SCHOOL BOARD AMALGAMATION. 
 
 To His Worship the Mayor and tlw Mtmbeis of tha Conncii of the Corporation 0} 
 the City of Toronto : , 
 
 Mr. Mayor and Gentlemen : 
 
 For some time there has been an agitation on foot looking to the amalga- 
 mation of the Public School and Collegiate Boards of this cfly. So far the 
 advocates of this change have advanced no arguments that are of such a 
 character us to justify the change. 
 
 I think it is due to the Council that the facts should be laid before It 
 somewhat fully, as the matter is one of very great importance to the City. 
 The Collegiate Truste* s, who represent the Council In tMs matter, and who 
 are responsible for the administration of the affairs of the three Institutes, 
 have never been askeJ for their opinion. As I have been a member of the 
 Board for a number of years, and have been honored by my colleagueHi with 
 the position of Chainran of the School Management Committee for the past 
 three years, I shall take the liberty of dealing with the whole matter rnder 
 discussion, and in do ng so I feel that I voice the sentiments of a great 
 majority of my colleagues on the Board. J'?" 
 
 The organization and management of our Collegiate Institutes differ 
 from those in any other city, because of the fact that we have three 
 Collegiate Inslitutes . while in every other city or town in the Province there 
 is not more than one. This, of course, is the cause of many items of expense 
 not found in Hamilton, London. Otlnwa, or any of the other cities or towns 
 having only one Institute. On the other hand, this distribution of the 
 Collegiate Institutes is a great advantage to citizens. Mirny bitter things 
 have been said both in conversation and in the public press about the efficiency 
 and economy of the management of the Institutes; and some have rather 
 hastily concluded that amalgamation would be the cure for some alleged 
 defects in the present method of management. 
 
 ; ':;. V f. >j !• — Efficiency. 
 
 The lack of efllciency has been charged against our Institutes, but the 
 charge is without foundntion. The following facts will amply justify my 
 assertion: 
 
 In selecting teachers the Board exercises the greatest possible care. 
 No consideration but that of fitness for the position is nlli)we<l to come into 
 consideration. I have never known the Board, nor any member thereof, make 
 any attempt to appoint a ieacher on any other ground. The result Is that 
 in the three Toronto Colhgiate Institutes we have a body of teachers that 
 
rank at the very head of the profession. Such a body of teachers would not 
 be guilty of discharging their duties in a faulty manner. 
 
 That our Institutes are efficient is shown by the condition of 
 the buildings, libraries, science appliances, grounds, gymnasia, etc. In all 
 these respects they are now in excellent condition, and meet with, 
 the approval of the High School Inspectors from time to time as they 
 make their official visits. This ig a matter of no small moment to the one 
 thousand pupils whose care and comfort the Board has in charge. 
 
 But it is clearly shown that they are doing good work from the simple 
 fact that our three Institutes, with thirty-two teachers and an average of 
 about 850 pupils, sent up to the University examinations last year a number 
 of candidates so thoroughly trained as to compete with those sent up by all 
 the other Tnstitutes and High Schools, with five hundred and fifty teachers 
 and twenty-four thousand pupils; and, in the face of this, our pupils obtained 
 s ome 45 per cent, of the honors and rewards . This is saying a great deal 
 for our Institutes; but it is only one of the scholastic tests of efficiency that 
 could be advanced. While I state these facts, I am not casting the first 
 reflection upon other Institutes or High Schools. They are all doing good 
 •work; and a work that fits into the local requirements of the city or town In 
 which they are situated. This very important consideration must not bO 
 forgotten, 
 
 ' «. - ^ - 
 
 Tested by the results of the past, our Institutes have always held a 
 high place in public confidence. The city and country are full of ladies and 
 gentlemen holding high and important positions, and standing well in the 
 various professions, who received their secondary education in one or other 
 of our Institutes. The honor roll of this class is a long and worthy one. 
 
 Unfortunately, there is often a tendency to belittle the work done in 
 our Collegiate Institutes without carefully looking into the facts. The 
 laudatory notices of succeasful results of local High Schools published in 
 town and village papers in the Province are observed by citizens of Toronto 
 who were natives of these places, and they conclude that the Toronto schools 
 are inferior because columns of our metropolitan journals are not taken up 
 with similar notices. The work in Toronto is done in such a manner as to be 
 much less obtrusive upon public notice than in the smaller places. 
 
