UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

The battle for the sabbath: the sabbatarian lobby in Canada, 1890-1912 Meen, Sharon Patricia 1979

You don't seem to have a PDF reader installed, try download the pdf

Item Metadata


UBC_1979_A1 M44.pdf [ 18.13MB ]
JSON: 1.0094766.json
JSON-LD: 1.0094766+ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 1.0094766.xml
RDF/JSON: 1.0094766+rdf.json
Turtle: 1.0094766+rdf-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 1.0094766+rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 1.0094766 +original-record.json
Full Text

Full Text

THE BATTLE FOR THE SABBATH: THE SABBATARIAN LOBBY IN CANADA, 1890-1912 by SHARON PATRICIA MEEN B.A., University of Toronto, 1966 M.A., University of Toronto, 1968 THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES (Department of History) We accept this thesis as conformim to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY'OF BRITISH COLUMBIA September, 19 79 (C) Sharon Patricia Meen, 1979 In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make it freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department or by his representatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. n ^ , History Department of _ The University of British Columbia 2075 Wesbrook Place Vancouver, Canada V6T 1W5 Date 1 October 197 9 ABSTRACT This study traces the growth of the Sabbatarian lobby in Canada. Limited to sporadic and ephemeral groups during the nineteenth century, Sabbatarianism became organized in res ponse to the appearance of the Sunday street car in the early 1890s. This issue precipitated the formation of an aggressive lobby, the Ontario Lord's Day Alliance. Owing to a succession of judicial decisions handed down concerning the Sunday car, the Ontario Alliance found itself balked in its pursuit of provincial Sabbath observance legislation. As a consequence, it expanded in the early 1900s into a national lobby, the Lord's Day Alliance of Canada, in order to pressure the federal govern ment. As the Alliance developed an increasing awareness of the requisites of successful lobbying, it improved and broadened its techniques: first, by presenting the Sabbatarian aim as a social rather than a moral reform; second, by forging a temporary alli ance with organized labour; third, by developing new campaigning methods such as a membership and a press campaign; finally, by persuading the Laurier Liberal government that the Alliance had the support of the two major groups within Canadian society. Throughout its campaign, the Alliance maintained a cohesive or ganization and pressured the government on all fronts -- two key determinants to a lobby's success within the Canadian political system. Political success came to the Alliance when the French Catholic church, for its own reasons, decided to support the campaign for Sabbath observance legislation. Convinced that he was effecting a compromise acceptable to both English and French, Laurier agreed to introduce a Lord's Day bill in 19 06. The subsequent debates forced Laurier to mo dify his position in the face of unexpected French Canadian hostility. The Alliance's lobbying inside Parliament was mar kedly less effective than it had been outside. Although a trun cated version of the bill became law, the Alliance failed to turn a political victory into a moral triumph. After five years' ardent pursuit of law enforcement, it became apparent that social legislation did not guarantee a reform of Canadian morals. Canadian Sabbatarianism was one of many responses to vast social and economic change in the period leading up to the First World War. The particular solution advocated by Sabbatari ans was the reform of society's ills through the reform of the individual's morals. This ideal had little contact with the rea lities of an emerging urban and industrial society; it had little relevance to the working class need for recreation other than church-going on the week's one day of leisure. Studies of crusades for moral reform legislation demand discussion because restrictions on recreation affected larger; groups more directly than did legislation concerning factory hours or poor relief. The study of moral and social reform groups is attracting the attention of increasing numbers of Canadian his-iv torians, while the study of pressure group activity is attract ing that of political scientists. Based on a theoretical frame work provided by David Truman and Neil Smelser, the core of my analysis consisted of a detailed examination of the papers of the Lord's Day Alliance of Canada, its allies, and the key poli ticians involved; the legislation passed at all levels of govern ment; and the numerous judicial decisions concerning Sabbath observance. It is hoped that the study of the Sabbatarian lobby, its transformation from a single issue group to a more institutionalized group, its shift from traditional nine-' . teenth century techniques to more sophisticated methods of lob bying, its political success in 1906 and subsequent failures, will contribute an historical dimension to the debate concerning the relationship between pressure groups and the policy-making process in Canada. V TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Abstract ii Table of Contents v Abbreviations vPreface viCHAPTER I Sabbath Observance in British North America, 1800-1850- 1 II Sabbath Observance in an Industrializing and Traffick ing Age, 1850-1890 25 III The 'Giddy Trolley' and Sundays — The Question of Jurisdiction 70 IV The Sunday Car as Catalyst: The Formation of the Ontario Lord's Day Alliance, 1895-1899 87 V A Tale of "Toil and Obloquy": John G. Shearer and the Ontario Alliance's Drive for Popularity 131 VI National Righteousness Aroused: The Organization of the Lord's Day Alliance of Canada, 1898-1903 174 VII The Lobby in Action, 1903-1906 202 VIII The Alliance as Clerical Policeman, 1907-1912 244 Epilogue 283 Bibliography 6 Appendices I Who Worked on Sunday, 1888-1911: Estimates for Pre-and Post-Lord's Day Act of 1906 309 II The Lord's Day Alliance of Canada: Profile of Leadership, 1888-1906 311 III Claimed Membership in the Lord's Day Alliance of Cana da by Province, 1901-1906 332 IV Regional Proportions of Claimed Lord's Day Alliance Membership in the years 1901 and 1906 333 V The Lord's Day Act of Upper Canada, 1845 335 VI The Lord's Day Bill, drafted by the LDAC, and Intro duced to the House of Commons, March 11, 1906 339 VII The Lord's Day Act of Canada, 1906 341 vi Abbreviations used in footnote citations; A. LDACP Lord's Day Alliance of Canada Papers The LDACP (Toronto, Thomas Fisher Rare Book Room, University of Toronto) include the Minutebooks, Reportbooks, Scrapbooks, and other records of the Lord's Day Alliance of Canada, the Ontario Lord1s Day Alliance, and other provincial organizations Footnote citations of these sources have used the following abbreviations: LDAC LDAC, CR LDAC, MB LDAC, SB LB OLDA OLDA, CR OLDA, MB OLDA, SB Lord's Day Alliance of Canada Lord's Day Alliance of Canada, Committee Re ports Lord's Day Alliance of Canada, Minutebook Lord's Day Alliance of Canada, Scrapbook Letterbook (The five Letterbooks in the LDACP contain letters of both the Lord's Day Alliance of Canada and the Ontario Lord's Day Alliance, arranged chronologi cally. Hence, no distinction between the two associations was possible.) Ontario Lord's Day Alliance Ontario Lord's Day Alliance, Committee Reports Ontario Lord's Day Alliance, Minutebook Ontario Lord's Day Alliance, Scrapbook B. PAC, LP Public Archives of Canada, Laurier Papers C. PC, APGA Presbyterian Church in Canada, Acts and Pro ceedings of the General Assembly (1875-1913) vii Preface: The Battle for the Sabbath: The Sabbatarian Lobby in Canada, 1890-1912. This study traces the growth of the Sabbatarian lobby in Canada. Limited to sporadic and ephemeral groups during the nineteenth century, Sabbatarianism became organized in res ponse to the appearance of the Sunday street car in the early 1890s. This issue precipitated the formation of an aggressive lobby, the Ontario Lord's Day Alliance. Owing to a succession of judicial decisions handed down concerning the Sunday car, the Ontario Alliance found itself balked in its pursuit of provin cial Sabbath observance legislation. As a consequence, it ex panded in the early 19 00s into a national lobby, the Lord's Day Alliance of Canada, in order to pressure the federal government. As the Alliance developed an increasing awareness of the requi sites of successful lobbying, it improved and broadened its techniques: first, by presenting the Sabbatarian aim as a so cial rather than a moral reform; second, by forging a temporary alliance with organized labour; third, by developing new cam paigning methods such as a membership and a press campaign; final ly, by persuading the Laurier Liberal government that the Alliance had the support of the two major groups within Canadian society. Political success came to the Alliance when the French Catholic church for its own reasons, decided to support the campaign for Sabbath observance legislation. viii Convinced that he was effecting a compromise accepta ble to both English and French, Laurier agreed to introduce a Lord's Day bill in 1906. The subsequent debates forced Laurier to modify his position in the face of unexpected French Canadi an hostility. The Alliance's lobbying inside Parliament was also markedly less effective than it had been outside. Although a truncated version of the bill became law, the Alliance failed to turn a political victory into a moral triumph. After five years' ardent pursuit of law enforcement, it became apparent that social legislation did not guarantee a reform of morals. Canadian Sabbatarianism was one of many responses to vast social and economic change in the period leading up to the First World War. These responses took many forms, but few dis played as defensive a reaction as the Sabbatarian lobby. Richard Allen, in his study of the Social Gospel, has characterized such conservative reformers as those "closest to traditional evangeli calism, emphasizing personal-ethical issues, tending to identify sin with individual acts, and taking as their social strategy legislative reform of the environment."^" The solution advocated by the Sabbatarians was the reform of society's ills through the reform of the individual's morals: the success of such a re form would be evidenced by increased attendance at public worship twice a Sabbath, accompanied by prayer and private contemplation. This ideal had little contact with the realities of an emerging Rxchard Allen, The Social Passion: Religion and Social  Reform in Canada 1914-1928(Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1973), p. 17. ix industrial and urban society; it had little relevance to the working class need for recreation other than church-going on the week's one day of leisure. Sabbatarianism was but another of the "middle class panaceas which ignored the root causes of 2 urban blight and the abuses of the factory system." Studies of crusades for moral reform legislation demand discussion, as Brian Harrison comments, because "much larger groups were more directly affected by restrictions on recreation and by limitations on drinking hours" than by legislation on 3 factory hours or poor relief. The study of groups agitating for such reform in Canada is engaging the attention of increas ing numbers of Canadian historians, as the work of Allen, Terence Morrison, Neil Sutherland,; and John Weaver, -among others, demon strates. At the same time, political scientists are paying more attention to pressure group activity within the Canadian 4 political system. Based on a theoretical framework provided 5 6 by David Truman, and Neil Smelser, the core of my analysis consisted of a detailed examination of the papers of the Lord's K. McNaught and D.J. Bercuson, The Winnipeg Strike: 1919 (Don Mills, Ontario: Longman Canada Ltd~, 1974), p. 2. 3 Brian Harrison, "State Intervention and Moral Reform in Nineteenth-Century England," in Pressure from Without in Early  Victorian England, ed., P. Hollis (London: Edward Arnold Ltd., 1974), pp. 288-9. 4 See Paul A. Pross, ed., Pressure Group Behaviour in  Canadian Politics (Toronto: McGraw-Hill Ryerson, 1975), p. 3. 5 D. Truman, The Governmental Process (New York: A.A. Knopf, 1950) . N. Smelser, Theory of Collective Behaviour (New York: The Free Press, 1962). X Day Alliance of Canada, its allies, and the key politicians involved; the legislation passed at all levels of government; and the numerous judicial decisions concerning Sabbath obser vance. It is hoped that the study of the Sabbatarian lobby, its transformation from a single issue group to a more insti tutionalized group, its shift from traditional nineteenth cen tury techniques to more sophisticated methods of lobbying, its political success in 1906 and subsequent failures, will contri bute an historical dimension to the debate concerning the re lationship between pressure groups and the policy-making process in Canada. Chapter I: Sabbath Observance in British North America, 1800-1850. When Norman McLeod founded his settlement at St. Ann's on Cape Breton Island in the early 1800s, he supervised every detail of the Sabbath with careful concern, permitting only works of necessity to be done. In the maple sugar season, for example, the settlers had to make the rounds of their trees on Saturday evening "and upset the sap troughs so that they would not even use the Sunday run of sap." Even necessity was not an acceptable excuse if pleasure accompanied the deed. One Sunday when two boys skated to church, "they were ordered to cut a hole in the ice and throw in their skates." McLeod allowed only theological topics as Sunday conversation. After the morning service, the adults discussed the minister's sermon while the children studied the catechism.''" In contrast to this model of holy living, disrespect or indifference to the Sabbath characterized colonial life in both the Maritime and Canadian colonies. After preaching his first sermon as the new Presbyterian minister in Pictou, Nova Scotia in 1784, James MacGregor learned that, immediately after the blessing, "the local doctor invited the men to the nearest grog "Srlora McPherson, Watchman Against the World; The .Story  of Norman McLeod and His People (Toronto: The Ryerson Press, 1962), pp. 100-102, cited by J.S. Moir, ed., The Cross in  Canada: Vignettes of the Churches Across Four Centuries (Toronto: The Ryerson Press, 1966), pp. 131-133. 2 shop." At his next station, he had to warn his audience "against the sinfulness of their 'singing and whistling, and 2 laughing and bawling1 as they approached the service." In Halifax, the highlight of the Sunday afternoon was the garrison parade at 3 p.m., adding to the bustle already generated by the 3 Sunday market and the open taverns. On Prince Edward Island, Bishop Plessis of the Catholic church viewed the.conduct of the Scottish settlers as "extraordinarily indecorous." His great est complaint concerned the "immodesty of the women, who came to the Sacraments with their throats exposed to a degree that should not allow them even to enter the church." But he was also disturbed by the settlers' habits of "talking freely," and of permitting "their dogs to enter the church and run around, as if they were in their masters' houses, without anyone check-4 ing them." In Lower Canada, the justices of the peace and grand juries, both in Quebec and Montreal, complained of the unnecessary proliferation of taverns which, they claimed, caused "continual scenes of riot and debauchery, particularly on Sun-2 G. Patterson, Life of James MacGregor, P.P. (Edinburgh, 1859), p. 96, cited by J. Moir, Enduring Witness: A History of  the Presbyterian Church in Canada (Toronto: Bryant Press, 1975), p. 55. 3 Michael Cross, "The 1820s," in Colonists and Canadiens, ed., J.M.S. Careless (Toronto: Macmillan of Canada, 1971), p. 156. 4A.A. Johnston, A History of the Catholic Church in  Eastern Nova Scotia (Antigonish: St. Francis Xavier University Press, 1960), vol. I, pp. 230-233, cited by Moir, ed., The  Cross in Canada, p. 94. 3 days, to the great scandal of society, and the ruin of lower 5 classes of every age and sex." In both Lower and Upper Canada, Sunday labour was the rule not the exception. Arriving in Montreal in 18 20, one immigrant, John Crichton, observed: The first thing that struck our attention, being the Sabbath, was the whole shore covered with people fishing, and the market place covered with stands of different kinds of goods, just the same as [if] it had been a fair day, and in the neighbourhood of the town numerous parties going about with guns, or amus ing themselves with playing at ball. (6) Proceeding to York and discovering that it was not unusual to find settlers "in fields on the Sabbath day, or going out a-shooting," Crichton concluded that the law did "not appear to interfere with them, and therefore they do what they please on Cited by J.-P. Wallot, "Religion and French-Canadian Mores," Canadian Historical Review LII (March 1971), p. 83. For descriptions of Sabbath observance in the days of the French regime, see W.J. Eccles, The Canadian Frontier, 1534-1760 (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1969), p. 98; W.J. Eccles, France in America (Toronto: Fitzhenry and Whiteside, 1972), p. 136; and C.J. Jaenen, The Role of the Church in New France (Toronto: McGraw-Hill Ryerson, 1976). From Eccles1 comments, it would seem that the problem of the Catholic church lay not so much in persuading the people to attend religious services on the Sabbath, but rather in maintaining proper standards of conduct at the services. Unable to secure proper behaviour themselves, the clergy were forced to appeal to the Intendant who issued frequent ordinances "ordering the habitants of this or that parish to behave with more respect toward the cloth; to cease their practice of walking out of church as soon as the cure began his sermon; of standing in the lobby arguing, even brawling, during the service; of slipping out to a nearby tavern, of bringing their dogs into church and expostulating with the beadle who tried to chase them out." (Eccles, The Canadian  Frontier, p. 98). R.F. Burns, Life and Times of Rev. Dr. Burns (Toronto, 1871), p. 350. 4 that day."' Others made similar observations. In the 1810s, William Case, an evangelical preacher, declared the western settlements along the Thames River and Lake St. Clair to be "the most wicked and dissipated of any part of America"; Sunday was but "a day of wicked amusements, visiting parties, often dancing, hunting, fishing, etc." In the 1820s, John Howison watched people spending "the day in idleness and amusement, either strolling among the woods, or shooting game, or wander-9 ing between their neighbours' houses." Legal protection for the Sabbath did exist. Two British statutes, the Sunday Observance Acts of 1677 and 1780, theore tically guaranteed protection of the Lord's Day throughout the colonies. Neither statute compelled religious observance of the day through attendance at public worship, but both strove to secure this end by prohibiting labour and the pursuit of plea sure."^ The Legislatures of the three Maritime colonies, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, and Prince Edward Island, had all passed 7Ibid. S.D. Clark, Church and Sect in Canada (Toronto: Univer sity of Toronto Press, 1948), p. 95. 9 John Howison, Sketches of Upper Canada (Edinburgh, 1821), pp. 157-8. 10The 1677 Act (29 Car. II, c.7) prohibited "any worldly labour or business or work" by tradesmen, artificers, workmen, labourers, or other persons and forbade such activities as "the showing or holding out for sale of any goods," travelling or frequenting inns or lodges. Exceptions to this Act allowed "works, of necessity and charity," the preparation of meat in homes, the dressing or selling of meat in inns and restaurants, and the crying and selling of milk before 9 a.m. or after 4 p.m. 5 Sabbath Observance Acts as one of their first colonial laws. The New Brunswick law prohibited "Shooting, Gaming, Sporting, Playing, Hawking, frequenting Tippling Houses, or Servile Labour or Drunkenness on Sunday." The Nova Scotia Act, empowered church wardens to act as clerical policemen to walk through the town once in the forenoon.and once in the afternoon during divine worship "to observe.and suppress all disorders, and apprehend 12 all offenders whatsoever." The Act also authorized them to enter public houses of entertainment to search for and seize any offenders. In the 1820s, Nova Scotia's Lieutenant-Governor, Sir Peregrine Maitland, "a moralist of a puritanical sort not seen in Halifax since the days of the Yankee pioneers," took advant age of this statute to arrest the declining moral tone of Hali fax. By walking to church, he put a blight on the once popular Sunday carriage procession. He also forbade the time-honoured The 1780 Act (21 Geo. Ill, c.49) made it an offence for keepers of public houses to operate their establishments at any time on Sunday either for public entertainment or public debate. A fine of five shillings punished offences against the 1677 Act, while fines of up to two hundred pounds were levied against offenders of the 178 0 statute. The main purpose of the 178 0 Act was to suppress working class "disputing societies" which the govern ment viewed as politically undesirable. See Ontario Law Reform Commission, Report on Sunday Observance Legislation (Toronto: Department of Justice, • 1970)., pp. 25-9,•for .information on this legal background. Geo. Ill (1761), cl (N.S.); also 31 Geo. Ill (1791), c.3 (N.S.); 26 Geo. Ill (1786), c.5 (N.B.); 20 Geo. Ill (1779), c.3 (P.E.I.) . 12 In 1851 the Nova Scotia Act for the Better Observance of the Lord's Day was consolidated and revised into an Act con cerning "Of Offences against Religion." R.S.N.S. (1851), c.156. This consolidation omitted the clause empowering the church war dens to act as clerical policemen. 6 pageantry of the Sunday garrison parade, and in person fell 13 upon the Sunday market "like a wrathful prophet." The House of Assembly in Lower Canada also passed laws to pro tect the Sabbath: one in 1805 to halt Sunday sales of goods or liquor ("Wine, Spirits and other Strong Liquors"); another in 18 08 to preserve order during religious services on Sun days; and a third in 18 27 to prevent "tippling in public 14 houses during divine services." In the absence of adequate police forces to enforce these statutes, "some parishes even selected muscular strongmen to impose order in their churches 15 and throw out the interruptors." By the 1830s, only the youngest colony of Upper Canada remained without its own Sabbath observance laws. Indiffer ence to the day offended the religious convictions of many evangelical Protestants who, believing in the literal interpre tation of scriptural passages regarding proper Sabbath obser-16 vance, felt it should be a day devoted entirely to religious exercises, public worship morning and evening, and private de votions. But the absence of religious institutions made these T. Raddall, Halifax, Warden of the North (Toronto: McClelland and Stewart, 1948), p. 182. 1445 Geo. Ill (1805), c.3 (L.C); 7 Geo. IV (1827), c.3, s.6 (L.C.) . 15Wallot, "Religion and French-Canadian Mores," p. 80. 16Genesis 2: 2,3; Exodus 20: 8-11; Isaiah 58: 13; Exeikel 20: 12-20, were the passages most often cited by Sabba tarians. See also Luke 12: 10-16; Mathew 12: 1-14, for discus sions between Christ and the Pharisees concerning proper conduct on the Sabbath. Christ argued, for example, that it was proper 7 rituals impossible. In some communities it was not uncommon for a year to pass without a visit from a minister. Visiting Upper Canada in the early 1820s, John Howison established that within one three hundred mile area in the west of the province, only four villages enjoyed regular public worship. Appalled, Howison concluded that: the deficiency in the number of religious establish ments must have a fatal effect upon the principles of the people, the majority of whom are truly in a state of most pitiable moral degradation, grossly conceiving that they never do anything profligate, vicious or dishonest, except when they infringe the laws of their country. The Sabbath, presenting no routine of duties to their recollection, gradually approximates a week day. They, when it occurs, abstain from labour, more from habit, than from principles. (17) At the end of the decade, immigrant John Crichton was still lamenting the lack of church services, noting that in the past 18 year he had heard only five or six sermons. Under such circumstances, conscientious Sabbatarians could do little. Before 1830, no one attempted to enforce the British statutes, relying instead on personal example to remind for him to heal on the Sabbath, as well as for his disciples to pluck ears of corn (that is, work) to feed themselves. In argu ing with the Pharisees, Christ maintained that "the Sabbath was made for man and not man for the Sabbath." (Mark 2: 27). For discussions of the origins and theology of the Sabbath, see William Hodgkins, Sunday: Christian and Social Significance (London: Independent Press, 1960); Winton U. Solberg, Redeem the  Time: the Puritan Sabbath in Early America (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1977); Ontario Law Reform Commission, Report  on Sunday Observance Legislation, pp. 69-74. Howison, Sketches of Upper Canada, pp. 142-3. Burns, Life and Times of Rev. Dr. Burns, p. 352. 8 neighbours "of the weekly return of the Sabbath." Some might refuse to desecrate the day by participating in community functions such as barn raisings or quilting bees; others might insist that their employees receive their Sabbath rest, as long as they observed it properly. Farmer Joseph Abbott, for example, told his loggers that he would "much rather see them getting ready to go to church" than engaging in other activities. When they asked him "with some astonishment and in a depreca tory manner" if Abbott wished them to go to church every Sunday, he replied that he would consider a neglect of this duty "with out sufficient cause" tantamount to a notice to quit his service. 19 Needless to say, the men obeyed his wishes. Such individual effort did little, however, and Sabbath-breaking continued unabated. The town of York observed Sunday quite inadequately, according to the Reverend William Proudfoot, a staunch Scottish Sabbatarian. Although there was, he recorded in his diary on October 7, 1832, "a great deal' of church-going at York," there was also a great deal of carelessness and Sab bath desecration: "Things are done openly here which I never 19 E. Guillet, The Pioneer Farmer and Backwoodsman (Toronto: The Ontario Publishing Co. Ltd., 1963), pp. 191, 340. Abbott continued in his diary: "They submitted to my wishes, but one of them thought me a hard and cruel task-master; that one, however, is now a serious, orderly, and regular attendant at church and a communicant, and attributes all his subsequent success in life, as well as his reformation of conduct, to such trifling instruction as I was led to give him on such occa sions." Thus, Abbott concluded smugly, "a word in season is sometimes like bread cast upon the waters, which may appear after many days." 9 saw done in Scotland." While few dared outrage public feeling by working or shooting in the woods, they lounged about the 20 streets; being idle, they became "disorderly." The Church of Scotland Synod worried about Sabbath violations by persons en gaging "in worldly conversation, 'idle visiting and receiving of visitors', travelling, failure to do chores before Sunday 21 and neglect of public and private means of grace." Both the Church of Scotland and the Methodist church felt that increasing Sabbath labour connected with the mails and steamship traffic interfered seriously with Christianity. Not only did such labour deprive hundreds of their opportunity to attend divine worship, but parties assembling at wharfside taverns and crowds gathering at the docks gave the whole province "an air of secu-22 larity and dissipation." The Methodist Christian Guardian, as part of its campaign against amusement in general and liquor in particular, focussed on steamship excursions, the first pleasure travel available in Upper Canada, and their effect in lessening reverence for the Sabbath. Not only did excursion 20 Cited by Jean Burnet, "The Urban Community and Changing Moral Standards," in Urbanism and the Changing Canadian Society, ed., S.D. Clark (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1961), p. 73. 21 Church of Scotland Synod Papers, Report of Toronto Presbytery on Sabbath Violation, 1837, cited by Moir, Enduring  Witness, p. 85. 22 Christian Guardian, 21 April 1841; also Presbyterian Church, Acts and Proceedings of the Synod of the Presbyterian  Church of Canada in Connection with the Church of Scotland, 1841, Appendix No. IV, p. 35. 10 patrons, presumably those of the labouring class, return "highly intoxicated with liquor" but those still at home were needlessly affected. The noise and bustle, occurring all too often during divine worship, greatly annoyed ministers and "every well regulated mind engaged in public worship." Excur sions presented "to the eye and ear a scene of confusion alto gether at variance with that peaceful and orderly state of things designed to be secured on that day by the laws of God and of country." Especially harmful was the effect upon the young: being confined to business during the rest of the week, the attractive novelty of the Sunday wharfside scene enticed them from church attendance; as a result, they grew up "ignorant of 23 great truths." Demands for either the enforcement of British law or the passing of new legislation increased. The Church of Scotland petitioned the Lieutenant-Governor for the appointment of responsible magistrates to suppress vices such as Sabbath-breaking through the prohibition of Sunday mail and Sunday 24 labour on the canals. The Methodist church, through the Guardian, urged magistrates and city authorities to take the necessary steps "to preserve as far as possible the religious 2 3 Christian Guardian, 25 September 1833; Ibid., 18 May 1836. See also CB. Sissons, Egerton Ryerson: His Life and  Letters (Toronto: Oxford University Press, 1937), vol. I, p. 261, n.2. 24 Presbyterian Church, Acts and Proceedings, 18 39, p. 198; Ibid., 1841, Appendix No. IV, p. 35; Ibid., 1843, p. 31; Ibid., 1844, p. 29. 11 rights of the inhabitants," and to enforce British law against the landing and shipping of goods on the Sabbath, and "the pur suit of their secular occupations by carters and other labour ing classes." When local authorities failed to take action, the Guardian pressed upon the Union government its duty to pass le-2 5 gislation "for the accomplishment of so religious an object." In 1844, Colonel John Prince, independent member for Essex, introduced a comprehensive Sabbath observance bill to the 2 6 Legislature. Since the bill aimed to enshrine in legislation a British ideal, the "Act to Prevent the Profanation of the Lord's Day, commonly called Sunday," was to be a virtual re-enactment of the 1677 British statute in a form more suited to 27 Canadian conditions and activities. Its first clause forbade Sunday sales and labour by "any merchant, tradesman, artificer, mechanic, workman, labourer or other person whatsoever, on the Lord's Day." Subsequent clauses attempted to extirpate all Sabbath recreational temptations of. colonial life: gambling, horse-racing, hunting, fishing were all forbidden; even bathing "in any exposed situation in any water within the limits of any incorporated city or town, or within view of any place of Public 25 Christian Guardian, 18 May 1836; Ibid., 21 April 1841. 2 6 Re Prince, see Dictionary of Canadian Biography, vol. IX, ed., F.G. Halpenny (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1976), pp. 642-6. 27 Ontario Law Reform Commission, Report on Sunday Obser  vance Legislation, p. 30. 12 Worship, or private residence," was included in an amendment by the Legislative Council. By implication the prohibition of Sabbath labour controlled pleasure steamship excursions. Re flecting the Methodists' intense concern with the consumption of alcohol as a leisure time pursuit, the second clause of the bill directly forbade persons "to tipple, or to allow or permit tippling in any inn, tavern, grocery or house of public enter tainment." Indirectly it attempted to control the flow of liquor by forbidding Sunday political meetings, public displays of intoxication and brawling, or the use of profane language "in the public streets or open air, so as to create any riot, or 2 disturbance, or annoyance to Her Majesty's peaceable subjects." When opposition from Lower Canadian members forced him to withdraw the measure, Prince amended it to apply to Upper Canada alone, reintroduced the bill in the following session, 29 and saw it through the Legislature in 1845. The fact that the law would not apply to Lower Canada irked its supporters, par ticularly the Christian Guardian. "Did members of the Assembly think," it queried: Debates of the Legislative Assembly of United Canada, March 1845, p. 2305. 29 8 Vict, c.45 (U.C.), see Appendix V; also Debates of  the Legislative Assembly of United Canada, March 1845, pp. 2025-28, 2305. The Legislature added the category "merchant" to those whose labour was prohibited by the 16 77 statute. The Act did not apply to Indians. Any person convicted under the Act was to be fined a sum "not exceeding forty dollars, nor less than one dollar, together with the costs and charges attending the proceedings and conviction." 13 that the God of the Catholics was more indulgent than the God of the Protestants, and that less would be exacted from the former than from the latter? And did they think that the great ruler of all re quired of them to allow a breach of the holy day in one class of the community and to punish it in another? If not, why the difference in legislation? . . . This may be expediency; but it is not consistency, nor Christianity. Nor in fact is it true expediency; for suiting only present difficulties, and not resting on the immutable principles of right, it is only pre paring greater difficulties to come when other legislators may resume the unfinished work. (30) The debate on Prince's bill raised the problem that would prove insoluble to all future Sabbatarians: how to re concile religious conviction with the desire for economic gain. On what basis were decisions to be made to exempt activities, particularly economic, from the restrictive clauses of the bill? An exempting clause allowed 'works of necessity and charity1, defining these to be the conveying of travellers or mail by land or by water, and the selling of drugs and medicines. But given the interdependent and seasonal nature of Canada's resource-based economy, should other activities enjoy temporary exemption? In 1845 the discussion concerned hunting and fishing. On one hand, many felt that fishing along the Detroit River was an activity of economic necessity and therefore should be exempt; on the other hand, the same people felt that hunting "was gener ally an amusement." In the end, the bill included both in its 31 prohibitions, but the debate was a portent of the future. Christian Guardian, 25 September 1844. 31 Debates of the Legislative Assembly of United Canada, March 1845, pp. 2027-8. Another member thought the bill should also exempt maple sugar making, but the House voted down this suggestion. 14 Five years after the passage of the Lord's Day Act of Upper Canada, the first Sabbatarian interest groups appeared in Kingston, Toronto, and Brantford to lobby for further legisla tive protection of the Sabbath. Their first target was Sabbath labour in the Post Office. In 1849 the Imperial government transferred jurisdiction over the Royal Mail to the colonial governments. The simultaneous introduction of a cheap postage system promised an increase in the amount of correspondence throughout the country with the certain result of a "material increase in the labourers required and the labour exacted." It seemed an appropriate occasion to effect changes in procedures, at least those affecting the Sunday opening of post offices and delivery of mail. Experience had amply shown, argued the King ston Society in 1851, that it was much easier to put a regula tion on the Statute books before a situation developed into com mon practice than later. The Society therefore believed it should "strain every nerve to prevail on the public authorities to begin well." The new postal system should "not be stained with the sin of legalized Sabbath desecration, but signalized 32 by its entire abolition." The formal structure of the groups consisted of an exe cutive board and a general membership. Laymen accepted the presidencies of both the Toronto and Kingston societies. James Hervey Price, Commissioner of Lands in Upper Canada, in Toronto, Kingston Chronicle and News Supplement, 17 January 1851. 15 and a Lieutenant-Colonel Lawrence in Kingston were the first presidents of their respective associations. On average, twenty members, the majority laymen, formed the executive boards (clerical representation was to be only ex-officio). Consultations between the most active members of the executive, the President, Secretary, and Treasurer, were to take place at least once every three months, while each society was to meet once a year for the formal presentation of the board's annual report and the election of new officers. The groups intended to correspond with British and American Sabbatarian associations 33 to collect information on methods used in those countries. They also projected the formation of a larger association, a Canada Sabbath Alliance. The groups planned to finance opera tions from membership dues of 2s6d a year. Membership was based on the religious conviction that: the Sabbath is of Divine origin and perpetual obliga tion; that it is an institution fraught with unspeakable blessings to mankind, temporal,sspiritual and eternal; that its violation in any form, by rulers or subjects, must be highly displeasing to Almighty God; and that it is the duty of all to pray for, and use their best exertions to secure, the due observance of the Lord's Day. (34) Though members might come from any church, it was expected that the congregations of the evangelical Methodist and Presbyterian churches would provide the main body of members; although the 33 Kingston Sabbath Reformation Society, "11th Annual Re port," 17 January 1861, McGill University Library. 34 Christian Guardian, 16 January 1850. 16 groups spoke of securing the aid of "all classes of the commun ity," no thought was given to recruiting membership outside the churches. To achieve the ends of their "pious and patriotic agi-tations," the groups intended to employ only "lawful means." They relied solely on the circulation and presentation of peti tions, the traditional technique of the nineteenth century, to 37 demonstrate to the government the strength of public support. Such petitions, stressing the religious basis of sabbata-r.-ranisitb's aim, addressed the government both as a legislative body and as the employer of Sabbath labour in the Post Office. The groups relied on the evangelical churches to circulate the petitions and made no plans to influence public opinion through non-religious means such as a secular press campaign. Instead they restricted themselves to urging ministers to "bring the impor tant subject directly under the notice of those committed to their spiritual oversight," to recruiting clergy to act as spokesmen on lecture tours throughout the neighbourhoods, and to circulating tract literature to publicize the cause. In its first year of operation, the Kingston Society sent 5,000 tracts to "a variety of central ports throughout the Province, whence, 3 5 Kingston Chronicle and News Supplement, 17 January 1851, 36Ibid. 3 7 See Colin Leys, "Petitioning in the Nineteenth and Twentieth Century," Political Studies III/l (1955), pp. 45-64. 17 through means of local agents, their further distribution might 3 8 be conducted." The groups remained active throughout.the 1850s and early 1860s, adding opposition to Sunday labour on the canals to their concern about Sunday mail. Support for their cause came from a variety of sources. The Free Church of Scotland, formed in 1843, was the most ardent advocate: voluntarist in most other respects, it insisted that it was the government's 39 duty to legislate in favour of Sabbath observance. Members of the Free Church, in particular the Reverend Dr. Robert Burns, a minister sent by the Free Church of Scotland to defend its break with the Church of Scotland, were instrumental in the initiation of the groups. Free Church Reform politicians backed 40 the lobby in the Legislature. In 1851, Honourable Adam Fergusson presented the petitions to the Legislative Council while James Hervey Price took them to the Assembly. From 1853 to 1857, George Brown acted as the groups' political champion, both through his introduction of three Sabbath observance bills and through his frequent editorials in the Toronto Globe. As ^"Kingston Chronicle and News Supplement, 17 January 1851. 39 See Moir, Enduring Witness, p. 130: "George Brown was a self-proclaimed voluntarist in all things — except sabbath observance." 40 See S.D. Clark, Movements of Political Protest, 1640-1840 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1959), p. 418. In discussing the nature of the 1837 Rebellion, Clark makes the point that support of the reform cause came not from Scottish people as such but from Scottish Presbyterians who were not attached to the Church of Scotland. Scotsmen attached to the 18 a politician, Brown had discovered that support of Sabbatarian ism, like temperance, strengthened him in the rural, "righteous 41 West" where the Free Church was strongest. "Do shoal down petitions," he urged Alexander Mackenzie, Secretary of the Sarnia Reform Committee, "about the Reserves, Rectories, Sect arian Schools, Maine Law, and Sabbath desecration. . . . The 42 more the merrier." Although, in Brown's opinion, the easy going nature of earlier Upper Canadian business life had not encroached on Sabbath rest, new business, energies and the "dense population" flooding the country threatened the creation of "a growing worldliness in the public mind on this point, 43 which would be easier controlled now than at a later moment." He welcomed the formation of Sabbath observance associations, arguing that "whether regarded as a religious, social, physical or mere mercantile question, the strict observance of one day of rest in seven is mercifully a necessity." But religious Church of Scotland, on the other hand, clearly identified them selves with the Tory cause. This identification of religion and politics continued after the 1837 troubles, as Scottish Free Church Presbyterians continued to support the Reform, later the Liberal, party. As P.B. Waite comments, "the great pro moters of temperance and Sabbatarian laws seem mainly to have been on the Liberal side in Parliament." (Waite, "Reflections on an Un-Victorian Society," in Oliver Mowat's Ontario, ed., D. Swainson (Toronto: Macmillan of Canada, 1972), p. 22. 41 J.M.S. Careless, Brown of the Globe (Toronto: Macmillan of Canada, 1959), vol. I, p. 160; Moir, Enduring Witness, p. 106. 42 Cited by J. Moir, Church and State in Canada West: Three Studies in the Relation of Denominationalism and National ism (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1959), p. 67. 43Toronto Globe, 16 May 1850. 19 conviction alone motivated Brown, as it did all Free Church Sabbatarians, and concern for the workers1 right to a weekly day of rest played no part in his support of the Sabbatarian cause. Called by Toronto workers "the prince of Reformers, the paragon of anti-Labour employers," Brown had shown himself to be anti-labour in the printers' strikes that had bedevilled his 44 own paper. His own employees worked on Sunday evenings after dinner; in his 1850s campaign against the Roman Catholics, during which he claimed, among other charges, that Catholics "were bad Christians who did not observe Sunday properly," he care fully covered the Globe's office windows with heavy blankets "so that the good people going to religious meetings would not see the employees of the 'Globe' were working on Sunday evenings 45 in defence of Sabbath observance." Brown had even less sympathy for the workers' need for recreation on what might be their only day of leisure: opposed to shorter work days on the grounds that if men had more time to spend at home they would make a nuisance of themselves, he did not view Sunday as 46 a day of leisure and recreation. He rejected out of hand suggestions that a military band might play on Sunday afternoon, Charles Lipton, The Trade Union Movement of Canada, 1827-1959 (Montreal: Canadian Social Publications Ltd., 1966), pp. 17-19; also Sally Zerker, "George Brown and the Printers' Union," Journal of Canadian Studies X (February 1975), pp. 42-7. 45 Henri Bourassa related this practice of Brown in the 1906 debate on the Lord's Day bill. Canada, House of Commons, Debates, 1906, c. 5653. Lipton, op. cit., p. 30. 20 or that people might engage in "snug dinner parties, or cozy-picnics, or inspiriting drives," a ball game or a hand of 47 whist. The Sabbath must be spent in religious practices, attendance at public worship, morning and evening, Sunday-school teaching, private Biblical reading, and family prayers. In addition to Free Church Presbyterians, the Method ists supplied additional support to the Sabbath observance cam paign. Together, Methodists and Free Church Presbyterians delivered 20,000 signatures to petitions accompanying Brown's 48 1853 bill. Other welcome aid came from the courts: in his 1854 decision in Regina v. Tinning, Judge John Beverley Robinson concluded that the clause of the 1845 Act that exempted the con veying of travellers did not apply to steamship excursions. In his opinion, such people were not travellers; rather, they 49 were "persons notoriously seeking mere recreation." On the other hand, the Church of Scotland, less enthusi astic than the evangelical Free Church to lobby for legisla tion concerning a subject it considered a matter of church dis cipline, made only passing reference in its annual reports to the campaign for legislation.^ The Anglican Church expressed 47Toronto Globe, 26 June 1856. 48 Moir, Enduring Witness, p. 125. 4911 U.C.Q.B. 636. 50 Presbyterian Church, Acts and Proceedings of the Pres byterian Church in Canada, in connection with the Church of  Scotland, 1853, p. 30: "The Synod, having had their attention called to the subject of Sabbath Observance, agreed to express their regret of the failure in Parliament, of the measure for 21 little or no interest in legalizing the severe Sunday required by Sabbatarians. Although he pronounced himself in favour of a five-and-a-half day work week, 'John Strachan publicly stated 51 in 1856 that Sundays should be happy, not "blue". The Angli can journal, The Church, supported Strachan's view, maintaining that nowhere did the Bible forbid the pursuit of innocent amuse ments. God in fact delighted to see his people "in the enjoy ment of every blessing. . . which His bountiful land has pro vided for them." This was particularly so, the editorial con cluded, when one considered "how entirely large masses of those upon whom the curse of excessive labour presses most heavily are prevented on all other days from enjoying many of the purest 52 natural pleasures of this present life." Seconding this sentiment, the Roman Catholic church, especially the French Canadian hierarchy, rejected-the emotional and' literal interpre tation of the Fourth Commandment as a hobbyhorse inherited from 53 the Scottish Reformation. Of the 20,000 petitions delivered in 1853, only 3,000 came from Lower Canada, all from Protest-relieving the servants of the Public, from Sabbath labour, agree to declare anew their determination to use every effort to promote the better observance of the Sabbath ..." Ibid., 1858, pp. 63-4. 51 J. Strachan, "Charge delivered at the visitation of the clergy," 1856 (Toronto,1856), cited by Moir, Church and  State in Canada West, p. 25. 52 . Cited by Toronto Globe, 16 June 1856. 53 J.S. Moir, The Church in the British Era: From the  British Conquest to Confederation (Toronto: McGraw-Hill Ryerson, 1972), p. 189. 22 ants. The press was divided in its attitudes. Both Toronto Conservative papers opposed Brown's campaign. The Colonist objected to Sabbatarian legislation on the grounds that it would 55 "contravene the principle of separation of church and state," while The Leader, Brown's chief competitor, strenuously objected to the invasion of personal rights: We do not pretend to decide the question whether it be an offence against heaven for the artisan whose pursuit confines him within doors six days a week, to walk or ride out in the country on the seventh day to view and admire the works and beauties of nature; and to imbibe those poetical feelings and that amiable temper of mind which such a scene is calculated to produce; we do not say whether this be a sin against the Author of nature. But, the editorial concluded, it was a case in which man had no authority. In a matter solely between the individual and his Maker, man's bigotry had no right to "usurp a jurisdiction to 56 which no earthly power is equal." For his part, Brown used the Globe to expound his views, most often attacking other churches and newspapers for not supporting his bills. In 1856, he attacked The Church's views as being those of the "degenerate Lutherans of Germany." At the same time he attacked The Church and The Leader for "lovingly working in the same cause." Both abhorred, he continued: 54 Moir, Enduring Witness, p. 125. 55 Moir, Church and State, p. 25. ^The Leader, 17 September 1852, cited by Christian  Guardian, 22 September 1852. 