Project Canterbury

Life of Robert Machray, Archbishop of Rupert's Land

By His Nephew, Robert Machray

Toronto: Macmillan, 1909.

Chapter XV. Reaction and Depression (1883-1887)

THOUGH the inevitable reaction after the inflation of the "Winnipeg Boom," and the resultant depression blighting both the country and the Church, are the chief features of the period of about four years now to be presented, yet the late summer of 1883 was rendered memorable by a further extension of the Church in Rupert's Land. Not only was the Bishopric of Assiniboia definitely formed, according to the desire of Bishop Machray--the fifth See taken out of the original Diocese, but a division of the Bishopric of Athabasca added a sixth See to the Provincial system, and there was something more than a hint of the establishment within a short time of a seventh--Alberta. Under date March 1, 1883, the Dominion Government issued a map showing the boundaries of Manitoba and the North-West Territories, as they had been defined a year or two previously by the Parliament of Canada, and the Provincial Synod--the third since the formation of the Ecclesiastical Province--rearranged the boundaries of the Dioceses, both old and new, to correspond with the lines ruled on the map by the civil authorities. This important Synod assembled at St. John's, Winnipeg, on August 8 and 9, 1883.

The Territory or "District," as it was officially termed at that period, of Assiniboia stretched westward of Manitoba for some two hundred miles, its farther frontier being the District of Alberta; Assiniboia has since been merged with the District of Saskatchewan, the two forming one Province of the Dominion under the name of Saskatchewan; as a geographical designation it has disappeared, like the earlier Assiniboia of the old Red River days. The greater part of it was in the Diocese of Rupert's Land, the smaller in the Diocese of Saskatchewan, as they were then constituted. Before he had begun to move actively in the matter, Bishop Machray had had in his mind the desirability of forming it into a separate Bishopric, but on communicating his views to his old friend and comrade, Dr. M'Lean, the Bishop of Saskatchewan, he was greatly disappointed to find an unsympathetic response. On this and other grounds there was for awhile a good deal of friction between the two Bishops.

Bishop M'Lean, it appeared, was ambitious of having his Diocese created an independent Ecclesiastical Province, and had even taken some steps to this end. Bishop Machray thought the project, if carried out, could only result in weakening the position of the whole Church in North-West Canada, and he therefore strenuously opposed it, arguing that while the North-West was a truly great country, which by and by might advantageously have more than one Ecclesiastical Province within it, the time for the consideration of such a change had certainly not arrived; on the contrary, the existing circumstances of the Church called imperatively for unity, combined effort, and a gathering up and holding together of all their strength. Bishop Machray consequently looked forward to the meeting of the Provincial Synod with some foreboding, but a few days before it assembled the two Bishops met and discussed their differences of opinion, the issue being that Bishop M'Lean abandoned his opposition, and fell into line completely with the Metropolitan. So thorough was his acquiescence in Bishop Machray's views that in a sermon preached at the opening of the Synod Dr. M'Lean took as his subject the need of unity within the Province.

When the Synod, after Divine Service in St. John's Cathedral, met in the College for the transaction of business, Bishop Machray, as Metropolitan, delivered an Address in which he referred to the new Dioceses which he hoped the Synod would form; the one was Assiniboia, the other was to be made by a division of the See of Athabasca at the request of Bishop Bompas. With respect to the former he said, "An active Bishop will be the best means of strengthening the Church, and finding the necessary money and men for the needed missions"; as regarded the latter, Archdeacon M'Donald, the veteran missionary of the North, had been sent to the Synod as the representative of Bishop Bompas in support of his proposal, which, the Metropolitan stated, was worthy of every encouragement. The C.M.S. were anxious to assist Bishop Bompas in carrying out his plans, and would provide an income for the new Bishop in Athabasca.