 :'''■/.■■ . ■■ . ,'---'' 2. — Economy. -■.'"•-: '''■'■\":.^/~"' '': 
 
 Amalgamation has been strongly urged in some quarters on the ground 
 of economy. Every statement of this kind merits careful consideration. It 
 is well, therefore, to look into this with more than usual attention, as it is 
 a vei-y important question to the ratepayer. The followirg are the means 
 
that might be resortwi to to effect a reduction In cost, and I shall leave them 
 with the public to (ieteimiae whether it would be wise to attempt any of these 
 methods: .':':'.■■.,' ' /, ■;. '-:■ ', _ . • ■■ "•'; . ' ,.'■■; ,- • ':■■ ■'...'■ '■''■:';>', 
 
 There might be made a reduction In salaries. When the coat of 
 living in Toronto is considered and the qualifications of our teachers kept in 
 mind, it will, I think, be iit once admitted that the salaries are none too high. 
 If they wi're cut down to the level of many of the other Institutes, we could 
 neither secure, nor retain, the services oi the class of teachers that are most 
 desirable. We have now in our Institutes several teachers who have been 
 successful principals of High Schools or Collegiate Institutes. I have not 
 spoken to any amalganiationlst who suggested any salary reduction; nor 
 was it favored when mentioned. . i ' i ■'■'■^'■'■^^i.^^^^/.. 
 
 Then the fees cou ld bejincreasecl. But it must be again remembered 
 that the fees could be made too high and become practically prohibitive. 
 This would serve no good end. Further, the Collegiaie Institutes are not 
 intended for the children of the wealthy merely; but they have always had in 
 attendance many children whose parents could not afford too large fees. If 
 they were too high the number of pupils would be lessened and the actual 
 cost increased, as the Institutes would then be maintained and doing much 
 less work than they are at present. Ottawa and Belleville only have hlf^her 
 fees than Toronto. i 
 
 It has been suggested by some that the average attendance might be 
 allowed to increase. This Is true to a very slight extent. The Collegiate 
 Institutes could accommodate additional pupils without additional cost for 
 accommodation. But it must be remembered that the regulations of the 
 Education Department fix the numbers nt 30 pupils per teacher , and the 
 Toronto Board has tried to live up to these regulations. Then, if the average 
 is allowed to become too high, the quality of the work must suffer. For good 
 work, things are well regulated as they are at present; .and good results are 
 of more importance than a trifling saving in cost per pupil. 
 
 But, some say, spend less money on libraries , apparatus, maps, 
 globes, etc. This would surely be a penny-wise and pound-foolish policy. The 
 aim of the Board has been to maintain the appliances of the Institutes in a 
 thoroughly efficient condition, and yet not to si)end one dollar on any need- 
 less object. This very matter has already received careful consideration by 
 the Board. 
 
 It has further been suggesced that the three Collegiate Institutes 
 might b(> gov_erned bv one principal. This would be quite unworkable. He 
 would be a highly paid official, and would lose far too much of his time 
 going ifrom one Institute to the other. Besides, he could do no teaching, as 
 
the principals now do. But one of the specialists In each Institute would be 
 required to act in his abs^-nco as a deputy principal, and would in tills 
 way lose much valuable timo. Thus there would be three specialists losing 
 port of their time, and the hlgL-pald principal practically all of his time, 
 except such results ns wiiuld come from his supervision. This would not be 
 great enough to justify the change. 
 
 The 'idea needs only to be suggested to be at once rejected, that 
 sufficient money should not be expended upon the buildings to keep them in 
 a state of repair and avoid deterioration in value. ••" 
 
 Present office rent, $120, and secretarj'-treasurer's salai-y. ?500, might b« 
 saved by amalgamation. The former will be saved In any case when the new 
 Court Houst' is occupied, and the latter would most likely still be r(:quired, a.3 
 a separate set of books must be kept, and it is not probable that the present 
 Public School staff would have time for this additional labor. 
 
 It is vigiorously stated that there Is a great loss, because the classes 
 during certain periods are small; and that teachers could handle larger classes. 
 It is quite true that they could instruct larger classes in the highest form. But 
 it is one of the necessary features and conditions of secondary and University 
 educat ion that such a state of things should exist. The numbers in any given 
 class depend upon the number of pupils attending the Institute and studying 
 with a certain object in view. A science master, for example, may have six 
 In one class, ten in another, twenty in another, and thlrty-flve in another. 
 "This is not the fault of organization; nor does it indicate that the master is 
 not well employed In the Interests of the public. Yet the number and grade 
 of subjects taught, and the qualifications of the teachers, are a'ter all in com- 
 pliance with the "High School Act." 
 
 It has been suggested that the senior classes might bo grouped to- 
 gether in one school, and a saving effected by reducing the number of 
 specialists required for this upper work. But this means that the work in 
 the middle and lower forms, .x good deal of which is now done by the 
 specialists in each school, would be wholly entrusted to a cheaper class of 
 teachers. It can be easily understood that the effect o, withdrawing the 
 specialist in any department from a school would be to immediately lower 
 the whole tone and level of that department In that schuor There would 
 be at once ,a loss of prestige which would be felt through the whole school, 
 and the trifling economy in expenditure would be far more than offset by 
 the disastrous effect upon the classes. The true way is to maintain each 
 department in the highest possible efficiency in each school.* Further, the 
 pupiils would be compelled, in many cases, to travel great distances to 
 attend these classes. 
 
