The following is a re-print of a past column by former Advertiser columnist Stephen Thorning, who passed away on Feb. 23, 2015.
Some text has been updated to reflect changes since the original publication and any images used may not be the same as those that accompanied the original publication.
A little while ago I was chatting with the editor of this newspaper about the history of municipal elections.
He suggested that the subject would make an excellent subject for this history column during the period leading up to this year’s election, and I agreed.
The historical development of municipal institutions seldom gets a thorough treatment in histories of Ontario, and that neglect extends to the majority of local histories. Many of the latter ignore the subject completely while others will make note of only the first council, and perhaps a photo of the sitting council at the time the book was published.
In Ontario, or Upper Canada as it was then known, local elected councils were relatively late in appearing, and they were and still are very much the creatures and creation of the provincial government. Another theme, perhaps not unrelated to the first, is that voters seldom show much interest in municipal elections. Voter turnouts of more than 50% are considered exceptional, and participation at a level of 20% or less is not unusual.
Low turnouts are nothing new: voter interest has risen and fallen several times in cycles over the years. Though municipalities control many of the services people take for granted, there is a feeling that they lack significant power.
Local government in what is now Ontario dates back to 1793, when the Upper Canada legislature set up Districts as the basic unit of local government. These were large areas, with appointed administrators, who were responsible for property assessments and taxation to fund local improvements. Appointed magistrates sitting on Courts of Quarter Sessions were responsible for municipal and judicial administration.
This was very much a top-down system of government, out of the hands of local residents. There were two reasons for this policy. Provincial officials, aware of unrest in England resulting from industrialization and rapid economic change, feared the power of the masses should they get a toe-hold on political power of any sort.
Closer to home, Upper Canada’s elite were horrified at the American example, which seemingly had empowered the illiterate and uncultured classes, resulting in something they viewed as bordering on anarchy. Canada, they were determined, would avoid such excesses.
District boundaries changed several times as the population of the province grew. In 1838 the District of Wellington was carved from the old Halton District. It consisted of what would become Waterloo, Wellington, Grey, and part of Dufferin. After strong campaigns from Fergus and Guelph interests, Guelph was named the District town. A.D. Fordyce of Fergus was appointed warden by the provincial government when the first council session met early in 1842.
There were 11 councillors elected from the constituent townships of Erin, Eramosa, Garafraxa, Nichol, Woolwich, Wilmot, Waterloo, and Guelph. But six failed to meet property or residency qualifications, and elections had to be rescheduled.
That district council remained in place until 1849, when there were representatives of 33 townships.
A small measure of democracy came in 1842, when the province authorized elected district councils to supervise property taxes and the completion of local public works, most of which were roads. Voting was far from universal. There were property qualifications to be on the voters list, and voting was done in only one location in each county, making the election a full day chore for those living some distance from the polling place. In addition, voting was by public declaration, rather than secret ballot. That made the system rife with bribery and intimidation.
The most significant development in Ontario’s local government until the Harris administration of the 1990s was the Baldwin Act of 1849. That legislation set up a system of local government that remained largely unchanged for 150 years.
The Baldwin Act established a two-tier system of municipal government. The Districts were gone, replaced by counties as the senior local level.
Counties were composed of various cities, towns, villages and townships, each with its own local council. Those councils were elected by males, resident in the jurisdiction or with property there, initially to the value of $400. The local councils were headed by reeves, who, as part of their duties, also sat on county council. When the municipality achieved certain population thresholds, they could elect one or two deputy reeves, who would also sit on county council.
Under the Baldwin Act, there were population thresholds for the categories of urban municipalities: villages (1,000 people), towns (3,000) and cities (10,000), with more authority and responsibility for the larger centres. Rural areas were designated as townships. The latter were divided into wards, each electing one township councillor. Reeves and mayors initially were selected by the councillors from among themselves, rather than by the electorate.
Voter participation increased dramatically under the Baldwin Act reforms. Under the old system, perhaps 25% of men qualified to vote due to the property qualifications, and many of them did not vote due to the difficulty of getting to the poll. With the reforms, and the ward system in effect in the townships, local politics became extremely local, with intense involvement when contentious issues were under consideration.
The ward system, although bringing democracy down to the grassroots level, also produced some problems. It was eventually abolished. As well, reeves began to be elected at large in 1869, rather than by the councillors. An anomaly persisted at county council, where, to this day, wardens are selected by the county councillors.
Confederation in 1867 resulted in little change for municipalities. The British North America Act confirmed that municipalities were the creatures of provincial governments. There were some changes in the latter part of the 19th century, most of which expanded the electorate. Property qualifications were reduced several times. Beginning in 1884 unmarried women and widows could vote in municipal elections, on the same property qualifications as men. For school boards, women who were property owners had the vote as early as 1850.
A major reform came in 1874, when the secret ballot was introduced for municipal elections. Centre Wellington MPP Charles Clarke (a former reeve of Elora) was the champion of the this reform.
The secret ballot removed some of the intimidation that sometimes had accompanied municipal elections. It also made bribery of voters less common – there was no way to tell whether a bribed voter carried out his end of the bargain.
It appears that the percentage of electors exercising their votes varied a great deal in the late 19th century. Controversial issues could produce a large turnout, sometimes over 80%, but it would appear that something in the range of 60% was more typical, and turnouts of 40% were not rare when there were few issues.
Voting was normally scheduled for the first week of January each year, with a nomination meeting a week or 10 days before that. Beginning in 1904 municipal elections were set by provincial law for Jan. 1, or the day after when New Year’s fell on a Sunday.
In most municipalities, the nomination meeting became a ritual event in the lull between Christmas and New Year’s. Some voters looked to the event to provide a little entertainment. For the more serious electors, it was a chance to hear the outgoing council review their activities, and to question them on their spending. Challengers could take issue with office holders, and voters could make statements and introduce new issues. At times there could be loud arguments that, in rare cases, degenerated into fisticuffs.
Though nomination meetings might be noisy, they frequently resulted in a consensus, with the council positions filled by acclamation. In perhaps half the years in the 1890s there were no elections in Wellington County’s municipalities, and poor turnouts when there was a contest.
Interest in Wellington’s local governments in the 1890s, was at a cyclical low, but it would pick up again in the early years of the new century.
(Next week: Municipal elections in the 20th century.)
*This column was originally published in the Wellington Advertiser on Oct. 1, 2010.
