCIETY--THE MEURLING MUNICIPAL REFUGE--OTHER RELIEF
    AGENCIES.


                 THE PROTESTANT HOME OF INDUSTRY

The beginning of the nineteenth century marked a decided growth
in the English population and there can now be seen its efforts
to organize its relief work. The present chapter will also
indicate the progress of the movement towards organized charity.

In 1818, an act was passed forming a corporation of the “Wardens
of the House of Industry at Montreal.” This was in order to
carry out the wish of a John Conrad Marsteller, who in 1808 had
left two stone houses and other buildings on St. Mary Street for
the erection of a House of Industry, but the amount not being
sufficient, there was delay till the act of 1818 created the
“wardens” or overseers and visitors of the poor. No regular steps
seem to have been taken for the appointment of these wardens till
April 2, 1827, when a commission, signed by the Governor General,
Earl Dalhousie, appointed as wardens of the House of Industry,
François Desrivières, Saveuse de Beaujeu, Samuel Gerard, Jean
Bouthillier, Horatio Gates, Rèné Kimber, Henry McKenzie and James
Kimber.

In 1863 an act of incorporation was granted for a “Protestant
House of Industry.” A building site was secured at the corner
of Dorchester and Bleury streets, for which the proprietor,
Mr. John Donegani, was paid £3,750. Upon this property a large
brick building was erected, three stories in height with a
high basement. It became the center of sociological activity.
“During the year 1865,” says Mr. Sandham, the historian, “the
missionaries of the different religious societies formed
themselves into a City Missionary Relief Society and were
liberally aided by the citizens in carrying on their work. The
following year it was thought advisable that all assistance
should flow out through one channel and accordingly a United
Board of Outdoor Relief was formed in connection with the
institution.” This institution is still in operation in the city.


                   ST. VINCENT DE PAUL SOCIETY

St. Vincent de Paul Society, to which no work of charity is
foreign, started poor visiting and relief in Montreal in 1848.
The parent body was originally formed in Paris in May, 1833, by
eight students under the direction of M. Bailly, the general
council being established at Paris in 1840, and the particular
council of Montreal being founded on March 18, 1848. The city
is now divided into the central, northern, eastern and western
particular councils with local parish conferences to each. In
December, 1914, these were more than fifty-four.


                     THE OLD BREWERY MISSION

An English exponent of a further phase of the relief movement is
the Old Brewery Mission, which was established in 1890 under the
following circumstances:

About the middle of the winter of 1890 there were many suffering
from cold and hunger through lack of work. A suggestion came
that much good might be done could a soup-kitchen be opened
to furnish cheap and nourishing food to the needy. A suitable
place was found in an old house on Dalhousie Street. There were
two rooms. The back one was used as a kitchen--the one in front
as a reading-room. It was furnished with benches and tables on
which were magazines. A grate-fire made the place homelike and
cheerful. Young ladies voluntarily served the soup. As the place
began to get crowded, it was thought best to have short addresses
delivered to the men. The work was so satisfactory and evidently
so badly needed that when the old house was torn down in the
spring, larger quarters were found in an old brewery (hence the
present name) on College Street. After this the work so grew
that a missionary was engaged and regular evangelistic services
were held. But there was so many disadvantages about this place,
and the locality was found so unsuitable, that another site
was chosen--a shop on St. James Street, near Inspector Street.
About this time the movement was started to put up the present
building, where for fourteen years the work has flourished.


                 THE SALVATION ARMY SOCIAL WORK

In 1884 the Salvation Army came to Montreal and its method of
organized charity work has been one of gain to the city.

Early in its life the rescue work for men was instituted, as
has been recorded. That for women and girls was also early
inaugurated and this latter has since remained one of the
important branches of the Army’s activities. Today the Young
Women’s lodge receives young women and girls who are employed,
furnishing pleasant rooms and good board at a nominal rate and at
the same time a safe and congenial home.

In addition to this work the Army opened up, on the 1st of
February, 1899, at 398 St. Antoine Street, a Working Women’s
Home, where floor scrubbers, window cleaners, etc., are furnished
room and board within their means and also employment when
needed. During the last year 11,494 beds were occupied in this
department and positions were found for 3,860 women.

With the erection of the Metropole, about 1903, the training
college was removed to Toronto and this building became the home
for the Social Corps for men. Board and lodgings are furnished at
a small price to those able to pay and employment is found for
those in need thereof.

The Industrial Home for men is located on Chatham Street, and
here, if employment is not found for applicants within a week,
they are put to work for the Army until permanent employment is
secured. At this place there is a store, with departments for
furniture repairing, shoe repairing, tailoring and paper sorting.
The men are put to work at repairing furniture and shoes which
are secured by the workers of the Army from all over the city,
and these repaired articles are sold at the store at very low
prices, the sale taking place about noon of each day. There, poor
people, who are reluctant to ask for charity, are allowed to
pay a very small price for furniture, clothes, shoes, etc., and
thereby retain their independence. The material sold is fashioned
from donations taken from all over the city and waste matter
generally. In this way the aim of the Army is accomplished,
to bring the waste matter of the city and the “down-and-outs”
together, thus utilizing the one and saving the other with
absolutely no cost to the city. The Industrial Home, through this
means and through the sale of waste paper, which, when sorted,
they are able to dispose of to the very best advantage and
command the best price, is practically self-supporting, and the
men are not only given board and lodging while waiting to find
permanent employment, but also are paid a sum of money for their
services, which they are advised to save up as a reserve capital
upon which to start in their new line of work when secured.

The Army has recently purchased a lot at 520 Outremont Avenue,
upon which it is planned to build a large building for hospital
purposes.


                THE CHARITY ORGANIZATION SOCIETY

The advent of the most modern form of organized charity work
in Montreal dates from 1894, for in that year the Charity
Organization Society really came into being, though it did not
come officially into the name until 1900. The incorporators of
the Society were George Hague, Lady Drummond, Charles F. Smith,
Emanuel P. Lachapelle, Harry Bovey, Louis J. Forget, Herbert
B. Ames, Frank J. Hart, Mrs. Margaret Thibeaudeau, Sir William
Hingston, Lady Margaret Hingston, Joseph B. Learmont, Mrs.
Charlotte Learmont, John C. Reid, Frederick L. Beique, John Cox,
Mrs. Caroline O. Cox, R. Wilson Smith, J. Damien Rolland, Robert
Craig, Miss Helen Reid, Jeffrey H. Burland, Trefflé Berthiaume,
Daniel F. Hamilton and Alphonse Turcotte.

Its work began in the former year when the Local Council of
Women took up the question of organized charity relief work.
It collected and studied trunks full of information about it,
mastered its principles and details, went about explaining it,
drew up a constitution and was ready. Then, in conjunction with
a number of influential men, it called a public meeting in the
old Board of Trade hall, in December, 1899. Lady Minto came from
Ottawa to be present. The hall was packed, and there and then,
with much enthusiasm, the resolution was taken and the Charity
Organization Society shortly opened its doors at 98 Bleury
Street. There it remained for some twelve years, till last May it
opened its new office at 70 Mance Street. Its first secretary,
Mr. Francis McLean, guided it with wisdom and discretion through
those first critical years. Then came the late Mr. Richard Lane,
who won for it wide recognition and sympathy, through his unusual
gifts and personality. At his death he was succeeded, about 1911,
by Mr. Rufus Smith.

The work as developed by this association, in league with others
of the same world-wide reputation for scientific efficiency in
relief management, is an important factor in civic sociology.
The society is very fortunate in having among its directors many
of the original incorporators, who are all connected with divers
other charities in this city, so that this central board has
far-reaching influence as a bureau of exchange in the solution of
relief problems.


                  THE MEURLING MUNICIPAL REFUGE

The latest relief movement in Montreal is the Meurling Municipal
Refuge, installed by the municipality. Its establishment was
brought about through a windfall in the form of a donation by a
former Montreal citizen, Mr. Gustave Meurling, who died recently
in France.

On the 19th of May, 1913, the contract was awarded for the
erection of the Meurling Municipal Refuge to Mr. Théodore Lessard
for the price of $116,000. The total cost of the Refuge amounted
to $180,000. The city received from the Gustave Meurling estate,
after deducting all expenses, $72,429.19, so that the city’s
share amounts to $107,770.81.

The building, although it is simple and without luxury, is quite
solid and safe. It is entirely fire-proof. In order to reduce to
a minimum the cost of maintenance, the inside facing of all the
outside walls and of all the divisions other than those which
are glazed has been made of pressed brick. The foundation walls
are of stone concrete. The floors, which are all of concrete
finished with cement, have a slight slope, which permits of their
being thoroughly washed. A steam and hot water heating system
runs through the whole of the building. The tank is provided with
a heater for summer. Improved appliances (among others three
fumigators of the most modern type) have been installed in the
laundry.

The walls have been constructed sufficiently thick to support the
additional stones which may hereafter be erected. The Meurling
Municipal Refuge is now, in 1914, in full operation.

The following table shows the number of destitute persons who
have been harboured gratuitously in the police stations and night
refuges since 1901:

  1901      55,125
  1902      50,207
  1903      46,685
  1904      61,400
  1905      65,184
  1906      62,228
  1907      59,713
  1908      78,548
  1909      59,097
  1910      58,726
  1911      76,334
  1912      82,731
  1913      90,076
  or 7,345 more than in 1912.

As will be seen by these figures, the establishment of a
municipal refuge could no longer be delayed. The Meurling
institution is undoubtedly of great service to the homeless poor.

Among other relief bodies are:

Refuge de Nuit (Ouimet); Refuge Français, 71 Viger Avenue; Refuge
of the “Union Nationale Française,” founded October 20, 1886, by
M. Victor Ollivon.


                               III

               SICK VISITATION AND NURSING BODIES

  GREY NUNS--SISTERS OF PROVIDENCE--OTHER BODIES--THE VICTORIAN
                         ORDER OF NURSES


                            GREY NUNS

The visitation of the sick in their homes has always been one of
the forms of charity in this city. As a more pronounced movement
the Grey Nuns took up domiciliary visits on October 23, 1848.
Among the works of the Grey Nuns for 1863 Jacques Viger, in his
“Servantes de Dieu in Canada,” has the following:

  Number of the poor helped in their homes        1,418
  Number of house visits                          4,943
  Number of night attendances among the sick        300


                      SISTERS OF PROVIDENCE

The Sisters of Providence who were engaged in the same work
according to the Annuaire de Ville Marie of Huguet-Latour, in
1863, were thus active:

  Number of poor and sick visited in 1863         13,243
  Night attendances                                  622
  Assisted at death                                  136-758

Thus the work was carried on by the early religious communities
and their work is now supplemented by other new congregations,
notably by the Sœurs del ’Esperance, on Sherbrooke Street, who
make this work a specialty, and by the Tertiaries (lay) of St.
François, and others. The work has also been carried on by groups
of ladies connected with the Protestant churches and as well by
nursing bodies organized of late years.

With regard to the modern organized nursing system, reference has
been made to the training of nurses for hospital work. There are
schools attached to each of the great hospitals. There are now,
however, several bodies who are trained to work in the homes
of the people, such as the Canadian Order of Nurses, Phillip’s
School for Nurses and the Victorian Order of Nurses. The latter
movement being the latest development and one that has reached
Dominion prominence, deserves especial historical recognition.


                  THE VICTORIAN ORDER OF NURSES

The Victorian Order of Nurses was inaugurated in 1897 as the
Memorial of Queen Victoria’s Jubilee in Canada. The suggestion
that this should be the Canadian Memorial came from the National
Council of Women of Canada, of which Her Excellency, the Countess
of Aberdeen, was then the presidential head. In 1896 the urgent
need of medical aid and trained nursing in the northwest
territories and outlying districts of Canada had been brought
home to the council through its affiliated societies in the
Canadian west. A scheme was thought out and laid before the prime
minister and other members of the government and at a public
meeting at Ottawa in 1897 a resolution in its favour was moved by
the Hon. Wilfrid Laurier, seconded by the Hon. Clifford Sifton,
minister of the interior, and carried unanimously.

After consultation with some of the leading doctors, public
meetings were held in Ottawa, Montreal and Toronto, and
representative committees were formed in these and other cities
for the promotion of the scheme. On the advice of the friends of
the movement in Montreal it was decided that only fully trained
hospital nurses, holding a diploma from a recognized hospital
school, after training in maternity and district work, should be
admitted into the order. Very strict rules were made forbidding
the nurses to go to cases where no doctor was in attendance,
placing the nurse in all cases under the control of the doctor
and limiting the nurse’s attendance on the patient to visits of
short duration, thus safeguarding the interests of the ordinary
professional nurse.

It was agreed to administer the order through a central board
and local boards of management who would supervise the nurses’
work and be responsible for their salaries, board and lodging.
It was hoped that enough money would be collected for the
permanent endowment of the order for work in all parts of
Canada, but, owing mainly to the strong opposition of the large
majority of medical men who misunderstood the objects of the
order and pronounced against it, public opinion was adversely
affected and only a tithe of the money required was collected
and that mainly for local purposes. So many new facts, however,
had been brought to light emphasizing the great need for such
a nursing order throughout Canada that it was decided to make
a start with the money in hand and four training centres,
namely, Montreal, Toronto, Ottawa and Halifax, were established
under district superintendents with a New Brunswick lady, Miss
Charlotte Macleod, of the Waltham Training School, as chief lady
superintendent.

Meantime a constitution and by-laws had been drawn up and an
application made to Her Majesty for a royal charter for the
new order, which was duly granted in 1898. By the end of the
following year there were eighteen Victorian Order districts
throughout the country with thirty nurses. Today in Montreal
alone we have ten districts, with seventy-one Victorian Order
nurses, while in Canada generally there are two hundred and
thirty-two. Cottage hospitals have been started all through the
country districts and in addition to these there are small
centres with two nurses who attend patients scattered over a wide
area and also receive emergency cases at the homes.

As the aim and object of the order became better understood the
opposition on the part of the doctors and nurses changed into
cordial sympathy and co-operation and the Victorian Order have
now no better friends than the medical and nursing professions.
So happily inaugurated with Lady Aberdeen as its first president,
the order has always enjoyed the warm support of the successive
governors general of Canada and their consorts. Lady Minto’s
exertions secured the money for the Cottage Hospital fund, Lady
Grey raised the necessary funds for the country nursing centres,
and it was owing to the interest and energy of H.R.H., the
Duchess of Connaught, that a large sum of money was collected
last year for the central fund. The Victorian Order has been
fortunate in attracting to its service devoted women to whose
singleness of purpose no less than to their highly trained
intelligence must be ascribed its marvellous growth and success.


                               IV

                MOVEMENTS FOR THE “UNFORTUNATES”

  FALLEN WOMEN--LA MISERICORDE--THE SHELTERING HOME--GIRL
    DELINQUENTS--THE “GOOD SHEPHERD”--THE GIRLS’ COTTAGE INDUSTRIAL
    SCHOOL--BOY DELINQUENTS--ECOLE DE REFORME--SHAWBRIDGE
    BOYS’ FARM--THE JUVENILE COURT--THE CHILDREN’S AID
    SOCIETY--THE MONTREAL SOCIETY FOR THE PROTECTION OF WOMEN AND
    CHILDREN--CANADIAN SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO
    ANIMALS. NOTE: COURT COMMITTALS.

The care of fallen women was early tentatively engaged in by
Madame d’Youville before British rule. Doubtless this was also
desultorily undertaken at a later period by her companions and
other religious communities of women, but it was not specifically
and regularly undertaken as a special work until Madame Jetté
founded her work which is perpetuated in the Hôpital de la
Miséricorde.


                  THE HOPITAL DE LA MISERICORDE

The Hôpital La Miséricorde owes its origin to Mgr. Ignace
Bourget, to whom so many of the Catholic works of charity and
education of the city owe their inspiration and encouragement
during his thirty-six years in the episcopate, from 1840 to 1876.
His name is written in indelible characters in this city. In
the year 1845, after having long thought of means of founding
some establishment for fallen girls he called to his aid a
pious widow, Madame Jetté, who had been engaged in much private
charity in helping unfortunate girls, and invited her to found a
community to perpetuate the good already commenced by her. The
first home, opened with one “penitent,” was called the Hospice
Ste. Pélagie, a garret reached by a ladder above a dilapidated
wooden building on St. Simon Street, in the tenement now numbered
208 St. George Street. Her family thought her demented and said
that she was disgracing them, and there were not wanting the
criticisms and sarcasm of the cynics. Madame Jetté was joined
on July 20th by another devoted widow, Madame Raymond, who had
worked towards the founding of the Good Shepherd Institution in
Montreal. A more comfortable building was shortly secured on
Wolfe Street (now numbered 207 and 209). More penitents were able
to be received.

By 1846 there were five workers and in July, 1846, Bishop Bourget
gave a “rule” to the Congregation de Sainte Pélagie. On April
26, 1847, they moved into another house at the corner of St.
Catherine and St. André Street, today a common restaurant. On
January 16, 1848, the little group of women was erected into
a canonical body under the title of “Sœurs de Miséricorde”
(Sisters of Mercy). Madame Jetté, the foundress, became Sister
de la Nativité and Madame Galipeau, Sister St. Jeanne Chantal,
was appointed superior. In 1848 the number of penitents reached
eighty-seven and in 1851 it increased to ninety-seven. During the
first six years the institution saved the lives of 390 new born
infants. In 1851 the community moved to the corner of Campeau and
Lagauchetière streets, the site where the present mother house
now stands. New buildings were ready in October, 1854. By 1862
further ground had been purchased to extend to St. Hubert Street.
On April 5, 1864, the foundress, Mother de la Nativité, died.

But the work progressed. At the end of 1872 there were fifty-six
professed sister, ten novices, 323 penitents were received and
there were 230 births in the hospital. In 1876 the west wing was
completed. On April 26, 1887, the present maternity hospital,
fronting St. Hubert Street, was dedicated. Up to 1889 the
children born in the hospital had been transferred to the Grey
Nuns. These Sisters now found themselves in this year unable to
accept the children and the infant asylum in the rear of the
Mother House was consequently built and entered into about 1898.
At present the children born in the hospital are kept there until
three months old, when they are sent to the country crèche at
Sault au Récollet. At this establishment they are taken care of
until six years of age, when they are placed, if possible, with
responsible parties.


                       THE SHELTERING HOME

The next important development for fallen women was the founding
of the Sheltering Home by Protestants.

Late in the ’50s, perhaps about 1858, work was instituted in
Montreal by some of the officers of the regiments stationed
here and by prominent men of the city, for fallen girls, mostly
maternity cases, one of the leaders of this movement being T.M.
Taylor. This home was called the “Magdalene” and continued for
a number of years, disbanding, however, after the regiments
left Montreal. On the 2d of March, 1868, the home on Seigneurs
Street, a direct outgrowth of the previous disbanded Magdalene,
was established for the reception of destitute and fallen girls.
Major General Russell and Captain Malan were among the principal
promoters and Mrs. T.M. Taylor and T.J. Claxton were trustees.
This was called the “Female Home Society.” Mr. and Mrs. Taylor
had general charge of the work, the former being president.

In 1878 Miss Barber, who had been closely connected with the
work, was asked by the matron of the jail to visit a woman who,
in company with her husband, had been imprisoned for theft. Miss
Barber tried to find a home or place of employment for the
woman, but was not successful, and finally she took her to the
“Female Home” which, though crowded at the time, made a place
for her. This incident brought to Miss Barber’s notice the need
of a shelter for released prisoners, and at once she began a
department of work in connection with the Home to cover that
need. In May, 1885, owing to lack of funds, the board of trustees
believed it necessary to close the Home, but Miss Barber, knowing
the value of the work being done, begged for its continuance,
stating that if they would give her the house and one year in
which to continue it, she would take full charge and raise the
funds to carry on the work for that length of time. This was
permitted, and during the year 1885 she was responsible for the
money.

At the end of that time when a meeting was held and her report
given, she stated that the Home was too far from the centre of
the city, where most of her work lay, and she asked the board
to sell the property on Seigneurs Street and with the money
thus acquired purchase another nearer the centre of the city.
In 1885 Mrs. Frost became secretary of the Society, with Miss
Barber continuing as its manager. The old property was sold for
$9,000 and after all outstanding debts were paid, there was
given over about $800 to Miss Barber and invested $8,000, the
interest from which was to be used in carrying on the work.
Two adjoining houses, in order to classify the inmates, were
taken on Dorchester Street. The advisory board, chosen by Miss
Barber, consisted of Mrs. M.H. Gault, Mrs. A.F. Gault, Mrs.
S. Finley, Mrs. Aiken, Mrs. H. Botterell and Mrs. E. Frost,
secretary-treasurer. By 1891 it was proved that the Home was in a
good locality for the furtherance of its work, but as the street
was to be widened about that time, the buildings were to be sold
and it was again necessary to search for a home. The present
location on St. Urbain Street was found and as the house was for
rent Miss Barber called the old original trustees together and,
making her report, placed the matter before them. It was decided
to turn over the $8,000 invested to Miss Barber, with which she
purchased the permanent home on St. Urbain Street. The house was
remodelled and work has been carried on ever since.

The classes of inmates who are assisted are as follows:

1. Discharged prisoners and those whom the Recorder wishes to be
placed in a home rather than imprisoned.

2. Inebriates, many of whom apply for shelter while others are
placed by friends.

3. Girls from the streets and houses of infamy.

4. Maternity cases, many of whom are more sinned against than
sinning.

5. What is called the “floating” class--patients discharged from
hospitals before strong enough to work; the weak in body and
mind; incompetent, idle girls, who, not vicious, would, however,
if allowed, sink to the abandoned class.

The Sheltering Home was incorporated on the 29th of September,
1898, the incorporators being Mrs. Sarah Hibbard, Mrs. Enoch
Frost, Mrs. John Murray Smith, Mrs. Ebenezer E. Shelton, Mrs.
Matthew Hamilton Gault, Mrs. Robert Ward Shepherd, Mrs. George
B. Burland, Mrs. James Day, Mrs. Joseph Savage, John Dillon,
Herbert B. Ames, Seth P. Leet, Walter Drake, Samuel Finley, Hugh
McLennan, Albert A. Ayer, Charles Alexander and George Hague.


                        GIRL DELINQUENTS

The work for girl delinquents was taken up by the Good Shepherd
Nuns in 1870.

The Community of the Congregation of Our Lady of Charity of
the Good Shepherd in Montreal is an offshoot of the original
body founded in Caen, Normandy, in 1641, by Jean Eudes, founder
of the Eudistes Fathers. June 11, 1844, marks the arrival of
the four first sisters in Montreal from Angers, Mesdames Marie
Fisson, Eliza Chaffaux, Alice Ward and Andrews. Their first
home was on Brock Street in the Quebec suburbs. On July 25th
they took possession of a fine stone convent of four stories
built on ground given by Madame D. B. Viger. Their work was: (1)
receive women penitents, (2) Magdalens from the first class, who,
however, may never join the order itself, and (3) the education
of young girls. The work of the Magdalens began in 1864 and that
of the preservation of the “penitents” began in 1847.

The work of the reformation of young Catholic girl delinquents
was inaugurated on May 3, 1870, with twenty subjects. These now
are sent by the court or placed by their parents under a useful
training in industrial works. In 1893 the industrial school was
transferred to Laval des Rapids, near Montreal. In addition to
the above work these Sisters have the direction of the female
jail on Fullum Street.


              THE GIRLS’ COTTAGE INDUSTRIAL SCHOOL

A recent effort by Montreal ladies to supply the need for the
special treatment of young girl delinquents between the ages
of twelve and sixteen, otherwise than in the Female Jail,
hitherto their only harbour, was crystalized in the opening,
in September, 1911, of a Girls’ “Cottage” Industrial School at
Outremont, which, however, was shortly removed to Front Street,
St. Lambert’s, in healthy and pleasant surroundings. It was
incorporated by government in 1913. The work is carried on in
connection with the juvenile court, but it is also open to
friendless and destitute girls, being supported by voluntary
subscriptions, and some government assistance. It has been
placed under government inspection. Very useful lessons have
been the outcome of this experiment. It has been shown that most
of those “committed” by the law are the victims of the _moron_
type of mental defectiveness and retarded intelligence and that
others are the victims of a carelessly trained childhood and
vicious environment. It has been found that the best method to
rehabilitate these cases is by building up their health and by
concentrating at present the educational part of their training
upon domestic lines, to make them good housewives and able to
support themselves hereafter. The “Cottage” system with its
possibilities of homelike and industrial training is claimed to
effect better cures than the cold and formal methods of the usual
government reformatory. The presidents of the school have been:
1911, Mrs. F.H. Waycott; 1912, Mrs. J. Macnaughton; 1913-14, Miss
Beatrice Hickson.


                         BOY DELINQUENTS

Modern reformatory work for boys began in Montreal in 1865. In
1858 a reformatory school for juvenile criminals was established
at Isle aux Noix, near the frontier and at the head of the
Richelieu river. Being an old military post it was again deemed
necessary to occupy it and the reformatory was removed to St.
Vincent de Paul, near Montreal, in 1861. In 1863 there were about
fifty inmates in the institution.

The name of M. Berthelet and the Brothers of St. Vincent de Paul
now became connected with this work. The latter Congregation
was founded in Belgium, in 1807, by Rev. P. Priest, a Canon of
the Diocese of Ghent, shortly after the French revolution, to
care for the sick and poor, the aged and orphans left destitute
through the expulsion of the religious orders.

Canada heard of their eminent services abroad. At the time,
there was in Montreal a gentleman, named Berthelet, and relief
of the poor seemed to be the goal of his ambition. In fact, M.
Berthelet’s happiness consisted in relieving their wants. He,
too, heard of the Brothers’ good work, and he begged Bishop
Bourget to invite them out to Canada. They accepted the kind
invitation and accepted the charge of a home for old people and
neglected children of the city, at the Asile St. Antoine provided
by M. Berthelet on Labelle Street. Four Brothers of Charity of
St. Vincent de Paul arrived on February 22, 1865, but moved to
a larger home on Dorchester Street, opposite the Convent of La
Miséricorde, on May 10, 1865. From there they moved to the new
home built by M. Berthelet on Mignonne Street, now De Montigny,
taking possession of it on February 19, 1868. The same work was
continued but with doubtful success, till it found its present
vocation as an industrial school, in 1873.

In 1870, the Government of the Province of Quebec had founded a
reformatory for youthful delinquents and incorrigible children.
Recognizing that happier results would be obtained, if it was
under the supervision of a religious body, familiar with the
work, the Government made overtures to the superior of the
Brothers, but it was only in 1872 that matters were definitely
arranged to the satisfaction of both parties. The Brothers
have been in charge ever since. The reformatory is a blessing
in disguise for many a family and for the community at large.
Hundreds of its inmates are today honorable and law-abiding
citizens with trades in their possession or equipped for a
livelihood. They would have always been so had their parents or
guardians done their duty by them and given them the example of
an industrious, sober, honest and Christ-like life.

The four Brothers have now grown to 150. In addition, since 1874
they have founded off shoots of their Community in Canada and the
United States.


                      SHAWBRIDGE BOYS’ FARM

Reformation work for non-Catholic boys is conducted at Shawbridge
in the Laurentian Mountains.

As told elsewhere the “Boys’ Farm and Training School” at
Shawbridge owes its first active steps to the farm committee of
1906 of the “Corporation of the Boys’ Home,” and its immediate
inception to the board of nine directors of the “Boys’ Farm and
Training School,” chosen out of the board of fifteen governors of
the “Boys’ Home” in accordance with the reconstituted amendments
granted in March, 1909, to the original charter, these amendments
having been prepared by Mr. J.S. Buchan, K.C., to provide for
the twin corporations of the Boys’ Home and the Boys’ Farm, the
latter, however, being a distinct but subsidiary corporation.
The first board of directors of the Boys’ Farm were J.R. Dougall,
Rev. Dr. Eagan Hill, J.C. Holden, S.M. Baylis, C.S.J. Phillips,
J.S. Buchan, K.C., F. Hague, F.S. Todd and G.W. Stephens. This
board elected as their officers the following: President, J.S.
Buchan, K.C.; vice president, S.M. Baylis; honorary secretary,
F. Hague; honorary treasurer, C.S.J. Phillips. Mr. J.R. Dougall
shortly became president on the resignation of Mr. Buchan. The
reformatory is conducted on the cottage system, the prison
atmosphere being carefully eliminated, so that it is rather a
country farm home school than anything else, although the pupils
are those committed thither by the courts of justice. Everything
at the farm makes for health, virtue and hope, and is a good
demonstration of the modern view of juvenile reformation.


  THE JUVENILE COURT AND THE CHILDREN’S AID SOCIETY OF MONTREAL

The Juvenile Court, which of recent years has been established
to treat younger delinquents than those already mentioned, was
largely the effort of the promotion of the Children’s Aid Society
of Montreal.

This association developed out of a movement inaugurated by
the Montreal Women’s Club, which, in 1905, formed a committee
having as its object the establishment of reforms in the methods
then in use in dealing with the children of the city who had
offended against the law. The members of the club had become
convinced from personal observation during the course of their
charitable work that, not only was juvenile crime increasing to
an alarming extent in Montreal, but also that the existing legal
machinery was very badly adapted to cope with the situation.
The “Juvenile Court” committee, therefore, began by collecting
information regarding the methods in use in children’s courts and
the probation system in various cities of the American continent
and Europe, and interviewed many public men in Montreal in
the interests of reform. Of these the first to offer definite
encouragement and assurance of personal support was Judge F.X.
Choquet, who, in an interview with some members of the committee
on the 28th February, 1907, expressed his opinion that complete
reformation of the law respecting juvenile offenders was urgently
needed, and that a juvenile court with a special magistrate and
officials was over-due in Montreal, in order that children’s
cases might be promptly and efficiently dealt with, the
circumstances and family history of the cases being investigated
before sentence should be pronounced. It was recommended to
the committee as their first step that a petition should be
framed and sent to the Minister of Justice asking for a new law
regulating the treatment of children’s cases before the courts.

Another public official to whom credit must be accorded for
encouragement given in the initial stages of this reform is
Governor Vallée of the Montreal jail, who stated as the result
of personal experience that the greatest wrong was being done to
the youth of the city by the system then in vogue; that he was
familiar with the juvenile court methods, and heartily in favour
of their introduction in Montreal.

A petition was prepared and was subsequently sent to the
different branches of the Legislature bearing the signatures of
over five thousand citizens. Public interest was increased in the
movement by an address given by Mr. W.L. Scott, president of the
Children’s Aid Society of Ottawa, before the Montreal Women’s
Club, in the autumn of 1907, on juvenile courts and probation
officers, and as a result of this address the club undertook to
defray the cost of supporting a probation officer, for a time,
provided the magistrates would sanction the innovation. Approval
and promise of co-operation having been obtained from Judge
Choquet, Mr. Recorder Weir, and Mr. Recorder Dupuis, a French
lady, Mlle. Maria Clément, was engaged to fill the position.

It was now thought that the growth and prospects of the movement
warranted the formation of a Children’s Aid Society, and the
first meeting of ladies and gentlemen to form the executive
board of such an association was assembled at the residence of
Senator and Mme. Beïque on Sherbrooke Street, February 1, 1908,
with Judge Eugène Lafontaine in the chair. Although the probation
officer had only been at work during a few weeks it was stated at
this meeting that her services had already proved of much value.
Judge Choquet explained the purposes and need of the proposed
society, whose officers were elected as follows: President, Judge
F.X. Choquet; vice presidents, Mme. Beïque, Mme. Choquet, Judge
Lafontaine, Miss Ferguson, president of the Montreal Women’s
Club, Reverend Dr. Symonds, Mrs. Waycott, Mr. J.M. Wilson;
secretaries, Mrs. Weller, Dr. St. Jacques; treasurer, Mr. F.
Beïque.

By kind permission of the Protestant Board of School
Commissioners, the meetings of the council of the Children’s
Aid Society were subsequently held in the board room of the
Protestant High School on Peel Street.

The members of the juvenile court committee of the Women’s Club
were incorporated with the council of the new society, and
subsequently, until the official organization of the juvenile
court, held meetings twice a month with the probation officer at
the home of Mme. Beïque in order to assist with the probation
work.

In June, 1908, the Juvenile Delinquents Act was passed by the
Dominion Parliament, and at the meeting of the Children’s Aid
Society in September of that year a letter was read from Mr.
W.L. Scott, one of the original framers of the bill, in which
he stated that, “the success of the Juvenile Delinquents Bill
has been due in great measure to your Society, and particularly
to your having secured the interest of Senator Beïque and Mr.
Bickerdike.”

The Society next exerted its effort towards having the act
proclaimed by the Provincial Parliament as a preliminary to
its being put into force in the province. To this end a public
meeting was arranged, which was addressed by the Chief Justice,
Sir Charles Fitzpatrick, and by Mr. J.J. Kelso, the originator of
the juvenile court system in Toronto.

During the following year the Society continued to co-operate
with the probation work, and endeavoured to effect regulation of
newspaper selling on the streets by small children and girls, and
to secure suppression of the deleterious features of the moving
picture shows, which were just beginning to overrun the city.

In 1910, the Juvenile Delinquents’ Act was formally proclaimed
by the provincial authorities, and arrangements as to division
of expenses, etc., having been adjusted between the province and
the municipality, a house at No. 209 Champ de Mars Street, was
acquired and fitted up by the city for use as a detention home,
the formal opening taking place on the 22d March, 1912.

In accordance with the provisions of the Juvenile Delinquents Act
two Juvenile Court committees were appointed from the membership
of the Children’s Aid Society, consisting of the following
persons:

For the Catholic Juvenile Court Committee:--Madame Beïque, Lady
Hingston, Mesdames Crevier, Moreau, Ethier, Miss Quigley, Miss
Murphy, Mlle. Marie Mignault, Rev. Canon Gauthier.

For the Protestant Juvenile Court Committee:--Rev. F.R. Griffin,
Reverend Doctor Symonds, Messrs. Owen Dawson, K.J. Hollingshead,
Lyon Cohen, Maxwell Goldstein, Mesdames F.H. Waycott, H.W.
Weller, W.S. Maxwell.

The society sent in a unanimous request to the provincial
authorities for the appointment of Judge F.X. Choquet as judge
of the Juvenile Court, for Mr. O.C. Dawson as clerk, and for the
retention of acting probation officers, Mlle. Clément, and Mrs.
Henderson, in a permanent capacity, and all of these appointments
were made, as asked for.

In 1912 the Children’s Aid Society cooperated with the executive
of the Child Welfare Exhibit by taking charge of the subsection
of that exhibit dealing with delinquent and dependent children.


    MONTREAL SOCIETY FOR THE PROTECTION OF WOMEN AND CHILDREN

An association which has done very effective work since 1882
among the sufferers at the hands of the delinquent classes is
the Montreal Society for the Protection of Women and Children.
Its work is largely preventative and has succeeded in the
protection of women and children from every kind of wrong, abuse
and cruelty, arising from nonsupport, wife beating, desertion,
assaults, child cruelty and miscellaneous causes. The society
has steadily pursued the aim of reform regarding prison labour
wages in favour of those who suffer from the incarceration of the
delinquent husband, the breadwinner.


  THE CANADIAN SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS

The following movement may be chronicled sufficiently
appropriately here among the charities for unfortunates:

The Canadian Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals was
incorporated in 1868, its charter being granted at the request of
Thomas Workman, M.P., H.J. Joseph, Henry Bulmer, T.J. Claxton,
E.A. Prentice, H.L. Boulter, J.J.C. Abbott, James Ferrier, Jr.,
R. Mowat, A.M. Foster, T. Mackenzie, George Stephens, James
Hutton, G.W. Weaver, Jesse Joseph and others.

In 1898 a woman’s auxiliary was formed with Mrs. W.R. Miller as
its first president.

The above association was the first in Canada. It is the head
office of the Province of Quebec, having several branches in
other towns. For the first twenty years progress was slow, but in
1913, as many as six thousand cases came to the association.


                        COURT COMMITTALS

The statistics for the year 1913 regarding the children committed
to industrial schools by the City of Montreal is as follows:

    Number of applications                           1,227

  These applications were accepted or refused as follows:
    Committals accepted                                330
    Committals refused                                 216
    Recommittals accepted                              397
    Recommittals refused                                53
    Committals accepted by the Government                4
    Recommittals accepted by the Government              5
    Applications discontinued                          100
    Applications for release                           126

  Children in industrial schools[A] on the 31st of December, 1912:
    At the expense of the city                         747
    Half at the expense of the Government               68
                                                     -----
       Total                                           815
  Committed during the year 1913:--
    At the expense of the city                         330
    Half at the expense of the Government                4

  Recommitted during the year 1913:--
    At the expense of the city                         397
    Half at the expense of the Government                5
                                                     -----
       Total                                           736
                                                     -----
       Grand total                                   1,551
  Released, discharged, etc., during the year 1913:--
    At the expense of the city                         732
    Half at the expense of the Government               13
                                                     -----
       Total                                           745
  In industrial schools on the 31st December, 1913:--
    At the expense of the city                         752
    Half at the expense of the government               54
                                                     -----
       Total                                           806

  [A] It is now desired to change the charter so that Reformatory
  schools should be renamed Industrial schools and former
  Industrial schools be renamed Trades and Labour schools.

Of the 806 Montreal children confined in the industrial schools
on the 31st of December, 1913, 463 were Catholic boys committed
to the Montfort Orphanage, 422 at the expense of the city and
41 at the joint expense of the city and Government, 290 were
Catholic girls confided to the care of the Good Shepherd Nuns,
277 at the expense of the city and 13 at the joint expense of the
city and Government, and 53 were Protestant children (33 boys and
20 girls) placed in the Ladies’ Benevolent Institution, Berthelet
Street, Montreal.

  Number of boys                                     496
  Number of girls                                    310

The expenditure in connection with the maintenance of uncared
for juveniles amounted to $69,450.15 in 1913, or an increase of
$2,582.49 as compared with 1912.


                                V

             VOCATIONAL TRAINING FOR THE HANDICAPPED

  DEAF MUTES: BOYS (CLERICS OF ST. VIATEUR)--GIRLS (SISTERS OF
    PROVIDENCE)--THE MACKAY INSTITUTE FOR PROTESTANT DEAF MUTES AND
    BLIND--THE INSTITUT DES AVEUGLES--MONTREAL ASSOCIATION FOR THE
    BLIND--SCHOOL FOR CRIPPLES (CHILDREN’S MEMORIAL HOSPITAL).

In a separate chapter we have treated of education only in the
old sense of the term, vocational training as such also being
treated in the notice on the technical schools of the city. The
origins of that for physically handicapped children, the deaf,
the blind and the crippled, have now to be recorded. There is
as yet no provision for the mentally handicapped in the city or
province though the subject is being at present promoted. This
section is, therefore, placed here rather than in the educational
chapter since the institutions it deals with are as yet conducted
on sociological and volunteer lines rather than as an established
part of the recognized educational systems of the city.

There are at present in Canada seven institutions for deaf mutes.

1. The Catholic Institution of “Sourds Muets,” deaf mutes, boys,
founded in 1848 and now conducted under the direction of the
Clerics of St. Viateur at 1941 St. Dominique Street, Montreal. 2.
The Catholic Institution of “Sourdes Muettes,” girl deaf mutes,
founded in 1851 under the direction of the Sisters of Providence,
595 St. Denis Street, Montreal. 3. The Mackay Institute, for
girls and boys, founded in 1870. 4. The Institution at Halifax,
Nova Scotia, founded in 1857. 5. That at Belleville, founded in
1858. 6. Winnipeg, in 1888. 7. St. John, New Brunswick, in 1903.


            THE CATHOLIC INSTITUTE FOR DEAF-MUTE BOYS

Montreal, therefore, might claim at present the lead in this
great educational work. Quebec, however, opened a school for deaf
mutes in 1831 under Mr. Macdonald, a lawyer who had studied at
Hartford, Connecticut, under the direction of M. Laurent Clerc,
a pupil of the Abbé Sicard, who had learnt under the famous
Abbé de l’Epée. In 1817 Laurent Clerc came to Hartford to found
under M.H. Gallaudet, the first institution for deaf mutes on
the American continent. The school established by Macdonald
was unfortunately closed in 1836, owing to the withdrawal of
subsidy by government. The Abbé Prince, afterwards bishop of St.
Hyacinthe, endeavoured to support a school under the direction
of the young Caron, a pupil of Macdonald, but through want of
funds it closed in 1840. Later the Abbé Lagorce, of St. Charles
on the Richelieu, attempted to teach the deaf mutes of his
parish by pictures. In 1848 he was invited by Bishop Bourget to
establish a school for deaf mutes at Hochelaga, in the hospice
of St. Jérome-Emilien (the old house of the Good Shepherd) on
Brock Street in the Quebec suburbs. He was assisted by a young
man named Reeves, a deaf mute and a pupil of Caron. The school
was afterwards transferred to a house on Dufresne Street, given
by M. Dufresne. In May, 1850, it was transferred to a building
on Coteau St. Louis (Mile End) on a piece of land given by
Dr. P. Beaubien. It was closed temporarily in May, 1851, on
account of a visit made by the Abbé Lagorce to France for the
purpose of study. He returned to Canada in October, 1852, and
was installed at Joliette. In 1853 he returned to the house at
Coteau St. Louis. There he remained till January, 1856, when he
relinquished his work in favour of Brother J.M. Young, a cleric
of St. Viateur. The latter, himself a deaf mute, had been invited
by Bishop Bourget on his return from Rome in 1854, when he found
M. Young a professor at the Forestier Institute in Lyons. M.
Young entered the novitiate of the Clercs de St. Viateur at
Vourles on the 15th of October, 1854, and after pronouncing his
vows on October 21, 1855, embarked for Montreal, arriving in
December. In view of his advent the classes had not recommenced
in September but were again opened January 7, 1856. After the
vacation of 1856, the establishment was removed to Chambly but,
not succeeding, it was definitely reinstated in Coteau St. Louis
after the vacation of 1857. Meanwhile, in 1856 Brother Young was
joined by Father Bélanger. To him are due the many important
developments, such as the opening in 1865 of the first workshops
for printing, binding and shoemaking. In 1878 he added two
stores to the principal house and in 1881 joined the workshops
to it by a viaduct. In 1870, after a year’s study in Europe, he
introduced teaching by words and again in 1880 the purely oral
method. In 1883 he was forced to take a rest till 1895, but in
1900, he definitely retired, being succeeded by the Rev. Father
Cadieux, of the Clerics of St. Viateur. The establishment gives a
complete education to the pupils in its vast halls and workshops,
where, besides printing, binding and shoemaking, other trades
are taught, such as tailoring, sadlering, joinery, wheelwright’s
work, painting, blacksmithing, etc. English Catholic children are
also admitted.


             THE CATHOLIC SCHOOL FOR DEAF-MUTE GIRLS

The next school, for girl deaf mutes, was established in 1851
at the time when that for boys was in a precarious condition.
Its home was first at Longue Pointe and it was opened, under
the auspices of Mother Gamelin, the foundress of the Sisters of
Providence, by Sister Marie de Bonsecours (Albina Gadbois) on
February 19th, with two pupils. The work for the unfortunate
children was not then understood in Canada, being even thought
useless. In 1852 there were four pupils, in 1857, thirty-two.
The school which had then become too small was transferred to
the hospice St. Joseph in Montreal. In 1864, the institution was
definitely established upon its present site on St. Denis Street.
Its first buildings have been gradually enlarged. The first
teachers studied for a year at Joliette under the Abbé Lagorce.
In 1853 they went to New York to study under the celebrated Isaac
Peet, director of the Institute for Deaf Mutes in New York.
Two years later they returned thither for further instruction.
In 1870 they went to Europe to familiarize themselves in the
oral method, but it was not till 1879 that the intuitive pure
oral method, replacing signs and imitation, was applied in
its entirety. In this they were greatly assisted by the Abbé
Trepanier, honorary canon of the Cathedral of Montreal, who was
for eighteen years attached to the institution of the deaf mutes
on St. Denis Street. In 1912 the establishment numbered 260 girl
pupils and fifty-four religious.


 THE MACKAY INSTITUTION FOR PROTESTANT DEAF-MUTES AND THE BLIND

Prior to the establishment of the institution known as the Mackay
Institution for Protestant Deaf Mutes and the Blind, there was
no school among the Protestant community for the unfortunates
who might be either blind or deaf. During the year 1868 the
subject was being agitated and on the 7th of January, 1869, a
public meeting of those interested in this work was held and the
following prominent citizens formed themselves into a society to
establish an institution for Protestant deaf mutes and the blind
in the Province of Quebec, then better known as Lower Canada:

Mr. Charles Alexander, Thomas Cramp, Frederick Mackenzie, Thomas
Workman, John Dougall of the Montreal Witness, William Lunn,
G. Moffatt, J.A. Mathewson, J.H.R. Molson, Hon. J.J.C. Abbott,
Edward Carter, Q.C., P.D. Browne, John Leeming, W.H. Benyon, J.F.
Barnard, S.J. Lyman; and the following ladies:

Mesdames Andrew Allan, R. Redpath, J.W. Dawson, Major, Bond,
Cramp, Fleet, Moffatt, Brydges, Brown and Workman.

The following officers were elected: Mr. Charles Alexander,
president; Thomas Cramp, vice president; Frederick Mackenzie,
secretary-treasurer; Thomas Widd, principal; Mrs. Widd, matron.

On the 19th of January, 1869, another meeting was held at
which it was announced that the sum of nearly $6,000 had been
subscribed, and more promised. The members worked vigorously to
raise sufficient funds.

The work of the honorable secretary-treasurer was no sinecure.
He sent out hundreds of circulars to ministers in all parts of
the province to obtain the names, age, sex and circumstances
of all Protestant deaf mutes in the province. On the 26th of
January, 250 circulars to Protestant ministers had brought only
23 replies, reporting 5 deaf mutes and 5 blind.

On the 10th of March, 112 replies had been received, reporting 38
deaf mutes, 8 of school age, and 34 blind, of whom only 5 were
of school age. On April 30th, 210 replies had been received,
reporting 57 deaf mutes, 35 males and 22 females; eligible for
school, 8 males and 5 females.

On the 4th of May, another meeting of the committee was held
and it was decided that Mr. Widd should look out for a suitable
house and grounds to open school for September. A house and ample
grounds were found in Côte St. Antoine at an annual rental of
$400 with an option to purchase in five years for $8,000. The
house contained accommodation for about twenty pupils but very
scant provision for teachers.

The doors were opened on the 15th of September, 1870, and 11
pupils admitted, 9 boys and 2 girls. Six paid full fees of $90
for the scholastic year and 5 were free. The number in attendance
was later increased to 16; 13 boys and 3 girls, one of the latter
being deaf, dumb and blind.

The institution had a hard struggle for existence for many years,
especially about 1876, which was a year of great financial
depression; but with the help of kind friends it was kept open
and attracted the attention of the late Mr. Joseph Mackay, who
finally bought a piece of ground in Notre Dame de Grâce and
erected thereon a handsome building capable of accommodating
about eighty pupils and their teachers, and the name was then
changed to the “Mackay Institution for Protestant Deaf Mutes and
the Blind.”

Mr. Widd retired from the principalship about 1882 and was
succeeded by Miss Harriet E. McGann as superintendent, who later
married a most talented teacher, Mr. John I. Ashcroft, and after
his death carried the superintendentship alone to the present
date.

There are now about seventy pupils of whom eleven are in the
blind class. The subjects taught the blind are the ordinary
English branches, music, typewriting, raffia work, knitting,
plain sewing, chair caning and piano tuning. For the deaf the
Masterson method is used in the kindergarten classes, dressmaking
and domestic economy, besides the ordinary public school course.
In the industrial department the boys acquire a good knowledge
of carpentry, wood carving, cabinet making, shoemaking and chair
caning.


                    THE INSTITUT DES AVEUGLES

The “Institut des Aveugles,” or the Institute for the Blind,
at “Nazareth,” St. Catherine Street, the first established
in Canada, was founded in Montreal in 1860 by the Rev. V.B.
Rousselot, a Sulpician, who sacrificed his private fortune for
the work of his predeliction. The course given aims at providing
a classical and religious education and follows the practical
methods adopted in Paris at the Institution National for the
young blind. Music is especially cultivated. In 1892 the Grey
Sisters, who have charge of the institution, added an Institut
Opthalmique. Eye diseases are also treated at the Hôtel Dieu and
Notre Dame Hospital.


             THE MONTREAL ASSOCIATION FOR THE BLIND

The latest development is now being enterprised by the
non-Catholics under the foregoing name.

In response to a circular letter sent out by a blind citizen,
Mr. P.E. Layton, inviting personal friends and others to meet at
his residence on Tuesday evening, April 21, 1908, about fifteen
blind men and their friends responded. The meeting having been
arranged by Mr. Layton, it was unanimously agreed that he should
take the chair. In a few well-considered words the chairman set
forth what he considered to be a pressing need in our community,
the establishment of an association to promote the interests of
the English-speaking blind in the Province of Quebec. He was
of the opinion that an up-to-date school for the blind was an
urgent necessity and that in connection with this, workshops
for blind adults should be established so that the non-seeing
might by instruction and training become self-supporting. In
the discussion which followed it was unanimously decided that
such an association should be formed, having the aforesaid
objects as its ultimate aim. The officers of the society were
then elected as follows: Dr. A. Fisher, honorary president; Mr.
C.W. Lindsay, president; Mr. W. Stewart, vice president; Mr.
P.E. Layton, treasurer; and Mr. S. Fraser, secretary. The above
officers, with the addition of Messrs. H. Baker and T. Stewart,
formed an executive committee of management. At a subsequent
meeting Messrs. A. Ross and I. Mullhollin were added to this
committee. By the end of the first year $12,608.48 had been
realized from subscriptions.

[Illustration: MONTREAL SCHOOL FOR THE BLIND]

[Illustration: MONTREAL DEAF AND DUMB INSTITUTE]

[Illustration: NAZARETH ASYLUM FOR THE BLIND]

[Illustration: MACKAY INSTITUTION FOR THE PROTESTANT DEAF-MUTES
AND THE BLIND]

A library of books in the raised type has been established. A
workshop for the training of blind adults in broom-making was
opened on December 1, 1908.

On June 4, 1910, an act to incorporate “The Montreal Association
for the Blind” was passed by the provincial legislature. The
principal incorporators were Sir Edward Clouston, Baronet; Sir
Thomas Shaughnessy, K.C.V.O.; Sir Melbourne Tait; Sir William
Macdonald; Sir Hugh Graham; W.M. Aitken; George Smithers; Charles
W. Lindsay; Philip E. Layton; H.F. Armstrong; E.B. Busteed, K.C.;
Septimus Fraser, and other persons.

During the next four years Mr. and Mrs. Layton were actively
engaged as treasurer and secretary of the society in collecting
funds for the erection of a school for the English-speaking blind
and a sum sufficient for the purpose was raised. A piece of land
8½ acres in extent was purchased at Sherbrooke Street, at the
corner of Notre Dame de Grâce, in 1910, and in 1912 the school
was built and opened for the admission of pupils in October of
that year. It was almost entirely furnished by donations of
friends. The official opening by the Premier of the Province, Sir
Lomer Gouin, took place in October, 1913. Thirty-two pupils have
been enrolled since that date. Funds have been raised during the
present year, 1914, for the erection on the school grounds of an
industrial home for the adult blind, and the building is now in
progress and will be ready for occupation on March 1, 1915. This
building will accommodate about twenty-five to thirty adults.
Various trades will be taught and the boarding accommodations
will be a great boon to the sightless workmen.


                     THE SCHOOL FOR CRIPPLES
                 (Children’s Memorial Hospital)

The Montreal movement for a school for cripples is of especial
sociological interest as a further instance of the trend of
modern educational impulse.

Less than a year after the founding of the Children’s Memorial
Hospital, in 1904, the members of the committee of that
institution realized the dire ignorance of most of the little
patients who were brought to the hospital for treatment, some
having never attended school, others having attended school
during but short and broken periods of their young lives.

A school was shortly organized in connection with the hospital
for the young patients in the temporary quarters, 500 Guy Street.
The scholars studied reading, writing, spelling, arithmetic,
grammar and geography; in one or two instances shorthand,
typewriting and music have been commenced. Some of these pupils
could sew, knit, crochet embroidery and make bead chains.

The aim of the committee of the Children’s Memorial Hospital
after the removal of the patients in 1909 to the new hospital
has been to have a separate school building on its grounds on
Cedar Avenue, which school would be not only the school for the
resident patients but also the school to which the crippled and
deformed children of Montreal and the surrounding vicinities
would be brought every morning in special conveyances, and there
receive instruction which would fit them to become independent
and useful citizens as they grew to manhood and womanhood. The
children would receive their mid-day lunch at the school and
later in the afternoon be conveyed to their respective homes.

The first step taken was in approaching the Protestant School
Commissioners, who gave permission for a collection to be taken
by children in their schools for the School for Cripples.

The second step was that of forming a committee and having
collecting cards printed. After the gracious permission was
accorded by the Protestant School Board of Montreal, and that of
Westmount, upwards of twenty thousand of these collecting cards
were distributed to the scholars attending the schools under the
control of these respective boards. The school inspectors of the
Province of Quebec rendered valuable assistance, also supplying
lists with the names of the schools and the teachers under their
inspectorates. These schools were supplied with collecting cards
also, together with a number of private schools and academies
in Montreal and the surrounding districts. As a result of the
efforts of the school children of the province and the kind
supervision of the principals and teachers, a very large sum was
collected.

The committee for the organization of the School for Cripples
held its first meeting in February, 1910. At the last meeting
which was held in May, a deputation, composed of the following
members of the committee: Mr. C.J. Binmore, Mr. W.D. Lighthall,
His Honor Mr. Recorder Weir, D.C.L., Doctor Rexford,--was
appointed to attend a meeting of the committee of the Children’s
Memorial Hospital, which was held the week after. At this meeting
the following report, read by Mr. C.J. Binmore, recommended that
provision should be made for three distinct divisions of children.

1. The inmates of the hospital who are able to go from the wards
to the class-rooms.

2. The pupils who may be brought daily to the school from their
homes.

3. The children resident in the hospital who are either
temporarily or permanently unable to leave their cots.

The school has at last, in September, 1914, been completed in the
grounds of the Children’s Memorial Hospital at the foot of the
hill adjoining Cedar Avenue, and is ready for formal opening. It
will have two departments, one for the hospital crippled children
and the other for the same unfortunate class from the city. It
will be taught on the same efficient lines as those employed in
the city schools. But special vocational training will be added
to equip the handicapped children for the battle of life.

The board of management, separate from that of the hospital, is
as follows: President, McKenzie Forbes, M.D.; vice president,
Rev. Herbert Symonds, D.D.; Mr. C.J. Binmore, treasurer; Miss
Sarah Tyndale, and Mr. W.D. Lighthall, K.C., honorary solicitor.


                               VI

                        IMMIGRATION WORK

  EARLY ACTIVITIES--YEAR OF CHOLERA--DOMINION AGENCY--THE WOMEN’S
    NATIONAL IMMIGRATION SOCIETY--CATHOLIC IMMIGRATION HOME.

Writing in 1839 Mr. Newton Bosworth, in “Hochelaga Depicta,”
says that “the citizens of Montreal are distinguished by one
feature which is highly honourable to them, standing out as
it does in pleasing and strong relief--and that is a habit
of active benevolence. Perhaps there is no place where in
proportion to the number and wealth of the inhabitants more has
been done to relieve the wretched and support the weak by deeds
of real charity than in this city--and this not by thoughtless
and indiscriminate profusion, but in the exercise of cautious
and painstaking administration.” As an illustration of this
fact he quotes, “On the authority of Nathaniel Gould, Esq.,
London, a warm and steady friend to Canada, that the Montreal
Emigrant Society during the past year (1832) forwarded to
their destination, or otherwise relieved, 10,744 of these poor
creatures at an expense of £2,126 11s 4d. Too much praise cannot
be bestowed on the exertions of those pure philanthropists, who
during a season of much distress and danger gave up their time,
money and health to so worthy a purpose.” The last quoted writer
is speaking of the year of the cholera epidemic of 1832.


                 THE DOMINION IMMIGRATION AGENCY

But immigration from the institutional point of view may be
dated at about 1834, when the national societies, as recorded
elsewhere, arose to safeguard the interests of their own country
people coming to the city. These societies either had houses such
as the St. Andrew’s Home or St. George’s Home to receive them, or
they did it by providing them lodging and care otherwise.

The Dominion Government has long had its immigration agency in
the city. Its home is now at 150 St. Antoine Street, where the
new building with its detention hospital was publicly opened on
May 1, 1914. Its previous locations were 306 St. Antoine Street,
the late one, the former residence of a former mayor, C.S.
Rodier; then 219 Cathedral Street; before that 183 Common Street;
517 St. James Street; then at a point opposite the Grand Trunk
Station (St. Bonaventure) and at Point St. Charles, etc. The
present agent, Mr. John Hoolahan, was appointed in 1893 and he
was preceded by Mr. Daly, father and son.


            THE WOMEN’S NATIONAL IMMIGRATION SOCIETY

An important philanthropic movement was started in 1882 under
the title of the Women’s Protective Society, which was changed
some years later to its present name, “The Women’s National
Immigration Society.” Its first president was Mrs. Gillespie, who
was succeeded at her death in 1913 by Mrs. H. Vincent Meridith.
As Montreal is a port of importance, the sociological value of
the movement is apparent.

As Montreal is a port of importance the sociological value of
this movement is apparent.

The home of the society situated at 87 Osborne Street is
recognized as a government receiving home for the Dominion of
Canada, where all newly arrived women immigrants are given
twenty-four hours free board and lodging. It has no business
connection with any employment agency in Great Britain or Canada.

The object of the society is the receiving and protecting
of newly arrived immigrant women irrespective of creed or
nationality. Should they remain in Montreal they can board in the
home at a low charge and assistance is given to them in every way
possible to obtain employment. If they are going further afield
help is given them in preparing for their journey and they are
seen safely onto the trains.

From the foundation of the society in 1882 to December, 1913,
11,366 newly arrived immigrants have been registered on the
books. In the first two years of the society’s existence those
registered totaled 459, as compared with the figures for the last
two years, 1,697. A comparison of these figures will show how
greatly the work has increased.

An outstanding feature of the work is the receiving and assisting
of large parties of immigrants brought out under the auspices
of the “British Women’s Emigration Society” of London, England.
These parties traveling under the care of experienced matrons
have been coming to the home for the past twenty-four years and
have grown rapidly of late years both in frequency of arrival and
numbers. At the present time they usually consist of from forty
to fifty persons, though on one day of August, 1912, a party
of over ninety was received and catered for at the home, while
waiting for trains for different points in the country.

Individual passengers are met by request at the steamers and
trains and assisted with their arrangements for their further
journeys. These form a very large class annually and as they
usually prefer to go forward with as little delay as possible
they are generally taken direct to the stations and are thus not
included in the above totals which only cover those newly arrived
immigrants registered at the home.


                  THE CATHOLIC IMMIGRATION HOME

A similar work to that of the last named association is now being
performed by the Catholic Immigration Home at 450 Lagauchetière
Street.

On April 10, 1913, their property was purchased, but numerous
alterations had to be made to make it suitable for immigration
work.

The Home has become very popular with the young women, strangers
in a strange land, who look upon it as their home where they are
well looked after by a competent matron.

On Saturday, June 28, 1913, the Home was officially opened for
the reception of the immigrants. Among those present were the
following: His Grace the Archbishop of Montreal; Hon. J.J.
Guerin, John Hoolihan, dominion immigration agent; E. Marquette,
provincial immigration agent; Denis Tansey, M.L. A.; Mr. E.
Dufault, deputy minister of colonization, Quebec Government; J.B.
Lambkin, dominion agent for the suppression of white slavery;
W.G. Kennedy, president of St. Patrick’s Society; J.L.D. Mason,
M.D.

Representatives of the Home meet the incoming steamers and
trains, and assist the immigrants, both male and female, arriving
in the city. The young women are protected at the Home, and saved
from the evil of white slavery while employment is secured for
them. It is managed by a board of life governors with a chaplain,
the Rev. F.J. Singleton of St. Patrick’s Church. It has a matron
and staff for the internal government.

Among other immigration activities may be mentioned the National
Societies, Union Nationale Francaise de Montreal, St. Anthony’s
Villa.


                               VII

                 HUMANITARIAN MOVEMENTS FOR BOYS

      THE BOYS’ HOME--THE PATRONAGE DE ST. JOSEPH--THE BOY
           SCOUTS--PARKS AND PLAY GROUNDS ASSOCIATION.


                         THE BOYS’ HOME.

Among the striking developments of humanitarian efforts for boys
there are several which stand out conspicuously.

The Boys’ Home of Montreal is a logical and lineal descendant of
the “Infant School Association,” which established a schoolhouse
on Barre Street in 1868 in connection with Zion Congregational
Church, Mr. Charles Alexander, James Baylis, J. Dougall, Fred
Perry and others being associated with the work.

On the Protestant School Commissioners taking up infant teaching,
as the charter of the above association permitted other
charitable work, by a resolution of May 5, 1870, in the Mechanics
Hall, it was utilized for the promotion of work for waifs and
strays, and in 1871 the association changed its name to the Boys’
Home of Montreal and established itself in the building erected
by Mr. Charles Alexander, on Mountain Street, known as the
Shaftesbury Hall, after the model of the Lord Shaftesbury homes
in England. The work commenced on February 1, 1871, with twelve
boys, to whom were added six others next day. They were street
boys of all religions and each boy paid ten cents for supper,
bed and breakfast. These were a rough lot and it caused Mr. John
Ritchie, the first superintendent, some trouble to handle them.
Still the work progressed. Mr. and Mrs. J.R. Dick took charge of
the boys about 1882 and have continued in this work till today.
The growth of this home from such humble beginnings is best told
by its buildings. In 1886 the present centre building, costing
$13,000, was built; in 1893 the north building for educational
purposes; and in 1904 the new Alexander wing, costing $30,000,
including gymnasium, swimming bath, etc., replaced the old
Shaftesbury Hall. The work has overflowed so that the home was
instrumental in fathering the Shawbridge Boys’ Farm. This had
long been projected through the efforts of Mr. Alexander, the
president, who had desired to accomplish some betterment of the
miserable conditions, officially acknowledged, attaching to the
care and reform of the Protestant juvenile delinquent in the
Sherbrooke reformatory, which was nothing more than a part of
the Sherbrooke jail. As early as 1902 the matter was brought
before the board by Mr. J. R. Dick. In 1906 it was again urged
that the Boys’ Home board was the right corporation to bring
about the reform so long required, through the establishment of
an industrial farm, which eventually opened its doors to the
fourteen boys from Sherbrooke Reformatory on March 31, 1909, the
contract with the government having been concluded on March 8,
1909. The first immediate step, however, was taken in 1906 by the
corporation of the Boys’ Home through its farm committee under
Mr. J.S. Buchan, with Messrs. S.M. Bayliss, Frederick Hague and
C.S.J. Phillipps. In 1907 the Goodfellow Farm of 300 acres and
cattle was purchased at Shawbridge, forty miles from the city
on the Nominique Division of the Canadian Pacific Railway. It
has a station also on the Canadian Northern Quebec Railway, the
farm being conveniently situated about a mile from the city.
Its grounds were laid out under the direction of Professor
Nobbs and Mr. F. Todd, with Mr. Cecil Burgess as the building
architect. A simple inauguration was held in December, when
the work was commenced. Mr. G.W. Mathews, late of the Kibble
Institute, Paisley, Scotland, arrived in March, 1908, to take
the position of superintendent on May 1st, when the farm came
into the possession of the corporation. The formal opening of the
Boys’ Farm took place on October 26, 1908. Its subsequent history
belongs to the section on “Reformation.” The Boys’ Home, which
still retains its original character, has merited the good will
of the citizens. Since 1868 it has had only two presidents, Mr.
Charles Alexander, who died on November 6, 1905, and Mr. J.E.
Dougall, his successor.


                     PATRONAGE DE ST. JOSEPH

Although there are numberless forms of charity among the
French-speaking population it was not till 1892 that young orphan
boys of the apprentice class were specially catered for, when, on
September 8th, the Patronage de St. Joseph was opened for such
at the southeast corner of Dorchester Street and St. Charles
Borromeo. The idea was conceived by the conference St. Laurent
of the Society of St. Vincent de Paul, under the direction
of its president, M. Sénécal, and its chaplain, the Rev. M.
Hébert. Shortly after six months the location was removed by an
offer of land from the Seminary of St. Sulpice to the corner of
Lagauchetière and St. George streets. The new dwelling was even
still too small for the growing number of apprentices and through
the generous assistance of M. Froidevaux great enlargements were
added within four months to the first building. Two years later,
in 1895, a third building was commenced, but was not utilized
till May, 1897, by the act of the Rev. M. Colin, superior of the
Seminary, who has made it possible by furnishing the necessary
funds.

The work has given asylum since its twenty-two years of existence
to more than fifteen hundred young boys learning their trades,
either in the Brothers’ workshops or in the town, returning to
the Patronage at night. At present ninety apprentices are housed
and only inadequate means prevents more from being served.

Other activities for boys beyond these two representative
institutions are connected with the churches and social works
of the city with numerous clubs for mental, moral and physical
uplift.


                         THE BOY SCOUTS

The scout movement, founded in England by Lieut.-Gen. Sir Robert
S.S. Baden-Powell, for building boys into strong, virile manhood,
is really organized clubdom for boys, bringing to them physical,
moral and intellectual training. It was intended at first by the
founder to be used by existing boys’ organizations, such as the
Y.M.C.A., Boys’ Brigade, School and Cadet Corps, but it grew
beyond those bounds.

