June 19th is officially 'United Empire Loyalists' Day' in Ontario. The private member's bill which led to its proclamation on December 18, 1997 was moved by Mr. Harry Danford, MPP for Hastings-Peterborough. Immediately following are the remarks made in the Legislative Assembly of Ontario by Mr. Danford the day before its first celebration, in 1998.
Following that are various readings and inyeresting discussion of the bill before it was voted into law and proclaimed. The multi-cultural nature of the Loyalists coming to ontario is discussed at some length. Included is an excellent presentation made to Ontario Parliamentarians by then-President of the United Empire Loyalists' Association of Canada, Bernice Flett.
All material is excerpted from Ontario Hansard, the official record of the Legislative Assembly of Ontario, at Queen's Park, Toronto.
Hon. Norman W. Sterling (Minister of the Environment, Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, on a point of order: I believe we have unanimous consent for one representative of each recognized party in the House to make a short statement with respect to United Empire Loyalists' Day, and I ask this consent as a very proud descendant of the United Empire Loyalist families.
The Speaker (Hon. Chris Stockwell): Do we have agreement on that? Agreed.
Mr. Harry Danford (Hastings-Peterborough): It is indeed my pleasure to rise today to recognize the first United Empire Loyalists' Day in Ontario. I want to thank all the members of this House for allowing me the opportunity to pay tribute to Ontario's Loyalist heritage.
Earlier this morning it was my privilege, along with the Speaker and many of our colleagues, to help in raising the Loyalist Grand Union Banner on the courtesy flagpole in front of the Legislative Building. This flag has not flown in an official capacity in Ontario since the early 19th century. Today we fly it in recognition of the role that the Loyalists played and that their descendants continue to play in the development of the province of Ontario.
It was also my pleasure to take part in a presentation by the Archives of Ontario to the Ontario branch of the United Empire Loyalists' Association. In recognition of June 19, the archives, led by Ian Wilson, has made public the Inspector General's register. This register was the official list of all those making claims for either land or privileged status as Loyalists in Upper Canada. Since it was the Inspector General who was responsible for sanctioning privilege in Upper Canada, we can assume that this is the most complete list of United Empire Loyalists in existence, and of enormous historical significance. This document is on display today in the main lobby of this building.
I would like to thank Ian Wilson and his staff at the archives, in particular Fawn Stratford-Devai and John Barton, for all their hard work in putting together today's display and helping make Loyalists' Day significant for so many people. I recommend that all members take in this display.
Loyalists' Day gives us all a chance to reflect on the contribution of the Loyalists to the development of Ontario. It is worth noting that our land tenure system, civil law system and, most important, our system of responsible government were brought to Upper Canada by the Loyalists. These systems are still in place today.
I have said before and I think it bears repeating: The Loyalist heritage led directly to the development of this great country's bilingual, multicultural and regional tradition under the unifying context of a constitutional monarchy and parliamentary democracy. This makes us very different from our neighbours to the south, and I believe it is a difference that we should all celebrate.
On Saturday night I was honoured to be at the United Empire Loyalists' Association of Canada's annual general meeting, which was held in Kingston. Over 200 Loyalists from across our country gathered together to elect a new executive and to conduct other business of the association. I wish to pay tribute to the outgoing president of the association, Bernice Flett, who is with us today. Bernice was instrumental in helping me with my private member's bill. Her cooperation and dedication as president of the United Empire Loyalists' Association of Canada will inspire all present and future members to contribute their talents to preserving the legacy and history of the Loyalists.
I would also like to thank everyone who helped make today a success. Dennis Clark, our Sergeant at Arms, and his staff were extremely helpful, as were Karyn Leonard and her staff at the interparliamentary and public relations branch. On behalf of everyone involved in organizing today, I want to say a sincere thank you.
I hope tomorrow, June 19, all members of this House will take some time and reflect on the sacrifices made by the Loyalists when they came to Upper Canada, and as well reflect on the contributions that Loyalists made in making this province and indeed our country one of the best places in the world to live.
At this point I would ask that all United Empire Loyalists in the galleries rise and be recognized by this Legislature.
Mr. Sean G. Conway (Renfrew North): On behalf of my Liberal colleagues I want to join our friend the member for Hastings-Peterborough in paying tribute to all of those who have come here today to pay tribute to an enormously important part of Ontario's heritage and historical traditional.
I want to in a personal way congratulate my friend and neighbour the member for Hastings-Peterborough for all the work he's done over the last number of months to make Loyalists' Day the reality that it now is.
There is no doubt, as the member has said, that United Empire Loyalism is part of the basic fabric and is very much the foundation of Ontario or Upper Canada, as it was called. There is on all of the insignia in this province an inscription. I won't quote the Latin -- my Latin isn't that good any more -- but I believe the motto of the province is in English, "Loyal in the beginning, so let us remain." It's a nice phrase and it's an important phrase.
Loyalism and what we celebrate today are not just a pageant, though I want to congratulate these people, as I was unfortunately not able to be with the member and others this morning at the session. It is important at a certain level to highlight the pageantry. Our American friends do it so well that we should not be afraid or ashamed to do our part.
It is really important, I think, for this Legislature and the province we represent to understand what this all means. These Loyalists were refugees and they were counterrevolutionaries. It's hard to remember and hard to believe -- and many of us don't want to think about this -- but this province of ours was born 210 or 215 years ago by refugees, by counter-revolutionaries, by thousands of people who, as it happened, were to leave behind one of the most successful and dynamic economies and polities the world has ever known, and they headed northward into the rough-hewn bush of what was almost a no-man's land. Voltaire had called it "quelques arpents de neige," a few acres of snow.
These Loyalists left some of the best agricultural lands of North America for some not apparently very attractive country. They did it on principle because they felt very strongly that what their brethren in the 13 colonies were doing was fundamentally wrong and mistaken. So they were refugees, they were counterrevolutionaries. They weren't just all the élite, they weren't just all upscale former Harvard and Yale men. As the member points out, if you look at the documentation that Ian Wilson, the provincial archivist, and others have made available, in the main the Loyalists were everyday people, as we would now call them. If you look at some of that material, you will see, in ways that most of us don't understand, the incredible hardship that these regular folks experienced as they moved northward into this uncharted bush.
I think in the antiseptic, modern world of the late 20th century, it is a useful thing for all of us, particularly those of us who purport to provide some leadership to the community 210 years later, to go back to our roots and to understand the sacrifice that that expression of loyalty involved. It was not a choice without painful consequence.
It is important as well to understand that Joseph Brant and people like Brant were also Loyalists. Aboriginals by the score moved north of the Lakes. So we were refugees, and we walked not just as Europeans, but we walked with people like Joseph Brant and others from the aboriginal community who agreed with our Loyalist fathers and mothers that it was the right thing to do.
I just hope, as we make public policy in the 1990s, and when we look at some of the very contentious issues that face this province and country, we remember some of that. Our beginnings were in rebellion and counter-revolution, and Joseph Brant and people like Brant walked with us north of the Lakes.
When I met Ian Wilson on the steps I said: "Ian, I'm sorry I couldn't go to your presentation; I was with a group of students. As our provincial archivist and a well-known historian, what would you say would be the one lesson you would want these young people from the Beachburg Public School to know about the legacy of Loyalism?" Mr Wilson said, I thought very aptly, "If you remember nothing else, remember that our origins were in that refugee movement." We should never forget that.
We have today the opportunity to understand that there are other rebellions and other revolutions going on across the world, and I hope that this generation is as welcoming today as others were when those Loyalists came north 200-and-some years ago.
A final observation, because the House leader was proud to advertise his loyal roots, as he should be: "Loyal in the beginning, so let us remain." What do you suppose people with names like Cartwright and Macdonell and Brant would want us to be loyal to? I say to the House particularly that I don't think I speak out of turn when I say I think they would want us, like those Loyalist forebears, to be loyal to honour, to duty, to principle and to the notion of loyalty itself.
I would hope, if push comes to shove, that we would have the guts and the fortitude to do as so many of Mr Danford's constituents and some of mine did in those uncertain days 215 years ago, to put everything at risk, to leave it all behind and to walk into an uncertain future because they believed that loyalty to principles like duty and honour were, at the beginning and the end of the day, of fundamental importance.
Mr. Bud Wildman (Algoma): On behalf of our caucus, I want to rise in celebration of Loyalists' Day and to congratulate the member for Hastings-Peterborough and the representatives of the United Empire Loyalists' Association here with us this afternoon.