In his Address the Metropolitan spoke of a Bishop in connection with the projected Diocese of Assiniboia, but said nothing with respect to the means of supporting him. In the course of his remarks, however, he said, "We have heard with no small interest and sympathy that the story of our growing spiritual needs in the vast expanse of country receiving immigrants has led the Hon. and Rev. Canon Anson, Rector of Woolwich, to give up his valuable and important living, and dedicate himself to the mission work of the Church in the North West." At the moment there was no further reference to Canon Anson's action, but it was hardly possible for any one to fail to understand that the mention of his name in close connection with the formation of the Diocese of Assiniboia, as it was in the Metropolitan's Address, was of special significance.

A matter which had come before the previous Provincial Synod the respective boundaries of the Diocese of Columbia (British Columbia) and the Diocese of Athabasca--was another important topic of the Address. The question was whether a part of the Diocese of Athabasca lying within the Civil Province of British Columbia was not really a part of the Diocese of Columbia. Bishop Machray pointed out that the part in dispute had been considered as being in Athabasca by the Hudson's Bay Company, and that it had been visited by Rupert's Land missionaries. It was only after Canada had transferred the district to British Columbia, owing to expected mining operations and the supposed inability of the Company's officers to deal with dis turbances, that any doubt had arisen as to its being in the Diocese of Athabasca. "We cannot be expected, for such a reason," said the Metropolitan, "to change our ecclesiastical arrangements "--and so dismissed the subject.

Resolutions were passed unanimously by the House of Bishops and the House of Delegates by which the Diocese of Assiniboia was set off from Rupert's Land and Saskatchewan, a general "rectification of the frontiers," as diplomatists would have termed it, being made with respect to Rupert's Land, Saskatchewan, and Athabasca. "Rupert's Land" was restricted to Manitoba and part of Ontario and the District of Keewatin; "Saskatchewan" included the District of that name and the District of Alberta; "Athabasca" coincided with the District of the same name; and "Assiniboia" was conterminous with the civil limits of that District. The Lower House, however, suggested that Alberta should be erected into a separate See as soon as possible. The chief loser (in a sense) by these changes was the Diocese of Rupert's Land, as it gave up a large western area to Assiniboia and a portion of its north-west to Saskatchewan. At the instance of Archdeacon M'Donald the two Houses agreed to the division of Athabasca, according to the desire of Bishop Bompas--the parent See being provisionally apportioned between "Northern" and "Southern" Athabasca, named afterwards "Mackenzie River" and "Athabasca" respectively.

Rupert's Land, as an Ecclesiastical Province, was now divided into six Dioceses:

Rupert's Land = Manitoba, parts of Keewatin and Ontario.

Moosonee = The region around Hudson's Bay and part of Keewatin.

Saskatchewan = Districts of Saskatchewan and Alberta.

Northern Athabasca = The region afterwards called the Diocese of Mackenzie River.

Assiniboia = District of Assiniboia (afterwards the Diocese was called Qu'Appelle).

Southern Athabasca = The region afterwards called the Diocese of Athabasca.

Apart from the formation of the new Dioceses the only other matter of primary importance before the Synod was a motion, passed by both Houses, appointing a committee to consider a revision of the Constitution of the Province and its Canons, and the establishment of a General Board of Missions--the committee to report fully, after consultation with the Bishops, at a special meeting of the Provincial Synod to be summoned by the Metropolitan during 1884.

Meanwhile Canon Anson had arrived in the country, and Bishop Machray, after the Synod, appointed him his Commissary for Assiniboia, which had been left in his episcopal charge. Canon Anson visited several of the centres of settlement in the new Diocese, and then returned to England to raise an endowment for the See and to procure clergy for it. He met with such success, that with the funds actually subscribed and an annual grant from the S.P.G., the way was opened for his Consecration should he accept the Bishopric. At this time he had the offer of the Bishopric of Central Africa, but decided to take Assiniboia. On June 24, 1884, he was consecrated in Lambeth Church, London, by the Archbishop of Canterbury (Dr. Benson), the Bishops of London (Dr. Jackson), St. Albans (Dr. Claughton), Rochester (Dr. Thorold), Lichfield (Dr. Maclagan), and other Bishops, amongst them being the Bishop of Saskatchewan, who preached the sermon on the occasion. With Bishop Anson was consecrated Bishop Hannington--so soon to lay down his life for the Church in Central Africa.