The first permanent work in connection with the Boy Scout
organization in Montreal was undertaken by Mr. Nigel Young
during the winter and summer of 1910. On September 2, 1910,
Lieut.-Gen. Sir R.S.S. Baden-Powell, the Chief Scout and founder
of the movement, visited Montreal and addressed a meeting of
the citizens in the arena with the mayor, Doctor Guerin, in the
chair. On the following day he reviewed the troop of the city
and addressed the scoutmasters. The Chief Scout was accompanied
by Lieutenant-Colonel Burland, who had the previous day been
appointed commissioner for the Province of Quebec.

In July, 1912, eleven scouts and three scoutmasters were present
at the rally and review held by His Majesty at Windsor during the
coronation events. The whole Canadian contingent, numbering in
all 136, was commanded by Lieut.-Col. Minden Cole, chairman of
the Montreal council.

In the autumn of 1911 Mr. David Evans was appointed assistant
commissioner and secretary for the province, since which time two
others have held that office, Mr. Russell Patterson, in 1912-13,
and Mr. Lordly, in 1914.

During the winter of 1911, through the efforts of the late
Lieutenant-Colonel Whitehead, honorary treasurer of the Montreal
Scout Council, a tract of land 300 acres in extent, with two fine
lakes, was purchased in the Laurentian Mountains for a permanent
camping ground for the scouts of the province. This has been
improved and a new up-to-date men’s hall has been erected. A full
equipment of tents, boats, etc., was supplied to accommodate 175
scouts at one time.

In September, 1914, Lieut.-Col. J. Burland resigned the
commissionership of the province and his place has been taken
by Lieutenant-Colonel Starke, appointed by H.R.H. the Duke of
Connaught, chief scout for Canada.

At the present time there are in Montreal 12 local associations,
54 scout troops, 53 scoutmasters, 49 assistant scoutmasters,
1,423 scouts, 23 king scouts, and 3 silver cross scouts.


               PARKS AND PLAY GROUNDS ASSOCIATION

A most important factor in the life of a city is the provision
of open spaces and breathing places for the working classes,
and especially for the children. In the winter of 1895-6 a few
ladies founded the Parks’ Protective Association. Its first
executive committee was: Mrs. N. Peterson, president; Mrs. Hugh
Graham, Mrs. N.V. Meredith, Mrs. Frank Redpath, Mrs. John Cox,
Mrs. Charles Hope, Mrs. F. Walton, Mrs. Kenneth Macpherson, Mrs.
Charles Whitehead and Miss Edith Watt, honorary secretary. In
April, 1900, its scope was enlarged by a larger association being
formed, with men admitted to committee work, to carry on its
work under the title of the “Parks and Playgrounds Association.”
A special object of the new association is to promote public
playgrounds for the children and urge the city authorities to do
this. The association was incorporated in 1904. Its presidents
have been: Sir William Hingston, Sir George Drummond and Sir
Alexander Lacoste. It has fostered a growing sentiment in favour
of public playgrounds and in 1913 it had seven of these under
proper supervision. Admirable modern playing apparatus has been
installed during the last two years. The movement has public
favour and the association’s slogan of 1912 for “$1,000,000 for
playgrounds” as the extent of a grant desired from the city
hall, has had the result of urging the city to purchase a great
quantity of land for definite further playground expansion. The
city has now also undertaken the care and management of its
own public playground property and the association at present
confines itself to its own playgrounds at Hibernia Road, and
two others. Its record is very creditable as a voluntary public
service.


                              VIII

                       HEBREW SOCIAL WORKS

BARON DE HIRSCH INSTITUTE--LADIES’ BENEVOLENT ASSOCIATIONS--OTHER
                           SOCIETIES.

The social work of the Hebrew as such may be treated separately
as an indication of social endeavour on racial lines.

The philanthropic institutions of the Hebrews of Montreal have
become numerous. The most important one is the “Baron de Hirsch
Institute,” which was founded in 1863 under the name of “The
Young Men’s Hebrew Benevolent Society.” When afterwards the late
Baron de Hirsch sent them large sums as a fund for assisting in
the onerous work which had fallen on this society through the
large influx of Jews from Eastern Europe in the ’80s they changed
the name to “Baron de Hirsch Institute and Hebrew Benevolent
Society.” Among its founders were Lawrence L. Levy, who was its
first president, Isidor Ascher, Tucker David, Charles Levy,
Lawrence Cohen, M. Gutman, Moise Schwob and S.E. Moss. Among its
presidents have been Jacob L. Samuel, Lyon Silverman, Jacob G.
Ascher, Lewis A. Hart, N. Friedman, Harris Vineberg, David A.
Ansell, Mortimer Davis, Lyon Cohen and Samuel W. Jacobs, K.C.
Mr. Ansell held office for fourteen years. It was during his
administration that the large building on Bleury Street, now
occupied by the institute was acquired. He was a very active
worker in the cause of education and his name will always be
especially identified with that branch of the work of the Baron
de Hirsch Institute. He also was Consul General for Mexico. Each
of the above-mentioned presidents in turn did yeoman service for
the advancement of the institute, which has grown in importance
from year to year.

The Ladies’ Hebrew Benevolent Society, founded in 1877, is
the oldest and most important of the Hebrew women’s charity
organizations. The Hebrew Free Loan Society, which was founded
some years ago, largely through the efforts of Z. Fineberg,
does splendid work in making loans to those requiring aid who
refuse to take charity and who pay back the loans thus made
as their condition improves. The Herzl Free Dispensary, the
Hebrew Sheltering Home, the Hebrew Sick Benefit Association, the
Hebrew Young Ladies’ Sewing Society all do noble work in their
separate branches, and there are a large number of other equally
meritorious Hebrew organizations doing work in every field of
philanthropy.


                               IX

                      COOPERATIVE MOVEMENTS

  WOMEN’S WORK--THE MONTREAL WOMEN’S CLUB--THE LOCAL COUNCIL
    OF WOMEN--LA FEDERATION NATIONALE--THE MONTREAL SUFFRAGE
    ASSOCIATION--THE CITY IMPROVEMENT LEAGUE--THE CITIZENS’
    ASSOCIATION--THE CHILD WELFARE EXHIBITION--ITS LESSONS--THE MILK
    STATION MOVEMENT.

Up to 1892 charitable and social work was conducted busily and
self-sacrificingly, but often without sufficient inter-relation
between the workers of the various institutions and bodies and
churches. Accordingly the movements for cooperation which now
began mark the beginning of a most fruitful epoch. The first
signs of the new period were manifested by the foundation of the
Montreal Women’s Club in 1892 and that of the local Council of
Women in 1893, to be followed by La Fédération Nationale in 1907.

Lengthy notices are given of the women’s movements, for
historically the period we are now in is peculiarly theirs. It is
also indirectly a summing up of the very large part played by the
women of Montreal in the charitable and humanitarian work of this
city, as this chapter amply testifies.


                    THE MONTREAL WOMEN’S CLUB

The Montreal Women’s Club was founded by Mrs. Robert Reid,
December 7, 1892--the object of the club being to promote
agreeable and useful relations between women of artistic,
literary, scientific and philanthropic tastes. The legal
incorporation of this club was secured on April 4, 1893. The
weekly programme, at first used as a means of personal culture,
soon became an important factor in the life of its members,
revealing to them abuses to be abolished or reforms to be
instituted. To-day, like so many modern clubs of women originally
of a literary origin, this club also is trying to assist in
solving some of the many complex problems which affect childhood
and womanhood, as regards industrial, educational, economic,
civic and home conditions. The necessities soon arose for
specialized efforts, hence the formation of the many standing
committees, the success of whose work has brought credit to the
club and much benefit to Montreal, through reforms promoted or
actually initiated through the committees attached to departments
bearing on “Home and Education,” “Social Science” and “Art and
Literature.”

The first Social Science Committee, Medical Inspection of Schools
(1902), laboured for four years, educating public opinion, and
influencing other organizations whose consent was necessary
before a system of medical inspection could be established.

The Hygiene Committee provides educative reports and
recommendations along civic and natural lines of hygienic
conditions.

The Moral and Social Reform Committee (1909) has given educative
reports on the moral problem. This committee has been acquiring
information, distributing literature, and through the publicity
of the press seeking to make the public realize conditions as
they are to-day in Montreal, caused by the influx of foreigners,
overcrowding of tenements, poor wages, and lack of compulsory
education.

The Forestry Committee (1908)--now Conservation--shows that the
club has a national outlook.

The Juvenile Court Committee (1904) began its work by directing
the movement in Montreal to assist in securing the passage of the
Dominion Act, which established children’s courts (passed June,
1908). With the financial support of the club, this committee was
the nucleus of the Children’s Aid Society of Montreal, formed
in February, 1908. Subsequently when the Provincial Legislature
adopted the Dominion Act, the City of Montreal agreed to its
provisions, and then purchased and furnished the necessary
detention home.

The Child Labour Committee (1906) took a very important part in
the Child Welfare Exhibit of 1912.

The Civics Committee (1906) secured the placing of
“anti-spitting” notices on street corners, and during 1912-1913
worked to secure the abolishment of the smoke nuisance, as well
as for the suppression of noises caused by milk and coal carts,
and by defective car wheels.

The efforts of The Industrial Committee (1906) were principally
directed to the continuance of the work of the Mary Laura
Ferguson Girls’ Club.

The establishment in the city of a Consumers’ League has been
promoted through this committee.

It also organizes lectures on its main subjects of intellectual
and artistic culture. On the social side it has committees of
courtesy, library and hospitality. In general it cooperates with
all civic movements to make Montreal a better place in which to
live.

The gifts to philanthropic work included grants to the relief
funds of the Royal Edward Institute and the Victorian Order of
Nurses.

The club is affiliated with the Local Council of Women, the Civic
Improvement League and the General Federation of Women’s Clubs,
and is represented by delegates to the Parks and Playgrounds
Association, and to the Child Welfare Moving Pictures Committee.

The club, this year attained its majority and celebrated
the auspicious occasion by the usual Charter Day luncheon,
entertaining as guests, the distinguished women of the National
Council, in convention here. The felicitations and congratulations
received, prove that the work, worth and earnest endeavours of
the club have richly justified its existence.

The presidents of the club have been:

  Mrs. Robert Reid              1892-02
  Miss Eglaugh                  1902-03
  Mrs. F.H. Waycott             1903-06
  Miss Mary Ferguson            1906-09
  Mrs. Alfred Ross Grafton      1909-11
  Mrs. Ninian C. Smillie        1911-13
  Madame Héliodore Fortier      1913--


               THE MONTREAL LOCAL COUNCIL OF WOMEN

The Local Council of Women was organized as a component part
of the National Council of Women, which was founded by Lady
Aberdeen, the wife of the Governor-General of the time. As the
aims of the Montreal Local Council of Women are modelled on
those of the National Council, the following preamble to the
constitution of the latter will illustrate the spirit of the
local phase of the same movement:

“We, Women of Canada, sincerely believing that the best good of
our homes and nation will be advanced by our own greater unity
of thought, sympathy and purpose, and that an organized movement
of women will best conserve the highest good of the Family and
the State, do hereby band ourselves together to further the
application of the Golden Rule to society, custom and law.”

The general policy is thus stated:

“This Council is organized in the interest of no one propaganda,
and has no power over the organizations which constitute it,
beyond that of suggestion and sympathy; therefore, no Society
voting to enter this Council shall render itself liable to
be interfered with in respect to its complete organic unity,
independence or methods of work, or be committed to any principle
or method of any other Society, or to any act or utterance of
the Council itself, beyond compliance with the terms of this
Constitution.”

In 1893 the Local Council of Women of Montreal was founded on
a similar basis in relation to the many separate associations,
which, in its turn it should hope to draw together.

It is therefore an organization which aims to secure the united
action, of both men and women and all existing organizations
of women, into closer relations through organized effort. Each
society entering the Local Council preserves its own independence
in aim or method, and is not committed to any principle or method
of any other society in the council, the object of which is to
serve as a medium of communication and a means of prosecuting any
work of common interest.

Believing, therefore, that the more intimate knowledge of one
another’s work would result in larger mutual sympathy and greater
unity of thought, and therefore in more effective action,
the various women’s associations interested in philanthropy,
religion, education, literature, art and social reform thus
formed a local council, its date of organization being November
30, 1893. Thirty societies united at first, the majority of which
still adhere. There are now fifty societies affiliated with the
local council. The first president was Lady Drummond, who is
still active in the work of the body. The first board consisted
of the following officers, in addition to the president: Madame
Thibaudeau, vice president; ex-officio vice president, president
of all affiliated societies; Miss Fairley, late principal of
Trafalgar Institute, corresponding secretary; Mrs. Clarke Murray,
recording secretary; Mrs. Carus Wilson, associate secretary; and
Mrs. Wurtele, treasurer. Subsequent presidents have been Mrs.
John Cox (deceased), Mrs. Bovey, Miss Carrie M. Derick and Dr.
Ritchie England, now presiding.

Among those who served either on the presidential board or as
officers for many years after the establishment of the local
council were: Mrs. H.C. Scott, who was early elected secretary
and served for several years; Mrs. William MacNaughton, Mrs.
Robert Reed, Mrs. Learmont, Mrs. John Cox, Mrs. Frank Redpath,
Mme. Gérin-LaJoie, Mme. Beïgue, Mme. Dandurand, Mrs. Warwick
Chipman and Mrs. John Savage. Mrs. William MacNaughton, Mrs.
Plumptre, Mrs. Walton and Miss Helen Reed served as chairman of
the presidential board when this body conducted affairs instead
of a president. The following names have also appeared on the
roll of officers during the early years, for long or short terms:
Lady Hingston, Mrs. A.D. Durnford, Mrs. E. McNutt, Mrs. F.
McLennan, Mrs. E. Hanson, Mrs. Gillespie, Mrs. John McDougall,
Miss Galt, Mrs. Hugh Allan, Mrs. Wolferston Thomas, Mrs. J.F.
Stevenson, Mrs. DeSola and Mrs. Leo.

The present officers are: Dr. Ritchie England, president; Mrs.
Warwick Chipman, Mrs. N.C. Smillie and Mrs. J. Henderson, vice
presidents; Mrs. Walter Lyman, corresponding secretary; Miss
Eleanor Tatley, recording secretary; and Mrs. A.K. Fiske,
treasurer.

Individual local members represent the local council of Montreal
in the National Assembly on committees such as laws for the
better protection of women and children, the custodial care
of feeble-minded women, work for dependent classes, finance,
immigration, press, vacation schools and supervised play grounds,
the equal moral standard and the prevention of traffic in women,
on peace and arbitration, on public health, on education,
covering problems of childhood.

It may be mentioned that the National Council was federated to
the International Council in 1897. The value of this threefold
relation established by so many women’s societies of Montreal
makes their work likely to be very universally useful, for many
questions suggested first at international or national meetings
have been taken up locally and _vice versa_.

The publication of the many phases of the work that the Local
Council of Women and the affiliated societies have enterprised
in the civic life of Montreal, especially in the last twenty-one
years, would fill many pages, but as there is no doubt that
in the story of Montreal the action of women in every sphere
of civic activity has done much for the uplift of the people,
credit and notice must be given to this very important outlook
on Montreal’s growth. Some of the particular activities of the
council, therefore, may be recorded.

Its patriotic efforts have been of a two-fold nature, racial and
imperial. Work for peace and arbitration was begun in 1894, and
has continued as part of the work of the National Council. During
the Boer War it gave aid to the volunteers and their families,
and during the present war of 1914 it has worked in connection
with the Canadian Patriotic Fund, the Canadian Women’s Fund, the
Red Cross Society and work for unemployed.

It has worked to obtain reports, and has recommended local
action, in regard to hygiene, education, labour, laws affecting
women and children, the equal moral standard and prevention of
traffic in women.

Since 1894 the council has promoted progressive reform in
nursing facilities leading up to the establishment of the
Victorian Order of Nurses. It has engaged actively in the crusade
against infantile mortality and that which led to the Pure Milk
League, out of which grew the movement for milk stations, which
finally received subsidies from the city. It engaged in the
preliminary anti-tuberculosis movements which finally ended in
the establishment of the Royal Edward Institute in 1909, and
subsequent institutions.

The local council has dealt in all matters which affect civic
life, even in municipal government. It has entered into various
departments of civic government, such as public baths, clean
streets, eradication of the smoke nuisance, inspection of
schools, the civic hospital for contagious diseases, etc.

One of the first committees established to obtain the appointment
of women on the school boards was that of the council, but this
plan never reached fruition. Many investigations and petitions
were made by the council regarding training of teachers, the
further extension of domestic science and manual training, school
hours, home lessons, etc., and reports on these subjects were
carefully made out and submitted. The Home Reading Union was
established by the council and for some years was carried on as a
part of this body.

The Aberdeen Association, to supply literature to people living
far from larger centres, had its inception through the council,
which has worked efficiently for the promotion of art, music and
literature. It was instrumental in introducing band concerts in
the public squares, has succeeded in obtaining public days at
the Art Gallery, and has cooperated with the Natural History
Society in matters of hygienic education.

The local council has done much to encourage Canadian
handicrafts, having started through the attempt to help the
Doukhabours. This work then passed from the council’s committee
to the Women’s Art Society, and is now carried on by the Canadian
Handicraft Guild, established for this purpose.

In 1896 a committee of the local council began to hold lectures
on sex hygiene and advocated the suppression of impure literature,
which work they still continue very effectively.

The Social Study Club, established between 1898 and 1902, which
led up to the formation of the University Settlement, owes its
existence to the Local Council, and as early as 1894 the latter
body was considering the question of industrial education.
Investigations into industrial conditions were made and reports
presented to the Royal Commission. Laws affecting women and
children, and labour conditions, have been promoted so that women
factory inspectors and the amended shop act were obtained, and
many other ameliorations for the women workers.

It has made careful study of the questions relating to special
treatment of mentally defective children and the segregation of
feeble-minded women of child-bearing age, while the matter of
segregation of male defectives has also been considered.

The education of mentally defective children in the province
has been studied and recommendations given to the provincial
government, while another important matter which it has
endeavoured to promote is compulsory education. Great interest
has been taken in the recreational and social side of education,
notably in the supervision of play grounds. At a meeting held
under the auspices of the local council an outgrowth was the
resolution to form a larger movement which developed from the
already existing Parks Protective Association into a Parks and
Playgrounds Association, as the new organization became in name,
having the addition of women on its board.

Among other social reforms the council has secured the
registration of births since 1899. Various jail and reformatory
ameliorations, such as police matrons and assistance for
discharged prisoners, have been accomplished, and the movement
promoted which, through the efforts of the Montreal Women’s Club,
led to the formation of the Children’s Aid Society, the chief
result of which has been the establishment of the Juvenile Court.
The preliminary agitation which ended in the formation of the
Charity Organization Society was conducted by the local council,
seven members of its executive becoming members of the first
board of directors of the Charity Organization Society.

The cause of temperance has received careful attention from the
council, in conjunction with the Fédération Nationale, so that
70,000 signatures were signed in favour of an amendment to the
license law, the suggestion being adopted by Government.

Notably, since 1910, the local council with the Fédération
Nationale and other women’s societies have cooperated with the
Citizens’ Association and other bodies working for municipal
reform. A large proportion of the 8,000 women voters of the city
registered at the polls, showing the success of the new movement,
which has been continued to 1914.

In 1912 the Child Welfare Exhibition found the local council from
the first one of the coordinate cooperating societies organizing
and carrying out the exhibition. In this the women’s societies
of Montreal, French and English, took charge of the sections
relating to their special aptitudes and previous experience. The
council were represented on the executive and beyond special
work in the exhibition, undertook the charge of the “Explainers”
committee in English and Yiddish.

In aid of the combined women’s charities of Montreal the Local
Council has cooperated with the Fédération Nationale in holding
two successful tag days.

The council has also taken interest in the subject of immigration
and suggested useful ameliorations.

The latest movement has been the promotion of the movement which
led to the formation of the Montreal Suffrage Exhibition early in
the same year.

The first concrete formation of the movement for women suffrage
through the peaceful means of an educational campaign, took
place on April 24, 1913, when at a meeting in the Stevenson
Hall the officers for the Montreal Suffrage Association were
elected as follows: President, Prof. Carrie M. Derick; vice
presidents, Dean Walton, Mrs. C.B. Gordon, Reverend Dr. Symonds;
corresponding secretary, Mrs. Oliver Smith; recording secretary,
Mrs. John Scott; treasurer, Mrs. George Lyman; convenors of
committees--legislative, Mr. C.M. Holt, K.C.; press, Mrs. F.
Minden Cole; literature, Mrs. H.W. Weller; with an executive of
Mrs. Walter Lyman, Miss Cartwright, Mrs. Alister Mitchell, Doctor
Guthrie, Mrs. Macnaughton, Reverend Mr. Dickie, Mrs. Fenwick
Williams, Mrs. Hayter Reed and Mrs. Rufus Smith.

Among the first to respond to the war call in the last days of
August, 1914, was the Local Council of Women, which summoned its
workers of the affiliated societies from their vacation homes to
form together for the organization of the relief committees taken
up in connection with the general patriotic fund of the Dominion.


                     LA FEDERATION NATIONALE

A second council of French-speaking women has since adopted
similar methods for combined action in social work.

La Fédération Nationale St. Jean Baptiste is the name which
a section of the ladies already connected with the St. Jean
Baptiste Association took in 1907 with the idea of federating a
number of existent women associations among the French-Canadians
which arose in the winter of 1906-7 to meet various social
problems peculiarly affecting women. While leaving to each
association its own autonomy, a central board of delegates from
each organization was formed with its central office in the
Monument National. The association obtained a special charter
in 1912 (3 George V) with a special seal “Vers La Justice par
la Charité.” It still works, however, in union with the Men’s
Association of St. Jean Baptiste. This union has been productive
of great value for the life of the French-Canadian women in
Montreal. It has made them study the principal obstacles to
social, moral and intellectual progress in the various classes
and callings in woman’s sphere.

The works undertaken by committees from the associations
federated, such as those of the office employèes, shop workers,
telephone operators, factory workers, the teachers and others,
are divided into three classes, charitable, economical and
educational. The _charitable_ works are those which had the
relief and aid of the neighbor as their goal, and thus their
committees are engaged on church, hospital and social betterment
bodies. The _economical_ are those which develop the women’s
interest in bettering their material conditions, while the
_educational_ are those which aim at the uplift and development
of the individual. The movement is sanely progressive. It has
effected many reforms in social conditions; it has attacked the
evil of alcoholism and it has opposed movements destructive
of the home life; while it has fostered all it builds up its
well-being. In the great Child Welfare Exhibition of Montreal in
1912 it played a conspicuous part. Imitating other modern women’s
movements it has held its congresses at regular intervals and it
has gathered around the movement a body of writers and social
experts well able to be of great value to the development of
French-Canadian womanhood. The transactions of its congresses are
printed, as well as those of its various committees in the annual
reports of the works of the federated association.

It has an official organ called “La Bonne Parole,” issued
monthly, which began in February, 1913. Among its chief writers
is Madame Gérin Lajoie, its editor, and one of the most vigorous
organizers of the fédération acting as its first secretary, with
Madame Beïque as its first president. Madame Gérin Lajoie is now
its president. The administration of the association is conducted
by an executive committee with an inner “bureau de direction.”
The executive includes the delegates of the various associations
who elect the board of directors who control the organization.
The following list of officers published in the report of 1911
may be reproduced as showing the constitution and personnel of
this modern woman’s movement:

    _Déléguées des œuvres fédérées_:

  _Dames patronnesses de l’Hôpital Notre-Dame_: Mme Fitzpatrick,
    Mme D. Rolland.
  _Dames patronnesses des Sourdes Muettes_: Mme Globensky, Mme O.
    Rolland.
  _Dames patronnesses de la Crêche de la Miséricorde_: Mme J.L.
    Archambault, Mme Hénault.
  _Dames patronnesses de Nazareth_: Mme Vaillancourt, Mme L.D.
    Mignault.
  _Dames patronnesses de l’Hôpital Ste-Justine_: Mme L. de G.
    Beaubien, Mlle Rolland.
  _Dames de charité de l’Hospice St.-Vincent de Paul_: Mlle
    Renauld, Mme Giroux.
  _Dames de l’Assistance Publique_: Mme Tessier, Mme Lamoureux.
  _Le Foyer_: Mlle Bonneville, Mlle Frappier.
  _Association des Institutrices_: Mlle Bibaud, Mlle Bélanger.
  _Patronage d’Youville_: Mlle Auclair, Mlle Vaillancourt.
  _Section française, société Aberdeen_: Mme Terroux, Mlle
    Desjardins.
  _Association des Employées de manufacture_: Mlle Robert, Mlle
    Vauthier.
  _Ass. des Employées de magasins_: Mlle Marin, Mlle Simoneau.
  _Ass. des Employées de Bureau_: Mlle Joubert, Mlle Godbout.
  _Ass. des Employées de téléphone_: Mlle Longtin, Mlle Meunier.
  _Cercle des demoiselles de St. Pierre_: Mlle L. Bélanger, Mlle N.
    Paquette.
  _Les écoles ménagères_: Mme Mackay, Mlle Anctil.
  _Association Artistique_: Mlle Idola St-Jean, Mme Baril.
  _Cercle Notre-Dame_: Mlle M. Gérin-Lajoie, Mlle LeMoyne.
  _Cour de l’Immaculée Conception_: Mme H. Papineau, Mme Lacombe.
  _Les Aides Ménagères_: Mlle Leblanc, Mme Brossard.


                   THE CITY IMPROVEMENT LEAGUE

We have recorded movements of concentrated efforts through the
cooperation of women associations; the year 1909 saw similar
efforts mostly by men, viz., the organization of the City
Improvement League and the Citizens’ Association. Both arose
through dissatisfaction among the citizens with the municipal
government, the former endeavouring to assist in promoting better
hygienic, æsthetic and civic progress.

The City Improvement League of Montreal was founded on March
9, 1909, at a meeting held in the medico-chirurgical rooms.
It grew directly out of the success of the anti-tuberculosis
crusade held in the city shortly before, and its object, in the
words of its original constitution, was “to unite the efforts
of all who are trying to improve and to cultivate the spirit of
right citizenship in order to make Montreal clean, healthful and
beautiful.”

The league was designed to effect this, by becoming a central
clearing house and bureau of intercommunication for existing
city betterment societies, or for individual citizens anxious to
assist the city, so that by economizing energy, time, money, by
federation, by surveying the whole field of municipal activities,
by the prevention of overlapping and by filling up of gaps and
by judicious dovetailing of effort, a central and solid unifying
organization might be found to put the force of all the societies
behind any particular one or individual cause, and thus to make
the strongest possible appeal when needed to the authorities and
to public opinion.

The league was formally inaugurated at the Board of Trade
assembly rooms on April 12th, being presided over by His
Excellency the Governor-General.

The audience and the speakers were widely representative of
cosmopolitan city life. All present hailed the new movement as
likely to be of permanent value in uplifting the city which had
long been suffering from a lowness of civic probity in high
places, consequent upon a supine apathy and neglect of civic
pride in the people generally, so that many scandals flourished
openly unchallenged and unchecked.

The league seemed to provide the antidote for the hour by an
appeal for the increased cultivation of an enlightened civic
consciousness of responsibility in the citizens, and met with an
immediate and warm welcome, notably in the press.

The league has since promoted and carried out useful reforms.
Its especial successes have been the establishment of the
Metropolitan Parks Commission, and the initiation and the call of
the Child Welfare Exhibition, which came from the league, which,
on January 27, 1910, discussed the matter, at the suggestion of
Mrs. J.B. Learmont, and by resolution encouraged the secretary to
proceed to New York to visit the first Child Welfare Exhibition
then being held there, and to report concerning the possibility
of some adaptable form for the conditions in Montreal. On
February 17th, on a favorable demonstration of its feasibility,
the secretary was thereupon empowered to call a meeting of the
betterment associations for the city. On May 24th a meeting of
delegates of sixty societies approved the holding of a Child
Welfare Exhibition in the course of 1912. A joint meeting was
held on April 25th of English and French-speaking organizations,
called in the rooms of the St. Jean Baptiste Association, when
Dr. J.G. Adami, Mr. Olivar Asselin and Dr. W.H. Atherton were
appointed to draw up a scheme to suit the English and French
communities of Montreal. This was placed before the latter on May
16th in the Monument Nationale. The scheme was adopted and the
patrons, honorary presidents and vice presidents and the active
executive board were elected.

Finally the Child Welfare Exhibition was carried out in October,
1912, by the special cooperation of coordinate associations of
women, notably those of the Local Council of Women, La Fédération
Nationale and the many associations affiliated with each of these.

The League has led the van in the city planning and better
housing movements for the working classes and as an offshoot the
Greater Montreal City Planning and Housing Association arose
in 1912 to further promote these desired reforms. It initiated
the City Cleaning Day adopted by the municipality in 1911 and
1912 and with the Montreal Publicity Association organized
the larger “Clean-up Week” of 1913. The league has cooperated
with many business, national, civic and women’s societies for
municipal reform and general city progress, and has largely
helped to develop the sense of combined citizenship in common
causes throughout the various sections of the cosmopolitan city
of today, and to foster a common civic pride. The league has had
a wide outlook and has worked for a league of city improvement
associations of Canada. At the International City Planning
Congress, held in Toronto in 1914, it advocated the establishment
of a Dominion town planning and housing bureau, which has already
been partially established. Among its officers have been, since
1909: President, J. G, Adami, M.D., D. Sc.; vice presidents,
Mrs. J.B. Learmont, Madame Archer, Madame Beïque, Prof. Leigh
R. Gregor, Hon. J.J. Guerin, M.D., Messrs. U.H. Dandurand, J.V.
Desaulniers, Farquhar Robertson; honorary secretaries, Prof. J.A.
Dale, M.A., Messrs. Olivar Asselin, A. Lesage, M.D., J.U. Emard,
K.C., C.H. Gould; honorary treasurers, Farquhar Robertson, J.F.
Boulais, N.P., and the executive secretary, W.H. Atherton, Ph. D.


                    THE CITIZENS’ ASSOCIATION

The “Citizens’ Association,” which was organized in 1909 by the
best and most representative citizens of Montreal, was a sequent
of the various other associations then either existent, moribund
or actually dead, among business men in the past whose aims were
to seek charter reform for better municipal government. It arose
out of the dissatisfactory state of municipal politics at this
date.

Its lines are along those of civic vigilance and it aims at
the suppression of attempts at corruption or malversation at
the city hall by watching the conduct of those responsible and
by seeing to it that future candidates coming up for municipal
election should be honest and respected citizens. Its earliest
work was the promotion of the amended charter which established
the Board of Control system and of securing a “clean slate” at
the election of 1910, as already told. It has also promoted
reforms for the better regulation of public utilities and for
better city management and administrative progress. It has
endeavoured to act as a clearing house for other associations
having a civic political tendency. In 1913, it sought to promote
a simplification of the ward system and at the beginning of 1914
to secure a good representative slate in the municipal elections,
but without the dramatic success of 1910. The career of such an
organization is necessarily chequered, but good men stand by
organized effort for the public good. While its activities should
primarily be placed in the constitutional or municipal sections
of this history, yet as sociological progress depends so much on
good municipal government, it deserves record here as an adjunct
of the bodies enumerated.

One gratifying aspect of the movements of late years has been the
growth of the spirit of civic cooperation through the central
representative associations of a now complex city life.


                    CHILD WELFARE EXHIBITION

References have been made to the great Child Welfare Exhibition
of 1912. This took place in the Drill Hall on Craig Street,
opposite the Champ de Mars, on October 8th and lasted for a
fortnight. It was the work of all the social workers acting for
their institutions of every class--national or religious--in the
city. The movement arose out of a desire to combat, by a dramatic
object lesson, the evils of infantile mortality, then becoming
to be realized more and more in an ever-growing and congested
city. But the welfare of the older child or the young person
under tutelage was also illustrated by charts and lectures and
living demonstrations of what was being done along progressive
educational lines at home as well as abroad. It was practically
an exhibition of modern social endeavour centering around the
home of the children, in their city environment. While it was
modelled on a similar exhibition in New York in 1910, it had a
peculiar Montreal aspect, as it was conducted largely on local
lines and embraced the phases of local endeavour. It had lessons,
however, for the Dominion, in bringing to the attention the need
of regard for human conservation as well as that of our forest
and animal resources. The municipal, provincial and federal
governments by gifts of $5,000 each, assisted local subscribers
in the organization of the exhibition so that it was able to be
thrown open to the public for a fortnight free of charge, with
the result that as a public educative movement it surpassed
anything previously attempted, at least, in Canada. Thousands
of parents crowded the immense hall and annexes daily, as well
as large numbers of civic officials, teachers, medical and
professional men, clergymen and religious men and women in their
habits. It has been the most notable public exhibition in the
history of the city and was marked by the spirit of universal
cooperation in a degree very gratifying to the promoters.

The exhibition paved the way to the immediate success of many
forward movements already existing, notably those for better
library and playground accommodations for the city, and the
establishment of milk stations or gouttes de lait. As this latter
was among the primary by-products of the main thesis of the
exhibition which sought to lessen the dangers of infantile life,
productive of infantile mortality, this may be now specially
noticed. In 1913, from May 11th to the 13th, there was held the
first convention of the French “Gouttes de lait,” which outlined
hygienic ameliorations through organized educational campaigns
that will be of great future value to the virility of our
people. Similar movements were initiated or continued among the
English-speaking sections.

To mark its approbation of the movement the municipal authorities
largely came to the rescue by subsidizing the efforts of the
social organizations of the city.


                      MILK STATION MOVEMENT

The following table of results obtained at
each (subsidized) milk depot in 1913 may fitly sum up this notice:

                                                   Average     Consulta-
     Milk Depots                Infants   Deaths  death rate     tions

  M.L.C. of Women                 466        10       2%         3,222
  St. Peter Parish                230        11       5%           252
  St. Joseph Parish               204        11       5%         2,041
  Mothers’ Clinic                 161         4       3%        13,320
  St. Arsène Parish               153        18      12%         1,440
  St Cunégonde Parish             150         5       3%           480
  St. Justine Hospital            147         8       5%         5,816
  St. Henry St. Zotique Parishes  146        12       8%           285
  St. Enfant-Jésus Parish         123         8       6½%          539
  St. Brigide Parish              112        12      10%           481
  St. Edouard Parish              109         4       4%           608
  Iverley Settlement              102         9       9%           462
  St. Clothilde Parish             85         8       9%           166
  St. Jean-Baptiste Parish         80         8      10%           452
  Mtl. Babies Hospital             72         0                    124
  University Settlement            71         2       3%           720
  Hochelaga Parish                 66         7      10%           130
  Babies Dispensary (Emard Ward)   61        12      20%           185
  St.-Jean Berchmans Parish        60         3       5%           174
  St. Helen Parish                 53         1       2%           659
  Chalmer’s House Settlement       33         0                     78
  St. James Parish                 25         2       4%            75
  Bonsecours Parish                20         1       5%            80
                                -----       ---      ----       ------
     23 Milk Depots             2,729       156       6%        31,789


                                               Pints of
     Milk Depots                   Outdoor     milk dis-     Pds of ice
                                    visits     tributed     distributed

  M.L.C. of Women                   3,045       78,048         24,210
  St. Peter Parish                               2,776
  St. Joseph Parish                   245        1,477          2,000
  Mothers’ Clinic                               10,749
  St. Arsène Parish                   160        1,666
  St Cunégonde Parish                 340        1,000
  St. Justine Hospital                          10,986
  St. Henry St. Zotique Parishes       60        1,326
  St. Enfant-Jésus Parish              20        3,953
  St. Brigide Parish                  631        4,388
  St. Edouard Parish                    5          913
  Iverly Settlement                   462        4,500
  St. Clothilde Parish                297
  St. Jean-Baptiste Parish                       3,174
  Mtl. Babies Hospital                           1,042            100
  University Settlement               770        8,110
  Hochelaga Parish                     20
  Babies Dispensary (Emard Ward)       30        4,500          1,500
  St.-Jean Berchmans Parish                      3,111
  St. Helen Parish                    218          908
  Chalmer’s House Settlement          110        9,126            200
  St. James Parish                     15        1,506
  Bonsecours Parish                              1,433
                                    -----      -------         ------
     23 Milk Depots                 5,966      154,692         28,010


     Milk Depots                    Receipts  Expenditure    Subsidy

  M.L.C. of Women                  $5,165.81   $5,149.56     $900.00
  St. Peter Parish                    290.00      289.15      350.00[A]
  St. Joseph Parish                   966.07      888.28      900.00[A]
  Mothers’ Clinic                   3,928.31    3,909.55      500.00
  St. Arsène Parish                   515.00      604.00      400.00
  St Cunégonde Parish                 632.00      638.00      600.00
  St. Justine Hospital              1,699.12    1,659.42    1,000.00
  St. Henry St. Zotique Parishes      566.33      508.99      600.00
  St. Enfant-Jésus Parish             996.77      874.09      700.00
  St. Brigide Parish                  700.00      692.39      700.00
  St. Edouard Parish                  530.00      523.87      500.00
  Iverly Settlement                   362.17      362.47      300.00
  St. Clothilde Parish                500.00      495.47      300.00
  St. Jean-Baptiste Parish            847.03      766.72      700.00
  Mtl. Babies Hospital                200.00      200.00      200.00
  University Settlement             1,206.89      955.17      450.00
  Hochelaga Parish                    300.00      278.84      400.00[A]
  Babies Dispensary (Emard Ward)      400.00      400.00      400.00
  St.-Jean Berchmans Parish           567.86      621.16      400.00
  St. Helen Parish                    467.11      413.22      400.00
  Chalmer’s House Settlement          300.00      255.50      300.00[A]
  St. James Parish                    410.00      387.56      400.00
  Bonsecours Parish                   165.00      127.80      100.00
                                  ----------  ----------  ----------
     23 Milk Depots               $21,715.77  $21,001.21  $11,700.00[B]

  ----------

  [A] A sum of $524.38 voted was returned in part as follows:
  St Joseph Parish, $60.00; St. Peter Parish, $60.00; Hochelaga
  Parish, $100.00; Chalmer’s House, $100.00; Convention of French
  Gouttes de lait, $64.38.

  [B] In addition the French Gouttes de lait Convention received
  $1,000.00.


                                X

               MOVEMENTS FOR SAILORS AND SOLDIERS

  THE MONTREAL SAILORS’ INSTITUTE--THE CATHOLIC SAILORS’ CLUB--THE
    SOLDIERS’ WIVES’ LEAGUE--THE DAUGHTERS OF THE EMPIRE--THE “LAST
    POST” IMPERIAL NAVAL AND MILITARY CONTINGENCY FUND.


                   MONTREAL SAILORS’ INSTITUTE

Montreal is well equipped in its seamen’s charities, having two
institutions which supplement one another harmoniously in helping
the seamen.

Philanthropic work among the sailors coming to Montreal can
be traced back to the year 1836-7. “Rev. Father” Osgoode, a
representative of the American Seamen’s Friends’ Society, who had
associated with him, among others, Mr. J.A. Mathewson and Mr.
J.T. Dutton, started the work in a little building called “The
Bethel,” situated at the entrance to the canal at the foot of
McGill Street.

Father Osgoode dying in 1850, the work was continued by the
Rev. Samuel Massey and the Y.M.C.A., until in 1862 the Montreal
Sailors’ Institute was organized with Mr. Hugh Allan as
president. Among the founders were Messrs. J.P. Clarke, P.S.
Ross, Charles Alexander, John Ritchie and others. Rooms were
engaged on McGill Street and Mr. David Linton was installed as
superintendent. These rooms served the purposes of the institute
only for a few years when larger premises were secured on St.
Paul Street, where the institute was housed until 1875.

In 1869 the Montreal Sailors’ Institute was incorporated by
special act of the Quebec Legislature, with the following
officers: President, Mr. Andrew Allan; vice presidents, Messrs.
George Moffatt and John McLennan; treasurer, Mr. John Rankin;
secretary, Mr. P.S. Ross; and a board of management of twenty
gentlemen, prominent in shipping circles.

The rooms on McGill Street having been outgrown, in 1875 the two
upper flats of Boyer’s Block, corner of Commissioners Street and
Custom House Square, were rented and Mr. John Ritchie engaged as
manager.

Upon the death of Mr. Ritchie in 1888, Mr. J. Ritchie Bell was
appointed manager. The need of a building suitably situated
and specially adapted for the purposes of the work had been
constantly kept in mind from the beginning and many attempts
had been made to secure such. In 1897 this was accomplished.
The institute purchased the “Montreal House” an hotel which had
been famous in the early days. This was rebuilt and in May,
1898, the institute moved into its own home. Continued growth
of the shipping of the port made it necessary to enlarge the
premises. This was done in 1907 when the adjoining property
was purchased and the accommodation doubled, so that today the
Sailors’ Institute has a building in which to carry on its work,
conveniently situated on the water front, with an equipment which
compares favourably with that of most of the great seaports of
the world.


                   THE CATHOLIC SAILORS’ CLUB

The second activity for seamen is that carried on by the Catholic
Sailors’ Club at 51 Common Street, a large building at the corner
of St. Peter and Common streets. Its first home was in a humble
garret at 300 St. Paul Street, close to the wharf. Its inception
in 1893 was due to a Men’s Catholic Truth Society, formed by the
Rev. E.J. Devine, S.J., in 1892. These, notably a Mr. J.J. Walsh,
Mr. J.A. Feeley and Mr. H.C. Codd, approached Lady Hingston
and Miss A.T. Sadlier and a joint association of ladies and
gentlemen resulted for work for Catholic seamen. Lady Hingston
became from the first the president of the ladies’ committee. In
1897 the Catholic Truth Society board had retired and the annual
report gives the following officers for the club: President,
Lady Hingston; vice president, Mrs. F.B. McNamee; second vice
president, Mr. J.P.B. Casgrain; secretary-treasurer, Mrs. S.R.
Thomson. In 1896, the present building was purchased and the
mortgage paid in 1913. In 1900, the club was incorporated and two
boards were again instituted, the ladies board, continuing with
Lady Hingston as president till today, and Mr. F.B. McNamee as
president of the general board.

The presidents have been as follows:

  1900      Mr. F.B. McNamee
  1901      Mr. Patrick Wright
  1902      Mr. F.B. McNamee
  1907      Mr. Felix Casey
  1909      Mr. Charles F. Smith
  1911      Commander J.T. Walsh, R.N.R.

In 1908, Mr. W.H. Atherton, Ph. D., entered into the life of the
club as its first manager. The chaplains of the club have been
distinguished Jesuits, among whom the present one, the Rev. E.J.
Devine, has served three terms of varying lengths.

The club has had among its advisory board many prominent Catholic
citizens and of the board of life governors, besides those
mentioned, there are several who have been with the club from the
inception, including the honorary treasurer, Mr. Bernard McNally;
the honorary secretary, Mr. Arthur Phelan; Dr. F.J. Hackett, vice
president, and the following ladies actively interested in the
internal management: Lady Hingston, Mrs. Robert Archer, Mrs. J.B.
Casgrain, Mrs. J. Cochrane, Miss K. Coleman, Mrs. P.S. Doyle,
Mrs. Charles F. Smith, Mrs. F.B. McNamee, Miss L. O’Connell, Mrs.
W.J. Tabb, Mrs. S.R. Thomson, and Mrs. J.T. Walsh.


                   THE SOLDIERS’ WIVES’ LEAGUE

On the outbreak of the Boer War in 1899, Lady Hutton founded the
first branch of the Soldiers’ Wives’ League in Montreal, assisted
by a small group of Montreal women. So urgent was the need of
such an organization that it rapidly spread throughout all the
military districts in Canada.

The aim of the league as defined in the constitution is “to bring
the wives and relatives of all soldiers, whether of officers,
non-commissioned officers or men of the staff, permanent corps
and active militia of Canada, into closer touch and sympathy with
one another so that whether in sickness or in health they may be
able mutually to aid and assist one another and their families in
times of difficulty, trouble or distress.”

It will readily be seen that at the present time there is
pressing need for the active work of the league. The military
authorities at Ottawa have always recognized the standing of the
Soldiers’ Wives’ League. At the time of the Boer War the funds
raised for the soldiers’ families were distributed in Montreal
through the league by voluntary workers to the satisfaction of
all concerned. At the military conference in Ottawa two years
ago, the Montreal league was invited to send representatives.

In 1914, the league is repeating its useful services.

The present officers of the league are: Honorary president, Mrs.
Denison; president, Mrs. Busteed; recording secretary, Mrs.
Woodburn; corresponding secretary, Mrs. Minden Cole; treasurer,
Mme. Ostell. Executives: Mrs. J.G. Ross, Mrs. Gibsone, Mrs.
Fages, Mrs. Stewart, Mrs. Anderson, Mme. LeDuc, Mrs. Molson
Crawford, Mrs. Gunn, Mrs. Carson, Mrs. Cooper, Mrs. Sadler, Mrs.
Bridges, Mrs. Lacey Johnson, Mrs. Creelman, Mme. Labelle, Mme.
des Trois Maisons, and Mrs. Kippen.

There is also a Westmount branch of the League.


                   THE DAUGHTERS OF THE EMPIRE

The Daughters of the Empire and the Children of the Empire, a
junior branch, was formed in Montreal February 10, 1900, by
Mrs. Clark Murray, with the motto “Pro regina et patria.” Its
object was to stimulate and give expression to the sentiment of
patriotism which bound the women of the Empire around the throne
and person of their gracious and beloved sovereign. It was also
to provide an efficient organization by which prompt and united
action might be taken by the women of the Empire when such action
was deemed necessary. It was promoted vigorously in Australia,
South Africa, India, England and Scotland, and is now all over
Canada as a great activity of chapter work. The movement is very
warm in Canada. Toronto has become the head office. A journal
entitled “Echoes” chronicles the doings of the chapters. There is
a municipal chapter for each large town and a provincial chapter
in the capital of each province, and individual chapters adopt
patriotic names chosen from events in the history of the Empire.
Imperial education in the schools, stimulated by prizes given
for essays on imperial subjects, is one form of carrying out the
object of this association. The occasion of the present war is
just one of those special emergencies foreseen for the activity
of the chapters of the Daughters of the Empire and they are
busily engaged in all the charitable works required in connection
with the patriotic movement for the welfare of the soldiers and
their families.


 THE “LAST POST” IMPERIAL NAVAL AND MILITARY CONTINGENCY FUND

In 1909, an association, sadly unique in the British Empire, was
founded in Montreal under the name of the “Last Post” Imperial
Naval and Military Contingency Fund under the viceregal patronage
of Earl Grey. Its main object is to give honorable burial to any
soldier or sailor who has served under the colours in the regular
or auxiliary forces and has fallen into destitution in the
Province of Quebec. It is also empowered to extend its operations
to other parts. It is a voluntary association unsupported as yet
by an Imperial grant or patriotic fund. When the association
was formed, it received letters of commendation from the
chief military authorities of the Empire, who were deeply in
sympathy with the patriotic movement, which is an obvious need
as a tribute of gratitude to the Empire’s defenders and at the
same time they expressed surprise that it has been overlooked
in the economy of the Imperial services. The first trustees of
the fund were: Brig.-Gen. L. Buchan, C.V.O., C.M.G.; Commander
J.T. Walsh, R.N.R., and the Rev. Canon Almond, who was also the
first chairman. The first treasurer was Mr. Lucien C. Vallée and
Mr. Arthur H.D. Hair, its secretary, was the original promoter.
Among its vice presidents have been Col. C.E. Paterson and W.H.
Atherton. Since its inception men who possessed medals gained in
most of the campaigns of modern times have been interred with
military honours in the Protestant and Catholic cemeteries of the
city, through the auspices of the Fund.


                               XI

                      TEMPERANCE MOVEMENTS

  SOCIETY FOR “PROMOTION OF TEMPERANCE”--THE YOUNG MEN’S TEMPERANCE
    SOCIETY--MONTREAL TEMPERANCE SOCIETY--ST. PATRICK’S TOTAL
    ABSTINENCE SOCIETY--THE SOCIETE DE TEMPERANCE DU DIOCESE DE
    MONTREAL--OTHER SOCIETIES.

The author of “Hochelaga Depicta,” writing in 1839, describes the
temperance movement of his date, as follows:

“The increasing prevalence of drunkenness, and the awful
consequences thence arising, have induced a general desire among
the sober and virtuous part of the community to stay the progress
of so fearful an evil. Temperance societies have been formed,
with this express view, both in Europe and America, and have been
productive of the happiest effects. Thousands of drunkards have
been reclaimed from their destructive habits.”

A society for the “Promotion of Temperance” was formed in this
city on the 9th of June, 1828, at the suggestion of the Rev.
J.S. Christmas; the declaration was against the use of distilled
spirits only.

The Young Men’s Temperance Society was formed on the 29th
November, 1831. The two were afterwards united.

On the 27th of February, 1834, an executive committee was
appointed by a convention then held, which continued to act
till the formation of the Montreal Society for the Promotion of
Temperance on the 22d of October, 1835.

This society had the two pledges of abstinence from ardent
spirits, and total abstinence from all intoxicating liquors. On
the 1st of September, 1837, the society was remodelled on the
total abstinence principle alone under the name of the Montreal
Temperance Society.

St. Patrick’s Total Abstinence Society was established on the 23d
of February, 1840, by the Rev. Patrick Phelan and organized on
the 12th of February, 1854, by the Rev. J.F. Connolly.

The Société de Temperance du Diocése de Montreal was established
in the city on January 5, 1841, by His Grace, the Bishop of
Nancy, and canonically erected by Mgr. Ignatius Bourget on
January 25, 1842, when the patronal name of St. Jean Baptiste
was given it. This society was established in various sectional
branches.

Other movements have followed and Montreal has profited by
them. Among the present societies working in the city today
are: Missionaries of Temperance, La Ligue, Anti-Alcoolique de
Montreal, the Temperance Committee of La Fédération Nationale St.
Jean Baptiste, the Dominion Alliance (Montreal branch), Catholic
Total Abstinence Union (Canadian), St. Ann’s Total Abstinence and
Benevolent Society, St. Ann’s Juvenile Temperance Society, St.
Gabriel’s, St Patrick’s, organized in 1854, St. Aloysius Society,
Société de Temperance de l’Eglise de St. Pierre and the society
organized by the Franciscan Fathers, etc.

The city has houses for inebriates as follows:

House of Good Shepherd, 64 Sherbrooke Street (women), and St.
Benoit Joseph Asylum (men).


                               XII

           THE IMPROVEMENT OF THE CONDITION OF WORKERS

  EARLY ASSOCIATIONS OF WORKERS--PROTESTANT INDUSTRIAL ROOMS--THE
    LABOUR MOVEMENT--THE Y.M.C.A.--THE Y.W.C.A.--LE FOYER--THE
    CATHOLIC GIRLS’ CLUB, ETC.


                 EARLY ASSOCIATIONS FOR WORKERS

This chapter will record those movements which have tended to
safeguard the varied economical and educational interests of the
working classes. By consulting Mr. Huguet-Latour’s “Annuaire
de Ville Marie” records of early bodies of a mutual benefit
association character among French-Canadians will be found as
follows:

In 1848, the Société St. Blandine was founded for domestic
servant girls.

Then came the era of mutual benefit associations for working
people, viz.: “Union St. Joseph,” founded March 22, 1852, by
Louis Leclaire, and incorporated July 11, 1856.

Société de St. François Xavier, founded in 1853, by Rev. E.
Picard, a Sulpician, and incorporated May 13, 1863.

Société Bienveillante de Notre Dame de Sécours, founded July 1,
1853, and incorporated May 30, 1855.

Société Canadienne des Carpentiers et Menuisiers, founded
December 6, 1853, by Antoine Mayer, George Rivet and Edouard F.
Duncan. Incorporated July 24, 1858.

Association St. Antoine, founded May 2, 1856, by Rev. E. Picard,
a Sulpician, and incorporated April 10, 1861.

Union St. Pierre, founded April 19, 1859.

Union St. Jean Baptiste, founded May 18, 1861, by P. Cerat, A.
Normandin, F.X. Caron and Charles Bourque. Incorporated May 5,
1863.

Union St. Louis (Coteau St. Louis), founded March 24, 1862, by
Ignace Boucher and Dominique Dupré (fils).

St. Patrick’s Benevolent Society, founded on September 7, 1862,
by Mr. Thomas Brennan, and incorporated on May 5, 1863.

Association de Bienveillance de Bouchers Canadiens-Francais,
founded June 2, 1863.

Union St. Jacques, founded March 1, 1863.

Caisse de la Section St. Joseph de la Société de Tempérance,
founded September 6, 1863.

The following provident movements for inculcating prevision and
thrift may be recorded as follows:

Caisse d’Economie des Instituteurs, December 22, 1856.

Caisse d’Epargnes des Petites Servants de Pauvres (a lay
association), founded February 6, 1859, by Rev. E. Picard.

Caisse d’Economie de la Congrégation St. Michel, founded March 6,
1859.

Of late years there has been founded in the Province of Quebec
the Caisse Populaire, of which the Children’s Savings Banks in
the Immaculate Conception and the Infant Jesus parishes, and that
of the general _caisse_ in the Immaculate Conception and St.
Eusebe parishes are examples.

The numerous modern institutions of mutual assurance, public
employment agencies and the helping associations for servants
and workers which have arisen of late years need not be treated
historically.


                 THE PROTESTANT INDUSTRIAL ROOMS

One of the best principles in all social amelioration in the
condition of workers is to help the poor to help themselves. As
an instance of this the history of the movement of the Protestant
Industrial Rooms of Montreal, which is now more than half a
century old, is rightly in place here. Sixty years ago Miss
Hervey, who founded the Hervey Institute, did a wise and kind
act when she opened a “Repository” for giving out to deserving
females the surplus work of families, so creating the “Protestant
Industrial Rooms” of Montreal, which has grown up observing the
same fundamental principles. The first start was made in 1862 in
the rooms of the Hervey Institute, then on Lagauchetière Street,
and shortly a transfer was made to St. Antoine Street, then one
of the principal streets. In 1864 the Home of Industry and Refuge
was built on Dorchester Street and the governors invited the
ladies to take up quarters there. Until 1900 the kind offer was
accepted. The work of providing sewing work to be done at home
by poor but respectable women is now carried on at 57 Metcalfe
Street.


                       THE LABOUR MOVEMENT

French-Canadians began to learn the use of trade unions before
1836, when they had commenced to migrate to New England
countries. In this year the first union was founded in Quebec,
known as the Association Typographique de Quebec. About the
same time there was founded at Montreal, the Shoemakers’ Union
which was followed, in 1844, by the Stone Cutters’ Association.
Little by little the work of organization developed and became so
general that, at the time the movement of the Knights of Labour
arose, numerous lodges in the cities of Montreal and Quebec were
formed. But, in 1886, the order of the Knights of Labour were
taken to task by the majority of the clergy with the result that
all the lodges were broken up within a short time.

On the ruins of the Knights of Labour there arose the
International Union of Cigar Makers, which concentrated for
a certain time all the strength of the international labour
movement and was the first one to inaugurate the celebration of
Labour Day in Montreal.

Then it was the turn of the Typographical Union, No. 145, made
up exclusively of French-speaking members, and the Montreal
Typographical Union, No. 176, followed by the Carpenters’ Union,
which has developed to such an extent that, today in Montreal,
it has seven locals and about three thousand members. Local No.
134 of this union is made up exclusively of French-speaking
workmen and comprises about two thousand three hundred members.
An impetus had been given, and the international labour movement
is still powerful. Today there are 194 international unions in
the Province of Quebec with a membership of over forty thousand
members, of which 109 locals, comprising over thirty thousand
members, are in Montreal. The proportion of French-speaking
members belonging to these unions is:

Building trades, 75 per cent; boot and shoe industry, 90 per
cent; cigar and printing trades, 90 per cent; metallurgy,
machinists, etc., 25 per cent; railway employees, 50 per cent;
musicians and others, 80 per cent.

As an example of what can be accomplished by political action
combined with trade unionism, it may be pointed out to the credit
of the workingmen of the City of Montreal, that it is the only
city throughout the whole Dominion which found a way of electing
one of its own labour members to the House of Parliament, Mr.
Alphonse Verville, who was returned in 1906 by a strong majority,
being reelected twice since by a still larger majority.

In the City of Montreal, another worker, Joseph Ainey, was
elected as city commissioner by a majority of 8,000 votes over
and above that of the second commissioner elected in the City of
Montreal.

It is well to place a record here of the average annual salary of
various classes of wage-earners in Montreal at present:

  Bricklayers               $800.00
  Carpenters                 700.00
  Plumbers                   750.00
  Plasterer                  750.00
  Stone Cutters              800.00
  Granite Cutters            800.00
  Painters                   700.00
  Electricians               700.00
  Structural Iron Workers    600.00
  Building Laborers          500.00
  Brass Workers              750.00
  Moulders                   750.00
  Machinists                 750.00
  Blacksmiths                750.00
  Typos                      900.00
  Pressmen                   800.00
  Bookbinders                750.00
  Stereotypers               650.00
  Cigarmakers                750.00
  Shoemakers                 650.00
  Musicians                  800.00
  Butchers                   650.00
  Barbers                    600.00
  Tailors                    600.00
  Weavers                    600.00
  Laundry Workers            500.00

A central executive entitled “The Trades and Labour Council”
has done very effective work in harmonizing difficulties and in
promoting useful legislation for the working classes.


              THE YOUNG MEN’S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION

[3] The development of the modern moral and intellectual
assistance for the worker may now be instanced. The work of the
Y.M.C.A., now so largely developed on the American continent,
owes its origin to Montreal. Its history is briefly thus. It
was in the Baptist Church on St. Helen’s Street, in the ’50s,
that the beginnings of the association took form. The official
date given on a tablet placed on the Gault Building on St. Helen
Street places the date as November, 1851.

Among those present were Messrs. F.E. Grafton, T. James Claxton,
W.H. Milne, F.H. Marling, and John Holland. Mr. Marling, who was
a student in the Congregational College, was chairman of the
meeting. A canvass was made of the churches and encouragement
obtained for the project. One of the planks in the constitution
was that the association would never admit any intermeddling with
those matters of faith and polity on which the Protestant church
may differ.

There was a general committee appointed and this body rented the
Odd Fellows’ Hall on St. James Street. In 1851, the Rev. Donald
Fraser, the pastor of Coté Street Presbyterian Church, delivered
the inaugural lecture.

The young association had much difficulty to realize growth, but
a city missionary was appointed to give his whole time to the
work of obtaining support, and of familiarizing the churches and
the people generally with the objects of the work.

Mr. John Holland, one of the original members, moved to Toronto
in 1853, and was instrumental in forming the first association in
that city.

There was a confederation of all the associations on this
continent in 1855, and to this the local association gave its
adhesion. All the European associations met this same year at
Paris, and reached what was known as the “Paris basis,” to which
the local association also gave its adhesion.

In 1856 the Confederated Association met in Montreal, and
adopted the basis of union. Montreal was, therefore, not only
the birthplace of the organization on the continent, but at the
meeting in the city the basis of union was adopted, which has
since bound all the associations on this continent together.

The Montreal association moved to 205 Notre Dame Street, where
its membership reached 205. Some of the names of the then members
have an interest for the present generation of Montrealers. Men
like Charles Alexander, James Baylis, George S. Bransh, T. James
Claxton, J.P. Cleghorn, George Childs, W. Cooper, David Bentley,
Robert Gardner, F.E. Grafton, E.K. Greene, Alexander Harte, W.R.
Hibbard, Robert Irwin, F.W. Kay, Joseph Learmount, S.H. Burnett,
Thomas Leeming, John Louson, Theodore Lyman, A. McGibbon, Samuel
Massey, G. May, John Murphy, William Muir, A.A. Stevenson, Robert
Dow, Henry Drummond, Kenneth Campbell, Henry Morton, J. Tees, J.
Holland, P.L. Ross, H.A. Nelson, Alfred Savage, John Torrance,
Joseph Rielle, John Dougall, John Lewis, R.C. Jamieson, and many
others.

In 1857 the slavery question in the United States became acute,
and was felt its influence here. It was the slavery question
which was the cause of the Montreal association withdrawing
from the confederation. A resolution was passed declaring that
slave holders were ineligible for membership. The international
convention was to be held in Richmond. The Montreal association
was asked to vote on the question. It resolved that as southern
associations which rejected men of color, were connected with the
confederation, the Montreal association resigned its connection
with the same. This slavery question created much feeling at the
time. Many outside associations followed the Montreal example.

In 1858 the association removed to 90 McGill Street. It was in
this year that the late Sir William Dawson connected himself with
the work, remaining with it till his death. It was the habit,
long before the erection of the present Sailors’ Institute, to
visit all the ships coming into port and talk to the sailors who
were given suitable literature.

The fortunes of the association were at a low ebb in 1862, and,
in fact, there was talk of disbanding. A meeting for that purpose
was called; but the result was a determination to prosecute the
work with more energy than ever. Rooms were secured over the Bank
of Upper Canada, then on St. James Street. The association began
to flourish. A fire broke out in the building, and in 1863 a new
suite of rooms was secured adjoining the postoffice. Each year
onward showed from this point increased success.

The city was properly classified; the bands of workers increased.
Mr. Alfred Sandham was secured as general secretary, and remained
in the position till 1876, when he was succeeded by Mr. Budge.

In 1867 the association removed to the Bible House at the corner
of Craig and Alexander streets. In this year, the twelfth
international convention was held in the city. This convention
represented 106 associations and 597 delegates. Major-General
Russell, commander of the British forces, and Sir Henry Havelock
were among the speakers on the important occasion. Occurring at
the close of the Civil War, the meetings were remarkable for the
interest and fervour, for the slaves had been freed, at fearful
cost, and it was a sight to see the delegation of colored men who
were, for the first time, received as accredited delegates.

The idea of the association was to have its own building, and
great efforts were made in this connection. It was in 1870 that
steps were taken to secure the property at the corner of Craig
and Radegonde streets. The cornerstone was laid in 1872 by Mr.
J.T. Claxton. Revs. G.C. Wells, Doctor Burns and Doctor Wilkes,
were among the speakers. Comfortably installed in their new
building, the work progressed. It had been in seven different
buildings since its inception. It now owned its own premises.
Mr. Budge began his work in 1874 as general secretary. The total
membership was in this year 1,360.

It was the late Mr. Moody who decided upon the present site
of the association. The work had become too large for the
accommodation on Victoria Square. The population had greatly
increased. The membership felt this increase. Enlarged interests
had been cared for; and the training and education of boys had
been undertaken. Mr. Moody had been in the city and held a most
successful series of meetings in what was known as the old
Crystal Rink on the corner of Metcalfe and Dorchester streets
facing Dominion Square. There was doubt as to the location of the
new association building. He was asked for his opinion. “Why not
build it on the site of the Crystal Rink?” he said. His counsel
prevailed, and in 1888 the deed was signed, which transferred the
site of the present building to the association.

Here the work grew marvellously. It has branched out in many
important directions. It has supported men in India; it has sent
out men to South Africa during the Boer war; it has added to its
membership and activities and its recent triumph, when it raised
over $200,000 for the further extension of the work in the new
and enlarged building, is within recent memory.

The new home on Drummond Street was entered on August 1, 1912,
and was formally opened in September.

From the little Baptist Church on St. Helen Street to the
palatial home of the association is a long step, but it is an
answer to the demand for this sort of service on behalf of the
young in our city.


        THE MONTREAL YOUNG WOMEN’S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION

The Montreal Young Women’s Christian Association was organized
and incorporated in 1874 under the presidency of Mrs. P.D. Brown,
its central idea being that of helpfulness--physical, moral, and
spiritual--for industrial women.

Its first purpose was to provide a boarding home which should be
in no sense a charity, where young business women and students
might find a safe home free from the numerous temptations which
beset the young woman in the city. This part of the work has only
been limited by the size of the building; today about eighty-five
young women are housed in the association building, and fifty
in an annex which was opened in 1908. Early in 1914 another
building, to accommodate fifty more, was opened.

Its second purpose was to provide an employment bureau where
suitable work was found for the stranger.

Some of the activities of the association may now be mentioned.

In 1880, the necessity for a diet kitchen was felt, and in the
basement of the American Presbyterian Church, under the wing of
the Young Women’s Christian Association, one was opened. Here
the ladies themselves prepared suitable articles for diet for
invalids, the food dispensed only to applicants provided with a
card from clergy or the medical profession. In a few years this
work became so necessary that it separated from the Young Women’s
Christian Association and carried on its good work alone.

The Montreal Day Nursery, or crèche, was begun by the Young
Women’s Christian Association in 1888, but like the Montreal Diet
Dispensary it outgrew its sponsors and branched out for itself,
and has long been one of the most popular of Montreal’s charities.

The Helping Hand sewing school was opened in 1875, its object
being to teach the children of the poor to sew.

In 1894, the first school for cookery in Montreal was opened
by the Young Women’s Christian Association, its object being
to teach the poorer classes habits of thrift and economy. This
continued for many years, or until the normal and technical
schools took up the work.

Thus the Young Women’s Christian Association has been the pioneer
in many of the flourishing charitable and philanthropic works of
Montreal.

Educational classes have been a large factor in Young Women’s
Christian Association work, classes being held nightly in
dressmaking, millinery, shorthand, first aid to injured, French,
bookkeeping, and elementary subjects.

The first Montreal Young Women’s Christian Association work
began at 47 Metcalfe Street. Three moves were made as the work
developed, until in 1897 the present building was bought, but
even then the opportunity for progressive movement has been
hampered by the limited space. Plans for a larger and more modern
building are under consideration.

