assing
difficulty; and that the opening and establishing of the College, and
consequently its very existence, are mainly to be ascribed, as we verily
believe, to his active and indefatigable exertions."

To this letter the Rev. W. T. Leach, who had been appointed Professor of
Classical Literature on April 4th preceding, added:

"My connection with McGill College has been of very recent date, and I
have no objection to add my testimony to the above."

It was also certified by the Bursar, the Rev. John Abbott, that the
Principal was jointly responsible with the Chief Justice of Montreal
for L500 borrowed from the Bank of British North America, and for L100
for outbuildings; that he was personally responsible for a debt of L120
for fuel, which "by his own individual means and credit he had obtained
and provided for the College while the funds belonging to it were
withheld during a considerable period." These liabilities, however, were
all liquidated later by the Royal Institution.

The eleven years that had passed since the acting-Principal assumed
office were among the most critical in McGill's history. They were
fraught with a hopeless misunderstanding arising from a dual control,
the causes of which have been made sufficiently clear in the documents
quoted. The Governors resented the interference of the Royal
Institution, which in those days of advocacy of political autonomy and
sensitive abhorrence of Downing Street coercion they could not easily
tolerate. It was contrary to the spirit of the age. Whether the
Governors helped their cause by their attitude or by their attempt to
give to the College a character of sectarian exclusiveness need not be
here discussed. They had, however, urged the actual erection and
equipment of a College, and it was in a large measure because of their
persistence and their faith that the original buildings were so early
constructed. They had the good fortune to see the buildings actually
opened, students enrolled and collegiate instruction commenced in
accordance with the will of the founder. They saw, too, the Medical
School made an integral part of the University.

And the controversy in which they had so prominent and at times so
painful a part, although unfortunate in many ways, had at least one
good result--it showed plainly and unmistakably the hopelessness of dual
supervision and divided authority. Nevertheless, by the dissension of
those bitter years of storm and stress the Co