In celebrating the UE Loyalists, we are celebrating the tradition of their loyalty to the crown, which is celebrated and recognized in the Ontario flag, with the Union flag in the corner, but we also celebrate the desire of those courageous women and men who walked and rode north of the Lakes after the American Revolution, the courage they had in meeting the wilderness and beginning anew, beginning a new life. This is the beginning of the tradition that all of us value in Canada and in Ontario, and that is the welcoming reception of those who are fleeing destruction and war, who are indeed refugees and who are seeking a new life, a new beginning after the loss of almost everything.
Many of the Loyalists who came to Ontario, and indeed also came to the Atlantic provinces, were coming with just the clothes on their backs or what they could carry in a cart, because they had in some cases been run off their own land and had to flee for their lives. So many of us, whether we are descendants of United Empire Loyalists, as the member for Hastings-Peterborough and I can claim to be, or whether we are descendants of other refugees or indeed ourselves are refugees, recognize the tradition of this country of welcoming those from abroad who are fleeing war and destruction to seek a new life on these shores.
I want to also recognize, as my friend from Renfrew North did, that it wasn't just those of British heritage who came forward and came north after the American Revolution to demonstrate their loyalty to the crown. It was also members of the Six Nations, Joseph Brant and the other Iroquoian nations who had remained loyal and fought on the side of the British in the American War of Independence, who came north and were welcomed by the aboriginal inhabitants of this area, of Ontario, with the Grand River land grant. The Ojibways welcomed the Iroquoian peoples to these shores, despite the fact that in some cases in the past they had been on opposite sides of conflicts.
All of us must value our tradition of welcoming those who are fleeing the death and destruction of war. All of us must value the courage it takes to come to a foreign land to make a new beginning. All of us must celebrate that in our heritage, the United Empire Loyalists and all of those refugees who have been welcomed to Ontario and to Canada since the arrival of the United Empire Loyalists.
We must not now succumb to a xenophobia that does not recognize and celebrate the value of the many cultures, the multicultural nature of people who come and make contributions to our society. I know those who celebrate the United Empire Loyalists' Day also celebrate that tradition in Canada and the freedom we owe those courageous people who have made it possible for us to welcome so many other representatives from around the world, to help make ours the cultural mosaic we celebrate in Ontario today.
MEMBERS' STATEMENTS
UNITED EMPIRE LOYALISTS
Mr. Harry Danford (Hastings-Peterborough): Yesterday I introduced a private member's bill that, if passed, will proclaim June 19 every year as United Empire Loyalists' Day. The Loyalists were Canada's first multicultural immigrants who, for various reasons, stood for the Unity of the Empire during and after the U.S. gained their independence in 1783. The Loyalist influence was the deciding factor in the passage of the Constitutional Act of 1791 that established the framework for Upper Canada's government. This act, also known as the Canada Act, received Royal Assent on June 19, 1791.Among the provisions of the Constitutional Act were the creation of elected legislatures for the two new provinces of Upper and Lower Canada, the forerunners of modern Ontario and Quebec. It was the Loyalists who laid the foundations for the future development of Canada as a country with bilingual, multicultural and regional traditions within the unifying context of a constitutional monarchy and parliamentary democracy.
The Loyalist influence is clearly seen in our provincial motto, which reads, "Loyal in the beginning, so remaining." I would like to ask all the members to join me in recognizing the historic contributions the Loyalists have made and their descendants continue to make to the development of Ontario by declaring June 19 as United Empire Loyalists' Day.
Ontario Hansard - Thursday 28 August 1997
PRIVATE MEMBERS' PUBLIC BUSINESS
The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Gilles E. Morin): Pursuant to standing order 95(c)(i), you have 10 minutes to make your presentation.
Mr. Harry Danford (Hastings-Peterborough): It is indeed a pleasure for me to move second reading of Bill 150, An Act proclaiming United Empire Loyalists' Day.
I would like to begin by thanking Bernice Flett of the United Empire Loyalists' Association of Canada for her help in drafting this bill. Bernice is in the gallery today, along with so many other members of her association. Other guests as well are members of the Monarchist League of Canada; members of the Ontario Black History Society; representatives of the Mohawks of the Bay of Quinte; and representatives of the Queen's York Rangers, a militia regiment led by Ontario's first Lieutenant Governor, Sir John Graves Simcoe. I would also like to thank the members of the King's Royal Regiment of New York for escorting me to the chamber this morning.
The Loyalist heritage is an important part of Ontario's history. As I am sure members will know, the original Loyalists were groups of American citizens who left America after the United States gained their independence, and they came for many reasons. Some were soldiers who settled here; some were persecuted for remaining loyal to the crown; yet others came because they were unable to fight because of their religious beliefs.
Loyalists were forced to leave the United States because of their wish to remain loyal to the crown. It was common practice to be persecuted for remaining loyal before and after the War of Independence. Loyalists at times were tarred and feathered and had other acts committed against them, not just by mobs, mind you, but by unjust laws as well. In 1776, the Provincial Congress of New York went so far as to order the purchase of all the pitch and tar necessary for the public's use and safety. Mr Speaker, I suggest to you that they did not do this to start a public roofing project.
After the Declaration of Independence in 1776, loyalty to the crown became grounds for treason. Failure to take an oath of loyalty to the state in which you lived meant possible imprisonment, confiscation of property, banishment and, yes, even death. If you did not take the oath, you became an outlaw. If you were a lawyer, doctor or other professional you could not practise. You could not be an executor of an estate, or if your neighbour owed you money, you had no redress.
The Continental Congress, in a move to bolster their treasury, recommended to the states that they appropriate the property of residents who had forfeited "the right to protection of the revolutionary government." It was recommended that states invest the proceeds of the land sales in continental loan certificates. In other words, proceeds from the sale of confiscated lands were to fund the war effort against the crown. As Loyalists began leaving the 13 colonies during the revolutionary war, large sums of money from the sale of confiscated Loyalist properties began to find their way into state treasuries. Loyalists felt they had no choice but to leave the country.
The Loyalists were Canada's first multicultural immigration. They were not just British Tories who benefited from the patronage of the crown. French Protestants, German pacifists, African-Americans, they were all part of the Loyalist migration. As a matter of fact, one of the largest groups of Loyalists was the Iroquois Confederacy, led by Joseph Brant who came to Ontario from New York state. As a reward for remaining loyal to the crown, they were given a tract of land six miles wide on either side of the Grand River and they were given land at Akwesasne near present-day Cornwall.
Many of the German and French Loyalists, who had decided to honour their oaths of loyalty to the crown or were unable to fight due to their religious beliefs, established agricultural settlements around Niagara where they supplied the British garrison there with food. These Loyalists soon moved to the area around Brantford named for the celebrated first nations chief.
By way of statistics, the Loyalist migration to Ontario began shortly after the US War of Independence and really took off after 1783. By 1788 the population of the region had passed 10,000. As a result of the Loyalist migration, one thing was certain: that changes had to be made in the way the colony was governed.
The Quebec Act of 1774 was the legislative authority that provided for the administration of what was then the province of Quebec. This was satisfactory to a majority of the population of the lower St Lawrence but not for the Loyalist settlers. The court system and land tenure system were not known to many of the new settlers and they found them very difficult to understand.
It became clear that the government needed to establish a Legislature, but it believed that divisions between the established Canadiens and the new settlers, as well as the unwieldy size and shape of the existing colony, made one Legislature impractical.
As a result of these concerns, the British government decided to introduce the Constitutional Act, which divided the province of Quebec into predominantly francophone Lower Canada and predominantly anglophone Upper Canada. It was this act that set up elected legislatures in the new provinces, and in Upper Canada it established a system of courts and land tenure modelled after Britain. The Constitutional Act received royal assent on June 19, 1791.
The Constitutional Act also provided the protection of the crown for the French language and culture in Lower Canada. It should be remembered that at this time in Britain, English Catholics could not own land, vote or hold office. As a matter of fact, it was not until 1871 that English Catholics were allowed to attend university. Yet by the Constitutional Act, Catholics were granted full participation rights in Canada. This was a very significant development in the history of our nation.
New freedoms were found in Canada at the time of the Loyalists that were not to be found in either Britain or the United States.
On July 9, 1793, the Legislature of Upper Canada passed an act that put an end to slavery. This was 50 years before the same thing happened in Britain and 70 years before the famous emancipation proclamation in the United States.
