IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) // ^ 1/ '^4^4, 4^ ^ « 1.0 1.1 ^m hi u St ^^ S la 12.0 IL25 IH 1.4 u 1.6 ^^ / .Sciences Corporalion 23 WIST MAIN STtHT WIBSTIR.N.Y. I45M (7U)a72-4S03 ^ ? 1 V CIHM ICMH s Microfiche Collection de Series microfiches (IMonograplis) • (monographies) Canadian Inttituta for Historical Microraproductions / Inttitut Canadian da microraproductiona historiquas ^ ^ Ttchnicjl and Biblio«raphie Notts / Notts ttchniquts et biblioflrtphiquts The Initjtuta has atttmpted to obtain tht btst original copy available for filming. Ftatures of this copy which may bt bibliographically uniqut, which may alttr any of tht imagts in tht rtproduction, or which may significantly changa tht usual mtthod of filming, art chtcktd btlcw. D Colourtd covtrs/ Couvtrturt dt couitur Covtrs damagtd/ Couverturt tndommag^ n Covtrs rtstortd and/or laminattd/ Couvi turt rtstaurte vt/ou ptiliculte I j Covtr title missing/ n n D n titrt dt couverturt manqut Colourtd maps/ Caites giographiquts an couitur Colourtd ink (i.e. othtr than blut or black)/ Encrt dt couitur (i.t. autrt qut bitut ou noirt) Colourtd platts and/or illu'trations/ Planchts et/ou illustrations en couleur Bound with other material/ Relie avec d'autres documents Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion along interior margin/ La reliure serrto peut causer de I'ombre ou de la distorsion le long de la marge interieure Blank leaves added during restoration may appear within tht ttxt. Whtntvtr possibit, thtst havt been omitted from filming/ II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajoutto lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte, mai$, lorsque cela etait possible, ces pages n'ont pas ete filmtes. Additional comments:/ Coinmentaires supplementaires: This Item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ Ce document est filme au taux de rMuction indiqui ci-dessous. ^°*' 14X ,8X L'Institut a microfilm* le meilleur e.-templaire qu'il lui a M possibit dt st procur«,r. Lts details dt ctt txtmplairt qui sont ptut-«trt uniquts •^u point dt vue Nbliographiqut, qui ptuvtnt modifitr unt image reproduitt, ou qui ptuvtnt txigtr unt modification dans la mithodt normalt dt f ilmagt sont indiqute ci-dtssous. □ Colourtd pagts/ Pagts dt couitur □ Pagts damagtd/ Pagts tndommag^ □ Pagts rtstortd and/or laminattd/ Pagts rtstaurtes tt/ou ptiliculits Pagts discolourtd. staintd or foxtd/ Pagts dteolortes, tachtt^ts ou piquets Pages dttachtd/ Pagts d^tachtes r~n Showthrough/ Transpartnct □ Quality of print varits/ Qualite inigale de I'impression □ Continuous pagination/ Pagination continue D Includes index (es)/ Comprend un (des) index Title on header taken from. / Le titre de I'en-tAte provient: livraison □ Title page of issue/ Page de titre de la I □ Caption of issue/ Titre de depart de la livraison □ Masthead/ Generique (periodiques) de la livraison 22X :%x mt. 12X y 16X 20X 24 X 28X H 22 1 Cflt t d« vue ■tion The copy filmed here hes been reproduced thanks to the generosity of: National Library of Canada The images appearing here are the best quality possible considering the condition and legibility of the origin«i copy and in keeoing with the filming contract specifications. Orig;nal copies in printed paper covers are filmed beginning with the front cover and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All other original copies are filmed beginning on the first page with a printed or illustrated Impres- sion, and ending on the laxt page with a piinted or illustrated impression. The !a8t recorded frame on each microfiche shall contain the symbol — »> (m«)aning "CON- TINUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "END"), whichever applies. Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at different reduction ratios. Those too large to be entirely included in one exposure are filmed beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to right and top to bottom, as many frames as required. The following diagrams illustrate the method: L'exemplaire fi'm* fut reproduit grAce A la gAnArositA de: BibliothAque nationale du Canada Les images suivantes ont 6t« reproduites avec le plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition at de la nettet« de l'exemplaire film*, et en conformity avec les conditions du contrat de filmage. Les exemplairas orMM: INTO AM) IMiPoiM ''»N <'i:i;iAI\ III \|;i;|S M \]>\. \.\ \\\ .\| ri; •"' I'll ■• ' '•1,1,1:1:1. \li; I.V'-I I 11 II . •-il;.\ 1 |(i|; With \ run i\iin m.v .M I. Mm 1; VMM- M \:\ I M i: < ^ 'I M ' --!• i\ | ;i!, .1 . ( ; 1,, ,1;, . , , ||. I". IN-, 1,1. I 'Kl'l r^ ^||V1>I|;,; Ml ,|il I \ Ih'S 1 ,,K ( )Nr\|;|, ^t::.c^ ■'M|^7 ■^/"AS.'i' i!, OroiUO; iillNTKI* i;^' WWltWii K ,v Sii.Ns, ji; .\NI> :.'> I'I.'mni' >riii;i:T W 1>T The Stratford Case— Idington vs. McBRiDE. REPORT OF THE COMMISSIONER APPOINTED BY THK HONORABLE THE MINISTER OF EDUCATION, TO ENQUIRE INTO AND REPORT UPON CERTAIN CHARGES MADE BY MR. JOHN IDINGTON QC AGAINST MR. WILLIAM McBRIDE, M.A., HEAD MASTER ' OF THE COLLEGIATE INSTITUTE, STRATFORD With a Preliminary Memorandum by the Commissioner, J. Gec^ 'i Hodqins, LL.D., Deputy Minister of Education for Ontark PRINTED BT WARWICK & SONS, 26 AND 28 FRONT STREET WEST. 1887. COMMISSIONEK'S PKEFATOKY NOTE. The Investigation, of which a Report will be found on page 16 and the following pages, commenced at Stratford on the 23rd of November and closed on the 11th of December, 1886. The Complainant in the case was Mr. John Idington, Q.O., County Crown Attorney for Perth, and Membei- of the Board of Collegiate Institute Trustees. The Defendant was Mr. William McBride, M.A., Head Master of the Institute. Mr. John Idington and Mri J. E. Harding, were Counsel for the Prosecution, Mr. James Fleming, M.P. for Peel, was Counsel for the Defence. Thirty-seven witnesseH were examined, and their evidence was taken under oath by the Commissioner. The number of Charges was twenty-nine. The Commissioner's notes of the Evidence given extended to 218 pages of foolscap, and the number of '' Exhibits " put in was 124. The names of the witnesses, with the pages of the report on which their evidence is quoted, will be found on reference to the Table of Contents. The Report of the Commissioner on each of the charges not ruled out will also be- found on reference to the same Table. The list of Exhibits will be found on pages 57-61. TAKLE OF CONTENTS. pAiir.. I'lufalory Note ' 2 Pruliminnry Meinoraiiduiii on the Cnfu by the Cominissioiier 6 Cupy of CoinmiMion issued by the Minister of Education tt List of Witnesses furnishotl l>y Mr. John Idingtoii H List of WitnesBui furnished by Mr. William McBride 10 LiHt of Witnossos who gavo Evidence at the liivcHtigiition 10 Mr. Idingtun's Statements and list of Charges ogniust Mr. William McBride 11 Amendments to Charges Nos. G, !' and 13 (ruled out) 15 Interim Report of the Commissioner to the Minister of Education ](( Report of the Ccmimissioner to the Minister of Eductit mn 10 JThe FiRHT CiiAKdE : Evidence ijuotod of Peter 8. IdingUm, Samuel R. Robb, William McBride, David Scrimgeour, John IdingUm, John M. Moran, Charles A. Mayberry, ' John B. Wilson. Mrs. McBride, Leonard Nowbold and Hugh A. Juineson 17 The Sbconp Ciiaroe : The "Card Case." Evidence i 3» 42 j. '1. IDINOTON r«. MiHUlDE. REPORT OF THE COMMISSIONliU IN THE STRATFORD CASE. PRELIMINARY MEMORANDUM BY THE COMMISSIONER. At the in8tonce of Mr. John Idington, Q.C, of Slrutford, an investigation waa held as to the truth, or otherwise, of certain Charges of "gross and repoated falsehoo*!," etc., brought by him against Mr. Wm. McBride, Head Master of the Collegiate Institute there. The following is a brief introductory narrative of the case : In a letter from Mr. Idington to the Honorable the Minister of Education, dated 20th October, 1884, he preferred several Charges of alleged untruthfulness against Mi. McBride. The Minister intended to have seen Mr. Idington on the subject, but was unable to do io. On the 26th of September, 1886, Mr. Idington, in a letter to the Minister, renewed his charges, with the addition of some others. To this letter the Minister replied. From his reply the following extracts are made, viz. ; — *». k" ^ ^^^^^^!' ''?'^*'' '.^"'* ^^^ question of an investigation for the time being in abeyance, in the hope that the irritation referred to would subside. Futherni..re, your complaint, were of such a oharacter «s iniglit very well be investigated l,y the Hoard of Trustees, and if sustained wouM justify action on thuir part. "On a re-perusal of your charge I am still of opinion that the proper place for an investiffa- tioasuch as you request, is before tlie Board of School Trustees, and would respectfully submit that ^ou ask their int»rr«ntion " on second thought, you are determined not to let tlie matter • From Mr. Idington's reply, dated 11th October, 1886, the following extract i» made : — , i.«n»*''^''* ""^'^""7 ''?''?'' ^u"" */"»*«•» '" investigate, I believe, is made in good faith, and I hope in •^Mlorllllce of what really has transpired. ' " The Trustees, then, and some of tl.eni still renmin so, were e.|ually guilty with Mr. Mc- Bride m makaiu some of the representations complained of, and all were theii charged with netr- leot of duty 1.1 failing to notice the charges as made from time to time. I must lechne such judges passing [judgment] on me." „.«.'-,^" speaking of the Trustees, I must be understood as referring to them in their corporate capacity, for they have changed so, thai home of the men now constituting the Board are not to be reproached with wl.at I have dealt [with] herein. And it is quite possible when it comes to a question of re-engagmg him [Mr. McBride] they may not act as did tLir predecessors .„j -t !V*"J ,i^.v ""'' ^^^ ^',"*y that devolves on you in dealing with such a man will remain, ana if tney do, all the more so. Before deciding to hold an investigation into the charges preferred by Mr. Idington, the Minister, on the 13th October, addressed the following note to C. J. McGregor. Esq.. as Chairman of Collegiate Institute Board. He said :— M.n'JiL^CT ^TJ'^) * T^ °^ the charges made by Mr. John Idington against Mr. William MoBride, Head Master of your Collegiate Institute. I am informed that the charges were in- tjuirad intn by your B(«rd •«me tint* »go, but m no report wm natit to me m ruK»rU to ilium* I »m Aniioiii t.» iuu«rt»in what ilo,ii»ii>ii. if «ny, wm nrrivetl at. This copy is aeiit that yuu nii|{lit detcrmitio whuther tha oliaruui prvviuualy iiivMti((ate<^^<' ln»titut<- Hoard : — " III acoordrtiioe with a resoliitioii piuisod by the 8trat((inl Ci)lleK>Ate Institute Hoard, I bfg tn acknowleilae the receipt of your letter of the lUth inst.., luldruMtHl to 0. J. Mcdrogor, Ka<|., with a copy of the charKos preferred i>y Mr. IdiiiKton HK^i'i't ^''■- MoHride enclosed. In iloiiig no I am instructed to give you n copy of the Minuten of the Hoanl, in rulatitJii to these charges, which I enchiso herewith. Ami 1 liave also to intimate that the latter part of your letf.r. (vi/., whether the chiirgott proviou»ly investigated were similar to those you have transmitted tu the Hoard), will be replied to later on." (■NCLUNVRM. ) CoP» or EXTBADTH FKOM TIIK MlNt'TRS OK TlIK SraATroRU t'oLLHIIATl IjiaTITfTE HoAKI>. .S/«cith, I8SI A special meeting of the Hoard call"d to conHidor Mr. Idington's complaint regarding the Head Master's treatment of his son. Present, the Chmirnmn, Messrs. .ramoson, 8crim«eouraiid Steet. Alter hearing Mr. Idington's statement and Head Master's renly, Mr. Wilson and Mr. Mayberry made statements regarding Master Idington's conduct and general deportment in school. Motion by Mr. Jameson, seconded by Mr. Hteet : — ' RinolMii, That having heard Mr. Idington's cliarges against the Head Manter, as well as re- lM)rts Iroin other Teachers, we can tind no fault with Mr. McHride'a action in the matter, and that we are Hatistied his course was justitiablu. Cai'iieliitini«'iu«iioti nf the rsiolutiun not t)«iiiuii-ci>iial Kleotor* by Mr. Idington, Oitrnud, Mr. Htitet, only, diaaonting. MTHATruHi), tlut«rii9th, 18H4). Certilied, JOHN V. MONTKITII, • Hi'c'y, Colltigiati! Inititute Hoard. (NoTB. — No furthur lutter wa* raveivud, ai intiinatiKl at the cloao uf Mr. Montuith'i letter.) The Miniitar, having taken all the circuniitanoea of the oasn into ooniiduration, ds- «ided to hold an irivMtigation into the chargea made by Mr. [dington, and by that ineana detHrrninf whether or not these charges would Iw sustained by the evidence of witnesses taken under oath. He, therefore, directed that the following letters should Ih) addressed to the partieH concerned. In one of tliem pointed out the principles on which that inTestigation would be conducted. The tirst letter was addressed to the Conip) .'nant: — (^Copy.) "Education Dbpaktmknt, " Toronto, '2nd Novombur, Ihho. "Ubar tiiR, - With a view to ntfonl you every opportunity of Hubstantiating your stntunientM and charges against Mr. McHridu, Huiul Mastur <>f thu Stratford Collugiatu liiHtitutu, tUvi Min- ister of Bdiiuation lias duuided to issue a special Coniniission, to investigate and r(i|iort to hint in regard to these statuniunts and charges. " In order to etiablu thu C'ouuiiissioner, whom thu Minister will appoint, to dual with distinct and spucilic charg«M, apart from infurunceor couinient, he re(|Uusts you to brielly formulate those chargus, and iiuiiibur tliuin for rufuruncu. " You aru almi ru(|uuittud Co suud thu iianius in full of any witnesius which you may dusiru to have exaiuinud undur oath by the Comuunsionur, and whuthur or not you dusiru thu subptenaa for such witnuHHuH to b« ilnce» tfiim. "Thu MiniHtur dusirus that thu investigation siv itd he aa thorough and exhaustive as im>s- aible. Your compliancu, thurufure, with the reiiuest contaiu«d in this letter, at your earliest oonvuniencu will gruatly fauilitatu that object, " It Would ux])editu matters if yuu would furnish Mr. Moliride with a copy of the spocifiu chargus which you desire to make. " I have, etc., (Signed,) "ALEX. MAULINtJ, "John Idinoton, Esq., (j.C. "Secretary. Stratford." ■'I (Copy.) " Education Dei-aktmknt, " Toronto, 2nd November, 1886. " Dkak Sill. - The Minister of Education desires lue to inform you that it is his intention to issue at an early date a special Oummission to investigate and report to him in regard to the chargus preferred against you by Mr. Idington, one of the Trustees of the Stratford Collegiate Institutt;. " I will tlumk you to inform me if you desire to have any witnesses examined on your be- half. If BO, pluaau submit their names in full, and whether or not you would require any, (and which) of them to produce books, or documents in the case. " I have, etc., (Signed,) " ALEX. MARLING, "Wm. McBridk, Esg., M.A., "Secretary. " Colleg'ate Institute. Stratford," Subseiiuently, in answer to an inquiry on the subject, the following intimation wm given to Mr. McBride : — ^* The Minister c&uuot deiil with th6 oijMtion of ^viyinfi^ ^nv of your expanses until he has decided the case, on the report of the Commissioner. He will settle that point on the merits of the case, and in the interests of the public." (Copy.) 'Education Dbpartmbnt, " Toronto, 2nd November, 1886. «fif,.f« T^^ff^ ;r 1 r u ^'l"«»'^f°n '1«'«™'» me to inform the Stratford Collegiate In- stitute Trustees through you, of his mtention at an early day to issue a special Commission to nvestigate and report to him in regard to the charges preferred by Mr. Idington a Co?Ciate Instituto Trustee, agamst Mr. McBride, the Head Master of the Institute. *^«"egiate fh« Tr,.V,'ff,fT"^'" " i'%'''I',?' 'n^°l^in8 *»>« professional standing and character of the Head of the Institution over which the Trustees preside, and to which they cannot be indifferent the Minister hopes that the members of the Board will give every assistance hi their power with a view to render the investigation as thorough and exhaustive as possible. ^ ' be convenTentlyheld ^"^ *** ^""'"'^^ ""'^ ""'"'' * ""'^""^ P'**'^ '" ^^'"^ ^''° investigation can "I have, ete., " John C. Montb.th, E««„ <'''«'"'^') " ^^^^^ MARLINO "Secretary, Collegiate Institute Board, Stratford.' ^"^ ^' NoTK.— On the same day that these letters were vmtten, the Collegiate Institute Board, by resolution, requested the Minister to hold an investigation into the truth of the charges. The following is a copy of the letter received from the Board :— (^°Vy) "Collegiate Institute Board, Stratford, November 4th, 1886. fnS.y^^'7'^fu''^ under instructions from the Stratford Collegiate Institute Board, I beg to fam iBhyou with a copy of a resolution passed by said Board on tL 2nd inst., viz - ^ B^nnofTTf ^ Mr Macgregor, seconded by Mr. Idington and resolved. That the Minister of Education be requested to investigate all the charges made by Mr. Idington against the Pri^! "You will observe that the Board desiret, you to investigate the charges, copies of which as handed in by Mr. Idington, are enclosed hi.rewith. ** ^ ' held at ariLrt'"date!* *'"'''' *^^^"^*^ ^ ^^ **"* "'"^ "^ ***^ Board that th, investigation be " Yours truly, "HnM r w p«=« (Signed,) "JOHN C. MONTEITH, ^"^ ^.- MTnistrjf Education, Toronto." " ^'''' "^"^^'''^^ ^"^"^"^ ^^"^ (Copy.) Stratford, November 8th, 1886. "Dear Sir,— I have just seen Mr. Steet, Chairman of our Collegiate Institute Board and tirStheTntLn'T ^"" *^] '^^ ^r** T" f '^^ '•«"^«'- ^"y --«**"«« i* "^^ TnTonnec tion >uth the investigation, and do anything that lies in its power to facilitate matters with a view to have a thorough investigation. <«-'"i.«ii.b mKiuers, witn a u- ul^t ^"fr^ .^"^ "*™®'^ ^^^ Council Chamber in the City Building as a suitable place in " Yours respectfully, <«A,„^ iir.» 1, "JOHN C. MONTEITH, The following letter was addressed to Mr. Idington :— (Copy.) " Education Department, "Toronto, November 11th, 1886. Mr M^ntiA^'^'Tl^^ Minister has received a statement of the charges which you make against Mr. MoBnde, and also a list of the names of witnesses in the case. agamst nnrH^n nf Ari"'**^'' ^^fT ^''f*" ^'"'' ""^n*'"" *« *« fact that in connection with a large pro- portion of the names of the witnesses, you give no reason why they should be subp«ned F^r lubrLnL" wni \f '"^.'