3. — OVERLAPPINO. 
 
 Overlapping of studies Is another of the evils proposed to be remedied by 
 amalgi;mat';>n. This overlapping means that there are classes In the lower 
 grades of the Collegiate Institutes doing practically the same work th;>t is 
 being done in the higher grades of the Public Schools. This statement 18 
 only partially correct, as additional studies are taken up in these grades 
 of the Collegiate Institutes. Even If the work does overlap In the EngUsh 
 and Commercial subjects, no HixTva Is done when the classes are full, and 
 there is no waste of teaching power caused by the unnecessary multiplication 
 of clofises. 
 
 Amalgamation would not prevent overlapping unless the Public School 
 course were to end with the fourth book classes, where the High School course 
 really begins. In that event about 2,000 pupils now In the fifth book classes 
 would have to be provided for in the Collegiate Institutes, and that, too, free of 
 cost, as the people can demand education free of cost to the end of the Public 
 School course, that Is, to the end of the fifth book. To complete this extended 
 Public School cc-irse beyond the fourth book, or High School entrance stand- 
 ing, two years are r(>qulred. The first form, or the first two years of the 
 High School course, must thus be free to all High School pupils, and this la 
 the plan adopted in mo.st other places to meet this difficulty. In the Toronto 
 schools that would mean a loss of ?3,000 to |4,000 a year, even with the 
 low fee now charged in the first form, besides the additional cost of giving 
 a High School education to about 2,000 .pupils who are not asking for it, and 
 would require at least five additional new Collegviate Institutes as large as 
 those now In existence for their accommodation. 
 
 The proper remedy for what is called overlapping Is to have the Public 
 School pupils branch off after passing through the fourth book. The free 
 fifth book classes should be maintained in the Public Schools, and I :\m 
 sure every member of the Collegiate Board desires to see them efficiently 
 maintained, for the purpose of im.parting a good English and Commercial 
 educntior. with the addition of manual training, if possible, for those who do 
 not wish to take up a High School course. The pupils who take up the High 
 School course should do so at the end of the fourth book, and should be 
 required to contribute towards the cost of their education, 
 
 II Is plainly seen, therefore, that overlapping affects no one, unless It be 
 those who are undecided as to the course they wish their children to pursue, 
 and who keep them in the fifth book classes a year or two. and then 
 have them enter upon the High School course. In such cases there is no 
 doubt some loss of time, but amalgamation would not provide a remedy for 
 this. The only remedy would be free High Schools and the abolition of the 
 fifth book classes — a rather costly arrangement for the accommodation of the 
 few pupils who lose time because of their parents' neglect or indecision. 
 
6 
 
 It has been suggested that some effort should be made to correct over- 
 lapping. In answer, It may be said that upon this subject the School 
 Miinagcment Committee of the Collegiate Institute Board met the School 
 Maiiitgoment Committee of the Public School Board more than two years ago. 
 After a very full and friendly discussion of the question, it was agreed by the 
 Public School authorities, as far as possible, to have It made known through- 
 out the Public Schools that all who desired to take the languages and a High 
 School course should enter the Collegiate Institutes at the end of the Public 
 School fourth class. As far as I am aware this understanding has been car- 
 ried out on the part of the Public School officials and teachers, so that this 
 matter has already been adjusted as far as la necessary and possible. 
 
 Some urge as an argument In favor of amalgamation that the fifth book 
 classes could be Instructed in the first form of the Collegiate Institutes. I 
 have just shown that this would be very expensive; but It is also entirely 
 erroneous in theorj'. The Public School system, to the end of the fifth book, 
 must be national, free, and, as far as possible, obligatory. The Collegiate 
 / system, on the other hand, must be supplementary and optional. The Public 
 School ia not a feeder oi: the Collegiate Institute. To provide the latter with 
 pupils is not the primary object and duty of the former. As a matter of fact 
 less than 4 per cent, of the pupils in the Toronto Public Schools ever enter 
 the Collegiate Institutes. 
 
 A prominent educationist the other day, in writing you, stated that there 
 is no need for theorizing, as we have the practical evidence of the success of 
 union Boards, and quotes Hamilton and London as examples where union 
 Boards have long exiisted. Let us examine these two cases: 
 
 In London there are no fifth book classes. As soon as pupils pass 
 through the fourth book, they pass into the Collegiate Institute. Now, the 
 cost of education for each pupil in the Public Schools of Ix>ndon, not in- 
 cluding the fifth book, is $23 a year, on the basis of average attendance; 
 and in the Collegiate Institute the cost per pupil, including the fifth 
 book, for average attendsince is ?42. Thus, the union Board has the 
 fifth book classes taught at an annual cost of $42, as compared with $23, the 
 cost of Public School pupils; or, in Toronto, of $20.35, where we have 
 separate Boards. _ ,;;•>..;.• . ^^ v ; • ; ^ :, -^ ■■,/; 
 
 Let us now turn to Hamilton. We find that in that City only 6 per cent, 
 of the Public School pupils go to the fifth book, whereas in Toronto 10 per 
 cent, become fifth book pupils. The education of the Public School pupils in 
 Hamiilton, on the basis of average attendance, is $24 a year. Thus, what 
 little appears to be gained in the Collegiate Institute is fully lost in the 
 cost of the Public Schools. 
 
