Biography: B. Mabel Dunham (1881–1957)

 Along with Mary Black, Mabel Dunham, the chief librarian at Kitchener (previously Berlin) from 1908–44, is notable for assuming a leadership role in Ontario's public libraries shortly after the First World War. After graduating with a BA in 1908 from Victoria College in Toronto, she trained at the recently formed summer library school at McGill University under the direction of Charles Gould, who was also serving as the president of the American Library Association in 1908–09. Mabel Dunham was the second female president of the Ontario Library Association in 1920–21. My earlier blog post this year covered her presidential address. Throughout her career she expanded services in Kitchener, notably for children's programming.

I originally posted this biographical synopsis of Mabel Dunham for the Ex Libris Association several years ago in 2016. The post also continues on the current ELA website. The image is taken from the The Ontario Library Association: An Historical Sketch 1900–1925 (p. 106).

Bertha Mabel Dunham

Born May 29, 1881, Minto Twp. (near Harriston), ON. Died June 21, 1957, Kitchener, ON

Education:
1908 BA (Victoria College, University of Toronto)
1908 McGill University summer school for librarians

Positions:
1898–1904 Elementary teacher, Berlin Model School (now Suddaby Public School)
1908–1944 Chief Librarian, Kitchener Public Library
1911–1912 and 1914 Chief instructor at Ontario Department of Education training course for librarianship

Publications:
Dunham, B. Mabel (1910). “Leaves from the diary of a librarian.” Acta Victoriana 33: 270–276.
Dunham, B. Mabel (1910). “Methods of reaching the people.” Proceedings of the Ontario Library Association Annual Meeting: 68–76.
Dunham, B. Mabel (1912). “The Ontario Library Summer School, 1911.” Proceedings of the Ontario Library Association Annual Meeting: 63–66.
Dunham, B. Mabel (1915). “The library and the school.” The School: a Magazine Devoted to Elementary and Secondary Education 4, no. 2: 118–120.
Dunham, B. Mabel (1917). “What is the place and use of newspapers and periodicals in our public libraries in towns.” Proceedings of the Ontario Library Association Annual Meeting: 68–76.
Dunham, B. Mabel (1918). “William Wilfred Campbell, 1861–1918: An appreciation.” Waterloo Historical Society Annual Report 6: 44–47.
Dunham, B. Mabel (Jan. 1924). “Some ‘plain’ people of Canada.” Canadian Magazine 62: 188–195.
Dunham, B. Mabel (1927). “The public school and the public library.” Proceedings of the Ontario Educational Association Annual Meeting held at Toronto, 18th–21st April, 1927: 66–76.
Dunham, B. Mabel (1934). “Kitchener (Berlin) Public Library [history].” Typescript.
Dunham B. Mabel (1937). “Co-operation in the libraries of Waterloo County.” Ontario Library Review 21, no. 3: 120–122.
Dunham, B. Mabel (1938). “Waterloo County’s library scheme.” Ontario Library Review 22, no. 3: 197–199.
Dunham, B. Mabel (1945). “The Mid-European backgrounds of Waterloo County.” Ontario Historical Society Papers and Records 37: 59–70.
Dunham, B. Mabel (1945). “The story of Conestoga.” Waterloo Historical Society Annual Report 33: 16–23.
Dunham, B. Mabel (1948). “The Pequegnat family.” Waterloo Historical Society Annual Report 36: 50–55.
Dunham, B. Mabel (1950). “Beginnings in Ontario.” Mennonite Life 5, no. 4: 14–16.

Literary works:
Dunham, B. Mabel (1924). The trail of the Conestoga. Toronto: Macmillan.
Dunham, B. Mabel (1927). Toward Sodom. Toronto: Macmillan.
Dunham, B. Mabel (1931). The trail of the king’s men. Toronto: Ryerson Press.
Dunham, B. Mabel, ed. (1941). So great a heritage: historical narrative of Trinity United Church, 1841–1941. Kitchener: Trinity United Church.
Dunham, B. Mabel (1945). Grand River. Toronto: McClelland and Stewart.
Dunham, B. Mabel (1948). Kristli’s trees. Toronto: McClelland and Stewart.

Associations/Committees:
1920–1921 President, Ontario Library Association
1922–1924 President, K-W University Women’s Club (also 1932–1934)
1947–50 President, Waterloo Historical Society

Honours:
1947 DLitt, University of Western Ontario
1948 Book of the Year Medal for “Kristil’s Trees” awarded by Canadian Association of Children’s Librarians
1953, the City of Kitchener declared her birthday to be ‘B. Mabel Dunham Day’ in tribute to all her contributions to the city.
The Kitchener-Waterloo Federation of University Women administers the Dr. B. Mabel Dunham Award for female high school graduates.
Dunham is inducted as a member of the Waterloo Region Hall of Fame.