Bishop Anson was a High Churchman, and his Church views, therefore, were not those of Bishop Machray, but the latter was deeply sensible that Dr. Anson's splendid act of self-devotion--one of the many romances of missions--in giving up Woolwich for mission work in the North--West at this critical time, and his capability in many directions to cope with the problems of a new Diocese, indicated that his appointment to Assiniboia was most fitting and opportune. Bishop Machray, it should be added, had no objection to a moderate High Churchman in his own Diocese, which was almost wholly Evangelical; the Bishop's Evangelicism was of the Church-Conservative type, and in no way bigoted. Writing about this time to his London Commissary, Mr. Jones of Westminster School, with regard to the kind of men he wished for his missions, he said: "I do not in the least object to a moderate High Churchman who is a good worker, but should be glad to have him if (1) loyal to the Church as Reformed, that is, if willing to conform to our ritual, and not a man who would introduce the modern innovations of bowings, crossings, etc.--I believe, apart from my dislike of these ways theologically, that they would be fatal practically to the Church here; and if (2) prepared willingly to take a kind and cordial position with other Protestant bodies though working separately."

In the course of the same letter the Bishop explained further what he meant by the last three words of the preceding paragraph--"though working separately." He wrote"

I wish men who are loyal to the Church, yet possess breadth of view for fellow-Christians. I wish men who consider the ways of the Church the best; who, except for intercessory prayer in visiting families or the sick, usually prefer the Church form of prayer; who will work simply with their brethren, and not go in with Presbyterian, Methodist, or Baptist with joint prayer-meetings and other spiritual exercises. "All things are lawful, but all things are not expedient." I have become perfectly convinced that members of our liturgical Church cannot in the present divided state of the Catholic Church use their full liberty. Such fraternising leads almost with certainty to a loss of loyalty on the part of some members of the Church.

On the other hand, I want men who, while not afraid of speaking of their own Church as the Church--thereby affirming their presence in the Catholic Church--do not Un-church others, but allow them, if they like, to make the same claim--do not refer to Presbyterians, Methodists, etc., as outside the Catholic Church--who will behave in a brotherly and friendly spirit to the ministers and members of other bodies--in fact, do all but work with them.

As had been resolved at the third Provincial Synod, a special meeting of the Provincial Synod was held in 1884. This Synod lasted for three days--October 1, 2, and 3. Bishop Machray preached the opening sermon, and took advantage of the opportunity to make a historical review of the Church in Rupert's Land, saying, amongst other things:

When I think of this country as I found it nineteen years ago, and then allow its chief city, and towns, and settlements, and institutions to pass before my mind, it seems as if there had passed over the scene the stroke of a fairy wand--so wonderful is the transformation. Yet the great material progress of the country was doubtless to be anticipated as soon as the onward advance of settlement had made it possible. There was the fairest heritage in a soil unsurpassed in fertility and a climate most healthy and inspiriting. But the growth of the Church has well kept up with the progress of the country; indeed, it is still more striking. I confess that, conscious as I am of the small resources of Churchmen in the country in the past and present, all of them starting into life with many out lays and anxieties, and conscious, further, of the want of men of large means outside of the country personally interested in it and anxious for the establishment of the Church, I sometimes seem to myself to be dreaming when I look over the vast region that was once under my sole episcopal charge, and find in it six Bishoprics and nearly one hundred clergy; or, confining my attention to what still forms the Diocese of Rupert's Land, 1 see central institutions for diocesan and educational purposes so well organised and established that a comparatively small sum could now make them most stable and effective.