 Some now complain that too many enter the Collegiate Institutes and 
 find their way into the professicms. The practice in London and Hamilton is 
 to increase this tendency, as you can readily see that when a pupil once 
 
cntars a Collegiate Institute the llki>lihood is that a full course will be 
 pursued. Such a metliod of curing overlapping would incur very heavy 
 exiM-nso, and require at Icjist five additional Collegiate Ins'itutes, each one 
 capable of accommodating 400 pupils. 
 
 But one word more on London and Hamilton as compared with Tonmto. 
 In London the cost of educiition per pupil, both Public and Collegiate, com- 
 bined, on the basis o£ average attendance, amounts to 125.32 a year. In 
 Hamilton, on the same basis, It Is $25.10 annually. In Toronlo, on the other 
 hand, it costs only $22.46. 
 
 The experience of London proves that to combine tho fifth book pupils 
 with the Collegiatje Institute pupils cosits on an average $42 a year per pupli. 
 Public Sch(M)l pupils in Toronto now cost about $20. To introduce this method 
 of dealing with overlapping would cost the City for 2,000 pupils now In the 
 fifth book tin annual xdditionnJ expenditure of about $22 per pupli, or a total 
 of some $44,000. It would be mon^ expensive still to close the first form in 
 the Collegiate Institutes and have language classes in the Public Schools. 
 Besides, this latter plaji would work ruin to our Collegiate Institutes, 
 
 • 4. — One Large Institute 
 
 Much has been said from time to time about the advisability of closing 
 one or more of our Institutes, and consolidating the wffrk intd one large 
 central building. But what would this lead to? . s, • ': ' 
 
 Which one should be closed? Would the Parkdale section permit its 
 Collegiate Institute to be closed, which it brought into the city in good faith 
 at the time of the annexation? Would the people residing east allow Jarvls 
 Street Institute to bo blotted out? Harbord Street Collegiate Institute was 
 ordered to bo built on Its present site by . vote of the ratepayers, after the 
 advantages of other sites had been fully Investigated. These questions nmst 
 first be answered before any attempt at consolidating the teaching Into one 
 large cenvral Institute could be carried out. If these sections of the city 
 objected to having their Institutes removed, this would no doubt settle the 
 matter; and It is almost certain that this opposition would be met with. 
 
 But grant for the sake of argument that they were all closed, and 
 one large Institute erected in some central part of the city. The present 
 buildings could be used for no other purpose than Public Schools. For this 
 purpose I doubt if they are conveniently located to meet the present 
 requirements of Public Schools. But, allowing this to go, it would require a 
 large expenditure of money to fit them for Public School purposes. Perhaps 
 It might be safely said, as I .am Informed by a good architect, that $40,000 or 
 $50,000 would be required, and then there would be loss on the gymnasia, etc. 
 
Then a now siU' In some central part nuiBt bo secur»'tl. On this a new 
 building capable of iiccommodatlnK 1,00(» pupl''i tnimt bo croctcd. This would 
 mean nn outlay of p<>rhaps |150,000 or ?20U.J;>; :. I'hlB one central building 
 wcHild bo far removed from very many of the pupils, and cause great loss of 
 time In transit. 
 
 The Government grant is n vital natter that must be considered In all 
 thlB. Our Institutes now recelvo over $4,100 annually from the Provincial 
 grunt. If there were only one Institute the grant could not exceed $1,400 or 
 $1,500. This would be a serious loss. 
 
 It is safe to say that the change to one central Institute would compel 
 at least 400 pupils to use street cars In addition to those who arc now using 
 them. In the year this would mean to the parents sending these pupils about 
 ?5,000. Toronto, for Its population. Is a very largo city In a-<^a. The local 
 conditions here differ entirely from those met with elsewhere. ; 
 
 But the massing of 1,000 pupils together mlgtht give rise to an agitation 
 for separate High Schools for boys and girls, such as exist In Boston and 
 some of the other large cities of the United States. Even If there were not 
 two separate High Schools, It might become somewhat difflcult to arrange 
 for the co-educntion of 1,000 pupils. So many of the pupils would come long 
 distances that a very large numTjer would have to lunch In the building. 
 This might give rise to the necessity for one prolonged session each day, 
 which is always injurious to health. 
 
 If we had one large Collegiate Institute with a staff of 30 or more 
 teachers, and an average attendance of 1,000 pupils, the principal could not 
 undertake much class work, if any. As things are at present the principals 
 are actively engaged in the work of teaching, and thus come into living con- 
 tact with the pupils. In the case of one large Institute the principal's time 
 would be almost all consumed in supervision work. 
 
