REACHING RURAL ONTARIO: THE COUNTY OF PEEL AGRICULTURAL SOCIETY
AND THE PEEL COUNTY FALL FAIR, 1853-1883
A Thesis
Presented to
The Faculty of Graduate Studies
of
The University of Guelph
by
JODEY NURSE
In partial fulfilment of requirements
for the degree of
Master of Arts
September, 2010
©Jodey Nurse, 2010 Library and Archives Bibliotheque et 1*1 Canada Archives Canada Published Heritage Direction du Branch Patrimoine de I'edition
395 Wellington Street 395, rue Wellington OttawaONK1A0N4 Ottawa ON K1A 0N4 Canada Canada
Your file Votre reference ISBN: 978-0-494-71439-3 Our file Notre reference ISBN: 978-0-494-71439-3
NOTICE: AVIS:
The author has granted a non L'auteur a accorde une licence non exclusive exclusive license allowing Library and permettant a la Bibliotheque et Archives Archives Canada to reproduce, Canada de reproduire, publier, archiver, publish, archive, preserve, conserve, sauvegarder, conserver, transmettre au public communicate to the public by par telecommunication ou par I'lnternet, preter, telecommunication or on the Internet, distribuer et vendre des theses partout dans le loan, distribute and sell theses monde, a des fins commerciales ou autres, sur worldwide, for commercial or non support microforme, papier, electronique et/ou commercial purposes, in microform, autres formats. paper, electronic and/or any other formats.
The author retains copyright L'auteur conserve la propriete du droit d'auteur ownership and moral rights in this et des droits moraux qui protege cette these. Ni thesis. Neither the thesis nor la these ni des extraits substantiels de celle-ci substantial extracts from it may be ne doivent etre imprimes ou autrement printed or otherwise reproduced reproduits sans son autorisation. without the author's permission.
In compliance with the Canadian Conformement a la loi canadienne sur la Privacy Act some supporting forms protection de la vie privee, quelques may have been removed from this formulaires secondaires ont ete enleves de thesis. cette these.
While these forms may be included Bien que ces formulaires aient inclus dans in the document page count, their la pagination, il n'y aura aucun contenu removal does not represent any loss manquant. of content from the thesis.
••I Canada ABSTRACT
REACHING RURAL ONTARIO: THE COUNTY OF PEEL AGRICULTURAL SOCIETY AND THE PEEL COUNTY FALL FAIR, 1853-1883
Jodey Nurse Advisor: University of Guelph, 2010 Catharine Anne Wilson
In 1871 the Peel County Fall Fair was considered a grand success by the local newspaper,
The Brampton Times. Even though the writer noted that "perfection has not been reached," the
fair was praised for the excellent exhibits presented and its marked improvement over former
years. Improvements made to the fairgrounds that year were noted approvingly and the large
array of visitors was described as a "joyous" crowd with "exhilarated spirits." Full of animals of
all shapes and sizes, the latest in agricultural implements and manufactured products, the best of
crops, vegetables and fruits on display, along with an assortment of dairy products, homes crafts
and fine art, the Peel County Fall Fair was an event that was eagerly anticipated by the area's
residents. Organizers of the fair promoted the event as an opportunity for farmers and artisans to
make comparisons between the winning entries exhibited so that they too could evaluate their
own products and livestock and strive to emulate any superior items.
This county agricultural fair and the description provided were similar to those of many of the county agricultural fairs held across the province of Ontario in the 1870s. Focused on the
agricultural and manufactured products being produced in the province, these events sought to influence producers into adopting better breeds, more improved methods of cultivation, new and
enhanced agricultural implements and machinery, and more desirable forms of household production and artistic pursuits. Yet, while education was touted as the primary function of agricultural fairs and exhibitions, this study will reveal that the county agricultural fair also provided a number of other important functions. A detailed analysis of the 1871 Peel County Fall
Fair and the fair's participants is achieved by linking participants with data collected in the 1871
Census of Canada, as well as through the analysis of one family farm diary and numerous newspaper accounts. This investigation shows the ways in which fairs were representative of the cultural and economic changes occurring in the countryside and how they had been shaped to meet the changing needs of rural people. This study challenges previous assumptions about the limited appeal of agricultural societies and fairs and shows that fair exhibitors and agricultural society members represented the diversity of individuals found throughout the nineteenth- century countryside. In particular, agricultural fairs by 1871 had become essential components of the rural landscape by providing valued social, recreational, and economic opportunities for rural communities. Acknowledgements
I would first like to thank my supervisor, Catharine Anne Wilson, for her interest in my
master's thesis and her unwavering support and guidance throughout its completion. My deepest
thanks and sincerest praise cannot express enough my gratitude and fortune that Dr. Wilson
chose to accept the supervision of this project. I would also like to thank my committee. Douglas
McCalla and Terry Crowley provided valuable feedback on the initial draft of this thesis and I
am grateful for their comments. Thank you to the volunteers and staff members of the Peel
Heritage Complex and Archives, in particular I would like to thank reference archivist Brian
Gilchrist and volunteer Merle Middlebrook for their interest and help in locating valuable
sources. I would also like to thank the Department of History at the University of Guelph for an
exciting and stimulating experience that I look forward to continuing during my doctorate
degree. Lastly, I would like to thank my parents, Jeff and Kenda Nurse, for instilling in me the
value of agriculture and rural life and making me aware of the rich history rural communities have.
1 Table of Contents
Acknowledgements i
List of Figures iii
Map of Peel County, 1877 iv
Chapter One: Introduction 1
Chapter Two: The Rise of the County Fall Fair 16
Chapter Three: An Investigation of the 1871 County of Peel Fall Fair and those who Participated 41
Chapter Four: The Reasons for Individual and Community
Participation at the Peel County Fall Fair 86
Chapter Five: Conclusion 112
Appendix A: A Brief Note on Sources 115
Appendix B: Statistical Tables 117
Appendix C: 1871 Peel County Fall Fair Prize List 127
Bibliography: 135
li List of Figures
Figure 3.1: Number of classes in each of the 13 categories, Brampton Fall Fair 1871 48
Figure 3.2: Portrait of Joseph Gardner, 1877 75
Figure 3.3: Residence of Joseph Gardner, 1877 75
Figure 3.4: Portrait of John P. Hutton and his wife, Jemima Hutton, 1877 79
Figure 3.5: Residence of J. P. Hutton, 1877 79
Figure 4.1: Residence of John Haggert, 1877 104
Figure 4.2: Haggert Brothers Advertisement 107
in County of Peel, 1877
fe„
V
fe.*-%#^:i£|,u-.l::i :• i ^:;' f: ^ • -$i...[::&Pj K, if: ,s,.,::^r^if"i! ;i: i!• -it-• •! .L ::• -"AiHx&^-i,- -^a, Liy? f;-fff
i- V-r- T fir is ...•!!-•• J|\ir --*•.« ..-4*- ii-jfM :•/•
K^^=-if™^li; ,!i"'fcX"H--- •••!'•• v^'Vl!'§*•// ifeSh,«^SpR:
"•Aif"
hf, • =! ,1* lift VJV^V.V'^* i, ': -•' ~JJ»i • •• -if - " i .!!, V - '.^••
I n.i? !('<. %!•••! (iii!-i'..; :: i :.^w»»i*!J ~ ''«* ['tftcr:icr*f:::,.: -|f-r^ j • •; \ ;~j • i g%
j f<€ , • 1V'^S33y%«»^<*f» if •* i :f( , !! :| : rjj* ; i>cr-:.... ^t?-:;.';-.^. v' •; j l X ^ IIS* -3
m..
Source: Historical Atlas of Peel County, Ontario (Published by Walker & Miles, 1877).
IV 1
Chapter One: Introduction
In 1871 the Peel County Fall Fair was considered a grand success by the local newspaper,
The Brampton Times. Even though the writer noted that "perfection has not been reached," the fair was praised for the excellent exhibits presented and its marked improvement over former years.1 Improvements made to the fairgrounds that year were noted approvingly and the large array of visitors was described as a "joyous" crowd with "exhilarated spirits."2 Full of animals of all shapes and sizes, the latest in agricultural implements and manufactured products, the best of crops, vegetables and fruits on display, along with an assortment of dairy products, homes crafts and fine art, the Peel County Fall Fair was an event that was eagerly anticipated by the area's residents. Organizers of the fair promoted the event as an opportunity for farmers and artisans to make comparisons between the winning entries exhibited so that they too could evaluate their own products and livestock and strive to emulate any superior items.
This county agricultural fair and the description provided were similar to those of many of the county agricultural fairs held across the province of Ontario in the 1870s. Focused on the agricultural and manufactured products being produced in the province, these events sought to influence producers into adopting better breeds, more improved methods of cultivation, new and enhanced agricultural implements and machinery, and more desirable forms of household production and artistic pursuits. Yet, while education was touted as the primary function of agricultural fairs and exhibitions, this study will reveal that the county agricultural fair also provided a number of other important functions. A detailed analysis of the 1871 Peel County Fall
1 "Peel Fall Fair! Another Grand Success!" Brampton Times (6 October 1871). 2 Ibid. 2
Fair and the fair's participants show the ways in which fairs were representative of the cultural and economic changes occurring in the countryside and how they had been shaped to meet the changing needs of rural people. This study challenges previous assumptions about the limited appeal of agricultural societies and fairs and shows that fair exhibitors and agricultural society members represented the diversity of individuals found throughout the nineteenth-century countryside. In particular, agricultural fairs by 1871 had become essential components of the rural landscape by providing valued social, recreational, and economic opportunities for rural communities.
Before exploring the specifics of the ideas presented here, however, it is first necessary to understand how agricultural societies have been examined in previous historical works. Research on agricultural societies in Ontario is not new, nor has there been a fundamental shift in the way historians have viewed the aims of these organizations. Both early and more recent studies have investigated agricultural societies as promoters of agricultural improvement and agents of modernization. The organizers of these associations were vocal about their aims for agricultural improvement in the province through the dissemination of scientific agricultural knowledge and practice, paying particular attention to the promotion of competition as a marker of success and a source for emulation. Subsequently, historians have sought to determine whether or not these groups successfully obtained their goals. Yet, despite a shared acknowledgement about the intentions of agricultural societies and the purpose behind their activities, there is disagreement among historians regarding just how effective these organizations were at achieving their aims.
It is largely recognized that in the first half of the nineteenth century agricultural organizations had only a minor impact, if any, on agricultural improvement within the province.
In his dated, though still influential work on the history of agriculture in Ontario, Robert Leslie 3
Jones determines that these societies had little vitality in the first decades of the nineteenth
century and too few accomplishments to have warranted any significant commemoration. Jones
is not alone in his evaluation of early agricultural societies in Upper Canada. It has been widely
held by both American and Canadian historians writing about the initial stages of agricultural
organizations in North America that the first agricultural societies did not attract great support
from the farming population, but rather were patronized largely by professionals, merchants and
gentlemen farmers, in sum, those who "rarely followed the plow or pitched manure."4
Historians studying Pre-Confederation agricultural societies have seriously questioned
the success of agricultural societies in fulfilling their aims of improvement in the countryside. In
his work on the development of agricultural societies in Upper Canada, Ross D. Fair is critical of
the membership of early societies, explaining that rather than actively engaging with the larger
farming population, these first associations held a limited appeal for most farmers and were more
useful as sites to exhibit elite status rather than forums to encourage the widespread improvement
of agricultural practices.5 Other historians have given more credit to the intentions of early
agricultural improvers, arguing that despite their gentility, these men were deeply interested in
agricultural problems and committed to improving farm practices and the activities of their
organizations.6 Nevertheless, they too recognize that agricultural societies were unable to
achieve great success in the beginning. As Paul W. Gates explains, early societies were "limited
3 Robert Leslie Jones, History of Agriculture in Ontario, 1613-1880 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1977, cl946), 163. Jones explains that so unimportant was the impact of the early agricultural societies in Upper Canada that "it is enough to notice that their activities were only a vague memory when in 1855 the first historian of agricultural organizations in Upper Canada undertook to investigate them." 4 Paul Wallace Gates, The Farmer's Age: Agriculture, 1815-1860 (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1960), 312. Also see Graeme Wynn, "Exciting a Spirit of Emulation Among the 'Plodholes': Agricultural Reform in Pre- Confederation Nova Scotia," Acadiensis, vol. 20, no. 1 (Autumn 1990). Ross Fair, "Gentlemen, farmers, and gentlemen half-farmers: the development of agricultural societies in Upper Canada, 1792-1846," Ph.D. thesis, Queen's University, 1998. 6 See Gates, The Farmer's Age, and Daniel Samson, Spirit of Industry and Improvement: Liberal Government and Rural-Industrial Society, Nova Scotia, 1790-1862 (Montreal & Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press, 2008). 4 by the nature of their appeal to gentlemen farmers, and the results of their activities, as set forth in their publications, could not have influenced the general practice of agriculture much at the time."7 According to Graeme Wynn in his study of agricultural reform in Pre-Confederation
Nova Scotia, farmers continued to resist the influence of agricultural societies well beyond their early years of existence and that, for all agricultural societies' claims of success, their impact was severely limited. Instead of convincing farmers to take up new farming practices, agricultural societies often drew attention to the deficiency and inappropriateness of the agricultural reform doctrine they promoted.8 In Daniel Samson's recent work on the making of modernity in rural
Nova Scotia, Samson also questions the effectiveness of these groups by determining that the development of reform in the province was "a fragmented and contested process" in which many people resisted the changes proposed by agricultural improvers and persisted with agricultural practices that were "not in keeping with the ideals of liberal modernizers."9 Samson contends that agricultural societies continued to serve the interests of rural elites and that "despite the improvers' shared proselytizing spirit, their declared belief in emulation, and the possibilities for instruction, society members remained much more interested in fraternity than in equality, and most of their correspondence fully dripped with disdain for the unimproved."10
The assertion here is that, even by mid-nineteenth century and beyond, agricultural societies in Canada remained detached from the everyday life of the rural population and that regardless of how agricultural improvers defined successful farming practices, most farmers were living their lives and managing their farms as they saw fit. While there were those who were engaged with improving their farms, implementing new modes of cultivation and adopting
7 Gates, The Farmer's Age, 312. 8 Wynn, "Exciting a Spirit of Emulation Among the 'Plodholes'," 50-51. 9 Samson, Spirit of Industry and Improvement, 5. 10 Ibid., 280. 5
new labour-saving machinery, they were doing so on their own terms, rather than conforming mindlessly to improvers' advice ." Ultimately Samson argues that rather than succeeding at
improving farming in Nova Scotia, agricultural improvers were more important historically for
"their role as formative elements in the institutional bases of governance, the organization of
middle-class masculine identity, the formation of a liberal state, the legitimization of certain
forms of liberal-capitalist practice, and the consolidation of key liberal ideas that lay at the heart
of governmentality."
The result of these studies on the early development of agricultural societies has had an
interesting impact on the perception of agricultural societies throughout the nineteenth century
and even beyond. Some historians have argued that agricultural leadership was nonexistent in the province during the majority of the nineteenth century. Douglas Lawr claims that despite the
widely held recognition by agricultural improvers that agricultural practices were backward and in need of improvement and an overwhelming consensus about the need for agricultural
education in nineteenth-century Ontario, it was not until the Ontario Agriculture College weathered the formative years of its existence and became a highly successful institution in the
early twentieth century that farmers finally received valuable assistance and education for their
farming practices.13 Lawr asserts that early attempts at agricultural education failed largely because of "the conflict of purposes between the improvers and the local farm people, the paucity of agricultural science, and the total lack of experience in organizing instructional programs for large numbers of the adult population."14 Lawr is not alone in identifying the
11 Ibid., 53. 12 Ibid., 251. 13 Douglas Lawr, "Agricultural Education in Nineteenth-Century Ontario: An idea in Search of an Institution," in Education and Social Change: Themes from Ontario's Past, ed. Michael B. Katz and Paul H. Mattingly (New York: New York University Press, 1975), 169. 14 Ibid. 6
twentieth century as a pivotal period in agricultural progress. Deborah Fitzgerald also argues that
agricultural leadership in North America did not emerge until the 1920s, when business leaders,
agricultural college professors, demonstration agents and bankers developed an "industrial logic
for agriculture."15 Fitzgerald explains that "this logic functioned as a matrix of ideas, practices,
and relationships that persuaded farmers to change the way they did things."16 This change was
to alter agricultural practices so that farmers could become efficient businessmen in the
increasingly competitive capitalist market. Canadian historian Jeffery Taylor agrees that it was
not until the early twentieth-century that farming was radically transformed by ideologies of
professionalism and that agricultural practices were altered by a "whole range of scientific and technological knowledge necessary for sustained and efficient production."17 Such studies imply that before the twentieth century agricultural improvement was minimal, if not altogether
stagnant. The assumption here is, that like the first agricultural societies that exerted little influence among the practical farmers of the province, late-nineteenth century agricultural
societies suffered similar indifference.
The fact is, however, that agricultural societies, particularly township and county agricultural societies, underwent significant transformations over the course of the century. Little attention has been paid to these changes and as a result the literature on late nineteenth century agricultural societies is minimal. Those who have examined agricultural societies and the exhibitions they held during this period have largely restricted their investigations to the provincial agricultural association or focused more on the international, national, provincial or large regional exhibitions like the Toronto Industrial Exhibition or Western Fair in London and
15 Deborah Fitzgerald, Every Farm a Factory: The Industrial Ideal in American Agriculture (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2003), 8. 16 Ibid. 17 Jeffery Taylor, Fashioning Farmers: Ideology, Agricultural Knowledge and the Manitoba Farm Movement, 1890- 1925 (Regina, Sask.: Canadian Plains Research Center, University of Regina, 1994), 117-118. 7 have neglected the township and county fairs around the province of Ontario. In his study of agricultural exhibitions and ploughing matches in the twentieth century, Daivid Mizener perhaps best describes the state of investigation into agricultural societies and the fairs they held by noting that "at best these events warrant only the occasional comment or amusing anecdote. Few authors pause and seriously reflect upon the evolving nature of these events or their social and cultural significance."19
Historians have noted that agricultural societies began to prosper after receiving grants from the government of Upper Canada in the 1830s and that there was a significant breakthrough that came for agricultural societies with the formation of the Agricultural Association of Upper
Canada and consequent provincial exhibitions that began in 1846. Very little is said, however, about how these changes influenced the social elements and membership, as well as function, of these organizations. This dissertation hopes to address this neglect and contribute to a deeper understanding of the transformations within county agricultural societies and the characteristics of these organizations in Ontario during the latter half of the nineteenth century.
Crucial to this study is the importance that the agricultural fair held in the second half of nineteenth century rural Upper Canada and Ontario.20 While fairs were only one of the many activities that Agricultural Societies organized to educate the rural population about improved
See Keith Walden, Becoming Modern in Toronto: the Industrial Exhibition and the Shaping of a late Victorian Culture (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1997); Elsbeth Heaman, The Inglorious Arts of Peace: Exhibitions in Canadian Society during the Nineteenth Century (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1999); and Vibeke Sanmiya, "A Spirit of Enterprise: The Western Fair Association, London, Ontario: 1867-1947" (Ph.D. thesis, Wilfrid Laurier University, 2002). 19 David Mizener, "Furrows and Fairgrounds: Agriculture, Identity and Authority in Twentieth-Century Rural Ontario" (Ph.D. thesis, York University, 2008), 8. 20 This study employs the term fair and exhibition interchangeably. By the second half of the nineteenth-century, agricultural fairs in Ontario were no longer just large market places for the sale and acquisition of goods; they had taken on the characteristics of exhibitions were farm products and manufactured goods were displayed and competitions and various forms of entertainment were offered. While the term exhibition has sometimes been used to denote larger events, such as the Provincial Exhibition, the American states called their largest fairs "state fairs." The Peel County Fall Fair was referred to in the newspapers as various times as both a fall fair and an exhibition. 8 agriculture, they quickly became the most important. Fairs became an invaluable didactic tool because they presented agricultural education alongside entertainment and celebration. The
County of Peel Agricultural Society provides a valuable example of how the annual agricultural fair captured the attention of the local population and gave farmers, artisans, manufacturers and other residents of the community the chance to see new agricultural implements and technology, superior breeds of livestock and plants, and quality domestic manufactures. Fairs were used by the agricultural society to educate the county residents on what was considered "the best" of a certain item and then they encouraged those whose products had not reached such excellence to adopt similar standards. Fairs also encouraged a sense of pride amongst the community and they encouraged each region to put on the best and largest exhibitions so that their community could be seen as economically and culturally superior. Therefore, the Peel County Fall Fair also demonstrates how fair organizers and supporters employed the rhetoric of responsibility and duty to the community, province, and the nation in order to ensure the population's participation.
Fairs held important social, cultural and economic importance in rural communities as well because these events attracted large numbers of people from the town and the countryside where neighbours could come and mingle, marvel at the assortment of articles on display and even use the fair to market their own produce and manufactures. Of course, the acquisition of knowledge remained the fundamental purpose of fairs for agricultural societies.
Agricultural societies placed an emphasis on the annual agricultural fair because it was at these events that they believed the greatest number of people could be reached and the greatest influence towards progressive farming practices could be exerted. Some historians have accepted that agricultural societies largely fulfilled their didactic and ideological purposes through the use of fairs and exhibitions, while others have questioned the success of agricultural societies' programs and highlighted the resistance encountered by these groups. In his evaluation of the historiography of agricultural exhibitions, David Mizener argues that American historians
Wayne Caldwell Neely and Warren J. Gates, among others, have been too eager to presume that
agricultural improvers were successful in persuading farmers to adopt their recommendations. As
Mizener explains, "[t]hese studies position agricultural fairs and ploughing contests as mechanisms of social control, shaping the practices, values, and sensibilities of hapless participants."21 Rather than portraying the competitors and visitors as active participants at these events, these studies imply that participants were ultimately regulated by the whims of organizers.22 In his influential work on agricultural fairs in the United States Neely claims that fairs "were held by practically all the societies," and they were "the means of broadening the farmers' information concerning live stock, machinery, crops and agricultural practices."23
Furthermore, he agrees with the period's agricultural improvers that "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness would take care of themselves if only the farmer could get hold of more efficient reapers and plows, better breeds of cattle and horses and hogs and sheep, and more productive grain."24 Neely credits the county fair with allowing the farmer the opportunity to witness the means by which agricultural expansion was taking place and the ways in which new advances in agricultural practices and machinery were bringing the land into fuller production.25 Historian
Warren J. Gates also argues for agricultural fairs' significant contributions to the dynamics of rural life in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, and he explains how fairs were able to expose fairgoers to cumulative forces of modernization that encouraged farmers to adopt new
21 Ibid., 9. 22 Ibid. 23 Wayne Neely, The Agricultural Fair (New York: Columbia University Press, 1935), 81. 24 Ibid., 89. 25 Ibid. 10 cultivation and husbandry practices.26 In addition, works such as Catherine E. Kelly's investigation of New England agricultural fairs and the construction of class and gender have accepted that these shows and exhibitions were successful in creating a "rural society that married an agricultural economy to an agrarian ideal," in which she finds that "provincial elites had successfully refashioned the agrarian ideal of the Early Republic to accommodate the conventions of middle-class culture."27 Kelly explains that cattle shows and fairs simultaneously worked to influence the population to accept the cultural needs and economic strategies of the emerging middle-class and the capitalist market, while maintaining the importance of domestic manufactures that resisted mass produced products.
Canadian historians have also maintained that the agricultural fairs sponsored by agricultural societies and their elite leaders had a significant influence on the improvement of farming and the development of superior livestock within the region.28 Not surprisingly, historical accounts produced by the Ontario Association of Agricultural Societies have also focused on the achievements of the nineteenth and twentieth-century township, county and provincial organizations in improving agriculture across the province. While each of these studies investigates the functioning of fairs for unique purposes, some using very different approaches to the topic, they all accept that agricultural fairs and the "elite" organizers that promoted them were successful in disseminating, not only the "scientific" agricultural practices
Warren J. Gates, "Modernization as a Function of an Agricultural Fair: The Great Grangers Picnic Exhibition at Williams Grove, Pennsylvania, 1873-1916," Agricultural History, vol. 58, no. 3 (July 1984): 262. 27 Catherine Kelly, ""The Consumption of Rural Prosperity and Happiness": New England Agricultural Fairs and the Construction of Class and Gender, 1810-1860," American Quarterly, vol. 49, no. 3 (September 1997): 594. 28 G. Elmore Reaman, A History of Agriculture in Ontario, vol. 1 (Aylesbury, Eng.: Hazell Watson & Viney, 1970), 77. 29 See Ontario Association of Agricultural Societies, The Story of Agricultural Fairs and Exhibitions, 1792-1967, and their contribution to the advancement of agriculture and betterment of community life (Picton: Picton Gazette, 1967) and Guy Scott, A Fair Share: A History of Agricultural Societies and Fairs in Ontario, 1792-1992 (Toronto: Ontario Association of Agricultural Societies, 1992). 11
they espoused, but also the values and philosophies of improvement, profit and industriousness
that they championed.
In contrast, Elsbeth A. Heaman and her study of agricultural and industrial exhibitions in
Canadian society during the nineteenth century provides a focus on exhibitions as agents of modernity and again expresses doubt about organizers' ability to use these events for instructive purposes. Through the use of the analytical framework of cultural hegemony, Heaman discovers
deep seated resistance to improvers' ideas. Even though Heaman concludes that "exhibitions
aided the development of agricultural industries by encouraging specialization and facilitating
the dissemination of products across the country", she also argues that they could not create an
industry where it did not already exist. Heaman claims that improvers were always surprised by how much resistance they met from farmers and that ultimately because the "elite" reformers' messages presented at exhibitions were often contradictory, these events were largely ineffectual
instruments of hegemony.30 Keith Walden also employs the analytical framework of cultural hegemony in studying the Toronto Industrial Exhibition, and although he finds that this fair was relatively successful as a "mechanism to engineer support for metropolitan, middle-class leadership," he also questions the fair's ability to persuade people to adopt modern practices.31
While these historians have contributed greatly to our understanding of the functioning of exhibitions and fairs, and their sometimes hidden, sometimes rather obvious, pretext of legitimizing the leadership of particular interests and ways of life, they have been unable to provide a compelling account of the fair experience from the average individual's perspective.
While Walden's work provides significant insight into how the fair experience shaped understandings of modern urban culture, the importance of agricultural fairs for the rural
Heaman, The Inglorious Arts of Peace, 313. ' Walden, Becoming Modern in Toronto, 30. 12
population is largely lost in his investigation. Walden admits in the introduction of his work that
the direct voices of many significant groups, including farm people, are hard to come by, and
thus the result is a study that often neglects the very people whose participation and viewership
the organizers of these events sought to influence. Even Heaman's study which achieves a fuller
understanding of agricultural exhibitions in rural areas is limited because, although she focuses
on agricultural exhibitions as they appeared in the first half of the nineteenth century, she directs
most of her study on the larger international and national industrial competitions that emerged in
the second half of the century, ignoring the importance of township, county, and even provincial
agricultural associations in the latter part of the nineteenth century when they provided a greater
service to rural communities than ever before.
Furthermore, the literature on agricultural societies, whether arguing for or against their
importance in the nineteenth century, often posits the "elite" reformer against the "ordinary"
farmer of those for and those against agricultural improvement. Of course, the countryside was
much more multifaceted than this. Certainly promoters for agricultural improvement did envision
an ordinary farmer that was unimproved and resistant to change; however, understanding that
this was not the reality is important when considering the ways in which some writers have
implicitly accepted the improvers' frame of reference. Terry Crowley has shown how measures
of rural differentiation could be extremely complex and no ordinary farmer ever existed unto
which reformers could direct their sermons for agricultural change.33 This thesis highlights the
diversity of those in the countryside and shows that individuals' acceptance or refusal of reformers' ideas was often because of their own social, cultural and economic reasons.
32 Ibid., 29. 33 Terry Crowley, "Rural Labour," In Labouring Lives: Work and Workers in Nineteenth-Century Ontario, ed. Paul Craven (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1995), 10-103. 13
David Mizener provides a valuable study of agricultural exhibitions in the twentieth
century by employing these events as a lens through which to examine how rural society in the
twentieth century responded to demographic decline and the transformation of the farm industry.