The Loyalists settled much of what is now Ontario. Their impact is seen in many of our towns, universities, colleges and other institutions that bear many Loyalist names. As a matter of fact, the first Premier of Ontario, John Sandfield MacDonald, was Loyalist.
In eastern Ontario in particular, the Loyalist influence is very pronounced. In 1784, the Loyalists landed at Adolphustown in Lennox and Addington county. This was the last landing of significant size of Loyalists in Upper Canada. The counties and townships of eastern Ontario were all settled by Loyalists.
The Loyalist influence is seen all around us today. As a result of this, I believe that the Loyalist tradition belongs to all Ontarians, whether their ancestors were Loyalists or not. The Loyalists worked on behalf of all subjects of the crown and citizens of Canada and not simply for those belonging to a Loyalist club.
The Loyalist heritage led to the development of Canada, with its bilingual, multicultural and regional traditions under the unifying context of a constitutional monarchy and parliamentary democracy. This is the tradition that sets Canada apart from other nations.
We should be proud of it and celebrate it.
To be a Loyalist means more than just the ties of historic ancestry. Loyalists earned their place in Canadian history through their self-sacrificing dedication to their new country.
Distinguished Ontarians like Hal Jackman, Galen Weston and former Ontario Treasurer Robert Nixon are descended from the Loyalists, as is Brian Orser, the skater. The Right Honourable Ellen Fairclough is a Loyalist. So was former Governor-General Roland Michener. Chief John Deserontyon of the Tyendinagas was a Loyalist. Egerton Ryerson, the founder of our public education system in Ontario, was also a Loyalist. Pauline Johnson, the Mohawk poet, was a Loyalist. First World War air ace Billy Bishop was a Loyalist, and countless other Loyalists and their descendants have given much to this province and indeed to this country.
The Loyalists complement the multicultural character of modern Ontario society. Catholic highlanders, Scottish Presbyterians, German Calvinists and Lutherans, the Dutch, all came in the Loyalist migration. A substantial number of black ex-slaves had fought for the British crown and had been freed. This group settled not only in Ontario but Nova Scotia and other British colonies in the Caribbean. These peoples have all left an indelible mark on Ontario society. This is something that we would celebrate on United Empire Loyalists' Day.
The very motto of this province, "Loyal in the beginning, so remaining," which is inscribed on our coat of arms, speaks to the contribution of the Loyalists. It was itself developed by Loyalists as a constant reminder of their role in our province's development.
In closing, I would like to ask all the members to again recognize the historic importance of the Loyalists by supporting this bill.
Ontario would not be the same without the Loyalist tradition. By recognising June 19 as United Empire Loyalists' Day, we will be celebrating the Loyalist contribution, not just to Ontario but indeed to Canada. Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and God save the Queen.
Mr. Michael A. Brown (Algoma-Manitoulin): We in the Liberal Party will of course be supporting this private member's bill.
One of the things we in Canada and in Ontario sometimes are not particularly good at is recognizing our historical roots. I would like to congratulate the representatives of the group in the gallery for filling the important function of providing us with reminders on a daily basis of how this province came to be, how our history came to be. Some members would know that my educational background is in history, particularly in Canadian and Ontario and Quebec history, and I find that what these folks do is terribly important.
I also appreciate what the member has done by bringing this important bill before the Legislature, because it reminds us of our roots and the important contributions made through the years by people here in Ontario and in Canada. Sometimes, if we had a better understanding of where we've been, we could see the future much more clearly.
In speaking to this bill, I think you have to talk about revolution. I think you have to understand what happened in the present United States of America. It's significant, for example, that when we refer to it we refer to it here in Canada as the American Revolution. If you were on the other side of the border, you would refer to it as the War of Independence. That in itself speaks volumes, just the way we refer to the particular historical event.
The history of the American Revolution, at least in part, is one that comes from taxation. The American colonists, if you would believe the War of Independence kind of rhetoric, didn't want taxation without representation. They wanted to be able to make their decisions locally, so to speak, not by a far-off government, a King and Parliament that were an ocean away. That's what they would tell you. If you spoke to the British Parliament or the King at the time, he would say, "We are providing garrisons of British soldiers to protect you, and that is the reason we want you to pay for some of the cost of providing protection in these new colonies in North America."
When Quebec fell to the British -- we're all aware of that -- and the subsequent treaty then awarded Quebec to the British, North America changed significantly. The need for a British garrison to protect British colonies from a French colony was diminished.
British policy became one of assimilation at that point in time. British policy at that time became, "We should assimilate Quebec and we should try to force immigration in North America towards Quebec so that we can achieve those goals."
To that end, you'll remember, they passed an act which prohibited American colonists from going west. They could not go beyond the mountains. The reason for that was to force North American immigration and settlement north into Quebec to have a British presence in a largely -- well, totally at that point -- French-speaking area. That of course caused great consternation in the American colonies or what is now the United States of America.
With the elimination of the need for paying for protection, there was also great concern about the taxation, so we had a revolution, and it was a revolution. Like all revolutions, there were victims, a great number of victims. Our province of Ontario is born largely out of the victims of that particular revolution.
Perhaps now we'll go to a little bit more history. American colonists of varied ethnic backgrounds who supported the British cause during the American Revolution came to Canada. In 1789 Lord Dorchester, the Ggovernor-in-Chief of British North America, proclaimed that Loyalists and their children should be allowed to append UE to their names, alluding to their great principle, the unity of the empire; hence the name United Empire Loyalists. The term applied initially in the Canadian colonies alone. It was officially recognized in the Maritimes only in the 20th century. Of course, the Maritimes were not part of Canada at that point.
In determining who was eligible for war losses, Britain used a fairly precise definition. Loyalists were those born or living in the American colonies at the outbreak of the American Revolution who rendered substantial services to the royal cause during the war and who left the U.S. by the end of the war or soon after. Those who left substantially later, mainly to gain land and to escape growing intolerance of minorities, are often called "late" Loyalists.
The Loyalists supported Britain for highly diverse reasons. Many evinced a personal loyalty to the crown or a fear that the revolution could bring chaos to America. Many agreed with the rebels that America had suffered wrongs at the hands of Britain but believed the solution could be worked out within the empire. Others, seeing themselves as weak or threatened within American society and in need of an outside defender, included linguistic and religious minorities, recent immigrants not fully integrated into the American society, blacks and Indians.
Sympathy for the crown was a dangerous sentiment. Those who defied the revolutionary forces could find themselves without civil rights, subject to mob violence or flung into prison. All the states finally taxed or confiscated Loyalist property. During the revolution over 19,000 Loyalists served Britain in specially created provincial corps, accompanied by several thousand Indians.
Others spent the war in such strongholds as New York City or in refugee camps in Quebec. Between 80,000 and 100,000 people eventually fled, half of them to Canada.
The vast majority were neither well-to-do nor particularly high in social rank; most were farmers. Ethnically they were quite mixed and many were recent immigrants. White Loyalists brought sizeable contingents of slaves with them. Free blacks and escaped slaves who had fought in the Loyalist corps and as many as 2,000 Indian allies, mostly Six Nations Iroquois from New York, settled in Canada. The main waves of Loyalists came to what is now Canada in 1783 and 1784. The Maritimes became home for upwards of 30,000; Ontario became home for about 7,500; about 2,000 moved to present-day Quebec and settled in the Gaspé; 7,500 here in Ontario, as I said, along the St Lawrence and Bay of Quinte, also substantial settlements in the Niagara Peninsula and near where I was born and raised, in the Sarnia area, with subsidiary and later settlements along the Thames River; and of course the Grand River was the main focus of the Loyalist Iroquois settlement.
The Loyalist influx gave the region its first substantial population and led to the creation of a separate province, Upper Canada, later Canada West, later Ontario. Loyalists were very instrumental in establishing educational, religious, social and governmental institutions. Though greatly outnumbered by later immigrants, Loyalists and their descendants, such as Egerton Ryerson, exerted a strong and lasting influence.
Modern Canada and this province have inherited much from the Loyalists, including a certain conservatism, a preference for evolution rather than revolution in matters of government, and of course the strong tendency towards a pluralistic and heterogeneous society.
It's hard to understand how this group has not been honoured with a day long before today, because substantially they were and still are leaders of this province and have put a stamp on this country that I think most of us who favour a pluralistic and heterogeneous and evolutionary society would appreciate.