 5. — Cost Herb and in Other Cities. 
 
 As to the cost of High School educa\ion in Toronto when compared with 
 t'ue cost in other cities, it is unfair to take into the estimate the total ex- 
 penditure as given in the reports of the Minister of Education, without 
 deducting the amount spent on building account. If this deduction were 
 made, it would be found that the disparity is not so great as appears in 'the 
 press comments. Of course the cost of both Public and High Schools is sure 
 to be higher in Toronto than in smaller places, and this is equally true of 
 other civic expenditures. It ia well known that labor is necessarily more 
 costly in cities than in towns, and it is equally true that the purchasing 
 power of money is less. As, then, we must pay more for land on which our 
 schools stand, for the labor employed In the erection and keeping in repair 
 
of thes*' schools, nml for thf labor -vhlch is givinB to our youth tho know- 
 lodgo which uldiio will luako thciu good citizeiiH, wo luiiBt l)r iin-pareii to 
 make u grejitcr oiillny than Is neci'ssiiry in smaller places where property 
 end labor are cheaper. Heuoe such coniparlBonB as nssiime tho ab:'urdliy 
 of a dollar in Toronto and a dollar in a country town beinj; one iiud the 
 Biime thing are inisleiiding and .at variance with elementary econoiidc pr.n-' 
 clples. A fairer, If not the only fair mode of comparison, is to compare the 
 rate for High and Public School purposes in Toronto with tho rate in other 
 places. Toronto has the lowest rate for High School purposes in the Province, 
 being less than one-third of a mill on the dollar; and If a comparison la 
 Instituted between the four largest cities In the Province, we get the foliowinu 
 reBults: . i .»,,,.■, ■ 'jf :• iH f 
 
 • . I 
 In Toronto and Ottawa — with separate Boards — the avenige rate 
 for High Sch(M>l purposes is about two-fifths of a mill; and in Hamilton and 
 London — willi united Boards — the average rate is more tlian twice as large, 
 being nearly one mill on the dollar. Putting the asscBsment of Toronto en 
 the same basis per ratepayer as that of Hamilton or London — where the 
 ratio is practically the same — the High School rate would be less than half a 
 mill on the dollar, 'still the lowest In the Province. The Public Schnol ra'e 
 on this basis would bo five and one-third mills. Comparing the High and 
 Public School rat 9 In these cities, we arrive at the following results: 
 
 ' Ratio of Public t.> 
 
 iliyli Sidiodl Pul)lic Schoc.l Hifjli School 
 
 Kato. Rate. • Rate. 
 
 London 1 /'ri'tvo '^ u^'i.'o '^Ji times aa groat. 
 
 Hamilton ,•',;'(.",; h\r^"xs U " 
 
 Toi'outo (witli jircsent aHsess- 
 
 i< 
 
 ment) ,^'oV., »i'^\f<y ^H " 
 
 Toronto (on the basis of as- , 
 
 sesHiuoiit as in Hamilton 
 or Lioijciou 1(71(1 °rii')<) '•' 2 
 
 It will be seen from the above tabular statement that while the Public 
 School rate is higher in Toronto than In the cities named, the High School 
 rate Is lower. One reason for this Is that the pupils of the Collegiate Institutes 
 In Toronto pay a larger proportion of the cost of their education. than in the 
 cities under united Boards, thus making the cost less burdensome to the 
 general ratepayer. The tendency of united Boards is to cheapen High School 
 education to those who benefit directly from it, as was proved by the report of 
 the Sub-Committee on Amalgamation presented a year ago. When this is 
 done, of course the dilTerence in cost Is made up by municipal grants, which 
 must be proportionately larger. 
 
io6 
 
 'But there is another way of looking at the question. The municipal 
 grnnt made by the various cities for High School purposes may be compared 
 with each other on a basis of the population in these cities, ,as collated fiom 
 the Dominion census: 
 
 (Jity. ~ Population. Gmnt. Per Capita. 
 
 Belleville 9,910 8 7,97a $0.80 
 
 Brantford l'i,7.03 G,700 O.GO 
 
 Chatham 9,052 4,700 0.50 
 
 Gnelph 10,587 5,674 0.54 
 
 Hamilton , 48,978 1G,100 0.84 
 
 Kingston 19,2(53 7.870 0.41 
 
 London 31,977 20,300 0.68 
 
 Ottawa , 44,142 12,120 0.30 
 
 St. Catharines 9,170 4,110 0.55 
 
 H i. Thomas 10,306 5.952 0.57 
 
 Stratford ; . 9,500 5,000 0.53 
 
 Toronto ./r . 181,209 85,175 0.20 
 
 L 
 
 The municipal grant per pupil for High School purposes based on average 
 attendance stands thus in the following places: 
 
 Guelph, ?38; Hamilton, $33; London, $32; Ottawa, $39; Stratford, $41; 
 Toronto, $41; but for the total number taught, only $26. Yet tb's is often 
 quite misleading, as considerable money may have just been spent ia improve- 
 ments to buildings, as was the case in Toronto in 1896-7. Next year the 
 cost to the municipality in Toronto will be much reduced, while In Hamilton 
 and London it will be largely increased because of valuable improvements 
 in the accommodation In these cities now in progress. 
 