Mizener concludes that these events provided important venues for the expression of rural
values, identities, and ideas from the farming communities.34 He dismisses suggestions of
institutional decline and asserts that, not only did these organizations flourish, but they played
valuable economic, social, and cultural functions in rural Ontario well into the twentieth
century.35 The question remains, however: how did agricultural societies and the fairs they held
emerge as such valuable institutions in the rural community of the twentieth century when they
have been considered as largely disconnected from the rural population in the nineteenth
century? Agricultural societies and the fairs grew in importance over the course of the
nineteenth century because they were refashioned to meet the needs for which they were required. Agricultural societies had to adapt to new interests emerging in society and abandon
old aims and functions that no longer suited their present purpose.
This dissertation investigates the County of Peel Agricultural Society and Peel County
Fall Fair because, like many of the established districts in Ontario, settlement in Peel County
continued to grow. Peel County consisted of five townships: Albion, Caledon, Chinguacousy,
Toronto, and the Gore of Toronto.36 In 1851 Peel County contained the three principal villages of
Brampton, Streetsville and Port Credit, with fewer than 2,000 engaged in the primary functions of each place: the grain trade in Brampton, shipping and fishing in Port Credit and cloth
34 Mizener, "Furrows and Fairgrounds," 352. 35 Ibid., 25. 36 While geographical area of Peel County was comprised of these five townships, in 1867 Cardwell county was established as an electoral district and it included the townships of Albion and Caledon from Peel. While these townships have been historically represented as part of Peel throughout its history, the 1871 Census did include them under the county of Cardwell and thus the census linkage conducted in this study did not attempt to include residents from these townships in the sample used to represent fair participants from Peel. 14 manufacturing in Streetsville.37 By 1871, however, Peel County, and the town of Brampton in particular, had a vigorous commercial sector and manufacturing industry that included numerous retail outlets, agricultural implement manufacturers, carriage builders, cabinet factories and a number of other businesses for skilled tradesmen.38 Still, the primary industry was agriculture, and as by the later half of the nineteenth century additional land acquisition became more expensive and difficult for the area's farmers, new methods for increasing the fertility and productivity of their existing lands became progressively more important. Furthermore, Peel
County was a wealthy farming community in comparison to many other regions in Ontario, as it had developed to become a strong producer of wheat which indicated its relatively good soil and access to the water transport system.39 This study also shows how mixed farming that emphasized livestock became increasingly important for Peel producers. The importance of livestock and the diverse agricultural and manufactured products being produced in Peel made it a good county in which to support a local agricultural society and fair.
As the following chapters reveal, Peel County residents supported their local Agricultural
Society and County Fair because it offered individual and communal benefits for doing so.
Chapter Two surveys the creation and rise of agricultural societies and fairs and establishes the ideological agenda that these societies pursued, while highlighting the significant transformations they underwent. It examines how agricultural societies adapted to the cultural and economic climate of the second half of the century by shifting their activities to support the agricultural fair as the primary function for their organization. This chapter also shows how the rise of liberal ideals and state formation influenced the rhetoric employed to promote fairs and
37 David Gagan, Hopeful Travellers: Families, Land, and Social Change in Mid- Victorian Peel County, Canada West (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1981), 126. 38 Ibid., 127. 39 R. Marvin Mclnnis, "The Early Ontario Wheat Staple Reconsidered," in Perspectives on Ontario Agriculture 1815-1930 (Gananoque, Ont: Langdale Press, 1992), 39. 15
their value for the community. Chapter Three provides a case study of the County of Peel
Agricultural Society and County Fall Fair that provides a deeper understanding of the socio
economic composition of the fair's participants. By linking the fair exhibitors, judges and
executive committee members of 1871 Peel County Fall Fair with the 1871 Census of Canada
manuscript data, this chapter reveals that rather than maintaining a selective group of
participants, agricultural fairs attracted a wide-range of people. It is shown that the middling
farmer, along with an array of individuals in diverse occupations and class backgrounds,
participated in the agricultural fair because these events offered social, cultural, and economic
benefits. The scope of the benefits that attracted fair goers is further examined in Chapter Four,
where the reasons behind individuals' participation are given a direct voice through fair
exhibitors' own stories. Commentary found in newspapers, journals and diaries give fair
participants' perspective on these events, thus going beyond the views and ideas expressed by
the organizers and promoters of agricultural fairs.
As a whole, these chapters provide an important contribution to the literature of late
nineteenth-century agricultural societies and fairs. This study describes the transformations
agricultural organizations underwent since their inception and ties these transformations to the broader cultural and economic changes occurring in the province. Furthermore, key assumptions
about the composition and appeal of agricultural societies in the second half of the nineteenth
century are challenged and, through the use of census data, newspapers, journals and diaries, a deeper understanding of individual and community experiences at agricultural fairs is achieved. 16
Chapter Two: The Rise of the County Fall Fair
The mid-nineteenth century has often been seen as a turning point for agriculture in
Ontario.1 It can also be considered the time when agricultural societies in the province came of age. This chapter traces the developments of local county and township agricultural societies in nineteenth-century Ontario and reveals the significant transformations these organizations underwent. During the first half of the nineteenth century agricultural societies' existence had been precarious at best. Often newly formed groups were defunct mere years after they began.
By the 1850s, however, more than 40 county societies and at least 150 township societies existed throughout the province,2 and by the twentieth century more than 350 county and township agricultural societies operated in Ontario.3 The increase in agricultural societies suggests that these institutions played an increasingly important role in rural society and, despite a rocky beginning, they had learned to use their most popular didactic tool, the agricultural fair, to advance their goals of agricultural education in the province. The County of Peel Agricultural
Society and Fall Fair demonstrate how agricultural fairs had undergone significant transformations that strengthened their social, cultural and economic significance in rural society. Moreover, agricultural societies promoted the agricultural fairs' importance by employing the rhetoric of responsibility and duty to the community, province, and the nation in order to ensure the population's participation.
1 See R. Marvin Mclnnis, "Ontario Agriculture at Mid-Century," in Perspectives on Ontario Agriculture 1815-1930 (Gananoque, Ont: Langdale Press, 1992) and Douglas McCalla, Planting the Province: The Economic History of Upper Canada 1784-1870 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1993). 2 Ontario Association of Agricultural Societies, The Story of Ontario Agricultural Fairs and Exhibitions, 24. 3 Scott, A Fair Share, 68. 17
The Early Stages of Agricultural Societies and Agricultural Fairs
Before investigating the specific roles that these organizations played in the late nineteenth century, it is first important to understand the transformations that agricultural societies had undergone since their inauguration. The first agricultural society in Upper Canada began when John Graves Simcoe, Upper Canada's first Lieutenant-Governor, created the
Agricultural Society of Upper Canada, later to be known as the Niagara Agricultural Society, in
1792.4 The Agricultural Society of Upper Canada was the first organization in the province to be devoted to the improvement of agriculture.5 Simcoe was devoted to increasing agricultural settlement and saw the creation of agricultural societies as a necessary apparatus for agricultural improvement and success.6 Since agricultural societies were reasonably commonplace in
England, Simcoe believed that agricultural societies in Upper Canada could be successfully modeled after their British counterparts.
The fact was, however, that an identical reconstruction of English agricultural societies was not possible in the sparsely populated colony of Upper Canada that had neither the social or political structure that formed the basis of these associations back in England. While the purpose of these organizations in both England and Canada was to break, or at least weaken, the traditional ways of farming in the countryside which were no longer considered acceptable by agricultural reformers, in England agricultural societies held a significant membership of powerful aristocratic landlords who were passionate about improving the agriculture on their lands.7 Also, because agricultural land had already been well established and worked for centuries, it was more critical to discover new agricultural techniques for maintaining soil
4 Ibid., 1. 5 Ontario Association of Agricultural Societies, The Story of Ontario Agricultural Fairs and Exhibitions, 1. 6 Scott, A Fair Share, 17. 7 Kenneth Hudson, Patriotism with Profit: British Agricultural Societies in the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries (London: Hugh Evelyn, 1972), 2. 18 quality. In Upper Canada pioneer farmers were more concerned with making farms out of the wilderness than they were about measures to conserve the soil and resources.
Furthermore, early agricultural societies in Upper Canada were often governed by government officials, merchants and professional gentlemen who ultimately had little in common with the yeoman farmers who they sought to influence; they therefore received scant attention from the majority of practical farmers. Initially, agricultural societies provided elite rural men with the opportunity to meet socially, demonstrate their social rank and legitimize the power they sought to govern future development and progress.8 Rather than playing a dominant role in shaping agricultural practices and improvement, Upper Canada's agricultural societies "remained little more than private forums for their members to display their gentlemanly status."9 Even those members who were deeply concerned with agricultural problems and made great efforts towards improving farm practices on their estates and in their communities were ultimately unable to achieve great success.10 Therefore, despite the best intentions of Simcoe and the members of the first agricultural society in Upper Canada, the organization was ultimately unsuccessful, and while it would re-emerge later in the nineteenth century, by 1806 the society was virtually defunct.'' The few other agricultural societies that attempted to organize around the province in the first decades of the nineteenth century also met with limited success because they too were unable to attain membership or support from the greater farming population.
Even with early agricultural societies' inability to attract greater membership amongst the general farmers of Upper Canada, the very creation of these groups did indicate an interest for
8 Samson, Spirit of Industry and Improvement, 251. Also, see Ross Fair, "Gentlemen, farmers, and gentlemen half- farmers: the development of agricultural societies in Upper Canada, 1792-1846," Ph.D. thesis, Queen's University, 1998. 9 Fair, "Gentlemen, farmers, and gentlemen half-farmers," i. 10 Gates, The Farmer's Age, 312. 11 Scott, A Fair Share, 18. 19 agricultural education and reform in the province and attracted the government's attention to their activities.12 Perhaps the greatest contribution made by these early agricultural societies was their successful campaign to receive government assistance. While there were certainly agricultural reformers who believed vehemently in the benefits that agricultural societies could offer the province, there were also many politicians and public figures that supported the creation of these organizations because they realized how agricultural societies and the events they held offered an opportunity for them to connect to the voters. Whether or not these organizations made significant contributions to farmers and rural communities was not always the priority of those who sought their use for other purposes. To what extent politics drove government support of agricultural societies is unknown; however, it certainly did not deter the government's approval for these organizations. Influenced in part by the powerful representatives of these organizations and the recent laws in neighbouring American states that supported the funding of agricultural associations, on March 6th, 1830, the first of a series of laws was passed by the provincial legislature authorizing the government subsidization of agricultural societies.
Although funding was limited, the government agreed to pay £100 to any district agricultural society which raised £50 by subscription.13 The agricultural societies prior to 1830 had been supported by individual effort, thus limiting their growth. The first law of 1830, however, increased the financial resources of these organizations, consequently stimulating the creation of more agricultural societies across the province.14
Despite this support, however, there still remained expressions of dissatisfaction over the inability of agricultural societies and their "parlour farmer" members to provide more practical
Reaman, A History of Agriculture in Ontario, 69. 13 "County and Township Agricultural Societies," Journal and Transactions of the Board of Agriculture of Upper Canada, vol. 1 (Toronto: Board of Agriculture, 1856), 5. The terms of these subsidies changed throughout the period until a final act in 1851. 14 Jones, History of Agriculture in Ontario, 164. 20 and useful knowledge to the agricultural community.15 Critics complained that agricultural societies placed too great an emphasis on specialized areas of agriculture such as the breeding of livestock, particularly light horses and show cattle, rather than advancing the more basic knowledge of improved cultivation methods and better farm building construction.16 Evidently there continued to be a disconnection between agricultural society members' interests and the concerns of the middling farmer.
This division of interests was also revealed at the agricultural fairs and exhibitions that county and township societies held. For agricultural reformers, fairs held a decidedly serious purpose because it was believed that they were the chief means of promoting new progressive agricultural methods, crops, livestock, and machinery as they attracted the general public, not just society members. Before the second half of the nineteenth century, however, the first fairs and exhibitions continued to be plagued by indifference. The limited nature of the earliest shows and fairs held by agricultural societies is revealed by an investigation of the prizes they offered.
In 1820 the Upper Canada Agricultural Society at York held a show and awarded prizes to the owners of the three best horses and the three best bulls.17 Breeding stock remained the chief concern to society members. Five years later in 1825, the Frontenac Agricultural Society held an exhibition, where premiums were not only awarded for livestock, but also for cheese, flannel, maple sugar, the best two acres of wheat, oats and peas, the best acre of Indian corn, barley and
1 R potatoes, and for ploughing with horses and oxen. This prize list displays a more varied concern for agricultural and domestic pursuits and it was more reflective of the farming
15 T.S., "Letter to the Editor," The Cobourg Star (15 November 1831), quoted in Percy L. Climo, "Fairs, Farms & Exhibitions," Cobourg and District Historical Society, Cobourg, Ontario, 27 September 1983, Percy L. Climo founds, Queen's Archives. 16 Scott, A Fair Share, 27. 17 Jones, History of Agriculture in Ontario, 162-63. 18 Ibid. 21 population because the classes included are illustrative of the necessary products produced and skills used for frontier farming.
Still, the ability of the fair, before the second half of the nineteenth century, to engage the broader public was limited because societies often limited competition to members only. This was to encourage those interested in such events to join the agricultural society, thereby increasing membership and, subsequently the resources of the group.19 Rather than increasing membership, however, this policy only further distanced the county agricultural societies from the general public they sought to influence.
Despite this criticism, government funding of these organizations continued and many believed that these groups could provide valuable assistance to advancing farming in the province. By mid-nineteenth century, Upper Canada was already recognized as a major agricultural producer internationally,20 and in the 1840s and 1850s increased immigration from the United Kingdom, and to a lesser extent the United States, allowed further development to occur in areas of Upper Canada still suitable for agricultural production.21 The desire to further improve and expand the agricultural capacity of the province was at the forefront of the provincial government and agricultural improvers' minds, as evidenced by the considerable attention improvement received in the region's newspapers and agricultural journals and publications. There was a strong belief that a central agricultural body was necessary if
"progress" was to be made and many believed that an expansion of agricultural societies on a provincial scale was the best option considering they were the only agricultural improvement organization in the province at the time.
19 Scott, A Fair Share, 25. J. David Wood, Making Ontario: Agricultural Colonialization and Landscape Re-Creation before the Railway (Montreal & Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press, 2000), 7. 21 Randall White, Ontario 1610-1985: A political and economic history (Toronto: Dundurn Press, 1985), 104. 22
This was also a period in which liberal ideas were taking hold.22 Agricultural improvers in particular were important participants in promoting liberal ideals and participating in state formation. They believed that advancing the interests of the nation would in turn advance their own interests. They believed that a central agricultural association would increase the strength of their influence across the province, and further legitimize their aims. By 1840, agricultural societies had existed in Upper Canada for almost half a century and regarded themselves as the natural voice of the farming community. They had earned some degree of public acceptance as well as government support.23
Campaigning for the creation of a centralized provincial association, proponents of agricultural societies argued that the limited success they achieved thus far was due to an absence of common organization between the disparate societies, rather than a failure with the program of the associations themselves.24 Promoter William G. Edmundson used his position as editor of the British American Cultivator to advocate for the creation of a provincial society, believing that a central organization was necessary if the labours of agricultural associations were to finally come to fruition. There were a number of arguments for the creation of a central agricultural association. The government had spent considerable sums of public money funding agricultural associations and it was argued that a central organizing body was needed to administer and monitor this expenditure.25 More importantly, however, was the desire to create a provincial organization that could manage a provincial exhibition. Supporters of a central agricultural organization felt that county and township agricultural societies were often limited by the scope of the agricultural products and technology in their respective regions. They argued
22 See Samson, Spirit of Industry and Improvement. 23 Thomas W. Irwin, "Government Funding of Agricultural Associations in Late Nineteenth Century Ontario" (Ph.D. thesis, University of Western Ontario, 1997), 17. 24 Jones, History of Agriculture in Ontario, 170. 25 Scott, A Fair Share, 32. 23 that by creating an extensive provincial organization that sought out the best and most valuable agricultural technology and products of every kind and from every quarter of the province and brought these items together for one grand provincial exhibition, they would create greater interest for these items amongst farmers which would result in their diffusion across the province.26 The idea was that county and township agricultural societies would ultimately benefit from inhabitants' increased interest in improved agricultural practices and products and thus their own fairs and exhibitions would become more successful. Although a similar attempt to organize a provincial association had been made in 1812 and resulted in failure, the subsequent funding of agricultural associations and the largely extended number of county societies in the following years showed an increasing popularity for these groups and a commitment to their success.
Those individuals hoping to create a provincial exhibition were encouraged by the success that had already been achieved by the Highland and Agricultural Society of Scotland, the
Royal Agricultural Society in England, and even the Royal Agricultural Improvement Society of
Ireland, which were holding large exhibitions that were receiving large support and patronage.27
The most immediate and important influence for the creation of a provincial organization, however, was the existence of a similar institution in the neighbouring American state of New
York. The New York State Agricultural Society had been in successful operation since 1832 and many Canadian residents had visited the organization's annual exhibition and, supporters argued that they were eager to see a similar central association and exhibition established in Upper
Canada.28
"The Agricultural Association," Journal and Transactions of the Board of Agriculture of Upper Canada, vol. 1 (Toronto: Board of Agriculture, 1856), 17. 24
The discussions for the creation of a central board to direct the activities of agricultural societies had surfaced periodically in the province's press before, but it was not until 1843 that an official communication between supporters of the idea and the provincial government commenced.29 The British American Cultivator published a letter from the Honourable Adam
Fergusson recommending the establishment of a central organizing body and suggestions for how to proceed, and while this topic would remain a staple of discussions presented by
Edmundson in the Cultivator, taking more than three years and sustained dialogue before such an organization was created,30 in the end the supporters of this idea were successful and in 1846 the
Agricultural Association of Upper Canada was formed.31
The provincial agricultural association was to be an important organizing body for the promotion of agriculture and agricultural improvement in the province. This organization was to use various publications, experimental work, and public meetings to circulate ideas about advanced agricultural practices and technology; however, the most important function of the central agricultural organization would ultimately be to coordinate and manage a provincial exhibition. Initially, each district society was to have two representatives on the board of the provincial association and these delegates were to attend an annual meeting to elect an executive for that year consisting of a President, two Vice-Presidents and a secretary-treasurer. Even though this new organization was intended to monitor and coordinate the activities of the county agricultural societies, in the beginning the Agricultural Association of Upper Canada held limited influence because no government grants were made available to this association until
" Ibid., 18. 30 Ibid, 18-21. 31 While the provincial association was formally entitled the Provincial Agricultural Association and Board of Agriculture for Canada West, reflecting the title change of Upper Canada to Canada West after the 1840 union with Quebec, Ontario residents continued to call the colony Upper Canada and the Association was largely recognized as the Agricultural Association of Upper Canada. 25
1849 and so the organization was limited by funds raised by memberships and donations from
the county societies. This meant that instead of controlling the activities of district county
societies, the provincial association was often ruled by their wishes.32 Nevertheless, it was
ultimately the success of provincial exhibitions that allowed the provincial association to expand
its influence and assume a central role in the agricultural society system.
The first Provincial Exhibition was an uncertain venture because the association had yet
-J-5
to receive legal status and it had limited resources to fund the exhibition. It is also important to
realize that before this point, the exhibitions and fairs that had been held by agricultural societies had had limited success. Still, the rise of thriving state fairs across the border had prompted a
desire among agriculturists in Upper Canada to do the same and it encouraged supporters of the
Provincial Exhibition that the event could be a success. The increasing number of Canadian
farmers along the border of the United States who went to see the large state fairs were
impressed by the quality of livestock and the variety of new implements that these exhibitions
displayed and they believed that they too could organize an agricultural exhibition with the same
quality of exhibits and achieve similar success.34
The leaders of Upper Canada's agricultural societies also recognized the potential of fairs
and exhibitions for promoting agricultural improvement to the general public, not just
agricultural society members. Having accepted grants from the government in 1830, agricultural
societies were responsible for providing public agricultural education and working towards the interests of the general rural population. It was agricultural societies' duty to attract the general rural population to these events, both as visitors and competitors, and organizers were keen to
32 Scott, A Fair Share, 32. 33 An act was passed by the Provincial Parliament on the July 28, 1847, for the incorporation of the Agricultural Assocation of Upper Canada, however, it was not until 1849 that the association finally received public funds for its operation. 34 Scott, A Fair Share, 32. 26 employ these events on a province-wide scale which would diffuse agricultural knowledge and technology on a larger scale. Therefore, once the Provincial Association was created the organizers decided to hold the first Provincial Exhibition during the same year, and the
Committee of Management rushed to create a prize list and distribute it before the exhibition in
Toronto on October 21st and 22nd of 1846. Despite the short organizing period, competitions were held for a number of agricultural and domestic pursuits deemed important in the rural economy, particularly classes for breeding stock, wheat, woollen goods, dairy, vegetables and fruits. While the agricultural implement section was regarded as smaller than desired, overall the exhibits and the attendance for the event were deemed a success.35
In the following years the Provincial Exhibitions were held at Hamilton, Cobourg and
Kingston and each year the events grew in size and became more organized and elaborate. In
1850 the Provincial Exhibition was held in Niagara and drew over 14,000 paid visitors.36 By the
1850s the increase in interest for agricultural organization led to further developments. The members of the Agricultural Association of Upper Canada soon felt that a more elaborate and powerful organization was needed to implement agricultural improvements across the province.
With the increasing success of the Provincial Exhibition, members of the Agricultural
Association believed their essential concern should be the management of these exhibitions while another organization should be formed to determine agricultural policy. Therefore, in 1851 the Board of Agriculture of Upper Canada was created and given relatively extensive powers, including the collection of statistics, the operation of experimental farms, the introduction of new breeds of plants and animals, and the creation of an agricultural journal to make its transactions
"The Agricultural Association," Journal and Transactions of the Board of Agriculture of Upper Canada, 26-28. Scott, A Fair Share, 35. 27 public.37 In addition, the central board was to supervise the work of agricultural societies in general, including the provincial association. The Board of Agriculture was comprised often members including the Inspector-General of the Province of Canada, the Professor of
Agriculture at the University of Toronto, and eight men elected by the provincial agricultural association. From 1851 to Confederation the Board of Agriculture performed a vital role in determining agricultural policies and influencing agricultural organizations in Upper Canada.38
In the end, however, it was the creation of the Agricultural Association of Upper Canada that has been regarded as "the big breakthrough" for agricultural societies during the nineteenth century. Their management of the Provincial Exhibitions served to convince many that fairs and exhibitions were the best way to showcase agricultural excellence and innovation.39 By 1852, the seventh provincial fair returned to Toronto and was more successful than ever. Attendance for the fair over the four days of exhibits was estimated at 40,000 people; a huge number considering the population of Toronto was only 32,000 at the time.40 Through these exhibitions, agricultural societies finally found a successful stratagem to influence farming populations. The directors of the provincial, county, and township agricultural societies recognized the economic advantages of attracting great masses to their exhibitions and they enthusiastically championed the expansion of these events and the building of permanent structures in which to house them.41
Even as membership remained relatively small and many farmers remained suspicious of the "scientific" agricultural practices and "book farming" that these organizations espoused, it seems that "many engaged in the practice of 'free riding', absorbing information from
37 Jones, History of Agriculture in Ontario, 328. 38 Ibid., 329. 3 "The Agricultural Association," Journal and Transactions of the Board of Agriculture of Upper Canada, 29. 40 Scott, A Fair Share, 35. 41 D. J. Cochrane, "Agricultural Societies, Cattle Fairs, Agricultural Shows and Exhibition of Upper Canada Prior to 1867" (Unpublished paper, University of Guelph, 1976), 11. 28 exhibitions or reports of discussions, without the burden of membership." Thanks in part to grants received from the government, as well as the creation of a provincial agricultural society to coordinate the efforts of the county and township societies, agricultural societies began to thrive. Rather than prospering at the expense of the smaller district and township agricultural societies, the provincial association aided in the growth and interest of these regionally based groups, particularly by creating renewed fascination with agricultural fairs and exhibitions.
Provincial Agricultural Exhibitions brought a new level of importance to the advancement of agriculture and industry amongst provincial residents. In her second book on life in Canada, Life in the Clearings versus the Bush, published in 1853, Susanna Moodie describes the changes occurring in agriculture as a result of the Provincial Association and Exhibition (albeit in an idealized fashion):
Nothing has contributed more to the rapid advance of the province than the institution of the Agricultural Society, and from it we are already reaping the beneficial results. It has stirred up a spirit of emulation in a large class of people, who were very supine in their method of cultivating their lands; who, instead of improving them, and making them produce not only the largest quantity of grain, but that of the best quality, were quite contented if they reaped enough from their slovenly farming to supply the wants of their family, of a very inferior sort. Now, we behold a laudable struggle among the tillers of the soil, as to which shall send the best specimens of good husbandry to contend for the prizes at the provincial shows... The summer before last my husband took the second prize for wheat at the provincial show, and I must frankly own that I felt as proud of it as if it had been the same sum bestowed upon a prize poem.43
Susanna Moodie went on to further describe the vast displays of livestock, machinery and produce, commenting on the variety and excellence of the items shown. Increasingly, agricultural societies became more than exclusive clubs and the fairs they held were frequented by more than a select few; agricultural societies and fairs had increased their appeal throughout
Irwin, "Government Funding of Agricultural Associations in Late Nineteenth Century Ontario," 10. 43 Susanna Moodie, Life in the Clearings versus the Bush (London: Richard Bentley, 1853; reprint, Toronto: McClelland & Stewart Ltd, 1989), 282. 29
the countryside. The growing acceptance of these associations as important components for the
future prosperity of the province and the fact that all levels of agricultural societies became much
more open in nature and increasingly beholden to the public for support, continued to work to
legitimize their authority on matters concerning agriculture in the province.
Agricultural Societies Take Hold
The 1871 census reveals that there were 1,620, 851 people in Ontario at the time.44 At
this time there were few cities and not many large towns; in fact, in 1871 the province had only
thirteen cities and towns with 5,000 residents or more.45 Therefore Ontario continued to be
largely dependent on its rural population and the agricultural products they produced. Northern
settlement remained limited and the variations in soil and climate throughout the province
encouraged the majority of the population to settle in more agriculturally productive areas,
largely located in the southern areas of the province. For the most part the settled areas of the
province had comfortable agricultural communities where farms were predominantly family
owned. While most of the working population belonged to the agricultural class, there were some
small-scale manufacturing enterprises, the only substantial ones being agricultural implements,
foundries, and other manufacturers of various machinery and equipment. The great industries
were grist, flour, and saw-milling, although there were a number of other service jobs linked to
the agricultural economy such as blacksmithing and the sale of various essential goods that could
not be produced in the household economy.46
Ian M. Drummond, Progress without Planning: The Economic History of Ontario from Confederation to the Second World War (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1987), 3. It is important to recognize that this number was probably somewhat greater considering that the Native population was not completely enumerated. 45 Ibid., 5. 46 Ibid., 6. 30
By the 1870s a shift had also occurred in the type of farming being carried out in the province. As wheat prices became more unreliable and as the western part of the country opened up to new settlement, many Ontario farmers were more disposed to place a greater focus on livestock raising, which involved more work but also promised a more certain return.47 Even well before Confederation a transformation in agriculture had begun. In his economic history of
Upper Canada, Douglas McCalla emphasizes that even at mid-century elements of mixed farming were widely practiced and that specifically livestock and their products played a significant role in the farm income.48 A demand existed for improved breeds of livestock, shown by the increasing numbers that were imported and developed throughout the province.49
Furthermore, by 1870 farmers were increasingly turning towards new forms of mechanized farming to relieve some of the grueling labour that occupied their daily routine.50 For agricultural societies this meant that, more than ever, there was a need for improved livestock. Information on animal husbandry was needed and these groups realized the important role that exhibitions and fairs would play in educating the farmer and encouraging a new appreciation for superior breeds of livestock.