^ *" P'fT^ PT"' ^'*^- ' ,* ""''P"'"* ''•"'■* '*<^'"»' ^i" be issued. These ?hSpirl^eqlt:r " *" ''''' '''" ""^'' ""' ^°" "^"^ *'""' """^J- ''-»' P^""" *" ^"»« "In regard to the advertisements of the Collegiate Institute sent to the Globe etc the paper to which they were sent are unnecessary. state'lmf^^ffiirin**"" T^'^'^'lf "^^^r »^ y""*- charges practically involve an inquiry into the state and efficiency of the Collegiate Institute bj the Commissioner. As the Inspectors have an iSiriT^^*'"' ' "Y "" ^^^f '!?." I>«P"^t»-"^' the Minister is of ojSlIn that such CneS^r • M'■^•f'^■',,^"^u'' ^o'n'n^^"""'- will have copies of the reports of the Inspectors with hini, so that it will not be necessary to have the Inspectors subp.ened. esneciallv a^^^h^f .ai^ffi . '*"* °1 the Registrar of the University, who need /lot be subp(«„ed, especially as the certihcate issued by hini is .|uoted by you and speaks for itself Particulars of each case you mention will be obtained from'the Registrar by the ConunLsioner. *^"''^"'*" "* with hirn.fl ft" -?"*'" the Minister is also entirely unnecessarj-, as the Commissioner will have with him all the documents m the case on the tiles of the Department will dJ^rfJ!^;."'"* "" «^*«""J.« * "»* °^ witnesses, you may possibly assume that the Minister w conXr tZ r?T''- ^^^ ^^ .?"»°t *^."«''r .t" do, although, after the case is decided, he will consider the question on its merits, an ' n the interests of the public. Justi«« for i.^ «*'=f.Pt>"n'' named, the M ^r will obtain subpcenas from the High Court of sioner ^ "" '"'" "*"'^''' ** *'^'"« '"^'1"''^'' '^ ^« examined by the Commis- JOHN IdinOTON, E.SQ., Q.C., " Stratford. I have, etc., ALEX. MARLING, " Secretary. Note. —Subsequently, subpoenas were issued for all of the parties named below by Mr. Idington. Copy of the Commission. " To AL. TO WHOM THESE PRESENTS SHALI. COME : " ^^"^^^^ DEPARTMENT, ONTARIO. ()ntaLJo,?end?r':;etinT-''"°"*'' "^''"^^ ^*'"^' ^^•^- ^^^'^^^'^ °' ^""^*"«'' '-^ ()n JrirYfrfH Tk i^^J''"*"? °^ ^^^ V°'^^"'. *"'* authorities conferred upon me by the Statutes of .'£f;L^k;xsitiffl,,txx°o°nt-''" """'"°"' *"■•"' * "''^ ■" '"*«"''■ " John George Hodoins, Esq. , LL. D. , Deputy Minister of Education, I • fl" '^.Commissioner, to enquire into and report to me upon certain alloEations and charges m'a ^^HeKaT' ^r.f 'P^t^^r^^ ""'^ niisiepresentatio'n, on the par! oWuiian mIbS M. A., Head Master of the Collegiate Institute at Stratford. uarties concer^pd rn/1'%"'^'^ Commissioner to proceed, upon proper notice on that behalf to th« UDon oath orr„1p;„n ?«^" ^' "'; ''II''''""' "^ parlies summoned as witnesses in the said inquiry upon oath or solemn afhrmat.on (as the case may be) .mdcr the Statutes in that behalf. ' ^ 1886 y ^^"^ "^ ""^"^ "* Toronto, this twelfth day of November, A.D. (Signed,) "Alex. Marling, "^Secretary." (Signed,) GEO. W. ROSB, [L.S.] "Minister of Education. List of Witnesses Furnished to the Department by Mr. Idington. John Idington, Peter S. Idington, William McBride, John C. Monteith, John B. Wilson, John M. Moran, Carlos A. Mayberry, Ambrose DeGuerre, Thomas Stoney, Alexander Matheson, Henry Thom.aP. Rutlor, James Eobb, Daniel R. McPherson, Chariea W. Young, Samuel Robert Robb, John Mason, Frank Pratt, Cornelius Tracey, James Sfceet, James Peter Woods, David Scrimgeour, Charles John McGregor, John Brown, Wilham Blair, Major Gray, Robert Hamilton, J. J. Crabbe, William Bradley, D. Munro, 10 James OLoane, Thomas Nevin, Richard Merrick Huston, John Henry Gordon, Henry Fenwick Gadsby, Robert A. Kennedy, Robert John Huston, William Walker, Lydia K. Commander, Alexander Ferguson, Mary E. Commander, Isabella Gibson, Thomas Watson, John Buchan, Robert W. Oarrall, John P. Kennedy, James Kennedy, Mary Kennedy, John McLennan, Edward E. Bailey, Polly Codd, Robert Eby, Herman Schmidt, Samuel Stubbs, Robert McFarlane, John A. Fraaer, Wm. Hamilton, Robert T. Harding, James H. Kellar, William H. Harvey, Maurice O'Loane, Alfred Maclin, David McLennan, Jessie Brown, Flora C. Idington, Georgina McNaughton, Florine Hamilton, Gilbert Robertson, Maud McFadden, Maggie Hamilton, Arthur Deacon, Professor McGregor, and John McLellan. List of Witnesses Furnished to the Dbpartmbnt by Mr. McBride. James Trow, M.P., Hugh Alfred Jameson, Samuel R. Hesson, M.P., John Schmidt, George J. Waugh, Leonard Newbold, Mrs. Lilly McBride, William Alexander, Jonah Johnson, Malcolm McFarlane, all of the City of Stratford ; Edward Mullins and John McLaughlin, of the City of London ; William Stanley Hodgins, of Waterloo, and Thomas Mulvey, of the City of Toronto. (Note.— There were other names given to the Depart- ment by Mr. McBride, but as they were already in Mr. Idington's list, they are not repeated here.) List of Witnesses who gave Evidbnce at the Intbstiqation, viz.: 1. John Idington, Q.C., County Crown Attorney. 2. Ambrose DeGuerre, B.A., Master Collegiate Institute, Strathroy. 3. John Seath, B.A., High School Inspector. 4. John C. Monteith, Secretary, Collegiate Institute Board, Stratford. 6. John B. Wilson, B.A., Master, Collegiate Institute, Stratford. 6. John M. Moran, Ist A Master, Collegiate Institute, Stratford. 7. Charles A. Mayberry, B.A., Master, Collegiate Institute, Stratford. 8. Peter S. Idington, ex-pupil, Collegiate Institute, Stratford. 9. James O'Loane, Police Magistrate, Stratford. 10. John Brown, Trustee, Collegiate Institute. 11. David Scrimg' .ur, Trustee, Collegiate -Institute. 12. Charles J. McGregor, M.A., Mayor of Stratford and Trustee. 13. Samuel R. Robb, ex-pupil. Collegiate Institute. 14. Mrs. Mary Kennedy. 15. Polly Codd, ex-pupil. Collegiate Institute. 16. Alexander Mathewson, Proprietor Stratford Beacon. 17. Thomas D. Niven, on staff of Beacon. 18. Florine Hamilton, ex-pupil,' Collegiate Institute. 19. Flora C. Idington, ex-pupil. Collegiate Institute. 20. Georgina McNaughton, ex-pupil, Collegiate Institute. 21. James P. Wood, Trustee, Collegiate'Institute. 22. Henry F. Gadsby, ex-pupil. Collegiate Institute. 23. Robert A. Kennedy, ex-pupil, Collegiate Institute. 11 [enry ia K. itson, nedy, imuel ranies nnan, ilbert r, and iniidt, Jonah John fioniaa epart- •e not 24. 35. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. John H. Gordon, ex-pupil, Collegiate Institute, Edward O'Flaherty, Trustee, Collegiate Institute. Jessie Brown, ex-pupil. Collegiate Institute. George G. Ewart, Accountant. Margaret Hamilton, ex-pupil. Collegiate Institute. Maurice O'Loane, ex-pupil. Collegiate Institute. William G. Walker, Teacher, School No. 8, EUice. Mrs. McBride. Thomas Stoney, Ex-Chairman Collegiate Institute Board. Hugh A. Jameson, Trustee, Collegiate Institute. James Steet, Chairman, Collegiate Institute Board. Jonah Johnson, Caretaker, Collegiate Institute. Leonard Newbold, on start" of G. T. R. William McBride, M.A., Head Master. * Mk. Idinqton's Statement and List of Charges against Mk. McBride. In the matter of the enquiry into the complaint of John Idington that William Mc- Bride the Principal of the City of Stratford Collegiate Institute is untruthful, and of the enquiry into the truth of the charges made in support thereof by the said John Idington to the Honorable the Minister of Education. The following are the particulars of certain charges upon which the said Complain- ant will rely, to support the said complaint before the special Commissioner appointed, or to be appointed, to enquire into the said complaint. 1. On the 15th of April A.D., 1884, Peter S. Idington, then, and for fifteen months pre- viously, a pupil in the third form of said school, declined to tell the said William McBride on others, and told him he had not come to school to be a detective and would not make lumaelf one. Mr. McBride thereupon, within a few minutes, ordered him back from the third form to the second, ostensibly for defective lessons. Upon being charged with doing this as a punish- ment, he asserted that it was not as a punishment but carrying out a decision arrived at before that morning, and as the result of a consultation with and reference to the pupil's otlier teach- ers. He reiterated the substfince of this before the Board on the 2nd May 1884, adding that tlie third form was for intermediate candidates, and this said pupil had no chance to pass. I charge that those several statements in answer to s^id charge were untrue. 2. The Complainant, having made complaint to tht Board of the treatment of Peter S. Idington by said William McBride, on the occasion firstly above named, appeared before the Board and the said McBride asserted then and there on said third of May in the strongest possible manner, that on one occasion he went to the basement of the school, found a number of boys there who had evidently been playing cards, but those engaged in the play got the cards out of sight before he reached them ; and that the said Peter Idington was one of the boys there. This accusation against Peter Idingtoi. was entirely false, and the Complainant charges said Mr. McBride with having made such false accusation knowingly, or recklessly, not caring whether true or false. 3. Although Complainant charged said Mr. McBride, through the press, with this being a wicked falsehood, and he saw fit to combat other of the statements made as to his integrity, he has never, to the Complainant's knowledge, either denied or explained this charge. The Complainant claims, that in any event if the statement thus characterized had been made through honest error and not of malice as alleged it became the duty of said Mr. McBride thus chamed to have enouireil into ,and withdrawn the sfaitement and that his allowing his late pupil to remain under such a false accuration publicly made l)y him was most dishonorable and uncaiidid and impossible for any hon^ai man or teacher. 4. On the same occasion he asserted that said pupil had never got but one of his lessons in Latin and that he had never solved a single cjuestion at the board in Arithmetic. 12 The register or records kept in the school will prove how false the first of these statements was and the second was not only false in fact but wilfully dei uptive and misleading for the facts were he had not asked him on more than three occasions to do so and the design of telling is was to lead to the belief that it had occurred from day to day. 5. On the same occasion said Mr. McBride stated that the said pupil's marks for March 1884 were only one hundred and eigty-nine oi *. of a certain total whereas they were two hun- dred and twenty-nino after deducting demerits. This'stateinent was made without (uialification or explanation and was wilfully and deliber- ately false for he had refused to allow the Complainant to see the register after promising to do so, but had promised an abstract therefrom showing the bf)y'8 marks, was accused of not keep- ing his promise, ^ried to excuse his breach of faith, asserted he had gone over the register and then had the iigu -t therefrom. The Complainant claims, not only that the main statement here complained of was wilfully false but that the several facts leading up to the proof thereof disclose much untruth on the part of said Mr. McBride and want of integrity in him. 6. In April 1884 he issued a circular on behalf of the school wherein he spoke of himself thus : " During his college course he obtained first class honors in Classics and Mathematics at Toronto University." The Complainant charges this to be a piece of hicanery the evident purpose of which was to mislead the public as to the scholarship of said K^r. McBride. 7. The Complainant hawing, through the press incidentally referred to this and charged said Mr. Mcliride as being guilty of such a piece of chicanery he replied to the charge and amongst other things said . " The passage quoted is absolutely true as is attested by the fol- lowing letter from the Registrar of Toronto University whose duty it is to keep a record of every student's standing throughout his whole covrse ": — "I have much pleasure in testifying to the scholarship of Wm. McBride. Though excelling in his favorite department of Classics he stood very high in first-class honors in Mathematics and has not by any means ;ieglected other branches. Alfred Baker, B.A., Registrar of Toronto University." The Complainant charges that this letter is in the face of his poor standing in Mathemetics if meant to refer to his standing at Toronto University a most dishonest and improper docu- ment for the Registrar to have given and that the procuring of it and use of it as above was also improper and dishonest. 8. The Complainant charges that this Baker certificate of standing was used in his (Mr. McBride's) application for his present position and alleges that its use was not an honest act. 9. In the same circular Mr. McBride refers to Mr. Mayberry as " having obtained first-class honors in Classics Methematics and English during his course at Toronto University." This is the reverse of truth as the standing given by the Registrar said " Mayberry, B.A., is as follows : ' Took Ist and 2nd years together (Pass) at supplemental examinations 1880. In his third year he obtained an regrotat and in his 41h year he stood 1st in Class II in Classics.'" 10. On his Mr. McBride's University standing being questioned he stated through the press— "I took the full course prescribed and passed every examination in the usual way." This is untrue the facts being that he failed at his fourth year's examination did not pass it in the usual way but got his degree by being granted an aegrotat. 11. The school had a literary society referred to in the above mentioned circular and his (Mr. McBride's) conduct had so aroused the animosity of the scholars that he felt it might be well for his sake to suppress the society and his course of double dealing throughout in relation thereto was such as led many of his pupils to disbelieve him. For example he professed that the Board in discontinuing the meetings from being further held in the school was not actmg in accordance with his wishes when, in fact they moved as he directed and in one of the stejjs to amending its constitution he called the meeting without notifying certain members whom he designed to exclude from the society and when he had called the meeting for four o'clock one day let school out half an hour before the time and called the meeting of the society together then thus dejjriving some of its members from having a chance of being heard. 12. After t!i!'. DfitMivt.ii'.ent-a! Ex-iminationa of 1884 he furnished the newspapers with a list of pupils from the Stratford High School who had succeeded thereat and claimed that forty-two had passed and that they had obtained sixteen second-class certificates, twelve third-class cer- tificates and fourteen intermediates. Of this list five were not Stratford High School pupils during his time and the Complainant believes four never had been there at any time. IS 13. Though one of the Stratford newRpapers partially corrected this yet he was a party to inserting an advertisement in the Daily Olobc of 30th August stating "Number attending last half-year, 215. 1884 record at Toronto University passed, 2it <>i>t 6e is also a fraud of thfl very worse kind. The adver: ement gives the record of the school for 1884 at Toronto University as 29 passed out of 32 with a whole string of honors thrown in. The inference is of course that 32 candidates wrote at the Matriculation Examinations and all passed but three. The fact is that there was not a solitary matriculant at all. The 2U referred to were simply candidates at the Laflies' Local Exanunation." 14. In considering tliis question of dishonest pulling of the school and of the results of its pupils' examinations the Complainant will ask the Commissioners to investigate each of the notices of that character published in ihe Stratford Beacon ever since Mr. McBride had charge of the school and determine how far he is responsible for the misrepresentation therein and especially the notice of the last June Matriculation Examination which was replete with dis- honest representations of the kind complained of and for which the Complainant believes Mr. McBride is responsible. 15. In replying in the month of September 1884 to some criticisms made by the Com- plainant upon the results of the then last examinations he (Mr. McBride) said of the Com- plainant : "He thinks the number passed should be proportionate to the number attending school but he forgets (?) that the influx last half year was into the junior forms and pupils from these forms are not sent up to Departmental or University Examination " tlius trying to mislead the public that he had not the material in the Upper School to draw from whereas in his report to the Board at their July meeting he states that the attendance in the Upper School for the half year is 36 or 33 in excess of the first half of 1883 or more than half the reported average increase for the whole school for the past half year." Either statement must the Complainant submits have been knowingly and wilfully false and misleading. 16. The Complainant had called attention to the fact that the failures at the 1884 Depart- mental Examinations were largely in Arithmetic taught by Mr. McBride and he replied as follows on 17th September 1884. " Further on he says 34 failed in Mathematics and of these 16 failed in Arithmetic. I have before me the report from the Educational Department signed by the Secretary in which Itind he is quite astray in his 35 and that 14, not 16 are reported as having failed in Arithmetic. The Complainant charges that this was a dishonest statement that he (the Complainant) corrected it publicly shewing he had under-estimated instead of over estimated the failure but the said Mr. HcBride never withdrew his misrepresentation. 17. The complainant will also ask the Commissioner to investigate fully the following state- ments made by Mr. McBride in his letter published on the 17th September 1884 : "In regard to Intermediates he says I sent up 37 as fit. Again he is wrong. 1 did not send up 37 ; more- over severui of those whose names were entered I did not think fit and I did not hesitate to tell them so but of course had not power to prevent their applying. 