23 what they term a Jewish, or Puritanic, or Pharisaical observance of the first day of the week, and both are desirous to introduce improvements and modifications, fitted in their respective opinions, to correct the unhappy or abominable mistakes into which so many of us have fallen on this momentous subject. 'The Leader' thought we would be all right if a military band would but play on Sunday afternoon; 'The Church' thinks that matters would mend, if, for the present "Jewish sever ity," we would only substitute the "holy hilarity of the holy day." (57) On a final vote in 1857, the House defeated Brown's bill (by one vote); however, in 18 60 the Post Office permitted Upper Canadian post offices to close on Sunday if they wished. Since Upper Canadian canals remained closed on Sundays, that issue was of minor concern. In the absence of issues, the Sab batarian groups disappeared. Moreover, the associations them selves had not developed a strong, independent identity. They had relied too much on Brown's presence in the House of Assembly and his position as editor of the Globe. But his advocacy meant that they could not secure political support from all.parties. Difficulties of communication and transportation denied them a broad basis of community support, and they did not organize on a province-wide basis. Although the Kingston Society engaged a "duly qualified Agent" to circulate its petitions, neither it nor the other societies considered the hiring of permanent staff 5 8 to replace voluntary help. The clergy publicized the cause only erratically; Sabbath observance was but one of a multitude Toronto Globe, 26 June 1856. 5 8 Kingston Chronicle and News Supplement, 17 January 1851. ~ 24 of concerns, and the prevention of individual profanity was of greater concern than the political lobbying. So the situation remained until the growing industrialization and urbanization of Canadian society provoked a stronger and more determined response. 25 Chapter II: Sabbath Observance in an Industrializing and Trafficking Age, 1850-1890. Between 1850 and the late 1870s, Canada enjoyed a period of Sabbath quiet serene enough to rival any other country. Sun day steamship excursions were common in but a few of the urban centres. Sabbath labour existed in isolated pockets only. The major canals, the Lachine, Cornwall, and Welland canals, were closed altogether on Sundays. With the decline of railway con struction in the 186 0s, only those few who worked on mail trains were active on Sunday. In the commercial life of the urban centres, Sabbath rest was an assumed part of factory or shop employment. Although retail establishments remained open until midnight Saturday nights, most closed the following day. Employment in industries whose processes were of a con tinuous nature was virtually unknown. Only in lumbering and mining and in domestic service was there any significant Sab bath labour; but such labour, not highly visible to church goers, did not cause concern. Only the Sunday work of some 2,000 postal employees in the Quebec post offices, which re mained open for one hour after morning mass, aroused comment."'" In 1868, the Postmaster-General promulgated by depart mental order: "Postmasters in Canada, except in the Province of Quebec, are at liberty to close their offices to the public on Sunday; and in the Province of Quebec postmasters should keep their offices open for at least one hour either before or after divine service, as may be most convenient to the public gener-26 The bulk of the population was rural and, with the passing of harsh pioneer conditions and the growth of church institutions providing regular services, Sabbath rest became the rule not the exception. Attitudes and practices were cal culated to fit in with the agricultural economy. Eleven o'clock became the standard hour for morning worship to permit early morning farm chores as weather conditions and season 2 dictated. Church-going became the rule and in most districts those not associated with a church would have been regarded as 3 "queer." For a man like Newton Rowell, future leader of the Ontario Liberal party and a prominent member of both the Sab batarian and temperance movements in the 1890s, "attendance at church and class meeting occupied much of every Sunday for all ages. In their approach to such Sabbath desecration as did occur, however, Sabbatarians became as rigid and legalistic as earlier Norman McLeod had been at St. Ann's. Committed "to a literal interpretation of the scriptures, Sabbath observance supporters, both lay and clerical, were constantly "aware of ally." The only city in the English-speaking provinces to re main open on Sundays was Charlottetown, which opened for one hour. Canada, House of Commons, Debates, 1876, c. 843. 2 Ontario Law Reform Commission, Report on Sunday Obser vance Legislation (^Toronto: Department of Justice, 1970), p. 79. 3 A.R.M. Lower, Canadians in the Making (Toronto: Mac millan of Canada, 1958), p. 330. 4 Margaret Prang, N.W. Rowell: Ontario Nationalist (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1975), p. 7. 27 the presence of God in human affairs," rewarding and protect ing His supporters, admonishing and punishing those who deviated 5 from His path. Believers in the idea of original sin, they felt that desecration of the Sabbath would bring retribution — Divine wrath in this life and eternal punishment in the next. Certain that most men and women, if left to their own devices, would not or could not resist temptation, they appro priated to themselves the responsibility for the actions of others. When one man, as A.R.M. Lower relates, attempted to take in his grain one fine Sunday, the neighbours soon put a stop to his labours. George Brown demanded enforcement of the 184 5 Upper Canada Act. Boys caught playing shinty or hurly games in Toronto's streets should be punished as a warn ing to others, he editorialized: "Twenty-four hours in the cells would be a good means of stopping boys from practices of this kind on the Sabbath." He and others, particularly the clergy, unanimously opposed Sunday reading of newspapers, skating, and other pleasures, and frowned upon the making of calls on neighbours. Even visiting the sick was questioned — only definite spiritual edification could elevate it above a "weak apology for the crime of Sabbath-breaking." ^Goldwin French, "The Evangelical Creed in Canada," in The Shield of Achilles, ed., W.L. Morton (Toronto: McClelland and Stewart, 1968), pp. 18-21. Lower, Canadians in the Making, p. 330. 7 Toronto Globe, 2 November 1863. g W.H. Elgee, The Social Teachings of the Canadian 28 But after this brief respite, there arose the twin threats of expanding industrialization and urbanization. With the integration of the railroad into Canada's economic struc ture, Canada truly entered the industrial age. Renewed railway construction in the 1870s led to expansion of rolling mills in the cities of Toronto and Montreal and engine works in Hamil ton. Railway needs promoted the new steam and steel technology and the effective start of heavy industry, some of whose con tinuous processes demanded Sunday work. By the late 188 0s a more complicated manufacturing pattern was emerging in major eastern centres, especially in Montreal, Toronto, and Hamilton. The focussing effect of the railways had much to do with it, leading industries to concentrate at places with the best transport and supply facilities, where labour could collect and the advantages of large-scale production could 9 best be secured. "Between 1871 and 1891, the number of em ployees in industrial establishments in Ontario alone more than doubled, increasing from 87,000 to 166,000."10 Agricul ture also experienced a technological revolution as field and crop rotation, the use of fertilizers, and employment of better and more sophisticated farm machinery became common. Churches, Protestant, The Early Period, before 1850 (Toronto: The Ryerson Press, 1964), p. 211. Q J.M.S. Careless, The Rise of Cities in Canada Before  1914, Canadian Historical Association, Historical Booklet No. 32, 1978, p. 24. 1^>O.J. Firestone, "Industrial Development," in The Can adians , ed., J.M.S. Careless and R. Craig Brown (Toronto: Macmillan of Canada, 1967), p. 458. 29 Of significance to the Sabbatarians was the trend to more di versified farming, since it increased the demand for Sabbath labour in the agricultural as well as the industrial sector of the economy. The growing urban market for food increased the herds of pigs and cows in Ontario by 50 percent, established the modern dairy and cheese industries, and promoted the culti vation of vegetable crops and the planting of fruit orchards. All of these activities, the cheese factories all year round, and the fruit crops in season, required Sunday attention. A vigorous growth of urban settlement accompanied this 12 economic growth. Industry attracted population to cities from farms where new machines such as the reaper-binder reduced the farmer's need for manpower. Although emigration greatly off-set the quantitative impact of immigration during this 13 period, those immigrants who did stay were most often highly trained workers or professional men who, bringing their skills and capital with them, wanted to remain in the cities. By 1881, Ontario's urban population had risen to 375,848 (23.1 ~1'1R. Cole Harris and John Warkentin, Canada Before Con federation (Toronto: Oxford University Press, 1974), pp. 138-42, 12 Despite economic recessions, economic growth proceeded through the 1870s and 1880s at a steady annual rate of 4.6 per cent. See G.W. Bertram, "Economic Growth in Canadian Industry, 1870-1915," Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science XXIX/2 (May 1963) , reprinted in Approaches to Canadian Economic  History, ed., W.T. Easterbrook and M.H. Watkins (Toronto: Mc Clelland and Stewart, 1967), p. 83. ' 13 See W. Kalbach and W. McVey, The Demographic Bases of  Canadian Society (Toronto: McGraw-Hill Ryerson, 1971), p. 41, Table 2:4. 30 percent of its total population) from 133,463 in 1851 (14.0 14 percent). In addition, the number of urban centres in the various provinces increased. While manufacturing was concentra ted in the larger cities such as Montreal, Toronto, and Hamil ton, other centres grew as trading and service centres either at crossroads or along the new railway system. By 1881 south-central Ontario had a dense pattern of seventy-seven places with 500 or more inhabitants, whereas in 1851 there had only been twenty-four such places. In Quebec, the number of villa ges with 500 to 1000 residents increased from thirteen to eighty-one. Only the Maritime cities did not "experience the thrusting growth brought on by large-scale manufacturing and 15 metropolitan functions." Improvements in urban living attracted increasing attention. In the 1860s and 1870s horse-drawn street railway systems inaugurated service in Halifax, Montreal, Toronto, and Hamilton. In 1861; the Montreal-City Passenger-Company started operations with eight cars and six miles of track running east-west and four miles north-south, while the Toronto Street Rail way Company began with six miles of single track running north-Jacob Spelt, Urban Development in South-Central  Ontario (Toronto: McClelland and Stewart, 1972), p. 144. "^Harris and Warkentin, Canada Before Confederation, p. 212. 31 south along Yonge Street, four cars, and seventy horses.16 Charging a maximum fare of five cents, the systems ran six days a week, sixteen hours per day in the summer months, fourteen in the winter. The citizens welcomed the new convenience: en thusiastic crowds thronged Toronto's flag-decked streets to LX, „18 17 welcome the first car on September 10, 1861. In Halifax, the cars "were a tremendous success; everybody wanted a ride. As a contemporary, H.Y. Hind, commented, public transportation would be a "great relief to commercial cities, where the busin ess centre is ever extending and pushing the population into 19 the suburbs." • Moreover, the companies were soon providing urban communities with increased opportunities for recreation. In Toronto, horse-boats crossed the shallow waters of Lake Ontario to the Island, where all the amusements characteristic 16 J.I. Cooper, Montreal, A Brief History (Montreal: McGiir^Queen's University Press, 1969), p. 104; T.H. Rad-dall, Halifax: Warden of the North (Toronto: McClelland and Stewart, 1948), p. 219; Toronto Transit Commission, Wheels of  Progress: A Story of the Development of Toronto and Its- Public  Transportation Services(Toronto: Toronto Transit Commission, 1946) ; see also John McKay, Tramways and Trolleys: The;,:Ris'e-of  Urban Transport in Europe (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton Univer sity Press, 1976) for descriptions of this early era in Europe. Toronto and Montreal began services only four years after the major American cities. An Englishman, A. Easton, who had brought the horsecars to Milwaukee and other American cities, introduced the idea to Toronto. C. Armstrong and H.V. Nelles, The Revenge of the Methodist Bicycle Company: Sunday Street cars and Municipal Reform in Toronto, 1888-1897 (Toronto: Peter Martin and Associates, 1977), p. 28. 17 Toronto Globe, 11 September 18 61. 1 p Raddall, Halifax, p. 219. H.Y. Hind, et al., Eighty Years' Progress in British  North America (Toronto, 1863), in Let Us Be Honest and Modest: 32 of beaches and other public playgrounds were available.^u Various city councils developed parks to meet the needs of citizens for open spaces. In Montreal, for instance, Sohmner Park became the destination of picnickers and walkers. This burgeoning industrialization and urbanization of Canadian society posed threats to the Sabbath unknown in a pioneer society. In an agricultural community, the farmer.was responsible for his decision whether or not to work on the Sabbath; in such a situation the church, once established, could hope to affect behavioural patterns. In the emerging 21 "bustling and trafficking age," however, the choice might not lie with the individual if, as an employee, he worked for an employer who demanded Sunday work. Soulless corporations were simply impervious to threats of spiritual damnation. Sabbat arians thus began to associate Sabbath desecration with an industrial and urban way of life and, forgetting that the Sab bath quiet of the rural countryside was a value only recently and painfully acquired, praised Sabbath observance as a cher ished and traditional rural value. Moreover, Sabbath obser vance supporters feared that the demand for Sabbath pleasure would rapidly increase with the growth of cities. Most mer chants, artisans, and labourers worked ten to twelve hours a Technology and Society in Canadian History, ed., B. Sinclair, N.R. Ball and J.O. Petersen (Toronto: Oxford University Press, 1974), p. 257. 20 E. Guillet, The Pioneer Farmer and Backwoodsman (Tor onto: The Ontario Publishing Co. Ltd., 1963), vol. I, p. 196. 21PC, APGA, 1877, p. cxxiv. day, six days a week. Such a routine left no time for recrea tion on weekdays and, for most people, Sunday was the one day of leisure. Already by the 1870s a vigorous Sunday entertain ment sub-culture had emerged in the working class areas of Montreal and just outside the city limits. On one May Sunday in 1870, for example, nearly five thousand spectators gathered to watch a velocipede race. During the same year, weekly crowds of up to 4,000 attended acrobats, prize fights, cock-fighting, and clog dancing events. Additional crowds watched 22 the Sunday horse races on the Lachine canal. Editorxal com-23 plaints by the Montreal Star had no effect upon this activity. The railway most distressed the Sabbatarians as it directly increased the need for Sabbath labour. Moreover, rail way companies overcame objections to Sunday labour by guaran teeing employees who worked Sunday a day off during the week and paying any fines levied against workers for working on that 24 day. Employees who refused to work on Sundays the companies fired. Railway demands had a multiplier effect on the economy, increasing Sabbath labour in other sectors, especially in pro cesses involving continuous operation such as the production of iron and steel. The number of people working in the Post '"''Alan Metcalfe, "The Evolution of Organized Physical Recreation in Montreal, 1840-1895," Social History XI (May 1978) pp. 163-4. 23 Metcalfe states that the Star complained 35 times be tween 187 0 and 18 94. 24 Canada, House of Commons, Debates, 1876, c. 855. 25 Office also increased (to 3,000 from 2,000), as special mail trains were established to provide more efficient service through linking with the trans-Atlantic ships out of Halifax. This did not take into account the numerous others who, employed 2 6 in domestic service, police forces, or on newspaper staffs, regularly worked on Sunday. The railway's potential recreational value posed a further threat to the Sabbath. By the late 1870s, railway companies were joining the potentially lucrative excursion 27 business. Excursions, whether by steamship or railway, could 2 8 only be "drunken saturnalia," scenes of riot and disorder. In addition to converting the Sabbath into a mere holiday for amusement, these indulgences familiarized one's mind to the 29 idea of Sabbath labour. In short, by "rushing and rumbling" from place to place, the railway train became "a mighty engine for the dishonour of the Lord, the demoralization of the land, and the spiritual ruin of those employed in connection with 25PC, APGA, 1876, p. 229. 26The Census of 1871 (Table XIII.) listed 60,104 people employed in the Domestic Class. By 1881 (Table XIV) this num ber had risen to 74,830. This class included barbers and hair dressers, bar-keepers, hospital attendants, hotel keepers, laundresses, midwives, as well as household servants. Not all may have worked on Sunday. 27PC, APGA, 1878, p. cxxvii; Ibid., 1882, p. cxlvii; Ibid., 1883, p. clxii. 2 8 Canada, House of Commons, Debates, 1885, c. 263; Ibid., 1891, c. 1483. 29Ibid., 1878, c. 727. 35 it."30 The Presbyterian church reacted with alarm to the threat of increased Sabbath labour and pleasure. At the time of the union of the various Presbyterian bodies into the new Presbyterian Church of Canada in 1875, a Standing Committee on Sabbath Observance was established to resume the agitation for legislative enactments. The Committee organized deputations to protest government offences, ranging from the members' use of the Commons' library on Sundays to continued labour in the Post Office.31 Coincident with these developments, three Liberal Scot tish Presbyterian Members of Parliament, Adam Gordon, Thomas Christie, and John Charlton, introduced bills to prevent Sabbath labour on the canals and to prohibit Sunday excursions by steam-32 ship or railway. These bills provoked an unexpected response in the House. The Presbyterian church had never questioned the consti tutional ability of the federal government to pass Sabbath obser vance legislation, since Section 91 of the British North America Act empowered the federal government to regulate all crimes 33 against religion. But the Macdonald government, with-30PC, APGA, 1888, Appendix No. 14; Church of Scotland, Acts and Proceedings, 1863, p. 74. 31PC, APGA, 1879, p. cxliv. 32 Canada, House of Commons, Debates, 1876, c. 851; Ibid., 1878, c. 726; Ibid., 1879, c. 75; Ibid., 1885, c.46, cc. 256-66. 33 The Confederation Debates dealt oniy indirectly with the question of Sabbath observance legislation. The British North America Act continued all previous legislation in force 36 out testing the matter in the courts, decided to declare Sab bath observance a matter of provincial rather than federal jurisdiction and so avoid a potentially troublesome ethno-34 religious issue. The Presbyterian church greeted this interpretation with equanimity and even a certain degree of enthusiasm. In the belief that all levels of government could legislate on the question, the church urged its provincial Sy nods to agitate at the provincial as well as at the municipal 35 level. As a result, individual Members of Parliament such as A.F. Wood of the Ontario Legislative Assembly, or small groups of Sabbatarians, presumably members of provincial Pres byterian Synods, brought the matter before provincial legisla tures . The provinces proved responsive to this lobbying. In its 1883 Street Railway Act, the Ontario Legislature forbade Sunday operations by street railway companies chartered under at the time of Confederation. With regard to future legisla tion, two sections of the B.N.A. Act could be interpreted as applying to Sabbath observance: Section 92, which gave the pro vinces the right to legislate upon property and civil rights; and Section 91, which empowered the federal government to regulate all crimes against religion. 34 Canada, House of Commons, Debates, 1885, c. 266. It is interesting to note that Macdonald expressed this opinion notwithstanding the contrary opinion expressed by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in 1882 regarding the Canada Temperance Act. See Russell v. the Queen (1882), 7 A.C. 829. 35 The municipal codes of most provinces allowed munici palities to pass by-laws regulating Sabbath observance: CS. N.B. (1877), c.99, s.96(35); R.S.N.S. (1873), c.57, s.65(15); M.C.S. (1880), c.10, s.10; 22 Vict. (1859), c.54, s.282 (Ont.); C.S.B.C. (1877), c.127, ,s.36 (30). In Ontario, for example, York County had enacted a by-law that prohibited inhabitants from 3 6 the Act; in 1885, it amended the 1845 Act to prohibit Sunday-steamboat or railway passenger excursions undertaken for amuse-37 ment or pleasure only. In 1891, the Nova Scotia Legislature attempted to control the employment of Sabbath labour by amend ing the 1851 Act, "Of Offences Against Religion," to make it illegal for a corporation to employ or direct a person "to per-3 8 form servile labour on Sunday." Manitoba passed legislation 39 prohibiting Sunday operations of any street railways, while British Columbia passed a Sunday Observance Act to apply to the portion of the province "comprised in the former separate 40 colony of British Columbia." An ordinance dealt with the 41 Northwest Territories. Only Quebec's stand on the issue seemed ambivalent: on one hand, Montreal's City Council could pass by-laws for the proper observance of the Sabbath, and thus prevent amusement places from opening and forbid the sale of liquor of the playing of games such as "billiards, pool, mississippi, pigeon-hole, ten pins, bagatelle" in taverns on hunting, fishing, or swearing at cows on the Sabbath. J.M.S. Careless, Brown of the Globe (Toronto: Macmillan of Canada, 1959), vol. I, p. 160. 3645 Vict. (1883), c.16, s.4 (Ont.). 3748 Vict. (1885), c.44 (Ont.). This bill was a dupli cate of the bill introduced into the House of Commons in 188 5 and rejected. 3854 Vict. (1891), c.32 (N.S.). 39R.S.M. (1891), c.90, s.143. 40C.S.B.C. (1888), c.108; Ibid., c.88, s.87(65). 41R.O.N.W.T. (1888), c.39. 38 Sundays;"1"- on the other hand, the Quebec Legislature allowed some expansion of Sabbath activity by legalizing the sale of candies, fruits, refreshments, cigars, and other sundries both 43 in Montreal and on St. Helen's Island. Yet, though it seemed apparent by the late 1880s that the legislative responsibility for Sabbath observance enact ments was passing to the provinces, the Presbyterian church continued to lobby for federal legislation. It still believed that concurrent legislation by the federal and provincial governments was both necessary and possible. Although the Ontario government had dealt with the problem of railway excur sions, the provinces could not deal with through traffic on the railways and the problems of Sabbath labour on these inter-44 provincial routes. The church believed that the two levels of government had the ability to pass necessary legislation 45 without infringing on one another's jurisdictional rights. The Presbyterian church therefore pressed for the formation of an association "of a wider --character r-• either cf or executive pur-4252 Vict. (1889), c.79, ss.8-11 (Que.). 43 Ibid., s.9. 44PC, APGA, 1888, Appendix No. 14. 45 In 1886 the federal government enacted the first re vision of the Statutes of Canada. "Apparently the law officers of Canada took the view.. . . that it was doubtful whether the 1845 Upper Canadian statute fell within the federal or provin cial jurisdiction. They did not sever the statute in any way as they did with some other pre-Confederation statutes. In stead, they listed the whole of the Upper Canadian statute on profanation of the Lord's Day as doubtful, and omitted it en tirely f-rom the first federal revision." Ontario Law Reform poses or to combine the influence of all interested parties." The church perceived the lobby as a focal point for the influ ence of "Christian people of this land," which, by serving as a channel for "inter-denominational and international co-opera-46 tion," would bring ultimate success. By the late 1880s it was entirely possible that the Presbyterian church might enjoy a wide measure of support from other groups, both religious and secular. While it expected support from the Methodist church, it might also attract sup port from the Evangelical Movement within the Church of England that was increasingly willing to cooperate with other churches 47 in their social and moral reform campaigns. Moreover, the evangelical Protestants could well look forward to support from the Roman Catholic hierarchy. The Catholic church was generally 48 favouring stricter religious observance of the Sabbath. American Catholic bishops were advocating campaigns for stricter controls on Sabbath activities and forbidding excursions and picnics. In 1880, in response to an American request, Pope Leo XIII had delivered "an earnest address" to the Roman Catholic Commission, Report on Sunday Observance -Legislation, p. 31. 46PC, APGA, 1888, Appendix No. 14. 47 J.W. Grant, The Church in the Canadian Era (Toronto: McGraw-Hill Ryerson, 1972), p. 76. 48 . . See Aaron I. Abell, American Catholicism and Social Action: A Search for Social Justice (Garden City, New York: Hanover House, 1960). 40 49 church opposing Sunday and festival profanation. In Quebec, the French Catholic hierarchy was also finding that early morn ing departures kept "people away from churches and made them 50 lose all spirit of meditation." Thus, in 1880, Cardinal Taschereau of Quebec City had banned "under pain of grievous sin" the faithful of his diocese to take part on Sundays or feasts in pleasure excursions on railways, on steamers, or in vehicles. Taschereau agreed with the Protestant churches that experience had shown that such excursions gave rise "to such 51 disorders as intemperance and immorality." The Presbyterian church might also expect close coop eration from the temperance movement. Although the Presbyter ians were not opposed to the consumption of liquor seven days a week as were the Methodists, the Sunday sale of liquor dis tressed both groups. They had already worked together to secure the passage of an Ontario Liquor Act, albeit much ear lier, and it seemed plausible that executive membership of the two groups might be overlapping. Besides the churches and the temperance movement, the Presbyterian church might receive support from both organized 4 9 Cited by John Charlton, "How To Provide for the Better Observance of the Lord's Day," Speech delivered to the House of Commons, 26 February 1885, p. 2, LDACP. 50 Cited by John Charlton, Canada, House of Commons, Debates, 1891, c. 751. 51Mandement No. 91, 26 April 1880, cited by Charlton, Ibid., c. 750; see also Grant, The Church in the Canadian Era, p. 85. 41 labour and business."" It was entirely possible that increas ing competition among manufacturers, particularly in the tex tile industry, might force owners to consider Sunday produc-53 54 tion. Labour would thus be ready to support a campaign that would prevent the extension of the work week to seven days, presumably for only six days' pay. Cooperation between reli gious deputations and canal workmen had already averted the ^'Changes in the labour movement's attitude towards eco nomic development indicated "an acceptance of very large-scale industrialism, agitation for shorter hours, the occasional use of strikes and boycotts, demands for welfare legislation -- in short, recognition of the existence of a permanent urban work ing class with interests peculiar to itself. . . " S.E.D. Shortt, "Social Change and Political Crisis in Rural Ontario: The Pa trons of Industry, 1889-1896," in Oliver Mowat's Ontario, p. 229; see also B. Ostry, "Conservatives, Liberals and Labour in the 188O's," Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science XXVII (May 1961); also Steven Langdon, The Emergence of the Cana  dian Working Class Movement '(Toronto: New Hogtown Press, 1975). 53 See G. Kealey, ed., Canada Investigates Industrialism (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1973), pp. 198, 367. 54 There is nothing to support the notion that labour ini tiated the formation of the Alliance, an idea suggested both by Jean Burnet, "The Urban Community and Changing Moral Standards," in Urbanism and the Changing Canadian Society, ed., S.D. Clark (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1961), p. 82, and John Gray, "They're Fighting to Save What's Left of Sunday," Maclean's Magazine, 15 February 19 55. The LDAC contained only one piece of evidence to support this view, a pamphlet, "The Why and How of the Lord's Day Alliance of Canada," (n.d., circa 1950), but its statement to this effect seems erroneous. In his statement to the LDAC organizing meeting on April 20, 1888, W.D. Armstrong, the Convenor of the Presbyterian church's Sabbath Observance Committee, asserted that "in seeking to bring about this conference he had acted in obedience to instructions of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church." LDAC, Minutes, 20 April 1888, LDAC, MB 1888-1901. The Presbyterian church's general wariness in seeking the cooperation of labour bodies, and the failure of the LDAC to do so casts doubts on the validity of Burnet's and Gray's statements. See also E.A. 42 opening of the Welland Canal on Sunday in the early 187 0s. For its part, the churches would probably support labour's petitions for a reduced work day, at least on Saturdays. As the Presbyterian church was fully aware, factory employees who received their wages at 7 o'clock Saturday night were forced to do their shopping that evening. Retail businesses thus remained open until midnight for this trade, incapacitating many from attendance at Sunday morning worship.^ For their part, small retail merchants would support the Early Saturday closing move ment as part of their collective "flight from competition." Early closing movements, which had appeared in the 1860s, be came a "regular feature of municipal business life in the 1880s 57 and 1890s"; supporting such a movement, merchants reinforced their tacit support of a quiet Sunday. With all this potential support, the 188 7 General As sembly of the Presbyterian Church authorized the Convenor of Christie, "The Official Attitudes and Opinions of the Presbyter ian Church in Canada with Respect to Public Affairs and Social Problems, 1875-1925"'' (M.A. thesis, University of Toronto, 1955); see also Graeme Decarie, "Something Old, Something New. . .: Aspects of Prohibitionism in Ontario in the 1890s," in Oliver  Mowat's Ontario, p. 167. 55D.J. O'Donoghue to A.G. Blair, 11 June 1898, PAC, LP, C757, p. 24278. 56PC, APGA, 1886, Appendix No. 32. 57 M. Bliss, "The Protective Impulse: An Approach to the Social History of Oliver Mowat's Ontario," in Oliver Mowat's  Ontario, p. 174; see also, Ian F. Jobling, "Urbanization and Sport in Canada, 1867-1900," in Canadian Sport: Sociological  Perspectives, eds., R. Gruneau and J. Albinson (Don Mills, Ontario: Addison-Wesley (Canada) Ltd., 1976), p. 71. 43 its Sabbath Observance Committee to bring together a group of influential laymen and clergy from other Protestant denomina-5 8 tions to discuss the formation of a lobby. After consider able negotiations with the Methodist and Anglican churches, Reverend W.D. Armstrong brought together twelve clergy and eight laymen at Ottawa's City Hall on the evening of April 20, 1888. In addition to ten Presbyterians and four Methodists present, there were also three evangelical Anglicans. Together these men planned the formation of the Lord's Day Alliance of Canada (LDAC). The first priority was the establishment of a committee to examine the legal aspect of the Sabbath question. Proposed legislation would "bring employers of labour, whether indivi dual or corporations, within reach of the law." Such legisla tion, by applying to Dominion corporations, general railway traffic, and canals belonging to the Dominion, and the manage ment of the postal service, would be "in the highest sense, necessary for promoting peace, order and good government in the Dominion of Canada." Offences would be punished as misdemeanours 59 under crimxnal law. The proposed operations of the Alliance showed that the 58PC, APGA, 1887, Appendix No. 15. 59LDAC, Circular, 1889, in LDAC, SB 1858-1928; LDAC, meeting of 20 April 1888, LDAC, MB 1888-1901; PC, APGA, 1888, Appendix No. 14; Canada, House of Commons, Debates, 1890, c. 1478. For a comment on the attitude of social and moral reform pressure groups towards the Criminal Code, see R.C. Macleod, "The Shaping of Canadian Criminal Law, 1892 to 1902," Canadian Historical Association, Historical Papers, 1978, p. 71. founders had some awareness of the requisites of successful lobbying. They proposed to form the Alliance along the lines of the Dominion Alliance for the Total Suppression of the Li quor Traffic, which had lobbied successfully for the passage 6 0 of the Canada Temperance Act ten years earlier. The Alliance was to be a national lobby and any existing provincial Sabbat arian associations would appoint delegates to the national executive as corresponding members. The Executive would assume responsibility for creating provincial associations in 61 Quebec and British Columbia where none existed. The Board also arranged for delegate representation from the British Pro testant denominations: forty-three from the Presbyterian church, thirty-three from the Anglican, ten from the Methodist, seven from the Baptist, five from the Congregational, and two 6 2 from the Reformed Episcopalian. These members alone had voting privileges. In addition to these representative members, the Alliance provided for other categories of membership. Hon orary members would be "eminent workers for the promotion of Sabbath observance." General members would be all those "who 6 3 accept the basis of the Alliance and contribute to its funds." LDAC, Minutes of Executive Committee, 2 April 1889, LDAC, MB 1888-1901. 61T. Ibxd. 6 2 LDAC, Minutes of Executive Committee/ 21 March-1889, Ibid, LDAC Minutes do not indicate the reasoning behind this alloca tion of denominational representation. 63LDAC, Circular, April 188 9, LDACP. 45 Although the religious basis of membership restricted the constituency from which the Alliance might draw a general membership, it did plan to broaden its base by establishing 64 contact with "interested parties," both religious and secu lar. The Board hoped to benefit from the change in the French Roman Catholic hierarchy's attitude towards Sabbath observance. Aware of the statements made by the Quebec bishops, the Alli ance agreed to seek the cooperation of the hierarchy.^ Al though Alliance instincts favoured a close association with members of the Liberal party,^ it also tried to establish contact with the Conservative party and generally broaden its lobbying techniques. In 1888 it appointed a Conservative, the Honourable G.W. Allan,. Speaker of the Senate and Chancellor of Trinity College, as President. In addition to making arrange ments to meet during the Parliamentary session "in order to bring influence to bear," it appointed a committee to consider PC, APGA, 1888, Appendix No. 14; see also Allen Potter, Organized Groups in British National Politics (London: Faber & Faber, 1961), p. 134. This basis of membership differed slightly from that used by the 1850s groups: "The basis of this Alliance is the Divine authority and the universal and perpetual obligation of the Sabbath, as ordained by God at the creation of the world, enjoined in the Fourth Commandment of the Moral Law, and continued and maintained by the Church of God to the present day, a"nd as essential to the best physical, intellectual, moral and social welfare of mankind." LDAC, Circular, April 1889. 6 5 LDAC, Minutes of Executive Committee, 21 March 1889. Biographical information (Appendix II) concerning the LDAC executive members in 1888 led to the identification of five Liberal Members of Parliament, one Liberal President of the Ottawa Reform Association, one other Liberal, and only one Conservative. See also Chapter I, pp. 17-18, re the 46 ways of persuading influential men in individual ridings to interview their Members of Parliament on the Alliance's be-6 7 half. And, although the Alliance intended to rely heavily on the petition, it spoke of mounting both a press campaign and an enforcement campaign to rally support and publicize the 6 8 Alliance's existence and purpose. Yet, like its predecessors in the 1850s, the Lord's Day Alliance proved ephemeral. To most ministers and to the church hierarchies, Sabbath observance continued to be but one of a multitude of concerns. Within the movement itself, there was a singular lack of focus on one decisive issue that could serve as a catalyst to stimulate the movement into aggressive action. Isolated labour on the canals or in the post offices did not bother the majority of Canadians or really interfere with the work of religious leaders. Despite Sabbatarian rhetoric, a Sunday of the early 1890s was exactly the kind of Sabbatarian affiliation with the Liberal party. See also Brian Harrison, "State Intervention and Moral Reform in Nineteenth-Century England," in Pressure from Without in Early Victorian  England, ed., Patricia Hollis (London: Edward Arnold Ltd., 1974), p. 296: "It is in fact the Liberal party which is the most closely associated with Victorian interventionism in the moral sphere. . . . Liberal non-conformists were often impres sed by the chapel's need for protection against recreational competition, and by the need to introduce into national legis lation the 'religious socialism' of the local chapel and its strict supervision of moral conduct." 67PC, APGA, 1888, Appendix No. 14; LDAC, Minutes of Exe cutive .Committee, 5 May 1890, LDAC, MB 1888-1901; -also Minutes, 23 June 1892, Ibid. 68LDAC, Circular, April 1889. day most Sabbath observance supporters could desire. In 1889, for example, the Sabbath Observance Committee of the Presby terian church sent out questionnaires to the provincial synods enquiring about the extent of Sabbath desecration throughout the land. On the basis of the replies, the Committee concluded 6 9 that "as a whole this is a Sabbath-keeping land." The major ity of complaints concerned individual moral violations such as visiting, hunting, fishing, pleasure driving, the reading of secular literature, and "the undue indulgence in sleep on Sabbath morning." Although about 18 percent of the labour force did work on Sunday, few complaints in fact dealt with 70 the employment of labour or Sunday trade. Contemporary sources confirm this impression of Sab bath quiet. In her weekly column in Saturday Night, Lady Gay wondered, on September 1st, 1894, if those in their homes up town realized the: grimness which Toronto shows to her Sunday guests. ... On Sunday, the wide bare streets are still, a few men, fewer girls loaf or lounge; the hotel guest drives through a wilderness of grim silence and if I were the hotel guest, I think I'd stay in bed all day. (71) British guests to the city agreed with her and complained bit terly of the "melancholy and suicidal" nature of the Canadian PC, APGA, 1890, Appendix No. 35. See Appendix I to this thesis. Saturday Night, 1 September 1894. 48 72 Sunday. Writing in 1895, one such visitor, Douglas Sladen, complained that Toronto was "one of the most unpleasantly . . 73 righteous cities I was ever caught in on a Sunday." The only exceptions to this general pattern were Bri tish Columbia and Quebec. In 188 9, the Synod of Columbia had the darkest report of all for the General Assembly: freight trains worked on Sundays as on other days, excursion trains ran between Vancouver and New Westminster, and steamboats plied the gulf waters. Both Vancouver and Victoria had Sunday papers. The post offices were open as were saloons everywhere in the province, except Vancouver city; people hunted and fished and played all sorts of open air games. Teamsters, miners, and dockmen generally made no distinction between Sab-74 bath days and other days. In Montreal, "the customs of the French Roman Catholics" were general on Sunday afternoon. As the Montreal Star described it, "Montreal has Sunday cars; it has the Sunday concert garden, and has seen an attempt at the Sunday theatre and at the Sunday paper. The Sunday saloon also thrives." In the summer, Sohmner Park drew thousands of picnickers, while in winter ice-skating rinks were the main 72 W.T. Crossweller, Our Visit to Toronto, the Niagara  Falls, and the United States of America (privately printed, 1898), pp. 69-70, cited by Burnet, "The Urban Community," p. 83. 73 D. Sladen, On the Cars and Off (London, 1895), p. 154, cited by Burnet, p. 85. 74PC, APGA, 1889, Appendix No. 14. 75 Cited by Christian Guardian, 16 December 1891; PC, APGA, 1891, Appendix No. 32. attraction. Despite its seeming awareness of the techniques of successful lobbying, the Alliance failed to establish itself as an interdenominational group with a broad base of secular and religious support. For one thing, it continued its close identification with the Presbyterian church. Although the Alliance established a national executive and apportioned dele gate representation to the various denominations, the Presby terian church continued to be the effective agency for the circulation of petitions and the dissemination of information. The possibilities of cooperation among the various denomina tions proved limited. The Methodist church demonstrated the most willingness to cooperate and expressed its warm support of the endeavour, announcing the formation of a Standing Committee 7 6 on Sabbath Observance to supplement its effort. The Church of England at first responded cordially to Presbyterian initia tives. Archdeacon Lauder of Ottawa participated in the organ ization of the Alliance and presented to -the meeting of April 20, 1888 a letter from the Anglican bishops "stating their 7 7 readiness to co-operate in this movement." The Dominion Synod 7 8 also_:passed a resolution lauding Alliance activities. But, 7 6 Methodist General Conference, "Report of Sabbath Obser vance Committee," Journal of Proceedings, 18 90, pp. 298-299; LDAC, Minutes, 22 May 1891, LDAC, MB 1888-1901. 77LDAC, Minutes, 20 April 1888, Ibid. 7 8 Canada, House of Commons, Debates, 1890, c. 1478. 50 unable to sustain its enthusiasm for what seemed a purely Pres byterian concern, Anglican participation faded by the mid 1890s. Although G.W. Allan continued as President, no official repre sentative of the Anglican church attended board meetings. The Alliance was even less successful in its attempts to gain the approval of the Roman Catholic hierarchy. Although the Alliance Secretary interviewed Cardinal Taschereau in 1890 to request official Catholic assent to the lobbying, the Bishops of Montreal, Quebec, and Ottawa refused to express their views, without volun-79 teering an explanation, on a Sabbath observance bill. The Roman Catholic emphasis remained on church discipline rather than on civil laws. Like the 1850 groups, the Alliance did not establish an office nor did it hire any permanent staff to oversee and co ordinate activities. It did not secure legal assistance or the services of a solicitor. It neither attempted to enforce exist ing laws nor did it take any cases to court to test the law's enforceability. It made no effort to finance its activities other than to ask the churches for contributions when neces-8 0 sary. As before, the Alliance relied solely on the circula tion of petitions among British Protestant church congregations to demonstrate support for its cause and did not effectively LDAC, Minutes of Executive Committee, 2 0 March 1890, LDAC, MB 1888-1901. 80LDAC, Minutes of Annual Meeting, 20 March 1889, Ibid. In 1893, for example, the Alliance operated on a $50.00 budget, collecting $15.00 from the Church of England, $15.00 from the Methodist church, and $20.00 from the Presbyterian church; LDAC, Minutes of Executive Committee, 28 March 1893, Ibid. 51 pursue other methods of influencing the government.°x The Alliance took no steps towards the establishment of a general membership, nor did it endeavour to mount a campaign aimed at the secular press. In addition, the Alliance made no attempt to follow up its resolution to seek contact with other groups that might support it. Reflecting the Presbyterian church's continuing hostility to the organization of labour, the Alliance made no effort to forge a bond with the national Trades and Labor Con gress. Although it pledged itself to the secular aim of secur ing "to the toiling man his rightful claim to one day's rest in seven" and resolved to invite the cooperation of labour associa-8 2 tions, any commitment by Alliance members to this social aim was purely rhetorical. It deliberately turned its back on a whole class of potential supporters, neglecting to lobby the Congress at its annual meetings or opening discussion in any other manner. Nor did it pursue the interest expressed by the Presbyterian church in a reduction of the work week to five and a half days in the hope that this might encourage a better atten dance at church the following day. For its part, the Congress did not initiate any contact with the Alliance. Although it did UJ"LDAC, Minutes of Executive Committee, 14 April 1891, Ibid. Distribution of petitions: 3,200 each to Presbyterian and Methodist churches; 400 each to Anglican, Baptist, and Con gregational churches; 100 to the Reformed Episcopalian church. The LDACP do not indicate the response received by the Alliance to the circulation of these petitions. 8 2 LDAC, Minutes of Executive Committee, 22 May 1891, Ibid. 8 3 raise the Sunday work issue at its annual congresses, this issue was not the most urgent matter facing the Congress, whose focus lay on the reduced work day. The Alliance also made no contact with the temperance groups and thusfailed to benefit from their lobbying experience. The Dominion Temperance Alli ance, for example, already lobbying the Trades and Labor Con gress, had opened an office and employed a paid staff officer. Although the LDAC deliberately patterned its organization on the Dominion Alliance, it established no direct contact with this group, nor did it recruit a delegate representative to its 84 board. Such reluctance reflected religious hostility to the promotion by temperance societies of secular Sunday afternoon activities such as temperance meetings, picnics, and pro-85 cessions. In short, despite its name, the LDAC did not become ah alliance and it was a national organization only in so far as it sought federal legislation. Not only did it not pursue its own plans for a national organization, but it proved unreceptive to the approaches of provincial groups. When, for example, a Toronto-based group asked for cooperation in 1895, the LDAC 8 3 Trades and Labor Congress of Canada, Proceedings, 188 8 p. 26; Ibid., 1890, p. 31. 84LDAC, Minutes, 20 April 1888, LDAC, MB 1888-1901. The one prominent temperance worker on the LDAC board was John Mac millan of Toronto, associated with the Sons of Temperance. 8 5 See Burnet, "The Urban Community," pp. 86-7. 53 8 6 hesitated and then refused. As a consequence of its failure to obtain a wide net work of support, the Alliance became identified, on a national level, solely with the parliamentary activities of John Charlton, Liberal Member for North Norfolk, Ontario. In later years, one Alliance organizer would remember its efforts as being "re stricted almost altogether to assisting John Charlton, M.P. in bringing his proposed Lord's Day Acts before the Parliaments 87 of Canada." Born of Scottish immigrant farmers, Charlton remembered his childhood Sabbaths as a succession of glum, humourless days. Unable to find local religious services to his liking, Charlton's father, a member of the strict Calvinist Associate Reformed church, conducted church services in his home. After morning worship and chores, the family assembled to hear the elder Charlton read a sermon. After a plain, easily prepared noon dinner, family worship recommenced with the reading of another long sermon. The shorter catechism and evening worship followed a frugal supper. Although the "bill of theological fare was always sound and wholesome," ft fi G. McRitchie to A.E. O'Meara, 25 January 1895, in LDAC, MB 1888-1901: "It was suggested (by the LDAC Board) that while a Provincial Association for a specific.purpose. . . would work in the same line as that of the LDA it would be the wiser course to maintain our own Alliance and accept any co-operation in the good work you could give to us. If, however, you saw proper to work through the existing Alliance and thus strengthen it, any modifications you might suggest would be duly considered." 87Anon., letter of 31 March 1906, LDACP. 