When Toronto’s Coffee Went ‘Continental’

Note: This article first appeared in Spacing Magazine Issue 71. It has been reproduced here with permission.

When Toronto’s Coffee Went ‘Continental‘
By Bob Georgiou

Cover image: Jack & Jill Coffee Bar in ‘The Village’, Hayter Street and LaPlante Avenue, 1963. Source: City of Toronto Archives

In March 1955, The Globe and Mail reported a growing “Toronto Trend”: the coffee house. While the drink itself was already sold and consumed in Toronto in various establishments (one of which was created by the temperance movement in the last quarter of the 19^th century), in the middle of the 20^th century it adopted a European, Bohemian, and outdoor flair. The newspaper also identified the catalyst of the new craze as “an Italian device known as the ‘expresso machine’” that had already caused a resurgence in coffee consumption in Britain.

On April 22, 1955, the Concerto Coffee House opened at 89 Bloor Street West. It billed itself as “Toronto’s First Continental-style Coffee House.” It was launched by partners British Brigadier Claude Dewhurst and Hungarian Irving Bolgar.

That June, in her Globe and Mail column “Around The Town,” Mary Walpole wrote about the cafe’s success:

“…And now in Toronto, the Concerto Cafe has proved that what we wanted most was a place to relax with our coffee and our chatter where the atmosphere…the service and the food made you feel that silly it is to rush like mad and get nowhere. The only problem is that too many people want to relax at Concerto Cafe…they line up for lunch…they drop in by hundreds to talk over the theatre, the film and the concerts with one of the twelve famous brews of coffee…though it’s still the Espresso that most everyone orders…and to dally over the intriguing salads, the Danish smorgasbord and French hors d’oeuvres and those delicious ices and pastries.”

The Globe and Mail, June 15, 1955

Another article in The Globe and Mail described the cafe’s “unusual aspects” – specifically that it was located above street level and featured “long-legged stools at a serpentine counter” where patrons could people-watch. The restaurant displayed interesting design motifs by Hungarian-born ceramicist Maria Rahmer de Nagay and the artist Karl May. The cafe also had a second-floor space called the “Picture Room.”

The cafe’s coffee itself was a mix of South American, Central American, and South African beans. An assortment of cakes and pastries provided accompaniment. Main courses included Hungarian goulash, veal ragout, stuffed peppers, chicken Tetrazini, and lobster Meridon. Later reports suggested the Concerto increased its selection of coffees, with espresso notes as the highlight, from 12 to 25 types.

The cafe, which was self-described as “Continental Bohemian”, had a happening vibe, frequented by “stars and celebrities.” In May 1955, opera singer Zinka Milanov was hosted at a coffee party there by the Yugoslav Consult General. Another soprano, Licia Albanese, stopped by the cafe after her show at Massey Hall in December 1955. Folk singer Greg Curtis was brought in to perform at the club, and a ‘singing Troubadour’ was a regular showcase. The owners, seeing the early returns of the Concerto Cafe, soon opened a second restaurant, the Concertino, at 32 Avenue Road. It sought for a similar atmosphere, and Maria de Nagay also provided her work for this foray. The Concertino was sold by March 1956 and renamed La Coterie.

Despite its great impact on Toronto’s gastronomic scene, the Concerto had a relatively short life. On December 13, 1959, a devastating fire totaling $15,000 in damages forced the cafe to close forever. The ground floor partially collapsed, and two firemen were hurt. A cigarette butt in the basement was believed to be the cause.

Meanwhile, another cafe with European flavour was contributing to converting Toronto to the new coffee culture. In March 1956, the Gaggia House at 28 College Street opened with a lavish gala. The owner was Venetian-born Pino Riservato, who fashioned the restaurant with Italian artistic stylings and a wood-burning oven for ‘pizza pie.’

But the intrigue did not stop in the coffee house’s interior: Gaggia House was also to become a sidewalk cafe, one of the first — if not the first – of its kind in Toronto. The Gaggia House seems to have only lasted six months, according to the Toronto Daily Star. But the trend had been initiated. In July 1960, Mary Walpole reported on the new sidewalk cafe of the Chateau Briand at neighbouring 32 College Street. She described how the “Wondrous Italian, Viennese and French coffees taste just that much better in this [patio] setting.”