'Tis true I thought some of them fit and in fact induced them to write but these either passed or came so near it that we thought most of them justified in appealing." In the face of the facts hat his report as published claim 37 as sent up for Intermediate, and that the whole third form was Complainant believes distinctly to be by him a school that each and every of them must go up or go back to the second form. These statements of Mr. McBride are I submit most disingenuous and furnish formidable evidence of want of integrity. 18. Tn July 1885 the Board were considering Inspector Seath's report which reflected somewhat severely on the teaching in the Classical Department of the School and the teachers responsible therefor being Messrs. Mayberry and McBnde they represented to the Board that such a report was unfair as Mr. Seath had really only inspected one class in classics and that composed of only three pupils. The Complainant claims that Mr. McBride in making this false representation and allow- ing Mr. Mayberry who wac. the chief spokesman of the two ignorantly as the Complainant believes to urge it nn the Board A<> he did wah guilty nf a moRt mean and nishnneat act, 19. Thereupon at that and a subsequent meeting a number of members of the Board attacked Mr. Seath in the strongest manter and denounced such supposed misconduct on his part of reporting thus on such slight inspection or means of knowledge and instructed Mr. McGregor and the Complainant to bring this under the notice of the Minister of Education li when waiting (in liini in regard to other matters relating to the school. Mr. McBride sat there at the table, round which the members were thus denouncing Mr. Seath heard all that passed and never opened his lips to explain or asked leave to explain the facts well known to him and of those present him only [know] that he (Mr. Seath) had not acted on such insufficient or slight knowledge but had also examined a very much larger class whilst Mr. Mayberry was absent from the school and which class had been taught by Air. McBride. The Complainant charges this was such grossly dishonorable and dishonest conduct that the actor is unfit to be a teacher of youth. 20. At the meeting of the Board on the 2nd September 1886 Mr. McGregor and the Com- plainant having reported these facts as appears by their written report a discussion followed and Mr. McBride's conduct in the matter having been reflected on by the Complainant he offered an untrue and if by a play upon words held to be true — most disingenuous explanation to the effect that he had understood the Examinations of this Intermediate Latin Class was not an inspection. 21. On the Complainant proposing a resolution to report the matter to the Department of Education the following more friendly course and resolution were adopted : " That the Secretary send a copy of Mr. McBride's statement to Mr. Seath Inspector and state that Mr. McBride intends communicating with him and that the Board will be glad to have Mr. Seath's remarks upon the statement at its next meeting." The statement or statements in question are entered by the Secretary or taken down then and appear in his minutes as follows — App. number three: — 2nd Skptembbr, 1886. " Mr. McBride's statement that on the occasion of Mr. Seath's visit in May he stated to Mr. McBride«who at the time was sick and only at scho'ol for the day to meet thfi Inspector- that he did not owing to the disorganization of the School through sickness of teachers Ac. , consider this an inspection in Classics or Mathematics although he did hear shortly the Latin Class Intermediate. "On the occasion of Mr. Seath's visit in June from a conversation he (Mr. McBride) hud with Mr. Seath which he thinks ho can recall to Mr. Seath's memory it will be shown that the subsequent report as to Classics was based on his examination of the one pupil or class then exam- ined by him." These statements the Complainant believes and alleges to be untrue and dishonest attempts to mislead the Boord. 22. Instead of communicating by letter as expected by the Board he went to Toronto to see Mr. Seath but missed him. Mr. Seath's reply did not bear out his statement and when the matter on receipt of Mr. Seath's reply came up at the October meeting of the Board he told the Board for the first time that he had really desired and intended in the first place when the members were complaining of Mr. Seath to have explained it but had no opportunity. The Complainant charges this to be a manifest falsehood. 23. In the same report by Mr. Seath the teaching of Natural Sciences at this School having been condemned and Mr. Moran the teacher of Chemistry and Botany declared not to be a Science teacher within the meaning of the Act Mr. McBride before the Board whilst dealing with this assorted that Mr. DeGuerre had been engaged as a specialist in Natural Sciences in compliance with the requirements of the Department when making the School a Collegiate Insti- tute but that Mr. Moran had in effect by his ])ersistence forced himself into possession of these classes against the wishes of the Principal ; at the same time intimating that Mr. DeGuerre being a First Class Honor man was better fitted for this work. The Complainant in this matter charges as follows : (a) that in this Mr. McBride misrepre- sented Mr. DeGuerre's qualifications (.')) that if true as stated by him that Mr. DeGuerre had been engaged as a specialist in Natural Sciences he was guilty of practising a fraud upon the Depa-tment in setting him at entirely different work leaving this to others not so specially qual- ified and (c) that if not true he made the statement for the purpose of misleading the Board and did mislead them into passing on the 11th July 1885 the following resolution: — " That in view of the Inspector's 'report and the explanation that Mr. DeGuerre was repre- sented to the Department of Education as a specialist in Physical Science he should be allotted the work in Physical Science throughout the whole school but allowing discretion in the Prin- cipal as to Botany." The latter part as to Botany having been modified expressly to meet his views. 24. VVJiea the subject of re-uiigtigiiig the Principal and his stall' and fixing their salaries was before the Board in the month of November 1886 the Complainant pointed out that the school was in a most inefficient state that it was badly organized, that the teachers had unhappily not been so assorted in their qualifications as to make a good school possible but that even of the material we had the best use was not made that especially in the case of Mr. DeGuerre who' 15 poBBOMod the highest University rank of any on the sUff we were not getting the full benefit of hiB work in Mathematics in which he was most proficient or his time was taken up otherwise. And when it came to the fixing of Mr. DuCiuerre's salary repeated that part of his observations as to Mr. DeOuerre not giving us all his time in Mathematics that he was best fitted to teach and that Arithmetic was taught by Mr. McHrido who notoriously could not teach that whatever else he could teach. Therefore Mr. McBride made the statement to the Board that Mr. DeGuerre's tune WHS wholly engaged in teaching Mathematics except in taking the class in Calisthenics which none of the others knew how to teach, whereas Mr. DeOuerre had been and was then engaged in teaching 8j)elling reading and French as well as Mathematics indeed a very con- siderable proportion of his time was thus being taken up. 26. Having armed himself with pr.jof at next meeting of the falsity of this statement the Complainant then brought it up and insisted on an explantion when Mr. McBride falsely allt-ced that he had been mislead by the time table being then new. 20. And this being then challenged at the next meeting he disclosed in further explanation that the falsehood had been stuck to in 8i)ite of Mr. Wilson one of the staff who sat beside him at the time correcting him on the spot. ,.„ ^"- X*'" I'uP'ls "^ "^he school were i)reparing for Senior Matriculation and being taught in different branches lessons given for their exclusive benefit or almost so for great part of the time from faL of 1886 to spring of 1886 and attention being drawn to it in different ways, Mr. McBride sought to conceal and misrei)re8ent the facts as follows (a) Mr. McGregor the Chairman of the Board at one of its ■. eetings in January, 188(> called attention to the fact that on a visit to the school he hat! found a teacher teaching a class of two only. Mr. McBride denied that there was any such class and explained that others belonged t(> the class. (6) In April 1886 the following resolution aimed partly at getting the facts estuMished was passed : " That the Principal bo instructed to produce at next meeting of the Board a copy of the time table in force in the school showing the teacher taking each class and a table or column showing tlie number in each class appearing in such time table and whenever the class does not exceed five in number, the names of each i)upil in each class. " mi. ^*"' ^•'^'■"^^ objected very strongly to this resolution being passed and never obeyed it The Coniplainant brought the matter up at different meetings of the Board. At its passage Mr. McBride protended he had not the time without abandoning some of his school work to make such a return. At a later meeting he pretendeJ. And an amendment making an additional charge had recently before the Board when they desired the Departmental Report on Examinations he nutrally alleged it was private and con- fidential for his use and that the Board had no right to demand it. INTERIM REPORT BY THE COMMISSIONER. To the Honourable Gboroh W. Ross, LL.B., Minister of Education. Dear Sir —My report on the result of the investigation, which I recently held in Stratford, in the case of Idington vs. McBride, is nearly ready for your consideration. In the meantime, I desire to inform you that, upon a careful analysis of the voluminous evidence in the case, my conclusions arf that the evidence presented has not sustained any of the Charges brought by Mr. Idington against Mr. McBride. I am, dear Sir, very sincerely yours, Toronto. 4th January, 1887. J- GEORGE HODGINS, Commissioner. Note.— A copy of the foregoing was sent to the Chairman of the Board, also to Mr. John Idington and Mr. William McBride, on the 6th January, 1887. • REPORT OF THE COMMISSIONER TO THE HONORABLE THE MINISTER OF EDUCATION, IN THE MATTER OF IDINGTON vs. McBRIDE, STRATFORD. In terms of the Commission issued to me to enquire into certain complaints preferred against William McBride, M.A., by Mr. John Idington, Q.C., of Stratford, I opened the Commission in the Town Hall Council Chamber of that city on Tuesday, the 23rd November, and closed it on Saturday, the 11th December, 1886. Mr. Idington was, for part of the time, represented by Mr. J. E. Harding, as Counsel, and Mr. McBnde during the whole of the investigation by Mr. James Fleming, M.P. The case was an unusally protracted one. Thi« arose partly from the gravity of the Chargeo preferred-" gross and repeated falsehoods and misrepresentation "-and partly also from the faet the Complainant repeatedly pressed upon the notice of the 17 Uined firtt- r»ity. d an lidver- r things as •sity pasHod upartmental ed same to I when they ite and con- itly held in leration. yiis of the ted has not S, ssioner. ard, alio to E MATTER ats preferred [ opened the ty, the 23rd jton was, for Bride during ravity of the — and partly atice of the Oommiaioner various detaila, chiefly narrative and pertonal. Theae deuila in hia evidence, aa well aa the opinionH and inferences of the Complainant, I felt could not, with any fairneaa. or juatice to the Accuaed, he regarded aa evidence of "groaa and repeated falsehood and uiiarepreaentation," in the absence of apecihc proof to that effect. Noverth..leH8 1 took down, aa fully as I could, the whole of the Complainant's statenienU and evidence, and submit both herewith pages 1 to 54 of my notea. The whole difficulty aroHe originally out of a personal matter ; and throughout the iuvestigaiioii thdt feature of it waa never lost sight of by the Complainant. The First Oharob.— Reduction op Petkr Idiwoton to a Lowih Form. The strongest personal charges agaiuHt Mr. Mc Bride were contained in the first and second, a^ formulated. In substance the First Charge was that Mr. Idington's aon waa, by Mr. McBride, (on the occasion of a refusal to give information in regard to pupils who had damaged the school-rooms on Good Friday, 1884,) put back by way of punishment from a higher to a lower form. What evidently added greatly to Mr. Idington's feeling of personal hoatility to th« Head Master, waa the fact, (as was apparent from the evidence on the subject,) that hia son, after he had been taken from the Institute, was refused admission as a boarder to Upper Canada College, owing, as Complainant alleged, (Evidence, page 19), to the un- fiivourable report of the Head Master to the Principal of the Ooll.ige. The correspond- ence on the subject, and the reaolutiona of the Board in regard to the matter, will be found in Exhibits Noa. 31-37. Mr. Idington's own evidence-in-chief, on the first of theae personal charges, waa, in effect, a recital of the circumstances and events connected with, and designed to set forth, that Charge more fully—his son's report of what the Head Master said to him, and did with him, on the 16th April, 1884-hia report of the circumstance to the Chairman of the Board of Trustees (»«« Exhibit No. 1), and his demand for an investigation by the Board of Trustees— of his letter to, followed by two interviews with, the Head Master and their unsatisfactory termination— of a meeting of the Board, held on the 25th April, 1884, etc. Several letters on the matter, which had been published in the local newspapers by Mr. Idington, and the Head Master, were put in as Exhibits. (Set Exhibits Not 17 18 19, 20, HI and »2.) ' ' In his cross examination by Mr. Fleming, M.P.,(Oounsel for Mr. McBride) Mr. Idington stated that, except from his son, he had made no inquiries on the subject from anybody, nor did he ask the Head Master for an explanation before writing to the Chairman of the Board, {Exhibit No. 1). (See Evidence, page 16). He further stated that at a meeting of the Board, held (as stated) on the 26th April, 1884, his letter was read and he then alao atrongly objected to the system of espionage by the Head Master. Statements, or explanations, were also made at that meeting by the Head Master and two other Masters One of the latter (Mr. Mayberry) Mr. Idington said, went back on old sores aa to his son, but the Board did not, he tho' \ want to ir-v ,sti-ate the case, because the Teacher had gone over the previous history of the boy, and they Uid not like Mr. Mavberrv 2 (ID.) 18 •=====■ — ~ , ft . Ah a renult of the con.id.r-tion of the eom- to go into that hi-tory. (Evidence pa«« 6.) A a __ plaint and explanation, the Uoard passed the .oil w.ng ^^ ^^^^ .. H.v.n« hean, M.. Idin^^n. cU.«e.^CS£ S ^^'-tt., and ^t we ar. , other teachurn, we can ♦|»'\,1!;;i,J^"'\eS ^nce, page* 1« and 17). «tiHfied h.. courne wa« j"«tdua.le. («- ^, ,,.,,;, .eHolutiou bein« mought m a. part Nox..-Mr. Idington. Counsel ^^^"^^^^ ,,, ground. :- of the case, but the Oo.nuus.ioner ov-rrulcd the ob^ct.o. ^^ ^^^^^ , ,hat Complainant had sought the interv.nt.on of the Hoard, ,o,e, object to a record of Us finding in the case. ^^ ^^^ ^^^^^ , That it was part of the r. ,e.. an o t ^^^^^ ^^^ ^^^^ ^^^^^ - -:^r:: it to be .. dut...^ - -rrr:: r^^r^f to report upon, the internal economy of the Colleg ^^^^^^^_ ^^^^^ .^ ^^^„ Head Master to remove pupils from a h.gher ^^^ ^^ '"^'^^j^ ^^ „,;„,i,,, of the Charges to understand the .hole case, and thus ^;^;^^'^^^l'^^^^^^^ and discipline in preferred. I would have to inform myself ^U.e deUds ^ J^^^^ ,^ ^^^.^^^^^^ ^^ ^^^^^ L Institute. As the CHa^^;;;;;;;^^ Jhile attending the Institute, and also to tain something of the career of Peter lamg circumstances. .ee how its management and «i"f '"^X*^^^^^^^^^^^ following matters, viz :- With these objectB in view. I received evidence on 1 Peter Idington's relative rank in his form. , L- V. *v.of rank was determined. 2. The proce.. by «h,oh "»'«"*'"' Arith».Uc, i.. March, 1884. ■:■ in°''tMrS"altIlL. or convert..., .Uh r.^h.r., ... 6. Nature of Mr. Mconae „ppe=8arv in order to under- : M. th. ev*„oe which »..rea .h..» p..- w»,^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ .fnd th. «W. of th. circ»™i.nc., wh.ch led to PeUr g M, Er.t ....,.i. o* * "*- ""■-■ "'"■• *-'*"• in April was not mentioned., ^ ^^^^^ ^^ ^^^^^ „f 48, Peter's rank It was stated in evidence by Mr Wihon ^_^^^^^^ ,^^^ ^^^^ ^^.^^ ^„, in January was 28 ; in February 19 . in March I K ^^^^ .^ ^^^.^ ^^^^^ ^^^^ p^^^ 19 of the com- repurta from A that wo are lit in aa part Id not, there- rd. ,nd the Board largOB asainst iquire into, or le right of the r, that in order jf the Charges i discipline in irable to ascer- ,te, and aUo to ors, viz :— 884. chers, etc I order to under- :tion. ,ined in tho Insti- rank in January, aster. His rank f 48, Peter's rank I, 140, 142) ; but 1884, when Peter I form of 49,) to 35 It of a form of 49) to which I refer ia this connection, and the fn<|uent unreliablo r.«ult« of the exan.inations, Peter's seemed to be a rapid descent from hiH rank of th« previouH month. It does not apppHr in evidence, althou«li it was mentioned by a witnewi, that changes in the form may have takcMi place in the months of February and March, (and April) which would, ofcourHe, of iUelf alter the relative placeH of those who remained in it. Mr. WiUon. in his ovidenc(>, stated that ledi.ctionK were being constantly made, (Evid.nce, pages 70 and 71). Mr. McBrido stntt-d that promotions were made chiefly ns tho result of the monthly examinations. (Evidence, page 209.) 