He specially referred, with some fulness, to the obligations under which the Province lay to the great English Church Societies, without whose assistance the progress of the Church in the country would have been, and would be for years to come, impossible. First of all, the Church owed a great debt to the C.M.S., the work of which had "been in so many ways an untold blessing to this land. The benefits of that work have been far from confined to the Indians, but it is for their sake that it has been carried on. Often has that work stood out before me, coming home to me as a work from above and not springing from human policy." Since the opening up of the country by immigration, the S.P.G. had come forward "in the most generous and sympathising manner, and with surpassing kindness and consideration." The S.P.C.K. had also helped "largely and generously... It has not allowed itself to be tied by precedents." The C.C.C.S., too, had also given invaluable assistance. The Church in the Province of Canada had from time to time afforded welcome help.

The clergy in the Province still depended in great measure on the subsidies given by the Societies; only in Winnipeg were there self-supporting churches, though there were two or three other towns in Manitoba which might be expected to support their clergy before long. Outside Winnipeg there was scarcely a clergy man, certainly not more than two or three, whose salary was not dependent on funds from England to the extent of at least one-half. And this being the case, said the Bishop, they must treasure the words of his predecessor, Bishop Anderson, and act upon them: "England must still be regarded by us as the heart and centre of life, from which the blood circulates to the most distant parts of the body. Our wisdom would be to keep up a lively intercourse with the Church whence we are sent forth; not to labour independently of her, not to frame a code of laws for our regulation differing from those which are in force at home, but rather to adapt, as much as may be, our own internal government to that which the wisdom of our forefathers devised and the experience of ages sanctioned." The Bishop remarked that it was on this principle that the original Constitution of the Province had been drawn up, and personally he could not recognise any such change in their circumstances as made any other principle wise or right. At the same time, he had the fullest confidence that the day would come when the Church as a whole would be self-supporting.

A draft Constitution had been prepared by the Committee appointed at the Provincial Synod of 1883, and when its provisions came to be considered by the two Houses the only very important difference between them arose over the appointment of the Bishops of the Province. Generally speaking, the Lower House de sired that the Bishops should not be appointed by England as represented by the Archbishop of Canter bury, but by the Provincial Synod in the case of Dioceses which had not ten clergymen supported by endowments or by congregations, or by the Diocesan Synod in the case of a Diocese which had that number of such clergymen. The attitude of the Upper House was that foreshadowed by Bishop Machray in the course of his sermon; the Church in Rupert's Land was dependent on support from England. The view of the Bishops was thus expressed: "In case of a vacancy in the Episcopate in any Diocese of the Province not specially provided for, the selection of a Bishop should rest with the Archbishop of Canter bury, unless and until there were twelve clergymen in the given Diocese supported by endowment or by congregations, when the Bishop was to be elected by the Diocesan Synod, subject to confirmation by the Metropolitan and two other Bishops of the Province." After much discussion in the Lower House and conferences between the two Houses, it was finally agreed to accept the view of the Bishops, who, how ever, added, as a concession to the feeling shown by the Lower House, the words "after consultation with the Metropolitan and such Bishops of the Province as can be conveniently communicated with" immediately subsequent to the words "Archbishop of Canterbury" in the above sentence (see p. 259, Constitution, 6).

With respect to the northern boundary of the new Diocese, provisionally known as Southern Athabasca, the Synod decided to accept the circle of latitude passing through Fort Smith, and, as Bishop Bompas had resigned the title of Bishop of Athabasca, to style the new See Athabasca, and to leave the name of the northern portion of the parent See to the Metropolitan and Bishop Bompas, who ultimately called it Mackenzie River. This sixth See of the Province, Athabasca, received its Bishop in the Rev. Richard Young, the Incumbent of St. Andrew's in the Diocese of Rupert's Land. After being given the degree of D.D., honoris causa, by St. John's, he was consecrated at Winnipeg on October i 8, 1884, the officiating prelates being the Bishops of Rupert's Land, Saskatchewan, and Assiniboia--the first Consecration of a Bishop held in the Canadian North-West. The appointment had lain with the C.M.S., and they gave it to Dr. Young, whom Bishop Machray described as "a godly, loving, and sound pastor," one of their missionaries.