In addition there is the Fairmount Branch Y.W.C.A. and those
branches at 323 Mackey Street and 25 St. Famille Street.


                            LE FOYER

An important work for French business girls on the same lines
as the Young Women’s Christian Association is conducted by “Le
Foyer,” which was established in March, 1903, under the direction
of the Curé of St. Jacques, on St. Denis Street--M. Henri
Gauthier. The first house of the society was at 207 Champ de Mars
and its first directress was Mlle. Marie Imbleau. As the work
progressed a branch house was instituted at 14 Osborne Street,
the first directress of which was Miss Gabrielle Taschereau.
Later a second branch house was opened at 55 St. Denis Street
under the direction of Mlle. Leona Bonneville. In addition
there is a country house at Ste. Adèle, which receives during
the summer months thirty-five boarders a week. The organization
has a central office at 60 Notre Dame Street and its government
is under a committee of lay people of whom Mlle. Emma Beaudoin
is the present president. Each of the three houses has its own
secretary. There are 800 meals served daily in the three houses,
with about five hundred at the chief house on Champ de Mars,
while there are 125 regular boarders besides transients. The
pension is $2.50 a week. The activities include the _Bureau
d’emplacement_ in which situations are arranged for, and the
_Bureau d’enseignement_, which provides for culture and education
through lectures, classes, etc. There are also social, musical,
domestic science and other clubs in connection with this varied
work.


                    THE CATHOLIC GIRLS’ CLUB

A work which is conducted on somewhat similar lines to the Young
Women’s Christian Association is the Catholic Girls’ Club.

On March 20, 1911, Lady Hingston called together a number of
ladies from the various English-speaking parishes and invited
their cooperation in forming a Catholic Girls’ Club. The idea was
enthusiastically received, a committee was promptly formed and,
with Lady Hingston as president, the scheme was fairly launched.
A house, 63 Victoria Street, was rented for a year and thanks to
an efficient committee, was furnished and ready for occupation in
an incredibly short space of time.

Early in June the rooms were formally opened by His Grace,
Archbishop Bruchesi, under the name of the “Catholic Girls’
Club,” while the opening for the members took place on June 6th.

A large and successful bazaar, under the convenership of Mrs.
Cornwallis Monk, was held in October, 1911, the proceeds of which
enabled the committee to arrange for the purchase of the present
handsome club house, 311 Mackay Street, and to make the first
necessary payments.

Among other agencies for business girls may be mentioned “Ave
Marie,” La Providence, Maison St. Nom de Marie, Patronage
d’Youville and the business organizations under affiliation
with La Fédération St. Jean Baptiste. There are many also among
the non-Catholic population, the branches of the Young Women’s
Christian Association, and the like.


                              XIII

                     RECENT SOCIAL MOVEMENTS

  NEIGHBOURLY CHARITIES--THE KING’S DAUGHTERS--THE UNIVERSITY
    AND IVERLEY SETTLEMENTS--THE SETTLEMENT IDEA--SOCIAL STUDY
    ORGANIZATIONS--THE CANADIAN SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY
    TO ANIMALS.

“Neighbourly” charities in Montreal flourish in many a corner too
numerous to individualize. Of late both in the French, or English
and foreign sections of the city, Free Air and Summer Vacation
committees, and others such as the “Holiday” Home, the various
crèches and relief associations and churches, do their utmost
to give rest and holidays to poor mothers and children. Other
bodies assist in sewing and making garments for them such as the
“Needlework Guild,” and the sewing circles of the various church
clubs. Then there are associations with a wide scope which are
ready to take up the social work most needed for the hour, such
as the Victorian Sunshine Society, which originated at Westmount,
and many others.


                      THE KING’S DAUGHTERS

One of the latter societies is the “King’s Daughters,” an
international association founded in 1886 and established in
Montreal in 1888 by the Ready Circle in connection with the
American Presbyterian Church. This work is now carried on by
the crèche on Côte des Neiges Road opposite the old entrance to
the Mountain Park. The primary aim of the King’s Daughters is
to deepen the spiritual life and to engage in social works. The
crèche is one form of such and since its establishment in 1908,
first at Outremont then at Côte des Neiges and now at the above
place it receives poor families with their children during three
months of summer for daily rest, fresh air and relaxation, even
paying their transportation thither.


                    THE UNIVERSITY SETTLEMENT

The “settlement” or “neighbourhood” movement which culminated
in the formation of the University Settlement House at 159
Dorchester Street West in May, 1910, when two of the organizing
committee, Mrs. W.P. Hodges and Mrs. D. McIntosh set to work
cleaning up the little tenement and founded the nucleus of a
settlement round the classes of the McGill Neighbourhood Club,
may be traced to an earlier move originating with social workers
in connection with McGill University. The following synopsis will
show in brief the progress accomplished from 1889 to 1913:

1889--The Mu Iota Society was formed by the women graduates of
McGill University.

1890--Its name changed to Alumnæ Society.

May, 1891--Girls’ Club and lunch room was opened by the Alumnæ
Society at 47 Jurors Street.

May, 1894--Girls’ Club was moved to 84 Bleury Street. Evening
classes, etc., were held. First Christmas tree and entertainment
for 100 children of the neighbourhood.

May, 1895--Dwelling over shop was rented, giving sitting room and
bedrooms for working staff and four club members.

1895-96--Library opened. Addresses on settlements were given.

May, 1896--Adjoining shop rented.

1899-1900--Further addresses on settlement work, one by Dr.
Graham Taylor, of Chicago Commons.

1902--Moved to east side of Bleury Street. Shop and dwelling
rented.

1903--King’s Club for boys and girls was formed in fall.

May 1, 1905--Girls’ Club closed.

1905-07--King’s Club continued--Bi-weekly use of rooms in
Dufferin School was made possible by courtesy of the Protestant
Board of School Commissioners.

Christmas, 1906--First Christmas dinner held in rooms of Montreal
Protestant House of Industry and Refuge. Eighty-two boys and
girls of King’s Club were present.

1907-8--Rooms taken for the King’s Club at 308 Lagauchetière
Street West.

October, 1908--Workers’ Committee formed into “The McGill
University Neighbourhood Club” as part of the Alumnæ Society.

January, 1909--McGill Y.M.C.A. formally joins in the work of
Neighbourhood Club.

Fall, 1909-Spring, 1910--The use of the Belmont School granted by
the Protestant Board of School Commissioners.

January, 1910--Settlement Committee formed by the Alumnæ and
McGill University Neighbourhood Club.

February 8, 1910--Lecture by Miss Sadie American on
“Settlements,” given under the auspices of the Montreal Local
Council of Women in the interests of the Neighbourhood Club. Boy
Scouts organized.

May, 1910--The University Settlement of Montreal formed and
recognized by the corporation of the University. House rented,
159 and 161 Dorchester Street West. The use of Dufferin School
gymnasium again granted by the Protestant Board of School
Commissioners. The first president was Prof. J.A. Dale of McGill
University.

October, 1910--Annex of rooms at 189 Dorchester Street West,
made necessary. Becomes headquarters for Scouts, library, and
kindergarten.

December, 1910--First salaried headworker engaged.

January, 1911--Use of two rooms in St. John’s Parish House,
Ontario Street West, given by Rev. Arthur French. Becomes
headquarters of Boy Scouts. No. 189 Dorchester Street West
retained for library and kindergarten.

October, 1911--Factory flat rented on Dufferin Square. Second
salaried worker engaged (kindergarten).

April 3, 1912--Incorporation.

April, 1912--Property purchased on Dorchester Street West, near
Dufferin Square.

August 12, 1912--Summer camp with one tent at St. Rose, Quebec.

February 13, 1913--New building opened by H.R.H. Duke of
Connaught in a handsomely remodeled bottling factory at 179
Dorchester Street West.


                     THE IVERLEY SETTLEMENT

The Iverley Settlement followed in September, 1911, through the
instrumentality of Mrs. Ivan Wotherspoon and her friends, the
organizing committee meeting on June 4th preceding.

A house was taken on September 13th with the approval of
Judge Archer and Mr. Eugene Lafleur, K.C., who from the first
have evinced their entire sympathy with the work, and active
preparations were made for its development. From the moment the
Iverley was ready, children and their parents flocked in, thus
showing the value even of the settlement idea as a powerful
modern force for social betterment. Other settlements of a more
parochial or church affiliation have since adopted the movement.

The settlement idea has been productive of imitation or a
readjustment of other forms of charitable endeavours so long
employed in connection with the many churches, religious and
other institutions of the city.


                          SOCIAL STUDY

The social movements just recorded also have succeeded in
bringing social students together. Cooperation between the
English and French associations began about 1910 to be more
frequent in social enterprises. Intercommunication by lectures
and round table conferences, the interchange of literature and
intercourse with expert sociologists from England, the United
States and the continent, have had a very broadening effect on
our sociological life. A school of social study and publication
started up in the French educational circles about 1912 under
the title of L’école Sociale Populaire, the English Catholics
having previously, about 1911, started a Social Study Guild. In
connection with the leading social organizations, a Social Study
Club was also founded about 1912 for discussion among experts
of problems of sociology. All these forces having influence in
high civic circles, Montreal received at this period a stimulus
in social reform which has been distinctly a phase of our present
civic life.


                               XIV

                       MUNICIPAL CHARITIES

The action of the city as such has been partially noticed also
in other social works. Its Department of Assistance Municipal,
organized about 1904, dispenses the city’s charities regarding
the reformatories and industrial schools; the insane, of whom
in 1913 it supported 242 at St. Jean de Dieu and 98 at Verdun
insane asylums; the incurables, of whom 43 were kept in 1913 at
Notre Dame de Grace Hospital for Incurables and the Grey Nuns;
tuberculosis patients, for whom in 1913 the sum of $14,300 was
apportioned as follows:

  Hôpital des Incurables      $7,500.00
  Royal Edward Institute       3,300.00
  Grace Dart Home                500.00
  Bruchesi Institute           3,000.00

The department deports from the city for causes of misbehaviour,
illness or insanity. In 1913 448 cases were deported to England,
Ireland, Scotland, Jamaica, Judea, Egypt, Russia, United States,
Austria, Guadeloupe, France, Italy, Normay, Germany, Australia,
Switzerland, Greece and Belgium.

Two hundred destitute persons were repatriated in 1913, or
fifty-eight more than in 1912.

Relief is given to homeless poor and unemployed, which was larger
in 1913 owing to the economic crisis prevailing over Canada and
to the fact that in the fall many immigrants flocked from the
harvest fields in the West to the city, and also because there
was an extraordinary influx of foreigners whose cheap labour
caused the discharge of others of British origin. The number of
cases dealt with in 1913 by the city apart from the ordinary
regular volunteer charities, was 648 (or 105 per cent more than
in 1912).

These 648 cases reported to the city department and handled
by the Charity Organization Society for it, were dealt with
as follows: 181 were temporarily relieved, 79 repatriated, 43
committed to the “Assistance Publique,” 10 committed to various
institutions, 9 committed to the Hôtel-Dieu, 6 given with
employment, 6 deported, 5 confined in the Notre-Dame Hospital, 5
referred to the Society for the Protection of Women and Children,
5 given legal advice, 5 referred to the Municipal Labor Bureau, 4
committed to the Hospital for Incurables, 4 referred to the Baron
de Hirsch Institute, 4 placed in the Royal Victoria Hospital,
3 referred to the “Union Nationale Française,” 3 placed in the
Protestant House of Industry, 3 placed in the General Hospital, 2
referred to the Old Brewery Mission, 2 placed in the Institution
of the Grey Nuns, 2 placed in the St. Bridget’s Home, 2 referred
to the Salvation Army, 2 referred to the St. Vincent de Paul
Society, 1 was placed in the Bruchesi Institute, 1 placed in
the Maternity, 1 referred to the Montreal Ladies’ Benevolent
Society, 1 placed in the St. Henry Asylum, 1 placed in the
Youville Patronage, 1 placed in the Nazareth Asylum, 1 placed in
the Sheltering Home, 1 placed in the St. Benoit Asylum, 1 placed
in the St. Paul Hospital, 1 referred to the Belgian Society, 165
were refused relief and 88 did not report.

The city in 1913 made grants to the charitable institutions and
public bodies of Montreal to the amount of $105,996.00. The city,
however, remits a great amount of the assessment of charitable
institutions.

The value of the properties belonging to charitable institutions
and exempted from taxation, in 1913, was $23,131,660.00.

The assessment of 1 per cent therefore represents $231,316.60.

The City of Montreal paid, in 1913, for the relief of destitute
persons a sum of $497,712.35, as follows:

  Remittance of assessments                        $231,316.60
  Grants                                            105,996.00
  Maintenance of insane                              83,249.60
  Maintenance of children in industrial schools      69,450.15
  Miscellaneous                                       7,700.00
                                                    -----------
     Total                                         $497,712.35

  Or $53,809.94 more than in 1912.

  In 1912                                          $443,902.41
  In 1911                                           356,758.00


FOOTNOTES:

[1] Quoted from “Hochelaga Depicta.”

[2] The Sulpicians and the Grey Nuns early commenced their
connection with Irish orphans. In 1758, M. de Lavalinière, a
Sulpician, succeeded by his entreaties and promises in rescuing
an Irish child of the name of O’Flaherty from the hands of fierce
Indians. She was but a few months old and was already tied to
the stake to be burned alive with her mother when the generous
liberator came to the rescue. Madame d’Youville voluntarily
consented to take charge of her, and the child became a Grey Nun.

[3] Cf. the reminiscences of a leading citizen given in the
Montreal Star of January 2, 1912. The work itself is so well
known that the writer has thought it necessary to indicate only
its general history.




                          CHAPTER XXXV

               COMMERCIAL HISTORY BEFORE THE UNION

  MONTREAL’S EARLY BUSINESS FIRMS--A PROPHECY AT BEGINNING
    OF NINETEENTH CENTURY--CULTIVATION OF HEMP--ST. PAUL
    STREET--SLAVES IN MONTREAL--DOCTORS AND DRUGS IN
    1815--WHOLESALE FIRMS IN 1816--FIRST MEETING OF COMMITTEE
    OF TRADE--NOTRE DAME STREET--M’GILL STREET--FRENCH CANADIAN
    BUSINESSES--SHIP CARGOES--THE SHOP FRONTS IN 1839.


The early struggle of Montreal to assume the mastery of the
commercial supremacy has been indicated by its continuance of
the great fur trading industry which became amalgamated in the
North West Company, and by the establishment of its general
merchant class. After the American war of 1775, business began to
flourish. One of the earliest of the firms of this period was the
tailor business founded by Benaiah Gibb, whose son, also Benaiah,
became a benefactor to the Art Association of Montreal. Benaiah
Gibb, who came in 1774, at the age of twenty years, succeeded to
a Mr. McFarlain. In 1782 there came Mr. John Molson, who started
a brewery in the east end, and in 1809 pioneered the steamship
lines of Canada. About 1800 was established the retail drug firm
of (George) Wadsworth & (Lewis) Lyman. This became a wholesale
business, also, in 1829, and today the Lyman Drug Company is
the direct lineal descendant. The great Montreal Ogilvie flour
milling business was begun in 1801 by Mr. Ogilvie at Jacques
Cartier near Quebec. Shortly afterwards, perceiving that Montreal
was to rise superior in the commercial world, he erected a mill
on the Lachine Rapids. The Glenora Mills on the Lachine Canal
were erected in 1852 by his grandsons, A.W., John and W.W.
Ogilvie. The Ogilvie mills have since spread over the Dominion.

There were far-seeing men, at the beginning of the nineteenth
century. A few years after its opening a visiting traveler had
the following prophetic view of Montreal as the emporium of the
northern world:

“The City is that subdivision which is enclosed by the ancient
fortifications, the ramparts, fosse and glacis of which are
suffered to go to decay. Its form is that of a trapezium, or
quadrilateral figure whose sides are unequal. It is situated on
an incline plane, gently descending towards the eastern branch of
the St. Lawrence River, in whose ample bosom the Island itself,
with all its villages, gentlemen’s seats, and cultivated farms,
reposes. The following was the population about this time:

                          Houses.  Males.  Females.
  City of Montreal         485     1,541    1,642
  St. Lawrence suburbs     514     1,292    1,488
  St. Antoine do.          144       348      346
  Recollet do.             187       552      620
  Quebec do.      256      783       784
  Grey Nunnery do.           1        38       94

“The return of men able to bear arms give an aggregate of 3,392;
but as little or no attention is given to their exercises and
discipline, even that number is contemptible in the estimation
of a military man, who in war justly considers an undisciplined
mob as an encumbrance rather than help. Should Montreal ever
be attacked it can only be defended by British troops. Without
these the inhabitants would not be likely to irritate a powerful
assailant by ineffectual resistance. As a military position, the
place would not be worth a contest, as it would remain no longer
in the hands of the garrison than they would keep possession
of the high level ground that commands the city. But its local
advantages for commercial purposes and manufactures are so great
and various that it will inevitably become the Emporium of the
Northern World.

“At the head of ship navigation, on the waters of the majestic
St. Lawrence, like the heart in the human body, it will be the
grand reservoir into which all the streams connected with that
immense river must pour their contents. The inhabitants bordering
on these waters on the lakes in the northern part of Vermont and
western part of New York must necessarily make it the depot for
whatever articles of export their labours may produce, and take
in return whatever merchandise they consume.

“Those countries, particularly New York and Vermont, are
populating so fast that the commerce of Montreal must increase
rapidly unless the mechants’ inattention to their own interests
should neglect to import goods in such quantity and variety
as will render it unnecessary for the country traders to have
recourse to the markets of New York and Boston. At present the
commerce of Montreal is principally confined to the fur trade,
and collateral relations, under the direction of a company of
wealthy, independent, enterprising merchants, whose immense
capital and judicious arrangements have set at defiance every
kind of competition. But the other mercantile departments remain
unoccupied, and men of industry and property might, with a well
grounded prospect of success, establish houses for conducting
those branches of commerce which are less expensive, troublesome
and hazardous than the fur trade.”

In 1802 an act (George III, 1802, Cap. V) provided for the
application of £1,200 currency to enable the inhabitants to
“enter on the culture of hemp with facility and advantage.” The
hemp was to be used for cordage for the Royal Navy. Committees
were formed at Quebec and Montreal. The following advertisement
appeared in the official gazette in English and French: “Notice
is hereby given to persons inclined to raise hemp that seed
will be delivered gratis at Quebec and Montreal to such persons
as will engage to sow the same, not exceeding two and one-half
bushels to one person, and that nine pence per pound will be
paid for clean hemp of the growth of Lower Canada equal to
samples of Russian clean hemp to be seen at Quebec and Montreal,
and delivered on or before the 30th of September, 1803, and
12 shillings and 6 pence per bushel for good ripe hemp seed
delivered on or before the 1st of January, 1803.” Premiums were
offered to societies and in 1804 Mr. Isaac Winslow Clarke,
chairman of the Montreal committee, received the gold medal
from the Society of Arts for hemp grown in Lower Canada. Great
interest was sustained for a time, but it was found useless to
compete with Russia. Sir Joseph Banks, the president of the
Royal Society, in reply to a reference from the Board of Trade,
concluded that the exportation of hemp from Russia could not
be stopped, that no matter at how low a price the British or
colonial producer offered it, Russian hemp would still be lower.

Meanwhile the principal retail businesses, the butchers, the
bakers, the candlestick makers, and the rest, were growing in
importance in their shops on St. Paul Street over which they
and their families lived. The historian, Heriot, says of these
in 1805: “The habitations of the principal merchants are neat
and commodious and their storehouses are spacious and secured
against loss from fire, being covered with sheet iron or tin.”
Speaking of the markets he also says: “The markets of Montreal
are more abundantly supplied than those of Quebec, and articles
are sold at more reasonable prices, especially in winter, when
the inhabitants of the United States who reside on the borders
of Canada bring for sale a part of the produce of their farms.
Quantities of fish are likewise conveyed thither in sleighs from
Boston.”

At this time there were 142 slaves in the Montreal district,
although their importation had been forbidden in Canada since
1793, and their perpetuation in Lower Canada was disfavoured by
the bill of 1799, in which year there was a petition of Montreal
citizens to secure master’s rights over them. In the first
issue of the Montreal Gazette of June 3, 1778, the following
advertisement appeared: “Ran away on the 14th inst., a slave
belonging to the widow Dufy Desaulniers, aged about thirty-five
years, dressed in striped calico of the ordinary cut, of
tolerable stoutness. Whoever will bring her back will receive a
reward of $6.00 and will be repaid any costs that may be proved
to have been incurred in finding her.”

In 1807 with the growing trade an act was passed for a new market
house in Montreal. The year 1808 marks the advent of a second
brewery firm, that of Dow & Dunn, with D. & D. on their bottles
of beer and whiskey. The first brewery was at La Prairie and the
liquor was shipped across the river. The business was started
by Mr. Dow who shortly took Mr. J. Dunn into partnership. Its
lineage is Dow, Dunn, White, Harris, Scott, Hooper, and it is now
merged, about 1911, into the National Breweries Company, into
which the Molson firm never entered.

In 1809 Mr. John Frothingham founded the firm now known as
Frothingham & Workman. The factory was at Côte St. Paul and
was the pioneer business to introduce the ax and tool industry
generally into Canada. An interesting relic retained by the firm
is an invoice for shelf hardware imported from England in the
spring of 1815 and contains this note at the bottom: “The premium
on insurance has risen since the reappearance of Bonaparte and
the above is the best terms we could obtain.” The reappearance
was due to Napoleon’s escape from Elba. In 1850 William Workman
was admitted to the firm. He was the well known alderman, mayor,
member of parliament--a good citizen. In 1809 the prospects of
trade were heightened by Molson’s introduction of steamships
in Canada. A third brewery was started in 1811 by Mr. Thomas
A. Dawes. It was located at Lachine, probably for two reasons,
the water supply and the opportunity to supply the northwestern
expeditions into the fur lands directed by Sir George Simpson,
the governor of the Hudson’s Bay Company, whose headquarters
were at Lachine. The Dawes firm also lately became merged in the
National Breweries Company.

A faded ledger of 1815, begun by Joseph Beckett & Company on
St. Paul Street, marks the foundation of a Montreal drug firm
almost a century old which, through Beckett & Company, Carter
& McDonald, John Carter & Company, John Birks & Company, John
Carter & Company, Carter, Kerry & Company, Kerry Brothers &
Company, Weston & Company, leads to the National Drug Company.
The ledger above mentioned is historically interesting, as it
reveals some of the names of the leaders of social life in the
early days of the nineteenth century. A study of it reveals the
following facts:

First of all there are the Earl and Countess of Selkirk--regular
customers of the firm, buying powders and pomades and perfume,
attar of roses, and the like, as becomes extreme delicacy, high
position and a super-refinement, not forgotten in a raw community.

We have Colonels and Captains and Lieutenants, who were in
abundant evidence in the life of the city at the time; medical
men; esquires by the score--all in account with Mr. Beckett for
prescriptions and toilet articles, and delicate perfumes and
aromatic waters and powders and lip salve and pomades to give
the skin a satin appearance, and other mysteries of the feminine
toilet--for the account is a family one, in each case.

We have General Proctor, Captain Thomas, Captain Barnes,
Captain Despard, Colonel Dechambault, Major Courtenay, Captain
Castle, the Hon. Judge Monk, the Hon. William McGillivray, the
Hon. Judge Sewell, Major McGregor, Captain Weeks--but, really
the military march through the pages, as thick as “autumnal
leaves in Vallombrosa.” As for the medical men, their name is
legion--Doctors Andrews, Arnoldi, Bender, Badgely, Brown, Dillon,
Davis, Cazieu (Chateauguay), Emerson, Ferris, Forsyth, Grassett,
Irving, Kennedy, Kimber, Lee, Morris, McLeod, McGale, Osborne,
Nelson, Sleigh, Seilby, Stansfield--and many more. Evidently the
people did not suffer for lack of medical advice a century ago in
Montreal.

The doctors are down, of course, for the ingredients with which
they compounded their own prescriptions, which was the general
practice of the time.

We see that Mr. William Gray, founder of The Herald, had an
account with Mr. Beckett, while John Kyte, Esq., is indebted
in the sum of £6 8s for a new green coat, and £1 5s for a new
waistcoat. This might seem incongruous, as drugs and dry goods
do not mix too well; but in another page we notice that a member
of General Proctor’s household has had a tooth extracted in the
establishment--thus testifying to the eclectic nature of the
business in that early day, when the departmental store had yet
to be evolved.

The Hudson’s Bay Company has an account. The Orkney family got
their perfumes and toilet articles from the firm. The Orkney
family had a large property facing on St. Catherine Street before
the latter was homologated--property which extended below Beaver
Hall Hill. Many will remember the family mansion, standing
in off the street, near Phillips Square--a big, old-fashioned
residence in the colonial style, with ample grounds.

These itemized accounts touch life in an intimate and
confidential way. That this ledger should have been preserved
all these years in such good condition, each page telling its
own story of status and pride and mode of living--is remarkable.
It is also interesting to note the copies of letters which
Mr. Beckett transferred to the pages of the ledger from time
to time--letters of business, but showing a perfection of
chirography which would be the despair of the slap-dash writer
of the present day--delicate, spiderylike copperplate, with
delectable involutions, hinting leisure, and the aesthetic sense.
By comparison, the horror of the typewriter is intolerable. The
ledger is regarded as an heirloom to be carefully preserved by
the National Drug Company, whose offices are now on St. Gabriel
Street, though the original firm of Dr. Beckett a century ago,
was on St. Paul Street.

Business was growing in 1815 and St. Paul Street was flourishing.
In November of that year, through the exertions of Mr. Samuel
Dawson, part of St. Paul Street was lighted by twenty-two lamps,
costing $7.00 each. Business commenced to pick up after this.

In 1816 the principal wholesale firms doing business in Montreal
were: McGillivray, Thain & Co., otherwise called the “Northwest
Company;” Forsythe, Richardson & Co., who were agents of the East
India Company; Maitlands, Garden & Auldjo; Gerrard, Gillespie,
Moffatt & Co., then agents of the Phoenix Fire Insurance Company,
of London; H. Gates & Co.; Allison, Turner & Co.; Desrivières,
Blackwood & Co.; Blackwood, La Rogue & Co.; Robinson, Masson &
Co.; Hector Russell & Co., also retailing fancy dress goods--the
great retail dry goods house of that time; Miller, Parlane &
Co., James Miller left the firm in 1819 and engaged exclusively
in shipbuilding, and was one of the founders of the Allan line
of steamships; James McDougall & Co., merchants and brokers;
Hart, Logan & Co.; George Platt & Co., hardware; J. and J.M.
Frothingham, hardware; J.T. Barrett, hardware; Jacob DeWitt,
hardware; Lewis Lyman, druggist, founder of the house of Lyman’s
Sons & Co.; Day, Gelston & Co., druggists, Mr. Day being the
father of the late Judge Day; Wadsworth & Nichols, druggists;
Thomas Torrance and John Torrance, both wholesale and retail
grocers; Bowman & Smith, grocers; Zabdiel Thayer, crockery;
Toussaint Peltier, grain merchant; Felix Souligny, do.; McNider,
Aird & White, auctioneers; M.C. Culliver & Co., do.; and Bridge &
Penn, ditto.

Most of these firms did what was then considered a very large
business and many of the men composing them were reputed to be
wealthy. The possession of $25,000 in those days made a rich man,
and $100,000 a very wealthy man.

The business needs required a bank and the Montreal Bank was
started in 1817 without a charter. This was secured in 1822. Its
story is told elsewhere.

In 1820 John D. Ward built the Eagle foundry on Queen Street and
with his brothers, Lebbeus and Samuel, provided engines for many
steamboats on the St. Lawrence. The successor of the firm was
George Brush. In 1821 Sherman & Co. formed a sculptory business.
Its successors were Hyatt & Co., James Mavor and Robert Reid.

The first meeting of the committee of trade on April 23, 1822,
indicates another link in the chain of progress of mercantile
solidarity. This was to become the parent of the present Board of
Trade.

The earliest boot and shoe factory was established on St. Paul
Street in 1824 by Alexander Bell, the founder of the J.T. Bell
Company of today. Among the first important industries of
Montreal also must be mentioned the hemp factory, established
in 1825 and owned by Mr. J.A. Converse. The Mussen grocery firm
opened in the spring of 1827 with a store in Mrs. Ousteroute’s
building on the south side of St. Paul Street facing Vaudreuil
Lane. In 1837 his third location at the corner of Notre Dame
and St. Gabriel streets marks a historic move and one thought
daring. Hitherto trade had centered on St. Paul and Commissioners
streets, between Custom House Square and Bonsecours Street, while
Notre Dame, Little and Great St. James, Craig and intersecting
streets were the residential part of the city. His example was
successful and Notre Dame Street then became the principal retail
street of the time. Birks’ famous chemist’s store was opened by
Dr. F. Fraser in 1828, to be succeeded by R.W. Rexford and by Mr.
R. Birks in 1846. His famous store was first near the old Albion
Hotel from which the stage coaches started, and afterwards at
the corner of Recollet and McGill streets, and has only recently
been demolished to make room for the McGill building. In 1829 the
wholesale dry goods importing firm of J.G. McKenzie & Co. was
founded, though a legitimate successor of one of the business
ventures of Horatio Gates, a merchant of great renown, and one of
the incorporators of the Bank of Montreal. This year also saw the
birth of Morton Phillips & Co., a firm of stationers.

With the date of 1829 we may associate a note on the Montreal
lines of stages which were conducted as follows: “between
Montreal and Prescott, every week day except Saturday, proprietors
H. Dickerson & Company, St. Paul Street; between Quebec and
Montreal, every week day except Saturday, proprietors H. Dickerson
& Company, of St. Paul Street, and John Cody, Quebec; between
Montreal and Bytown (Ottawa), twice a week, Tuesday and Friday
morning, proprietor E. Cushing, Haymarket, Montreal; between
Montreal and Albany, twice a week, proprietor, E. Cushing; between
Montreal and Albany, thrice a week, proprietor, John Esinhart &
Company (St. John).”

The railway era started in 1831, when the charter for the first
railway in Canada between La Prairie and St. John was granted.
All this was to mean great extension to Montreal business. To
the date of 1833 is to be attributed the original foundation of
Kenneth, Campbell & Co., wholesale druggists, through D. Michael
McCulloch, Alexander Urquhart, Dr. William McDonald, John Birks
(for Carter, Kerry & Co.), and Johnson & Beers, passing to
Kenneth Campbell in 1850.

At this time the grocery business of Hudon Hebert, established
on St. Paul Street near Jacques Cartier Square since 1839, and
that of Chaput, Fils, on Youville Place in 1842, mark early
French-Canadian enterprise.

McGill Street before the ’40s was considered in the country, when
Samuel Mathewson started his present grocery business there. For
a long time the street as it grew up was a frowsy affair, till
the Grand Trunk offices set the way to higher ideals. The street
has begun its transformation period during the last four years.
Mathewson & Co. was established by Samuel Mathewson on May 1,
1834, on St. Paul Street. In 1840 he moved to McGill Street and
was thought to be moving into the country.

It has been found difficult to trace the history of the chief
French-Canadian firms. The advent of the Banque du Peuple
originally established in 1835 as a private bank under the
title of Viger, DeWitt & Cie, shows that this portion of the
population was becoming financially stronger. In 1843 the Banque
du Peuple as such was started. The petitioners for incorporation
were Messrs. Louis Viger, Jacob DeWitt, John Donegani, Pierre
Beaubien, Augustin Tulloch, Hosea Baillou Smith, Ronald Trudeau
and Pierre Jodoin, Esquires, of Montreal; Alexis Sauvageau,
Esquire, of La Prairie; Timothée Franchère, Esquire, of St.
Mathias; Joseph Frederick Allard, Esquire, of Chambly; and Alexis
Montmarquet, Esquire, of Carillon. It will be noted that we have
not treated of the banks and insurance businesses which are so
closely connected with the commercial growth of the city. These
are treated separately in another place.

The state of commerce about this time will appear from the
following scale of vessels and their tonnage, which arrived at
Montreal:

            No. of
  Date.     Vessels.   Tonnage.
  1832       117       27,713
  1833       137       30,864
  1834        89       20,105
  1835       108       22,729
  1836        93       22,133
  1837        91       22,668
  1838        63       15,750

Of these vessels and their cargoes, by far the greater part were
from England and Scotland. A few came every year from Halifax and
other British ports in North America and sometimes cargoes of
grain, etc., from other ports in Europe.

The state of the store fronts of this period immediately
preceding the Union will afford a picture of the commercial
streets of the city.

In 1839 Mr. H. Greig wrote in his History of Montreal: “Both
in Quebec and Montreal the windows in many of the old stores
and shops are small, not larger than those of ordinary dwelling
houses, very little calculated for display and not giving
indications of the extensive depositories of goods that may be
found within.

“A very great number of the recent shops are elegantly, and some
of them splendidly, fitted up. Perhaps there is in scarcely any
part of the commercial world, either in Europe or America, a more
superb or exquisitely finished room, for its size, than the shop
of Mr. McDonald, at the corner of Place d’Armes and Notre Dame
Street.”

If Mr. Greig were only privileged to take a walk along St.
Catherine Street now!




                          CHAPTER XXXVI

               COMMERCIAL HISTORY SINCE THE UNION

         THE RISE OF MODERN MANUFACTURES AND INDUSTRIES

  MONTREAL CENTER OF CANADIAN TRADE--LORD ELGIN’S OPINION OF THE
    CANADA CORN ACT--TRADE DEPRESSION BEGINNING IN 1847--SUGAR
    AND FLOUR INDUSTRIES--THE PANIC OF 1860--A PROSPEROUS
    DECADE--ANOTHER DEPRESSION--THE NATIONAL POLICY--PROSPERITY
    AGAIN IN THE EIGHTIES--ST. CATHERINE STREET--THE RISE
    OF FURTHER INDUSTRIES--THE RISE OF THE COMMERCIAL
    ASSOCIATIONS--THE COMMITTEE OF TRADE--ITS ACTIVITIES--THE BOARD
    OF TRADE--ITS ACTIVITIES IN CANAL, PORT, RAILWAY, CANADIAN AND
    EMPIRE EXPANSION--ITS INTEREST IN CIVIC GOVERNMENT AND GENERAL
    CIVIC BETTERMENT--ITS BUILDING--ITS SOCIAL FUNCTIONS--THE
    “CHAMBRE DE COMMERCE”--ITS ORIGIN--THE OTHER MERCHANTS’
    ASSOCIATIONS OF THE CITY--A TRIBUTE TO THE MERCHANTS OF
    MONTREAL. NOTES: PRESIDENTS OF THE BOARD OF TRADE--CENSUS
    (1912) OF MONTREAL MANUFACTURES.


Trade at the time of the Union centered at Montreal. Quebec had
been left behind. The Canada corn act brought in by Lord Stanley,
the colonial secretary in Robert Peel’s cabinet, while it
cheapened corn in England stimulated business in Canada, for the
act lowered the duty on Canadian wheat and flour to one shilling
in the quarter upon the condition that Canada should impose
a duty of three shillings upon United States wheat. Montreal
became the center of its distribution. This success was dashed to
disappointment by Peel’s bill of 1846, described by Lord Elgin in
writing to a friend shortly after, as drawing “the whole of the
produce down the New York channels of communication, destroying
the revenue which Canada expected to derive from canal duties
and ruining at once mill owners, forwarders and merchants. The
consequence is that private property is unsalable in Canada;
not a shilling can be raised on the credit of the province.” To
crown the disasters in 1847 there was the ship fever in the city.
In 1848 the depression was continued, followed next year by the
riots over the rebellion losses bill, so that many were ready
in the same year for the annexation to the United States as a
desperate remedy.

The year 1850 was not commercially satisfactory, but remains
bright in the annals of trade on account of a most successful
fair opened in Bonsecours Hall, October 17th, and attended by
from 20,000 to 30,000 people. This fair was held in order to
prepare for the great International Exhibition in London in the
following year, and resulted in 200 packages being sent forward,
by which the attention of Great Britain was called to Canada
in a most practical manner. The war between Great Britain
and Russia in 1854, while improving the demand for cereals,
injuriously affected commerce in Montreal through stringent
European money markets, etc., while American tourists, upon whom
the retail trader then as now relied for no small portion of his
summer trade, were deterred from visiting the city through the
prevalence of cholera. This, coupled with the unusually late
arrival of the spring importations, resulted in leaving large
stocks on hand.

In 1854 the Canada Sugar Refinery business was established by Mr.
John Redpath. The late Sir George Drummond was early connected
with it as general manager.

An improvement in business characterized the following year,
while the city was thronged in March with visitors to a fair
held in anticipation of the Paris Exhibition, and which was very
successful. In the same year Montreal was visited by Admiral
Betveze to arrange for closer trade relations between Canada
and France. The reciprocity treaty also of 1855, followed by
the American Civil war, led to increased activity of trade in
Montreal, her citizens, as well as those of other Canadian
cities, supplying many of the needs of the army of 1,000,000
taken from pen and plough in those days of trial.

In 1858 a torchlight procession of about twenty thousand souls
(including spectators), a general illumination and a military
parade, expressed the jubilation of Montreal over the successful
laying of the first Atlantic cable. The procession, composed of
tradesmen and handicraftsmen, was a mile long and marched six
abreast.

In 1859 the Victoria Tubular bridge was opened, but just before
its completion in 1860, commercial panic struck the country, with
disastrous effects.

The greatest disasters were those in the United States, where
every bank but one suspended payment; but the calamity was
sympathetically reflected in the Dominion.

The Bank of Montreal remained firm, thanks to Mr. Davidson, the
cashier, who carried the Montreal merchants through that black
time. It may be said that Mr. Davidson founded a school of
banking.

Manufacturing made great progress in the ’60s, owing to the Civil
war in the United States taking millions of men from the ordinary
activities of the country to the battlefields, thus stimulating
Canadians to manufacture sufficient to supply the resultant
demand.

In the decade from 1860 to 1870, the investment in Montreal
industries leaped from $800,000 to $11,000,000. Just about then,
however, a period of depression set in, due to a variety of
causes.

Chief among these were the inevitable slackening in Canadian
outputs due to production being resumed in the United States,
and the general stress caused by the financial losses incurred
through wars both on this continent and in Europe. During this
period the manufacturers of Montreal suffered possibly more than
any other body; for the great population and easier developed
natural resources of the United States, with other contributing
factors, enabled nearly all lines of goods to be produced there
at a lower cost; and with his goods barred from the States
by high tariffs and his home market thrown open to American
factories, the Montreal manufacturer suffered from his nearness
to the American border, suffered, perhaps, more acutely than
other Canadians. With the inauguration of the National Policy in
1879 conditions changed materially, and the beginning of 1880
found business booming again. Meanwhile St. James Street had
become the chief business street. Morgan’s Colonial House was at
the northeast corner abutting Victoria Square. When the head of
the firm took an idea to open on St. Catherine Street, as yet an
unimportant business thoroughfare, in the present location, it
was a dangerous move according to the wiseacres, but instantly
justified, being followed by other great departmental stores,
such as Murphy’s, Hamilton’s and the rest. Substantial and steady
progress was made in the ensuing twenty years, the products of
the various factories doubling in value in each decade. Then came
the remarkable development of the city, beginning about 1898, and
in the ten years from 1900 to 1910 the production increased from
about eighty-five million dollars to two hundred millions.

The origin of some further of our chief industries may now be
recorded.

The cotton industry originated in the old Hudon Mill at
Hochelaga, which was started in 1874. When founded there were
employed at this mill some three hundred hands, and the buildings
and plant were quite small. As the mill stands today, the ground
covered is about four times that originally built upon and the
number of men employed is upwards of eleven hundred.

The four other cotton mills of Montreal, all of which are under
the ownership or control of the Dominion Textile Company, provide
employment for between five thousand and six thousand persons
in this city and must therefore be accounted amongst its very
greatest industries. Some idea of the magnitude of the industry
may be formed from the fact that the capitalization amounts to
$13,500,000, including bonds. It may be noted in passing that the
Dominion Textile Company, the chief offices of which are in this
city, controls many other mills, some of them at considerable
distances from Montreal.

Prior to 1883 there were no metal bridges manufactured in
Montreal or vicinity and practically no structural steel work for
buildings.

Since 1883, bridge and structural steel manufacture has developed
greatly in Montreal. And there are now three large concerns
engaged in this line of business: the Dominion Bridge Company,
Limited, the National Bridge Company, Limited, and the Phoenix
Bridge and Iron Works.

It is estimated that the combined output of these companies for
1912 was between seventy-five thousand and eighty thousand tons
of bridge and building work, having a value of about four million
and a half dollars.

It is also estimated that the number of hands employed in the
shops and offices of these companies is about eighteen hundred,
with a pay roll of about a million and a quarter dollars.


                       NATURAL ADVANTAGES

Of the great variety of natural advantages for manufacturing
possessed by Montreal, it would be difficult to say which is the
most important. With cheap transportation, it can assemble raw
material and ship finished product with far greater facility
than any other city on the American continent. Other cities
have possibly equally good railway facilities, others have lake
transportation; and other manufacturing cities, but not many, are
ocean ports. No other city on the continent, however, combines
all three advantages.

Coupled with these, Montreal has an important and rapidly
expanding tributary territory in the Dominion, for products of
its factories find their way all over Canada; it has a large
class of skilled labor to draw on; and it commands cheaper power.
Every requisite for successful manufacturing is found here. The
cheapness with which power can be secured is a very important
factor and with the development of important hydro-electric
properties in the immediate vicinity industrial power costs
are likely to be materially reduced in the near future. With
both ocean and lake navigation at its disposal, Montreal taps
both the Nova Scotia and the American coalfields and thus has
unlimited supplies of fuel to draw on, which can be delivered
here at a very low cost. Some of the largest ocean-going bulk
cargo carriers in the world are running between the St. Lawrence
ports and the Sydneys, freighting coal here at the lowest figures
achieved anywhere for ocean transportation.

As far back as 1859 Sir William Dawson, the principal of McGill
University, referred to Montreal’s position for commerce in words
as apropos today as they were then:

“In its situation at the confluence of the two greatest rivers,
the St. Lawrence and Ottawa; opposite the great natural highway
of the Hudson and Champlain valley; at the point where the St.
Lawrence ceases to be navigable for ocean ships, and where the
great river, for the last time in its course to the sea, affords
a gigantic water power; at the meeting point of the two races
that divide Canada, and in the center of a fertile plain nearly
as large as all England: in these we recognize a guarantee
for the future greatness of Montreal, not based on the frail
tenure of human legislation, but in the unchanging decrees of
the Eternal, as stamped on the world he has made. We know from
the study of these indications that were Canada to be again a
wilderness, and were a second Cartier to explore it he might
wander over all the great regions of Canada and the West, and,
returning to our mountain ridge, call it again Mount Royal, and
say that to this point the wealth and trade of Canada must turn.”

At this time of writing the industries have grown so numerous
that the chronological method of relating their rise is
impossible. We shall present a brief indicaton of their number
and scope besides adding in tabulated form various statistical
facts which will sum up the variety of the industries engaging
attention in Montreal in 1912. Probably the most important
industry of the city is the manufacture of clothing, both custom
and factory. Nearly ten per cent of the factory workers of the
city are engaged in this trade and they furnish two-thirds of the
annual Canadian production.

But apart from this industry, manufacuring in Montreal covers
a very wide range, embracing the chief Canadian car and engine
manufactories, structural works, cotton factories, sugar
refineries, rubber manufactories, rolling mills, cement works,
and leather manufactories. In extent and value of output it
easily heads the list of Canadian cities, having double the
output of its two nearest competitors, Toronto and Hamilton.
The extent to which manufacturing is carried on is strikingly
shown by the per capita valuation of its product, which is $360
annually.

Tobacco is a principal single industry, while boots and shoes
come next in importance. As to textiles, cotton takes the first
place. Among food products, slaughtering and meat packing rank
with flour, the largest flour mill in the British Empire being
situated in Montreal. Of the miscellaneous industries, electric
light and power and electrical apparatus and supplies are the
chief.

Immediately outside of Montreal is a large business in iron
and steel products. Among the largest are the Dominion Bridge
Company’s works at Lachine and the Montreal Locomotive Works and
the Structural Steel Company’s works at Longue Pointe. Again, in
Montreal are to be found the great car and repair shops of the
two chief railways: the Canadian Pacific Railway and the Grand
Trunk Railway System.

The city is also the center of several industries, which though
not actually situated in Montreal, are yet managed from it. The
pulp industry is an example, yet there is not actually a single
pulp mill in Montreal.

In the president’s address to the Canadian Manufacturers
Association in September, 1912, it was pointed out that in
the ten-year period Canadian exports showed an increase of
$110,000,000, while manufactured articles showed an increase of
$683,000,000. Probably no other country in the world can show
such a satisfactory record as this. And when it is considered
that more than one-sixth of all the manufactures in the Dominion
come from Montreal, the part which the city has taken in this
great industrial evolution will be appreciated.

Montreal is most favourably situated with regard to obtaining
cheap power. Canada is essentially a land of rivers and lakes,
and her water-power is undoubtedly her greatest asset. In 1911
the total electrical energy developed from Canada’s water-power
was 1,016,521 horse-power, of which the province of Quebec
developed 300,153 horse-power. At twenty-two tons of coal per
horse-power per annum, this is the equivalent of about six and
one-half million tons of coal. Eighty per cent of the power used
in the province of Quebec is water-power.

The wood pulp and paper industry have contributed very largely to
the development of this kind of industry, but other industries
have taken advantage of it, such as lumber mills, textile mills
and rubber factories.

The following companies supply power in Montreal:

1. The Montreal Light, Heat and Power Company, Limited, act as
distributing agents in the City of Montreal for the Shawinigan
Water and Power Company, whose plant is situated at Shawinigan
Falls, on the St. Maurice River, eighty-four miles from Montreal.
There is a fall of 135 feet, and 107,000 horse-power has been
developed. The electricity is transmitted to Montreal and the
Eastern Townships; a large portion supplying the asbestos mines
with power. Thirty thousand horse-power is used in Shawinigan
itself for the production of aluminum and carbide.

The company also obtains power from Chambly on the Richelieu
River, and from the Lachine Rapids and the Soulange Canal.

2. The Montreal Public Service Corporation act as distributing
agents in the City of Montreal for the Canadian Light and
Power Company, which has a plant at St. Timothée, where 30,000
horse-power has been developed. Electrical and other power is
also obtained from the Lachine Canal, where there is a total fall
of thirty-five feet, to the extent of 4,642 horse-power. This is
used for flour mills, rolling mills, and many others.

There are, in addition, one or two other power plants in process
of development.

The manufactures carried on in Montreal are very varied, but of
these we cannot speak in detail.[1]


                 OFFICIAL BUSINESS ASSOCIATIONS

Before closing this chapter showing the rise of many of the
individual conmercial enterprises of our merchants we must refer
to them again in a collective fashion. We have already indicated
their combined effort in securing advanced governmental and
municipal action. This has been carried on by the great official
bodies or associations of commercial men organized during the
last few decades of the commercial expansion of the city. The
first of such organizations to arise was the Committee of Trade.


                       COMMITTEE OF TRADE

                             (1822)

Early in the last century, the merchants of Montreal realized
that a country’s trade and progress are to be measured by its
transportation facilities, and that until these are secured,
there can be little advance. Accordingly, when on July 19,
1821, the first sod of the Lachine Canal was turned by one of
their number, the Hon. John Richardson, a vista of a future
inland waterway system and consequent commercial progress was
unfolded. Individual action had prevailed so far, but now the
value of union among the merchants was seized upon. A few months
later, on April 11, 1822, the Hon. John Richardson presided at
a preliminary meeting held in the Exchange on St. Joseph Street
(St. Sulpice) of merchants and others interested in commerce,
which gave birth to the “Committee of Trade.”

At this meeting a resolution was adopted stating “that
the ruinous consequences now apprehended from the growing
embarrassments of Canadian commerce can no longer be averted or
even delayed by the solitary exertions of individuals or by the
occasional hasty and inadequate deliberations of public meetings,
and that the present alarming crisis demands the establishment
of a standing committee of merchants to be authorized by their
constituents to watch over the general interests of the trade of
the country.”

The subscription of the members of this organization was placed
at three guineas per annum, and the original subscribers numbered
fifty-four, who elected the following thirteen gentlemen as the
first committee of trade: Horatio Gates, George Auldjo, George
Moffatt, Henry McKenzie, Campbell Sweeney, John Forsyth, Peter
McGill, F.A. Larocque, John Fleming, Samuel Gerrard, Thomas
Blackwood, Charles L. Ogden, James Leslie. This committee began
its operations in a very humble way, for at its second meeting
Mr. Auldjo was authorized to finish the proposed agreement
with Mr. A.L. Macnider for a room for the accommodation of the
committee, including fuel and attendance at the rate of thirty
pounds per annum. The population of Montreal at this time was
18,767, increasing to 27,997 by 1831.

From the records we possess of this Committee of Trade, it
is clear that Montreal recognized early its vocation as the
commercial metropolis of Canada, for its rules “authorized
and required the Committee to make to His Majesty and the
Legislature of the United Kingdom, and others in authority, such
representations on Trade matters as might be deemed advisable in
the defence of such suits as involved the General Trade of the
country.”

The securing of the construction of the Lachine Canal warranted
this assumption of authority by the merchants of Montreal, who
were not unopposed in Upper Canada through mistaken motives of
jealousy. The Committee of Trade foreseeing that Montreal was
to become the commercial port of Canada, set to work at once to
encourage large vessels to come to the St. Lawrence. In 1825,
it made strong efforts to induce the Government to deepen the
channel in Lake St. Peter so that “vessels of nearly 250 tons
burthen, might reach Montreal fully laden during the whole
season.” It is a far cry from such vessels to the magnificent
steamers which now perform the service between Great Britain and
Montreal, some of which are nearly fifteen thousand tons.

Steadily the Committee of Trade began to prepare for the future
destiny of the port. One of its number, the Hon. James Leslie,
presented in Parliament a petition praying for aid to deepen the
channel to sixteen feet. In spite of the cholera outbreaks of
1832 and 1834 and the rebellion of 1837 and 1838, the Committee
of Trade went on, until 1839, effecting further improvements.


                   THE MONTREAL BOARD OF TRADE

                             (1842)

In April, 1840, when the Union was in the air, at a meeting
under the chairmanship of the Hon. Peter McGill, the more active
members of this committee took steps to reorganize as a Board of
Trade, an act of incorporation being procured in 1841, but as in
those days all important bills were “reserved,” it was not till
March 2, 1842, that the Royal assent was signed by proclamation
and the present Board of Trade came into existence, the number of
original members being 106. On April 1st of that year the first
meeting of the newly incorporated board was held, at which Mr.
J.T. Brondgeest was elected chairman; Mr. Thomas Cringan, vice
president; and Mr. J.W. Dunscomb, treasurer.

The board under its new name, pursued the same policy as
hitherto. Realizing the value of Montreal’s water position, that
all trade had to follow the waterways and that all the waters of
the West flowed past Montreal, the merchant members of the board
secured the fastest ships to Montreal and early controlled the
import trade. The Lachine Canal had been opened in 1825 and in
the first decade of the new board they had the satisfaction of
seeing the whole magnificent St. Lawrence system of inland water
communication fully opened up through the foresight and initial
push of Montreal merchants.

In 1853 the first ocean steamer, the Genova, arrived, the new
channel having been deepened to fifteen feet two inches and later
to sixteen feet six inches. But in 1854 and 1855 this prosperity
experienced a check, for during those years no ocean vessel
reached Montreal; its rival, New York, with its navigation open
all the year, had greater attractions for shipping. Trade became
alarmingly bad, but the Montreal merchants were not supine,
they rose to the occasion and determined to deepen the channel
to twenty feet, and (in 1856) the Allan Brothers came to the
rescue, establishing the Montreal Ocean Steamship Company, which
commenced a fortnightly service with four steamers. Since then
the shipping trade has prospered continuously. The Board of Trade
has continuously urged and secured improvements along the St.
Lawrence route, the channel depth having been gradually increased
to thirty feet and a further increase to thirty-five feet has
been promised by the Dominion Government.

A few other activities of the board, which are synonymous with
those of the representative merchants of the city, may be here
mentioned in connection with the port. The office of port warden
was established through the board and its work of overseeing
the loading of vessels sailing from this port has entirely
prevented the sad loss of life and property which at one time
so frequently resulted from the faulty loading of cargo. The
question of harbour improvement and development has always
received the earnest attention of the board and the council’s
representations to the Government in 1906, urging that instead of
eleven commissioners there should be three, were instrumental in
securing such reduction. The result of the work of the smaller
board has exceeded all expectations. The Board of Trade for many
years agitated for the relief of the Harbour Commissioners from
the cost of the channel through Lake St. Peter on the ground
that it was a national work for the national waterway, and
this agitation resulted successfully, for in 1888 the Dominion
Government assumed the debt, which action relieved the Harbour
Commissioners from the burdensome charge for interest on such
expense. Similarly the board has succeeded in its efforts to
induce the Dominion Government to free the canals from tolls. But
while so much improvement has been obtained, there is at present
one most urgent need, viz.: the establishment on the St. Lawrence
of the dry dock now constructed in which the largest vessels
trading on our river can be repaired in case of emergency.

Montreal has yet to become a free port. The Board of Trade hopes
that its ceaseless representations to the Government on this
matter will ultimately be successful.

It would be interesting similarly to trace the efforts of members
of the Board of Trade and other Montreal merchants towards the
provision of the great railways emanating from our city as their
center. Space limit will only allow us to indicate, that when
shortly before the canal system was perfected it began to be
seen that the waterways would not be sufficient to accommodate
the ever growing trade of Canada, Montreal men faced the railway
transportation problem and greatly contributed to its present
success. In this they were largely helped by the Grand Trunk
Railway which, originally backed by English money, made splendid
sacrifices for Canada. The Grand Trunk Railway has not always
received its just need of appreciation, but it is now a great
national institution stretching its arms across the Dominion and
receiving its just reward. The enterprise of Montreal merchants,
is, however, mostly to be discerned in that wonderful system
of railroads, with its headquarters in Montreal--the Canadian
Pacific Railway, which, conceived by Canadian brains, was started
by Montreal men and carried out by Canadian executive force and
capital. Men of wonderful courage, skill and judgment, prominent
members of the Montreal Board of Trade, concluded a contract
with the Government in 1880 to complete the whole road by May 1,
1891. On the 28th of June, 1886, the first through train to the
Pacific Coast left Montreal for the Pacific terminus, Vancouver.
On the first board of directors (1880) of the Canadian Pacific
Railway Company we find the names of Mr. George Stephen (now Lord
Mount Stephen), president; Mr. Donald A. Smith (Lord Strathcona),
vice president; Messrs. R.B. Angus, Duncan McIntyre, and C.B.
Rose; leading members of the Board of Trade.

With regard to the water transportation of the Dominion the
Georgian Bay Canal prospect has been for some years the object of
the Board of Trade and on March 14, 1912, a large deputation of
boards of trade and municipal councils urged upon the Dominion
Government an immediate commencement of work upon the Georgian
Bay Canal.

The Premier promised his earnest consideration of the great
question involved but said that the Government must have time for
a full investigation.

In the spring of 1914 an immense delegation organized by the
Chambre de Commerce of Montréal also approached the Government to
the same effect.

All praise to the merchants of the Board of Trade, who by their
undaunted push, character and political foresight have written
their names in the history of the development of Canada, and have
bound the Mother Country, through Montreal, by bands of steel
and water to the extreme ends of the Dominion. Their influence
extends even further, for it is a matter of record that the
congresses of the chambers of commerce of the Empire are the
result of a suggestion made by the Council of the Board. The
last congress was held in September, 1909, in Sydney, Australia,
where the board was represented by Mr. H.B. Ames, M.P., and its
secretary, Mr. George Hadrill. Nothing but good for Empire trade
can come of such conventions.

Again the Board of Trade looks far and wide. Apart from its
present trade working relations between South Africa and Mexico
it is looking for a larger and most interesting exchange of
business, for a year ago an Imperial Royal Commission sat in the
board’s rooms taking evidence regarding the trade between Canada
and the West Indies.

By its internal constitution, as we have noticed, the Board of
Trade is ever on the alert watching Dominion, Provincial and
Civic legislation.

In the municipal life of the city it has urged improvements in
the fire service, the water supply, the lighting service and the
betterment of streets and interested itself in various other
spheres of municipal government reform, among them the securing
of the great modern amendment of the city charter which has
necessitated the reduction of the number of aldermen to one for
each ward, and the creation of a board of five commissioners for
the disbursement of money, the awarding of contracts and the
purchase of material.

It would be tedious to enumerate further the home activities of
the Board of Trade, but this feature should not be omitted, viz.:
that its work has made this city a manufacturing center of ever
increasing possibilities. Montreal, as a manufacturing center, is
hardly sufficiently advertised; Montreal should be made known not
only as a gateway for export and import transportation, but also
as the busy center of headquarters of numerous and constantly
growing industries of its own. It is a distributing source of
cheap power, light and heat. All that goes towards the making of
a great and successful commercial metropolis has been planned
by the merchants of modern Montreal, whose predecessors began
humbly in 1822, and ever conscious of the future destiny of
their city, were always led by visions of its future greatness as
the commercial metropolis of Canada.

It has made representations to the Dominion and Provincial
governments on the subject of industrial and technical education
for the workers and has taken a lofty and ideal stand in more
recent philanthropical and civic betterment schemes.

The Board since 1893 has occupied quarters in its own building,
though the first building was destroyed by fire on the 23d of
January, 1901. The present building which was entered into in
May, 1903, while built on the same site and on a similar plan
to the first, is of fireproof construction and, like the former
building, faces on four streets. The board occupies the greater
portion of the fourth floor, its premises consisting of a
handsome exchange hall, branch association room, reading room,
secretary’s office, council chamber and committee room. It has a
membership of 1,400 and there are daily gatherings of various of
its affiliated commercial associations.

In addition to being the center of the commercial life of
Montreal, the building has been the locale of several important
social functions, the most notable being its inauguration of the
evening of 17th August, 1903, by the Rt. Hon. Lord Strathcona
and Mount Royal, G.C.M.G., which was attended by the members of
the board and the delegates to the Fifth Congress of Chambers of
Commerce of the Empire (which was held in Montreal that year) and
the president of the congress, the Rt. Hon. Lord Brassey, K.C.B.;
the reception of Their Excellencies the Rt. Hon. Earl Grey,
G.C.M.G., and the Countess Grey on the evening of the 24th of
January, 1905, to welcome them on their arrival in this country,
which, attended by over twelve hundred guests, was pronounced one
of the most brilliant social functions in the history of the city.


                       CHAMBRE DE COMMERCE

                             (1887)

The next great commercial association was the “Chambre de
Commerce,” of French business men. Up to 1886 the Board of
Trade had been alone, though with individual French citizens,
as at present, among its members, but in this year Mr. J.X.
Perrault, not without opposition even among his compatriots,
took the initiative of forming a second board to group together
French-speaking citizens. An act of incorporation was applied
for from the government at Ottawa and was granted on January 1,
1887. On February 2, 1887, the first reunion of French business
representatives took place under the chairmanship of Mr. Jacques
Grenier, the mayor of the city, and then president of “La Banque
du Peuple,” in the offices of G.W. Parent, at the corner of St.
Lambert and St. James streets. Its few hundreds of members have
now surpassed a thousand. Its activities are similar to those
of the Board of Trade with which there is mutual cooperation in
points of common, civic, provincial and federal import. It has
taken a great interest in the future commercial education of the
merchant by promoting the “Ecole des Hautes Etudes Commerciales”
recently erected.

[Illustration: MONTREAL STOCK EXCHANGE BUILDING]

[Illustration: MONTREAL BOARD OF TRADE BUILDING]


            CHAMBRE DE COMMERCE FRANCAISE DE MONTREAL

There is also at present the “Chambre de Commerce Française de
Montreal” for the promotion of trade by merchants of France
settled here. It was originally proposed at a meeting in Montreal
of French traders on May 27, 1886, by M.G. Dubail, the Consul
General of France, and on June 26th of that year the projected
constitution was received for approval. Since then its purpose
of intercommunication and trade relations with France have been
sustained under its presidents.


                          OTHER BODIES

There is also a Federation of the Chambers of Commerce of the
Province of Quebec with its offices in this city and among the
many mercantile bodies now promoting the trade and industries of
Montreal may be mentioned the Montreal branch of the “Canadian
Manufacturers’ Association,” the “Montreal Stock Exchange,” the
“Montreal Mining Exchange,” the “Canadian Mining Institute,”
the “Builders’ Exchange,” the “Corn Exchange Association,” the
“Montreal Business Men’s League,” the “Association Immobiliére
of Montreal,” the “Milk Shippers’ Association,” the “Wholesale
Grocers’ Guild,” the “Wholesale Dry Goods Association,” the
“Metal and Hardware Association,” the “Wholesale Hardware
League,” the “Montreal Lumber Association,” the “Montreal Produce
Merchants’ Association,” the “Retail Merchants’ Association of
Canada,” with its office of the Provincial Board for the Province
of Quebec at Montreal, the Province of Quebec Association
of Architects, the “Licensed Victuallers’ Association,” the
“Federation of Licensed Wine and Spirit Dealers of the Province
of Quebec,” the “Dominion Association of Chartered Accounts,”
the “Canadian Bankers’ Association,” with numerous other trade
organizations, all cooperating and making for the commercial
growth of Montreal and Canada.[2] To all these may be applied in
their degree the words of tribute spoken at the Board of Trade
building in 1908 by the Governor General Earl Grey:

  “I am glad to be able to stand here as the representative of
  the King and to signify by my acceptance of your hospitality
  His Majesty’s appreciation of the benefits you, the Montreal
  Board of Trade, have conferred by your energy, by your spirited
  enterprise, and by your imperial aspirations, not only on the
  Province of Quebec and the Dominion, but upon the population of
  the United Kingdom of the whole British Empire. * * * Thanks to
  the brains, energy and public spirit with which your board have
  met the requirements of a trade which is being borne in ever
  increasing volume to your doors, over the continuous bands of
  steel and mighty waterways which you have harnessed to your city,
  the doors of the great treasure house of the West, containing
  illimitable riches, have been unlocked for the benefit of
  impoverished mankind.

  “I am aware that the proud consciousness of your past
  achievements has not made you indifferent to future improvements
  and that you are still busily engaged in honourable emulation
  of your predecessors, in promoting plans which will increase
  the Commercial strength and prosperity of Montreal and further
  advance the general welfare of the Dominion.”


            CHAIRMEN OF COMMITTEE OF TRADE, MONTREAL

 From Its Inception in 1822 to 1841 When It Was Changed into the
                     Montreal Board of Trade

  1822-25      Thomas Blackwood
  1825-33      George Auldjo
  1833-34      James Miller
  1834-35      T.M. Smith
  1835-36      George Auldjo
  1836-37      J. Quesnel
  1837-38      A. Cuvillier
  1838-39      Adam Ferrie
  1839-41      A. Cuvillier


              PRESIDENTS OF MONTREAL BOARD OF TRADE

  1842-43            J.T. Brondgeest
  1844-45-46         Hon. George Moffatt
  1847               Thomas Gringan
  1848               Hon. Peter McGill
  1849-50            Thomas Ryan
  1851-52-53-54      Hugh Allan
  1855               Hon. John Young
  1856-57-58         E.H. Holton
  1859               Thomas Kay
  1860               Hon. John Young
  1861               Edwin Atwater
  1862               Hon. E.H. Holton
  1863               Thomas Gramp
  1864-65            Peter Redpath
  1866               John McLennan
  1867-68            Thomas Rimmer
  1869               J.H. Winn
  1870-71            Hon. John Young
  1872-73            Hugh McLennan
  1874-75            William Darling
  1876-77            Andrew Robertson
  1878-79            Henry Lyman
  1880-81-82-83      T.W. Henshaw
  1884-85            John Kerry
  1886-87-88         Hon. Geo. A. Drummond
  1889-90            James P. Cleghorn
  1891               Robert Archer
  1892               G.B. Greenshields
  1893-94            W.W. Ogilvie
  1895               James A. Cantlie
  1896               Robert Bickerdike
  1897               John McKergow
  1898               James Crathorn
  1899               Charles F. Smith
  1900               Robert Mackay
  1901               Henry Miles
  1902               Alexander McFee
  1903               Arthur J. Hodgson
  1904               George E. Drummond
  1905               William I. Gear
  1906               F.H. Mathewson
  1907               George Caverhill
  1908               T.J. Drummond
  1909               F. Robertson
  1910               George E. Cains
  1911               Jeffrey H. Burland
  1912               Robert W. Reford
  1913               Huntley R. Drummond
  1914               Robert J. Dale


                           SECRETARIES

  1842-49      Fred’k A. Wilson
  1849-50      Charles Lindsay
  1851-54      Alex. Clerk
  1854-63      John Dinning
  1863-86      Wm. J. Patterson
  1886         George Hadrill


                              NOTE

              PRESIDENTS OF LA CHAMBRE DE COMMERCE

                              1887

  D. Parizeau, Ex-M.P.P.
  l’ex-Maire J. Laporte
  Joseph Contant
  Damase Masson
  L.E. Geoffrion
  H.A.A. Brault
  C.H. Catelli
  Isaie Préfontaine
  O.S. Perrault
  Frédéric C. Larivière
  Armand Chaput
  le Lieut.-Col. A.E. Labelle
  A. Fortier


         PRESIDENTS OF LA CHAMBRE DE COMMERCE FRANCAISE

  1886-90        M. Schwob
  1890-92        C.H. Chouillon
  1892           A. Girard
  1892-95        E. Galibert
  1895-97        G. Herdt
  1897-1900      E. Galibert
  1900-04        H. Jonas
  1904           J. Helbronner
  1904-08        C.H. Chouillon
  1908-09        M. Chevalier
  1910-11        A.F. Revol
  1912-14        J. Obalski


      THE CENSUS RETURNS OF 1912 ON MONTREAL’S MANUFACTURES

The Industries of Montreal City (Not Greater Montreal); the
Capital Invested, Output, Hands Employed and Wages and Salaries
Paid.