2. Thb Pkocbbh hv wkich this Kank was Attainrd:— As to how this rank was determined, tho eridencn showed that it was arrived at by taking the number of marks given at the weekly and monthly examinations, after deducr- ing the demerit marks of the pupil. (Evidence, pages 70, 119 and 209). It came out in evidence, however, that the marks given at these examinations were not always honestly obtained. Peter Idington gave the following testimony on this point :— ';There was copying done in the weekly and monthly examinations. . . . I have askod •lUMtions from other pupik, and would compare anewers with other pupil, under examination f know It was not the jm.per thn.g to 7.) i^r Mi;Brid», in hii •videnco, »aid :— . * .. I mcntionod . . . [th-t IVter] ]md never ^.tinfacU.^^^^^^^^ Moent in onB hLtance. I had tho Latm cla«. .ix wuok» l.ufoio EaHtor, . . . i>ir. « y 7 had It boforo." (Evidence, pftgo 1»<') Mr Scrir,u,xour, Trustee, in hin ♦•vidence, in reply to Mr. Idington, said :- .. .Sirs: £j;:^-sir' i!S./^. .. .« .r;-^: -^-is '""" ^t-Wne iVo. .^ handed in by Mr. Idington, gives the renult of the Exanunation in Latin (1884) as follows: -Hamilton. r,9 ; Baily, 46; J. McLellan. 4r, ; L'arrall, .»6 ; Frazer, 25 , and Peter Idington 19, out of possible 100. Secondly, as to Akitiimrtk', Peter Idington said :— 1 .» M !>.;,»,. I was called un to the blackboard but three pages 114, 116, 117 and 119.) I find, on reference to Exhibit No. 77, that in January, 1884, Peter Id.ngton got 60 mnrks in the first class in arithmetic (as entered in the report), so did Robert 0"ral and John Kennedy ; in the second class in arithmetic, Peter got 10 marks and Kobert Oarrall .JO. (J. Kennedy not entered). In February, arithmetic was not a subject entered m the report. In March, Peter got 36 marks in arithmetic, Carrall 46, and Kennedy 60 ; so that tL,. calling off of Peter in this necessary subject was more seriouR than that of either .Carrall or Kennedy, who were reduced at the same time with hin,. In other subjects h.a .marks, in March, were higher than theirs. The n.arks in Latin are not given. In April, Peter's marks in arithmetic were 45, while Carrall's do not an^ ' i '^tc < 8 rank thisn,onthwas35„andCarrall's36.inaformoi42. (Kennedy's nain ■'. • ' .tered.) Ur McBride, in his evidence, said :— «law. I Im-l sent him to the blackboam "^r«« "^ ' ^ q-^ turn would not come the claB«. . . , . The.ver..go^wa« -^^^^^ J^^J^^^ .o^king at'th^ blackboard other pupil, very often m ^'^^"tre^ I go about to room to see how they did their work . . 1 are workup ou 1 J 'X'" -ork My object was to find out what were the difficulties and took close obsi., ,%. \-' -*'''„ ^.Jf^L ^J^ g„-'n^e of the better pupils up to the blackboard to S5S fir'^'lt: ;" ::.o^iut riritCetlc of peter Idington was absolutely correct." (Evidence, pa',ea Mi.' -aC 183.) Mr Idington, relerring to this matter in his evidence, said :— ..i,t^ ^,;fi„„«t,in. t,he only subject compulsory for the Intermediate, and which Mr. Mo- As t« n.1-- - - , never asked luiu, but on two or tnrcc ucL-aaiuns, <-'• »ymK attention in the class aii.l h.u loHt the place. He asked i.iu to pamo a wonl and I w.w tryt ,« to Bnd out what the word was. Ho thought , lid not know h..w to ,«»rse it ; anr,ther did it \^ords ensued and Mr. Mayborry sent mo out of the class. Mr. McBride advised mo t<. writ(, an »poloiy which I tlul. . . Mr. Munro was a teacher in the school in 1H«;{. I had trouble with him It was of the same nature. Mr. McLaugidin was a teacher in the sch<.<.l , n 1881} and IHH;! I remember an mcident with h.m. but it was settled in the class. Ho called . ..< a liar Mr' Hogarth was a master. I had trouble with him. . . . Ho could not kee,. ,rdor and the boys commenced tramping ami hissing at him, ami snow-balling. I had been tr aping and he saw me, and I stoppo.l. Be trieeforo not control Peter Idington. . . . loter was insolent to him. Ho reported thi !"*?• ■ • • I wanted to settle the matter amicably if possible. I asked Mr. Mayl it 111 pre.Honce of I'otor. Peter was angry when Mr. Mayborry cauio in and became Mr. Mayborry was talking. He used some objectionable language in my presence Mr. Mayborry s presence was calculated to irritate Petor and I beckoned to him (.\I the room, which ho did. ... I reasoned with tho boy for some tiii-o and ho br I ; r •■ , rr'" "" ti'"l"gy. wl'ich I handed to Mr. Mayborry ; it was not satiafacb but 1 induced him to lot the matter drop, as it was a concession from the boy. Soon his conduct was unsatisfactory. I took the class myself . . . for tlii» solo reason " pages 180-182. ) Mr. Chark$ A. Mayherry, (Teacher), in his evidence on this subject, said :- " I had trouble with Petor while he was in the [Latin] class. I can't remember anx .thers with whom I had tmublo. I had some difficulty with him in tiio class It arose from little misconduct on hi-n part. I sent the boy outside tho room and told Mr. McBride It was ttlod immediately af er that." (Evidence, page 110.) 5. Repokt of the Teacher'! on Pbter iDiNfJTON's PitoaaEss in Study. In his evidence on this matter, Mr. Maybe.rry said : " I remember Peter idington in iny class in Roman History. ... 1 think there improvement m Peter in Roman History up to the time he left school. I dd remember that Mr. McBride ever spoke to me as to his improvement in Roman History \^\\ reiiioinber wli.it he said to mo about the Latin lessons. (Evidence, pages 104 and 'iCS) Mr. McBride spoke to me on one occasion about Peter's work." (Evidence, page i:0.) Mr. John B. Wilson, (Teacher), speaking of Peter Idington's progress, said :— He could matter to ■rry about ore so as saw that ) to leave ' thinks the ents in the of untruth. a to a lower }me during the preceding month in regard to putting pupils back, and as reported to the Board. In his Report to the lioard for March, 1884, the Head Master said: — " Notwithstanding the fact that additional help has recently been aecured, the work is still heavy, partly in consequence of the fact that the forms have not in the past been j)roperly graded. There were several pupils in forma for which they were not prepared, and the work of which they could not get up. As some of these were in those forms for two or ihree terms, and would feel too keenly a degradation to a lower form, we thought it advisable to jrive them special assistance to enable them to keep up with the work of their form." {Hj-hibit No. 57, Page 3). It should he noted in this connection, that at the very time when Mr. McBrido penned this Report to the Board {Exhibit No. 57), he informed ten or eleven of the pupils, thus retained in their form, that they would be reduced " unless they showed signs of improvement." The leniency, therefore, pointed out in that Report was . clearly intended as a tentative act (as the succeeding paragraph quoted from the Report shows) ; and the continued exercise of that leniency was evidently dependent upon the "improvement and conduct" (as shown in the evidence) of the pupils concerned. This is clear, for Mr. McBride, in his evidence, says : — " There were severall intended to put back unless they showed signs of improvement. . . . I intended, in March, on putting Peter back (judging from his work then) and Carrall, unlo-s they showed signs of improvement." (Evidence, page 205). Again, in further proof, he said : — " I gave him an^l other pupils warning, about the first of February, 1884, that they would be put bauk if they did not show some improvement in their work and their conduct, especially their work. I renewed that warning the beginning of the next month (March). F reported the cases generally to the Board before the Easter Vacation, ... I think in the March Report. " {Exhibit No. 57). (Evidence, page 177). Thus, before and about the time of writing the Report for Marcii, the Head Master had decided that he would not retain ten or eleven pupils, including Petor Idington, in the forms they were then permitted to remain in, as reported to the Board, "unless they siiowed signs of improvement in their work and in their conduct." But, in order to understand the whole case more fully, I make th(! following extracts from Mr. McBridu's March Report to the Board. {Exhibit No. 57.) This Report was strongly emphasized by Jlr. Idington, in his argument on summing up the case, with a view to prove by it that Mr. McBride was inconsistent in reducing Peter Idington, after writing the paragraph already quoted. But immediately after that paragraph follows an explanatory statement of the condition of the forms when he took charge of the school, and a reference to the difficulty which he had experienced, and would hereafter experi- ence, in properly classifying the pupils. The Report, speaking of the future, says :— "It will be some time before the pupils can all be graded satisfactorily, inasmuch as there seems to have been little uniformity in promoting pupi s from one form to another. The Head Master found f«•'"« "f knowing the probabilities of Peter's success or i '^-inf7r:sr:r^i3';traVwivr^^ ^"* »>'« -^~*'- - «ii«ht, as chanfroflucSV"'''™"' ^"" *'''* *''•• ^''^^'^^ ^-l very little knowledge of your son's the ^Zv"'^'' '°" ''''^ '"^ *''** »>« '^'^^ -ly »Bked him on three occasions to do work at^ obtaitdsl'mLrot'ofl'^o^S Examination. I find that your son Am.—" Yes. " (Evidence, pages 34, 35.) -ui?;:u7Zht i?aSu.tL?natr ?^'''' *'^ "'"^ ^' ^'^^ '^^^ --*in«. April, 1884). the ti -„f ehe £^z^^:^it^ %" -^t::K^.^7^v2^- -^JT^ - to th?:Sn7aS;t: a1^?hrb?glCoF April* IZT"" '' ^'""^ ^'^^ ^^«'^' °^ ^^^^^ - at the Ume." ^P''^^^'"" ^^^^ on my memory 'is the result of these enquiries and discussions standt;S''~[57%] ? ^"" '"""'^ ^'^^^ *^« «**"dard at the time of the examination was the higher Alls.— " Yen." reduced r""^'*^ ^""' '°" ^''' *^« Intermediate Examination by reason of the standard being ^»w.-" Yes, by the old standard." (Evidence, page 29.) Mr. McBridc'a evidence on this subject is as follows :- the tlm'e'l ^^TS\^ ^^^'^^Z^^^'T '" T" " ' ' ^T'^ ^^"^^^ *»>»* «^«tement at 50 % It was 40 % in tL former year °' ? w^l""'^ *° Tr?, ."flntermediatrwas vacation I think I got [the informationl from the LlTr^ZT °t ^""'l ^^^"''^ ^^^ faster ment a few times on the subject of the ColleS lZtitT''f^'-T ^ '""' ^°^" ** ^^^ ^epart- ''I was informed before Easter vSoii that H^l^" , (^^'^^"ce pages 178, 179.) *^ for the Intermediate Examinations^ (TvSctlage m''^ '"' "'^^ ™'^«^ ^^°-" *«% *« ««% mediate ran^r^^^de^'VeXtr^tlfc? ^i^^^^^^ ht^ ^^^^ .™ P-^*^ ^'^^ ''^^- mediHte ; fourteen passed accordwTo the hio^'-r -In^ ^-^ ^^ .-^ ^'''^'' ^"^ ^^^ '"t^*"- -ludmg some that had tried fo. Z sto^Jd oS^^d Stfed^'^ tEtitt,^raKo9.) "* -^"^ ^r. Wilson, in his evidence on this point, said :— by e;^utroi™:;iae\ir rrtTiV"-*'%^"*?."i'^r*^ ^---^-" would sliow it to the teachers. " (Evidence, Jage 75 J"'"'"^^'^ ^^^'"g '^- (^-^''^t No. 108). He It would appear from the preceding evidence— -aic« wuai reter idingtons standing was as a pupil. standU'or4j%"" '"" '""' *'^ ^*^°'"' *^ '^ ^^^^'^^^ ^^^ '' %■ -^ "'^^ ^^e old Peter' Idbjll' ZT'' t" '' ""'' *'' ^*''*^'"''"*' ^'^'^ *'-°- *-- *- f-t«. that reter Idmgton "had no chance to pass" the Intermediate. 29 eter's succeas or « was slight, as ;e of your son's to do work at- that your son g, April, 1884). ief was that at , page 24.) , 1884 ?" 3f enquiries as ind discussions was the higher itandard being t statement at irmediate was e the Easter * the Depart- i, 179.) 40% to 50% 3d the Inter- ar the Inter- lassed in all, 209.) Examination ^o. 108). He Ir. McBride D jt the old facts, that The Second Charge— The "Card Cask." '^''V;''""'* '^'"'^^ '■« t° ^^^ ««■««* tJ'-^t Mr. McBride, at a Board .noeting on the 3rd May, 1884, asserted " that on one occasion he went to the basement of the school found a number of boys there who had evidently been playing cards, . . . and tha^ Peter Idington was one of the boys there." Mr. Idingtm, in his evidence, denied that his son was in the basement at all but added :-" I do not swear that he was not there." (Evidence, page 2.) Peter Idington, in his evidence, said : — HI, '7^^"'?* present at the time the cards wore played I was not- m t),« k„. . r_ £.'^rSrKi;e^r.^^-^^ notallowei We were allowed in at tSntr^Sota^ in the basement when classes were going on. . When thk oponrrn. ;„ V ' b """f ^*' m the Botany class. . . . Some were absent from reBotonH™^^ ^^^^ ^^^^^^ tZf:ti ''?r* .""/ •" '\^ ^'"" *° '^"l"'^^ ''''°»"h« missing boys '^ Evidence paeellb^""? was m the third form class-room before the Botany was started I win f f rn^^f^ A,- i r ^ class-room to the first form class-room. I went dlrectlv I diH nnf ^J^ T *'l«.*^"''i f""" the basement, nor near the stairway at all I diHot irii^ Mr m^r T" *'"-' '"^''"■« *°'^''^'^'' : . . I was not in the basement thauVl of turs!th"^^^^^ lu cross-examination, page 213.) "'», ""at is auring scnool hours. (Evidence, This evidence is carefully expressed and is quite non-committal. It is no doubt true (as that was not the statement) that Peter Idington was not « present," or " in the basement when Mr. McBride found the boys playing cards." It is also no doubt true that he was " xn the Botany Class " " when this occurrence took place," for Mr. McBride says he met Peter going up when he was going down the stairs before he caught the boys And no doubt it is quite true that at that time he "did not go down stairs towards the' basement, nor near the stairway at all." All of this is no doubt quite consistent with he a ter time facts of the case, but it had no reference to the exact time in the day to which Mr. McBnde's evidence refers. This is clear from the following subsequent statements and admissions which in his after cross-examination by Mr. Fleming Peter Idington made : — *' it. ;^'emembe?l\tt Mr"Xt3f S'^ 'iTeTif ' ""^f f ^ "f^ ^ ' ''^ P-«- "^ the Botany class-3 or 3:30 p. S^^lnk thaT it wLrmrdirylCfnSrst'^itrih^" SVorTanrfl^X^t^-th a^^^ the cloakroom to the third form room Su^^grng'ilTe^coJridor^'Yw^^^^^^^ fh""} form to the first form room immediatelv after rflp«HB Af i^^l^ • • t ■ .°"* *"® *""'d I don't-remember ^.hether I came from the Cnentt^^^^^^ T J" *^" basement. don t remember the bell being rune that flav r,n i>?;„ "ie»«- up classes. ... 1 think the boys came m after him or before him." (Evidence, page" "2 13°215) ' Mr. Jonah Johnson, caretaker of the Collegiate Institute, in his evidence said •- classl's''^ He IttrthTLlitt or.ntiLgTitr^^hra^d "£ 'fT^"* .^"""^ *»>« were down the first hour that morning. Th^ZTedt'seKLTel "^John lere^" waS 80 (Evidence, page 171.) • • • • l h»ve seen Peter down on other occasions as well." In his cioss-exttniination by Mr. Idington he said :— told 2^' "EXfce^ pSeTrat """"^'^ "^'^ "^ "''' "' '""^ *«*""'-' ^ '^^y '^^^ -"- I M7: Mr.Bride's evidence is as follows : in the basement.. A «nrs"aft f ^^k^d^lo'ng^^L' t^^^^^^^^^ X Tt^'V east end, and ctoinK down th« afairwav f^ f»,o k„„ „ » ""^ wuiuor ana aown the stairs at the Peter Idington'rsCr two btrtLlaSding'roleTw^^^ f^^ T^'l-^ '"«* 8a.d nothing to these two, but let them pass ij^ ' I walked alon^o^i Z^l^"'y^}V^^': ^'"'- J furnace where the boys were. I don't think I knew H.p of hir^ u\^ % «^ ^ ?f "^'"" ^^^ knew Peter Inington then. There were on, e boys came to the Znf'Sl"'*.^"*"'' ^•^'"8*?"- ^ came down. . . The two boys did cZe dZn after leal rJn' '^"^^^ Two of them ing there bokmg on. Some of the boys w re with their backTo me " " Tf' P \ ""''L ^^''^• went to his class after he went up paat me he would be in tfm« f„^ kj. 1 ' •, ".u ^*^'' Kington ring until after I had gone down, or until I waTat the bottn^ „ri . ''' ^° r ^'^^.Song dilnot Peter as one of the boys playing cards I said no I ^i^ „ ? f *il^ ^**'"- ^ ^"^ "°* accuse No. 2. I firmly believ^L thXthe stlJement of Pete J^ngSnTet ''nth^T'"' ^^'" T'^^^''^^ mean by basement anything below the first floor. ''(Snce.rges 179 18")'"'''' " ^ In his cross-examination by Mr. Idington. Mr. McBrid/ n XI." ^^niet Peter a step or two below the landing, half-way down Tho nth«r K^„ xu on the floor below, or on the first step." (Evidence, pages 2% and 212.) ^ """ ^'*^^'' From this evidence it is clear that Peter Idington, as he admits in his cross exami nation, was in the basement in the afternoon of the day in question, but, as he says, not " dunng prohibited hours." He also said in his cross-examination : « At intermission I was in the basement. . . . It would likely be five minutes from the time I Mr. McBride says that he met Peter on the stairs that day. Peter says that he " did not meet Mr. McBride, nor see him at all." Both statements are made under oath Peter also says that he - never went to the basement during prohibited hours." Mr. Johnson Caretaker, says: " Peter Idington was one of the boys that sometimes came to the base- 31 em duwn thtiro. uions aa well. " ey left when I Fanuary (on or the charge of ot regard it as wn to the baae- n in the base- i something up i Stairs at the corner, I met after him. I got near the r Idington. I Two of them I wiiB stand- Peter Idington le gong did not lid not accuse riven in charge int is true. I he stairway of i) and another gton for being I did not find minor offence, m I suspected as quietly as believed that ore, they were 3 to-day, as I ot inform the pstairs prelty was shown oy was either cross exarai. he says, not intermission the time I lence, pages lat he " did 'ath. Peter r. Johnson, to the base- ment during the classes. He was down in the basement one morning with John and Robert Kennedy . . . They were down the tirst hour that morning ... I have seen Peter down on other occasions as well." (Evidence, page 171.) As in the other case, Peter's denial and Mr. Johnson's affirmation are both made under oath. The Third CuAKaB— Omission to Deny a " Wickkd Falsehood " chaboed AOAINSl IIIM. The third charge is that Mr. McBrido, being charged through the Press " with a wicked falsehood," saw fit to combat other statements made as to his integrity, and has never to the Oompiaiaant's knowledge either denied, or explained this charge. On this Charge Mr. Idington was examined by Mr. Fleming, as follows : Question.— " Do you sr.y that when you write a letter in a newspaper, charging a man with any crime or misdeme mor, it is his duty to rush into print and answer it ? .4mtwr.—" Under certain circumstances it might be his duty, or, in others, a matter of taste. Qit««.