With the aid of government support and the Provincial Agricultural Association, county societies renewed their commitment towards promoting improvement. County agricultural societies, in particular, placed a new emphasis on the annual agricultural fair as a way to influence farming populations. As Paul W. Gates explains, "[i]t was the county fair, rather than the publications and meetings of societies, which reached the lower strata of farmers. The fairs became the principal means by which farmers displayed the progress they were making,
47 Douglas A. Lawr, "The Development of Ontario Farming, 1870-1914: Patterns of Growth and Change," Ontario History 64:4(1972): 245. 48 McCalla, Planting the Province, 224. 49 Lawr, "The Development of Ontario Farming," 248. 50 Ibid., 241. 31 encouraged their neighbours to follow the best and most modern practices, and invited purchase of the good stock they had for sale."51 Elsbeth Heaman has also argued that fairs and exhibitions were powerful didactic tools because farmers were presented with an amusing festival that "lured the farmer towards improvement despite himself,"52 explaining that "exhibitions were the oats that hid the bridle, the school that did not seem to teach."53 The resistance that improvers had initially met with from farmers in the early stages of Upper Canada's agricultural societies' development was increasingly overcome because even the most resistant of farmers to agricultural change could be excited to curiosity about improvement at an exhibition.
The County of Peel Agricultural Society and the Peel County Fall Fair
The County of Peel Agricultural Society provides a valuable example of how the organizing of agricultural exhibitions and fairs became the priority of most agricultural societies throughout Ontario. The County of Peel Agricultural Society was created under the Board of
Agriculture of Upper Canada in 1853 when 78 men from around Peel County came together on the first of February and signed a petition agreeing to abide by the rules and by-laws of the Act of Legislature under which all agricultural societies were governed. Peleg Howland from
Brampton was elected the first President of the association and John Lynch was the first
Secretary-Treasurer. Other directors included Jason Hamilton, Matthew Smith, James Young,
John Elliott, John Clark and Wesley Todd.54 From the 78 men who first joined the organization, the County of Peel Agricultural Society grew to include a membership by 1877 of over 400
51 Gates, The Farmer's Age, 312. 5 Heaman, The Inglorious Arts of Peace, 22. 53 Ibid. 54 Historical Atlas of Peel County, Ontario (Published by Walker & Miles, 1877), 59. 32 people.55 Important to the success of the society was the continual expansion of the Peel County
Fall Fair. There was an agricultural fair reported to have taken place in Chinguacousy Township in 1832, and later in the autumn of 1844, as a branch of the Home District Society,
Chinguacousy established a township agricultural society that held a semi-annual fair and cattle show that was well attended by the surrounding community.56 It was not until 1854, the year after the County of Peel Agricultural Society was created, however, that the first official Peel
County Show was held and 91 members from the townships of Albion, Caledon, Chinguacousy and Toronto Gore took part.57
The Peel County Fall Fair was held in the village of Brampton in Chinguacousy
Township. The County Fair can be seen as a harvest celebration because it was usually held in the first week of October and when most of the crops, fruits and vegetables were ripe for competition. This annual autumn exhibition was also an important event for livestock farmers who wished to sell their surplus stock before the winter months. While there was also a spring fair held in Chinguacousy and a number of township fairs in the fall months, it was the Peel Fall
Fair that received the greatest attendance and offered the most competitions. By the 1870s the fair had become a two day event that highlighted agricultural, domestic, and industrial pursuits of all kinds. Fair exhibitors competed in over 255 classes divided amongst categories for various types of horses, cattle, sheep, pigs, poultry, agricultural products, fruit, flowers, dairy produce, implements and other manufactured articles, fine arts and music. The vast expansion of this fair is illustrated by the fact that in 1871 there were 247 competitors listed on the prize list alone, all
55 Ibid., 59. 5 John Lynch, "County of Peel," Journal and Transactions of the Board of Agriculture of Upper Canada, (Toronto: Board of Agriculture, 1853). 57 Ontario Association of Agricultural Societies, The Story of Ontario Fairs and Exhibitions, 15. 33
of which had to have received at least a third place prize to be included.58 Like many other
agricultural societies, by the 1870s, the Peel County Agricultural Society had "a tendency to
emphasize the exhibition at the expense of everything else."59 Indeed, the primary function of
agricultural societies in many areas of the province in the period after 1850 was to hold an
exhibition.60 Agricultural fairs in Ontario had successfully captured the attention of the general population and "aroused a spirit of competition among the regions, each anxious to attract the most exhibitors, the largest crowds, and the wealthiest purchasers from across North
America,"6'and the Peel County Fair was no different. The success of the Peel County Fall Fair was a source of pride and boosterism for the local community. In 1869 the Brampton Times enthusiastically congratulated the county fair's successful showing:
Our county fall Fair which was this year such an encouraging and praiseworthy success to the Directors of the Peel Agricultural Association, also to its liberal supporters who offered the attractive special prizes, and to the enterprising farmers in this flourishing agricultural district, was aptly and justly classed by one of the Toronto journals as a Provincial Exhibition on a small scale.62
The fact that the holding of fairs had become the primary function of agricultural societies was not accepted without criticism. The Commissioner of Agriculture noted with regret that "comparatively few of the Ontario Agricultural Societies do more than hold an annual exhibition."63 Agricultural improvers still maintained that there was a great deal to learn from the
"book-farming" that was considered by many commentators as unappealing to many farmers in the province. In Peel County, The Bulletin and Streetsville Semi-Monthly Register encouraged
58 "Prize List", Brampton Times (6 October 1871). 59 Jones, History of Agriculture in Ontario, 337. 60 Ibid., 339. 1 Heaman, The Inglorious Arts of Peace, 79. 62 "County Peel Fall Fair of 1869," Brampton Times (5 November 1869). 63 RAA 1879, ix, quoted in Jones, History of Agriculture in Ontario, 337. 34 farmers to subscribe to agricultural journals, particularly those in Upper Canada like the British
American Cultivator. However, even with this encouragement to take up reading agricultural literature, it seemed that many farmers had failed to do so. The editor of the The Bulletin and
Streetsville Semi-Monthly Register, for example, complained that farmers were not doing enough to support the Upper Canada's agricultural journals, such as the British American Cultivator.
We learn with feelings of sorrow, we had almost said of indignation, that the Farmers of Canada, have ... failed in their duty, towards this excellent work. It is upwards of sixteen months since the first number of the Cultivator was published, and during the whole of that time, the actual loss sustained by the proprietor, has amounted to no less a sum, than seven shillings & sixpence a day, on an average. This is truly disgraceful, particularly when we consider that the subscription is only one Dollar per annum. Men of the [Peel County] come forth at once and show a good example to your fellow agriculturalists. Down with your Dollars, and you will be never a whit the poorer. On the contrary, you will be unquestionably the gainers. To use the words of Mr. Ruttan, "I sincerely believe that a good agricultural paper, such as this is (alluding to the Cultivator) attentively read, and the directions attended to, is worth as much to a farmer, who has fifty acres of improved land to till, as an extra labourer would be."
Even as late as 1883 the Council of the Agricultural and Arts Association of Ontario felt that a more general study of reading about agricultural science would be beneficial for farmers and the progress of agriculture in Ontario and they decided to "inaugurate a scheme of annual examinations in subjects bearing directly upon the work of the farm, accompanied by the granting of certificates of merit to all whose examination papers shall come up to a pre determined standard of merit."66 Despite the continual commitment on the part of many improvers to expand agricultural education through many different mediums, ultimately the
"Literature: The British American Cultivator, Toronto 1843," The Bulletin and Streetsville Semi-Monthly Register (15 May 1843). 65 After Confederation the Board of Agriculture was called the Council of the Agricultural and Arts Association and the Agricultural Association of Upper Canada became the Agricultural and Arts Association. 66 "Agricultural Education: A New scheme for Encouraging a course of Reading on Agricultural Subjects - Annual Examinations to be held - Certificates of merits and money prizes to be granted," Brampton Conservator (2 November 1883). 35
agricultural societies of this period found that their strongest option for the successful education
of farmers lay in the confines of the fairground.
The organizers of agricultural fairs realized the other important functions of fairs, such as
their social and economic contributions to the community; however, it was their belief that the
fundamental purpose of the agricultural fair was one of education. The annual exhibitions they
organized were to be a vital part of their overall mandate to educate farmers in the most
improved ways of agricultural practice and to introduce them to the latest modes of farming
technology. As Daniel Samson explains in his work of agricultural improvers in Nova Scotia, the
fundamental goal of agricultural societies was to impart knowledge, however, "ultimately, it was
also the willingness of people... to accede to the guiding hand of the paternal improver."
Agricultural improvers had already discovered the difficulty of influencing farmers through the
use of the journals, the newspapers, and other forms of literature, but they had also discovered
the strength of exhibitions in offering "a new kind of knowledge, appropriate for people they
characterized as "an unlettered, prejudiced audience that resisted formal instruction."
Agricultural society members believed strongly in the idea behind exhibitions: "that by directly
comparing one object with another, laying them side by side, one could discover their
relationships and their true nature."69 Fairs would give farmers, artisans, manufacturers and other residents of the community the chance to see with their own eyes how one animal or article was
superior to another based on an agreed criterion of value.
The adoption of a certain standard of quality for similar products was one of the
fundamental principles in agricultural reform. Fair organizers believed strongly that, when given the choice, producers would work towards achieving a superior product if they could compare
Samson, Spirit of Industry and Improvement, 66. 68 Heaman, The Inglorious Arts of Peace, 23. 69 Ibid., 23. 36 their work with others. At the fair, the work of the best farmers and artisans was on display to instil this desire for improvement and to impart knowledge for how such success could be achieved. Exhibitions encouraged competitiveness and through competition people were to be convinced to do better, for no one wanted to be considered inferior to his or her neighbour. The idea that the competitive stimuli present at fairs were the vehicle through which progress rode forward and that competition led to better products, higher efficiency in farms and factories, and a higher standard of living was a popular one amongst fair advocates.70 The Peel County Fall
Fair supporters were eager to emphasize how "examining what others have done and forming a comparison with the results of one's own efforts," would lead to the acquisition of "new ideas," thus stimulating progress.71
New ideas were particularly encouraged among the younger generation of farmers and artisans who promoters believed were not biased by traditional ways of doing things. In Peel, the local newspaper advised parents that they were doing a disservice to their children if they did not allow them to attend the Peel County Fall Fair:
We hope the mothers and fathers of our young people are prepared to take their children to the fair. It is a part of education that should not be neglected, and opens their eyes to comparisons, while exciting a spirit of emulation.. .Let the boys have some poultry or animal to show: the girls, some flowers or fruit they can watch the season through, and then exhibit as the result of their care. Even if they do not win a prize (and all cannot), the trial will not be lost, but incite them to further attempts... The contact with others, the varied display, the diversity of arrangement and method of exhibiting will not be lost to their young, observing eyes: and if father and mother instruct them in the survey they will be amply repaid by the keen, eager scrutiny that will be given. By all means take the children to the fair.72
Grant MacEwan, Agriculture on Parade: The Story of the Fairs and Exhibitions of Western Canada (Toronto: Thomas Nelson & Sons, 1950), 1. 71 "County of Peel Agricultural Exhibition," Brampton Times (1 October, 1869). 72 "Take the Children to the Fair," Brampton Conservator (17 September 1880). 37
Inspiring a new generation of residents to improve their practices of production was just as
important as influencing those already engaged in such pursuits. The future was what would ultimately determine the prosperity of the province and this depended on increasing the quantity
and quality of agricultural and manufactured products. In farming, however, new land sources in
the province suitable for agricultural purposes were decreasing; therefore producers had to find
new ways of increasing yields on already productive farms. The idea was that people attending the local fairs would be inspired by the new technologies and biological innovations presented
and hope to use these methods for the betterment of their farms, businesses, and/or households. It was agricultural societies' members' job to convince these individuals that a new mindset was needed, that rather than being content with subsisting and plodding along in life, they needed to race towards progress and they would prosper for having done so.
Agricultural society members hoped to instil individual desire for self-improvement because they believed the residents had an obligation to themselves and the community to do better. Peel County society members reminded Peel residents that "unless people take a lively interest in [the] affairs [of the society] it is not encouraging for the Directors to take any new
steps, nor indeed to spend so much of their own time and money in prosecuting the work of the
Society."74 Increasing the membership of the Peel County Agricultural Society was always on the mind of existing members, as they believed "[t]here should be, and we believe could be,
1,000 tickets of membership sold each year in this county if properly canvassed and the work pushed as business is by business men in other matters of life."75 While increased membership continued to be eagerly sought after, agricultural society members realized that if they could not
Heaman, The Inglorious Arts of Peace, 14. "Annual Meeting of Agricultural Society," Brampton Conservator (14 January 1881). "Co. Agricultural Society Meeting," Brampton Conservator (17 January 1878). 38 make farmers join the association, they would at least make them feel a responsibility to come out to the Annual Fall Fair.
As they reminded the community in the local press, no matter how energetic and competent the directors of the Peel County Fall Fair were, the responsibility for a successful fair rested with the people of Peel. For their own good it was the duty of residents to support the fair
and take up the opportunity for learning new skills and improving their existing ways: "We should urge upon all interested (and who should not be) in our County Fair, to put forth stronger efforts than ever before to ensure its success, make it a brilliant and profitable undertaking...
[Fairs] afford a pleasant and healthy stimulus to competition in the manifold branches of industry and skill, and as popular educators they have no equal in the land." Another article promoting attendance at the fair argued that "[j]ust as reading other's thoughts enlarges and stimulates one's own thinking, so contact with other men, seeking what they do, what they show, asking how they produced this or that good thing, can not fail to afford some new hints and do one good."77 More than providing the people with new ideas on how to go about their business, however, fair supporters argued that the event also benefited the community's residents because "a day at the fair lifts one out of daily drudgery; the sight of so many people engaged in the same calling, helps one out of that low view which the great mass of farmers set upon their own pursuit."
The annual fall fair was purported to uplift farmers' spirits through camaraderie and remind them that they were engaged in one of the noblest of pursuits.
Rural and village residents were reminded of not only their duty to themselves to attend the fair, but also their civic duty. In an era of liberal ideals where improvement was considered a
"Peel fall Exhibition," Brampton Conservator (1 August 1879). "Go to the Fairs? - Why?" Brampton Conservator (7 September 1877). 39
duty "and thus also a constituent part of civic virtue," fairs and exhibitions were to be the
showcases of the nation's productivity and therefore it was considered one's civic responsibility
to support the improvement of the nation's agricultural and manufactured products. As Elsbeth
Heaman explains in her study of exhibitions in the nineteenth century, "improved farmers were
intolerant of the unimproved because low-grade products lowered the price for everyone. If
much Canadian flour was lightweight or full of weeds, or Canadian beef was tough, then all
Canadian farmers suffered from lower prices and reduced demand." Agricultural societies
encouraged farmers to use the agricultural fairs and exhibitions to learn about new farming
practices, new implements and machinery and livestock because improvement was not only
beneficial for the individual, but it was necessary for the good of the community, the province,
and the country. Effectively linking the success of the nation to the success of local agricultural
pursuits, agricultural improvers claimed that "the best evidence of a nation's standing or
advancement in the sciences is found in its exhibits at the great fairs and expositions," and that
there was no further proof "of the progress and development of the resources of a county or
section of country than an excellent and varied display of agricultural products, manufactured
goods, improved stock and fine arts."81 The fair was a display of residents' progressive mindset.
It was here that evidence of their attempt to break with old ways and their acceptance of
experimentation and improvement were judged. Inhabitants were encouraged to attend fairs so
that they could make informed, rational decisions based on observation and apply this newfound knowledge to their individual endeavours that would benefit the community. The County of Peel
Agricultural Society members reminded Peel residents that is was their duty to support the fair
and uphold "the already well earned reputation of Peel as one of the foremost counties for
79 Samson, The Spirit of Industry and Improvement, 71. 80 Heaman, The Inglorious Arts of Peace, 15. 81 "Peel Fall Exhibition," Brampton Conservator (1 August 1879). 40 enterprise and agricultural implements" in Ontario.82 The standing of the county, as well as the nation, was in effect bound to the success of the local Agricultural Society.
Conclusion
Agricultural Societies in nineteenth-century Ontario underwent significant transformations from the beginning of the century to its end. Agricultural fairs came to perform an increasingly important role in the success of agricultural societies and their initiatives, providing popular forums for disseminating knowledge about new agricultural technology and production that would restructure Ontario's agricultural pursuits. In addition the expansion of liberalism ensured that private property, liberty, progress, and the nation's interests were tightly bound.83 Agricultural society members sought new ways to increase their influence in determining agricultural policies through the creation of central organizing bodies and developing fairs that held a broader appeal for rural residents. In addition, the Peel County Fall
Fair illustrates how agricultural society members and fair supporters adapted to the cultural and economic changes taking place by making use of the growing sense of national community to align the success of these events with the success of the individual, the county, the province and the country.
sz "County Peel Fall Fair of 1869," Brampton Times (5 November 1869). 83 Catharine Anne Wilson, Tenants in Time: Family Strategies, Land, and Liberalism in Upper Canada, 1799-1871 (Montreal & Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press, 2009), 5. 41
Chapter Three: An Investigation of the 1871 County of Peel Fall Fair and Those Who Participated
Proponents of agricultural fairs made it quite clear that it was the responsibility of the
citizenry to participate in these events because a poor showing not only reflected badly on the
community's interest in the agricultural pursuits that fuelled the success of the provincial
economy, but it also indicated a lack of interest in progress which was so crucial for an
enlightened society. The ideology of these societies, however, did not always transfer to reality.
The farming practices that agricultural societies sought to alter, particularly the adoption of
advancing "scientific" methods of agricultural cultivation and livestock husbandry, were not
always observed. Nor did early attempts at philosophical discussions between agriculturists or
an appeal to greater agricultural knowledge through journals and book reading prove extremely
successful. Still, agricultural fairs were increasingly important didactic tools for advertising the latest methods of improved agricultural practice. The Brampton Times reported 10 to 12,000 people attended the 1868 Peel Fall Fair, a significant number considering the county population numbered 16,369 in 1871.' The attendance clearly indicates a general interest by the community in which these events were held, however, one must question whether this was reflective of an engaged and active participation from the area's populace or merely an acceptance of the event as a spectacle to be seen and enjoyed, rather than a place for serious instruction and an opportunity for emulation. This chapter will show that above all other didactic forms of instruction, the fair and exhibition proved to be the most successful for agricultural improvers.
1 "County of Peel Fall Fair: Two Gala Days," Brampton Times (9 October 1868). When considering this number, however, it is also important to note that there was a tendency among agricultural societies to count attendance based on the number of people that came through the gates separately on each day, therefore people may have entered more than once and the number of 10 to 12,000 does not necessarily reflect 10 to 12,000 different people. 42
By looking at all sections of agricultural society participation, be that the executive committee,
the judges hired to judge the classes offered at the fair, or the exhibitors who took part in these
events, and thus legitimized the premise of agricultural societies' activities, it becomes clear that
the Peel County Agricultural Society was able to attract a broad base of support from the
community.
It is important to understand what types of people were involved at the Peel County Fall
Fair before it is possible to fully examine the reasons why people chose to participate. A great
deal of speculation exists as to the sort of people involved with agricultural societies and their
fairs, yet little real quantitative analysis has been done. The conclusions that many historians
have made about the elitist nature and limited appeal of agricultural societies in the early half of
the nineteenth century have led to the perception that those who participated at these events
remained members of a restricted segment of society. These assumptions, however, ignore the
fact that more agricultural societies had been created and were attracting larger numbers of
members and that agricultural fairs had become popular community events.
Historians writing about early nineteenth century agricultural associations argue that low
membership in agricultural societies represented a general indifference or even resistance to the
programs and practices that societies promoted. Some historians suggest that because only a minority of the farming community joined these associations it is unlikely that agricultural
societies instituted extensive changes in improving local farmers farming practices.2 It is true that
the membership for these organizations remained relatively small considering the overall population employed in agricultural production at this time; however, this does not necessarily
indicate a wholesale rejection of the initiatives pursued by agricultural societies. Despite a desire
2 Samson, Spirit of Industry and Improvement, 258 43
for membership, many farmers found that the membership fees and time commitments required
prohibited their participation.3
These same farmers could ultimately benefit from the work produced by their local
societies, despite not having shouldered any of the responsibility for providing it. Agricultural
fair visitors and exhibitors, for example, attended fairs and competed in and/or witnessed the
different competitions and saw the various displays of agricultural machinery, livestock,
agricultural produce, and artisan work without having to become a member of the local
agricultural society. Agricultural society members, particularly those on the executive committee
of the fair, often sacrificed time and money to organize and support these events. The fact that
non-members attending the annual fall fair received the same benefits from the event as members
no doubt lead many to refrain from the duties associated with membership. As Thomas Irwin
explains in his work on agricultural associations in nineteenth-century Ontario, "the low rate of
recruitment was not unique to agricultural organizations; in fact sociologists view this as a
common theme in all voluntary organizations... most individuals in a large group (defined not as
a synonym for organization but as a population with a common interest) will evade the burdens
of association membership and ride free on the efforts of the minority."4 This is not to say that
all non-participation was passive. Certainly there were farmers who disagreed with the programs
and ideas espoused by agricultural societies and others who had more pressing concerns,
particularly newly settled farmers in remote areas of the province who were still clearing the land
and had little concern for "scientific" systems of advanced crop rotation. However, it is also
important to recognize that as agriculture matured in the province, it also underwent significant
Daniel Samson indicates that this was the case for some farmers in early nineteenth century Nova Scotia where the cost of joining for 5s or 10s could not be spared. See Spirit of Industry and Improvement, 258. 4 Irwin, "Government Funding of Agricultural Associations in Late Nineteenth Century Ontario," 72-73. 44 changes and agricultural societies had recognized these changes and adapted so that they were able to play an increasingly important role in the province by the second half of the century.
By the second half of the nineteenth century agricultural societies, thanks in part to government funding and the popularity of agricultural exhibitions that were now open to all to participate, the number of societies grew. Interest in the information societies had to offer grew too as immigrants steadily continued to move into the province and settled on mature farm land.
Farmers were increasingly interested in seeking out agricultural advice on new methods of increasing the fertility and productivity of their existing lands.5 Even though recent work from
Gordon Darroch and Lee Soltow has challenged earlier beliefs that rural populations were increasingly forced off the land in the later half of the nineteenth century,6 in Peel County, and other older farming regions in the province, after more than two decades of intensive settlement and unprecedented prosperity, land was increasingly in demand and more expensive to acquire.7
Peel County was indeed a wealthy farming community in comparison to many other regions in
Ontario and the natural and man-made advantages of the landscape were "not lost upon the newly arrived immigrant, the speculator, the merchant, or the artisan with enough capital put by to start in farming."8 More than ever before it was important that Peel farmers acquired greater knowledge about maintaining the quality of soil on their farms and other measures of improvement that would allow for a more intensive farming that would increase yields and productivity on limited land sources. If, as Kenneth Michael Sylvester explains, "maintaining and finding the means to make an independent living and passing on the resources for
5 White, Ontario 1610-1985, 104. See Gordon Darroch and Lee Soltow, Property and Inequality in Victorian Ontario: Structural Patterns and Cultural Communities in the 1871 Census (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1994), and Gagan, Hopeful Travellers: Families, Land, and Social Change in Mid- Victorian Peel County, Canada West. 7 Gagan, Hopeful Travellers, 7 8 Ibid., 17. 45
independence to one's children was the central focus of rural life,"9 then increasing the wealth of
one's existing farm through land and livestock management practices that could lead to increased
profits must have been attractive.
Therefore, considering the rising need for intensive farming techniques long promoted by
agricultural societies, it is important to reassess the appeal agricultural societies held in the
second half of the nineteenth century. To truly understand the social makeup of these
organizations, and determine whether they appealed to a larger demographic than the elite
gentleman farmer, merchant, or professional man, one must investigate county agricultural
societies' most popular event: the annual fall fair.
The following investigation of the participants in the 1871 Peel County Fall Fair reveals
important insights about the social and economic background of individuals associated with the
fair and challenges the notion that agricultural societies were the strongholds of a privileged few,
that the judges who judged at fairs and exhibitions lacked the qualifications necessary for the
position and that these organizations had a limited appeal among the rural community. What
such an investigation shows is that the classes at the Fair represented the broad rural community
and those participating were not wealthier or more influential than the average Peel resident. Fair
participants were making changes to their farms and homes because of the benefits that new
methods of cultivation, farm machinery, and animal husbandry accomplished.
Early agricultural exhibitions were often unsuccessful because they restricted the general
public from competing and classes were mostly limited to livestock.10 By 1871 the Peel County
Fall Fair had undergone a significant transformation offering a wide variety of classes which
9 Kenneth Michael Sylvester, The Limits of Rural Capitalism: Family, Culture, and Markets in Moncalm, Manitoba, 1870-1940 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2001), 7. 10 This was the case for the Home District Society's first exhibition in 1831 according to Heaman, The Inglorious Arts of Peace, 47. 46 encouraged greater participation from the area's residents, and strengthened the vitality of the organization.
The Brampton Fall fair prize list of 1871 illustrates the changes agricultural fairs and exhibitions had undergone. The prize list shows that participants competed in over 255 classes divided amongst categories for various types of horses, cattle, sheep, pigs, poultry, agricultural products, fruit, flowers, dairy produce, implements and other manufactured articles, fine arts and music (Appendix C). " Promoters were proud that by the 1870s the fair's prize list had a greater variety and number of prizes than ever before. They claimed that the contrast between the present fair's prize list and that of the "modest" prize list offered at the first County of Peel Fair provided confirmation that the fair had advanced considerably over the years.12 For example, at the 1854 Spring Fair and Cattle Show there had only been one class in the cattle division for the best bull on the grounds of no specific breed.13 By 1871 there were 15 classes that awarded prizes which were divided between the different breeds of Durham, Devon, Ayrshire and grade cattle, all of which were clearly now present in the county. In addition, special prizes were given out by individuals or businesses from the community for various honours. Some of these awards were cash prizes such as the prize of $20.00 awarded to John Laidlaw from Messrs K. Chisholm and Co. for the best 10 bushels of Diehl Wheat, or material prizes could also be given like the sewing machine valued at $12.00 won by Mrs. Benjamin Watson from William M. Baird, Esq., for the best home-made cheese of not less than twenty pounds. When the real earnings for the average worker were reported to be $200.80 a year in 1870,14 these prizes, in addition to the premiums awarded for the usual classes, were certainly enticing incentives to compete. It was not
11 "Prize List", Brampton Times (6 October 1871). 12 "County of Peel Fall Fair," Brampton Times (26 August 1870). 13 "County of Peel Agricultural Show," The Streetsville Weekly Review (20 May 1854). 14 See table 13.2 in Drummond, Progress without Planning, All. 47 enough, just to compete, however, for to win top prizes exhibitors had to enter products displaying superior quality. Undoubtedly some farmers worked year round to make sure that their animals, produce, and handiwork were in top condition for fair competitions.
What is most revealing about the prize list of 1871 is the number of classes in each general category [Figure 3.1]. The category with the most classes was the agricultural products division of competition, which was closely followed by implements and other manufactured articles. The music category offered the least number of classes with only one class, a popular best band competition that offered the largest cash prize of $20.00 for the first place band. Most first place prizes ranged anywhere from $7.00 for the wagon and carriage classes in the horse division to $ 1.00 for the winner of a poultry class or some of the ladies' work such as the winner of the best woollen mittens. The different categories, the number of classes offered in each, and the different values of prize money awarded are all important indications of how important the agricultural society viewed a particular type of livestock, article, product, or skill. As Leslie
Prosterman notes in her study of Midwestern American fairs, "the county fair reinforces the notion that within each cultural context people make categories to separate the things they value from those they do not."15 The exhibits that were displayed and judged at the Peel Fall Fair were no doubt deemed important features of agricultural, domestic, and social pursuits and certainly the fact that a class existed for a particular item conveyed the fair organizers' belief that that item was popular enough in the county to warrant and sustain a class in the first place. The large numbers of exhibitors in these classes demonstrate that the community agreed upon the importance of these skills and articles. In addition, the number of classes offered in the different
5 Leslie Prosterman, Ordinary Life, Festival Days: Aesthetics in the Midwestern County Fair (Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1995), 67. 48 categories and the different values of the prizes available also suggests how certain pursuits and articles where valued over others.