I have here some letters in support of this. I'm bringing these to the House today on behalf of Mr. Cleary, the member for Cornwall. He has received letters from quite a number of people in the Cornwall area who are very supportive of this. Of course, Cornwall has a sizeable Loyalist population. I'm just going to read one that I think would be representative of them all:
"I wish to put my support towards Bill 150 of Mr Danford, MPP for Hastings-Peterborough, for the introduction of United Empire Loyalists' Day to be 19 June.... This would be an honour to all the founding fathers of Cornwall and area, which they settled after the American War of Independence."
"This group of people were the first truly non-racial group to settle Canada. They include not only Europeans, but African slaves as well, to be free men regardless of religion, race or creed. I have three great-grandfathers who fought with Sir John Johnson's King's Royal Regiment of New York and settled the area, Philip and Peter, for whom Eamers' Corners is named, and Michael Gallinger."
"Please support this bill, as it does show a sense of pride for our local history and the history of this province."
It's signed Michael Eamer, UE.
I have quite a number of these. I recognize the support across this province for this particular bill, which I believe is overdue, and I'm very pleased that Mr. Danford has brought this before the House. It is widespread. I congratulate him. I hope this adds to a sense of Ontario's history, that our children and grandchildren will more fully understand and appreciate where a province came from, the evolution it has gone through, and that we will all have a better future, a brighter future, because of this proclamation of a particular day.
Mr. Tony Martin (Sault Ste Marie): I too will be supporting this piece of work brought before us in the House today by the member for Hastings-Peterborough, perhaps for different reasons than others, because I won't stand here for a second and pretend that I know a lot about the United Empire Loyalists; however, I appreciate the contribution they have made to the fabric we call Ontario today.
I think it behooves us all, enriches us all, when we recognize that contribution in the way suggested by the member. It's always valuable to recognize the threads that run through the fabric that makes up Ontario, to recognize the contribution made by those who have participated in the history of the development of the wonderful province we all call home, for those who serve in this place here today and on behalf of the constituents we represent. Indeed this province and this country have a very rich heritage, however young that may be. We're not a country with the kind of history that some of the countries that border on us have. We have a young history that was cobbled together by numerous groups of people coming here for various reasons, some because of persecution, some to find a new land to have a family, develop a business or an interest and make it home.
I myself came to this country as an immigrant from Ireland. We arrived here in 1960, seven kids, my mother and father, to make a home in Wawa. Our family has become part of the rich heritage of that particular community. When that is recognized, as it was, for example, at a homecoming during the long weekend in August by those who organized that event, as were so many of the other very important families who made up that community over the years, I felt good. I felt a sense of ownership and I felt I wanted to do something to make that community even better. I think that will be the end result of the approval of this bill today and the work of the member for Hastings-Peterborough.
I think it's also important that we remember where we come from. As so many others more eloquent than I have said over the years, if you don't remember where you come from, there is always the possibility of repeating some of the mistakes we have made. I don't think that is in our best interests.
I was educated here this morning. I listened to the presentations by previous speakers, and they taught me a little about why it is that the United Empire Loyalists came to this country originally and the struggle they went through. I think it will stimulate others who have come to take a look at their history, and because of that, all of us as a community of people in the end will be better served.
I know from some of the reading I've done some of the challenges the Irish faced when they came to this country. There was a time when in Ontario to be Irish Catholic was not something you wore on your forehead, was not something you presented in trying to get a job in some of the larger industries in places like Toronto. But we've overcome that. As a community of people bigger than that, as a community of people educated and looking towards a future that included more of us in positive ways, we got beyond that. In my own community of Sault Ste. Marie, for a long time, to be Italian, to have an Italian name, meant you got in line behind those who had a name that was of British ancestry and you didn't get the good jobs, if you got a job at all. I think it behooves us all to remember that that was our history so we don't repeat it again.
In recognizing a group such as the United Empire Loyalists, with the history they bring with them and the difficulties they overcame and the way they have contributed to the fabric of Ontario, we present to others an opportunity to think about their particular experience. When we put all that together, the rich heritage, remembering where we come from, the struggles we individually and collectively have worked our way through, we become a better country, we become a better province, we become a better community of people, a community of people better able, in a world that gets smaller and smaller, to reach out in more inclusive ways to other peoples, if not by way of our education then by way of our travel and ability to communicate today, and that makes us a better community.
As a matter of fact, Canada, because of its history and because of its openness to other cultures and religions and languages, presents a wonderful opportunity to show the world how people of different histories and traditions can work together in a positive way to build a better future and a better home for our children and our children's children to come and for other people who perhaps are persecuted in other places in the world today.
We don't have to look very far. The issue in the newspapers over the last week or two is the issue of the Gypsies from the Czech Republic. Initially, some may have a very negative and judgemental response to that, but it behooves us for a minute to think back on the response to the arrival of our forefathers to this country or some other jurisdiction in the world where we chose to move to start a new life because where we came from was not supportive of the best that was in us, whether it be our faith, our language or our culture.
To remember a group such as the United Empire Loyalists, who have contributed in such a positive way to the building up of what our wonderful province and country is today, I think is to call on all of us who claim Ontario as home to be ever more vigilant as we look around the world today at peoples who are persecuted, who are looking for a place to call home, so that they might build a future for their children in Canada, a country of vast proportion.
I come from Sault Ste. Marie. I often drive home and I see the miles and miles and miles of territory that we have, that we own collectively, that is still to be developed in the best interests of ourselves and of the world, so I think it behooves us as we remember to be open to the possibilities that are there for the future.
I will be supporting this bill today, brought forward by the member for Hastings-Peterborough for all of those very important reasons, and I would ask members of the House to listen to others who will present today and to be enlightened, as I have, by the members who have spoken so far so that you might find it perhaps in your wisdom to support it as well.
Mr. John L. Parker (York East): I'm very pleased to have the opportunity this morning to rise in support of the bill brought forward by my colleague from Hastings-Peterborough, a bill that seeks to recognize the Constitutional Act of June 1791 by making it a recognized holiday in the province of Ontario.
In so doing, we're recognizing a very important milestone in the history, not only of this province but of this entire country and our society. It's important in a number of respects, and I want to acknowledge the point that was just made by my colleague from Sault Ste. Marie, who noted that the arrival of the United Empire Loyalists into Canada was part of a tradition that lives on.
We must remember that the Loyalists who came to Canada, by very definition, were immigrants to this country. They were newcomers.
Mr. Bud Wildman (Algoma): They were refugees.
Mr. Parker: They were refugees; they were war refugees; they were DPs. They were people who were forced to leave their homelands to come to a new land. More than that, they were pioneers. It's often forgotten that at the time of the War of Independence, the United States was a mature, well-developed nation. It had a history that was already about 200 years old.
These were not people who were leaving one log cabin to move to another log cabin; these were people who were leaving established societies, friends, homes, jobs to come to a brand-new land where they had to carve a living out of the wilderness.
Loyalists after the War of Independence moved in many directions. Some moved to the West Indies. Some moved to the eastern townships of what is now the province of Quebec. Governor Haldimand, who was the Governor of the colony of Quebec at that time, was responsible for placing the Loyalists in various settlements. Remember that what we now call Quebec and Ontario at that time bore the name alternately Canada or Quebec. He was responsible for the entire province of Quebec, which included present-day Ontario, and he directed the settlement of the United Empire Loyalists into essentially four identifiable areas.
Apart from the eastern townships, within what is now Ontario the Loyalists were settled in the areas of the upper St Lawrence, the Quinte area, the Niagara peninsula and the Grand River, and the Loyalist traditions in those areas live on and, as has been pointed out, the names, the traditions, the history that began in those days is still visible in the names and in the communities in those areas.
I want to take this opportunity in the time available to me to comment at some brief length on the subject of one group of Loyalists who arrived in present-day Ontario at that time and to focus on their highly exceptional, colourful and outstanding leader, Joseph Brant. I am speaking, of course, of the Mohawks.
Joseph Brant was a Mohawk, born in Ohio, moved in the highest circles. He was not in the wilderness. He was a great political and social leader of his day, highly educated, world travelled. He had lived in London for a period of time, was received by King George III, included among his friends James Boswell, one of the leading figures of all of history not just of that time. This was the world Joseph Brant knew and lived in.
Joseph Brant came back to his homeland in New York state and was a major influence in leading the Iroquois Nation in support of the crown in resistance to the revolutionaries who were seeking independence in the War of Independence. He united the Mohawks with many of the Seneca and others of the Six Nations.