With these encouraging evidences of the growth of the Church under him, a spirit of hopefulness and of optimism appeared in Bishop Machray when he met his Diocesan Synod which assembled on October 29, but he was compelled to admit that both Church and country were suffering from the effects of the Boom. In his Address he said:

When the Synod last met, the shadows of the reaction from the undue and unhealthy speculation of the previous year or two were already closing round us. Since then the country has passed through a period of serious trial for many. There has been nothing to create the slightest doubt as to the ultimate prosperity of the country. The causes of the depression are very simple and temporary. Still their effect has been very real and injurious. They have hampered us in the sustaining and extension of our Church work. Many individuals have been embarrassed. And as the immigration for the past two years has passed mainly beyond Manitoba, it is questionable whether in many cases our missions are not for the moment weaker instead of stronger. As a result of these combined influences several of our parishes are weighed down by obligations undertaken under different prospects. And where this is not the case, there has often been much difficulty in raising the salary of the clergyman.

Under these circumstances I think there is much cause for thankfulness for the very considerable progress that has been made. Services continue to be held in almost all former places, though there are not at present clergymen at Headingley and Morris. The following new mission districts have been supplied with resident clergymen:--The Boyne, Turtle Mountain, Gladstone, Rat Portage, Rowan, Souris, Shoal Lake, Clearwater, Beaconsfield, Manitou, and Alexander. Two new parishes have been formed in Winnipeg--All Saints' and St. George's. Means have been provided for appointing a clergy man at Wakopa through the generosity of Mr J. C. Sharpe of London. I hope we may be able shortly to form another mission district to include Virden. . . . There are now within our reduced Diocese over fifty ordained clergy holding my licence. I doubt if there are as many ministers of any other body. There are also a number of laymen licensed by me under our Canon, some of whom have Services very regularly. New churches have been consecrated or opened at Sunnyside and Westbourne; in All Saints' and Holy Trinity parishes, Winnipeg; and at Clanwilliam and Souris. Churches are either finished or nearly so at. Rounthwaite, Birtle, Shoal Lake, and in St. George's, Winnipeg.

The Bishop stated that the Societies had responded to his appeal for funds--the S.P.G. had added a considerable sum to its annual grant to the Diocese, and had twice given a special grant of £500, ($2500), and the C.C.C.S. had increased its grant by £100 ($500). With the aid of the S.P.G. and the S.P.C.K. the General Endowment Fund had been raised from $13,000 (£2600) to $23,000 (£4600). On the other hand, contributions within the Diocese had fallen off owing to the local financial depression, though the Diocese had raised about $40,000 (£8000) for Church objects in the past year. In one way or another the invested funds had grown until they now aggregated $350,000 (£70,000); to deal with investments for these funds or "trusts" the Bishop had formed an Advisory Board, and in the next year he proposed to place all the accounts of the trusts with this Board.

It was with respect to St. John's College that the evil effects of the Boom were mainly seen. To quote from the Address:

Since last Synod the new building of St. John's College has been erected. With the general structure we are well satisfied, but the heating, draining, and plumbing have given us a good deal of trouble, and seem likely to cause both trouble and expense. We have felt severely the pressure of the times. There has always been more or less a burden of debt from our growth requiring from time to time additions to our buildings for which we had no funds. This debt was reduced a few years ago, but the erection of the house for the Deputy Head Master, and of additional rooms for Matron and Hospital, again raised it to about $17,000. Then a double brick house for two masters cost $10,500. The erection of the new College, many additional expenses attending this, the interest on the debt, and an additional cost from occupying the new buildings in fuel, service, and the other expenses of a double establishment, which we have reckoned at $4000, have raised the debt to $55,000 (£11,000). We did not see our way clear, in face of the commercial depression and difficulties of the past two years, to ask for further subscriptions, though many of the leading Churchmen of the Diocese have not contributed, while about $12,000 (£2400) of the subscriptions promised have either not been paid or paid in land of which we cannot advantageously dispose.