Figure 3.1: Number of classes in each of the 13 categories, Brampton Fall Fair 1871
Source: "Prize List", Brampton Times (6 October 1871). Note: The following is a breakdown of the number of classes offered in the 13 different sections of the prize list: Agricultural Products 46, Implements and Other Manufactured Articles 42, Ladies' Work 39, Horses 23, Poultry 18, Sheep 17, Cattle 15, Pigs 14, Dairy Produce 14, Fine Arts 11, Fruit 10, Flowers 5, Music 1. In addition, 21 special prizes supplemented the awards distributed. For a full list of the classes offered and the individual prize winners refer to Appendix C.
Of course, factors other than perceived importance could also determine which divisions received greater amounts of prize money or the number of classes in each section. Certainly large animal livestock classes of horses and cattle received greater premiums than did small livestock classes such as poultry because of the associated cost and time involved in raising and showing those animals. Also, even though there was a larger number of classes in the category of Ladies'
Work this is not to say that this section of competition was considered more important than the livestock competitions. A greater variety of items were exhibited in the Ladies' Work 49 competitions than could have been possible in the individual livestock breed classes, and thus more classes were offered. Still, the fact that 39 different classes for items in the Ladies' Work division were considered worthy of display and evaluation by the Peel County Agricultural
Society shows a desire on behalf of the organization to publicly reward women's work as well as a recognition that these items were important articles for consumption and/or appreciation. There were also cases where certain items received greater awards than was reflective of any significant additional costs associated with their production in comparison to similar articles. The special prizes were a perfect example of this. While the winner of the "best firkin of butter not less than 50 pounds" received $3.00 in the Dairy Produce section of competition, a special prize was donated by the Haggert Bros, for the same competition, however, this time the winning entry received a cooking stove valued at $28.00. This is an example of how the fair could be utilized by individual residents, in this case a wealthy implement manufacturer, to promote the production of a certain article for personal interest. While the reason behind the Haggert Bros.' support of butter making is not known, the considerable prize they offered for this product would have attracted participants to compete for this honour, and perhaps thus encouraged greater numbers of people to produce this item.
Without a doubt, the Peel Agricultural Society used the Fall Fair as an important mechanism to impart a value system on the agricultural, industrial, and domestic pursuits that they believed important for the rural community and agricultural in general. A quick look at the
Fall Fair prize list of 1871 reveals that the organizing committee felt that it was important to offer specific classes for individual breeds of horses, cattle, sheep, pigs, and poultry. For example, the sheep show classes were separated for the different purebred breeds of Leicester,
Cotswold and Southdown sheep. They determined that the value of the prizes offered for wheat 50 and cheese would be the same, but that these categories were more deserving of higher premiums than other agricultural products like carrots or beets. Also, the prize list reveals that the winner of lace work would receive a greater monetary prize than would the winner of the best woollen socks. These details are reflective of a number of concepts that were emerging during the latter period of the nineteenth century, not all of which necessarily followed the expressed ideology of agricultural societies.
From the beginning of agricultural exhibitions and fairs in Upper Canada, agricultural societies had promoted the breeding of improved livestock. One of the earliest records of the
Peel County Agricultural Societies exhibitions is the spring show held in May, 1854. The prize list is a useful illustration of the emphasis placed on breeding stock because all of the classes offered for their spring show were either classes for stallions and brood mares or bulls.16 When one compares the prize list of 1854 with that of 1871, not only is the incredible increase in size and class numbers and categories evident, but when one focuses on the livestock classes there is a greater emphasis on specific purebred breeds rather than "general purpose" and "grade" animals. As has been identified in studies concerning Canadian agriculture in the decades after
Confederation, there was an increase of different breeds of livestock throughout the country and a "general shift from the production of wheat for export to a mixed farming that emphasized meat and dairy products."17 Marvin Mclnnis' study on Canadian agriculture in this period emphasizes that most Canadian farmers were remarkably sensitive to the changing profitability of different lines of production;18 therefore it is not surprising that farmers in Peel County were
16 "County of Peel Agricultural Show," The Streetsville Weekly Review (20 May 1854). 17 R. Marvin Mclnnis, "The Changing Structure of Canadian Agriculture, 1867-1897," in Perspectives on Ontario Agriculture 1815-1930 (Gananoque, Ont: Langdale Press, 1992), 85. 18 Ibid., 90. 51 diversifying their stock, a practice that was encouraged by the county agricultural society.19 The annual fall fair was not only used for disseminating knowledge about new modes of production or machinery, it also, through its competitions, promoted which breeds, agricultural products, and manufactured goods were to be produced. The increasing importance of dairy and other livestock products in Peel, a county best known at mid-century as the "quintessential wheat
90 farming county in Ontario," is reflected by the fact that the winners in the livestock and dairy products categories received among the largest cash prize amounts and the classes offered and these categories continued to expand. Furthermore, the increase in manufactured articles and implement classes illustrates agricultural societies' support of labour saving devices, so heralded by agricultural societies for their ability to increase the quantity and quality of farm produce, as well as revealing the very real expanding mechanization of farming at this time. From 1861 to
1871 alone the value of farm implement production in Canada increased more than sixfold while the number of reapers and mowers in Ontario increased sevenfold.21
Yet, while many of the classes and categories offered at the Fall Fair seem consistent with agricultural societies' wishes for farming in Ontario, the fact that some classes, such as those for fine penmanship and lace work, received more prize money than the more practical pursuits for a rural population, such as the production of wool socks or a gentlemen's straw hat may seem surprising. However, even though these pursuits are not necessarily agricultural, they were important practices of social respectability and they were representative of the middle-class values and skills that were becoming increasingly important.
Ultimately the Fall Fair was still an agricultural event whose main function was to educate the average farmer. To determine whether or not agricultural fairs attracted the average 19 Jones, History of Agriculture in Ontario, 149. 20 R. Marvin Mclnnis, "Ontario Agriculture at Mid-Century," 69. 21 McCalla, Planting the Province, 225. 52 rural resident an analysis of the social and economic background of fair participants is necessary.
By comparing the manuscript data collected for individuals involved with the Peel County Fall
Fair with the data available for the total population of Peel County in the 1871 aggregate census records, it is possible to determine if they were representative of a diverse strata of individuals rather than a selective assembly of a privileged few.
This investigation begins with an understanding of the general demographic composition of the Peel County Fall Fair participants in comparison to the average resident of Peel County.
This analysis considers fair participants to be those who did not just attend the fair, but those who actively participated in the event. This analysis divides fair participants into three groups: the fair exhibitors, judges, and executive committee. The 1871 Fall Fair Prize List records over
241 different competitors who obtained a third place prize or higher, 183 of which resided within the county of Peel. Of these, 99 exhibitors were linked with the 1871 census for Peel County and used for this study. A total of 12 judges at the fair have been included in the sample and 10 executive members.22 While there were often residents of neighbouring counties participating at the Peel County Fall Fair, for manageability, this study focuses on the fair participants who resided within Peel County as listed in the 1871 census. While records for the total number of exhibitors at the Brampton Fall Fair are missing, along with complete membership lists, the prize list of 1871 and the executive committee list obtained in the annual meeting report are still useful sources for evaluating the demographic composition of fair exhibitors, judges, and executive committee members. From these lists it was possible to verify the identity of 115 individuals who participated at the fair in some function, who were then linked to the 1871 manuscript census data for Peel County. This group of fair participants included 99 exhibitors, 12 judges, and 10 executive members. As these numbers reveal, a few fair participants were involved in
22 For a more detailed explanation of the sample used see Appendix A and B. 53 multiple roles during the fair; some judges and executive members also competed in some of the competitions offered at the event. The fair prize list, when linked with the 1871 census returns, becomes an important source for investigating the socio-economic characteristics of fair participants and, as mentioned, a necessary tool for determining what sort of assembly of individuals fair participants were.
The Exhibitors
One of the major arguments against the vitality of agricultural societies in the nineteenth century has been the notion that these organizations were unable to reach the middling farmer.
The historical literature on agricultural societies and fairs in the early periods of the nineteenth century claims that the individuals who participated at agricultural fairs were gentlemen-farmers who could afford to exhibit superior livestock and produce, thereby dominating displays and taking an "undue" proportion of the prizes at these events.23 As a result, it is argued that working farmers refused to support fairs because they resented the domination of these events by wealthy gentry farmers and felt that the expensive and uneconomic "model" farms they encouraged did little wide-reaching good to aid agriculture.24 For the later half of the nineteenth century, however, the idea that fairs held a limited appeal among the rural community and that exhibitors were from a select segment of society does not hold true. The evidence collected in this investigation of the Peel County Fall Fair illustrates that the fair had a broad base of support in the community and that those who exhibited came from all walks of life and represented the diverse group of rural inhabitants residing in Peel County.
Gates, The Farmer's Age, 313. 54
The diversity of classes offered at the Peel County Fall Fair ensured that there was also a diversity of competitors. An examination of the different individuals on the prize list reveals that the Fall Fair attracted a range of exhibitors every year who were intent on bringing home the winning prize in each of their respective categories of competition. Some of the many occupations of exhibitors included farmers and labourers, pump makers and auctioneers, shopkeepers and photographers, carriage builders and implement manufacturers, and shoemakers and school teachers. While farmers were the largest occupational group represented with 59 percent of exhibitors identifying themselves as such, this still meant that 41 percent of exhibitors held other occupations [Table 14]. What is so interesting about this fact is that county agricultural fairs have historically been studied for their importance to the farming population.
Indeed, agricultural societies themselves advertised these events as being necessary opportunities for farmers to educate themselves on the improvements being made in agriculture. Clearly, though, fairs were also important events for non-farmers too. Chapter Four will provide a detailed discussion of how agricultural fairs were important for both farmers and non-farmers; however, for now it is important to consider how the Fall Fair had a wide-ranging scope of classes for all sorts of products, many of which were manufactured or artisan items. For example, the local artist and photographer, John Cole, won prizes for his photography; a pump maker,
Fredrick Burrows won a first place for his wooden pump; and a carriage builder, Richard Lewis, won prizes for his sleigh and carriage entries. The fair attracted exhibitors engaged in different trades and occupations because it encouraged their participation. Classes were offered so that individuals engaged in all sorts of work could participate.
One social characteristic that Fall Fair exhibitors did largely have in common was their ethnic and religious background. As one would have predicted, like the majority of Peel 55
residents, the Peel County Fall Fair exhibitors' origins were predominantly associated with the
British Isles. What is different, however, is those of Irish origin were the majority in Peel with
45.7 percent of the population, however, they were significantly underrepresented among fair
exhibitors with only 21.2 percent of competitors claiming Irish origin. Those of English
background were the most likely to have competed at the county fair, with 60.6 percent of
exhibitors having English origins. In comparison to the 36.9 percent of people in Peel of English
background this increase is significant (Table 1). Most exhibitors were born in Ontario, like
most other Peel inhabitants. Of the foreign born, those born in England were more apt to exhibit
at the fair than those born in Ireland (Table 2). An investigation into the religious denominations
of fair exhibitors shows that these individuals were predominantly Methodist. Furthermore,
Methodists and Baptists were overrepresented amongst exhibitors and other religions were
underrepresented (Table 3).
These ethnic and religious differences have several implications. For example, the ethnic
background of exhibitors may have been more of a reflection of the cultural aspects of
agricultural societies and fairs than it is an indication for the economic status of these
participants. Studies have shown that patterns of wealth inequality were associated much more
with life-cycle patterns than ethnicity in Ontario and that despite differences of origin or birthplace, wealth in Ontario was dramatically less divided than in England and Wales, Scotland,
or Ireland.25 Indeed, the Irish in Ontario as a whole had 20 percent more land per farmer than the
English,26 and therefore one can not equate the increased percentage of English participants at
fairs as indicative of a wealthier group of supporters for these events. More likely the historical importance and tradition agricultural exhibitions had in England accounted for English
25 Darroch and Soltow, Property and Inequality, 204. 26 Ibid., 64. 56 enthusiasm at these events.27 Furthermore, studies have shown that cultural transfer was not unusual in nineteenth century Ontario and that a great deal of agricultural ideas and practices in
Ontario were derived from England.28
The predominance of evangelicals amongst exhibitors is interesting. On average, Baptists across Ontario had a 15 to 20 percent advantage in farm acreage and Methodists had 10 percent more land per capita than either Catholics or members of the Church of England.29 Furthermore,
Protestants in general had a substantial advantage over Catholics in house accumulation.30 As will be explained in more detail further on, land acquisition and home ownership were important assets of wealth and security in nineteenth century rural Ontario communities and the fact that
Peel Fall Fair participants were more likely to belong to religious denominations that valued property accumulation suggests that they were also influenced by the "evangelical moral order
[that] foster[ed] an emergent middle class."31 It is possible that their zeal for spiritual regeneration influenced their participation as well. Evangelicals' belief in the reform of the individual and desire for personal salvation aligned comfortably with the goal of agricultural improvement.
An examination of Peel County Fall Fair exhibitors also reveals that the majority of men involved with the fair had reached a stage in the lives where they were expected to be settled, if not settling, into full ownership of their farms. In Gordon Darroch and Lee Soltow's investigation of property and inequality in Victorian Ontario, they discover that the increase in land ownership was greatest between the ages of 25 and 35, as it appears that farmers gained
27 See Kenneth Hudson, Patriotism with Profit. 28 See Kenneth Kelly, "The Transfer of British Ideas on Improved Farming to Ontario during the First Half of the Nineteenth Century," Ontario History 63 (1971): 103-111. 29 Darroch and Soltow, Property and Inequality, 64. 30 Ibid., 100. 31 Ibid., 64. 57
land ownership in a comparatively early phase of their lives, either due to inheritance or their
own efforts, and they further note that the probability of becoming a landowner was greatest
between the ages of 26 and 48.32 In fact, by 40 years of age 80 percent of men were likely to own
land.33 The average male fair exhibitor in Peel was 41 years of age, while the majority of male
exhibitors were found to be between the ages of 21 and 60, with the largest group between the
ages of 31 to 40, followed by those between 41 to 50 years of age (Tables 7 and 8). These
numbers indicate that male exhibitors where most likely to be at a point in their lives when they
were both increasing their land ownership and expanding their operations or they had already
achieved an established homestead and could now work on improving production. Furthermore,
92 percent of male exhibitors were married which, again, indicates that these men were at the
point in their lives when they were prepared for marriage and a family (Table 5). The average
household size for fair exhibitors was 6.8 people, the majority of households having young to
teenage children (Table 9). Of course, the amount of children and the family size can not
necessarily be equated with the extent of a family's prosperity because it could also be a sign of
poverty too, nevertheless these factors indicated that exhibitors were likely to have achieved a
certain level of material security.
These conclusions based on average life cycles can be further substantiated by a direct
examination of the landownership of fair participants. While the aggregate census data for Peel
County does not reveal the overall percentage of adults that were landless, it does indicate that there were 1,679 occupiers of land in the county. Out of the exhibitors identified on the 1871 Fall
Fair prize list, 77 percent of exhibitors were owners or resided with their parents who owned
Darroch and Soltow, Property and Inequality, 37. 1 Ibid., 34. 58 land (Table 10).34 This evidence supports the conclusion that the household heads of the families participating at the Brampton Fall Fair would represent those families who had succeeded at making it to an advanced "rung on the agricultural ladder."35
What is important about the results of this study of landownership is that fair exhibitors who were owners were not significantly greater than the percentage of owners among the overall population in Peel County. Exhibitors only had a two percent increase in the percentage of ownership than the average for the county, which had a 75 percent ownership rate in 1871
(Table 10). This is surprising considering the predominant criticism of agricultural societies for their exclusion of the middling farmer or community resident and the supposed elitism that symbolized these organizations and the events they held. Ross Fair argues that the practical farmers of the province were never truly sought by agricultural societies before mid-century because their inclusion in the organization "would be recognition of equal social status" and agricultural society members, sought to retain their authority, even superiority, over the average rural population.36 This study of landownership, however, shows that fair exhibitors included both tenant and owner farmers in no significantly lower or higher portions than was representative of the average Peel County resident.
A study of the size of property ownership among fair exhibitors provides additional evidence that these participants were no more affluent than the average person in Peel. Rather than occupying greater amounts of acreage than was typical, on the whole Peel County Fall Fair exhibitors occupied fewer acres than the average for the county. While the average acreage occupied per individual in Peel was 97 acres, the average for fair exhibitors was only 88.1 acres
34 Out of the 99 exhibitors included in the sample of fair participants, one individual had to be excluded from this table because he lived with and worked as a labourer for a family unrelated to his own, and therefore no indication of landownership could be obtained. 35 See Wilson, Tenants in Time, 190, for an explanation of the agricultural ladder to ownership. 36 Fair, "Gentlemen, farmers, and gentlemen half-farmers," 46. 59
(Table 11), despite the fact that the exhibitor category had a slightly greater number of farmers participating at the fair than the average percentage of farmers in Peel (Table 14). The average acreage increases to 135.3 acres when only the farmers who participated are considered, however, because the 1871 Census of Canada aggregate data for Peel did not indicate how many acres were occupied by individuals of different occupations, there is no way of knowing what the average acre occupied was for farmers in Peel County (Table 16). What can be determined is that 35 percent of fair exhibitors occupied lands of less than 10 acres, more than double the amount that was typical in Peel County. At the same time, fair exhibitors were much less likely to occupy land between 10 to 100 acres and more likely to hold lands greater than 100 acres than was average in Peel (Table 13). This indicates that exhibitors were more likely to live in town or on a substantial sized farm than was typical.
Still, when one examines exhibitors who were farmers only, the data reveals that 61 percent of these individuals held only medium sized farms that were between 70 to 169 acres, an acreage amount that was standard for farmers in Ontario at the time (Table 16).37 A closer investigation of the farmers exhibiting at the fairs shows that there was certainly a mix of farming operations represented by these individuals. From the 36 year old George Grassby who had a small mixed farming operation on 49.5 acres to the large family-run-farm of the Snells who owned and occupied 435 acres devoted to variety of crops and purebred livestock, fair competitors came from diverse farming population. Still, the greatest percentage of farmers were occupying standard sized farms for the province and this indicates that the farmers competing at the Peel County Fall Fair generally held a typical amount of land and should not be considered to be gentlemen farmers who had limitless resources to devote to agricultural improvements and pedigreed livestock.
37 Mclnnis, "The Early Ontario Wheat Staple Reconsidered," 44. 60
While landownership and the amount of acreage occupied can be used to support an understanding of an individual's wealth, these factors are not the only sources of capital to consider. An individual's assets, particularly those living in rural areas, were tied to the moveable property they owned like livestock, farm implements and vehicles. Recent work on the importance of chattel mortgages in Ontario reveals that moveable property could provide an important source of capital for individuals. "[C]hattels facilitated production as well as consumption, providing the security for economic growth as well as the means to stave off, however temporarily, 'destitution'."38 Therefore, people could also have a significant portion of the capital invested in moveable assets like agricultural implements and livestock that provided sources of income but could also be sold or leveraged if need be.
In Ontario, the period from the 1870s to the end of the century was one of significant expansion in the amount of livestock. This was a reflection of the increasing importance that animal husbandry (which had already played an important role in the rural economy before this period) continued to have in the province, particularly with the growth of the cheese industry after 1870 and the success of the pork industry before 1900.40 The cattle industry was flourishing. Despite the ending of the Reciprocity Treaty with the United States which had been an important export market, new markets in the United Kingdom were also encouraging farmers to increase cattle holdings, as evidenced in Greenbank, Ontario County, where an average of six cattle per farm in 1867 increased to 14 cattle per farm in 1872.41 Cattle added an additional source of income and allowed farmers the advantage of having more manure for fertilizer to
38 Peter A. Baskerville, "Chattel Mortgages and Community in Perth County, Ontario," The Canadian Historical Review 87, 4 (December 2006): 619. 39 Mclnnis has argued that in a general way, animal husbandry was at least as important as wheat in mid-century Ontario, although he does note that specialized production of animal products had yet to really emerge. Mclnnis, "Ontario Agriculture at Mid-Century," 83. Drummond, Progress without Planning, 34. 4 W. H. Graham, Greenbank: Country Matters in 191 Century Ontario (Peterborough, Ont: Broadview Press, 1988), 221. 61 improve the soil and productivity of their farms. They also allowed for farmers to be less dependent on the unpredictable grain market.42 The number of horses an individual had was also significant because at a time when the main source of farm power was the horse, greater numbers could mean faster planting and harvesting, which could be crucial for surviving the often perilous planting and harvesting seasons.43 Therefore, livestock were an important source of capital and farms that housed work animals showed that farmers were either adopting the popular
'mixed farming' mentality promoted by agricultural improvers to improve their soil and capitalize on the meat and dairy product industry, or they had simply established themselves enough to afford to invest in livestock, as well as the fences, barns and sheds necessary to house these animals.
In comparison to the average Peel County family, those families who exhibited at the Fall
Fair were more likely to own larger numbers of farm animals.44 Overall the average fair exhibitor family had almost two times the number of horses over the age of three years of age than did the average Peel County family. While the average family had 1.68 horses, fair exhibitors' families averaged 2.75 (Table 17). Fair families also held significantly greater numbers of milk cows, 'other horned cattle', sheep, and swine (Table 18). Unsurprisingly, the data also reveals that more meat animals were killed or sold per year by fair exhibitor families than the average family in Peel (Table 19). What is interesting about these numbers is that it has
Drummond, Progress without Planning, 40. 44 Some of the following tabulations for the average numbers of particular items have been calculated according to the total number of families in each category rather than just farmers for several reasons. While farmers tended to own greater amounts of livestock than those with other occupations for obvious reasons, there were still a considerable number of people showing certain types of livestock (particularly horses and poultry) at the fair that did not list their primary occupation as farmer. Also, because the 1871 aggregate census data only included the overall numbers of livestock, implements, vehicles, etc. for the total population with no separation for farmers only, it was not possible to accurately compare the amount of animals held by the average Peel County farmer to the farmer who exhibited at the Peel County Fall Fair. Families were used instead of individuals, because the number of children included in the total population of Peel would have skewed any comparison to the total numbers found for fair participants. For further details refer to the notes included in Appendix B for the specific tables indicated. 62
already been shown that overall fair exhibitors had less land acreage than was average in Peel,
yet they still owned greater numbers of work and farm animals. While these numbers indicate
that fair exhibitors had greater capital invested in livestock, they also provide evidence that
exhibitors were more likely to be adopting the increasingly popular trend of mixed farming
operations, a type of farming that had received continual support from agricultural improvers.
At the same time that the overall average of livestock in the province was increasing, in
Peel County, fair participants can be seen as more likely to be adopting a sizeable 'mixed
livestock farming' operation than was normal (Tables 17 to 19). Certainly, agricultural
improvers and the agricultural societies in the province had long been exhorting the benefits of mixed farming for agriculture even though mixed farming was not a new practice. Still, there were improvers who did believe that a greater adoption of raising livestock was needed. In 1848,
Mr. William Hutton of Belleville won a gold medal valued at £10 for his essay that encouraged the keeping of livestock and the use of the manure gained from their presence. Hutton warned
against those fanners only concerned with grain cropping because, ultimately, there were only two great principles a farmer should follow, vowed Hutton: "the first principle is never to
exhaust the land by severe cropping; and the next great principle is to restore it, in some shape or
other; the properties which we have abstracted."45 According to Ontario's agricultural societies, for farmers to improve their farms and become more productive in general they needed to own more livestock. Although the 1871 census does not reveal anything about the specific breeds of animals that were owned by the individual families enumerated, the Peel County Fall Fair prize list has already shown that there was a significant increase in purebred livestock classes since the
Fair's original prize list and that exhibitors were showing in these classes. Although an overall
45 William Hutton, "Agriculture and its Advantages as a Pursuit," Journal and Transactions of the Board of Agriculture of Upper Canada, vol. 1 (Toronto: Board of Agriculture, 1856), 189. 63 indication of the number of purebred animals owned versus grade animals cannot be attained, it is clear that fair exhibitor families were adopting the "improved" types of breeds advocated by agricultural societies. Furthermore, the overall numbers of livestock indicate that fair participants realized the importance of animal husbandry, particularly in a period of shifting markets, and they profited from the greater capital in livestock they held, as well as the benefits these animals had for their overall farming operations.
Greater production was also an important goal of the improving agriculturalist, be that an increased yield per acre or animal. An examination of the agricultural products produced in Peel
County reveals that for every product other than rye and beans, fair participant families averaged significantly higher production than the average Peel family. While it should be remembered that
54 percent of fair exhibitors were farmers versus the 48 percent overall in Peel County (and thus the families would have been more likely farm families among exhibitors), this is only a six percent difference while the total production numbers for fair exhibitors were well beyond this difference. Predictably the greater numbers of livestock owned by fair exhibitors also equalled larger amounts of animal products being produced, like the more than double amounts of wool and cheese and a considerably larger amount of butter that exhibitor families produced in comparison to the average Peel family (Table 20). More surprising, however, is the fact that despite fewer acres of land, fair participant families out produced the average Peel County family in almost all areas of crop production. While 101 bushels of winter wheat was the average produced per Peel County family, fair exhibitor families produced an average of 157 bushels.
Barley and oats were another popular crop in Peel and while the average of barley and oats produced in Peel was 116 and 82 bushels respectively, exhibitors averaged 203 bushels of barley and 149 bushels of oats per family. Peel County Fall Fair exhibitors were also much more likely 64 to produce turnips than was typical, averaging 379 bushels of turnips per family in comparison to the 79 bushels per family in Peel overall and the growth of this specific crop also indicates an overall increase in animal husbandry among fair participants as turnip was often fed to cattle.
While exhibitors produced less rye and beans, in every other category of field crops they largely surpassed the average production of Peel County families in general (Table 21).
When considering agricultural production it is also necessary to consider the improved land that each family had available for crops, pasture, gardens and orchards. The data shows that, not only did fair exhibitors occupy less land than the average Peel County resident, they also had slightly less improved land to work with. Overall, the average Peel County resident had 76.8 acres of improved land versus the 73.8 acres that the average fair exhibitor farmed (Table 22).
Furthermore, 62.8 acres of land was cropped by the average Peel County occupier of land and
59.9 acres were cropped by the average fair exhibitor. These numbers reveal that exhibitors had no land advantage that would allow them to produce more crops and other agricultural products, yet they did, and with noticeably greater results.
It is impossible to gain a complete understanding of the reasons behind exhibitors' higher productivity. Perhaps fair participant families adopted the methods espoused by the Agricultural
Society such as "improved" cultivation methods, crop rotations, superior seeds and livestock breeds, and manure; however, there is no way of determining this. Still, the greater output from this group and their possession of more livestock as animal husbandry was increasingly important to a farming family's success in Ontario does indicate that the families participating at their local annual fair were eager to adopt agricultural advice if it allowed them to be more successful and prosperous in the future. 65
Certainly landownership, livestock and increased production indicated a certain degree of
success. A further indication was the amount of farm machinery and vehicles one could afford.
The 1871 Census shows that families competing at the Peel County Fall Fair also had more
transport vehicles and farm implements than was typical in Peel (Table 23). While the first
steam threshing machine would not turn up until 1877 in Woodbridge and portable steam
engines would not appear in Peel until the 1880s, farm implements and machinery had already
undergone important transformations in the years before, and although some implements were
popular, particularly the relatively simple and inexpensive fanning-mill, there continued to be
relatively few threshing machines, horse rakes, reapers, and mowers, suggesting that the majority
of Ontario farms still "scythed, stoked, and gathered by hand" the crops they produced.46 Despite
this, the rise of labour-saving farm machinery continued to increase as the costs of that
machinery decreased. In Peel County, fair participants were already showing a greater tendency
to use these devices and no doubt many used the annual fall fair to compare the merits of
implements they already owned with the new ones being shown or sold at the event. Fair participants did not shy away from acquiring implements that would assist in farm cultivation.
Their ownership of this equipment signified an appreciation of the benefits machines could bestow, and the vehicles and implements they owned, like the livestock, were important sources
of capital that could help increase their wealth when conditions were good, or provide security
during hardships.