— "Isit your contention in promoting this charge that anything stated in the news- papers and not denied by him is true ? " u*'""T" ^^'*®" ^*'- McBride combatted in the newspapers certain allegiations and failed to combat other charges that appeared either side by side with those charges, the failure to combat the more serious charges is strong evidence of its truth." The alleged "wicked falsehood" in this Charge was not proved— for Petur Idington admitted that he was in the basement at intermission, on the day in question. The Fourth Charge — Peter Idington's Deficiency in Latin and Arithmetic. This Charge is to the eflTect that Mr. .McBride falsely declared before the Hoard that Peter Idington had never got but one of his lessons in Latin, and that he had never solved a single question at the blackboard in Arithmetic. I have gone fully into the subject of this charge in dealing with the status and con- duct of Peter Idington under the head of the First Charge. (Seepages 17-28.) Mr. McBride's evidence will be found there ; and also a report of what he said to the teachers on the subject of Peter's status and studies. The Complainant produced no witness to disprove the evidence there quoted in rebuttal of these two-fold charges. Besides, it was shown in evidence that not only were the reports of the results of the weekly and monthly reports of the pupils' standing not in all cases correct, but the weekly and monthly examinations were tainted and unreliable, owing to the common practice of copying and other dishonorable acts on the part of some of the pupils when under examination. On this latter part, see the evidence of Peter Idington and Samuel E. Robb, quoted in this report, page 19. The Fifth Charge— Reducing Peter Idington's Credit Marks. This Charge is to the effect that Peter Idington's marks for March, 1884, were stated by Mr. McBride to the Board to be 189, out of a possible 500, whereas they were entered as 229 in the monthly report. Mr. John B. Wilson, Teacher, in his evidence on this charge, said : " Mr. McBride said :— I had not given a sufficient number of demerits [to pupils]. He in- stanced Peter Idington's case as one. He said that Peter's demerits were not enough ; that I had given three or four, as he thought, whereas the other teachers would give five. One purpose he had in speaking to me was with a view to introduce uniformity as to the system of marking in 32 thogcliool. Tho othor |iurp(.no WHH to gut iit Potur laingtoirB corrott numl.or of hml iimrks according to tho Htandiird iidoptisd hy otliur touchorH. ... I udoi)ted their systoiii aftnr- wiird.s. I found tlmt IVtor Idiiigton Imd u nuuilwr of bml iimrks nioro timn whs rocordod (Ui tlui monthly report, l>y inuronsing tlie vuluo on tho systuni followed by the other teiicherH. . llio number of tiaieH he received bad nmrkH was not inereasod. Tho entries were correct, but not as to their value, in carryinj^ them into the clasH register. ... I said to Mr. MoBrido it may bo bettor to review other persons' marks. He said his object was not to tiiid the relative niarks, but to tind tho exact ninnber of demerit marks tlmt Peter should have, (Evidence, pages' 72, 73.) Exhibit No. 77, pago 3, Report for March, was shown to witneas. He naid : " I don't remombor Iiaving seen tho alteration in Peter Idington's mrrks. Tho marks are clianged from «'2!> to 181», and, in tho margin, tho words ' imperfects not deducted, otherwise he would be much less ' are inserted, and over tho discredit marks is written tho words' 'not correctly added and recorded.' . . . Tho decrease in Peter Idington's marks from 229 to 189 was not miide solely by inoreasing tho demerit marks up to 6, | the common standard for each ordinary deiiu'nt then adopted in tlie school], but we found that the demerit marks I'v this increase made 40 more than were recorded in tho class register, or monthly reports, so t.;at the conclus'.;.n wo came to at the time was tlmt the person who had made up the demerit nu''t <>4 demerits should have been the correct number of marks, instead of 24. It (04) was found by increasing those marks that were not up to P to 5, and by allowing those that were 5 to remain as they were. There wore no omission* i, tlie demerit rogistar. . . . There were no fresh records made in tho dement register. Tlipro were no ' recollected ' denierit marks added. . . . There is no doubt that tlie pupils, [Flora Idington and Georgina McNaughtonJ , who made up that register, allowed the value of the marks in the demerit register to remain the same as they were. . . . They transcribed them into the class register. . I think the new system as to ' lates ' was adopted in February and carried through March and in April, up to the time my attention was called to the matter by Mr. McBriie. In making up the 64, the number 5 was given for each ' neglected homo work.*^ . . . There was 24 in the class register and 64 in the demerit register, according to our calculation, as explained. . We thought that the pupils [named] had made a mistake in their counting or reckoning. . I have no other reason for saying that the pupils made a mistake in their counting and reckoning than that we had carefully made the calculation. I felt that ours was correct at the time " {Evidence, pages 78, 81, 82 and 83.) In his cross-examination, Mr, Wilson said : — "Mr. McBride and I examined the register and found that Peter's demerit marks should be 40 more— or 64, instead of 24. The total marks on the register were 229. The true number would be 40 demerits less, or 189. " (Evidence, page 84. ) Mr. McBride'a evidence on this niatter is as follows : „,., " "^^^ statement I made to the Board, (26th April, 1884,) as to Peter's marks was correct. Mr. Wilson and I went over the regisber that evening of the Board meeting, as I wanted to make sure of my statement. We found that the balance of marks should have been 189 and not 229, as in the monthly sheets. I have examined the monthly reports and have found them very inaccurate. Mr. Wilson and I went over the demerit register and credit marks and found that they should be 189, instead of 229 ; and I made that statement to the Board. Mr. Wilson was . . . at the Board meeting when I made the statement. (Evidence, page 183). Tho foUowinfi: evidence shows how "inaccurate" the ordinary report of marks was. ^tiss Flora C. Hington—ouQ of the, compilers of the register of marks,— on being shown the cla«s register, Exhibit No. 74, page 2,— said : — "In the case of Bedford Richardson in that class reeister. I have addpd thn dnmnrit mark- ^r^ fi"f l>art of any othe names." (Evidence, page 142). ^ ^" """'" '" "'" "i-rk. oppo.it. to tiro other m.s0.or,u>a MeNaugkion (the other compiler of the Register) wa. shown E.km No. 71 She was pointed to Minnie Weir's name, and said: - In thl'^l^nihii:'l!';:rll^::;"6!! T^VutTV? '*•? '^''t;' ''', '^^-"""^ ■"-''»' »>«"— 1«. . . . Oeor«e Marshall's cred t maUV -U T*"' ''\^^^'- . "' '"'8'" ^" ''« U-T-difference 62 of demerit marks should be 33 instead o 37 ' tT7\ ™"'"'. ^^' l^iff^^^-'-'-S?. The number entered as 122. instead of 84. thrcrecfnfmber'''' &«;! p^' U4tdV]^)!? ^'^""'^ " From the foregoing evidence it will be seen :— hims.\/'Tvf 'w^"^"^'"" "P"' °' ^'"'' ^^""8*°"'« '"''••'"'' •"• ^-"-fuliy made up by himself and Mr. W.lson. was correctly stated to be 189. instead of 229 ^ ^ 2. That the entry of mark, in the monthly reports was unreliable from two cause. - (a) Errors in making up the marks themselves, an.l (6) Results of the examination being vitiated, by rea.son of "copying " etc 3. That the Fifth Charge of the Complainant was not sustained. Thb SI.XTH Charoe-Circulab Announckment op the School Was 7'^^ -t by the Commissioner, on the ground that the Circular wai i.sued by the authority of the School Board, over which action of the Board the ComZioner had no jurisdiction. See Resolution of the Board. (E.MtUs No. 52 anaZZ2> the evidence of Police Magistrate O'Loane. a member of tho Board, quoted below The Amended Sixth Charqe-The School Aknounckment Crculab Was also ruled out by the Commissioner, so far as the first part of it was oolcerned for the reasons given before, and those given by Mr. O'Loan. in L evidence, as folw, !! the BllLZn^:?nT^rwr isle?ry^tho"rit^'^^^^^^^^^ } ""f' ".r'"^- "^^^ - verified McBride. We did not see anTtSg in 't nconLtant wS'**;^- ^ r^i^^u'^'^ ^^^^'^ «P°» Mr. difference of opinion among the memh«rinf^hR ^ *^^ ^*^*'' °^ *^« •»"«• There was no thatcircular."%Evidere?p4el20) ° "'"""•*"*^ ^"'^ "»« '" the adoption of The Seventh Oharge-Rkqistrar Baker's Univbrsitv Certificate. This Charge relates to the issue of a certificate of Mr. McBride's standing in the Toronto TJniversity. attested by Mr. Registrar Baker. E.^it No. J,S was put in as an answer to this Charge. The Commissioner ruled that he had no jurisdiction in the case or over he Registrar, in his issue of the certificate, especiali; as the Registrar had assumed the entire responsibility of his act. The Eighth Charge-Mr. MoBr.de's Use of the University Certificate. V h:!?' «°77•°-^"'I«dthat Mr. McBride's use of the certificate, lawfully obtained W r p ' 7"'5 i °"''' "" ^"*'^ °'' ^''"^'^««' "^« ^ ™'^*<^«'' ^-^tirely personal btw en the Board and himself, ov^ ,,, Commissioner had no jurisdicin. Th Jiighth Charge was therefore ruled out. 3 (ID.) 84 Tub Nimtii Oiiarok— Mk. Maybirry'i Univkbbity Standino. Thia Charge related to a stateini'rit in the Circular iiiHueii by authority of the Board as to Mr. C. A. Maylwrry's UnivorHity standing. It was also ruled out Uy the Coni- niissioner, — the Hoard having, by resolution (Exhihiu JVoa, f»)i and U7), nasumed all, resprnsibility in regard to the matter. The amended Ninth Charge was also ruled out for the same reason. Tub Tenth Chabor— Mr. McBkidk's Univkrbity Stani»ino. This Charge ought to have been ruled out by the Commissioner, as the fact of having a degree from the Toronto University implied that the necessary requirements- prescribed by the Senate, in regard to the examinations, had beon duly complied with. However I received evidence on the subject, and also several exhibits. {See Bxhibitt No$. iO, 41, 4ii 43, 44, 55, 112 and 116). Mr. AfcBride, in his evidence on the subject, said : — " 1 attended the examinations from matriculation to the end of the fourth year, and passed at all of them. I remoinbor the difticulty about my honor examination. Thore were two Examiners in Classics, Mr. 8. Arthur Marling and Rev. F. H, Wallace. Mr. Marling said I had spoiled graciously with a 'd.' There wore two other trips in si)elling. The Examiners had not mot when the class lists were published. Mr Marling's objection was overruled when the Examiners mot. Their roconnneiulatiim was for an hohor degree. I now find it was a pass degree conferred after I passed the examination." (Evidence, page 186.) In his cross-examination by Mr. Idington, Mr. McBride said : — "1 spoke lo Mr. Falconbridge, Registrar, about my examination. He advised me to go to the Examiner.s. I did so— to Mr. Wallace,— and he gave me the certificate shewn in Exhibit No. 116, as follows ; — "The Examiner in Classics recommended Mr. Wm. McBride for the degree of B.A. , with honors in Classics. (Signed) Franc's Huston Wallace, Toronto, August 2nd, 1879." " I Sv^nt my |)etition to the Senate a few days after." (Evidence, page 205.) The Exhibits put in answer to this Charge showed that Mr. McBride did pass each of the four prescribed examinations of the University "in the usual way." The certificate of the Rev. F. H. Wallace, M.A.. B.D., Examiner of the fourth year, quoted above, shows that Mr. McBride was recommended for a " degree of B.A. with honors in Classics," which shows that he did pass in Classics with honors, but by reason of mistakes in spell- ing, he only got a pass degree, instead of an honor degree, upon his application by petition. Thb Elbventh Charoe — Hostility to the Literary Society. This Charge was to the effect that Mr. McBride's conduct in regard to the Literary Society of the school had so aroused the animosity of the scholars that he felt it might be well for his sake to suppress the Society — that his course of double dealing in relation thereto led many of his pjipils to disbelieve him — that he professed that the Board, in dis- continuing the meetings of the Society, was not acting in accordance with his wishes that he called the meeting to amend the constitution without notifying certain members whom he designed to exclude from the Society — that when he called the meeting for four o'clock he let out the school halt an hour before the time and called the meeting of the Society then — thus depriving some of its members from having a chance of being heard.. Mr. McBride, .yid.nce on thi. char«« U a. follow. December. 1H84, a resolution wan passed «ra7tL 7' "'""' °" ^'^ •'''* no meeting truth in t^e'r^trariirr Svr'.ihaJ'Th ""^"^ ''•''' ''«-'"»>- «*»•. !««*• There i. -n« o. the Society, a. I had n^p^^r ^Jt ■nS^Ce:^^^^^^^^^^^^^ -"'^ * In hi8 cr«B8.exa.nination, by Mr. Idington, he said :- noo„';::piiVtw'jt:'ri:^ Aaa-„b,,Roo„, before four o'clocU one aft.r- appouited to con.ider the new constitution " ^, .' l^"^ ^ .'^.*' * '"ember of the oommittee was oH.osed to this, and was in fS of sus,,ond"rth!!' "" V'^'^ to suppress the no,",7j'"l This the Board agreed to. I was asked -v Xl 1 ^ operations until after the exa.ninations approved of the meeting." (Evident p.liesaofiS^o:; '"'"^'"""'^ * """""S °^ ^^e pu,"ls "'f Mr. John H. Gordon, an ex-pupil, teHtified as follows :- Socie);;:'and'':aif tVaf tt .n^eS oflh? LS"" ^'"J^ ^^^"-'^'^ *"« <=-^'""«nae of th. exactly favorable to the manner hi whiph .^f^- *°'"l'''*°'^«''ly = •'"^ although he was not influence with the Board t^ have the Q^'f , ""^ '^."'='«'^ ^ad been carried on, he wouhl us' W. in the constitution. " *"*' ' '^'' ^''"^'^ contmued. although they might re,,u"re a chailj' Mr. Idington proposed this question to the witness :_ acoo:i7oThL'::Lrortto'3ed aS'?^ ^"'^'^"^^ ^'' ^^^'''^^ ™ ^^e part of the Society on but that the witness mi.ht answer l-TuestLnU^.l'^ ^^^^^ ^"^ ^^^^'^ °^ -^^- pW" I--XrjelT£iTtoun;'Sthe^^ "'^ occurrence in the basement [card the Board would require. I had no feelina nf „ *'>?/-'""»g« m the constitution which he said Society. I differed with him in regard ^otlfematt^or^ "gainst him on account of the Lker^^ to him m the matter." (Evidencefpage 15L) ''^" P"*""" ^^'^'^ ^^^^^ feeling of animosiS^ Mr. Henry F. Gadshy, an ex-pupil, gave the following evidence :- iinde. (Evidence, page 147.) "»ving meetings, hence my feeling against Mr. Mc Bride. I w;;su;pend;ronn7him""'^ " ^'^Mt'' °^ !«»*• ^ ^^J* -imosity to Mr. Mc- also made an apology. Leniency wa^ extended to ^t ?k*" T^'^^^ *'' ^'^^ ^o^'d.' My father 86 "It appears that the Board would prohibit the meetings of the Society if order kept. ... I don't remember tliat Mr. McBride ever presided. On Decei 1 1^ was not better - presided. On December 8th, 1884, teacher and pupils met at 4:20 in fifth form room to appoint officers and amend constitution, confining the membership to actual pupils." (Evidences, pages 148, 149.) Mr. Thomas Stoney, Chairman of the Board in 1 884, in his evidence, said : — " The matter of the Literary Society was brought under the notice of the Board by me. The caretaker told mo that the members of the Society acted as though they had control over the whole building ; that they had broken a lock and had taken oflF another. He had locked the rooms, but they had got into them. The Board asked me, as Chairman, to enquire into the matter, and to see what could be done to induce them to conduct matters in an orderly way. . . . Mr. Mayberry told me that the difficulty was that outsiders were allowed in. The feeling of the Board was not to allow outsiders. I attempted to explain this, but the boys would not hear me, and even said they would whip me if I came out [of the school]. They were throwing gravel at the windows and I warned them not to do it. I reported these things to the Board. Mr. McBride said that as the examinations were near, it would be better to suspend operations then. Some of the members wished to suppress the Society, as things were. Mr. McBride, in conversation with me, was always in favor of having a Literary Society in con- nection with the High School." (Minutes of Board shown witness.) '« On December 3rd, at the Board, it was moved that the Society be allowed a room provided the teachers be present — Exhibit No. Ill put in. (Evidence, pages 159, 160.) Mr. James O'Loane, Police Magistrate, and a member of the Board in 1884, said : — "The question of the Literary Society came up at a Board meeting. Some complaint was made. ... It was discussed. Mr. McBride was present. ... He was much dis- gusted at tlie damage done in the school [on Good Friday]. Mr. Stoney, I think, was asked to enquire into the matter. He reported certain facts about it. On the 4th June the Board passed a resolution "That no meeting of the Music and Literary Society be allowed in the mean time in the High School building." {Exhibit No. ISS.) I was present. I discussed the matter privately with Mr. McBride, and we were both in favor of its continuance. Mr. McBride con- curred in a recommendation of a suspension rather than a suppression of the Society." (Evi- dence, page 168. Thus the e idence of Police Magistrate O'Loane, Chairman Stoney and the other •witnesses, went to prove : — 1. That Mr. McBride never favored the suppression ^f the Society. 2. That its proceedings were most disorderly. 3. That the meeting was not held until 4.20 p.m. on the 8th December, 1884. 4. That the meeting was not called by Mr. McBride, but merely announced by him, at the request of an officer of the Society. 5. That the only "animosity" proved was not on account of Society matters, but was due to other causes. 