                                                              Employees
         Name or kind                Establish-               on salaries.
  No.    of industry.                ments.      Capital.     No.      Amt.

       CITY OF MONTREAL       Totals 1,093    $135,044,782   6,863  $7,258,810
   1.  Aerated and mineral waters       15       1,017,900      73      85,819
   2.  Axes and tools                    6         351,550      19      21,790
   3.  Awnings, tents and sails          5          57,510      21      15,827
   4.  Bags, cotton                      4       1,106,000      33      35,740
   5.  Baking powder and
       flavoring extracts                7         174,585      26      24,224
   6.  Blacking                          5          95,582      14      15,016
   7.  Blacksmithing                     5          94,000       5       6,576
   8.  Boilers and engines               8       2,909,729     143     131,987
   9.  Boots and shoes                  39      10,386,852     346     380,461
  10.  Boot and shoe supplies            5         363,536      24      26,762
  11.  Boxes and bags (paper)           10         963,100      67      77,481
  12.  Boxes (wooden)                    3         376,500      10      10,012
  13.  Brass castings                    6         901,238      30      61,288
  14.  Bread, biscuit and
       confentionery                    48       2,326,662     161     132,158
  15.  Brooms and brushes                5          29,200      18      13,114
  16.  Buttons                           3          61,600       5       3,076
  17.  Car repairs                       3            --        25      20,340
  18.  Carriages and wagons             33       1,351,078      67      70,096
  19.  Cars and car works                4       3,867,000     166     142,850
  20.  Clothing (men’s custom)          64       1,244,917     139     156,131
  21.  Clothing (men’s factory)         84       4,525,551     447     591,969
  22.  Clothing (women’s custom)        48         843,548     123      93,254
  23.  Clothing (women’s factory)       22         737,225     182     178,112
  24.  Cocoa and chocolate               3         269,000      23      16,515
  25.  Coffees and spices                6         563,150      34      33,488
  26.  Cooperage                         3         114,346       7      15,840
  27.  Cottons                           6       9,502,973      74      98,219
  28. Drugs                              7         614,558      48      39,158
  29. Dyeing and cleaning               12         479,609      51      45,418
  30. Electrical apparatus and
      supplies                          13       4,828,667     157     199,274
  31. Electric light and power           3       3,753,392      16      21,356
  32. Elevators                          3         266,353      31      32,610
  33. Flour and grist mill
      products                           3       3,424,500      61     128,900
  34. Foundry and machine shop
      products                          43       3,804,137     305     325,776
  35. Fruit and vegetable
      canning                            3          75,500       8      11,500
  36. Furnishing goods (men’s)           9       1,597,500     162     157,930
  37. Furniture and upholstered
      goods                             15         828,700      57      53,079
  38. Furs (dressed)                     3         134,000      13      15,220
  39. Glass (stained, cut and
      ornamental)                        4         109,500       6       6,250
  40. Gloves and mittens                 3         485,588      40      30,052
  41. Hairwork                           3          59,500       2       3,380
  42. Harness and saddlery               8       1,527,153     104     124,800
  43. Hats, caps and furs               59       3,468,671     231     222,406
  44. Hosiery and knit goods             5       1,072,093      35      28,096
  45. Housebuilding                     15         504,070      30      30,398
  46. Interior decorations               9         185,768      16      12,585
  47. Iron and steel products            8       4,092,900     197     187,929
  48. Jewelry and repairs               14       1,644,387     141     105,405
  49. Leather goods                      9       1,000,287      83      59,508
  50. Leather (tanned, curled
      and finished)                      4         770,163      23      41,250
  51. Liquors (malt)                     7       2,939,223      46      68,552
  52. Lime                               3         134,100      12      14,980
  53. Log products                       3         877,000      17      24,906
  54. Lumber products                   34       3,460,328     137     164,971
  55. Mattresses and spring beds         7         159,000      30      33,808
  56. Mirrors and plate glass            5         335,000      48      42,201
  57. Monuments and tombstones           7         257,800      12      15,991
  58. Musical instruments                4         220,500      26      34,750
  59. Oils                               4         423,200      19      22,194
  60. Optical goods                      3          34,150      24      20,707
  61. Paints and varnishes               7       3,829,538     155     175,576
  62. Patent medicines                   6          89,803      14      10,903
  63. Picture frames                     4         101,500      19      12,980
  64. Plumbing and tinsmithing          26       3,796,433     209     203,363
  65. Printers’ supplies                 3          34,207       7       8,640
  66. Printing and bookbinding          64       2,414,200     255     252,650
  67. Printing and publishing           15       5,323,991     473     419,905
  68. Roofing and roofing
      materials                          6         499,500      44      55,254
  69. Rubber clothing                    8         383,750      30      30,498
  70. Signs                              5          76,700      21      22,300
  71. Silversmithing                     4          30,500       6       4,916
  72. Slaughtering and meat
      packing                           12       2,414,000     116     115,348
  73. Soap                               4         360,000      23      31,300
  74. Stationary goods                   4         166,668      24      25,282
  75. Stone (cut)                        3         386,074       6       6,864
  76. Tobacco (chewing, smoking
      and snuff)                         5       2,874,489      22      41,346
  77. Tobacco (cigars and
      cigarettes)                       30      10,068,784     322     425,327
  78. All other industries*            105      14,442,976     629     632,579

                                      Employees         Cost of
          Name or                     on wages.           raw        Value of
  No. kind of industry.             No.      Amt.      material.    products.

      CITY OF MONTREAL   Totals  60,390  $26,779,657  $88,862,420  $164,698,761
   1. Aerated and mineral waters    325      165,140      150,260       575,330
   2. Axes and tools                118       67,974      155,649       301,059
   3. Awnings, tents and sails       67       28,153       85,587       167,553
   4. Bags, cotton                  250      105,000    1,632,000     2,982,000
   5. Baking powder and
      flavoring extracts             55       27,398       97,248       449,425
   6. Blacking                       28        8,084       97,472       162,494
   7. Blacksmithing                  34       16,536       21,500        77,000
   8. Boilers and engines         1,184      831,997    1,389,527     3,267,873
   9. Boots and shoes             5,291    2,228,701    6,377,823    11,462,566
  10. Boot and shoe supplies        253      112,838      134,933       303,177
  11. Boxes and bags (paper)        792      250,226      457,934     1,087,119
  12. Boxes (wooden)                167       70,654      120,000       250,000
  13. Brass castings                245      113,303      822,766     1,329,006
  14. Bread, biscuit and
      confentionery               1,095      457,435    1,808,552     3,270,525
  15. Brooms and brushes             40       13,882       25,880        66,500
  16. Buttons                        76       17,600       13,000        49,000
  17. Car repairs                   433      217,997      223,464       465,985
  18. Carriages and wagons          649      340,286      719,317     1,594,787
  19. Cars and car works          3,348    1,649,889    4,064,832     7,710,430
  20. Clothing (men’s custom)     1,562      706,087    1,428,123     3,226,234
  21. Clothing (men’s factory)    5,378    2,442,810    6,306,479    11,358,192
  22. Clothing (women’s custom)     967      425,908      994,836     2,176,924
  23. Clothing (women’s factory)  1,976      609,821    1,232,304     1,857,493
  24. Cocoa and chocolate           190       53,856      300,000       443,480
  25. Coffees and spices             85       45,241      501,826       748,599
  26. Cooperage                      50       16,907       41,800        84,992
  27. Cottons                     3,435    1,292,493    4,531,282     6,480,698
  28. Drugs                         116       51,274      291,130       627,488
  29. Dyeing and cleaning           630      268,314      213,750       883,103
  30. Electrical apparatus and
      supplies                    1,929      898,951    3,026,228     6,841,124
  31. Electric light and power       94       54,558        --          396,850
  32. Elevators                      97       52,990       58,797       315,170
  33. Flour and grist mill
      products                      255       10,900    4,791,000     5,686,000
  34. Foundry and machine shop
      products                    1,919    1,002,673    2,269,868     4,735,357
  35. Fruit and vegetable
      canning                        44       13,900       85,000       123,500
  36. Furnishing goods (men’s)    1,823      467,144    1,007,831     2,820,816
  37. Furniture and upholstered
      goods                         725      383,144      409,671     1,358,310
  38. Furs (dressed)                183       73,612      854,700     1,255,000
  39. Glass (stained, cut and
      ornamental)                    49       23,184       15,900       386,000
  40. Gloves and mittens            327      112,431      358,234       707,449
  41. Hairwork                       43       28,400       30,200       107,000
  42. Harness and saddlery          429      207,340      688,600     1,173,750
  43. Hats, caps and furs         1,268      500,155    2,598,029     4,388,918
  44. Hosiery and knit goods        586      192,137      553,298     1,016,901
  45. Housebuilding                 462      251,932      390,566     1,053,583
  46. Interior decorations          148       75,720      128,555       294,342
  47. Iron and steel products     1,224      794,416    1,908,666     3,880,597
  48. Jewelry and repairs           574      312,244      477,348     1,184,351
  49. Leather goods                 228      101,038      817,710     1,112,035
  50. Leather (tanned, curled
      and finished)                 276      126,914      735,795     1,300,141
  51. Liquors (malt)                410      238,326      638,615     1,627,311
  52. Lime                           57       28,000        8,600       149,000
  53. Log products                   84       41,429      478,000       630,400
  54. Lumber products             1,618      877,271    2,272,876     4,904,573
  55. Mattresses and spring beds    274      129,327      307,509       572,475
  56. Mirrors and plate glass       123       54,022      173,132       342,830
  57. Monuments and tombstones      114       65,998       74,182       237,032
  58. Musical instruments           159       92,100      112,167       283,400
  59. Oils                           60       25,019      744,068       864,674
  60. Optical goods                  55       19,882       45,271       121,771
  61. Paints and varnishes          516      299,019    2,822,706     4,722,477
  62. Patent medicines               38       17,705       23,074       136,803
  63. Picture frames                 61       33,106       28,975       104,000
  64. Plumbing and tinsmithing    1,952      691,537    1,416,917     2,767,034
  65. Printers’ supplies             21        9,328       10,000        23,500
  66. Printing and bookbinding    1,484      703,392      740,770     2,367,655
  67. Printing and publishing     1,144      631,994      742,956     2,595,180
  68. Roofing and roofing
      materials                     307      161,167      526,695       886,450
  69. Rubber clothing               291      136,885      384,100       869,744
  70. Signs                          76       41,000       36,400       140,797
  71. Silversmithing                 28       17,036        9,200        51,128
  72. Slaughtering and meat
      packing                       650      310,638    5,059,000     6,123,125
  73. Soap                           99       34,660      269,878       495,862
  74. Stationary goods              191       56,522       84,159       235,980
  75. Stone (cut)                   270      100,760       25,060       324,418
  76. Tobacco (chewing, smoking
      and snuff)                    787      255,999    2,596,356     3,564,736
  77. Tobacco (cigars and
      cigarettes)                 3,108    1,107,464    4,809,173    10,292,144
  78. All other industries*       4,812    2,280,479    8,995,320    15,677,928

* All other industries comprises:--2 wire, 1 cutlery and edge
tools, 1 oxygen gas, 1 time recorder, 1 window fixtures, 1
coffins and caskets, 2 glass, 2 vinegar and pickles, 1 wall
paper, 1 paste flour, 1 pins, 1 washing blue, 1 sausage casings,
1 bells, 1 shoddy, 1 glue, 1 boats and canoes, 1 cement
(Portland), 1 fertilizers, 1 paper, 1 batting, 2 brick, tile
and pottery, 1 cordage, rope and twine, 1 malt, 1 plaster, 1
foods (prepared), 2 railway supplies, 1 refrigerators, 1 safes
and vaults, 1 saw, 1 typewriters, 1 cement blocks and tiles,
1 lasts and pegs, 2 stone (artificial), 1 vaseline, 1 sewing
machines, 2 silk and silk goods, 1 spray motors, 2 stamps and
stencils, 1 sugar (refined), 2 umbrellas, 2 vacuum cleaners, 2
washing compounds, 1 woodworking and turning, 1 costumier and
hairdresser, 1 cotton and wool waste, 1 paper (blue print), 1
stove polish, 1 automobile repairs, 1 bicycles, 2 gas (lighting
and heating), 1 inks, 2 photographic materials, 2 stereotyping
and electro-typing, 1 artificial limbs, 2 asbestos, 1 babbitt
metal, 1 bridges (iron and steel), 1 butter and cheese, 2 corks,
1 fringes, cords and tassels, 1 gas machines, 1 miscellaneous, 2
plumbers’ supplies, 1 typewriter’s supplies, 1 dyes and colors,
1 typefounding, 1 fancy goods, 1 laces and braids, 1 scales,
1 church ornaments, 1 macaroni, 2 prepared flour, 2 statuary,
1 boxes (cigar), 1 corsets and supplies, 2 dies and moulds, 1
jewelry cases, 1 metallic roofing and flooring, 2 patterns, 1
showcases, 1 textile (dyeing and finishing), 1 window blinds and
shades, 1 pipe and boiler covering.


              THE MANUFACTURES OF GREATER MONTREAL

                          Capital.                   Wages.
                    1910.         1900.        1910.        1900.

  Montreal      $132,475,802  $57,148,661  $34,270,835  $17,810,356
  Laprairie          112,000       --           31,940        --
  Longueuil           75,000       --           55,300        --
  Maisonneuve      7,919,080    4,147,533    4,856,496      912,789
  Lachine          7,496,612    3,913,846    1,301,545      565,432
  Outremont          187,993        --          51,780        --
  St. Henri            --       4,303,362       --        1,154,383
  St. Lambert        191,638        --          58,496        --
  St. Louis            --         101,053       --           52,988
  Verdun             426,051        --         102,547        --
  Westmount        1,441,288       48,947      374,562       26,394
                  ----------  -----------  -----------  -----------
  Total         $150,325,464  $69,663,402  $41,103,501  $20,522,342


                       Production.
                    1910.        1900.

  Montreal      $166,296,972  $71,099,750
  Laprairie           17,500        --
  Longueuil          145,750        --
  Maisonneuve     20,813,774    6,008,780
  Lachine          6,295,716    2,909,847
  Outremont          190,506        --
  St. Henri            --       4,139,391
  St. Lambert        185,119        --
  St. Louis            --         200,140
  Verdun             229,299        --
  Westmount        1,541,802      102,500
                ------------  -----------
  Total         $195,716,438  $84,460,408


FOOTNOTES:

[1] See the supplemental chart at the end of this chapter.

[2] It is worthy of record that within the past few years there
has been also on the part of these great organizations great
interest and active concurrence shown in the civic betterment
and good government schemes as well as in general humanitarian
movements for the common good.




                         CHAPTER XXXVII

                             FINANCE

              MONTREAL BANKING AND INSURANCE BODIES

  I. BANKING: HAMILTON’S PLAN FOLLOWED BY THE FIRST BANK OF THE
    UNITED STATES IN 1791--1792, THE ATTEMPTED CANADA BANKING
    COMPANY AT MONTREAL--DELAY THROUGH AMERICAN WAR OF 1812--1815,
    RENEWED AGITATION FOR A BANK CHARTER FOR MONTREAL--1817,
    THE FIRST BANK OF MONTREAL WITHOUT A CHARTER--ITS FIRST
    OFFICERS--OTHER BANKS FOLLOW--THE QUEBEC BANK--THE RIVAL
    “BANK OF CANADA”--THE BANK OF BRITISH NORTH AMERICA--MOLSONS
    BANK--THE MERCHANTS BANK--BANQUE JACQUES CARTIER, PREDECESSOR
    TO BANQUE PROVINCIALE--THE ROYAL BANK--THE BANQUE
    D’HOCHELAGA--THE MONTREAL CITY AND DISTRICT BANK--BANKS WITH
    HEAD OFFICES ELSEWHERE--MONTREAL BANK CLEARINGS WITH CANADIAN
    AND NORTH AMERICAN CITIES.

  II. INSURANCE: THE PIONEER FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY OF CANADA--THE
    “PHOENIX”--THE “AETNA”--IN THE FIFTIES AND SIXTIES--THE GREAT
    FIRE OF 1854--LATER COMPANIES. A. LIFE INSURANCE: THE PIONEER
    COMPANIES--THE SCOTTISH AMICABLE AND SCOTTISH PROVIDENT
    COMPANIES. B. MISCELLANEOUS INSURANCE.


                           I. BANKING

      THE RISE AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE BANKS OF MONTREAL[1]

As Montreal has been for many years the financial center of the
country, a considerable part of Canada’s banking history is
contained in the story of the formation and growth of the city’s
representative banks.

It is well known that there was no joint stock bank existent in
British North America one hundred years ago.

The first attempt was not made in Canada until 1792 when, after
the conclusion of the Revolutionary war, Montreal’s commercial
importance was increased through the settlement of the United
Empire Loyalists in Upper Canada.

Until the Loyalists came, there were only a few scattered
military posts in Upper Canada. The new settlers began to clear
the land and grow crops. Then, as now, the greater part of the
produce exported by the provinces was sent to England; and the
greater part of the imports came from the American colonies. The
imports came by the Lake Champlain routes. So Montreal handled
the inceased exports and imports caused by the settling of the
Western province.

In connection with this trade, and with the other business of the
city, banking operations were required. These were transacted by
the English merchants. They took money on deposit, made advances,
and issued due bills which served as currency.

All the writers dealing with this period of Montreal’s history
lay much stress on the troubles caused by the lack of circulating
medium. It should be remembered that the habitants in Lower
Canada had suffered great losses from the issues of paper money
during the French régime. Their experience with this paper money
caused them to hoard gold and silver and to distrust paper
promises to pay. Their attitude towards the first bank notes is
said to have had a considerable influence in making the banks
hold strong reserves against issues of notes. The currency of the
country then consisted largely of French, Spanish and Portuguese
gold coins.

In his “Early History of Canadian Banking,” Professor Shortt
has shown that banking in Canada represented the development
of ideas emanating from Alexander Hamilton, the great American
statesman. In 1791 the first Bank of the United States was
formed, on a plan constructed by Hamilton. This bank performed
very valuable services for the young Republic; and it contributed
most importantly to the development of industry and trade. But it
was a private concern; and in its work of caring for the business
of the country, it committed the crime of earning satisfactory
profits for its proprietors. Even in that early day “the people”
exhibited a strong propensity for putting out of business any
public corporation which had the temerity to earn good profits in
serving them. In the case of the Bank of the United States, its
end was probably hastened by the fact that the greater part of
its capital stock had been purchased by investors in England. At
any rate, in 1811, after twenty years of operation, its affairs
were liquidated.

In 1792, the year after the Bank of the United States was formed,
an attempt was made to launch the “Canada Banking Company,” which
was to receive deposits, issue notes, discount bills and keep
cash accounts with customers. Professor Shortt says the idea of
the bank is supposed to have been originated and worked up by
Montreal merchants. The official notice in the Quebec Gazette
is signed by Phyn, Ellice & Inglis, a London firm, and by Todd,
McGill & Company, and Forsyth, Richardson & Company--Montreal
merchants, who were customers of the London firm. The Canada
Banking Company was to have its head office in Montreal and
branches at Quebec and other places. The two Montreal firms here
referred to had a large share of the trade with the Upper Canada
settlers.

This scheme fell through. Mr. James Stevenson says in his work
that the promoters succeeded in forming a private bank of
deposit; and in Sir Edmund Walker’s book it is stated that the
company did issue notes, but they doubtless had a very limited
use.

Upon the failure of this project, the Montreal merchants
proceeded to develop and extend the business of private banking
carried on by them in connection with wholesale trade. They gave
credit for supplies, issued due bills, accepted orders drawn by
one party on another, etc.

In 1808, while the first Bank of the United States was still
in active business, steps were taken to organize the “Canada
Bank.” A bill was introduced in the Legislature providing for a
capital of £250,000 currency ($1,000,000), the shares being of
the denomination of £25 currency ($100). This bank was promoted
by a combination of citizens of Montreal and Quebec. It was to
have twenty-four directors, twelve from Montreal and twelve from
Quebec. Although the Legislature rejected this bill, it was
printed at the time of introduction. Professor Shortt states that
he had the opportunity of examining it and comparing it with the
charter of the Bank of the United States.

“Allowing,” he says, “for the necessary changes required to adapt
the American charter to Canadian conditions, the bill reproduces
in a very literal manner every essential feature of the American
Act.” The bank provided for in the bill was naturally on a
smaller scale than that of the United States. Then he gives in
parallel columns the full number of articles, sixteen in each
case, applying to the Canadian bank and the American bank. On
perusing them it is quite easy to see that the idea or plan was
taken bodily from the United States and changed only so much as
to make it applicable to Canada’s position.

This new banking scheme formed the subject of much discussion,
in the Legislature and outside of it, for several years. The big
merchants of Montreal and Quebec had not abandoned their plan,
and were no doubt working for its accomplishment when in 1812
war broke out between the United States and Great Britain. The
war served to put an end for the time to the projects for a new
bank. The various writers dealing with this stage of Canada’s
history appear to agree in their statements that the maintenance
of considerable bodies of British troops in Canada served to make
business prosperous for the producers and merchants. The troops
consumed large quantities of produce, which was purchased by
the Home Government at famine prices. Consequently, exports of
produce tended to decline. One authority says that about the only
exports passing down the St. Lawrence at this time were bills of
exchange.

During the war the currency troubles were largely removed, too,
through the issue of the army bills. These bills were issued at
first in denominations of $25 and upwards bearing interest and in
the denomination of $4 not bearing interest. Afterwards bills of
the denominations of one, two, three, five, eight, ten, twelve,
sixteen and twenty dollars were added to the non-interest bearing
issues. The large interest-bearing bills could be converted into
small bills not bearing interest; and the small bills could be
converted into large bills subject to interest. The rate of
interest was 4 pence per £100 per day. Bills were redeemed at
the option of the commander in cash or bills on London at thirty
days’ sight at the current rate of exchange.

While these army bills were in circulation there was plenty of
currency available for carrying on the country’s business. The
total outstanding on March 27th, 1815, was £1,249,996. After the
close of the war, the issues were rapidly redeemed. A year later,
in April, the outstandings had been reduced to £197,974. At the
end of 1820, all bills had been retired. Their cancellation
brought back the currency troubles in an aggravated form; and
the merchants and citizens redoubled their efforts to secure
authorization of a bank which would transact, deposit exchange,
and discount business, and issue notes to serve as circulating
medium.

Even before the army bills were withdrawn and cancelled, the
agitation for a bank was renewed. Early in 1815 a motion was
introduced in the Lower Canada Legislature to resolve the House
into a committee of the whole to consider the establishment of a
bank. This came to nothing. At the next session sundry Montreal
merchants petitioned for incorporation as a bank. The dissolution
of the House on 28th February, 1816, put an end to the bill which
was framed to give effect to this plan. It was put in again when
the new House assembled; but before it could be passed the House
was prorogued. Then, to quote Professor Shortt, “The merchants
of Montreal, who had been chiefly interested in the attempts to
get a bank charter, feeling, no doubt, that the sympathy of the
business community was with them, and that it would be a pity
to lose another year with no more certainty of success, * * *
decided to start the bank _without a charter_. Accordingly, on
May 19, 1817, the articles of association of the Montreal Bank
were adopted, and the corporation proceeded to organize.”

The founders of the bank had their articles of association
published in The Montreal Herald, May 22, 1817. Our authority
states that he was not able to discover any copy of The Herald
for that date. But he found that the Quebec Gazette, exactly one
week later, on May 29th, copied from The Herald an editorial item
commenting on the new enterprise thus:

  “In the first page of this paper the articles of the Montreal
  Bank Association are laid before the public. Such an
  establishment has always been a favorite with this journal,
  and we cannot but congratulate the community on the prospect
  of a wonderful change for the better in the agricultural and
  mercantile pursuits of this province. The articles of this most
  laudable association, so far as we are enabled to judge from
  practical experience in our younger years, and from much reading,
  are drawn up with great judgment and wisdom, and seem extremely
  well calculated for our local position. We forbear making any
  remarks on the subject for the present, further than that we wish
  the establishment the utmost success in all its bearings.”

These original articles of the Montreal Bank, according to
evidence collected by Professor Shortt, were without doubt
adapted from the proposed charter for the Canada Bank, drawn up
in 1808; and as we have already seen, the articles of the Canada
Bank were almost literally copied from the charter of the first
Bank of the United States. Just a few months before the Montreal
Bank articles were signed--in January, 1817--the second Bank of
the United States was organized. If more evidence is required to
demonstrate that our banking system was originally founded on
the United States model as then existing, it is supplied in the
statement that one of the officers of the newly created Montreal
Bank was sent to New York to study the methods of the American
institution, and that one of the first officers of the Montreal
Bank was an American experienced in United States banking.

The names of the first officers are given as follows: President,
John Gray; cashier, Robert Griffin; accountant, H. Dupuy; first
teller, Mr. Stone.

The directors, appointed the first year after organization,
were: John Gray, George Garden, John Forsyth, Horatio Gates,
James Leslie, George Moffat, F. W. Ermatinger, David David,
Austin Cuvillier, John McTavish, George Platt, Hiram Nichols, and
Charles Bancroft.

The Montreal bank directors and officials continued to press for
incorporation. They did not, however, finally secure it until
May 18, 1822, when the Royal assent was given to the bill passed
by the Legislature for the purpose.

The following resumé of its history may be given:

The Bank of Montreal opened for business on Monday, 3rd November,
1817, in premises in a building belonging to the Armour estate,
situated on St. Paul Street, between St. Nicholas and St.
Francois Xavier streets, with a paid-up capital of $350,000.

In the year 1819 the capital was increased to $650,000, and in
the following year to $750,000. In 1829 the capital was $850,000;
in 1841, $2,000,000; in 1845, $3,000,000; in 1855, $4,000,000; in
1860, $6,000,000; in 1873, $12,000,000; in 1903, $14,000,000; in
1905, $14,400,000; in 1912, $16,000,000.

In the first full year (1819) of the bank’s operation, a dividend
was paid at the rate of 8 per cent per annum, and since then
(with the exception of the years 1827 and 1828, when the bank did
not pay any dividend), the annual dividends have ranged from six
per cent to sixteen per cent (or say, a dividend of 12 per cent,
with a bonus of 4 per cent), according to the earnings. But of
late years 10 per cent per annum has been the rate paid, with a
bonus of 1 per cent in April, 1912.

After 8 per cent had been paid as dividend in 1819, a balance
of $4,168 remained on hand, and was laid aside as a _rest_.
From that date of small beginnings the rest has steadily grown.
In 1825 it was $30,780, going down to $12,064 in the following
year, and then up again to $107,084 two years later; in 1830 it
stood at $31,360. Five years later it stood at $80,660, reaching
$197,828 in 1837; in 1840 it showed $89,480; in 1850, $120,192;
in 1860, $740,000; in 1870, $3,000,000; in 1880, $5,000,000; in
1883, $5,750,000; in 1884, $6,000,000; in 1900, $7,000,000; in
1908 $12,000,000; and now it stands at $16,000,000, and there are
additional undivided profits amounting to $696,463.27.

In 1903 the Bank of Montreal purchased the assets and business of
the Exchange Bank of Yarmouth. In 1905 it acquired the People’s
Bank of Halifax, in the same way, and in 1907 the People’s Bank
of New Brunswick at Fredericton was also acquired in this way by
the Bank of Montreal.

In 1906 the Ontario Bank having intimated that it was in
difficulties and would have to suspend, the Bank of Montreal
assumed all its liabilities, and it was subsequently liquidated
without loss.

In 1863 the Bank of Montreal was appointed Banker in Canada for
the Canadian Government, and on 1st January, 1893, Mr. E.S.
Clouston being general manager at the time, the bank became their
financial agent in Great Britain, also.

On 4th December, 1911, Sir Edward Clouston resigned the position
of general manager and was succeeded by Mr. H.V. Meredith.

Other banks followed the establishment of the Montreal Bank.

Next year, 1818, a company of Quebec merchants organized the
Quebec Bank. On March 17th the articles were ratified and on
the 18th the books were opened for subscriptions to the stock.
On September 16, 1822, the Royal assent was given to the bill
incorporating this second bank. Less than two months after the
Quebec Bank’s articles were signed a company of “speculative
Americans attracted to Canada by the prosperity of the war
period,” entered into articles of association under the name
of Bank of Canada. This bank was formed in Montreal to compete
with the Montreal Bank. It started with a capital of £300,000 as
against the Montreal Bank’s capital of £250,000 and the Quebec
Bank’s capital of £150,000. Royal assent was given to its bill of
incorporation on September 16, 1822, the same day as the Quebec
Bank’s bill was signed.

The charters of these two banks followed the lines of the charter
of the Montreal Bank. The Bank of Canada passed out of existence
in a few years.

These were the first three chartered banks to be started in
British North America. Upper Canada was not far behind in the
matter of organizing a bank. The Bank of Upper Canada got
its charter in 1821. In 1820, the Bank of New Brunswick was
incorporated; in 1825 the Halifax Banking Company started as a
private bank; in 1832 the Bank of Nova Scotia was chartered. Soon
several other banks were started in Upper and Lower Canada and in
the Maritime Provinces.[2]

In 1837 the banks experienced very stormy weather. There was a
great panic in the United States followed by general suspension
of specie payments. Also business in Canada was completely
disorganized by the rebellion. In May, 1837, the Lower Canada
banks suspended specie payments. In the Upper Province the banks
continued to meet their liabilities in specie until March of the
next year. Specie payments were resumed in the United States and
in Lower Canada in June, 1838; but in November another outbreak
in the Lower Province necessitated a second suspension. Finally,
payments were resumed in Lower Canada in June, 1839, and in Upper
Canada four months later. That represents the last occasion on
which the Canadian banks have suspended specie payments. For
seventy-three years they have stood up, in fair weather and foul,
meeting all demands in specie or its equivalent. The American
banks have suspended generally on four or five occasions since
1837.

Of the banks now having head offices in Montreal the Bank of
British North America is the next to appear on the scene.
This institution was formed in 1836 by “British capitalists
interested in the prosperity and commerce of the North American
colonies,” to quote from “The Canadian Banking System,” by R.M.
Breckenridge. The nominal capital was £1,000,000 sterling; and
£690,000 of the capital paid up and utilized in the business of
the bank in America. The connections of the British Bank were
in both Upper and Lower Canada, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, and
Newfoundland. The bank was obliged to procure legislation from
each province or colony. This legislation or authorization was
secured in 1837 and 1838.

Doctor Breckenridge mentions that the Nova Scotia Act recites
that the bank had introduced into that province the system of
cash credits and of allowing interest on deposits, usually
known as the Scotch system of banking. As it was difficult to
operate the bank under authority of so many different provincial
statutes, the directors secured a Royal Charter in 1840. In
granting it, the British Government stipulated that the capital
of £1,000,000 should be fully paid up and that no notes under
one pound currency should be issued. This charter also limited
the liability of the stockholders to the amount of their
subscriptions. The Bank of British North America thus had a wider
territorial scope than any of the other banks in Canada. It
gradually increased its power and influence; and in 1867, when
the Commercial Bank was about to fail, we find that the Bank
of Montreal and the British were regarded as the two big,
strong banks of the metropolis, able to bolster up the crippled
institution if they found it advisable to put forth their
strength.

[Illustration: SPECIMENS OF MONTREAL’S BANKS]

[Illustration: Bank of Toronto]

[Illustration: Canadian Bank of Commerce]

[Illustration: Bank of Montreal]

[Illustration: Bank of British North America]

[Illustration: Molson’s Bank]

[Illustration: Eastern Townships Bank]

[Illustration: La Banque Nationale]

The next bank appearing on the list with head office in Montreal
is the Molsons. This charter was granted in 1855. The original
capital was £250,000, authorized, of which £50,000 were to be
paid in before the bank should begin business; and the whole
amount was to be paid up in five years. The author of “The
Canadian Banking System” says the Molsons, the Zimmerman Bank,
the Niagara District, and the Eastern Townships came into the
field “when the tide of sudden and remarkable prosperity which
followed the Reciprocity Treaty of 1854 was beginning.”

The Molsons was one of the few banks to take advantage of the
famous “Act to establish Freedom of Banking,” passed in 1850
by the Legislature of the Province of Canada. Banks taking
advantage of this act were required to deposit with the receiver
general provincial securities for not less than £25,000 currency,
par value, as security for the redemption of their notes. The
receiver general would then deliver to the bank an amount of
registered notes equal to the amount of debenture lodged. The
notes were marked “Secured by provincial securities deposited
with the Receiver General.” This represented an attempt to
introduce to this country the system of bond secured currency
which had then been taken up in the United States. The Canadian
Government’s action in this matter was prompted in part by the
desire to improve the market for its issues of debentures.
At that time the Government resorted to various devices for
converting the resources of the banks to its own uses.

The Bank of British North America also took advantage of the
provisions of the Free Banking Act as regards note issue. It is
understood that the British did so in order to obtain the right
to issue small notes.

The charter of the Merchants Bank of Canada was obtained in 1861;
and it began on 9th May, 1864, with a capital of $100,000, Hugh
Allan being the founder and first president. This bank operated
as a local Montreal institution for the first four years, and in
1868 it expanded into an important branch bank through acquiring
the estate of the Commercial Bank, which failed in 1867, the
failure following closely after the closing of the Bank of Upper
Canada. The bank thereby acquired a valuable connection in
Ontario and placed itself in position to develop with the growth
of that great province.

It is interesting to note that between 1867 and 1873 there was
strong competition in the matter of increasing paid-up capital
among the larger banks. The Bank of Montreal, the Canadian Bank
of Commerce (which had recently been organized in Toronto) and
the Merchants were particularly active in calling up new stock.

The bank return for 30th June, 1867, at Confederation, showed
twenty-eight banks in existence with total assets of $80,772,834.
And at the end of June, 1873, there were thirty-three banks, with
assets of $168,519,746.

Among the existing at present Montreal institutions the Banque
Provinciale ranks next to the Merchants in point of age, taking
into account the fact that it is the successor to Banque Jacques
Cartier. The Jacques Cartier was chartered in 1861, the same year
as the Merchants.

Then comes the Royal Bank--its head office in
Montreal--qualifying it for recognition as a Montreal
institution. The great business now controlled by the Royal
Bank of Canada had its beginning in Halifax in 1864. According
to the “Historical Sketch” of this bank, by J. Castell Hopkins,
a co-partnership institution called the Merchants Bank was
established that year with J.W. Merkel as president and George
Maclean as cashier. In 1869 it was transformed into a joint stock
institution, and received a charter under the name Merchants Bank
of Halifax. The capital was $300,000, the reserve fund $20,000,
and total assets $729,163. In 1887 the bank opened a branch in
Montreal, Mr. Edson L. Pease as manager. Since then the bank’s
business in this city has rapidly increased. In 1901 the bank’s
name was changed to Royal Bank of Canada, as the business had
assumed nation-wide proportions. And on March 2, 1907, the head
office was transferred from Halifax to Montreal. Mr. Pease had
assumed the general management in 1900, and the establishment of
the general manager’s office in Montreal dates from that year.

La Banque d’Hochelaga was organized by French-Canadian
capitalists, and received its charter in 1873.

The story of Montreal’s banking institutions would be incomplete
without a reference to the Montreal City and District Savings
Bank. Although it does not belong to the list of chartered banks,
the City and District, in the sixty-eight years of its existence,
has taken a prominent and very useful part in the financial life
of the metropolitan city. It now has fourteen branches in Greater
Montreal; and its total resources are well above the thirty
million dollar mark.

Also it should be remembered that various other banks, having
head offices in other cities, have taken a very important part
in the work of developing Montreal on the financial side. This
is shown by the record of branch offices operated in the city.
According to Houston’s Bank Directory for December, 1914, the
banks with head offices in Montreal, and other banks, had branch
offices in the city as follows:


               BANKS WITH HEAD OFFICES IN MONTREAL

                                            Offices.
  Banque d’Hochelaga (1874)                    28
  Bank of Montreal (1817)                      17
  Royal Bank of Canada (1869)                  21
  Molsons Bank (1855)                          10
  Montreal City and District (1846)            15
  La Banque Provinciale (1900)                 12
  Merchants Bank of Canada (1864)               8
  Bank of British North America (1836)          3
                                              ---
  Total                                       114


                BANKS WITH HEAD OFFICES ELSEWHERE

                                            Offices.
  Standard (1873)                               1
  Bank of Toronto (1855)                        8
  Canadian Bank of Commerce                     7
  Dominion Bank                                 4
  Quebec Bank (1818)                            5
  Bank of Ottawa                                2
  Imperial Bank of Canada                       2
  Union Bank of Canada (1865)                   5
  Banque Nationale (1860)                       1
  Bank of Nova Scotia                           3
  Sterling Bank of Canada                       1
  Home Bank                                     6
                                              ---
  Total                                        45

The Bank of New Brunswick, established in 1820, the oldest of
the list, existed until 1913 when it was merged with the Bank of
Nova Scotia. The Canadian Bank of Commerce is the most important,
the total of its resources having risen to an equality with the
resources of the Bank of Montreal, and the number of its branches
being considerably greater than the number of Bank of Montreal
branches. The Commerce was incorporated originally as the Bank
of Canada in 1858. From the beginning of Canadian banking,
until a comparatively recent period, the Bank of Montreal
occupied a dominating position in regard to the other banks. At
Confederation the Bank of Montreal had roundly one-fourth of the
total capital of the banks, and more than one-fourth of the total
assets.


                    GROWTH THROUGH ABSORPTION

Largely by means of amalgamations, the Commerce and the Royal
have improved their positions relative to the Bank of Montreal.
The growth of these two banks has been phenomenal. Thus, taking
the Commerce, the total assets in 1870 were $7,844,681; in
1880 they were $21,435,711; in 1890, $22,596,520; in 1900,
$42,822,799; and in 1912 (September 30th), $242,172,114. Since
the beginning of the twentieth century the resources have
increased nearly six fold. In that period it has absorbed the
Bank of British Columbia, the Halifax Banking Company, the
Merchants Bank of Prince Edward Island, and the Eastern Townships
Bank.

The Royal Bank’s phenomenal growth also dates from the end of
the nineteenth century. As late as 1898 its total assets were
but $12,681,664; in 1910 they were $92,510,346; and in 1912
(September 30th), they amount to $172,908,661. In the list of
banks absorbed by the Royal are Banco de Oriente, Santiago, Cuba;
Banco del Comercio, Havana, Union Bank of Halifax, and Traders
Bank of Canada.

The Bank of Montreal, too, has absorbed several other banks; but
it can be said that it has not augmented its resources in that
manner to such an extent as its rivals have. In recent years its
absorptions began with the taking over of the Exchange Bank of
Yarmouth in 1903. Afterwards the People’s Bank of Halifax and
the People’s Bank of New Brunswick were absorbed on successive
occasions. And, of course, the Bank of Montreal acquired a
considerable portion of the Ontario Bank’s business through its
action in assuming the liabilities of that institution.

In order to show the recent progress of the Canadian banking
institutions now in existence, the following table is given,
comparing them in respect of total assets as at September 30,
1912,[3] and December 31, 1890. The banks are given in order
according to amount of paid-up capital as at the end of 1890:

     Bank.            December 31, 1890.   September 30, 1912.
  Montreal              $ 47,978,000         $ 240,503,000
  Commerce                23,061,000           242,172,000
  Merchants               21,664,000            83,805,000
  British                 14,285,000            67,528,000
  Quebec                   9,030,000            21,343,000
  Toronto                 12,188,000            57,643,000
  Molsons                 12,186,000            52,958,000
  Imperial                10,055,000            78,110,000
  Dominion                12,407,000            73,607,000
  Nova Scotia              8,911,000            66,982,000
  Ottawa                   5,534,000            50,310,000
  Hamilton                 6,719,000            47,695,000
  Nationale                3,997,000            24,158,000
  Union                    6,419,000            66,985,000
  [A]Merchants (Halifax)   5,849,000           172,908,000
  Standard                 6,052,000            39,758,000
  Hochelaga                2,975,000            29,475,000
  New Brunswick            3,070,000            12,676,000
  [B]Jacques Cartier       2,841,000            12,115,000
                        ------------        --------------
                        $215,221,000        $1,440,731,000

  [A] Now Royal Bank of Canada.
  [B] Now Banque of Provinciale.

This table shows at a glance the wonderful progress made by the
banking institutions of the country. Although Montreal can claim
only about one-third of these institutions as her own, in the
sense that they have head office in Montreal, yet it is the case
that the financial development of the city has been promoted by
the growth of practically all of the banks.

Probably there is no other country in the world able to show
such a record of advancement. In the case of eighteen banks with
resources in 1890 of $215,221,000, the increase has amounted to
$1,225,000,000, or nearly six hundred per cent, in less than
twenty-two years. Counting in the new banks it can be said that
the resources at present are seven times the resources possessed
in 1890 by the eighteen banks appearing in the first list.


                         BANK CLEARINGS

The statistics of bank clearings at the principal centers also
serve to illustrate the financial growth of Montreal and of
Canada. In 1892 there were clearing houses in operation at four
cities--Montreal, Toronto, Halifax and Hamilton. The total
of exchanges for each city in the year ending August, 1893,
was: Montreal, $602,180,723; Toronto (exclusive of the Bank of
Toronto), $326,009,971; Halifax, $59,835,278; and Hamilton,
$38,871,401. The grand total was therefore $1,026,897,373.
Montreal thus had about sixty per cent of the total.

The following table shows how the clearing system of the city and
of the country has developed:

                                  Year Ending
     Clearings.             May, 1902.     December, 1911.
  Montreal                 $ 982,455,000    $2,370,487,000
  Toronto                    710,860,000     1,852,397,000
  Winnipeg                   155,506,000     1,170,763,000
  Vancouver                   49,675,000       543,484,000
  Calgary                                      218,681,000
  Ottawa                                       213,932,000
  Victoria                    29,071,000       134,929,000
  Quebec                                       133,319,000
  Hamilton                    43,388,000       125,251,000
  Edmonton                                     121,447,000
  Halifax                     91,545,000        88,194,000
  St. John                    40,734,000        77,328,000
  Regina                                        73,032,000
  London                                        71,534,000
  Saskatoon                                     56,757,000
  Brandon                                       29,430,000
  Lethbridge                                    28,818,000
  Brantford                                     27,806,000
                          --------------    --------------
                          $2,103,234,000    $7,337,615,000

In 1902 Montreal’s average daily clearing was about $3,270,000;
and in 1911 it was $7,900,000.

The outstanding feature of this exhibit is the progress of the
great cities of the West. In ratio of increase the Western cities
far surpass the Eastern cities. Winnipeg, Vancouver, Calgary
and Edmonton are rushing to the front. Of course, the growth
of the clearings of these secondary centers serves to swell
the clearings at Montreal and Toronto. Ultimate settlement of
differences or balances at the smaller places is made by putting
through drafts on the greater centers.

Montreal stands well up in the list of North American cities in
the matter of bank clearings, her position being from seventh
to ninth. But, when the clearings of a Canadian city are
compared with the clearings of a United States city, it should
be remembered that the existence of the branch system in Canada
has a tendency, in some respects, to make our figures appear
less. For example, the cheques and items drawn on or payable at
the Bank of Montreal, Montreal, which the other branches of the
Bank of Montreal receive each day, do not figure in the daily
clearings. Each institution clears within itself every day a very
large aggregate of transactions.

The banks of Canada originating from Montreal now have an
international reputation. The greatest financial institutions
and the most famous financiers of Europe and America regard
our leading banks as worthy of their respect. Our banks have
established their branches in the United States, Mexico, the West
Indies, Newfoundland, and in England and France; and they do
useful work in all those countries.


                          II. INSURANCE

                             A. FIRE

The Phœnix Fire Company, established in Montreal in 1804, was not
only the first insurance company in Canada, but it was the first
insurance corporation to leave England in search of business.
It was founded by a company of merchants to insure their sugar
warehouses, and being an innovation, most business houses in
England up till then having been composed of partnerships, it
was severely frowned upon by the “experts.” Seeing that many
British firms were desirous of insuring their Canadian property
it decided to establish its office here the better to be able to
handle such policies. It soon found that there was a good field
for its activities outside of English owned buildings and its
Canadian office was a flourishing adjunct by the time 1811 was
reached. It was destined to have the field all to itself until
1818, either because it had firmly entrenched itself during this
time or because Montreal and Canada in those days offered a very
unattractive sphere from an insurance point of view. The Phœnix
in those early days won for itself a splendid reputation and
grew to be recognized in the light of a bounteous institution by
the people of Eastern Canada, and today it successfully holds
its own against its younger rivals in the city, while in the
country districts, where tradition probably counts for more,
it is a household word and people insure with it for the not
inadequate reason that their fathers and grandfathers did. The
Phœnix Company not only introduced fire insurance to the rank and
file among our Canadian people, but it encouraged the formation
of fire fighting forces, itself donating engines, the city of
Montreal being a recipient of one of these machines, which put
it in possession of probably the first piece of fire fighting
apparatus it ever owned.

In 1818 the Phœnix monopoly in Canada was challenged at Quebec
by the Quebec Fire Insurance Company, which was established in
that year in the Ancient Capital, its formation being the first
practical effort on the part of Canadians to get a share of the
lucrative business which must have been obtainable at that time
for a corporation operating “on the ground floor” as it were. The
second insurance office to be established in Montreal itself was
the result of the enterprise of the Ætna Fire Insurance Company,
a concern which had been constituted in Hartford, Connecticut,
that birthplace of so many great fire and life institutions, in
1819.

These three companies seem to have practically parcelled up the
business of Eastern Canada among themselves until the ’50s, their
only rivals being several local mutual associations, brought into
existence probably by Montrealers anxious to secure some of the
wealth that was pouring into the coffers of the Phœnix, Quebec,
and Ætna, but which were doomed shortly to meet a disastrous
fate. In Upper Canada the British America, a Canadian enterprise,
and a branch of the Hartford, had begun operations, the former in
1833 and the latter in 1836.

The epochal decades of the ’50s and ’60s saw a tremendous
impetus given to the fire insurance business in Montreal,
seven great companies commencing careers which have continued
with uninterrupted success till the present day. In 1851 the
Royal, the famous English Company, established itself here, as
did the Liverpool and London and Globe, another great British
corporation, while the Mutual Fire Insurance Company of the City
of Montreal was inaugurated in 1859. This last-named concern
changed its title to the Montreal Canada Insurance Company in
1904 and took out a Dominion license, having operated under its
Lower Canada charter until that date.

In 1854 came a tremendous test for all the companies doing
business here--the big fire which practically wiped out the whole
of the east end of the city. The mutual fire associations, which
had been eking out a more or less haphazard existence, were
unable to meet the claims made upon them as a result of this
fire and consequently died ingloriously, much to the advantage
of the Phœnix and the Ætna, which settled every claim promptly,
and liberally. The Royal, and the Liverpool and London and Globe
were also called upon to pay a share of the losses of this
great conflagration, which they did at once, though of course,
their liability was very small compared to that of the older
established companies.

The growth of Montreal’s trade and the increase of her population
during the next decade are reflected in the eagerness with which
British houses, which had hitherto done their Canadian business
from home, decided to operate from this end. In 1862 the North
British and Mercantile Company and the London Assurance opened
head offices for Canada here, to be followed in 1863 by the
Commercial Union, in 1867 by the Northern Assurance, and in 1868
by the Guardian.

The coterie of fire insurance companies then in existence seems
to have been capable of absorbing all the new business that could
be written quite easily because for fourteen years no other
concern thought it advisable to enter the Canadian field. It was
in 1882 that the next office was to be inaugurated, that of the
Scottish Union and National, the Caledonian opening up here in
1883, while in 1886 another Canadian enterprise, the Manitoba
Assurance, was founded here, its policies being guaranteed by the
Liverpool and London and Globe.

After this the colony of insurance headquarters here was swollen
at regular and short intervals as will be seen from the following
list of newcomers between 1886 and 1911 (the nationality of the
companies being given in parentheses):

Atlas (British), 1887; Insurance Company of America (United
States), 1889; Phœnix of Hartford (United States), 1890; Queen
(United States), 1891; Alliance (British), 1892; Law Union and
Rock (British), 1899; Ottawa Assurance (Canadian), 1899; Home
(United States), 1902; German American (United States), 1904; St.
Paul Fire and Marine (United States), 1907; Yorkshire (British),
1907; Provincial (British), 1910; Royal Exchange (British), 1910;
Continental Life (United States), 1910; Underwriters at American
Lloyds (United States), 1910; and Union of Paris (French), 1911.
Since 1912 three or four small fire companies have retired, but
to offset this, others, to the number of six or eight, have
entered the field.

A statistical table prepared in 1912 to show Montreal’s
predominant position in fire insurance underwriting in the
Dominion and its long lead on Toronto, which is the second city
in Canada in this connection, follows:

                        Gross
                      Premiums.     Losses.     Income.      Expenses.
  Montreal Companies  $14,335,000  $6,000,000  $14,657,000  $11,594,000
  All Canada           26,867,000   3,912,000    9,333,000    6,596,000
  Toronto Companies     7,767,000  10,936,000   26,699,000   21,833,000

                          Ins. in force.   Assets.   Cap. paid-up.
  Montreal Companies     $1,360,720,000  $20,213,000  $53,363,000
  Toronto Companies         717,000,000    5,985,000   15,140,000
  All Canada              2,279,688,000   38,000,000   72,427,000


                             B. LIFE

The development of the life insurance business of Canada began in
1846 by the establishment in Montreal of offices by the Scottish
Amicable and Scottish Provident Companies. After doing a fine
business these two corporations relinquished their right to do
new business in the year 1878. In the meantime, in 1847, the
Standard Life Assurance Company, a Scottish institution, had
entered the Canadian field, operating from a head office in this
city, the Royal and Liverpool and London and Globe inaugurating
life departments at the same time as they began to write fire
insurance from their Montreal office in 1851. In 1857 the ranks
of life companies here were augmented by the appearance on the
scene of the Life Association of Scotland, though this concern
has written no new business since 1878.

The period between 1860 and 1911 is punctuated at intervals with
the advent of new life corporations in Canada, Montreal being
selected as headquarters for most of them. In 1862 came the North
British and Mercantile, and a year later the Commercial Union and
London and Lancashire Life.

Eighteen sixty-five may be considered as a banner year for purely
Canadian life insurance underwriting, for the Sun Life, that
splendid monument to the genius of a number of Montreal men, was
founded in this year. The same year witnessed the arrival of
the Hartford Company of Connecticut in this city, this concern
being followed the next year by the Ætna and Phœnix Mutual Life
companies, and in 1868 by the Connecticut, these three last-named
corporations also having their headquarters in Hartford. The
Phœnix Mutual and Connecticut relinquished their licenses as far
as new business was concerned in 1878.

The Equitable, having its head office in New York City, and the
Union Mutual of Portland, Maine, also broke ice here in 1868, the
North Western Mutual of Milwaukee coming in 1871 and deciding to
do more new business in 1878. In 1887 the Germania of New York
State, and the New York Life were attracted to Canada and to
Montreal.

After this there was a lull in the formation of new businesses
until 1907, when the Prudential Life Insurance Company of Canada
was constituted, this company afterwards changing its title and
selecting that of the Security Life. In 1908 the Prudential Life
of the United States began to cater for Canadian business from
headquarters here and in branches elsewhere.

The Phœnix, the doyen of fire insurance companies in Canada,
decided to branch out into life, and launched a department to
deal with this phase of underwriting in 1910. In this year the
Travellers, a strong Canadian enterprise, was formed. Several
others not mentioned also intervened.

Since the above there has been no retirements in life insurance,
but four or five new companies have been added.

The following table indicates that Montreal holds the lead in
life insurance activity in the Dominion in the same way that it
does in the sister sphere of fire:

                           Gross        Paid      Total
                          Premiums.    Losses.    Income.      Expenses.

  Montreal Companies     $15,858,000  $6,793,000  $21,789,000  $13,240,000
  Toronto Companies       14,435,000   4,900,000   18,414,000    7,791,000
  All Canada              40,608,000  19,194,128   53,911,619   40,607,303

                        Ins. in force.   Assets.    Cap. paid-up.

  Montreal Companies     $344,573,798  $116,027,692  $18,551,510
  Toronto Companies       292,366,595    76,829,479    4,308,024
  All Canada              950,220,771   265,214,984   26,540,323


                     MISCELLANEOUS INSURANCE

To the Guarantee Company of North America, a Montreal concern,
founded by local men and backed by Montreal capital, goes the
palm for being the pioneer among guarantee institution in Canada.
This company, whose standing is second to none in the world, was
brought into being in 1851.

In 1911 the contribution of Montreal to the insurance activity of
the Dominion was as follows:

  Fire, 30 companies.
  Life, 26 companies.
  Miscellaneous, 16 companies.

For the sake of comparison, the figures for the same divisions of
insurance activity in Toronto, which comes second to Montreal in
Canadian business, are given. They follow:

  Fire, 17 companies.
  Life, 17 companies.
  Miscellaneous, 21 companies.

In the whole of the Dominion the totals for these sections in
1911 were as follows:

  Fire, 62 companies.
  Life, 49 companies.
  Miscellaneous, 51 companies.

Six Montreal and three Toronto life companies no longer take new
business.

As against the one small branch office of the Phœnix in 1804,
in 1911 Montreal could boast of possessing 141 offices devoted
exclusively to the handling of insurance in one form or another,
and eighty-three agents. No reliable and exact estimate of the
actual number of people who are employed here by insurance firms
and companies is obtainable, but it is safe to put it up in the
thousands.

In fire insurance Montreal has been made the headquarters of many
of those great British corporations who occupy an impregnable
position in the world in fire underwriting, a number of American
companies also handling their Canadian connection from this
point. Several enterprises with a Canadian backing also operate
from here, while every fire insurance concern in the Dominion of
any importance is represented in Montreal by agents of influence
or by special managers and staffs.

Canada has very largely assumed control of its own life insurance
business, and Montreal financiers have always been to the front
in developing this phase of underwriting. Those British and
American corporations which have selected this city as a starting
point for their Canadian ventures are among the most powerful in
the world, and have materially assisted in placing Montreal in
the first place among Canadian cities in the business done in
life insurance.

Montreal can also show that it has always lead in that section
of insurance enterprise covered by the term “miscellaneous” and
which includes the writing of policies on automobiles, accidents,
employer’s liability, plate glass, steam boilers, burglary,
sickness, inland transit, sprinkler leakage, titles, live stock,
hail, weather and tornado, etc.

To-day the bulked insurance business of Montreal institutions is
probably the greatest of any one city in the world by reason of
the fact that most of those influential enterprises which are
split up and divided among a number of cities in Great Britain
and the United States have concentrated their head offices for
Canada in this city.

It is safe to say that next to the great banking and railway
business done by local institutions more money is handled by the
insurance companies than by any other group of enterprises.


FOOTNOTES:

[1] An article by H.M.P. Eckhardt has been mainly used in this
chapter.--_Ed._

[2] One of these, the Banque du Peuple, established on July 11,
1835, has since lapsed.

[3] The statistics in the accompanying pages do not go, for
the most part beyond 1912. They will suffice for comparative
purposes. The rates of losses or gains will be found to be
comparatively the same till 1914.




                         CHAPTER XXXVIII

                         TRANSPORTATION


                                I

                   SHIPPING--EARLY AND MODERN

                       BY RIVER AND STREAM

  MONTREAL HEAD OF NAVIGATION--LAKE ST. PETER--JACQUES CARTIER’S
    DIFFICULTIES--THE GRADUAL DEEPENING OF THE CHANNEL--THE LACHINE
    CANAL IN 1700--ITS FURTHER HISTORY--MONTREAL THE HEAD OF THE
    CANAL SYSTEM OF CANADA.

From a very early age of improvement in the art of navigation
it must have become evident that water carriage was that which
presented the cheapest and most easy mode of transporting
merchandise from place to place. Accordingly, with some
exceptions, such as occur to all rules, we find that great cities
have always arisen either upon convenient ports of the sea, or
upon large navigable rivers and inland waters.

Such being the case, it is no wonder that the spot on which
Montreal now stands was early chosen for the foundation of a
commercial city.

It is true that the commerce of Canada in the early days was not
such as to employ many hands.

Peltry was for a long period the only traffic to which importance
was attached, and the cargoes of a few canoes, rich though they
were in value, required little labour for their transfer to the
hold of the European merchantman, and the market was managed by a
very few agents of the great houses in France.

While furs were the only exports, the bateau was suited to
the trade in both directions; but when agricultural exports
commenced, grain was first sent down before 1800 on the rafts and
in scows or “arks” which were broken up and sold as lumber in
Montreal. Merchandise was at that time carted to Lachine, whence
the bateaux and Durham boats took their departure (in “brigades”
of five or more boats that their united crews might help one
another at the rapids) and sailed through Lake St. Louis.

Still, such as the trade was, Montreal presented a most favorable
site for carrying it on. Never was a place for shipment and
transhipment more plainly indicated by natural laws.

For hence, more or less, navigable water courses spread out like
a fan over hundreds of thousands of miles in the interior, and
permitted the canoe of the Indian trader to penetrate in all
directions, while on the other hand, a broad and safe river led
to the great ocean.

When the labours of the voyageur and native hunter gave way
before the steady toil of the agricultural settler, the
advantages which had first prompted the selection of Montreal
were by no means diminished. The articles of export had changed,
but those by which they were followed could only reach Europe by
water and could be sent only thence by the same means.

The St. Lawrence, however, with all its acknowledged capacity,
was not without its drawbacks. Foremost was the long winter which
sealed its waters during six months of the year, and next were
the dangers of navigation of nearly nine hundred miles to the
sea. The first could not be overcome, but the enterprise of the
people has, to a great extent, done away with the other.

In years gone by, when, for instance, Jacques Cartier visited
the town then upon the site of Montreal, he was compelled by
the shallowness of the river to abandon his larger vessel and
approach the town by means of his pinnace.

In the year 1805 the Trinity House was established by act of
Parliament, with important powers relative to the navigation of
the St. Lawrence.

The principal difficulty met with was at Lake St. Peter, over
which (prior to 1851) only vessels of 250 tons could pass and
come up to the wharves of Montreal. As early as 1831, the
attention of the Legislature was directed to the matter. For
ten years it was discussed and in 1841 the Board of Works was
authorized by act to commence operations. At that time there were
only eleven feet at low water on the lake.

Up to 1846, some $400,000 had been expended without important
results. In June, 1851, the Harbour Commissioners, under the
impulse of Hon. John Young, began dredging, and in November of
the same year it was deemed a wonderful advance when the City
of Manchester passed down the river, drawing fourteen feet. In
1853 the depth was increased to sixteen feet two inches, and the
breadth of the channel to 150 feet. Every year saw improvements
made and by 1869 vessels drawing twenty feet could make the
passage in safety, while today the channel will permit navigation
by vessels drawing thirty feet.

This deepening of the channel accompanied and caused a vast
expansion of the shipping of the city, made more important by
the establishment of steam navigation. The commerce of Montreal
in the future will always be in direct proportion to the future
depth of the channel.


                          LACHINE CANAL

Before the construction of canals the great inland waters were
of but little value to commerce, the only means of reaching them
being by the bark canoe or bateau of the voyageur.

Many still living recollect how Sir George Simpson, Governor of
the Hudson’s Bay Company, made his annual canoe journeys from
Montreal to the Red River country. Having “sung at St. Ann’s
their parting hymn,” the flotilla of canoes ascended the Ottawa,
breasted the rapids, and after many weary days, by river, lake
and portage, reached Lake Huron and the Sault Ste. Marie, thence
along the north shore of Lake Superior to Fort William and the
Grand Portage and by Rainy Lake and Lake of the Woods to Fort
Garry.

With the self-possession of an emperor he was borne through the
wilderness, and is said to have made the canoe journey to the Red
River forty times.

For his distinguished management of the Hudson’s Bay Company’s
affairs and for his services to the trade of Canada, Governor
Simpson was knighted. He died in 1860, a man who would have been
of mark anywhere.

The Lachine Canal, therefore, is to be closely connected with the
history of transportation, seeing that it was the initial stage
of the journey from Montreal, northward.

The credit of being the pioneer of the first Lachine Canal is
to be given to the Sulpician Dollier de Casson who, in 1700,
undertook to deepen the Little St. Pierre River and to make it
navigable for canoes through Lake St. Pierre between Montreal and
Lachine and thence to open a cut from the lake to a point on the
St. Lawrence above the worst part of the rapids.

The engineer was Gédéon de Catalogne between whom and Dollier de
Casson a notorial contract was made for the excavation of canal
twenty-four arpents (about one mile) in length, twelve feet wide
at the surface of the ground and of varying width at the bottom,
according to the depth of the cutting.

The water flowing through the canal was to be at least eighteen
inches deep at the lowest water in the St. Lawrence.

The work was begun in 1700. It was apparently never fully
completed, though it is very likely that the imperfect channel
could be used by canoes, for Upper Canada, during the period of
high water.

About the year 1780 certain short cuttings with locks available
for canoes and bateaux were made at few points on the St.
Lawrence where the rapids were wholly impassable.

As early as the 1795-6 session of the Provincial Parliament,
a bill was introduced for the construction of a canal and a
turnpike to Lachine by the Hon. John Richardson.

In 1804 was completed a channel three feet in depth along the
shore line of the Lachine Rapids, connecting with short canals
at the Cascades, Split Rock, and Coteau du Lac, which were
provided with locks eighty-eight feet long and sixteen feet wide,
admitting of the passage of “Durham boats.”

In 1805 the first attempt was made to improve the Lachine rapids.
The sum of $4,000 was voted to be expended in removing any
obstacles to navigation.

It is scarcely necessary to add that the attempt proved futile.
It had, however, the advantage of making perfectly plain that the
only means of overcoming these rapids was by the construction of
the Lachine canal.

The necessity of such a work, owing to increased intercourse with
Upper Canada, was obtaining more general recognition; but some
few years were to elapse before definite steps were taken to
carry the project into effect.

The proceedings of 1805 are worthy of record, as the first
practical attempt at any improvement of the navigation at this
spot.

The history of the modern Lachine Canal begins in 1815 when an
appropriation of £25,000 was voted for its construction, but no
steps were taken until 1819 when a joint stock company was formed
with a capital of $600,000. Surveys were made and the design
perfected by 1821 when the government took it up as a provincial
undertaking.

The work was commenced July 17, 1821, and was completed in 1825
at a cost of $438,404. The first sod was turned by the Hon. John
Richardson.

It had seven locks, each 100 feet long, 20 feet wide and with 4½
feet of water on the sills, but it was inadequate for the wants
of the trade as may be gathered from the following notice from
the Quebec Gazette of the 3d November, 1831:

“Public notice is hereby given that the undersigned, and others,
will apply to the Legislature of this Province as its ensuing
session for the privilege to form a Joint Stock Company for the
purpose of making a Canal, Locks, and Basins, in such places as
they may find necessary for a useful navigation from the Lake
of the Two Mountains to the waters of Lachine, and from thence
to the foot of the current St. Mary, with a branch to the port
of Montreal should they think fit, of dimensions not less than
will admit the passage of such vessels as can pass through the
locks of the Rideau Canal, and to acquire lands for basins and
water privileges as may be wanted by the said Company for the
Navigation and the use of the waters thereof.

      Horatio Gates
      Dr. Arnoldi
      Thomas Phillips
      Andrew White
      Peter McGill
      Joseph Masson
      Jules Quesnel
      J. Bouthillier
      Frs. Ant. La Rocque
      Jos. Logan
  Montreal, 1 October, 1831.”

The enlargement was not, however, undertaken until 1843.

In 1843-49 it became a “Ship Canal” with five locks, each
200 feet long, 45 feet wide, and nine feet of water, costing
$2,149,128.

The enlargement, commenced in 1875, cost $6,500,000 and by this
the locks were increased to 270 feet in length and 14 feet depth
of water throughout the canal.

The Lachine Canal movement also included that for overcoming
the rapids of the Cedars, the Cascades and the Coteau. These
were completed in 1871. Since Montreal gave the impulse a canal
system has been instituted, so that from Belle Isle at the mouth
of the St. Lawrence via Montreal there is a water communication
by navigable rivers and great lakes to Port Arthur at the head
of Lake Superior, a distance of 2,200 miles, Duluth 2,343, and
Chicago 2,272. The number of locks passed from Montreal to Port
Arthur is forty-nine.


                               II

              THE DEVELOPMENT OF MONTREAL SHIPPING

                       A--SAILING VESSELS

BIRCH BARK CANOE--BATEAU--DURHAM BOAT--SHIPBUILDING IN MONTREAL.

                        B--STEAM VESSELS

  JOHN MOLSON’S ACCOMMODATION, 1809--PASSENGER FARES BETWEEN
    MONTREAL AND QUEBEC--PASSAGE DESCRIBED--THE TORRANCES--INLAND
    NAVIGATION--THE RICHELIEU AND ONTARIO COMPANY--THE FIRST UPPER
    DECK STEAMER TO SHOOT THE LACHINE RAPIDS.

