Published online by Cambridge University Press: 24 February 2017
In 1870 John Carling, Ontario's Commissioner of Public Works and Agriculture, repeated one of the most persistent ideas of the nineteenth century: what this country needed, he said, was some kind of agricultural education in “the science of farming.”
1. Commissioner of Agriculture and Arts, Report, 1870, p. xi [hereafter cited as Agriculture and Arts].Google Scholar
2. Rev. [Hartley, E., Dewart, Toronto, “Characteristics and Tendencies of the Time,” Ontario Teachers’ Association, Minutes, 1871, p. 31.Google Scholar
3. Morgan, Henry J., ed., The Dominion Annual Register and Review 1886 (Montreal, 1887), pp. 231–34.Google Scholar
4. British American Cultivator (Toronto), June 1845, p. 176.Google Scholar
5. Agriculture and Arts, 1868, p. 8.Google Scholar
6. President James Mills, Ontario Agricultural College and Experimental Farm, Report, 1885, p. 3 [hereafter cited as OAC Report].Google Scholar
7. Bryant, John, publ., “Agricultural Education,” Ontario Teachers’ Association, Minutes, 1890, p. 25.Google Scholar
8. Charles True, Alfred, A History of Agricultural Education in the United States, USDA Publication no. 36 (Washington, D.C., 1929), p. 12.Google Scholar
9. Hodgins, John G., Documentary History of Education in Upper Canada 5 (Toronto, 1912): 187, 190 [hereafter cited as DHE]; ibid., 6:63.Google Scholar
10. Expressions of these three principles can be found in the various Petitions printed in DHE, and in an excellent editorial review in the St. Catharines Journal, May 15, 1845.Google Scholar
11. Quoted in Burwash, N., “Origins and Development of the University of Toronto,“ in The University of Toronto and its Colleges, 1827–1906, ed. Hutton, Maurice, (Toronto, 1906), p. 30.Google Scholar
12. DHE, 5:145.Google Scholar
13. Journal and Transactions of the Board of Agriculture of Upper Canada, 1856, 1:246.Google Scholar
14. DHE, 12:275.Google Scholar
15. Journal of Education (Toronto), June 1857, pp. 87–88.Google Scholar
16. DHE, 17:67.Google Scholar
17. Journal of Education, February 1966, p. 22.Google Scholar
18. Agriculture and Arts, 1868, p. 4.Google Scholar
19. Ellis, W. H., “Faculty of Applied Science,“ in University of Toronto, Hutton, ed., pp. 180–3.Google Scholar
20. Ontario, , Sessional Papers, 1873 no. 32, p. 2.Google Scholar
21. Akenson, Donald H., The Irish Education Experiment (London, 1970), p. 149.Google Scholar
22. Russell, Sir John, “Rothhamsted Experimental Station,“ Encyclopaedia Britannica (1959), 19:571–2.Google Scholar
23. Ontario, , Sessional Papers, 1873 no. 32, p. 16.Google Scholar
24. Ibid., 1871–1872, no. 5, p. 19.Google Scholar
25. Ontario, Legislative Assembly, Journals, 1873, pp. 220–1.Google Scholar
26. Ibid., p. 224. An eye-witness account of the opposition to the Guelph site is presented in Clarke, Charles, Sixty Years in Upper Canada (Toronto, 1908), pp. 194–96; see also Jones, R. L., A History of Agriculture in Ontario 1613–1880 (Toronto, 1946), p. 335.Google Scholar
27. Ontario, , Sessional Papers, 1871–1872, no. 55, pp. 14–15.Google Scholar
28. Journal of Education, December 1873, p. 181.Google Scholar
29. Ontario, , Sessional Papers, 1871–1872, no. 55, p. 18.Google Scholar
30. Ibid., p. 15.Google Scholar
31. Ibid., p. 13.Google Scholar
32. Ontario School of Agriculture and Experimental Farm, Report, 1877, pp. 32–39.Google Scholar
33. Journal of Education, May 1874, p. 74.Google Scholar
34. Agriculture and Arts, 1874, pp. xi–xii; 1875, p. xiii.Google Scholar
35. Farmers’ Advocate (London, Ont.), March 1882, p. 83.Google Scholar
36. Ibid., February 17, 1910, p. 263.Google Scholar
37. Ibid., February 1877, p. 29.Google Scholar
38. Most of the nonresidents were from England. For an account of one such student, see Benson, Lillian Rea, “An OAC Student in the 1880s,“ Ontario History, 42, no. 2 (April 1950): 67–80.Google Scholar
39. DHE, 15:188.Google Scholar
40. Farmers’ Advocate, May 1879, p. 98.Google Scholar
41. Ibid., June 1887, p. 162; February 1886, p. 39.Google Scholar