 The Globe, a short time ago, took Kingston, St. Thomas and Woodstock, 
 W'lth an average High School attendance of 810, and compared the cost 
 with To'-onto, with an average Collegiate Institute attendance of 835. 
 But if these three places be taken for Public School comparison 
 we find that In Toronto the Public School cost per pupil for average attend- 
 ance was $20.65, whereas in the above named places it was\ $15.44; while 
 the average for the whole Province, including Toronto, for the year 1898, was 
 $8.61 per pupil, and $14.78 in Toronto for all the pupils, and $8.57 in the above 
 three places. Now this is not stated with any desire to find fault with 
 the Public School system, but to shtjw that school management generally is 
 higher in Toronto than elsewhere. 
 
 It will thus be seen that the expense of our three splendid Collegiate In- 
 stitutes to the City of Toronto compares favorably with other large cities. 
 For the excellent advantages that our Institutes afford, the pupils are called 
 upon to contribute a considerable portion of the total income. This cost to 
 
11 
 
 the pupil la not a hardship In many cases, and, compared to the disadvan- 
 tages of going a greater distance to one central school, that some think could 
 be mianagt'd at less cost than the three, is a positive advantage. 
 
 6. — Separate High School. 
 
 The relation of Separate Schools to the High Schools in the event of 
 amalgamation is worthy of consideration. If the union of the Boards were 
 effected, the representative of the Separate School Board must have a place 
 upon the Board of Education. Will the Separate School supporters be satis- 
 fled with one ri "esentative? And if they have not a satisfactory representa- 
 tion, will they r.i: have the right to demand a Separate High School, to the 
 support of which will be appropriated the tax^ for High School purposes 
 now collected from them? In the City of Toronto, where unfortunately the 
 line between Public and Separate Schools is so strictly drawn, would the 
 new Board care to have the Public School business transacted with the 
 Sep.'irata School representative present? Or would the business of the two 
 classes of school— Public and High— be tranaactcd on separate nights? If 
 Separate School supporters are driven to demand a separate High School, 
 will they not also have the right to demand a return of the taxes levied upon 
 them for the erection and equipment of the present buildings? 
 
 7. — Public School Language Classes. 
 
 An Intimation in the nature of a threat has been made that if. the union 
 of the Boards is not effected, language classes will be formed in the Public 
 Schools. It would be difficult to justify the expense of maintaining such 
 classes aR a part of the free Pv.blic School eou.se fur Lbe suite of the few who 
 can get the necessary instruction by paying for it in the High Schools, as 
 they should be obliged to do whether the Boards are united or not. 
 
 8. — Union Boards. 
 
 The Public School Board of Toronto prepared twelve questions, which 
 were submitted to thirty-one union Boai-ds for answer. A Sub-Committee of 
 the Collegiate Board carefully examined the replies, and reported the follow- 
 ing results in AprU, 1897: 
 
 " With respect to the advnntnges of union Boards fifteen of the thirty- 
 one claim that they are more economical, but several, if not most, of these 
 have had no experience of separate Boards. Particulars are given in only 
 a few instances, three of the fifteen claiming economy in having one set of 
 officials, and In the purchase of sv implies, and three others in having the 
 schools under one roof. Eight claim harmony and unity of interest as ad- 
 vantages arising from unioa, and four claim as an advantage that, in Boards 
 
12 
 
 of Education, where there are appointed members, a better clasa of trustees 
 have a voice in Public School affairs, and that there is not such a groat 
 danger of hasty legislation. 
 
 " The reports received from these thirty-one schools, as summarized above, 
 do not appear favorable to union Boards. 
 
 " As, however, many of the thirty-one Boairds reporting represent small 
 schools in small towns and villages where the conditions are widely different 
 from those existing in Toronto, your Committee have thought that it might 
 be helpful in arriving at a wise conclusion to present some comparative 
 statistics of the Collegiate Institutes, which are situated for the most part 
 in the cities and larger towns of the Province. These statistics were 
 obtained from the latest Report of the Minister of Education. 
 
 " It may be assumed that, with hardly any exceptions, the best secondary 
 schcols of the Province are those tliat have reached the rank of Collegiate 
 Institutes. These xiow number thirty-seven, of which twenty-three, or 60 
 per cent., are under separate Boards, and fourteen, or 40 per cent, under 
 rniter^ Boards. Of the former, three or 13 per cent., and of the latter, seven 
 or 50 per cent., are free to resident pupils. 
 