                       C--ATLANTIC LINERS

  THE ROYAL WILLIAM FIRST OCEAN STEAMER AND PIONEER OF THE
    OCEAN LINERS--ITS CONNECTION WITH MONTREAL--MAIL SERVICE TO
    MONTREAL--THE GENOVA--ARRIVAL IN MONTREAL IN 1853--DINNER TO
    CAPTAIN PATON--THE CRIMEAN WAR--THE MONTREAL OCEAN STEAMSHIP
    COMPANY--THE FIRST CANADIAN ATLANTIC SHIP COMPANY--THE ALLAN
    LINE--EARLY BOATS--MAIL CARRIERS--1861 DISASTERS--SUBSEQUENT
    SUCCESS--THE PRESENT MONTREAL ALLAN SERVICE--THE CANADIAN PACIFIC
    RAILWAY STEAMSHIP LINES--OTHER LINES--THE SHIPPING AND THE WAR OF
    1914--THE GREAT ARMADA.

The early navigation apart from the few small sailing vessels
that would come up from Quebec was confined in great part to the
birch bark canoe, than which nothing yet has been found more
successful for primitive transportation. These were supplanted
later by the bateau. In 1679 La Salle, whom Montreal may claim
as one of its earliest citizens, launched the Griffin above
Niagara Falls in which he sailed to Lake Michigan, but previous
to 1790 little else but the bateau or open boat was constructed.
The bateau which supplemented the birch bark canoe was a large,
flat-bottomed skiff, sharp at both ends, about forty feet long
and six to eight feet wide in the middle, and capable of carrying
about five tons. It was provided with masts and lug sails,
with about fifteen feet hoist, an anchor, four oars and six
setting-poles shod with iron and a crew of four men and a pilot.
With forty barrels of flour on board it drew only twenty inches
of water. This was a very safe and adaptable vessel.

The Durham boat, an improvement on the bateau, was introduced
by the Americans after the War of 1812. They were flat-bottomed
barges with keel and center board and with rounded bows, eighty
to ninety feet long and nine to ten feet beam, with a capacity of
about ten times that of a bateau down stream, but in consequence
of the rapids and want of back freight they brought up on an
average only about eight tons.


                       A--SAILING VESSELS

The first ships built in Montreal were those constructed by Mr.
David Munn, who commenced his operations about the year 1806.

Two or three years later he entered into partnership with Mr.
Robert Hunter; the vessels they built were generally from 200 to
350 tons burthen; one, the Earl of Buckinghamshire, was 600 tons.

J. Storrow & Co. built two vessels in 1808 and 1809.

James Dunlop, in the three following years, built several of 330
to 350 tons burthen each.

James E. Campbell, M’Kenzie and Bethune, and James Millar & Co.
also built a number of vessels generally of about this same
tonnage.

There were built in the Province in 1825, 61 vessels; in 1826, 59
vessels; in 1827, 35 vessels; in 1828, 30 vessels, and in 1831,
only 9 vessels.

The Canada Ship Building Company from London began to build in
1828, but finished only two vessels.

In 1829 Shay and Merritt took possession of the yard and that
year built the steamboat British America, 170 feet long, 30-foot
beam, for John Torrance & Co. as a trader between Montreal and
Quebec; in 1830 the steamer John Bull, 182 feet long, 32-foot
beam, for John Molson & Co. as a trader between Montreal and
Quebec; the same year the steamboat St. George, 160 feet long,
26-foot beam, for John Torrance & Co.; in 1831 the steamboat
Canada, 175 feet long, 26-foot beam; also the steamboat Eagle
for Mr. James Greenfield, 140 feet long, 24-foot beam, and the
steamer Canadian Patriot, 130 feet long, 24-foot beam, for a
joint stock company.

In 1833 they built the steamboat Britannia, 130 feet long,
24-foot beam, for John Torrance & Co.; in the same year the
Varennes, 140 feet long, 23-foot beam, for Rasco & Co.; also the
steamer Montreal, 96 feet long, 18-foot beam, for James Wait.

In 1834 was built the ship Toronto of 345 tons for Captain
Collinson, running between this port and London; also the
Brilliant and Thalia, each 472 tons, for James Millar & Co., sent
home for the Baltic trade.

In 1835 the ship Dougles, 348 tons, was built for Captain Douglas
and in 1836 the bark Glasgow, 347 tons, and the bark Thistle, 260
tons, were built for Millar, Edmonstone & Co., and sent home for
West India trade.

In 1837, the bark John Knox, 347 tons, and in 1838, the ship
Gypsey, 572 tons, for the same company.

The same year--1838--the bark Colburne, 340 tons, and the brig
Wetherall, 252 tons, were built for Captain Collinson.

The situation of these shipbuilding yards was very favourable,
as the timber was hauled in at once from the St. Lawrence. The
length of the yard was 200 feet and all conveniences then known
were at hand for facilitating and completing the work in the most
perfect manner.


                        B--STEAM VESSELS

To a citizen of Montreal belongs the honour of launching the
second steam vessel which navigated the waters of America, and
the first on the river St. Lawrence.

In 1809 Hon. John Molson launched the Accommodation, a steam
vessel of eighty-five feet length.

When eighteen years of age he had come to Montreal in 1782 and
there he built the brewery. It was from the river bank at the
back of his brewery that he launched his first vessel broadside
into the river. The early history of steam navigation should
always remember Molson’s name.

The inventor of the application of steam to a marine engine was
William Symington who first constructed, in 1788, a vessel on
Lake Delawater, Dumfrieshire. In 1801-2 he completed a tow-boat
on the Forth and Clyde canal called the Lady Charlotte of Dundas.

Robert Fulton obtained drawings of the machinery and constructed
his Clermont, the machinery being made by Boulton & Watts of
Birmingham, England. The Clermont navigated the Hudson River in
1807.

John Molson now began to equip his Accommodation, fitting it with
engines, also by Boulton & Watts, and launching it in November,
1809. Though it caused him a loss of £3,000 he persevered and his
venture was followed by the Swiftsure in 1811; Lady Sherbrooke,
the Car of Commerce, and other vessels. These steamboats were a
powerful factor during the War of 1812 in forwarding troops and
supplies up the St. Lawrence to Montreal. Mr. Molson died in 1836
in his seventy-third year.

The first trip, November 3, 1809, of the Accommodation was thus
described by a contemporary writer:

“The Accommodation shot out into the current and after a voyage
of some sixty-six hours, of which some thirty hours were spent
at anchor in Lake St. Peter, reached Quebec. As might have been
expected, this vessel created a great deal of excitement, and
the Quebec Mercury chronicles its arrival thus: ‘On Saturday
morning at 8 o’clock, arrived here from Montreal the steamboat
Accommodation with ten passengers. This is the first vessel of
the kind that ever appeared in this harbour.

“‘She is continually crowded with visitants. She left Montreal
Wednesday at 2 o’clock, so that her passage was sixty-six hours,
thirty of which she was at anchor.

“‘She arrived at Three Rivers in twenty-four hours.

“‘She has at present berths for twenty passengers, which next
year will be considerably augmented.

“‘_No wind or tide can stop her._

“‘She has seventy-five feet keel and eighty-five feet deck. The
price for a passage up is nine dollars and eight down, the vessel
supplying provisions.

“‘The real advantage attending a vessel so constructed is that a
passage may be calculated on to a degree of certainty in point of
time, which cannot be the case with any vessel propelled by sail
only.

“‘The steamboat receives her impulse from an open double spoked,
perpendicular wheel on each side, without any circular band or
rim.

“‘To the end of each double spoke is fixed a square board that
enters the water, and a rotary motion of the wheel acts like a
paddle.

“‘The wheels are kept in motion by steam operating within the
vessel.

“‘A mast is to be fixed on her for the purpose of using a sail
when the wind is favourable, which will occasionally accelerate
her headway.’”

The first steamboat advertisement we quote from the Canadian
Courant:


                         “THE STEAM BOAT

will leave Montreal tomorrow at 9 o’clock precisely for Quebec.
Those wanting to take a passage will make choice of their Birth
(sic) and pay their Passage money before 8 o’clock tomorrow
morning, that a proper supply of fresh Provision may be provided.


                         FARES TO QUEBEC

  For Passenger             £2--10s--0d
  Child under 11            £1--5s-- 0d
  Servant with birth        £1--13s--4d
  Servant without birth     £1--5s-- 0d

N.B.--60 lbs. weight will be allowed for each full Passenger, and
so in proportion. Way Passengers are to pay 1s per league and if
a meal occurs in the going, not less fifteen leagues, will be
gratis, if less will be charged Two Shillings and Six-pence each
meal.

    Montreal, 4th June, 1810.”

       *       *       *       *       *

The Accommodation was the first steamer on the river between
Montreal and Quebec. She made her first trip from Montreal
November 3, 1809. The Swiftsure followed in 1811, the Car of
Commerce, the Caledonia and others came later, but these early
steamers landed their passengers and freight at Molson’s wharf
at the foot of the current, and these which first ascended the
current did so with the aid of oxen or horses.

The Hercules (a tow-boat) was the first vessel with steam power
and without other aid to ascend St. Mary’s current, with the ship
Margaret in ballast in tow, during the season of navigation in
1824.

The well known writer M. de Gaspé, says of traveling between
Montreal and Quebec at this period, 1818:

“This reminds me of a first voyage from Quebec to Montreal by
steamer. It was in October of 1818, at 11 o’clock in the evening,
when the Caledonia, in which I had taken passage, left the
Queen’s wharf.

“Between 7 and 8 o’clock on the following morning my companion,
the late Robert Christie, opened the windows of his stateroom and
called out, ‘We are going famously.’

“We were really progressing well, for we were opposite Pointe
Aux-Trembles: aided by a strong wind we had made seven leagues in
nine hours.

“We arrived at the foot of the current below Montreal on the
third day, congratulating ourselves on the rapidity of steamer
trips, nor did we feel humiliated in the absence of favourable
winds, which did not last more than twenty-four hours, to have
recourse to the united strength of forty-two oxen to assist us in
ascending the current.

“I acknowledge that the Caledonia deserved to be ranked as a
first class steamer of that time, and it was with regret that we
bade adieu to it, after the pleasant time we had on board.”

Among the names of those who were chiefly connected with the
introduction and development of steam navigation in the Province
of Quebec may be mentioned, besides the Hon. John Molson, the
father of the steamboat enterprise in Canada, those of Messrs.
John and David Torrance, who, in 1826, placed the steamboat
Hercules on the Montreal-Quebec route, and who were also the
first in Canada to branch out into direct trade with the East
Indies and China; and George Bush, in 1834 manager of the Ottawa
and Rideau Forwarding Company, and after 1840 the sole proprietor
of the Eagle Foundry in Montreal.

[Illustration: THE EVOLUTION OF THE STEAMSHIP]

[Illustration: Early steam vessel with auxiliary sails]

[Illustration: The Allan liner “Alsatian”]

[Illustration: Old style sailing vessel]

[Illustration: Montreal harbor in 1872]


                        INLAND NAVIGATION

The Canada Steam Ship Lines, Ltd., succeeding the Richelieu and
Ontario Navigation Company, had its inception in 1845 when the
Richelieu, a small boat of 125 tons, commanded by M. Sincennes
who formed the Company, was put on its route between Montreal and
Chambly for the transportation of freight and passengers.

As this venture proved a success, the Jacques Cartier was built
three years later and ran between Montreal and Berthier.

In 1855 the Company added two greatly improved boats, the
Victoria and Napoleon, 350 tons each, to ply between Montreal
and Quebec. As a result of the keen competition thus produced
the Torrance Company, which had, prior to this, controlled the
entire traffic of the route, in 1858 sold their boat, the Quebec,
for $30,000 to the Richelieu Company, which by this time had a
capital of upwards of $125,000. During 1860-61 two additional
boats, the Columbia and the Europa, were added and the capital of
the Company considerably added to.

During 1862 the Company was increased by the fusion of
Terrebonne, and l’Assomption and Lake St. Peter Lines with the
Richelieu Company.

In 1861 the Montreal, costing $12,000, was placed on the line; in
1863 the Francois Yamaska was added, and in 1864 the Quebec was
constructed at a cost of $172,000.

In 1875 the company line was further enlarged by the taking
over of the line of boats running from Montreal to Toronto and
Hamilton.

This amalgamation took the name of the Richelieu and Ontario
Navigation Company and had a capital of $1,500,000 and eight
steamboats. Four more were soon added, the Athenian and
Abyssinian in 1876, the Cultivateur in 1880, and the St. Francis
in 1883.

From 1876 to 1882 the late Sir Hugh Allan was president of the
company, succeeded by L.A. Senecal, who died in 1887.

In 1895 Louis J. Forget became president of the company.

June 21, 1898, the company launched at Toronto, The Toronto, a
handsome new steel steamer, costing about $250,000. In 1913 the
Richelieu and Ontario became the Canada Steamship Lines Company,
which amalgamation controls most of the freight and passenger
boats operating in Canadian waters between the Gulf and the Great
Lakes, except the Sincennes, McNaughton Line, which controls the
towing in the district of Montreal, the Montreal Transportation
Company, the Hall Forwarding Company and several smaller inland
lines.

The Steamer Ontario, Captain Hilliard, was the first upper-deck
steamer to descend Lachine Rapids, August 19, 1840. Her name was
afterward changed to the Lord Sydenham.

It is not recorded that more than one steamer ever succeeded in
ascending the rapids of the St. Lawrence River. In November,
1838, the little Dolphin, after four weeks of incessant toil,
was towed up the Long Sault rapids with the aid of twenty oxen,
besides horses, capstans and men, added to the working of her
engine--the first and probably the last steamer that will ever
accomplish the feat.


                       C--ATLANTIC LINERS

Montreal can claim some share in the success of the first ship
that ever crossed the Atlantic under steam. The Royal William was
built in the yards of Campbell and Black in Quebec in 1830-1, the
designer being Mr. John Gondie.

The ship was launched in the spring of 1831 and towed to Montreal
to receive her machinery, and on being fitted out for sea her
first voyage was to Halifax, thence to Boston, being the first
British steamer to arrive at that port.

Her dimensions were: Length, 176 feet; hold, 17 feet, 9 inches;
breadth outside, 44 feet; breadth between paddle boxes, 28 feet.
She had three masts, schooner rigged; builders’ measurement,
1,370 tons; with accommodations for sixty passengers. She left
Quebec for London on August 5, 1833, via Picton, Nova Scotia.
Thence her voyage was twenty-five days.

Ten days after her arrival she was chartered by the Portuguese
Government to enter the service of Dom Pedro. In 1834 she was
sold to the Spanish Government and was converted into a war
steamer under the name of the Ysabel Segunda and was employed
against Don Carlos.

She was undoubtedly the pioneer of the great Atlantic liners.

The connection of Montreal and the Atlantic Service is now to be
told.

The origin of the Montreal steamboat mail service is indicated
from an article by Thomas C. Keeffer, civil engineer, 1863. “On
the 13th of August, 1852, a contract was entered into between
the Commissions of Works of Canada and Messrs. McKean, McLarty &
Company, a Liverpool firm, for a term of seven years, by which a
line of screw steamers of not less than 1,200 tons, carpenter’s
measurements, 300 horsepower and capable of carrying 1,000 tons
of cargo, besides coal, for twenty-two days, were to commence
running between Liverpool, Quebec and Montreal in the spring
of 1853, one every fortnight during the season of navigation,
and to Portland once a month; the outward passage not to exceed
fourteen days and the homeward passage thirteen days. The maximum
rate of freight to be charged was 60 shillings per ton. Fourteen
trips were to be made from Liverpool to the St. Lawrence and
back, for which at least five steamers were to be provided; and
five trips to Portland and back, for which three steamers were
required. The vessels were all to be ready and to commence their
fortnightly service on or before the 1st of May, 1854, and a
sufficient number to be ready and to commence the monthly trips
in the spring of 1853. The price to be paid by the province was
for fourteen fortnightly trips to the St. Lawrence, £1,238--1--11
sterling. The Grand Trunk Railway was to pay £388--6--8 sterling
for each monthly trip to Portland. In October, 1852, Messrs.
McKean, McLarty & Company formed a provisional company under
the title of the Liverpool & North American Screw Steamship
Company, and petitioned the Board of Trade for a Royal Charter
with limited liabilities. In this they were vigorously and
successfully opposed by the Cunard Steamship Company (already
magnificently subsidized by the British government) and generally
by ship owners not protected by a limited liability, and were
compelled to attempt the formation of their company under a
Canadian charter.

“Under this contract the Genova, a small steamer of 700 tons and
160 horsepower, was sent out in 1853, the first trans-Atlantic
steamer which entered the St. Lawrence proper.”

It reached Montreal carrying the royal mail on Friday, May
13, 1853, amidst great rejoicing. She was an iron boat from
Liverpool, commanded by Captain Paton.

On the evening of her arrival a dinner was given in the Donegani
Hotel, the following being the text of the address presented to
Capt. Walter Paton, who with Mayor Wilson and the others sat at
the banquet:

       *       *       *       *       *

“Captain Paton, Sir.--Your arrival in the Port of Montreal in
charge of the Genova, the pioneer steamer of the Ocean Line, is
an event of too much importance to Canada to be allowed to pass
without notice.

“To mark the sense which the City Council entertains of this very
gratifying token of our Country’s advance, I have been instructed
to welcome you with heartfelt congratulations, and to offer you
the hospitalities of the City.

“It is now happily beginning to be understood that the highways
which nature has provided for access to the interior Countries,
are usually the shortest and most practicable, and a single
glance at the Map of North America, should convince the most
skeptical that the St. Lawrence, with its chain of lakes, is the
true channel for the commerce of the Great West. To divert into
other outlets the products of the vast granaries which skirt our
waters for thousands of miles, has employed the talents, energies
and resources of our great rival and neighbour, and not without
success.

“The time, however, is fast approaching when the tide of trade
and travel will take its proper and destined course. Canada
begins to feel its strength and to value its advantages. Its
pupillage has not been altogether misspent. Arrived at the
maturity which demands self-reliance it is ready to take
its place, as a full grown worker, and little doubt need be
entertained of the vigour which it is prepared to bring to the
task. What the future of Canada will be, the largest minds have
not adequately conceived. A knowledge of its unbounded resources,
the tithe of which has not been developed--an appreciation of its
salubrious climate, and the essentially liberal character of its
institutions offer guarantees to the emigrant for the successful
pursuit of competency and happiness which no other country can
exceed.

“The disturbance of our waters by your gallant vessel is one
of those strong pulsations which indicate the high health of
Canada. And the time cannot be very distant when this pulse will
beat--not once in the month, but with greatly increased power and
frequency. Nevertheless, Dear Sir, The Genova and Captain Paton
will ever be associated in the history of a note-worthy era; and
when the first Steamer of the ocean line is referred to, these
names will stir up the most pleasurable reminiscences. Again,
then, we hail your advent among us; and we may express the hope
that your connexion with this enterprize will be sufficiently
prolonged to place you in competition with other rivalries in the
same honourable strife.”

The Genova was followed by the Lady Eglinton, 600 tons and 160
horsepower, and the Sarah Sands, 1,200 tons and 150 horsepower.
But these boats only made five trips in 1853. The average voyage
was fourteen to twenty-two days, home twelve to eighteen days;
and 80 shillings freight instead of 60 shillings was charged. In
consequence of this total failure on the part of the contractors
the government of Canada annulled the contract.

The Crimean war of 1854 now broke out and no doubt the vessels
were needed for military transport purposes, so that no new
contract was made with the firm. This was the great opportunity
which was seized upon by the Allan Company, so that on September
28, 1855, a new contract was entered into with Hugh Allan, of
Montreal, to commence in April, 1856, and to give the same time
and number of trips as before, but with vessels not less than
350 horsepower. The subsidy was £24,000 sterling per annum, and
a penalty of £1,000 for every trip lost was provided for, the
deduction of a pro rata amount of the subsidy. The contract
was terminable by the contractors at the end of any year by
giving six months previous notice. Although the line was not
remunerative in its first season, 1856, the contract was
fulfilled in the most satisfactory manner, the outward passage
being under thirteen days and the home work a little over eleven
days. The Montreal Ocean Steamship Company was, therefore, the
first “Canadian Atlantic steamship company.”

But it must not be imagined that this was a brand new firm. It
had been long connected with the Montreal shipping ventures. The
Allan line dates back to 1822. In that year Capt. Alexander Allan
sailed to the St. Lawrence from Glasgow in the brig Jean--not
one-fiftieth of the tonnage of the liners of today, but the first
of the fleet, withal. Captain Alexander was succeeded by his five
sons, Captain Bryce commanding some of the earlier ships.

Hugh Allan arrived as a boy in Montreal, sailing from Greenock
in Scotland with his father on the brig Favorite. We can imagine
the scene of landing from the state of the development of the
port at that time. Hugh went into business as a bookkeeper to
William Kent & Company, but in 1831 he entered the office of
Messrs. William Edmonstone & Company, ship agents and ship
builders. Andrew, his brother, joined him later and they both
married sisters, daughters of R. John Smith, a wealthy importer.
These two brothers represented the Allan line in Montreal, while
Glasgow and Liverpool were served by the three other sons.
Meanwhile the Allan fleet, especially since 1834, had been
growing with such ships as the clippers Glennifer, Abeona, the
Corinthian, and their first steamship Sardinian, of which Captain
Dutton, a religious-minded but capable seaman, known as “Holy
Joe,” was the commander, afterwards becoming the commodore of the
fleet.


               THE ALLAN LINE ROYAL MAIL STEAMERS

The firm now owned a fleet of fast sailing vessels of about three
hundred and fifty tons register--full-rigged ships which, with
ice-blocks round their bows, pushed their way through the ice, so
that sometimes they would arrive in port on the 15th of April. In
1853 Mr. Hugh Allan, who was a man of great tenacity of purpose,
and at the same time of remarkable foresight, saw that the time
had come for the building of iron ships for the St. Lawrence
trade. Besides, there was the consideration that they would run
to Portland in the winter time, and connect with Montreal by
rail. He enlisted the support of several wealthy men, including
Mr. William Dow and Mr. Robert Anderson, of Montreal, and formed
the Montreal Ocean Steamship Company. The Canadian and Indian
were the first two boats built by the company.

The boats cost about two hundred and fifty thousand dollars each
and had a speed of eleven knots.

They were wonders at the time and made a great impression, as
the people had not been accustomed to see iron ships. Thus it
happened that when about this time the Crimean war broke out,
and the government was at its wit’s end to provide transports,
the Allans went into the business, and while the war lasted made
large profits.

The Canadian Government now made a contract with Mr. Hugh Allan
for carrying the mails, paying an annual subsidy of $120,000 per
annum. The Anglo-Saxon, a new boat, ran from Quebec to Liverpool
in nine days on one occasion. This was thought to be wonderful,
as the people had been accustomed to a voyage of forty days on
the old sailing vessels. At that time the ships got 30 cents per
bushel for carrying grain. Contrast this with the 2 cents of
today, or the carrying of grain for nothing, as is done by New
York shipping at certain periods of the year, in order to get
ballast on an outgoing trip.

The requirements of the service in 1858 demanded more
accommodation, and the Allan brothers determined on a weekly
service.

Larger and faster boats were introduced. The government paid
subsidies to the new service totalling $416,000 per annum. Year
by year the Allans launched new boats, always bigger and faster,
though speed was never the chief consideration with the company.

In 1861 they had a fleet of over twenty vessels; but a sinister
fortune befell the company in the first ten years of its
existence. Eight ships were lost in as many years.

In 1857 the Canadian, in 1859 the Indian, in 1860 the Hungarian
and the second Canadian, and the North Briton in 1861, and later
the Anglo-Saxon, the Norwegian and the Bohemian--all became total
wrecks. The river was badly lighted. The tides did not run true.
The pilots were incompetent. The compass deviated, owing to some
strange local attraction due, it was said, to mineral deposits
in the gulf. Anyway, disaster followed disaster, and, as was
said at the time, any other man than Mr. Allan would have given
up in despair. But that gentleman had something of the firmness
of his native granite in his composition, and he never wavered.
Difficulties in time were overcome; the Allans began to prosper
and from this on their boats were singularly free from accidents.

To show, however, how little even the most perspicacious can see
in advance of their time, it may be stated that at the banquet
which the citizens tendered Mr. Hugh Allan in 1850, he said that
ships of 1,700 tons were the most suitable for the Montreal
trade. He lived to see his boats grow to 5,500 tons.

The line prospered; the number of boats was constantly increased
to meet the need; the Northwest was opened up; and the Allan
boats brought in many thousands of immigrants. In addition the
company branched out to South America.

The building of the Parisian in 1881 was supposed to be about the
last word in shipbuilding. She was far in advance of anything
to be seen on the route. Today she is, by comparison with the
leviathans of the route, almost as antique as the old Favorite
was when steamships came in.

In 1887, the Canadian Government decided to subsidize a line of
fast steamships. They asked for twenty knots an hour and that
the vessels should call at a French port. The Allans held that
the first demand was impracticable, owing to the fact that high
speed would be dangerous because of the fogs in the gulf; while,
as to the second, it was deemed to be out of the question. The
Government played with a tender from another firm, Anderson,
Anderson & Co., of London, which, however, did not make good;
and the fast Atlantic service, in spite of much discussion and
tentative efforts on the part of the Government and the shipping
people, has never come to anything to this day. The C.P.R.
offered to build a fast service; but the terms were deemed by the
government to be too onerous.

The line increased, however, in ships, in business done, in
reputation, both from our own and the American ports.

Mr. Hugh Allan was knighted in 1870. In 1877 he determined to
associate his name with the C.P.R. enterprise. He, in fact,
formed the first syndicate to build it. The fall of the Macdonald
Government defeated his plan.

He succumbed to an attack of gout in 1882, at the age of
seventy-two years. His remains were brought out to Canada in one
of his own ships, and laid to rest in Mount Royal Cemetery.

Alexander Allan died at Glasgow in 1892, leaving a fortune of
three million dollars. Andrew, so well remembered by Montrealers
for his public spirit, his identification with good works, his
“canny” Scotch caution, compatible, at the same time, with an
enterprise and boldness in the conduct of his business, died in
Montreal in the ’90s.

The business today is carried on by Mr. Hugh A. Allan, chairman,
resident in London, and Mr. Andrew A. Allan, vice chairman,
resident in Montreal.

The firm has broadened out in many important ways. It was the
first to introduce turbines on the St. Lawrence, and it is still
augmenting the fleet.

Of the Allan fleet, the steamers on the Montreal-Quebec-Liverpool
service making the port of Montreal are: Tunisian, 10,576.38
tons; Victorian, 10,629.09 tons; and Virginian, 10,569.62 tons.

The steamers on the Montreal and Glasgow line are: Corsican,
11,436 tons; Grampian, 10,900 tons; Scandinavian and Hesperian,
12,100 and 10,900 tons, respectively.

Those in the Montreal and London service are: Ionian, 8,267.61
tons; Sicilian, 6,229.49 tons; Scotian, 10,490 tons; Corinthian,
6,229.49 tons; and Tunisian, 10,576.38 tons.

Those in the Montreal and Havre service are: Ionian, 8,267.61
tons; Scotian, Corinthian, Sicilian, 6,229.49 tons; and Tunisian,
10,576.38 tons.

The year 1914 also saw the introduction to the Liverpool service
of the Allan Line the new steamers Alsatian and Calgarian,
quadruple screw turbine steamers, ships of 18,000 tons, 21
knots speed, the largest, fastest and most luxuriously equipped
steamers on the St. Lawrence route.

Among the great mercantile fleets of the world no house flag is
better known than the red pennant and tri-color of the Allan
Line and none represents to the ocean voyager a greater degree of
safety and comfort.

To the Allan Liner Corsican, Capt. John Hall, belongs the honour
of being the first ocean liner to make the port of Montreal in
1914, arriving here at 12:30 p. m., Wednesday, April 29th.

Following the time honoured custom Captain Hall was presented by
the Harbour Commissioners with a gold headed cane and a silk hat.


                          OTHER FLEETS

Another great fleet connected closely with Montreal is that of
the Canadian Pacific Railway steamship service. The history of
the inception and development of the railway is told elsewhere.

The history of the Canadian Pacific Railway Company, as steamship
owners, dates back for more than a quarter of a century, for it
was early in 1883 that the company contracted on the Clyde for
the construction of three steel screw steamships for service on
the Great Lakes. In 1887 a trans-Pacific service was established,
and in 1889 a car ferry service was put into commission
between Windsor, Ontario, and Detroit, Michigan. In 1896 the
C.P.R. bought the Kootenay Navigation Company, and in 1903 was
established the British Columbia Coast service. In 1903 also the
Atlantic service was established, and all these services have
been extended until as it may be said it is possible to take a
trip completely around the world on a C.P.R. ticket and never
leave a C.P.R. boat or train.

It has also a trans-Pacific and a Mediterranean fleet. The
Canadian Pacific railway steamship service also operates three
freight boats between Montreal and Avonmouth Dock in summer and
from Halifax in winter. In 1906 the Empress of Ireland, which met
disaster in May, 1914, and the Empress of Britain were put on the
Quebec route.

The Elder Dempster line established the South African line in
1902 and in 1905 established the service to Cuba and Mexico.

The White Star Dominion established a weekly service in 1909
between Liverpool, Quebec and Montreal and the great liners, the
Laurentic and Megantic, appeared at Montreal in the early summer
of that year.

Meanwhile the Thomson & Donaldson lines had long been connected
with the port under the agency of the Reford Company, so long
connected with commercial and shipping interests of the port. The
Furness Withy Company, which has its agency here, also have been
trading for some time between Montreal and Manchester, and the
east coast of England.

Another fleet closely connected with Montreal is the Royal Line,
owned and operated by the Canadian Northern Railway Company since
1912, between Montreal and Bristol.

For various reasons the Royal Line did not wish to run to
Liverpool, which was already overcrowded with Canadian shipping.
So they ran to Avonmouth dock instead, and opened up an entirely
new artery of traffic to the Canadian ports. Before the
inauguration of the Royal Line, no passenger ships of importance
ran to Bristol, and naturally the securing of the Royal Line
service was made an occasion of much rejoicing.

The Royal George and the Royal Edward began their trips in 1912.
These are the only Canadian registered ocean liners. The other
fleets entering the Port are connected with agencies elsewhere
and only enter into the history of the Port inasmuch as they
contribute largely to its success as a mercantile center.

These include the White Star-Dominion, Canada, the Cunard,
the Monson and Donaldson lines, which the Reford Company so
long connected with the commercial circles of the city, the
Furness-Withby lines to Manchester, the Elder-Dempster Dominion
lines.

Today ten big ocean steamship lines now run passenger vessels to
the port of Montreal, and many smaller lines of coastwise and
tramp traffic swarm the port during the shipping season which
opens in May and closes in November.

During the season of 1912 the Allan Line alone carried 87,159
passengers into and out of Montreal, while the C.P.R., White
Star, Donaldson, Thompson, Cunard, Royal, Elder-Dempster, Canada,
Canadian Northern Railway and Dominion Line boats carried
passengers in proportion.

During the same season the Custom House in the port collected
$15,508,124.53 in duties on foreign made goods imported here.
These figures take no account of exported goods, goods made in
Canada, or the tremendous grain business which is done each fall,
and to a lesser degree throughout the season. In 1912 125,000
tons of coal were brought into the port of Montreal from the
mines at Glace Bay alone, and 736 ocean-going vessels entered
the port during the season, showing a total tonnage of 2,403,924
tons, and in wharfage dues, $461,396.43.

During the last two years the Port of Montreal has seen the
advent of the Cunard Line, originally founded by Mr. S. Cunard of
Halifax, who had the first contract with the British government
for a fortnightly mail service in 1850 from Halifax to Liverpool
and Boston.




                          CHAPTER XXXIX

                         TRANSPORTATION

                                I

  THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PORT OF MONTREAL--HERIOT’S DESCRIPTION
    IN 1815--T.S. BROWN IN 1818--THE ISLAND WHARF--THE
    CREEK--THE PRIMITIVE WHARVES--THE “POINTS”--THE RIVER
    FRONT--THE SPRING FLEET--FIREWOOD RAFTS--TOW BOATS--THE
    EVERETTA--AN ACCOUNT OF 1819--BOUCHETTE’S PLAN OF 1824--THE
    FIRST HARBOUR COMMISSIONERS, “THE TRINITY BOARD”--FIRST
    REPORT--LATEST REPORT--EARLY ENGINEERS--REVIEW OF HARBOUR IN
    1872--A TRANSFORMATION FROM 1818--GRAIN ELEVATORS--NUMBER
    OF VESSELS--MARKET AND WOOD BOATS--THE BONSECOURS
    MARKET--1875 PLAN FOR IMPROVEMENT NOW CARRIED OUT--FLOATING
    DOCK--DESCRIPTION OF PRESENT HARBOUR--ITS FACILITIES FOR
    FURTHER DEVELOPMENT--THE DESIRE TO LENGTHEN THE SHIPPING SEASON.

                               II

  HARBOUR COMMISSIONERS--THE HARBOUR COMMISSIONERS FROM 1830 TO THE
   PRESENT TIME.

                               III

  CUSTOMS--SHIPPING FEDERATION--THE PILOTAGE AUTHORITY--IMPORTS AND
    EXPORTS.


                                I

             THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PORT OF MONTREAL

Heriot in his travels, thus describes the harbour front about the
year 1815: “A natural wharf, very near to the town is formed by
the depth of the stream and the sudden declivity of the bank. At
the breaking up of the river, the buildings of the town, which
are situated nearest the bank, are sometimes subject to damage by
the accumulating of ice, impelled by the rapidity of the current.”

A description of three years later is to be found in a rare
pamphlet entitled,

           THE HARBOUR OF MONTREAL IN 1818 AND IN 1872

                          By T.S. Brown

I came to Montreal on the 28th day of May, 1818, in a Bateau from
La Prairie--no steamer had made the trip at the time--and landed
on a sloping, rough beach, exactly where the pier next below the
Custom House runs out to the Island wharf and St. Lambert Ferry.
What is now the Island wharf was then a rocky Island separated
from the main land by a Channel about one hundred feet wide.

On my left was a small brook called the “Creek,” being the
discharge of a wide open ditch that ran from the Champ de Mars,
through Craig Street, round to Inspector Street and then down
Commissioners Street to a stone bridge, crossing at the bottom
of St. Francis Xavier Street. From this till near the river it
ran between the wall of a rough stone building, on the site
of the present Custom House, and another wall that supported
Commissioners Street.

Above the brook a low narrow wooden wharf ran to Port Street,
Common Street being supported by a wooden revetment, with gaps
for sloping roadway to the river.

All beyond Port Street was the natural Bank, the same as in the
front of country villages, except a small wharf opposite the
north end of Youville Street, at which point, then called Pointe
à Blondeau, there was a cottage, with garden in front, running
down to the water.

Here, too, was a shipyard and the east wall of the Grey Nunnery.
Further on, all was vacant, except some buildings at the corner
of Grey Nun Street, and beyond here open fields, running up to
Point St. Charles, with three windmills, the graves of three
soldiers, shot for desertion, and the Nuns buildings at Point St.
Charles, since used for offices, while Victoria bridge was in
course of construction.

The Lachine Canal had not been commenced, and distances appeared
so much farther than now, that the river front was divided into
“Pointe à Callière,” “Pointe à Blondeau,” “Windmill Point,” and
“Point St. Charles.”

Directly before me was a sloping beach running up to an opening
or street between low houses, forming the east side.

On the square, now occupied by the old Custom House, and then by
the “old Market,” so much frequented by Country people, that they
blockaded the approaches, and had sometimes to be driven away by
constables to the “new market,” then built on Jacques Cartier
Square.

On my right the natural beach continued down to Hochelaga, or
“the Cross” as it was then called. A wooden revetment held up
Commissioner Street and St. Sulpice Street and thence downward
there was nothing but the natural bank, on which weeds grew
profusely. There may have been something more opposite the
Barracks.

The buildings fronting on the river were mostly old, low and
dilapidated. A good part of the space was occupied by walls and
mean outbuildings of the houses fronting on St. Paul Street. The
new buildings were the three-story brick stores just above St.
Diziers Lane, and a three-story store just below.

The “spring fleet” mostly in port (a part may have arrived a few
days later), consisted of, I think, half a dozen brigs of from
one hundred and eighty to two hundred and fifty tons burthen,
moored to the muddy beach; below them were some “Durham boats,”
which we should now call small barges, navigators to Upper
Canada, carrying a very large fore and aft sail and top sail.
Wind then had to do what is now done by steam. Below these,
opposite the present Jacques Cartier Square, were moored many
rafts--mostly of firewood.

[Illustration: THE HARBOR OF MONTREAL]

[Illustration: General view of sheds]

[Illustration: Grain Elevator No. 2. First entire concrete
elevator in the world. Capacity 2,622,000 bushels]

[Illustration: King Edward Pier. Vessels loading and unloading
grain]

[Illustration: Duke of Connaught Pier and Floating Dry Dock.
Capacity 25,000 tons]

There were no steamboats, except those running to Quebec, clumsy
things, with bluff bows, built on the model of sailing vessels,
rigged with bowsprit, high mast and square sail; the deck flush,
and cabins all below.

Their steam power was so small that they could not get fifty
miles from Quebec unless they left with the tide; and oxen were
frequently used in assisting them up the current, below the city.
All the structure on the deck of the largest, called the “Car of
Commerce,” was a square house over the stairway, which may still
be seen, converted into a summer house, with gallery surrounding,
at St. Catherines, that all may notice on the right side of the
road, when riding round the mountain.

There were no tow boats then. Vessels from sea had to make their
way to Montreal by wind which often took a month or more, the
worst being the last mile where I have seen oxen used on a tow
line, as otherwise the light winds would be insufficient to
enable them to overcome the force of the strong current.

The “ship” of the period was the Everetta from London, which
arrived some days after, and summer goods were advertised about
the middle of June, there being no way of getting Spring and
Summer “fashions” earlier, so that our ladies were always one
year behind the age.

I have in my possession a bill of lading of goods by this ship,
dated 25th of March, 1800. She brought the supplies to the
“Northwest Company,” which then carried on the great Indian
Trade, from Montreal, by canoes, up to Lake Superior, and onwards.

The Ship remained moored at the foot of St. Sulpice Street all
summer, till the canoes returned with the year’s catch of furs,
and carried them to England.

A traveller quoted by Mr. Sandham in “Ville Marie” as visiting
the city in 1819 thus describes the activity of the water side:

“We crossed the river in a canoe hollowed out of a single log,
and on landing we climbed a steep and slippery bank, and found
ourselves in one of the principal streets of the city.”

“In the morning” continues the account “we witnessed a scene of
considerable activity, caused by the carts and horses which are
driven into the river as far as possible to obtain wood, etc,
from the boats, and as they go out so far, the body of the cart
is sometimes out of water and the larger sticks are drawn out
with a rope.”

It would be hard to imagine a more hopeless outlook than existed
in the Harbour of Montreal, as indicated on Bouchette’s plan of
1824. The first Lachine Canal was only completed in 1825, having
a depth over the sills of 4½ feet, and is not shown on that plan.

Two stone windmills marked the progress of industrial development
to the westward of what is now McGill Street. They were situated
on top of the open beach.

The Grand Trunk Railway Company’s elevator now stands on the site
of the water front of 1824.

A small wharf 200 feet long existed, providing a depth of water
of 9 feet, in the position of the flood wall opposite the present
Harbour Commissioners’ office.

Another irregular wharf known as Berthelette’s Wharf existed
between the Harbour Commissioners’ office and the Custom House.

From the Little River, now the Custom House, downward, the beach
was unimproved except by the construction of sloping roadways
down to the water.

Shallow water, even points of exposed rocks, existed two-thirds
of the distance across to St. Helen’s Island, in the early days
before the Moffatt’s Island Wharf was built.

The size and type of the vessels trading to Montreal may be
imagined from the fact that Lake St. Peter limited the draft to
11 feet, and even that depth was not available at any of the
wharves in the Harbour.

The shipping trade of a whole season, eighty years ago, could
have been carried in one or two of the modern ships which now
frequent the port.

Sloping roadways down to the water where the river was so low
as to permit of rocks showing above the current, a long stretch
of beach where the children of those days romped and played,
and the poorer women washed the linen using the big stones as
washing boards, a long unbroken line of trees and shrubberies
past Maisonneuve, where now the Harbour Commissioners’ powerful
locomotives transport merchandise from vessels of 15,000 tons
register to the various railway terminals, these were the
features of the Port of Montreal long before Confederation had
ever been dreamed of. In those days inland navigation commenced
at Lachine. Goods for Upper Canada were carted to Lachine and
from there taken up the Haldimand Canals in bateaux about
thirty-five feet long and 5½ feet beam, built of the type of a
modern raft boat with pointed bow and stern.

From 1824 to 1892 the development of the port progressed but
slowly. Still, in the early days the development of the harbour
was a very live question and it was on the 8th of May, 1830, that
George Moffatt, Jules Quesnel and Capt. Robert S. Piper, R.E.,
were appointed commissioners under the Great Seal of the Province
of Lower Canada and signed by His Excellency the Governor at the
Castle of St. Louis; for the purpose of carrying into effect an
Act of the Provincial Legislature, 10 and 11, Geo. IV., Cap. 28:
“An Act to provide for the Improvement and Enlargement of the
Harbour of Montreal.”

The first works undertaken were for the construction of wharves,
ramps, slips for Durham boats, a revetment wall and a bridge to
Oyster Island, which was to be the principal wharf.

In their first annual report the commissioners, who were called
the Corporation of the Trinity Board of Montreal until 1855 when
an act was passed changing the name to the Harbour Commissioners
of Montreal and increasing the number of commissioners from
three to five, stated that they confidently anticipated that the
wharves undertaken, when completed, would be superior to any
works of the kind in the Province, and would enable the City of
Montreal to be advantageously contrasted with any other in North
America for beauty, solidity and convenience of approach by
water, and the present Harbour of Montreal rather justifies the
modest boast of the commissioners of eighty years ago.

Writing in 1839, before the improvements had been made in the
harbour by the commissioners, Mr. Newton Bosworth in “Hochelaga
Depicta” quotes a New York traveller, who, on landing from
a bateau which brought him from La Prairie, thus afterwards
expressed himself:

“The approach to Montreal conveyed no prepossessing idea of the
enterprise of its municipality; ships, brigs and steamboats lay
on the margin of the river at the foot of the hill, no long line
of wharves, built of the substantial free stone of which there is
an abundance in the very harbour affording security to vessels
and profit to owners; the commercial haven looked as ragged and
as muddy as the shores of Nieu Nederlandt when the Guede Vrow
first made her appearance off the battery.”

“Now,” remarks Mr. Bosworth in 1839, commenting on this “if
he were to repeat his visit he would be constrained to make a
different report, and find himself able to step ashore without
more trouble than in walking across a room.”

The appropriation for the first three years amounted to $4,000,
while at present the Harbour Commissioners have undertaken a
series of improvements which are soon to be completed at an
approximate cost of $6,000,000.

During the past ten years no less than thirty-eight million
dollars has been expended to improve the local harbour and ship
channel, nearly one-half of which immense sum has gone towards
the establishment of harbour and terminal improvements.

Millions of dollars have been spent on lighthouses, light ships,
submarine bell stations, whistling buoys, the dredging of the
main ship channel from 27½ to 30 feet at low water, its widening
and straightening have been carried out at a cost of $14,000,000,
the reorganization of the pilotage system has cost $140,000,
the establishment of fifteen land telephone stations between
Quebec and Montreal has involved the expenditure of $150,000,
while hundreds of thousands of dollars have been spent for other
important projects.

Since 1830 some of the best Engineers in Canada, the United
States and Great Britain, have from time to time been called upon
to investigate and submit plans for improvements.

Messrs. Gzowsky, Keefer, Forsythe, Trautwine, Legge, Nish, and
Slippell all submitted plans up to 1873.

A picture of the results of the improvements during the
intervening period is to be found in Mr. T.S. Brown’s retrospect,
already quoted.

“I visited it (the harbour)” says the same writer, “at the end of
fifty-four years, on the 28th of May, 1872. And what did I see?[1]

“A canal of the largest dimensions coming in at Windmill Point,
and the old fields converted into basins, filled with steamers,
schooners and barges, one side fringed by manufactories, and the
other by lofty warehouses, and platforms filled with merchandise.

“From ‘Pointe à Blondeau,’ or Grey Nun Street, to the Barracks,
there is a high stone revetment wall, supporting Commissioners
Street, with Ramps at convenient distances, leading to a broad
platform or wharf running down to below the barracks and
Dalhousie Square, along which is a track for Railway Cars, and
from which project many piers, one connecting with the Island
before mentioned, and others lower down, extending further out.

“This platform or line wharf, and the piers, are covered and
filled with merchandise, of all discriptions, in bars, bundles,
casks, cases, boxes and bales, a part being covered with
temporary sheds.

“The quantity and weight is so immense that one wonders where it
comes from, and where it goes to, but the immense mass extending
along Harbour and Canal for a mile, is but a small portion of
what is passing into or through the port, for while countless
carts and cars, are daily removing from one side, steamers and
ships fill up every space by discharging on the other, with steam
power and regiments of laborers. The taking in of the cargo is
going on at the same time and elevators alongside the ships are
taking from propellors alongside from the west and far west
thousands of bushels of grain. Instead of the half a dozen brigs
of 1818, with an aggregate tonnage of twelve to fifteen hundred
tons discharging slowly with skids on a rough beach, there lays
one steamer that will measure more than the whole put together.

“In all there is in port, stretched along the wharves and piers
from Grey Nun Street to below the Barracks, 21 Ocean Steamers,
22,612 tons; 20 Ships, 17,710 tons; 22 Barques, 12,409 tons; 3
Brigs, 760 tons; 4 Brigantines and Schooners, 278 tons, in all 70
Vessels with an aggregate tonnage of 53,769 tons.

“The shore (I have often seen it bare), below the foot of St.
Sulpice Street has been dredged and wharfed to accommodate ships
drawing twenty feet of water. A Quebec Steamer, not stumpy,
low and flush deck, but long, built on a skiff model, with two
stories of staterooms raised above the deck, is at a pier at
the bottom of Jacques Cartier Square, stretching out beyond the
limits of the old firewood rafts, brought down by farmers from
Chateaguay and neighbouring regions, to be sold in June, when
they were impatient to get home, for $2.00 a cord.

“Directly below is a fleet of ‘Market Boats,’ really elegant
steamers, of modern build, that navigate to all ports down to
‘Three Rivers.’

“Mixed with these are a fleet of ‘Wood Barges,’ rigged on the
principle of a ‘Chinese Junk’ (which some of them resemble on a
small scale), with a very high mast, and very long square-sail
yards.

“These bring up firewood, hay, grain, lumber, etc., from below, a
trade little dreamed of in old times.

“Further down are piles of boards, planks, and other lumber, and
ships being loaded with it for the South Atlantic, or perhaps
Pacific, and work is in progress for continuing the wharves to
Hochelaga where I have seen many ships launched.

“Where stood the ‘Mansion House’ (in 1818 our great hotel), a
former residence of Sir John Johnson, and dwelling houses with
small gardens, there is now the Bonsecour Market. The old walls
and sheds, along the ‘front’ to ‘Pointe à Calliêre,’ are replaced
by tall warehouses. An elegant Custom House on the Pointe
replaces an old potash store. Other warehouses are built on the
old ship yard, and the Grey Nuns having removed to their new
establishment on Guy Street, their buildings are disappearing,
St. Peter Street being continued to the harbour by cutting
directly through their old church.

“Such was the aspect of the harbour of Montreal in 1818, and
such it is today (1872) and I sincerely hope this article may be
preserved to be republished half a century hence, accompanied by
a description of the harbour as it then was.”

To continue the story of the developments of the harbour for the
greater part of fifty years. In 1875 Mr. Robert Bruce Bell, Major
General Newton and Mr. Sanford Fleming drew up a report and plan
for the improvement of the Habour. Mr. John Kennedy, for so many
years Chief Engineer of the Harbour Commissioners, has not only
designed but carried out many of the improvements now existing.

Ten years ago there was no Alexandra Basin or wharf to speak of,
there was no level harbour front, no permanent sheds, over a
dozen of which have only been finished within the past four years.

Magnificent concrete wharves with corrugated iron sheds built on
solid concrete foundations have been built opposite the plants of
some of Montreal’s largest industries.

The Harbour Commissioners’ tracks pass behind the sheds affording
direct communication all over the harbour, while excellent
wharfage facilities permit of the circulation of any amount of
traffic.

The greatest addition to the port in recent years, however,
and urged by the Montreal Board of Trade since 1887, has been
the huge floating dock, the “Duke of Connaught,” which was
successfully towed across the Atlantic in the fall of 1912.
It was dedicated by H.R.H., the Governor General on 18th of
November, 1912.

H.R.H. the Governor General in replying to the Commissioners’
address well said that “by the arrival and installation of this
great floating dock, the great reproach against the St. Lawrence
trade route has been removed, and the largest vessels can now run
up to Montreal, secure in the consciousness of entering a port
which is in possession of a competent modern equipment for repair
and examination.”

The dock is capable[2] of accommodating vessels of Olympic size
or larger and necessitates the employment of a staff of 500 men,
the majority of them skilled workmen. The dock can accommodate
thirty vessels at present operating on the St. Lawrence route
which are too wide of beam to be taken into any existing dock
between here and Halifax, 1,000 miles away.

A ship building plant which is to be operated in connection with
the dock is to give employment to about two thousand men.

The type of Port of Montreal is a combination of a protected
tidal basin, riverside quays and pier jetties.

There is no rise and fall of tide, but the river level fluctuates
to an extent of about 12 feet from high water in the spring to
low water in the autumn.

During the winter, due to ice shoves, the water occasionally
rises to an extreme of 28 feet above the low water level. An
artificial embarkment, parallel to the shore, about one and
one-third miles long, protects the whole of the upper part of
the harbour, including the entrance to the Lachine Canal, from
not only the currents of the river but from ice shoves. This
constitutes the protected tidal basin in which the water rises
and falls with the river level.

It has not been necessary to purchase any land above the high
water mark on the beach, as all piers and wharves have been made
artificially by building out into the shallow water and the
berths formed by dredging.

From the entrance to the protected basin for about two and
one-half miles downstream, to Hochelaga, the river channel is
too much contracted to permit of the construction of piers or
jetties, and this part of the harbour is developed as riverside
quays, sufficient width for harbour purposes being obtained by
building the quay-walls in deep water and filling in the area
behind to give a width from 100 to 250 feet. Below Hochelaga,
where the river section is larger, piers have been built out into
the river, inclined so as to give an easy angle of approach from
the ship channel.

The success of the port is due primarily to its early
development, before any of the water front had been alienated
from the crown, and to its geographical, physical and trade
situation.

No rights or franchises stand in the way of further extensions,
and the sentiment of the country is in favour of a continuance
of the policy of retaining the whole harbour area in the public
interests.

The facility of approach both by ocean vessels, inland vessels
and railways to a convenient point of transfer makes Montreal
almost unique, there being nothing in the way of close connection
for traffic from all points, and almost in the heart of a large
and growing city.

Montreal Harbour is also the terminus of the St. Lawrence Canal
System, which affords navigation between Montreal and Lake
Erie, a distance of 300 miles, for vessels of 14 feet draft
and a carrying capacity of 2,500 tons. From Lake Erie to this
head of Lake Superior vessels are able to navigate with a draft
of 20 feet and a carrying capacity of 10,000 tons. The inland
navigation centering in Montreal therefore commences either by
the all lake route of 1,600 miles and vessels of 14 feet draft,
or by the lake-and-rail routes, using the 10,000 ton boats to
Georgian Bay ports or Port Colborne, and connecting with Montreal
either by short-haul rail route or the St. Lawrence canals.

The following figures give the total trade in the Harbour from
1901 to 1914:

           Sea-going Vessels     Inland Vessels.
            Arrived in Port.
                     Total                Total
            Number   Tonnage     Number   Tonnage
  1912       736    2,403,924    12,586   4,649,767
  1900       726    1,393,886     8,310   1,659,616

             Total Trade
  1911      $201,066,256
  1901      $121,292,349
  1914      $251,873,912

About two-thirds of the grain comes to Montreal in steamers
carrying 2,500 tons on the 14 foot draft. These vessels cannot
afford to wait, but must be unloaded at once if they are to be
attracted to Montreal. The rest of the grain coming from the
Georgian Bay ports by rail must also be unloaded quickly, as
during the grain rush there is a constant railway car shortage.
The storage and rapid handling of grain has thus become, in the
last few years, a new factor in the problem of harbour economy.
There are three modern grain elevators at present in the harbour
and none of the older type. Of the modern elevators, one belongs
to the Grand Trunk Railway. It had a capacity of 1,000,000
bushels, but has been enlarged to a capacity of 2,100,000. The
others belong to the Harbour Commissioners. No. 1 in 1915 will
be capable of storing 4,000,000 bushels; while No. 2, recently
erected opposite Bonsecours Market, has a capacity of 2,600,000,
and can handle 1,000,000 bushels a day. It is entirely built of
reinforced concrete, and is the largest of this kind in the world.

It is easy to see that Montreal Harbour, being the farthest
inland ocean port of the Northern Continent and also the terminus
of the inland Canadian canal and railway routes, is an important
factor in the grain carrying trade of the Northern part of the
Continent.

In 1914 about two million dollars have been expended by the
Harbour Commission in dredging, renovating piers and wharves,
building new sheds and wharves, and other work incidental to the
five-year program of development undertaken by them at a total
cost of $15,000,000. All this work has been under the direction
of Mr. W.G. Ross, chairman, Mr. Farquhar Robertson, and Colonel
A.E. Labelle, commissioners.

The great desire is now to lengthen the shipping season.
Professor Barnes, of McGill University, has made the study of
ice his specialty and he is at present carrying on experiments
for the Canadian government. He is of the opinion that winter
navigation is a possibility. At present the government has, on
the St. Lawrence, two ice-breakers, which extend the time of
navigation by a few days. The ice difficulty arises where the
river widens into a lake, as at Lake St. Peter. Ice forms on the
sides of the lake and is blown into the current. When the banks
again converge, this ice jams, soon forming a solid ice-bridge.
The ice-shoves which occur in the spring are caused in the same
way. The solution of the problem is to have ice-breakers always
suitably situated to break these bridges as soon as they form.


                               II

                      HARBOUR COMMISSIONERS

The following is a list of the Boards of Harbour Commissioners
that have executed the duties of the Trust from 1830 up to the
present time showing the interest represented by each member:--

* Indicates the President of the Board.

  (_c_) Indicates the representative of the Corn Exchange.
  (_t_) Indicates the representative of the Montreal Board of Trade.
  (_m_) Indicates the representative of the City of Montreal.
  (_s_) Indicates the representative of the Shipping interest.
  (_c de c_) Indicates the representative of the Chambre de Commerce.

The members not indicated as representatives of the Corn
Exchange, Board of Trade, City of Montreal, Chambre de Commerce
or Shipping interest have been appointed by the Government of
their time. From 1907 the members have been exclusively appointed
by the Government.

              1830 to 1836.
  Hon. George Moffatt.*
  Jules Quesnel, Esq.
  Capt. Robert S. Piper.

              1836 to 1839.
  P.L. Letourneux, Esq.
  Thomas Cringan, Esq.
  Turton Penn, Esq.*

              1839 to 1840.
  Turton Penn, Esq.*
  Thomas Cringan, Esq.
  William Lunn, Esq.

              1840 to 1850.
  J.G. Mackenzie, Esq.*
  John Try, Esq.
  C.S. Rodier, Esq.

              1850 to 1855.
  John Try, Esq.*
  Hon. John Young,* from 1853.
  Louis Marchand, Esq.

              1855 to 1856.
  Hon. John Young.*
  H.H. Whitney, Esq.
  Sir George E. Cartier.
  Doctor Nelson. (_m_)
  Hon. H. Starnes. (_t_)

              1856 to 1858.
  Hon. John Young.*
  H.H. Whitney, Esq.* Chairman _pro tem_.
  Sir George E. Cartier.
  Hon. H. Starnes. (_m_)
  Hon. L.H. Holton. (_t_)

              1858 to 1859.
  Hon. John Young.*
  Sir George E. Cartier.
  H.H. Whitney, Esq.
  Hon. L.H. Holton. (_t_)
  J.A. Berthelot, Esq. (_m_)

              1859 to 1860.
  C.S. Rodier, Esq. (_m_)
  Hon. John Young.
  H.H. Whitney, Esq.*
  Thomas Kay, Esq. (_t_)
  A.M. Delisle, Esq.

              1860 to 1861.
  C.S. Rodier, Esq. (_m_)
  Hon. John Young.
  H.H. Whitney, Esq.*
  A.M. Delisle, Esq.
  Thomas Cramp, Esq. (_t_)

              1861 to 1862.
  C.S. Rodier, Esq. (_m_)
  Hon. John Young,* Chairman _pro tem_ in 1862.
  H.H. Whitney, Esq.*
  A.M. Delisle, Esq.
  E. Atwater, Esq. (_t_)

              1862 to 1863.
  Hon. John Young.
  H.H. Whitney, Esq.*
  Hon. L.H. Holton. (_t_)
  A.M. Delisle, Esq.
  Hon. J.L. Beaudry. (_m_)

              1863 to 1864.
  Hon. John Young.*
  A.M. Delisle, Esq.
  Thomas Cramp, Esq. (_t_)
  Hon. J.L. Beaudry. (_m_)
  Henry Lyman, Esq. (_t_)

              1864 to 1865.
  Hon. John Young.*
  Thomas Cramp, Esq.
  Hon. J.L. Beaudry. (_m_)
  John Pratt, Esq.
  P. Redpath, Esq. (_t_)

              1865 to 1866.
  Hon. John Young. *
  Thomas Cramp, Esq.
  Hon. J.L. Beaudry. (_m_)
  John Pratt, Esq.
  J.H. Winn, Esq. (_t_)

              1866 to 1867.
  Hon. H. Starnes. (_m_)
  A.M. Delisle, Esq.*
  J. McLennan, Esq. (_t_)
  George Stephen, Esq.
  William Workman, Esq.

              1867 to 1869.
  Hon. H. Starnes. (_m_)
  A.M. Delisle, Esq.*
  George Stephen, Esq.
  William Workman, Esq.
  Thomas Rimmer, Esq. (_t_)

              1869 to 1870.
  Hon. H. Starnes. (_m_)
  A.M. Delisle, Esq.*
  J.H. Winn, Esq. (_t_)
  George Stephen, Esq.
  William Workman, Esq.

              1870 to 1871.
  Hon. John Young. (_t_)
  Hon. H. Starnes. (_m_)
  A.M. Delisle, Esq.
  George Stephen, Esq.
  William Workman, Esq.

              1871 to 1872.
  Hon. John Young. (_t_)
  A.M. Delisle, Esq.*
  George Stephen, Esq.
  William Workman, Esq.
  C.J. Coursol, Esq. (_m_)

              1872 to 1873.
  A.M. Delisle, Esq.*
  George Stephen, Esq.
  William Workman, Esq.
  C.J. Coursol, Esq. (_m_)
  Hugh McLennan, Esq. (_t_)

              1873 to 1874.
  Hon. John Young.*
  A.M. Delisle.
  William Workman, Esq.
  Hugh McLennan, Esq. (_t_)
  Doctor Bernard, (_m_)
  Victor Hudon, Esq.
  M.P. Ryan, Esq.
  Andrew Allan, Esq. (_s_)
  W.W. Ogilvie, Esq. (_c_)

              1874 to 1875.
  Hon. John Young.*
  Thomas Cramp, Esq.
  John Pratt, Esq.
  Hugh McLennan, Esq. (_t_)
  Doctor Bernard. (_m_)
  Andrew Allan, Esq. (_s_)
  W.W. Ogilvie, Esq. (_c_)
  Peter Donovan, Esq.
  Adolphe Roy, Esq.

              1875 to 1876.
  Hon. John Young.*
  Thomas Cramp, Esq.
  John Pratt, Esq.
  Hugh McLennan, Esq. (_t_)
  Doctor Bernard. (_m_)
  Andrew Allan, Esq. (_s_)
  Peter Donovan, Esq.
  Adolphe Roy, Esq.
  Charles H, Gould, Esq. (_c_)

              1876 to 1877.
  Hon. John Young.*
  Thomas Cramp, Esq.
  Hugh McLennan, Esq. (_t_)
  Andrew Allan, Esq. (_s_)
  Peter Donovan, Esq.
  Adolphe Roy, Esq.
  Charles H. Gould, Esq. (_c_)
  Dr. W.H. Hingston. (_m_)
  Hon. J.R. Thibaudeau.

              1877 to 1878.
  Hon. John Young.*
  Thomas Cramp, Esq.* _pro tem_ 1877.
  Hon. J.L. Beaudry. (_m_)
  Hugh McLennan, Esq. (_t_)
  Andrew Allan, Esq. (_s_)
  Peter Donovan, Esq.
  Adolphe Roy, Esq.
  Charles H. Gould, Esq. (_c_)
  Hon. J.R. Thibaudeau.

              1878 to 1879.
  Thomas Cramp, Esq.*
  Hon. J.L. Beaudry (_m_)
  Hugh McLennan, Esq. (_t_)
  Andrew Allan, Esq. (_s_)
  Peter Donovan, Esq.
  Adolphe Roy, Esq.
  Charles H. Gould, Esq. (_c_)
  Hon. J.R. Thibaudeau.
  Edward Mackay, Esq.

              1879 to 1881.
  Hugh McLennan, Esq. (_t_)
  Victor Hudon, Esq.
  Andrew Allan, Esq. (_s_)
  Charles H. Gould, Esq. (_c_)
  S. Rivard, Esq. (_m_)
  Andrew Robertson, Esq.*
  J.B. Rolland, Esq.
  Edward Murphy, Esq.
  Henry Bulmer, Esq., *Chairman _pro tem_.

              1881 to 1885.
  Hon. J.L. Beaudry. (_m_)
  Hugh McLennan, Esq. (_t_)
  Victor Hudon, Esq.
  Andrew Allan, Esq. (_s_)
  Charles H. Gould, Esq. (_c_)
  Andrew Robertson, Esq.*
  J.B. Rolland, Esq.
  Edward Murphy, Esq.
  Henry Bulmer, Esq.

              1885 to 1887.
  Hugh McLennan, Esq. (_t_)
  Victor Hudon, Esq.
  Andrew Allan. Esq. (_s_)
  Charles H. Gould, Esq. (_c_)
  Andrew Robertson, Esq.*
  J.B. Rolland, Esq.
  Edward Murphy, Esq.
  Henry Bulmer, Esq.
  Honoré Beaugrand, Esq. (_m_)

              1887 to 1888.
  Hugh McLennan, Esq. (t)
  Victor Hudon, Esq.
  Andrew Allan, Esq. (s)
  Charles H. Gould, Esq. (c)
  Andrew Robertson, Esq.*
  Hon. J.B. Rolland.
  Edward Murphy, Esq.
  Henry Bulmer, Esq.
  Hon. J.J.C. Abbott, Q.C., M.P. (_m_)

              1888 to 1889.
  Hugh McLennan, Esq. (_t_)
  Victor Hudon, Esq.
  Andrew Allan, Esq. (_s_)
  Chas. H. Gould, Esq. (_c_)
  Andrew Robertson, Esq.*
  Edward Murphy, Esq.
  Henry Bulmer, Esq.
  Hon. J.J.C. Abbott, Q.C., M.P. (_m_)
  J.O. Villeneuve, Esq.

              1889 to 1890.
  Hugh McLennan, Esq, (_t_)
  Victor Hudon, Esq.
  Andrew Allan, Esq. (_s_)
  Chas. H. Gould, Esq. (_c_)
  Andrew Robertson, Esq.*
  Hon. Edward Murphy.
  Henry Bulmer, Esq.*
  J.O. Villeneuve, Esq.
  Jacques Grenier, Esq. (_m_)

              1890 to 1891.
  Hugh McLennan, Esq. (_t_)
  Victor Hudon, Esq.
  Andrew Allan, Esq, (_s_)
  Charles H. Gould, Esq. (_c_)
  Hon. Edward Murphy.
  Henry Bulmer, Esq.*
  J.O. Villeneuve, Esq.
  Jacques Grenier, Esq. (_m_)
  Richard White, Esq.

              1891 to 1893.
  Hugh McLennan, Esq. (_t_)
  Victor Hudon, Esq.
  Andrew Allan, Esq. (_s_)
  Charles H. Gould, Esq. (_c_)
  Hon. Edward Murphy.
  Henry Bulmer, Esq.*
  Richard White, Esq.
  James McShane, Esq. (_m_)

              1893 to 1894.
  Hugh McLennan, Esq. (_t_)
  Victor Hudon, Esq.
  Andrew Allan, Esq. (_s_)
  Charles H. Gould, Esq. (_c_)
  Hon. Edward Murphy.
  Henry Bulmer, Esq.*
  J.O. Villeneuve, Esq.
  Richard White, Esq.
  Hon. Alphonse Desjardins. (_m_)
  L.E. Morin, Esq. (_c de c_)

              1894 to 1895.
  Hugh McLennan, Esq, (_t_)
  Victor Hudon, Esq.
  Andrew Allan, Esq. (_s_)
  Hon. Edward Murphy.
  Henry Bulmer, Esq.*
  J.O. Villeneuve, Esq.
  Richard White, Esq.
  L.E. Morin, Esq. (_c de c_)
  W.W. Ogilvie, Esq.
  N.A. Hurteau, Esq.
  John Torrance, Esq. (_c_)

              1895 to 1896.
  Hugh McLennan, Esq. (_t_)
  Victor Hudon, Esq.
  Andrew Allan, Esq. (_s_)
  Hon. Edward Murphy.
  Henry Bulmer, Esq.*
  J.O. Villeneuve, Esq. (_m_)
  Richard White, Esq.
  L.E. Morin, Esq. (_c de c_)
  W.W. Ogilvie, Esq.
  N.A. Hurteau, Esq.
  John Torrance, Esq.
  H. Laporte, Esq.
  Frank J. Hart, Esq.

