"As a result of Mr. Buller's recommendations, (not, however, till after the legislative union of the Provinces which Lord Durham had suggested, as the best remedy for the various political ills under which they severally laboured,) a law was passed in 1841, covering both Provinces in its range, for the establishment and maintenance of public schools. It provided for the appointment of a Superintendent of Education for the whole Province, with two Assistant Superintendents under him, one for each of the sections. A sum of $200,000 was appropriated for the support of schools, which was to be distributed among the several municipal districts, in proportion to the number of children of school age in each of them; $80,000 being assigned to Upper and $120,000 to Lower Canada, such being the then ratio of their respective populations.
"The circumstances of the two sections, however, particularly in the proportions of Roman Catholics to Protestants in each, and the extent to which the Roman Catholic religion may be said to be established in Lower Canada, were soon found to be so different that insuperable difficulties were encountered in working a combined system under one central administration, and in 1845 the law was changed. The nominal office of Chief Superintendent was abolished, and the entire executive administration of the system was confined to the sectional superintendents, and the Provinces, for all educational purposes, again became separated. The law itself was thoroughly revised and adapted to the peculiar wants of each Province, as ascertained by experience; and ever since there have been two systems at work, identical in their leading idea, differing, sometimes widely, in their details, administered by independent executives, and without any organic relations at all.
"Before we proceed to observe the manner and record the results of its practical working, it is proper to premise that it is a purely permissive, not a compulsory system, and its adoption by any municipality is entirely voluntary.... Entering a Canadian school, with American impressions fresh upon the mind, the first feeling is one of disappointment. One misses the life, the motion, the vivacity, the precision—in a word, the brilliancy. But as you stay, and pass both teacher and pupils in review, the feeling of disappointment gives way to a feeling of surprise. You find that this plain, unpretending teacher has the power, and has successfully used the power, of communicating real, solid knowledge and good sense to those youthful minds, which, if they do not move rapidly, at least grasp, when they do take hold, firmly. If there is an appearance of what the Americans call "loose ends" in the school, it is only an appearance. The knowledge is stowed away compactly enough in its proper compartments, and is at hand, not perhaps very promptly, but pretty surely, when wanted. To set off against their quickness, I heard many random answers in American schools; while, per contra to the slowness of the Canadian scholar, I seldom got a reply very wide of the mark. The whole teaching was homely, but it was sound. I chanced to meet a schoolmaster at Toronto, who had kept school in Canada, and was then keeping school at Haarlem, New York, and he gave Canadian education the preference for thoroughness and solid results. Each system—or rather, I should say, the result of each system—seems to harmonize best with the character of the respective peoples. The Canadian chooses his type of school as the Vicar of Wakefield's wife chose her wedding-gown, and as the Vicar of Wakefield chose his wife, "not for a fine, glossy surface, but for such qualities as will wear well." I cannot say, judging from the schools which I have seen—which I take to be types of their best schools—that their choice has been misplaced, or that they have any reason to be disappointed with the results. I speak of the general character of education to which they evidently lean. That the actual results should be unequal, often in the widest possible degree, is true of education under all systems, everywhere.
"One of the most interesting features in the Canadian system is the way in which it has endeavored to deal with what we find to be one of our most formidable difficulties, the religious difficulty. In Canada it has been dealt with by the use of two expedients; one, by prescribing certain rules and regulations, which it was hoped would allow of religious instruction being given in the schools without introducing sectarianism or hurting consciences; the other, by permitting, in certain cases, the establishment of "separate," which are practically denominational, and in fact Roman Catholic schools.
"The permission under certain circumstances to establish separate, that is, denominational schools, is a peculiar feature of the system both of Upper and Lower Canada. Dr. Ryerson thinks that the admission of the principle is a thing to be regretted, though at the same time he considers that the advantages which it entails entirely rest with those who avail themselves of its provisions, and he would not desire to see any coercion used either to repeal or modify them.
"Such, in all its main features, is the school system of Upper Canada. A system, in the eyes of its administrators, who regard it with justifiable self-complacency, not perfect but yet far in advance, as a system of national education, of anything that we can show at home. It is indeed very remarkable to me that in a country, occupied in the greater part of its area by a sparse and anything but wealthy population, whose predominant characteristic is as far as possible removed from the spirit of enterprise, an educational system so complete in its theory and so capable of adaptation in practice should have been originally organized, and have been maintained in what, with all allowances, must still be called successful operation for so long a period as twenty-five years. It shows what can be accomplished by the energy, determination and devotion of a single earnest man. What national education in Great Britain owes to Sir James Kay Shuttleworth, what education in New England owes to Horace Mann, that debt education in Canada owes to Egerton Ryerson. He has been the object of bitter abuse, of not a little misrepresentation; but he has not swerved from his policy or from his fixed ideas. Through evil report and good report he has resolved, and he has found others to support him in the resolution, that free education shall be placed within the reach of every Canadian parent for every Canadian child. I hope I have not been ungenerous in dwelling sometimes upon the deficiencies in this noble work. To point out a defect is sometimes the first step towards repairing it; and if this report should ever cross the ocean and be read by those of whom it speaks, I hope, not with too great freedom, they will perhaps accept the assurance that, while I desired to appreciate, I was bound, above all, to be true; and that even where I could not wholly praise) I never meant to blame. Honest criticism is not hostility."
In a letter addressed to Dr. Ryerson in 1875, the Bishop says:—
"I take it very kindly in you that you remember an old acquaintance, and I have read with interest your last report. I am glad to observe progress in the old lines almost everywhere. I was flattered also to find that some words of mine, written in 1865, are thought worthy of being quoted.... It is pleasant to find a public servant now in the thirty-second year of his incumbency, still so hopeful and so vigorous. Few men have lived a more useful or active life than you, and your highest reward must be to look back upon what you have been permitted to achieve."