6. That Mr. McBride had nothing to do with notifying members. In no case, therefore, was the Eleventh Charge sustained by the evi:Ience given before the Commissioner. It was rather disproved in detail. The Twelfth Charoe — Furnishing Newspapers with Lists of Pupils. This Charge was to the eflTect that Mr. McBrida furnished the local newspapers with a list of pupils from the Stratford High School, who had succeeded in the Departmental Examinations of 1884, etc. Mr. Alexander Mathewaon, Proprietor of the Stratford Beacon, in his evidence g»Te the names of the writers (as far as he could recall them) of the several articles named by Mr. Idington which appeared in the Beacon. In no case was Mr. MoBride named as the writer of any one of them. (Evidence, pages 135 and 136.) ) not better ir 8th, 1884, ionatitution, )ard by me. control over i locked the lire into the )rderly way. ed in. The ut the boys They were hings to the p to suspend were. Mr. iiety in con- nber 3rd, at )e present — a, said : — mplaint was much dis- as asked to ! the Board in the mean 1 the matter icBride con- ty." (Evi- i the other 884. ed by him, latters, but iven before PIL8. )aper8 with partmental dence gare cles named e named as 37 ..t ™,„i„ ,he witness to <,i,cl„„ h , "Ztitt ^ f ""T"':*« ■>"'"•""•■ '" "»""■ Mr. Idington, no, that of .„y „thL ' Jn ll Tr Tw7. °/ ""'"«='• »«»«■! V n...p.,.„.„.tHei,.au„,/„po:trz".j:rr^^^ to others he could give no information R„f ,« ^ . idmgton. In regard 30tb, 1886, he said :-- "'""'*'""• ^"* '" ^^-'^ *° - -"cle in the Beacon of July f'^f^'^MS:i^::7^^ ^'ir Sf "^^ f ''\ ^^^-^^ -•^ ^^^ Toronto as he generally does. ) The names were in the TorS°" ^"T^'^'^^^^" ''"^^ "^ *h« heading mtroduction written by Mr. Chewson Thl arHplp^'P'-f- ^'^ ^'^''^^ '^'<* "°* «« the and Mr. McBride compiled with th«T?.r\.,f "^ ^ ** •'* appears, was the one which be ("Beaeo,,' newspaper o? July'Sh^Lr;;*^^^^^^^^ P-t-'« '• Cross examined by Mr. Jameson, on behalf of Mr. Fleming ■_ docul^^Jj.L'r^;^'\V"etn1Srita tlltentH^' ''^- ""'^^^t^'^' ""* ^'^^-^ anythmg. It is a reproduction of the aS in the Tor^.f 'P^P'"^,T'^ ^^ ^'^ "«* ^"terject a local application. (Evidence, page 138 ) "*° P*?^"' ^'°*^ *"«1 ^'"'^rf. but with (Toronto World of July 8th, 1886. having been shown to witness he said) :- shownio me. • "' '" "'"' ^^"'^ P"P" ^^^-^^^ » ««» opposite each name in the World report Re-examined by Mr. Idington :— and P^^ ^r ^ft— S.p wy,,i ;.. ..ts ip-t.-i.-^ vr --- -- - " -■ "^ "^-^ P"- • "S £x,-cjuits Aos. lis, 114, and 115, The figures, as stated by Mr. McBride, were taken from the official reports of the Board of Trustees and the Head Master to the Department. 39 jroprietor of iper. inted out by it, in regard ■ the articles ixt witness, ained in the ' University sit. . . . ' ifttiveratty onto papers, one which I le printers." Put in as >it No. 101. 1886, and id that Mr. iles pointed '> sustained. nd wilfully le material it, so char- aber, 1884. nd 6. department less). He 1884, was . . In d that the the Lower June 30th, lohool 176 ; 162, on 57. t would be rts of the No evidence in rebuttal of Mr. McBride's evidence was submitted to the Commis- sioner, so that the Fifteenth Charge of the Complainant was not sustained. to thf r''~^" *"' T""* '* '^" "'"'' °^ *•" investigation, Mr! Idington pointed out to the Oommjss>.ner that m February. 1884, Mr. McBride stated that the number in the June 1884 f ^V\ '''^ "^"^ *° ^'^ ^^P^^*"^^"* '^' ''^ ^^^^ y-" ^^-^ 30th Jun . 1884 four months af terwards-gives the number as 43, and the average attendance a. Jb,,,. In a memorandum attached to the same report, the Head Master gives the arverage attendance as 38. {Exhibit No. II4.) . ^ The Sixteenth Charge-Failures m Arithmetic. Mr. McBride's evidence was as follows : ExamldJns*? iff ''emTnT i5 m" TZ^h""' '"^'*"r*^ f '^ ^'"'' -'^ Intermediate recorded as having failed in ihomatLs'tLf^rf.nV '''P."'* ^ ^Pf *^« ""»»^«'- «f P»Pil- pupils in the report Thesrsf^^eirDUDilVof <-!,!« rL'7 *^'? '^^^ H'^'"^" "^ *'»« number of In Mr. Idin^ton^ letter to the StrltfoTfeL ^«^«^« ^^e examinations, remarking that 35 failed in Maufe.if Id o^^^^^^^ he says :' Yet cannot forbear Arithmetic, having been taughTby t^ Hekd Ma^tfr Tl l"*' "" ^'f P'f ^°™ ^^^ ^"''^^ *" which I have already .moted I find tWfhni!, n u^^ report of the Department, from Arithmetic I know that 12 aAd 1 'i llv ^ ^."^t ^^^ ^''^ recorded as having fai ed in had been attending just before ai' up to the' H^ " f^ '**" '""^ F""""^ °^ ">« ^igh School, who lowered from 50 Tto 40 % only G^f thete iS the'srH^F"*'""- T**"" "'" ''"""^^^^ ^" faded in Aiithmetic. I base my informatfon on Jh^f n ^ ,T ^'"P'^' Previously mentioned Failure.'" (Evidence, page 197^198) that part of the report headed 'Subjects of In his cross-examination by Mr. Idington, Mr. McBride said :- by the BrrdVEtminet IZt'^m whenV W '•''?.°^ ^."*^*"- «««'•*"•■ '' " "««» Second and Third Intermediate Examinaors I Lf« In T, *^« ^^Pt^ment the result of the head of Arithmetic,' but I neverTcrutinrzed i^'^,i°°^*'^*"'\««"l'^«>»of%"'-e« under the 45, or any minimum' number I Sid ho ^ over ^,?lri?' *' ^""^ ^'" '"^^ ''*^ ^*"«» b«l«'' page 206). ^./uft^e i^. ,,, ,as p'S int'c^onn^^io^nt/tt thisThC ''"'"""^- ^"^•'»-"-' No evidence in rebuttal was submitted to the Commissioner ; but the Complainant zicvxtr'^"^. ': r T" '-'-' "Arithmetic" 'should havZ!::: numbe. f th f"' "" ' °' *'' '"' '^''^^ "^"^'J^'''^ ''^ ^«"-«'" -^ that th. numbe of those whose marks were below 45, given. Tke number of such failures in I have gone over the column indicated by Mr. McBride and find in it that 26 failed in Ant met., and 7 in Algebra-total 33. Of this number 12, out of the 33, passed ndr 8ustan.ed therefore, as the number of failures in Algebra and Arithmetic, in the column headed : " Subjects of Failures." to which Mr. McBride referred was 33. The SEVP.HT.K..TH Charge-" I^ehhedutes" Sent up to Examination ,n 1884. tions?/l8?4"'';f' r *V'V"™'" ""^ ^"P"^ ""^^ "P *° ^'^^ Intermediate Examina- tions of 1884. and to the alleged " threat" to put them back if they did not go up. If , I 40 Miaa Flora C. Idington, in her evidence, said ;— .ho.. „,„ ,.„^ „„, xte:t»sti?,-rh,™:«?„ be,.™..-. fssv.r/A'T)! Mtts Georgina McNaughton, in her evidence, said:— said this to thsTass ouL J wlnf k ^f ^^ Exainin-..tion, or go back to the seoonit form. He that did not go up were not pul back asZ lA L' "'"'""iVT' t ¥'"' '"''"y ^^"* "P" ^ho.e from the way he snoke Tn <,;tir,„7K* l- l^"*"^' ,^ bought he wanted us to work better, and rather ^^u^ft, Sa-f aTt^a^^Sr "(i^iS^:^^^^^^^^^^ ^^ * '^^'^ "^ "-: .^i«« Po/?y Co.?d'« evidence was to the effect that Mr. McBride told her that she should either go up to the Examination, orgo back to the second form ; and if she would do neitner, that she should leave the school. She had been absent, she said, for two or three months, and left the school. (Evidence, page 135). Mr. McBride, in his evidence, said :— thiaZ^!^fti^ctt°ldXh^sL^^^^^^^^^^ the application, of Intermediate Candidate.. In which 1 handed to Mr ^kxa^d^r tS' I '^^'=t^^«'^.*^« apphcations and the money both of .ended n.ost of fhf 37 t^/L 1^^^^^^^^^!^"!^ *^« ^^^Z. slZlZ the other tnd 1^7^°' ^ "^°"«^*' ^"^ "" ^»'*"<='» »* *»>« Intermediate ExamlnatTon O^ shou d So back There was no fw!?^- I "^^^l^ /"Pha^i^ed as strongly as possible that they Vh.i, At T J • 1 Z"®"^® ^*8 oo threat, and none of them were foiced, or sent back All in f^i XVm, 189)" '° "'• '^"' "''"' ""^ ""* '*'='' '^^ "°* ^'''"s "P' or Ufriiu'r'- (Evii c': In his cross-examination by Mr. Idington, he said — No evidence m rebuttal to the foregoing was submitted to the Commissioner • nor was any evidence adduced in regard to the numbers sent up. The Seventeenth Charge was, therefore, not sustained by the evidence. The Head Master, as he asserts, had no power to prevent pupils from going up to' the Intermediate Examination, while, of course, as he and others stated he did seek to induce such of them as he thought were prepared, to go yp. The two things are per- fectly compatible, and, as a matter of fact, are so. In this case, as he states in his evidence, Mr. McBride merely acted on behalf of the County Inspector, in receiving names and fees of candidates for the Intermediate Examination. He says:-"! had no discretion in receiving the applications." 41 the third form^ class that they form. I went retty sure that nee, page 141), Bride stated to jnil form. He nt up. Tho«e work better, BDgth of time, I her that she 1 if she would d, for two or .ndidatei. In noney both of ns. I recom- 'ere some four lination. On , I had been »re brought to irged them to came near it. mination, and d, in pointing ly e .tiniation, ling up for the second form, any of them ible that they All in the (Evidence, — Maud Mc- /ised Carrall y that I put isioner ; nor nth Charge »oing up to' did seek to igs are per- ates in his n receiving :— " I had Judging from the proceedings in re»«>eir studies and con- McBride, 'rt rZn "v d ^"'™.V':^"'°°"« ''^^ ^^ '^^ ^^ur or five which Mr. H.ely he' wouM I^aZ^d tZ : o^M^rr ^ "t" """"' '' ' ^^ thus have increased the number of posile L ^e, to ll d T" "TT ''^"'^ '''' the Institute, as one of the higher schools oulrp'ovint ' "' ''' ^^^"'^"^ °' already quoted it is clear th f .». , ' " '^'"^^ "'*''• ^'""^ ^^' «^idence, Those that did not go up were not put back, so far as I know." ,_, . ,' A great many went up. (iividence, page 143.) But speaking of other pupils who were put back, she says - those' wtwefe'SbJJJr'''^"-""'^"''''^'"'' McNaughton, (the witness) are the names of certificates. It ^Mr. Mcferike's) was a Zr^aToL"* ^'f *' .*'"^ "'^^^ P^<^P-^ng J. r tSclass on myself was that I thought it m^duty t^go \:^r'Tthon t° >' "'^ "^--"atL. The eSt dd'- %"% ^""^ K^"y^«»t back bera did JesstNfohn^"'?t "Y '■^*-" ^'^^ ^i" am. (Evidence, page 144.) "^^^'^ ^*<="<>1 went back the same time I And Mr Idf„„.„„ ,,„„' of th Ik "", '"' '" ""''' ^P""""' »''-"»■■ .n.. MoBridi :;;:::,:„*::;:?:' ■ '''"""^ '-"'^ ""« '° '™'' "'°™™»' had to d.p.„J „p„„ heHrTaTfo °1 f ;''" " " ' "•'" "'•"'■'•"'*'«<'■ He often ^now Hafe o. nL^ oXeJ • relt:., « Th'^T'', " f" °' "' '"' proceedings with a personally en.bitt.rpd f r .. '^''' ^' ^^^^^^^ the for this feeling. He thou« t tW I f "/ ^° '°"'* '^ '°^* *^^^ '^^ '^^ — lowered in the^ehoole:rfhi?:r;^ T ?"'^' ^"'' ^^ ^ P""^^^-"*' resented, bythewithdrawalo^lisiromt^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^"^»"^' ^"^''^"^^^ ^^^ ^- niet by a refusal of admission of his snnT f ' ' ""«^P«ctedly and decisively refusal too. he attribut d o L nl ^1;":, ""'''' '^"^'^ "°"^^^- ^^^^ Principal of the College In Z A ""^^"^"^^^^ ''^P^'-t of M, . McBride to the his oon'vietion that M^McBrib!^^^^^^^^^^ ^ ''^^^^ '^^^^ -^ -P-ed the head of the College Th slist ?' " "'"''^"' '° ^'^^ °'^"^'' ^'^'^ "--^ed " * was explained to n, an tha^the P T: ' " '"°^ ^''^"^"««'^ "^^ *'- Commissioner. had beL.. imposed ;Vn'"?:Ir37n'^^'^"^ This, and other incidents of the casp nnl„ oi,„ j l of .ho co„p,...«, „,,, .,, w':;.':;':rr::r rr:!.:r"™''"^ hi. charge,. ' "I"--'— 8"n.t th. oU.f e.„e„„„ „f .,.„^ ^, J^ j^^^__^8 ^ 42 The Eighteenth Charge— The "Seath Incident" (No. 1.) This Charge refers to Mr. McBride's conduct when Mr. Seath's report was discussed by the Board of Trustees. Mr. McBride'a evidence on this charge is as follows : — " I was present at the Board meeting in July, 1885. Mr. Seath'a report was criticised by members of the Board, but not by me. I was asked questions and I .mswered all the questions put to me. There was one class of one boy examined in Latin. I thought at tlie meeting tha* that was all that Ser.th had reported as inspected. I looked over the report very carefully, and I found the figure ' 1 ' after the word 'Latin.' The heading was ' list of classes inspected.' Mr. Seath visited the school first on the 6th May. When he was going away, he said he wouldn't, (or couldn't) consider this an inspection of Classics, or Mathematics, owing to the absence of the teachor, but would return some convenient day if I would let him know when the teacher would be better and back to work. Mr. Mulvey of Toronto was taking Mr. De Guerre's classes during liis illness. I asked him if he (Mr. Seath) would go in and inspect Mr. Mulvey' s classes. I had been speaking to him before about teachers being absent and others t iking their places, and he asked lae if Mr. Mulvey was the regular teacher. I said 'no.' He said:— 'I don't intend to insi)ect classes that are not taught by the regular teachers, but I'll drop in for a fsw minutes and see liow he is doing his work. ' We went in and spent a little while there. He came out and did not take any notes while in. In regard to Latin, I was ill and had been for some time, though attending to my duties. That day I told Mr. Seath that 1 was very ill and woulil not be attending to my duties that day. I felt a little better about 3 o'clock and went in to take a Latin class (Virgil.) Mr. Seath came with me. I had had this class for eight or ten recitations. (It was Mr. May berry's class.) I was not the regular teacher. He stayed for a little while and then left, and said to me what I have already stated. Hence I did not consider my class inspected, any more than Mr. Mulvey's. I can't tell whether, or not, he took notes at the examination of the Virgil class. I could not see the text of the book I was so ill. On tlie 5th June he visited the school again. After he had examined this one boy in Latin he came out of the Board room— Mr. McGregor had been with him— and I said to him :— 'Mr. May berry is going to hear a large class in Cato Major and would like you to go in and examine that class' ? I said I thought it would be only fair to Mr. IMayberry, as the boy examined was very nervous and had not got on very well. He declined to go in as he said he had heard enough, and he spoke disparagingly of the Latin and of the teacher too of the boy." (Evidence, pages 189-191.) J X his cross-examination he oaid : — "I heard part of Mr. Seath's report on the 16th July ; and I had read parts of it before it came up for discussion." (Evidence, pages 206, 207.) Exhibit No. 10, (Mr. Seath's report) was shown to witness, and several questions were put to him and answered, which the Commissioner held were not relevant to the case. Mr. Seath's evidence, after explaining his mode of inspection, is as follows : "The official report is my estimate of the school. Mr. McBrido was present I think all the time, as was Mr. Mayberry and Mr. McGregor. I had conversation with Mr. MnBride in St. Mary's on the subject of my inspection. . . . The conversation was in regard to the examination or inspection, B,nd this diflBculty. ... I met you (Mr. Idington) and Mr. McGregor at the Queen's, Toronto, sometime during the vacation. I don't remember that I said that I did not regard the examination on that day as an inspection. Verly likely I did. I said I would come back. Mr. McBride's telegram was before the letter. It was asking to see me in Toronto. Secretary Monteith's letter was dated 5th September. My letter to him is dated 29th September, and Mr. Marling's 1st October. (See Exhibit No. 54). 1 received Mr. McBride's letter before sending in the explanatory report, dated 29th September." (Exhibit No. 64). (Evidence, page 58.) In his cross-examination Mr. Seath said : — "I inspectc ' a class (Anabasis) and the Odyssey (three classes hi Greek). Only one boy reading the Odyssey. . . . They were examined one after another and in the same room, so far as I recollect. One of the teachers was ill on che second day. The classical master was not there the first day." (Evidence, page 68). -t; 48 was discussed ts of it before " Hari I * ocnool. His evidence was as follow*- torn me that he had examined a large clasa W.r» li I " J 7*,* surprised when Mr. Seath expressed a different opinion at the Board ' ^a"!,-- ^^^ ^ ''""'^n t^at I woulk have .tatte;r\^ ■ i It"«-tcamrupwhenMrstthWrr*'"\P^'''^^ stated that he had not had an opportunity when «>« »- -^ ^^ '^'"' *"*'"""«'•• Mr. McBride ^eath Z"f T:"^ *^" P'«^i°"« inspecS'of thU dL^ofS '^*''«'-«tT^'- discussion, toexpC seath, and had telegraphed or written him but oTu I' ^^ ?»"' ^e intended to see Mr (Evidence, pages 126, 126.) -, """' ''"^ "'"^'^ "»» see him or get an appointment'' that M. McBrid, „,, k. m-^l^f^^l'Zr *° "■= -' "™"'"'"' That mu.t have alio be.n He in«„™™,.. . " '""Po'""! «» Mtered. the i„.pe.«o.. I„ hi, ouZurlJ^, " T """ '"^ •""°"'°' '" ">-'■> "- »nt.d „ .be Bo„d .,:."!:■ s^tb tdt:r """■•■ ''°'"""' '-• •'""<""">■ -p- .vid,„e. „ „ „b.. he J;.nrddjr.^^';:!; 7""°°"'"''" "'""=■■" "'■> figure " 1 " .f«r jhe vord " Ulin - i„ .b. . "*"" "'°"- '''» """"S »' -cted, b, *h. n.en.ber.^leBl'r'Z-:''':''.?""'""''"'""^' '•''■"• MeBride .„d the Teachen. *' "" "°"' "«l •^» bj Mr. the cflSr' ""*'■ "'"'""■ "" »°' '"'•-•^ ^^ "y "M»oe given before _ the indL'ti?:/;:: cwrritLr '"r^" ''- •"- " »»• °' "■» »-" '- July, whM, it wa, decided t! P""™' " "« »"b.eq»6M meeting," (held on the 2«h h.-. HP. to..p,:: ^ir>rz:jrT "'" "'-'"''•' -' »""»■»-- .«ct„ eomport ,itb ,hi. part oThifSCLt J^r""' °" "'^'°" "^ "»' " Mr. McBride . . ^aa nrp««nf of *u sure as to the othe meetings." (ErWence page isT'""^ ""^ ^^"^ "^"^^ ' ^"* ^ '''" '^"^ ^rniS'cc : :z;err;i.rhr ri °' "- "*^ '-^ " - P.« ». the Charge ha. airead, b«n dU^JT^rorrXt: "" ""'■ ^' ""' 44 The Twentieth Chauqe — " Seath Incident" (No. 3). This Charge is the third count in the indictment, and is to the effect that at a Board meeting held on the 2nd September, 1885, Mr. Mc Bride " offered an untrue, and — if, by a play upon words, held to be true, — moHt disingenuous explanation," etc. Mr. Idinyton'a examination by Mr. Fleming on this Charge was as follows : — Quediun. — " What did Mr. McBride say at that meeting i" Anawer. — " That he did not regard the examination of the Latin class an inspection ?" Qxuit. — " Did he consider it an inspection f Ans. — "He professed that he did not so consider it." Qnes. — " If he did not consider it an inspection, what is there untrue in his statement I" Ann. — "If it were true, it could not be untrue ; but 1 think it would be impossible for hin» not to consider it an inspection." (Evidence, pagu 43.) il/r. Mc Bride's evidence on the charge if as folio w^s :-— "I had understood from Mr. Seath that the iu8peui;ii>n ci the 5th May of the particular Latin class was not an inspection. This is the way I unders.'-.ood Mr. Seath at the time. I have heard Mr. Seath's explanation [when he was here.] My interpretation of what Mr. Seath said was a misunderstanding of his meaning and the statement which he has since made." (Evidence, page 191.) Mr, Seath, in his evidence said : — > i " I met you (Mr. Idington) and Mr. McGregor at the Queen's, Toronto. ... I don't remember that I said that I did not regard the examination on that day as an inspection ; very likely I did. I said I would come back." (Evidence, page 58.) No evidence of the untruth and disingenuousness alleged in this Twentieth Charge was submitted to the Commissioner. Mr. Seath said that " very likely" he had said that the Examination was not an inspG..