              1896 to 1897.
  Hugh McLennan, Esq. (_t_)
  Andrew Allan, Esq. (_s_)
  L.E. Morin, Esq. (_c de c_)
  John Torrance, Esq. (_c_)
  R. Wilson Smith, Esq. (_m_)
  Robert Mackay, Esq.*
  Jonathan Hodgson, Esq.
  Robert Bickerdike, Esq.
  Alphonse Racine, Esq.
  Eustache H. Lemay, Esq.
  William Farrell, Esq.

              1897 to 1898.
  Andrew Allan, Esq. (_s_)
  John Torrance, Esq. (_c_)
  R. Wilson Smith, Esq. (_m_)
  Robert Mackay, Esq.*
  Jonathan Hodgson, Esq.
  Robert Bickerdike, M.L.A.
  Alphonse Racine, Esq.
  Eustache H. Lemay, Esq.
  William Farrell, Esq.
  David G. Thomson, Esq. (_t_)
  Joseph Contant, Esq. (_c de c_)

              1898 to 1899.
  Andrew Allan, Esq. (_s_)
  John Torrance, Esq. (_c_)
  Robert Mackay, Esq.*
  Jonathan Hodgson, Esq.
  Robert Bickerdike. M.L.A.
  Alphonse Racine, Esq.
  Eustache H. Lemay, Esq.
  William Farrell, Esq.
  David G. Thomson, Esq. (_t_)
  Joseph Contant. Esq. (_c de c_)
  Raymond Préfontaine, Q.C., M.P. (_m_)

              1899 to 1901.
  Andrew Allan, Esq. (_s_)
  John Torrance, Esq. (_c_)
  Hon. Robert Mackay.*
  Jonathan Hodgson, Esq.
  Robert Bickerdike. M.L.A.
  Alphonse Racine, Esq.
  Eustache H. Lemay, Esq.
  William Farrell, Esq.
  Joseph Contant, Esq. (_c de c_)
  Raymond Préfontaine, K.C., M.P. (_m_)
  James Crathern, Esq. (_t_)

              1901 to 1906.
  R. Mackay, Esq.*
  R. Bickerdike, Esq.
  J. Hodgson (resigned).
  A. Racine.
  E.H. Lemay.
  J. Crathern. (_t_)
  L.E. Geoffrion. (_c de c_)
  H.A.A. Brault.
  A. McFee. (_c_)
  W.E. Doran.
  H. Laporte. (_m_)
  H.A. Ekers. (_m_)
  J. Cochrane. (_m_)
  R. Reford. (_s_) resigned.
  Andrew A. Allen.
  E. Goff Penny.

              1907 to 1912
  G.W. Stephens.*
  L.E. Geoffrion.
  C C. Ballantyne.

              1913
  W.G. Ross.*
  F. Robertson.
  A.E. Labelle.

List of Secretaries of the Board of Harbour Commissioners of
Montreal, from its establishment in 1830 up to the present time
(1914).

  Frederick Griffin, May, 1830, to May, 1831.
  Nicholas Charles Radiger, May, 1831, to April, 1837.
  W. Badgley, April, 1837, to January, 1838.
  Francis Badgley, January, 1838, to July, 1841.
  John F. Badgley, July, 1841, to February, 1852.
  John Glass, February, 1852, to October, 1855.
  Alexander Clerk, October, 1855, to May, 1863.
  H.H. Whitney, May, 1863, to January, 1877.
  H.D. Whitney, January, 1877, to June, 1887.
  Alexander Robertson, July, 1887, to December, 1898.
  David Seath, December, 1898, to present time (1914).
  Michael Fennell, Assistant Secretary (1909-1914).

List of Engineers and Superintendents in charge of the deepening
of the Ship Channel between Montreal and Quebec, or otherwise
prominently connected with the execution of the work up to 1914.

  Capt. Henry W. Bayfield, R.N., in charge of the Admiralty Survey
  of the River and Gulf of St. Lawrence, made several special
  reports in connection with the deepening of Lake St. Peter.

  Capt. Robert S. Piper, Royal Engineer, Consulting Engineer, 1830.

  John Cliff, C E., Superintendent of Works and Draughtsman, 1830
  to 1845.

  C.M. Tate, C.E., Superintendent of Works and Draughtsman, 1845 to
  1848.

  David Thompson, Esq., C.E., made survey and estimate for
  deepening channel in 1841.

  Charles Atherton, Esq., Civil Engineer in charge of the surveys
  and investigations made in Lake St. Peter, in 1842-3.

  F.P. Rubidge, Esq., Civil Engineer in charge of surveys,
  investigations, etc., in Lake St. Peter, in 1847.

  C.S. Gzowski, Esq., C.E., Engineer of the Harbour Works and
  Consulting Engineer to the Ship Channel Improvements, 1851 to
  1853.

  T.C. Keefer, Esq., C.E., Engineer of the Harbour Works and
  Consulting Engineer to the Ship Channel Improvements, 1853 to
  1855.

  Robert Forsyth, Esq., C.E., Engineer of the Harbour Works and
  Consulting Engineer to the Ship Channel Improvements, 1855 to
  1864.

  A.G. Nish, Esq., C.E., Engineer of the Harbour Works and
  Consulting Engineer to the Ship Channel Improvements, 1864 to
  1875.

  John Kennedy, Esq., C.E., M.I.C.E., Chief Engineer of the Harbour
  Works and the Ship Channel Improvements, 1875 to 1907.

  Captain Vaughan, Superintendent of Dredging, 1844 to 1846.

  Captain Bell, Superintendent of Dredging, 1851 to 1856.

  Robert Forsyth, Esq., C.E., Superintendent of Dredging, November,
  1856, to April, 1857.

  Capt C.L. Armstrong, Superintendent of Dredging, 1857 to 1867,
  and in 1874-5.

  Capt. Thomas McKenzie, Superintendent of Dredging, 1876 to 1883.

  James Howden, Esq., Superintendent of Dredging, 1883 to 1888.

  Frederick W. Cowie, M.J.C.E., Chief Engineer, 1907.


                               III

                       CUSTOMS AND EXCISE

               IMPORTS AND EXPORTS--EXCISE DUTIES

  THE PRESENT CUSTOM HOUSE--A MEMORIAL OF 1790 FOR A CUSTOM
    HOUSE INDEPENDENT OF QUEBEC--THAT OF 1799 RECANTING THE FORMER
    MEMORIAL--THE MONTREAL COMMITTEE OF TRADE OF 1831--STEAM VESSELS
    CHANGE CONDITIONS--FIRST CUSTOM HOUSE PROPER AT MONTREAL--THE
    COLLECTORS’ NAMES--THE SHIPPING FEDERATION--STATISTICS--EXPORTS
    AND IMPORTS SINCE 1842--TRADE OF PORT OF MONTREAL--CUSTOMS DUTIES
    SINCE CONFEDERATION--EXCISE DEPARTMENT OF MONTREAL.

The business of the Customs was conducted before 1840 in a
building on Capitol Street. In 1836 the building now used by
the Inland Revenue on Place Royale was commenced and opened for
the customs office in 1845. It is of the Tuscan order and was
designed by Mr. Ostell.

In 1790 in the fall the merchants of Montreal presented a
memorial desiring the establishment of a custom house separate
from that of Quebec on two grounds: (1) the necessity of having
the goods landed at Quebec; (2) the want of authority in the
surveyor of the ports to grant certificates for the exportation
of pot and pearl ashes. This was strenuously objected to by the
naval officers, on the ground that were the prayer answered the
passage between Quebec and Montreal would be taken advantage of
by the country merchants, shop keepers, publicans, etc., to carry
on an illicit trade “to the injury of the revenue and the fur
traders.” The complaints in the memorial state that the landing
at Quebec of cargoes for Montreal “must be attended with very
heavy expense for agents, wharfage and labourers, besides the
waste that will happen on cargoes of liquor by landing. What
is of still greater consequence, is the loss of time which may
arise, it being well known that the delay of a few hours waiting
for a clearance upwards has occasioned vessels to be many weeks
in performing a voyage of sixty leagues.” This is, of course,
an allusion to the sailing vessels then solely used. These
inconveniences were removed and the application was not repeated.
A further memorial, dated from Montreal the 21st of October,
1799, represents that certain modifications are all that are
required and that “a separate and independent custom house may
introduce intricacies, difficulties, delays and expense beyond
what at present exists and can be foreseen and if so render the
means of redress extremely tedious, not to say impracticable.”
The names attached to the memorial are Isaac Todd, Forsyth,
Richardson & Company, Auldjo, Maitland & Co.; Leith, Jameson &
Company; John Gray; Samuel David; James and Andrew McGill; David
David; McTavish, Frobisher & Company; J. Laing; Parker, Gerard &
Ogilvie; Richard Dobie.

The introduction of steam vessels made new regulations necessary.
In 1831 vessels coming to Montreal continued to report at
Quebec. In consequence of remonstrances the superintendent of
customs residing at Montreal was authorized by a provisional
act to collect the provincial revenues there, but this was only
a partial relief, as the crown duties had still to be settled
for at Quebec, to the great loss of merchants, shippers and
consignees. The Committee of Trade of Montreal represented in
their memorial of 1831 that the navigation of the St. Lawrence
between Quebec and Montreal was rendered speedy and certain by
the employment of steam towboats, but the necessity of entering
the vessels at the Quebec custom house caused a delay of one day
and sometimes two days in unloading. The burdens laid upon the
shipping coming to Montreal, the memorial states to have been
exceptional for that city, no other instance being known of a
merchant being compelled to pay duties on his importations at a
distance of 180 miles from the port of discharge, the expense
and inconvenience thence arising being equivalent to an extra
tax. The memorial reveals the difference of the two ports today.
It states that the vessels resorting to Montreal bore a small
proportion to those entering Quebec, but the memorials already
anticipated that by improvements in the river, vessels from
sea would land at Montreal the whole of the goods for its own
district, Upper Canada and the adjoining frontier of the United
States.

The first Custom House building situated at Place Royale was
begun in 1836 and finished in 1838. Montreal, accordingly
obtained its own completed Custom House in 1838. In 1870 the
Government purchased from the Royal Insurance Company the present
Custom House building at 1 Common Street. A newly erected Custom
House is now (1914) in course of completion on Youville Square.

The Collectors of Customs at the Port of Montreal have been:

Wm. Hall, from 1838 to 1849: Tancrède Bouthillier, from July,
1850, to November, 1863; Benj. Holmes, from December, 1863, to
May, 1865; John Lewis, acting, from May, 1865, to September,
1866; A.M. Delisle, from September, 1866, to October, 1873; W.B.
Simpson, from November, 1873, to June, 1882; M.P. Ryan, from
July, 1882, to January, 1893; W.J. O’Hara, acting, from January,
1893, to December, 1895; R.S. White, from January, 1896.

Montreal became a port of entry in 1842.


                 THE MONTREAL PILOTAGE AUTHORITY

In the early part of the eighteenth century an official knowing
the navigation of the St. Lawrence boarded the king’s ships and
brought them to Quebec, and in 1731 the first official pilot
was appointed, and sent each season thereafter to Isle Verte, to
await ships arrivals. This appears to have been the beginning of
the St. Lawrence Pilotage.

After the British occupation, and during the term of General
Murray’s governorship, in 1762, an order was issued requiring a
number of pilots to be stationed early in each season at Bic, and
to remain until the middle of October, also a further number at
Isle aux Coudres. No person was to act as a pilot, unless he had
passed a satisfactory examination, and had a certificate signed
by the governor.

In 1805 there was passed an act entitled “An Act for the better
regulation of pilots and shipping in the Port of Quebec, and
in the harbours of Quebec and Montreal and for improving the
navigation of the River St. Lawrence, and for establishing a fund
for decayed pilots, their wives and children.”

This was the beginning of the Trinity House of Quebec and its
jurisdiction then included the harbour of Montreal. Further acts
were passed in 1807, 1811, 1812, 1822 and 1834, amending and
extending the provisions of the preceding acts. By an act passed
in 1832, a separate Trinity House was constituted for Montreal.
This arrangement continued until the passing of the act in 1873,
which made the Harbour Commissioners of Montreal the authority.
They continued to be the authority till the passing of the Act
of 1903, when the Minister of Marine and Fisheries became the
authority, which he still continues to be.


                THE SHIPPING FEDERATION OF CANADA

Montreal is the headquarters of the Shipping Federation of
Canada. In 1903 in order to amalgamate those interested in
the shipping business of Canada a charter of incorporation
(3 Edward, VII Chap.), was granted to “Hugh Andrew Allan,
representing the firm of H. & A. Allan; John Russell Binning,
representing Furness, Withy & Company, Limited; James Thom,
representing the Hamburg-American Packet Company; William I.
Gear, representing the Robert Reford Company, Limited; Frank A.
Routh, representing the firm of F.A. Routh & Company; David W.
Campbell, representing the Elder-Dempster Company, Limited; James
Gordon Brock, representing J.G. Brock & Company; Charles McLean;
McLean, Kennedy & Company; and John Torrence, representing the
Dominion Line of Steamships; and the Leyland Line of Steamships
respectively, and such others as hereafter become members of the
association.”


                       IMPORTS AND EXPORTS

Statistics of Imports and Exports since Montreal was made a Port
of Entry in 1842:

In its fiftieth annual report the Montreal Board of Trade in 1892
presented tables of statistics showing as nearly as possible the
development of trade in Montreal since 1842, when this city was
made a port of entry.

The accompanying figures portraying conditions every ten years,
were taken from that report and give an excellent summary.

Prior to 1850 the government did not publish blue book
information of trade conditions, and the statistics referring
to trade before that time were obtained from various sources.
What early figures were obtained are accurate so far as could
be determined, but there are unavoidable gaps where information
could not be secured.


                        EXCISE DEPARTMENT

Previous to the confederation of the provinces, the excise
duties, the canal tolls and the harbor dues were collected under
the management of the Customs Department. The revenues from the
other public works were collected either by the Department of
Public Works or by the Crown Lands Department and the issue of
bill stamps was managed by a Board of Stamps and Excise.

  By the act constituting the Department of Inland Revenue, it was
  enacted that the Department should have the control and management

  1. Of the collections of all duties of excise.

  2. Of the collections of all stamp duties and the preparation and
  issue of stamps and stamped paper, except postage stamps.

  3. Of Internal taxes.

  4. Of Standard weights and measures.

  5. Of the administration of the laws affecting the culling and
  measuring of timber and the collection of slidage and boomage
  dues.

  6. The collection of bridges and ferry tolls and rents.

  These conditions have at different dates been changed until now.

  The Inland Revenue consists of Excise, Weights and Measures, Gas
  and Electric Light, and Food Inspections.

  Excise is the branch which supervises and collects the duties
  from distilleries, malthouses, breweries, tobacco factories,
  cigar factories, bonding warehouses, compounders, bonded
  factories for the manufacture in bond of vinegar, acetic acid,
  perfumes, pharmaceutical preparations, soaps, fulminates, malt
  cereals, etc.

  The Inland Revenue is divided into two services: the Inside and
  the Outside.

  The Inside comprises all officials in the Department at Ottawa.

  The Outside comprises all the rest of the staff, the officials
  who actually assess and collect the revenues and duties.

  The Excise, Montreal, is officered by sixty-two men--forty-six of
  whom are permanently appointed, the rest, sixteen, are temporary
  employees.

  There are licensed, in Montreal: One distillery, four malthouses,
  sixteen breweries, forty-one cigar factories, one acetic acid
  factory, five perfumes, six pharmaceutical preparations, fourteen
  bonded warehouses, twenty-one chemical stills and one wood
  alcohol manufacturer.

  The Weights and Measures Inspection are responsible for the
  verification of all weights and measures used in trade.

  Gas Inspection has charge of the inspection of all meters used by
  consumers of gas and the illuminating power and purity of gas.

  Food Inspection deals with the purity of alimentary substances.

  As a collecting office, the Inland Revenue, Montreal, is second
  only to the Customs, and collects nearly one-half of all the
  excise revenue of Canada.

  The officers named by the British Government and who remained
  in office at Confederation were R. Bellemare, Inspector; P.
  Durnford, Collector, assisted by a staff of fourteen officers.

The first excise office was situated on St. James Street, on part
of the site now occupied by “La Presse Building”; in 1871, it was
moved to the present location, at No. 412 St. Paul Street, (the
site of the first public square in Montreal).

The steady increase in collections of the Inland Revenue duties
is one of the best indications of the growth of Montreal.


  TABLE OF THE TRADE OF THE PORT OF MONTREAL FROM 1882 TO 1912

                Sea-going                     Value of      Value of
              Vessels arrived    Total       Merchandise   Merchandise
  Years          in Port         Tonnage      Exported      Imported

  1913-14         ---              ---      $99,238,107   $152,635,805
  1912            736            2,403,924   87,679,422    148,977,605
  1911            762            2,338,252   71,254,446    129,811,810
  1910            747            2,234,722   71,642,648    114,473,845
  1909            670            1,911,413   76,642,485     96,787,938
  1908            739            1,958,604   80,583,171     79,851,814
  1907            740            1,924,475   85,494,534    106,391,891
  1906            820            1,973,223   89,616,459     89,376,259
  1905            833            1,940,056   73,786,548     80,345,420
  1904            796            1,853,853   57,947,045     76,056,830
  1903            802            1,890,904   70,939,510     78,527,078
  1902            758            1,541,272   59,755,673     70,737,832
  1901            742            1,453,048   56,220,759     65,632,086
  1900            726            1,393,886   62,496,431     64,071,590
  1899            801            1,517,611   64,040,982     65,018,544
  1898            868            1,584,072   62,729,180     61,117,703
  1897            796            1,379,002   55,156,956     47,036,196
  1896            709            1,216,468   49,160,364     45,900,270
  1895            640            1,069,386   40,348,197     41,996,686
  1894            734            1,096,909   40,401,392     42,514,582
  1893            804            1,151,777   47,700,433     53,796,227
  1892            735            1,036,707   45,638,275     47,670,361
  1891            725              938,657   39,344,783     48,418,569
  1890            746              930,332   32,027,176     45,159,124
  1889            695              823,165   32,638,270     47,415,620
  1888            655              782,473   24,049,638     39,856,283
  1887            767              870,773   29,391,858     43,391,715
  1886            703              859,699   27,925,916     42,086,266
  1885            629              683,854   25,209,813     37,042,660
  1884            626              649,374   27,458,775     41,859,299
  1883            660              664,263   27,122,891     44,073,915
  1882            648              554,692   26,503,001     50,527,497

The foregoing table does not include inland vessels, the figures
of which for the season of 1912 were 12,586 vessels with a
tonnage of 4,649,767.


  CUSTOMS DUTIES COLLECTED AT PORT OF MONTREAL SINCE CONFEDERATION

              1867-68     $4,009,675.56
              1868-69      3,608,254.75
              1869-70      4,128,051.89
              1870-71      5,140,132.03
              1871-72      5,358,701.13
              1872-73      5,011,154.89
              1873-74      5,633,705.88
              1874-75      5,862,047.05
              1875-76      4,292,057.10
              1876-77      3,865,410.50
              1877-78      3,814,864.77
              1878-79      4,026,975.75
              1879-80      5,232,802.19
              1880-81      7,077,793.32
              1881-82      8,100,341.40
              1882-83      8,181,935.78
              1883-84      7,041,306.18
              1884-85      6,856,186.99
              1885-86      7,353,009.24
              1886-87      8,874,147.75
              1887-88      8,548,737.15
              1888-89      9,265,405.73
              1889-90      8,776,875.22
              1890-91      9,065,486.99
              1891-92      6,627,526.11
              1892-93      7,078,707.12
              1893-94      6,653,299.34
              1894-95      5,983,342.25
              1895-96      6,779,879.74
              1896-97      6,765,771.85
              1897-98      7,207,005.29
              1898-99      8,662,764.98
              1899-1900    9,136,377.52
              1900-01      9,018,659.84
              1901-02     10,041,662.04
              1902-03     11,803,298.00
              1903-04     12,437,927.95
              1904-05     11,591,656.70
              1905-06     13,275,623.17
              1906-07     11,433,595.61
              1907-08     16,480,921.60
              1908-09     12,935,098.62
              1909-10     16,325,229.78
              1910-11     18,327,198.73
              1911-12     19,951,815.23
              1912-13     25,655,340.42
              1913-14     24,732,198.57

The variations in the amount of duties collected are due (1) to
the growth of imports and (2) to changes in tariff rates.


                       IMPORTS AND EXPORTS

                                                1842.        1850.
  Imports                                     $8,075,840   $6,905,400
  Exports                                      1,714,644    1,744,772
  Ocean vessels--
    Number                                           137          222
    Tonnage                                       41,319       46,867
  Exports--
    Butter (lb.)                                              595,840
    Cheese (boxes)                                                 44
    Breadstuffs (bushels), flour reduced to
      terms of wheat                                        1,091,435
  Inland vessels---
    Number                                                      3,726
    Tonnage                                                   391,520

                                                              1860.
  Imports                                                 $15,334,010
  Exports                                                   6,020,715
  Ocean vessels--number                                           259
  Ocean vessels--tonnage                                      121,559
  Inland vessels--number                                        4,558
  Inland vessels--tonnage                                     348,652
  Exports--Butter (lb.)                                     2,598,262
  Exports--Cheese (boxes)                                         301
  Exports--Breadstuffs (bushels)                            4,563,206
  Imports--Teas (lb.)                                       1,577,179
  Imports--Raw sugar (lb.)                                 18,862,536

                                                              1870.
  Imports                                                 $25,680,814
  Exports                                                  19,100,413
  Ocean vessels--number                                           680
  Ocean vessels--tonnage                                      316,846
  Inland vessels--number                                        6,345
  Inland vessels--tonnage                                     819,476
  Exports--Butter (lb.)                                     8,127,360
  Exports--Cheese (boxes)                                      99,576
  Exports--Breadstuffs (bushels)                           13,691,310
  Exports--Lumber (value)                                     528,793
  Imports--Teas (lb.)                                       6,269,071
  Imports--Raw sugar (lb.)                                 51,857,741

                                                              1880.
  Imports                                                 $37,073,068
  Exports                                                  30,224,673
  Ocean vessels--number                                           710
  Ocean vessels---tonnage                                     628,271
  Inland vessels--number                                        6,489
  Inland vessels--tonnage                                   1,044,380
  Exports--Butter (lb.)                                    20,547,840
  Exports--Cheese (boxes)                                     514,964
  Exports--Breadstuffs (bushels)                           26,091,130
  Exports--Cattle                                              35,070
  Exports--Sheep                                               64,592
  Exports--Lumber (value)                                     673,481
  Exports--Phosphates (tons)                                    8,667
  Imports--Teas (lb.)                                       4,339,182
  Imports--Raw sugar (lb.)                                 82,551,474

                                                              1890.
  Imports                                                 $45,934,406
  Exports                                                  31,660,216
  Ocean vessels--number                                           746
  Ocean vessels--tonnage                                      930,332
  Inland vessels--number                                        5,162
  Inland vessels--tonnage                                     966,959
  Exports--Butter (lb.)                                     3,243,920
  Exports--Cheese (boxes)                                   1,379,684
  Exports--Breadstuffs (bushels)                           13,550,974
  Exports--Cattle                                             123,136
  Exports--Sheep                                               43,135
  Exports--Lumber (value)                                   3,039,963
  Exports--Phosphates (tons)                                   23,488
  Imports--Teas (lb.)                                       7,020,076
  Imports--Raw sugar (lb.)                                136,874,550


                        PORT OF MONTREAL

Combined Statement Showing the Number and Tonnage of all Vessels
that Arrived in Port During Ten Years--1901 to 1913:

        Trans-Atlantic  Maritime  Provinces          Inland    Grand     Total
  Year Vessels  Tonnage  Vessels  Tonnage   Vessels  Tonnage   Vessels  Tonnage

  1901   449   1,016,918   293    436,130   8,450   1,683,186   9,192  3,136,334
  1902   436   1,072,538   322    468,734   9,395   1,885,150  10,153  3,426,522
  1903   484   1,418,156   318    472,748   15,358  2,415,791  16,140  4,306,695
  1904   417   1,270,640   379    586,057   10,063  2,354,975  10,859  4,211,672
  1905   442   1,354,829   391    585,227   11,112  2,785,551  11,945  4,725,607
  1906   439   1,380,835   381    592,388   12,557  3,095,174  13,377  5,068,395
  1907   381   1,339,014   361    586,972   14,420  3,620,950  15,161  5,546,936
  1908   364   1,315,688   375    642,916   12,434  3,589,124  13,173  5,548,028
  1909   371   1,436,963   299    474,450   10,991  3,146,494  11,661  5,057,907
  1910   411   1,658,414   336    574,808   13,636  4,327,799  14,383  6,561,021
  1911   401   1,695,613   361    642,639   11,670  4,275,019  12,432  6,613,271
  1912   409   1,775,487   327    628,437   12,586  4,649,767  13,322  7,053,691
  1913   477   2,020,333   343    670,202   13,426  5,703,467  14,246  8,394,002

Statement Showing Classification of Vessels that Arrived in Port
for Ten Years, from the Lower St. Lawrence and Martime Provinces.

            Steamships     Barques      Schooners     Grand Total
  Year    No.   Tonnage  No. Tonnage  No.  Tonnage  Nos.  Tonnage

  1901    282  434,140    1    999    10     991    293   436,130
  1902    311  406,671  ----  ----    11   1,063    322   468,734
  1903    303  468,100  ----  ----    15   4,648    318   472,748
  1904    366  582,819  ----  ----    13   3,238    379   586,057
  1905    364  580,485  ----  ----    26   4,116    391   585,127
  1906    367  588,980  ----  ----    14   3,408    381   592,388
  1907    343  579,930  ----  ----    18   7,042    361   586,972
  1908    350  640,244  ----  ----    25   2,672    375   642,916
  1909    273  470,936  ----  ----    26   3,514    299   474,450
  1910    346  572,022  ----  ----    30   2,786    336   574,808
  1911    330  639,752  ----  ----    31   2,887    361   642,639
  1912    292  625,099  ----  ----    35   3,388    327   628,457
  1913    299  666,053  ----  ----    44   4,149    343   670,202


FOOTNOTES:

[1] “Canadian Antiquarian,” 1873, Vol. II, pp. 16-21.

[2] The Dock, one of the largest yet built, is capable of docking
the largest existing vessel in the British Navy. It is of the
double-sided self-docking type, on the principle known as the
“bolted sectional.” It consists of a pontoon or lifting portion
of the dock, and two parallel side walls, built on to and forming
part of the same, and the whole length is divided into three
complete and separate sections, which, when bolted together, form
the complete dock. These sections are so arranged that when the
dock is separated into its three parts, any two of them can dock
the remaining third between them. For this purpose each section
is fitted with its own independent pumping machinery, so that it
can also act as an independent unit.

The general dimensions of the dock are as follows:--

                                                  Ft.   In.
  Length over platforms                           600    0
  Length over pontoons                            550    6
  Width over all                                  135    0
  Depth of pontoon at center                       17    0
  Length of side walls                            470    6
  Height of side walls above pontoon deck          42    0
  Width of side walls at base                      17    6
  Width of side walls at top                       12    6
  Clear width between roller fenders              100    0
  Draught of vessel                                27    6
  Lifting capacity                             25,000 tons

The construction of the dock is such as to make it suitable for
lifting a modern British battleship, the pontoon deck being
specially stiffened to allow it to support a large portion of the
weight of the vessel on side or bilge, as well as central, keels.

In the season of 1914, 27 vessels were repaired.

In addition a ship building yard has been built in 1914 with five
or six miles of railroad connecting with the C.P.R., C.N.R., and
G.T.R. lines. At present a gigantic million dollar ice breaker,
the second in the world, is being built by this firm for the
Dominion government to be launched in 1915. In addition a bucket
dredge costing $835,000 has been ordered by the Government for
delivery in June, 1916.




                           CHAPTER XL

                     TRANSPORTATION BY RAIL


                               IV

               MONTREAL AND THE RAILWAYS OF CANADA

  MONTREAL THE CENTRE OF RAILWAY COMMUNICATION--THE FIRST
    RAILWAY--THE SNAKE RAIL AND THE “KITTEN”--“THE CHAMPLAIN AND
    THE ST. LAWRENCE”--THE SECOND RAILWAY, THE ATLANTIC AND ST.
    LAWRENCE--THE AMALGAMATION INTO THE GRAND TRUNK RAILWAY COMPANY.

  1. ITS HISTORY--ITS PRESIDENTS--AN INTERESTING REPORT AT
    CONFEDERATION--NEW FREIGHT YARDS--CHAS. M. HAYS AND THE GRAND
    TRUNK PACIFIC RAILWAY--THE BUILDING OF THE VICTORIA BRIDGES BY
    THE GRAND TRUNK RAILROAD.

  2. THE CANADIAN PACIFIC RAILWAY--ITS FINANCIERS--TWIN TO
    CONFEDERATION--OPPOSITION TO PROMOTERS--EARLY FINANCIAL
    DIFFICULTIES--NO BIG FORTUNES MADE--ROLLING STOCK--A
    REAL EMPIRE BUILDER--HELPING NEW INDUSTRIES--HUGE LAND
    HOLDINGS--IRRIGATION OF BARREN LANDS.

  3. OTHER SYSTEMS--THE “INTERCOLONIAL”--THE CANADIAN NORTHERN AND
    ITS MOUNTAIN TUNNEL.

Night and day from January 1st to December 31st, year in and year
out, the heavily loaded passenger and freight trains pass into
and out of the railway terminals of Montreal, bearing to their
various destinations millions of human beings and thousands of
tons of freight.

Altogether eight important railways have entrance to Montreal at
the time of writing, while yet another transcontinental line, the
Canadian Northern, is planning a new and imposing terminal in
connection with the tunnelling of Mount Royal, which is the most
important engineering undertaking in Montreal projected since
the construction of the Victoria tubular bridge. At the present
time the Canadian Pacific, the Grand Trunk, the Intercolonial,
the Canadian Northern, the New York Central, the Rutland, the
Delaware & Hudson, and the Central Vermont railroads are all
running trains directly into Montreal. The railway freight yards
are crowded with cars bearing the initials of practically every
road of any importance on the continent.

This huge business in carrying, of such vital importance to the
city of Montreal, yet so little appreciated, because of our
familiarity with it, is less than a century old, for the success
of the locomotive was not admitted until the opening of the
Liverpool & Manchester Railway in 1830. On the news of this
the first railway in Canada, the Champlain & St. Lawrence, was
chartered in 1831 to run from La Prairie to St. Johns, P.Q., and
opened for traffic with horses in 1836 and first worked by the
locomotives in 1837. Its length was only sixteen miles.

The rails were of wood with flat bars of iron spiked on them, and
from the tendency of this class of rail to curl or bend upwards
as the wheels passed over it, it became known as the snake rail.
The first locomotive used on the line was sent from Europe,
accompanied by an engineer, who for some unexplained reason had
it caged up and secreted from the public eye.

The trial trip was made by moonlight in the presence of a
few interested parties and it is not described as a success.
Several attempts were made to get the “Kitten,” for such was
the nick-name applied to this pioneer locomotive, to run to St.
Johns, but in vain: the engine proved refractory and horses were
substituted for it.

It is related that a practical engineer being called in from
“the States,” the engine which was thought to be hopelessly
unmanageable, was pronounced in good order, requiring only plenty
of wood and water. This opinion proved correct, for after a
little practice the extraordinary rate of speed of twenty miles
per hour was obtained. It was a “strap” rail until 1847 when the
heavy T-iron was laid.

The Champlain & St. Lawrence Railway, thus inaugurated the
railway era of Canada in the year 1832, and the line continued
to be operated as a separate and distinct organization for
just forty years. In 1872 it was made a part of the Grand
Trunk Railway, and it is operated as a part of the Grand Trunk
organization at the present time.

The Atlantic & St. Lawrence Railroad followed the Champlain
& St. Lawrence. Although not a Canadian railroad, this line
had a tremendous influence on the development of the country,
since it gave the Canadian people access for the first time to
an all-the-year-round port. Halifax and St. John were yet mere
villages without any rail communication with the industrial
heart of the country, separated from it by that vast stretch
of then undeveloped and almost unexplored country which we now
recognize as lower Quebec and upper New Brunswick. The Atlantic
& St. Lawrence line gave access to the port of Portland, running
from that city through a thriving agricultural country to Norton
Mills, Vermont, just on the Canadian border. Norton Mills and
La Prairie, now merely villages without any special importance,
were at this period in Canada’s growth railway terminals of
consequence.

The Atlantic & St. Lawrence road was built with a purpose. It
was chartered in 1845, and long before it was completed, in
1852, to be exact, the Grand Trunk Railway of Canada was granted
a charter by the Provinces of Upper and Lower Canada, which,
with subsequent additions, provided for the construction of the
present Grand Trunk line between Riviere du Loup, Quebec, and
Sarnia, Ontario.

The Atlantic & St. Lawrence Railroad was completed about 1860,
and was at once leased for a period of 999 years to the Grand
Trunk Railway. This gave the Canadian people unbroken stretches
of railroad from Portland, Maine, and from Riviere du Loup to
Montreal, and on this foundation the present huge transportation
business of this city has been erected. The people of Canada
recognized the importance of this development by grants of cash
and mail subsidies to the line.

In point of age, therefore, the Grand Trunk Railway claims
priority over all the Canadian railways now existing, and the
road may be said to be the pioneer railway of Canada.


                     THE GRAND TRUNK RAILWAY

The first meeting of the Grand Trunk Railway Company of Canada
was held in the City of Quebec on Monday, July 11, 1853. The Hon.
John Ross was appointed president of the road; Benjamin Holmes
was made vice president, while Sir C.P. Roney became managing
director and secretary-treasurer.

The following is a list of the presidents and general managers of
the road, with their dates of service:

      Presidents.                     Dates of Service.
  Hon. Jno. Ross                              1852-1862
  Sir Edward Watkin, Bart                     1862-1869
  Richard Potter                              1869-1876
  Sir Henry W. Tyler                          1876-1895
  Sir Charles Rivers-Wilson                   1895-1910
  Chas. M. Hays                               1910-1912
  E.J. Chamberlin                             1912-

      General Managers.               Dates of Service.
  Sir C.P. Roney (Man. Dir.)                  1853-
  T.E. Blackwell (Man. Dir.)                  1853-1862
  C.J. Brydges (Man. Dir.)                    1862-1874
  Sir Joseph Hickson                          1874-1890
  L.J. Seargeant                              1891-1896
  Chas. M. Hays                               1896-1901
  Geo. B. Reeve                               1901-
  Chas. M. Hays (Vice Pres. and Gen. Mgr.)    1902-1912

  (Since January 1, 1910, Mr. Alfred W. Smithers has been Chairman
  of the Board of Directors in London, England--a new departure in
  the organization.)

In order to gain insight into the conditions under which the
railway was operating, Sir Henry Tyler, who later became
president of the road, paid an official visit to the Dominion in
1867 under instructions from the Board of Directors. Sir Henry’s
report gives some interesting information about the road as it
then existed.

He found that the Grand Trunk at that time comprised a total length
of 1,377 miles. In addition to the water routes hereinbefore
mentioned, the chief competitor in Canada of the company was the
Great Western Railway Company, extending from Niagara Falls to
Sarnia, Ontario, and to Detroit, Michigan. As a result of this
competition Sir Henry reported (1867) that the rates for freight
service averaged 0.92 of a cent per ton per mile--flour being
carried between Montreal and Toronto as low as a cent per ton per
mile. The average rate on the Grand Trunk System for the year 1910
was 0.69 of a cent per ton per mile.

The average number of freight cars to a train was then reported
as 15.5; the average net load of each train as 150 tons.

The records for 1910 show an average of 26.6 freight cars per
train and the average weight of “revenue” freight carried, per
train, was 299 net tons.

The original gauge of the Grand Trunk was five feet six inches,
except that portion between Port Huron and Detroit, where the
“narrow gauge” of four feet eight and one-half inches was used.
Sir Henry’s report recommended the adoption of the wider gauge
for the whole of the road, bringing it into conformity with the
other lines on the continent.

The year of Sir Henry’s visit was also the year of Confederation,
and this change, which had so tremendous an effect upon Canada’s
history, had also an important bearing upon the history of the
Grand Trunk Railway. The new Dominion Government, being desirous
of opening up the country purchased on the 17th of July, 1879,
that portion of the Grand Trunk road which lies between Riviere
du Loup and Point Levis, with the object of making it a portion
of the new Government road, which subsequently became the
Intercolonial Railway.

With the proceeds of this sale the Grand Trunk agreed to
construct a line between Port Huron, Michigan, and Chicago. The
International Bridge Company undertook another great engineering
feat in 1857, in the building of the Niagara River Bridge,
between Fort Erie and Buffalo. This bridge was completed in 1873,
and entirely rebuilt to accommodate the heavier traffic in 1900.
The two systems of railways, the Grand Trunk and Great Western,
were amalgamated into the present system under agreement dated
August 12, 1882.

The directors started out in 1889 to make the Grand Trunk the
longest double tracked system on this continent, and the line is
now double tracked from St. Rosalie, a point thirty-eight miles
east of Montreal and St. Johns, twenty-seven miles south, to
Chicago, an unbroken double tracked run of 907 miles. With other
double tracked lines connecting principal cities the Grand Trunk
is now in possession of 1,037 miles of duplicate tracks.

The Grand Trunk owns and controls ten grain elevators in various
parts of the Dominion and the United States, having a total
capacity of 20,000,000 bushels of grain. The latest of these, an
elevator with a capacity of 5,500,000 bushels, is located at Fort
William, and was built in connection with the Grand Trunk Pacific
Railway.

The four principal bridges owned by the Company, the Victoria
Bridge, the Coteau Landing Bridge, the steel arch bridge across
Niagara Gorge, and the International Bridge across the Niagara
River, have a total length of 16,653 feet, and the railway owns
other bridges in different parts of the continent, which have a
total of 18.43 miles.

Recent improvements and developments of the line in the city and
district of Montreal include the erection of the magnificent new
offices on McGill Street and the promotion, in connection with
the Jacques Cartier Union Railway, of a belt line around the
city. Also, in 1892, the company secured control of the Canadian
Express Company, which now operates over all the Grand Trunk and
connecting lines from Montreal.

[Illustration: INITIALS OF SIR GEORGE SIMPSON AND HIS INDIAN
GUIDE FOUND NEAR BANFF IN 1913 The date, 1841, indicates that the
initials were evidently carved at the time Sir George was making
the original survey of the Canadian Pacific Railroad through the
mountains.]

[Illustration: FIRST TRAIN IN CANADA Laprairie, P.Q.--St. Johns,
P.Q. 1836]

[Illustration: GRAND TRUNK LOCOMOTIVE BUILT IN G.T.R. SHOPS IN
1859 Hauled royal train with Prince of Wales (King Edward VII)
through Canada in 1860.]

[Illustration: LORD STRATHCONA DRIVING THE GOLDEN SPIKE
COMPLETING THE CANADIAN PACIFIC RAILROAD AT CRAIGENACHEE,
NOVEMBER 7, 1885.]

In order to better the existing conditions of handling its train
service, and to relieve as much as possible the already heavily
worked yards and general freight terminals, both at Point St.
Charles and on the Mountain Street to Chaboillez Square freight
sidings, the company has constructed two extensive systems of
freight yard tracks. One of these is located at Southwalk,
about two miles east of the passenger station at St. Lambert,
and the other is at Turcot, in Notre Dame de Grace Ward of the
City of Montreal. At St. Lambert there is an aggregate of about
twenty-seven miles of new sidings, and at Turcot, twenty-two
miles of new tracks have been laid down.

It is an interesting feature of these yards that no shunting or
switching movements is done on the main lines.

So far this chapter has dealt exclusively with the Grand Trunk
Railway System proper, and no mention has been made of that
momentous period of the railway history of the Dominion in
which we now live and which followed the agreement entered into
between the Grand Trunk Railway and the Dominion Government.
This agreement provided for the construction of a railroad clear
across Canada, from Moncton, New Brunswick to Prince Rupert,
British Columbia, wholly within Canadian territory. The project
was conceived by the late President Chas. M. Hays, of Montreal,
who was one of the victims of the Steamship Titanic disaster.

The new line, known as the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway, is now
practically complete and is already operating over the major
portion of its road, there being a fine passenger and freight
service between Ft. William, Ontario, and Prince Rupert, British
Columbia. Its construction marks the most important development
of the Grand Trunk, since the amalgamation with the Great Western
Railway of Canada, and it is expected to make the Pioneer Railway
of Canada one of the greatest forces in the development of the
country, the uniting of East with West into one huge harmonious
whole.

The Grand Trunk Pacific Railway was incorporated October 24,
1903, following the contract entered into between the G.T.R. and
the Dominion Government, on July 29th of the same year, providing
for the construction of the line as a joint government and Grand
Trunk enterprise.

Roughly the terms under which this huge work is being carried out
are as follows: The railway is divided into two sections, Eastern
and Western. The Western Division, extending from Winnipeg to
Prince Rupert, is subdivided into the Prairie and Mountain
sections, and the entire line has been constructed by the Grand
Trunk Pacific Railway Company.

The Eastern Division, 1,804 miles in length, is being
constructed by the Canadian Government, under supervision of the
Commissioners of the Transcontinental Railway. It links Moncton
with Winnipeg, and thus gives the company a clear coast to coast
line. Upon the completion of the work, the Government leases the
Eastern Section to the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway for a period
of fifty years, on the following terms:

For the first seven years of the said term, the Company
shall operate the same subject only to payment of “Working
Expenditures;” for the next succeeding forty-three years the
company shall pay annually to the government, by way of rental, a
sum equal to 3 per cent per annum upon the cost of construction
of the said division, provided that if, in any one or more of
the first three years of the said period of forty-three years
the net earnings of the said division, over and above “Working
Expenditure” shall not amount to 3 per cent of the cost of
construction, the difference between the net earnings and
the rental shall not be payable by the company, but shall be
capitalized and form part of the cost of construction, upon the
whole amount of which cost a rental is required to be paid at the
rate aforesaid after the first ten years of the said lease, and
during the remainder of the said term.

All the branch lines of the Eastern Division will be constructed
by and at the cost of the company.

The company is responsible for the construction of all lines
west of Winnipeg, the Government guaranteeing the principal and
interest of three-quarters of the cost of the main line from
Winnipeg to the Pacific Coast terminus at Prince Rupert, B.C.,
for fifty years, but with the limitation that such three-quarters
of the cost shall not exceed thirteen thousand dollars per mile
on the Prairie Section--with no limitation, however, in regard to
the cost of the Mountain Section. The Grand Trunk Railway Company
of Canada has guaranteed the principal and interest for fifty
years of the balance required to complete the main line of the
Western Division.

The line has created a new seaport on the Pacific, which will
give a further impetus to our already immense trade with Japan
and the other commercial countries of the Orient, as well as
opening a fresh route to Australasia which cannot but help bind
in closer union the British Dominions of Australia and New
Zealand, already closely related to us by the splendid sentiment
of Empire. It opens up splendid new wheat fields in the Prairie
Provinces of Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta, and taps also
immensely valuable coal and agricultural areas in British
Columbia. Through its branches it reaches the already created
industrial and commercial centres of the great West, while its
fleet of steamships links Prince Rupert with the other Pacific
Coast ports, both on the Canadian and the United States shores.
With the example of the growth of the Western United States since
adequate rail facilities were provided for their cities and towns
before us, it is difficult indeed to see how the Grand Trunk
Pacific Railway can fail to establish itself as a dominant factor
in the growth of Western Canada, a growth which at this view it
is impossible to estimate and which only time can show.

Before passing from the history of the Grand Trunk Railway, a
place must be given to the record of the great engineering feat
in transportation effected by them. Previous to the building of
the first tubular Victoria bridge erected by this company over
the St. Lawrence at Montreal, the only communication with the
Grand Trunk lines hitherto, was by ferry to Longueuil, then the
terminus. Passengers and freight were carried on barges across
the St. Lawrence. In winter sleighs were used across the ice. In
a period of one to three weeks in the spring this crossing was
either abandoned or very dangerous in the break up of the ice.


                      THE VICTORIA BRIDGES

As early as 1847 the Hon. John Young had desired to erect a
bridge. In 1851 he used the opinion and report of Mr. Thomas C.
Keefer, a Canadian, on the practicability of building a bridge
over the St. Lawrence in the position eventually chosen and based
on the findings of his report.[1]

[Illustration: GRAND TRUNK STATION]

[Illustration: GRAND TRUNK OFFICES]

[Illustration: PLACE VIGER STATION]

[Illustration: PROPOSED MONTREAL TERMINAL OF CANADIAN NORTHERN]

[Illustration: WINDSOR STREET STATION]

In 1852 Mr. A.M. Ross, C.E., the engineer of the Victoria Bridge,
came to Canada on behalf of English capitalists. He was met at
Quebec by Sir John Young who took him to Montreal to inspect the
locality for a bridge. Mr. Ross suggested an iron tubular bridge,
took soundings and plans of the bridge as designed by him and
returned in the fall.

Mr. Robert Stephenson, the consulting engineer, and a son of
George Stephenson, the great railway pioneer, came to Montreal in
1853 and at a complimentary dinner, he said:

“I cannot sit down without referring to the all-important subject
of a bridge over your magnificent river. Abundance of information
was brought over to me in England by my esteemed friend, Ross,
during the last visit he paid to that country so that I was able
to get a good notion of what the bridge was to be before I came
out here.

“I had been here twenty-five years before and the St. Lawrence
seemed to be like the sea, and I certainly never thought of
bridging it.” On the same occasion he said: “I assure you I
appreciate your kindness most amply and one of the proudest days
of my life will be that when I am called upon to confer with
the engineers of the Grand Trunk Railway on bridging the St.
Lawrence.”

The stone for the first pier of the Victoria Bridge was laid on
July 22, 1854, by Sir. C.P. Roney, the first secretary of the
Grand Trunk, along with Vice President Benjamin Holmes, Mr. James
Hodge, the builder, Mr. A.M. Ross, C.E., the engineer, and other
gentlemen who were also joined by Lady Roney, Mrs. Hodge and Mrs.
Maitland, each taking the trowel and assisting in preparing the
mortar board for the first stone in the first pier in the great
construction. Of the enormous difficulties in building it and the
danger by accidents, a dozen at least having been killed, we say
nothing beyond that the contractors had to contend with a rapid
stream two miles broad and with enormous shoves of ice.

One of those employed on the construction says: “There were
hundreds of men employed--many of them being Indians. The latter
manned the rafts that brought the timber down from Nun’s Island,
although, of course, it came from the west, at the first go-off.
We got our timber from the west and our stone from Pointe Claire.

“The first year’s work was entirely swept away. We had made good
progress with the under work and the crib work.

“Hundreds of men had worked all spring, summer and fall. The
work was well advanced and the contractors were congratulating
themselves that they would be able to fulfill their contract
on time; but the ice came down in the winter with a rush and
carried everything before it--crib work, material, coffer
dams--everything that had been done or set up. The loss was
great, but the loss of time was the most important.

“That necessitated another year in the duration of the contract.
The latter called for completion in five years. It was now seen
that six would be required. But nobody could be blamed, and the
contractors set to work with a will, and did the work over again.”

The first crossing was made on November 24, 1859, when the first
to cross were Vice President Holmes, Hon. George Etienne Cartier,
James Hodges, A. M. Ross, Walter Shanly, Messrs. Gzowski,
Macpherson, Forsyth, Captain Rhodes and others. The last stone
was laid and the last rivet driven on August 25, 1860, by the
young Prince of Wales, afterward King Edward VII. On the occasion
a grand banquet was held near the bridge, at which addresses were
given by the Prince, the Duke of Newcastle, Mr. A.M. Ross, Mr.
Hodges and others. To commemorate the event Mr. Blackwell had a
medal prepared by the chief engineer of Her Majesty’s seals, a
gold one of which was presented to the Prince and a bronze one to
each of the officers of the Grand Trunk Railway.

It bears a fine impression in relief of the Prince as he then
was, and the words, “Welcome Albert Edward, Prince of Wales.
Visited Canada and inaugurated the Victoria Bridge, 1860.”

The first train with passengers traversed the bridge December 17,
1859.

This structure was 9,184 feet long, of twenty-three spans of 242
feet and one in the center of 330 feet.

Sir George Etienne Cartier, before being knighted, was asked by
Queen Victoria at Windsor, “Mr. Cartier, I hear that the Bridge
at Montreal is a very fine structure. How many feet is it from
shore to shore?”

The reply was pleasing to Her Majesty. “When we Canadians build
a bridge and dedicate it to Your Majesty we measure it, not in
feet, but in miles!”

The difficulties connected with the building of the bridge
were greater than they would be today. The facilities and the
machinery necessary were comparatively crude and inadequate. The
bridge itself was in the nature of an experiment; nor was it
designed in the original plan, for a tubular bridge. The plans
were altered several times during the progress of the work. It
needed the genius of George Stephenson, which had to be invoked,
to make the plan realizable.

But when the bridge was completed, it was almost instantly seen
what a boon it was to the whole country. Trade began to pick up.
Population increased. The Grand Trunk was extended. Towns began
to grow, and this great enterprise, brought to a successful
conclusion, encouraged other enterprises to follow.

It may be said that the building of the bridge brought out the
first of the British immigrants. Here and there, there might
have been a few, but the bridge opened up such possibilities
of expansion as encouraged people to come out, and especially
skilled men, who began to settle in the neighborhood of Point St.
Charles, forming the nucleus of that population which, today,
preserves the sturdy characteristics of the men who founded what
was then a distinct colony. The building of the bridge meant
the extension of the Grand Trunk shops, the giving of increased
employment, and the setting up of a big town on the other side of
the canal.

Before many years the growth of traffic called for the
replacement of this dark tubular bridge by the present openwork
steel bridge, with double tracks, carriage ways and foot walks
which now stand on the piers which held the old bridge. The Royal
Victoria Jubilee Bridge was opened for traffic on December 13,
1908.

The chief engineer of this bridge was Mr. Joseph Hobson, now
consulting engineer of the Grand Trunk Railway System. The
contractors were the Detroit Bridge and Iron Company for the
whole of the superstructure and for the construction of
nineteen spans of it, including the center one. The remaining six
spans were constructed by the Dominion Bridge Company of Montreal.

[Illustration: VICTORIA JUBILEE BRIDGE, MONTREAL Opened for
traffic December 13th, 1898]

[Illustration: CANADIAN PACIFIC RAILROAD BRIDGE AT LACHINE]

[Illustration: VICTORIA TUBULAR BRIDGE, MONTREAL Opened for
traffic by H.R.H. the Prince of Wales, August 25th, 1860]

The masonry required for the enlargement of the abutments and
piers was built by Mr. William Gibson.

The work was commenced in October, 1897, by the erection of the
span on the west end, the structure being built completely around
the tube of the old bridge, the latter being cleverly utilized as
a roadway. Traffic never ceased except for twenty hours during
the whole construction, the longest delay being two hours. The
old bridge weighed 9,044 tons, the new 20,000 tons. The width of
the old bridge was sixteen feet, the new one sixty-six feet eight
inches. The height of the former superstructure was eighteen
feet, that of the new superstructure over all is from forty to
sixty feet. The new bridge ranks among the foremost constructions
of present engineering progress.

On October 16, 1901, the son of Edward VII, the Duke of York, and
Cornwall, now George V, visited the bridge with the Duchess, now
his Queen.

Though the Grand Trunk Railway is the pioneer railroad of
Canada, it was greatly assisted by English capitalists, although
Montrealers played a prominent part.


                  THE CANADIAN PACIFIC RAILWAY

The history and development of the Canadian Pacific Railway
shows, however, a still closer connection with Montreal. The
great line was born in this city, reared through an infancy of
tremendous difficulties here, and has always, and probably will
always, have its headquarters in this city. Though four of the
original syndicate, J.S. Kennedy, of New York; J.J. Hill, of St.
Paul; Morton Rose and Company, of New York, and Kohn Reinach,
of Paris, were not citizens, yet the four others were good
Montrealers, Lord Strathcona, then plain Donald A. Smith, Lord
Mount Stephen, then George Stephen, Duncan McIntyre, and R.B.
Angus, who, as faithful guardians, risked their very financial
existence that it should become a strong, self-supporting
institution, able to stand on its own legs. That their belief in
the future of this splendidly virile institution was justified,
everyone now realizes, but it is nevertheless a fact that the
general opinion of some of the wisest of Canada’s wise men at
the time of its commencement was that the C.P.R. would never be
finished, or if it should crawl through its first few years of
existence, it would never earn sufficient net profits to pay its
bills for axle grease.

Born in the midst of political turmoil, pulled through a puling
and precarious infancy only by tremendous personal sacrifice
on the part of those responsible for its existence, this
organization is now one of the leading corporations of the entire
world, its ramifications reaching clear around the globe and its
annual income counted in figures which stagger the mind of the
average man.

The C.P.R. owes its tremendous success to the imagination of its
sponsors, and to nothing else. When it was brought into being,
the developed portion of Canada was well served by the Grand
Trunk Railway and its connecting lines. There was no room for
another railway among the established markets of what is now
called Eastern Canada. But the men who created the C.P.R. out
of their hopes and their belief in the future of the country,
looked beyond the East. Between Ontario and the Pacific Coast,
according to popular superstition at that time there lay nothing
but trackless, ice bound wastes, of no value to man or beast,
and cut off from the balmy climate of British Columbia by the
impenetrable fastnesses of the Rocky Mountains. The original
syndicate and their executive led by William Van Horne, the great
constructive railroad genius of the nineteenth century, thought
differently. For one thing they had already had experience of the
possibilities of the Western United States, because of certain
railroad transactions conducted by them in that territory, and
they believed that the possibilities of Western Canada were every
bit as great. Neither ridicule nor abuse could shake them from
their determination, and they literally rammed their convictions
down the throat of an only half willing Dominion Government, to
what end we all know.

The project of a line connecting the railway system of
Canada with the seaboard of British Columbia was one of the
chief inducements held out to that province to enter into
Confederation. At several periods between Confederation and the
year 1880 the Dominion Government had before it very strong
schemes for the construction of a transcontinental line, but none
of them proved effective until what was known as the Canadian
Pacific Syndicate finally entered into a definite contract in
1880 for the construction of the road. The financial arrangements
were largely in the hands of the Montrealers already mentioned,
George Stephen, Donald A. Smith, R.B. Angus, and Duncan McIntyre.

As the Macdonald Government allied itself with the C.P.R.
proposals, the railroad was for some time classed by the public
as a Tory organization, but for the last twenty years the C.P.R.
has held itself aloof from all party politics. In the early days,
however, it was not surprising that opponents were vehement in
opposition. They condemned the scheme unsparingly, declaring
that it would never pay expenses. Their predictions of ruin and
disaster and the pessimistic attitude of influential parties
in England, no doubt, led the Canadian Government to grant a
larger aid to the enterprise in order to increase the chances
of ultimate success. The company was incorporated in 1881. Its
endowment consisted of 25,000,000 acres of land in western
Canada and $25,000,000 in cash. It was also presented with some
700 miles of railway, which the Government had constructed at a
cost of $35,000,000. The railway mileage taken over represented
less than one-fourth of the amount necessary to connect Montreal
and Vancouver. The cash subsidy of $25,000,000 represented
considerably more than a cash subsidy of that amount would
represent today, for thirty years ago a dollar in cash had a much
larger purchasing power. With reference to the land grant, it can
safely be said that, when the company was formed in 1881, few
realized its value.

The names of two men must be connected with the successful
fortunes of the company, William Van Horne, who was elected
general manager, and Thomas Shaughnessy, appointed purchasing
agent. Their humble offices were first in the Imperial Building,
on St. James Street, opposite Place d’Armes Square. The general
offices were next removed to Victoria Square, to the old Albert
Building. Things did not progress in the early stages, but fine
optimism marked these men.

At one of the early annual meetings there was great
consternation. The small stockholders were alarmed and Mr. Donald
McMaster spoke out indignantly for them. Then up rose Sir Donald
Smith and said:

“Gentlemen: I would be a richer man today if I had never touched
or seen the C P.R.; but I am not going to go back on it now. On
the contrary, my faith, which has never wavered, is stronger than
ever. I fully and unwaveringly believe in the C.P.R. I believe
in its future. I believe that in a very short time, it will be
the greatest earner in the Dominion of Canada. Mark my words.
Retain your holdings. Do not give way to depression. The moment
is unpropitious, owing to the general depression; but the clouds
will lift; and you will be thankful, in the course of a year or
so, that you held on to your stock.”

The bad times passed, the corporation turned the corner, the
earnings increased. Lord Mount Stephen retired, Sir William Van
Horne became president, Sir Thomas Shaughnessy became first
assistant, then general manager, and finally president. David
McNicoll moved up from assistant passenger agent to general
passenger agent until he became manager and vice president.

One remarkable feature of the history of the C.P.R. is that no
one of the men who financed the road in the beginning, has made
anything like a big fortune out of it, in spite of the tremendous
success which has crowned the undertaking. Lord Mount Stephen
sold the three or four thousand shares he held in the company
when he retired in 1885, at fifty-three. Lord Strathcona, of
course, retained his connection with the line, and drew his
dividends on the five thousand shares he held, but he did not
make what might be even considered a reasonable return for the
staking of his financial existence, and the same thing applies to
other men who have directed the affairs of the company from time
to time.

At the time of the incorporation of the road in 1881 the capital
was $5,000,000. Today it is $200,000,000 and every cent of it
needed to provide for the development of the corporation. In 1882
two stock issues totalling $60,000,000 worth of stock were made,
to complete the road. Three years later, on November 7, 1885,
Lord Strathcona drove the last spike and the road was officially
opened, and its splendid history began.

In 1886 the gross earnings of the road were $8,368,493. In 1911
the gross earnings were $104,167,808, crossing the hundred
million mark for the first time in the road’s history. This
growth has continued in corresponding ratio, though partially
effected by the international war of 1914.

In 1886 the mileage controlled by the C.P. R, was 4,315 miles.
Its rolling stock in its principal divisions in 1886, was
totalled as follows:

Locomotives, 336; freight cars, 7,835; no steamships.

In 1914, the line owned rolling stock as follows:

Locomotives, 2,248; freight cars, 88,000; first and second class
passenger cars, baggage cars and colonist sleeping cars, 2,174;
sleepers, dining and cafe cars, 502; conductors’ vans, 1,427;
work cars, shovels, etc., 5,850.

The total mileage owned and controlled by the line, up to June
30, 1914, was 18,050 miles, and the passenger cars could move
simultaneously 165,000 people.

In the course of its development, the C.P.R. has been extremely
fortunate in being able to secure for its directorate men of
broad vision. Thus it is that this railroad which is more than
a railroad, and this corporation which is in operation an
Empire Builder of the truest type, has found occasion in the
course of its existence to put its energy to work in directions
which the average railroad never dreams of. The scope of a
great transcontinental railroad is wide enough in ordinary
circumstances, but the policy of the C.P.R. has been to extend
its activities in every direction where it appeared that the
interests of the Dominion, which are indissolubly united with
the interests of the road, might be advanced. In pursuance of
this plan we get its immigration and land development policy,
which is unique on the Continent.

One of the first notable efforts of the road in this direction
was its aid to the cattle ranching industry in Alberta. By means
of low rates and the special facilities offered by the line
to cattle ranchers the great beef industry which founded the
prosperity of Alberta was nurtured and developed until it grew to
be a feature of Canada in the minds of uninitiated Old Country
people, and to the regular impression of snow and Indians which
prevailed in the average Englishman’s mind in the ’80s, was added
the romantic idea of cowboys. After cattle, came wheat and here
again the railroad aided the farmers in all possible directions,
realizing that in the prosperity of the inhabitants of the
territory which it served, lay its own future greatness.

In a thousand and one ways the great railroad has advanced
the various interests of the West. Its splendid immigration
organization has seconded the efforts of the Dominion Bureau in
London. Each year at harvest time it transports tens of thousands
of labourers from Eastern Canada to the West to help harvest its
crops, and as an instance of the lengths to which the road is
prepared to go in order to advance the interests of the great
community from which it draws the greater part of its wealth,
there may be taken the case of the Winnipeg water scheme.

Some years ago the City of Winnipeg desired to install an
expensive plant to improve its water supply. The undertaking was
a huge one, planned to meet the needs of the rapidly growing
city for many years to come and the cost was heavy. The C.P.R.
donated $200,000 to help defray the expenses, and Winnipeg was
duly provided with a water supply which cannot be bettered on the
Continent.

The Company’s various interests, outside of its straight railroad
work, would make by themselves a huge undertaking for any
ordinary commercial organization. It owns coal, copper, lead, and
gold mines, big smelting plants in British Columbia and enough
timber limits to make any lumber company in the Dominion envious.
The hotel section of the Company’s operations, originally planned
to provide accommodation for passengers where such accommodation
did not exist, have extended until they are a material factor in
the Company’s wealth.

The Company’s tremendous land holdings in the West are regarded
by many financial experts as its most powerful asset. When these
grants were made, or at least such of them as were made to the
Company in return for its services in opening up what was then
regarded as a barren and trackless waste, it is not likely that
anyone, not even excepting the directors themselves, realized
the value of the grants. Since the original grants were made
other valuable and extensive land areas have been acquired
through the purchase of other railways which owned land grants.
Altogether the Company now owns over seven million acres of land
in Manitoba, Alberta and Saskatchewan and nearly four and a half
million acres in British Columbia. These lands have steadily
increased in value as the railroad itself developed the country.
In 1905 the sales were 509,386 acres at an average of $4.80 per
acre. In 1909 the sales of these same lands were 306,083 acres
at an average of $10.96. In 1910 the inrush of settlers from the
United States and Great Britain served to increase the demand for
the C.P.R. lands and 829,609 acres of the unimproved lands sold
at $12.78 per acre along with 145,421 acres of irrigated lands
at $26.59 per acre. And in 1911, the sales of unimproved land
were 631,777 acres at the average of $14.11; and of irrigated
lands 19,097 acres were sold at the very satisfactory average
of $33.63 per acre. This progressive rise in value is most
impressive. Every year without exception shows an increase,
and in some years the increase is considerable. It is to be
remembered, too, that when the company sells a parcel of land
to a good farmer-settler it is just beginning its profitable
relations with him. For he will in all probability be a heavy
shipper of grain outward over its lines in future years, and he
will occasion the shipment of much merchandise inward as well.

The latest and perhaps the greatest work which the C.P.R.
has undertaken in connection with its land holdings, is its
irrigation scheme, which has transformed nearly one and a half
million acres of barren land into fertile farm country, at an
outlay of over $15,000,000. The rounding out of the irrigation
scheme involves the bringing of the best class of farmers from
the United Kingdom or the United States and planting them in
the Canadian West, on farms which are “ready made” for them.
Demonstration farms are provided to show the best methods of
working the land, and everything possible is done to ensure the
success of the newcomers’ enterprise. In this manner and by the
sale of similar farms to residents of the United States desirous
of settling in Canada, the C.P.R. in its latest undertaking
is perhaps doing more than ever before to provide Canada with
her most pressing need, sturdy self-reliant citizens, and so
furthering the cause of Imperial unity which has been the
guiding spirit of this splendid enterprise ever since those four
Montrealers dreamed their dream of a new Empire plucked from the
barren expanse of the Last Great West.

Of the C.P.R. steamship line we speak in its proper place. For
the C.P.R. railroad and its attendant enterprises on land, there
appears to be an almost limitless future. A rough estimate of
the value of its railroad, shipping and hotel systems would not
be far wrong if placed at $885,000,000. What the C.P.R. will
be doing this time ten years from now, who shall say? With the
inspiration of so glorious a past behind them, who can set a
limit on the possibilities which will open up for the new rulers
of the road’s destinies? The All Red Line so greatly discussed
some years ago as a government project already exists in the
C.P.R. It is possible to board a C.P.R. train at Windsor Street
and to circle the globe, never leaving the sphere of influence
of this tremendous organization. A splendid result surely to
be attained by the little quartette of dreamers whose idea of
a railroad line of Atlantic to Pacific met with so scornful a
reception when it was first mooted a bare forty years ago.


                    THE INTERCOLONIAL RAILWAY

The Intercolonial Railway, which runs from Montreal to Halifax,
and the two Sydneys, claims the distinction of being a successful
government-owned railroad.

It was originally the North American and European Railroad,
which was taken over by the government over half a century ago.
There were at that time only about fifty miles of railway. This
has been added to from time to time, until the road is now a
very considerable one in size and importance. It travels through
some of the finest scenery in Canada, and does a heavy tourist
business, the sporting country it touches being famous the world
over. It is connected with all the big Atlantic seaports, and has
grain elevators at St. John, N.B.

The actual trackage owned by the Intercolonial extends westward
only as far as St. Rosalie Junction. From there to Montreal the
trains have running rights over the Grand Trunk tracks.

The Intercolonial is of importance to Montreal in supplying the
means of communication to Halifax during the season of closed
navigation.


                  THE CANADIAN NORTHERN RAILWAY

The Canadian Northern first reached Montreal under the name of
the Great Northern Railway of Canada. Its history of the few
years preceding is full of interest. Its success has been due to
the financial and business ability of two Canadians, Sir William
Mackenzie and Sir Donald Mann.