It was this heavy debt on the College that long weighed on the Bishop; in 1884 he was sanguine that it would be removed in a comparatively short time, owing to the expected rapid recovery of the country, but in this hope he was disappointed, for the country did not recover so soon as he anticipated. In addition to the debt on the College there was also a growing debt on the Ladies' College, and that, too, cramped him sorely.

This Diocesan Synod had not much business before it; perhaps the most important thing it did was to appoint a committee, to be named by the Bishop, to consider the best means of retaining permanently the Diocese of Rupert's Land as the Metropolitical See of the Province. The question had been introduced by the Bishop in some touching words, for it was a subject on which he felt very deeply:

It has always been an object very dear to my heart that this See, which has been the Mother See of this land, should, according to all the traditions of the Primitive Church, be the Metropolitical See of the Province. And the labour I have given for the establishment of our institutions, which an additional sum, by no means very large, could now, I believe, make as complete as any in the Colonial Church, has been with a view of a larger usefulness than merely for a Bishopric of Winnipeg, or of a district of Manitoba, for to this it will otherwise come. It has, therefore, been a disappointment to me to observe a tendency, for reasons that do not approve themselves to me, to accept this limited sphere, and so practically cast away the Bishopric of Rupert's Land with the advantages that might make this Bishopric the choicest as well as the chief See of the Province. .

As far as I am concerned in this matter, I may say, once for all, that I cannot forget that I am Bishop of Rupert's Land in the full meaning of that expression, and am, therefore, equally anxious for the well-being and best interests of the whole Province and of this Diocese. For many a day it seems to me that there will be serious disadvantages if the Metropolitan be not the Bishop resident in this city. I trust, then, that the subject may, in the next year or two, receive the earnest consideration of the clergy and laity of the Diocese, in the hope that some scheme may be adopted for the appointment of the Bishop of Rupert's Land, by which the Diocese may be satisfied that it is likely to get a worthy Bishop, and the Province that it will get a suitable Metropolitan.

The depression grew deeper and deeper during the winter of 1884-85; the spring of 188 saw no improvement, but the reverse. Riel, who had been the leader of the Métis rebels in Red River in 1869-1870 (see Chapters IX. and X.), headed another insurrection of his French half-breed compatriots, its theatre, on this occasion, being the valley of the Saskatchewan. On March 19, 1885, Riel and a body of armed rebels established themselves at Batoche's Crossing, fifty miles from Prince Albert, where Bishop M'Lean had his headquarters. Several of the heathen Indian tribes rose--none of the Christian Indians joined them; for some time the situation in the Saskatchewan was dark and terrible. Canada quickly took action, troops were organised and rushed to the front, and after a few months the rebellion was suppressed and Riel captured and hanged. Volunteers from Manitoba went to the scene of the fighting, and took their share in it, but the rising did not affect that Province directly, though indirectly it was damaging to it, as business was checked and immigration came practically to a standstill. In this way it affected the Diocese of Rupert's Land, and made the hard times after the Boom harder still.

As has been seen, the Bishop was always pressed by the want of means to keep his missions going in the new settlements; however much help he got from England or elsewhere it was never enough, for ·there were always more settlements springing up and wanting clergymen. A large part of the assistance came from the contributions of his own people to the Home Mission Fund; now, for the first time, so great was the pressure of circumstances, their contributions fell off; and the Fund had to be overdrawn. By the close of this year, 1885, all the cash at the Bishop's disposal was exhausted; there had been no improvement during the summer, and a frost in August spoiled the crops. The debts on the College and Ladies' College increased, and now the Mission Fund was in debt! In December the financial position of the Diocese was so serious that the Bishop wrote:

"I feel sometimes so burdened with the financial care of our institutions and the Diocese, and so disheartened by the unfavourable turn so many different things have taken, that I hardly know what to do. I have lived for this Diocese very completely, but the crisis is such that unless things take a turn in the coming season, the Diocese must have in its Head not only the will but the power to help it."