Certainly these are limited comparisons. It is difficult to accurately assess the wealth of farmers in Peel County based on their property ownership and capital alone. As studies on rural credit and mortgage have shown, farmers often maintained a certain level of debt in order to
secure capital, expand their farming productions, or simply weather the seasonal lulls in
46 Drummond, Progress without Planning, 42. 66 production.47 In particular, the 1870s and 1880s appeared to be times when farmers borrowed a great deal; in fact, it has been argued that "their mortgage needs formed the basis for the remarkable growth of the province's mortgage companies between Confederation and the early
1890s."48 Still, one cannot ignore the significance of property ownership in determining economic and social prosperity. Gordon Darroch and Lee Soltow explain in their valuable study of property and inequality in Victorian Ontario, that "land and homes had their primary social significance as foundations of household production and family security," while being at the same time, "the most widespread forms of private capital and wealth accumulation."49 Additional investments often took the form of moveable property that must also be considered important.
What this study indicates is that fair participants were aware of the shifting conditions in agriculture and they had secured greater amounts of livestock and labour-saving agricultural implements in response to these changes. Furthermore, the higher than average agricultural production for Peel County achieved by fair exhibitors indicates that these rural inhabitants had been successful in adopting farming techniques and practices that secured greater resources for their families.
Female Fair Exhibitors
Indications of occupational status and property ownership have been important for challenging the criticisms of exclusivity held against agricultural fairs in the nineteenth century.
Another criticism against agricultural societies that should be revised is the argument that these
47 See Douglas McCalla, "Rural Credit and Rural Development in Upper Canada, 1790-1850," in Patterns of the Past: Interpreting Ontario's History, ed. Roger Hall (Toronto: Dundura Group, 1996), 37-54; and Baskerville, "Chattel Mortgages and Community in Perth County, Ontario." 48 Drummond, Progress without Planning, 44. 49 Darroch and Soltow, Property and Inequality, 17. Gordon Darroch also makes the argument that ownership of small property in the form of land was the foundation of family economies in his article, "Scanty Fortunes and Rural Middle-Class Formation in Nineteenth-Century Central Ontario," The Canadian Historical Review 79, 4 (December 1998): 621-659. 67 organizations were dominated by men more intent on creating middle-class masculine identity and authority than reaching a broad base of rural community involvement.50 Daniel Samson argues that agricultural improvers in Nova Scotia were instinctively aware of a division between themselves and everyone else, including the female population, as middle-class male improvers increasingly pushed their claim to power on the basis of their civic virtues, virtues that were considered to be masculine domains.51 Records of early agricultural exhibitions in Ontario concur that women's involvement in agricultural societies and fairs was practically nonexistent.
Again, however, the exhibitions and fairs conducted in the first half of the nineteenth century cannot be considered representative of these events in the second half of the century. An examination of the 1871 fair prize list shows that, even though female fair exhibitors were underrepresented in comparison to the overall percentage of women in the county, they still constituted an important section of the population participating and made up 29 percent of fair exhibitors at the Peel County Fall Fair (Table 4). Women were still absent from the executive committee of the Peel County Agricultural Society, but they were now encouraged to participate at agricultural exhibitions, particularly in the Ladies' Work section of the competition. This is a significant change from the earliest exhibitions in Canada where women were considered obstacles to improvement.
Historically, women's participation in rural life has often been considered secondary to the importance that the work and institutions driven by men had in shaping and regulating rural society. A similar neglect of women at county agricultural fairs in the nineteenth century exists and therefore it is also necessary that women should be recognized for their significant
Samson, Spirit of Industry and Improvement, 251. 51 Ibid., 273. 52 Ibid., 267. 68 participation at these local events.53 Marjorie Cohen's research on working women in nineteenth- century Ontario is just one of many scholarly studies which have called attention to women's critical role in Ontario's economic development.54 In fact, it was because of the importance of women in the household economy, and therefore in the material success of a farm family, that agricultural improvers realized the need to incorporate "women's work" into the agricultural fairs if they were to achieve their goal of improving "every branch of Rural and Domestic
Economy."55 This point was not lost on the organizers of the Peel County Fall Fair and the large size of women's exhibits indicated this (there were 39 separate classes within the Ladies' Work division of competition). Indeed, women welcomed the opportunity to participate, as was noted by the Brampton Times where the press writer explained that "in the ladies' department the fair sex contributed rather more than their share to the general effect of the exhibition, proving that their interest for its success increases with each recurring year."56 Though the fair perpetuated gender divisions between the types of classes women and men participated in, the fact that women were now encouraged to play a part in the success of these events was significant.
Evidence suggests that women were also using the fair as an important social device. The sample of female fair exhibitors at the Peel Fair illustrates that women tended to be younger than men and that young women were more apt to participate than their male counterparts of the same age. On average the female fair exhibitor was 35 years old, 8 years younger than her male
53 For an investigation of women's work at agricultural fairs in twentieth-century western Canada see David C. Jones, '"From Babies to Buttonholes': Women's Work at Agricultural Fairs," Alberta History, vol. 29, no. 4 (Fall, 1981): 26-32. 54 See Marjorie Griffin Cohen, Women's Work, Markets, and Economic Development in Nineteenth-Century Ontario (Toronto: University of Toronto, 1988). "The Agricultural Association," Journal and Transactions of the Board of Agriculture of Upper Canada, vol. 1 (Toronto: Board of Agriculture, 1856), 24. The Provincial Agricultural Association's constitution that was read and approved on August 17, 1846, declared that "the objects of the Association shall be improvement of Farm Stock and Produce; the improvement of Tillage, Agricultural Implements, &c; and the encouragement of Domestic Manufactures, of Useful Inventions, and, generally, of every branch of Rural and Domestic Economy." 56 'Peel Fall Fair! Another Grand Success!," Brampton Times (6 October 1871). 69 counterpart (Table 7). Even more revealingly, however, is that fact that 20 percent of female exhibitors were between the ages of 11 and 20 years, while only 1 percent of male exhibitors were under the age of 20 (Table 8). And even though females were more likely to be married than not, 28 percent of female exhibitors were single and this percentage was almost 6 times as much as male exhibitors (Table 5). The single female competitor was also, on average, 9 years younger than a single male exhibitor (Table 6). What these numbers suggest is that the fair allowed young single women of marriageable age the chance to show their domestic prowess in a public forum. As Barbara Maas explains in her study of middle-class women in nineteenth century Ontario, women were expected to fulfill the ideal of an efficient household manager.57
The Ladies' Work and the Dairy Produce classes that the majority of women participated in were important sections of competition for showing off rural women's important economic contributions to the household. A woman's ability to make superior cheese and butter or produce better quality clothing and domestic products was certainly attractive to a potential suitor. Also classes like lace work and embroidery suggested a woman's refinement and respectability. An investigation of women's participation at the Peel Fair shows that women not only were increasingly involved in agricultural fairs, but they also used these events for their own benefit because fairs provided a platform to showcase their competency in domestic pursuits. Certainly the individual pride that women held for their successful entries and women's engagement with one another were also motivating factors for their participation as well.
The 1871 census data provides evidence that fair exhibitors were diverse in occupation, class, land status, material assets and gender. An examination of the ethnic and religious background of fair exhibitors does reveal that exhibitors were predominantly Ontario-born
57 Barbara Maas, Helpmates of Man: Middle-Class Women and Gender Ideology in Nineteenth-Century Ontario (Bochum: Universitatsverlag Dr. N. Brockmeyer, 1990): 56. 70
English Methodists, however, this seems to be more of a cultural difference among fair exhibitors than an economic one. Furthermore, both male and female benefited from the use of fairs and the social opportunities they provided.
The Judges and Judging
An essential part of agricultural fairs and the success they achieved was the variety of competitions they offered for fair exhibitors. Of course, competition and the awarding of prizes required judges to determine which article was the 'best' species of any given exhibit. In her study on agricultural and industrial exhibitions in nineteenth-century Canada, Elsbeth Heaman argues that judging was the most important feature of these events because without it an
CO exhibition was no different than a market or bazaar. Still, as important as judging was to fairs,
Heaman also argues that "much of the judging done in the nineteenth-century Canada was very poor," and that "[ojften no expert could be had, and judges were simply prominent men who knew nothing of the business."59 Heaman also claims that when "experts were found, they usually had exhibits on the grounds or had sold their stock to an exhibitor, so the glory would redound on their herd."60 Robert Leslie Jones also argues that as late as the 1880s the provincial exhibition suffered from poor judging as it was asserted that the fair "was controlled by a small ring of breeders in their own interests, and that many of the judges employed were mere favourites of the directors and were completely unqualified for their responsibilities."61 These criticisms against the judges at nineteenth-century fairs suggests that the results of these competitions were unreliable and exhibitors could not have gained a strong understanding of
Heaman, Inglorious Arts of Peace, 124. 59 Ibid., 125. 60 Ibid. Jones, History of Agriculture in Ontario, 338. 71 what was considered a superior product, and therefore would not have tried to produce articles that emulated these winning items. The implication is that fairs did little to advance an understanding of improved agricultural livestock and products, as well as other manufactured and artistic items.
It is not surprising that historians have questioned the suitability of judges based on critiques found in some newspapers and journals. Critics of fair judges were not uncommon.
Unlike most breeder associations and craft guilds today that determine specific criteria and standards by which to evaluate livestock and products, in the nineteenth century judges relied on their own understanding of what the best was. Also, it is not surprising that those who had entered items for competition, and hence believed in their quality, were disappointed when their product did not receive a prize. At the 1878 Peel County Fall Fair there were several protests against the awards given. A Mr. Treadgold protested against the decision of judges on pianos while George Savage protested against the judges' decision on certain varieties of apples that year.62 Some complained awards had been given for biased reasons. An interesting exchange occurred between an agricultural society member and a judge of the Cooksville Fair in 1880 after an exhibitor had felt slighted when his horses did not receive a prize. In a letter to the editor of the Brampton Conservator a member of the Toronto Township Agricultural Association wrote in that a "gross injustice was done to Mr. George Torrence at the Cooksville fair by the judges on horses ruling his pair out as being unsound." The member complained that this was either "done with an object or the said judges were entirely unfit for their position" because the horses had been fully examined by a veterinarian and a certificate of their soundness had been obtained.
Furthermore, the member implied that this affair would deter Mr. Torrence's future participation,
62 "Brampton Fair: Delightful Weather, Immense Crowds, Magnificant Display, Receipts above any Former County Exhibition," Brampton Conservator (4 October 1878). 72
"particularly as it is whispered that the judges had their own ends to meet and met them." In response one of the judges at the Cooksville fair, Mr. T. McConnell, a veterinarian himself, argued against the attack:
It was not entirely on the grounds of Mr. Torrance's nigh horse having the abnormal houghs that they were not a awarded a prize, as I was aware they were on him when I first saw him, and are now, and always will be, but they never interfere with the usefulness of the horse - thus the certificate. I confess that Mr. Torrance was told the day of the fair that his horses were unsound; but had the off horse been equal to the nigh one, independent of those abnormal houghs, they would have got a prize; but owing to his age and worn out appearance they were a very unseemingly looking pair... The pair that got the 1st prize were supposed to be owned by myself, and I one of the judges. This is the whispering that Mr. Torrance's friend refers to in his letter. Allow me to say that I neither owned nor had any interest in them directly or indirectly, and that the inferior one of the pair has been sold since for $225 and the other one at $300, and owned by John L. Scott & Co., Toronto, and the 2nd prize pair of well matched bay horses, the owners of which I do not know. So that the 1st and 2nd prizes were easily determined by the judges... As for the other two judges suffice me to say if they always have at Cooksville Fair as impartial judging as they had this year, the association may be thankful. No further notice will be taken to any correspondence on this matter, unless accompanied with writer's name in full.64
There were certainly some hard feelings as a result of the decisions made at the horse show at
Cooksville Fair, however, the descriptions provided indicate that this was not simply a case of prejudiced judging, nor should the veterinarian horse judge be considered an unsuitable judge based on the accusations of one individual. Judging was a very serious matter as much was at stake. In this case and others, fair exhibitors had lost more than just a premium; their reputation as a skilled producer or artisan was tarnished, and therefore they fought vigorously against placings that they felt insulted their entries. Instead of attacking the judges, some exhibitors would accuse the exhibitors of the winning items of cheating or falsifying their entries. At the
1880 Peel County Fall Fair a protest was made against Mrs. Green's winning sofa pillow because it was rumoured that she had not produced the article herself. Mrs. Green defended herself by
"Cooksville," Brampton Conservator (5 November 1880). T. McConnell, V.S. "Judging at Cooksville Fair," Brampton Conservator (12 November 1880). 73
producing a letter from the business house in Toronto where she bought the material to make the
article and by acquiring witness statements of persons who saw her making it, thus proving that
the work was indeed her own. This evidence satisfied the committee and the protest was
dismissed and Mrs. Green was given full credit for "the very handsome work shown."65 A heated
letter was published in the Brampton Times when an exhibitor at the 1868 Peel County Fall Fair,
John Smith, wrote into the paper, not because he disagreed with the judges, but because he had been criticized for his winning entry:
I am aware that when one finds fault with the decision of judges, he lays himself to the charge of undue interference; or when he complains of his being but an unsuccessful exhibitor, his opposition attributed to spring from disappointed ambition. With such I cannot be charged, because I neither find fault with the decision of the judges, nor do I complain because a prize was awarded to another article on fair competition with my own. But I do find fault with the action of the President of the County of Peel Agricultural Society - he being an exhibitor in the same department - who busied himself spreading a report that the turnips shown by me on the 7th inst., were not grown on my farm, but procured from amongst those shown at the Provincial Exhibition.... Now by what mode of reasoning does it follow that because my turnips were universally acknowledged to be the largest on the ground, that they were not grown by me? Or how is it that turnips a few sizes larger than his own must be identical with those shown at the Hamilton Exhibition? Is it the part of the President of such a society thus to busy himself in detraction? Or does he think he fills his honourable position more worthily by circulating reports calculated to damage articles shown?... I may say, Mr. Editor, that I would scorn the idea of exhibiting, as grown by me, what had been purchased from others. Not only were the roots grown on my farm, but I defy the President to show that I ever tried to take the advantage of the Society by any misrepresentation whatsoever.66
The unwise decision of the President, Michael Perdue, to compete in an event that he presided over was probably ill-advised in the first place; however, it is clear that despite the implications that his protests would have, he felt it necessary to defend his entry and, undoubtedly, his pride.
These examples of discontented exhibitors and criticisms of judges should not be used as
"Co. of Peel Fall Exhibition," Brampton Conservator (8 October 1880). John Smith, "A Grievance," Brampton Times (23 October 1868). 74
irrefutable evidence for the large scale partiality of judges or their incompetency but a standard
accompaniment to most serious competitions.
A more comprehensive evaluation of judges is necessary before one can evaluate their
suitability for such a role. Judges were likely selected by the fair directors for the category of
competition in which they were assigned and they were selected based on their perceived
qualifications. The 1871 census data allows for a deeper understanding of these qualifications
based on judges' socio-economic positions and their individual experiences. An investigation of
the occupations judges held, the property they had acquired and the experience they had
collected indicates that the judges at the Peel County Fall Fair did indeed have the necessary skill
set or economic and occupational status considered necessary to have the authority to judge the
respective classes charged to them.
The sample of judges linked to the 1871 census reveals that judges held occupations that
suggested they were qualified for their respective judging assignments. For example, Joseph
Gardner was one of the judges for the horse show at the Peel Fall Fair. Joseph Gardner was an
extremely wealthy landholder in Peel, holding over 1000 acres in total throughout the county,
including an impressive farm that was praised for its beauty and the fine buildings and grounds it
contained [Figure 3.3].67 While Gardner could certainly be classified as a gentleman-farmer, he
identified himself as a farmer and an evaluation of the number of livestock he owned showed
that he had a particularly large number of horses - 10 horses over the age of 3 years. Gardner was
indeed a successful farmer and his interest in horses seems to suggest that he was well qualified
to judge the horse classes at the county fall fair. The other livestock judges from Peel were also
farmers who owned the types of animals that they judged, and one would assume, had a firsthand knowledge of what made a better specimen of animal.
7 Historical Atlas of Peel County, Ontario, 67. 75
Figure 3.2: Portrait of Joseph Gardner, 1877
Source: Historical Atlas of Peel County, Ontario, Published by Walker & Miles, 1877.
Figure 3.3: Residence of Joseph Gardner, 1877
1 T PROSI'EOT HODBK-RKSIDKNCE OF JoSKPi! GARDNER jBfiQ ', LOT 5, l,CoN1E.HuRONTARtoS T.T.
Source: Historical Atlas of Peel County, Ontario. Published by Walker & Miles, 1877. Note: The pictures sketched of individuals' homes and businesses in the historical atlases published in the late nineteenth century are useful for providing an indication of what these residences looked like or contained, however, it should be noted that these illustrations where often idealized versions of the reality and that they should not be considered as exact representations of the original buildings. This illustration indicates that Gardner clearly considered himself an improving farmer with an ideal farm. 76
Another judge whose background suggests he was fit for his judging position was John P.
DeLahaye, a judge for the fine arts category. Census records show that DeLahaye owned 646 acres of land in Peel. Originally from France, DeLahaye identified himself as a 'gentleman' and his property holdings and the six servants he employed in his home indicates that this was a correct assessment of his position in life. It is not surprising then, that a man who was among the top ranks of society in Peel - whatever his own artistic ability was - might be considered a good choice to judge the fine paintings and artistic works found in the fine arts category of competition.
While these individual examples provide evidence that some judges seemed qualified for their positions, a more general study of this category of individuals is necessary to determine if this was the case for the majority of judges. Like the exhibitors, Peel County Fall Fair judges tended to be Ontario-born English Methodists, although this group also included a greater percentage of Catholics and Presbyterians than was average in the general population of Peel
(Tables 1, 2 and 3). Also, like exhibitors, judges were more likely to be between the ages of 31 to 40, however, judges had a larger percentage of individuals in the 51 to 60 category and a higher average age overall (Tables 7 and 8). It is not surprising then, that judges also had more mature families where the children were older than children in the other participant groups
(Table 9). In fact, the judges' category was the only category in which every individual was either married or widowed (Table 5). What these social characteristics suggest is that judges were at a more advanced stage in their lives when they could be expected to have a greater level of knowledge, security and wealth accumulation than other participants at the fair. Judges were chosen for their tasks because they had achieved stable employment, secured homes and gained the years of experience - assets that conferred authority and respect within the community. 77
These assumptions based on their social characteristics are further substantiated by a detailed examination of their property holdings. An evaluation of the land occupied by judges shows that the average judge held a higher than normal amount of acreage than any other Peel
Fall Fair participant or average Peel County individual (Table 11). Furthermore, unlike exhibitors and the executive, every single judge owned his land (Table 10). An evaluation of the agricultural production and moveable property shows that judges also produced the greatest quantity and range of crops and held the greatest amount of livestock, vehicles and implements
(Tables 17 to 21 and 23). These findings provide further evidence judges at agricultural exhibitions were indeed chosen from the most successful and established of community residents, and were as a result viewed to be the most qualified to evaluate the fair's exhibits.
The Executive Committee
The Agricultural Society members involved in the executive committees of annual fall fairs have often been considered to be from the affluent classes of nineteenth-century society.
Indeed, the criticism of elitism in agricultural societies, especially in the executive committees of these organizations, has been rather pervasive in recent historical works. The argument has been made that membership on executive committees was a sure sign of status and that agricultural societies' executives were composed almost entirely of members of the local elite who excluded the common farmer in order to preserve their roles as leaders in the community.68 Even though the agricultural society executive praised the role of the farmer, they also needed to criticize him for being cloddish and unprogressive if they were to maintain their authority for directing his future improvement.
Samson, Spirit of Industry and Improvement, 256. Fair, "Gentlemen, farmers, and gentlemen half-farmers," 47. 78
The Executive Committee consisted of individuals elected from the agricultural society's membership at the annual meeting at the beginning of each new year. Certainly there were members of the agricultural society who held positions on the executive of the organization because such 'honourable' titles as President and Secretary secured or advanced their influence in the social circles of Peel society. In 1871 the President of the County of Peel Agricultural
Society was John P. Hutton, a local lumber merchant who owned 298 acres of land and 11 houses in Peel. Hutton's father had come to Canada from Perthshire, Scotland in 1819. He first settled in Quebec but then moved to Niagara and married, living there 10 years before moving to
Peel County. John Hutton was born in Niagara in 1821 and was one of nine children who would eventually grow up in Peel. Although John Hutton had been engaged in farming and lumbering most of his life, he was appointed Magistrate in 1857 and later was appointed captain of the militia and elected a member of the Chinguacousy Council for which he held the position of
Deputy Reeve for over ten years.70 In 1870 Hutton became the President of Peel's agricultural society and he held the position for three years before a farmer on the executive, William Elliott, was elected President in 1873.71
70 Historical Atlas of Peel County, Ontario, 68. 71 Ibid., 59. 79
Figure 3.4: Portrait of John P. Hutton and his wife, Jemima Hutton, 1877
<^w J-/1. /tn f J> .40*P.
Source: Historical Atlas of Peel County, Ontario. Published by Walker & Miles, 1877.
Figure 3.5: Residence of J. P. Hutton, 1877
.:^mm^sm
RusmKNOH &tMlM-S Of J-P.HOTTO-VJESQ. HUTTONVII.LK-.'PlRONITO ^bVNSHIl'
Source: Historical Atlas of Peel County, Ontario. Published by Walker & Miles, 1877. 80
John P. Hutton, however, was not representative of all the individuals who participated on the executive committee. Other executive members included three farmers, one druggist, a barrister, a cattle dealer, the county treasurer, a "gentleman" and a labourer. Here we see that the
1871 executive committee was a collection of men of diverse occupations. The labourer, William
Johnson, was the single 24 year old who lived with an unrelated farming family. One of the farmers, Samuel Pearson, was a 32 year old tenant farmer who rented 175 acres and had a mixed farming operation that consisted of raising sheep, cattle and pigs and growing wheat, barley, oats, corn and a variety of other fruits and vegetables. Pearson operated his farm with his 27 year old wife and they had 4 young children. Druggist Christopher Stork and his wife Jane, owned 9 acres of property. The 40 year old married couple had 6 children and employed a servant named
Kat Devore to tend to their younger children who were between the ages of 2 and 14.
Christopher Stork's two eldest sons also lived with the family. His 16 year old son Charles was the postmaster for the area and his 18 year old son Edwin was a student, as well as an exhibitor at the 1871 Fall Fair.
Just as this study has already shown that fair exhibitors were much more representative of the general farming population than previously considered, so too was the executive committee.
A more detailed analysis of all the members of the executive illustrates how these men were not just from the elite of rural society, in fact, but were more likely to be among those still working towards home ownership and property accumulation than any other group.
Like the other fair participants, the executive committee consisted primarily of Ontario- born English Methodists, although there was also a significantly higher portion of men of
Scottish origin on the executive than was average for Peel's general population (Tables 1, 2 and
3). Of the executive committee, 20 percent were unmarried which was the highest portion of 81
single people of any fair participant category (Table 5). This may have been because these
individuals had more time to commit to the organization than family men. As well, this is
reflective of the fact that the executive committee was also the youngest group of participants.
Even though the majority of the executive were between the ages of 31 and 50, the average age
was 38 (Tables 7 and 8). The youth of the executive committee in comparison to the other
categories of fair participants is further substantiated by the fact that these men had the youngest
children of any group, and thus they employed the largest number of female servants, not
necessarily because they had greater funds to do so, but because these women were needed to
help take care of babies and young children (Table 9). These findings are significant because
they suggest that members of the agricultural society executive committee were not the old
wealthy men that were of an age when they had already achieved financial stability and could
afford the time and money required to participate on the board of agricultural societies as has been previously assumed. Instead, these men were at a stage in their lives when they were still building their careers, raising their children and working towards obtaining financial security for
their families.
Further evidence that the Agricultural Society executive committee cannot be seen as an
exclusive club of the richest and most powerful elites in the region is that this group had the highest percentage of tenants with 33 percent of individuals renting land rather than owning it
(Table 10). Recent work on tenancy amongst farmers has shown that renting should not be seen
as a sign of destitution because it allowed many to achieve a level of material comfort and
security, as well as flexibility in meeting family needs.72 Fair executives were not only more
likely to be tenants, but also occupied fewer acres of land than was average in Peel County
(Table 11). It is important to note that this can partially be explained by the fact that the
72 Wilson, Tenants in Time, 213. 82 executive committee contained the fewest farmers and had members whose occupations were not as dependent on land for prosperity (Table 14). Yet, while this should thus be considered when evaluating the overall averages of acreage owned, land ownership was still a good investment in the nineteenth century and it was often indicative of a certain level of wealth accumulation.73
Unsurprisingly, considering the occupational diversity of the executive, the fact that a higher portion of these members were living in town than exhibitors and judges, and the smaller amount of land they occupied, this group had the lowest production numbers for agricultural crops of any other fair participant category, as well as a below average production of most products in comparison to the Peel County average (Tables 20 and 21). The exception to this was a greater production of wool, an advantage in the production of fruit, oats and peas, and a slightly superior production of potatoes. An examination of the amount of livestock owned by the executive committee category shows that, per family, the executive committee group owned more horses and sheep, but fewer cattle and pigs than the average Peel County family (Tables 17 and 18). An examination of the individual census manuscripts shows that the farmers that were on the executive committee were predominantly engaged in raising sheep which would also explain why they had a significantly higher production of wool than was average. Considering that the executive committee members held fewer acres of land and produced less agricultural products, it is surprising that executive committee families still owned more agricultural implements on the whole than the average family in Peel (Table 23). The executive committee members were divided equally between those who occupied less than 10 acres and those who occupied between 100 to 200 acres, which implied that these members lived at either an urban residence or a more substantial farm, rather than a small farm in the countryside (Table 13), and
Darroch and Soltow, Property and Inequality, 17. 83 it would seem that those who did have a significant farming operation also invested highly in labour-saving agricultural machinery.
Overall, what these conclusions reveal is that the Agricultural Society executive committee was not just a group of wealthy, elite men. While there were those on the board who had significant wealth and can be considered of gentlemanly status, there were also those who owned modest amounts of property and capital and yet still others who were working to acquire their own property and struggling to achieve financial security. Despite the fact that some of the men on the executive committee were quite young and at a stage in their lives when they were still endeavouring to achieve financial stability, they chose to make a commitment to the
Agricultural Society and participate on the executive of the organization. As already explained, the responsibility associated with these positions often required a great deal of time, travel and even monetary commitments. The fact that these men chose to participate anyway, signalled that these positions did offer benefits. No doubt the young tenant farmer, Samuel Pearson, felt that he could gain increased social status and recognition in the community through his participation.
William Johnson, a landless labourer, was likely seeking out the connections he might later need for future work or when he could afford to purchase land of his own. Even John P. Hutton, the wealthy lumber merchant, would have felt that the position of President of the Agricultural
Society was a great honour that would continue to cement his position in the social and civic life of the region. Therefore, participation on the Society's executive offered an important opportunity for individuals to gain public recognition. It did not, however, mean that these men had already achieved prosperity or elite status in the community. 84
Conclusion
The 1871 census data provides an important initial foray into examining the wealth of those participating at the Peel County Fall Fair in comparison to others in the county. The judges were the most likely group of fair participants to have achieved economic and professional success. They were usually the group who had established households and occupations that allowed them a certain degree of authority in the community and the experience necessary to evaluate the categories of competition to which they were assigned. Exhibitors, however, were diverse in occupation, class, land status, material asserts and gender. Surprisingly too, considering the assumptions about the elite status of agricultural societies' executive committees, the executive category of fair participants showed that these individuals represented rural and urban backgrounds, different ages and levels of economic success. Therefore, not only is there direct evidence against the argument that the leadership of agricultural societies was a domain of a privileged few, but also property ownership shows that those who exhibited at the fair were closer to the average Peel resident in terms of economic status than they would ever be to the gentlemen farmers or professional men who exhibited their high priced hobby animals for accolades and influence.