By the end of the 1950s, the coffee house trend had completely caught on in Toronto. The Toronto Daily Star declared an ‘espresso blitz’ was taking place. “The most tell-tale sign of espresso’s growing popularity is that it is now being drunk during the ubiquitous Canadian ‘coffee break.’” Since the middle of the decade, the “continental coffee habit” grew to thirty espresso-serving establishments in Toronto. Another that grew from Hungary’s famed café culture was the Domino Cafe at 255 College Street owned by Hungarian-born Louis (or Leslie) Fekete.

Further west on College, the Capriccio Restaurant and Billiard Hall at 580 College Street, run by brothers Dante, Claudio, and Vittorio Cocca, helped launch Toronto’s Little Italy neighbourhood as an epicentre of sidewalk cafes, with long-running establishments such as Café Diplomatico continuing the activity to this day.

In the 1960s, Toronto’s Bohemian, Continental, and accompanying coffee cultures settled into two other districts. The first was ‘The Village’, an area west of Bay along Gerrard, Elizabeth, and Hayter Streets. In March 1960, Estonian-born Peeter Seep opened a new coffee house at 23 Gerrard Street. The Jack and Jill Coffee Bar on Hayter Street, another Hungarian establishment, was a popular spot with a sidewalk cafe and “after-dark activity.” By the middle of the decade, the Village was known for its coffee houses, live music, and patios.

The second of these areas would become the most synonymous with coffee house culture in Toronto’s history. Interestingly, it was located in Yorkville, steps from the ill-fated Concerto Café. In 1963, the Star reported a sidewalk cafe “boom” in Toronto with sixteen patios in the city — many of them in the streets north of Bloor near Avenue Road. The newspaper described how, in 1960, the Half Beat on Cumberland Street was persuaded by a former sidewalk cafe restauranteur and espresso machine salesman to place some tables outside. Their clientele soon preferred to sit or stand in the open air to drink their coffee. More coffee houses followed, many of them European-owned and -operated: the Old York Lane Cafe, the Coffee Mill, the Roof at 137 Avenue Road, the Penny Farthing, the Das Uppenbrau, the Cumberland Cafe, and La Provencal. Yorkville’s coffee houses provided venues for folk, blues, and jazz artists – some who laid the groundwork for a Canadian popular music scene.

Redevelopment in the Village and Yorkville erased both districts as nexuses for coffee houses. Many of the former converted rowhouses that had hosted the cafes were demolished. Nonetheless, as of 2025 the location of the Concerto Cafe remains at 89 Bloor Street West. Although no physical marker exists yet, it’s a good reminder of where Toronto got its taste for coffee nearly 70 years ago.

I’ve started a Substack! It will plug my recent projects, including articles on this site, and what has interested me. I will also share favourite Toronto History resources and projects! Please follow here: https://bobgeorgiou.substack.com/

I’ve started a Substack!

I’ve decided to get into the newsletter game! It will serve as another outlet to explore and report on my curiosities in Toronto history and fill the space in between posts. I’ll have what’s interested me, what I’m up to, and sharing some favourite research resources. The articles on this site won’t stop, of course. In fact, I have a few coming down the pipeline in 2026!

Please venture over to Substack and subscribe if you feel inclined: https://bobgeorgiou.substack.com/

Scenes From Windfields Park

Windfields Park is an 83-acre park in the former city of North York in Toronto. Its history includes being part-golf course and part-equestrian estate, and it is an important chapter in suburban Toronto.

A short distance from the southeast corner of Bayview Avenue and York Mills Road, the park begins by following the course of Wilket Creek. The narrow and shallow watercourse was historically known as Milne Creek, named after the Milne family, who built a mill on the creek further south and east near Lawrence Avenue. The creek seems to have later taken on the current and lasting name Wilket Creek, which itself comes after the Wilcotts of Willowdale where the waterway’s headwaters stood.

To the centre of the park, the topography opens up into rolling hills to the east and the Canadian Film Centre (CFC) grounds to the west. This is where the land’s history and geography get interesting.