Accomplishments:
Mabel Dunham was the first trained chief librarian appointed to lead an Ontario public library. She was the third woman to be president of a provincial library association in Canada. She was the first woman to serve on a public board in Kitchener, being twice elected to the public school board. She was one of the early leaders in efforts to train and educate librarians in Ontario before World War I. She helped organize systematic cooperation to distribute books throughout Waterloo County in the late 1930s prior to the formation of a county library service. She was one of the founders of Kitchener’s Women’s Canadian Club (later president); president (and founder) of the Waterloo Historical Society; and a founder of the K-W Business and Professional Women’s Club.
Dunham wrote five books depicting the history and heritage of her region. Her first novels, “Trail of the Conestoga” and “Toward Sodom,” described the migration of the Mennonites to the K-W area centered in Berlin (now Kitchener). The “Trail of the King’s Men” recounted the arrival of the United Empire Loyalists from the United States. The “Grand River” was an exploration of a river and its surrounding countryside. “Kristli’s Trees” was an enjoyable story of a Mennonite boy and his family on a small farm illustrated by Selwyn Dewdney.
Although Dunham made no major contribution to librarianship on a national scale, she greatly influenced its development on a local scale through the force of her personality as well as making a noteworthy literary contribution to regional historical fiction.

Sources:
Kitchener Public Library holds information on Dunham and there are library board minutes for her tenure. The Ontario Archives has some speeches and correspondence as part of the Ontario Library Association records.
Banting, Constance (1928). “Mabel Dunham.” Ontario Library Review 12, no. 2: 66.
“Honour to Whom Honour is Due” (1953). Waterloo Historical Society Annual Report 41: 7–8.
Snider, Lillian (Aug. 1954). “Miss Mabel Dunham.” Ontario Library Review 38, no. 3: 221–24.
Shoemaker, Dorothy and Grace Schmidt (1989). “Dr. B. Mabel Dunham (1881–1957).” Ex Libris News no. 5: 5–7.
Taylor, Ryan (1981). “Mabel Dunham’s Centenary.” Waterloo Historical Society Annual Report 69: 13–25 [extensive bibliography].

Also, my earlier post on Mabel Dunham's address about women to the Ontario Library Association in 1921.

Biography: Mary J.L. Black (1879—1939)

Earlier this year I posted comments and excerpts from Mary Black’s presidential address at the Ontario Library Association in 1918. Mary Black was the first female president of a library association in Canada. As background for her career, I am adding a biographical piece that provides basic facts about her library career. I composed this biography for the Ex Libris Association in 2016 and it also appears on this association's website. The image above is taken from the 1908 Papers of the Thunder Bay Historical Society (p. 6) of which she was a long-standing member of the executive.

Mary Black was an inspirational force for improved library service to everyone in the old city of Fort William and its environs (today Thunder Bay). Service for people was her mantra. She was active in community and library and organizations, including the American Library Association extension services. In a time before national and provincial library associations formed across Canada, she was a progressive, regional force for librarianship, even in the gloomy years of the Great Depression.

Mary Johanna Louisa Black

Born Apr. 1, 1879, Uxbridge, ON. Died Jan. 4, 1939, Vancouver, BC

Education:
Received informal `homeschooling` in her youth
Attended (but did not complete) the first Ontario Department of Education one-month summer training course for librarianship at Toronto in June 1911

Positions:
1909–1937 Chief Librarian, Fort William Public Library
1917 Lecturer, Department of Education two-month training course in librarianship