54 Charlton recalled it as a "trifle heavy for the children." He never "looked forward to the coming of the Sabbath with any special anticipation of pleasure," nor did he have "a very keen relish for the exercises of the day." Often his father chose him to read the afternoon sermon to restore him to a "condition of wakefulness." Resisting his father's efforts to persuade him to become a minister, Charlton entered mercan tile life instead. Only at the age of twenty, after moving with his family to the town of Ayr, Ontario, did he begin to "derive some enjoyment from religious services and the company of religious persons." But a fondness for humour and fun and "the idea that religion was gloomy and gave no pleasure" pre vented him from joining a church for another ten years. At that time, experiencing an awakening at a Methodist revival meeting and deciding that it was his "duty, as well as a great privilege" to profess faith, he joined the Presbyterian church.88 As the "courage and vim of youth" vanished and a sense of duty supplied "to a great extent the place of hope," Charl ton placed greater stress in his private and public life on 8 9 evangelical religious values. Throughout his adult life as a lumber merchant and politician, Charlton always managed to 8 8 John Charlton, "Autobiography," (n.d., circa 1905), Charlton Papers, University of Toronto, Thomas Fisher Rare Book Room, pp. 27, 110. 89Ibid., p. 412. 55 be at home on the Sabbath. His usual routine consisted of attendance at morning worship, afternoon Sunday school class and the reading of sermons, and public worship once again in the evening. As his one "safeguard against breaking down" in a life of "incessant activity," Charlton found these Sabbath activities "restful and invigorating." The only non-religious activity he might occasionally allow himself was an afternoon 90 visit with his ailing father. Becoming active on the com mittees of the Presbyterian General Assembly at the same time as he entered Parliament, Charlton strove to translate his religious and moral ideas into political legislation. He made himself champion of such moral reform causes as the prevention of cruelty to animals and the protection of young females 91 against seduction under promise of marriage. Upon the death of Adam Gordon, he became responsible with Dr. Thomas Christie for introducing Sabbath observance bills into the House. His introduction of a bill in 1884 and again in 1885 to prohibit steamship and railway excursions prompted Macdonald's decision to declare Sabbath observance legislation ultra vires the 90 Ibid., p. 533; also John Charlton, "Diaries," John Charlton Papers, University of Toronto, Thomas Fisher Rare Book Room, vol. Ill, entries of 1 April 1888, 15 April 1888, 29 April 1888. 91 Both a bill to prevent cattle from being confined to railway cars longer than twenty-eight hours and another to protect young girls under age 16 from seduction under promise of marriacre or mock marriage passed the House; for some dis cussion of Charlton's promotion of these bills, see R.R. Hett, "John Charlton: Liberal Politician and Free Trade Advocate" (Ph.D. thesis, University of Rochester, 1969). 56 federal jurisdiction. Believing firmly that federal legisla tion was essential to control Sabbath labour on Dominion works (railways, canals, and the Post Office), Charlton influenced the Presbyterian church's determination to continue lobbying the federal government. As a Vice President of the newly-formed Lord's Day Alliance, he agreed to introduce a general Sabbath observance bill in 1890. The bill incorporated the core of the 1845 Upper Canada Act as well as two new clauses — one that made the employer of Sabbath labour guilty of a misdemeanour and one that made both the publisher and vendor 92 of a Sunday newspaper liable to prosecution. Although this bill failed to gain approval of the House, Charlton continued to introduce Sabbath observance bills. His 18 91 version was a modification of the previous year's bill, and his 1892 bill, 93 a yet more "watered-down version," dealt principally with the closing of canals, railways, and newspaper sales. Debate on this bill dragged on until it was defeated in-1898. Charl ton also introduced a motion, in 1893, to close the Canadian portion of the Columbia Exposition in Chicago on Sunday, but 94 the House rejected it after a lengthy debate. Charlton's views on Sabbath observance were neither original nor innovative, but rather repetitions of American 92 Canada, House of Commons, Debates, 18 90, c. 147 9. 93 Ontario Law Reform Commission, Report, p. 37. 94 Canada, House of Commons, Debates, 1893, cc. 2217-44. arguments already in use for thirty or forty years. But, although he borrowed heavily from these sources to structure his arguments concerning the needs and benefits of a religious Sabbath, Charlton's arguments and attitudes reflected those of most Canadian Sabbatarians. In a world of rapid social and economic change, many clung to traditional religious values in an effort to comprehend and control these changes. Charlton's rhetoric established the vision of an ideal Sabbath-observing nation. Sabbath observance legislation was the conservative panacea for all social ills. It would secure social stability and eradicate nihilism, anarchism, and socialism by keeping the 96 labourer in his proper place within a paternalistic society. Not only would such legislation preserve the best of Canada's British inheritance by asserting the dominance of Protestant "'"''in 1893, Charlton represented Canada at a Congress on Sunday rest held in Chicago as part of the Columbia Exposition. There he listened to papers that covered virtually the whole spectrum of Sunday observance: the physiological basis of Sun day rest; the economic and ethical value of Sunday rest; the effects of Sunday rest on character, habits, women, children, home and family life, and so forth. His speeches to the House of Commons reflect his adoption of the ideas presented there and his constant use of American rather than Canadian examples to illustrate his points. Ontario Law Reform Commission, Report, p. 3 9.. Charlton also corresponded frequently with Wilbur Crafts, President of the large New York Sabbath Associa tion, and received and used much American literature from Crafts. See also H.G. Gutman, "Work, Culture, and Society in Industrializing America, 1815-1919," in his Work, Culture and  Society in Industrializing America (New York: Vintage Books, 1977) , pp. 38-9. Canada, House of Commons, Debates, 1890, c. 1478. 58 ideals over rival French Catholic ones, but it would guaran tee national and individual prosperity. In Charlton's view it was in the national interest "to have a virtuous, industrious, intelligent and sober people," and in the employer's interest to have a "clean, intelligent, healthful man to work for him." Charlton therefore promised that Sabbath observance laws would secure these ends and that it would be in the employee's in terest to be the kind of man desired by employers. Other fruits of Sunday observance would be better sanitary conditions, better public health, a greater degree of cleanliness, temper ance, self-respect, and obedience to the law. Charlton in sisted that his bill's religious aim was subordinate to its secular goal. The bill did not intend "to force the people to be religious and to observe the sanctity of the Lord's Day"; rather it left each citizen "a voluntary agent to exercise 9 8 that right or not as he may choose." He claimed that govern-^'Having adopted Canada as his homeland, Charlton be came an ardent British Canadian nationalist, believing that Canada's destiny "must be blended with that of the Great Em pire to which we belong" through sympathy with, devotion to, and loyalty for, the common interest of all the Commonwealths under the British flag. He found Canada's own ethnic condi tions "peculiar" and felt that any success it might enjoy in creating a nation would depend upon the success in assimilat ing the different races. To Charlton, it "was desirable to secure the greatest possible degree of homogeneity." The "perpetuation of race cleavage," he-believed, would be "calami tous." He opposed French Canadian claims, speaking out against the Jesuit Estates bill, becoming a member of the Equal Rights Association, and opposing the election of Laurier as Liberal party leader. (Charlton, "Autobiography," pp. 568-9, 578, 1012.) 9 8 Canada, House of Commons, Debates, 1892, c. 338 0. 59. -merit employees resented their inability to attend divine wor ship and receive religious instruction. They knew "by sad experience" that the ceaseless round of toil and drudgery was not only disastrous to their physical well-being, impairing their health and shortening their lives, but was demoralizing in all its tendencies, depriving them of many comforts and blessings, "which would otherwise brighten their lives and make them better and purer." Sabbath rest spent in public worship would produce healthy citizens and happy families and foster the influence of the mightiest educational agencies in 99 the land, the Church and the Sabbath School. In contrast to this vision of social harmony which he felt distinguished British Protestant countries, Charlton painted the blackest picture to depict the practices of the Sabbathless society. In Catholic European countries, he claimed, only one hour was devoted to morning mass while the rest of the day was "dedicated to the world, the flesh and the devil." Horse-racing, parades, reviews, picnics, excursions, drinking, and dissipation made the day a.holiday for the rich and a day of toil for the poor. Citing elaborate statistics and quoting eminent authorities, Charlton equated Sabbath de secration with increased rates of crime and social impurity: not only were 90 percent of all the men incarcerated in New England-jails-Sabbath-breakers, but in European countries Sun-"ibid., 1897, c. 678. 60 day was "the prolific day for suicides among women and Monday for suicides among men." He compared the 4 percent illegiti macy rate of Sabbath-observing Britain with the 3 4 and 72 per cent rates of heathen Paris and Rome."^^ The inevitable result of such debauchery was physical deterioration. Travellers reported that in visiting European countries, one scarcely saw an old man and found "the labourers wan and worn and lack ing that stamina and vivacity which characterizes the labourers in other countries who have their Sunday rest.""^^" To Charlton, the appearance of the American Sunday newspaper unfortunately heralded the Continental Sabbath's in vasion of "one of the most truly Sabbatarian nations of the world." Bearing the "most disastrous fruits," it debased the people, making them frivolous, immoral and sensational, super ficial in their tastes and pursuits. Day after day, the Sun day newspaper was "sapping the foundations of national pros perity and strength in that country, sapping public virtue, and rendering the outlook as to the future of that country most dubious and pessimistic." To avoid following the American example and to establish instead in Canada a "healthy, sound, progressive nationality," to create and foster sentiments, habits of thought, and moral action that would make Canada a gharlton., "How To Provide for tfie-Better-Observance -of the Lord's Day," 26" February"1»85. 101Canada, House of Commons, Debates, 1897, c. 678. 61 great, vigorous, and flourishing people, Charlton pleaded with his Parliamentary colleagues to support his bill for the bene-102 fit of future generations. Waving in front of the Members of Parliament a copy of the Toronto Sunday World, the one Ontario paper with a Sunday edition, Charlton denounced it as 103 "the harbinger of an evil swarm of foul birds." Unconvinced by his arguments, Charlton's colleagues were quick to point out the basic inconsistency of his reason ing; that is, if he wanted "to stop labour and to preserve the Sabbath for the working man, he must enact a law that will prevent these men from working on Sunday to get out a Monday 104 newspaper." The production of the Monday paper, not the Sunday edition, involved Sabbath labour. In British Columbia, for example, where three Sunday papers were available, the publishers had deliberately adopted the policy of preparing a Sunday edition late Saturday night in order that their employ ees might enjoy Sunday as a day of rest. Otherwise, they argued, "if they had to publish on Monday, they would be com pelled to work the greater part of Sunday," as was indeed the case with all other papers. These arguments had no effect on Charlton and he re fused to acknowledge the illogical nature of his position. He 102Ibid., 1898, c. 1956; Ibid., 1897, c. 681; Ibid., 1898, cc. 1976, 2414. 103Ibid;, 1892, c..2303. - - . 104Ibid., 1898, c. 2418; Ibid., 1894, c. 3423. also refused to forego his Monday paper. Instead he maintained that "the question of the amount of labour involved in the publication of a Sunday newspaper is a question of very small moment" in comparison with its influence upon society, "the deleterious and disastrous influence that is exerted upon society by the circulation, by [the] reading and by the sale of that newspaper on the Lord's Day, whether it is published 105 on the Lord's Day morning or upon the evening previous." Charlton's stand on the Sunday newspaper issue illus trates how tenuous was his commitment-to the sociali-.aim of Sabbath observance legislation, the guarantee to working men of a weekly day of rest. The prohibition of Sabbath labour was Charlton's key to achieving the underlying religious and moral aim of the legislation. He realized that if labour in the field of newspaper sales and commercial recreation could be prohibited, opportunities for Sabbath pleasure could be severely limited. In order to prevent commercial operations from evading restrictions by granting another day in the week_ as a rest day, Charlton refused to countenance the guarantee of any day but Sunday. Thus, although he insisted that work ing men might enjoy "whatever privileges they may consider proper to exercise on that day," his stress lay on the. provi sion of "the leisure necessary for attending divine worship . . . [and] for attending Sunday Schools." Only if the work-Ibid. 63 ingman observed Sunday as a day of religious observance, at tending "both morning and evening service," would he be a "sober, alert, clean, respectable, efficient labourer, pre pared to take hold of his work," instead of a labourer who, having spent a dissolute Sabbath, was "unfitted to labour upon Monday and often unfitted upon Tuesday."106 Although Charlton characterized opponents of his bills as "loafers, hoodlums, prostitutes, and drunkards," opposition to Sabbath observance legislation centred around two respect able groups, one ethnic, the other economic. Their combined 107 opposition prevented Charlton's bills from becoming law. Most often "talked out," only once did a bill pass third ,read-108 ing, then to be rejected by the Senate. French Canadian members of the House resisted the attempt to impose a Protestant religious sentiment on them by law. The essence of Charlton's bill, they argued, was con trary to the teachings of the Catholic church which allowed its members to pursue innocent amusements such as walking, 109 talking, or singing songs after morning mass. In addition, Charlton's bill was unconstitutional. Both the provinces and the municipalities had the jurisdiction to pass adequate 106Ibid., 1892, c. 3377; Ibid., 1891, cc. 763, 2947. 107Ibid., 1892, c. 1076. 108 Ontario Law Reform Commission, Report, p. 38. 109 Canada, House of Commons, Debates, 1895, cc. 764-5, 64 Sabbath observance legislation. Legislation such as Charlton proposed would be an invasion of civil rights and would dis regard provincial autonomy. French Canada, Georges Amyot, Liberal member for Bellechasse, irtartly reminded the House, had joined Confederation "as a commercial partnership, and not as a salvation army. We do not believe in this Parliament turning itself into a salvation army, and with drums and fifes trying to force us into heaven."110 Economic hostility was not as cohesive as ethnic. Wholesale and retail merchants had little desire to expand their work week to seven days and thereby run the risk of in creasing costs by spreading the same volume of sales over a lon ger period of time. To these men, the guarantee of Sunday as a weekly rest day reduced the threat of competition for the consu mer's dollar.111 Of course they did not object to Sunday being spent preparing the articles that would then be sold in these shops: it seems clear that Timothy Eaton, upright Sabbatarian who covered his store windows so that their tempting wares would not offend the righteous, tolerated a considerable amount of Sabbath sweatshop labour to prepare his goods for sale the 112 next day. Other Sabbatarians, factory owners such as the 110Ibid., 1894, c. 3404. 111See Michael Bliss, A Living Profit: Studies in the  Social History of Canadian Business, 1883-1912- (Toronto: McClelland and Stewart, 1974), pp. 33-54. 112 Cf. G. Kealey, Hogtown: Working Class Toronto at the  Turn of the Century (Toronto: New Hogtown Press, 1974), p. 13. 65 Massey family's agricultural implements concern, could also recognize the value of a pause day in the disciplined lives of their industrial workers, in that productivity on the other six days of the week would correspondingly increase. But owners of companies that required continuous production such as the emerging iron and steel industries would resist a Sun day stoppage of operations and might prefer to follow..the railways' example of guaranteeing their workers another day off in the week if they worked Sundays. Above all, the transporta tion concerns were implacable in their hostility to any sug gestion that all operations stop for a twenty-four hour period from midnight Saturday to midnight Sunday. Both the railway and the steamship companies, argued that the close relationship of Canada's transportation system, both water and rail, to the 113 American system made Sunday operations imperative. W. van Home, President of the Canadian Pacific Railway Company, de fined the railways'; position'in a letter he wrote: to theuLOrd's Day Alliance Secretary in 1888: Our train arrangements, to the extent that trains are required to entrench more or less on Sundays, whether on the main line or elsewhere, are forced upon us by the action of the American lines with which we are competing for traffic, and I can see no way to overcome this difficulty without destroy ing our through business, upon which the railway largely depends. (114) 113 J. Hickson to W.D. Armstrong, 25 March 1889, quoted in Canada, House of Commons, Debates, 1890, c. 1481. 114 W. van Home to W.D. Armstrong, 11 June 1888, in Ibid., c. 1482. Other factors made the cessation of traffic impractical: the short navigation season made it imperative to keep the canals continuously open at the end of the navigation season in order to get the grain harvest down to the Montreal Exchange. Peri shable loads of livestock and produce made it impossible to stop trains in the middle of nowhere for a period of twenty-four hours, not to mention the inconvenience to passengers travelling long distances. Furthermore, cessation of service on Sundays would cause such congestion of traffic, both at the ends of the canals and on railway sidings, that Monday would elapse before operations could resume their natural rhythm. As their trump card, the railways argued that they already offered their employees a day off in lieu of Sundays if condi-115 tions necessitated Sunday work. Citing such reasons, the railway and steamship compan ies vigorously lobbied the government. As the railway inter ests enjoyed direct access to the government at the cabinet and prime ministerial level, they were able to lobby by repre sentations to committees and did not need to rely on petitions. Ship owners, Boards of Trade, and the Montreal Grain Exchange, lobbied at the same level to have the Welland Canal re-opened 116 on Sunday. American interests, both vessel owners and Boards 117 of Trade, supported the Canadian protests. 115 Hickson to Armstrong, 25 March 1889, Ibid. 116PC, APGA, 1889, Appendix No. 14. 117T. Ibid. 67 The fate of Charlton's bills revealed the strength of both the economic and e.thno-religious arguments against such legislation. To avoid direct confrontation over the issue, both the Conservative and Liberal governments exploited the ambiguity surrounding constitutional jurisdiction in such le gislation. The Macdonald government and its Minister of Jus tice, John Thompson, continued to insist that Sabbath obser vance was: a subject of which the Provincial Legislatures have fully possessed themselves, and it is, no doubt, within the competence of the Provincial Legislatures, and within their practice, to say how far the enactments of this subject are suf ficiently severe or how much the severity should be increased from time to time. (118) On assuming office in 1896, Laurier refused to support fellow Liberal Charlton, adopting the Conservative method of dealing with the issue. When asked in 1898 what policy he proposed to adopt towards Sabbath legislation, Laurier replied that he in-119 tended "to leave the Sabbath to the laws of the province." Charlton himself finally wearied of the task of being a voice crying in the wilderness, "arising to advocate this measure . . . under discouraging and depressing circumstances 120 . . . to an unsympathetic House." In an unusually frank statement to the Commons in 1897, Charlton acknowledged that 118 Canada, House of Commons, Debates, 18 91, c. 764. 119Ibid., 1898, c. 2429. 120 x uIbid., c. 1951. 68 little support, even religious, for his bills existed. "It seems," he admitted: to be to a large extent a matter of indifference to professing Christian people in Canada whether or not a law is enacted for the purpose of securing to labourers their right to the Sunday rest. We do occasionally have resolutions passed by synods, conferences, assemblies and presbyteries bearing upon this matter; but we have no indication of any great degree of popular feeling on the subject. ... . . so far as I am aware, no delegation of pro fessing Christian people has ever visited this capital to urge upon this government or upon any other Government in power, the propriety of en acting a Sunday rest law. (121) At least at the national level, the Sabbatarian move ment seemed to lack a broad consensus in public opinion. If any did exist, it was either quiescent, owing to the serene (and some said boring) calm of the Canadian Sabbath, or con cerned with local aspects of the Sabbath question. The latter aspect would seem to provide the answer. "To create the sense of urgency and hasten mobilization of action" necessary for an effective lobby, a social movement needs a catalyst or "preci pitating factor" as political sociologist Neil Smelser terms 122 it. Owing to its relative absence in Canadian life, the Sunday newspaper issue that Charlton tried to promote as his burning issue did not have the ability to act as this catalyst. But, at the same time as Charlton was abandoning his fight at 121 Ibid., 18 97, c. 67 5. The first interdenominational deputation organized by the LDAC took place in May 1897. LDAC, Minutes of Executive Committee, 6 May 1897, LDAC, MB 1888-1901. 122 N. Smelser, The Theory of Collective Behavior (New York: The Free Press, 1962), p. 194. the federal level, the Sunday car was exciting tempers in the eastern Canadian provinces. It would thus be the Sunday car issue that would precipitate the formation of the aggressive Ontario Lord's Day Alliance and other provincial Sabbatarian lobbies. 70 Chapter III: The 'Giddy Trolley' and Sundays — The Question of Jurisdiction The relative calm of the Canadian Sunday, so disparaged by British visitors, owed much to the lack of an alternative to church-going. Once other opportunities became available, Canadians, like the British and the Americans, quickly availed themselves of new delights. The introduction of urban trans portation, first the bicycle, then the giddy trolley,x began the transformation. Both innovations, but particularly the electric street car, goaded latent Sabbatarian sentiment into 2 militant activity. Although the Methodist and Presbyterian churches had already complained about steamboat and rai-1 excur sions, they had convinced themselves that only the lower classes and new immigrants actually patronized them. The Sunday opera tion of street railways or its proposed introduction, however, threatened to attract from church attendance the very class that provided the financial backbone of the churches' social and economic position. As such, they could not allow the chal lenge to go unmet. For a decade (from 1895 until 1905), sab-xSaturday Night, 1 September 18 94. 2 For another treatment of the material presented in this and the following chapter, see Christopher Armstrong's and H.V. NellesE "kind of non-fiction entertainment," The Revenge of the  Methodist Bicycle Company: Sunday Streetcars and Municipal Re form in Toronto,. 1888-1897 (Toronto: Peter Martin & Associates Limited, 1977). 71 batarians tried to defeat the Sunday car in the courts; by so doing they raised important constitutional questions concern ing the respective jurisdictions of the federal and provincial (and even municipal) governments. Most importantly the story of the legal tangle of those years explains why Macdonald and Laurier were wrong in assigning jurisdiction over Sabbath oob-servance legislation to the provinces and why the Lord's Day Act of 1906 was a federal statute. ************ The appearance of the bicycle symbolized Canada's optimistic spirit as it emerged from the relative stagnation of the 1870s and 1880s. As P.B. Waite describes the Canadian scene of 1896, "thousands of cyclists were to be seen daily, 'gliding along the streets and out in the suburbs of the city,' pleased with the speed, the ease, and the grace with which they 3 cover distance." Although expensive — bicycles cost at least 4 $50 each — many were able to buy them and quickly demonstrated their intent to use them, even on Sundays. One Torontonian estimated that one thousand bicycles passed him on College 5 Street in the course of one hour on a Sunday morning. Accord-3 P.B. Waite, Canada 1874-1896: Arduous Destiny (Toronto: McClelland and Stewart, 1971), p. 279. 4 Toronto World, 16 March 1897; Ibid., 3 April 1897. 5Saturday Night, 1 May 1897. ing to the Toronto World, as many as ten thousand bicyclists made their way through city streets on a hot summer Sunday. There seemed indeed much truth to Saturday Night's assertion that "quite a large percentage, if truth were known, bought 7 bicycles to free themselves from our stay-at-home Sunday." The bicycle compensated for the lack of other forms of public trans port on Sundays, facilitating outings to parks and less crowded areas of the cities. To bicycle enthusiasts in urban and indus trial communities the "wheel" enlarged "views on the need of g reasonable recreation." It offered freedom of opportunity, especially to the young, "to get out somewhere on Sunday and 9 shake off the odours and cares of indoor life." But, in the eyes and ears of Sabbath observance sup porters, the bicycle disrupted "the sweetness and holy calm of the Day of God."x^ Although Sabbatarians agreed that when pro perly used on weekdays, the bicycle was as "harmless as a wheelbarrow" and in some cases "even helpful and healthy," they attacked its role in "the matter of Sunday recreation" as "Toronto World, 8 April 1897. 7Saturday Night, 1 May 1897. 8Toronto World, 8 April 1897. 9Saturday Night, 9 May 1896. "^Methodist Church, Toronto Conference, Minutes, 1896, p. 55-6, cited by George Emery, "Methodism on the Canadian Prairies, 1895-1914: The Dynamics of an Institution in a New Environment" (Ph.D. thesis, University of British Columbia, 1970), p. 98. "vicious." The Christian Guardian complained that large num bers were: breaking away from the quiet refining pleasures of good homes, and . . . are spending the hours of the Sabbath amid the excitements of the road, of the; park, and of the crowd . .. . For all of this the alleged benefit to health is but a poor compensation. (12) Yet the furor caused by the bicycle was but a prelude to the storm that arose over the Sunday street car. The urban transport systems introduced in the 1860s and 1870s in major urban centres had proved completely inadequate to meet the demand. Slow and erratic service, limited by the horses' phy sical capabilities, characterized the early operations. In Montreal, for example, the north-south lines climbed grades as steep as 11 percent -- "at what cost to the horse must be left 13 to the imagination." Even at the best of times,, movement was extremely slow, "scarcely better than a foot's pace." Compan ies followed no fixed time schedule and frequent stops to accommodate favoured patrons made the operations even less de pendable. Moreover, although the Toronto Globe described the Toronto Street Railway Company cars as having a "neat and com fortable appearance" and as "well lighted and ventilated," this was true only during the summer months when the right-hand side "^Christian Guardian, 12 May 1897; W. Anderson to W. Laurier, 3 February 1897, PAC, LP, C754, p. 2035. 12 Christian Guardian, 12 May 1897. 13 J.I. Cooper, Montreal, A Brief History (Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1969),.-p. 104. 14 of the car was removed, leaving it completely open. In the winter, the cars were in fact extremely cold, and only "a liberal sprinkling of pea straw on the floor served to help keep 15 the passengers' feet warm." Sunday service was rare, although most provinces (ex cepting Ontario) did not forbid it. The charters of most 16 companies permitted (by not prohibiting) Sunday operations. Even in Ontario, a dozen or more companies had been chartered before the 1883 Street Railway Act; of these, only two charters, those of the Toronto and Ottawa companies, contained a clause 17 forbidding Sunday operations. But the Hamilton Street Rail way Company, which introduced a service in 1874 at the hours of public worship, was the only company to sustain a Sunday opera-14 Toronto Globe, 11 September 1861. 15 L.H. Pursley, Street Railways of Toronto, 1861-1921,. Interurbans Special 25 (Los Angeles: Electric Railway Publica tions, 1958), p. 7; M.F. Campbell, A Mountain and a City: The  Story of Hamilton (Toronto: McClelland and Stewart, 1966), p. 163; W.D. Middleton, The Time of the Trolley (Milwaukee: Kalmback Publishing Co., 1967), p. 290. 16 See, for example, charters of the St. John People's Street Railway Company, 30 Vict. (1866), c.35 (N.B.); of the Halifax Street Railway Company, 47 Vict. (1884), c. 6 2 (N.S.) ; and of the Winnipeg Street Railway Company, 55 Vict. (1892), c . 56 (Man. ) 17 City of Toronto, Minutes of Council, 1861, Appendix, By-Law No. 353, cited by Armstrong and Nelles, The Revenge of  the Methodist Bicycle Company, p. 187, n. 17; re Ottawa City Passenger Railway, see 29-30 Vict. (1866), c.10.6.. For charters of companies chartered between 1867 and 18 83 in Ontario, see Ontario, Legislative Assembly, Statutes, 1867-1883. tion until the late 1880s. Few companies in fact realized the potential impact of public urban transportation on the 19 mobility habits of central city populations. Instead, company owners felt that service should facilitate flow into the city to places of employment on workdays and showed lit tle interest in Sunday service to recreational areas. Active promotion of Sunday service began with the growth and improvements of street railway systems in the late 1880s. Although slow, expansion of track laid had already ad vanced the development of suburban residential areas to which the more affluent citizens were moving. The rapid increase in urban population prompted a similar extension of the sys tems. In Toronto, for example, where the population increased from 86,415- in 1880 to 144,023 in 1890, the horse-drawn system expanded from 19 to 6 8.5 miles, placing every part of 20 the city within reasonably easy access of the railway. The Montreal system underwent similar expansion as did those in J"UJ. Mills, Gataract Traction: The Railways of Hamilton (Toronto: Canadian Traction Series, 1971), vol. II, p. 73. An effort by the Kingston Street Railway Company to introduce Sunday service in the late 1870s failed; see PC, APGA, 1879, p. cxliv. 1 Q Peter Goheen, Victorian Toronto, 1850-1900: Patterns  and Growth (University of Chicago: Department of Geography, Research Paper No. 127, 1970), p. 73. 20Ibid., p. 72. Between 1861 and 1880 the Toronto system had expanded from 4 to 19 miles. Pursley, Street Railways, p. 144. 76 21 Hamilton and Winnipeg. Profits increased accordingly: by 1890, those of the Toronto Street Railway Company, which carried 55,000 passengers daily, totalled $165,562 on earnings of about $7 30,000, in comparison with its 1873 profits of $25,000.22 Although electrification of the systems took place after these major expansions, it still played an important part in the growth of service. The introduction of the "giddy trolley" permitted a thorough rationalization of operations. Electrifi cation markedly cut the per unit operating costs while at the same time the improved service drew more patrons and thereby enlarged total revenues. Electrification increased the systems' capacity to carry passengers; and, since greater speed meant a longer trip in the same length of time, it further encouraged suburban development and the dispersal of urban populations. The quality of the journey now improved as well, for the trolley 23 ride was smoother and the cars generally more comfortable. Gradually companies in the larger cities, assured of sufficient profit margins, went so far as to offer lower fares to the work ing class. The normal fare was five cents, but the Winnipeg 21 Cooper, Montreal, p. 104; Mills, Cataract Traction, p. 75; A.S. Thompson, Spadina: A History of Old Toronto (Toronto: Pagurian Press, 1975), p. 162. 22 Armstrong and Nelles, The Revenge of the Methodist  Bicycle Company, p. 29. 23J. McKay, Trams_and Trolleys: The Rise of Urban Transport  in Europe (Princeton, N.J.7 Vrinceton University Press, 1976), pp. 51-58; for descriptions of the introduction of electric cars, see Pursley, Street Railways, p. 144; Mills, Cataract Traction, p. 76. 77 Street Railway Company and others sold tickets to workmen at the rate of eight for a quarter between 5.00 and 8.00 a.m. and 5.30 24 and 6.30 p.m. A change in the transit companies1 attitude towards the nature of their operations accompanied these technological changes. Companies now realized that a large potential market lay in the suburbanization that followed expansion and improve ments in quality. Such developments would allow the movement of people out from the core of the city not only on workdays, but on holidays as well. Commenting on a proposed extension of the Toronto system to the north and east of the city in 1891, the Globe described the potential effects on the city's development as revolutionary: not only would it be a "boon to the wealthy and the well-to-do, " who? worked.:,in ..the city but lived, in the suburbs, but it would also "be a blessing to the poor, who in habit the lowly places, the slums and shanties of 'the ward,' for they will be given opportunities they do not possess of breathing the fresh, pure air and of seeing the beauties of „25 nature." In order to cultivate this market, some companies developed recreational areas at the end of their lines while 24 City of Winnipeg, By-Law No. 543, s.5 in 55 Vict. (1892), c.56, Schedule "A" .' The Toronto Railway Company offered the same fare; see Pursley, Street Railways, p. 16. See also charter of Ottawa Electric Railway Company, 57 Vict. (1894) , c.76, s.39. 25 Toronto Globe, 15 May 1891. 78 others extended lines to link up with existing facilities. In Winnipeg, James Austin, owner of the Winnipeg Street Rail way Company, created a 5.5 acre park at the southern end of his line, complete with refreshment booths, pavilions for elec-2 6 trical exhibits and concerts, and ball grounds. In Toronto, in response to the building of a new race track in Glen Grove Park, the Metropolitan railway company, which connected with the city railway, extended its lines to the park entrance. During this period as well, interurban companies obtained char ters to begin operations. Although the construction of such lines had as its primary purpose the transportation of the far-27 mer and his produce to market and not the reverse, the poten tial holiday business quickly appeared attractive. In British Columbia, for example, interurban trains ran from Vancouver to Queen's Park in New Westminster with multiple trains required on September days when provincial or national lacrosse finals 28 were played. It was obvious that Sunday customers existed both with in the cities and between cities. On one hand, a market existed in conveying people to church. As urban expansion continued and' 2 6 Thompson, Spadina, pp. 162, 186. See also H.J. Sel-wood, "Urban Development and the Streetcar: The Case of Winni peg, 1881-1914," Urban History Review, No. 3-77 (February 1978), p. 37. 27 Mills, Cataract Traction, p. 24; re the development of Canadian interurban systems, see John Due, The Intercity Electric  Railway Industry (Toronto: University, of Toronto Press, 1966). 28 Ian F. Jobling, "Urbanization and Sport in Canada,' 1867-1900," in Canadian Sport: Sociological Perspectives, ed., Richard S. Gruneau and John G. Albinson (Don Mills, Ontario: Addison-Wesley (Canada) Ltd., 1976), p. 68. 79 people moved away from the central core, the operation of a Sun day service would allow them to continue their church affilia-29 tions. On the other hand, a large potential market existed among those who did not attend church. In the early 1880s the Toronto Globe conducted a survey to determine attendance at that city's churches on a winter Sunday: although church attendance was certainly respectable, over half (55 percent) the city's 30 population did not attend church. If the same number of people rode the cars on a Sunday as on a normal working day — and there were already indications in Europe and the United States that in fact more people patronized the cars on Sundays than on normal 31 working days — a company such as the Toronto Street Railway Company could hope to realize an increased yearly revenue of 32 $105,000 without substantial increases in cost. The over whelming success of the bicycle as a means of getting around 29Saturday Night, 2 March 1895. 30 Toronto Globe, 7 February 1882, cited by D.C. Masters, The Rise of Toronto, 1850-1890 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1947), p. 193. Masters, interprets this figure to indi cate a strong attendance at church. For a revision of Master's interpretation, see M.G. Decarie, "Something Old, Something New: Aspects of the Prohibition Movement in Canada," in Oliver Mowat's  Ontario, ed., D. Swainson (Toronto: Macmillan of Canada, 1972), pp. 166-7. 31 McKay, Tramways and Trolleys, p. 226. See also T.G. Barker and M. Robbins, A History of London Transport (London: George Allen and Unwin Ltd., 1975), vol. I, pp. 204-7; also George M. Smerk, "The Streetcar: Shaper of American Cities," Traffic Quarterly XXI (December 1967), p..578. 32 Goheen, Victorian Toronto, p. 72. This estimate was calculated on the basis of daily passengers figures multiplied by $0.04 (adult fare — 5*, children's — 3*) x 52. 80 cities on Sundays provided even more convincing evidence that companies could well hope to realize significant profits on Sundays. As companies recognized the potential of Sunday service, they began to introduce it. By the late 1880s, Sunday cars were running in the cities of St. John, Halifax, and Montreal. In Ontario, the Hamilton Street Railway Company increased its ser vice, initiated twenty years earlier, to a full twelve hour 33 operation. Appeals to the city council to halt the service 34 were to no avail. Cars also ran on mterurban lines radiating out from Hamilton and in the Niagara Falls area. Only in Toronto did repeated efforts to commence Sunday service fail. The company could neither obtain an amendment to its charter permitting Sunday operations nor did it succeed in operating illegally. When one well-known liveryman, 'Citizen' William Kelly, secured four disused horse-drawn buses from the company and operated them on a voluntary basis, prompting others to adopt this method, city by-laws were enforced. Inspector Archi bald, Toronto's Public Morality Officer, "swooped down and arrested Kelly driving his family to church in one of the buses. 33 Mills, Cataract Traction, p. 80; The Week, 16 June 1887. 34 OLDA, "Memorandum concerning the formation of a Provin cial Alliance for the better observance of the Lord's Day," 15 February 1895, in LDACP, OLDA, SB (hereafter OLDA, SB) 1892-1900. 35 Armstrong and Nelles, The Revenge of the Methodist Bi cycle Company, pp. 202-3, n.l; PC, APGA, 1886, p. clix; Canada, House of Commons, Debates, 1894, c. 3437; Pursley, Street Rail ways , p. 142. 81 The Sunday car presented an elusive target to Sabbath observance supporters, one difficult to challenge successfully. In Nova Scotia, Sabbatarians assumed that the 1891 Act, which made it illegal for a corporation to employ or direct a person to "perform servile labour on Sunday," would prevent street 3 6 railway companies from operating. In Ontario, Sabbatarians assumed that several acts made Sunday service illegal. As part of its 1883 Street Railway Act, the Ontario Legislature had for-37 bidden the Sunday running of cars. For several reasons, it assumed (as did the Sabbatarians) that the 1845 Upper Canada Act would apply to companies chartered before 1883: British legal precedent defined the phrase "or person whatsoever" in the Act's first clause to include business corporations such as 3 8 street railway companies; moreover, in 1854 Judge John Beverley Robinson of the Upper Canadian bench had ruled that the Act prohibited all local traffic and allowed only through 39 traffic. More recent court decisions, however, were raising doubts as to the efficacy of the Act. The decision by the Ontario Appeal Court in Regina. v. Somers (1893) implied that the 3654 Vict, c.32 (N.S.). 37R.S.O. (1887), c.171, s.34. 3 8 OLDA, "Memorandum of Facts and Reasons regarding De sired Legislation amending the Lord's Day Act," December 1897, in OLDA, SB 1892-1900. 3911 U.C.Q.B. 636. 82 Act applied only to those people specifically cited in the first 40 clause. Judge J.H. Hagarty's ruling in Regina v. Daggett (1882) made it possible that all passengers, whether they tra velled "wholly for pleasure, fresh air, relaxation from work, with or without luggage, or actually on important business," were exempt from the Act. To Hagarty, any attempt to draw a distinction between persons, "according to the purpose which in duced them to travel," was in vain, "leading to impossible and irritating enquiries, and tending to bring a useful and salutary 41 enactment into contempt." Several years later, Hagarty upheld the right of the Niagara Falls, Wesley Park and Clifton Tramway Company, chartered under the 1883 Street Railway Act, to operate on Sundays, arguing that the company;had inflicted no punishable injury upon public property. G.W. Burton, Hagarty's colleague on the Appeal Court bench, made an even stronger statement in support of the Sunday car during these same proceedings, com menting that: Human nature may have changed much in the last 1800 years, but it is really painful to find in this nineteenth century anyone, and especially a person assuming to be a teacher of religion, grudging the enjoyment of a number of poor people and their families who avail themselves of, perhaps, the only day open to them to visit and enjoy one of nature rs grandest works, because in order to do so they have 24 O.R. 24 4. The court decided that a cab driver was not included in any of the classes enumerated in section 1 of the Act and therefore could not be lawfully convicted for driving a cab on Sunday. 411 O.R. 527. 83 to travel a few miles by train or other vehicle. It would seem almost incredible had we not the witnesses' admission in evidence. (42) Given the uncertain nature of the law, opponents of the Sunday car decided to obtain legal clarification. Two important cases entered the courts: first, the Hamilton Street Railway Company, whose charter did not forbid Sunday 43 operations, was charged with violating Section 1 of the 1845 Upper Canada Lord's Day Act. The second case charged the Halifax Electric Tramway Company (whose charter likewise 44 did not forbid Sunday operations ) with violating the 1891 Act. In Ontario, the case proceeded through the lower courts to the Ontario Appeal Court which handed down a decision in 45 favour of the street railway company in March 1897. As a result, the Ontario Legislature amended, a few months later, the 1845 Act to forbid the Sunday operation of street railways 46 and radial electric railways. In January 1898, however, 4218 O.A.R. 459. 43 33 Vict. (1873), c.lOO,(Ont.). 4458 Vict. (1895), c.107 (N.S.) 45 A.G. v. Hamilton Street Railway Company, 27 O.R. 49; also Toronto Globe, 1 January 1896; A.G. v. Hamilton Street  Railway Company, 24 O.A.R. 170; also Toronto Mail and Empire, 3 March 1897. The Ontario Appeal Court decided that the phrase 'or person whatsoever', as defined by British precedent did not apply. The phrase did not apply to street railway companies, or indeed to any industrial corporation. Chief Justice Burton reasoned that if the 1845 Legislature had wished to prohibit the labour of corporations in the Act, it would have specifical ly named them since it had been so specific in its list of per sons whose Sabbath labour was prohibited. 4660 Vict. (1897), c.14, s.95 (Ont.); R.S.O.(1897), c.246. 84 the Nova Soctia Supreme Court ruled that the 1891 statute was ultra vires the provincial jurisdiction. The court de cided that the clause forbidding the employment of servile labour had been an amendment to an 18 69 Act, which was itself an amendment to the pre-Confederation statute, "Of Offences 47 Against Religion." Since this statute was part of the crimi nal law of Nova Scotia, only the federal government had the power to repeal or amend it.48 The Nova Scotian decision cast doubt on the validity of all existing provincial (including municipal) legislation dealing with Sabbath observance. As a consequence, the Ontar io government resubmitted the Hamilton Street Railway case to its Appeal Court for a decision on the Ontario Legislature's ability to pass the 1897 Act. In 1902, the Ontario Appeal Court upheld the Ontario Legislature's right to pass the Act, although Chief Justice Armour dissented: in his opinion, the profanation of the Lord's Day was an offence against religion; since such offences were properly classed as crimes, the enact ment of appropriate laws and the imposition of punishment by fines or imprisonment properly belonged to the Parliament of 49 Canada. **'R.S.N.S. (1851), c.157; R.S.N.S. (1869), c.159. 4830 N.S.R. 469; 1 C.C.C.424 (C.A.). Robert L. Borden was counsel for the prosecution. 49O.W.R. 312; 54 C.C.C. 344, quoted in PC, APGA, 1902, p. 271. 85 Owing to the conflicting opinions of the Canadian high 50 courts, the Sunday car issue proceeded to the Judicial Commi ttee of the Privy Council for a final and authoritative inter pretation. In July 1903, in its judgement on the Hamilton Street Railway case, the Privy Council reversed the decision of the Ontario Appeal Court. In its opinion, the 1845 Act had been a statute of criminal law at the time of its enactment and was thus a matter of federal jurisdiction. Any amendments to this Act, such as that of 1897, were therefore "beyond the compe tency of the Ontario Legislature to enact," and the 18 97 Act 51 "as a whole was invalid." It seemed clear that, as Chief Justice Armour had argued, only the federal government could pass Sabbath observanceelegislation. The Privy Council decision surprised governments and Sabbath observance supporters alike. They had assumed that the provinces had jurisdiction over this matter, and both the Mac donald and Laurier governments had declared Sabbath observance a matter of provincial legislation. Since 1867 the provinces had asserted their supposed competence by passing various statutes and amendments. By 1898, New 1 Brunswick, Quebec, Mani toba, British Columbia, and the Northwest Territories, in addi tion to Nova Scotia and Ontario, had statutes dealing with In 1899, in a case unrelated to the Sunday car (Ex  Parte re Green, 4 C.C.C. 182; 35 N.B.R. 137), the New Brunswick Supreme Court ruled New Brunswick's Sabbath observance legisla tion intra vires the provincial jurisdiction. (1903) A.C. 524. 86 Sabbath offences. But the provinces and the Prime Ministers were wrong: according to legal interpretation of Canadian law, only the federal government could pass laws regulating Sabbath obser vance. Yet./Chief Justice Armour had been entirely correct in describing the peculiarities of the Canadian situation that not only made provincial legislation preferable but would also be devil the problem from that day to the present. "The Lord's Day Act," Armour stated, was "not a subject matter irrespective or origin or religion." The Quebec Act of 1774 had allowed Lower Canadians to preserve their customs, property, and civil rights. Consequently, Quebecers had a different Lord's Day Act than did the rest of the country. To "force a Lord's Day Act on them would be the very opposite of what they contracted for. The different Provinces," he.concluded,'"have different ideas on this subject and it would be contrary to constitutional rights to enforce the average idea of the whole Dominion upon each 53 Province." Thwarted in its bid to obtain comprehensive Sabbath observance legislation at the provincial level, however, this was exactly what a new and more aggressive Sabbatarian lobby would attempt to do. Prince Edward Island continued, without amendment, its pre-Confederation statute, 20 Geo. Ill (1779), c.3 (P.E.I.). 53Quoted in PC, APGA, 1902, p. 271. 87 Chapter IV: The Sunday Car as Catalyst: The Formation of The Ontario Lord's Day Alliance, 1895-1899. The Sunday car was but one manifestation of the growing complexity of Canadian society. By the late 18 90s, wheat and immigration were having dynamic impacts upon Canada's economic growth.x Felt across Canada, their multiplier effects upon the economy stimulated further technological change. The expanding use of electricity, for example, was rapid. Electric lighting, electric railways, and the telephone all came into common use. "Chains of banks, department stores, and mail order houses, steel rails and telephone wires" tied the country together from 2 coast to coast. Increasingly sophisticated urban architecture, institutions of higher learning, and complex municipal govern ments became the hallmarks of an abundant urban life. So too, however, were the concentrated social ills of wretched housing, crime, and alcoholism. For, despite the obvious prosperity of the times, life was bleak for the working class in the large ci-3 ties of Toronto, Hamilton, Montreal, and Halifax. Unable to """See G.W. Bertram, "Economic Growth in Canadian Industry, 1870-1915," Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science XXXIX/2 (May 1963) , reprinted in Approaches to Canadian Economic  History, ed., W.T. Easterbrook and M.H. Watkins (Toronto: McClelland and Stewart, 1967), p. 92. 2J.M.S. Careless, The Rise of Cities in Canada Before  1914, Canadian Historical Association, Historical Booklet No. 32, 1978, p. 25. See G. Kealey, Hogtown: Working Class Toronto at the Turn  of the Century (Toronto: New Hogtown Press, 1974); J.T. Copp, 88 afford a house, most lived in tenements with several other fami lies. Cold in winter, stifling in summer, such tenements offered few amenities, an outdoor privy possibly, bathing fa cilities never. Returning home from a ten or twelve hour day, the working family had little time or inclination for recrea tional activity. The one day of leisure continued to be the Sabbath. The Sabbatarian response to the vast and rapid social and economic change was but one of the many progressive reform movements that proliferated at the end of the nineteenth cen tury. Canadians began to feel that the collectivist, rather than the individualist, approach might solve some of prosperi ty's attendant evils. Some groups attempted the purification of municipal governments; others saw alcohol or prostitution as the root of all social evil. Some focussed on the child as the human being most needy of help; others determined that the ex tension of suffrage to women would cure problems that would otherwise go unsolved. All groups shared a desire to amelio rate conditions if possible for the working class, but to main tain above all the social and economic superiority of the middle class. Per capita productivity would not rise if absent-The Anatomy of Poverty: The Condition of the Working Class in  Montreal, 1897-1929 (Toronto: McClelland and Stewart, 1974). Life in the new cities of the Prairies may not have been much better for the working class. See Paul Voisey, "In Search of Wealth and Status: An Economic and Social Study of Entrepren eurs in Early Calgary.," in Frontier Calgary: Town, City, and  Region, 1885-1914, ed., A.W. Rasporich and H. Klassen (Calgary: University of Calgary, McClelland and Stewart West, 1975), p. 233. 89 eeism owing to alcoholism prevented the worker from contributing to economic growth. Prosperity would not continue if men, women, or children were absent from work on Monday (and even Tuesday) owing to the debauchery of a Sunday ride on a street car. In raising questions about the nature of social and 4 moral reform, the Sunday car contributed to the debate about the quality of life in an urban and industrial society. The central issue was the weekly day of rest and its use. Should it be a day devoted solely to the health of the soul, or should it be partly devoted to that end and partly to the rational recreation of the physical body? Car supporters argued that the Sunday car was a necessary convenience in an urban com munity. It did not rob the street railway employee of his day of rest, for companies were willing to guarantee their employ ees another day in the week as a rest day. Sunday service was entirely a matter of choice for both employees and patrons. The man who worked on the streetcars was at liberty to leave his job if he so chose. The patron, on the other hand, was also at liberty to refuse to ride the cars if his religious convic tions directed him not to. The service, however, should be 4 See Brxan Harrison, "State Intervention and Moral Re form in Nineteenth-Century England," in Pressure from Without  in Early Victorian England, ed., Patricia Hollis (London: Edward Arnold Ltd., 1974), p. 289: "The nineteenth century debate on State intervention cannot be fully understood unless the historian, like the Victorians themselves, discusses both moral and social reform together; for attitudes generated in the moral sphere carried over into the social." 90 available. In addition, car supporters believed that the Sunday car would effect a true social reform. Since working class people, 5 it was assumed, did not in any case attend church services, they should have the opportunity to receive some physical and spiritual solace in the open air. The Sunday car would allow those who lived in urban working class districts to escape the stultifying environment in which they both lived and worked on the one day of the week they could claim as leisure. Was it possible, queried Goldwin Smith, a car supporter, to serve the interests of either humanity or of Christianity by: mewing men, women and children up in a small room or compelling them to sit on a doorstep in the close air of the city during a sultry afternoon when they might be enjoying the air and verdure of High Park with a thankful heart not alien to religion. (7) The Sunday car would in fact "drive people.out of the slums and g saloons on Sunday into more wholesome and decent surroundings." Supporters felt, therefore, that the Protestant evangelical churches would demonstrate a real commitment to reform if they changed their fearful attitude towards the car.and, instead, ab-5 Christian Guardian, 12 September 1888, cited by S.D. Clark, Church and Sect in Canada (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1948), p. 393: "We cannot get the rich and poor to mingle in our fine churches. . . Churches are no sooner built than they have to be enlarged or rebuilt to accommodate the worshippers; and yet, outside of all this is a vast population of from forty to fifty thousand who go to no church." 6Toronto World, 14 June 1893. 7Ibid., 17 June 1893. 8Saturday Night, 24 April 1897. 91 sorbed this technological innovation. E.E. Sheppard, editor of Saturday Night, suggested that the churches place themselves in the forefront of the changes represented by the Sunday car. "Is it not manifest," he postulated, "that it would be wiser to place guiding hands upon the car of progress than to get vainly crushed under its wheels and have it then run mad?" He recom mended that the churches disarm the Sunday car "by acquiescence" by giving poorer parishioners free Sunday car tickets and by encouraging people to spend their afternoons (after public wor-9 ship) in the parks. Sabbath observance supporters also projected their cam paign as one of social reform: the Sunday car unnecessarily robbed one class of workers of their Sunday rest in order that others might have frivolous pleasure. Although they too agreed that the Sabbath should be a day of. leisure, they wished it to be a day totally devoted to the cultivation of the religious spirit. Like their British counterparts, Canadian Sabbatarians "saw Sunday as a Christian and rural interlude of class harmony amidst the hectic rush of a materialistic, competitive, and urban society. The Sunday car therefore infused new life into the Sab batarian movement, giving it a focus that the earlier Lord's Day Alliance had lacked. Long before the court actions were 9Ibid., 4 July 1896. "^Harrison, "State Intervention and Moral Reform," p. 295. 92 complete, the Sunday car acted as the precipitating factor in the formation of provincial lobbies in St. John, Halifax, and Toronto, whose goal it was to challenge the Sunday car's right to run. The two Maritime associations, unable to retain public interest when litigation concerning the Sunday car dragged on in the courts, had little or no vitality. Only in Toronto did an association become truly "aggressive," as John G. Shearer, initiator of the Ontario Lord's Day Alliance, was to write some years later.11 Here the anti-Sunday car sentiment did not focus only on the courts but also on the municipal referendum in Toronto which would decide the issue of Sunday service. ************ The 1891 charter incorporating the Toronto Railway Company (formerly the Toronto Street Railway Company) allowed Sunday operations when approved by a majority of the city's 12 ratepayers. The signatures of 5,000 ratepayers on a petition could occasion a vote on Sunday service, and the first such vote took place on January 4, 1892. Over 24,000 people voted and the anti-car faction won handily with a majority of 3,936. The announcement of a second vote for the end of August 18 93 led to Rev. J.G. Shearer to Rev. Dr. Waddell, 1 November 1901, LB 1899-1902, p. 883. 1255 Vict., c.99, ss. 1, 4(1), 19(1), 21. 93 the formation of a Citizens' Central Anti-Sunday Car Committee to organize public meetings, circulate literature and petitions, and mobilize the vote in each ward of the city. Although the Committee was victorious, the anti-car majority slipped to 13 14 1,003. Fearing an adverse decision in the next vote, the Committee contemplated two courses of action: petitioning the government to pass general legislation to supersede municipal legislation; or challenging in the courts Toronto's right to hold a vote, on the grounds that the 1845 Upper Canada Lord's Day Act forbade street railway operations. Either course of action would "render a vote upon the question of no use whatso-„15 ever. In Hamilton, appeals by car opponents to the city au thorities to stop Sunday operations proved "fruitless."x^ In the fall of 1894, therefore, a Hamilton Presbyterian minister, John G.. Shearer, approached J.K. Macdonald, his Toronto friend and colleague on committees of the provincial Presbyterian Synod, with the suggestion of creating a provincial lobby. As a result of this meeting, the Ontario Lord's Day Alliance was 13 Toronto Mail, 28 August 1893. 14 In 1894 the Ontario government imposed a three-year interval between plebiscites on the Sunday car issue. C. Arm strong and H.V. Nelles, The Revenge of the Methodist Bicycle  Company: Sunday Streetcars and Municipal Reform in Toronto, 1888-1897 (Toronto: Peter Martin & Associates, 1977), p. 146. x^OLDA, "Memorandum concerning the formation of a Provin cial Alliance for the better observance of the Lord's Day," 15 February 1895, in OLDA, SB 1892-1900. 16T. Ibid. 94 formed in January 189 5. Its primary aim was to secure a speci fic amendment to the 1845 Upper Canada Act prohibiting the Sunday operation of industrial and business corporations. At the same time, it petitioned for general legislation similar to the 1883 Street Railway Act to ban Sunday operations on the new interurban, radial electric railway systems rapidly appearing 17 on the Ontarxo landscape. The Alliance centred in Toronto in order to capitalize on support already given to its cause in previous fights against the Sunday car. To a large extent, as Armstrong and Nelles ex plain, the anti-Sunday car faction depended upon a host of . existing agencies, the Protestant churches, the Ministerial Association, the quasi-religious societies of Orangemen, Temp lars, Masons, and the like, to provide "ready-made networks of association, lines of communication and systems of authority." The Christian Guardian, for example, "left no stone unturned to 19 prevent the innovation." The Evangelical Movement of the Anglican Church also campaigned actively against the Sunday car; members of the local Trades and Labor Councils lent their Ibid. Whereas in 1894 only two such lines running out from Hamilton operated, in 1895 alone eleven companies applied to build. 18 Armstrong and Nelles, The Revenge of the Methodist  Bicycle Company, p. 177. 19 Marian Royce, "The Contribution of the Methodist Church to Social Welfare in Canada" (M.A. Thesis, University of Toronto, 1940), p. 249; Christian Guardian, 28 June 1893, 12 July 1893, 19 July 1893, 26 July 1893, 2 August 1893, 9 August 1893, 15 August 1893, 23 August 1893, 30 August 1893. support as did several temperance leaders.^u In comparison to the LDAC, therefore, the Ontario Alli ance proceeded most energetically about its task. Either cleri cal or lay representatives of the Presbyterian dhurch formed the core of the executive; they in turn quickly recruited prom inent members of the Methodist and Anglican churches. All men who joined the Alliance executive lived in cities directly threatened by the Sunday car, since the street railway companies of these cities had all been chartered before the 1883 Street 21 Railway Act. In addition, the Alliance executive secured ex tensive legal expertise among its recruits. Ten of Toronto's 22 lawyers, among them Sam Blake and Newton W. Hoyles, both active in the affairs of Wycliffe College, the centre of evange lical Anglicanism, and Dr. J.J. Maclaren, an equally prominent Methodist layman, volunteered their services to the Alliance. A.E. O'Meara, a Toronto solicitor, became the Alliance's paid Solicitor and Secretary. The Alii ance did not intend to rely solely on the efforts of one sympathetic member of the Legisla ture to introduce legislation, but to lobby the Premier and his Attorney-General directly by deputation. Toronto Mail, 25 July 1893; Ibid., 22 July 1893; Toronto World, 22 August 1893. 21 Toronto, Brantford, Hamilton, London, Kingston, St. Catherines, Guelph, and Niagara Falls. For charters, see Ontario, Legislative Assembly, Statutes, 1867-1883.-2 2 Blake had been responsible, as City Counsel, for the negotiation of the 1891 charter of the Toronto Railway Company, securing the clause restricting Sunday operations. Toronto World, 3 March 1897. 96 The Alliance also made plans to recruit a general mem bership to satisfy the government that Sabbatarianism was in deed the sentiment of the majority. The membership campaign was to concentrate on urban centres, establishing branches first in every city and then "so far as possible in every town and 23 village of the Province." After some discussion as to the feasibility of a membership fee of one or two dollars, the Exe cutive decided on fifty cents in order to attract greater num bers thereby. The Ontario Alliance attempted to promote contact with the Lord's Day Alliance in Ottawa, but the LDAC was unprepared 24 to cooperate with the Ontario Alliance in any concrete fashion. Nor did the Ontario Alliance establish any direct links with American Sabbatarian associations, although it was certainly aware of, and made .constant reference to, the frivolous obser vance of the Sabbath in American cities. The Alliance perceived the American Sabbath as the Globe described it, a day of turmoil 25 and abominations, open shows and open theatres. It was much better, the Alliance believed, to enact legislation in advance 2 6 of such a situation than to try and regain it, once lost. 23 OLDA, "Memo concerning formation," 15 February 1895. 24 G. McRitchie to A.E. O'Meara, 26 January 1895, LDAC, MB 1888-1901. 25 Toronto Globe, 24 December 18 90. 2 6 OLDA, Memorandum, February 1896, in OLDA, SB 1892-1900. 97 Yet, despite its organization and expertise, the first lobbying of the Alliance was only partially successful. On one hand, in 1895 the Ontario Legislature passed an Electric Rail way Act that, among its provisions, forbade all Sunday traffic on radial electric railways, except for the transportation of milk. The Act also included a clause stipulating that parks or pleasure grounds owned by a company chartered under the Act "should not be open on the Lord's Day to be used for games, picnics, concerts, excursions, or other public entertainments. The eleven electric railway companies chartered by the govern-2 8 ment in that year thus fell under these prohibitions. In addition, the government amended the 1883 Street Railway Act to include the Electric Railway Act restriction on parks or enter-29 tamment areas. On the other hand, Premier Oliver Mowat, believing himself that Sabbath observance was really a matter of municipal regulation,30 refused to amend the 1845 Act until the Alliance could prove that it was insufficient. As a result, the Alliance instituted proceedings against the Hamilton Street Railway Company. When the courts indicated that the Act was insufficient because the phrase 'or person whatsoever' did not include business corporations, the Alliance again lobbied the 2758 Vict., c.38, ss.9(2), 136. 28 See Ontario, Legislative Assembly, Statutes, 1895. 2959 Vict. (1896), c.50, s.5. ^Toronto Mail and Empire, 24 January 1896. 98 31 provincial government to amend the Act. It hoped that this would prevent the Toronto ratepayers1 vote on the Sunday car set for May 1897, as well as forestalling Sunday operations by the Hamilton company. Again, the provincial government only partially acceded to the Alliance's request: in April 1897, the Legislature passed an amending clause to the 1845 Act that specifically for bade the operation of street railways and radial electric rail-32 ways on Sundays. Exemptions to the clause, however, permitted companies that had been operating on Sundays prior to the enact ment of this clause to continue, and it also allowed the vote on the issue to go forward in Toronto. Although the Alliance challenged the validity of these exemptions, there was no time 33 to take the matter to court before the Toronto vote of May 1897. The Alliance suffered public humiliation in the final Toronto "Sunday Car Agitation," one of the most exciting and bitter municipal contests to take place in late Victorian Toronto. The Globe reported that the Sunday car by-law was "for weeks, the chief, if not the sole topic of conversation upon the 34 streets, in the clubs and churches and even in the household." 31 A.G. (Ont.) v. Hamilton Street Railway Company, 27 O.R. 49; A.G. (Ont.) v. Hamilton Street Railway Company, 24 O.A.R. 170. 3260 Vict. (1897), c.14, s.95 (Ont.); R.S.O. (1897), c.246. 33 Mayor Fleming of Toronto had announced in January 18 97 that a vote would take place in May as long as the Ontario Ap peal Court did not declare it a violation of the 1845 Act. Toronto World, 28 January 1897. 34Toronto Globe, 17 May 1897. Anti- and pro-car associations clamoured for the public's atten tion, circulating petitions, hurling invective, and employing questionable tactics to win support. Of an evening, three or four boisterous meetings filled to capacity the city's largest public halls, often leaving many more outside unable to gain entrance. On the eve of the vote, the agitation had indeed taken on the air of a life-and-death struggle between Christ-35 lanity and the Toronto Railway Company. As already noted, the debate centred on the moral and social implications surrounding the introduction of pleasure transportation in an industrial city at a time when Sunday was the only day of leisure for most people. Both sides claimed to be reformers. Those in support of the cars argued that the changed circumstances of modern urban life, the dispersion of population to the suburbs and the crowded 'quarters in the city core, demanded a cheap transportation system as an "important 3 6 social and moral condition" of city life. As a social bene fit, the Sunday car would place the poor in a position of equality with the rich man and his carriage. Moreover, it would occasion proportionally less labour than already existed among coachmen and cabmen. As a moral reform, Sunday cars would strengthen the spiritual tone of the community and directly aid 35 Saturday Night, 5 August 1893: "It is not a fight between Christianity and the Toronto Street Railway Company." 3 6 Citizens' Pro-Sunday Car Committee, "Manifesto," Tor onto World, 29 April 1897. 100 the churches by enabling, people who had moved to the new sub urban areas to maintain an affiliation with their old church. The Alliance, which led opposition to the Sunday car, rejected these arguments, attacking the "contagious character 3 7 of this moral and industrial plague." As the "forerunner of a great deal of Sunday business, Sunday concerts, spectacular exhibitions and desecration by open pleasuring," the Sunday car 3 8 would open the doors to Sunday labour. It would be but the first of a never-ending string of Sabbath secularizers; after it would come worse evils in the form of the ice-cream parlour, the shoe-shine and the barber shop, and worst of all, the Sunday newspaper. Not only would the Sunday car facilitate Sunday visits to the graves of the dead and the beds of the sick, but it would encourage social visitings to city parks and amusement centres. The experience of other cities had irrefutably shown that street railway companies, in search of increased profits, would take any steps necessary to "make the Sunday cars the means of Sunday recreations and pastimes and refreshments in 39 parks controlled by them or others." Thus, the Sunday car would bring no moral benefit to the community, and the Alliance denounced the argument that the Sunday car might add "to the OLDA, "Memo concerning formation," February 1895. 38Shearer to A. Scott, 27 June 1900, LB 1899-1902, p. 11. 39 Citizens' Anti-Sunday Car Committee, "Manifesto," in The Toronto Book, ed.,- William Kilbourn (Toronto: Macmillan of Canada, 1976), pp. 71-2. 101 influence and usefulness of the churches and Sunday schools by conveying worshippers to distant sanctuaries" as a "delu sion and a snare": The individual churches throughout the city have all the better distribution of strength because of the absence of street cars, as it leads most people to attend churches near at hand and no doubt the street cars would lure more from the churches than they would lead to them. (40) Finally, the Sunday car would not aid the workingman: in cities where the Sunday car was already running, the Alliance insisted, 41 it did not provide "valuable relief to the crowded centres." Rather, by robbing the workingman of his Sabbath rest, the Sunday car shattered his home life and "his opportunity to worship on the first day of each week, together with his family, 42 his friends, and the rest of the community." The Alliance claimed therefore that the workingman, recognizing this threat, had not agitated for the Sunday car and had in fact consistently voted against it. The Alliance viewed the Toronto contest as one of su preme importance for the future of the lobby throughout the province. Oliver Mowat, while Premier of Ontario, had indicated that changes to the 184 5 Act would "largely depend on what ap-43 peared to be public opinion on the subject." The Toronto 40 Citizens' Anti-Sunday Car Committee, "Manifesto," Toronto Mail and Empire, 1 May 1897. Ibid. Ibid. 43 Toronto Mail and Empire, 24 January 1896. 102 fight gave the public a chance to voice its opinion. A victory for the pro-car forces would cast serious doubt on the validity of the Alliance's claim to represent the majority of public opinion. If "Toronto the Good," as contemporaries dubbed the 44 city, should reject that image by welcoming the car, other cities would soon clamour for its introduction. Moreover, if the Toronto Railway Company proved victorious, street railway companies in other cities would claim exemption from the 1897 Act on the basis of public demand. The Alliance thus poured all its reserves into the fight to defeat the Sunday car in Toronto. In an attempt to include citizens both in-and-outside the churches, the Alliance promoted the formation of another Citizens' Anti-Sunday Car Com-45 mittee on the model of the successful 1893 committee. The new committee circulated literature and petitions, organized huge public meetings, and systematically canvassed each ward of the city. It pressed its allies to do all in their power to aid the fight, asking ministers to bring the matter repeatedly to the attention of their flocks and urging all the city's churches to devote the Sunday before the vote to a discussion of the 46 issue. It also recruited Trades and Labor Council members to speak against the Sunday car in the public forums. And, if the 44 C.S. Clark, Of Toronto the Good (Montreal: The Toronto Publishing Co., 1898; Coles Canadiana Collection, 1970). 45 Toronto World, 19 April 1897. 46Saturday Night, 1 May 1897. 103 opponents of the Alliance are to be believed, the Alliance went so far as to lobby the bicyclists to vote against the car in 47 order to preserve the roads for themselves on Sundays. On Saturday, May 15, in the heaviest and perhaps most 48 corrupt poll in Toronto history, thirty-two thousand people recorded their votes on the Sunday car issue. Crowds assembled in front of the newspaper offices after the polls closed at 5 p.m. It seemed that the organization of the anti-car forces might again bring triumph, but the pro-car faction achieved 49 victory by a slim ma3ority of 480 votes. A last ditch effort by the Alliance to obtain a court injunction against the running of the Sunday car failed, and on Sunday, May 23, a wet and mis erable day, "Toronto the Good" welcomed the Sunday car. Crowds of people — approximately 45,000— rode the cars while others 50 lined the streets to watch. ************* Toronto World, 8 May 1897. The Christian Guardian re futed this accusation, 21 April 1897. 48 Armstrong and Nelles describe grand-scale personation by ward workers hired by the street railway company, including the case of one unemployed Englishman personating no less than twenty-five voters. The Revenge of the Methodist Bicycle Com pany, p. 165. 49 Toronto Globe, 17 May 1897; also Clark, Of Toronto the  Good, p. 64: "And now, horror for horrors! the populace of Toronto have decided by a good substantial vote that they desire street cars on Sunday and they have them." 50 This number is calculated on the basis of total receipts 104 Whereas a weaker-willed group might have retreated in the face of such defeat, the Alliance returned almost eagerly to the fray. "Defeated but not vanquished"^x by the Toronto vote, the Alliance refused to acknowledge that the public vote had granted the Toronto Railway Company a franchise to operate on Sundays. Insisting that provincial legislation alone could grant this right, it immediately lobbied the Ontario government to appeal the Hamilton Street Railway decision to the Privy 52 Council for a "final and authoritative interpretation." In the meantime the Alliance petitioned the government to grant an injunction against the running of Sunday cars anywhere in the province until the Privy Council decided the issue. When the government refused this request, on the grounds that a reversal of the Ontario courts' decisions was improbable, the Alliance again demanded amendment of the 18 45 Act to prohibit Sunday ser vice. The Ontario government seemed ready to do this when in January 18 98 the Nova Scotia Supreme Court ruling that Sabbath observance legislation was ultra-vires the provincial juris diction forced reconsideration. As a result, the Ontario govern ment decided to resubmit the Hamilton case to the Ontario Appeal Court. It did not, however, issue an injunction against the operation of Sunday cars in Toronto or elsewhere while the issue for the day and the price of tickets, seven for a quarter. Total receipts according to Saturday Night were $2,000 (29 May 1897). Cf. Armstrong and Nelles, The Revenge of the Methodist  Bicycle Company, p. 167. 51 Toronto Mail and Empire, 17 May 1897. 52 Christian Guardian, 22 September 1897. 105 was in litigation. Believing itself only temporarily stalled in its legis lative campaign, the Alliance proceeded to approach the Sunday car problem with other methods. First it appealed to the courts for injunctions against companies that, encouraged by the judicial support for the Hamilton company and the public support in Toronto, had started Sunday service in defiance of the 1897 legislation. When the courts refused to grant injunctions, the Alliance instituted proceedings against two companies that had started Sunday service, but whose charters specifically prohi bited such operation (the Metropolitan Street Railway Company of 53 Toronto and the Toronto and Mimico Electric Railway Company). The Alliance also opposed attempts to modify or repeal the 1897 legislation. In 1899 alone, nine companies applied to the Ontario Legislature for permission to operate local passenger 54 service on Sundays. Although the Legislature rejected most of these applications, the appeal of the Ottawa Electric Railway Company received special consideration. Since the Ottawa Electric Railway Company proposed ser-5340 Vict. (1877), c.84, s.8 (re Metropolitan Street Railway Company); 54 Vict. (1891), c.96 (re Toronto and Mimico Electric Railway and Light Company, chartered under the 1883 Street Railway Act). Another company, the St. Catherines, Mer-riton and Thorold Street Railway, which also commenced Sunday service, had been chartered prior to the 1883 Act [45 Vict. (1882), c.63 (Ont.)]. The Alliance did not challenge this com pany. 54 OLDA, Minutes of Executive Committee, 12 January 1899, OLDA, MB 1897-1905, p. 30; Toronto Mail and Empire, 9 March 1899. 106 vice between Hull and Ottawa, the federal'government had chart ered the company in 1892 but had placed it under provincial jurisdiction for the parts of the line that ran in the respec-55 tive provinces. By 1899 the company was in an awkward situa tion: on the Quebec portion of the road, no legislation existed to prohibit Sunday operations; on the Ontario portion, the 1897 Act was presumably operative. In January 1899, the Ottawa City Council decided to appeal to the Ontario government for exemp tion from the 1897 Act. In order to strengthen its hand, it decided to submit the question to the city's ratepayers. After a lively public discussion similar to Toronto's, Ottawa citizens 5 6 voted in favour of the cars by a convincing majority of 1,677. The Alliance, arguing.that the Ontario government should delay its decision until the courts settled the constitutional issue, manned and led deputations to the Legislature to make this 57 point. But the government, impressed by the majority of the pro-car vote and by the peculiar difficulties of the company's position, granted the company an exemption at the end of March 58 1899. The final Sunday in July 1899 was a "red-letter day at Ottawa" as the street car company did a "record-breaking busi-5555-56 Vict., c.53, s.6. ^Toronto Mail and Empire, 9 March 1899. 57A.E. O'Meara to A.S. Hardy, 29 March 1899, LB 1899-1900, pp. 105-7; Toronto Globe, 9 March 1899. 5862-63 Vict. (1899), c.82, s.5 (Ont.). 62 Vict. (1899), c.6 6 protected the street railway employee's right to a full Sunday off or another free twenty-four hour period elsewhere in the week. 107 „59 ness. By mid 18 99 the Sunday car was poised to defeat the Ontario Alliance. Sunday street cars were trundling merrily through the streets of Toronto, Hamilton, Ottawa, St. Cather ines, Windsor, Niagara Falls, and Berlin, as well as on inter-6 0 urban routes in the Hamilton and Niagara River districts. By its ubiquity, the Sunday car had turned the Alliance into a one issue lobby. Although the Alliance challenged the Sunday opera tions of several industrial corporations by bringing court pro ceedings against some employees, and although it petitioned the government about sporadic Sunday labour on the Welland Canal, it devoted itself almost exclusively to the Sunday car 61 issue. In doing so, it concentrated its activities in Toron to, focussing its attention on the Ontario Legislature and the courts of that city. It devoted little time to the planned development of membership, either in Toronto or in other parts of the province. In 1898 it had branches in twenty-nine centres. That year the Annual Convention established a Committee on Or ganization and Education under the energetic chairmanship of Reverend John Shearer, with the ambitious goal of establishing branches in every urban centre throughout the province. The following year, the Committee could report but limited progress: 59 "Flaneur," Toronto Mail and Empire, 29 July 1899. 60O'Meara to H.S. Campbell, 4 February 1899, LB 1899-1900, p. 40.-61OLDA, "Annual Report, 1897," in OLDA, SB 1892-1900; also OLDA, "Annual Report, 1898, 1899," in Ibid. 108 of the 154 urban centres in the province, the Committee had man-6 2 aged to visit only thirty-eight new ones. Although considerable numbers had supported the Alli ance's cause by voting against the Sunday car, indifference to the Alliance's existence as a continuing organization was gener al. At the Annual Meeting in 1896, Alliance President J.K. Macdonald had lamented the fact that in Toronto, a "city usually keenly alive on all such questions," so few should have gathered 6 3 to take steps to safeguard the Sabbath. Two years later, the "very small" attendance at the Annual Convention elicited from him the same lament, and he again called attention to the "won-64 derful apparent lack of interest" in the Alliance's work. What Macdonald failed to mention was Toronto's increasing ac ceptance of the Sunday car. Company records indicate that by 1898 people travelled on Sundays as much as on any other day of the week.^^ Apathy towards the Alliance was general outside Ibid. 63 Toronto Mail and Empire, 13 April 1896. 64Ibid., 22 October 1898. ^Figures are based on population figures for Toronto, the revenue passengers of the Toronto Railway Company, and the number of operating days in the years 1896 (the last year before Sunday operations) and 1898 (the first full year of Sunday oper ations) . Figures given in Pursley, Street Railways of Toronto, 1861-1921, p. 144. 1896 - population: 178,185 revenue passengers: 25,537,000 operating days: 313 = .4220 revenue passengers per capita per operating day. 109 Toronto: of the twenty-nine branches that existed in 1898, 6 6 thirteen had fewer than five members. When he began his work as Chairman of the Organization committee, Shearer found that it was often necessary "to plead for an opportunity to hold a meet-„67 mg to organize." The Toronto group that formed the core of the Alliance executive was unable to convince other members of the provincial scope of the problem and of the impossibility of fighting it town by town. The Ottawa branch, for example, wanted to base its opposition to the Sunday car on the smaller size of Ottawa relative to Toronto. Only after badgering by the Toronto group did it reluctantly agree to adopt the Alliance's argument that the Sunday car was illegal in every city, regardless of size. Executive members from outside Toronto simply ceased to attend meetings. A.E. O'Meara, Secretary of the Alliance, complained of their parochialism: 1898 - population: 186,527 revenue passengers: 28,710,000 operating days: 365 = .4217 revenue passengers per capita per operating day. Had the same number of people not used the cars pn Sundays as on Weekdays, the 1898 figure would have been 15 to 20 percent lower than the 1896 figure. 66OLDA, "Financial Report, 21 October 1898," in', . OLDA, SB 1892-1900. Membership figures are estimates and are calculated on the basis of $0.50 = one member, as established by the OLDA 1895 Constitution. to J.S. Williamson, 25 September 1900, 295. Shearer LB 1899-1902, p. 110 . . . Our past experience in connection with meet ings of the Executive Committee has shown the extreme difficulty of securing such attendance of members even from the principal cities [Hamilton, London, and Kingston] outside of Toronto as is absolutely necessary to render the meeting in a true sense representative of the various sections of the Province. I do not think that members of the Committee outside of Toronto quite fully realize the importance of this point. ... A very serious weakness has existed in the work in the past by reason of the fact that many meetings of the Provin cial Executive Committee have been to such a large extent composed of Toronto members. (68) In addition to these personnel problems, the cost of the Sunday car agitation — the preparation of literature and the payment of O'Meara's legal fees — exhausted the Alliance's meagre financial resources. At the 1898 Annual Convention, Treasurer J.C. Copp threatened to resign, since the constant 69 lack of funds placed him so often "in a humiliating position." Operating on a budget of $2,158.50, the Alliance carried a debt 70 of $913.00. The situation did not improve: during the fol lowing year, twenty-one of its sixty-seven branches contributed 71 nothing to the funds and the debt rose to $1,411.39. Copp made good his earlier threat and resigned. The Alliance only made things worse for itself by taking to the courts. When the Ontario courts rejected the argument 6 O'Meara to G.M. Macdonnell, 17 April 1899 , LB. 1899-1900, p. 138; also O'Meara to Mrs. T.S. Johnson, Ibid., p. 136. 69 Toronto Mail and Empire, 22 October 1898, in OLDA, SB 1892-1900. 70 OLDA, "Annual Report, 1898," in OLDA,.SB 1892-1900. 71 OLDA, "Annual Report, 1899," in Ibid. Ill that the 1845 Act applied to street railway,companies, they ruled, by extension, that the Act did not apply to any business corporations; hence, any business or industrial operation in the province could defy the law with impunity. Judges were overtly hostile to the Alliance and all its works: as mentioned earlier, Justice G.W. Burton of the Ontario Appeal court consi dered it "painful to find in this nineteenth century anyone, and especially a person assuming to be a teacher of religion," grudging the enjoyment by poor families of their only day of 72 lexsure. The relationship between the Alliance and the Ontario government also altered for the worse. Before the formation of the Alliance, Mowat's Liberal government had been willing to pass legislation to deal with specific issues such as street railways (1883) and steamship excursions (1885). In 1895 and again in 18 97 the government also responded to Alliance lobby ing with the Sunday clauses of the Electric Railway Act and the 1897 amendment to the 1845 Act. But the government had no de sire to interfere with the operations of Sunday cars in larger cities and, by its 1897 legislation, deliberately allowed Sun day operations to continue in Hamilton, St. Catherines, Windsor, Niagara Falls, and Berlin, permitting at the same time another vote in Toronto. It became clear that most members of the Ontario cabinet favoured Sunday cars in large urban centres but 218 O.A.R. 459. 112 not on the rural interurbans until residents along the routes approved.73 With regard to general legislation dealing with business corporations, the Ontario government proved more sensitive to the lobbying of economic interests than to that of the Alliance. When Premier A.S. Hardy seemed willing to introduce an amend ment desired by the Alliance to curb Sunday industrial opera tions, a fierce outcry from "owners of blast furnaces, malts ters, brewers, bakers, certain lumber interests, the Grand Trunk, Canadian Pacific and Canadian Southern Railways, steamboat owners, foundries, and other iron works, gas companies, coal companies, manufacturers of calcium carbide and acetylene" 74 forced him to withdraw the bill. The Sunday car issue only marginally involved the fed eral government through the Ottawa Electric Railway case government members showed the Alliance scant sympathy. When the Ontario government granted the exemption from the 1897 legislation to the Ottawa company, the company also applied to the-federal government for repeal of the clause in its charter forbidding Sunday operations in Ontario. On this occasion, the 7 3 Toronto Globe, 29 March 1899; also O'Meara to Rev. H.R. Home, 1 May 1899 , LDACP, LB 1899-1900, p. 519. 74 Toronto Globe, 15 January 18 98. Moreover, in his state ment to the House, Hardy admitted that "as the time [had been] short since the bill was distributed in the country and in which representations could be made to the Government, it is alleged that there are many other callings which would be quite seriously affected." See also Canada, House of Commons, Debates, 1898, c. 1963. 113 federal government, or more specifically its Railway Committee, reacted with hostility to the Alliance's deputations to oppose 7 5 this move, and approved the Ontario government's action. In fact, the Railway Committee refused to hear O'Meara present the Alliance's case and seemed "to resent the proposed inter ference of an outside body with a matter pertaining solely to 7 6 the city of Ottawa. Despite the 18 98 Nova Scotia Supreme Court decision, the federal government considered Sabbath ob servance still a matter of provincial if not local regulation. The bitter nature of the Sunday car agitation and the intense lobbying of the Ontario Alliance provoked strong posi tive and negative reactions in other sections of Ontario's 77 urban community. The Presbyterian and Methodist churches provided the Alliance's principal support, for the Sunday car was an issue on which these churches could easily unite since it did not involve theological doctrines. In 1897 the Alliance claimed the support of 172 of Toronto's 180 Protestant chur-7 8 ches, and as the Globe noted, "one of the most prominent 7562-63 Vict. (1899), c.82, s.5. 7 fi Toronto Mail and Empire, 26 April 1899, in OLDA, SB 1892-1900. 77 David Truman, The Governmental Process (New York: A.A. Knopf, 1950), p. 59: "A disturbance produces an associa tion whose effectiveness in achieving its goal (and thus sta bilizing its equilibrium) so upsets other groups that they develop an association in compensation." At this stage, no counter-groups formed to combat Sabbatarianism, except a very short-lived Canadian Rational Sunday League. Toronto Mail and  Empire, 14 May 1898; Ibid., 19 May 1898. 7 8 Toronto Globe, 14 May 1897. 114 features of the campaign was the active part taken by the min isters, a very great majority of whom went into the fight with the very greatest of vigor and enthusiasm, and in the majority of cases, carried the machinery of their church organization 7 9 with them." The Presbyterians and more particularly the Methodists emphasized the secular and humanitarian rational ization for proper Sabbath observance, especially its salu tary effect upon family life, its medical benefits, and so forth. Preaching the cause of the workingman they asked: "Why should a number of men be deprived of their Sunday, the only day they can spend with their families, in order that some people may ride about the city in the street cars?" Sunday was the poor man's day, affording him "an opportunity for needed 8 0 rest, mental culture, worship/and religious instruction." Yet the churches insisted that the only day of rest could be Sunday and would not support the principle of the weekly day of rest. There was no merit to be found in "a day of idleness" during the week.81 Support for the Alliance's cause constituted both a religious and humanitarian concern, and a pragmatic response by these churches: humanitarian, in that they still clung to the evangelical belief that a reform of an individual's public be-79Ibid., 17 May 1897. 8 0 Christian Guardian, 16 December 1891. 81 Toronto Mail and Empire, 1 May 1897; Christian Guard ian, 16 August 1893. 115 haviour could remedy industrial society's ills; and pragmatic, in that the churches were aware of the Sunday car's potential impact on their social and economic position in the community. As Armstrong and Nelles comment, Sabbatarians "were driven onward" by the knowledge that many city dwellers already lay beyond the pale of Christianity, for only one-third to one-quarter of those Torontonians who professed belief in Protest-8 2 antism were active church members. Although the churches insisted that "socially and morally respectable people" would never vote for the Sunday car, the fear that they in fact would 8 3 do so prompted church opposition to the innovation. The Christian Guardian admitted that the "organized violation of the sanctity of the Lord's Day, in the way proposed will injuriously affect the attendance at religious worship and all Christian 84 ordinances." Reverend Dr. William Caven, Principal of Knox College, seconded this sentiment in 18 9 9 when he wondered what Armstrong and Nelles, The Revenge of the Methodist  Bicycle Company, p. 17 9. According to their figures (Appendix B, p. 183), of a total 120,532 Torontonians who professed adherence to the Anglican, Methodist, Presbyterian, or Baptist churches, only 2 9,06 8 (24.1 percent) were actual members of these churches. In contrast, 7 4.5 percent of those who pro fessed adherence to the Roman Catholic church were also members. 8 3 Christian Guardian, 16 August 1893. The Guardian maintained that only "the rowdies, the drinking loafers, the profane and ungodly, the agnostics and infidels" (providing they somehow passed voter qualifications) would vote for the car. After the defeat, the Guardian apportioned blame to the money forces, "the force of a foreign element to some extent, and to young men panting for faster life to some extent." Ibid., 19 May 1897. 4Ibid., 18 June 1893. 116 the churches would do when they "suffered the losses of peo ple."85 Support from the other churches was more fragmented. The Church of England was divided in its attitudes towards the Sunday car. Members of the High Church publicly supported the innovation, although at least one of them, Bishop Sweatman of Toronto, refused to sign a public petition in support of the 8 6 Sunday car. To Hector Charlesworth, who was soliciting his signature, Sweatman explained that to give expression to his views in his official capacity would be "an embarrassment" to those of his flock, laymen as well as clergy, who did not share 8 7 his views. The "most splendid" Church of England supporter of the Sunday car, according to Charlesworth, was the Reverend William Clark, Professor of Philosophy at Trinity College, Toronto: "The opponents of the Sunday cars could not break down his imperturbable good humour, nor was the whole host of them a match for him in theological argument; for from the standpoint of Christian doctrine, Sabbatarianism, like prohibi-8 8 tion, has not a leg to stand on." The Anglican journal, The  Churchman, also favoured the Sunday car, asking pointedly if "every other city of the size of Toronto has Sunday cars, are 8 5 Toronto Globe, 11 November 1899. 86Toronto World, 11 May 1897. 8 7 Hector Charlesworth, Candid Chronicles: Leaves from  the Note Book of a Canadian Journalist (Toronto: Macmillan, 1925), pp. 52-3. 88Ibid., p. 145. 117 they not more apt to be all right than Toronto, which stands 8 9 alone to be right and all the others wrong?" Some support for the Alliance anti-Sunday car campaign did come from the Evangelical Movement. In response to the public announcement of the support of Anglican Bishops Du Moulin and Sullivan for the Sunday car, the Toronto diocese adopted a resolution moved by Newton Hoyles and seconded by John Langtry to support the Alliance. At the request of Hoyles and Langtry, the Globe 90 made public this resolution. Nonetheless, no Anglican clergy openly supported the Alliance. As O'Meara wrote to Reverend Dyson Hague in 1899, urging him to attend Executive meetings: broadly speaking, it has been heretofore impossible to get any one minister of the Anglican church to join in any way in the Executive business of the Alliance. Anglican laymen are in evidence but so far Anglican pastors are conspicuous by their absence. This has been felt to be a weakness in the whole work and I trust that you will see the force of this point and will be willing to attend at least the more im portant meetings of the Executive Committee even if it means sacrifice on your part. (91) With the high level of hostility between the Roman Catholics and Protestants in the city of Toronto, so recently aroused by the activities of the Equal Rights Association and the Protestant Protective Association, the Alliance made little 92 effort to curry Roman Catholic votes. The presence on the Quoted in Saturday Night, 15 May 1897. 90Toronto Globe, 13 May 1897. 910'Meara to Hague, 18 April 1899, LB 1899-1900, p. 148. 9 2 In 18 9 3 an attempt was made to placate the large Roman Catholic vote in one Toronto ward by substituting the word 118 Alliance board of four members of the former executive of the Equal Rights Association, including its chairman, Principal William Caven of Knox College, reinforced the Alliance's anti-93 Catholic image. In 189 3 the Roman Catholic church openly supported Sunday cars, and the Catholic Register editorialized that "the cause of morality would be advanced by a limited car service on Sunday. There is much more tendency to drink and immorality when people are crowded together in miserable rooms in cities than when breathing the fresh air of suburban dis-94 tricts." There is nothing to indicate that any members of the Catholic hierarchy or clergy supported the fight against the Sunday car, and the only Catholic prominently involved was Daniel O'Donoghue, the Irish labour leader. Since the fight against Sunday cars coincided with a rapid growth in the strength and assertiveness of organized labour in Ontario, considerable potential for cooperation be tween the Alliance and the Trades and Labor Councils existed. Besides, the Sunday car was an ideal issue for a collaborative "Christianity" for the word "Protestantism" in a resolution stating that Sunday cars were "contrary to the interests of Protestantism." Toronto Mail, 22 July 1893. 9 3 Toronto World, 11 May 1897: "Most of the clergymen who were prominent in the Equal Rights movement are strong against Sunday cars. They do not believe in equal rights in the matter of cars. They wish to dictate to their fellows how they shall get about on Sunday." 94 Cited by Armstrong and Nelles, The Revenge of the  Methodist Bicycle Company, p. 112. 119 95 effort. To the leadership of organized labour, the fight to retain Sunday as a day of rest was part of its overall strategy to achieve a shorter work week, first the guaranteed weekly rest day, then the Saturday half-holiday, and eventually the 9 6 five-day week. To the Alliance, the Sunday car represented the principle of Sabbath labour in the service of Sabbath pleasure. Recognizing the need for a secular rationale and a measure of support from outside the church, the Alliance moved away from its stress on the religious arguments against the Sunday car, and emphasized more and more the social and humani-97 . . tarian arguments. In addition, it joined labour deputations 9 8 lobbying government for the Saturday half-holiday. Labour leaders responded in turn. Members of the national Trades and Labor Congress executive, President John Tweed and four others, accepted positions on the 1895 Alliance executive board. D.J. O'Donoghue, representing the Hamilton Trades and Labor Council, was particularly active on the Alliance's behalf throughout the 18 9 7 contest. In O'Donoghue's mind, the weekly 95 Organized labour and the Alliance could never have agreed on the bicycle, for instance, for workingmen considered the bicycle simply another form of walking. Toronto World, 27 April 1897. 96 Toronto Mail and Empire, 13 April 1896. 97 Cf. Brian Harrison, "The Sunday Trading Riots of 1855," Historical Journal VIII (1965), pp. 222, 240; Toronto World, 29 April 1897; Ibid., 11 May 1897. -9 8 Toronto Mail and Empire, 24 January 1896; OLDA, "Annual Report, 1896," in OLDA, SB 1892-1900. 120 rest day issue was "eminently a case where the church and labor, in their collective capacities, can make common cause," and he maintained that it was "a gross impertinence ... to say that all opposed to the car are under the domina-99 tion of the clergy." As the Toronto contest well illustrated, support from organized labour's leadership guaranteed neither the support of the rank and file nor of unorganized labour. In 1893, the Toronto Trades and Labor Council passed a resolution in favour of the Sunday car as did the Knights of Labor. In 1897, the Toronto Council not only helped in preparing the company's agree ment with its employees, but prominent members of its executive, among them G.T. Beales, George Dower, and John Armstrong, also took the platform to advocate the Sunday car.1^ The Toronto Railway Employees' Union actively opposed the Sunday car as long as the street railway company refused a written guarantee of a weekly rest day.x^x But, when the company signed the written agreement in 1897, the railway employees immediately supported the Sunday car, denouncing O'Donoghue's activities. "Much annoyance," the union stated to the press, had been created among the members and officers of the union "by reason 99 London Advertiser, 14 November 1899, in OLDA, SB 1892-1900; see also Toronto Mail, 22 July 1893. x^^Christian Guardian, 16 August 1893; Toronto Mail, 22 July 1893; Toronto Mail and Empire, 12 May 1897; Toronto World, 29 April 189 7; Ibid., 15 May 1897. 101Toronto World, 5 May 1897. 121 102 of Mr. 0'Donoghue's mxsrepresentations." The May 18 97 vote confirmed working class support for the Sunday car. The Globe's analysis of the vote found that the central and eastern parts of the city where the population was "most dense and the area of breathing space per resident smallest" were solidly for the cars. In these districts, new male voters (non-ratepayers), voting for the first time on the 103 issue, expressed themselves in favour of the Sunday car. The Globe even suggested that had the polls stayed open past the 5 p.m. closing of factories and shops, the vote from these 104 districts might have been even heavier. After the Toronto defeat, cooperation between organized labour and the Alliance dwindled. The Trades and Labor Congress of Canada passed its annual resolutions protesting Sabbath 105 labour without reference to the Alliance's existence. The Alliance ceased circulating petitions on behalf of the Saturday half-holiday. When few workingmen were in attendance at the 1897 Convention to hear a Mr. Whyte present a paper on "The Lord's Day and the Workingmen," the Alliance concluded that they were "busy men, and have their own methods of approaching the 102Ibid., 15 May 1897. 103 Armstrong and Nelles, The Revenge of the Methodist  Bicycle Company, pp. .166, 185, Appendix D. 104Toronto Globe, 17 May 1897. 105 Trades and Labor Congress of Canada, Proceedings, 18 97, p. 28; Ibid., 1899, p. 19. 122 106 subject." As the Sunday car issue illustrated, the Alli ance, in fact, had not done its homework on the labour question. It had fought the Sunday car with arguments against six days' pay for seven days' work even though the company's agreement with its employees effectively negated the validity of this argument. The Alliance, in short, had not devised a success ful means of securing sustained labour support. With the temperance movement, the other major social and moral reform lobby of the period, the Alliance's relation-107 ship was similarly uneasy. At an official level, few links existed with the Dominion Alliance for the Total Suppression of the Liquor Traffic. J.J. Maclaren, a member of the Dominion Alliance executive, was also a member of the Ontario Alliance's board, but was not an official representative. The Ontario Alliance did not recruit F.S. Spence, leading temperance advo cate and Toronto alderman, to its board, although, at City-Coun cil meetings, Spence protested the introduction of cheaper Sunday fares and the extension of street railway service to 10 8 Toronto Island on Sundays. The Woman's Christian Temperance Union was the only temperance group active on the Alliance's behalf. In 18 9 5 the W.C.T.U. formed a Sabbath Observance Com-106Christian Guardian, 22 September 1897. 107 The formal relationship between the Sabbatarian and temperance movements does not seem to have been as close as Armstrong and Nelles (The Revenge of the Methodist Bicycle  Company, p. 178) indicate. 1 08 Toronto World, 31 December 1896; Ibid., 2 January 1897 123 mittee, and in 1897 the Toronto committee cooperated in the "disastrous" anti-car campaign by canvassing the wards for the 109 women's vote. In 1898, the Toronto committee again joined the Alliance in petitioning government for legislation, while its other provincial committees kept tabs on the extent of Sabbath desecration throughout the province. (The W.C.T.U. in fact seemed to have a better grasp of this aspect of the pro blem than did the Ontario Alliance executive.) Although the W.C.T.U. did not coordinate its local committees' approach to the Sabbath problem, it did advise members "to read up the law on this question, so as to be able to know when the law is being kept or broken in our towns and cities.""1""1"0 W.C.T.U. enthusiasm for the Sabbatarian cause, however, also faded. The Superintendent of the 1899 Sabbath Observance Committee received only one reply to the circular letter she had sent to all 250 unions. At the annual meeting, she found that over half the union meetings had not even bothered to consider the subject.1"'"1 The lack of strong cooperation between the temperance and Sabbatarian groups reflected the conflict between them 109 Woman's Christian Temperance Union, "Annual Report, 1895," pp. 82-3; Ibid., 1897, p. 90. Widows and unmarried women who owned or rented property assessed at over $400 or earned an income of at least $400 held the municipal franchise, Armstrong and Nelles, The Revenge of the Methodist Bicycle  Company, p. 14. There is no indication of how many women voted in the various plebescites on the Sunday car issue, or how they voted. 110W.C.T.U., "Annual Report, 1898," p. 93. 111Ibid., 1899, pp. 101-3. 124 concerning the proper use of Sunday. Whereas Sabbatarians in sisted that only religious exercises might fill the day, tem perance advocates were willing to promote other activities as distractions from drinking. The tension emerged into the open when Sam Blake blamed the Sunday car defeat partly on "temper ance organizations which conduct lectures and public meetings o ^ «112 on Sunday. The Alliance's press relations underwent considerable modifications throughout this period. In the early fights against the Sunday car, the Alliance enjoyed considerable press support. In Toronto, the established papers, the Conservative Mail and Empire and the Liberal Globe, opposed the Sunday car, as did the newer journals, the Star, the News, and the Tele-113 gram. The Maxl and Empire in particular supported the moral 114 objections to the Sunday car; in 1897 it went so far as to muzzle its weekly columnist "Flaneur" who until that time had maintained a relentless campaign against the Sabbatarian 112 Christian Guardian, 22 September 1897; see also Satur day Night, 9 May 1896. 113 See Charlesworth, Candid Chronicles, p. 144. 114 See, for example, its pre-1897 vote editorial, 14 May 189 7: "Add to the breaking down of the Sunday observance and all the accessories which attach to it — its fetes, its papers and its labor --absolute contempt for the pulpit and where shall we land? We are engaged in the creation of a new land. The children of today will be the leaders and rulers of tomorrow. Let us not commit the error of supposing that we can weaken religion and yet have a sound and lasting morality behind us." 125 115 "enthusiasts." Nonetheless, vocal press opposition existed. In its early days, The Week had supported the Sunday car as part of its campaign for the introduction of the British "Rational Sunday" concept of open museums, art galleries, libraries, and so forth.116 When The Week faded in the 18 90s, Billy Mac lean's Toronto World assumed the leadership of the pro-car 117 faction. In the 1897 campaign he wrote daily editorials.,. 1150n April 17, 1897, "Flaneur" stated that, because of the pending vote, he would not "discuss the Sunday question in any form." Toronto Mail and Empire, 17 April 1897. For an example of "Flaneur" at his best, see Ibid., 20 April 1895: "Who is Mr. Paterson? I have asked several people who this per son is, and the general answer has been, with a laugh and shrug of the shoulders, "Oh, he is an enthusiast." If some words in the papers are correct, the general estimate is evidently a shrewd one. J.A.P. tells us that the people are not to be al lowed to settle the question of Sabbatarianism, but that J.A.P. and his clique will do it for us. Well, as one of the people, I think not. Rightly or wrongly, we quite mean to run our own affairs, and we can do it without let or hindrance from persons of the J.A.P. genus. What discrimatory fellow was it who said that a fool was hatched about every minute? I wonder what there is in the air of Toronto that tends to encourage the breed? The people of this city are to be given a candy and trotted off to church with a pat on the head from J.A.P. and his congenors. Fancy, how nice. Six days' hard labour all week, and then '•— special Sunday afternoon service in the Pavi lion, John. Still it is scarcely a.matter for joking. There will be an accident soon if these poor people are allowed to wander about without a keeper. The Lord's Day Alliance should gather in its garments and go home to bed; the hour is too late in the nineteenth century for old ladies to be out alone." 116The Week, 12 June 1884; Ibid., 14 July 1887; Toronto World, 3 April 1897; Ibid., 22 April 1897. 117 Maclean published a Sunday edition of his paper. The paper was printed and distributed Saturday night, but was called the Sunday World. See Charlesworth, Candid Chronicles, p. 144. 126 urging car supporters to register to vote and not to be com placent about the outcome. By the 1897 vote, other papers supported the Sunday car. E.E. Sheppard of Saturday Night ar gued on behalf of the cars for reasons akin to those of Maclean: both men believed that the issue was civil, not religious. Since neither theological creed nor doctrine specifically pro hibited Sunday cars, why should something that was eminently 118 moral for six days of the week suddenly change on the Sabbath? Rather it was a municipal question concerning both the citizen's and the visitor's free will to avail themselves of the "most 119 economical and convenient methods of transportation." As a friend of the working class, the Star reversed its opposition once the Toronto Railway Company signed an agreement with its employees. Most significantly, the Globe modified its rigid opposition to the Sunday car. In 1890, the Globe had believed that the Sunday car would bring "the American and French Sab-118 Toronto World, 28 August 1893: "For six days in the week this same means of getting about is considered the cheap est, the speediest. . . Unprotected females travel in them in perfect safety and even Sunday School teachers board them with out fear of losing their virtue. But on Sunday the very devil gets into these cars and no young woman is safe, not to mention the ordinary young man. As for the working man and his family getting about in this way. . . there is every liability of his becoming a beer guzzler and a whiskey drinker, and once he leaves one of these cars on Sunday and gets into a park we have testimony unimpeachable that fifty policemen will not control him when on ordinary days one is more than sufficient." 119Ibid., 17 April 1897; Saturday Night, 24 April 1897. Sheppard became an enemy of Sabbatarianism in 188 5 when boys delivering a special Sunday issue of his paper, the News, con taining the latest despatches from Batoche, were arrested. 127 bath, with all its turmoil and all its abominations, open shows, open theatres, and open or at least an enormous increase 120 of secret business for the saloons." By 1897 it realized that this development was not inevitable: every Sunday bicy clists, worthy young men and women, crowded Toronto parks. "Are we to suppose," the Globe wondered, that "disorder and vice will set in when the cars introduce the non-wheeling element, 121 including older people and children?" Although it aided the Sabbatarian cause during the 1897 plebiscite, its support 122 lacked conviction. In a balanced analysis of the vote, the Globe acknowledged that the issue was a civil, not religious, one and it emphasized that the change had "not been forced upon the community by some alien power." Rather the "free vote of free citizens" had chosen the convenience of the Sunday car. Having "got into the habit of jumping on a car and travelling from one to five miles," people chafed when Sunday came and they either had to walk or forego the journey, whether its pur-123 pose was "health, pleasure, friendship, or duty." 120 Toronto Globe, 24 December 18 90. Yet John Cameron, editor of the Globe and a Presbyterian church elder, opened the newspaper's offices every Sunday evening at seven o'clock, firing any employee who failed to turn up. See Armstrong and Nelles, The Revenge of the Methodist Bicycle Company, p. 58. Re the first editor of the Globe, George Brown and his Sunday night activities, see Chapter One, p. 19. 121Toronto Globe, 17 May 1897. 122Ibid., 10 May 1897. 123Ibid., 17 May 1897. 128 As with the press, the Sunday car issue provoked a varied response from the business community. Some members of the financial community — for example, J.K. Macdonald, Manag ing Director of Confederation Life Insurance Company, and G.T. Ferguson, President of the Toronto Stock Exchange — opposed the innovation; while others, Byron Walker, President of the Bank of Commerce, to choose one example, favoured the Sunday car. Important business groups supplied effective support for the car. E.C. Gurney, President of the Board of Trade, and B.B. Osier, a member of the Board, frequently spoke at pro-car rallies during 1897. They argued that introduction of service would materially aid the development of the city, not only benefitting its own citizens but also attracting tourists and outside investors. Without the car, Toronto ran the risk of 124 economic stagnation. The street railway companies themselves actively pro moted acceptance of the Sunday car. For a company such as the Toronto Railway Company, estimated revenues from Sunday opera tions ran to at least $105,000 per. year. In 1893 , therefore, CL. Porteous, agent for the Toronto Railway Company, paid the 125 costs of holding the vote. The company further responded to public sympathy for the street railway employee by agreeing to a written guarantee of a six day work week. In order to 124 Saturday Night, 15 May 1897; see also Toronto Mail and  Empire, 14 May 1897; Toronto World, 30 January 1897. 125The Week, 25 August 1893. 129 secure Sunday patrons, the company also proposed a reduced fare of seven tickets for twenty-five cents, nearly two cents cheaper than on weekdays,and it agreed to extend service to 126 the Island on a one-ticket fare. Then in 1897 it bought the support of two popular newspapers, the News and the Star, 127 to ensure victory. In 1899, it seemed that many Ontarians were either hos tile or indifferent to the Sabbatarian aim. Yet, as in 1897, the Ontario Alliance did not succumb to apparent defeat as do 128 many issue-oriented groups. Instead, in the spring of 1899, the Alliance executive took the decision to organize systemati cally the constituency which it claimed to represent. To do this, it had to transform itself from a group attempting "to 129 influence government policy on a single specific issue," to a more institutionalized group with broader goals and more 130 organizational continuity and cohesion. To effect this transition, the Alliance had to abandon the somewhat ad hoc and largely voluntary efforts of its Sunday car campaign, 126 Toronto World, 31 December 18 96. 127 P.F.W. Rutherford, "The People's Press: The Emergence of the New Journalism in Canada, 1869-1899," Canadian Histori cal Review LIV (June 1975), p. 180. 128 Paul A. Pross, ed., Pressure Group Behaviour in Cana dian Politics (Toronto: McGraw-Hill Ryerson, 1975), p. 11. 129 Donald Barry, "Interest Groups and the Foreign Policy Process: The Case of Biafra," in Pross, ed., op. cit., p. 133. 130 Pross, ed., op. cit., p. 11. 130 establish a permanent organization with a physical presence (i.e., "an office, a listed telephone number, and a permanent 131 office staff"), and use new methods and techniques of poli tical lobbying. By adopting these practices, the Ontario Alli ance exhibited a vitality and resiliency that earlier Sabbat arian groups had not possessed. It also made an impressive shift from the traditional techniques of the nineteeth century pressure group to the more sophisticated techniques of the twentieth century. J"~>XD.A. Chant, "Pollution Probe: Fighting the Polluters with their Own Weapons," in Ibid., p. 66. In December 1898, the Executive Committee recommended the opening of an office, and the employment of an office assistant. In January 1899, it also recommended the purchase of a typewriter and the instal lation of a telephone. OLDA, Minutes of Executive Committee, 9 December 1898, OLDA, MB 1897-1905, p. 25; Minutes of Executive Committee, 12 January 1899, Ibid., p. 27. 131 Chapter V : A Tale of "Toil and Obloquy": John G. Shearer and the Ontario Alliance's Drive for Popularity. As the nineteenth century closed, the Sunday car was poised to defeat the Sabbatarian lobby. But the Ontario Al liance did not succumb. Instead it congratulated itself on its legislative victories: the 1895 Radial Electric Railway Act, the 1897 legislation, the Ontario government's decision to send the Sunday car question to the Privy Council for clarifi cation of the constitutional issue.1 Defeats such as the On tario government's withdrawal of proposed legislation in 1898 the Alliance ignored. These incidents were "simply new proofs of the seriousness and great importance of the work undertaken." Nevertheless, the fight against the Sunday car had convinced the Alliance that it must transform itself from a single-issue lobby into a more institutionalized interest group; that is, it must "relate its concern for a specific issue to a 3 broader and less clearly defined cause" that would'unify Sabbatarian sentiment throughout the province. To do xOLDA, "An Outline of the Situation," June, 1898, in OLDA, SB 1892-1900. 2OLDA, "Annual Report, 1899," in OLDA, SB 1892-1900. 3 Paul A. Pross, ed., Pressure Group Behaviour in Cana dian Politics (Toronto: McGraw-Hill Ryerson, 1975), p. 11. 132 4 this, it must adopt new methods. While reliance on the courts to vindicate its cause had proved a "painful" disappointment,5 the Alliance remained convinced that public opinion supported its cause. The "overwhelming majority," it claimed, welcomed the 1897 legislation. The task ahead was one of marshalling this majority into a coherent voice; the problem to be overcome was parochial sentiment — most communities felt they could successfully fight Sabbath desecration on the local level, not realizing that the solution lay in provincial legislation. As O'Meara wrote to an Executive member after the Ottawa Electric Railway Company gained exemption from the 1897 Act, "any hope which may now be entertained in certain of our cities that local restraints or local considerations will permanently be sufficient to prevent a Sunday car service in these cities, is 7 sure to be delusive." On 21 April 1899, the Alliance executive met to decide g upon a strategy with which to unify public opinion. The pro-4 See N. Smelser, Theory of Collective Behavior (New York: Free Press, 1962), p. 302: ". . . the history of any given movement — its ebbs and flows, its switches, its bursts of enthusiasm — can be written in large part as a pattern of abandoning one method which appears to be losing effectiveness and adopting some new, more promising method." 5Toronto Globe, 7 October 1899. ^Christian Guardian, 22 September 1897. 7A.E. O'Meara to Mrs. T.S. Johnson, 17 April 1899, LB 1899-1900, p. 136; OLDA, Minutes of Executive Committee, 12 January 1899, OLDA, MB 1897-1905, p. 29. o OLDA, Minutes of Executive Committee, 21 April.1899, Ibid., pp. 4 9-54. 133 posed policy was to consist of a three^pronged campaign. Con vinced that there was "no better way . . . of forming public opinion than by the extension of membership," the Alliance planned an intensive membership drive. Closely related to this would be a prudent enforcement programme to secure the Day of Rest to all classes. The Alliance assumed that it would there by become generally popular, and that such popularity would 9 translate itself into increased membership. As a complement to these two programmes, the Alliance would attempt to "bring influence to bear" on the provincial press.x^ Later that same year, the Executive decided to appoint a Field Secretary to execute this campaign.xx An innovation in Sabbatarian methods, the Executive felt such a position to 12 be "indispensable to the permanent success of the movement." Secretarial responsibilities were to include arranging and chairing meetings; organizing deputations and petitions; per forming all secretarial work connected with legislation and 9Rev. J.G. Shearer to C. Harris, 6 June 1900, LB 1899-1902, p. 62a. 10Toronto Globe, 22 April 1899. ^O'Meara to J. Scanlon, 8 December 1899, LB 1899-1900, pp. 348-9; O'Meara to Rev. F.A. Cassidy, 13 December 1899, Ibid., p. 352. 12OLDA, "Annual Report, 1899." See also C. Copp to Shearer, 29 July 1899, LB 1899-1900, p. 244: "With you I feel that if we had the right stamp of man working the province of Ontario we should have more money than is needed to put this work on a proper footing, and if such a man could be found, no amount of expense or remuneration to him would be lost." 134 keeping Alliance records, correspondence, and reports; prepar ing literature for distribution; investigating all questions 13 involving Sabbath labour; and securing financial support. In the hope of dispelling the image of the Alliance as a purely Presbyterian group, the Executive first offered the position to Reverend F.A. Cassidy, a Methodist minister from Guelph. When he declined, Reverend John G. Shearer, a Presbyterian 14 minister, became the Board's "unanimous choice." At the time of his appointment, Shearer was forty-one years old. Raised in western Ontario near the town.of Bright, Shearer was the son of an immigrant Scottish farmer. He received his early education in local schools and graduated from the University of Toronto in 1889, with a Bachelors degree in mental and moral 15 science, and civil polity and logic. Ordained as a Presby terian minister in the early 1890s, Shearer accepted the pas torate of Erskine Church in Hamilton. After the Hamilton fight against the Sunday car failed, he initiated the formation of the Ontario Alliance. Although he took no part in the Toronto Sunday car agitation, he fostered Alliance activities 13 OLDA, "Report of Special Committee re Adjustment of Secretarial Work," 4 January 1900, OLDA., CR 1899-1903, p. 7. Until 1899, Alliance records were not systematically kept and only a few copies of correspondence before this year are among the Lord's Day Alliance papers. Between 1899-1906, the Alliance kept a fairly complete record of its papers; thereafter, the papers, particularly correspondence, become erratic. 14 Lord's Day Advocate (hereafter Advocate), (November 1907). 15 H.J. Morgan, The Canadian Men and Women of the Time: A Handbook of Canadian Biography of Living Characters (Toronto: CW. Briggs, 1912), p. 1015. 135 by chairing its Organization and Education Committee. For three years after his appointment as Field Secretary, Shearer worked mostly alone, helped occasionally by O'Meara, who contin ued as Alliance Solicitor. Reverend T. Albert Moore, President of the Hamilton Methodist Conference, became Associate Secre tary in 1902 and Field Secretary a year later when Shearer, as a result of the Privy Council decision, assumed responsi bility for lobbying the federal government. As John Charlton had done in the 1890s, so Shearer came to typify the Sabbatarian movement in the early 1900s. Both men represented the most conservative wing of the reform movement that was emerging in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century. As described by Richard Allen in his analy sis of the Social Gospel, such conservatives "were closest to traditional evangelicalism, emphasizing personal-ethical issues, tending to identify sin with individual acts, and taking as their 16 social strategy legislative reform of the environment." These traditional convictions reflected Shearer's background: he had received his education in the late 188 0s and had been trained by traditionalists such as Dr. William Caven, Principal of Knox College. Thus Shearer may well have had little or no direct contact with the "new forms of social thought and R. Allen, The Social Passion: Religion and Social  Reform in Canada, 1914-1928 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1973), p. 17. 136 action" which were affecting a "growing group of Christian and the Sunday car fight in Hamilton and his activities with the Ontario Alliance in the 1890s, it is probable that Shearer did not attend any meetings of the Queen's Theological Alumni Conference which, under Principal G.M. Grant's tutelage, dis cussed papers on such topics as "biblical criticism, economic development, the problems of poverty, socialistic schemes, the 18 single tax, social evolution," and so forth. Although he presented the Sabbatarian aim as one of social reform, the guarantee of a weekly day of rest, Shearer rejected any modi fications to his traditional evangelical convictions concern ing proper Sabbath observance. He cared little for the de sires and needs of working men for recreation, physical and social, on their one day of leisure. It may well be that his callous stance was the simple result of ignorance: as Secre tary to the Alliance in Toronto, Shearer both lived and worked in the affluent residential suburb of Rosedale and may well have never seen the overcrowding, the outdoor privies, the filth and the squalour that characterized the downtown living areas. Whatever the cause, Shearer remained convinced that at least one problem of an industrial society could be reduced to a simple moral question to which Christianity had a deci-ministers and laymen. II 17 Preoccupied with his new ministry. 17 Ibid. 10. , P-18 Ibid. 137 sive answer: man should work six days a week and rest, through 19 worship, on the seventh. Both the individual and the nation would prosper as a result. Thus, although Shearer believed himself to be in the vanguard of a progressive reform movement, he remained in reality in its rearguard. By emphasizing pro per Sunday behaviour through attendance at morning and evening worship, he resisted any innovations that might have given his campaign true social content. Although his new responsibilities represented a "great sacrifice to my comfort, my personal preference, and my inter ests as a minister," Shearer felt "divinely guided" in accept-20 mg the position as Alliance Secretary. The situation he faced was most uninviting: to his dismay, he found that most places he had visited the year before as Chairman of the Organ ization Committee were in a "comatose" condition and "had to 21 be practically organized afresh." As he wrote to one of the more energetic branch presidents: I have visited some branches recently which were visited a year ago and absolutely nothing has been accomplished or attempted in the interval, which ""^See Clyde Griff en, "The Progressive Ethos," in The  Development of an American Culture, ed., S. Cobden and L. Rat-ner (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1970), p. 147. 20Shearer to R.B. Miller, 25 January 1900, LB 1899-1900, p. 394; also Shearer to J.M. Thompson, 4 August 1900, LB 1899-1902, p. 253. 21 Shearer to CA. Goodfellow, 29 June 1900, Ibid., p. 136; OLDA, Report of Organization Committee, 28 June 1900, OLDA, CR 1899-1903; also Shearer to Rev. W.A. Duncan, 3 August 1900, LB 1899-1902, p. 235. 138 from my standpoint is simply criminal in a great and urgent work like this. . . (22) In addition, Shearer discovered that no machinery existed for 23 the enforcement of the 1845 Act. Although the Act stipu lated fines for breaches of the law, the authorities did not generally assume responsibility. Most police refused "to serve without special orders and fees," and the provincial L „25 24 Crown Attorneys followed suit. Further, adverse judicial decisions were rendering the Act "to a large extent useless The decisions in the Hamilton'^Street Railway case established the legal precedent that the 1845 Act did not apply to employ ers of labour such as corporations nor to persons not specifi cally cited in the first section of the Act (the ejusdem gen eris principle). Using this precedent, senior Ontario courts quashed such convictions as did occur in the lower courts. The divisional Court, for example, reversed a Police Magis trate's conviction of a bandmaster who played sacred music on Toronto Island on a Sunday afternoon, reasoning that "the Act was no more intended to apply to a bandmaster than to an or-2 6 ganist in a church." In a case involving the Grand Trunk 22 Shearer to Rev. W.R. Mcintosh, 31 July 1900, Ibid., p. 218. 23Toronto Globe, 7 October 1899. 24 OLDA, Minutes of Executive Committee, 12 January 1899, OLDA, MB 1897-1905, p. 27; Toronto Globe, 7 October 1899. 250'Meara to Rev. J.H. Jackson, 12 July 1899, LB 1899-1900, p. 236; O'Meara to Mrs. W.E. Hutcheson, 3 June 1899, Ibid., p. 200. 2 fi C.S. Clark, Of Toronto the Good (Montreal: The Toronto 139 Railway, the same court ruled that the 1845 Act did not apply to an employee acting under instructions from a superior offi cer, nor did it apply to either the employer or the employee 27 of a Dominion corporation. The press had become either indifferent or increasing ly hostile towards the Alliance after the Sunday car campaigns. On one hand, the Toronto Globe published reports of Alliance 28 annual meetings with little editorial comment. On the other hand, "Flaneur," who shared the opinions of Billy Maclean and E.E. Sheppard on the proper use.of Sunday leisure, resumed his relentless attack on Alliance activities. Opposed to "unneces sary work done on Sunday," Flaneur recognized that men and women "confined at work the entire week require healthy and wholesome recreation on the only holiday they have." To him, the "crazy inconsistency" of the Alliance was the support it received from those who earned their living by Sabbath labour. "We must," he argued, "sit on these cranks, and the sooner we 29 do so the better." He supported the formation in 1898 of a Publishing Co., 1898), p. 64. 27 O.R. 732. Apparently the Court also ordered costs "to be paid by the informant mainly upon the ground that the prosecution was promoted by an organization of people desirous of imposing their own views upon others, and that therefore such organization should be willing to pay costs." See OLDA, Minutes of Executive Committee, 21 April 1899, OLDA, MB 1897-1905, p. 50. 2 8 Toronto World and Saturday Night paid less attention to the issue. Sheppard announced that he wished to drop the subject. Saturday Night, 29 May 1897. 29 Toronto Mail and Empire, 16 April 1898. 140 Canadian Rational Sunday League.whose object was "to obtain greater freedom in the enjoyment of the weekly day of rest" by opening reading rooms, reference libraries, art galleries, and 30 museums, and by allowing bands to play in the parks. Such were the conditions faced by Shearer as he em barked on his duties. At first Shearer intended to organize according to provincial electoral constituencies, with a volun-31 tary correspondent in each. It quxckly became apparent, however, that reliance on erratic and unreliable voluntary efforts would not succeed, and Shearer proceeded with the for mation of branches city by city. The task facing him was im mense and gruelling, taxing Shearer's energies to the utmost, youthful and dynamic though he was. Since it was rare indeed that a branch organized itself spontaneously, Shearer's duty 32 was to visit in person each city and town. Since the Alli ance 's goal was a branch in each centre with a population ex-33 ceeding 1,000, this involved approximately 150 visits. To carry out his work, Shearer found he had to travel eleven Ibid., 19 May 1898. The League proved short-lived but Flaneur continued to support the idea. See Ibid., 6 Feb ruary 1904. 31Shearer to J.J. Maclaren, 12 November 1900, LB 1899-1902, p. 370; also OLDA, "Annual Report, 1899." 32 . • Only two instances of spontaneous organization appear ed in the Letterbooks. See Rev. T.A. Moore to Rev. E. Burns, 28 April 1903, LB 1902-1904, p. 262; Moore to R.S. McLaughlin, 13 March 1905, LB 1904-1905, pp. 834-5. 33 Canada, Census, 1901, in Canada Year Book 1912. 141 months of the year. 34 His plan was to visit one town each day, meeting with the ministers and influential townspeople in the afternoon and conducting a mass meeting in the evening. Ironi cally, the.fact that many towns felt Sunday itself to be the most propitious day for discussing the formation of such a group obliged Shearer, against his own preference, to travel 35 to two or more towns on a given Sabbath. Consequently, he himself never realized the Sabbatarian ideal of the Sabbath as a day of rest. As the years passed, his routine became that of speaking "from nine to fourteen times in the week, and keep ing it up week after week." He attended to the "voluminous correspondence, on the railway train, in the night, or when 3 6 and wherever else it may be possible." Although the fear that his body "would break under the strain" brought Shearer close to the "resignation or rebellion state" in 1901, he did 37 neither. He took few holidays and those only as a "matter 3 8 of duty"; instead, as he wrote to an Alliance member in 1904, the "imperative sense of duty" kept him going as a "wanderer on the face of the earth""and helped him bear the "burden of 34 Shearer to A. McKillop, 21 December 1900, LB 1899-504. 1902 / P-35 Shearer to H.C. Hunt, 14 May 1900, LB 1899-1900, p. 873. 36 Shearer to Rev. M.G. Freeman, 5 January 1904, LB 1902-1904, p. 592. 37 LB 1899-1902, pp. 940-2. 38 Ibid p. 562. 142 39 detail, of toil and often of obloquy" which the work involved. Shearer conceived the campaign he was to organize in military rhetoric, a "Battle for the Sabbath." He spoke of the need for "heroic garrisons" and "worthy Generals" and referred to the information he sent to branches as "ammunition for cam-40 paign gunners." Shearer's top priority was the membership drive, "to add as many as possible to our side in the Battle 41 for the Sabbath." A strong membership would impress "the public, the press and the Legislature" that the Alliance did 42 enjoy a broad base of secular support. Branch duties in cluded organizing deputations of influential townspeople to 43 "terrorize" the local member of Parliament, aiding in the enforcement programme by supplying precise details of viola tions of the existing Lord's Day Act, and doing everything possi ble to obtain press coverage of Alliance activities. Further, Shearer hoped that increased membership would make the Alli ance self-financing and independent of private subscriptions. 39 Shearer to Rev. M.G. Freeman, 5 January 1904, LB 1902-1904, p. 592. 40Shearer to W.H. Hayes, 14 November 1900, LB 1899-1902, p. 427; Shearer to Rev. J.A. Cranston, 6 June 1900, Ibid., p. 100. 41 Shearer to Rev. L. Brown, 4 April 1900, LB 1899-1900, p. 690. 42 Shearer to C. Harris, 6 June 1900, LB 1899-1902, p. 62a. 43 Shearer to H.C. Hunt, 23 August 1900, Ibid., p. 271; for other examples of the expected political role of branches, see Shearer to Rev. W. Moffat, 14 March 1900, LB 1899-1900, p.567; Shearer to Rev. Dr. Johnston, 17 March 1900, Ibid., p. 583; O'Meara to G.S. Wright, 20 March 1900, Ibid., p. 630; O'Meara to T.A. Moore, 23 March 1900, Ibid., p. 643. 143 Not only did Shearer feel that it was a "great thing in any movement of this kind to be able to solve the money question 44 without direct appeal to subscribers, but he also thought that the number who "would be willing to promise more than one 45 year's subscription at a time" was "comparatively limited." Shearer sent each branch an estimated requirement of its ex pected donation based on the population of the town. For example, he required small towns with populations around one thousand to recruit fifty members and donate $25.00; for towns with populations of five thousand such as Cornwall or Colling-wood, the expectation doubled; ,and, for cities with ten thou-46 sand such as Guelph or Belleville, it doubled again. He counted on larger cities to contribute even more, and of Tor onto he anticipated well over one thousand members. Each branch was responsible for the collection of fees and was to send all monies, except for local expenses., to the head 47 office. But the branches could not increase their number, 44 Shearer to Dr. Eede, 28 July 1900, LB 1899-1902, p. 215. 45 Shearer to Mrs. M. Thornley, 4 April. 1900, LB 1899-1900, p. 693. In 1899 the Alliance was carrying a debt of $932.82. Its revenue for that year had been $1,511.73, an increase of approximately $500 over 1898. See OLDA, "Annual Report, 1898"; Ibid., 1899. 46 Shearer to A.E. Trout, 28 June 1900, LB 1899-1902, p. 133; Shearer to Rev. R.S.E. Large, 1 October 1902, LB 1902-1904, p. 162. 47 See Shearer to C. Harris, 6 June 1900, LB 1899-1902, p. 62a; Shearer to Rev. Dr. McRae, 1 August 1900, Ibid., p. 223; Shearer to Rev. Dr. Torrance, 16 November 1900, Ibid., p. 453. 144 of members by reducing fees. At its 1900 Annual Convention, the Executive rejected a proposal to reduce the adult fee to twenty-five cents, arguing that the higher fee placed upon the 48 members "a larger responsibility regarding the Sabbath." Adult membership fees continued to be fifty cents, and juvenile 49 members paid ten cents. Although never rigorously elaborated, certain princi ples did guide the formation of branches. Shearer concentrated on urban centres with the hope that these branches would organ ize their surrounding rural districts, "including any small 50 villages or country churches within easy access." Only in exceptional cases such as the small mining town of Bruce Mines, where the existence of a branch might deter Sunday operations, could Shearer "easily imagine a wise exception" being made to 51 this policy. In a more particular sense, branches were es tablished in response to increasing outcroppings of Sabbath desecration. For example, Shearer attempted to create branches along any railway line that applied for exemption from the 1897 legislation and in border areas vulnerable to the importation 48 Toronto Globe, 10 November 1900; Moore to S. Sample, 28 December 1904, LB 1904-1905, p. 687. 49OLDA, "Annual Report, 1899." 50Shearer to C. Harris, 6 June 1900, LB 1899-1902, p. 62a. 51Shearer to N.A. Campbell, 7 May 1900, LB 1899-1900, p. 820. 145 52 of American Sunday newspapers. He paid specific attention to towns where American financing of industrial concerns, such as the American Cereal Company in Peterboro, might stimulate membership by appealing to anti-American sentiment. Vacation areas also received special vigilance as Shearer strove to keep one step ahead of the summertime "Sabbath-breaking season". and the excursions whose "mischevious" influence adversely 53 affected communities. In the summer of 1900 he endeavoured to organize "a vigorous Branch in every one of the [Georgian] 54 Bay ports." Finally, Shearer always planned branches in towns where he wanted to proceed with an important test case such as those against the Petrolia and Sarnia oil wells or against the introduction of Sunday labour in the Huntsville 55 tanneries. Throughout this campaign, Shearer's limited resources forced him to rely heavily on existing church structures. He usually contacted a fellow Presbyterian minister in making the 52 OLDA, Minutes of Organization Committee, 31 December 1900, OLDA, CR 1899-1903, p. 28; Shearer to Rev. J.A. Chapman, 15 May 1900, LB 1899-1900, p. 863; OLDA, Minutes of Convention, 1901, OLDA, MB 1897-1905, p. 237. 53Shearer to E.J. Mitchell, 24 May 1901, LB 1899-1902, p. 635; Shearer to Hon. W. Patterson, 11 April 1903, LB 1902-1904, p. 252. 54Shearer to Rev. J.A. Chapman, 15 May 1900, LB 1899-1900, p. 863. 55 OLDA, Minutes of Sub-Executive Committee, 17 February 1899, OLDA, MB 1897-1905, p. 34; also OLDA, Minutes of Execu tive Committee, 21 April 1899, Ibid., p. 78; OLDA, Report of Legal Committee, 5 April 1900, OLDA, CR 1899-1903, p. 12. 146 preliminary arrangements for a visit. This minister was then expected to arrange both the meeting with other ministers and lay people and to promote the evening public meeting from his pulpit and in the local press. When a branch was formed, each participating minister would automatically become a Vice-Presi dent, responsible for drawing up lists of potential members from his congregation for use by the branch executive. At the outset of a "systematic and thorough" canvass of the names on the lists, Shearer urged each minister to take "advantage of the starting of this new work to make a powerful impression upon the public community" by preaching a sermon devoted to the subject and distributing Alliance literature at the church door. Shearer consciously tried to break away from too close an identification with the Presbyterian church. Realizing early that the Methodists accused the Alliance of being "rather too Presbyterian," Shearer asked his branch presidents to 57 arrange for him to preach in other churches. In looking for Shearer to Dr. Eede, 28 August 1900, LB 1899-1902, p. 213. This information was contained in Leaflet No. 8 of the OLDA, "For the Guidance of Branch Executives." .No copy was found in the LDACP. 57 Shearer to Rev. T. Wilson, 22 February 1900, LB 1899-1900, p. 495. See, however, Shearer to Rev. Dr. Johnston, 31 August 1900, LB 1899-1902, p. 273: "I would like you to quietly find out which is the better service for each Church — I mean for reaching the representative people of the con gregation — and secure that service for me. . . . Those Methodist D.D.'s might try to put me off with the second best service of the day. . . . Don't let them." someone to assist him as Associate Secretary, Shearer deliber-5 8 ately sought a Methodist, deciding upon T. Albert Moore. He also suggested that branch executives contact Anglican and even Roman Catholic priests to establish a non-sectarian image 59 for the Alliance. In correspondence with local ministers, Shearer stres sed the recruitment of entire congregations into Alliance membership and always recommended that "energetic" laymen assume the active executive positions of President, Secretary, 6 0 and Treasurer. Not only did he feel ministers were too busy to accept more responsibilities, but he also felt that influ ential laymen would more successfully solicit funds in the 61 community than would ministers. In spite of complaints from some members, Shearer permitted female participation on execu tives, encouraging branch officers to recruit women to head 6 2 church canvassing committees. He urged church young people to take advantage of the juvenile membership, to make the 58 With regard to Moore, Shearer wrote: ". . .a capi tal worker, tireless in energy and application, and is probab ly the strongest man that we could have gotten. We, of course, were practically tied to selecting a Methodist." Shearer to Rev. A.H. Scott, 30 December 1902, LB 1902-1904, p. 195(b). 59Shearer to H.C. Hunt, 14 May 1900, LB 1899-1900, p. 874. 60Shearer to J. McKay, 2 August 1900, LB 1899-1902, p. 218; Shearer to Rev. W.J. Clark, 28 June 1900, Ibid., p. 118. 61T, Ibid. Shearer to Rev. Dr. McRae, 1 August 1900, LB 1899-1902, p. 225; also Shearer to Rev. Mr. Kerr, 21 June 1902, LB 1902-1904, p. 117. 148 public meetings youth rallies, and "to feel the personal res-6 3 ponsibility for being present and getting others to come." Christian young people, Shearer thought, "ought to take a more active interest in the Battle" which their elders were patri-64 otically fighting for their benefit. Believing that more could be done "by informing and inspiring the Christian people to take the interest they ought to take in this great cause," Shearer made little attempt to go outside the churches for members.^ Although he talked of appealing to all "classes," he restricted himself to the mid dle class — to him, "classes" meant young people, ladies, and 6 6 "representative men" of the community. Shearer was unsure "that the general indifferent crowd is the class that we need 6 7 most to reach." Sharing the Alliance executive's suspicion of the working class, Shearer did not oppose its rejection of a proposal to lower membership fees for individual members of fi 3 Shearer to Rev. S.W. Muxworthy, 2 5 September 1900, LB 1899-1902, p. 301; Shearer to Rev. Mr. Kerr, 28 June 1900, Ibid., p. 111. 64Shearer to E.T. Peel, 3 September 1901, Ibid., p. 772. 65Shearer to Dr. W.P. Towler, 19 May 1900, LB 1899-1900, p. 944. Shearer was also uninterested in the indifferent with in the church: he urged those arranging the canvass of church members to arm their canvassers with lists of only those who were sure to respond the the appeal, in order to shield the canvassers from exposure to mass indifference and discourage ment. See Shearer to Dr. Eede, 28 August 1900, LB 1899-1902, p. 213. 66Shearer to Rev. CA. Eaton, 23 February 1900, LB 1899-1900, p. 580. 67Shearer to Dr. W.P. Towler, 19 May 1900, Ibid., p. 944, 149 labour unions. He supported the decision to reduce the mem bership fee by half only if twenty members of one union joined and to extend this privilege only if the full twenty came from one union and were "not made up by canvassing outside its own ranks." To obtain the discount, the full list of twenty names accompanied by the $5 membership was to be handed into the branch at one time.68 Shearer in fact had little sympathy or respect for the workingman, as an encounter with Welland canal workers in 1900 illustrates. Recognizing that "the whole future of the ques tion depends upon the attitude of the Government employees who are concerned in the matter," Shearer tried to persuade 69 the canal men to protest Sunday canal openings. When the OLDA, Minutes of Executive Committee, 28 June 1900, OLDA, MB 1899-1904, p. 18;-.Shearer to D. Ward, 13 November 1900, LB 1899-1902, p. 395. 69Shearer to Rev. J.H. Ratcliffe, 6 April 1900, LB 1899-1900, p. 719: "It seems to us of the utmost possible conse quence that in some way or other between now and the government investigation of the question, every man, high and low on the canal should be reached and informed of these facts and assured that if he values his Rest Day he had better make it clear to the Secretary of the Department when he comes that he is deeply anxious to have the whole twenty-four hours of the Lord's Day, and that it is a matter of very great consequence to him that he should have it." Shearer wanted the pastors to visit the various men on the canal "on their own part, each as it were on his own responsibility, and without letting it be known that the Alliance is suggesting such action, so that the men may be fully aware of what is to take place,, and of what hangs on it, and impressed with the importance of rightly representing their attitude towards Sunday opening." (underlining his); also Shearer, circular, 4 May 1900, Ibid., p. 804: "I think it will be well not to mention my name or the Alliance specially, but simply to say that you have absolutely reliable information upon the points that you wish to emphasize in their minds." 150 employees instead expressed themselves in favour of Sunday work, Shearer angrily protested to the Deputy Minister of Rail ways and Canals that he could not understand why the government attached so much importance to the workers1 views, "many of whom are very far from intelligent men, and to whose opinions, we, as representing the Lord's Day Alliance, attach very little 70 importance." Although Shearer did not intend to recruit working class membership, the ostensible goal of his enforcement pro gramme was the freeing of men from Sabbath labour. With Sab bath observance legislation under litigation, the Alliance decided to assume responsibility for raising funds and initiat ing proceedings. Its first task was to discover whether or not prosecutions could be made under the Act, limiting itself to test cases in which a "new development of Sunday labor is shown to have occurred," rather than endeavouring "to prevent such forms of apparently unnecessary labor as have been usual-71 ly carried on for some time." Once it was established that the law could, within limitations, be enforced, Shearer lob bied the Attorney-General to issue instructions to the provin-72 cial police to apply the law. When the Attorney-General agreed to this, Shearer himself wrote to individual police 70 Shearer to Collmgwood Schreiber, 18 June 1900, LB 1899-1902, pp. 81-3. 71 OLDA, Minutes of Executive Committee, 12 January 1899, OLDA, MB 1897-1905, pp. 27-8. 72Shearer to J.M. Gibson, 15 May 1901, LB 1899-1902, p. 648. 151 chiefs, suggesting that they issue "strict instructions" to 73 those under their command to do their duty. He also tried to influence the Attorney-General's choice of police consta bles, arguing, for example, that the Niagara frontier area re quired a man of more "vigor and determined purpose" than the 74 man proposed by the Department. With the opening up of the lands in the area of New Ontario, Shearer pressed the govern ment to appoint a mobile officer to supervise the enforcement 75 of the Lord's Day Act in that district. Shearer was personally most involved with enforcement in Toronto. The Police Commissioners and the Alliance Execu tive agreed that the Alliance would take the "necessary steps for the purpose of settling the law" while the Police Commis-7 6 sioners would enforce the law "when clearly ascertained." But by 1901 Shearer felt that the police were not living up to their commitment. He complained to Morality Branch Inspector Archibald that it was "becoming a matter of common talk that the Police Authorities of Toronto are coming very short of their duty," and he hinted that unless there was "a very material difference in the attitude of the Police towards the enforcement of this law in the near future, a public agitation 73 Shearer to Mr. Maines, 20 May 1901, Ibid., p. 659. 74Shearer to J.M. Gibson, 15 May 1901, Ibid., p. 648. 75 Shearer to W.A. Charlton, 21 June 1901, Ibid., p. 697 7 fi OLDA, Report of Legal Committee, 27 March 1902, OLDA, CR 1899-1903, p. 72, 152 and appeal to the Police Commissioners will be vigorously in-77 stituted." One month later, Shearer recruited a squad of "clerical policemen," trusted ministers who would patrol down town streets after Sunday School in the afternoon and after church in the evening in search of druggists selling soda water or ice-cream, confectioners selling candies, or tobac-7 g conists selling cigars. His observers were merely to "take a walk along where such places of business are, see whether they are open and what is going on within." If there were good reason to believe that business of an illegal kind was occurring, they were to report the matter to Inspector Archi-79 bald for action. The clergymen were not to be directly in volved themselves; rather, their actions were to stir the police to do their duty and provide them with necessary evi-8 0 dence. To the police, Shearer wrote: . . . we will always be found as ready to commend the faithfulness as to condemn seeming negligence on the part of the Police force. ... We propose standing by the Police before the public and in x the press and elsewhere—meeting unfair criticism as far as it is possible for us to do so, though 77 Shearer to Inspector Archibald, 18 June 1901, LB 1899-1902, pp. 673-5. 78See Saturday Night, 12 May 1897. 79 Shearer to Rev. H.S. Magee, 4 July 1901, LB 1899-1902, p. 725; see also, Toronto Lord's Day Alliance, Minutes of Exe cutive Committee, 29 April 1901, OLDA, MB 1901-1909, p. 23; Shearer to W. Fisher, 6 July 1901, LB 1899-1902, Ibid., p. 742. 8 0 Ibid.; see also Shearer to Inspector Vaughan, 6 July 1901, Ibid., p. 734. 153 we shall do it as private individuals and often under assumed name. We believe this is due the Police force. (81) Shearer hoped that his patrol in combination with ef fective police action would quickly stamp out most evils in Toronto. In the rest of the province, the branches were the key to a successful enforcement programme. They were to sup ply Shearer with precise information concerning the nature of the manufacturing processes involved, the number of men em ployed, the different types of work done, and the different types of workmen involved, as well as a careful statement of 8 2 the reasons used by the company to justify Sunday labour. Shearer passed this information on to O'Meara who then advised the branch whether or not to proceed. Since Shearer thought that branches might be "a little reckless about rushing into legal proceedings" which could involve the Alliance "in very large costs," the branches assumed all legal expenses such as the securing of witnesses, the serving of subpoenas, and the 8 3 like, together with O'Meara's travelling expenses. If O'Meara advised a branch not to proceed and it did so, it also had to pay for his legal services. Conversely, if a given branch 81Shearer to H.J. Grassett, 6 July 1901, Ibid., p. 728; see also Shearer to Rev. H.S. Magee, 4 July 1901, Ibid., p. 726: The Police "need. . .and are entitled to, the assist ance of private individuals." 82 O'Meara to Rev. R. Weir, 20 January 1899, LB 1899-1900, p. 14. 83Shearer to Mr. McDonald, 28 September 1900, LB 18 99-1902, p. 322. 154 was" unwilling to proceed, Shearer and O'Meara could do little. In all cases, Shearer advised branches to employ moral suasion tactics in their first effort, for "to proceed at once to enforce the law would unquestionably arouse a strong anta gonism." Instead, "kindly conference should be had with the offending parties," as well as reasoning "in a friendly and 84 Christian spirit. Such friendly gestures might include, as it did in Glencoe in 1901, the sending of a telegram to a cir cus which planned to erect its tent on a Sunday. In this in stance, Shearer advised his branch officer to couch the tele gram "in general terms perhaps something like the following: 'No Sabbath-breaking permitted with impunity in Glencoe — 8 5 accept timely warning.1" If this approach proved unsuccess ful, the next step was to urge ministers to chastise the of fenders publicly from their pulpits, as Shearer believed that "many people have regard for their reputations, that have none 8 6 for character or conscience." Only as a last resort might O'Meara and Shearer advise recourse to the courts. They felt that the "uncertain condition of the law," owing to the contin-8 7 uing litigation, made it unwise to enter the courts. Having 84 Shearer to Rev. J.S. Woodsworth, 28 September 1901, Ibid., pp. 847-8. 85 Shearer to Dr. J.Y. McLachlin, 14 May 1901, Ibid., p. 627. 86 Shearer to Dr. Waddell, 1 November 1901, Ibid., p. 883, 8 7 Shearer to D.J. McKinnon, 11 December 1900, Ibid., p. 494. 155 found that many magistrates were "not in sympathy with Lord's Day Preservation" and were "considerably influenced in giving the judgement by their own views and prejudices," Shearer ad vised branch officers "not to make the attempt" unless they 88 were "pretty sure to succeed." Shearer hoped an effective press campaign would com plement the membership and enforcement programmes and aid in making the Alliance popular. With the help of O'Meara and a Press Committee, Shearer contacted prominent writers of the Toronto dailies, editors of Canadian and American religious newspapers, and Secretaries of the American National Sabbath Association, the British Lord's Day Observance Society, as well as the London Workingmen's Lord's Day Rest Association to obtain appropriate articles for distribution to the secular 8 9 press. The Alliance also hoped that publishing houses fur nishing "ready-print" material to newspapers throughout the province would include Alliance material gratis in their ship-Shearer to Mrs. G. Acheson, 7 August 1900, Ibid., p. 259; also Toronto Globe, 10 November 1900; also OLDA, Re port of Legal Committee, 5 April 1900, OLDA, CR 1899-1903, p. 12. 8 9 OLDA, Minutes of Sub-Executive Committee, 9 November 1900, OLDA, MB 1897-1905, p. 79; OLDA, Report of Press Campaign Committee, 7 December 1899, OLDA, CR 1899-1903, p. 4; Shearer to Editor, The Ram's Horn, 9 February 1900, LB 1899-1900, p. 411; also Shearer to Rev. M.D. Kneeland, 10 February 1900, Ibid., p. 413; O'Meara to Rev. F. Peake, 3 January 1900, Ibid., p. 369; O'Meara to Rev. J.B. Davison, Ibid., p. 371; O'Meara to C. Hill, Ibid., p. 372; O'Meara to Rev. W.F. Crafts, Ibid., p. 374. 156 90 . . merits. When organizing branches, Shearer exhorted ministers to invite editors to attend his afternoon meetings. Once formed, he urged branches to interview editors to seek their cooperation. On the advice of several editors, Shearer sent all Alliance material to the branch secretary to deliver per sonally to editors in the hope that it would then receive more 91 attention than were it sent from Toronto. It was the branch secretary's responsibility to provide newspapers with items or articles "affecting the local observance of the Sabbath with 92 the view of improving local opinion." In places where no branch existed, Shearer sent material to the editor hoping that, were he favourably disposed, he might himself take the 93 initiative in organizing a branch. To those editors "who signified their willingness to print items," Shearer also sent his newly developed Alliance newsletter, "News and Notes From 94 the Field." Primarily a brief statement of provincial execu tive decisions and the financial statement printed after Board 90 OLDA, Minutes of Executive Committee, 6 December 1900, OLDA, MB 1899-1904, p. 34. 91Shearer to J.C. Hamilton, 3 July 1900, LB 1899-1902, p. 157. 92 Shearer to Dr. CF. McGillivray, 14 January 1901, LB 1899-1902, p. 521; OLDA, Report of Press Campaign Committee, 5 September 1901, OLDA, CR 1899-1903, p. 52. 93 OLDA, Minutes of Sub-Executive Committee, 9 November 19 OLDA, MB 1897-1905, p. 79. 94Shearer to D. Ward, 2 May 1900, LB 1899-1900, p. 800, OLDA, Report of Press Campaign Committee, 28 June 1900, OLDA, CR 1899-1903, p. 17. 157 meetings, the leaflet was intended for officers and contribu-95 tors of the Alliance "more than for general distribution." Shearer also used the press to respond to hostile cri ticism. To one branch president, he suggested: that a letter or series of letters be written by some of your own men, either over their own names or over nom de plumes, making known to the public the various facts regarding local desecration of the Lord's Day, such as by the Hotel men, tobaccon ists, druggists, cyclists' refreshment booths . . . and making a strong pronouncement indicating trouble if these things are continued or repeated. . . . (96) He urged his London branch president to promote a letter cam paign in the press to protest the introduction of the Sunday 97 car. Although he dismissed hostile letters-to-the-editor as "not worthy of much attention," he did urge branch presidents to reply to them and to lobby editors to obtain their refusal 9 8 to publish such "villainous" correspondence." Occasionally he would suggest write-in campaigns to editors of papers which ^Shearer to N.W. Hoyles, 6 April 1900, LB 1899-1900, p. 713. 96 Shearer to J. Penman, 19 March 1900, Ibid., pp. 618-9. 97 Shearer to W.E. Saunders, 30 August 1901, LB 1899-1902, p. 753; also Shearer to Mrs. M. Thornley, 30 August 1901, Ibid., p. 755: "I can readily see that if many people were writing to the 'News' in favor of the Sunday car that a great many weak-kneed people in the City would get the idea that public opinion was in favor of the cars and they themselves would be more inclined to dismount from their perch on the fence, to that side. Now the trouble with very many of our friends is that they do not think it worth while to express their views when an opportunity of this kind is afforded." 9 8 Shearer to A. McKillop, 21 December 1900, Ibid., pp. 504-5. 158 were most censorious of the Alliance. Thus, for example, when a correspondent in the Ottawa Journal criticized Alliance co operation with labour as hypocritical, Shearer suggested to his Ottawa branch president, Reverend D.M. Ramsay: Do you not think that somebody, possibly under an assumed name, should answer Mr. Patterson? I have no doubt that large numbers of readers are not aware that he is a man of no influence, indeed is repudiated by them. Would it not be well to bring these points out in the columns of the Journal itself so that those who have read his remarks may have their minds disabused. I think it is a mis take to allow such letters as his to go unnoticed though I think it would be well to reply under an assumed name. . . (99) Responding to Flaneur's continuing attacks, Shearer publicly -- and using his own name -- engaged the columnist in debate.10 Despite the confidence and the tenacity of the Alli ance's efforts, neither the membership nor the enforcement programmes enjoyed success. Although it claimed 10,000 members in 1903, membership claims were grossly inflated as the names of members remained on the rolls long after they had ceased to contribute annual fees. A similar situation existed in tally ing the number of branches -- although in 1903 the Alliance claimed an increase in branches from 202 to 237, the number of "defaulting branches" that contributed nothing to Alliance 99 Shearer to Rev. D.M. Ramsay, 28 March 1901, Ibid., p. 594. 100Toronto Mail and Empire, 15 November 1900; Ibid., 1 December 1900; Ibid., 8 December 1900, in OLDA, SB 1892-1900, funds rose from forty-four to sixty.For all any one knew, such branches had disappeared entirely. Many towns failed to respond to Shearer's appeals to organize branches. Few of the port towns along Lakes Ontario and Huron maintained active branches. Port Dover, for example, active in protest against the Sunday running of a ferry in 1897, became totally inactive, while residents in Port Hope expressed "an utter lack of enthusiasm to pay lawyers' fees in 10 2 Toronto." Meanwhile, in border cities such as Windsor where "the barber, tobacco and fruit stores were open, and the Detroit Sunday papers . . . sold openly, even loudly announced on the streets," few supported the formation of an Alliance 103 branch. The lack of volunteers for executive positions often made it impossible to elect a president or to arrange 104 meetings after the initial organization. Shearer and Moore also found that the method of "electing" community leaders to executive positions and informing them afterwards often aroused 101See Table 1. Total revenues for 1903 were $4,578.63. Approximately $1,000 of this were donations from about ten wealthy Alliance subscribers. A more realistic estimate of the Alliance membership would seem to be about 7,000, based on $0.50 = one member. 102Shearer to T.A. Kirkconnell, 7 April 1900, LB 1899-1900, p. 737. Port Dover's contribution of $25 in 1897 de creased to $6.24 in 1899 and $4.25 in 1906. 103Shearer to Rev. D.R. Drummond, 7 October 1901, LB 1899-1902, p. 860; Shearer to W.H. Hayes, 14 November 1900, Ibid., p. 427. The situation never improved; see Moore to J. Duncan, 9 June 1904, LB 1902-1904, pp. 956-8. 104 Shearer to Rev. G. MacArthur, 12 February 1900, LB 1899-1902, p. 425. 160 THE OLDA AND ITS TABLE DEFAULTING 1 BRANCHES, 1899-1906 1899 1902 1903 1904 1906 No. of Branches Claimed 67 202 237 315 346 Number Contributing 46 158 177 230 233 Number Not Contributing 21 44 60 85 113 Total Branch Receipts ($) 2,270.00 3,646.91 4,578.63 N/A 6,783.00 Total Expenditures ($) 2,530.80 3,904.14 5,079.59 6,553.95 6,941.00 SOURCE: OLDA, Annual Reports 1897, 1898, 1899. OLDA, Reports of the Financial Committee, 1899-1906. 161 antagonism and some leaders so elected refused to accept.'''05 Other branches lapsed after ministers who had initiated organ-106 ization were transferred to other parishes; other men who had helped the Alliance secretaries organize found either that 107 they had no time or, in the absence of glaring violations of 108 the Sabbath or in the face of public apathy, little enthusiasm 109 to continue the work. Protestant ministers themselves were Shearer to J.M. Gill, 12 February 1900, Ibid., p. 431; Shearer to Rev. A.A. Graham, 31 August 1900, LB 1899-1900, p. 27.5; Shearer to W.A. Wilson, 6 March 1902, LB 1 902-1904, p.32. • - ' • 106Shearer to Rev. A.H. Scott, 30 December 1902, Ibid., p. 195(b). 107 Shearer to Rev. T.G. Thomas, 3 January 1902, Ibid., p. 2; Shearer to Mrs. D. McAlpine, 4 January 1902, Ibid., p. 15. 108Shearer to R.T. Slemon, 14 November 1900, LB 1899-1902, p. 438. 109 This was the case, for example, in the town of Thes-salon, Ontario. James Baxter, branch secretary, wrote Shearer that "two attempts to get a meeting of the Executive Committee have been abortive, that none of the ministers of the town attended. . . " He advised the disbanding of the organization and the return of membership fees to the few who had paid. (LB 1899-1902, p. 881). Shearer's reply to Baxter was that "it would be a very great mistake to entertain for a moment the thought of disbanding on account of lack of interest: to my mind this is only an additional reason for persevering in the work, that an interest worthy of the cause should be aroused. I am a great believer in what Dr. Parkhurst of New York on one occasion called 'Sanctified doggedness' or what we Presby terians call 'the final perseverance of the saints'. . . Be sides if there are no local reasons to be interested in the pre servation of the Sabbath, Christians everywhere should feel res ponsible for the support of the general work. . . " At the same time, Shearer wrote to the branch president that "if Dr. Baxter is so easily discouraged it might be well to have him drop out of the Secretaryship. . . ". 162 often less than anxious to promote the Alliance's cause, feel ing that the financial demands of the Alliance competed with local needs for the available donations.xx<^ As in earlier years, individual ministers were too concerned with their im mediate work to have an interest in a legislative campaign.xxl The policy of local expansion similarly failed. By the end of his term as Field Secretary in 1903, Shearer had ex hausted the number of potential new urban branches. T. Albert Moore's first task as the new Ontario secretary was to attempt the organization of the frontier areas in New Ontario. Moore reasoned that since pioneer life seemed "to suggest to some persons the possibility of breaking the law with impunity," it was imperative that the Alliance "be on the ground early before any lax practices [became] established customs among our citi zens in New Ontario," particularly with the invasion of "so many foreigners from Sabbathless countries and Sabbathless 112 homes, with their greed for gold and passion for pleasure." Moore's self-appointed duty was to instruct rural citizens that, 110Moore to G.H. Milne, 16 June 1903, LB 1902-1904, p. 372, lxlMoore to J.A. Giffin, 7 November 1904, LB 1904-1905, p. 501: ". . .To have ministers throw in the wastebasket such important documents as the petitions re Sunday legislation, is even worse, for if the ministry of the churches of Canada do not stand with us in our work, what can we expect of those whom they are expected to lead. . . in all the endeavors to obtain better moral conditions." See also Moore to Dr. F.C. McGregor, 6 May 1903, LB 1902-1904, p. 298. 112 Moore, Circular to northern ministers, 30 July 1903, LB 1902-1904, p. 464; Moore to J. Muncaster, 7 October 1904, LB 1904-1905, p. 378. 163 although they felt that the Lord's Day question had no relation to them, they needed to realize that rural areas as well as the cities were: being honeycombed by the influences that destroy the integrity of the Lord's Day. These things may creep in almost, if not quite unawares, and yet are as surely robbing us of the Lord's Day as though they were the wholesale attack of all the massed powers of evil. (113) Secondly, he hoped to instil impregnable values into potential 114 migrants to the alien urban environment. Unaware of or un acquainted with the dangers that the urban-based Alliance felt so acutely — the Sunday car, newspaper or ice-cream parlour -- rural communities simply did not respond to Moore's appeals. Indifferent to the need to lobby for legislative protection of a day they did not perceive as endangered, men either did not reply to Moore's letters or used the busy harvest season as an 115 excuse to postpone Moore's visit. Continuous financial demands caused tensions with branches. Shearer and Moore insisted that expenditures — the cost of his tours, office overheads, and the preparation and distribution of literature — were incurred solely on behalf of the branches and justified the demands. Having sent out es timates of monies required to each branch, the Secretaries 113Moore to V.J. Gilpin, 19 May 1903, LB 1902-1904, p. 320. 114Moore to Rev. J.W. Robinson, 17 August 1904, LB 1904-1905, p. 126. p. 572 115Moore to T.E. Finlay, 12 November 1903, LB 1902-1904, 164 exerted intense pressure on them to respond, bombarding them with letters and timing their visits to coincide with annual meetings to add further weight to the financial appeal.116 Even after they received contributions, they demanded more and inveighed against branches that retained more than they ought 117 for local expenses. The branches angrily responded to the Alliance's financial importunities, feeling that it neglected their local concerns. They resented the requests for more funds 118 when they felt they had already done quite well. As the judicial battle dragged on, many branches protested the Alli ance's lack of progress and inactivity, criticizing the money 119 120 spent on "high-salaried officers" and "expensive lawsuits" in Toronto. The Alliance therefore failed to become self-financing/ and the membership campaign, rather than easing, further strained its financial situation. In 1903, for example, a gain of $931.72 in new revenues did not cover the increased admini-116 See, for example, Moore to F.C. Macnee, 5 October 1904, LB 1904-1905, p. 341; Moore to J. Eadie, 19 December 1904, Ibid., p. 641; Moore, circular to various ministers, 23 March 1904, LB 1902-1904, p. 715. 117Shearer to R.B. Miller, 1 August 1900, LB 1899-1902, p. 232. 118 Shearer to J. Gibson, 25 September 1900, Ibid., p. 291. 1 1 Q Shearer to Rev. M.G. Freeman, 5 January 1904, LB 1902-1904, p. 592. 120Shearer to A.E. Trout, 28 June 1900, Ibid., p. 133-5; also Moore to G.W. Ling, 18 March 1904, LB 1902-1904, p. 688; Moore to Rev. M.G. Freeman, 4 October 1904, LB 1904-1905, p. 312. 165 strative expenses, which rose by $1,175.121 To meet these ex penses, Shearer and later Moore made an annual appeal to wealthy 122 individuals in Toronto, Ottawa, and London. This method of financing proved unreliable, however, when donors were unwill ing to subscribe as much as requested. As a result, the Alliance's financial difficulties assumed "almost colossal pro-123 portions." The enforcement programme was even less successful than its membership programme. Although no one actively disputed its membership claims, enforcement failures were plain for every one to see. Judicial decisions that did occur were unfavour- -able to the Alliance. The Ontario Appeal Court's 1902 decision interpreted the exempting phrase "work of necessity" in a much broader context than did the Alliance. By concluding that the phrase did not apply only to those industrial activities "with out which the particular manufacture, trade or calling cannot successfully be carried on during the remaining six days of 121 OLDA, Report of Financial Committee, 1902; Ibid., 1903 122Shearer to Mrs. W.E.H. Massey, 26 May 1902, LB 1902-1904, p. 81; Shearer to C. Massey, 10 February 1903, Ibid., p. 204; Shearer to J.N. Shenstone, 10 February 1903, Ibid., p. 181; Shearer to Timothy Eaton, John Penman, John McGill, J.J. Maelaren, Robert Kilgour, Thomas West, Rev. E. Harris, (Toronto);.Mrs. M. Elliott, (London); E.H. Bronson, A. Fraser, John Charlton, George Hay, Mrs. H.S. Howell, F.C. Keefer, (Ottawa); H. Robinson, (Hawkesbury); Elias Rogers (Toronto), 17 March 1903, Ibid., p. 223; Shearer to Hon. E. Bronson, 18 October 1904, LB 1904-1905, p. 392. 123 Moore to Rev. W.C. Henderson, 2 September 1904, LB 1904-1905. 166 the week," Chief Justice Armour left industries to their own 124 interpretations of what might constitute a work of necessity. The Alliance's only recourse was prosecution of employees; an 125 action it was loath to adopt. Moreover, because Sabbath observance legislation was sub judice, the Alliance was unable to publish literature setting out its policies and methods for distribution among the branches. It was restricted to publish ing in its newsletter brief items dealing with particular en forcement matters calculated, it hoped, "to remove misconcep-126 tions" regarding the Alliance's "true policy and methods." Industrial operations such as the Petrolia oil wells ignored Alliance appeals and government instructions to stop 127 Sunday operations. In other cases the government refused to take action, and the Alliance made no progress in prosecu ting mining operations such as the Copper Cliff and Bruce 128 Mines companies. Test cases involving existing legislation usually resulted in adverse decisions, either on the grounds that the work was in fact necessary, as were the decisions in 124O.W.R. 312; 54 C.C.C. 344. 125See Moore to Rev. G.C. Little, 25 November 1904, LB 1904-1905, p. 575. 126OLDA, Minutes of Legal Committee, 30 May 1902, OLDA, CR 1899-1903. 127Advocate (November 1905). 128Moore to J.M. Gibson, 15 February 1904, LB 1902-1904, p. 652. 167 the cases against the American Cereal Company of Peterboro and against the Ontario Sugar Company in Berlin; or on the ejusdem generis principle, that is, that the. men prosecuted, being trade foremen, engineers, and so forth, were not specifically 129 mentioned in Section 1 of the Act. Responding to public demand, street railway companies continued to defy the 1897 legislation. In Scarboro, Sault Ste. Marie, and Kingston, companies started Sunday service and the Alliance, fearing an adverse decision based on the ejusdem 130 generis principle, did not take action. In Port Arthur the company arranged a plebiscite on the issue and won a convincing 131 majority. The courts supported the street railway companies, dismissing a case against the Kingston, Portsmouth, and Cata-raqui Railway Company on the grounds that the company was not only authorized to offer daily service, "but in duty bound to operate daily." The wording of its charter was "imperative, the cars shall run daily." If the cars did not run on Sunday, the court concluded, the company left itself "open to have an 132 application made to cancel its charter for not running." O'Meara to Rev. CE. Scott, 6 September 1899, LB 1899-1900, p. 257; O'Meara to Rev. J. Locke, 31 January 1900, Ibid., p. 400; Moore to Rev. J.A. Wilson, 6 January 1904, LB 1902-1904, p. 590. 130Shearer to J.M. Gibson, 10 June 1902, Ibid;, p. 105. 131Advocate (October 1904). 132 Ibid.; also OLDA, Minutes of Legal Committee, 8 Novem ber 1904, OLDA, MB Legal Committee, 1903-1912. See Company Charter, 56 Vict. (1893), c.91, s.16(c). 168 Steamship companies proved equally adept at circumvent ing the law. By making no special effort such as offering cheaper fares to promote Sunday trips as excursions, steamship operators could claim to be "but links in a line of travel," merely conveying travellers and unfortunately unable to "pre-133 vent people coming on their boats who may be excursionists." The onus lay on the Alliance to prove that any particular ex cursion had for its only or principal object amusement or 134 pleasure and this it found "exceedingly difficult" to do. Moreover, as any excursion involving a religious exercise was also exempt, steamship companies took to inviting ministers 135 aboard to preach. All the Alliance could do was to warn 136 against this calculating flattery. It received little sup port from the government on the question. Responding to one appeal, the Attorney-General replied thatr since Sunday excur sions had been running for some twenty years, local sentiment, not the government, should regulate the situation. If local sentiment was not strong enough to end excursions, "he did not 137 feel called upon to undertake the responsibility." 133 OLDA, Report of Legal Committee, 4 September 1901, OLDA, CR 1899-1903, p. 56. Ibid. 135Shearer to J. Penman, 19 June 1900, LB 1899-1902, p. 90; Moore to W.M. Howe, 28 April 1903, LB 1902-1904, p. 270. 136Moore to W.L.H. Rowand, 16 July 1903, Ibid., p. 438. 137Shearer to J.W. Ridgeway, 6 July 1901, LB 1899-1902, p. 7 3 6. 169 In addition to its problems with Sunday labour and pleasure travel, Sunday trading continued, aided by the courts and the government. The Attorney-General's office and the police were willing to tolerate considerable Sunday liquor sales,and the Alliance made meagre progress in its attempts to 13 8 curtail them. The courts also permitted a vigorous Sunday trade in other comestibles despite Alliance protests. In 1900, Toronto's Judge McDougall ruled in Regina v. Alberti that a licensed restaurant owner was "within his legal rights in sel-139 ling ice-cream." When London's Police Magistrate asserted the legality of Sabbath ice-cream and soda water sales in restaurants, many ice-cream parlour owners in the city applied 140 for restaurant licenses. Although at first the courts sup ported the Alliance's protests that sales by shops that had obtained licenses "solely in order to sell ice-cream on Sunday" 141 were illegal, since they were not bona fide restaurants, gradually they turned against the Alliance. In 19 05 an Ottawa 138 Advocate (December 1903) 3 C.C.C. 356. Shearer to Mrs. A. Johnson, 2 July 1900, LB 1899-1902, p. 155; see also Moore's description in 1904: "A restaurant keeper who supplies meals in the ordinary week days could supply a meal on Sunday if that meal consists entire ly of ice-cream. [McDougall] declined to make a distinction between what might be called in popular language a 'good square meal' and a customer gently touching his aesthetic palate by frozen cream diluted with some tasty extract." Moore to Rev. N. Lindsay, 24 June 1904, LB 1904-1905, p. 3. 140 Shearer to Rev. J.C. Tibb, 4 June 1900, LB 1899-1900, p. 992. 141 Regina v. Sabine (1900), 3 C.C.C. 356. 170 court quashed a conviction on the grounds that the law under 142 which the charge had been laid was obsolete-The American Sunday newspaper continued to cross the border and sell briskly in railway stations and on trains. Although the Alliance wanted to arrest the agents or delivery boys, newsagents such as those in Chatham overcame the law by having the papers sent to the city's Insurance Agent who then 143 had school boys deliver them. The Alliance was also unable to charge the Toronto Sunday World's publisher, Billy Maclean, 144 for his paper was printed wholly before the Lord's Day began. The pursuit of Sunday pleasure continued unabated when police generally refused to prosecute seemingly inoffensive 145 activities as bathing or fishing. The Toronto police "sanc tioned the non-enforcement of the Lord's Day Act in High Park and at the Island," the city's most popular recreational 142 Advocate (July 1905). The Alliance response was pre dictable: "What a travesty of Justice! Because a law was passed before Confederation, and has never been repealed, there fore it is obsolete!! Because a man who does not pretend to do an eating house business holds a restaurant license, he is at liberty to do his ordinary business on Sunday!!! Was ever the aim of the law defeated with less reason? Surely the Police Magistrate and County Crown Attorney cannot be parties to an effort to break down the Sabbath ..." 143Moore to Rev. J.E. Ford, 12 January 1905, LB 1904-1905, p. 758; also Shearer to T. Groves, 7 March 1902, LB 1902-1904, p. 44. 144 Moore to Rev. D.W. Snider, 12 September 1903, Ibid., p. 527. 145Moore to W.H. Maines, 19 August 1903, Ibid., pp. 395-6. The Alliance continued to offer its support. See Moore to T. Groves, 7 March 1902, Ibid., p. 44; Moore to Chief of Police, Niagara Falls, 16 July 1903, Ibid., p. 442; Moore to A. Murray, 171 146 areas. Appeals over the Police Chief's head were to little 147 avail; although the Board of Commissioners was prepared to apply the liquor laws, it did not see its way to prohibit re freshment sales altogether on Sundays as desired by the Alli-148 ance. By 1905, therefore, the frustrated Alliance was con vinced that "it would be an immeasurable gain to the cause of Temperance and moral reform generally if, throughout the Domin ion, the municipal police system were replaced by a provincial or national force," modelled on the example of the Northwest Mounted Police. They, so the Alliance believed, were fearless-149 ly enforcing Sunday laws in the Northwest Territories. Of the three phases of his campaign, Shearer enjoyed greatest success with the press. By 1901, he claimed that 90 percent of the newspapers in the 140 communities with branches had "declared themselves willing to forward the ends of the 28 July 1903, Ibid., p. 452. The Ontario government refused to appoint "strong, intelligent, reliable provincial Constables, at least two in number, one located in Port Arthur or Fort William, the other at Sudbury, or the Soo, whose services would be available at any point in their respective districts." Shearer to J.J. Foy, 5 July 1905, LB 1905-1906, p. 28. 146 OLDA, Minutes of Sub-Executive Committee, 3 0 September 1902, OLDA, MB 1899-1904, p. 63. 147 Shearer to Board of Commissioners of Police of the City of Toronto, 16 April 1903, LB 1902-1904, p. 247. 1 AQ Shearer to Colonel Grassett, 29 April 1903, Ibid., p. 272. The Alliance continued to demand.enforcement. See Moore to Chairman and Members, of the Board of Commissioners of Police, 27 June 1903, Ibid., p. 397. 149 Advocate (February 1905). 172 150 Alliance." With this degree of success, Shearer continued with the approach already established. The religious press regularly mentioned the battle and the Wilson Ready Print Com pany distributed Alliance material to all provincial news-151 papers. On the transformation of "News and Notes" into the Lord's Day Advocate in 1903, the Alliance began to send its house organ to all local papers thus adding to the material sent through branch secretaries. Finally, Shearer developed an unsophisticated method of monitoring press coverage through out the province by having branches send in copies of relevant articles: in response to hostile articles and letters, he continued to urge members to bombard editors with pro-Alliance 1 4-4- 1-52 letters. Although unprepared to support only a religious obser vance of the day, most provincial papers came to support the principle of a weekly day of rest contained in Sabbath obser-153 vance legislation. Earlier Alliance critics such as the Shearer to Editor, Stratford Herald, 19 June 1901, LB 1899-1902, p. 682. 15 •'"OLDA, Report of Press Campaign Committee, 26 December 1901, OLDA, CR 1899-1903, p. 68; Ibid., 27 March 1902, p. 73. 152 . . OLDA, Report of Organization and Education Committee, 1 September 1904, OLDA, Reports of Organization and Education Committee, 1903-1912; Moore to J.A. Crichton, 18 August 1904, LB 1904-1905, p. 132. 153See Paul Rutherford, "The New Nationality, 1864-1897: A Study of the National Aims and Ideas of English Canada in the Late Nineteenth Century" (Ph.D. thesis, University of Tor onto, 1973), p. 60. 173 154 Ottawa Journal finally came to support it. In Toronto the established papers and the more popular dailies both rallied to the cause; together, they possessed a potential influence with 115,000 readers. Moreover, either by "private understand ings" with editors, as A.M.C. Waterman alleges, or by some other 155 methods, vociferous critics of the Alliance became silent. After ten years of unstinting criticism, "Flaneur" wrote his last sally against the "Sad Sunday Society" on August 10, 1904; E.E. Sheppard of Saturday Night delivered his final blast on November 19, 1904. With the retirement of these two opponents from the battlefield, Shearer and his closest colleagues were, despite the disappointments of the membership ..drive and the failures of the enforcement programme, "supremely confident that their cause was the wave of the future."156 Advocate (March 1904); Ibid. (April 1906). 155 A.M.C, Waterman, "The Lord^s Day in a Secular Society, A Historical Comment on the Canadian Lord's Day Act of 1906," Canadian Journal of Theology XI (1965), p. 114. The only re ference to "Flaneur" in the Alliance papers is in the August, September 1905 issue of the Advocate; "The Mail and Empire is one of the best journalistic friends the L.D.A. has . . . But it has trouble occasionally in keeping some members of its staff in line. The kicker used to be Flaneur, but for long.he has been kept silent." If Shearer did make an arrangement with the editor, it must have been in private conversation. 156Waterman, "The Lord's Day," p. 114. 174 Chapter VI: National Righteousness Aroused: The Organization of the Lord's Day Alliance of Canada, 1898-1903. In 1898, the Ontario Alliance assumed responsibility for the formation of a national lobby. In January of that year, the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia declared that province's legislation ultra vires. For their part, the Ontario courts had not yet decided if Ontario's 1897 legislation was consti tutional. But the possibility that the courts might declare provincial legislation invalid spurred the Ontario Alliance to consider the necessity of lobbying for federal legislation, at least in matters directly under federal control such as ca nals, railways, and the Post Office. No other association was as strong as the Ontario Alliance. The Lord's Day Alliance was moribund. By 1898, John Charlton had abandoned his fight for federal legislation,aand the raison d1etre of the LDAC diasppear-ed. The Lord's Day Alliance did not respond to the Ontario Alliance's plea for help in the fight against the Sunday car in Ottawa nor to its request to suggest a plan "by which the leadership of the Dominion Committee, the co-operation of other provincial organizations. . . could be secured, so as to bring the strongest and widest possible influence to bear upon the Dominion Government and Parliament."1 Although Sabbath obser vance associations existed in Montreal, Halifax, Winnipeg, and A.E. O'Meara to Rev. W.D. Armstrong, 2 6 January 189 9, LB 1899-1900, p. 21. 175 Victoria, only the Ontario Alliance had the aggressive nature 2 and the impetus to expand beyond provincial borders. In promoting the organization of a national lobby, the Ontario Alliance displayed the growing sophistication with which it perceived its function as a political interest group. From its experience in Ontario, it had realized the need to relate its concern for a specific issue, the Sunday car, to a broader 3 but less clearly defined cause. The Ontario Alliance was al ready seeking to transform itself into an "institutionalized" interest group: having acquired "a heightened understanding of 4 public policy processes," it had recognized that Sabbatarianism could not become solely identified.with one backbench Member of Parliament. Sabbath observance must become a non-partisan issue, and the Alliance must approach the real centres of power, Cabinet members, provincial or federal, and other political leaders, regardless of their political persuasion.5 In doing so, the Alliance would emphasize the secular social principle of Sabbatarian legislation, the guarantee of a weekly rest day, 2 O'Meara to J. Scanlon, 11 September 1899, Ibid., p. 271: ". . .So far as I know the Manitoba Alliance is the only actually organized provincial Alliance besides the Ontario Alli ance." The OLDA was unaware of the existence of the Quebec association until July 1899; see O'Meara to J. Scanlon, 10 July 1899, Ibid., p. 226. 3 Paul Pross, ed., Pressure Group Behaviour in Canadian  Politics (Toronto: McGraw-Hill Ryerson, 1975), p. 59. 4 Ibid., p. 12. 5Ibid., p. 60; OLDA, "Annual Report, 1897," in OLDA, SB 1892-1900. 176 clearly separating it from the moral principle of religious observance. Legislatures, the Alliance had realized, sought Sabbath preservation, not Sabbath observance. "It was not the province of the State to legislate on the particular methods 7 of keeping the Sabbath." Yet, though the State would not seek to advance ecclesiastical or religious interests, "it should legislate in favour of rest . . . and have the laws referring to this enforced. Every man should have secured to him the privilege of worship and other religious exercises." The Alli ance's goal therefore as a political interest group would be "the preservation of the day so that all classes may be free to teach and practice its [sic] observance according to the dic-tates of conscience." Churches, schools, and homes would then assume the responsibility "to teach and inculcate proper Sabbath practices and to impress the sacredness of the Sabbath on the 9 youth and the community at large." In the spring of 1899, the Ontario Alliance received an invitation.to participate in a conference sponsored by the Christian Endeavour Society. The Conference, planned for Octo ber, was to discuss a broad range of questions facing the Pro testant churches, among them Sabbath observance. The Alliance, 60'Meara to H.S. Campbell, 13 February 1899, LB 1899-1900, p. 53. 7LDAC, Minutes of Convention, 25 June 1901, LDAC, MB 1888-1901. 8Toronto Globe, 7 October 1899, in OLDA, SB 1892-1900. g yIbid. ' 177 unaware of the LDAC1s lethargic condition, took this opportunity to initiate formal contact with the Lord's Day Alliance execu tive. Quickly irritated by the latter's lack-of "aggressive spirit . . . and enthusiasm" and its fear of "attempting to do anything too definite," the Ontario Alliance deliberately sought to control plans for the October conference."'"0 Its delegates were to approve of "no form of Dominion organization . . . which would in any way interfere with the complete auton omy of any provincial alliance.""''1 The October meeting there fore resulted in an agreement to establish provincial Alliances "similar to that of Ontario"; that is, they would not be branches of the Lord's Day Alliance but would be independent 12 provincial organizations with their own network of branches. The meeting also agreed to appoint as General Secretary of the national Executive a man of "inspirational initiatives and 13 administrative ability in marked degree." The pressures on the Ontario Alliance — its exhausted financial state and lack of membership — precluded further development of these plans until 1900. By that time, the ener getic efforts of John Shearer as Field Secretary of the Ontario 10O'Meara to Rev. J.G. Shearer, 19 June 1899, LB 1899-1900, p. 214. 11OLDA, Minutes of Executive Committee, 8"September 1899, OLDA, MB'1897-1905, p. 73. 12Toronto Globe, 5 October 1899 in OLDA, SB 1892-1900. Ibid. 178 Alliance had doubled its membership and cleared its outstand ing debt. Since the Ontario Court of Appeal had still not handed down its decision about the constitutionality of Ontario's 1897 Act, Shearer turned to the formation of a new Lord's Day Alliance of Canada as the Ontario Alliance writ large. In January 1900, Shearer became General Secretary to the Lord's Day Alliance as well as Field Secretary of the Ontario Alliance. In late 1900 and early 1901 he travelled first to the Maritime provinces and Quebec and then to Manitoba and British Columbia to talk with friends.of Sabbath observance in these provinces and, if possible, establish provincial associations. Shearer's plans.for organization followed patterns that he felt had been successful in Ontario: he made contact either with a member of an existing Sabbath observance associa tion or with a Presbyterian minister whom he knew from General 14 Assembly meetings. He concentrated on urban centres and paid greater attention to meetings with influential townspeople than to the mass public meeting in the evening. He also pro moted new avenues suggested by his experience in Ontario, par-15 ticularly the recruitment of Anglicans and Roman Catholics. Only in Quebec did he suggest restricting the effort to the 14 Shearer, circular to Nova Scotia ministers, April 1900, LB 1899-1902; also Shearer, circular to western ministers, 29 September 1900, LB 1899-1900, p. 335. (Identification was done through the Canadian Almanac.) 15 Shearer, circular to Nova Scotia ministers, 3 July 1900, LB 1899-1902, p. 171. 179 16 "main Protestant centres." At this time Shearer also made efforts to extend the social base of the membership to include workingmen in the railway and manufacturing centres, and he asked D.J. O'Donoghue, Fair Wages Officer in the Laurier govern ment, to supply him with labour contacts in the western pro-17 vinces. The results of Shearer's tours were personally most gratifying, especially in the West. 0 'Donoghue ' s-v assistance facilitated contact with labour groups in general and in par ticular with Ralph Smith, a former Methodist minister, leader of the Nanaimo Miners1 Union, President of the Trades and Labor Congress of Canada, and Liberal Member of Parliament in the Laurier government. Shearer found the labour groups willing to extend "hearty co-operation" to his cause and, after his return to Toronto,he enthusiastically forecast that Canada's 18 "moral regeneration" would come from the west. As an added fillip, in Quebec where he had expected to find "a degree of indifference, the result of hopelessness," Shearer had found such "unexpected life on the question" that he made immediate 19 plans to revisit the province. 16Shearer to Rev. A. Falconer, April 1900, LB 1899-1902. 17 Shearer, circular to New Brunswick ministers, 24 Aug ust 1900, Ibid., p. 272; Shearer to D.J. O'Donoghue, 11 Novem ber 1900, Ibid., p. 492. ^Hamilton Spectator, 4 May 1900, in OLDA, SB 1892-1900; Shearer to Rev. G. MacArthur, 20 May 1901, LB 1899-1902, p. 548. 19 Shearer to Rev. R. Murray, 28 September 1900, Ibid., p. 324. 180 The formal re-organization of the Lord1s Day Alliance of Canada took place at a meeting on the 25th of June, 1901. Structurally, the Lord's Day Alliance was to be a "federating 20 Executive of various Provincial and Territorial Alliances. As such, the national Alliance would not "be of a popular character"; that is, it would not have a membership independent of the provincial associations. Its Executive would consist of the Presidents of the provincial groups in addition to an Honorary President and the General Secretary. The General Secretary would be responsible for overseeing the organization and running of provincial alliances, providing advice on the recruitment of leadership and membership, and supplying legal advice on enforcement of existing laws. The Alliance would meet in convention once every three years, although the core of the Executive would meet once a year. The chief responsi bility of the national office would be to disseminate informa tion about the Sabbath question in Canada, to suggest methods of combatting desecration, and to report the general state of the political battle. Since the Ontario Alliance already had a body of campaign literature, the organizers of the Lord's Day Alliance decided to adapt this material for distribution 21 throughout the country. 20 Shearer to Rev. D.R. Drummond, 29 April 1901, Ibid., p. 578. 21 See Shearer to Rev. E.S. Rowe, 25 September 1900, Ibid., p. 286; Shearer to Rev. R. Murray, 28 September 1900, Ibid., p. 324; Shearer to Rev. G. Steele, 13 November 1900, Ibid., p. 442. 181 The Alliance's strength was to lie in the provincial associations. Their duties included the recruitment of a prom inent leadership, both lay and clerical; the establishment of legal, organizational, and press committees; and the raising of money to pay for the Secretary's salary, his travel expenses, the costs of distributing literature, as well as any office overhead. The first Alliance budget was set at $4,000. The Ontario Alliance pledged over half of this amount, but it ex pressed a determination to maintain an independent strength by reserving half its monies for the hiring of a Provincial Secre-22 tary. The structure of the national alliance reflected the Ontario Alliance's optimism about the outcome of the pending judicial decision. The Ontario Alliance assumed that, once the courts confirmed the validity of provincial jurisdiction, the provincial associations would lobby their governments for as much provincial legislation as possible. Strong provincial lobbies would complement each other's efforts. Since the Lord's Day Alliance as a unit would only lobby the federal government for legislation after the bulk had passed, provincial legisla tures, the Alliance did not establish a national office but was housed in the Toronto offices of the Ontario Alliance. The Alliance's objective was to "secure to every man OLDA, Minutes of-Executive Committee, '5 September 1901, OLDA, MB 1897-1905. 182 23 and woman the benefits of the Day of Rest." It pledged it self to inform "the public mind concerning the danger by which the Lord's Day is threatened" and to arouse "the public con science to a sense of the paramount importance of . . .[Sabbath] preservation in the interests alike of the domestic, the indus-24 trial, the national, and the religious life of the people." The Alliance identified the enemies of the weekly rest day as coming from two groups, both"to be found within the Protestant churches: "those who had the greed for gain and those who had 25 the desire for pleasure." In the first instance, the Alli ance concentrated on the motives of the individual who, as a member of a business corporation, consented to "receive the profits of this indefensible invasion of the sacred hours of 2 6 the Sabbath." But rather than directly censuring the indi vidual businessman, more likely than not a respectable member of the church, the Alliance blamed changes in Canada's economic condition for these practices. The switch from individual manufacturing activity to "organized companies, corporations, combines and trusts" had produced a situation in which "the convictions of the individual are overcome by the anxiety of the combined body to secure the best dividends possible on the 23LDAC, Minutes of Convention, 25 June 1901, LDAC, MB 1888-1901. 24 LDAC, "Constitution, 1901." 25Toronto Globe, 28 October 1899. Ibid. 183 capital invested." In a company, men did what they would not do themselves. Such circumstances placed "capitalists and managers in great temptations to encroach upon the Sabbath day, while the helpless artisans must coerce their consciences 27 into passive and helpless acquiescence." In attacking the "lust for pleasure," the Alliance blamed "the native selfishness of human nature," which demanded the opening of the post office before and after church, the Sunday ice-cream parlour and soda water fountain, the butcher, barber, and tobacco shops, the dentist's office, and the photo-28 grapher's gallery. Further, the Alliance decried the "love of outward display" that led people to attend Sunday funerals, 29 . . parades, and outdoor religious services. Such vanities would eventually "reduce all life to the dreary dead life of a sordid and soul-destroying commercialism" which would in turn ruin the fellowship of the family, negate its authority, and 30 undermine family religion and family happiness. Deprived of the privilege of proper Sabbath observance, artisans would "lose interest in religious matters and settle down to a de-31 graded secular life." A few more generations of such a life 27Ibid., 7 October 1899, 2 8 Shearer, "The Sabbath of the Dawning Century in Canada," Christian Guardian, 6 February 1901, in OLDA, SB 1892-1900; Vancouver Daily World, 3 March 1901, in Ibid. 29 Christian Guardian, 6 February 1901. 30 Vancouver Daily World, 3 March 1901. 31Toronto Globe, 7 October 1899, in OLDA, SB 1892-1900. 184 and there would be few with strong enough convictions "to lift up their voices on behalf of the sacred right of every toiler to a day of rest." The main emphasis of Shearer's restructuring of the Alliance lay in making it a focus for all parties concerned about the weekly day of rest. More specifically, this entailed an alliance with organized labour and the Trades and Labor Con gress. Shearer and his closest colleagues had realized that the political power of the workingman's vote and influence could bring them their victory. It was imperative that pains "be taken to show the workingman of our country that whether they : be personally Christians or not, they, as workingmen, have a 32 vital interest at stake in this struggle." Spurred by the enthusiastic cooperation of organized labour in British Columbia, Shearer directed the Ontario Alliance to revitalize its contacts with labour, flagging since the defeats in 1899. The Legisla tion Committee of the Ontario Alliance therefore recommended the collection and tabulation of "full information as to all labor bodies and other sympathetic organizations" throughout 33 the province. The Committee also advised establishing con tact with the Toronto Trades and Labor Councils through addres ses to the approximately eighty city unions before undertaking 32 Christian Guardian, 6 February 1901; also Vancouver Daily World, 3 March 1901: "The laboring classes must realize what the day of rest means to them..." 33 OLDA, Report of Legislative Committee, 7 February 1901, OLDA, CR 1899-1903. 185 a province-wide effort. As part of its press campaign, the Ontario Alliance also planned to prepare a letter to labour journals "setting forth the interests that labor men have in the 34 preservation of the Weekly Day of Rest." It further recom mended that the Alliance collect complete information from Great Britain and the United States concerning the Sunday labour aspect of their Lord's Day legislation and the attitude of labour towards the preservation of the Lord's Day. Throughout 1901 and 1902, Shearer worked on renewing links with the Trades and Labor Congress on the same basis as had existed in Toronto at the time of the Sunday car agitation. In return for labour's support for Lord's Day legislation, the Alliance promoted the TLC's campaign for the Saturday half-holiday as a "vast advantage to the community at large in the 35 cause of Sabbath observance and industrial reform." He urged branches to avail themselves of the prestige of D.J. O'Donoghue's position as Fair Wages Officer when planning speakers for their 3 6 annual meetings. He also re-established contact with Charles Hill, Secretary of the Workingmen's Lord's Day Rest Association in London, England, to acquire information on the nature of Sab bath labour and the demands made for it by British industrial 34 OLDA, Report of Press Campaign Committee, 25 April 1901, OLDA, CR 1899-1903. 35 LDAC, Minutes of Convention, 25 June 1901. 36Shearer to Rev. D.M. Ramsay, 13 May 1901, LB 1899-1902, p. 622. 1.86 37 concerns. Moreover, he attempted to assess the extent of Sabbath labour on the Canadian railway system by sending his branch officers questionnaires to be answered by railway workers 3 8 in their districts. Besides speaking at various Trades Council meetings throughout the province, he addressed the annual meeting of the Trades and Labor Congress for the first time in September 1901. In talking to such groups, Shearer concentrated on the Alliance's secular aim, trying to make it attractive to the workingman. The Alliance believed, he. promised: that men whould be protected in the observance of the day exactly as they wished to enjoy it. They did not wish to curtail individual enjoy ment of the Lord's Day, except in cases where the desires of individuals could only be met at the expense of additional work on the part of other men. (39) The Trades and Labor Congress responded by appointing a commit-40 tee to cooperate with the Alliance. Other local Trades and Labor Councils, in particular the powerful Toronto Council, 41 followed the national body's example. 37Shearer to C. Hill, 8 October 1901, Ibid., p. 866. 3 8 Shearer to Rev. M.L. Leitch, 30 May 1902, LB 1902-1904, p. 91. 39 Trades and Labor Congress of Canada, Proceedings, 1901, p. 74. 40T, Ibid. 41 Shearer to G.M. Macdonnell, 27 September 1901, LB 1899-1902, p. 833; Shearer to P.M. Draper, 22 July 1902, LB 1902-1904, p. 137. 187 Shearer also worked to consolidate support from the official church bodies, to make the Alliance an "agency. . . 42 through which all the churches can act in union." From his experience in Ontario, Shearer realized that prejudices against the strong Presbyterian identity of the Alliance still existed and, as he wrote to one branch officer, "I feel that we all .. must sink our preferences rather than risk injuring our great 43 cause by giving any seeming justification to such a charge." Therefore, in 1901, Shearer made arrangements to visit the five Methodist Conferences in Ontario in addition to the three Pres byterian Synods. He also applied to the four Anglican Synods 44 for permission to present the Alliance's case. But, either unable to overcome his antipathy to the Catholics or fearing rejection, Shearer made no attempt to establish contact with the Catholic hierarchy beyond encouraging the provincial associa tions to contact local Roman Catholic priests. Success in the Ontario courts seemed to confirm;the Alliance's 1901 decision to have strong provincial associations and a weak national organization. In 1902 the Ontario Court of Appeal upheld the right of the Ontario Legislature to pass the 45 18 97 Act. This meant that two provincial high courts, the 42 Christian Guardian, 6 February 1901. 43Shearer to Rev. T. Wilson, 22 February 1900, LB 1899-1900, p. 495. 44 OLDA, Report of Organization Committee, 25 April 1901, OLDA, CR 1899-1903, p. 50; Shearer to Rev. D.M. Ramsay, 28 March 1901, LB 1899-1902, p. 594. 188 the Ontario Appeal Court and the New Brunswick Supreme Court, supported the province's right to pass legislation dealing with Sabbath observance, while one court, the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia, opposed this right. Desiring final clarification of the issue, the Ontario Government submitted the Hamilton Street Railway case to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in 1903; meanwhile, Alliance optimism that the final outcome would favour provincial jurisdiction remained high. Shearer there fore continued along lines already established, annually travel ling to the various provinces- and visiting as many cities and large towns as possible. Owing to incessant demands on his time, Shearer had few hours to devote to a national press campaign. He sent copies of the Lord's Day Advocate, the Alliance newsletter, to every . local paper in the Dominion and, if an article were particularly appropriate to the region, would enclose a postcard calling 46 attention to the page and paragraph. 'Ks an added effort to promote the recruitment of membership, the Executive decided in 1902 to send the Advocate to each member and not only to church 47 ministers as had been done formerly. Among other things, the Advocate was to print items dealing "with particular matters 46 Shearer to Ramsay, 28 March 1901. 47Shearer to Rev. G.C. Cook, 10 June.1902, LB 1902-1904, p. 110; Shearer to Rev. J.M. Aull, 6 January 1902, Ibid., p. 11: "This will be a great improvement and ought to result in adding to the interest taken by the members." 189 arising in securing obedience to the law . . . calculated to remove misconceptions regarding the true policy and methods of 48 the Alliance in seeking that end." Because of the uncertain state of the law at the time of Alliance re-organization, the Convention of 1901 had not established a policy regarding the enforcement of the law in the provinces, some of which had pre-Confederation statutes dealing with Sabbath observance. Rather, the Alliance intended to follow the model of the Ontario Alli ance and exert pressure on other provincial Attorneys-General to enforce whatever provincial statutes existed. It reached no conclusion as to what works of necessity might be considered exempt under the bill, preferring to leave such interpretations 49 to the courts. The Alliance's major enforcement effort focussed on the increasing Sunday traffic on the major railway lines between Montreal, Toronto, and the west. In 1901, Shearer naively con cluded that public ownership of the Maritime Intercolonial rail-50 way system accounted for its fewer demands for Sunday labour, failing to realize that the economic prosperity of the wheat boom made a demand upon the heart of Canada's communication sys tem that did not exist in the Maritime provinces. He therefore 48OLDA, Report of Legal Committee, 30 May 1902, OLDA, CR 1899-1903, p. 77. 49 LDAC, Minutes of Convention, 25 June 1901. 50Shearer to D.H. Drummond, 29 April 1901, LB 1899-1902, p. 577. 190 promoted the idea of public ownership: * in a letter to George Reeve of the Grand Trunk Railway, Shearer suggested that unless the railway companies had "more regard for the laws of God and of the Country," it would be "necessary to instigate a vigorous and determined agitation for a new and large measure of popular control of the Railways." The Christian sentiment of the coun try, he insisted, was "growing restive to the point of revolu-51 tion." In a letter to a colleague, Shearer reiterated his notion: "My own deliberate judgement," he wrote to Reverend D.H. Drummond, "is that the only remedy is to agitate for state 52 ownership and direct control of the railway systems." Shearer took no action, however, on either threat. When the Ontario high court declared provincial legislation in applicable both to Dominion corporations and their employees in 53 1902, Shearer retreated from his earlier radical proposals. Robbed of any legal recourse with which to deal with the rail ways, he reverted to the traditional technique of a moral sua sion effort. Organizing a large deputation to the Montreal head offices of the railway corporations, he appealed to the 54 Trades and Labor Congress of Canada for its support and urged his branch officers in the larger urban centres in central 51Shearer to G. Reeve, 14 January 1901, Ibid., pp. 524-6. 52 Shearer to D.H. Drummond, 29 April 1901. 53O.W.R. 312; 54 C.C.C. 344. 54Shearer to R. Smith, 18 April 1902, LB 1902-1904, p. 73 191 Canada to contact influential manufacturing and business men with the request to join the "respectful but strong remonstran-55 ces." In addition, Shearer contacted Wilbur Crafts of the American National Sabbath Alliance to ask if he would arrange a complementary demonstration in the States.56 In November 1902, a deputation from the Trades and Labor Congress, the Lord's Day Alliance, and the various Protestant churches waited upon Charles Hays, General Manager of the Grand Trunk Railway, to ask him to abolish unnecessary traffic and labour on the 57 Lord's Day. Although his effort failed, Shearer advised those who wrote about the problem to complain continually in letters to Hays. As he wrote to one minister: Every time there is anything to complain about, write again, and do not hesitate to appeal to him on the score of such traffic being a violation of the law of God. I have found Mr. Hays and others in like positions very amenable to such ap peals. They do not like to be accused of breaking the Divine law. They are more concerned about that than about violation of the civil law. (58) In addition to all his other obligations, Shearer assumed responsibility for directing any public contests against 55 LDAC, Minutes of Executive Committee, 27 March 19 02, LDAC,. MB 1901-17, p. 7. 56Shearer to Rev. W. Crafts, 21 April 1902, LB 1902-1904, p. 79. 57 J. Castell Hopkins, Canadian Annual Review, 1903, p. 551; LDAC, Minutes of Executive Committee, 6 November 1902, LDAC, MB 1901-1917, p. 13. 58Shearerto Rev. J.K. Godden, 29 August 1903, LB 1902-1904, p. 493. Although Hays was a Presbyterian, his business convictions were stronger than his religious,beliefs. 192 the Sunday car. In 1902, the issue arose in Winnipeg, when the provincial legislature amended the city's charter to per-59 mit a vote on the question of Sunday service. Immediately Shearer wrote to the Manitoba Alliance President, Reverend Joseph Hogg,urging him to organize a strong Winnipeg Alliance branch quickly and not to wait until the vote was "suddenly sprung on the community."6^ To marshal the anti-car forces, Shearer advised Hogg to seek strong cooperation of organized labour: . . . get in touch with the organized workingmen and reason with them pointing out what this must necessarily lead to in other directions involving Sunday labor on the part of large numbers of work ingmen ... if possible, getting them to take their stand in opposition to the cars, or if that cannot be secured at least preventing them from favoring the cars. He also requested the leadership of the Trades and Labor Con gress to furnish him with "strong personal testimony showing any evil consequences of the Sunday cars, especially that their running is in general not in the best interests of labor."61 The support of organized labour allowed the Alliance to defeat the Sunday car's bid to run. An analysis of the vote indicated that the wage earners voted against the car 6 2 while business and the middle classes voted for it. The Winnipeg Trades and Labor Council, the Street Railway Employees' 59l-2 Edw. VII-, (1902), c.7, s.736a. 60Shearer to J. Hogg, 26 March 1902, LB 1902-1904, pp. 55-7. 61Shearer to S. Landers, 21 July 1902, Ibid., p. 135. 6 2 Winnipeg Voice, 19 December 1902; PC, APGA, 1903, p. 231 193 Union, and the Labor Party all actively opposed the Sunday car. The latter passed a strong resolution that Winnipeg workingmen "should be prepared to walk on Sunday for another three years, if necessary, and on week days as well, rather than submit to 63 legislation in which labor is left without consideration." The Trades and Labor Congress endorsed Alliance demands that only Sunday be recognized as the legitimate day of rest. Ralph Smith, for example, insisted that it must be Sunday "or it is not a holiday," and Sam Landers, Congress President, publicly stated: I do not agree with the argument that as long as a man rests one day in seven that is sufficient. When all rest on the same day the effect of the rest and the quietness is far greater than otherwise, and since Sunday is the recognized day of rest in this as a Christian country, let the day of rest for the working classes be on that day. (64) The influential labour newspaper, the Winnipeg Voice, and its editor, A.W. Puttee, supported the fight against the Sunday car, encouraging further cooperation between the Alliance and labour. Puttee himself joined the Manitoba Alliance executive and sug gested that Trades and Labor Councils invite clergy to address their meetings "once a month perhaps": It is clear that where the churches and the working-men unite they can carry the day. There is probably no question in which this is not true. This suggests what has often been in the mids of some of us. That Winnipeg Voice, 14 November 1902; Ibid., 7 November 1902. [Ibid., 5 December 1902; Ibid., 28 November 1902. 194 it would be worth while for workingmen to try more than they often do to cultivate the sym pathy and co-operation of the churches. (65) In particular the Voice welcomed Alliance support of the five-and-a-half day work week for it seemed to indicate recognition "that for those who work . . . some provision must be made for play, and also that a full week with an extra late rush on Saturday makes of Sunday a rest day in the strictest animal ,,6 6 sense." By late 1902, it seemed that most of Shearer's efforts to establish a broadly based interest group had borne fruit. His efforts to consolidate support among the Protestant churches had been successful, especially with the Anglican church. In 1901, the Toronto Synod "appointed a strong, sympathetic Com mittee to act with the Alliance ... at any time they might 6 7 think wise." The following year, the General Synod, deplor ing "the laxity everywhere manifested in the observance of the Lord's Day as a day of rest and worship," approved the appoint ment of a committee to cooperate with the Alliance.68 At the same time, the Presbyterian General Assembly and the Methodist Conferences passed strong resolutions in support of the Alli-Ibid., 13 December 1902. 6 6 Ibid., 14 November 1902; Rev. T.Albert Moore to Rev. H.W. McTavish, 4 May 1903, LB 1902-1904, p. 281. 67Shearer to J.L. Mathews, 18 June 1901, LB 1899-1902, p. 679. 6 8 Church of England, General Synod, Journal of Pro  ceedings , 1902, p. 85. ance."" The Protestant churches supported the distinction made by the Alliance between the preservation of the weekly rest day as an interest group's political goal and the proper observance of the Sabbath as the churches' responsibility. The churches also gave their wholehearted support to cooperation between religious and secular forces as they too recognized the politi cal influence of the workingman. "With the combination of the religious and labour forces of our country," the Presbyterian church declared, "we may confidently anticipate ultimate and complete success as far as the Legislative protection of the integrity of the weekly rest day is concerned." The churches, Presbyterians concluded, should therefore "watch and welcome every point of contact with this element of the nation, and 70 shoulder to shoulder, help to guard this holiday." Structurally, the Alliance seemed strong. In 1901 the Alliance had claimed 5,000 members in Ontario and 3,000 in the other provinces; by 1903, it boasted a total of 20,000 members 71 and 375 branches. In addition, provincial associations had recruited an impressive leadership to their executives. Repre sentatives of the Protestant church hierarchies; Members of W"PC, APGA, 1901-1903; Methodist Church, Journal of Pro ceedings , 1902, p. 197. 70PC, APGA, 1902, p. 271. 71Shearer to Rev. D.E. Martin, 20 April 1903, LB 1902-1904, p. 249. See Appendices III and IV. Parliament and of the Senate, both Conservative and Liberal, local politicians, univ.ersity professors, industrialists, mer chants, lawyers, and editors —approximately 256 Christian activists in total — had agreed to lend the influence of their 72 names to the Alliance cause. As a result of lobbying, more over, the Attorneys-General of Ontario, Manitoba, and Nova Scotia agreed officially to undertake the expense of furnishing counsel in any prosecution necessary to enforce the law, while the Commissioner of Police for the Northwest Territories in-73 structed his police force to impose the law. Although the press for the most part ignored the Alliance, reports that did appear on the cooperation between labour and the Alliance were generally favourable.74 Despite its impressive show of strength, there were in dications that the Alliance was dangerously compromising itself. As a political interest group, it had committed itself to achieving the social reform of a guaranteed weekly rest day without insisting that the proper religious observance of this day receive equal legislative sanction. To attain this end the Alliance had forged a link with organized labour, and representa tives of the Trades and Labor Congress sat on Alliance executive 72 See Appendix II. 73PC, APGA, 1903, p. 230. 74 See, for example, Hamilton Morning Post, 1 May 1901: "Action on the part of the different Central National and Inter national Labor bodies against the desecration of the Lord's Day evidences the fact that 'there are others' besides the Lord's Day Alliance who desire a day of rest." 197 boards. Yet the Alliance remained primarily a religious organ ization: the bulk of its leadership supported the Alliance for religious, not secular, reasons. The bulk of its membership was middle class, drawn from the major Protestant denominations; few, if any, of its members came from the working class. The Alliance's primary task therefore was to benefit the churches that identified themselves with it. The churches feared the de fections from prosperous congregations which innovations such as the Sunday car and increased commercial recreation threatened to produce. Once the Alliance's lobbying bore fruit, the churches hoped to effect moral reform and secure proper Sabbath observance through increased middle class attendance at public worship. The problems and needs of working class people concerned the Alliance and its supporting churches only insofar as visible indifference to the Sabbath — the patronage of excursions, or the purchase of a cigar or candy— offended the sensibilities of church members. Once opportunities for such desecration were removed, offences would, it was hoped, cease. The churches remained unsympathetic toward the problem of working class recreation, although they recognized that "all efforts to stem the tide of pleasure-seeking and ultimately of labor" would be of no avail if the churches failed "to fill the day with some 75 . . form of activity and vital usefulness." Yet, despite this PC, APGA, 1901, pp. 244-5; also Ibid., 1903, p. 231: "The Christian Church can never be content with securing the day as a day of rest. She must stimulate the conscience of the 198 realization, the churches made little concrete effort to find a solution to this problem. Instead, they expressed the belief that workingmen, having seen the advantages of cooperation with the churches to achieve a social reform, would defend "the sanc-7 6 tity of the Lord's Day also." But, for its part, labour gave the Alliance no guarantee that, once legislation protected the weekly day of rest, working-men would observe the Sabbath in a religious manner. It became increasingly obvious that, in the alliance between Sabbatarianism and organized labour, Sabbatarianism was the weaker ally. Sabba tarianism was dependent upon the labour movement to achieve its goal. Labour was not nearly as dependent upon Sabbatarianism; in supporting the Alliance, the Trades and Labor Congress merely availed itself of convenient religious aid to achieve one part of its overall plan for a shorter work week. Labour's attitude in the Winnipeg Sunday car contest made it clear that, once the company guaranteed its employees a weekly day of rest, workingmen would vote for the cars. For instance, the Labor party, which favoured "a reasonable service of Sunday cars," agreed to resist their introduction only until the company consented to such 4- 77 an agreement. people until the element of worship and religious effort domi nates the day throughout the land." Ibid. 77 Winnipeg Voice, 14 November 19 02. 199 Other problems threatened the Alliance. Despite offi cial assurances, it did not achieve a truly effective programme of enforcement. As the previous chapter has illustrated, the Ontario Attorney-General did as much as possible to evade the problem of enforcement. Other Attorneys-General followed a similar course. In the Northwest Territories, the Commissioner of the North West Mounted Police took little action and the 7 8 police responded only when badgered by private citizens. Of an average 2,359 criminal arrests brought annually before the courts by the Mounted Police between 1901 and 1903, only twenty-79 one cases a year dealt with breaches of the Sabbath. Second, the national railways totally ignored the 1902 moral suasion campaign. The General Manager of the Grand Trunk Railway had clearly stated to Shearer in 1901 that "it was the right of rail ways to judge for themselves as to what is necessary and to act upon the judgment independent of the sentiment of the community 8 0 or the law of the land." Despite the 1902 Alliance deputation, railway management did not change its mind. Finally, the Alli ance represented only Canada's English-speaking community. The membership of the Quebec Alliance, for example, centred in the 78R.C. Macleod, The NWMP and Law Enforcement, 1873-1905 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1976), p. 124. 79 Canada, Sessional Papers, 1902, No. 28, "Report of the Commissioner of the North West Mounted Police for the year 1901"; Ibid., 1903; Ibid., 1904. 80Shearer to Rev. D.H. Drummond, 29 April 1901, LB 1899-1902, p. 577. 200 81 areas heavily populated by English Canadians. The French Catholic hierarchy displayed no interest in supporting the cause. The last attempt to establish contact with the hierarchy had been in 1899 when A.E. O'Meara had written Montreal Arch bishop Paul Bruchesi to enquire if he would send "copies of any publications showing your views on the subject of the prevention 8 2 of unnecessary labor on the Lord's Day." Bruchesi had not replied. When Sabbath labour concerned him, he wrote to Prime 8 3 Minister Laurier direct; otherwise, he and the other Catholic bishops resisted state intervention in an issue which they con sidered a matter of church discipline. In the west, there is nothing to indicate that members of non-British Protestant im-84 migrant groups joined the provincial Alliances. In 1903, therefore, the Lord's Day Alliance of Canada appeared to be a numerically well-supported lobby with an aggressive leadership and links with the leadership of other interested parties. Its principal weakness was its middle class, English Canadian bias. As long as the Alliance assumed that the fight for legislation would occur at the provincial level, 81 This conclusion is based on an examination of the petitions presented to Parliament from the province of Quebec in February 1904. Canada, House of Commons, Journals, 1904, pp. 19-96. 820'Meara to P. Bruchesi, 9 January 1899, LB 1899-1900, p. 5. 8 3 Bruchesi to Laurier, 4 January 1900, PAC, LP, C7 71, p. 40729. 84 Canada, House of Commons, Journals, 1904, pp. 19-96. 201 it accepted this bias. In 1903, however, the Judicial Commit tee of the Privy Council declared provincial legislation ultra  vires — the Battle for the Sabbath entered its final phase. 202 Chapter VII: The Lobby in Action, 1903-1906 What was the nature of Sunday in the early 1900s? Seventy years later, Lester B. Pearson, son of a Methodist min ister, remembered the day as "oppressive": it began at ten with a round of Junior League, morning service followed at eleven, then Sunday School at half-past two, and evening service at seven.1 At the time, however, the Lord's Day Alliance of Canada perceived the day as one of unceasing frivolity, as its des cription of an Ottawa Sunday illustrates: Sunday baseball is in full swing just across the river in Hull. . . . The Ottawa Electric Railway has not hesitated to take the low level of sordid greed in putting on at its park resorts, band concerts, moving pictures exhibitions, the refreshment business, etc., in order to "attract the crowd" to use its cars"and contribute to its coffers. . . . (2) As with most things, the truth probably lay somewhere in the middle. Doubtless, Sabbath labour and Sabbath pleasure were on the increase. The Alliance estimated that at least 100,000 men, about 10 percent of the labour force, worked on 3 the Sabbath, and this figure seems plausible. Although regional L.B. Pearson, Mike, The Memoirs of the Right Honourable  Lester B. Pearson (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1972), vol. ' I, .p. 10 . 2 Lord's Day Advocate (hereafter Advocate) (June 1905). 3 PC, APGA, 1902, p. 271; For an estimate of the amount of Sunday labour, see Appendix I. 203 variations existed, Sunday work patterns were basically the same for the entire country. The transportation systems, railways, steamships, canals, street railways, and interurbans, continued to account for the greatest amount of labour, although indus trial processes that needed to run continuously to achieve maxi mum efficiency were increasing the demand for Sunday labour. In the city of Sault Ste. Marie, for example, the Algoma Iron works repaired its machinery on Sunday and, according to the Alliance, the machine and blacksmith shops were "busier on Sun-4 day than on any other day of the week." At the steel plant men worked to keep the blast furnaces and coke ovens running uninterruptedly. At the docks men unloaded iron ore from the boats and then loaded them with lumber. In other parts of Ontario, cement works, oil wells, sugar refining plants, and cheese factories employed at least half their staffs on Sunday. In Nova Scotia, Ontario, Quebec, and British Columbia, most miners worked on Sunday as if it were a weekday. Pockets of Sunday labour occurred in other areas of Canadian society as well. Domestic servants continued to be the largest single sector of 'hidden1 Sabbath labour, although servants might well receive another day in the week off. Police men and firemen, for their part, worked a seven day week almost without a break. Most newspaper operations, with the exception of the three papers in'iBfitish Columbia that did not print a 4 Advocate (February 1905). 204 Monday edition, began preparations for the next day on Sunday evening after dinner. The Post Office was generally closed in the Maritimes (except for the city of Charlottetown where it remained open for an hour after church) and the older parts of Ontario, but was open for an hour in the morning in Quebec and either for the whole or major part of the day in New Ontario 5 and the western provinces. Although most large retail businesses and manufacturing factories remained closed on Sundays by custom, considerable Sunday trade was done by small merchants in all parts of the country. Train stations were busy centres for the sale of news papers, cigars, and light refreshments. Drug stores sold not only medicines but also all sorts of sundries — postage stamps, candies, cigars, and so forth. In Winnipeg and Vancouver, Chinese and other ethnic communities were 'wide open,' "running laundries, shoe shine and ice-cream parlors, selling fruit and 7 confectionery, cigars and tobacco, newspapers and magazines." In some parts of the country, saloons may well have been closed, but liquor was still freely available for consumption with one's friends. In British Columbia not only were saloons open on Sundays, but other forms of diversion were available as well: in the mining regions, "the lawless liquor bar, the brothel, the 5Ibid. 6Ibid. 7Ibid. (March 1905). (August, September 1904). (November 1905). 205 gambling den or device, fly their nefarious trades unashamed and in some cases flaunt their flags as it were in the faces alike of the officers of the law and the heralds of grace and o righteousness." In the city of Winnipeg, where no law existed to restrict the Sunday trade of the brothels, "they operated round the clock as the demand warranted, and the demand on week-9 ends consistently did so." Despite such Sunday trade, Sunday continued to be a day, indeed the only day, of leisure for the majority of Canadians. Precisely as the Alliance had always feared, the introduction of Sunday leisure transportation did spark the demand for more forms of Sunday recreation. As the demand increased, so too did the quality and quantity of available commercial recreation. Sunday excursions still attracted many patrons among groups such as labour unions and social clubs arranging outings for their memberships. In order to draw passengers, street railway companies continued to develop recreational areas near the large urban centres. In addition to refreshment stands, the companies often made provision for band concerts and other forms of enter tainment. In North Vancouver, for example, there was apparently "a sort of Coney Island of the coast, with open bars, gambling, 8Ibid. (October 1904); see also A.J. Hiebert, "Prohibi tion in British Columbia" (M.A. thesis, Simon Fraser University, 1969), p. 15. 9 James Gray, Red Lights on the Prairies (Scarborough, Ontario: New American Library, 1973), p. 51. 206 sports, balloon ascensions, etc., etc., on the Lord's Day."1^1 Within the cities, other distractions gradually appeared. Cir cuses often set up their tents on Sundays and crowds gathered to watch. Although not extensive, Sunday sports such as base ball attracted spectators, particularly in prairie cities.11 More and more frequently, military parades tempted children away from the Sunday schools. In large cities such as Toronto and Montreal, theatres and concert halls began to offer regular 12 Sunday evening performances. In short, the churches found themselves in active competition with secular forms of recrea tion on Sundays and increasingly, at least in the churches' eyes, they were losing. The Alliance leapt to the churches' defence. Although reconciled to the use of the Sunday car in "very large and con gested centres of population," it still felt that the car was unnecessary in most parts of Canada. The Alliance continued to oppose Sunday service on the interurban systems on the grounds that the great majority of patrons were "mere pleasure seekers." All excursions, whether by train, steamship, or street railway, 13 continued to be a "most fruitful source of vices." 10Advocate (August 1903); Ibid. (October 1904); Ibid. (March 1905); Ibid. (July 1905). i:LIbid. (January 1905) . 12Ibid. (January 1904); Ibid. (June 1904); Ibid. (Novem ber 1905) . 13Ibid. (July 1905); Ibid. (February 1904); Ibid. (July 1904) . 207 In attacking all forms of Sabbath desecration, the Alliance adopted nativist arguments already being heard at Pro-14 testant church meetings. Italians were responsible for rail way construction; Orientals with "their idolatry, reeking vice, and generally 'wide-open town'" seriously lowered "the respect, not only for sacred things, but for law and order in general" 15 xn Britxsh Columbia. British remittance men, "lazy, listless, shiftless, strangers to religion, often moral derelicts or lepers," set a dreadful example to the community: "To them there is no 'Lord's Day,' and Sunday is a day of lounging or sport. Ball, tennis, hunting, fishing, are the best of their 16 Sunday occupations." Refusing to acknowledge that English Canadians owned industries that operated on Sundays, the Alli ance blamed the demand for Sabbath labour, whenever possible, upon the invasion of American capital and its soulless profit motive. American capital, for example, had "high-handedly thrust the Sunday car on the good people" of Cape Breton communi ties. A.greedy American capitalist ran the Brookfield Mines in North Queen's, Nova Scotia, where men mined gold ore until 4 a.m. Sunday,.and ran the steam mill to pulverize it for thir-14 See, for example, PC, APGA, 1902, p. 270. The Committee on Sabbath Observance and Legislation reported that it was "no small matter of church convenience and advantages, this of Sab bath Observance and legislation, but a large concern of national and even racial moment." 15 Chrxstxan Guardxan, 26 June 1901. 16Advocate (May 1904); Ibid. (October 1904); Ibid. (Octo ber 1905) . 208 teen out of twenty-four hours. Workers regularly ran the cyan ide plant to remove the 'tailings' from the gold and generally 17 behaved as though Sunday were any day of the week. The use of nativist arguments was a convenient addition to the Alliance's arsenal of rhetoric. The Alliance's chief concern was to halt the tendency of church members "to drift 18 into the practice" of Sabbath pleasure. As had been obvious since the introduction of bicycles and street cars in Ontario cities in the 1890s, English-speaking, native-born Canadians welcomed recreational opportunities on the Sabbath. The Sabba tarian struggle against commercial (or non-commercial) recrea tion would have occurred without the immigrant: his arrival (be he European, British, or American) did not create a problem, but only exacerbated an existing one. By imposing Sunday as a day of rest upon the immigrant and banishing his pleasure-seeking example from the eyes of the churches' middle class constituency, the Alliance hoped to regain church-going as "the 19 only show in town" on Sunday. 17Ibid. (July 1905) 18 Ibid. (June 1905): "They keep one end of the day holy by going to church, declaring their desire to obey God's laws and enjoy his blessing, then spend the rest of the day in setting at naught the Divine law, 'Remember the Sabbath Day to keep it holy.'" 19 Roger Hall and Gordon Dodds, A Picture History of Ontario (Edmonton: Hurtig Publishers, 1978), p. 10 9. 209 The final engagement of the Battle for the Sabbath was fought against this background of increasingly busy and lively Sundays. The 1903 Privy Council decision was indeed a "sharp 'right-about face'" to the Sabbatarian forces, as Albert Carman, 20 Superintendent of the Methodist Church, wrote to Laurier.. In ruling the Ontario 1897 Act ultra vires the provincial jur isdiction, the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council reasoned that this legislation had been an amendment to the 1845 Act which, although it applied only to Upper Canada, was in reality a federal statute. Since provincial governments did not have the power to amend federal statutes, the entire bill of 1897 was invalid. This decision provoked a variety of responses from the protagonists in the Battle. Shearer and the Lord's Day Alli ance executive interpreted the decision to mean that all pro vincial legislation affecting the Lord's Day, passed by the 22 provinces since Confederation,, was ultra vires. Wishing to spend no more valuable time on the endless judicial battles, Shearer proposed that the Alliance accept the decision as final and immediately prepare to do battle on the federal level. 20 A. Carman to W. Laurier, 19 February 1904, Carman Papers, United Church Archives (Toronto), 28A. 21A.C. (1903) 524. 22 • By implication, this included all municipal legislation as well. 210 Launching the attack, he promptly wrote to Laurier to establish the Alliance's credentials as a lobby enjoying the "active support" of organized labour, the principal Protestant churches, and "the Roman Catholics so far as we have had the opportunity of submitting our purposes and plans to their judge-23 ments." Portraying the provinces as bereft of all protection and "at the mercy of foreign as well as Canadian greed and sel fishness," he insisted that the Alliance did not want: the re-enactment of the Blue Laws of a by-gone age, but the preservation in its integrity of our National Sabbath against all unnecessary Sunday labor and business and all disturbance of the be coming quiet of the Day when the great mass of Canadians desire opportunity to worship God. . . (24) Shearer also lobbied members of Laurier's cabinet, in particular Charles Fitzpatrick, the Minister of Justice and a Montreal Irish Catholic, who would be responsible for the introduction of any Lord's Day legislation. Shearer arranged an interview "to ascertain his views, and if possible, enlist his sympathetic ..25 co-operation. Shearer realized that the support of the Roman Catholic hierarchy would be crucial in convincing Laurier that a Lord's Day Act was acceptable to the most powerful segments of Canadian society. Immediately after hearing of the Privy Council 23Rev. J.G. Shearer to W. Laurier, 23 July 1903, PAC, LP, C892, p. 75336. 24 ^Ibid. 25 LDAC, Minutes of Legislation Drafting Committee, 7 Nov ember 1903, LDAC, CR 1902-1907. 211 decision, Shearer contacted Archbishop Bruchesi of Montreal. "Since this is the first time we have gone before the Dominion authorities," Shearer informed Bruchesi, "it is of the utmost consequence that our Delegation should be the most influential possible." Besides requesting him to appoint a deputy to accom pany the delegation, he asked Bruchesi to write to Laurier per sonally, "urging that prompt measures be taken to avert the serious peril that threatens the Lord's Day in our country as 2 6 a result of the Privy Council's decision." Shearer concluded from an interview with Bruchesi late in August 1903 that the Alliance "might count upon his co-operation in seeking at least most of what we would think of asking from the Dominion Parlia ment." He immediately wrote to other members of the Catholic hierarchy, English and French, to inform them of Bruchesi's 27 supposed support and to solicit theirs. Shearer also directed his attention to structural changes in the Lord's Day Alliance. He organized a Legislation Draft ing Committee and made plans to hire a solicitor, strengthen the Ottawa branch,aand establish prestigious, politician-laden 2 8 Legal and Legislative Committees. 2 fi Shearer to Bruchesi, 8 August 1903, PAC, LP, C803, pp. 76039-40. 27Shearer to Rev. Dr. W. Caven, 20 August 1903, LB 1902-1904, p. 477; Shearer to Bishops Macdonnel, Begin, O'Brien, Gauthier, Casey, and Decelles, 24 August 1903, Ibid., p. 479. 2 8 LDAC, Minutes of Executive Board, 12 & 13 August,19 03, LDAC, MB 1901-1917; Rev. T.A. Moore to W. Steen, 5 September 1903, LB 1902-1904, p. 507; Moore to Rev. J.W.H. Milne, 16 Sep tember 1903, Ibid., p. 532. 212 Although the other provincial alliances supported Shearer's decision, the Ontario Alliance decided on a contrary 29 course of action. The Alliance's solicitor, A.E. O'Meara, had argued the case before the Judicial Committee and he inter preted the decision as dealing with a province's ability to amend a federal bill but not at all with the question of juris diction over Sabbath legislation.3^ He believed that, if the Ontario Legislature had passed the clause concerning the Sunday operation of street railways as a piece of new legislation in 1897 rather than as an amendment to the 1845 Act, the Judicial Committee would not have declared it ultra vires. O'Meara therefore argued that the Ontario Alliance ought to lobby the provincial government to pass legislation in those fields over which the provincial governments had, by Section 92 of the Bri tish North America Act, exclusive jurisdiction, namely civil rights, local undertakings, and local matters. Such legislation could restrict employment•• on Sundays in mines and factories, in shops and restaurants, and in companies incorporated by pro vincial charter such as street railway companies. Thus, although O'Meara was not-sure if the provincial legislatures "could occupy the whole field by enacting complete and adequate legislation under 'civil rights'" or whether the Dominion Par liament would have to assume responsibility for legislation 29 Advocate (December 1903). 30 A.E. O'Meara, "The Privy Council Case," in Ibid. concerning Dominion corporations such as the railways, he was optimistic that the provinces could enact the bulk of Sabbath 31 legislation. O'Meara's arguments convinced the executive of the Ontario Alliance. At its annual convention in November 1903, it resolved to press for as much provincial legislation as pos sible before lobbying the federal government and it appointed 32 a fulltime Secretary to take care of the Ontario campaign. The federal government itself, the third party affected by the Privy Council decision, supported the Ontario Alliance's interpretation because it did not wish to accept responsibility for Sabbath observance legislation. Laurier had always main tained that the subject was a provincial concern, hoping in that way to avoid French and English religious conflict. Upon receipt of Shearer's letter in August 1903, Bruchesi had written to Laurier, expressing his concern about Shearer's lobbying: Cette question d'une legislation concernant 1'observance du dimanche est bien grave. Les,protestants [vuent?] 1'envisageant pas comme nous, je crois que nous devons y apporter la plus grande prudence. Dans tous les cas je fais repondre a M. Shearer que je vous ai ecrit a ce sujet. Pour la moment je ne vois rien a faire. . . (33) Laurier agreed completely with Bruchesi: "Je ne me rends pas compte de ce que desire M. Shearer," he confided: 31T, Ibid. 32OLDA, "Annual Report, 1903," in Advocate (December 1903) 33Bruchesi to Laurier, 10 August 1903, PAC, LP, C803, p. 76803. 214 Naturellement si l'effet de la decision du conseil etait de laisser tout le pays sans aucune loi pour 1'observation du dimanche, il y aurait certainement quelque chose a faire. La question serait simplement de s'arreter a la limite acceptable: la legislation que nous avons toujours eue jusqu'ici dans la province de Quebec me parait absolument suffisante. (34) Charles Fitzpatrick supported Laurier's stand. Although he agreed with the Lord's Day Alliance executive that the Dominion possessed "full and unlimited jurisdiction to legislate on the question" if it chose to do so, he still considered concurrent 35 legislation a viable method of dealing with the issue. He believed that the provincial enactments for the preservation of civil rights and the control of local undertakings could cover a wide portion of the field of Lord's Day legislationi Before proceeding in this manner, however, Fitzpatrick announced his intention to seek clarification from Department of Justice lawyers. The Ontario Liberal government of Sir George Ross supported this idea and refused to enact legislation along the lines suggested by the Ontario Alliance. It agreed only to re-enact the street railway clauses of the 18 97 Act by civil statute. Frustrated in its campaign, the Ontario Alliance con sented to aid the Lord's Day Alliance in its first national 34Laurier to Bruehesi, 13 August 1903, PAC, LP, C803, p. 76041. 35 LDACP, "Report of Interview with the Honourable, the Minister of Justice, Charles Fitzpatrick," 29 December 1903. 36OLDA, "Annual Report, 1904." 3 7 lobbying effort during the winter and spring of 1903-1904. Hoping he could now exert maximum pressure on Laurier1s govern ment, Shearer mobilized all the resources so carefully culti-. vated over the past three years. He asked his leadership, particularly the hierarchies of the English Catholic and Angli can churches, to write letters of support to Laurier, and he pressed his allies to participate in all agitations for the 3 8 bill. In addition, he established contact with groups such as the lodges and the fraternal orders, (Masons, Oddfellows, Foresters, and Templars), asking them to authorize their offi cers to sign and forward petitions asking for "reasonable" 39 legislation. He approached organized business, addressing the 1904 Annual Convention of the Canadian Manufacturers' Asso ciation and requesting its support. In addition, he encouraged branch officers to arrange special canvasses "of the business and representative men of the cities, rather than trust to 40 reaching them through the churches" as formerly. Throughout the winter, he and T. Albert Moore, the new Ontario Alliance Secretary, travelled extensively, Shearer to the western pro vinces and Moore to Manitoba and New Ontario. They urged branch 37 OLDA, Minutes of Legislative Committee, 2 February 1904, OLDA, Minutes and Reports of Legislation Committee 1903-12. 3 8 See, for example, Trades and Labor Congress, Proceed ings , 1903, p. 36. 39. Advocate (January 1904). industrial Canada (Octob Rev. W.J. Smith, 27 April 1904, LB 1902-04, p. 834. 40Industria  (October 1904), p. 157; Shearer to 216 executives to organize mass meetings and obtain as much local press coverage as possible. They also emphasized the possibil ities of exerting pressure through a Lord's Day Week, arranged to coincide with Parliamentary sittings. Branches were exhorted to send as many delegates as possible to the Alliance's Tri ennial Convention, which was also scheduled to coincide with the Parliamentary session. Individual members were prodded.: to write "earnest letters" to their Senators and Members of 41 Parliament. Finally, Shearer altered the format of the Advocate, changing it from a quarterly magazine primarily in tended for the membership into a monthly whose content was aimed directly at the politicians. He filled its pages with quotations from prominent religious, labour, and industrial leaders, both domestic and international, and reprinted all favourable press comment from across the country. Copies were 42 then sent to every member of the House and the Senate. Throughout the campaign, the Alliance concentrated solely on the secular aim of the legislation, defined as the protection of "every man and woman in their right to rest and 43 opportunity to worship." Applauding those newspapers that presented the "humanitarian, economic and industrial arguments," Advocate (March 1904); see Advocate (December 1903-March 1904) passim. 42LDAC, Minutes of Executive Committee, 12 & 1-3 August 1903, LDAC; MB 1901-17.-43 Advocate (January 1904). 