 " In all the Collegiiate Institutes, the fees constitute 18 per cent, of the 
 total receipts; in the twenty-three schools under separate Boards 22 per 
 cent.; and in the fourteen schools under united Boards only 11 per cent. 
 The fees amount to 25 per cent, of the salaries paid in all the Collegiate 
 Institutes, while they are 31 per cent, in the twenty-three schools under 
 s(>p:inite Hoards, and only 14 per cent, in the fourteen schools under united 
 Boards. It will bo seen t'lat where there are separate Boards, the pupils 
 bear more than twice as great a percentage of the cost." 
 
 The tendency is, where tried, towards free High Schools. A careful 
 study of the returns made to the Education Department from year to year, 
 and of the replies received in answer to inquiries, shows that this holds good. 
 The income from fees yi«'lds a much smaller percentage to the general ex- 
 penditure in union Sciiool Boards than it doi'S in places where the Boards 
 are separate. If we had free High Schools here, it might tend to impair the 
 fifth book forms in the Public Schools; and certainly would demand a large 
 increast; in the number of Coiiegiate Institute teachers and in afcommodation. 
 This would entail relatively much greater cost upon the municipality than 
 does the present system. 
 
 But it Is contended by some that the Public School course should end 
 with the fourth book. This I have shown to be impossible, as the law calls 
 for free education to the end of the fifth book. If, on the other hand, we did 
 
•13 
 
 not afford High School Education to all who wish It, they would be forced to 
 go somewhere else for it. It ia no part of the public's concern whether too 
 mnry go into the learned professions. This i'' a right of choice that must 
 always belong to the individual. From Toronto there are at present about 
 1,300 persona who desire secondary education. Now, if they had not ouH 
 Collegiate Institutes these pupils would be forced to sojouvn in Hamilton, 
 London, and elsewhere, during this period of their studies. The citizena 
 would not tolerate this. 
 
 The Collegiate Institute Board two months ago appointed a second 
 Committee to looli into the subject of amalgamation and report. Let me 
 quote from the report of this Committee, " that having received from the 
 Toronto Public School Board, a communication of the ' reiteration by 
 resolution of its desire ' for amalgamation, must express regret that the 
 document contains no statement whatever of any reasons for such 
 amalgamation." 
 
 It is rather surprising. At amalgamation can cure overlapping, and cur- 
 tail many of the expenses of High School education, that so many towns and 
 cities with flourishing High Schools, Collegiate Institutes, and Public Schools, 
 should not be seolting amalgamation. Such places as Ottawa, Brantford, St, 
 /Catharines, Collingwood, Picton, Goderich, Stratford, Port Hope, Gait, 
 Niagara, Newmarket, Weston, Listowel, Orangeville, Toronto Junction, Blora, 
 Barrie, Brampton, Berlin, Walkerton, Mitchell, Markham, Chatham, Cale- 
 donia, Grimsby, Bradford, could be mentioned as among those where separate 
 Boards exist, without an attempt to deal with overlapping, etc., by forming 
 union Boards. ; 
 
 It has been urged on the Collegiate Board and elsewhere as a reason 
 for anialgamaticm th.-it the tendency of our Collegiate education is totsend 
 far too many into the professions of medicine, law and theology, and that 
 our teaching ought to be <rf a more commercial character. Now, what are 
 the facts? There are in Toronto about 28,000 Public School pupils; of these 
 not quite 4 per cent, enter the Collegiate Institutes. Out of the Institute 
 pupils, less than 5 per cent, annually enter the University. When these 
 obtain their degrees, at least one-half become High School teachers by way 
 of the Collegiate Institutes; the remainder of the Collegiate pupils, who 
 spend frorii one to four years, go Into teaching, business, banks, etc.; or settle 
 down to a domestic life. This cry must surely, in the face of these facts, be 
 dropped. 
 
 It may be noted that years ago amalgamation of Boards had become 
 such an evil that the Legislature of the Province intervened to put a atop 
 to it in the interests of both High and Public Schools. Some two years 
 ago the prohibition was withdrawn; but there has been .almost no desire 
 
14 
 
 shown to take advantage of the new permission. Kingston is the only place 
 v/here u union Board has been formed since the change in the Act. For 
 many year:; there had been friction bi'tween the two Boards, and it was 
 hopt'd amalgamation would cure this. The conditions prevailing in Kingston 
 now are: (1) No fifth boolt classes in the public schools; (2) No teo for com- 
 mercial pupils; (3) All others, including thoso doing fifth boolt vfork, $10. 
 
 If a union Board was formed here by a vote of the Collegiate Institute 
 Board to meet the wishes of the Public School Board, there would result a 
 body of 44 persons to form the Board of Education, and wrangle over the 
 terms of management, and the relative strength of the two sections, appoint- 
 ed and elected. 
 
