Chapter XXV

1838.

Return to the Editorship of the "Guardian."

The Rebellion of 1837-38 was suppressed by the inherent and spontaneous loyalty of all classes of the Canadian people. Yet, after it was over, the seeds of strife engendered by the effort to prove that one section of the community was more loyal than the other, and that that other section was chiefly responsible for the outbreak, bore bitter fruit in the way of controversy. Dr. Ryerson took little part in such recriminatory warfare. It was too superficial. He felt that it did not touch the underlying points at issue between the dominant, or ruling, party and those who were engaged in a contest for equal civil and religious rights. He, and the other leaders who influenced and moulded public opinion, clearly saw that this recriminatory war was carried on by the dominant party as a mask to cover their ulterior designs--designs which were afterwards developed in the more serious struggle for religious supremacy which that party waged for years afterwards, and which at length issued in the complete triumph of the principles of civil and religious freedom for which Dr. Ryerson and the representatives of other religious bodies had so long and so earnestly contended. (See page 452.)

Besides, Dr. Ryerson was anxious to fulfil the engagement made with the Kingston Society that he would resume his pastoral charge there, after his return from England in June, 1837. He was, however, repeatedly pressed by his friends to write for the _Guardian_, or other newspaper, on the vital questions of the day. In reply to his brother John, who had urged him in the matter, he wrote (March, 1838) saying that he was so happily engaged in his pastoral duties at Kingston that he could not then devote the necessary time to the discussion of public questions. His brother, in remonstrating with him on the subject, said:--

Your letter affords me great satisfaction, accompanied with sorrow.
I am afflicted to think of the state the Province is in. Never did
high-churchism take such rapid strides towards undisputed
domination in this country as it is now taking. Never were the
prospects of the friends of civil and religious liberty so gloomy
and desperate as they are now. You say that you have not time to
write on these subjects. I will say, if you had, it would not now,
I fear, accomplish much. Indeed, it would, require the undeviating
course and the whole weight of the _Guardian_ to accomplish
anything at this time, so completely is all moral power in the
country enervated and liberty prostrated.

It is a great blessing that Mackenzie and radicalism are down, but
we are in imminent danger of being brought under the domination of
a military and high-church oligarchy, which would be equally bad,
if not infinitely worse. Under the blessing of Providence there is
one remedy, and only one; and that is, for you to take the
editorship of the _Guardian_ again. Several preachers have spoken
to me on this subject lately. One of them said to me (and he could
think of nothing else) that that alone would save us and the
country from utter ruin, and urged the necessity of the Conference
electing you, whether you would consent to serve or not. The truth
is, it is absolutely necessary for the sake of the Church and the
country that you reside in Toronto, and have direction of affairs
here. I wish all of our proceedings to be calm and moderate, but
that we be firm, and that the great principles of religious freedom
and equality should be uncompromisingly maintained.

In a subsequent letter to Dr. Ryerson his brother John said:

In fact there is no way of escape out of our troubles but for you
to take the _Guardian_. The feeling of dissatisfaction at the
present state of things is becoming exceedingly strong among the
preachers and people. I participate in their feelings.

Dr. Ryerson yielded to these appeals, and did write for the _Guardian_. In a letter, dated Kingston, April 4th, he said:--

I have recently written at considerable length to Lord Glenelg
respecting the Academy and other local matters. What you say in
regard to myself, and my appointment next year, I feel to be a
delicate and difficult matter for me to speak on. In regard to
myself I have many conflicting thoughts. My feelings, and private
interests, are in favour of my remaining where I am, if I remain in
the Province. I have been very much cast down, and my mind has been
much agitated on the subject. For the present I am somewhat
relieved by the conclusion to which I have come, in accordance with
Dr. Clarke's "Advice to a Young Preacher," not to choose my own
appointment, but after making known any circumstances, which I may
feel it necessary to explain, to leave myself in the hands of God
and my brethren, as I have done during the former years of my
ministry. If the Lord, therefore, will give me grace, I am resolved
to stand on the old Methodistic ground in the matter of appointment
to the _Guardian_.

