King's College, purpose and accountability in higher education, the dilemma of King's College, 1827-1853

grantor: University of TorontoThe first university in Upper Canada to receive a royal charter was King's College at York. Although petitions for a university in the colony are recorded in the late eighteenth century, it was not until 1827 that a charter was actually acquired and it was only in 1843 that the university opened its doors to students for the first time. In the meantime, three other universities had opened in the province: Victoria, sponsored by the Methodists, in Cobourg (1842); Queen's sponsored by the Church of Scotland (1842) and Regiopolis by the Roman Catholics (1837) both in Kingston. The story of King's College has been told in part and in varying ways by a number of writers and historians. W. J. Alexander and Stewart Wallace have provided brief, objective, chronological outlines of the major developments in their histories of the University of Toronto in 1906 and 1915 respectively. More recently, historians such as John Moir, Gerald Craig, William Westfall, and Brian McKillop have dealt with the history of King's College in connection with denominational history, the economic, social and political development of Upper Canada, and the transition from constitutional to responsible government. No one, however, has written a full book or dissertation with a primary focus on the history of King's College. This paper is presented in an attempt to provide an account of the founding of King's College and the quandary surrounding its development and ultimate transformation into the University of Toronto. The chronicle is focussed primarily on the political and denominational context and on legislative attempts to resolve the university dilemma. It also examines the roles played by leading political, religious and provincial administrators touching on the university question. The paper traces the history of King's College through the adoption of three university models: John Strachan's pedagogical model, Robert Baldwin's political model and Francis Hincks' compromise model. The discussion encompasses the rationale for the adoption of each and the rejection of the Strachan and Baldwin options.Ph.D