-uion. The Charge was, therefore, not sustained. The Twenty-First Charge — "Seath Ingident" (No. 4). This Charge is the fourth count in the Seath indictment, and alleges that certain "statements" made to the Board by Mr. McBride on the 2nd September, 1885, and recorded on the minutes, are "untrue and dishonest attempts to misle&.d the Board." The evidence offered in regard to this (charge was simply a narration of the act of recording Mr. McBride's statement, and of its being sent to Mr. Seath. No evidence of anything untrue, or dishonest in this matter was offered. The Twenty-first Charge was not therefore, sustained by any evidence submitted to the Commissioner. The Twenty-Second Charge — "Seath Incident" (No. 4). This Charge is the fourth count in the same indictment, and is to the effect that Mr. McBride " uttered a manifest falsehood " when he stated to the Board in October that he had no opportunity to ekplain in regard to the Seath inspection. Afr. C. J. McGregor in his evidence said : — '* When Mr. Seath's re'^lv was submitted Mr. McBride stated that he h.td not h.id ats opportunity, when the report was first under discussion, to explain to the Board or to the pre- vious inspection of this class of 12. He said he intended to see Mr. Seath and had telegraphed, or written him, but could not see him, or get an appointment." (Evidence, page 126.) 'f5 ;hat at a Board ue, and — if, by llowB : — gpeotion ?" Btiitement '!" possible for iiitn particular Latin s. I have heard Seath said was a e." (Evidence, . . . I don't ispection ; very entieth Charge e had said that iustained. es that certain iber, 1885, and lie Board." 1 of the act of No evidence of rst Charge wa» the effect that ard in October Hf^d not Hfi^ n!^ 'd or to the pre- ad telegraphed, el26.) BoarcUoftwM" '^"''' "''.'"" ""*"" " '"^' '"'""'^^^ ''' '"^^ proceedings of the waabdS^nSed' "SMaTo^^r'^a^if fu^i^ ""' f"'*^!*;'- ''^''' i^^h'^'t No. 10) Work du,»o, poor in classics.' He exT.CLl 1 ,a M C"l. f^'^'", ''''' ""P"',' "^ ^'- ^eath that thoro w,..s no notice of the InsStor d at i, w«™ "»ly exanuned one scholar and did not dissent from anything that MM^^^^^^^^^ . . Mr. McBride totheMmiHtor {EMhit No //) Mr McBrk\lZlk.i.'.A't " ^"^l^^ •■«?«" <'f the deputation Board to bo placed in a false position in rStrMr^M^^^ explanat on of allowing the report (Rchihit No 10) 1 V i. i li ^r- Mayborry s class and Inspector Seath'a tion (iMbit No uf : ■ ■ \{rMcZi..?'*^r^™'"r'''*«'"''"*'*"'''"°v«dth^^ chamcter. He said thit !;« was ^oiiu^ to „£l„ .!,?!' """*'**"■ .""'.:'""'^*'""-P«''«'">«l i" its matter up, but soniething had pr^evented h m r,,,'infc ,fTl' "'^''^ ^7^'^ '"*"« '^'«»''«d ^^e dence, pages 145, 140.) vuuoeu mm. i pointed out the inconsistency to him." (Evi. Mr. McBride, in his evidence on this charge, said :— ^^T^^^Z^^r:.^^^^ P^-,' [as stated in the up to make an explanation but sat dol a '„!" 1.^1' !''''' discaasioj, was going on. 1 stood up to make an explanation but Tt down „?. "" wliu« uie uiscassion was going on. 1 stood *°— ^ " (Evidence, iagtToiS^^ I bad no defiie or intentioj to conceal." The Twentv-Thikd Charoe-..* Fraud on the Department." ur,on!f 1?'T "'° r""' °"* "* '^'- ^'"'^'^ ««P-*' -^ly charge is founded ontiroly .n Mr. MoBride'a own statement, as you have already givun. ' g„,es " Wliat did Mr. McBiide say about Mr. De Guerre's position in the school, or represent to the Government 'I ' .1. "*'",• T" ^° **''^ *'i*' '■'^''' ^® Guerre had been engaged with a iew to complyinff with the regulation in regard to making the High School a Collegiate Instil ute, in order that he might have a specialist in Natural Science '-are his exact words, as near as I can remember. Mr. McBride on the same occasion stated, as to Mr. De Guerre's position in the school, that he had desired that Mr. De Querre, who had been engaged for the purpose stated, should have had or taken tliese classes-that Mr. Moran had resisted strongly and he had allowed him to take them and Mr. De Guerre others. ^ites.— " He also said what you have already told us, and at the same time that Mr De Uuerre was a farst-class man in Mathematics and Physics ? " 4h».— "Yes." Cites.—" At that meeting (l«th July, 1885) you moved a resolution ? " (Exhibit No. I4.) Am.—" Yes— that the work in Physical Science be allotted to Mr De Guerre." NoTB.— Counsel Fleming put in Inspector Hodgson's Report dated 10/11 Noveiiiber, 1886, as Exhibit No. Jfti. Also a certificate from Mr. Baker, Registrar, Toronto University, as to Mr. De Guerre's University standing. (Exhibit No. 44). §ite«.— " Had you at the time of the meeting, (16th July, 1885), possession of the Circular handed in by you as Exhibit No. 29" [also attached to Exhibit No. 45] ? 1 r^'/f r7,"^^ i^l^ ""*oi^® ?"^ handed in, but a copy of it from Easter vacation of 1884, (when 1 got It) till October, 84, when I mailed it to the Department of Education, in support of the charges against Mr. McBride. I did not make myself acquainted with its contents in relation to the subjects we were discussing. I made myself acquainted with its contents in October, 18S4, m regard to the University standing of IVxr. McBride and Mr. Mavberrv " (Evidence, pages 45-48. ) j j- • . . Mr. Dt Guerre, in his evidence, said : r. '^?"*i""^ **** ever said to me by Mr. McBride about taking Chemistry. Mr. McGregor after Mr. Seath was here, did not speak t(j me about it. Was not spoken to about taking Botany. I said I had rather not take Chemistry, as Mr. Moran had taken it and had made special preparation for it, while I had not." (Evidence, page 65.) Mr. Moran, in his evidence, said : "I remember the Board discussing Mr. Seath's report in July, 1885, and how Chemistry and Botany were taught. ... I remember Mr. De Guerre's qualifications wore referred to by Mr. McBnde and others. ... The import of what Mr. McPride said ws;, that Mr De Guerre was an honor graduate in Mathematics and Physical Science. Mr. Idincton. from' h-» language, seeiuud to jump at tiio conclusion that that meant that he was qualified to teach Chemistry and Botany. He said to me that he thought it strange that I thought myself as well :i 47 lialiHt, it WAR tk inent that Sir. atural Soiencet 184," (Exhibit' No. 45) from 18 Teacher of aticB. it as a Teacher 5 it would not ;, as you have the school, or amplying with order that he can remember, johool, that he lould have had 1 him to take i that Mr. De ibit No. 11) ruerre." oveniber, 1886, liversity, as to jf the Circular )f 1884, (when upport of the ts in relation ;8 in October, rry, ... V, McGregor, about taking nd had made )w Chemistry re referred to that Mr. De ;on. from hi* fied to teach nyself as well qualified to teach these subiects m, Mr n.. r-i entitle. n.e t., think that Ts L^etl i.i dT? / "fl>l'^)»«d U, him that my certificate wa. nnpatieut, an.l F d.,n't think Lu.h^J^I^* at rH^n'^h^ •'^^' ^" ^'"""^ = »'" ' h- McBr^e). ... we had • practised a fr.^«d upor^^eXltt^t .^'^ '^^Sj:^, ^ «!i 5? T" ^^r. McBr^ae, in denying the truth of the Twenty-third Charge, said - De oueriTn^r:;^ t;rr;- ;'j.:;;iii'^i^i,j -^t ''^''^ «"'---• ' •'"- ^^-t m. Phv,i''.'l»'''""'*'"'"f Natural Scienuo. bu C M oran IT 'm X'''"''.*^''' *" **"• Depart- Physi. ;1 Scence. and ho insisted upon having Ph^ talSnT ' .r"* ''^""» '•«l''t''d to and lyieMed to him for peace sake Mr T), ff. !. ^''""ce«, as well as Natural Sciences M. McBna. replied to the sub-divisions of Mr. Idington's 23rd Charge as follows :- matiL^ ''^''^'- «e«"-re was a first-class honor man in Physical Science, and Mathe- (fc) " He was so represented to the Department." Afte!- ihat^to'lutionVal ^rsterMrD^'^'^Lif 7\-P-ialist in Mathematics and Physics Sconce The Chairman, (K Mc« e,S , '^a": mTVo'^T k' "'' ,^^ •='«««- '» pS A. V.*^f*".«^'"'" '^a^ in accordance with th«Lf- *-™" ''^"'^^ °^ ^■^^ Natural Sciences ttns "?«i^^' '"f '*"*t- The Insp^ct^r spoke Ter^ hSlvr V" 't I>«P»'^"'ent on creating tions r did not mislead the Board excent bv ,7v T ^ ^,'"- Koran's work and nualifica- Mr Moranhad been reported aKainst b vX Tni^ ^ ^"''!.' ^2'' ^^"^ in regard to Chemistrv qualmed. I saw a difficulty, anWd not kimw bl^^ '' T*^ ^/: °« ^'^^"^ ^»« ""t spSj not had a fair chance, as he was no^ well T w^^^ §?* °S^ "l '*' ^ *honght Mr. Mora n had ejection to give Mr. Mon.n another chance He slrd l'' h'f ^ ""^•'^''K^^ ^"" i*' ^e had anj the Minister had none. I saw the Minister H« J,V 7f ?.M"'* objection, if the Board anl v^ou Idgive him another chance.' I aS Mr Mf,rLn !' "'^ ^°"'^ ■*"'• ^ ^^^ no objection, ho and the . . Board left the LttS in tLhT t?u"^V' '''^ ^"^''d meeting He did over and interviewed Mr JVIoran Mr n ^ '""i*^" °^ *^e Chairman. The Chairman r«m- Chairman gave Mr. Moran pe^b^^ fo teaTch ""^ ■ T ''^'- . '^^' '""""«'• ^»« «eSd a"„d tTe the D:Z^:r:''7:!:::C:^!l '-r- ^^--^-- -^--^ waspractieedupon Beside, in every case the r s ^'^'°''" """' '^^"^ '°"« since discovered it. question were Ledotjrtr " '-"' '^ ^'^ '''^^'"^'^*^ "' *'^ ^'"^°°' '"^ the Chairman. ' '"'" ""^ *''j"«'«'* *° ^'^^ -'-^-^on of the Board by of u^i£ro^:.':^zt ^r -"i '■- '^«^'''*° ''^^ ^^-^«- ^- ^ -- Charge from Mr. ^ZZl^r:i:T:::::Tr "'"^ "'''-' ''' "fraud," for, speaking of the meeting aT 1 ^ . Board parties to the alleged should have discretion'as to the rt:7ela:: he ::id:l^^^ ^^^^^' ^'^^ ^^- ^^«^^^« rt? t "nr^^^^^^^^^ "^harr^erct^^o^wtlS Sri'^ \''T^^ ^'- M<'B"de speciS. fc C"fmtl??.Si1-eT.1 ^° - -"- -^^^^^^^^ ThH TWB.X.-KOURTH ChAHOB-" Mh. Dk GuBRRk's St;B,KCT8 " (No. 1.) This Charge was to the effect that IVfr. McBride did nnf u Board the whole of the subjects taugh. by m7 De Guel ^^''' ""^^'^'^ *° *'^ I Mr, John li. WiUon, apeakinjj of thts Hoard Nfeeting of Novomher, 188ft, said :- " r was prosent at a U )anl inmitin^ whon Mr. MoHriilo wiw atikud to kIvb a li»t of tho •iibiuoU Uui:^;''i*.^o. 15\ J rfmr.rr.hrr invaifj.-rgti -.- itafterwards I i. e. after ^.i „ ,ig of Noveml r 1885] and found that'Mr.DeGuerrrtod^ French, Reading and Speilmg." (Evidence, page 128). i^, Raid :— a lilt of the reply to Mr. >riiiiil)tud him 1(1 to niu, and linpor — it wa§ u «5. ) ul)rii, Euclid, togothur and lot! in a Time speaking Mr. t conceal — aa Hub-diviitions French and T. Do Ouerre od it. I had I Time Table. . in deceiving are special Time Table, es. . , It m wliy I had 7'i request." [son prompt non subject Moran, in thmntic and r. May berry ends of sub- It appears not M f. De t8 named in as heard by h). . De Guerre • in a Time eld. act : — nvcsHgating Gruerre took mt„™.ti„„, tWMr Mo(lr™„r,!l ,• ; """'""'"' "»""™P'"'«»b4 ""' "■» ^•'"« "-« - f ffi " ¥£: mi th, • f.g.o„d .»bj.;i?Z™"' to dHdodlT' •S'' """"• «"'■ l™*" to ki. own work On cross examination by Mr Idinot«« i, *i. j , 50 internal management of the school. One was thaf Mr n^p, ^ • . ~ of his time to subjects other than MathemrtTcs I ilw^hat thTfiTr f^r^^'^^ " "'"^ ^"««J>»'t Table and that it would show how his time was taken un-nf.^ '"'^ .1"°?^ "^ *»>« "^me replied that he was teachinir Calisthenioa Xflt!., * • aT ,. ^ «" Passed the question and I said that no one else in Thl scCTuW ^rr r'i.^'^^^^^^ Euclid and Trigonometry I * Spelling,' and I said ' yes,' while I was IteiSi^^ on .'S'S'""- ^'- ^"''*'" '^^^ mentfoned was combatting other statements of Tours abou^ the S.trfw' ''"^^"''g y°»>- questions. I time it was brought nn;. '''f^ we,£doing juniJ: reportei. the matter to the Board. I exnlainedTo ^1,^^^^ 1^ fu *^f *='«««• ^r. McGregor That class had nothing to do with the class of two boys " "" '''' "° '^'"" °^ **"«• to b|>g a ?L^'fer "nsv^i^r^-^fx-- 4i 'irT^^. vr ' ^---^^ at It for a very short time and sa d something Hke this-' -Thi^^An n"^*?".'""''^^ '* "P- '""^ed ^e meeting [April, 1880] at which the resoCn^J^^i^J''^* ' ot'a'l '" T" ' '""*' "*" ** na.b„. of Wes of a Time Table, but Mr. Idington would no" gite n;Pa";ttiskS.'"'ai: meetii (5th). preser June J There be iru( never 1 196, If M "1 •ndKe ■aid : was witi On {Exhibi „ "H ■Harvey, days. W in the ol 8ubmitte( Mr. {Bxhibit I Time Tab] Christmas witness.) were candi which was from me. Harden to Table {Bxh fall of 1885, boys [Harv Biydone). Mr. ^ r, "^d'd Forbes was i In ale certain subj "I take you that no I nations " , ''The St, to be given to 1 should be m In '< Mei he combats al Board. The In this c( by Mr. Idiugtt •That resolutioi ^ery large part )y of the Time [uestion and I [onometry. I en mentioned questions. I school. One 'idence, pagei him, said : — a Time Table handwriting, »ith numbers riile. When was objected igtun said he Table was in vestigafing it (Evidence, n its posses- [r. Idington a offered tO' accepted bjr meeting of >t from Mr- d sent it to h Oharge8» i, Mr. Mc- i noticed a ;ter of fact vidence. nt into the lie class of which the remember (Evidence, ent in the ling junior McGregor Jss of one, promised ip, looked iat was at ggebttid a ion. The ®- (evidence, pages Mr. Moran. in his evidence, said:- ^^ with them." ""^ '" "«« ^J»«n Harvey and Keller itrher ^ '^itnesa.) He On reference to private Ti«, Tu, '"" ' " ^'" *''"'"» (E.kmu 1,0,. 92 aSmJ ^''^'^ °* ""'' "-« (September 1885 an. t ^^ ^''"'^^^) witness stated that— ^^'^' ^^'^^ *nd January 1886) witn; ; r !;,„„ • .J foUowed the Time Tbl/"*'* ^**"^«. . , , "'"-^. nays :— . "t^^Si^S^^^^ -in " Memo, of Arffumfinf » . . ' he combats at length the ,ta ' . "' ""' ""'■ "•"«*°". »« the 29th of n Board. The "Memo" '*'**""^°*^ «"d Position of Mr McBrir A ^'''"^^^'' ihe Memo. « appended as I^'.kibif No joo °^"^"' "^ *'»'« '""er to the ^^In th,s connection I may state tha. ^..v... v ,' ■ v f'i r 52 From the foregoing evidence it is cleaf that there were three small classes in the School, viz.: — ' , ^ 1. The class in Latin— one member of which was seen by Mr. McGregor. This class Mr. McBride states in his evidence was a temporary one, made up of five or six pupils well up in other subjects but deficient in Latin. In such a class such pupils were put - from time to time, with a view, as Mr. McBride says, to have them "shoved up to catch up with another class." Such a class is almost always a necessity in a High School. Other teachers refer to this kind of a class in their evidence, and Mr. Idington thinks that his son ought to have been put into such a class, instead of being put back to form two. But it is in evidence that his son was deficient in other subjects too. 2. A class of three taught by Mr. Moran. He gives their names Harvey and Keller and adds : " When we had Grammar Miss Maclin was with us." 3. A Matriculant class of five or six, taught by Mr. Mayberry, viz., two " candidates for senior matriculation" and then adds : '" Honor Latin , . . would be the class in which these two boys were in Horace, with four others— Forbes, Hughson, Crossen and Brydon. Mr. Mayberry gives three additional names, viz., Keller, Harvey (also in Mr. Moran's class) and Haidon ; but says :—" Harvey and Keller went away last winter." That would leave a class of five. Mr. Wilson states that Harvey and Keller were in his English class, but adds : " Forbe^ was in part, if not the whole of the time." In his "m<*morandum" on Exhibit No. 79, Mr. Idington mentions the names of Gadsby and McBrien, but I have no evidence on the subject of their being members of Any of these classes. The evidence shows that the Twenty-Seventh Charge was not sustained. The Twextt-Eighth Charge— Registers and Records asked for. This Charge is virtually a request to the Commissioner that he would " investigate the facts as to what register or records of any kind, showing the standing of pupils, existed in the school for the first six months of 1884 and compare the facts with the representations made to the Secretary of the Board when demanding the same on the order of the Chairman." As to the representations made to the Secretary when demanding these the Register and records, I quote his own evidence as follows : — "I remember an order from the Chairman of the Board {Exhibit No. 62) on Mr McBrida !'wl^''!i!'^''-^^?,'?f^y^f-^?P°'"*^'^'f'"'^^'^'^ • • • 24th November, 1886, to the efieot that he Mr. McBride was to dehver up the registers from 1884 to date of the order I went at once to the Institute, presented the order to Mr. McBride and got from him two reiristerg— attendance register from 1st July 1884 to lat July 1886, and one for the present term 1 went afterwards . . . as these were not satisfactory to Mr. Idington. I told Mr. Mel Bride It was the class register I required to get. ... He replied that the nlaa. r»«i.f^r -«. not kept, aaa that iie had only the one for the present term. 1 ilso asked him for thVdemerit registers^ He produced a dement register for one form which commenced on the 20th May 1884. He did not object to my taking them, tho' he did not like to let them go out of the 53 classes in the ey and Keller ig these the ?fi rssristsr was SrL *] ^."". '^ ^^i'''' the demerit registers before 1884. He said that he might poe- l£S f ^*''w"''r"^^'^ ^''? the aggregate of the monthly merit and demerit marks^ ^ Lthill «r'^f ^"''^'"f™"''°"'^?"^""^ Chairman 'before taking them. Ther^ wa.; ahnnfii IT -i^jn^"' "r''' '^'^'^^P.* *'"^ '""'^''»^y summaiy. There was something safd about the weekly and monthly reports that they would contain the demerits, but they were on •parate sheets. I asked l„m if he would let me have them. He said the o'rder diKot cover J! A i" nV "ht Jj®"**^* *^^"? '^^"^ *''** meeting of the 5th November, 1886, when it was moved l.y Mr. McGregor seconded by Mr. Brown "that the Secretary procure aU books 7Z rJT.TT''^"''^ *h«f h-'f f"^ the Hrst six months of 1884 for thl^ p^urjose of ayS them feard C^SLT^^^^^ t" *h« members^of th^ hi-^ Ifa^Jr'^ /'f • A ^-A?^^ f ''''P "^ t'^'^ resolution to Mr. McBride and handed it to < V f't' '"''^ 'tK'^ *?,^ ^""^ *^h^' h^ *h°"S?ht ' the Board ought to have been mo^a specific as m^^bfL*' h I u'^ "". '^''. 'If ?y P'""' *« ''•""''8'^ >"« Desk and Secretary and that there might be other books etc., in the Institute which were not tiiere. 