Publications:
Black, Mary (1911/1912). “Our public library.” Papers and Annual Reports of the Thunder Bay Historical Society 3: 6–7.
Black, Mary (1913). “Books for girls.” Proceedings of the Ontario Library Association Annual Meeting: 74–79.
Black, Mary (1915). “Town survey in theory and practice.” Proceedings of the OLA Annual Meeting: 72–80.
Black, Mary (1916). “The library and the girl.” Ontario Library Review 1: 8–9.
Black, Mary (1917). “What seems to me an important aspect of the work of public libraries at the present time.” Proceedings of the OLA Annual Meeting: 30–34.
Black, Mary (1918). “Concerning some popular fallacies.” Proceedings of the OLA Annual Meeting: 52–58 (OLA Presidential Address.)
Black, Mary (1918). “Walks and talks with Wilfred Campbell.” Ontario Library Review 3: 30–31.
Black, Mary (1919). “Twentieth century librarianship.” Canadian Bookman n.s.1: 58–59.
Black, Mary (1920). “New library legislation in Ontario.” Canadian Bookman n. s. 2:18–19.
Black, Mary (1921). “Tales through the ages from the banks of the Kaministiquia.” Papers and Annual Reports of the Thunder Bay Historical Society 16–12: 8–10.
Black, Mary (1924). “Early history of the Fort William Public Library.” Papers and Annual Reports of the Thunder Bay Historical Society 16–17: 12–21.
Black, Mary (1924). “Place names in the vicinity of Fort William.” Papers and Annual Reports of the Thunder Historical Society 16–17: 12–21.
Black, Mary (1927). “Canadian library extension meeting”. Proceedings and transactions of the American Library Association, 49th Meeting: 338–340.
Black, Mary. (1928). “Adult education.” Proceedings of the OLA Annual Meeting: 61–64.
Black, Mary (1931). “Ontario libraries.” Ontario Library Review 15:132–138.
Black, Mary (1933). “Publicity for the older books.” Ontario Library Review 17: 5–6.
Black, Mary (1934). “Fort William, Ontario, Public Library.” Library Journal 59: 510–511.
Black, Mary (1935). “Ideal librarian.” Ontario Library Review 19: 125–126.
Ridington, John, Mary J. L. Black and George H. Locke (1933). Libraries in Canada: a study of library conditions and needs. Toronto: Ryerson Press and Chicago ALA.

Associations/Committees:
1917–1918 President, Ontario Library Association
1926–1934 American Library Association, member of Extension Board
1933–1934 American Library Association, chair, Small Libraries Round Table
1934–1937 Canadian Library Council, executive member (ex-officio)
1913–1928 Secretary-Treasurer, Thunder Bay Historical Society
1929–1932 President, Thunder Bay Historical Society
1916–1918 President, Fort William Women's Canadian Club

Honours:
The Mary J.L, Black Branch library, opened in 1938, was named in her honour. It was recently renovated for the second time in 2010 by the Thunder Bay Public Library at a cost of $4 million. It is one of the handful of Canadian libraries constructed during the Great Depression to continue in operation.

Accomplishments:
Mary J.L. Black believed the mission of the public library was essentially utilitarian – to provide the right book to the right reader at the least cost. Her “ideal librarian” was one who held the spirit of public service and knowledge of people alongside the love of books. Libraries should reach out to every citizen and in this regard her work with the non-English speaking immigrant population was particularly noteworthy. Her personal town survey in 1915 to identify library needs exemplified her approach to library service. On a national scale, her work as a member of the Commission of Enquiry, funded by the Carnegie Corporation and conducted in 1930, remains a lasting contribution to Canadian librarianship. In her home city, she was active in local service groups, promotion of history and local political and educational life. The poet, William Wilfred Campbell, was her cousin. She was the first woman to be president of a library association in Canada.

Sources:
Thunder Bay Public Library holds annual reports by Black and there are library board minutes for her tenure. The ALA Archives holds records of her activities and the Carnegie Corporation New York has information on her work on the 1930 Commission.

[Carson, William O.] (1917). “The librarian and library of Fort William.” Ontario Library Review 1: 92–95.
MacBeth, Madge (1918). “A bookish person.” Canadian Magazine 51: 518–520.
“Miss Mary J.L. Black is interviewed by Globe.” Toronto Globe June 18, 1927: 15.
Kirker, Ena. (1927). “The woman who put charm into a public library.” Canadian Magazine 68: 32, 41.
Abbott, Brook (1931). “An accidental librarian: Mary Black of Fort William, Ont.” Canadian Magazine 76: 18, 29.
“Mary J.L. Black dies in Vancouver.” Ontario Library Review 23 (Feb. 1939): 5–7.
Morrison, Ken (1994). “Mary J.L. Black of Fort William library.” Epilogue; Canadian Bulletin for the History of Books, Libraries and Archives 9, no 1: 13–22.
Scollie, Frederick Brent. “Black, Mary Johanna Louisa.” In: Dictionary of Canadian Biography, vol. 16.
Giles, Suzette (2015). “Libraries named after librarians.” ELAN no. 57 (Spring): 6–7.

My earlier blog on Mary Black's presidential speech is also available.

 

Ontario Public Libraries: The Provincial Role in a Triad of Responsibilities, 1982

Ontario Public Libraries: The Provincial Role in a Triad of Responsibilities. The Report of the Ontario Public Libraries Programme Review for the Minister of Citizenship and Culture. Toronto: Ministry of Citizenship and Culture, 1982. Executive Co-Ordinator, Peter J. Bassnett. Tables and appendices; xxxiii, 318 pp.