Remember, the Six Nations at that time were not a fully unified group. They found their loyalties pulled in different directions. There were some leaders who took some of the Iroquois people into an alliance with the American revolutionaries. Joseph Brant was a leading figure in bringing many of the Iroquois people into alliance and loyalty with the British crown. He fought bravely and his troops fought very effectively on behalf of the crown in the War of Independence, and many victories in that war on behalf of the Loyalist forces were attributed to the contribution made by Joseph Brant and by the soldiers under his command.
There's a bit of a romantic myth that the Six Nations reserve on the Grand River today was granted to Joseph Brant and the Mohawks as an act of generosity and spontaneous gratitude by the crown, out of gratitude for the good work the Mohawks had delivered to the crown during the war and for the effectiveness of Joseph Brant's leadership. That is not untrue, but I think it's important we notice that it was also the result of some good, solid hard bargaining by Joseph Brant.
In the treaty that ended the War of Independence, there were various compensations that were arrived at and established at the treaty table between the newly established United States of America and the British government. One of the groups that was forgotten at that table, quite frankly, was Joseph Brant and the Mohawks. Joseph Brant wasn't about to put up with that. Joseph Brant went to Governor Haldimand at the time, who was the Governor of the colony of Canada, the colony of Quebec, and he demanded on behalf of his people that the British crown grant him compensation for what they had lost in what became the state of New York.
The literature isn't altogether clear on why the Grand River site was chosen. Remember, there was also John Deserontyon, another Mohawk leader, a leader of a slightly smaller group, the Upper Mohawks, who was granted a settlement in what is now called Deseronto. The literature would suggest that there was some thought of putting the Upper Mohawks, the Joseph Brant Mohawks, in the same area with Deserontyon. It's suggested that maybe Joseph Brant didn't want to be associated with that group and wanted an independent group. It's also suggested that Haldimand wanted to keep them separate, recognizing what a strong force they would be if the two groups were assembled together.
In the end, Haldimand and Brant arrived at an agreement and the Haldimand proclamation of 1784 was granted. I'll just read that to you now:
"Whereas His Majesty having been pleased to direct that in consideration of the early attachment to his cause manifested by the Mohawk Indians, and of the loss of their settlement they thereby sustained…I do hereby in His Majesty's name authorize and permit the said Mohawk Nation, and such other of the Six Nation Indians as wish to settle in that quarter to take possession of and settle upon the banks of the river commonly called Ours or Grand River, running into Lake Erie, allotting to them for that purpose six miles deep from each side of the river beginning at Lake Erie, and extending in that proportion to the head of the said river, which them and their posterity are to enjoy forever."
There's much more I can speak on the subject. I look forward to another opportunity to add on the subject. I see my time is now up and I'm glad to release my time to others.
Mr. Wildman: I rise to support the passage of this bill brought forward by the member for Hastings-Peterborough. It's given us an opportunity that we don't have very often in this assembly to reflect on the history of this province and the importance of various groups in the development of this province.
I personally have been thinking about my own family's background. I'm a sixth generation Canadian. My family's roots were on both sides of the Ottawa River in the Ottawa Valley, around Shawville, Quebec, and Renfrew County, Carleton County and Lanark County on this side of the river. I'm proud to say that my own heritage is English, Scots, Irish, Mohawk, and many of the ancestors I have were United Empire Loyalists.
I was pleased to have the opportunity to think about this and to reflect on that in listening to some of my colleagues because this is one of the many waves of refugees that we in North America are descended from. The initial waves of refugees to the shores of North America from Europe often were trying to escape religious persecution. Some were trying to escape economic deprivation.
Many of the Scots and Irish obviously came to North America subsequently when their lands were confiscated by the nobles, who were enclosing the lands to raise sheep and thereby displaced people. These refugees, United Empire Loyalists, were trying to escape political and economic persecution related to the fact that they remained loyal to the crown, in opposition to the revolutionaries who were arguing that they should not have to pay taxes without representation. They argued that they were not properly represented.
I find it somewhat ironic, and my friend from Hastings-Peterborough might agree that it is somewhat ironic, that a revolutionary government of which he is a member is bringing forward this resolution celebrating those who opposed revolution; or the government that is amalgamating school boards in the province today and thus in many parts of the north, where we will have enormous geographic areas, depriving people of representation on those boards that will be taxing them; that we are here celebrating that this morning.
I appreciated the comments of the member for York East about Joseph Brant and the Mohawks, the Iroquois Nation, the Six Nations, who supported the British and were allies of the British. I think it's important for us to recognize that in giving them their lands, in some cases the British were depriving the Ojibway Nation of lands. The Mohawks were immigrants to Canada in that sense. They had a history, of course, of war on the Huron, who were allies of the French previously. As allies first of the Dutch and then of the British, they had made incursions into what was Ontario and Quebec previously.
I think it's important for us, who are mostly of European descent, to recognize that the aboriginal nations of Canada were not conquered people. They were never conquered, either by the French or the English. They were in fact allies who had signed treaties with the crown. They were allies of the King. They saw themselves, and they were, in persons like Joseph Brant, equals who were supporting the crown because it was in their interests, they believed, to maintain the relationship they had developed with the crown.
When I hear some members -- and I have heard some members -- say, "Why do the aboriginal people think these treaties are so important? why do they think the rights that were recognized in those treaties should be preserved?" they forget that those treaties were not signed between a conqueror and a defeated nation, but between two nations that decided to cooperate with each other in both of their interests against a common enemy.
We owe a debt to those people. That was again demonstrated in the War of 1812. We have welcomed refugees and the aboriginal people have welcomed refugees, wave after wave after wave, in Canada. We should be celebrating that past, and for that reason I support this bill.
Mr. Jim Flaherty (Durham Centre): I join in complimenting my colleague the member for Hastings-Peterborough for bringing forward this quite appropriate bill for consideration by the House, acknowledging the contribution of United Empire Loyalists to Ontario, the old Upper Canada, and to Canada's heritage. This is a very important group of mixed background, which has been noted. Many people view the United Empire Loyalists as British Tories and limit their view of the group to that group, but as my colleagues have pointed out, there were pacifists, Germans, French Protestants, German Calvinists, German Lutherans, Catholic Highlanders, Scottish Presbyterians and First Canadians also as part of that group, which is a more accurate description of that part of Ontario history, the history of Upper Canada.
I support the bill, of course, because I believe, as other members do, in the importance of recognizing, first of all, that we are all Canadians, but second, that we have a rich and diverse heritage not only in Canada but also in the early history of Upper Canada.
My own family emigrated from Ireland in the 1830s to St John, New Brunswick. My wife's family, on the other hand, is a United Empire Loyalist family from the Brockville area of Ontario in the county of Leeds. Those are the Elliott and Phillips families, many of whom still reside along the shores of the St. Lawrence in central and eastern Ontario. The diligence and dedication of the United Empire Loyalists is clear when one looks at the architecture of eastern Ontario and the vitality of the communities of eastern Ontario, particularly along the St Lawrence.
I also want to comment briefly on the contribution of the United Empire Loyalists, among others, but in particular the United Empire Loyalists, to the development of our parliamentary tradition in Upper Canada; our system of land registration, which has been crucially important to the economic development and success of what is present-day Ontario; and also our system of justice, incorporating the Equity Courts, the Chancery Courts of the United Kingdom and also the great tradition of British common law.
Two of our most important and seminal statutes came from that time, namely, the Quebec Act of 1774, followed by the Constitutional Act of 1791 establishing this elected assembly.
I join with my colleagues in support of this bill and I compliment the member for Hastings-Peterborough for bringing it forward.
Mr. Tim Hudak (Niagara South): I'm very pleased to stand in support of my comrade and friend the member for Hastings-Peterborough on this excellent idea through private members' bills today.
They say everybody is Irish on St. Patrick's Day, so why not give everybody a chance to be an Empire Loyalist on Empire Loyalist Day on June 19 from here on in?
Although I cannot make a claim to Loyalist ancestry myself, I fully support this bill which recognizes a special place in Ontario's history that these immigrants represent in the social and economic development of our young colony. The Niagara area, which is home for me, born and raised in Niagara, is also particularly rich in Loyalist tradition, thanks to Colonel John Butler and his Rangers and many of his Mohawk and Seneca allies under the great Joseph Brant, whom we've heard mentioned many times today. This band of about 1,200 Loyalists fought valiantly out of their base in Fort Niagara in present-day Lewiston, New York, against the forces of republicanism and rebellion in the States.
