By Ron Stagg - Chair, Department of History, Ryerson University

 

For those wondering about Egerton Ryerson’s role in the creation of residential schools, I can offer the following observations, after reading the report quoted by the CBC. Schools for native children were set up by various churches in southern Ontario, beginning in the 1790s, but especially in the 1820s and 30s. These were day schools in native communities. Natives generally welcomed them as the education provided would help their children cope with the changing nature of their environment. Increasingly they lived among farms and, as the farms were cleared of trees, their semi-nomadic way of life became increasingly difficult. Knowing English, arithmetic, etc. was seen as beneficial in the new environment. For the churches, this was a way to convert the natives, but was not seen in terms of making them into copies of white persons.

            Until after the War of 1812 First Nations were considered by government as military allies and equals. By the 1830s, however, they were regarded by the British government, which controlled ‘Indian’ policy, as an impediment to settlement. Government officials in Ontario decided that natives could be put on reserves and taught agriculture. Since the churches were already in the business of native education, the government supported their efforts, although the churches did not see themselves assisting in assimilation, but rather as bringers of Christianity. They generally had no desire to eliminate all aspects of native culture, only those associated with religion.

            While some First Nations were settled on lands in the far south that they had never surrendered, attempts to move other groups onto reservations in more northerly areas were only partially successful, since there was less Euro-Canadian settlement in those areas. A dispute within government arose over the policy in the 1830s, resulting in the (British) government setting up the Bagot Commission in 1842. It was this commission that set the general guidelines for relations with the native population for decades to come. It saw the future of relations with First Nations in terms of persuading natives to surrender their lands and accept individual plots of land, in order to become farmers and self sufficient (cutting the cost of annual presents to individuals, which were required by treaty). In order to force natives into this way of life, it was proposed to separate native children from their parents, who would teach them their culture, by creating residential schools and sending children there. Initially, there was considerable support for these schools, as native elders wanted their children to learn how to cope in a changed environment but, once the reality became apparent, as children would in some cases be moved long distances, there was considerable resistance, and the residential system was not particularly successful. 

            Where does Egerton Ryerson fit in, since the system was established in 1842 and his report was written in 1847? Ryerson was asked in 1847 to suggest the type of education that should be used in native residential schools, since he had already created an educational plan for the general population in Ontario. His report is only just over four pages long, and basically suggests a variation on the education that he had recommended for everyone else. In essence he recommended that most of the same things be taught, except for British patriotism and ‘manual training’ (i.e. training for the trades). He did not think that the latter was practical, given the cost of hiring tradesmen to live in native communities and of erecting buildings for training. He felt that native youths who were interested in a trade should be apprenticed to a tradesman. Where his plan differed from that for schools for the Euro-Canadian population was in recommending an increase in emphasis on agriculture and on religion, and a slight decrease in time spent on other aspects of education. Ryerson was a conservative of the mid-nineteenth century and that is why one can find a patronizing comment in the report. He felt that both natives and the ‘labouring classes’ of Euro-Canadian society (the CBC did not mention the latter group) had a propensity to commit sin because of their lack of ‘intellectual development’. Only strong emphasis on religion in education could overcome this. One should remember that Ryerson started his career as a travelling Methodist preacher and his comments reflect his belief in religion as the salvation of society. He does not talk about creating a policy, but rather says that he understands that the intended goal of the existing policy is to provide ‘a plain English education adapted to the working farmer and mechanic’. Since the training would be different from that of the general population, ‘It is, therefore, necessary that the pupils should reside together’.

            The facts as I see them are that Ryerson did not create the policy, but was asked to comment on the types of courses that would be appropriate, as an expert in education. In so doing he made a comment about both Natives and the working class that was typical of conservatives at the time, but which, in modern terms, is prejudiced. It is rather interesting that Ryerson lived for a time with the Mississauga nation on the Credit River. He can hardly be seen as anti-native, but these natives were both largely Christianized and engaged in farming. They were likely the model for what Ryerson and the missionaries thought would allow native peoples to survive in a Euro-Canadian environment. In fact, Ryerson’s report says that he hopes the native population will thrive as farmers.

            After Confederation in 1867, the Canadian government assumed responsibility for ‘Indian’ policy. In 1879 the minister responsible for this policy commissioned a report on what should be done about natives throughout the country, but really about First Nations in the West. By this time Ryerson was retired and the report had nothing to do with him. The recommendation was to base the policy on that enunciated for Ontario and Quebec in the Bagot Report of 1842-44. Treaties were to be negotiated to put natives on reserves, and residential schools would be used to make them into farmers. The minister responsible for this was also the Prime Minister, John A. Macdonald, although the actual work was carried out by his deputy in the department. Not surprisingly, there was considerable resistance to residential schools, the most successful generally being ones close to particular reserves. In consequence, in 1894 the government made attendance compulsory, but enforcement was uneven and a fairly high proportion of First Nations children were able to avoid the schools. Only after 1920 did the government strictly enforce the policy, although, because of rising cost, more and more reliance was placed on day schools and boarding schools, rather than the Industrial Schools about which Ryerson wrote. Ryerson’s connection to residential schools is not very substantial. More blame should be placed on the British government, on John A. Macdonald and on later Canadian governments.

 
(End)