In September 1980, Ontario’s Minister of Culture and Recreation (MCR), Reuben Baetz, met with the Ontario Public Library Council (OPLC) to announce a two-year Public Libraries Programme Review (OPLPR). Scarborough’s chief librarian, Peter Bassnett, would be the director and work with a small intermediary group at the outset to plan the review process. Since 1975 he had been chief librarian at Scarborough. Before this appointment, he had managed systems at North York and worked in the UK for many years. The Minister believed a positive approach with abundant consultation would improve the delivery of library services throughout Ontario. The 1970s had been a time of controversy about the role of regional library services, the accountability of library boards, disputes with municipal authorities, the funding provided for libraries by the provincial government, and dissenting viewpoints about policies for future planning. A previous report on provincial libraries by Albert Bowron in 1975 had produced much discussion but no significant legislative changes. Revised public library legislation was the major objective because the older statute, enacted in 1966, had not proved to be as effective as originally expected.

The OPLPR established fifteen groups in search of consensus and solutions for many contentious issues. Some groups explored general provincial concerns: policy and social purpose (1), general delivery of services (2), governmental liaison (3), provincial financing and accountability (4), and field services (5). Task groups on planning and development for technological potential (6), electronic information (13), and co-operatives and processing centres (15) addressed technical and networking questions. Special considerations for northern Ontario (7), publishing and libraries (12), and access to resources (14) required separate groups. Finally, four groups studied cultural identities and services for French languages (8), Native services (9), multicultural programs (10), and disabled persons (11). Each group was responsible for a report to Peter Bassnett, who was charged with publishing a final report. In addition, Bassnett held 20 open sessions for discussion and received 368 briefs encompassing a wide variety of issues.

The OPLPR sets its course for a year-and-a-half with the knowledge that the Progressive Conservatives under William Davis had finally secured a majority government in a March 1981 election. Four years would be sufficient to develop new legislation for libraries. The OPLPR submitted seventy-five recommendations by August 1982. By then, there was a new Minister, Bruce McCaffrey, in charge, and, earlier in the year, in February 1982, the MCR had become the Ministry of Citizenship and Culture, with its Library and Community (MCZC) Information Branch relocated in the Arts, Heritage and Libraries division.

The OPLPR report, Ontario Public Libraries: The Provincial Role in a Triad of Responsibilities, was issued, mostly in microfiche to the consternation of many, by autumn 1982 for review by library boards, politicians, and librarians. The Bassnett report made clear-cut statements that cut across the entire spectrum of public library services. It found that the current provincial role performed by the LCIB or OPLC was deficient (p. 68–71). The Report indicated more specific legislation and guidelines were required (p. 93). Lack of awareness about the LCIB and OPLC and their inadequate authority had stalled communication and led to ineffectual provincial leadership. A strengthening of provincial direction within the Ministry through an enlarged staff component to plan and liaise with the library community was essential. A Public Library Services Division and a new advisory body would be required (rec. 7.72 and 7.73). Other recommendations for increased staff for data collection, French-language service, networking, services for disabled persons, aboriginal services, multicultural activity, management, and training responsibilities (p. 168–187) would permit the MCZC to deal with policies that it brought forward. Some ideas originated from background studies or were influenced by general developments such as the 1981 United Nations International Year of Disabled Persons theme ‘Full Participation and Equality.’ Assistance for non-professional staff, mostly untrained persons in charge of small libraries, was an important issue, the subject of one lengthy submission from an ad hoc group of consultants. In one case, the Task Force on Native Services, the main thrust urging the formation of a Council to oversee library services for natives at an estimated $290,000, was disregarded because the group insisted on working outside the framework of the LCIB. The OPLPR’s recommendations on northern Ontario conditions mostly bypassed the ideas from Task group 15 headed by Richard Jones, director of North Central region.