I thank you for Chief Justice Robinson's address at the trial of
the prisoners. It is good. My own views are in favour of lenity to
these prisoners. Punishments for political offences can never be
beneficial, when they are inflicted in opposition to public
sentiment and sympathy. In such a case it will defeat the object it
is intended to accomplish. It matters not whether that sentiment
and sympathy are right or wrong in the abstract; the effect of
doing violence to it will be the same. But I would not pander to
that feeling, how carefully soever one may be disposed to observe
its operations. The fact, however, is, that Sir Francis Head
deserves impeachment, just as much as Samuel Lount deserves
execution. Morally speaking, I cannot but regard Sir Francis as the
more guilty culprit of the two.

I admire, as a whole, Sir George Arthur's reply to the address of
the "Constitutional Reformers." There is good in it. They will see
the folly of continuing the former party designations, and
pretended grounds of complaint. I think, however, that their
address will do good, from the large number of names attached to
it. I was surprised, and it has created quite a sensation here,
that there are so many as 772 in Toronto, who still have the moral
courage to designate themselves "Constitutional Reformers." It
will teach the other party that they are not so strong, and so
absolute in the voice of the country, as they thought themselves to
be.

I am satisfied that there never was such a time as from the
termination of the trial of the prisoners to the next session of
Parliament, for us to stamp upon the public mind at large, our own
constitutional, and Scriptural, political, and religious doctrines;
and to give the tone to the future Government and Legislation of
the Province, and to enlarge vastly a sphere of usefulness. I shall
write some papers for the _Guardian_ with this view.

In a letter from Brockville, Rev. William Scott said:--

My humble opinion is, that in order to our safety as a Church--our
preservation from high church influence--you must be at Toronto. I
assure you that is the opinion of our influential men in this
quarter, who understand the state of the province, and the position
of Methodism. Permit me to add that the one hour's conversation
which I had with you amply repaid me for all the furious battles
which I have fought on this circuit in your defence.

Rev. Joseph Stinson, in a letter to Rev. John Ryerson, said:

I am quite of your opinion that your brother Egerton ought to take
the _Guardian_ next year. There is a crisis approaching in our
affairs which will require a vigorous hand to wield the defensive
weapon of our Conference. There can be no two opinions as to whom
we should give that weapon. We now stand on fair ground to maintain
our own against the encroachments of the oligarchy, and we must do
it, or sink into a comparatively uninfluential body--this must not
be.

As urged by these letters from his brethren, Dr. Ryerson, early in May, 1838, prepared several articles for the _Guardian_. His brother John, who was a member of the Book Committee, thus speaks of the series of articles sent to that paper:--

I cannot express to you how much I am gratified and pleased with
your article on "Christian Loyalty." It will, no doubt, do immense
good. We have had a regular campaign in our Book Committee, in
reading and discussing your articles. The one on "Christian
Loyalty" occupied nearly the whole time. Your article on "The
Church" is one of the most admirable papers I ever read. Not a word
of that is to be altered. Your communication on "Indian Affairs," I
cannot speak so highly of. I hope you will pardon me for leaving
out some of the severe remarks on Sir Francis. I am afraid they
will do harm with the present Government.

At the Conference of 1838, Dr. Ryerson was re-elected Editor of the _Christian Guardian_. In his first editorial, dated 11th July 1838, he said:--

Notwithstanding the almost incredible calumny which has in past
years been heaped upon me by antipodes-party-presses, I still
adhere to the principles and views upon which I set out in 1826. I
believe the endowment of the priesthood of any Church in the
Province to be an evil to that Church.... I believe that the
appropriation of the proceeds of the clergy reserves to general
educational purposes, will be the most satisfactory and
advantageous disposal of them that can be made. In nothing is this
Province so defective as in the requisite available provisions for,
and an efficient system of, general education. Let the distinctive
character of that system be the union of public and private
effort.... To Government influence will be spontaneously added the
various and combined religious influence of the country in the
noble, statesmanlike, and divine work of raising up an elevated,
intelligent, and moral population.[70]

In combatting the idea that his editorial opinions in the _Guardian_ were necessarily "the opinions of the Methodists" as a body, and that they were responsible for them, Dr. Ryerson, in the _Guardian_ of August 15th, thus defines the rights of an editor:--To be the mere scribe of the opinions of others, and not to write what we think ourselves, is a greater degradation of intellectual and moral character than slavery itself.... In doctrines and opinions we write what we believe to be the truth, leaving to others the exercise of a judgment equally unbiassed and free.