It was during this distressing time, when the Bishop was putting all his powers, as well as every dollar he himself possessed, into a determined effort to keep the Diocese and its institutions from falling behind, that the attacks mentioned in a preceding chapter (see p. 249) reached their height. The Bishop replied fully in his Address to the Diocesan Synod which met on October 8 and 29, 1885, at St. John's. The exaggerations of the Boom or, rather, of "Boomsters," had given rise in Eastern Canada, and even apparently in England in some quarters, to an impression, which was thoroughly erroneous, that the Diocese possessed large endowments which might have been available for its missions but had been diverted to education. A writer, signing himself "Inquirer," in the London Guardian, began a number of questions about the Diocese by asking, "is not the Diocese of Rupert's Land the richest and best-endowed Diocese in Canada?" [The Guardian, June 3, 188 The Bishop replied at length in the Guardian, September 2, 1885. "Inquirer" was also answered by Archdeacon Pinkham and Canon Coombes, in other issues.] There was even an idea that the Bishop had lavished money on a fine Cathedral. In his reply the Bishop said:

I have long been aware of a very false view on this subject being current in Eastern Canada, the result of statements that were sent there in the time of the Boom. The exaggeration of some of them almost exceeds belief. Shortly before the presentation of my portrait in 1882, I received a letter from one of the Canadian Bishops, in which he remonstrated with me for having spent a large sum of money in building a splendid Cathedral instead of giving it to the missions. To those who know the little, plain Cathedral, built by my predecessor, the absurdity of this is amusing. In my reply on the presentation of the portrait I entered into a full explanation of such invested funds as we had, and of their origin, but though the explanation was widely disseminated through the kindness of the Church papers in Canada, the impression continues. Within the last few weeks I observed that a missionary in the Diocese of Algoma (Eastern Canada) thought he could not better strengthen his case in appealing to the Church people of Eastern Canada than by remarking that they had no Cathedral.

After a plain recital of the actual facts of the case regarding the endowments connected with the Cathedral and College--they have been set forth sufficiently in this biography, and need not be repeated--and how prospects had shrunk away because of the collapse of the Boom, he continued:

The misconception in Canada has been very painful to me, and as I have a strong conviction that it has in part originated in idle gossip and thoughtless talk within the Diocese, I hope that in the future clergy and laity will, when they have opportunity, disabuse any one of a wrong impression. I take indeed a deep interest in education. I feel that a sound and religious education lies at the root of all true progress, and it certainly has been a pleasure to me that my efforts for education have been so far recognised in the Province (of Manitoba), that I am filling the offices of Chancellor of the University and Chairman of the Protestant Board of Education, but it is perfectly the opposite of the truth that I have sacrificed for education any mission interests. I believe the Cathedral and College system of St. John's have been the salvation of the country. . . . Whatever may be the imperfections of my own service, I can say that since I was appointed to my present office I have simply lived for the good of the Diocese, and my work would indeed be a labour of love if it were brought home to my heart that I had the affectionate support of the members of the Church for its institutions and efforts.

With the Bishop's consent the Synod appointed a committee to inquire into the financial position of St. John's College, the incomes of the Professors, their work, the numbers of students, and other cognate matters. The Bishop was only too glad that there should be the fullest inquiry. At the next meeting of the Diocesan Synod, which was held on August 5 and 6, 1886, the committee presented its Report. This Report, an exhaustive document, went fully into the history of both Cathedral and College, giving the sources of their respective endowments, and the existing position of all their various funds. It now appeared that the Cathedral, as represented by the Dean and Chapter, and the College as represented by the Professors, who were also the members of the capitular body, i.e., the Dean and Chapter, drew their incomes from an active endowment capital of $131,856 (about £26,400), and that the average income for each Canon-Professor was about $1700 (£340) a year, as the capital yielded between 6 and 7 per cent. If there was any notion in the Diocese or elsewhere that the Canon Professors were receiving magnificent stipends, this Report effectually dissipated it.