After the American Revolution, Butler and his allies crossed the Niagara River and settled in many communities throughout the peninsula. They were joined by hundreds of Loyalists of all descents, especially from the New York and Pennsylvania areas.
Reading through the history, you see that life was not easy at all for the early Loyalist immigrants. Some spent years in temporary quarters before moving on to build homes and farms in the wilderness. The year 1789 was known as the hungry year, as the previous year's crops were ruined by extreme heat. Overhunting had depleted game in Niagara's forests, yet the Loyalists survived, and at this time eight townships had been established in the northern part of the Niagara Peninsula.
Newark, now known as Niagara-on-the-Lake, became one of the young colony's first metropolises. The history of this very House in fact dates back to Newark, the first seat of government in Upper Canada. Had Newark not been so close to the border, facing the constant threat of American invasion in those days, it may have been the city that Toronto is today and we'd be cheering for the Niagara-on-the-Lake Maple Leafs instead of a Toronto team.
Shortly thereafter, many more townships were settled throughout Niagara, including those communities like Port Colborne, Fort Erie, and Wainfleet in my riding of Niagara South, with a great number of Pennsylvania Quaker and Mennonite families in that area.
These Loyalists went on to achieve many great things shortly thereafter. They defended the vulnerable Niagara Frontier in the War of 1812 against daunting odds. William Hamilton Merritt, one Loyalist descendant who fought the American invaders, later went on to build the Welland Canal as well as various railroads and bridges throughout the Niagara Peninsula and Upper Canada.
About 40,000 Niagarans today can trace their roots back to Loyalist beginnings. Surnames well known in Niagara like Brown, Sherk, Overholt, Huffman, Wintemute, Winger and, yes, even Harris, are commonly recognized Loyalist monikers in our part of the province.
The Loyalists were instrumental in building Niagara and in building Ontario's cultural, legal and constitutional institutions. I commend the member for Hastings-Peterborough for his efforts in promoting the province's history and the heritage of its people.
The Deputy Speaker: Mr Danford, you have two more minutes.
Mr. Danford: First of all, I want to thank my colleagues for their support this morning that's been shown in this House, certainly the members for Durham Centre, Niagara South, York East and also the members for Algoma-Manitoulin, Sault Ste Marie and Algoma. Their comments were well received and we appreciate that sort of support that recognizes the importance of this bill to the history of the province of Ontario.
As citizens, we are all constantly striving to improve our future, but we always need to remember our roots and our past because truly the lessons of the past are an asset for the decisions of the future, and we always have to keep that in mind.
The Loyalist movement and those people who migrated to this part of Canada set the example for us. Their hard work, their pride, their dedication and the strong principles they brought with them, through very difficult times which many of the members here have already related to and mentioned, set the basis for the province we have here today. Certainly, all the generations that followed, and I think that includes everyone present in this House today and whoever happens to be watching, have been the benefactors of those things that were brought here and how we were established.
The member for Algoma-Manitoulin in one of his remarks recognized the time that has passed, over 200 years, and the fact that we have not recognized this important occasion, and I agree. I thank the member for bringing that point forth and I think it is time.
The Deputy Speaker: Because the standing orders require that votes on private members' public business not be taken before 12 noon, I will suspend the proceedings until noon, pursuant to standing order 95(e), at which time I will put the questions on the ballot items debated this morning.
The House recessed from 1156 to 1200.
The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Gilles E. Morin): We will now deal with ballot item number 92.
Mr. Danford has moved second reading of Bill 150, An Act proclaiming United Empire Loyalists' Day. Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.
Pursuant to standing order 96(k), the bill is referred to the committee of the whole House.
Mr. Harry Danford (Hastings-Peterborough): Could I make a request, Mr Speaker? I would like this referred to the Legislative Assembly committee if the House chooses.
The Deputy Speaker: All those in favour? Carried.
Call in the members; there will be a five-minute bell.
The division bells rang from 1202 to 1206.
The Deputy Speaker (Mr Gilles E. Morin): All those in favour of the motion will please rise and remain standing.
The Deputy Speaker: I declare the motion carried.
Before we adjourn, I would like to congratulate the ladies and gentlemen who took the time to dress in those beautiful costumes and spend the time here with us this morning. Thank you very much.
The Chair (Mr. Joseph N. Tascona): The matter on the agenda today is Bill 150. We'll start off the meeting with a statement by Harry Danford, MPP.
Mr. Harry Danford (Hastings-Peterborough): Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and members of the committee. I'm sure there'll be a few others joining us before we're finished. I appreciate the opportunity to be here and to have an opportunity to make a presentation regarding An Act proclaiming United Empire Loyalists' Day.
Let me start by saying that I believe our heritage is something we should be celebrating. If passed, Bill 150 would give us a chance to recognize the important part that one particular group, the Loyalists, played, and their descendants continue in play, in the development of Ontario. I believe the Loyalists' influence has contributed so much to the province of Ontario; that it is a heritage that belongs to all Ontarians and not just to those with Loyalist roots.
I was disappointed, I might say, to see in last week's papers the poll that found very few of our students know the basics of Canadian history. I believe this is a sign that we need to focus more on our history because it is a history we can be proud of. I believe this bill will help us focus attention on this one important aspect of Ontario's history.
As I have said before, it was Loyalist heritage that led to the development of Canada, with its bilingual, multicultural and regional traditions, under the unifying context of a constitutional monarchy and parliamentary democracy. This is the very thing that sets Canada apart from other nations. This is something we should be proud of and celebrate, and Bill 150 does that.
The Loyalists were Canada's first multicultural immigration. As a result of this massive immigration, pressures were brought forward by the Loyalists for new freedoms that were not found in either Britain or the United States. For example, the Legislature of Upper Canada passed an act in 1793 that effectively ended slavery. This was 50 years before Britain and 70 years before the United States.
Members may be wondering why we should mark UEL Day on June 19. June 19 marks the anniversary of royal assent to the Constitutional Act of 1791. This is probably the most important legacy the Loyalists have left for us. The Constitutional Act set out the framework for representative government in Upper Canada, which is the predecessor of modern-day Ontario. As a matter of fact, our roles as members of provincial Parliament can be traced back to the Constitutional Act of 1791, and indeed the first provincial Parliament held at Newark, which we refer to now as Niagara-on-the-Lake, in 1792. It was the Constitutional Act that established our court system and system of land tenure that is still in use today.
So much of what we take for granted here in Canada has happened as a result of that Constitutional Act. It was this act that guaranteed the protection of the crown for the French language and culture in Lower Canada. It was also the Constitutional Act that gave Catholics full participation rights in Canada, despite the fact that they did not have them in Britain at that time.
The Constitutional Act was passed as a result of the Loyalist migration to Upper Canada, as the new immigrants began demanding changes to the way the colony had been governed in the past. June 19 is the appropriate day because it recognizes one of the lasting contributions of the Loyalists.
I'd like to say that this bill could not have happened without the assistance of a number of organizations. Consultations were held with the United Empire Loyalists' Association of Canada, the Monarchist League of Canada and the Ontario Black History Society, prior to and indeed after the introduction of Bill 150. Out of those consultations I realized the need to amend the preamble of the bill to recognize all African American Loyalists and not just those that were slaves. During clause-by-clause consideration, I will be moving such an amendment.
The Loyalist influence is seen all around us today. As a result of this, I believe the Loyalist tradition belongs to all Ontarians, whether their ancestors were Loyalists or not. The Loyalists worked on behalf of all subjects of the crown and citizens of Canada and not simply for those belonging to a Loyalist club.
I would like to ask all members to recognize the historic importance of the Loyalists by supporting this bill. The Loyalists have left an indelible mark on Ontario. By recognizing June 19 as United Empire Loyalists' Day, we will be celebrating the Loyalists' contribution, and their descendants' continued contribution, not just to Ontario but indeed to Canada.
The Chair: Thank you, Mr Danford. Are there any questions or comments for Mr Danford?
Mr. Gary Fox (Prince Edward-Lennox-South Hastings): I come from an area that's supposed to be United Empire Loyalist territory. I've always been led to believe that the people who claim to be United Empire Loyalists were British subjects who fled from the U.S. and came to an area of Ontario along the northeasterly shore of Lake Ontario, and their protectorate at that time was Fort Henry. Is that not true?
Mr. Danford: There were different migrations. While many of them settled in Adolphustown -- Quinte is in Loyalist country as we know it; certainly in our area, Mr. Fox, as you and I share the same area -- there also were significant movements to Niagara and another large movement around the Windsor-Sarnia area. There were three major areas. That's not to say we didn't cover Ontario as it spread out, but those were the three main points, as history shows us. Of course we have to rely on history and the records that are before us.