Where fair participants did achieve more success than the average person in Peel, however, was the assets they acquired in portable property that were not only important sources of capital but important tools for improving their farms. Shifts in markets for agricultural products and the increasing need for greater productivity per acre encouraged farmers in particular to adopt or expand already existent modes of mixed farming and to use agricultural implements that would aid in cultivation. It is difficult to ascertain to what degree fair exhibitors implemented these changes, but clearly they were raising at least some pedigree livestock, they 85 were interested in achieving the best wheat, the best cheese, and the best apples, etc., and they were interested in determining the best agricultural implements to ease their workloads and increase production. These aspects of agricultural improvement purported by the agricultural society had not been ignored. It would seem that fair participants adopted practices most beneficial for their success. Community residents and farmers wanted to increase their wealth and social standing and thus they implemented the means to do so. Agricultural fairs not only provided an important source of information for farmers for improving their practices, but they were also important forums to achieve respectability in the community as well. 86
Chapter Four: The Reasons for Individual and Community Participation At the Peel County Fall Fair
On the weekend before the 1871 Peel County Fall Fair, John H. Ferguson was engaged in washing ram lambs and "fixing them up for the show." John and his father Samuel were regular participants at the County Agricultural Society's Show in Brampton and this year they intended on bringing a number of sheep and ram lambs that they considered worthy of a prize. On
Monday, October 2, the first day of the Fair, John recorded in his diary that the fairgrounds were
"greatly enlarged and improved," making particular mention of the new horse ring that was enclosed with a picket fence and the strong display of grain and vegetables that year. Upon returning from the Fair that day the Fergusons' had a visitor from McGillivray, a township north west of London, Ontario, in to see their livestock; undoubtedly the gentlemen had heard of their considerable success at the county show in the past and the superior livestock they owned, particularly their Cotswold sheep. The second day of the County Fair started off showery but
John returned to the Fair grounds to prepare for the livestock competitions when the weather improved that afternoon. John was impressed with the particularly large crowd of people in attendance that day and he commented that "the show of livestock, especially the hogs was very good, there being a lively competition in all the classes." At the end of the day, the Fergusons took second prize for one of their Cotswold ram lambs and third prize for their aged Cotswold ram. They had earned $3.00 in prize money for their efforts. Unlike previous years, however,
"the demand for sheep was very limited," and they were only able to sell one lamb to a Mr.
Cooney for $10.00. Despite the limited sale of stock at the Fair, in the weeks following the event news spread of their prizewinning livestock and the Fergusons attracted a number of buyers to 87 their farm and ultimately they were able to sell surplus ram lambs for greater sums than they had received at the fair.1
This description of John Ferguson's experiences during the 1871 Peel County Fall Fair is possible because from 1869 to 1883 John Ferguson faithfully recorded his activities everyday in his diary. While the previous chapter investigated the 1871 Fall Fair by linking participants and the 1871 Census of Canada data taken for Peel to determine the nature of participation at the
County Fall Fair and the types of people involved at these events, this chapter presents additional information on the reasons for community participation at the Peel County Fair using first-hand accounts found in the diaries of John Ferguson and the newspapers of the time. As Terry
Crowley explains in his study of rural labour in nineteenth-century Ontario, the study of rural society cannot be based on quantitative data alone because "the manner in which farmers and rural labourers spoke in letters, diaries, account books, surveys, newspapers, and journals is an important way of augmenting our knowledge" about these groups.2 In this section some of the earlier conclusions based on statistical data are substantiated, while important new functions of fairs and exhibitions in the countryside are revealed. The ways in which John Ferguson spoke about his experiences at the County Fall Fair and other exhibitions, along with the commentary he provides about others' experiences is invaluable to this study. While the newspapers in Peel supply important remarks about residents' expectations and uses for their local agricultural society and fair, as well as commentary on those who participated at these events, it is the descriptions provided by the Ferguson family and the other fair participants in this chapter that allow the exhibitors' perspective on agricultural fairs, rather than just the fair promoters' interpretation of these events, to come to the forefront.
1 See John Ferguson Diaries 1871. Peel Archives, Brampton. 2 Terry Crowley, "Rural Labour," 15. 88
This chapter will show how agricultural societies provided a number of social and
economic functions for the rural communities in which they existed. Besides the time and effort
that organizers and participants dedicated, the wider community supported these groups because
they realized the important social, recreational, economic and educational services they provided.
The writings of John Ferguson are particularly useful, not only because of their detail and
the comprehensiveness of the collection, but because the Ferguson family can be seen as representative of an average farm family in Peel County. At the time of the 1871 census, John
was 20 years old and his father Samuel Ferguson was 50 years old. Born in Upper Canada,
Samuel married and had six children; five girls and one boy. By 1871 Samuel was an owner of a
125 acre farm in Chinguacousy Township, a township of Peel renowned for its wheat growing
capabilities. Although he did not own his own threshing machine and relied on the use of his
neighbour's machine during harvest season, he did have 2 fanning mills, 1 horse rake, 1 reaper or mower, 3 ploughs and cultivators, 3 wagons or sleds, and 2 carriages or sleighs. The Fergusons
appear to have had a mixed farming operation with some specialty in sheep. Of the 125 acres that the Ferguson family occupied, 100 acres were improved and they planted 50 acres of wheat (in which they harvested 50 bushels of spring wheat and 250 bushels of winter wheat), used 19 acres
for hay, as well as growing barley, oats, peas, potatoes and turnip. In addition they used 3 acres
for garden and orchard land in which they grew grapes, apples and other fruits. For livestock the
Fergusons had 4 horses, 6 dairy cows, 10 beef cattle, 40 sheep and 7 pigs. The year of the census they declared to have produced 250 pounds of butter and 300 pounds of wool, but they did not make cheese or produce their own cloth.
Both Samuel and his wife, Ellen, were of Scottish descent and identified themselves as
Wesleyan Methodists. Religion played an important role in the lives of the Ferguson family. 89
They were extremely active in the church, almost never missing Sunday worship over the 14
year period that John Ferguson made entries into his daily diary. Indeed, John faithfully attended
Sunday school and Sunday evening sermons and he often recorded in detail the lessons and biblical texts preached that week. Also important for the family were the close bonds that they
had with friends, neighbours, and relatives. Ellen Ferguson was born in the United States and the
Ferguson family maintained numerous ties with friends and family that resided south of the border through correspondence and occasional visits. More immediately, however, the Ferguson
family maintained strong ties with a neighbouring family, the Snells. Although the history behind the initial friendship is unknown, the marriage of Jane Ferguson, Samuel and Ellen's
eldest daughter, to John C. Snell, the son of one of Peel's most prominent farmers, John Snell, no
doubt cemented the close bond between these two families. The closeness between these two households is evidenced by the many visits made between members of the families on a regular basis. In particular, John Ferguson developed a strong friendship with his brother-in-law J.C.
Snell that lasted throughout his diary entries.
Also important to John and his family was the Peel Fall Fair. John Ferguson spent
considerable time and effort in preparing for the fair; as evidenced by his detailed and consistent diary entries that clearly indicate that the fair was a highlight in his schedule of annual events.
John Ferguson's diary entries reveal that significant preparations were made before the agricultural exhibition and certainly the Fergusons and other Peel County residents competing at the fair began fitting and conditioning their livestock, carefully tending crops and agriculture produce, or completing their lace work and embroidery so that their entries would be in top condition by fair time. In an era where heavy, steady manual labour continued to dominate the farm and domestic work, the time and effort taken to show at County Fairs were significant. 90
Also, fair exhibitors came from all regions of the county, as well as from outside the county and
therefore these individuals often had to ship livestock, implements and other goods at a
considerable cost as well as acquire lodging. These competitors would not have participated at
these events, however, if they did not believe that there were important benefits to be had. Fair
organizers recognized the importance of advertising these benefits for the public and they
fervently defended the educational, economic, and social benefits that attending the County Fall
Fair would bring.
Although organizers continued to market agricultural fairs' fundamental purpose as one
of education for the community and they emphasized the latest in improvements to agricultural
technology and livestock that would be on display, they also realized that perhaps the greatest
draw for many to come to the fair were the important recreational and social functions these
events had. In advertising the upcoming Peel County Fall Fair, a writer for the Brampton Times
concluded that "none will grudge one day if not two" to attend the fair because "the custom of
attending these fall fairs has now become second nature, not only with the farmers themselves, but also with their comely and industrious spouses, whilst the youngsters, lasses as well as lads,
feel sadly disappointed if not allowed to attend on that day - the day of all days in the year - for
have they not, one and all, been looking for its enjoyment as their reward through all the hurry
and worry of the driving harvest time."3 Indeed, agricultural fall fairs and exhibitions were
trumpeted as "one of the great and popular institutions of Canada" and they were advertised to be
"regarded by the masses as holiday times" for rich and poor alike.4
John Ferguson's diary reveals the great anticipation with which he looked forward to
attending and exhibiting at the annual Peel County Fall Fair. Despite not having always won a
3 "County of Peel Agricultural Exhibition," Brampton Times (1 October 1869). 4 "Peel Fall Exhibition," Brampton Times (1 August 1879). 91 prize, he continued to return to the event and comment on the quality and improvement of the displays and grounds.5 The fact that these events were keenly sought after is also evidenced by the fact that John made numerous trips to other township, county, provincial and national and even international fairs, often at a significant personal expense. Whether "none but the sick or superannuated [were] content to remain at home"6 remains a mystery, but it is quite clear from the large attendance that frequented these events and the significant press they received, that local county fairs were important to the community. In the case of the Peel County Fall Fair, the event represented more than a simple reprieve from the ordinary; the Peel County Fall Fair was a highly anticipated event that provided an important social and recreational function for the farming and village communities in Peel.
The tradition of attending the local Fall Fair was an important one for County residents such as John Ferguson who looked forward not only to the sights and sounds to be had, but for the opportunity to meet with friends and neighbours who were interested and engaged in similar pursuits. Indeed, the "happy delighted groups," reported the Brampton Times, would find the
Peel County Fall Fair to be "a great County re-union, and not a few from a distance will embrace the opportunity of meeting their old friends and connexions."7 In his investigation of twentieth- century agricultural fairs and ploughing matches David Mizener argues that "[t]he exchange of greeting and the conversations between family, friends, and acquaintances at these events played a crucial role in renewing ties that formed the basis of kinship networks and communities."8
Similarly, Warren Gates believes that these events played an important role in creating communities because "[socialization in consequence of a shared experience, annually renewed,
5 See collection of John Ferguson Diary entries. 6 "County of Peel Fall Fair," Brampton Times (2 October 1868). 7 "County of Peel Agricultural Exhibition," Brampton Times (1 October 1869). Mizener, "Furrows and Fairgrounds," 124. 92
offset rural isolation and contributed to a sense of community."9 Rural isolation should not be
considered an important factor in Peel since the county was relatively well established and populated by the 1870s. John Ferguson's diary entries reveal that the family received and made numerous visits to friends and family, sometimes traveling substantial distances, other times
simply going into town or down the road for tea at neighbours. The constant comings and goings
of family and friends, however, indicate that this household felt little of the isolation experienced by rural settlers in the early period of the century.10 Still, the ability to maintain old ties and build
new ones with members of the rural and village communities in Peel was important.
Exhibitors who participated in the same events developed relationships that could prove
advantageous when seeking out buyers for their goods or even when enquiring about information pertaining to their common pursuits and interests. Although John Ferguson and J. C. Snell were competitors at the County Fair, they were also friends and they often bought livestock from each other and helped one another at the shows. After successfully competing at the Provincial
Exhibition in London in 1873, J. C. Snell sent a telegram to John Ferguson asking him to help them show at the St. Louis Fair. Eager for the adventure, John immediately set out to meet the
Snells in Windsor before making their way by train to St. Louis. It was not only their friendship, but also their working relationship and their mutual show experiences that gave J. C. Snell the confidence to ask John to help him show at this major event and with 52 sheep exhibited by the
Snell family, John's help was undoubtedly needed. In turn, John had the opportunity to travel to the United States and see parts of the country he had never seen before. John was impressed with the "fine and large farms"11 he saw in traveling through Michigan, and with the stock yards of
Chicago, which to him were "a wonderful sight, covering 40 acres filled with pens which contain
9 Gates, "Modernization as a Function of the Agricultural Fair," 277. 10 See Susanna Moodie, Roughing it in the Bush (New York: G. P. Putnam, 1852). 11 John Ferguson Diary (Wednesday, October 1, 1873). 93 thousands of hogs and cattle and sheep."12 He also marvelled about the beautiful fairgrounds in
St. Louis, the excellent livestock, and the handsome machines and implements, many of which had capabilities he had never before seen, like a reaper that bound grain with wire.13 John's participation at agricultural exhibitions allowed him to build connections and take hold of opportunities to see new places and observe new agricultural innovations that would have otherwise been closed to him. The new experiences John gained through his involvement in fairs and exhibitions expanded his knowledge and increased his interest in the new advances being made in the field of agriculture.
There were other reasons why meeting new people was particularly important at the fair.
For the single male or female who had exhausted their immediate circle of prospects, the annual county fair could prove an important place to seek out a future marriage prospect. The Peel
County Fall Fair brought families from around the county together who may have had limited contact otherwise. Certainly young men and women anticipated the event because it was a chance to gather with friends and encounter the opposite sex in a respectable public setting. At nineteen years of age John Ferguson was no longer oblivious to the "fairer sex" and when he attended the Edmonton Fair in the fall of 1869 he was disappointed that the cold and wet day had discouraged a large attendance because this resulted in the "girls [being] rather scarce," although it was not a complete disappointment because he considered the female visitors to still be a
"scarce but select" group.14 John Ferguson had already built a relationship with Sarah Snell, but was weighing his options after flirtations between him and Sarah became uncertain. Earlier in the year when meeting up with Mr. Snell's carriage one winter day, John Ferguson recalled that
"Sarah looked at me so pleasantly that she almost won me over again," but a relationship
12 Ibid., (Thursday, October 2, 1873). 13 Ibid., (Wednesday, October 6 - Saturday, October 11, 1873). 14 Ibid., (Monday, October 11, 1869). 94
between the two was not to be. By the following year all mention of Sarah disappeared from his
diary entries and John Ferguson began to look outside of his immediate circle of friends to find a
companion, in the end not marrying until 1882 when he met Rilla Boyle and took over his
father's farm.
Finding a suitable partner for marriage was important, especially for farmers who often
laboured side by side with their spouses. As Francoise Noel explains in her book on family life
and sociability in Upper and Lower Canada in the late eighteenth and nineteenth centuries,
marriage was a major turning point for young adults and a successful transition to forming a new
household meant that both husband and wife had to be skilled in their area of labour because the
work of both was essential for the well-being of the family. According to Noel, this meant that
"[y]oung men learned to farm, apprenticed for a trade, or studied to join a profession that would
support their family. Young women learned the housekeeping skills they would need once they
were married."15 While Noel admits that "an increasing number of couples were married for love
rather than purely economic considerations,"16 even so, the skills that each partner brought to the
marriage remained imperative if they were to have a successful life together. The County Fall
Fair provided the perfect opportunity for seeking out a spouse with a certain desirable skill set
because the very structure of the event separated individuals into categories to be judged on
specific merits. The last chapter revealed that a large percentage of young single women of
marriageable age competed at the fair because these events allowed young women to display
their skill in domestic and agricultural pursuits important for the family economy.17 No doubt a
suitor would be proud to call the best bread-maker in Peel County his wife. The same can also be
15 Francoise Noel, Family Life and Sociability in Upper and Lower Canada, 1780-1870: A View from Diaries and Family Correspondence (Montreal & Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press, 2003), 100. 16 Ibid., 126. 17 See Chapter Three for an extended discussion of women's participation at fairs. 95 said for single men. Although fewer young men appeared on the prize list than women this does not mean that it was not an important event for them as well. There are fewer young men showing up on the fair prize list, in part, because the sons of farmers and artisans who were engaged in the same work often competed in their fathers' name, especially if their father was still the household head, and therefore their entry would be listed under their father's name.
Nevertheless, women could use the results of farm competitions to seek out a well-to-do farmer who displayed a talent for breeding livestock or growing superior wheat, abilities often interpreted as signalling future prosperity. Of course a woman's bread-making skills or a man's superior breeding of livestock would not have been the only consideration in selecting a suitable spouse, but in a rural community where these qualities could benefit the family economy and lead to increased financial security, they were not skills to be rejected either.
The fair was also important for the recreation and entertainment it provided for the community. In the pioneering period of the province, communal recreation often came in the form of neighbourhood bees. Bees served as a "mechanism of social integration" that reinforced bonds between neighbours and friends, as well as provided families with an important source of recreation. Although very serious work was accomplished at various bees, these events also provided amusement and entertainment for those involved, especially during the great feasts and celebrations which included "charades, dancing, singing, and flirtations" between the sexes.19 Work bees continued throughout the nineteenth century at the same time as the rise of agricultural fairs, but now fairs provided new forms of entertainment and recreation. The local county agricultural fairs would never reach the extremes of carnivalesque that were achieved at
18 Catharine Anne Wilson, "Reciprocal Work Bees and the Meaning of Neighbourhood," in Home, Work, and Play: Situating Canadian Social History, 1840-1980, ed. James Opp and John C. Walsh (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006), 119. 19 Ibid., 128. 96 the larger provincial, national, and international exhibitions, however, there were still many
"sights and sounds" to be had.
As early as 6:00am, country visitors and their teams would arrive onto the fairgrounds.
Some came early to make sure they secured stabling for their horses, while others who had already brought their stock in days before would go and prepare them for the competitions to come. Next the crowds of visitors and exhibitors, whose produce and handiwork had already been judged, arrived, pouring through the fair gates ready to witness the day's events. The fairgrounds were full of animals of all shapes and sizes. Prize horses, cattle, sheep, pigs, and poultry filled the rings and barns while the latest implements and farm machinery were on display. The best crops were on show and the main exhibit hall was full with artisan crafts, fine paintings, large quilts, and lacework and embroidery. The tables were filled with fresh vegetables and fruits and huge quantities of butter, cheese and honey. Concession booths and even pedlars were present ready to woo the unsuspecting passerby into a purchase they could not pass up. A summary of the 1871 Peel County Fall Fair, written in the Brampton Times, provides a detailed illustration of the entertaining spectacle:
The fair ground in the afternoon exhibited as lively and pleasing a scene as the warmest friend of such exhibitions could desire to behold. The countless groups of animated faces, on enjoyment bent, moving in every direction around the central arena - the thrilling strains of the music of the competing bands, the joyous laughter that occasionally burst forth, - the shrill din created by the itinerants proclaiming the marvellous properties of their catch penny invaluables - the bustle and confusion of the moving animals whose merits were to be canvassed and judged, all contributed to form a living and breathing panorama interesting to view, and affording much matter for reflection and discussion within the thousand and one quiet homes in Peel, in which for many weeks to come the pregnant question will continually intrude, - "How did you like the
"Peel Fall Fair! Another Grand Success!" Brampton Times (6 October 1871). 97
The Peel County Fall Fair was an eagerly sought after civic festival in which community members came together to participate in recreational activities considered socially acceptable for
all ages, classes and sexes of people.21 The large cheering crowds, the music, the speeches and the displays of items of all shapes and sizes were all part of the entertainment provided at the county fair. In his diary, John Ferguson often made mention of the large crowds attending these events and he was always eager to provide his own commentary on which exhibits excelled that year and which ones did not meet previous years achievements. In 1877 John noted that "[t]he show in all departments of the County Fair was better than any predecessor,"22 however, at the
1878 Peel County Fair, John observed that the weather was fine and the crowd of people large, but "the show in most of the departments was inferior to last year [bejcause the large Central fairs of London & Hamilton [were] being held [that] week."23 For John Ferguson the annual fall fair was not an event to be missed and his commentary displays a keen interest in the attractions of the fair each year. The recreation and entertainment that area residents could depend on at the fair was an important reason that they returned annually to this event.
Of course, the Peel County Fall Fair was attended for more than just creating and renewing relationships or partaking in recreation. The county agricultural fair also served an important economic function by providing farmers and craftsmen a valuable opportunity to market and sell their livestock, produce and products. In Upper Canada, Brian Osborne has argued that "[pjrior to the emergence of a mature system of central places serving the needs of the settled area, and prior to the concentration of commercial activity in the business districts of urban centres, itinerant traders, periodic markets, and seasonal fairs were important agencies of
21 Sanmiya, "A Spirit of Enterprise," 4. 22 Ibid., (9 October 1877). 23 Ibid, (2 October 1878). 98 both retail and wholesale commerce."24 Osborne concludes that, while the fair was important in the initial period of settlement in Upper Canada, by the 1870s the commercial division of the fair was weakened and that seasonal livestock fairs were extinct by the twentieth century because they had been replaced by other marketing agencies.25 The Peel County Fall Fair, however, shows that despite the rise of competing forms of trade in commodities in Peel and around the
Toronto area in general, it continued to play an important economic role in the lives of agricultural and manufacturing producers of the county. The Peel County Fall Fair aided livestock producers' sale of livestock and manufacturers and artisans' sale of goods while also giving exhibitors the ability to increase the value of their products based on the awards they received and ultimately the premiums bestowed at fairs provided an additional monetary benefit for participation.
For the Snell family, the Ferguson family and other farming families in Peel County, the fair provided a vital opportunity to advertise their livestock, crops and produce. The winning of awards and prizes signalled the superiority of their farm products and built their reputations as top-quality breeders and farmers which would result in increased sales and better prices for their produce. This was especially the case in livestock breeding, as evidenced by John Snell and
Sons. Originally from England, John Snell came to Canada in 1829, first working in the lumber trade in New Brunswick. Once earning enough money to move to Upper Canada and buy a farm of his own, John Snell settled in Chinguacousy Township in 1838.26 The Snell farm originally consisted of 100 acres, acquired at a cost of $1,300, however, because of the success of John
Snell's fanning practices, by 1854 John Snell was able to purchase an additional 100 acres and
24 Brian Osborne, "Trading on a Frontier: The Function of Peddlars, Markets, and Fairs in Nineteenth-Century Ontario," in Canadian Papers in Rural History, ed. Donald H. Akenson, vol 2 (Gananoque, Ont: Langdale Press, 1980), 60. 25 Ibid., 79. 26 Margaret Dodds Snell Henry, From Devon to Ontario (Bolton, Ont.: The Bolton Entreprise, 1973), 1. 99
again in 1863 he purchased another 100 acres, thereby adding 200 acres to his farm at an average
cost of $60 an acre.27 Soon the Snells were recognized as the premier breeders of farming
livestock in the county and one of Peel's most prominent farming families.28 By 1871, John Snell
owned and occupied 435 acres of land in Peel, 385 of which were improved. The Snells owned 1
threshing machine, 3 fanning mills, 2 horse rakes, 4 reapers or mowers, 10 ploughs and
cultivators, 9 wagons or sleds, and 5 carriages and sleighs. There were two houses on the
property and a total of 11 barns and stables. The Snells had an extensive mixed farming
operation with 10 horses, 28 dairy cows, 31 beef cattle, 103 sheep, and 28 pigs at the time of the
census. For crops the family planted 23 acres of wheat and 95 acres of hay, and they also grew
large amounts of other products. That year they produced 1700 bushels of barley, 1600 bushels
of oats, 520 bushels of peas, 300 bushels of potatoes, 9600 bushels of turnip, 325 bushels of
apples and 5 bushels of other fruits.29
John Snell farmed with his family and three adult sons, John C, Joseph, and Richard.
John C. Snell resided in a separate household and was considered the "general manager" of his
family's farm.30 The Snells were well known for their purebred livestock including their Short
Horn (otherwise referred to as Durham) cattle, Cotswold sheep, and Berkshire swine, although
other breeds such as Galloway cattle, Yorkshire and Suffolk swine and Southdown sheep were
also bred on the farm during the 1860s.31 With their primary breeding of Short Horns,
Cotswolds, and Berkshires, the Snells attained national and international reputations as breeders
Gagan, Hopeful Travellers, 49. 28 J.A. Carroll, "Agriculture: From Humble Beginnings to International Fame," A History of Peel County: To Mark Its Centenary as a Separate County, 1867-1967 (Brampton: Charters Publishing Company Limited, 1967), 34. 29 1871 Census of Canada, manuscript census: Peel County, reel C-9958, page 43. 30 Ibid. 31 Carroll, "Agriculture: From Humble Beginnings to International Fame," 34. 100 of superior quality livestock. Their ability to achieve such a highly regarded position as elite livestock breeders was in large part due to their success at agricultural exhibitions and fairs.
John Snell and his sons were not only successful at winning top prizes for themselves, but they were also highly regarded because of their contribution to the overall quality of cattle. After the 1868 County of Peel Spring Fair,33 a writer for the Brampton Times recorded the prizes awarded to John Snell but made specific mention that it was Mr. Snell's improvement of cattle in the region overall that was most rewarding:
Mr. John Snell carried off prizes for the three animals he exhibited, but it must be still more gratifying to that enterprising and pushing stock-breeder to note that all the prizes bestowed on other participants for thorough-bred Durhams and grade cattle were the progeny of stock sold from his herd. A better proof of the good he has done in improving the breed of stock in this County, no man could desire, and it has been well deserved. Mr. Snell sold, we are informed, one of his two year old Kentucky bulls to a farmer who resides near Baden, at a very high figure.34
The Snell family was respected for the achievements they made in improving local livestock but they were also rewarded financially for their success by increasing the value of the stock they produced.
Fairs provided farmers with an important marketing medium. By displaying his products in competition and achieving respectable results, the farmer could advantageously promote his goods; the value of his stock and produce was further enhanced by the prestige of the prizes he won, the higher the placing and the more difficult the competition, the greater his product was valued. In his classic work on the history of fairs and expositions, H. W. Waters discuses one of the important functions of fairs as being an instrumental tool in allowing breeders and farmers
iZ Ibid., 35. 33 The County of Peel Agricultural Society also ran a spring fair as was as the fall fair. The spring fair had less classes and focused more on livestock and agricultural implements than other agricultural, manufactured or artisan products. 34 "County of Peel Spring Fair," Brampton Times (1 May 1868). 101
the ability to "secure the best possible price for his breeding and surplus live stock and other
products."35 Only through competition can animals be evaluated and deemed "the best", a title
often sought after and generally well compensated for; the winner of such a title, particularly in
the live stock trade, would have received a major increase in the value of his stock, especially if
the animals were to be used for breeding purposes. Peel County farmer John R. Craig was
extremely successful at the Chicago Exhibition of Pigs in 1871. Not only did Craig win $1,030 in
cash prizes and the Grand Special Prize for the best display of hogs of any breed by any one
exhibitor, a great achievement considering the strong competition and exhibitors with imported
stock from England, but he also sold a ten month old sow to a Mr. S.G. Reed of Portland Oregon
for $500, a boar to the same buyer for $200, one pair of suckling pigs to a Mr. Willis of Illinois
for $200, and two suckling pigs for a $100 each to another two buyers. Furthermore, John Craig
refused a "tempting" offer of $1,500 for his large imported Boar, "Sambo II."36 These prize
winning pigs were valued because of the breeding potential they possessed, and as these prices
show, farmers who won prestigious prizes were well compensated for their efforts. Just as John
Craig received large sums for his prize winning pigs, John Snell and other farmers who had
success at the Provincial Agricultural Exhibitions and the agricultural state exhibitions held in
the United States greatly increased the value of their stock and their reputations as premier
livestock breeders.
Though not as renowned as John Snell, Samuel Ferguson can be considered a successful
farmer. He and his son John placed well at the County Agricultural Fairs and Samuel was asked to judge township agricultural shows such as the 1870 Township of Caledon Fall Fair in which he was one of the cattle judges, an indication of the respect he had earned for the quality of his
H. W. Waters, History of Fairs and Expositions: Their Classification, Functions and Values (London, Ont: Reid Bros. & Co., 1939), 107. 36 "Honor to Peel: Great Success in Pigs," Brampton Times (29 September 1871). 102
produce and livestock. The Ferguson Family, however, did not show at the larger Provincial
Agricultural Exhibitions, although they did regularly attend.37 They chose to exhibit at the Peel
County Fall Fair because even though it did not attract the tens of thousands of visitors that
attended the Provincial fairs, it provided an important opportunity to converse with the local
consumers and a strong placing at the County Fair was still considered a significant achievement,
specifically when it was often only the best from the local townships who would compete. More importantly for the Fergusons was the fact that the County agricultural society brought together thousands of Peel County and neighbouring counties' residents to view the Fergusons livestock.