 It is worthy of note that a number of Important schools in different 
 parts of the Province, after having tried the working of united Boards, 
 resolved to change the system, and are now working under Separate Boards. 
 Among these are the Collegiate Institutes at Strathroy, Stratford, Brockville, 
 and St. Mary's, and the High Schools at Port Hope and Bowmanville. The 
 testimony of these places, which have tried both plans, is emphatically In 
 favor of separate Boajds. ' •'' .■ 
 
 (,"'•"' " •■ - Conclusions. ■ '■ ' '-' ' 
 
 Althv ugh I am one of your representatives on the Collegiate Institute 
 Board, I t >el it to be my duty to lay before you the results of my study of 
 this importdiUt question, and would summarize what I have said as follows: 
 
 1. The union would Introduce a controlling number of elected members. 
 Local and ward influences would therefore be likely to be felt in the manage- 
 ment of the Collegiate Institutes, ■ . 
 
 2. Our three Collegiate Institutes are now in a very high state of 
 efllciency, and doing good work for the citizens of Toronto. 
 
 3. There is no waste of money. Any undue restrictions forced- iipon the 
 Board would impair efficiency. But I have shown that ad the buildings are 
 now in a good state of repair, and have accommodation for further attend- 
 ance without additional outlay, or the engaging of additional teachers, the 
 cost In the future per pupil will decrease considerably. 
 
 4. Before amalgamation is brought about, it miight be well to consider 
 the feet that at present you have really the control over the Collegiate 
 Institutes, through your reproseu itives on the Collegiate Board. In the 
 case of a union Board, your representatives would be in the minority. 
 
 5. The tendency of union Boards la towards free High Schools. 
 
16 
 
 B. The following itatenicrii of feca in Toronto and some other cities, goos 
 to show that this wotld likely be the effect of union here: 
 
 City. Kind of Board. Foos. 
 
 Toronto Sepiinito Jr. Form, $10 ; II. Form, ^^7 ; III. Form, $26. 
 
 London ..'.....,. Unicn Free to City ; 81.00 to County. 
 
 Hamilton Unioti Junior ^'orui, S'J.oO ; otlicr Form-*, ^W. 
 
 Ottawa Sepal ate Resident, $25 ; Non-Residont, 840. 
 
 Kingston Unior OommcrcicJ, Free ; all others, $10. 
 
 Guelph Union Free to Resident ; N on-Resident, .$20. 
 
 Perth Union Free to Resident ; Non-Resident, $10. 
 
 Windsor . . Union Free to all Classes. • 
 
 Brantford Sei)arate Resident, $10 ; Non-Resident, $16. 
 
 Stratford Sejjarate Resident, 810 ; County, $20. 
 
 St. Thomas Union First Form, Free ; other Forms, $10. 
 
 Chatham Separate Free to Town ; County, $9. 
 
 St. Catharines . . . .Separate Non-Residents, $16. 
 
 7. The claim that a bettor class of trustees would, after the union, have 
 a say in the management of the Collegiate Institutes, Is really ii censure 
 upon the City Council. It has been stated that ward heeler^ now secure 
 appointment on the Collegiate Board. If the City Council, which has been 
 elected by the people, cannot free itself of the ward influence sufficiently 
 to make good appointments to the Board, then there is but little hoi)e that 
 the elected Board would be free from such influences. 
 
 8. In many of the places with union Boards the question of separation 
 has been discussed at one time or another. There was, therefore, a feeling 
 of dissatisfaction with this system in these places. 
 
 9. With the many interests we have in this city, its Puollc and Separate 
 School systems, and its nunid-ous private schools, sending pupils to our 
 Institutes, I am of the opinion, after very consciontioua study of the subject, 
 that our three Institutes can best be managed in the interests of the people, 
 both on the grounds of efficiency and economy, by a separate Board. 
 
 The above is a fair presentation of the advantages and disadvantages of 
 the several suggestions that have been made at one time or another tc effect 
 economy in the management of our Institutes. Clearly, most of the sug- 
 gestions, when examined fully, could only woWt mischief, and set back the 
 progress of education in this city for a long time ii, come. Some of the sug- 
 gestions are impossible, because of the existing laws, or because they would 
 be directly opposed to the wishes of the people, while others, if carried out, 
 would .add greatly to the expense of education in this city. 
 
 Not one of the changes that have been suggested is of such a character 
 that, if possible at all, or desirable, it cannot be carried out as well by a 
 separate as by a union Board. 
 
16 
 
 A year ngo I belioved that there might be some advantage's to thu rate- 
 payers as weH as to the cause of education by an amalgamation of the two 
 Boards. During the past twelve months I ha.o given the matter my most 
 earnest and careful consideration, and am bound to advise you that as a 
 result I have satisfied myself that amalgamation is not in the interests 
 either of education or of the taxpayer. This view is a.lso, as I have already 
 declared, entertained by the great majority of your representatives on the 
 Collegiate Institute Board. 
 
 All of which is respectfully submitted. 
 
 Toronto, 
 
 January 21st, 1898. 
 
 JOHN, FERGUSON. 
 
 
 '4t 
 
 \: