Chapter 10 the Early Years in Fredericton: St. Thomas
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Spray & Rhinelander, History of St. Thomas University: The Formative Years 1860-1990 -- page 515 CHAPTER 10 THE EARLY YEARS IN FREDERICTON: ST. THOMAS 1964-1974 Moving In Preparations for the removal of St. Thomas’s staff and their belongings began in the summer months of 1964. On September 2 the new St. Thomas officially opened for registration. Fears that enrolment would fall because of the move were laid to rest. Registrar Martin reported that enrolment actually rose to 294, compared to 275 the previous year in Chatham. Classes began on September 12. It was chaos, given the unfinished buildings, the considerable mess, and the general state of confusion. Indeed, not all classes began on schedule, and they often had to be cancelled on account of the din of construction. The Administration Building, with its offices and classrooms, was open, if not entirely finished. Its kitchen and dining hall opened for business only in October. The chapel above the dining hall was still under construction. The new building to the west of the main building, the men’s residence, was not entirely finished on the inside but most of the 198 student rooms and six suites for priests were available for occupancy. Construction had begun on the Holy Cross House of Studies, and even a few residence rooms were open for the Holy Cross contingent, although conditions were primitive. Owing to a delay in funding, construction had still not begun on the fourth Larson-designed building, the women’s residence, to be situated on the east side of the Administration Building, opposite the men’s residence. Until it was completed, St. Thomas’s female students were housed in quarters rented from UNB at Maggie Jean Chestnut House, a fine old Queen Anne Revival house, ca. 1895, situated down the hill on Charlotte Street in the east town plat. (The building had been purchased in 1949 and donated Spray & Rhinelander, History of St. Thomas University: The Formative Years 1860-1990 -- page 516 to UNB by Lord Beaverbrook to serve as UNB’s women’s residence.) For Fr. George Martin, registrar, it was challenging but exciting. In an interview he recalled: Nothing was complete. They were still pouring concrete. We moved on the second [of September]. Nothing was ready. Nothing. And for the first month or two we ate our meals down at the Lady Beaverbrook Residence, or one of the dining rooms down there. But it was lucky that it was that way, too, because there was a spirit of roughing it….You didn’t have time to be homesick or to be put off because everyone was roughing it. You were like a pioneer. You were doing something that nobody else had done, and you were enjoying it too. If everything were right, people would have been complaining, but here everyone had to chip in and do things in the rough, as it were, and so they were distracted. They had no time to think, “Oh! Isn’t it awful that we’re not in Chatham anymore.” This was an adventure. I remember the contractor coming to me the day before classes were to begin, let’s say Monday the twelfth, we might have been there [only] two weeks, and saying, “How many classrooms do you need tomorrow morning?” And I said, “Four, yeah, two big ones and two small ones.” There was no heat and there were no light fixtures. They just dropped down big things from the ceilings. And there was no women’s residence. The girls lived in the Maggie Jean Residence that UNB had downtown. They walked up the hill. They were there for a year [or two]. So it was kind of an adventure. Continuing Leadership Problems Not everyone saw it as an adventure. Besides having to cope with the mess in their new surroundings, many of the faculty were still deeply unhappy with Duffie’s leadership. Fr. Winfield Poole, ever since his return in 1962 to Chatham from studies in the U.S., was one of the most active opponents of Duffie’s regime and, by extension, Bishop Leverman’s administration. He was involved in writing a number of the criticisms of the president and his style of governance. He helped compose the various petitions and letters to the apostolic delegate Baggio as well as to the authorities in Rome, first protesting the removal of St. Thomas to Fredericton and second proposing a separate diocese for the Miramichi. On August 18, 1964, Poole wrote the bishop to say he had heard from a faculty member at St. Dunstan’s University in Charlottetown, PEI, that “Msgr. Duffie recently told Fr. Roach (also of their faculty) that you are willing to ‘lend’ me to any Catholic College where I might wish to teach.” He discussed this with friends at St. Dunstan’s and “we concluded that it was a desirable thing, both for them and me.” He therefore was requesting from the bishop a leave of absence. Spray & Rhinelander, History of St. Thomas University: The Formative Years 1860-1990 -- page 517 Bishop Leverman replied on August 28, denying the request. We can only wonder why he did so. It was no secret that Duffie had long wanted to have this bothersome and stubborn person, his personal gadfly—regardless of his acknowledged theological expertise and irreproachable moral comportment—removed from St. Thomas. But only the bishop could assign or reassign priests. Given his reservations about Duffie’s leadership, did Leverman somehow wish to force Duffie to learn how to deal with difficult people? Or did he wish to punish Poole for his past disrespect for the bishop and the president by forcing him to stay in an institution where he appeared to be so discontented? Or did Duffie himself have a change of mind, thinking Poole might settle down and cause less trouble in Fredericton? Whatever the reason, the bishop wrote Poole that although this may have been something discussed away back, you are needed now. The whole picture has changed since then. In loyalty to St. Thomas University, and in your spirit of zeal to assist the new St. Thomas in its difficult period of change, I am sure you will do your part in helping to get it on its feet. The rector of St. Dunstan’s, Fr. George MacDonald, wrote Leverman on August 31 in an unsuccessful attempt to get Leverman to change his mind. Leverman wrote back: “I cannot release Fr. Poole. There are a number of reasons for this. We are short of priests and teachers, and since we are going through the trying time of transition you can understand my position.” Of course, one of the reasons for the shortage of priests and teachers was that he had moved some of St. Thomas’s teaching priests to parishes, while others had resigned because they did not want to continue teaching under Duffie or because they did not want to leave the Miramichi. On September 5 Leverman wrote Poole, who was now in Fredericton to take up residence in one of the priests’ suites in the men’s residence: “I am sure your repugnance and difficulties will not seem so vivid once you begin your work, in whatever capacity you may be assigned.” Whatever Poole thought of the bishop’s advice, he would continue to teach mathematics at St. Thomas for many years. He even served several years as its academic vice- president, but only after Duffie had resigned. Spray & Rhinelander, History of St. Thomas University: The Formative Years 1860-1990 -- page 518 Poole was not Duffie’s only dissatisfied faculty member. On September 8 the president received a letter of resignation from Vance Toner, who had remained in Chatham and who now felt “compelled to resign my position as Professor of Education and Director of Athletics.” He was sure that Duffie was well aware that he did not “concur” with his “tactics of administration.” Toner said he was “one of a large majority of the faculty which felt the same way about your administration.” He was hoping that “the President and his superiors” would come to “some conclusions concerning some change for the welfare of the University.” But since it now appeared that Duffie was starting a new term, he must have had “an endorsement” by his superiors of his “policies of operation.” Toner was not resigning because of the move, but for the same reason so many others who could, have avoided going to Fredericton under your administration. I hope you do not construe this as a personal criticism but rather as it is intended, a criticism of your administration and my reason for disassociating myself from St. Thomas. Toner sent copies of his letter to the bishop and to Henry Ryan, the board’s secretary. Settling In At least UNB President Colin Mackay was pleased about the way St. Thomas was settling in on the campus. On October 2 he wrote his friend John Deutsch: St. Thomas is here, and while their new buildings are far from finished, nevertheless the students are in and all seems to be going reasonably well. For the moment, the boys are dining with us in McConnell Hall. Incidentally, I have found their president to be a fairly slap-happy administrator and materials of detail bother him not at all. Tonight, after walking around the campus and looking about Teachers’ College and St. Thomas I could not help but think back over all the fuss and fury of the past months and years, when people kept saying we would never succeed in moving the two institutions to the campus and that it would never take place.