What is now the Canadian Northern Railway had its inception in
December, 1906, when the Lake Manitoba Railway and Canal Company
built one hundred miles of track between Gladstone and Dauphin,
Manitoba, and ran trains over it. The line was a success from its
inception, and next year Mackenzie and Mann, famous partners,
built under the name of the Manitoba and South Eastern Railway, a
line out of Winnipeg running in the direction of Lake Superior.
The purchase of the Port Arthur, Duluth & Western line completed
the entrance into Port Arthur. The lines of the Northern Pacific
Railway in Manitoba were taken over by the Manitoba Government
and leased to the Canadian Northern for a period of 999 years,
which gave them terminal facilities in Winnipeg and connections
to the International Boundary. In 1901, the company which
started with one hundred miles of track and a payroll of $650 a
month found itself owning and operating 1,200 miles of line and
carrying 12,000,000 bushels of grain to the head of navigation at
Port Arthur. Extensions to Edmonton and through the valley of the
Saskatchewan were planned and the whole huge enterprise bloomed
forth one fine morning as the Canadian Northern Railway.

The rapid expansion of this comparatively insignificant railway
into a force to be reckoned with when discussing the growth of
Western Canada in the short space of five years made even the
optimistic Westerners sit up and take notice, but the activities
of the two Scotch Ontarians did not stop here. By 1905 the new
line had reached Edmonton, having built four bridges across
the Saskatchewan River to get there, while in the same year
Prince Albert was reached by way of the Swan River and Carrot
River valleys. On the way across, the C.N.R. made a city out
of Edmonton. When the line was first projected the town had
something like 3,000 people. Today it has 45,000 and is still
growing.

Saskatoon, Regina and Calgary quickly linked into the chain
until the Canadian Northern line west of the Great Lakes had a
total mileage of 5,000 miles. Construction joining Vancouver
with Edmonton is now being pushed rapidly to completion through
the Yellowhead Pass, and the Thompson and Fraser River valleys
and will be open for traffic in 1915. Construction is also going
on in Ontario which will link Montreal and Ottawa together in
a direct line with Port Arthur and the West, the line between
Toronto and Ottawa having been opened in January, 1914, making a
total mileage of 7,800 for the system at the end of 1914.

The history of the Canadian Northern’s activities in Montreal,
still fresh in the minds of our readers, gives a fair index of
the spirit in which this line is conducted and managed. The
C.N.R. desired an entrance to Montreal for its main line. It
was vital that the terminal should be central. Accordingly, the
property on Lagauchetiere Street was purchased and a freight
terminal at the Haymarket.

So when it was pointed out that Mount Royal stood serene between
the C.N. R. line and the C.N.R. terminal, the answer came back:
“Run a tunnel through it.” And accordingly, the Montreal Tunnel
is now being bored.

Typical also of the whole enterprise is the creation of the new
model city of Mount Royal. Obviously a lot of open farm land at
the northern entrance to the tunnel promised no profit for the
C.N.R. So they bought the land and sold it again in building
lots, and just as soon as the first electrical locomotive
pulls the first C.N.R. passenger train through the Mount Royal
tunnel there will be a new suburb--residences, and shops, and
postoffice--all complete ready to feed business into this train
and into the thousands which will follow. Of the Canadian
Northern steamships mention is made elsewhere.

The other railways mentioned as coming into Montreal, do so
on running rights with one or other of the above mentioned
railroads.


FOOTNOTES:

[1] Mr. Keefer’s name has not been sufficiently connected with
those of Ross and Stephenson.




                           CHAPTER XLI

                     TRANSPORTATION BY ROAD


                                I

        THE ANCIENT AND MODERN POSTAL SERVICE OF MONTREAL

  ANCIENT ROADS--THE “GRAND VOYER”--GOOD ROADS MOVEMENT--THE
    EVOLUTION OF ROADS--“POST” MASTERS RECOGNIZED IN
    1780--THE EARLY POSTAL SYSTEM OF MONTREAL AND BENJAMIN
    FRANKLIN--BURLINGTON THE TERMINUS--EARLY LETTER RATES--MAIL
    ADVERTISEMENTS--THE QUEBEC TO MONTREAL POSTAL SERVICE--EARLY
    POSTOFFICE IN MONTREAL--OCEAN AND RAILWAY MAIL SERVICE--THE
    PRESENT POSTOFFICE--ITS HISTORICAL TABLETS BY FLAXMAN--THE
    DEVELOPMENT OF THE POSTAL SYSTEM--THE POSTMASTERS OF MONTREAL.

The question of the transportation of the mails and the origin of
the Montreal postal services makes some prefatory remarks on the
road system necessary. The early roads were under the Grand Voyer
of the province, a sort of surveyor general who had deputies
“sous voyers” and surveyors under him. The roads were divided
into three classes: (1) _Chemins Royaux_--post roads or “front”
roads, the soil of which belonged to the crown; these generally
traversed the “front” of the seignories. (2) _Chemins de Ceinture
et de Traverse_--or back roads, the soil of which belonged to
the seigneurs. These ran in the rear and parallel with the royal
roads. (3) _Chemins de Sortie et de Communications_--called also
“_routes_” and by-roads. These were crown roads connecting those
in front and rear, also banal roads which were those leading to
the seigneury mill.

The office of Grand Voyer was held as early as 1669 by Sieur de
Bécanour. It had almost despotic power. This continued until
1832, when his powers were transferred to the road commissioners.
In 1841 the roads came under the municipality. The condition of
the early roads to Montreal and in Canada were deplorable, and
Carleton was compelled to enforce the “individual responsibility”
of proprietors and tenants to keep the post roads in repair.
These roads were thirty feet wide and the cross roads maintained
by joint labor were twenty feet wide. It was not until Sydenham’s
time that much improvement was effected, owing to the passive
resistance of the French-Canadian to enforced labour. By 1850
good roads ran over the Province in all directions. Not all of
them were well made, but most of them were useable for stage
traffic which had greatly increased.

The evolution of the Canadian roads (1) the bridle road, (2) the
winter road, (3) the corduroy road, (4) the common or graded
roads, (5) the turnpike, macadam, gravel and plank is as follows:

The bridle roads were made solely for the use of horsemen, before
carriages had been introduced into the more unsettled parts of
the country. By their aid the people found their way to religious
ceremonies and transported their grain on pack horses to the
neighbouring villages. They were made simply by clearing away
the branches and trunks of trees so as to allow a horse to pass
through the bush.

The winter roads were very important. The Canadian winter
with its snow and frost was a blessing to the farmer, giving
him a firm, smooth road over which heavy loads could be drawn
with ease. Most of the heavy freight was not moved until the
winter unless the water routes were accessible. It was in the
cold weather that the lumbermen and builders transported their
supplies and the farmer carried his crops to market.

The “corduroy” roads were made by placing tree trunks side by
side and consequently could be constructed only where there was
an abundance of timber. As these trees decayed with time and
moisture the roads required constant repair and a great amount
of valuable timber was wasted. It was not an uncommon thing for
one of these roads to be destroyed in a single season by frost.
In many places they actually delayed progress, as they were
used as an excuse for delaying the construction of more durable
highways. At their best they were rough, very slow and damaging
to vehicles, “any attempt at speed being checked by immediate
symptoms of approaching dissolution in the vehicle.” The effect
on the driver and his passengers appears to have been equally
disastrous, the “poor human frame being jolted to pieces.”

The common or graded roads were marked out by fences in the more
settled and open districts, and in the woods by wide clearings.
They were properly drained and bridged and an attempt was made to
reduce steep hills. Although they did not possess an artificial
road-bed, they were very serviceable except for the heaviest
traffic. Their construction was expensive, however, as they were
laid out in straight and direct lines with the idea of overcoming
rather than going around obstacles in their path.

In the more settled parts of Canada the construction of the
turnpike with its artificial road-bed began with the opening of
the nineteenth century. The materials composing the road-bed
varied. Gravel was used where convenient. In many districts
plank roads were used after the Union, but unless they rested
on a bed of sand were a failure owing to the expense of the
frequent necessary renewals. The most satisfactory road-bed was
of macadam, although in many places Canadian traffic was not
heavy enough thoroughly to consolidate the materials used in its
construction. The best roads of this kind were those outside
of Montreal and Quebec. In Upper Canada the turnpikes were
controlled by joint stock companies in the main and were kept in
a miserable condition.

Before the War of 1812 the four principal roads in the provinces
followed the routes taken later by the railways. The first,
connecting Lower Canada with the Maritime Provinces, began at
Point Levis, running thence to Temiscouata, whence it ran to
Fredericton which it connected with St. John, terminating at
Halifax, after traversing a total distance of 718 miles.

The second road followed the route taken later by the Grand Trunk
and Great Western Railways, running from Quebec via Montreal,
Coteau-du-lac and Cornwall, to Kingston and thence to York. From
York it ran to Michillimackinac by way of Fort Erie and Detroit,
a total distance of 1,107 miles.

The purpose of the third road, which ran from Montreal to the
international boundary line en route to Boston, was later
accomplished by the St. Lawrence and Atlantic Railway. The
other road twenty-eight miles long connected La Prairie wtih
Isle-aux-Noix.

On these roads the conveyances were the calèche and the post
chaise. The charge was high, varying from six and one-half cents
upward per mile. The first stages in Upper Canada, running
between Queenstown and Fort Erie, charged four cents per mile.
The original rate from Kingston to York by stage was $18.00
more than the present return first class fare from Montreal to
Toronto. The fare between York and Niagara was $5.00. On the
roads near Montreal and Quebec moderate rates were charged and a
considerable traffic maintained. In the Upper Province however
the roads were controlled by Companies who not only charged
excessive tolls but kept the roads in poor condition.

_Maitres de Poste_, or postmasters, were first recognized by law
in 1780 and some half a dozen ordinances and acts were passed in
their favour or to control them between that date and 1819, when
their privilege ceased. The distance between Montreal commonly
called sixty leagues was divided into twenty-four stages. The
“Maitres de Poste” were obliged to keep four _calèches_ and four
_carioles_. They had the exclusive right of passenger traffic by
land, charging twenty to twenty-five cents per league--twelve to
fifteen dollars the journey between Quebec and Montreal. Benjamin
Franklin when deputy postmaster general of North America in
1766 stated before a committee of the house of commons that the
only post road then in Canada was between Montreal and Quebec.
The origin of the postal system of Montreal dates from 1763 and
is due to the enterprise of Benjamin Franklin, who was then
holding an important position in the postal department of the
American colonies. Franklin, on hearing that the treaty of Paris
had definitely made Canada a sister colony, without waiting for
official sanction hurried thither although a man of fifty-seven
years of age, not fearing the hardships of the wild journey. In
his diary he records that in the spring of 1763 he set out on a
tour of inspection of the northern districts under his control
and did not stop until he visited Quebec and Montreal where he
opened postoffices and arranged for a weekly courier between
these towns and New York. His prompt action was afterwards
appreciated by the postmaster general of England.

It is difficult to locate the position of the “village”
postoffice established by Franklin. The postal communication thus
commenced between Canada and the American colonies continued
except for a break during the war of 1775 till the colonies had
obtained their independence. In November, 1783, a few months
after the treaty of peace, mails were restored between England
and Canada through the medium of the new postal office at
Burlington. This latter now became the terminus of the Canadian
courier service. In 1792 the first postal convention between
Canada and the United States benefited Montreal, although it was
stipulated that the transmission of letters should be by United
States fast mail packets and land service by Burlington.

Letters were carried by the packets at four cents from Great
Britain to New York, then twenty cents added for the journey
to Burlington, with the further charge of twenty cents on to
Quebec and twenty cents more was demanded for the further journey
through Canada. A letter would then have cost Montrealers about
forty-four cents and that only if it consisted of a single sheet
of paper and weighed less than an ounce. Above that, the price
was quadrupled. A letter that today cost two cents[1] from
Liverpool then cost about a dollar and sixty-four cents. But if
the British postal service had been used a letter under one ounce
would have cost ninety-two cents and above the ounce $3.64.

An advertisement was put in the Montreal papers in 1797 on the
18th of June. “A mail for the upper countries, comprehending
Niagara and Detroit will be closed at the office on May 30th
at 4 o’clock in the evening to be forwarded from Montreal by
the annual winter express on Thursday, 3d February next.” In
1809 an advertisement of this year states, “A passenger may go
from Boston to Montreal, a distance of 312 miles, in four days
and a half. This line is furnished with the new and convenient
stages, good horses and careful drivers.” But the irregularity
and slowness of the service in Canada itself called forth loud
protests from many merchants who were forced to employ private
runners to carry their mail. In 1811 Mr. George Heriot, then
Post-Master General, investigated these complaints and his report
is descriptive of local conditions:--“The mail is carried from
New Brunswick and vice versa by two couriers, one setting out
from Quebec and the other from Fredericton once a month in winter
and once a fortnight in summer. The distance is 361 miles; the
cost of conveying the mails £240. There is one courier once a
week between Fredericton and St. John, N.B., eighty-two miles at
a cost of £91.5s. There are two packets weekly across the Bay of
Fundy between St. John and Digby, 36½ miles at £350. There is one
courier twice a week between Digby and Annapolis, twenty miles,
and one courier between Annapolis and Halifax once a week, 133½
miles. From the commencement of the present year a communication
by post has been opened from Montreal to Kingston. The courier
goes once a fortnight and has a salary of £100. A post to York
is proposed for six months or during the close of navigation.
The post between Quebec and Montreal is despatched twice a week
from each of those towns. Eight pence is charged for postage on
a single letter from Quebec to Montreal. There are on the road
between Quebec and Montreal about twenty-seven persons whose
houses are seven or eight miles distant from each other and who
keep four or five horses each, not of the best description, and
small vehicles with two wheels of a homely and rude construction
hung upon bands of leather or thongs of unmanufactured bull’s
hide by way of springs. They will with much difficulty contain
two persons in front of which a man or boy is placed to guide the
horse. The rate at which they go when the roads are favourable
is not much more than six miles an hour. The roads are generally
in a very bad state as no proper measures are taken for their
repair.”

The mail system of that time was a part of the English postal
service and the province had no voice in the matter. About
1815-1816 according to Borthwick, “The Montreal postoffice was
a room about twelve feet square in St. Sulpice Street near St.
Paul. There were no letter boxes; it was all ‘general delivery’
in its crudest form. The few letters laid scattered on a table
and had all to be looked at at each application at the door. Very
few letters came or went. The mail to Upper Canada was weekly
and the seven days’ collection could be contained in one small
mailbag. That to Quebec was oftener and larger. The English mail
carried in sailing vessels arrived during the summer at periods
of from a month and a half to three months apart. In winter it
came by New York and was longer on the way. Postage was very
dear, about 9d. to Quebec and 5d. to St. Johns, 1s. 6d. to
western parts of Canada and 1s. 6d. to lower provinces.

“In 1820 there appeared in the various newspapers an official
advertisement signed by a member of the English postal service
giving a list of reduced rates between Canada and many foreign
countries. The postage on a letter to the various countries
of western Europe varying from 3s. 10d. to 4s. 4d. There were
no money letters for indeed there was no money in the form
convenient for sending thus. A recipient of a letter paid all
the postage except in cases when it crossed the United States
boundary, when the sender paid as far as the line. There was much
private mail carrying, both for pay and free. Anyone traveling
to the United States or Upper Canada was expected to fill half
his baggage with letters and various articles to persons there.”
About 1840 the postoffice at Montreal was at the southwest corner
of St. James street and St. Lambert’s Hill.

Montreal and Quebec geographically being some hundreds of miles
nearer European ports than New York and Boston, Canadians began
on the success of the steam navigation to desire to handle their
own mails directly, and on the foundation of the Allan Line
in 1856 this was put to practice by fortnightly trips until
1859. In 1859 the Allan Line contracted for a weekly mail to
and from Montreal and Quebec in the summer and Portland, Maine,
in the winter. Thus began the ocean mail service to us, now so
largely developed. The opening of the railway era also assisted
the postal facilities. The next location of the postoffice at
Montreal was the building constructed in Place d’Armes on the
site of the present Banque Provinciale. It was followed by a new
location on the southwest corner of St. Francois Xavier and St.
James streets, to be followed in 1876 by the present imposing
edifice on the corner of St. Francois Xavier and St. James
streets, with the equally large annex erected later and situated
on Craig and St. Francois Xavier streets. The Montreal postoffice
is of proportionate size and efficiency to that of any of the
great cities of the world.

The site of the present postoffice is historic and the following
tablet has been recently placed to explain the four artistic bas
reliefs on the exterior which commemorate it.


                          JOHN FLAXMAN

  Author of these bas reliefs and GREATEST OF BRITISH SCULPTORS was
  born at York, England, July 6th, 1755. Designed the classical
  groups on wedgewood-ware. Made a great reputation in Italy.
  Was the first professor of sculpture at the Royal Academy.
  Executed the monuments of Burns, Kemble, Mansfield and Paoli
  in Westminster Abbey, Sir Joshua Reynolds in St. Paul’s, and
  illustrations of ancient Greek poets. He was elected a Royal
  Academician in 1800, and died December the 7th, 1826.

  These bas reliefs were part of the facade of the building erected
  on this site for the Bank of Montreal in 1821; later on occupied
  by La Banque du Peuple from 1846 until 1873 and also of that now
  occupied by the General Post Office since 1876.

  The subjects of the bas reliefs are:--

  AGRICULTURE,                   MANUFACTURERS,
  ARTS,                          COMMERCE.

The Montreal postoffice has had under its control for many years
subsidiary district postoffices as the growth of population
demanded them. In 1900 there were only twenty sub-offices. Today
there are ninety-four stations. Its growth can be seen from a few
facts.

City Mail: In 1900 there were only 180 letter boxes and ten for
newspapers. In 1910 they amounted to 350 and 142 respectively. In
1914 there are 562 letter boxes and 235 news boxes.

English and foreign mail: In 1900 the English mailbags received
via New York were from thirty-three to forty-three. In 1910
the number was increased from seventy-five to one hundred. The
Canadian steamers bring in at present from 200 to 235 bags. The
Compagnie Generale Trans-Atlantique, which brought in ten to
fifteen bags now brings forty to sixty. The German line adds
seventy to eighty, and there are in addition thirty from other
sources.

The directors or postmasters of Montreal have been:

  1. 1763-1810      Edward William Gray. He combined the offices of
                      sheriff and postmaster.
  2. 1810-1816      F.W. Ermatinger, merchant of Montreal.
  3. 1816-1827      James Williams.
  4. 1827-1840      Andrew Porteous, dismissed by Lord Sydenham for
                      delaying his Excellency’s courier.
  5. 1841-1855      James Porteous.
  6. 1855-1861      Jean Baptiste Meilleur.
  7. 1861-1874      G.S. Freer.
  8. 1874-1891      G. Lamothe.
  9. 1891-1899      Arthur Dansereau.
  10. 1899-1904     Cleophas Beausoleil.
  11. 1904-1911     Henry S. Harwood, ex-M.P. for Vaudreuil.
  12. 1911-         Hon. L.O. Taillon, Ex-Premier Province of
                      Quebec, and for a time postmaster general of
                      Canada. (L.J. Gaboury in charge of the Eastern
                      division.)


                               II

                      STREET TRANSPORTATION

                      MODERNIZING MONTREAL

  MONTREAL IN 1861--THE STREET RAILWAY MOVEMENT--THE “MONTREAL
    CITY PASSENGER RAILWAY COMPANY” CHARTERED--THE HISTORY OF THE
    COMPANY--ITS FIRST PROMOTERS--EIGHT PASSENGER CARS, SIX MILES,
    HORSE SERVICE IN 1861--THE OPENING UP OF THE STREETS--WINTER
    SERVICE OF SLEIGHS--1892 THE BEGINNING OF ELECTRIC ERA--THE
    CONVERSION OF THE SYSTEM INTO ELECTRIC TRACTION--THE GRADUAL
    GROWTH OF THE COMPANY.

Half a century ago no one in his wildest imaginings could have
prophesied the amazing growth of the Canadian Metropolis. In
1861, Montreal had a population of but 91,000 and with its
suburbs 101,439. It was practically the ancient Montreal,
which had scarcely outgrown the days when it was a fortified
city crowded within walls to resist the incursions of hostile
Iroquois. The city was bounded on the north by the old creek at
Craig Street, and did not extend west of Victoria Square.

Today Montreal with its suburbs has a population of approximately
600,000, while the streets which marked its limits fifty years
ago are the centre of the downtown business district. Thus within
a scant half century the population of Montreal has much more
than multiplied five times over, its street mileage has increased
in even greater proportion, while practically the whole city has
been remodeled and modernized.

They were men of courage and far-sighted ideas who in 1861
decided that the time had come when Montreal needed a street
railway. The population was small, business was a mere fraction
of that transacted today, and as forbidding as could be found in
any city in the world.

But these difficulties did not discourage the founders of the
Montreal Street Railway, who had ample belief in the future
development of the city, and its consequent opportunities for
street railway work. They builded more wisely than they knew
however, and could William Molson, John Ostell, William Dow,
Johnston Thompson and William Macdonald, the original directors
of the company, return to Montreal, attend a meeting of directors
at the board room in the Company’s handsome building on Craig
Street, and then make a tour of the city in one of their
magnificent modern electric cars, they would probably be lost
in wonder and admiration. The company they founded used horses.
Stables were its power stations, and in winter the service was
kept up by sleighs, and in the late fall and early spring by
omnibuses. They started with six miles of track, eight cars,
a few horses and one stable. To-day they would return to an
electric system with hundreds of miles of track extending all
over the city and suburbs, huge power stations, an army of
uniformed, well paid and cared for employes, and many hundreds of
cars which are not merely modern, but so far in advance of the
times that the greatest cities of the United States and the world
are paying tribute by the adoption of the same style of cars for
their service.[2]

The Montreal Street Railway was born with little ceremony, or
anything else to mark the beginning of a new epoch for Montreal
when, on May 18th, 1861, the Provincial Legislature adopted a law
incorporating the Montreal City Passenger Railway Company “for
the purpose of constructing and operating street railways in the
City and Parish of Montreal.” The provisional directors named
in the act of incorporation were William Molson, John Ostell,
William Dow, Johnston Thompson, William Macdonald, John Carter,
Hon. Thos. Ryan and William E. Phillips. All these have long
since passed away, although they lived to see the riper fruition
of the works they planned.

On August 9th of the same year a meeting of the subscribers
was held at the “Mechanics’ Hall,” at which the following were
present:--

William Molson, Thomas Molson, Hon. Judge Gale, Hon. L.H. Molson,
William Macdonald, E.M. Hopkins, William McLaren, Charles Garth,
J.H. Springle, G. Weaver, William Dow and John Ostell. At this
meeting J.H. Springle was appointed the first secretary of the
Company.

On August 17th, another meeting was held, at which Alex. Easton
was awarded the contract for building the first section of road,
comprising six miles of single track, and an equipment of eight
passenger cars, a stable and car shed. This may be called the
first attempt at modernizing Montreal.

Work was started in September, ground being broken on the 18th,
for the line from St. Mary Street, near the Quebec toll gate, and
considerable progress made. The arrangement was that Mr. Easton
should build the line and operate it for a time under lease. By
November 27th, 1861, part of the line was sufficiently advanced
to be opened. The road met with immediate success, and was well
patronized, although the service, naturally, was slow and the
cars infrequent.

Matters having progressed thus far a meeting of the directors
was held on November 5th, 1861, when the Company’s stock books
were ordered closed, 2,500 shares having been subscribed for at
$50 a share, representing a capital of $125,000. Another meeting
was held on the next day, when the following were appointed
directors: Thomas Morland, E.M. Hopkins, G.W. Weaver, E.S. Freer
and John Ostell. Thomas Morland was elected president.

In the following year construction work was continued, and by
June 10th, 1862, a line had been completed from Place D’Armes on
Notre Dame Street westward, connecting with St. Joseph Street.
This was equipped with three horse cars.

On this same day the Company declared its first dividend, at the
encouraging rate of 12% per annum for the first year.

On July 4th, 1862, the Company terminated the lease with the
contractor, and took over the actual operation of the road, with
considerable profit, the earnings far exceeding the lease price.

At this time the head office of the Company was in a small
building at the corner of Craig and Place d’Armes, owned by Rev.
Mr. Toupin, but in 1863 the Company moved to Hochelaga. But
shortly afterwards the head office of the Company was again at
Place d’Armes Hill and Craig Street and remained there until 1894
when the present Street Railway Chambers were erected. Thus it
may be said that the head office of the Company has been situated
at the corner of Place d’Armes Hill and Craig Street since the
incorporation of the Company. The terminus of the line was then
Hochelaga and the Company spent $300 on an omnibus to connect the
cars with the convent. The service in the city was, of course,
only a day one, and the cars were pretty far apart. But even then
the demands of the service on Craig and St. Antoine streets was
such that improvements to the tracks were needed so as to permit
of a more frequent service on these streets.

The advantage of the car line was so much appreciated by the
public that in this year, 1863, the Company applied to the city
for power to build lines on the following streets:--

Commencing at Papineau Avenue, along St. Catherine to Mountain
Street with a line in St. Lawrence Street to the Toll Gate
to connect with that now constructed on Craig Street, also
commencing at St. Joseph Street along McGill Street to Wellington,
to the Bridge and possibly to Point St. Charles.

During 1863 the Company carried 1,066,845 passengers, scarcely 1
per cent of the number carried to-day. It was regarded, however,
as an excellent showing, and the Company started to build six
miles more track, along Wellington, St. Catherine and St.
Lawrence streets. The contract for this work was let to Messrs.
Plunkett and Brady.

By May 1864 the St. Catherine line was finished, and opened,
while eleven additional cars had to be placed on the Notre Dame
Street route. Even the track difficulties were felt, and the line
on McGill Street had to be renewed.

By the end of 1864 St. Catherine, St. Lawrence and Wellington
street lines, comprising 5¾ miles, had been opened, and all
proved revenue producers except the last. During that year
1,485,725 passengers had been carried, an increase of about a
half a million for the year. In view of the progress made it was
decided to issue more stock at par to the old shareholders. At
this time the capital stock of the Company was $200,000.

The winter service was being kept up by sleighs, the tracks and
appliances preventing the cars from running. The Company had
eight sleighs at this time, with five more being built. There
were no heating appliances, and in order to keep the passengers
warm each sleigh was provided with about a foot of pea straw, in
which the people buried their cold feet.

During the early days the cars were run in a rather
happy-go-lucky fashion. Time was of little object. The cars would
stop anywhere to take up passengers, and if one wanted to get
off and talk to a friend or do a little shopping, the obliging
conductors would wait and give their horses a rest. But the
demands of business were getting too much for this, and in June,
1865, the board decided that in future the cars should not be
stopped to allow passengers to go into stores and make purchases
and return again, because this kept other passengers waiting.

It was found that the wages paid were too high, and in August,
1865, conductors were reduced from $30 to $25 a month. The
conductors petitioned for a return to their old pay of $1 a
day, but this was refused, and the Directors reduced the pay of
drivers from $25 to $20 a month. At this time Mr. J.H.R. Molson
found he had not time to attend to his duties as vice-president,
and resigned.

In 1870 the Company celebrated its tenth birthday by issuing
$10,000 of new stock pro rata to the old shareholders, and in
1873 $200,000 more was allotted at par.

For many years matters went along smoothly and quietly until the
twenty-sixth annual meeting, in 1886, when an event occurred
which subsequently meant a good deal for the Company, although
little noticed at the time. This was the election of the present
president, Hon. L.J. Forget, as a director. The board of
directors was as follows:--

Jesse Joseph, president; Alex. Murray, vice-president, Dr. W.H.
Hingston, Hugh McLennan, and L.J. Forget.

During all this time the mileage of the Company had not increased
very greatly, only amounting to 12½ miles by 1892, although St.
Denis Street had been double tracked in 1891. At this time the
Company was operating eighty-two regular sleighs during the
winter season.

The year, 1892, however, marked the most important period in
the Company’s history, the beginning of the electric era,
which has produced such wonderful results in the past two
decades.[3] It was not without violent opposition that the
subject was discussed. Several directors supported by many of
the shareholders declared that the thing was impossible and
would ruin the Company, and some of the directors even went to
the length of resigning rather than countenance such a project.
So if the first directors of the Company, in 1861, were men of
courage and enterprise, how much more so were those who backed up
the change to electricity in face of the great cost and doubtful
outcome.

At the adjourned special meeting of Tuesday, May 17th, 1892,
there being present Mr. H. McLennan, vice-president; Dr. W.H.
Hingston and L.J. Forget, a tender for electric car service was
submitted and considered clause by clause and finally approved
of and adopted and ordered to be transmitted to the city clerk,
together with the sum of $25,000.00 deposit.

The city accepted the Company’s terms, and the work of
electrifying the service was started without delay.

The president and directors at this period were--

Jesse Joseph, president; Hugh McLennan, vice-president; L.J.
Forget, H.A. Everett, Dr. W.H. Hingston, and associated with them
in the enterprise was William Mackenzie, of Toronto.

The conversion of the system into one operated by electricity
was commenced in 1892, and the work was especially interesting
in this city, owing to the climatic difficulties to be overcome.
Meteorological records had shown that the average snowfall for
each of the sixteen winters from 1875 to 1891 was 118 inches; the
greatest fall of 173 inches, or over 14 feet, taking place in the
winter of 1886-7.

Another exceptional difficulty was that of grades. For instance
Amherst Street rises 50 feet in a distance of 800 feet; St. Denis
Street rises 47 feet in a distance of 700 feet; St. Lawrence
Street rises 68 feet in a distance of 1,500 feet; Beaver Hall
Hill, 60 feet in a distance of 900 feet; and Windsor Street, 70
feet in a distance of 1,500 feet; while on Guy Street and Cote
des Neiges Hill there is a rise of 350 feet in a distance of
5,150 feet, with a maximum grade of 11 per cent for about 100
feet.

Before the introduction of electricity, the negotiation of some
of these grades was almost a cruelty to animals, while upon other
routes now readily, safely and quickly traversed, the old horse
car service would have been an impossibility.

[Illustration: THE EVOLUTION OF THE STREET CAR]

[Illustration: “Round-the-Mountain” sight-seeing car]

[Illustration: Sleigh used in winter--Horse car period]

[Illustration: “Pay as You Enter” car now in use]

[Illustration: Ordinary horse car in use prior to 1892]

The progress under the electric regime was immediate and
wonderful, and the business of the Company grew in such manner as
to enforce frequent increases in its capital, while dividends at
the rate of 8% per annum were paid.

By 1895 the capital stock of the Company had increased to
$4,000,000, with bonds of $973,333.33. In 1897 it was increased
to $5,000,000, and in that year Mr. G.C. Cunningham resigned
as director, manager and chief engineer. Later Mr. R.B. Angus
replaced him as a director and Mr. F.L. Wanklyn as manager and
chief engineer.

In 1901 the Company purchased all the bonds and a majority of the
stock of the Montreal Park and Island Railway Company. In the
same year the Company secured franchises from the towns of St.
Louis and St. Paul, both now part of Montreal.

In the following year the Company issued $1,500,000 4½% bonds to
pay for the Park and Island Railway. The capital at this time was
$6,000,000, and no less than fourteen miles of new track were
built and put into operation.

In 1903 another $1,000,000 of stock was issued.

Mr. James Ross resigned as vice-president and managing director,
during this year, and was replaced by Mr. F.L. Wanklyn, later in
that year Mr. Wanklyn resigned and Mr. K.W. Blackwell was elected
vice-president, and Mr. W.G. Ross managing director. Mr. Duncan
McDonald was appointed manager and Mr. Patrick Dubee secretary.
The Company, pursuing its policy of rapid extension, secured a
franchise in Delorimier (now part of Montreal), and an extension
of their Westmount franchise. Also through another subsidiary
company, the Suburban Tramway and Power Company, now The Public
Service Corporation, they secured a franchise to Longue Pointe
and the Village of Beaurivage.

In the following year, the Company secured an extension of the
Maisonneuve franchise, and bought considerable property on St.
Denis Street for building purposes.

In 1906, the Company entered into an agreement for the purchase
of the stock and bonds of the Montreal Terminal Company, and
also secured a franchise in Outremont, for the further extension
of its system into the suburbs. By this time the capital stock
had grown to $7,000,000. The purchase of the Montreal Terminal
Company was concluded in the following year, while considerable
additions and extensions were made, and to meet the increased
demands the capital stock was increased to $9,000,000.

The Park and Island Company also secured a franchise in Notre
Dame de Grâce, and started an extension of the Sault-au-Recollet
line to opposite St. Vincent de Paul. The Cartierville line was
also double tracked to the bridge.

In 1908 $292,000 debenture bonds were redeemed, and £460,000
($2,238,666.67) debenture bonds, and another $1,000,000 of stock,
were issued, bringing its capital up to $10,000,000 stock and
$4,420,000 bonds where it stands today.

In 1910 the Company was capitalized at $10,000,000 stock
and $4,420,000 bonds, operated over 144 miles of track, and
controlled and operated subsidiary companies with some eighty-six
miles of track, a total of 230 miles. On March 24, 1911, an
act to incorporate the Montreal Tramways Company saw a new
development, the incorporators of the charter being, E.A. Robert
(president), J.W. McConnell (vice president), F. Howard Wilson
(vice president), Hon. J. M. Wilson, Wm. C. Finley, J.M.
McIntyre, Geo. G. Foster, K.C., D.L. McGibbon and N. Curry.

As an indication of the growth of the passenger service the
account for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1914, gave the gross
earnings as $7,147,804.19, the operating expenses, $4,206,114.57
and the net earnings as $2,936,689.62 while the total number
of passengers carried, including “transfers” was 58,120,066.
Such a story of rapid progress in the face of natural and other
obstacles is one of which both the Company and the city may
reasonably feel proud.


FOOTNOTES:

[1] The two-cent rate of the United States was introduced into
Canada in 1899.

[2] The “pay as you enter” cars originated in Montreal on the
invention of Mr. Duncan McDonald, of the Montreal Street Railway
Company.

[3] The rapid growth of the city in population dates from 1891.
1861, City and suburbs, 101,439; 1872, 155,865; 1881, 178,237;
1891, 261,302; 1901, 376,402; 1910, 600,000.




                          CHAPTER XLII

                            1760-1841

                CITY IMPROVEMENT FROM THE CESSION

                   UNDER JUSTICES OF THE PEACE

  EARLY STREET REGULATIONS--A PICTURE OF MONTREAL HOUSES IN
    1795--FURTHER STREETS OPENED--A “CITY PLAN” MOVEMENT IN
    1799--HOUSES AT THE BEGINNING OF THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY--MAP
    OF 1801--CITY WALLS TO BE DEMOLISHED--CITADEL HILL
    REMOVED--FURTHER IMPROVEMENTS--ROAD COMMISSIONERS--PICTURE
    OF 1819--IMPROVEMENTS DURING THE TRANSITIONAL PERIOD OF THE
    JUSTICES AND THE MUNICIPALITY--PICTURE OF 1839 BY BOSWORTH.


In view of chronicling the efforts of the past, since the
Cession, to make the city comfortable for the dweller and
attractive to the visitor, the reader is now offered the
following notes:

In 1676 an ordinance provided that each tenant should pave up to
the middle of the road, every street passing by his home, but
this was scarcely attended to and at the time of the British
régime these regulations were in desuetude.

The earliest ordinances governing city improvement have already
been mentioned in the ordinances of Governors Gage and Burton.
Those following on the great fire of 1765 have also been treated
elsewhere.

In the letter of an English traveller, dated March 22, 1795,
occurs the following reference to Montreal: “Montreal is not
equal in size to Quebec, but has considerably the advantage
in point of cleanliness. On the whole Montreal has more the
appearance of a middle sized country town in England than any
place I saw in America. The principal streets are flagged.
The houses are built of stone, on the French plan, with this
exception that they are in general, much lower and present a
greater appearance of neatness than French houses usually do.
* * * The amusements of Montreal are exactly similar to those
of Quebec. In winter, all is dance and festivity. * * * I have
seen few places where a veteran officer of moderate income might
entrench himself for life better than at Montreal.” (Canadian
Antiquarian and Numismatic Journal, Vol. IX.)

In order to provide for a uniformity in the planning of the
streets to meet the growth of the city and the suburbs the
legislature by an act of 1799 (36 George IV, Cap. 5) authorized
the appointment of a surveyor “who should draw plans of the city
and land adjacent and that commodious streets should be opened
and ground reserved for public squares.” At the same time an act
was passed for the repairing and the changing of the roads and
bridges of the country. Montreal was affected by this and was
taxed accordingly.

“The houses at the beginning of this century,” says Mr. P.S.
Murphy, writing in 1879, “were generally of ‘rubble masonry,’ or
of wood, one or two stories high--the former with iron shutters.
Some houses on St. Paul Street were two or three stories high,
of Ashlar masonry. The buildings in the old city proper were
generally of stone.”

At this period Simon McTavish’s castle was standing. He had died
in 1805 and left it unfinished. There it stood deserted on the
site now covered partially by the Allan property till the latter
part of December, 1860--the abode of ghosts according to the
credulous.

In 1800 Beaver Hall, the mansion of Joseph Frobisher, one of the
founders of the North West Company, was built. It was then far in
the country. Being of wood it was burned down in 1845.

A badly preserved map of the city of this period (1801), made by
Louis Charland, inspector of roads, reveals that certain streets’
names were applied to localities since renamed. St. Marie was
that given to the present Sherbrooke Street; St. James to St.
Catherine; Dorchester to St. Jean Baptiste. The present names
begin to appear in the map of 1825 by John Adams.

In 1800 an engineer was named by the legislature with a salary
of £200 a year to direct the opening of new streets, and with
jurisdiction beyond the city limits. The new engineer set to
work to pave St. Paul and Notre Dame streets and then to open
up others under the direction of the magistrates. In 1815 the
road across the property of Etienne Guy was opened. In 1817 the
opening was legalized of King, Queen, Prince, George, Nazareth
and St. Gabriel streets. St. Paul Street was extended to McGill
Street and St. Maurice Street was opened. In 1818 St. Helen,
Lemoine and Dubord were opened. At the same time the construction
of the fashionable esplanade of the period, the Champ de Mars,
was begun and the demolition of the citadel erected under the
French régime allowed Notre Dame Street later to be extended to
St. Mary Street.

In 1802 His Majesty assented to the last reserved acts regarding
the removal of the walls around the city of Montreal. In 1801
a bill for the removal of walls was passed by the legislature,
with some amendments, but reserved by Sir Robert Milnes in case
any further consideration from a military point of view might
be thought necessary. On the 10th of June, 1803, a proclamation
was issued giving effect to the reserved bills. Thus at last the
fortifications were to be demolished! They had been threatened
many years previously. Mr. Brymner (Archives Report for 1892)
tells the story. “So far back as 1791 General Mann, then a
captain of the Royal Engineers, reported that, while in the
infant state of the colony the works around Montreal were
useful as a protection against the Indians, they were no longer
required for that purpose and that their ruinous condition made
them rather a nuisance than a benefit. Part of the materials of
the walls, he recommended, should be preserved, the rest to be
used by filling up the ditch or for any other purpose in the
reforming of the town. Citadel Hill, he considered, should be
levelled and barracks built on part of it, or by levelling the
hill to any easy slope Notre Dame Street might be opened to the
Quebec suburbs, forming a good entrance and a great improvement
to the town. The cross streets should lead to the mountain and
a road be preserved along the front of the river, which in time
would form a fine quay or promenade. * * * In July, 1793, Mr.
Dundas approved of the removal of the walls, but directed Lord
Dorchester to ascertain whether the owners of the adjoining
property had or had not the right, as they maintained, to have
their property extended on the removal. In 1797 Prescott,
lieutenant governor, informed the legislature that the petition
for the extension of the property consequent on the removal
of the walls desired the assembly to take measures to prevent
litigation between owners, past and present, and stated that
the officer commanding the Royal Engineers would be directed to
make a plan of the town and fortifications, which should show
the reserves proposed to be made for the use of the crown.” In
November, 1797, the colonial secretary wrote that the bill had
been received and would be returned with such directions as might
be necessary, which were sent in August, 1798. The rest of the
history has been told above.

[Illustration: NOTRE DAME STREET IN 1803 The portal of the First
Parish Church is seen blocking the street. It was necessary to
go around the church to continue along Notre Dame to the Quebec
Gate. The gable of the Seminary is seen on St. Francis Xavier
Street. Between it and the portal is the cemetery gate.]

“From authentic sources,” says Sandham in his History of
Montreal, Past and Present, “we learn that between the years of
1805 and 1816 there were sixty-four stone houses erected within
the old gates. At the latter date there were forty-five wooden
houses, of which four were erected by government during the
American war. In 1814 seven stone and four wooden houses were
built; in 1815 twenty-three of stone and twenty-one of wood;
and in 1816 sixty stone and wooden houses were in the course of
erection.”

In the meantime the city was developing its approaches[1] and
special commissions were appointed. An old almanack printed at
Quebec in 1815 mentions: “Trustees for improving, ordering and
keeping in repair the road from the city of Montreal to Lachine
through the wood.” (Honourable James McGill, Honourable John
Richardson, Joseph Papineau, Isaac W. Clark, Louis Gugy and Jean
Marie Mondelet.) The commissioners for the removal of the old
walls of Montreal were J. McGill, J. Richardson, Jean Mondelet
and L. Chaboillez. (Lachennais Bridge, Canadian Numismatic and
Antiquarian Journal, Series N, Vol. I, pg. 881.)

A traveler visiting the city in 1819 describes the houses
and streets thus: “The first impression of the city is very
pleasing. In its turrets and steeples glittering with tin; in its
thickly built streets stretching about one-and-a-half miles along
the river and rising gently from it; in its environs ornamented
with country houses and green fields; in the noble expanse of
the St. Lawrence sprinkled with islands; in its foaming and
noisy rapid and in the bold ridge of the mountain, which forms a
back-ground to the city; we recognize all the features necessary
to a rich and magnificent landscape and perceive among these
indications decisive proofs of a growing inland emporium. The
streets of the city are narrow except some of the new ones. The
principal ones are St. Paul, which is the bustling business
street, near the river, and Notre Dame, on higher ground, more
quiet, more genteel and better built. The latter street is
twenty-five feet wide and three-quarters of a mile long. Many of
the houses are constructed of rough stone coarsely pointed or
daubed with mortar and have certainly an unsightly appearance.
Many of the stores and dwellings have iron plate doors and window
shutters, fortified by iron frames, as a precaution against fire
as well as robbery. An act of ’59, (George IV Cap. 8), obliges
householders of Montreal whose houses have wooden roofs to
whitewash or to paint them every two years.”

Previous to 1827 St. Paul, St. Francois Xavier, St. Sacrement,
Notre Dame and others of our present business streets contained
the private residences of many of our first citizens where
stores and warehouses are now only to be seen. Not half a dozen
of our merchants and prominent men lived out of the old city
proper, viz. from McGill Street to Dalhousie Street and back to
Craig Street, which was its northern boundary. At that time and
even later St. James Street and its seven galleries, a terrace
of one-story buildings, were the fashionable rendezvous of the
military. The windows of the stores were little larger than those
of the ordinary houses, but in 1839 more modern display windows
were beginning to appear. The iron shutters for protection which
are still to be seen on some of the old houses even in 1914, were
then giving place to more elegant ones of wood. Puddles were
allowed to remain in the street. The roads were very dusty in
the dry weather and very muddy in the wet. To remedy the former
sprinkling carts were recommended and for the latter wood paving.
The streets were still badly lighted for although the old oil
lamps were being superseded by gas, the city was not generally
lighted.

During all this period under the justices of the peace, it may
be remarked, that they had the power to make certain assessment
for defraying the necessary expenses of the city and to enact and
enforce such by-laws for its regulation as were not inconsistent
with the statutes of the realm.


                        MONTREAL IN 1839

Writing in 1839 in “Hochelaga Depicta,” Mr. Newton Bosworth gives
many interesting side lights of the civic improvement of the time
preceding the municipality.

“An act passed the Provincial Legislature in 1832, forming
Montreal into a Corporation and transferring the authority for
the Magistrates to the corporate body; but in 1836, the Act of
Incorporation having expired, the Government again passed into
the hands of the Justices of the Peace.

“The city is represented in the Provincial Parliament by four
Members, the East and West Wards into which it is divided,
returning two each. The period of service in the House of
Assembly is four years.

“Under the Corporation the city and suburbs were distributed into
eight wards, for the more convenient arrangement and dispatch
of business. These are East and West Wards, the Wards of St.
Ann, St. Joseph, St. Antoine, St. Lawrence, St. Louis, and St.
Mary. Another division of the city may be called the Military,
according to which the battalions of militia, which are six in
number, are collected from the portion of the city or suburbs in
which they reside.”

Speaking of the appearance of the town in 1839, Bosworth remarks:

“Montreal, the second city in political dignity, but the first
in magnitude and commercial importance, in British America, is
situated in Latitude 45° 31' North, and Longitude 73° 34' West.
Including the suburbs it covers about 1,020 acres, although
within the fortifications the area did not much exceed 100 acres.
Its local advantages for the purposes of trade, giving it a
decided superiority over every other place in the Province,
and its climate, though severe, is more genial than that of
Quebec. On approaching it either on the river from below, or in
descending from La Prairie, the tall and elegant steeple of the
English Church, the massive grandeur of the French Cathedral,
the spires of other churches and chapels, the spreading mass of
habitations in the suburbs, and the well built and lofty stores
in Commissioner Street, the stranger will be impressed with a
very favourable idea of the city he is about to enter. If the
entrance be by the Lachine road, a fine view of the city is
presented just before descending the hill near the Tanneries, or
the village of St. Henry; and another on coming along the road
from Mile-end, north west of the city. * * * In the commencement
of towns and villages, when no specific plan has been previously
arranged, houses and other buildings will be erected where land
can be obtained or convenience may dictate, without much regard
to regularity or order; and hence in towns of any considerable
standing, we generally find that the earliest streets are crooked
and irregular. This may be seen in St. Paul Street in this city,
which by its contiguity to the river, presents great facilities
for trade, and, with the space between it and the wharf, would be
occupied in preference by men of business.

“It contains many excellent houses, which would be seen to more
advantage, had the street been wider. It reminds one of some of
the central streets in London, but without their fog and smoke.
From St. Paul Street, downwards to the river, was formerly called
the lower town, and the rest of the city the upper; but though
in some of the cross streets there is an evident rising in the
ground, in others it is scarcely perceptible. The principal
streets are airy, and the new ones particularly of a commodious
width; some of them running the whole length of the town, nearly
parallel to the river, are intersected by others generally at
right angles.

“An Englishman when he enters the city, and in his perambulations
through nearly the extent of it, is struck with the French names
by which nearly the whole formerly, and the greater part now, of
the streets are distinguished; the names of Catholic Saints, or
eminent Frenchmen, will meet his eye in abundance.

“The Rue Notre Dame, extending from the Quebec to the Recollet
Suburbs, is 1,344 yards in length and thirty feet broad. It is
in general a handsome street, and contains many of the public
buildings. St. James Street, Craig Street and McGill Street, are
of still greater width, and when the yet empty spaces in each
are filled up with elegant houses, they will be ornaments to
the town. * * * The spirit of local improvement has long been
in active and efficient operation and betrays no symptoms of
langour or decline. Beside a multitude of new and elegant houses
in almost every part of the city and suburbs, large spaces and
several streets have been considerably improved.

“The covering of the creek, or rather ditch, an offensive and
dangerous nuisance, in Craig Street; the levelling of McGill
Street; the improvements in Dalhousie Place, in the French
Square, and Notre Dame Street, and of that part of St. Ann
Suburbs called Griffin Town, by which a large portion of swampy
land has been raised and made available for building, may be
adduced as specimens. The recent houses are almost universally
built of the grayish limestone which the vicinity of the mountain
affords in abundance; the fronts of the same material, hewn and
squared; even the new stores and warehouses are finished in the
same manner.

“Many of the houses are large, handsome, and in modern style, and
some of them display great taste in design.

“The best houses and most of the churches are covered with plates
of tin, a far better material for this purpose than the wooden
shingles which are frequently used. In comparing the climate with
that of Quebec, it may be observed that in general the winter is
shorter in Montreal and the cold not so intense.

“In the latter city also the snow is seldom so deep, or remains
so long, as in Quebec.

“The favourable situation of Montreal enables her to command
the trade of a considerable portion of the lower Province, and
the greater part of the upper. Her position, indeed, is such as
always to ensure a profitable connection with every part of the
continent where business is to be done.

“By some persons it has been thought, however favourable the
situation of Montreal is at present, it would have been better
had the city been founded a little lower down the river, so
that the difficulty of ascending the current of St. Mary might
have been avoided. The aid of steam navigation, however, by
which ships of all burdens may easily be towed up to the city,
renders this a consideration of much less importance than it was
formerly.

“The civil government of Montreal is administered by Justices of
the Peace, who are appointed by the Governor of the Province.
They are at present forty-six in number, and have the power to
make certain assessments for defraying the necessary expenses of
the city and to enact and enforce such by-laws for its regulation
and advantage as are not inconsistent with the statutes of the
realm. For a short period the municipal affairs of the city were
managed by a Mayor and Common Council.”

[Illustration: VIEW OF THE CHAMP DE MARS, MONTREAL, 1830]

[Illustration: From a sketch taken by John Murray and engraved by
Bourne ABOUT 1845 Notre Dame Street, looking east from St. John
Street. Christ Church Cathedral, on the left beyond Notre Dame]

[Illustration: BONSECOURS MARKET]


FOOTNOTES:

[1] The first bridge connecting the island at Bordà Plouffe,
now Cartierville, with the north was Pont La Chapelle, built
in 1834-5 as a private venture on his own grounds by M.
Persillier-Lachapelle.




                          CHAPTER XLIII

                            1841-1867

                CITY IMPROVEMENT AFTER THE UNION

                     UNDER THE MUNICIPALITY

  GREAT STRIDES AT THE UNION--THE EARLY MARKET PLACES--THE
    BONSECOURS MARKET--OTHER MARKETS--PUBLIC PLACES--THE EARLY
    SQUARES--PRESENT PARKS--THE EARLY CEMETERIES--THE FIRST JEWISH
    CEMETERY--THE DORCHESTER STREET PROTESTANT CEMETERY--DOMINION
    SQUARE--MOUNT ROYAL--COTE DES NEIGES--OTHER CEMETERIES--GENERAL
    CITY IMPROVEMENT--AREAS OF PUBLIC PLACES.


The advent of the Municipality saw great strides in city
improvements, especially in laying out of public places, such as
markets and parks.


                          MARKET PLACES

The first market place was held in the first public square or
Place Royale, opposite the little river, the landing place of
Champlain and Maisonneuve, and on the site occupied by the custom
house and the present inland revenue office. The date of this
first market goes back as far as 1680. Under the English régime
with the growth of the city the provision of further markets was
further foreseen. The second market, between Notre Dame Street
and St. Paul Street, was placed on the site originally occupied
by the Château de Vaudreuil, which became the Collège de St.
Raphaël, burnt in the great fire of 1803. An ordinance of 1807[1]
(47 George III, Chap. VII) gave authority to borrow to the amount
of £2,500 for construction of the market, which, however, was
delayed for a time. In 1821 a new wing was added. The building
was in wood and was demolished to be replaced by the Bonsecours
Market in 1843, and its site, the Jacques Cartier Square of
today, served for a public place.

The “new” market, Bonsecours, was established under the
regulation of the city council of 1841 (May 22d). It was designed
also to be the seat of the Council. It is in the Grecian Doric
style of architecture. Its site is partially that of the
intendant’s palace and that of the house of Sir John Johnson,
commander of the Indians in the American Revolution, and son of
Sir William Johnson, the Indian warrior. In 1845 the market at
St. Lawrence and St. Dominique streets was also built. Other
markets have followed in the following order:

  1830--The first St. Ann’s Market owed its origin to the
        initiative of some private citizens who furnished the
        capital to the amount of nearly fifteen thousand pounds.
        It was afterwards leased to the government and became the
        house of parliament.

  1830--About 1830 the market of Près de Ville on the north of Coté
        Street, near Chenneville and Vitré streets, was erected,
        but abolished in 1839.

  1840--Viger, in St. James ward, bounded by Campeau, Craig, Dubord
        and St. Hubert; constructed in 1861; demolished in 1893.

  1845--Papineau Market, on Papineau Road, between Craig and
        Lagauchetière; reconstructed in 1855; demolished in 1890.

  1851--St. Ann’s Market, built on the site of the old parliament
        house, burnt down in 1849, in the rebel losses riots. It
        was demolished in 1900. Its site is now preserved by the
        gardens of Youville Square.

  1860--St. Gabriel, bounded by Centre Street, Richmond, Richardson
        and Montmorency streets; abolished in 1900.

  1865--St. Antoine, bounded by St. James, Mountain, Aqueduct and
        Adeline streets.

  1865--The Haymarket, bounded by St. Paul, Inspector, William
        streets and Nolan Park.

  1870--St. Jean Baptiste, bounded by St. Lawrence, Rachel, St.
        Dominique and Market streets.

  1871--St. James, bounded by Ontario, Amherst, Wolfe and Houle.

  1885--Cattle Market (East), at the head of Frontenac Street.

  1885--Cattle Market (West), originally situated at St. Henri and
        removed in 1902 to St. Etienne Street (Point St. Charles).

  1890--Weighing Station (Papineau), corner of Craig and Notre Dame
        streets.

  1890--Weighing Station (St. Denis), corner of Carrière and Berri
        streets.

  1890--Weighing Station (Hochelaga), on Desery Street between
        St. Catherine and Notre Dame Street. (In 1896 this became
        a fire station and later a repairing shop for fire
        appliances.)

In 1810 the regulations enforced by the magistrates concerning
trade were reunited and sanctioned by the court of king’s
bench. It is there decreed, among other things, that leathers,
shoes, fish, meat, sugar, tobacco, cloths brought in by the
“cultivateurs” should only be sold at certain places in the town
under penalty of 5 shillings. The sale of fruit and vegetables
was permitted on the streets. Other merchandise was forbidden
to be sold on the street in order to prevent the obstruction
of passage and the sale of them by auction which was reserved
for market days. The slaughtering of animals was forbidden and
there are other regulations pertaining to the cleanliness of the
streets. That part of the water front from the northeast limit of
the Montreal bridge to about opposite St. Victor Street, near the
church of Bonsecours was declared the port for building and fire
wood, with the exception of 100 feet reserved at the entrance of
the new market for the bateaux, chaloupes, barges, and canoes
bringing provisions to the markets.

[Illustration: GROUP FROM THE KING EDWARD MONUMENT]

[Illustration: L.P. Hébert EDWARD THE PEACEMAKER Erected 1914]


                          PUBLIC PLACES

The movement for public squares was encouraged by His Excellency,
Governor Lord Dalhousie, in 1821, when he gave the piece of
ground on which Citadel Hill had so long stood, with its powder
magazine. It was called Dalhousie Square. It is now covered by
the Viger station tracks. The earth from the citadel was carted
to the Champ de Mars to increase its size and to build it up.

The municipality, after the reestablishment of the corporation
in 1840, turned its attention to the acquisition of more public
places to meet the growth in population. The following is the
history of the present parks or squares under the régime of the
corporation of Montreal:

Custom House Square, now called Place Royale, the original Place
d’Armes, Market Place and meeting ground of Montreal, was bought
from Mr. William Dow on the 4th of April, 1845, at the price of
$2,400.

Jacques Cartier Square, between Notre Dame and St. Paul streets,
originally given to the city by virtue of an act of 1808 for
the establishment of a market which was built and afterwards
was taken down when Bonsecours Market was completed, was first
used for its present purpose about 1845. The Nelson Monument was
erected on this square in 1809.

Place d’Armes Square, opposite the Notre Dame Cathedral, had
always been used as a public place from the early days of
the French régime. In 1836 it was purchased by the city from
the Gentlemen of the Seminary. In 1845 the city inclosed it
and leveled the ground and paved the street around it. It
has undergone several changes. The Maisonneuve Monument by
Philippe Hébert was placed in the centre on June 24, 1895, and
the railings have been removed and the whole square cemented
during the last three or four years. This monument was erected
to celebrate the two hundred and fiftieth anniversary of the
founding of the city by Paul de Chomedey de Maisonneuve. On
the question of a statue being raised, a delegation from the
Numismatic and Antiquarian Society, consisting of de Léry
Macdonald, W.D. Lighthall, D.J. Beaudry and the Vicomte H. de la
Barthe, presented to Mayor James McShane on April 23, 1891, a
detailed scheme of placques and bas-reliefs for a great monument.
This was ratified by the council. The Maisonneuve Committee,
presided over by Judge Pagnuelo, eventually adopted with slight
modifications, the scheme of designs suggested by the above
Archaeological Society.

Champ de Mars belongs to the Imperial government for military
parades. It was originally but a small piece of ground situated
in one of the bastions of the old town walls; when these were
pulled down it was enlarged. In 1839 it formed a space of 227 by
114 yards and was one of the fashionable promenades. The parapet
stone railing overlooking Craig Street was erected in 1913.

Victoria Square was bought in 1841 to increase the Haymarket then
held there. It was then called Commissioner’s Square. It received
its present name in 1860 on the occasion of the visit of Prince
Albert Edward (Edward VII). The southern portion situated between
Craig and St. James streets belonged to the city since 1825,
except the strip on the west side, which was expropriated in 1888.

Phillips Square and Beaver Hall Square were ceded to the town in
1842 by Mr. Alfred Phillips. In September of 1914, the Statue of
King Edward the Peacemaker, designed by Philippe Hébert, was
unveiled by his brother, the Governor General of Canada, H.R.H.
the Duke of Connaught.

Viger Garden, or Viger Square, was ceded to the city gratuitously
in 1844 by Jacques Viger and P. LaCroix. It has been added to
since. The site of this garden was originally a swamp or marsh
and on an old map of 1758 it is marked as such. A portion of the
square was used as a cattle market for many years. For years
after its establishment as a public garden it was the principal
square of the city where people congregated to hear the military
bands two or three evenings every week.

Richmond Square has belonged to the city since 1844.

Parthenais Square was established in 1845 on a portion of ground
belonging to the city. It was added to in 1858 by a piece
purchased by Mr. McGill.

Papineau Square, established before 1845, was at first called
Queen’s Square. Its new name was given by the council in 1890.

Lafontaine Park was bought by the Federal government on October
29, 1845, from Mr. James Logan, a merchant who had it from his
father. This land was made part of the property commonly called
Papineau or Monarch Farm. This property, owned by the federal
government with the exception of a little strip, bounded by
Rachel and Lafontaine Park, and a piece situated in the east of
the Jacques Cartier Normal School has been left to the city for
ninety-nine years on certain conditions for $1.00 a year. One of
these is that the government can end the loan at any time, and
another is the right to reserve for military purposes that part
of the park situated to the north of Sherbrooke Street and to the
east of Panet Street. The city conservatories originally erected
on Viger Garden in 1865 were reconstructed on Lafontaine Park in
1889.

Wellington Square was bought from the Gentlemen of the Seminary
in 1856.

St. Gabriel Square was bought in 1862, but its history as a
public garden does not begin till 1893.

Western Square was bought as a public park from the gentlemen of
the Seminary on December 31, 1870.

Cherrier Square, known under the name of St. Jean Baptiste
Square, was acquired in 1870 and became a public park in 1875.

Dufferin Square, which had been a Protestant cemetery since 1799,
was expropriated as a public park in 1871.

Mount Royal Park, the property of several owners, was originally
expropriated at a cost of $1,000,000 in 1872. In 1875 Mr.
Frederick Law Olmsted, a landscape architect from the United
States, was entrusted with the preparation of a general plan for
Mount Royal.

Fletcher’s Field, attached to this site, also dates its history
to this period.

Dominion Square, hitherto the Catholic cemetery, was similarly
expropriated in 1873.

St. Helen’s Island, in the St. Lawrence, and so named after his
wife, Helène Bouillé, by Samuel Champlain, was established as a
public park in 1874. Its extent is 128 acres.

Bellerive Square, established in 1880, became the property of the
city definitely in 1893.

St. James Square, up to 1886 part of the St. James Market, became
a public place in this year.

[Illustration: LAFONTAINE PARK]

[Illustration: ST. LOUIS SQUARE]

[Illustration: DOMINION SQUARE]

[Illustration: VIGER SQUARE]

[Illustration: PLACE D’ARMES]

Nolan Square (Haymarket Square) was established as a park in
1896 on a part of the second Haymarket. This land was originally
bought from the seminary in 1865.

Gallery Square was established as a public place in 1898.

Youville Square, so called from Madame d’Youville, who founded
the Grey Nun’s Hospital originally adjacent, was transformed into
a public space on the site of the old parliament building and
afterwards St. Ann’s Market.

In 1913 parks were ceded to the city at Rosemount, Longue Pointe,
and in 1914 in the St. Marys, Hochelaga, St. Denis, Notre Dame de
Grâces, and Bordeaux Wards.


                           CEMETERIES

In the first volume the origin of the earliest cemeteries of Montreal
has been traced. To resume; the first cemetery was established in
1643 at the southeast corner of the fort inclosure, known later as
“Pointe a Callières,” today commemorated by a tablet on the present
custom house building. The second was established in 1654 in the
vicinity of the grounds of the Hôtel Dieu on St. Joseph Street
(afterwards St. Sulpice Street), and was called the “Hospital
Cemetery.” It occupied part of the ground occupied by the Place
d’Armes and the present Notre Dame Cathedral. There was a mortuary
chapel to receive the bodies which stood on the present site of the
Bank of Montreal, and although the hospital cemetery had ceased to
be in use in 1799 the chapel was not destroyed till 1816, when it
was given over by the Fabrique of Notre Dame to the commissioners
of fortifications of the city for the enlargement of St. James
Street. Meanwhile a subsidiary cemetery, the third, was acquired
about 1749 “on a site belonging to Mr. Robert near the powder
magazine, containing about a quarter of an arpent in superfices.”
It was granted at the request of the curé and the church warden of
Notre Dame by the Marquis de la Galissonière, governor, and François
Bigot, the intendant, as follows:

“Vue la requête, nous autorisons le curé et les marguilliers de
la paroisse de cette ville (Montréal) à faire l’acquisition des
terrains ci-dessous désignés pour servir à inhumer les pauvres de
la dite paroisse.

                                  “(Signé) LA GALISSONIERE
                                              BIGOT.”

By 1751 it was resolved to inclose it with a stone wall and
to build a mortuary to house the bodies during the winter.
In 1799 the hospital cemeteries and the powder magazine were
discontinued. At this period the grand juries, recognizing that
these cemeteries so near to the dwellings were unhealthy and a
menace to the public health, addressed a report to the Procurator
General Sewell asking for their removal. The latter approached
the Fabrique and it was resolved to seek for other lands. An old
plan of the powder magazine cemetery shows that it ran from St.
Peter Street, taking in a portion of St. James Street, and the
block of buildings occupied by the Canada Life Building and the
Canadian Bank of Commerce and terminating in Fortification Lane
at the city wall.[2] This cemetery was that used by Protestants
and Catholics alike. Historically it may be called the first
cemetery for Protestants.

At this same period there was already a Jewish cemetery in a lot
on St. Janvier Street, near the present Dominion Square. The
deed of sale was signed by the congregation of “Shearith Israel”
in 1775, and the first interment was that of Lazarus David on
October 22, 1776.[3] This was the first Jewish cemetery on the
American continent.

The more remote site chosen for the next cemetery was that
belonging to Pierre Guy in Coteau St. Louis and the St. Antoine
suburbs, and covered four arpents. St. Anthony cemetery, as
it was called, occupied a part of Dominion Square of today.
An increase of ground was subsequently added on the part now
occupied by the Archbishop’s Cathedral. This cemetery was used
till 1854, when again its nearness to dwellings caused its
removal to the slopes of Mount Royal.

For long the Protestant community had been desirous of its
own exclusive burial ground. In 1799 a meeting was held in
the courthouse on the 21st of June, when for the purpose
of purchasing a piece of ground on Dorchester Street for a
Protestant burying ground, Messrs. Edward W. Gray, Isaac W.
Clarke, Arthur Davidson, John Russell, and William Hunter were
chosen trustees. On the 15th of June, 1811, an order was issued
for all bodies to be removed from the old cemetery before the
7th of July. In 1824 a considerable addition to the cemetery
was made. The site is preserved today as Dufferin Square. It
continued to serve its purpose as the “old” Protestant cemetery
till about 1847. Many prominent Englishmen were buried here, such
as the Hon. James McGill, whose body was afterward transferred to
McGill College grounds. In 1871 it was expropriated as a public
place.

The transition of the Protestant cemetery from Dorchester Street
to Mount Royal may be now briefly told. Somewhere about 1845 or
1846 it was felt that the Dorchester Street burying ground was
becoming overcrowded and a body known as the Montreal Cemetery
Company incorporated with a charter granted in 1847 obtained
some land at the top of Coté des Neiges Hill on property
belonging to a Mr. Furness. A few burials only took place here
as circumstances rendered it unsuitable. The project was then
abandoned, and public meetings were held to obtain a more
appropriate site. The Montreal Cemetery Company was succeeded
by another incorporated by 16 Victoria, Cap. 56 (1852) under
the name of the Mount Royal Cemetery Company. This company of
stockholders has developed a beautiful mountain cemetery so that
it may be considered one of the parks of Montreal and its garden
of sleep.

The first interment in the Mount Royal Cemetery was that of the
Reverend Mr. Squires, who died of cholera in 1852. Since 1910 an
additional cemetery has been added in connection with the Mount
Royal Cemetery Company, situated at Hawthornedale on the road to
Bout de l’Ile.