1 got three bundlesof what purported to be weekly reports fThey were put in as EMbiU Nos. %, elandT) Thlt is all I got on Monday Mr. McBri.le did make a search, but did not find any more at that time to Julv 18«''R''f l"/"" "^ "?"" ""-^ ^^"*/ daily attendance register from the beginning of 18(^4 r«J!«f .1^ ?™ "''^- I "[^^e'^ed from the Principal on the 9th (November) nionthlv pTa.'/ v^'f. ^'^^' ^^-^J'^d and fourth forms-all for the first half of the year 1884 (Put in 2 Exhibits Nos 00, 67 and OS). I got from Mr. Moran on the 9th a rough private conv of he ^""^l^yJT'^'^ rK'^'^"^' (P"t i° «« ^•*'''&''* (^O.rs inclusive). . .^ I went with him SeS"^^"- ' L^v '"""^^ "'' r^ ^T 'r •'""ks otregisters, L repoHsin Ise hfMSr'ego " Sntlr-o. ,^i««Ti,; • • r* (Mr Idington put in class registers, forms 3 and 4) of 1882 (fc.eptem.o- ,, ,,,d 1883 obtained from the Library as {Exhibits Nos. 74 and 75). At the time I which " '-^g'^ters I received from him on the 11th, the monthly reports for the third f™rm wWtI; '■^^r'^'^ *''.'?'' ^^"'■' .• • • Nothing further was said that I remember beyond 7^om^rmu7}^"l7l"'"A On that occasion (11th) I received this book (ExhihitNo^lo) mZfiT I ]■ K^"^ ^^^'^ "i^®*^ "^ "" •^«""^'''* '■agister of 1884. (Mr. Idington put in monthly reports from January to June 1884: Exhibit No. 77). Mr. McBride eate me the Inspector s report of 1884 and some Board accounts which he had got from me - I asked him specially for the demerit register of the third form, and he remarked that possibly the demerit registers were destroyed with other papers by the caretaker. I did not get ^t No other reason for the disappearance of these registers was given. . . When handiiiK me onns • wShT°t "' ''". '''''' '°"'!? ^°.^'*'•^ ^ ' '^'^■^ '« ^''^ '^""^ «^ except tie otJermoHtSy torms, which he afterwards gave me." (Evidence, pages 60-63.) ' In his croas-examination by Mr. Fleming, the Secretary said :— Bno.'i' ^''' M*'^'''''^ ^'^' ■'ri'^°'^^ "'^y reluctance to let me have the registers on the order of the ;S A.\ • u . r ^^^ ^''Hi '"^'^ '"'' sufficiently explicit and told me I could rummage the place and take what I wanted He said one was a private book and asked if Mr drgton r w 11^ tT^ ^® "^"^ ""* *''® •'"<*«'* "^ '^^'■''^ t'"^ I*°'^'"d ^vanted. I got the class books and dement. Mr. Idington was in constant communication with me about the getting of these reports and registers." (Evidence, pages 68 and 69). B'"-'""g "i "^"cse I have here given the evidence of the "representations" made to th« Secretary in igard to records of the standing of the pupils during the first six months of 1884. I see in them nothing to call for either remark or judgment, especially as No. 28 is really a request and not a Charge. Everything in possession, or could be found, was given that was asked for, and the records not given were accounted for as uon-exist.nt, or destroyed. The Twenty-Ninth Charge— Departmental Report, This Charge was formulated after the Commission was opened. It is to the effect that when the Board desired the Departmental Report on Examinations, Mr. McBride declined to give it, on the ground that it was private and confidential. His evidence on this Charge is as follows : — j„af " ^ '""1 *»^«,'i,*V¥ ^?'''^ meeting if I had the results of the recent Departmeut vl Exam- ' inations. I sai I I had. A resolution was under discussion-Sth October-movea by m". 54 McGregor, seconded by Mr. Idington, requesting the Principal to submit copy of Report from the Department (Exhibit No. 117). I said I considered this report private and confidential Mr Jameson asked if it were so marked. J said 'no,' but that I considered it so and gave reasons lor It At that time. . .1 never received anything from the Department to be laid before the Woard. I considei a and asserted as a matter of judgment that some documents are marked for the information of the Head Master and the Board. . . . When the report was asked for 1 had made some memorandum on it about the candidates. I marked the candidates who- hart appealed and succeeded. I wished to get th -se changes annotated by Mr. Marling and gave the report to Mr. Jameson to post for me to the Department as I was sick. He reported that he had lost It." (Evidence, pages 196 and 197). Mr. MoBride, from his evidence, it is clear, believed what he stated. He was in error in his contention, howerer, as these reports are neither private nor confidential. Note.— I took evidence in regard to a matter which came up incidentally in connec- tion with Chargif No. 13. Mr. Mc Bride had been authorized to insert an advertisement in the Olobe. In the Globe ofice he added the necessary words : " For circular and infor- mation apply to Wih.im McBride." During the investigation he had access to the original advertisement, as approved by the Board, in the hands of Secretary Monteith. He then tore off the words "William McBride." In his expla»ation of this act he said : — "I removed . . . my name, bepause, as a document of the Board, it had no right to be there, as it was no part of the original resolution of the Board." (Evidence, page 197): This act the Commissioner declared to be unwarrantable, as the document returned by him to the Secretary was, as it stood, the property of the Board, and he had no right to deal with it in any way. His Counsel, Mr. Fleming, concurred with the Commissioner. On closing the Investigation, after a session of about three weeks, the Counsel for Mr. McBride and the Complainant addressed the Commissioner on the evidence in the case for about two hours or more each. After a few complimentary words at the close from each of the Counsel, the Commissioner declared the Investigation closed. Remarks on the Cask by the Commissioner. I cannot close this Rep art without making a few remarks upon some special features of the case itself. I have, during the last ten years, conducted many an investigation under com- missions from the Department, most of them of an unpleasant character, but I never had to deal with onn so intensely and persistently personal as this one proved to bo. It was quite evident at every stage of th« investigation that personal feeling was the main feature in every charge, if it did not dictate the very wording of each one. As an illustration, I refer to the fact that, while the case was still sub-judice, Mr. Idington published in the Stratford Timca of the 8th December, a highly sensational lettor, headed : " The Head ivlaster Caught Mutilating a Document." This referred to the removal of his name from an advertisement in the Globe and Mail by Mr. McBride, as detailed in the preceding "Note." When the matter was brought under my notice, as Commissioner — having taken evidence explanatory of the incident — I declined to look into the paper, or to read the letter until after the investigation was closed. I have placed it among the Exhibits in the case (No. 124). 55 Report from the ifidential. Mr. nd gave reasons Q be laid before ents are marked aport was asked candidates who* larling and gave reported that he d. He was in lonfidential. illy in connec- advertiaement ular and infor- access to tha iry Monteith. )n of this act had no right to page 197). nent returned a had no right commissioner. le Counsel for ddence in the Is at the close 9ed. jecial features 1 under com- it I never had be. It was was the main b-judice, Mr. y sensational s referred to Mr. McBride, my notice, as lined to look sed. I havfl \ The personal ani.nus displayed so conspicuously by the Complainant was a source of constant irritation to the parties concerned. It was also one of inconvenience and regret to me as Commissioner. Acts, or circumstances, that could reasonably bear two construe- tions, were more or less strongly presented in a light adverse to the Accused. Rarely, if ever, was anything presumed in his favor. And little or no allowance was made for a man's fallibility, or errors of judgment. Opinions and inferences of the Complainant "'sre emphasized, with a view to discredit the Accused, or to exaggerate the questionable character, which the Complainant attached to the circumstance, or incident, under review- Such a proceeding virtually assumed the principle that a man was guilty, on the strong asservations of another man, and before he was proved to be so. ' Common sense and common justice were in revolt against such prejudgment and no unprecedented a course of procedure. And comraoH justice and fair play Jeinanded that a prosecution conducted in such a spirit, and on such a system, by a Complainant, who also acted as Counsel, should be carefully watched in the details of its progress by the Commissioner, and te by him subjected to the strictest rules of evidence, so that no injustice should be done to either party. I felt that no man's acts and conduct, watched as Mr. McBiide's had been for over two years by Mr. Idington,— without a knowledge of all the circumstances and surround- ings of the case— could pass unchallenged, or be unscathed, while undergoing such an ordeal as that to which Mr. Idington was subjecting those of Mr. McBride. I never saw either of the gentlemen concerned before. I knew nothing of their differences until early in the month of the investigation. I had no personal feeling in the matter and could have none. I sought, therefore, to conduct the enquiry as fairly and as justly as possible, under the adverse circumstances of the case. In a personal matter of this kind, I could not assume, without clear proof, that every- thing alleged against the Accused was true as a matter of course, and as a matter of fact, simply because it was strongly and most emphatically declared to be so by the Com- plainant. No doubt it was so viewed by him, from the extreme point of embittered feeling at which he stood, and, as it appeared, of morbid dislike to Mr. McBride. But the very object of the enquiry was to divesi *.he alleged facts of th«ir prejudiced and distorted surroundings, and to distinguish what were the real facts from what was mere opinion, or assumption, or inference, and to bring them out into the clear light by the aid, and under the solemn sanction, of an oath, and the truthful statements of the witnesses. I was compelled, therefore, more frequently than ought to have been neces«"\ry, to reject as evidence against the Accused not only the narrative of what the Complainant, or individual members of the Board, said or did, but also the personal opinioms and inferences of the Complainant himself— the very foundation for which had yet to be established. In the discharge of a duty so onerous as this, I felt the full responsibility of mv acts, both to the Comnlainant and to thn An.miaoA j w°° on>or« *-'^'\ iu~t. ~,» rulings were being subjected to the criticism of two, and often three, gentlemen— skil- fully trained and experienced practictioners nt the bar. I must do the Complainant, who was a Queen's Counsel, the justice to say that, although he objected in many cases to my ruling, yet he always courteously acquiesed in the rieht ot th. ,^ ■ ~~ had no power to Drevent-_««nB,>,-nii„ • .1, ueience. ihis the Commissioner re™../.. „..r:;'r„::::: :::t:i;:;:r:zr; r "'^^^^^^ to a short sentence. This privilege the a~^ f 1 71 ^ ^"""^ '^°'^'' °'* before .he Oo.„i„i.„er. I „f.. J„ p'.^Ll.rC 1; w^°" '"''■>•«'' »';»-l-y The o»lj re^o. wh, i, „a, ,ho„gh., tai„ble to receive eviard had passed . 24, 27 and 28. these Charges )f' a certificated nake enquiries, ence in conneo- idence,) on the <-d Master and ichool. I had , by the aid of cts and state- And it was ' referred, and, hand. fom acting as fn. I have no niasioner with four occasions rate. So was defence. The Commissioner elating to the writing, and NS, ''issioner. fully quoted ia \ . 57 LIST OF EXHIBITS, Received by the Commissioner re Idinoton v'. McBbide. Sch J°' *' '*"°°'""'"°' °' Examination in Latin, Form HI., 1884, Stratford High j!fo. 4. "Kotes on Teaching staff" from High School Announcement, 1884 September: JST '^J^t'dUt^^*^'^ ^"'"^'^'^ '" *'^ '"'''"'''"' "''"" °' '""^ ''*^ '' r,v/:f ^he^tJs%:!?:«3f ^t2;d%e^LSri^?4.r'"^'^' '^ ''- ''--''-' No. 8. Head Ma8t.> s Report to the High School I!oard for June, 1884. (Not dated ) ^*'t T o^'!*'*' ^''^^- forMay, 1884. (Not dated.) tuteoi;"thiVhT3:;!r.it\^j^^^^^^^ the T? istees oftheltmtfori'nolf "^ ^^^X ^'^^°8*°.^ '^"'^ ^"«'««°'-' « deputation from tions (1st Septemtr S '"''^*"*^ '' *'^ ^"'^^^'^^'^ '""^ ^-''^^ °' ^duca- SeathWi2t^t'he^nfHi'^f'-'*t""'°*.*°r '^' 0°"e«i»t« InBtitute Board re Inspector aeath 8 visit to the Institute in May and June, 1886. (2nd September, 1885 ) Mr. S::til^^'::'Z^^^^^^ ^^- ^««^^^«'- --e.ent ba sent to in PhTsicaf Sc^nc^a^H °* '^" ?°^'?-' '^"'''^^ *^^* **••• »««"«"« ''^ "^"o^ed the work in i-hysical Science, and giving direction to the Head Master as to Botany. (July, 1885.) No. 15. Time Table of the Stratford Collegiate Institute. (Not dated ) withilL'Lbnt"to anv *?' ^°'?' t''^'''^ *^« H«*^ ^^'''^ *« *"™»b the Board wicn mrormation as to any class under fire in number, (7th April, 1 886 ) 1884^''(Not daS/'""" ^'- ^^^^^"^ P^^H'^hed, in the Stratford Beacon of May 2nd, 1884:^''(Not S.V''"" ^'- ^*''°«**"'' P"**"'^^^ ''' *^« ^''•«'/'"-'' ^i^"> of May 7th, ^S84^''(Not dl!ed!)*'°°'.^''- "'°**°''' published in the 5« County of datedo"" ^^" ''°*'" °' '"°*''" '^ ''''• ^^'"«*°'^ •** ^^^'^ M««*'"g of Trustees. (Not 7o lo R " w' ""'f f''"'^' ^""°'^"°«'"«'^* fo'- 1*"* year 1884. (April 9th. 1884.) Ohar^a'^^rTS^lstt ^°"'' "'"™*"' """ McBride fro. Mr. Idington's ^0. 31. (Letter from the Principal of Upper Canada College ) No. 8S better to Mr. Idingtonfrom Principal Buchan. (21st April, 1884.) 7o \i « 'T^" ^'; 1"*"^*°" ''"°" ^"""P''' ^"^''^"- (23rd April. 1884.) withf copy otrny ^rtmcl': ^^L'^r'^X'"'' ?-'^-M-*- to furnish the Secretary ex-pupiJ. (AprilTst TsST "'"" '"'* '°°^"''* °* ^^^ P"P"' o' No. 38. Page 210 of the School Law Compendium of 1878 .P"tm». on in.p»ti.n of 8lr.ttord ;jf 59 •om JunelSthi I of June 27th, the County of rustees. (Not iril 9th, 1884.) dr. Idington's J, in regard to (November, 1884.) 1884.) the Secretary any pupil, or Lcipal Buchan h the Board Hatement of 8 University ty Standing. y Standing. tidorsing the orandum of itc Institute .) (August tion of the professional as, 1884. f Stratford ;iate Insti- ■' the lSift''/« £r.°i""°" °' *•",' ^'r\^"^f''? 'he Head Master to prepare a Circular of tne Institute for the approval of the Board, (2nd April, 18^4.) ApriU884)^**°'"*'°"°**''^ ^*'"'' adopting Circular of Collegiate Institute. (5th M.Ti^A ,^^-, Secretary Marling's letter, enclosing Inspector Seath's Memorandum on Mr. McBnde's Statement. (Ist October, 1885.) «*"uum on jur. ber 29th,^i885"r^*'*°' ^^**^'' '^^™°'"' '''^"™ ^"''°""' '" ^^^ foregoing letter. (Septera- v«r«,-£%f^''j?'^'^*''T *'?" J^«8'«*'"'^'' Baker to the Commissioner, re Mr. McBride's Uni- versity Standing, and reply thereto by Commissioner. (November 24th, 1886.) ver8it?sfatli!^?f r ^'•«'"R«gi«trar Baker to the Commissioner, re Mr. McBride's Uni- versity Standing and reply thereto by Commissioner. (November 25th, 1886.) ^0. 57. Head Master's Report to the Board for March, 1884. (Not dated.) (NotTated*) ^^^"^ M^*«''8 Report to the Board for September, 1884, pages 3, 4 and 6. r.n^,"!!!' ^^- ^?*« ^fO"? Minister of Education, enclosing High School Inspector's Memo- randum, r« Collegiate Institute, July, 1885. (15th July, 1885.) (lOth^April; l^SsV""" ^'' ^"^""^^ *° Secretary Monteith, re cheques for salary, the 3^':7?h^uiri88l7Not Va':^^^^^^ ^'^'^ Examination, held at Stratford on ' q«.ri?" ^fu ^^1°^""°'^ «* *'»« B°*>^d, directing the Head Master to deliver up to the Secretary the School Register and Records. (November, 1886.) 1884. .1884 No. 63. Report of Weekly Examinations in Stratford Collegiate Institute for May, No. 64. Report of Weekly Examinations in Stratford Collegiate Institute for June, 1884^"' ^^' ■^°^°'^* °* Weekly Examinations in Stratford Collegiate Institute for July, TT t^°T ^^' ^^P^'") o^Mo^thly Examinations in Stratford Collegiate Institute of Form 11, for January and February, 1884. For/a'orMrh.lAprit'^gfr"''"'""" '" '"""'"' °'""«'"'° '-'""" »' Fon.'^l.tetr.'ndlunrfes'/''*"''"'''""' '° """'"'' <'»"''«'»'• '°"""" «' No. 69, Daily Attendance Register of Stratford Collegiate Institute. • No. 70. Daily Attendance Register of Stra\;£ord Collegiate Institute. No. 71. Daily Attendance Register of Stratford Collegiate Institute. No. 72. Register of Form I, Collegiate Institute. Instit!ite^^' "^®°'^"* Register: "Lates," "Imperfects," etc., of Form I, Collegiate No. 74. Class Register, Form III, Collegiate Institute. No. 75. Class Register, Form III, Collegiate Institute. No. 76. Demerit Register, Collegiate Institute. No. 77. Report of Monthly Examinations, Form TTT. CoHe^^-te T^-titnt- f— n- -- ary, February, March, April, May and June, 1884." ^°--«»-** -..^titat., f„. „auu No. 78. Time Table, Stratford OoUegiate Institute. (Not dated.) No. 79. Head Master's Report to the Board for July, 1886. (July 13th, 1886.) 60 ^". *?■. Head Master's Report for Mav 18«r> ,\ 77 . ^«' *5- Resolution of thpRnnr^ • .• — , xoo^. (-nuy 4th, 1885.) - the Oollegiate Instit"utf Y2frterT lSf4^^ '^^ «-- Mathematical Master letter from Head Mnai. ,- f„ m- i., .. r^^:t^?;^s.^s^rLsr jj^s^ta... ftnH « M J ^-^ ^ '"^ ^>™e Tab e c and Monday noon "-October, 1 885.) ^ ^ . « A^o. 5^. Mr. McGre^nrV n •. t7 ^ September. 1885.) ^, Jl^c »«. Report „( hJmJZTT^ Ex«„,„..,„„, ,„ ,88, (No. dated., (June 6.1, 1886.) "'*'" '» "■« «»«'-d «» M,. Mo™-', ol,^ .J „,t_ JVo. 97. (Duplicate of Eirltiiit Mo. SS.) ^0. lOS. Toronto World for July 8.h, 1888 j,^^ /Of F„™ „,.pp,.<.,„„ ,, e.»did..e. for Dep.r.„..te, Ex.„i„.L, M.y z«*u.. for j-:j-^x-- :?Mti^S;L^^^^^^^^^ *.^/«. K-KU-'of resuhof S.r..,ordDop.r.o„n..lE..„i,„.Hor. -•- .-„ ,,, *. ... K»o,u.io„ Of Board, ^«„, roo„ .o LlWy s;.,..r,;Z„:r,^, ^ 61 M. M V?". ^«™°™°^'>'n to and letter from, Registrar Baker to the CommisBioner r, Mr. MoBnde'8 University standing. (27-30 November, 1886.) the D^Iiar.tnf ' (ISti'^Jutn^eVs?""' ""' "'^^^ '"^''^^'•' ''""''^^ «'«•• «°''-'' *<> tute.%Othj?ne.'imO ^!^"* °' ^°"' ""'^ "°'^ ^"""' ^*"''^°"* ^°"'«''^'" ^"•"• ^0. 116. Rev. Francis H. Wallace'i recommendation of examiners in classics " for degree of B.A. with Honors in Classics " for Mr. M- Bride. (August 2nd" 1879.)