During the Programme Review, the regional role—now retitled the intermediary role—was gradually reshaped. A Network Development Office was transferred to the Ministry offices in July 1981 and some LCIB staff worked on a provincial study of union products for resource sharing in regional systems. The OPLPR was wary of multiple regional processing centres and bibliographic databanks. Task force 15 had recommended the Midwestern Region centre become a Crown Corporation. Instead, the OPLPR (p. 164–167) followed the Ministry’s internal report that recommended further study of Midwestern’s possibilities. A new path was clarified: automation and cooperative area networks were to become local level responsibilities supplemented with planning and financial assistance offered by the Province. Centralized regional acquisitions and processing utilities would no longer receive support. The Programme Review recommended intermediary involvement with basic services, such as rotating book collections, staff training, special collections, reference centres, programming for groups, and direct service to municipally unorganized populations. Some briefs authored by administrative groups emphasized long-standing issues such as resource libraries and centralized processing, but these positions were not conclusive. The key point was the Review’s statement that the intermediary role “is an extension of the Provincial Government’s responsibility and role in the delivery of public library services across Ontario” and that there were currently three types of regional service, “the northern, southern, and Metropolitan Toronto area” (p. 147–148). Northern distinctions warranted more proactive provincial library intermediaries. The southern systems were more complex, so the Review recommended a gradual phase-in over five years to one provincial agency with field offices, starting with Southwestern, Lake Erie, and Niagara (p.154–159). Metro Toronto required amendments to the Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto Act to repeal the Metro Library Board’s status as a regional library system and to authorize more sitting Metro Council members for the upper-level board. Provincial funding for the Metro Board would need an examination to determine what special purposes the province wanted to accomplish with its legislative payments (p. 160–164).

At the local level, the OPLPR made forty-two recommendations clarifying functions and management. Several recommendations would eventually make their way into the revised Library Act almost three years later in 1985. In place of standards, boards should embark on community analysis; boards should provide services their communities desired or needed; legislation for free entry to libraries and use of materials should be enacted; and services for particular groups (e.g., the disabled and Francophones) should be augmented with provincial assistance. Capital funds should be made available because only a few libraries had shared in the brief Wintario capital construction program in the late 1970s before the government redirected it to other purposes. Funding from programs such as Wintario and the Board of Industrial Leadership was important but episodic. Special funding for the creation of county-regional municipal systems and enrichment of per capita grants to northern libraries was a desideratum. Some recommendations addressed the composition of boards and their relationship with appointing bodies by affording municipal councils more control. The century-old traditional board of nine members, with the majority composed of public and separate school appointees from larger county school boards, was a leftover from the 1960s restructuring of school authorities. Now, municipal councils should make all the appointments (p. 116). In summarizing the provincial conditional grant to libraries, the Review found little change over ten years: the 1971 grant had totalled $8,552 million (20% of total support), and in 1981, $25,279 million (19% of total support). The Bassnett report recommended continuing payment of annual grants directly to boards. On the issue of non-operating boards, currently in 136 communities, the Report recommended the grant be paid only if municipal revenue matched its grant (p. 132–135). This policy, along with the promotion of larger units of service in counties and upper-tier municipalities, had the potential to halve the total number of boards.

The Bassnett report concluded by drafting a policy statement regarding public library service (p. 188–192). Ultimately, provincial goals should be:
▪ provision of public library legislation ensuring deww access and delivery of services;
▪ encouragement and support for municipal libraries;
▪ ensuring library collections reflect the population characteristics of their jurisdictions;
▪ encouragement and assistance for technological changes;
▪ development of a province-wide public information utility by networking municipal libraries; and
▪ provision of funding and staff support to achieve these goals.

The cost of expanding provincial support was not expensive: Task Group 4 estimated a 10.5% increase from $25.7 million to $28.5 million (p. 194). At the former regional levels, expenses could be reduced by 40 percent and be redirected to augment the proposed public library service division. In terms of the Public Libraries Act, the OPLPR recommended a complete overhaul. In response to the OPLPR, Bruce McCaffrey announced at the November 1982 Ontario Library Association conference in Toronto that his Ministry preferred to issue a ‘green paper’ for more discussion without any specific commitment to action, A Foundation for the Future/Réalitiés et Perspectives. This ‘green paper,’ released in December 1982, would form the basis for legislative changes. In February 1983, Wil Vanderelst, from the MCZC policy secretariat, became the new director of the LCIB, now shifted to the Ministry’s Culture and Regional Services Division. While the Ontario Public Libraries report had sought consensus on many issues, in fact, its author, Peter Bassnett, expressed dissatisfaction with the ‘green paper’ in the Toronto Star in May 1983. He felt many of his recommendations had been passed over or modified. Such was the fate of many recommendations in the OPLPR: finding consensus in the library community was an uncommonly difficult task.

There were, however, positive outcomes of the OPLPR. Municipal councils gained more control over library board appointments, thus ending a decade-long struggle. Free access to a variety materials became an important feature of new legislation enacted in 1985. The Province reiterated its support for conditional grants paid directly to library boards. The conflict and confusion about regional library boards was reduced when the province took control of southern and northern ‘intermediary’ services and began to deliver targeted policies, such as Francophone concerns, disabled programs, and improved service to indigenous communities. The review, which appeared at the same time when ‘turnkey systems’ were beginning to provide integrated solutions for library functions, proposed extensive automation projects be supported by provincial studies (p. 166). The idea of equalization of services addressed on large geographic scale came firmly into play. In fact, after almost four decades, very few changes have been made to the original 1984–85 legislation; again, one of the accomplishments that may be traced to the Bassnett report.

Libraries of Metropolitan Toronto (1960) by Ralph Shaw

Libraries of Metropolitan Toronto: A Study of Library Service Prepared for the Library Trustees’ Council of Toronto and District. By Ralph Robert Shaw. Toronto: Library Trustees’ Council of Toronto and District, 1960. Illustrated, pp. 98.

In the late 1950s, there were thirteen library boards serving the metropolitan area of Toronto. One board, Toronto, served 658,000 people. Twelve adjacent boards served 742,000. More centralized regional service for police and other area concerns had formed after the creation of a Metropolitan government in 1953 through a provincial act. A few years later, in November 1958, the Metro Council authorized a group of trustees, the Council of Library Trustees of Toronto and District, first formed in 1954, to prepare a detailed survey of the thirteen area municipalities of Metropolitan Toronto. The Council believed systematic coordination was the most logical way to achieve satisfactory area-wide service. The trustees, led by Richard Stanbury from the township of North York, chose Dr. Ralph Shaw, Rutgers University, New Jersey, to bring American-style library planning to Ontario. He began his work in 1959 and published his report in the following year in May.

Dr. Shaw’s report did two significant things: it set a better standard for social science research in Canadian library surveys and, more importantly, revealed the disparity in library service across Metro’s thirteen library authorities for books, reference, personnel, and financial support. Shaw made fifteen recommendations to improve integration and standards of service, the principle ones being:
▪ establishment of a Metropolitan Library Board to coordinate agreed upon activities and report to the Metro Council;
▪ no amalgamation or consolidation of local boards into a single system;
▪ funding by a metropolitan board for services necessary for all citizens in the greater region, that is, reference collections and information service;
▪ provision for centralized cataloguing and card preparation for all libraries operated by the proposed metro board;
▪ priority for the development of regional branches of 100,000 volumes with specialized staff;
▪ priority development of neighbourhood branches for children’s services and adult recreational and general reading with bookmobile services;
▪ Toronto Public Library (TPL) to merge its reference and circulation departments into a single department with subject specialization and relocate from College Street to a new building for use by all metro residents; and
▪ a metro-wide use of a single card for all citizens.
The most important recommendation, a metropolitan board, would prove difficult despite the advice that there should be no amalgamation of local boards.

Dr. Shaw rejected the idea of having TPL serve as a central bibliographic and reference resource for all Ontario. This concept, the heart of a ‘Provincial Library’ promoted by many librarians and the Ontario Library Association in the 1950s, had proved to be elusive and unattainable over the years. Further, he advised that the administrative separation of TPL’s children’s services should be discontinued, especially in branches. The management of libraries in schools for students by TPL also was an awkward arrangement. Shaw reported that services for schoolchildren and young adults varied throughout the region and required new delivery approaches. He judged technical services in all libraries to be slower and more expensive than necessary. A metro board would provide this service more effectively.

When the final report came to Metro Council in 1960, Frederick Gardiner, the Metro chair, asked Dr. Shaw how services compared to American cities. The surveyor replied that Metro’s demand was “explosive.” Later in the year, the Toronto Board of Education appointed Leonard Freiser as chief librarian and established the Toronto Education Centre to support the goal of equipping schools with their own libraries. A Globe and Mail editorial on 11 January 1962 approved: “It must be observed only with surprise that this policy has not been in effect for decades past.”

To implement the Shaw report, Metro Council set up a Special Committee chaired by Richard Stanbury in July 1960. The federated approach of centralized Metro funding for standard services and continuance of local municipal autonomy had merits. However, because some library boards lagged behind general Canadian standards, coordinated development and tax-based financing from Metro councillors were complex issues to overcome. As early as June 8th 1960, the Toronto Star had observed: “After reading Dr. Shaw’s report, the immediate reaction of Toronto politicians will be to call for an end to the free-loading of many of the smaller municipalities.” By the autumn of 1960, the Special Committee was receiving briefs, not all supportive of Dr. Shaw’s conclusions, for example, the Metro Separate School Board felt providing libraries in every school was an expensive option.

When Stanbury’s committee reported to Metro Council in July 1961, it proposed the creation of a 30-member Metro-appointed library board, funding for a network of district libraries in Greater Toronto, grants to local library boards to equalize service, and payments for the operation and construction of TPL’s reference library. However, Metro Council balked at providing money without an upper-tier board controlling expenditures. The chair, Frederick Gardiner, declared, “It is either unification of the area library boards or nothing.” When the Special Committee’s effort came forward at Council later in November 1961, its report was adopted with an amendment to form a regional board. Nevertheless, this action had the effect of stalling efforts to create one because there was no unanimity on the issue.