42. Middleton, J. E. and Landon, Fred, The Province of Ontario, A History 1 (Toronto, 1927): 474; Canada, Select Committee of the House of Commons on the Agricultural Industry, Report, 1884, p. 174.Google Scholar
43. Canada, Royal Commission on the Relations of Capital and Labor in Canada, Report, vol. 2, “Evidence—Ontario” (Ottawa, 1889), pp. 446–48.Google Scholar
44. “Letter to the Editor,” Farmers’ Advocate, March 1882, p. 83.Google Scholar
45. Patterson, T. F. in Ontario, Farmers’ Institutes, Report, 1895, p. 43.Google Scholar
46. There are many references in support of this assessment. One of the most forceful is a letter in the Farmers’ Advocate, September 26, 1912, pp. 1678–79. The same preference was common among American farmers. See, for example, the Proceedings of the 18th Session of the National Grange of the Patrons of Industry, 1884, p. 82.Google Scholar
47. There is a brief account of the development of agricultural science in Mason, Stephen F., A History of the Sciences (New York, 1962), pp. 517–20; see also, McLarty, Duncan, “A Century of Development of Agricultural Science in Western Ontario,” Western Ontario Historical Notes 5, no. 2 (June 1947): 49; Kaye Lamb, W. and Cameron, Thomas W. M., “Biologists and Biological Research Since 1864,” in Pioneers of Canadian Science, ed. Stanley, G. F. G., (Toronto, 1966), pp. 36–43.Google Scholar
48. Glen, Robert, “Entomology,“ Encyclopedia Canadiana 4 (1970): 19–20.Google Scholar
49. Canada, Select Committee of the House of Commons on the Agricultural Industry, Report, 1884, p. 152.Google Scholar
50. Agriculture and Arts, 1875, p. 263.Google Scholar
51. Thomas, J., New York State Agricultural Society, in British American Cultivator, February 1847, pp. 51–58. Indeed, until the end of the century, some progressive innovations were introduced to Ontario farms in spite of the agricultural scientists. One example was the practice of dehorning cattle. A full account is given in Canada, Sessional Papers, 1893, no. 2.Google Scholar
52. See Kelly, Kenneth, “The Transfer of British Ideas on Improved Farming to Ontario During the First Half of the Nineteenth Century,“ Ontario History, 43, no. 2 (June 1971): 103–11.Google Scholar
53. “President's Address,” in Agriculture and Arts, 1878, p. 195; Benson, “OAC Student,” p. 71.Google Scholar
54. For the changes in Ontario farming in this period see “The Development of the Agricultural Industry, 1870–1910,” in Lawr, Douglas A., “The Development of Agricultural Education in Ontario, 1870–1910“ (Ph.D. diss., University of Toronto, 1972), pp. 1–29.Google Scholar
55. An interesting development in view of the founders’ antipathy toward University association.Google Scholar
56. OAC Report, 1901, p. 220.Google Scholar
57. Ibid., 1902, p. xiii; 1903, p. xvi.Google Scholar
58. Ontario, Superintendent of Farmers’ Institutes, Report, 1902–1903, p. 5.Google Scholar
59. OAC Report, 1903, p. ix.Google Scholar
60. Taton, René, ed., Science in the Nineteenth Century (London, 1961), p. 407.Google Scholar
61. OAC Report, 1909, pp. 24–36, 85–86.Google Scholar
62. Ontario Experimental Union, Report, 1889, p. 5.Google Scholar
63. Farmers’ Advocate, July 24, 1913, p. 1294.Google Scholar
64. OAC Report, 1909, pp. 97–98.Google Scholar
65. Farmers’ Advocate, March 29, 1906, pp. 494–95.Google Scholar
66. James, C. C., “History of Farming in Canada,“ in Canada and its Provinces, ed. Shortt, Adam and Doughty, Arthur G., 18 no. 2 (Toronto, 1914):582.Google Scholar
67. Ontario Department of Agriculture, Report of the Oxford County Agricultural Representative, 1913, p. 10 (typescript in ODA Office, Woodstock).Google Scholar
68. Canada, Department of Agriculture, Canada Agriculture, The First Hundred Years (Ottawa, 1967), p. 5.Google Scholar
69. Ruddick, J. A., An Historical and Descriptive Account of the Dairying Industry in Canada, Department of Agriculture Bulletin no. 28 (Ottawa, 1911), p. 56.Google Scholar
70. Farmers’ Advocate, June 15, 1905, p. 882; ibid., February 27 1908, p. 357.Google Scholar