Throughout the 1870s John Ferguson's diary entries reveal that it was at the County Fall Fair that he and his father were able to sell their surplus stock and the livestock which did not sell at the
fair were usually sold just shortly after the exhibition.3 In 1869, John records bringing seven ram lambs to the Peel County Fair, six of which were sold at the event. The Peel County Fall
Fair provided the Ferguson family with an important marketplace to advertise the quality of their livestock and then sell their stock to the top bidder.
County agricultural fairs allowed the areas' manufacturing and artisan community a chance to display their products and compete for top-prize in their respective categories. A prize at the fair was an important award if a company or individual artisan hoped to convince consumers to purchase their products of proven superior quality. One such individual who made regular use of the county fair to market his manufactured goods was John Haggert. Born in
Scotland, John Haggert immigrated with an elder brother to the United States in 1839 and apprenticed to be an engineer. He later decided to join his parents in Canada and was employed in a number of engineering positions before finally arriving in Brampton in 1849 and
See collection of John Ferguson Diary entries. 38 Ibid. 39 Ibid., (Thursday, October 7, 1869). 103
establishing an agricultural implements manufacturing company.40 The Haggert Brothers firm
was initially formed between John Haggert and his two brothers; however, in 1866 a dissolution
took place and ultimately John Haggert took this opportunity to form a partnership with his
brother-in-law, Mr. R. Cochrane, which resulted in the successful expansion of his business for
years to come. Elected the Mayor of Brampton from 1874 to 1877, Haggert was forced to resign
his position after further expanding his company by acquiring the St. Thomas Agricultural
Works in that same year because he felt that he no longer had the time needed to continue his
political life. An important employer for the town, John Haggert was regarded as playing a vital
role in the rapid growth in Brampton after 1850. The Brampton factory employed over 150
people in Brampton in 1877 and, in association with the factory in St. Thomas, the Haggert
Brothers manufacturing business was considered "one of the representative establishments of the
Dominion."41
Historical Atlas of Peel County, Ontario (Published by Walker & Miles, 1877), 67. 41 Ibid. 104
Figure 4.1: Residence of John Haggert, 1877
JKAGEBTUSA TCERHACE,- RESIDENCE or JOHW HAGGERT JESQ* BRAMPTON.
*«a»*^«W*~#«/^"STO«rB -*-—•••"" xx.-v-?. ;..£ a.„'...^.-——- -•••!•;••--••-- ., ig,ir Source: Historical Atlas of Peel County, Ontario (Published by Walker & Miles, 1877). Note: The pictures sketched of individuals' homes and businesses in the historical atlases published in the late nineteenth century are useful for providing an indication of what these residences looked like, however, it should be noted that these illustrations where often idealized versions of the reality and that they should not be considered as exact representations of the original buildings. The Peel County Fall Fair offered Haggert Bros, and other manufacturing companies the opportunity to display their products for the local population. Fairs and exhibitions have been recognized as "an advertising medium of the best possible type" because they brought exhibits from around the region together and allowed thousands of interested visitors to compare the merchandise, saving both time and money to the producers and buyers alike.42 For the Haggert Brothers manufacturing firm, the chance to display their vast array of agricultural implements Waters, History of Fairs and Expositions, 107. 105 and compete for awards offered an important opportunity to convince consumers that they should buy their implements. The importance of placing well against competitors producing similar implements was obvious; a red ribbon placing let consumers know which product was superior (in the minds of the judges anyways) and indicated which one they should ultimately buy. Even the consumers who did not attend the fair were subject to the influence of its results because the local newspaper published the prize lists and often provided commentary about the respective merits of the exhibits displayed. At the 1868 County of Peel Spring Fair a writer for the Brampton Times was particularly impressed with the quality of the Haggert Bros, display of agricultural implements: Messrs. Haggert & Bros., had on view before their establishment an assortment of reapers and Mowers, hand-rakers and self-rakers, got up in masterly style, which attracted general attention, and drew forth openly expressed approval from all the farming critics, that according to public opinion in this locality are aufait in the practical working and management of these priceless labour-saving machines in so fickle a climate (especially during the harvest months) as appertains to our beloved Canada.43 A successful showing at a county fair was important for local businesses, particularly if their regional competitors were also taking part. The Brampton Times congratulated a local carriage manufacturer, Anthony Brothers, in an article entitled, "Well done, Brampton!" According to the paper, Anthony Bros, of Brampton had received a second place at the Peel County Fall Fair to an exhibitor from Halton County, despite public opinion in favour of Anthony Bros.' entry. The paper was happy to announce that at the County of Halton Fall Fair it was the local Brampton manufacturer who received first prize for the best one horse carriage over the winner at the Peel "County of Peel Spring Fair," Brampton Times (1 May 1868). 106 Fair and the Brampton Times expressed that this award "[spoke] volumes for Anthony Bros. establishment."44 The reputation gained through successful competition at these events was an important marketing tool for manufacturers. Their awards and prizes were advertised as reflective of their overall establishment and merchandise. At the Peel County Fall Fair in 1872 John Ferguson noted in his diary his particular interest in the expansive display of good quality agricultural implements and carriages.45 Later that week he recorded that he had "settled in full the remainder of the payment on the new reaper at Haggert's Office, $68.00."46 While it is impossible to know if the Fergusons had bought a reaper they had seen at the show or if the purchase had been made prior to the event, the fact that the Haggert Bros, had been successfully winning awards at the County and Provincial Exhibitions certainly would have given farmers the confidence to purchase Haggert Bros, agricultural implements based on their excellent reputation. John Haggert realized the importance that fairs could make in marketing and selling his products and he remained a regular exhibitor at the county fairs, regional shows, and provincial exhibitions throughout the 1870s and 1880s. Haggert was proud of his success at these competitions and, realizing fairs' ability to attract buyers, he showed off his participation at these events in his newspaper advertisements [Figure 4.2]. "Well done, Brampton!" Brampton Times (16 October 1868). John Ferguson Diary (Saturday, October 5, 1872). John Ferguson Diary (Wednesday, October 9, 1872). 107 Figure 4.2: Haggert Brothers Advertisement Poiinclal Ixhtpffiol,Ottawa, /? Great Western Fafp, knlorv Great Central Fair, Hariiiliori, And jftlm <»* &* j» Op*«Wi>» WE AEE ROW OETEBJNO 4T nrST COMPLETED, AN ASSORTMENT OF SHEET- IBON BOX STORES, AL£- AT THE MOST REASON ABLE PKICESi i ' HAGCfERT BROS, WIG GO. Source: "Haggert Bros. Advertisement," Brampton Conservator (12 September 1884). The Peel County Fall Fair not only provided farmers, artisans, and manufacturers with a valuable opportunity to market their livestock and products, but also awarded premiums which could amount to significant sums depending on the quantity and quality of the items an exhibitor 108 brought for competition. The 1871 Peel County Fall Fair paid a winning entry usually from $1 to $7 for first place.47 For larger shows such as the Provincial Agricultural Exhibition, prize money could be significantly higher. At the 1869 Provincial Exhibition John Snell and sons won the best herd of Durham Cattle and they were presented with the Prince of Wales prize and a premium of $60 presented by His Royal Highness himself who attended the event.48 At that same competition the Snell family also won prizes for individual Durham heifers and bulls, along with a number of prizes for the Cotswolds sheep amounting to over $200.49 In 1871, John Ferguson recorded in his diary that the Snells were very successful at the Provincial Exhibition, held in Kingston that year, bringing home more than $800 in prizes.50 Later at the 1877 Provincial Exhibition in London the Snells again won a number of top awards and prizes that allowed them to earn nearly $600 in premiums.51 While there were expenses associated with showing at exhibitions and fairs, a successful competition not only increased the value of the items shown, but the premiums offered at these events could allow exhibitors to make a profit just from competing. The prize money, the chance to market livestock and products, and strong reputations for success that could be built at a fair all contributed to the important economic function a fair could serve for the community and its members. Finally, in addition to the social, recreational, and economic functions served by fairs, it is still important to realize that agricultural fairs were able to accomplish their most valued goal - educating the farming population. As Keith Walden has previously noted, "there is little point... in trying to measure degrees of influence,"52 and certainly it is difficult to gage just how much 47 See Chapter 3 for further details on the division of classes and premiums earned. 48 "The Exhibition of 1869," Brampton Times (1 October 1869). 49 Ibid. 50 John Ferguson Diary (Thursday, September 28, 1871). 51 "Honours for Peel," Brampton Conservator (28 September 1877). 52 Walden, Becoming Modern, xv. 109 information farmers absorbed at the fall fair or if they bought new implements or new breeds of livestock because they had been influenced to do so after returning from the fair. It is, however, fairly safe to assume that annual fairs had an "impact on visitors, who returned time and again," and therefore "[t]he opportunities for moulding were more sustained."53 The annual commentary about the displays and competitions at the Peel County Fall Fair found in John Ferguson's diary reveals that visitors to the fair were certainly taking in its attractions, and those that competed year after year at this event would have undoubtedly paid attention to judges' decisions and made future adjustments to their own entries so that they would have a chance at earning top prize. In 1871 John was happy to have taken second prize for a ram lamb and third prize for an aged ram because "the show of livestock... was very good there being a lively competition in all the classes."54 At the 1869 Peel County Fall Fair, John entered some plums and potatoes for competition but obtained no prize, however, he was not disappointed because that year there was a "good show especially among the vegetables."55 John recognized the merits of the entries placed above his own and he would have undoubtedly learned what kind of product he would have to compete with next year if he wanted to win. Because "exhibitions had a direct path to the brain through the eyes,"56 fair competitors and visitors no doubt learned something about what was expected and considered excellent in various agricultural, domestic, industrial and artistic pursuits. Rather than attending the fair to dispute and resist new ideas and knowledge, it is also important to consider that many people would have attended fall fairs with the desire to acquire greater knowledge about the various branches of agriculture and industry in which they were John Ferguson Diary (3 October 1871). Ibid., (6 October 1869). Heaman, The Inglorious Arts of Peace, 25. 110 engaged. Despite a historiography that suggests that the farmers and visitors attending agricultural fairs and exhibitions were stubborn creatures who were resistant to change, and even commentary from the period that suggested many visitors often felt "indignant at the idea of receiving instruction from any source,"57 a closer investigation of individuals' responses to these events reveals that at least some people who frequented fairs were there to see what was the latest and best in agricultural, manufactured and artistic endeavours. When John Ferguson competed in livestock, crop, and vegetable and fruit competitions at the fair over the years, he did not complain about the judging when he did not receive top prize, rather he commented on the strong showing in these classes and made particular mention of the new items he had discovered. In conclusion, the annual Peel County Fall Fair can be considered an important part of the rural landscape in the later part of nineteenth-century Ontario. Fairs underwent significant changes in this era to become essential components of rural life and this foundation lead to the future development of agricultural societies and fairs across Canada in the twentieth century. Communities supported and attended these events because agricultural fairs provided important social, recreational, economic and educational purposes. Farms brought county residents and families together, along with individuals outside of the region and assisted in the maintenance and creation of working and social relationships. Fairs provided an important source of communal recreation that was particularly important during the arduous harvest season in which farmers and rural labourers were engaged. Fairs also served important economic functions by allowing farms and businesses to market their products and receive top-price for their labours and the premiums awarded at fairs were an added enticement for participation at these events. 57 Canadian Agriculturist (January 1849), 293, quoted in Elsbeth Heaman, The Inglorious Arts of Peace: Exhibitions in Canadian Society during the Nineteenth Century (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1999), 21. Ill Finally, despite the dogma that surrounded the educational purposes of these events, they did in fact allow visitors to learn from the trial and experiments of others and they brought new forms of technology and production before the eyes of the rural population. While it is impossible to understand all of the implications associated with the annual county fair, the evidence presented here has demonstrated that these events should be seen as a significant social, cultural, and economic component of rural life by the second half of the nineteenth century. 112 Chapter Five: Conclusion Agricultural societies and fairs in the later half of the nineteenth century were not replicas of their early nineteenth-century predecessors. Neither were agricultural executive committee members limited to the rural elite, nor were participants only those wealthy gentlemen farmers who could afford the best livestock or affluent businessmen, government officials or professionals who sought to solidify or increase their authority in the community. Additionally, agricultural exhibitions were not judged by posturing individuals who held little knowledge of the items which they evaluated. Finally, agricultural fairs were not irrelevant, detached entities that did not reflect rural residents' concerns or interests. These inaccurate conclusions, which can be found in some of the historical literature on the topic, came from assumptions based on limited investigation. This dissertation has shown instead how by the later half of the nineteenth century agricultural fairs were reflective of the communities in which they existed and held a great deal of benefit for those who participated. From the established gentleman farmer to the rural labourer, the successful agricultural implement manufacturer to the small-town shoe maker, and the wife of the county sheriff to the young, single farm woman, the Peel County Fall Fair proved to hold a vast array of benefits for the diverse rural population for which it existed. The Peel County Fall Fair illustrates how agricultural fairs provided social, recreational, economic and educational opportunities, based on the needs of the community in which they functioned and how individuals adopted their utility based on personal needs and desires. The Peel County Fall Fair made significant transformations over the course of its existence. The first county fair held in Peel had a few classes for breeding livestock and select 113 agricultural products and implements. By 1871, however, the prize list had increased to over 255 classes for a variety of agricultural, domestic, artistic and manufactured pursuits. Hundreds of people from around Peel County competed at the annual fall fair and thousands more came to experience the event. The management and organization of such fairs became the county agricultural societies' most important function and most successful tool for pursuing their goal of agricultural education and improvement. More than this, however, fairs became essential components of rural life, providing community residents an opportunity to create and maintain working and social relationships, an important source of communal recreation, and an opportunity to market and increase the value of their stock and products, thus aiding their efforts for greater prosperity and security. In addition, fair organizers adapted to the cultural and economic changes taking place by making use of the growing sense of national community to align the success of these events with the success of the individual, the county, the province and the country. By doing so they were able to generate greater support and increase the value of the fair itself. By 1870s and 1880s the Peel County Fair had become a deeply rooted tradition for the areas rural residents. Newspaper, journal and diary accounts reveal how fairs were highly anticipated events that garnered great encouragement from the community. In fact, in 1884, the concluding year of this study, the Peel County Fall Fair had grown so large that a new site was required. After purchasing a large parcel of land, the former driving park, on the outskirts of the village of Brampton, the Peel County Fall Fair continued to grow in size and scope well into the twentieth century. Admittedly, more needs to be done to further the study of these events. This is only a case study of one fair with its own unique environment and features. No doubt an examination of 114 a late nineteenth-century agricultural society in the northern reaches of Ontario would prove to have had its own unique functions and characteristics that differed from the County of Peel Agricultural Society. Nevertheless, it is my belief that this microanalysis has provided some important conclusions on agricultural societies and fairs that can only be established as the pattern or the exception by undertaking more extensive studies that engage with numerous county agricultural societies and fairs across the province. Ultimately, however, the significance that the Peel County Fall Fair had for community inhabitants cannot be denied and the continued success of the fair today rests on the foundations laid more than a century and a half ago. 115 Appendix A: A Brief Note on Sources Several types of records were used for this study. A key component of this examination of the County of Peel Agricultural Society and Fall Fair was the census linkage conducted for fair participants. The 1871 Fair Prize List retrieved from the local newspaper, the Brampton Times, allowed for a sample of individuals that included fair exhibitors, judges, and executive committee members. These individuals were linked with the 1871 census of Canada manuscripts for residents of Peel County. In total 115 fair participants were linked from the Fair Prize List to the census. The census of 1871 allowed for detailed tabulations of these individuals' socio economic characteristics which were used to bring forth new information about the people involved in agricultural societies and fairs. The information that the census of 1871 provided about residents' ownership and use of land, livestock, and other forms of property was incredibly important for examining the property distributions and their social correlates that were so crucial to this thesis. This study also uses descriptive evidence, in combination with statistical data, to achieve a balanced analysis of the agricultural fairs and the participants of these events. Newspapers, journals and diaries were used to give voice not only to promoters and critics of fairs, but also to the exhibitors themselves. In particular, John Ferguson's diary was a valuable source for the commentary it provided about his own and others' experiences at the fair. While the newspapers and journals supply important remarks about expectations and uses for agricultural societies and fairs, as well as commentary on those who participated at these events, it is the descriptions provided by the fair participants themselves that allow the exhibitors' perspective on agricultural fairs, rather than just the fair promoters' interpretation of these events, to come to the forefront. 116 I chose to select the County of Peel Agricultural Society and Fair for this microanalysis because of the availability of sources and the geographical importance of the county. The archives of Peel had the newspaper and diary records necessary for this study and the availability of these materials was imperative. Geographically, Peel is a useful region for examining agricultural societies because it was an important agricultural producer in the nineteenth-century, containing areas of rich agricultural land and access to water and train transport. This environment allowed for a strong county agricultural society as well as numerous township societies therefore a comprehensive investigation of these groups was possible. Despite limitations within the records and the considerations that must be taken when working with census material, newspapers, and diaries, I feel that the sources used for this study allowed for a detailed analysis of the importance of agricultural societies in the latter half of the nineteenth century. 117 Appendix B: Statistical Tables The statistical tables are divided into the following five categories: the total population of Peel County, the total number of fair participants, the fair exhibitors, the fair judges, and the Peel County Agricultural Society's executive members. The total population for Peel County equaled 16,369 people. The sum of all fair participants was 115 people, while the subcategories within this group included 99 exhibitors, 12 judges and 10 executive members (in some cases fair participants were included in multiple subcategories). These categories are determined by the full population numbers in each unless noted otherwise. TABLE 1: Percentage of individuals grouped by ethnic origin, 1871 Origin Exhibitors Judges Executive Dutch 0.4 0.9 1.0 - - English 36.9 58.3 60.6 58.3 50.0 French 0.3 0.9 0.0 8.3 - Irish 45.7 20.9 21.2 16.7 20.0 Scotch 13.1 19.1 17.2 16.7 30.0 Other 3.6 . Source: Census of Canada 1871 Note: "Table No. Ill: Origins of the People" of the First Volume of the Census of 1871 categorizes origin under the following categories: African, Dutch, English, French, German, Greek, Half Breed, Hindu, Indian, Italian, Jewish, Russian/Polish, Scandinavian, Scotch, Spanish/Portuguese, Swiss, Welsh, various other origins, and not given. Not all of these origins were found in Peel. Only those under the categories of African, Dutch, English, French, German, Irish, Italian, Scotch, Welsh, "various other origins", and "not given" were listed. The above table shows Peel County's population percentage descendent from the origins that are also listed by fair participants, while the "other" category compromises the rest of Peel's origins (African, German, Italian, Welsh, other, and "not given") as they were not found among fair participants. 118 TABLE 2: Percentage of individuals grouped by birthplace, 1871 Birthplace Peel County All I Exhibitors Judges Executive England, Wales 11.7 32.2 35.4 25.0 20.0 Ireland 13.2 9.6 9.1 8.3 10.0 Scotland 3.5 6.1 7.1 - - Ontario 69.6 50.4 48.5 50.0 70.0 France 0.0* 0.9 - 8.3 - United States 1.4 0.9 . 8.3 - Other 0.6 - Source: Census of Canada 1871 *Only three individuals in Peel were born in France, representing 0.0002 percent of the population. Note: "Table No. IV: Birth Places of the People" of the First Volume of the Census of 1871 categorizes birthplace under the following categories: British Isles (England, Ireland, Scotland), Canadas (New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Ontario, Quebec, N.W. Man., Columbia), Prince Edward Island/Newfoundland, Channel Islands, Other British Possessions, Austria, France, Germany, Italy, Russia/Poland, Spain/Portugal, Sweden/Norway/Denmark, United States, Other Foreign Countries, At Sea, and not given. Not all of these origins were found in Peel. Only those under the categories of British Isles, Canadas, Prince Edward Island/Newfoundland, Channel Islands, Other British Possessions, France, Germany, Italy, Spain/Portugal, United States, Other Foreign Countries, At Sea and not given were listed. The above table shows Peel County's percentage of those born under the same birthplace categories that are also listed by fair participants, the "other" category compromises the rest of Peel's birthplaces (the other Canadas, Prince Edward Island/Newfoundland, Channel Islands, Other British Possessions, Germany, Italy, Spain/Portugal, Other Foreign Countries, At Sea and not given) as they were not found among fair participants. TABLE 3: Percentage of individuals grouped by religion, 1871 Religious Denomination Peel County All Fair Participants Exhibitors Judges Executive Baptist 3.4 7.0 8.1 - - Catholic 9.2 5.2 2.0 25.0 10.0 Church of England 25.2 13.0 14.1 - 10.0 Methodist 40.4 59.1 61.6 50.0 70.0 Presbyterian 20.5 13.9 13.1 25.0 - Other 1.3 1.8 1.0 - 10.0 Source: Census of Canada 1871 119 TABLE 4: Percentage of male and female individuals by category, 1871 Sex Pee / County All Fair Participants Exhibitors Judges Executive Male 51 74 71 93 100 Female 49 26 29 8 - Sources: Census of Canada 1871 and "Prize List", The Brampton Times, (6 October 1871). Notes: These numbers are calculated from the original prize list which includes the total number of fair executive committee members, the fair judges and the exhibitors that won a prize, whether or not they were from Peel County or linked with the census. The original prize list indicates that there were 284 fair participants at the Peel County Fall Fair, 211 of which were male and 73 female. This number can be separated into three groups: exhibitors, judges, and executive committee members. In total there were 247 exhibitors (176 male and 71 female); 27 judges (25 male and 2 female); and 15 executive committee members, all of which were male. This table uses the complete numbers found on the prize list because it provides the most accurate representation of the division of participants by sex, however, it is important to note that not all of these participants were linked with the census. Only those identified as living within the county of Peel in the 1871 Census (thus excluding the townships of Albion and Caledon which were included under the electoral county of Cardwell) were considered for the census linkage and only 115 participants out of a possible 222 fair participants residing within Peel could be identified and thus included in the sample. Out of those 115 fair participants that were linked with the census, 78 percent were male and 22 percent were female. In the individual categories, the exhibitors were 75 percent male, 25 percent female; the executive was 100 percent male; and the judges were 100 percent male. Out of the judges, only twelve could be linked with the census, all of whom were male. This excluded a Miss Taylor and Mrs. Scott, the two female judges for the Ladies Work section of the fair, whose specific identities could not be ascertained. Therefore, as indicated by the above numbers, it was slightly easier to link male participants to the census than female participants, thus it should be kept in mind that the sample reflects a slightly greater percentage of male to female participants than existed. TABLE 5: Percentage of individuals grouped by conjugal condition, 1871 Conjugal condition Peel County All Fair Participants Exhibitors Judges Executive Total % (Male/Female) T (M/F) T (M/F) T (M/F) T* T* Married 31 (30/31) 86 (90/72) 87 (92/72) 83 80 Widowed 4 (2/5) 4 (4/0) 2 (3/0) 17 Unmarried 65 (67/64) 10 (6/28) 11 (5/28) - 20 Source: Census of Canada 1871 The total percentages of married, widowed, and unmarried are the same percentages for the men in the Judges and Executive categories as there were no females in the sample group. See Table 1 for the percentages of female and male individuals by category. 120 TABLE 6: Average age of Fair participants grouped by conjugal condition, 1871 Conjugal condition All Fair Participants Exhibitors Judges Executive Total Av. (Male/Female) T M F T M F nr * rp * Married 43.3 43.6 41.9 43.5 43.9 41.9 44.1 41.5 Widowed 51.8 51.8 - 48.5 48.5 - 55.0 - Unmarried 20.8 26.2 17.0 20.4 26.3 17.0 - 25.0 Source: Census of Canada 1871 *See note for Table 5. TABLE 7: Average age of Fair participants by category, 1871 All Fair Participants Exhibitors Judges Executive Total 41 41 45 38 Male 43 43 45 38 Female 35 35 - - Source: Census of Canada 1871 TABLE 8: Percentage of individuals grouped by age category, 1871 Age category Peel County All Fair Participants Exhibitors Judges Executive Total % (Male/Female) T (M/F) T (M/F) T (M/F) rp * rp * 0-10 30 (30/30) 1 (0/4) 1 (0/4) - - 11-20 24 (23/25) 5 (1/20) 6 (1/20) - - 21-30 17(17/17) 10(11/8) 9 (9/8) 17 20 31-40 10(11/10) 35 (36/32) 34 (35/32) 33 40 41-50 8 (8/8) 29 (30/24) 29(31/24) 17 30 51-60 5 (5/5) 13(14/8) 13(15/8) 17 10 61-70 4 (4/3) 5 (6/4) 6 (7/4) 8 - 71-80 1 (2/1) 1 (1/0) - 8 - 81 and over 1 (0/1) 1 (1/0) 1 (1/0) - - Source: Census of Canada 1871 *See note for Table 5. 