Although the idea of a metro board did not take immediate hold, the Ontario government intervended at this point by appointing H. Carl Goldenberg to head a review on Toronto municipal governance in June 1963. His Report of the Royal Commission on Metropolitan Toronto received some library briefs in May 1964, primarily from TPL. Goldenberg’s final report reaffirmed the need for a Metro library board. It would be composed of nine members—two Metro Council appointees, five members from local area boards, and two from Toronto school boards. The report also concluded that 13 municipalities would be reduced to 6—Toronto, Etobicoke, North York, Scarborough, York, and East York. The result of this amalgamation process blended six independent libraries into a unique upper-tier regional structure in which trustees looked to the Metro Council, or the potential ‘regional’ library board, to play the central role in planning and provision of reference services.

The Shaw report was an influential guide to Toronto library development during the first half of the sixties. The creation of a new central reference library, new district library buildings, and the development of school libraries by the boards of education were apparent changes that could be traced to the pages of Libraries of Metropolitan Toronto. There was a sense that the concept of a Toronto-centred ‘Provincial Library,’ as it had existed in the 1950s, was consigned to history.

Later, in the 1970s, when TPL found its neighbourhood branch libraries needed revitalization, it was still wedded to a policy of creating larger district branches, a legacy from the 1960 Shaw report. Also, TPL was more inclined to work on studies about its own system goals, internal management, and local planning projects within city limits. There was more interest in inner-city issues than metro-wide library activities. Nevertheless, despite opposition, a world-class regional reference library opened in 1977. Two decades later, in 1998, the six metro municipalities were amalgamated into one Toronto entity. The evolution of library centralization, first envisaged in the late 1950s when there were thirteen library boards, had finally come about.

Proposed network of 20 Metro districts in the Shaw Report, 1960

ONTARIO'S CENTENNIAL LIBRARIES, 1966—1967

     In 1961 the National Centennial Act established a federal Centennial Commission reporting to Parliament. This Commission intended to celebrate Canada’s birthday by planning and assisting projects across the country. Provincial departments helped coordinate finances with local groups and municipalities. In all, the total expenditure under various grant programs for all governments reached $200 million for about 2,500 projects, including the building of Confederation Memorial Centres, such as the one in Charlottetown which included a library. In Ontario, in 1965, the Department of Tourism established a Centennial Planning Branch to help plan and finance celebrations such as armed forces ceremonials, canoe pageants, the Confederation and train caravans, aboriginal events, sports events, municipal projects, and Queen’s Park celebrations. Approved local projects received funding from the federal government normally based on one dollar per capita to a maximum of one-third of the total cost. Provinces usually matched the federal amount, and municipalities funded the balance. Some new regional library co-operatives also provided funds for a few projects, notably Teck Township, where library facilities were the primary focus. Eventually, Ontario municipal projects totalled approximately $7 million; more than seventy-five libraries qualified for funding in the building category.–

     About five percent of the total Canadian projects were library-related (144). Ontario communities accounted for slightly more than half of all Canadian library buildings. The most notable project, the Public Archives and National Library, which opened on 20 June 1967, fulfilled a need expressed since the beginning of the century. The Canadian Library Association received $12,000 to microfilm Canadian newspapers in the Confederation period, 1862–1873; these microfilms were subsequently used across the country in many research projects. In Ontario, few major cities choose to erect or renovate libraries because large buildings were more complex to plan and finance during the Commission’s short lifespan. In Canada, Edmonton’s towering $4,000,000 centennial central library was a remarkable example of municipal funding for library services.

Sault Ste. Marie Centennial Library, 1967

      In Ontario, only Sault Ste. Marie ($776,000), Chatham ($515,000), and Mimico ($300,000) were expensively conceived projects. The Sault Ste. Marie library’s lower level included space for a “Centennial Room” for lectures and exhibits. The vast majority of libraries were projected to be under $100,000 due to the per capita funding formula. Smaller municipalities sometimes entered into joint projects with their neighbours to combine their financial resources. One municipality, suburban Toronto Township, built three smaller libraries (3,000 sq. ft. each) that opened on the same day in October 1967—Malton, Lakeview, and Clarkson-Lorne Park.