Mr. Fox: I never knew that Niagara and Windsor were classified as United Empire Loyalist country.
Mr. Danford: I'm relying on history and research -- that's what we based it on -- and from the United Empire Loyalist group that has been in place for so many years. I'm trusting their background and the information they provided for us in putting this together.
Mr. McLean: I'd like to hear from the 4 p.m. witness we have to see what input she has into this before I ask any questions.
The Chair: You're right on schedule.
UNITED EMPIRE LOYALISTS' ASSOCIATION OF CANADA
The Chair: We have with us Bernice Wood Fett, the national president of the United Empire Loyalists' Association of Canada.
Thank you for attending today, Ms. Wood Flett. It's a fairly informal process. The members may want to ask you a question or just to comment afterwards.
Ms. Bernice Wood Flett: I hope they will ask me some questions. The topic I've chosen perhaps will fill in a few of the cracks that appeared here, but the others I'll try if we have time. I am grateful for the opportunity to speak to you today in support of Bill 150. Ontario, as we know it today, owes its creation to the United Empire Loyalists, although the name 'Ontario' did not come into use until 1867.
The actual story of the United Empire Loyalists was eloquently recited by various members during the second reading of the bill, and I will not repeat that today, but I would like to add one fact to the accounts already heard. Loyalists believed in political development through evolution rather than revolution. They achieved their purpose, albeit more slowly, as we know.
In the words of Arthur Gelber during the 1984 Ontario Bicentennial: "The Loyalists' approach to democracy and politics in those early days was the foundation not only of our own parliamentary democracy, but a model which was a significant inspiration to the development of the Commonwealth. That heritage of change through evolution is one which remains with us strongly to this day."
I believe the recognition of the Loyalists and their contribution to this province has been evolving over many years. In the words of Mary Beacock Fryer, "One pervading theme threads through Ontario's story -- loyalty -- from the founders of Ontario to the motto," which she translates as, "Loyal she began, loyal she remains."
We have been reminded of this history at quite regular intervals in Ontario's time. For example, in 1816, after the War of 1812-14, the executive council of Upper Canada, as Ontario was called then, decreed that no land petitions would be received until proof of loyalty was provided. Sons had to have done their duty in defence of the province, and daughters had to prove that their husbands had also done their duty. Only when this proof was presented was land granted.
Intermarriage with new settlers somewhat diluted the Loyalist influence after the War of 1812, but in 1855 the Toronto Globe printed an editorial on the ignorance in Canada West -- a new name -- concerning the Loyalist fathers.
This may have resulted in Egerton Ryerson, who was our first Minister of Education, being approached about writing a history of the Loyalists, and eventually he did this. His two-volume history of the Loyalists is still in use today and is still read regularly by historians.
In 1859, the publishing of William Kirby's 178-page poem, A Tale of Upper Canada, served to remind us of our beginnings. The section on the Hungry Years is perhaps the best-known part, and it is one of the most poignant passages in Canadian literature.
At the same time, the Niagara area was the centre of Loyalist interest. William Hamilton Merritt was known for his Welland Canal, and in 1859 circulated a petition asking that the Ontario Legislature pay more attention to the history of Upper Canada.
Other petitions soon followed and researchers were appointed to uncover Upper Canadian documentary material in Britain. Through such efforts a Loyalist tradition was created in the mid-19th century, many traces of which still remain today.
The reminders continued. In 1861 a provincial historical society was founded and it was called the Upper Canada Historical Society, because there was a growing interest in the history of the province. The year 1884 brought the centennial celebration of the Loyalist landing at Adolphustown. There were huge celebrations in Toronto and Niagara, as well as the Bay of Quinte area.
Loyalist history was in the limelight again.
On February 28, 1896, the United Empire Loyalists' Association of Ontario was organized with the purpose of preserving such Loyalist records as were still available. Our work in this area continues today, especially now that archival space has become too scarce to keep all the valuable data which have been accumulated.
In 1904 an Ontario Archives report made available a large collection of important documentary material relating to Loyalist claims. This report is still one of our major references.
But in 1909 we have the biggest step in the evolutionary process thus far: the creation of the Ontario coat of arms, with its motto, "Ut incepit fidelis sic permanet": As she began, so she remains, loyal. This bore official witness for the first time to the Loyalist origins of the province.
The building of the St. Lawrence Seaway brought attention again to our Loyalist story in the 1950s. The entire area which was to be flooded as part of the Seaway system was Loyalist ground. Some of the oldest and most valued historic buildings of the area were to be flooded. Whole villages were lost. Ontario's citizens must be forever grateful to Premier Leslie Frost and his government for having the wisdom and the sense of history to create Upper Canada Village, a living museum of the Loyalists and of early Ontario.
Today we can see some of these buildings which were saved, as well as the wonderful artefacts, the documents, the library, which make up the best collection of our early history anywhere. It is our fervent hope that proposed commercialization will be sufficiently controlled so that the historic integrity of the site is preserved.
We now move ahead to 1965 when on February 15 the new Canadian flag, the red maple leaf, was unfurled for the first time.
Just three months later, on May 21, the Ontario provincial flag was proclaimed, the former Red Ensign with the provincial arms in the fly. I wonder if anyone realized at that time that the Loyalist flag is part of our provincial flag. The Union Jack is really the old Union Flag with the cross of St Patrick added. Whether it was intentional or not, the Loyalist flag is enshrined in the flag of Ontario, forever recognizing the Loyalist beginnings of our province.
Who of us will ever forget the excitement of the 1984 bicentennial celebration? Loyalist history again was at the forefront, and again people were reminded of how our province began. But 1984 was more than just celebration. Newly arrived citizens began to realize that they too followed the traditions laid down by our Loyalist forefathers.
A taxi driver in London, Ontario, who told me he had come from Ethiopia, recognized the badge on my blazer and asked if I knew about United Empire Loyalists. He went on to say he had studied English with a Canadian teacher in his native village. This teacher had told his class stories about the UELs and Ontario's beginnings. Eventually, when he knew he would have to leave his
homeland, he remembered these stories and decided to try to get to Ontario to start a new life. A place which had been built by political refugees would understand his plight. As a matter of fact, he lives in my building, which I didn't know.
The Loyalists arrived with a special desire for justice and for peace, for respect and tolerance for people and cultures. Thus, at our very beginnings, the stage was set for the kind of multiracial, multicultural and multifaceted society we have in Ontario today.
In a real sense we are all heirs to the Loyalist heritage.
"Our history belongs to all of us," said Sydney Wise of Carleton University. "We owe it to our children and grandchildren to pass on to them an understanding of our heritage and the strengths given us."
Bill 150 will give us the opportunity to do it. It is the culmination of all these and other efforts to give our Loyalist ancestors their due. It has taken 213 years for the evolutionary process to be completed, but with the passing of Bill 150, we will have achieved, in the tradition of the United Empire Loyalists, evolution without revolution.
The Chair: Thanks very much. Are there any questions or comments?
Mr. David Tilson (Dufferin-Peel): My question has to do with the list of names that is suggested in the bill, whether or not that list is complete.
Ms. Wood Flett: Do you mean names of people or names of groups?
Mr. Tilson: The bill refers to "the Dutch, the English, the freed African American slaves, the French, the Germans, the Iroquois, the Scots."
Ms. Wood Flett: You can add to that the Swiss, the Jews and about 18 more as well.
Mr. Tilson: That's my point.
Ms. Wood Flett: The way I would answer that is that those are the larger groups. The largest group who came were German ancestors, and they perhaps spoke German rather than English when they came here. There were smaller groups. There was a group of Jewish immigrants who came and settled around the Gananoque area, for example. There weren't very many of them, but they certainly were there.
Mr. Tilson: I guess my question really is that we, as representatives of constituents around the province -- are there going to be some people in this province who may not be part of that group but may consider themselves, their ancestors at least, were loyal to the empire and will be a little annoyed that this list is as short as it is? I'm not necessarily saying the list should be extended. I'm raising the question, should that list even be there?
Ms. Wood Flett: You're suggesting it be written in more general terms?
Mr. Tilson: Or even don't refer to nationalities. I don't know. You wouldn't believe the calls we get.
Ms. Wood Flett: Oh, I think I do. I get quite a few.