121 TABLE 9: Categories compared by family and labour characteristics, 1871 Characteristic All Fair Participants Exhibitors Judges Executive Household size, average 6.9 6.8 6.5 1A Households with dependent 59 59 55 78 children age 0-5 (%) Households with dependent 61 61 45 89 children age 6-13 (%) Households with dependent 49 48 55 56 children age 14 + (%) Households with independent 27 26 36 22 adult children (%) Households with 1 or more 17 15 18 33 female servants (%) Households with 1 or more 17 17 18 - male servants or labourers (%) Households with unidentified 30 31 18 11 member(s) (%) Source: Census of Canada 1871 Note: Table 3 is based on a similar table designed by Catharine Anne Wilson, Tenants in Time, 234. Modifications have been made in regards to some of the characteristics listed which were changed for the particular purposes of this study. The characteristic, "Households with independent adult children," is to represent those households with adult children that have occupations who are still residing with their parents. For the purposes of this table, because of the tendency for enumerators to record farmer's young sons as having the same occupation, any fanner's son who was also listed as a farmer but unmarried and under the age of 21 will be considered a dependent child. The characteristic, "Household with unidentified member(s)," is to represent any household that had member(s) with a different surname or an individual indicated as a relative rather than a part of the nuclear family, and was not classified as a servant or labourer. TABLE 10: Percentage of individuals owning or renting land, 1871 Pee / County All Fair Participants Exhibitors Judges Executive Owner 75 78 11 100 67 Tenant 25 22 23 - 33 Source: Census of Canada 1871 Note: The percentages of Owners and Tenants in each category are tabulated by the total number of occupiers of lands as declared in each category. In Peel County this equaled 1,679 occupiers of land out of a total population of 16,369. The total percentage for fair participants is tabulated from 113 individuals rather than the full 115 that participated at the fair because two individuals were not household heads or identifiable immediate family of the household under which they resided and therefore no record of land occupancy or property ownership is available. Therefore, the total number of individuals included in the Judges category is 11 instead of the total 12 listed judges because one of the judges was excluded from this sample for the above reasons. On the same basis, the total number of individuals included in the executive category is 9 instead of the total 10 executive members. The full 99 exhibitors are represented. 122 TABLE 11: Average acreage occupied per individual by category, 1871 Peel County All Fair Participants Exhibitors Judges Executive 97.0 89.0 88.1 110.1 75.3 Source: Census of Canada 1871 Note: The average acreage occupied per individual is tabulated from the total number of occupiers of land in each category as declared on the census manuscripts and aggregate census data. See note in Table 4 for a discussion of the sample used to determine the individuals included within each of these categories. TABLE 12: Average acreage owned per owner of land by category, 1871 Peel County All Fair Participants Exhibitors Judges Executive 147.1 137.3 116.9 256.9 106.2 Source: Census of Canada 1871 TABLE 13: Percentage of occupiers of land grouped by amount of acreage occupied, 1871 Amount of acreage Peel County All Fair Participants Exhibitors Judges Executive 10 acres and under 15 35 33 36 50 10 to 50 acres 15 1 1 - - 50 to 100 acres 44 13 15 - - 100 to 200 acres 21 39 39 45 50 Over 200 acres 4 12 12 18 - Source: Census of Canada 1871 123 TABLE 14: Percentage of farmers by category, 1871 Peel County All Fair Participants Exhibitors Judges Executive 48 54 59 50 30 Source: Census of Canada 1871 Note: The percentage of farmers was determined by those within the category that had listed an occupation, thus this excludes most women and children. As Ian Drummond discusses in his work Progress without Planning, however, it is important to recognize that the proportions would be very different if all the working but unpaid wives and children of farm families had been counted because there was usually at least one working woman in every farm household and numerous children that provided unpaid farm labour. For Peel County 4,936 people declared an occupation or trade out of a total population of 16,369. Out of the 115 fair participants, only 91 had a listed occupation. TABLE 15: Average acreage occupied per farmer by category, 1871 All Fair Participants Exhibitors Judges Executive 141.6 135.3 161.2 133.3 Source: Census of Canada 1871 The average acreage occupied per fanner is tabulated by the total number of self-identified farmers that occupied land as declared in each category. TABLE 16: Percentage of farmers' farms by size category, 1871 Farm Size All Fair Participants Exhibitors Judges Executive Tiny (1-31 acres) Small (32-69 acres) 12 14 _ _ Medium (70-169 acres) 57 61 50 67 Large (170 + acres) 31 25 50 33 Source: Census of Canada 1871 Note: These farm size categories are designed by R. Marvin Mclnnis, Perspectives on Ontario Agriculture, 45. 124 TABLE 17: Average working animals per family represented in each category, 1871 Working animal Peel County All Fair Participants Exhibitors Judges Executive Horses over 3 years old 1.68 2.84 2.75 3.82 2.56 Colts and fillies 0.50 0.77 0.83 1.00 0.11 Working oxen 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.18 0.22 Source: Census of Canada 1871 Note: I have chosen to provide an average animal per family versus an average per farmer in each of the different categories. For obvious reasons, farmers tended to own greater amounts of livestock than those with other occupations, however, there was still a considerable number of people showing certain types of livestock (particularly horses and poultry) at the fair that did not list their primary occupation as farmer. Also, because the 1871 aggregate census data only included the overall numbers of livestock, implements, vehicles, etc. and there were no separate numbers for farmers only, it was not possible to accurately compare the number of animals held by the average Peel County fanner to that of the farmer who exhibited at the Peel County Fall Fair. The categories are based on the following numbers. There were 3,005 families listed in Peel County, 98 fair participant families were listed in total, which included 85 exhibitor families, while the judges' category held 11 families and the executive members represented 9 separate families. TABLE 18: Average farm animals per family represented in each category, 1871 Farm livestock Peel County All Fair Participants Exhibitors Judges Executive Milk cows 2.34 3.69 3.74 4.45 2.11 Other horned cattle 2.58 4.48 4.49 6.91 2.44 Sheep 6.48 11.44 11.21 17.64 8.89 Swine 4.14 6.43 6.60 7.18 2.89 Source: Census of Canada 1871 TABLE 19: Average animals killed or sold per family represented in each category, 1871 Animal Peel County All Fair Participants Exhibitors Judges Executive Cattle killed or sold 1.14 2.50 2.63 2.55 0.56 Sheep killed or sold 3.01 4.60 4.32 8.45 3.33 Swine killed or sold 4.26 7.24 7.10 10.64 2.78 Source: Census of Canada 1871 125 TABLE 20: Average amount of various products produced per family represented in each category, 1871 Product Peel County All Fair Participants Exhibitors Judges Executive Pounds of wool 31.98 68.57 66.94 97.27 63.33 Pounds of butter 165.43 231.51 234.23 286.36 155.56 Pounds of cheese 5.22 27.71 31.31 22.73 3.33 Bushels of flax seed 0.05 0.13 0.13 0.55 - Yards of homemade cloth 6.30 7.05 7.44 1.45 4.00 Bushels of apples 46.24 78.00 83.87 74.82 31.67 Pounds of grapes 26.13 10.56 12.07 - - Bushels of other fruits 1.17 1.72 1.20 1.82 5.89 Source: Census of Canada 1871 TABLE 21: Average amount of field crops produced per family represented in each category, 1871 Field crop Peel County All Fair Participants Exhibitors Judges Executive Bushels of spring wheat 15.70 18.94 18.67 39.09 6.67 Bushels of winter wheat 100.83 153.17 156.60 221.73 88.89 Bushels of barley 116.43 198.02 203.10 239.09 61.11 Bushels of oats 81.69 148.91 149.05 220.00 97.22 Bushels of rye 0.59 - - - - Bushels of peas 48.18 89.22 89.46 158.64 66.67 Bushels of beans 0.13 0.06 0.07 - - Bushels of buckwheat 1.03 3.22 3.68 18.18 - Bushels of corn 1.08 1.78 1.74 0.18 2.78 Bushels of potatoes 53.14 69.16 67.92 76.27 55.00 Bushels of Turnip 79.42 363.91 378.99 445.45 200.00 Tons of hay crop 8.39 16.03 15.76 28.27 5.56 Bushels of grass seed 0.90 2.96 2.69 5.64 1.00 Source: Census of Canada 1871 126 TABLE 22: Average acreage occupied, improved, under crops, in pasture and used for gardens & orchards per individual occupying land by category, 1871 Land Category Peel County All Fair Participants Exhibitors Judges Executive Occupied 97.0 89.0 88.1 110.1 75.3 Improved 76.8 73.7 73.8 88.6 54.8 Under crops 62.8 59.6 59.9 74.1 27.8 In pasture 12.1 12.2 11.9 12.1 15.5 Gardens & Orchards 1.9 1.9 2.0 2.4 1.5 Source: Census of Canada 1871 TABLE 23: Average vehicle or farm implement per family represented by each category, 1871 Vehicle or implement Peel County All Fair Participants Exhibitors Judges Executive Light carriages 0.97 1.76 1.69 2.55 1.44 Vehicles for transport 1.33 2.34 2.24 3.00 2.33 Ploughs and cultivators 1.21 2.02 1.96 3.09 1.44 Reapers and mowers 0.54 0.58 0.58 0.91 0.33 Horse rakes 0.37 0.61 0.63 0.91 0.33 Threshing machines 0.06 0.16 0.15 0.27 0.11 Fanning mills 0.51 0.79 0.80 1.18 0.56 Source: Census of Canada 1871 127 Appendix C: 1871 Peel County Fall Fair Prize List HORSES Heavy Draught Span horses attached to wagon ($7; $5) Two year colt ($3; $2) Two year gelding or filly ($3; $2; $1) Yearling colt ($3; $2) Spring colt ($3; $2; $1) Brood mare $3; $2; $1) Agricultural Span horses attached to wagon ($7; $5; $3) Two year old colt ($3; $2; $1) Two year old gelding or filly ($3; $2; $1) Yearling colt ($3) Yearling gelding or filly ($3; $2; $1) Spring colt ($3; $2; $1) Brood mare ($3; $2; $1) Carriage or Roadster Span horses attached to carriage ($7; $5; $3) Two year old gelding or filly ($3; $2; $1) Yearling colt ($3; $2) Yearling gelding or filly ($3; $2; $1) Spring colt ($3; $2; $1) Brood mare ($3; $2; $1) Hack horse in harness ($4; $3; $2) Saddle horse ($4; $3; $2) Carriage horse attached to carriage ($4; $3; $2) Thoroughbred Yearling gelding or filly ($3; $2) CATTLE Durhams Milk cow ($4; $3; $1) Two year old heifer ($3) Yearling heifer ($3; $2; $1) Heifer calf ($3; $2) Bull calf ($3; $2; $1) Devons Milk cow ($4; $3) Two year old heifer ($3) Yearling heifer ($3; $2; $1) Heifer calf ($3) Bull calf ($3; $2; $1) Ayrshires Milk cow ($4) Grade Cattle Milk cow ($4; $3; $2) Two year old heifer ($3; $2; $1) Yearling heifer ($3; $2; $1) Heifer calf ($3; $2; $1) SHEEP Leicesters Ram ($3) Shearling ram ($3; $2; $1) Ram lamb ($3; $2; $1) Pair ewes ($3; $2; $1) Pair shearling ewes ($3; $2) Pair ewe lambs ($3; $2) Cotswolds Ram ($3; $2; $1) Shearling ram ($3; $2; $1) Ram lamb ($3; $2; $1) Pair ewes ($3; $2; $1) Pair shearling ewes ($3; $2) Pair ewe lambs ($3; $2) Southdowns Shearling ram ($3) Ram lamb ($3; $2) Pair ewes ($3; $2) Pair shearling ewes ($3) Pair ewe lambs ($3) PIGS Large Breed Boar pig one year and over ($3; $2; $1) Breeding sow ($3; $2; $1) Sow pig under one year ($3; $2; $1) Litter of 5 pigs not more than 6 months ($5; $3) Small Breed Boar pig one year and over ($3; $2; $1) Boar pig under one year ($3; $2; $1) Breeding sow ($3; $2; $1) Sow pig under one year ($3; $2; $1) Litter of 5 pigs not more than 6 months ($5; $3) Suffolks Boar pig one year and over ($3; $2; $1) Boar pig under one year ($3; $2; $1) Breeding sow ($3; $2; $1) Sow pig under one year ($3; $2; $1) Litter of 5 pigs not more than 6 months ($5) POULTRY Common fowls ($1; 75c; 50c) Brahma Pootras ($1; 75c; 50c) Dorkings ($1; 75c; 50c) Spanish fowls ($1; 75c; 50c) Bantams ($1; 75c; 50c) Polands($l;75c;50c) Buffcochins($l;75c) Heudan fowls ($1; 75c; 50c) Game fowls ($1; 75c; 50c) Hamburgs($l;75c;50c) Domestic turkeys ($1; 75c; 50c) Wild turkeys ($1; 75c) Geese ($1; 75c; 50c) Common ducks ($1; 75c; 50c) Coll ducks ($1) Aylesbury ducks ($1; 75c) Rowen ducks ($1; 75c) Pen fowl ($1; 75c) AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS Treadwell wheat ($3; $2; $1) Diehlorsoules($3;$2;$l) Red winter wheat ($3; $2) Spring wheat, Glasgow or Fife ($3; $2; $1) Spring wheat any other kind ($3; $2) Barley ($3; $2; $1) White oats ($3; $2; $1) Black oats ($3; $2; $1) Peas, marrow-fat ($3; $2) Prussian blue peas ($3; $2; $1) Other kind of peas ($3; $2; $1) Rye ($3; $2) Field beans ($3; $2) Early Rose ($1.50; $1) Early Goodrich ($1.50; $1; 50c) Cups ($1.50; $1; 50c) Garnet chilis ($1.50; $1; 50c) Peach blows ($1.50; $1; 50c) Gleason's ($1.50; $1; 50c) Potatoes ($1.50; $1; 50c) Swedish turnips ($1.50; $1; 50c) Aberdeen yellow turnips ($1.50; $1) White globe turnips ($1.50; $1) Long mangold wurtzel ($1.50; $1; 50c) Globe mangold wurtzel ($1.50; $1; 50c) Red beets ($1.50; $1; 50c) White carrots ($1.50; $1; 50c) Red carrots ($1.50; $1; 50c) White onions ($1.50; $1; 50c) Red onions ($1.50; $1) Yellow onions ($1.50; $1; 50c) Citrons ($1.50; $1; 50c) Summer cabbage ($1.50; $1; 50c) Winter cabbage ($1.50; $1; 50c) Red cabbage ($1.50; $1; 50c) Indian corn ($1.50; $1; 50c) Parsnips ($1.50; $1) White celery ($ 1.50; $ 1; 50c) Red celery ($1.50; $1; 50c) Tomatoes ($1.50; $1; 50c) Collection of Tomatoes ($1.50; $1; 50c) Cauliflower ($1.50; $1; 50c) Watermelons ($1.50; $1; 50c) Pumpkins ($1.50; $1) 131 Squashes ($1.50; $1; 50c) Egg plant fruit ($1.50; $1) FRUIT Five varieties winter apples ($1; $50c) Five varieties fall apples ($1; 50c) Fifteen varieties of apples correctly named, six of each ($2; $1.50) Variety of Pears correctly named ($1; 50c) Sample Quinces ($1; 50c) Sample egg plums ($1) Sample of blue plums ($1) Sample of plums, other kind ($1) Three clusters of coloured grapes grown in open air ($1; 50c) Three clusters of white grapes grown in open air ($1; 50c) FLOWERS Table bouquet ($1) Hand bouquet ($1) Hand bouquet wild flowers ($1; 50c) Collection of green house plants ($1) Recommended - Cactus plant DAIRY PRODUCE Twelve lbs fresh butter in rolls ($3; $2.50; $2; $1.50; $1) Firkin of butter, 50 lbs ($3; $2.50; $2; $1.50; $1) Factory Cheese, not less than 25 lbs ($3) Homemade cheese, not less than 15 lbs ($3; $2; $1) Honey in comb, not less than 10 lbs ($1.50; $1; 50c) Jar of clear honey ($ 1.50; $ 1; 50c) Grape wine ($1.50; $1; 50c) Black currant wine ($1.50) Rhubarb wine ($1.50; $1; 50c) Raspberry wine ($1.50; $1; 50c) Raspberry vinegar ($1.50; $1; 50c) Side of cured bacon ($1.50; $1; 50c) Cured ham ($1.50; $1; 50c) Homemade soap ($1.50; $1; 50c) Very highly recommended - collection of grapes; wild cherry wine IMPLEMENTS AND OTHER MANUFACTURED ARTICLES Metal steel mould-board plough ($3; $2) Gang plough ($3; $2) Land roller ($3) Iron harrow ($3) Wood harrow ($3) Two-horse cultivator ($3) One horse cultivator ($3) Grain drill ($3) Fanning mill ($3; $2) Straw cutter ($3; $2; $1) Grain crusher ($3; $2) Sawing machine ($3) Threshing machine ($5) Mowing machine ($4; $3) Reaper and Mower ($4) Two horse wagon ($4) Two horse market wagon ($4) Two horse sleigh ($4) Two horse pleasure sleigh ($4) One horse cutter ($4) Two horse open carriage ($5) One horse covered carriage ($5; $4) One horse open carriage ($5; $4) Washing machine ($2) Horse hay rake ($2; $1) Turnip drill ($2) Wooden pump ($2) Churn ($1) Farm gate ($1) Cider press ($1) Set silver mounted single harness ($3; $2) Set black mounted single harness ($3) Pair homemade blankets ($3) Five yards homemade cloth ($3) Five yards homemade flannel ($3; $2; $1) Cooking stove and furniture ($3; $2) Parlour stove ($2; $1) Shoemaker's work, men's wear ($1.50) Shoemaker's work, women's wear ($1.50) Two sides harness leather ($2) Two sides upper leather ($2) Two grained calf-skins ($2) Recommended - Two horse wagon iron axle; horse power; rack and grain lifter; reaping machine. FINE ARTS Oil panting ($2) Pencil drawing ($2; $1; 50c) Coloured crayon ($2) Watercolor($2;$l;50c) Collection of ambrotypes ($2) Photographs ($2) Pen and ink sketch ($2; $1) Ornamental penmanship ($2) Penmanship (business hand) ($2; $1; 50c) Collection of stuffed birds ($2) Other insects ($2) LADIES WORK Embroidery in muslin ($1.50; $1; 50c) Embroidery in worsted ($1.50; $1; 50c) Embroidery in silk ($1.50) Embroidery in cotton ($1.50; $1; 50c) Embroidery in flannel ($1.50; $1) Ornamental needle work ($1.50) Crochet work ($1.50; $1; 50c) Lace work ($1.50; $1; 50c) Fancy knitting ($1.50; $1; 50c) Cone work ($1.50; $1) Netting ($1.50; $1; 50c) Braiding ($1.50; $1; 50c) Gentlemen's shirt (cotton or linen) ($2) Gentlemen's shirt (woollen) ($2) Piece work quilt ($3; $2; $1) White counterpane ($2; $1; 50c) Bed comforter ($2; $1) Quilt of other description ($2; $1; 50c) Woollen socks ($1; 75c; 50c) Woollen stockings ($1; 75c; 50c) Worsted stocking ($1; 75c; 50c) Woollen mittens ($1; 75c; 50c) Gentleman's straw hat ($1; 75c; 50c) Pound of woollen yarn (white) ($1; 75c; 50c) Pound of woollen yarn (coloured) ($1; 75c; 50c) Feather flowers ($1; 75c; 50c) Shell work ($1) Guipure work ($1; 75c) Two pair gloves ($ 1) 134 Hairwork($l;75c;50c) Tatting ($1; 75c; 50c) Fancy leather work ($1; 75) Raised German wool work ($1) Berlin wool work ($1; 75c; 50c) Bead work ($1; 75c; 50c) Straw plaits for hats or bonnets ($1; 75c) Wool mat ($1; 75c; 50c) Ragmat($l;75c;50c) Mat of other description ($1) Recommended - Point lace, Daisy mat, woollen shirt, child's woollen sack, child's woollen under suit, silver wire work. MUSIC For the best band ($20; $ 15) SPECIAL PRIZES For the best span, matched carriage horses, attached to a carriage (a silver watch valued at $10) For the best 10 bushels Diehl wheat ($20) For the best 5 bushels Treadwell wheat ($10) For the best 5 bushels spring wheat ($ 10) For the best 5 bushels barley ($5) For the best 10 bushels black oats ($8) For the best firkin of butter, not less than 50 lbs (a cooking stove valued at $28) For the best two sides hemp leather (a gentleman's saddle, valued at $18) For the best 20 lbs fresh butter ($10) For the best gentleman's pleasure sleigh (a complete set of second growth woodwork for carriage, valued at $13) For the best two loaves homemade bred (a silver plated cruet stand, valued at $10) For the best top buggy, with moveable top (a set of axles and a pair of springs, valued at $10) For the best specimen of business penmanship ($6) For the best 20 lbs strained honey ($10) For the best pair gentleman's mitts, homemade (a two horse scrapper, valued at $7) For the best homemade cheese of not less than 20 lbs (a sewing machine, valued at $12) For the best specimen of ornamental needle work (an album and portrait of winner, valued at $8) For the best gentlemen's linen shirt (a clock, valued at $9) For the best gentlemen's straw hat ($4) For the best horse, harness and buggy in the County (a saddle and bridle, value $15) For the best 5 bushels Soules wheat (two extra barrels flour, $11) 135 Bibliography Primary Sources Historical Atlas of Peel County, Ontario. Published by Walker & Miles, 1877. Moodie, Susanna. Life in the Clearings versus the Bush. London: Richard Bentley, 1853; reprint, Toronto: McClelland & Stewart Ltd, 1989. - Roughing it in the Bush. New York: G. P. Putnam, 1852. Unpublished Primary Sources John Ferguson Diaries 1868-1883. Peel Archives, Brampton. T.S. "Letter to the Editor." The Cobourg Star (15 November 1831). Quoted in Percy L. Climo, "Fairs, Farms & Exhibitions." Cobourg and District Historical Society, Cobourg, Ontario (27 September 1983). Percy L. Climo founds, Queen's University Archives, Kingston. Government Publications Board of Agriculture. "The Agricultural Association." Journal and Transactions of the Board of Agriculture of Upper Canada, vol. 1. Toronto: Board of Agriculture, 1856. - "County and Township Agricultural Societies." Journal and Transactions of the Board of Agriculture of Upper Canada, vol. 1. Toronto: Board of Agriculture, 1856. Census of Canada 1871. Manuscript Census: Peel County, 1871. Census of Canada 1871,1-III. Ottawa: LB. Taylor, 1875. Hutton, William. "Agriculture and its Advantages as a Pursuit." Journal and Transactions of the Board of Agriculture of Upper Canada, vol. 1. Toronto: Board of Agriculture, 1856. Lynch, John. "County of Peel." Journal and Transactions of the Board of Agriculture of Upper Canada. Toronto: Board of Agriculture, 1853. Newspapers and Periodicals Brampton Conservator Brampton Times British American Cultivator 136 Bulletin and Streetsville Semi-Monthly Register Canadian Agriculturist The Streetsville Weekly Review Secondary Sources Addison, William. English Fairs and Markets. London: B. T. Batsford, 1953. Baskerville, Peter A. "Chattel Mortgages and Community in Perth County, Ontario." The Canadian Historical Review 87, 4 (December 2006): 583-619. Carroll, J. A. "Agriculture: From Humble Beginnings to International Fame." In A History of Peel County: To Mark Its Centenary as a Separate County, 1867-1967. Brampton: Charters Publishing Company Limited, 1967. 27-54. Cochrane, D.J. "Agricultural Societies, Cattle Fairs, Agricultural Shows and Exhibition of Upper Canada Prior to 1867." Unpublished paper, University of Guelph, 1976. Cohen, Marjorie Griffin. Women's Work, Markets, and Economic Development in Nineteenth- Century Ontario. Toronto: University of Toronto, 1988. Crowley, Terry. "Rural Labour." In Labouring Lives: Work and Workers in Nineteenth-Century Ontario, ed. Paul Craven. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1995. 10-103. Darroch, Gordon. "Scanty Fortunes and Rural Middle-Class Formation in Nineteenth-Century Central Ontario." The Canadian Historical Review 79, 4 (December 1998): 621-659. Darroch, Gordon and Lee Soltow. Property and Inequality in Victorian Ontario: Structural Patterns and Cultural Communities in the 1871 Census. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1994. Drummond, Ian M. Progress without Planning: The Economic History of Ontario from Confederation to the Second World War. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1987. Fair, Ross D. "Gentlemen, farmers, and gentlemen half-farmers: the development of agricultural societies in Upper Canada, 1792-1846." Ph.D. thesis, Queen's University, 1998. Fitzgerald, Deborah. Every Farm a Factory: The Industrial Ideal in American Agriculture. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2003. Gagan, David. Hopeful Travellers: Families, Land, and Social Change in Mid-Victorian Peel County, Canada West. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1981. Gates, Paul Wallace. The Farmer's Age: Agriculture, 1815-1860. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1960. 137 Gates, Warren J. "Modernization as a Function of an Agricultural Fair: The Great Grangers Picnic Exhibition at Williams Grove, Pennsylvania, 1873-1916." Agricultural History, vol. 58, no. 3 (July 1984): 262-279. Graham, W. H. Greenbank: Country Matters in 19' Century Ontario. Peterborough, Ont.: Broadview Press, 1988. Heaman, Elsbeth. The Inglorious Arts of Peace: Exhibitions in Canadian Society during the Nineteenth Century. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1999. Henry, Margaret Dodds Snell. From Devon to Ontario. Bolton, Ont.: The Bolton Entreprise, 1973. Hudson, Kenneth. Patriotism with Profit: British Agricultural Societies in the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries. London: Hugh Evelyn, 1972. Irwin, Thomas W. "Government Funding of Agricultural Associations in Late Nineteenth Century Ontario." Ph.D. thesis, University of Western Ontario, 1997. Jones, David C. '"From Babies to Buttonholes': Women's Work at Agricultural Fairs." Alberta History, vol. 29, no. 4 (Fall, 1981): 26-32. -Midways, Judges, and Smooth-Tongued Fakirs: the illustrated story of country fairs in the Prairie West. Saskatoon: Western Producer Prairie Books, 1983. Jones, Robert Leslie. History of Agriculture in Ontario, 1613-1880. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1977, c.1946. Kelly, Catherine E. ""The Consumption of Rural Prosperity and Happiness": New England Agricultural Fairs and the Construction of Class and Gender, 1810-1860." American Quarterly, vol. 49, no. 3 (September 1997): 574-602. Kelly, Kenneth. "The Transfer of British Ideas on Improved Farming to Ontario during the First Half of the Nineteenth Century." Ontario History 63 (1971): 103-111. Lawr, Douglas A. "Agricultural Education in Nineteenth-Century Ontario: An idea in Search of an Institution." In Education and Social Change: Themes from Ontario's Past, ed. Michael B. Katz and Paul H. Mattingly. New York: New York University Press, 1975. - "The Development of Ontario Fanning, 1870-1914: Patterns of Growth and Change." Ontario History 64:4 (1972): 239-251. Maas, Barbara. Helpmates of Man: Middle-Class Women and Gender ideology in nineteenth- Century Ontario. Bochum: Universitatsverlag Dr. N. Brockmeyer, 1990. 138 MacEwan, Grant. Agriculture on Parade: The Story of the Fairs and Exhibitions of Western Canada. Toronto: Thomas Nelson & Sons, 1950. Marti, Donald B. To Improve the Mind and the Soil: Agricultural Societies, Journals, and Schools in the Northeastern States, 1791-1865. Ann Arbor: University Microfilms International, 1979. McCalla, Douglas. Planting the Province: The Economic History of Upper Canada 1784-1870. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1993. - "Rural Credit and Rural Development in Upper Canada, 1790-1850." In Patterns of the Past: Interpreting Ontario's History, ed. Roger Hall. Toronto: Dundurn Group, 1996. Mclnnis, R. Marvin. "Ontario Agriculture at Mid-Century." In Perspectives on Ontario Agriculture 1815-1930. Gananoque, Ont.: Langdale Press, 1992. - "The Changing Structure of Canadian Agriculture, 1867-1897." In Perspectives on Ontario Agriculture 1815-1930. Gananoque, Ont.: Langdale Press, 1992. - "The Early Ontario Wheat Staple Reconsidered." In Perspectives on Ontario Agriculture 1815- 1930. Gananoque, Ont.: Langdale Press, 1992. Mizener, David. "Furrows and Fairgrounds: Agriculture, Identity and Authority in Twentieth- Century Rural Ontario." Ph.D. thesis, York University, 2008. Neely, Wayne. The Agricultural Fair. New York: Columbia University Press, 1935. Noel, Francoise. Family Life and Sociability in Upper and Lower Canada, 1780-1870: A View from Diaries and Family Correspondence. Montreal & Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press, 2003. Ontario Association of Agricultural Societies. The Story of Agricultural Fairs and Exhibitions, 1792-1967, and their contribution to the advancement of agriculture and betterment of community life. Picton: Picton Gazette, 1967. Osborne, Brian. "Trading on a Frontier: The Function of Peddlars, Markets, and Fairs in Nineteenth-Century Ontario." In Canadian Papers in Rural History, ed. Donald H. Akenson, vol 2. Gananoque, Ont.: Langdale Press, 1980. 59-82. Prosterman, Leslie. Ordinary Life, Festival Days: Aesthetics in the Midwestern County Fair. Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1995. Reaman, G. Elmore. A History of Agriculture in Ontario, vol. 1. Aylesbury, Eng.: Hazell Watson &Viney, 1970. 139 Samson, Daniel. Spirit of Industry and Improvement: Liberal Government and Rural-Industrial Society, Nova Scotia, 1790-1862. Montreal & Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press, 2008. Sanmiya, Vibeke. "A Spirit of Enterprise: The Western Fair Association, London, Ontario: 1867- 1947." Ph.D. thesis, Wilfrid Laurier University, 2002. Scott, Guy. A Faire Share: A History of Agricultural Societies and Fairs in Ontario, 1792-1992. Toronto: Ontario Association of Agricultural Societies, 1992. Sylvester, Kenneth Michael. The Limits of Rural Capitalism: Family, Culture, and Markets in Moncalm, Manitoba, 1870-1940. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2001. Taylor, Jeffery. Fashioning Farmers: Ideology, Agricultural Knowledge and the Manitoba Farm Movement, 1890-1925. Regina, Sask.: Canadian Plains Research Center, University of Regina, 1994. Walden, Keith. Becoming Modern in Toronto: the Industrial Exhibition and the Shaping of a late Victorian Culture. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1997. Waters, H. W. History of Fairs and Expositions: Their Classification, Functions and Values. London, Ont.: Reid Bros. & Co., 1939. White, Randall. Ontario 1610-1985: A political and economic history. Toronto: Dundurn Press, 1985. Wilson, Catharine Anne. "Reciprocal Work Bees and the Meaning of Neighbourhood." In Home, Work, and Play: Situating Canadian Social History, 1840-1980, ed. James Opp and John C. Walsh. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006. 119-135. - Tenants in Time: Family Strategies, Land, and Liberalism in Upper Canada, 1799-1871. Montreal & Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press, 2009. Wood, J. David. Making Ontario: Agricultural Colonialization and Landscape Re-Creation before the Railway. Montreal & Kingston: McGill-Queen's Univesrity Press, 2000. Wynn, Graeme. "Exciting a Spirit of Emulation Among the 'Plodholes': Agricultural Reform in Pre-Confederation Nova Scotia." Acadiensis, vol. 20, no. 1 (Autumn 1990): 3-51.