Mimico Centennial Library, 1966

      The Centennial Commission was not concerned with library architectural features or functional requirements of libraries. By now, the excesses of the Carnegie era were well known: some communities—Cornwall (1956), Sarnia (1960), and Guelph (1964)—had simply demolished their buildings and rebuilt without regard to heritage considerations. Chatham, opened on 15 November 1967, followed the same process, moving to the Thames Theatre Art Gallery while demolition of the Carnegie proceeded. Sault Ste. Marie also razed its Carnegie building to make way for Sixties-style progress. 

   In keeping with the limited funds available on a per capita basis, the general architectural style of the vast majority of smaller Centennial libraries might be described as “commercial-vernacular” with the following usual characteristics:

▪ most new buildings were 4,000 – 8,000 sq. ft. in size and based on a simple rectangular or box plan, sometimes allowing for future expansion;
▪ modernist style exteriors were rectilinear in form with plain surfaces, featuring extensive use of glass, and horizontal roof lines;
▪ buildings had approachable “street-level” entrances often with adjoining parking;
▪ interior “open plan” mix of stacking, fluorescent lightening, and public space provided more convenient, individual study areas, larger lounge areas for reading, and improved interface with staff and book collections;
▪ structural elements featured concrete, glass, and steel that revealed skeleton-frame structure;
▪ lighting took on more importance with visible fluorescent and long, metal window mullions providing strength in single-storey buildings and allowing more interior daylight to make study and programming pleasant for users;
▪ in larger libraries, modular column squares made load-bearing and functionality simpler to plan for future redesign needs;
▪ use of vernacular, localized style combined with contemporary wood-steel furnishings created attractive, simplified library spaces.
The majority of Centennial libraries and extensions did not continue the monumental traditional style of the Carnegie era. Instead, the ideal, “form follows function,” was adhered to even if contemporary additions clashed dramatically with the older Carnegie style, as in Fort Frances. Many additions simply alleviated space problems, thereby limiting their scope and style. Renovated buildings, such as a service station at Sioux Lookout, did not present opportunities for architectural statements.

Streetsville Centennial Library, 1967

    The architectural qualities of Centennial libraries differed tremendously. Because of their size and community location Centennial libraries escaped the major elements of the Brutalist style, so evident in Ontario’s 1969 Centennial Museum of Science and Technology. One library, Mimico, opened in November 1966, received a Massey Medal for Architecture for its architect, Philip R. Brook. It was a spacious 18,000 sq. ft. building with a capacity of 60,000 books and an auditorium for 250 people. Streetsville, opened in November 1967 by the Premier, William Davis, reflected a contemporary cubic style with a capacity for 20,000 volumes  within 6,500 sq. ft. Larger libraries, such as Oakville, formed part of a civic complex and combined with art gallery space to satisfy municipal needs. The complex was on three levels: a lower area for technical services, main floor children’s library, and upper level (actually at street level) included adult services and the art gallery.

Nepean Centennial Library, 1967

      Some structures were built with an eye for successful extensions, such as Fort Erie. Others, such as Nepean Township’s modular octagon at Bells Corners, were too small at just under 2,000 sq. ft. to cope with population growth. Nepean was required to add later modular additions in 1970 and 1974. A few county library systems built better accommodations. The Middlesex library included a local branch for Arva residents as well as storage and garage to organize transport of books to other county branches via bookmobile—there was14,000 sq. ft. on one level. Several, notably Cornwall’s Centennial Simon Fraser wing, opened by Prime Minister Lester B. Pearson in July 1967, were successful additions to existing buildings.

     Very little critical study of Centennial library building projects exists, Bracebridge being a noteworthy exception. Its 1908 Carnegie, of course, suffered space constraints before the trustees and town council decided to renovate the basement for a children’s library and add a small extension for a separate entrance. The project cost was just less than $20,000; it included renovation upgrades in the main building and a “centennial wing” which was really “just a concrete-block bunker” that blemished the heritage aspects of the original Carnegie design. Nonetheless, speeches at an official ceremony on 13 May 1967 deemed the town’s decision to be a wise investment in children’s education.

     Indeed, the Centennial helped enhance the library’s public image about an expanded range of services, for example, auditoriums for programs, meetings, and performances; exhibit areas for art; and accommodation for audio-visual departments. These advantages reinforced the library’s position as an educational and recreational locus for community activity. Improved library facilities were part of a rapid increase in library usage across Ontario: in 1961 libraries served approx. 4.4 million and by 1971 6.9 million, a 56% increase — the greatest single decade increase in Ontario library history. Across the province, Centennial libraries were a visible symbol of local pride, the growth of Canadian identity, the democratization of culture, and the utility of shared federal-provincial programs for the public benefit. In some ways, Centennial libraries emulated the local self-help philosophy and enthusiasm for library building inspired by Andrew Carnegie six decades previously without the need to venture beyond national boundaries for funding.