The Chair: We'll have someone calling up and saying, "I'm Italian, I'm Irish, I'm from some other nationality and my ancestors I believe were loyal to the empire," and away we go, we're in big trouble.
Ms. Wood Flett: For what it's worth, we have four applications on our desk right now which have very Italian-sounding names. That's what they were. And there has been intermarriage back over the time, so I understand what you're getting at. I'm not sure what the answer is to that. I really am not. If you take the groups that came to Canada at that particular time, then the ones that have been named were the largest groups. But certainly there should be something to indicate that they were not the only groups. How you're going to do that, I'm not sure.
Mr. Tilson: Thank you very much.
Mr. Curling: I just want to emphasize that the presentation was excellent, it gives you some historic background and I enjoyed that very much, but I still have those concerns too, as you know, that have been raised by Mr. Tilson here.
Ms. Wood Flett: May I reply? You see, there were many of the people who left the United States who did not come to Canada. Many of them went to the Caribbean. Many of them went to Sierra Leone. Others went back to England. Some of them hid in Florida and areas like that. There are many people that did not come to Canada. They estimate that there was a third who left the country, a third who stayed who were rebels, and a third who were completely neutral and kind of disappeared for a few years until it was safe to come back. That is another story.
Mr. McLean: Can I add a supplementary to that? If you came from Britain, are you not classified as an Empire Loyalist?
Ms. Wood Flett: Not unless you actually lived in the United States before 1775. I'm sorry I didn't bring my bylaws with me and I could have read that word for word, but you had to have lived in the United States before 1775 and had declared your loyalty; that is, you had to join the British standard by that time, and then after that it happened as we've described.
The Chair: Thank you very much for your presentation.
At this point in time we've heard from Mr. Danford and Ms. Bernice Wood Flett. Is there any further discussion at this point in time before we go to clause-by-clause?
Mr. Silipo: I wonder if while Mr Danford is checking out the wording, perhaps I could just indicate -- I'd be happy to do it under section 1; I'm just as happy under the preamble. I just want to indicate on the record my support for this bill.
I wasn't in the House when second reading took place, but I had a chance to look back at the Hansard, and quite honestly I'm sorry I wasn't there because it struck me as being one of those rare moments when not only was there a fair amount of unanimity, but there was such unanimity around a cluster of points and issues that go back to the heart of what I think makes this province and this country one of the best places in the world to live.
I share in one extent Mr. Curling's concern about how far you can take the multiculturalism aspect of this, but on the other hand I do understand the point that I think Mr. Danford has been making on this, which is that clearly within the make-up of the United Empire Loyalists of the time, there were people who had come to the United States and then here to Canada, to Ontario, from many different parts of the world and indeed from different races, including the native peoples. That's a point that should not be missed and so I appreciate the fact that was put in.
However, we resolve the wording of this, I'll be interested in hearing what suggestions -- I'm kind of six of one, half a dozen of the other on that in terms of whether you include the largest groups or whether you don't. I don't have a strong view on that.
But I do think it is important -- it was partly why I was interested in the information. I appreciate research providing us that information in terms of the number of days or times of the year that the Legislative Assembly has made proclamations with respect to other events. I do think this is one that is important to have recognized by the assembly. I say that as somebody who fits perhaps in the category of the more recent arrivals to this country, having come here in 1970, and I say that therefore with a great deal of respect for those who have been here before.
That's not to say I necessarily agree with the views that groups such as the United Empire Loyalists might have on particular issues or not, but I don't think that's the issue here. The issue here is recognizing a part of our history and recognizing that there has been an incredible amount of evolution that also includes one of the first groups that then played a key role in developing and eventually establishing this country.
I just think that is something that is worthwhile. As somebody who has come relatively recently and from a community the majority of whom have come relatively recently but also a community that can trace its presence in Ontario and Canada back some 150 years at least, I think I can not only voice my own views, which obviously are the only ones I have the right to, but voice the sentiment of many who have come, like me, relatively recently to this province and to this country, about the need, while we continue to ask for respect and fairness and understanding vis-à-vis the more recent immigrant groups, to be prepared in ways like this to also recognize the respect we have for some of the original settlers of this province.
It's in that spirit that I certainly support this bill. It's something that I wonder why it wasn't done before, but it's a good thing it is here. I thank Mr Danford for bringing it forward. It will add something that will be useful as we try to describe, in the limitations that anybody ever can in legislation, the evolution -- I appreciated very much the phrase Ms. Wood Flett used, not once but twice, of "evolution rather than revolution."
But I do say seriously that I think this piece of legislation recognizes an important part of our history and, as such, it's important to have that done. It's important to understand that as part of the evolution of this province and this country, but it's equally important for that to be done with a view also to the future, for myself, for my son and indeed for all children to also understand that that history is a part of us as well.
That doesn't mean we necessarily subscribe to everything that was there. That doesn't mean that we agree with necessarily everything. I have particularly, for example, some different views than others might have with respect to what should happen with the evolution of the monarchy. As we've seen the empire change over the years, we've obviously begun to see in more recent times that the monarchy has to change, and perhaps we will see the day when the monarchy will no longer play a role in this country. It's something that I think is just going to be part of the continuing evolution of Canada as a country.
But that would not for one second deny and should not deny the recognition that part of our history as a province and as a country involves the very significant role the United Empire Loyalists played, and without whom this province and this country would obviously have taken a very different kind of configuration. I'm grateful for the contribution they have made and am happy to be in a position where I can raise my hand in support of a bill that seeks to recognize that history and to recognize that contribution.
The Chair: Mr. Curling, do you want to deal with the sections?
Mr. Curling: I just wanted to place on the record too that I strongly support this legislation. I want to commend Mr. Danford for the way he presented it and the way he actually worked the caucus and worked me to bring me up to date on any changes he was envisioning and any concern the community had. I want to thank you for that.
I too want to echo the things Mr Silipo said as also a new immigrant of just 30 years or so, that what we are enjoying today, and I'm talking about immigrants like myself, and what my daughters and son are enjoying today, who are Canadian-born, should never be taken for granted.
There were those who had a belief and a commitment that have allowed us today to enjoy this country, our country, in this manner. Knowing where we come from, as we always say, without precisely telling us exactly where we are going, makes it much easier for us. Too often we forget those things. Many times in the House there are debates that sometimes people think are rather unnecessary, but it's enlightening, it's encouraging and it's remindful of the things we should be looking at. Today I've learned a considerable amount and hope that the knowledge I gathered will stimulate me to learn more about that and to carry that kind of message out to those of us who are here in Canada and building our country.
I fully want to support this. I'd like to see all those recognized who have contributed to making this country what it is, and this is a wonderful time in which to do that. I hope that the amendments you bring forward may be helpful in making those kinds of recognition.
The Chair: Shall section 1 carry? Carried.
Shall section 2 carry? Carried.
Shall section 3 carry? Carried.
Shall the preamble, as amended, carry? Carried.
Shall the title carry? Carried.
Shall the bill, as amended, carry? Carried.
Shall I report the bill, as amended, to the House? Agreed.
That concludes our activities for the day. I'd like to thank everyone and especially Mr. Danford for his efforts.
Ontario Hansard - Thursday 18 September 1997
STANDING COMMITTEE ON THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY
Mr. Joseph N. Tascona (Simcoe Centre): I beg leave to present a report from the standing committee on the Legislative Assembly and move its adoption.
Clerk at the Table (Ms. Lisa Freedman): Your committee begs to report the following bill as amended:
Bill 150, An Act proclaiming 'United Empire Loyalists' Day'.
The Speaker (Hon. Chris Stockwell): Shall the report be received and adopted? Agreed? Agreed. The bill is therefore ordered for third reading.
The Speaker (Hon. Chris Stockwell): Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.
Be it resolved that the bill do now pass and be entitled as in the motion.
Hon. Hilary M. Weston (Lieutenant Governor): Pray be seated.
The Speaker (Hon. Chris Stockwell): May it please Your Honour, the Legislative Assembly of the province has, at its present meetings thereof, passed certain bills to which, in the name of and on behalf of the said Legislative Assembly, I respectfully request Your Honour's assent.
Clerk Assistant (Ms. Deborah Deller): The following are the titles of the bills to which Your Honour's assent is prayed:
Clerk of the House (Mr. Claude L. DesRosiers): In Her Majesty's name, the Honourable the Lieutenant Governor doth assent to these bills.
Copyright © 1999 BoQ Branch
U.E.L. Association of Canada
- 30 -