* * * * *

In the exuberance of loyal zeal, and yet in a kindly spirit which was characteristic of him, Rev. W. M. Harvard, President of the Canada Conference, issued a pastoral on the 17th April, 1838, to the ministers of the Church, enjoining them not to recognize as members of the Society those whose loyalty could be impeached. The directions which he gave were:--

Should there be a single individual for whose Christian loyalty the
preacher cannot conscientiously answer for to his brethren, in the
first place such individual should not be included in the return of
membership, and in the second place such individual should be dealt
with kindly and compassionately, but firmly, according to the
provisions of the Discipline.

No man who is not disposed to be a good subject can be admissible
to the Sacraments of the Church....

Should any person apply hereafter for admission into our Church,
who may be ill-affected to the Crown ... tell him kindly, but
firmly, ... that he has applied at the wrong door.

As soon as this extraordinary pastoral had appeared, Dr. Ryerson addressed a letter of some length to the _Guardian_, objecting in very temperate, but yet in very strong language to the doctrine laid down in it by the President of the Conference. Before publication, however, he sent it to Mr. Harvard for his information and perusal. He showed from the writings of John Wesley, Richard Watson, and others, and from examples which he cited (John Nelson, "the apostolic fellow-labourer of John Wesley," etc.) that such a doctrine savoured of despotism, and was harsh and inquisitorial in its effects. He concluded thus:--

None of the various political opinions which men hold, and their
respectful and constitutional expression of them, is any just cause
of excluding from the Lord's Table any human being, provided his
religious character is unexceptional. The only condition of
membership in our Church is "a desire to flee from the wrath to
come,"[71] and none of the opinions mentioned is inconsistent with
the fruits by which that desire is evidenced. The Discipline of the
Church, or the Scripture itself, does not authorize me to become
the judge of another man's political opinions--the Church is not a
political association--any man has as good a right, religiously and
politically, to his opinions of public matters as I have to
mine--and laymen frequently know much more, and are better judges,
than ministers in civil and secular affairs.

It can be well understood what would be the effect of the Pastoral, and not less so of Dr. Ryerson's clear and dispassionate disclaimer of the doctrines which it officially laid down.

It required courage and firmness, in the loyal outburst and reaction of those days, to question the propriety or expediency of any reasonable means by which the unimpeachable loyalty of members of the Church could be ascertained. What added to the embarrassment of Dr. Ryerson in discussing such a question was the fact that the Methodists were being constantly taunted with being disloyal. Knowing this, and sensitive as to the disgrace of such a stigma being cast upon the Church, the President felt constrained to take some decisive, and yet, as he thought, kindly and satisfactory means of ridding the Church of members who were the cause, in his estimation, of such a disgrace and reproach to that Church.

Among many other strong letters of commendations of his reply to Mr. Harvard, which Dr. Ryerson received, were two,--one from a representative minister of the Canadian section of the Church, and the other from an equally excellent representative of the British missionaries. Thus:

Rev. Anson Green, writing from Picton, said:--

I was sorry, though not surprised, to hear that you were very much
perplexed. I could easily understand your feelings, and quite
sympathize with you. Your recent efforts for the peace and
prosperity of the Church have very much endeared you to my heart. I
am fully prepared to believe the assertion which you made while in
England, "that you love Jerusalem above your chief joy." This you
have fully proved by your untiring efforts on behalf of the
Academy, the Chapels, and on the Church question; but in nothing
more, allow me to say, than in the firm, manly, and Christian
spirit, in which you have come out, publicly, in defence of the
membership of the Church, and of sound principles. I had resolved
when Rev. Mr. Harvard wrote to me to carry out the principles of
his instructions and Pastoral in this district, to write him a
letter respectfully and yet firmly declining to do so. But when I
saw the storm gathering in every quarter, I could only exclaim in
the despondency of my soul:--When will our brethren cease to
destroy us, and when will the Church again have rest from internal
commotion and strife! And just at this crisis (a memorable crisis
to thousands of our Canadian friends) your excellent rejoinder to
Mr. Harvard's Pastoral came out in the _Guardian_. It was a balm to
the afflicted heart. It was a precious cordial poured forth. Your
letter was sent from house to house, from cottage to cottage, and
met with unequivical applause from all. The lowering sky began to
clear up, and we are encouraged once more to hope for clear
sunshine. You have had the courage to speak the truth in opposition
to men in high authority. Your letter was in every respect just
what it should have been, and thousands do most sincerely thank you
for it.

Rev. Joseph Stinson, writing from Simcoe, said:--

As far as I can ascertain, your appointment as Editor of the
_Guardian_ next year will give general satisfaction. The
President's Pastoral and your reply are producing quite a
sensation. Most people give Mr. Harvard credit for purity of
intention, but regret that the subject of politics has been
adverted to by him in such a form. Your remarks on the Pastoral
have hushed the fears of many who were greatly disturbed; but some
think that your statement of abstract right is carried too far, and
may at a future day be appealed to in support of measures which you
would utterly condemn.

Some of your old tory friends think that there is design in all you
write on these questions, and do not hesitate to designate you by
the amiable title of a "jesuit," etc. You can bear all this and
much more in carrying out your design, to show them that their
tactics are understood, and their proceedings are closely watched,
so as to prevent them from obtaining those objects which would be
alike unjust to us as a Church, and ungenerous to themselves. It is
well that in all of the "burnings which your fingers" have had, you
have not yet lost your nails; for I expect that you will need them
before long. The high church party have the will, if they can
muster the courage, to make a renewed and desperate attack upon
you. Fear not; while you advocate the truth, you can defy their
rage.

The public mind seems to me to be in a state of painful suspense.
The people hate and dread rebellion. They are not satisfied with
the present leading political party. They hope to see a new man
rise up with sufficient talent and influence to collect around him
a respectable party to act as a balance between oppression and
destruction. Some talk of a new election; some talk of leaving the
country; all seem to think that something must be done; none know
what to do. How ought we in this awful crisis (for an awful crisis
it is), to pray for the Divine interposition in behalf of our
distracted province.... I saw your venerable father last night. He
very much wishes you to write to him.

On the 7th of November, 1838, the first number of the 10th volume of the _Guardian_ was issued. In it there is an elaborate article signed by Dr. Ryerson (although he was then Editor), on the state of public affairs in Upper Canada. In his introductory remarks he said:--

From the part I have usually taken in questions which affect the
foundations of our Government, and our relations with the Mother
Country,--and from the position I at present occupy in respect to
public affairs, and in relation to the Province generally, it will
be expected that I should take a more than passing notice of the
eventful crisis at which we have arrived. In conclusion, he says:
Having faithfully laid before the Government and the country the
present posture of affairs, and the causes of our present
dissatisfaction and dangers, I advert to the remedies: (1. Military
defence.) 2. Let the Government be administered as much in
accordance with the general wishes of this country, as it is in
England. 3. Abolish high-church domination, and provide perfect
religious and political equality. 4. Let them be at equal fidelity
to obey the authorities when called upon.... He who does most to
bring about this happy state of things in the Province will be the
greatest benefactor of his country.

FOOTNOTES:

[70] Even at this early date, Dr. Ryerson indicated the comprehensive character of the system of education which he was afterwards destined to found in Upper Canada.

[71] These words as to membership are identical with those which Dr. Ryerson uttered fifteen years afterwards in his discussion on the Class-meeting question.