There was a General Endowment Fund for the College, the Report went on to state, of $22,000 (£4400), and a Scholarships Fund of $6695 (£1340). There were also certain lands belonging to the Cathedral and the College that would ultimately be of value, but for the time were a source of expense as taxes had to be paid on them. The general debt on the College, incurred in erecting buildings, amounted to $60,900 (£12,200). The Report closed with an appreciation of what the Bishop personally, out of his own pocket, had done--not only had he lent to the College (for the debt) part of the episcopal endowment at 4 per cent. when he might have had 7 for it in the ordinary course of investment, but he had given considerable sums to the College, both to its General Endowment and to the Professorships, especially the Professorship of Ecclesiastical History, and for scholar ships, and other sums to the Ladies' College, the total reaching a very large sum.

In his Address to this Synod, the Bishop said that the position of the College, owing to the heavy debt upon it, was so critical that he felt he must visit England to raise funds for it. Reviewing the state of the country, he deplored that the depression consequent on the disastrous Boom still continued. At the previous Synod he had mentioned that ten new missions ought to be opened, but could not be because of the want of means; he regretted that things remained much in the same condition. But the Home Mission Fund was no longer in debt. Archdeacon Pinkham, the Secretary of the Synod, had made two successful visits to Eastern Canada, and had raised over $3000 for the Fund. The S.P.G. had also helped splendidly with grants, as had the other Societies. More money, however, was required; more men were needed--there was the old difficulty in obtaining suitable men.

As the Synod had now become incorporated by the Legislature, the Bishop passed into its keeping nearly all the Church endowments or "trusts" which had been hitherto centred in him, the exceptions being the Cathedral and College endowments, which were handed over to the Dean and Chapter and the College respectively, the episcopal endowment and one or two other trusts, such as the endowment for the "Machray Exhibitions," which the Bishop went on nursing" himself. Referring to this transfer of these trusts, he said he "was glad to be relieved of what had been a very heavy burden." From the business point of view, the Bishop's management of the various Church funds had been singularly successful--to such a degree had it been successful that he was universally regarded as so excellent a man of business that his advice was frequently sought on matters outside his sphere altogether, and he was asked to become an executor or a trustee under wills--as if he had not cares enough!--because of his financial shrewdness and ability; eventually, he was compelled to make a rule not to act as executor or trustee.

Shortly after the Synod the Bishop left Winnipeg for London, with the hope and intention of raising a sum sufficient to bring up the General Endowment Fund of the College to £10,000 or $50,000. What was required was about £6600, as £4400 was in hand. Towards this the S.P.C.K. had promised £1000, provided the total amount raised was £9000; thus the amount the Bishop had to get was £4600. Apart from some brief visits to his friends and relatives, he devoted some nine months to this effort--writing letters, seeing prominent Churchmen, and addressing meetings--working in this as in all things with his whole energy. But when he returned in June 1887 to his Diocese, it was with a heavy heart, for the result of all his appeals was scarcely £1500 ($7500).

A sad event which occurred in the early part of the winter of 1886 affected him deeply--this was the death of Bishop M'Lean. The Bishop of Saskatchewan had been making a Visitation in his Diocese, and was returning from Edmonton to Prince Albert when his horses took fright and bolted; he was thrown from his waggon and seriously injured. He was obliged to return to Edmonton, where he recovered somewhat; still far from well, he was anxious to get back to his home, and travelled in a skiff or small open boat for many days down the Saskatchewan River, reaching Prince Albert on November 2. But in his condition the journey proved too much for him, and he passed away five days later. Referring to him Bishop Machray said, "I sorely miss the friend of my youth, whom I brought here to stand by my side, and with whom I shared the early years of my episcopate. For his own Diocese his labours were abundant." Dr. M'Lean was succeeded by Archdeacon Pinkham, who was consecrated at Holy Trinity, Winnipeg, on August 7, 1887, the officiating prelates being the Bishops of Rupert's Land, Moosonee, Qu'Appelle, and Athabasca, of the Province of Rupert's Land, the Bishop of Rochester (Dr. Thorold), England, the Bishop of Huron (Dr. Baldwin), Canada, and the Bishops of Minnesota (Dr. Whipple) and North Dakota (Dr. Walker), of the United States.

Project Canterbury