The purchase of Mount Royal cemetery for the various Protestant
denominations of Montreal was followed, by that of Notre Dame
des Neiges adjoining, by the Catholic community. A committee
of five appointed on July 17, 1853, to find a suitable location
for a cemetery reported to the Fabrique of Notre Dame Cathedral
on July 31st the desirability of acquiring 115 arpents of land
on Coté des Neiges Road belonging to Dr. Pierre Beaubien at
the price of £3,000. This land was bought, but the project of
finally settling it as a cemetery was not executed till the
next year, since in the meantime a counter proposition had been
gratuitously offered by the Sulpicians at Coté St. Luc. The
original recommendation, however, being ratified, work was begun
and the cemetery was opened to the public in 1855. The cemetery
was enlarged in 1865, 1872, 1907 and 1909, and now covers
over four hundred arpents of land.[4] It is being constantly
beautified, adding a beautiful garden to the adjoining mountain
park. The name of Notre Dame des Neiges was chosen in remembrance
of the little chapel built on the Mountain Mission under that
title to be a souvenir of the placing of the great cross which
Maisonneuve planted in 1643 on the day of the Epiphany, but which
the Iroqouis afterward destroyed. There is no doubt that this
name for the chapel was chosen by Marguerite Bourgeoys, who had a
special veneration for the shrine of that name in France. Three
of her Iroquois maidens were called by her Marie des Neiges. The
neighbourhood has borne the name of Coté des Neiges for the same
sentimental reasons, it being said that several of the first
farmers settling there came from the district of the same French
shrine.

[Illustration: ENTRANCE TO MOUNT ROYAL CEMETERY (PROTESTANT)]

[Illustration: ENTRANCE TO COTE-DES-NEIGES CEMETERY (CATHOLIC)]

[Illustration: THE “CALVARY” IN COTE-DES-NEIGES CEMETERY]

The oldest Protestant cemetery in the city still existing is that
on Papineau Road, where in 1816 land was purchased at a cost of
£500 and was known as the “new” burial grounds. A portion of the
latter, known as the military burial grounds, still exists as
such and, owing to the efforts of the “Last Post” Association,
the federal government has lately renovated it with needful
repairs. Here there are several interesting monuments, among them
being that of Sir Benjamin D’Urban, the first governor of Natal,
who was sent out here to take command of the troops when the
friction caused by the Oregon question threatened to bring on a
war between Great Britain and our neighbours to the south.

There is also a military burial ground at St. Helen’s Island.
It was discontinued in 1825. It is said to have been used for a
hundred years and to contain between one thousand five hundred
to two thousand remains. A further burial ground is preserved in
memory by the great boulder of Point Charles at the north end
of the Victoria Jubilee bridge, where the fever-stricken Irish
emigrants were hurriedly buried in 1847.


                       OTHER IMPROVEMENTS

Beyond the establishment of the public places and cemeteries
during this period other civic improvements have to be accredited
to this period before Confederation.

In 1852 the laws against wooden buildings were enforced. At this
time St. Lawrence Main Street was the fashionable boulevard for
the French citizens.

A review of the year 1856 says: “There has been an intense
energy manifested during the year and is still visible. The
business streets are being paved in the most substantial manner;
the avenues to the city and the roads in the outskirts are graded
and macadamized; handsome fountains have been erected, trees
are being planted out, rows of dwelling houses of elegant and
substantial descriptions are going up in various quarters; a
number of stores and warehouses of the largest, most substantial
and at the same time most elegant kind are approaching completion.
The great wharf for ocean steamships is finished as are the railway
buildings at Point St. Charles. Labourers, mechanics, manufacturers
and merchants--in a word all classes are at work with all their
might and the results make their appearance with almost magical
celerity. Nor in all this material advancement are the pulpit, the
press, the college, or the school neglected.”

The year 1864 marked great building operations. No less than
seven church edifices were commenced, viz., Trinity church on
Viger Square; the Church of the Gesu, Bleury Street; three
Wesleyan churches; the American Presbyterian church; Knox church
on Dorchester Street, and Erskine church on St. Catherine Street.
The Protestant House of Industry and Refuge, Dorchester Street,
and the Molson Bank, St. James Street, complete the list of
public buildings, while in addition to these 1,019 dwelling
houses were erected.

The extension of Notre Dame from Dalhousie Square to McGill
Street was made from 1864 to 1868. Ontario Street was opened
in 1864 and at the same time St. Catherine Street was extended
between St. George and St. Lawrence streets.


                PUBLIC PLACES, SQUARES AND PARKS

  Wards.                               Names.                     Areas.
  Notre Dame de Grace                  Vaillant                   2-9/10 acres
                                       MacDonald                  8-3/10 acres
                                       Trenholme                 13-3/5  acres
                                       Notre Dame de Grace       10-9/10 acres
                                       Windsor              20,900 square feet
  Emard                                                           1-3/10 acres
  Saint Denis                          Crémazie                  26-1/2  acres
                                       Lamoricière                  1/10 acre
                                       Molson                     4-2/5  acres
  Laurier                              Lahaie                     1-1/10 acres
  St. Mary and De Lorimier             Baldwin                   28-3/10 acres
  Saint Mary                           Parthenais                 1      acre
                                       Bellerive                  1-4/5  acres
  Lafontaine, Papineau and Duvernay    Lafontaine Park           95      acres
  Lafontaine                           Saint Jacques                3/5  acre
  St. Joseph and St. Andrew            Richmond                     2/3  acre
  St. Joseph                           Victoria                   1-3/10 acres
  Papineau                             Papineau                   2.84   acres
  St. Louis                            Viger Square (a part)         1/4 acre
                                       St. Louis                  2-9/10 acres
                                       Place St. Jacques             2/5 acre
  St. Louis and St. Jacques            Viger Square               6-3/5  acres
  Hochelaga                            St. Joseph                    1/4 acre
                                       A Square                   6-7/10 acres
                                       Déséry                        3/4 acre
                                       A Square                   3      acres
  Hochelaga                            St. Joseph                    1/4 acre
                                       A Square                   6-7/10 acres
                                       Déséry                        3/4 acre
                                       A Square                   3      acres
  Mount Royal                          Mount Royal               18-2/5  acres
                                       Troie                      1-9/10 acres
  Saint Henry                          Sir Geo. Etienne Cartier   6      acres
                                                   {1             4-1/2  acres
                                       Playgrounds {2             1-1/5  acres
                                                   {3              16,380 feet
                                       St. Henri                  1-1/3  acres
                                       Jacques Cartier            1-2/5  acres
  West                                 Youville                     3/4  acre
  Centre                               Place Royale                 1/11 acre
                                       Place d’Armes                1/3  acre
  East                                 Champ de Mars              3-2/3  acres
                                       Jacques Cartier            1-1/5  acres
  Saint Gabriel                        Monaghan                  12-9/10 acres
                                       Saint Gabriel              3-9/10 acres
  De Lorimier                          Fairmount                  1-3/5  acres
  Saint Cunegonde                      Iberville                    1/3  acre
  Saint Laurent                        Dufferin                   2      acres
                                       Mance                        1/5  acre
  Saint George                         Dominion                   6-1/4  acres
                                       Phillips                     1/2  acre
                                       Beaver Hall                  1/9  acre
                                       Victoria                   1-1/3  acres
  St. Jean Baptiste                    Vallières                    1/3  acre
  St. Ann                             Haymarket                   3-1/5  acres
                                      Gallery                     1-1/4  acres
                                      St. Patrick                 2-1/2  acres
                                      Tausey (Alma)                10,000 feet
  Saint Andrew                        Western                     1-2/5  acres
                                      Mount Royal Park          708-1/2  acres
  Saint Paul                          King Edward                 1-7/10 acres
  Rosemount                           Drummond                   29      acres
  Longue Pointe                       Thibaudeau                    1/2  acre
                                      St. Helen’s Island        135      acres
                                      Ile Ronde                  34      acres
                                      Ile Verte                  16      acres
      A total of seventy-five parks and public places.

[Illustration: GROUPS FROM THE KING EDWARD MONUMENT]


FOOTNOTES:

[1] In 1815 (55 George II, Chap. 5), the justices of the peace
regulated the price of bread and enforced the stamping of it.

[2] Mr. G. Durnford, who gives me this memory sketch of the plan,
adds that evidence of this cemetery has been found from time to
time when excavating for foundations, when skeletons and parts of
skeletons have been dug up.

[3] The remains of Lazurus David were subsequently removed to
the present cemetery when the first was closed. Cemeteries were
afterwards purchased at the “Back River,” but of late years a
portion adjoining the Protestant cemetery of Mount Royal has been
used for Hebrew burials.

[4] A table of Catholic burials in Montreal from 1642 to 1910
prepared by Simeon Mondou, ex-secretary-treasurer of the Fabrique
of Notre Dame, reaches the total of 362,315.




                          CHAPTER XLIV

                            1867-1914

              CITY IMPROVEMENT SINCE CONFEDERATION

                THE RISE OF METROPOLITAN MONTREAL

  THE METROPOLITAN ASPECT OF MONTREAL IN 1868--EDUCATIONAL
    BUILDINGS--THE CITY STREET RAILWAY AIDS SUBURBAN
    EXTENSION--FORECAST OF ANNEXATIONS--THE CITY HOMOLOGATED
    PLAN--THE ANNEXATION OF SUBURBAN MUNICIPALITIES IN 1883--TABLE
    OF ANNEXATION SINCE 1883--PREFONTAINE’S REVIEW OF THE YEARS
    1884-1898--IMPROVEMENTS UNDER THE BOARD OF CONTROL--A REVIEW
    OF THE LAST TWO DECADES OF METROPOLITAN GROWTH--THE CHANGES
    DOWNTOWN--THE GROWTH UPTOWN.

  STATISTICAL SUPPLEMENTS: 1. STATEMENT OF BUILDINGS. 2. REAL
    ESTATE ASSESSMENTS. 3. RECENT BUILDINGS ERECTED OR COMPLETED.
    4. THE METROPOLITAN POPULATION; COMPARATIVE STUDIES ON THE
    POPULATION OF MONTREAL WITH THE CITIES OF THE CONTINENT. 5. OF
    THE WORLD. 6. OPTIMISTIC SPECULATIONS FOR THE FUTURE. 7. VITAL
    CITY STATISTICS IN 1912. 8. A PLAN FOR “GREATER MONTREAL”--THE
    HISTORY OF THE PRESENT MOVEMENT.


A traveler who visited the city in the year 1868 gives a
criticism which reminds us that Montreal was now assuming
metropolitan proportions: “I was much struck by the continued
rapid growth of this now great northern city. But as it is almost
wholly of stone in the business portions and along the extensive
and massive quays which line the banks of the river, Montreal
makes a dignified, indeed, an imposing effect. The beholder for
the first time, unless marvelously well up in his geography, is
surprised to find so large and so complete a city. To stand at a
street corner for a moment is to see pass by the Indian woman,
wrapped in her heavy blanket; the French habitant; Scotch, Irish
and English residents; and emigrants of all social conditions,
the “American” from the United States; officers of the British
army in their different uniforms; Catholic priests in their
robes; Sisters of Charity; crowds of neat-looking soldiers; and
the burly policemen clad in a dark blue military uniform. The
buildings everywhere in course of erection would dignify any
city. There are none in the United States which present finer
specimens of street architecture than are found, not isolated
here and there, but in long blocks and throughout the entire
city.”

Speaking of the buildings of this period, Sandham in his Ville
Marie Past and Present, remarks: “A striking feature in the
progress of the city was the number of buildings erected for
educational and charitable purposes. Indeed, each year seemed to
have a peculiarity in the character of its new buildings. In 1868
the tendency was in favour of dwelling houses; the year before it
was stores; and before that again the erection of churches and
religious edifices appeared mostly to employ the energies and
surplus capital of the citizens.

“The year 1869 was marked by efforts in an educational direction.
The Gentlemen of the Seminary nearly doubled the previously large
accommodation at the college above Sherbrooke Street. The Roman
Catholic bishop put up a large schoolhouse in Lagauchetière
Street and the Catholic school commissioners erected a schoolhouse
on Ontario Street and another in Fullum Street. They also erected a
very spacious school on Alexander Street opposite St. Patrick’s
church. A very large stone structure was erected on Visitation
Street by the St. Vincent de Paul Society for educational and
charitable uses. The extensive asylum or infant school in St.
Catherine Street, near Bleury, had its size doubled, a neat chapel
being added. The St. George’s (Episcopal) church was also commenced.”

The extension of the city toward the suburbs was being
facilitated by the city railway commenced in the fall of 1861.
“It is difficult,” says Sandham, writing in 1869, “to mark the
distinction between the city and the villages of the outlying
municipalities. It is apparent that these villages must
eventually form part of the city and it would be advantageous if
some preparatory arrangement were to be made for assimilating the
building and sanitary laws of the municipalities to those of the
city.” A remark equally pertinent today when having annexed many
of these “villages” we are looking forward to do the same to many
more till the city embraces the island of Montreal.

In 1867 paving and wood was adopted for Jacques Cartier Square,
but stone was adopted for the rest. The year of 1875 saw great
progress in paving, the expense of the outlay being not less than
$431,090. The side paths in blue stone on St. Denis, Sherbrooke,
Union, St. Catherine and Dorchester are of this date. This period
of city improvement culminated in the homologated plan of the
city still in use. The sanitary state of the city at this time
was deplorable and Dr. William Hingston, afterwards knighted,
was elected mayor for its amelioration. The construction of the
chief collecting sewer on Craig Street, begun at this time,
was finished in 1878. The year 1887 saw also a regular system
established for the removal of rubbish. All these ameliorations
reduced the mortality rate very much.

In 1883 there began a series of modern suburban annexation which
has given the name of the “Greater Montreal” to our enlarging
city.

In 1883 the superficies of Montreal proper was 3,958 acres.
Its population was, according to the census of 1881, 155,238
souls. Since the annexations began in 1883 there have been added
up to 1910 21,767 acres. On the 4th of June, 1910, the total
superficies of the city was 25,747.75 acres, about 40.23 square
miles, and the population was 455,000 souls. At this time the
following municipalities were still outside the city:

  Maisonneuve            22,500 Population
  Westmount              14,000 Population
  Verdun                 10,500 Population
  Outremont               3,000 Population
  Lachine                11,000 Population
  Summerlea                 500 Population
  Ville St Pierre         2,000 Population
  Montreal West             900 Population
  St. Anne de Bellevue    2,000 Population

It is expected that Greater Montreal will include these.

[Illustration: THE LOOKOUT AND SOME OF THE DRIVEWAYS IN MOUNT
ROYAL PARK]

The subjoined table of annexations since 1883 deserves to be
recorded:

                           Date of           Area        Population
                           annexation.      (acres).     when annexed.

  Hochelaga                Oct.   3, 1883     1,230         6,000
  St. Jean Baptiste        March  8, 1886       308         7,000
  St. Gabriel              May   25, 1887       330         6,000
  Cote St. Louis           Feb.   1, 1894       850         3,500
  St. Henry                Oct.  30, 1905       450        21,192
  St. Cunegonde            Dec.   4, 1905       124        10,912
  Villeray                 Sept  11, 1905        60           600
  Rosemount (part)         Jan.  15, 1906       185           --
  Sault au Recollet        Nov.   5, 1906       863.6       1,200
  St. Laurent              March 14, 1907       960           --
  Cote des Neiges          April 25, 1908     1,148.3         550
  Rosemount (part)         April 25, 1908       249           800
  Sault au Recollet (part) April 25, 1908       313.6         --
  De Lorimier              May   29, 1909       391         7,000
  St. Louis                Jan.   1, 1910       720        35,000
  Bordeaux                 June   4, 1910       868.28        900
  St. Laurent (part)       June   4, 1910       877.3         700
  Ahuntsic                 June   4, 1910       726.5       4,000
  Ville St. Paul           June   4, 1910       263         3,257
  Beaurivage               June   4, 1910        46         1,400
  Tetreauville             June   4, 1910       311         1,500
  Longue Pointe            June   4, 1910     4,164.2       1,693
  Rosemount (part)         June   4, 1910     1,431.5       1,200
  Cote des Neiges (part)   June   4, 1910     1,402.17        600
  Ville Emard              June   4, 1910       951         5,000
  Notre Dame de Grace      June   4, 1910     2,536         4,100
  Cote St. Luc                       1912       373           --
                                             ---------    -------
                                             22,162.45    124,104

      City in 1883                            3,494
      Mount Royal park                          464
                                             ---------
          Total area                         26,090.45

Annexation seems to have been successful. To illustrate the next
period of fifty years of Greater Montreal the following official
account of the year 1898 is useful as a brief summary of city
improvements:

His Worship Mayor Préfontaine, wishing to give in his inaugural
address, in 1898, an idea of the progress made by Montreal,
during the past fifteen years, submitted the following figures:

“The taxable property, in 1884, was $73,584,644; in 1897, the
same had reached $141,790,205; increase, $68,205,561.

“The value of the property exempted from taxation in 1884 was
$15,324,084; in 1897, it had reached $36,023,295; increase,
$20,697,211.

“In 1884, we had 133 miles of streets opened; in 1897, we had 178
miles. Increase, 45 miles.

“In 1884, we had less than one-half mile of paved streets; we now
have 26½ miles.

“The territory of Montreal in 1884 was 3,788 square acres; in
1897, it was 6,547 square acres; increase, 2,761 square acres.

“In 1884 we had about 75 miles of brick sewers; we now have 104
miles; increase, 29 miles.

“The population increased during the same period of time, from
172,000 to 250,000, taking the lowest estimate of the present
population; increase, about 78,000.”

From 1898 to 1910 the same corresponding increase of growth was
marked.

Another epoch started with the later date on the advent of the
Board of Control.


         CIVIC IMPROVEMENT UNDER THE “BOARD OF CONTROL”

Among some of the outstanding civic works undertaken under the
control régime may be chronicled the following, as recorded in
the official reports:


                       THE MEURLING REFUGE

In 1911, Mr. Gustave Meurling died at Menton, France, bequeating
all his property to the City of Montreal.

Following the correspondence between the late Mr. Meurling’s
attorneys and Doctor J.J. Guerin, Mayor at the time, the
Consulting City Attorney was instructed to take the necessary
means to put the City in possession of the bequest.

To carry out the wishes of this generous benefactor, the
Commissioners decided to build a refuge for the poor and
homeless, giving it his name.

On the 29th of July, 1912, a report was made to Council to
purchase a property on Champ de Mars Street and to erect thereon
a refuge to be known as “The Meurling Municipal Refuge.” This
report was adopted by the Council on the 1st of August, 1912. An
architect was engaged to prepare the plans and specifications and
the refuge was in full operation in March, 1914. It is thoroughly
equipped with the most modern appliances.


                       MUNICIPAL ARCHIVES

The Commissioners decided to create a new department to be known
as the Municipal Archives Department.

This action was deemed necessary, preventing the loss of
documents, and the worry and loss of time spent in searching for
them. All documents will be in charge of one official who
will be the head of this Department. This Department came into
existence and the head official appointed in 1913.

[Illustration: MAP BY WARDS OF MONTREAL]


                          CHAMP DE MARS

In 1911, the Board of Commissioners had plans and specifications
prepared and the necessary funds were voted by Council for
improvements to the Champ de Mars.

The tenders received for this work exceeded the estimates
prepared by the Public Works Department to such an extent that
the Commissioners decided that it would not be in the City’s
interest to award the contract.

The Chief Engineer was thereupon instructed to have new plans and
specifications prepared; these being prepared by Mr. F.J. Todd,
Architect. Tenders were called for and on the 10th of June, 1912,
Council awarded the contract.

The Champ de Mars improvements, including the change of grade and
paving of St. Gabriel Street, were completed during the course of
the year 1913.


                         CITY HALL ANNEX

In 1910, the attention of the Commissioners was called to the
congestion existing in the offices of the Police Department,
Municipal Assistance Department, etc., and finally, in 1911, they
decided that the efficient administration of those departments
required that they should occupy more spacious quarters.

Consequently, they reported to Council for funds to purchase
a property on Gosford Street, between Champ de Mars and
St. Louis streets, for the site of a new building for this
purpose. The report was adopted by the Council and the sum of
$10,000 was voted for the preparation of the necessary plans
and specifications for the erection of this building, as well
as for repairs to the City Hall. Messrs. Marchand & Haskell,
architects, were engaged for this work. Tenders were called for
the construction of this building and on the 4th of June, 1912,
on report of the Commissioners, Council awarded the contract to
Messrs. Peter Lyall & Sons. The building was ready for occupation
early in 1914.


                         EXPROPRIATIONS

During the last three years, 1910-13, many streets have been
opened, widened or continued. A new system of expropriation
has been adopted since 1910 by the City. When a street is to
be widened or a new street opened up, the City is empowered to
purchase the whole of a property to be expropriated, if it thinks
fit, and then resell the residue. In most cases the City is
reimbursed the whole of the expropriation, and in others a fair
profit is made, as for instance, in the case of opening up St.
Lawrence Boulevard to the River front.

For the opening of St. Lawrence Boulevard, the City purchased,
from the Sisters of the Congregation of Notre-Dame,[1] the whole
of their property for the sum of $617,350.00, at the rate of
$7.34 per foot; from the McArthur Estate, the whole of their
property for the sum of $51,050.00, at the rate of $5.03 per
foot; from the Masson Estate, a part of their property for
the sum of $22,170.00 at the rate of $6.00 per foot; the sale
expenses, etc., amounted to the sum of $7,933.08, making a total
expenditure of $698,503.08.

The City then resold a part of the Sisters’ property for
$694,184.74; a part of the McArthur Estate property for
$27,005.40; the sale of the building materials brought $1,936.00;
the whole proceeds of the resale amounted to $723,126.07; the
City thus realizing a net profit of $24,622.00 on the whole
transaction.

Taking the prices paid by the City, as a basis, to arrive at the
whole cost of this transaction, we have part of the Sister’s
property (36,740.2 square feet) used for the Boulevard at $7.34
per foot, making a total amount of $269,677.06; part of the
property of the Masson Estate (3,695 square feet) at $6.00 per
foot, making a total amount of $22,170.00; part of the property
of the McArthur Estate (8,475 square feet) at $5.03 per foot,
amounting to $42,659.53; the cost of the St. Lawrence Boulevard
thus amounting to the sum of $334,502.59. By adding to this
sum the above mentioned amount of $24,622.99, we see that
the opening of St. Lawrence Boulevard, which was a matter of
public convenience, not only cost the City nothing, but by this
transaction, reaped a benefit of the value of $359,125.58.

These facts go to prove that while in some cases the City is
obliged to purchase, in a limited time, a certain designated
property and to pay a seemingly high price, yet in other cases
with the new system of expropriations, the City is enabled not
only to have improvements made that cost nothing, but also to
make a good profit on its investment. This method was considered
by the Cities of the United States a progressive movement.


                             TUNNELS

In 1913 the St. Lawrence Street tunnel, which was begun by Ville
St. Louis, was completed and open to traffic.

The Commissioners have also under consideration the building of
tunnels on St. Hubert and on Wellington Streets, and the widening
of the Ontario Street tunnel, and to the widening of the St.
Denis Street tunnel.

The expropriation of the land necessary for the construction of
Park Avenue tunnel is now going on and as soon as the proceedings
are finished, means will be taken so that this tunnel be
constructed without delay.


                        FILTRATION WORKS

At present in accordance with the endorsation of a scheme
presented for the improved state of the city’s future water
supply there is being constructed a large filtration plant which
promises Montreal the finest water supply on the continent.

The site of filtration plant will be mostly in the town of
Verdun adjoining the low level pumping station, and will occupy
an area of about eighty-five acres. After being conveyed to
the filtration pumping station the water will be lifted to
the prefilters, then flow by gravity to the final filters to
the filtered water reservoir, and will finally reach a new
hydro-electric pumping station, and from there it will be pumped
up to the reservoirs on Mount Royal and distributed through the
city.

[Illustration: KEY MAP. SHOWING LOCATION OF FILTRATION WORKS At
present in accordance with the indorsement of a scheme presented
for the improved state of the city’s future water supply there is
being constructed a large filtration plan which promises Montreal
the finest water supply on the continent.]


                THE BOULEVARDS ALONG THE AQUEDUCT

Incidentally the aqueduct is being broadened and a series of
boulevards are being constructed on its banks. As this enterprise
was an outcome of the city planning movement, which has favorably
marked the last few years of civic improvement, it may be
recorded.

On the 26th May, 1913, the City Council adopted the following
report of the Board of Commissioners:--

1. That the principle of establishing boulevards along the canal
of the Aqueduct, according to the plans prepared by the City
Engineers, be adopted by Council, a duplicate of these plans to
be deposited with the City Clerk.

2. That the offers of ceding the land gratuitously for these
boulevards be accepted on the following conditions:--

(a) The work of planing and levelling the boulevards will be
carried on as the work on the canal progresses, the City shall
not be bound to open the proposed boulevards to traffic until the
work on the canal is completed.

(b) The City shall, if possible, compel the contractors throwing
up earth along the banks of the canal, to give the streets
connecting with the boulevards a grade of not more than 6% from
the line dividing the boulevards from the adjoining properties.
Proprietors adjoining the boulevards shall have the exclusive
privilege of having the material from the excavations deposited
on their land in the way they may determine, provided, however,
such material is not needed by the City.

That all properties which will not have been ceded on the above
mentioned conditions within a delay of three months from the
1st of June, 1913, be expropriated according to the terms of
the law 3 Geo. V., Chap. 54, Section 20, and that the cost of
said expropriation be borne exclusively by the proprietors of
land bordering the proposed boulevards, according to a roll made
and prepared according to the prescriptions of Art. 450 of the
Charter of the City of Montreal.

That in case of there being any doubt of the power of the City
to give effect to the above mentioned recommendation, the
Legislation Committee and the City Attorneys be requested to
obtain from the Legislature any legislation necessary for the
accomplishment of this undertaking.

That the City obtain from the Legislature:

1. Exemption from all taxes whether municipal, school, general
or special which might be imposed upon the land forming part
of the boulevards or of the Aqueduct and situated in other
municipalities, without prejudice, however, to the rights of the
Town of Verdun, in virtue of the Statute 1 Geo. V., 2nd Session,
Chap. 60, Section 2, concerning the commutation of taxes on
immovables owned by the City of Montreal in the Town of Verdun.

2. Authorization to apply to all proprietors of lots fronting on
the proposed boulevards, the decrees of its Charter and of its
By-laws relating to building, sewers, sidewalks and pavements, as
well as by-laws relating to police and the maintenance of streets.

The opening of these boulevards is one of the greatest
improvements that Montreal has made for years, and once they are
completed, our City will be in a position to compare favourably
with the most beautiful cities of America, in so far as its parks
and boulevards are concerned.


                           CONCLUSION

               THE LAST PHASE OF CITY DEVELOPMENT

In order to preserve the continuity of the historical pictures of
the physical growth of this city from 1898 to 1914, the following
picture summing up the confusing changes going on during the
greater part of the last two decades of commercial activity, may
serve as a review.

The city is now undergoing a reconstruction and remodeling that
is confusing even to its middle aged citizens, who were born in
the old humdrum city. Landmarks are disappearing; the buildings
in the older part of the city and even parts of the new are
being replaced with wondrous celerity, baffling the mind of
one not a statistician. It is the age of the house-wrecker and
steam-rivetter. Montreal is being modernized--becoming a second
New York--but in spite of all, manages to preserve its unique,
psychological and historical characteristics. Commenting on the
changes, now undergoing in 1914, a writer in one of our daily
journals (the Montreal Star of April 11, 1914, from which the
following is adopted) describes the present period as the era of
the house-wrecker and steam-welder.

This is a substantial description of the optimistic state of the
city shortly before the war of 1914.


                 THE BOOM BEFORE THE WAR OF 1914

The dust of the house-wrecker, followed by the chatter of the
steam-rivetter marks more than the mere replacement of building
by building, it marks the gradual alteration of the very face of
the city--and the house-wrecker and the steam-rivetter are abroad
in the land six days in the week and fifty-two weeks in the year.

The truth of the matter is that plan and excavate and build as
we can, we cannot keep abreast of our requirements. What seems
enormous to-day, fit to withstand the demands of the next half
century, is almost to-morrow found inadequate. In New York they
are tearing down buildings erected but a few years ago, of modern
construction, and climbing up nineteen or twenty stories into
the air, because they do not pay, replacing them with the aid of
night and day shifts by buildings which shoot upwards for forty
stories. In a lesser degree that is what is happening here.

Let us take a few concrete instances of what has happened within
the memory of hundreds, if not of thousands, of Montrealers,
using St. James Street as an illustration.

The site of the new Bank of Commerce offices on St. James Street
gives a good instance of the steady advance in the principal
down-town street of Montreal. Where the great stone pillars
rear their bulk to-day, a church once stood, the St. James
Methodist Church. A congregation, receding before the steady
advance of commerce, drove the church uptown, where the Allan
private residence on St. Catherine and St. Alexander streets,
was purchased, and the down-town church went the way of all old
buildings. On its site rose the Temple Building, considered at
the time to be adequate to meet all needs for many years. This
was in the late ’80s, and the Temple Building lasted only till
1909, when it, although it still served a useful purpose, made
way for the huge building now on the site. Where the London,
Lancashire and Globe Building now stands, there stood a huddle of
small shops and cottages built in the ’70s. These gave way to the
Barron Block, which was a four-story brick affair, considered at
the time to be the last word in office architecture. The Barron
Block went up in flames eventually, but it was doomed anyway, and
for the same cause that spelled the end of the Temple Building
across and down the street; the space was needed. Freeman’s
restaurant, a name associated with Montreal for many years, also
located at this spot, suffered demolition about the same time,
but sprung up again a few doors away.

The “Star” needed a permanent and adequate office on St. James
Street, and to make way for it a famous old commercial house
stepped aside, J. and W. Hilton, furniture makers. A little
later and almost next door an even greater transformation was
going on when the Dominion Express Building sprung into the
air, shouldering the historic old St. Lawrence Hall back on
to Craig Street. St. Lawrence Hall had for many years allowed
the C.P.R. a corner of its space on the ground floor, together
with a drug store of immemorial antiquity. Now, the ten-story
Dominion Express stands as a monument to what commerce and
industry demand. Across the street its bigger neighbour, the
Transportation Building marks the spot where a three-story
building once sheltered Picken, the broker; the R. & O. and
several other tenants. The new Bank of British North America, one
of the finest bank buildings in Montreal, is another illustration
of what is continually happening, the steady inroad of the big
building upon the small. Next to the present Transportation
Building to the west stood at one time the Montreal Post Office,
before the present one was erected; it too has undergone many
interior changes and exterior enlargements.

The Royal Trust Building has replaced the Imperial Insurance
Building. The Credit Foncier Building stands where a ramshackle
collection of little buildings once stood on Little St. James
Street and St. Lambert’s Hill. The courthouse annex has succeeded
St. Gabriel Presbyterian church. During the last twenty years
Craig Street has suffered less changes, the Montreal Light, Heat
and Power Building, one of the biggest in its class in Canada,
and the new Herald Building, being the only two outstanding
structures which have gone up.

In Victoria Square, the changes have been numerous, the Eastern
Townships Bank Building replacing the original Morgan store,
as perhaps the most notable. McGill Street has changed since
those disturbed days of flood when skiffs could be rowed across
Youville Square. The McGill Building, the Shaughnessy Building,
the Dominion Express Building, and the huge head offices of the
Grand Trunk have all grown up within the memory of young men, and
the completion of the new Customs House below Youville Square
bids fair to transform the lower end of McGill Street completely.

It is, of course, impossible even to enumerate the buildings
which have gone up north of Craig Street within the last two
decades. St. Alexander Street is a good illustration of what
is happening from day to day. No less than three huge office
buildings have gone up on this short street in as many years, and
apparently the end is not yet.

Rip Van Winkle is reported to have found many changes after his
twenty year siesta. The Montrealer who has come to the years of
discretion can share in Rip’s sensations of astonishment if he
only stops to think what is going on, methaphorically speaking,
under his nose. All he has to do is to imitate Rip, wake up,
and realize that his city has changed during every one of the
years when he has been too busy to note. And, incidentally, he
will realize that these changes will become more instead of less
frequent, in the years to come.

Another account summarizing the changes occurring in 1913-1914 is
as follows:

On St. James Street and Notre Dame there have cropped up in the
business section of La Sauvegarde, opposite the Court House,
the Lewis Building on St. Francis Xavier; the Versailles, on
St. James Street, near Place d’Armes; the Bank of British North
America Building; and the Reford Building on Hospital Street,
the latter a small four-story structure of unusually fine
finish. Other big downtown buildings are the Shaughnessy, on
McGill Street, and the McGill, at the corner of Notre Dame and
McGill streets--all but the one in the ten storey class, and all
completed within the last year.

The present shows the great advance in growth of uptown
structures.

That big buildings soon will be common uptown has been shown by
the coming into being of three that have been erected almost
simultaneously,--the Drummond, at the corner of Peel and St.
Catherine streets; the Guarantee Building on the Beaver Hall
Hill; and the Dandurand, the first ten storey building east
of the Main Street and North of Craig, at the corner of St.
Catherine Street and St. Denis Boulevard. Accommodation has been
booked heavily in all three, and already there are projects for
more to be erected in the course of the next year. The Scroggie
Building, erected by the Peter Lyall Company, who have built most
of the “big stuff” in Montreal, including the Transportation
and Express on St. James Street, constitutes something of a
record--ground was broken in December, 1912, and the place was
occupied by November 1, 1913. The area covered by the structure
is 127 feet by 345.

Another large structure, that has gone up quietly with little
interference with traffic and public convenience, is the
ten-storey addition to the Power Building on Craig Street--work
was begun in June and already the lower storeys are occupied
by some of the office staff. One of the more remarkable of the
newer buildings is the Southam Press Building, the novel front of
which attracts the eye of many a traveller in Bleury Street. Four
stately female figures support the front, which is frescoed with
small colored lizards and snakes.

The ground floor has an area of 4,525 square feet.

The new Montreal High School in University Street, which covers
about five acres of ground, and which has been in construction
for more than a year, will be vacated by the builders in about
two months. The new Sun Life Building on Dominion Square, which,
the Company claims will have cost when finished upward of one
and a quarter million dollars, has already been fitted with its
skeleton of steelwork, and will be nearly completed by the end of
the summer. Another large building on which a great deal of work
remains to be done is the new custom house building on McGill
Street, which will not be finished for two years, the object
being to allow of the proper “seasoning” of the main structure,
and the settling of the foundations. Considering the extent of
building operation in the city, there are comparatively few
accidents, the death list being proportionately smaller than that
of New York, where every skyscraper exacts its toll of several
deaths before completion.

The growth of the city of recent years has been so rapid and
great that it can be best gauged about 1913 by the testimony of
a Montrealer, Mr. Donald McMaster, who had been absent for a few
years:

“As I came up the river last night on the boat, I was astounded
by what I saw in the way of industrial development in the East
End of the city.

“Belching chimneys, great mills and factories, the glow of
furnaces, the signs of an eager and aggressive industrialism. And
then today when I went westward and saw what was being done there
in the way of expansion in the building up of the environs of the
city, in the multiplicity of machine and car shops, along the
Lachine canal, I said to myself that such growth surpassed that
of London or Paris proportionately to population.

“Why, you will have a million, not in a decade, but in a lustrum.
You don’t see all this growth as a stranger sees it. I am not
a stranger, of course; but I have been absent. I tell you I am
amazed at what I see, and proud of old Montreal.”

[Illustration: TYPES OF MODERN ARCHITECTURE IN MONTREAL]

[Illustration: Canadian Life Assurance Building]

[Illustration: Canadian Express Building]

[Illustration: Linton Apartments]

[Illustration: Ritz-Carlton Hotel]


                DURING THE GREAT REAL ESTATE BOOM

Montreal has been so steadily growing into metropolitan
proportions that we must now let students use their imagination
by a glance at the following figures and studies.

They are put on record here as reflecting the grounds on which
optimistic calculators were looking to the future in 1913 before
the outbreak of the Great International War.


                                I

                     REAL ESTATE ASSESSMENTS

The growth may be estimated by the following increase in real
estate assessment values:

  1880      $ 78,387,759.00
  1890       122,859,859.00
  1900       185,744,531.00
  1901       190,952,235.00
  1902       194,045,075.00
  1903       200,622,335.00
  1904       207,338,585.00
  1905       219,047,960.00
  1906       255,013,389.00
  1907       272,761,032.00
  1908       299,157,416.00
  1909       329,933,089.00
  1910       428,585,356.00
  1911       501,291,812.00
  1912       638,021,625.00
  1913       791,820,595.00

To present a picture of the present activities the following
list shows the buildings valued over $70,000 which are under
construction in Montreal at the present time, or have been
finished since April, 1912.


                               II

 STATEMENT OF BUILDINGS OCCUPIED BY PROPRIETORS OR TENANTS, ALSO
                 VACANT, AND IN ERECTION (1912)

  TABLE LEGEND

  Column A = Number of dwelling houses by tenants
  Column B = Number of dwelling houses occupied by proprietors
  Column C = Number of vacant dwelling houses
  Column D = Number of dwelling houses in erection
  Column E = Number of store and office buildings
  Column F = Number of store and office buildings in erection
  Column G = Miscellaneous buildings

  WARD                        A         B      C      D        E      F       G

  East                       60         4      2     --      165      2      21
  Centre                      2        --     --     --      207      2       8
  West                        1        --     --     --      306     --       6
  St. Ann                   970       170     13      1      532      4      63
  St. Joseph                859       159     36      2      282      1      24
  St. Andrew                873       601     28     19      139     --      58
  St. George                786       439     34      9      379      6     106
  St. Lawrence            1,306       241     41      6      418     10      69
  St. Louis               1,650       370     27      9      340      2      77
  St. James                 669       184     19      3      134      2      34
  Lafontaine                939       562     20      4      121      1      20
  Papineau                1,080       462     17     14      292      2      28
  St. Mary                  688       438      6     29      239     --      18
  Hochelaga               1,001       642     51     49      106      6      48
  St. Jean Baptiste       1,137       461     11     17      186      2      23
  Duvernay                  586       396      6      6       89      5       5
  St. Denis               2,479      2071     71      4      444     13      52
  St. Henry                 954       610     13     32       70     --      57
  St. Cunegonde             332       113      1     --       59      1      10
  Mount Royal               127       158      6      9       16     --      11
  De Lorimier               799       340     31     46       99      9      14
  Laurier                 2,149     1,265     49     95      241      3      63
  Notre Dame de Graces      374       378     51    116       22     --      30
  Emard                     697       212     29     17       30     --      12
  Longue Pointe             550       330     18      5       52     --      26
  St. Paul                  234       172      3      7       36     --      11
  Bordeaux                  205       158     21     11       15     --       7
  Rosemount                 139       122     12     40        9     --       5
  Cote des Neiges            52        48      2      4        4     --       6
  St. Gabriel               877       423     10      2       56     --      34
  Ahuntsic                   64       118      8     14       16     --       7
                         ------    ------    ---    ---    -----     ---    ---
                         22,639    11,647    636    570    5,100      71    953


                               III

                        RECENT BUILDINGS

The buildings here listed represent a total value of $13,623,330
and aside from the Grain Elevator and Dominion Government
warehouses are for the most part office buildings, apartment
houses and factories. They give a good idea of the present
prosperity of Montreal, and its growth of population and business:

  Owner, Location and Description--                                     Value.

  Harbor Commission, foot of Berri Street, grain elevator             $2,500,000
  Canadian Steel Foundry, Maisonneuve, factory                         1,000,000
  Dominion Government, McGill and Youville, storehouse                   900,000
  City of Montreal, Gosford Street, City Hall Annex                      712,000
  Ritz-Carlton Hotel Company, Sherbrooke and Drummond, hotel             663,330
  Royal Trust Company, 107 St. James, office building                    500,000
  Bank of B.N.A., 140 St. James, bank and office building                500,000
  Alexander Building Company, St. Alexander Street, warehouse            480,000
  A. Sommer, Berthelet Street, office building and factory               400,000
  United Shoe Machinery Company, Boyce Street, Maisonneuve, factory      400,000
  Sir Thomas Shaughnessy, McGill and St. Paul, office building           350,000
  Lewis Building, St. John and Hospital, office building                 350,000
  McGill Property Syndicate, McGill Street, office building              300,000
  Y.M.C.A., Drummond Street, club                                        300,000
  The Herald Building, Craig Street, office building                     275,000
  Unity Building Company, Limited, Lagauchetiere Street, office building 225,000
  Frontenac Breweries, Casgrain Street, brewery                          220,000
  La Sauvegarde Company, Notre Dame and St. Vincent, office building     200,000
  Séminaire St. Sulpice, St. Denis Street, seminary                      200,000
  Sisters of Cong. of N.D., Sherbrooke and Atwater, school               150,000
  A.M. Vineberg, Duluth and St. Lawrence, office building                150,000
  Sir Rodolphe Forget, Ontario Avenue, residence                         142,000
  Fabrique St. Stanislaus, Boulevard St. Joseph, church                  142,000
  Quebec Amusement Company, Bleury Street, theater                       140,000
  J.O. Gravel, Notre Dame and St. Sulpice, office building               136,000
  John W. Peck, St. Dominique Street, factory                            135,000
  Séminaire St. Sulpice, Cote St. Antoine Road, apartments               125,000
  Protestant School Board, Esplanade Avenue, school                      120,000
  Fabrique St. Irène, Atwater Avenue, church                             110,000
  Regent Construction Company, Amesbury Avenue, apartments               100,000
  National Bridge Company, Longue Pointe, factory                        100,000
  J.C. Wilson Company, Ltd., Lagauchetière and Alexander, warehouse      100,000
  J.A.E. Gauvin, St. Catherine and Maisonneuve, office building          100,000
  O.L. Henault, Bishop Street, apartments                                100,000
  Johnston Bros., St. Catherine W., offices and store                    100,000
  Imperial Tobacco Company, Bourget and Rose de Lima, factory            100,000
  Belgo-Canadian Realty, Bleury Street, offices                           95,000
  Grand Trunk Railway Company, Wellington and St. Etienne, warehouse      90,000
  Imperial Tobacco Company, Bourget and Rose de Lima, factory            100,000
  Belgo-Canadian Realty, Bleury Street, offices                           95,000
  Grand Trunk Railway Company, Wellington and St. Etienne, warehouse      90,000
  W.H. Creed, Cote des Neiges Road, apartments                            90,000
  Northern Electric Company, Notre Dame and Guy, factory                  88,000
  Harbor Commission, Notre Dame and Davidson, warehouse                   80,000
  O. Lamoureux, Esplanade and St. Urbain, apartments                      80,000
  P.A. and H.A. Adams, Prince Arthur and Oxenden, apartments              79,000
  Engineers’ Club, 9 Beaver Hall Square, club building                    76,000
  D.C. Macarrow, Peel Street, residence                                   70,000
  University Club, Mansfield Street, club building                        70,000
  St. Lawrence Flour Mills Company, Notre Dame West, factory              70,000
  Jas. H. Mayer, Cote des Neiges Road, apartments                         70,000
  Canadian General Electric, St. Antoine Street, warehouse                70,000
  Winter Club, Drummond Street, club building                             70,000


                               IV

                     METROPOLITAN POPULATION

In 1891 the census returns showed for Montreal proper a
population of 220,181; in 1901 a population of 266,826; in
1911, 466,197. Including the unnamed municipalities the total
population of Montreal we may place in 1911 at 586,756. This
allows us to make a comparative study of the growth of Montreal
from the beginning of British rule.


                         CITY POPULATION

  1760                          3,000
  1765                          7,000
  1800                          9,000
  1809                         12,000
  1825                         22,000
  1831                         27,000
  1839                         35,000
  1844                         44,000
  1870                        100,000
  1890                        220,181
  1901                        266,826
  1911, city proper           466,197
  1911, Greater Montreal      587,756


                       COMPARATIVE GROWTH

In the years from 1900 to 1910 Montreal has shown a greater
percentage of growth than has any of the great cities of the
United States.

The growth in Montreal’s population since 1900 has represented an
increase of 188,270 people, or 70.3 per cent.

New York has shown the greatest growth of any city in the United
States. The percentage of increase in the same ten years was
38.7.

The following are the comparative figures:

                                           Per cent.    Area
                      ----Population----   of increase  in sq.
                        1910.     1900.    1900-1910.   miles.

   1 New York         4,766,883 3,437,202    38.7       326¾
   2 Chicago          2,185,283 1,698,575    28.7       190½
   3 Philadelphia     1,549,008 1,293,697    19.7       129½
   4 St. Louis          687,029   575,238    19.4        61⅓
   5 Boston             670,585   560,892    19.6        42⅔
   6 Cleveland          560,663   381,768    46.9        45
   7 Baltimore          558,485   508,957     9.7        31½
   8 Pittsburg          533,905   451,512    18.2        41
   9 Detroit            465,766   285,704    63          40
  10 Montreal (proper)  456,000   267,730    70.3        18.7
  11 San Francisco        --      342,782    --          43
  12 Buffalo            423,715   352,387    20.2        42
  13 Milwaukee          373,357   285,315    31          22¾
  14 Cincinnati         364,463   325,902    11.8        43½
  15 Newark             347,469   246,070    41.2        23
  16 New Orleans        339,075   287,104    18.1       192
  17 Washington         331,069   278,718    18.8        69¼

A contemporary study of the population of Montreal for 1912 may
also be put on record.

There are in regard to population, two Montreals: the people
within the civic boundaries and the community of which Montreal
city is the heart.

The whole is necessarily greater than the part, and in
considering the size of Montreal, in the matter of population, it
is the whole which should be discussed. To take the naked figures
of the census would be utterly misleading, for they do not
include even the whole of the area within the city’s limits. That
is to say, between the taking of the census and the publication
of the results, Montreal had annexed a number of large towns
contiguous to it. But this is not the only respect in which
the relation of Montreal to the census is unique. It contains,
within the city’s limits, or bounded by the city on more than
one side, but under distinct municipal government, three other
cities--Westmount, Maisonneuve and Outremont It also possesses
suburbs, such as Lachine, which are merely manufacturing outposts
of the city proper, and others, such as Longueuil, St. Lambert
and Montreal West, which are in effect the city’s dormitories.

In figures given below, therefore, are included the population
of these and other suburbs which are to all intents and purposes
part of Montreal. They are part of the communal life, and the
only respect in which their people differ from those of Montreal
is that they have distinct municipal administrations.

If we were to take the figures of the 1911 census, Montreal’s
population would stand at 466,197, whereas the population of the
metropolitan community, as given by the census, is 590,919. Here
are the figures in substantiation of this claim:

  Montreal               466,197
  St. Cunégonde           11,172
  St. Henry               30,337
  Westmount               14,327
  Lachine                 10,778
  Longueuil                4,016
  St. Lambert              3,350
  Montreal South             790
  Montreal West              703
  St. Laurent              3,502
  Outremont                4,745
  Cote des Neiges          2,447
  Notre Dame de Grâce      5,217
  Verdun                  11,627
  Longue Pointe            3,037
  Maisonneuve             18,674
                         -------
                         590,919

No one who knows the relation of these towns to Montreal will
deny the justice of grouping them as integral parts of this
community.

It must be remembered that these figures, first published a year
ago, are the result of a census taken in June, 1911. During
the decennial period 1900-1910, the city proper increased in
population an average of 19,000 yearly. The increase during
the latter years of the period was much greater than at its
beginning, and it is a matter of common knowledge that it is the
suburbs which of late years have shown the fastest growth. From
these facts as a basis, it can be argued with every probability
of accuracy that this community has grown since the census was
taken, by at least 35,000 people, making the total population at
this time not less than 625,000.

Of the seventeen cities mentioned in the foregoing table Montreal
stood sixteenth in 1900, Newark only being below her. Now,
assuming that the population of Greater Montreal is 625,000, she
jumps to sixth place, taking rank above all except New York,
Chicago, Philadelphia, St. Louis and Boston. In justice to the
cities she has passed in the race, it must be acknowledged
that they have doubtless also added to their population since
the census was taken, but it will hardly be claimed that the
leader among them, Cleveland, has jumped from 560,663, its
census standing, to the 625,000 of Montreal. If it be urged that
perhaps some of the cities which Montreal has passed should also
be credited with the population of their suburbs, the answer
is that neither Cleveland, Baltimore, Pittsburg, nor Detroit,
possesses as many or as large suburbs as does Montreal. Boston is
a striking exception to this rule, and if the community of which
it is the nucleus was included in computation, the result would
probably raise Boston to fourth place among the cities.

[Illustration: MONTREAL OF TO-DAY]

[Illustration: Royal Victoria Hospital]

[Illustration: Windsor Hotel]

[Illustration: Transportation Building, 1912]

[Illustration: Modern Montreal from the Mountain]

[Illustration: McGill University Grounds]

[Illustration: The City Hall and Jacques Cartier Square]

[Illustration: Chateau de Ramsay, 1912; built in 1705]


                                V

                    MONTREAL AND WORLD CITIES

But there is still another interesting comparison to be made--how
does Montreal stand among the cities of the world? Here is the
answer:

   1. London                7,429,740
   2. New York              4,766,883
   3. Paris                 2,763,393
   4. Tokio, Japan          2,186,079
   5. Chicago               2,185,283
   6. Berlin                2,101,933
   7. Vienna                2,085,888
   8. St. Petersburg        1,678,000
   9. Canton                1,600,000
  10. Pekin, estimated      1,600,000
  11. Philadelphia          1,549,000
  12. Moscow                1,359,254
  13. Constantinople        1,125,000
  14. Osaka, Japan          1,117,151
  15. Calcutta              1,026,987
  16. Buenos Ayres          1,000,250
  17. Rio de Janeiro          811,265
  18. Hamburg                 802,793
  19. Bombay                  776,006
  20. Warsaw                  756,426
  21. Glasgow                 735,906
  22. Buda Pesth              732,322
  23. Liverpool               702,247
  24. St. Louis               687,029
  25. Boston                  670,585
  26. MONTREAL, 1911          625,000
  27. Brussels                612,401
  28. Manchester              606,751
  29. Bangkok                 600,000
  30. Cairo                   570,062
  31. Naples                  563,541
  32. Cleveland               560,663
  33. Baltimore               558,485
  34. Amsterdam               557,614
  35. Madrid                  539,885
  36. Munich                  538,983
  37. Pittsburg               533,905
  38. Barcelona               533,090
  39. Birmingham, Eng.        522,182
  40. Dresden                 516,996
  41. Madras                  509,346
  42. Leipzig                 503,672
  43. Melbourne               496,079
  44. Milan                   491,460
  45. Marseilles              491,161
  46. Sydney                  481,830
  47. Copenhagen              476,806
  48. Breslau                 470,904
  49. Detroit                 465,766
  50. Rome                    462,783
  51. Lyons                   459,099
  52. Odessa                  449,673
  53. Hyderabad               448,466
  54. Leeds                   428,953
  55. Cologne                 428,722
  56. Buffalo                 423,715
  57. San Francisco           416,912
  58. Sheffield               409,070
  59. Toronto, and suburbs    381,000
  60. Kioto, Japan            380,568
  61. Shanghai, est.          380,000
  62. Milwaukee               373,357
  63. Rotterdam               370,389
  64. Cincinnati              364,463
  65. Lisbon                  356,009
  66. Lodz                    351,570
  67. Belfast                 349,180
  68. Newark, N.J.            347,469
  69. Kobe, Japan             345,952
  70. Mexico City             344,721
  71. New Orleans             339,075
  72. Bristol                 339,042
  73. Turin                   335,656
  74. Frankfort               334,538
  75. Santiago                334,538
  76. Washington              331,069
  77. Yokohama                326,035
  78. Alexandria              319,766
  79. Kiev                    319,000
  80. Stockholm               317,964
  81. Edinburgh               316,479
  82. Palermo                 309,694
  83. Minneapolis             301,408
  84. Montevideo              298,127
  85. Nuremburg               294,426
  86. Antwerp                 291,949
  87. Dublin                  290,638
  88. Nagoya                  288,039
  89. Hong Kong               283,905
  90. Teheran                 280,000
  91. Bradford, Eng.          279,809
  92. Bucharest               276,178
  93. Havana                  275,000
  94. Jersey City             267,779
  95. MONTREAL, 1901          267,730


                               VI

             OPTIMISTIC SPECULATIONS AND PROPHECIES

By this table Montreal jumps to twenty-sixth place in the list of
great cities. In 1901 she stood ninety-fifth in the same list.
This position, however, is not as conclusively Montreal’s due as
is her rank in the table of North American cities, for the reason
that it is not possible to speak with exactitude regarding the
actual size of the cities below Montreal when their suburbs are
included. Manchester, so considered, is no doubt much larger.
However, the position accorded the city cannot be far wrong, and
there is no gainsaying the fact that Montreal has grown in ten
years from the ninety-fifth place among the cities of the world
to a place in the first thirty or forty.

There is good reason for believing that Montreal is now the
largest city in the self-governing Dominions of the Empire.
Only London, Glasgow, Liverpool and Manchester, in the British
Isles, can claim to exceed her in population. If we exclude
from the calculation the densely populated cities of the East,
and Occidental cities, she will rank among the first twenty.
And is there a city, among those which now surpass her in
population, which is showing as large a percentage of growth? As
the metropolitan city of a virgin half-continent, towards which
the tide of immigration is yearly rushing with greater force,
Montreal is growing with Canada’s growth, and every man who is
convinced of the tremendous development Canada will witness
within the next decade must realize that this development will
mean that Montreal must move, in that time, close to the million
mark.

In 1901 Montreal had a population of 267,000. Her suburbs then
were small, but supposing we put them at 33,000, and call the
greater city 300,000. If today this greater city is 625,000 the
growth in eleven years has been 325,000, or about 30,000 per
year. Is it unreasonable to assume that in nine years’ time we
will have a million souls on this island?

The following computation also will be interesting in later years
as a specimen of current speculations and prophecies in 1914 of
Montreal’s growth:

“At this rate,” says a contemporary writer, “the city’s
population will be considerably over the million mark in 1919.
By 1931, two years would be quite sufficient to add to the
population of the spreading city, more people than are at present
living in both the city and suburbs. If the present rate of
increase should remain constant, twenty-six years from today
would see a city containing a greater population than the whole
of the Dominion of Canada can boast of today, and with seven
and three-quarter millions of people, exclusive of suburbs,
considerably larger than the London of the present time. A trip
further in the future is too dizzy for the brain of any but the
trained mathematician, but the array of figures are sufficient
to show that within the life-time of the present citizens the
city on the shores of the St. Lawrence is likely to stand in the
fore-front of the leading centers of the world. Of course, it is
only natural to expect that the increase will not be maintained
at the present rate, but the addition of growing suburbs will
likely prevent any considerable decrease in the rate of advance.”

Before concluding these statistical pictures we may sum up the
vital figures of the metropolis:


                               VII

                  THE GREATER MONTREAL OF 1912

Population of Greater Montreal, estimated, 625,000.

Assessed valuation of city nearly equals $1,000 per head of
entire population of greater city.

City’s revenue from all sources, $8,200,000.

Montreal’s customs receipts are $20,000,000 a year.

The city of Montreal is divided into 125,141 lots.

The city of Montreal is owned by 29,123 people.

If the land upon which the city is built was divided up among the
population the per capita share would be about one and one-sixth
lots.

Montreal’s assessed valuation this year is $601,000,000.

Exemptions from real estate assessment in the city amount to
practically one-quarter of the whole.

Montreal has 1,200 streets and more are being opened up every
week.

Montreal’s police force numbers close upon seven hundred officers
and constables.

The city’s militia units have an enrolled strength
of approximately four thousand two hundred officers,
non-commissioned officers and men.

Montreal has over five hundred firemen, divided up among nearly
thirty stations.

There are 150 churches in Montreal.

The longest street is Notre Dame Street, with a total length of
nearly fifteen miles.

Montreal’s port is visited during the season by nearly eight
hundred ocean steamers and thirteen thousand lake and river
steamers, the whole fleet having a tonnage of approximately seven
million tons.

Montreal has three grain elevators, with a total capacity of
4,750,000 bushels, which is to be added to by another 2,000,000
bushels.

Montreal’s annual snow removal bill amounts to over one hundred
thousand dollars, a considerable portion of which is paid by the
Montreal Tramways Company.

Montreal has sixty moving picture theaters, with half a dozen
others building in different parts of the city.

St. Helen’s Island is visited annually by close upon two hundred
and fifty thousand people, mostly children.

Montreal has nearly three thousand privately owned automobiles,
representing capital worth approximately six million five hundred
thousand dollars.

Greater Montreal comprises two cities, three towns, and half a
score of small municipalities.

Montreal’s annual civic light bill is $200,000.

Investigations show that on an average 3,022 school children in
Montreal spend $188.70 a week on picture shows.

Montreal has 805 acres of park area.

Montreal’s banks, head offices and branches, number 112.

Montreal’s bank clearings average between fifty-five million and
sixty million dollars weekly.

Montreal has one general postoffice, nine branches and eighty sub
offices.

One hundred and fifty passenger trains enter and leave Montreal
railway depots every twenty-four hours.

The death rate of Greater Montreal is about 40.5 per 1,000.

The city building inspection department has so far this year
issued 3,150 permits.

Montreal has 260 miles of streets, of which sixty-five miles are
paved.

Montreal’s 240 miles of brick sewers, if placed end to end, would
reach from here to Ottawa and back, with sufficient over to reach
Coteau.

Montreal’s tramways system owns and operates 125 miles of line
all over the island.

Montreal’s streets are illuminated by over three thousand
separate lights.

Montreal street cars this year have carried over one hundred and
twenty million passengers.

There are sixty-three parishes and 800 priests in the diocese of
Montreal.

Montreal has 731 schools, public, high and convents.

There are seventy-two hospitals, public and private, and asylums
in Montreal.

The city has two seminaries and two universities.

Other educational establishments in Montreal include eight
classical colleges.

Property under the jurisdiction of the Montreal Harbor Commission
on the Montreal side of the river is worth over twenty million
dollars.

Montreal’s moving picture show theaters have a seating capacity
of 35,000.

Realty transfers in Montreal this year are in the neighborhood of
one hundred and twelve million dollars.

There are 172,000 names in the Montreal directory for 1912.

Montreal’s area is 27,747 acres.

Greater Montreal’s daily water supply exceeds sixty-eight million
gallons.

The daily per capita consumption of water in Greater Montreal is
112 gallons.

The City of Montreal waterworks supply the needs of 351,000
people.

The Montreal Water and Power Company daily pumps 25,100,000
gallons for 251,000 people.


                              VIII

                A CITY PLAN FOR GREATER MONTREAL

Seeing the future growth of the city, a movement was started
in 1909 by the City Improvement League, an association of good
citizens, desirous of the best for their city. The report of its
secretary for 1912, states the progress of the city plan movement
as follows:

The City Improvement League has, from its commencement,
consistently promoted the movement for a preconceived city plan
to be adopted for the future expansion of Montreal. Its City
Planning Committee, backed by the cooperation of the great
commercial and philanthropic bodies of the city, has been
recognized as the exponent of the wishes of our best citizens,
having already two years ago secured the appointment of a
Metropolitan Parks Commission, whose duty it was to study the
needs of the city for such a plan.

This Commission, after a careful study, reported to the
Government on January 5, 1911, on the very urgent necessity of
the city immediately undertaking some action in city planning,
and it recommended the establishment of a permanent Metropolitan
Parks Commission, to carry on the work already initiated by the
present temporary use. The Commission presented a report drawn
up for them by Mr. F.M. Olmstead, on subjects dealing with the
selection of lands for parks and playgrounds, and with the
location of boulevards and other main lines of urban and suburban
transportation, as necessary preliminaries in the formation of a
city plan for Montreal. In addition, the Commission presented a
draft bill for an act to establish a permanent Metropolitan Parks
Commission.

A bill based on the above draft was presented in March at the
following session of the Provincial Parliament, but was not
passed, being held over for the next year. In the meantime, the
temporary Commission having presented its report, for which it
was appointed, automatically expired. The efforts of the League,
to overcome the difficulties in the way of the bill, have since
occupied a great part of the last year’s work.

Apart from meetings, and consultations of experts of a technical
nature, every occasion was used to keep up public interest in the
demand for a permanent commission.

In October the Fourth General Assembly of the Royal Architectural
Society of Canada was held in Montreal, and on October 2d, at a
special meeting of the delegates of this convention, and a large
and representative gathering of citizens called together by the
City Improvement League, to discuss the town planning situation,
the following resolutions were carried:

“That this assembly of the Royal Architectural Institute of
Canada earnestly desires to urge upon the several Provincial
Governments, the necessity of providing without delay, parks and
playgrounds and housing commissions for each large city under
their jurisdiction, especially with the object of preventing
excessive mortality, and making better provisions for the health,
comfort and recreation of the masses.

“That the Government of the Province of Quebec is especially
urged to appoint a permanent Metropolitan Parks Commission with
executive powers.”

In December the Public Health Association of Canada called its
first convention, it being held in Montreal. A very valuable
session on city planning, which was well attended by members of
the League, provided much stimulating thought to Canadian public
health officers and city planners.

A resolution to the following effect was proposed by Mr.
H. Bragg, and seconded by Dr. Adami, president of the City
Improvement League, viz., that this convention should recommend
that Provincial legislatures should create Park Commissions, to
regulate the growth of towns and cities, and to control their
housing conditions, with powers of city planning and housing to
extend even to suburban areas.

The matter was debated and finally left over to the Executive
Committee of the Canadian Public Health Association, which next
day passed the following modified resolution:

Moved by Doctor Bryce (Ottawa), and seconded by Doctor Sheriff
(Ottawa), “that this association deems it worthy of urgent
necessity that Provincial legislatures pass Acts making provision
whereby urban municipalities can make house planning and land
purchase schemes, whose operation may include suburban areas.”

During the year public bodies interested in the bill renewed
their resolutions in its favour. Thus, for instance, at the
annual meeting of the Board of Trade, it was resolved on the
motion of Mr. R.W. Reford, seconded by Mr. Armand Chaput, “That
the Montreal Board of Trade, which since February, 1910, has
advocated the creation of a Metropolitan Parks Commission for the
Island of Montreal, now notes with gratification that the Quebec
Legislature is considering the appointment of such a commission
and the board, in annual general meeting assembled, hereby
prays that Legislature to adopt, during the present Session,
legislation to that end.”

The above resolutions are quoted as indicative of the general
trend of expert thought, which has helped to form public opinion
in the city, in favour of a Metropolitan Parks Commission.

During the last two years every draft bill that has been drawn up
for the above movement has always had conjoined with it clauses
of a “housing” aspect, since city planning and the comfort of
the working classes should never be separated. Consequently, the
League has constantly promoted the study of city housing and
advocated schemes for garden cities and for model workingmen’s
dwellings, side by side with those for more parks, playgrounds
and open spaces, as desired by all town planners.

The following associations lent valuable cooperation: The Board
of Trade and La Chambre de Commerce, The Canadian Manufacturers’
Association, The Architects’ Association of the Province of
Quebec, The Trades and Labor Council, The Parks and Playgrounds
Association, The Citizens’ Association, The Canadian Club, The
Local Council of Women, The Montreal Women’s Club, The Fédération
Nationale, The Association St. Jean Baptiste, The Children’s Aid
Society.

To Mr. W.D. Lighthall, K.C., Convenor of the City Planning
Committee, and to its members, was due a large measure of the
success of the bill. Among these may be mentioned J. George
Adami, M.D.; Sir William Van Horne, E.P. Lachapelle, M.D.;
J.L. Perron, K.C.; Hon. J.J. Guerin, M.D.; Controller Ainey,
Sir Alexander Lacoste, L.A. Lavallee, K.C.; J.I. Finnie, M.D.,
M.L.A.; W.S. Maxwell, J.R. Gardiner, F.G. Todd, W. Rutherford,
Prof. J.A. Dale, J.V. Desaulniers, Farquhar Robertson, Olivar
Asselin, Leslie H. Boyd, K.C.; William Lyall, the late Professor
Gregor, W. Johnson, H. Bragg, Dr. W.H. Atherton, secretary, and
others.

Later an association entitled the Greater Montreal Housing and
Planning Association was formed to assist in carrying on the
above movement.

The plan movement has made uncertain progress, but still it is
appreciable, especially as having overcome initial difficulties
and in promoting preparatory measures and amelioration, leading
toward the desired goal.


FOOTNOTES:

[1] This expropriation caused the demolition of the old historic
Chapel of Notre Dame de Pitié. There were many who were grieved
at this act of vandalism.




Transcriber’s note:

Footnotes cited in tables were moved to the end of the table,
even if the table spans multiple pages and the original footnote
was therefore in the middle of the table. All other footnotes
were moved to the end of their respective chapters.

Illustrations in the original were presented on special plate
pages, followed by a blank facing page. The illustration pages
were numbered while the blank facing pages were not. These pages
usually split a paragraph and sometimes even a word. Where they
split a paragraph, they have been moved to follow the paragraph.

Tables too wide to display well on a screen have been divided
into multiple tables with repeated row labels. Lists displayed in
multiple columns simply to better use space now appear as single
vertical column.

This work contains a very large number of deviations from
accepted spellings, common diacritical markings, capitalization
and punctuation rules, even for the period of the book. It is
impossible, in the majority of the cases, to determine which of
these deviations were desired by the author, which deviations
reflect referenced or cited material, and which were printing
errors. They have therefore not been changed, with the exception
of obvious punctuation printing errors, and the items below:

35,00 changed to 35,000 on page 666.

1911 changed to 1811 on page 127.

926,34.46 changed to 92,634.46 on page 193.

1910 changed to 1913 in the table heading on page 606.

Repeated sentence removed from page 493. (As Montreal is a
port of importance the sociological value of this movement is
apparent.)

*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 48244 ***