217 it agreed that "it was best to leave the theological side of 44 the question to the pulpit." As the climax of these efforts, Shearer organized a huge petition campaign, circulating peti tions among all the groups whose interests the Alliance claimed to represent — the branches, the trade associations, the 45 church bodies, and the fraternal societies. The support that rallied to the Alliance's cause could only be characterized as impressive. The leadership of the churches, both Protestant and English Catholic, sent letters to Laurier. The official bodies of the Presbyterian and Methodist 46 churches passed resolutions of support. Members of Parliament and of the Senate who were also members of Alliance executives attended the Triennial Convention held in March. All interested parties responded to the request for petitions: the Dominion Trades and Labor Congress delivered a petition representing 61,606 union men;47 in total, the Alliance claimed that "more than 1,8 50 organizations, churches, branches of the Lord's Day Ibid.; also Ibid. (March 1904). 4 5 Ibid. (April 1904). The Alliance Papers do not explain why the temperance organizations were not included. 46W. Bond to Laurier, 18 February 1904, PAC, LP, C809, p. 82657; W.L. Mills to Laurier, 18 February 1904, Ibid., pp. 86258-60; Booth to Laurier, 1 March 1904, Ibid., p. 83000; Courtney to Laurier, 19 February 1904, Ibid., p. 82680; C. Ham ilton to Laurier, 22 February 1904, Ibid., p. 82796; House to Laurier, 20 February 1904, Ibid., pp. 82692-4; A. Carman to Laurier, 19 February 1904, Carman Papers, United Church Archives (Toronto), 28 A; PC, APGA, 1904, p. 266.-. The , English / Catholics declared their support in public statements, see Advocate (January 1904). 47 P.M. Draper to Laurier, 20 February 1904, PAC, LP, C809, p. 82761. 218 Alliance, fraternal societies, and labour bodies, representing in all nearly 400,000 persons, joined in petitioning the Dom-48 inion Parliament for a Lord's Day Act for all Canada." News paper editorials were generally favourable, and the popular press, in the past often hostile to Alliance goals, came out in support. The Ottawa Journal, for example, formerly critical of the cooperation between the Alliance and labour, urged "labor men and others. . . alive to their own best interest" to sign 49 the petitions. But lack of French Canadian support, particularly from the Catholic church, caused Laurier to hesitate and then to take evasive action. Bruchesi had not altered the opinion expressed in his August 1903 letter to Laurier, despite his meeting with Shearer. He preferred to keep Sabbath observance a subject of church discipline rather than a matter of civil 50 law. He did not authorize anyone to participate in Alliance deputations, nor did he make a public statement in support of the lobbying. Not one French Canadian member of Parliament or the Senate attended the Alliance's Triennial Convention and few, ** "Advocate (April 1904). The Alliance claimed 25,000 members and 550 branches. PC, APGA, 1904 ,-p. '268 . 49Cited by Advocate (March 1904). 50 See J. Levitt, Henri Bourassa and the Golden Calf; The Social Program of the Nationalists of Quebec, 1900-1914 (Quebec: Presses de l'Universite de Laval, 1972), p. 12 re atti-tude of Catholic church towards state intervention on matters of moral behaviour. 219 if any, of the petitions originated from French Canadians. Moreover, the French Canadian ^press gave no indication of sup port for the agitation. Laurier's government therefore hedged, seeking ways to avoid the issue. When the Crown Officers of the Department of Justice confirmed Fitzpatrick's interpreta tion of the Judicial Committee's ruling, Fitzpatrick decided to submit a draft provincial Act to the Supreme Court. Then, if necessary, he could submit that decision to the Privy Council 52 for a ruling on its constitutionality. Frustrated, Shearer depicted the situation to Advocate readers in these terms: We shall have. . . the novel spectacle of the Dominion, through counsel, arguing before the courts in favor of Provincial jurisdiction, and quite likely some of the Provinces arguing in favor of Dominion jurisdiction. Charity, however, requires us to assume that in this the good politicians are but practising the scriptural injunction, to not "look each of you to his own things, but each of you also to the things of others." (53) Between May 1904 and March 19 06, however, Laurier did change his mind once again, finally consenting to introduce Sab bath observance legislation. As Shearer had recognized in 1903, the key to this change was the attitude of Archbishop Bruchesi and the French Catholic church. The basic conflict between the 51 Canada, House of Commons, Journals, 1904, pp. 38-40. The one exception might be a petition signed by one Joseph Bourassa (p. 96). 52 Shearer to Rev. D.R. Drummond, 12 April 1904, LB 1902-1904, p. 783. 53Advocate (May 1904). 220 Protestant and Catholic churches centred in their attitude to wards amusements, for the Catholic church was less rigid in its definition of breaches of the Sabbath than were the evangelical 54 Protestant churches. The Catholic church did not consider it sinful to take a tram ride on a Sunday. Bruchesi, for example, did not wish to see the suppression of all trains and steamers on Sunday. "It behooves us to accord to our people," he wrote to Fitzpatrick, "and particularly to the labouring classes, facilities for leaving the city, and to making trips on Sunday 55 which they could not perhaps make on any other day." But the increasing commercialization of recreation and its ability to compete with the churches provided common ground for Catholics and Protestants. Bruchesi opposed theatrical representations, concerts, and tournaments given as public or paying entertain ments.^6 Like other Catholic clergy, he felt that modern theatre-going, "with all of its tendencies to throw off re straints and become a constant menace to the morality of the 57 . . country, must be held in check." In addition, Bruchesi was "absolutely opposed to the organization of public excursions, 54 Both the Protestant and Catholic churches were united in their opposition to Sabbath labour. For a detailed examina tion of Catholic attitudes towards this problem, see W.F. Ryan, The Clergy and Economic Growth in Quebec (1896-1914) (Quebec: LesPresses de l'Universite Laval, 1966). 55Advocate (June 1906). Ibid. 57Ibid. (May 1905). 221 organized for gain and amusement. Experience has shown that these excursions are the occasions of disorders and deplorable 58 abuses." By mid 1905, Bruchesi was finally recognizing that church mandements were insufficient to control the expanding recreational businesses in Montreal. In particular, the proli feration of beer gardens and quasi-theatres such as 'Le Stadium' and the Montreal Gymnasium, which operated as combination wine parlour, beer garden, amusement hall, and gambling den, aroused Bruchesi's anger. Since the Privy Council decision cast doubt on the validity of city by-laws to forbid such operations on Sunday, many amusement promoters were eager to test the waters. Bruchesi and his colleagues lent the weight of their influence to the fight for reinstatement of the municipal by-law. As one high ecclesiastic told the Montreal Star, "the Catholic church will be in the forefront of the ranks which will array them selves in opposition to the attempt which is about to be made 59 to introduce legalized theatre-going oh Sundays." When the combined Protestant and Catholic forces emerged triumphant in June 1905, the French Roman Catholic church decided to promote further cooperation. Meeting with the other Catholic bishops in October 1905, Bruchesi assisted in drafting a report to be sent to the Minister of Justice concerning the 58Bruchesi to C. Fitzpatrick, 29 March 1906, PAC, LP, C836, p. 111497. 59Advocate (May 1905). 222 Canadian Catholic church's attitude towards Sabbath observance legislation. He agreed with the other bishops that the State did not have the power to make its citizens Christians, nor to purify their private lives by an Act of Parliament, but that it did have "the power and the duty of restraining those who would force its people to forego their right to bodily rest on Sun-6 0 day." The Report concluded by "urging on Parliament the desirability of enacting such legislation." In March 1906, Bruchesi set out his own views in a private letter to Fitz patrick. "Contrary to what has been written in many newspapers," he assured Fitzpatrick, "I am of [the] opinion that the Govern ment has the right and the duty to legislate in this matter." Believing personally that "nearly all our fellow citizens admit that legislation in this matter is necessary," he urged Fitz patrick that it was "high time to act." "Without precise and firm legislation this Canada of ours will before long be as several countries of Europe; not a vestige will be found therein 61 of the respect due to the Lord's Day." In particular, the French Catholic hierarchy approved of legislation dealing with labour and organized amusements, those "veritables fleaux," as 6 2 Bruchesi called them. It would not, however, assent to legis lation that would prohibit the general populace from pursuing 60Ibid. (February 1906). 61Bruchesi to Fitzpatrick, 29 March 1906, PAC, LP, C836, p. 111497. 6 2 Bruchesi to Laurier, 3 June 1906, PAC, LP, C836, p. 111156. 6 3 innocent amusements such as walks and picnics. When the Alliance offered the guarantee that the bill would only prohibit amusements "where there is an admission fee, or prize, or re ward contended for," Laurier was satisfied that Canada's two 64 "ethnic charter groups" agreed on the need for legislation. Moreover, it had become clear that only the federal government could pass the necessary law. In March 1905, the Supreme Court of Canada rejected the claim that the provinces could pass Sabbath observance legislation as civil legislation: "Legislation having for its object the compulsory observance of such day or the fixing of rules of conduct. . . to be followed on that day, is legislation properly falling. . . within the 65 jurisdiction of the Dominion Parliament." When the federal government attempted to appeal this decision to the Privy Council, the judges of that court peremptorily refused to give leave to hear the appeal, declaring that they had "already ex-6 6 pressed themselves on this Sunday business." 6 7 Shearer and his lobby were successful, and Laurier sailed into the storm. On March 11, 1906, Fitzpatrick intro-6 3 Bruchesi to Fitzpatrick, 29 March 1906, quoted in Advocate (June 1906). 64 See Robert Presthus, Elite Accommodation in Canadian  Politics (Toronto: Macmillan of Canada, 1973), pp. 3-19. 6 5 "In re Jurisdiction of a Province to Legislate Respect ing Abstention from Labour on Sunday," 35 S.C.R. (1905), 581. 6 6 LDAC, Minutes of Executive Committee, (n.d., circa -August 1905), LDACP. 6 7 Richard Van Loon and Michael Whittington, The Canadian duced the Lord's Day Bill, drafted by the Alliance, to the House of Commons. The House of Commons gave second reading to the bill in April and duly referred it to a Select Committee. The bill returned to the House in late June. On July 9, it was delivered to the Senate and on the 13th, when the House passed the Senate's amendments, the Lord's Day Act became a federal statute. In all three forums, furious debate raged over the bill's social and moral implications. Conflict developed along ethno-religious and economic lines. The major economic battles took place in the Select Committee hearings, while the ethno-religious battle raged in the House of Commons and the Senate. In all, they were "some of the most acrimonious public discus-6 8 sions ever witnessed in Canada up to that time." Shearer knew he was in for a fight. "There may be much public opposition," he wrote to his members when the bill was introduced to the House. "The deadly work will be done 69 when the measure is in committee." And so it was. The pur pose of Select Committee hearings into the bill was to air "all the honest criticism that may be offered of its provisions and 70 to meet the reasonable needs of the community." Shearer and Political System (Toronto: McGraw-Hill Ryerson, 1976), pp. 302-3. The Alliance had displayed.the requisite "determinants of success," namely, a cohesive organization and an application of pressure on government on all fronts. 6 R Ontario Law Reform Commission, Report on Sunday Obser-vance^Legislation (Toronto: Department of-Justice, 1970), p.- 44. 69Advocate (March 1904). 7 0 Canada, House of Commons, Debates, 1906, c. 1010. R.U. Macpherson, the Alliance's solicitor, were in constant attendance at the Committee hearings to rebut accusations. .'.As the most critical sector, the business community was well re presented by the hostile testimony of sixty corporations. The economic battle centred on the clauses restricting the opera tions of railways, steamships, and industrial processes such,:as mining, and-steel and iron works.,„As* proposed by. the Alliance-, the bill allowed only trains in transit when the Lord's Day began and trains that contained either livestock, perishable goods, or grain to continue to their destination. Ships could proceed to their nearest port of call if they too were in tran sit when the Lord's Day began. But the bill did not allow the unloading of such freight on arrival at its destination. In dustrial concerns could perform only incidental repairs of an 71 emergency nature. The transportation corporations insisted that, as essential services, they needed the right to operate twenty-four hours a day seven days a week. Competition from the United States, the short duration of the wheat harvest and the navigation season, as well as the perishable nature of much of the freight, were other arguments advanced. In addition, the railways maintained that their men enjoyed a weekly day of rest. Industrial corporations such as the. steel and iron industries and the mining industry alleged that they must continue opera-71 Advocate (April 1906). For bill drafted by the Alli ance, see Appendix VI. 226 72 tions throughout Sunday or suffer ruin. On advice of the Committee, the Alliance and represent atives of these businesses met in private sessions. As a re sult, the Alliance agreed to modifications with regard to indus trial operations. As amended, the clause let such corporations start or maintain fires, make repairs, and do: any other work when such fires, repairs or work are essential to any industrial process of such a continuous nature that it cannot be stopped without serious injury to its product or to the plant or property used in such process. (73) With regard to transportation needs, the Alliance consented to exemptions that allowed steamship companies to avoid the ice that closed navigation and to unload perishable stock at its destination on Sundays. It granted railways the right to un load freight from passenger trains at stopping points along the route as well and do some work in railway.yards;both Sunday morning and evening. In addition, the Alliance finally assented to the principle of a weekly rest day. As amended, the bill made it unlawful for any person to permit an employee to work on Sunday "unless such employee is given during the next six 74 days of such week twenty-four consecutive hours without labor." The modifications produced mixed reactions among oppon ents to the bill. The industrial concerns were pleased, for 72 Canada, House of Commons, Select Committee on the Lord's Day Bill, Minutes of.Evidence, pp. 68-116, p. 180. 73Advocate (June 1906). Ibid. 227 they realized that the Alliance had handed them "a virtual 7 5 blank check. . . to claim exemption from the bill." The steamship companies were also reasonably satisfied. The rail way corporations, however, unceremoniously left the meeting with the Alliance with the intention of directly lobbying mem bers of the House and Senate to obtain further modifications. As a result, the House amended the bill, granting the Board of Railway Commissioners permission to allow exceptions to the bill which they unanimously deemed "necessary. . . in connec-7 6 tion with the freight of any railway." The House refused further amendments proposed by the Senate that would have given the railways total liberty to perform all general repair work on Sundays, assuming instead that the Railway Commissioners would make the necessary alterations^when the bill went into: effect. The Alliance in fact scored only two minor victories in the economic field. The Select Committee rejected the ap plication from Grimsby Park, the lone amusement business to appear before it. Theppark owner asked permission to continue charging admission on Sunday on the grounds that he provided religious services and not frivolous entertainment. The Com mittee also supported the insertion of a clause directly for-75 A.M.C. Waterman., "The' Lord ' s. Day in a-Secular. Society: A Historical Comment on the Canadian Lord's Day Act of 1906," Canadian Journal of Theology XI (1965), p. 118. 76Advocate (May 1906); Ibid. (June 1906). 228 bidding the importation of foreign newspapers on Sundays, a restriction directly aimed at the American Sunday paper. Although ethno-religious tensions simmered throughout the Select Committee hearings, no full-blown conflict took place until the bill went before the House in late June. The two issues concerned were a Sabbatarian exemption to Jews and Seventh Day Adventists, and the so-called 'amusement1 clauses that for bade any amusement business, which charged an entrance fee, to operate on Sunday. In 1891 John Charlton had been amenable to providing an 77 exemption from his proposed bills to the Jews, but by 1906 the Sabbatarian attitude towards the Jews had hardened into rigid opposition. The size of the Jewish community in Canada had increased' significantly, more than doubling from its 1901 7 8 total of 16,401 to approximately 40,000 in 1906. To the Alli ance it seemed that the Jewish community was responsible for most Sunday trading in the larger cities, especially in Montreal. In 1905, when the Montreal Jewish community sought permis sion to carry on Sunday trade, the Alliance responded: While we sympathize with those who suffer for conscience sake, yet it is better that a few should so suffer than that the many toilers 77 Canada, House of Commons, Debates, 1891, c. 761. Charlton had proposed a Sabbatarian exemption clause. 7 8 Canada, Select Committee, Minutes, p. 187. Shearer disputed these figures, but the Canada Census 1911 figures would seem to confirm the accuracy of the figures Rabbi Jacobs pre sented to the House. In 1911 the Census recorded 74,564 Jews in Canada. Canada Year Book, 1912, p. 28. should lose their Sabbath rest for the benefit of these few .... . . . Our national Rest Day, in a Christian country like Canada, must be on the Lord's Day which is the Sabbath of the vast majority of Canadians. And all those who come into our country to share its great wealth must also accept its institutions. It is the foreigners who most frequently break our laws. (79) Addressing the annual meeting of the Quebec Alliance in the same year, the President, Dr. E. Hill, whined: "Why should aliens be encouraged and tolerated, who trample upon our rights and institutions, when we make them sharers in our heritage of law, liberty and equality? Surely it is ungrateful of them to assume 8 0 other than their legitimate rights." Jewish community leaders argued that both British and American legislation regarding employment on the Sabbath granted exemptions to the Jews. Since Canada had conferred full civil, political, and religious liberty upon Jewish citizens in 1832, 81 it should grant similar exemptions in all such legislation. When the Jews adopted the same lobbying techniques as the Alli ance — interviewing the Prime Minister and his Minister of Justice, circulating petitions, and giving"testimony before the Select Committee — it tried to discredit their claims. Shearer mobilized his forces to defeat the exemption measure, exhorting 79 Advocate (August, September 1905). Ibid. 81 Canada, Select Committee, Minutes, p. 13. Jacobs cited the British Factories Act of 1878 and 1901 as giving special privileges to Jews ... 230 his branches to send resolutions to Members of Parliament and Senators "strongly urging against the exemptions clause for Jews and others" and organizing a mass deputation to Lau-8 2 rier and Fitzpatrick. Jewish testimony impressed the members of the Select Committee, and it passed the exempting clause by a majority of one. In the House, the debate on the issue "saw party lines 8 3 wiped out and provincial voting blocs disregarded." Laurier himself supported the exemption for, "par instinct et par tra dition," he was inclined to protect minority rights although, as he assured the Alliance, he would certainly not approve of Jews "being allowed to do general business or traffic or any-84 thing that would be a scandal to their neighbours.11 Two members of Laurier's cabinet, Fielding and Lemieux, also sup ported the exemption, as did Robert Borden. But opposition to the exemption centred in Aylesworth, Laurier's new Minister 8 5 of Justice, and Henri Bourassa and his followers. Despite Laurier's support, the House defeated the amendment. Forgotten in the fight over the Sabbatarian exemption, traditional patterns of English Canadian, French Canadian con flict reasserted themselves in the debate over the amusement clauses. How did Laurier, usually so shrewd in effecting com-8 2 Advocate (April 1906). 83Toronto Globe, 2 8 June 1906. 84 Advocate (April 1906); Laurier to Bruchesi, 16 June 19 PAC, LP, C835, p. 111161; Laurier to H.H. Miller, 4 June 1906, Ibid., p. 110834. 8 5 Canada, House of Commons, Debates, 1906, c. 5637. 231 promise between the English and the French, make the mistake of assuming that conflict over the bill would focus on the economic clauses and that the amusement and labour clauses would pass the House with little comment? It would seem that he believed that French Canadian views on these subjects differ ed little from those of the French Roman Catholic hierarchy. Laurier thought that once French Canadian public opinion under stood that the bill did not prohibit steamship or train excur sions, or amusement parks, but rather forbade "des speculations qui pourraient etre faites sous couvert d'exhibitions de jeux athletiques, de representations ou d1 excursions," it would sup port the bill. French Canadian members of Parliament would then echo this public support by voting for the clauses that banned commercial recreation but left untouched the individual's right "de se recreer, de se distraire, de se delasser, de respirer 8 6 l'air pur et d'entretenir ses relations familiales." Instead, much to Laurier's discomfiture, the bill pro voked enormous and vocal protests from Quebecers both outside and inside Parliament. Outside Parliament, the powerful Mon treal Board of Trade, the Protestant Mayor of Montreal and his City Council had already expressed their opposition to the bill in strongly worded letters to Laurier and memorials to the Laurier to G. Langlois, 3 April 1906, LP (Prang trans-script) . 232 Select Committee. The French Canadian press was hostile; a March editorial in Le Canada, an otherwise loyal Liberal paper, especially distressed Laurier. Arguing that the bill "ne pou-vait convenir ni au temperament ni a la mentalite de la province de Quebec," the editorial implied that French Canadian members of Parliament should vote against the bill in full knowledge that their electors backed them. Other papers joined the 8 8 attack. "We hope," cried Israel Tarte's La Patrie late in June, "that such a Draconic measure will never be adopted!": Never has the liberty of the subject been so dis regarded. As a matter of fact such a Bill would not be accepted in a country governed by the most autocratic methods. There is no Government or public man capable of carrying such a measure into force. We are asked how Sir Wilfrid Laurier ever became a champion of so retrograde a measure. (89) Inside the House of Commons, Henri Bourassa directed the attack. To Bourassa, as H. Blair Neatby comments, the Lord's Day Bill "meant forcing on Quebec the puritan ideals of the pro vince of Ontario" and was but one more example, on the heels of the Autonomy Bills, of Laurier's willingness to sacrifice Quebec's interests. "Bourassa was able to argue that he, not Laurier, was defending the Liberal principle of freedom of con-0/G. Hadrill to Laurier, 23 March 1906, LP (Prang Tran script) ; Canada, House of Commons, Select Committee, Minutes, p. 7. 8 8 Le Canada, 28 March 1906, copy in LP; Laurier to God-froy Langlois, 3 April 1906, LP (Prang transcript), "Je suis en effet tres mecontent de 1'article que le "Canada" a publie sur la question du bill du dimanche. . ." Quoted in J. Castell Hopkins, Canadian Annual Review, 1906, p. 560. science against this 'most illiberal measure ever advocated in 90 the Canadian parliament.'" Armand Lavergne and the three Liberal Montreal members, Honore Gervais, Camille Piche, and Louis Rivet, supported Bourassa, arguing that the Lord's Day Bill contradicted provincial autonomy. Directing the attack first at the labour clause, Camille Piche introduced an amend ment to make it subject to provincial laws "now or hereafter in 91 force." In late June, these French Canadians arranged a mas sive demonstration against the bill, to be larger, they claimed, 92 than those of March 1885 protesting Riel's hanging. Laurier capitulated to this French Canadian hostility. The night before the planned demonstration in Montreal, the government not only accepted the provincial autonomy amendment to the labour clause, but also made known its intention to delay enactment of the bill until April 1, 1907.93 Although the government attempted to resist demands to make the amusement clauses subject to the same proviso, continued French Canadian pressure forced additional amendments. Ten thousand- workers and small merchants attended Bourassa's mass demonstration, at which he submitted "resolutions for the assembly's approval, petitioning parliament to respect provincial rights by submit-90 H. Blair Neatby, Laurier and a Liberal Quebec (Toronto: McClelland and Stewart, 1973), p. 163. 91 Canada, House of Commons, Debates, 1906, c. 5647. 92D. Monet to Laurier, 28 June 1906, PAC, LP, C835, p. 111649. 93 Canada, House of Commons, Debates, 1906, cc. 5651, 6590, 6675. 234 ting the application of the law in each province to the decision 94 of the legislature." The Quebec Assembly responded by voting his resolutions by acclamation and adopting a resolution "which deplored the intention to impose on Quebec a law contrary to the customs, the sentiments, the interests and civil rights of 95 its inhabitants." While Bourassa insisted there would be no outright revolt, he threatened, in the same breath, that the people of Quebec would not "swallow tamely this piece of legis-96 lation." Editorials in the Ottawa press spoke of the dangers 97 of "a semi-revolution in that province" should the bill pass. Under pressure from the Liberal caucus, the Liberal Senators agreed to additional modifications of the bill. Not only did the Senate add the provincial autonomy amendment to clauses five and six, but in addition, it introduced a discre tionary "opting out" clause by which legal proceedings under the Act could not be commenced "without the leave of the Attorney General for the province in which the offence is alleged to have 9 8 been committed." Amid howls from Alliance supporters that "with this amendment carried, the Bill is dead — dead as Julius Caesar," the amendment passed by a vote of 32 to 19, with all 94 Mason Wade, The French Canadians, 1760-1967 (Toronto: Macmillan of Canada, 1968), vol. I, p. 547. 95 Canada, House of Commons, Debates, 1906, c. 7330. 96Ibid., c. 7315. 97 Ottawa Free Press, 5 July 1906, cited by Bourassa in Ibid., c. 7332. 9 8 Canada, Senate, Debates, 1906, cc. 1163, 1201. 235 9 9 Liberal Senators supporting it. The French Canadians were most satisfied with these amendments, particularly the "opting-out" clause. Bourassa was jubilant: I think the government are to be congratulated on having accepted the very good amendments that have been made to this Bill by the Senate. . . I do not think that, with the Bill in its present form, the disfavour will be quite what it was. I think pro bably the people of Quebec will regard this law as some Americans.said they regarded Indians. The say ing there was that the only good Indian was a dead Indian. I think the people of Quebec will regard this as a good law because it is a dead law. (100) Commentators in the 1970s have called the Lord's Day Alliance "one of the most effective legislative lobbies in Cana dian history. "-'-Ol ^he. Alliance's influence, however, peaked with the introduction of the feill. The subsequent hearings and debate revealed the declining influence of the Alliance against the increasing strength of its economic and ethno-religious opponents. Shearer himself must assume responsibility for numerous 102 mistakes. His testimony before the Select Committee revealed 9 9 Ibid. c. 1201-6; Ontario Law Reform Commission, Report  on Sunday Observance Legislation, p. 56. 1 ^Canada, House of Commons, Debates, 1906, c. 7689. x^xOntario Law Reform Commission, op. cit., p. 44. 1 07 Shearer to Rev. W. Rochester, 5 May 1906, LB 1905-1906, p. 527: "This fight at Ottawa breaks all records in my experi-236 a general ignorance of Canada's economic development. He dis regarded advice that ran contrary to his own attitudes: for example, when D.W. Bole, the Liberal member from Boissevan and an Executive member of the Manitoba Alliance, advised Shearer to modify restrictions on the hauling of freight, Shearer concluded that Bole had been "stuffed" by his advisers and that he was "wrong in his statement of the impracticability of the proposed 103 legislation." Instead, Shearer relied on arguments supplied by American Sabbatarian groups without verifying their validity. He claimed, for instance, that some American railways had com pletely ceased Sunday operations. But his opponents easily punctured this argument. By contacting the American companies cited by Shearer, railway lawyers could testify that American companies had curtailed only non-profitable passenger services, 104 not freight traffic. Canadian companies desired no more. Shearer made other errors of the same kind. Before the Select Committee he claimed to have received "a considerable number of communications" from the railway brotherhoods, 8 9 per-ence and is, in a sense, a whole education to one, but the way the difficulties have been met and overcome, in the good provi dence of God, is wonderful." In late June, however, Shearer admitted.to "having a desperate fight." See Shearer to W. Hend-son, 23 June 1906, Ibid., p. 586. 103Shearer to J.B. Mitchell, 3 March 1906, Ibid., p. 468. 104 Canada, House of Commons, Select Committee, Minutes, 1906, p. 178, pp. 192-8. This lack of serious investigation seems to have been a common failing among Canadian reformers. See John Weaver, "'Tomorrow's Metropolis' Revisited: A Critical Assessment of Urban Reform in Canada," in The Canadian City: Essays in Urban History, ed., G.A. Stelter and A. Artibise (Toronto: McClelland and Stewart, 1977), pp. 393, 413, n.2. 237 cent of whom had declared support for the bill. Cross-examina tion, however, forced him to admit that of the 225 brotherhoods to whom he had sent copies of the bill, he had received only 105 twenty-four favourable replies, that is, 10 percent. Later, when the House made the bill's labour clause subject to provin cial authority, Shearer foolishly commented to the press that since the provincial autonomy amendment only applied to the one clause, it did not invalidate the entire bill. This comment prompted Bourassa to propose similar amendments to the amuse ment clauses, and Shearer lost any advantage he might have . , 106 gained. The cohesion of the Alliance broke down as it became obvious that many men had consented to support the Alliance 107 without fully exploring the ramifications of its aims. The debate exposed various facets of Alliance policy: on one hand, its inflexibility on issues such as the Sabbatarian exemption; on the other hand, its ability to compromise with secular groups such as organized labour in order to achieve its desired goal. Alliance members, forced by the heat of battle to come to terms 105 Canada, House of Commons, Select Committee, Minutes, p. 174-5. 106 Montreal Witness, 2 July 1906, cited by H. Bourassa, Canada, House of Commons, Debates, 1906, cc. 7314-5. 107 D. Truman, The Governmental Process (New York: A.A. Knopf, 1950), p. 156: "Complete stability within any interest group is a fiction. . . All groups experience continuous alter cations over policies, involving both means and end. . . [The] internal political life of the group is made up of a continuous effort to maintain leaders and followers in some measure of har monious relationship." Also Ibid., p. 535. 238 with their own religious convictions and commitment to moral reform, responded in varying ways, none of which materially aided Shearer. Robert Borden, for example;, opposed compromis ing Sabbatarianism's moral aims. Membership in the Alliance, he declared, did not allow him to waive his own judgement, and his conduct throughout the debate was consistently at odds with 108 Shearer's wishes. In order to provide provinces with the opportunity to pass stricter laws if they so wished, Borden supported the provincial autonomy amendments and proposed one of his own (which failed) to make the playing of games, whether 109 for profit or not, an offence. Other executive members opposed Shearer's inflexibility on the economic clauses and the Sabbatarian exemption clause. E.M. Macdonald, a member of the Select Committee, was also a member of the Alliance's Legislation Committee. A Presbyterian, "imbued strongly. . . from early training and association with the idea that the Sabbath day should be kept holy," Macdonald was "most sympathetic to all reasonable propositions. . . made for the purpose of bringing this about." But the Committee hearings forced him to realize: that the proposal to legislate on the subject was a matter of wider importance and affected a great many more interests than one would have thought Canada, House of Commons, Debates, 1906, c. 7353. 9Ibid., c. 5753. 239 who had not previously delved into the subject with some degree of care. (110) Testimony by the Jewish leaders impressed him greatly and it was his.vote that gave the Sabbatarian exemption clause its one vote majority. As the hearings continued, Macdonald came to resent Shearer's bullying tactics, specifically his habit of lurking in the halls to accost members after sessions."1"11 Another Alliance member, J.R. Dougall, editor of the Montreal Witness, expressed his surprise at the scope of the bill and its restric tions on "personal work that did not require the work of 112 others." Requested by Laurier to voice his opinion on the Sabbatarian exemption clause, Dougall emphatically supported 113 it. Other Alliance members avoided commitment by absenting 114 themselves from the debate. F.L. Schaffner, Conservative Member of Parliament for Souris, Manitoba, concluded midway through the debate that Parliament had no right to pass the bill. 115 and stayed away thereafter. In all, fourteen of the twenty-110E.M. Macdonald, Recollections, Political, and Personal (Toronto: The Ryerson Press, 1938), p. 98. 111Ibid. Macdonald told Shearer he would report him to the Speaker and have him excluded if he continued this bullying. 112J.R. Dougall to Laurier, 6 April 1906, PAC, LP, C834, p. 109260. Ibid. 114 H.R. Emmerson, the one cabinet minister on the Alliance Executive Board, was experiencing such difficulties with his per sonal "dissolute living" that he was unable to render effective aid to the Alliance. See J. Schull, Laurier (Toronto: Macmillan of Canada, 1965), p. 459. 115 Canada, House of Commons, Debates, 1906, cc. 6335-8. 240 six politicians on the Alliance' s .Legislation Committee were absent from the final votes. In addition to internal strains, tensions developed be tween the Alliance and its secular supporters. One, the Cana dian Manufacturers' Association, repudiated its cooperation with the Alliance. Finding the proposed bill utterly "objectionable," the Association actively lobbied against the bill in Committee 116 hearings. Organized labour also hindered as much as it helped: on one hand, the Trades and Labor Congress of Canada forwarded its resolution "that this Congress take all possible means to secure the abolition of all Labor on Sundays"; with the same petition, however, it included a letter explaining that the resolution "must not be understood as passed in the sense of in any way wishing to interfere with the normal laws of recreation, 117 to which working people feel themselves entitled." Moreover, the Trades and Labor Congress's Solicitor was unprepared to give testimony before the Select Committee hearings and, only when pressed by the Committee chairman, did he submit a formal state-118 ment of support for the bill. In direct opposition to Con gress support, the Railway Employees' Union, the union most 116 Industrial Canada (October 1906), p. 214; Canada, House of Commons, Select Committee, Minutes, p. 200. 117 Trades and Labor Congress of Canada to Laurier, 16 April 1906, LP (Prang transcript). 118 Canada, House of Commons, Select Committee, Minutes, 30. 241 affected by the bill, authorized its representative, J. Hall, to protest the bill vigorously. Hall therefore emphasized how the bill would adversely affect the railway men by decreas ing their earning power while increasing their work, owing to 119 the congestion built up over a twenty-four hour Sunday stoppage. Labour support in the House did little to aid the bill. Ralph Smith defended the bill and the Alliance loyally, but another Member of Parliament, Armand Verville, who, Shearer hoped, would be one of the Alliance's "best friends in fighting through 120 the proposed legislation," consistently opposed the bill. He participated in Bourassa's mass meeting and voted for all provincial autonomy amendments."'"21 Not only did Shearer's alliances break down, but his 122 dependence on Laurier's ability to 'whip' his party into line and the influence of the French Catholic hierarchy also proved vain. By assuming responsibility for the bill, Laurier's govern-123 ment only guaranteed its passage through the House. It offered no assurance that the bill would emerge 119 Ibid., p. 116. 120 Shearer to A. Verville, 27 February 1906, LB 1905-1906, p. 457. 121 Wade, The French Canadians, p. 547; Levitt, Henri  Bourassa and the Golden Calf, p. 104; Canada, House of Commons, Debates, 1906, c. 7348, 122Shearer to Rochester, 5 May 1906, LB 1905-1906, p. 527. 123 Cf. van Loon and Whittington, The Canadian Political  System, p. 26: "There has never been a piece of government legislation defeated by the House of Commons in a majority situation, and even with a minority government, government legislation has only been defeated on rare occasions." 242 intact. Thus, after initial attempts to enforce party discipline in support of the bill as introduced, Laurier acceded to French Canadian demands. Not only did he agree to the amendments pro posed by Piche and Bourassa, but he exerted pressure on Liberal Senators to introduce important modifications such as the opting-124 out clause. After the introduction of the bill, the French Catholic hierarchy was unable to render further aid to the Alli ance. Laurier rejected Bruchesi's request that he oppose the 125 Sabbatarian exemption clause. Despite Bourassa's loyalty to the teachings of the Catholic church, his fight against Laurier was more important. "I take my theology from Rome," he stated, 126 "but my politics from home." Bourassa and his supporters com pletely ignored the Catholic hierarchy's support of the bill The Lord's Day Act as passed by Parliament on July 13, 127 1906 was but an emasculated version of the original Lord's 128 Day Bill. The chief clause forbade the sale of property or goods, the pursuit of one's "ordinary calling," or the employ-Canada, Senate, Debates, 1906, c. 1163; R.W. Scott, Secretary of State, responsible for shepherding the Bill through the Senate, acknowledged this in his comment about the amendment to the amusement clause: "The people of Quebec think the first clause is not broad enough. I think it is. But if it is going to gratify them and secure their, co-operation in the Bill I have no objection." (Ibid., c. 1193) 125Bruchesi to Laurier, 3 June 1906, PAC, LP, C836, pp. 111157-58; Laurier to Bruchesi, 16 June 1906, Ibid., pp. 111161-62. 12 6 Cited by Levitt, Henri Bourassa.and the Golden Calf, pp. 23-4. 1 27 7 Ed. VII, c.4. See Appendix VII. 128 See also Appendix vi. 243 merit of another person to do any work, business, or labour on 129 Sunday. Provincial laws "now or hereafter in force" could supersede the Act and a Provincial Attorney-General had to con sent in writing to any prosecution. Exemptions to the Act were so numerous that one Conservative Member of Parliament labelled it "an Act to legalize practices heretofore prohibited on the Lord's Day," while another critic described it as "an Act for 130 the benefit of the legal profession." But in an open letter to the press, Shearer defended the Act: Already very different estimates have appeared in the public press.. Some have said the Act is dead, others that it is useless, on the one hand; and on the other, there are those who consider it the best Lord's Day Act on the Statute books of any country; others that it is in many particulars over-stringent. The truth lies between the two extremes. We have not secured all we sought. The Act has been weakened in certain particulars, but on the whole it is a good Act. It is an immense gain over what we had before. It covers the points that were left uncovered in our old Provincial Acts, which still remain in force. It is much more sweeping than, perhaps, many people recognize. (131) The law had been passed, but had the Alliance in fact won the battle and lost the war? With this piece of social legislation would it be able to achieve moral reform? 129R.S.C. (1906), c.153. 130 Castell Hopkins, Canadian Annual Review, 1906, p. 562. 131Ibid., p. 563. 244 Chapter VIII: The Alliance as Clerical Policeman, 1907-1912. On March 1, 1907, the Lord's Day Act came into effect. The first offender convicted was the "redoubtable" Louis Birk, a Hamilton newspaper vendor who.had already demonstrated "some -means and ingenuity" in defying the 1845 Upper Canada Act: not only had he offered city authorities a $600 bribe to avert their eyes, but he had also sought legal advice about obtaining a Dominion charter to evade the Ontario law. The Alliance re joiced when a police magistrate fined Birk $30 and costs.1 In other cities, police took similar action against persistent, and usually immigrant, offenders Syrian merchants in St. John, New Brunswick, and Hebrew, Syrian, Italian, and other foreign shop owners in Winnipeg were charged with violating the Sabbath.2 Such action pleased the Alliance, for it intended to advocate enforcement of the Act as vigorously as it had pursued its enactment. As Shearer wrote to members, the Alliance, had no 3 intention of "dispersing its forces or even stacking arms." xLord's Day Advocate (hereafter Advocate), (August, September 1905); Ibid. (April 1907). For fines and other sen tences levied under the Act, see Appendix VII. 2 Advocate (April 1907). 3 Ibid. (October 19 07). The Alliance enforcement campaign contradicts the theory advanced by Murray Edelman that the sym bolic value of legislation may deflate the impetus of a social movement. See M. Edelman, "Symbols and Political Quiescence," 245 Instead, the Alliance executive intended, through "impartial enforcement" of the Act, to arouse "the Christian conscience to 4 the right use of the Lord's Day." In its pursuit of enforcement, the Alliance assumed without question its right to do so. Accordingly, it made plans to strengthen its own organization. In 1905, it appointed for the first time a Western Secretary, Reverend William Roch ester, an Ontario Presbyterian minister. In 1907, when Shearer resigned to become Secretary of the newly formed Social and Moral Reform Department of the Presbyterian church, T. Albert Moore became General Secretary. Between 1907 and 1912, the Executive appointed Associate Secretaries, all Presbyterian ministers, for the other major regions of the country. That these men worked tirelessly is illustrated by Moore's report to the 19 09 annual meeting. During the previous year, he reported, he had: delivered 424 addresses and sermons; attended 55 meetings of Committees of Provincial Alliances and 213 Branch Executives; interviewed 217 employers of labor; conferred with several hundred individual workingmen, and met 39 labor unions; interviewed Ministers of the Crown, Provincial and Federal, 38 American Political Science Review LIV (September 1960) , p. 695. When Joseph Gusfield applied this idea to the American temper ance movement, he concluded that the prohibitionists, having attained symbolic victory, were unwilling to press for a more tangible kind of change and thus did not pursue a vigorous en forcement of the law. Joseph R. Gusfield, Symbolic Crusade: Status Politics and the American Temperance Movement (Urbana, Illinois: University of Illinois Press, 1972), p. 122. 4 Advocate (August, September 1906); Rev. J.G. Shearer to A. Macgillivray, 17 August 1906, LB 1905-1906, p. 656. 246 times; travelled 41,813 miles, and along with this . . . conducted the necessary correspondence and given attention to other duties devolving upon the office. (5) As the enforcement campaign proceeded, the Alliance maintained old and developed new publicizing techniques. On an informal level, the Alliance continued to rely heavily on the Protestant churches for the circulation of petitions, letter campaigns to politicians, and so forth. The Secretaries also depended on ministers to set a good example to their flocks, pleading with them, for instance, not to patronize the Sunday 7 street car. The Alliance retained the practice of supplying both the religious and secular press with items of interest but, as it considered the Advocate the only reliable source of infor mation, it made plans for its expansion. In addition the Alliance authorized the printing of posters for display in public places, which would inform the public of the laws (both g federal and provincial) in force in each province. The print ing of the posters in German, Italian, Scandinavian, Ruthenian, Icelandic, and Galician as well as English reflected the Alli ance's recognition that immigrants, "the children of Sabbathless ancestors," could not "in a few days unlearn the teaching of 5LDAC, "Annual Report, 1909." Rev. T.A. Moore to A.J. Cadman, 29 November 1909, LDACP. Moore pleaded with ministers not to throw his missives into the wastebasket upon receipt. See Moore, circular to min isters, 3 May 1909, LDACP. 7 Advocate (February 1908). 8OLDA, "Annual Report, 1908." 247 generations, nor understand and appreciate the benefits" of institutions such as the Sabbath, which Anglo-Saxons prized as 9 "among the mightiest factors in the formation of character." Finally, the Executive suggested that Alliance branches make their meetings "real, live [and] electric" through the addition of "an attractive programme of addresses and music" to the usual business discussions. People would then realize that the Alliance was "alive, active, and accomplishing results.""'"0 The Alliance also continued, with modifications, its association with the churches and organized labour. On one hand, the Alliance formally attempted to alter its close rela tion with the Protestant churches: since emphasis on civil rights had facilitated cooperation between the Alliance and labour in the legislative campaign, it seemed only logical to continue in this vein. The formation of a Department of Moral and Social Reform by the Presbyterian church's 1907 General Assembly, and Shearer's subsequent appointment.as Department Secretary, provided the Alliance with an opportunity to define its sphere of activity vis a vis the churches. The Alliance would preserve the Lord's Day as a day of rest through legal en actment and law enforcement. The churches would then secure the right use of the day through religious instruction and the or-LDAC, Minutes of Executive Committee, -1-0 December: 1908, LDAC, MB 1901-17, p. 82; Advocate (December 1908). 10Ibid. (October 1907). 248 dinances of worship.11 With regard to organized labour, the Alliance's need for its active support had disappeared with the passage of the Lord's Day Act. The Alliance therefore no longer lobbied Trades and Labor Congress meetings, although it continued to support labour's campaign for the Saturday half-holiday and to portray the cooperation between labour 12 and religion as the positive impetus to the bill. Concerning actual enforcement procedures, the Alliance intended to employ policies developed by the Ontario Alliance prior to 1906. To avoid creating a public image of a petty prosecuting agency, the Alliance assumed responsibility for settling as many cases as possible out of court by "persuasive 13 and conciliatory methods." By such methods as "friendly" letters of warning to offending parties or public admonitions 14 from church pulpits, the Alliance addressed not only shop keepers and factory owners, but also a religious group such as the Salvation Army to protest its Sunday afternoon light shows. 11LDAC, "Annual Report, 1908"; Ibid., 1909. 12 Advocate (May 1907). The Alliance also supported labour's demand that the Act's fourth clause be amended. As passed, the Act forbade an employer "to require" an employee to work on Sunday. Labour wanted this changed to "to permit." LDAC, "Triennial Report, 1907." 13LDAC, "Annual Report, 1908." 14 See, for example, the Winnipeg Telegram of 2 0 January 1910 (LDACP) which reprinted an Alliance Circular: "We have no desire to cause you trouble or expense although we are expected to report the complaint to the authorities for prosecution and are writing y©u without-prejudice, this friendly letter to ask you to have all such work on the Lord's Day discontinued.