Historically, the park is made of parts of Lots 8 to 10, Second Concession East of Yonge — the majority being the Bell property on Lot 9. By 1930, parts of Lots 8 and 9 were part of the Glen Mawr Golf Club with an address on Bayview Avenue.

In the 1940s, the International Business Machines (IBM) Ltd bought the course for exclusive use of its employees. Its address was on Leslie Street and extended to Wilket Creek. The company had their headquarters nearby at Don Mills Road and Eglinton Avenue.

In 1932, industrialist and financier Edward Plunket (E.P.) Taylor bought twenty acres of land on Bayview Avenue, also on lots 8 and 9. An estate house was commissioned and built in the colonial revival style. A gatehouse, stables, workers’ cottages, and gardens were added in the Fourties.

In addition to his business pursuits, in the Fifties, Taylor became big-time stock-breeder – a connoisseur for racing horses and cows. He amassed hundreds of acres of real estate as part of his Windfields Farm — a name conceived of by his wife Winnifred while feeling the breezy air while walking through the open land — and turned it into “a top centre for thoroughbred houses and cattle.” In 1959, The Globe profiled Windfields as “the type of farm that doesn’t really exist.” The farm consisted of parcels of land on Bayview Avenue and on both sides of York Mills Road west of Leslie Street. In 1964, the Taylors’ Northern Dancer won the Kentucky Derby, the first Canadian-bred horse to achieve the accolade.

In the Sixties, several transformative events impacted the two landholdings. With surrounding farmlands beginning to be redeveloped in the decade prior, IBM sold its 103-acre club to Morenish Land Developments. The last year for golf was 1967. By the mid-1970s, new streets and houses replaced the greens. The rolling topography of the western part of the property near the creek seems to have remained as parkland.

In 1968, Taylor agreed to sell 330 acres of its 390-acre Windfields Farm to Morenish Land Developments as well. The new subdivisions near York Mills and Leslie went up by the end of the Seventies. The neighbourhood now bears the Windfields name.

Windfield Farm & IBM Golf Course, 1965 & 1978
City of Toronto Archives,

Taylor set aside 50-acres to North York of his equestrian estate for parkland. It was named appropriately named Windfields Park. The family immediately retained 20 acres, including the house, to live on. These lands were to be deeded to North York upon the family’s wishes or deaths. In 1987, Charles Taylor officially transferred the remaining property to the city. The Canadian Centre for Advanced Film Studies, now the Canadian Film Centre, was founded in the building by Norman Jewison in the following year.

Today, Windfields Park and CFC grounds mark a picturesque landscape in North York, one with interesting historical layers.

When Leader Lane Led: A Quick History of One-Way Streets in Toronto

Map of Toronto in 1933 with traffic and parking prohibitions

What is the first street in downtown Toronto recorded as a one-way street? The answer is not obvious – perhaps because the street itself is not very consequential for most travelers today. It was the first chapter in the history of Toronto’s uniquely directed roads.

On July 2nd, 1901, By-Law No. 4108 prohibited “the conveyance of traffic on Leader Lane, from the south to the north.” The street ran, as it does today, between King Street and Wellington Street just west of Church Street. The reason for the ban against northbound traffic was that the lane was “too narrow for the passing of one vehicle by another.” Vehicles were defined in the law as horses, carriages, wagons, or other vehicles (other than a bicycle).

The issue came about when Mr. George R. R. Cockburn raised a complaint to the mayor:

“The fact that vehicles of every description are entitled to pass up and down Leader lane causes great inconvenience both to those using them and also to foot passengers, and it would be in the interests of the city that the traffic of carts and vehicles should be constrained to pass only from north to south through the lane. I may say that already two panes of glass have been broken by vehicles attempting to pass one another in so narrow a space.”

Toronto Daily Star, October 9, 1900

Cockburn was a Member of Parliament in Toronto and educator, who was Principal at Upper Canada College and a member of the Senate at the University of Toronto.

By the spring of 1901, legislation was passed to allow Toronto to make the by-law and the Works Committee recommended the prohibition. It was given its readings in Council before being passed into law on July 2.

Leader Lane was named for the Toronto Leader Newspaper, which operated between 1853 and 1878 and had its offices at 63 King Street East and 40 & 44 Colborne Street. It had the previous names of “Old Post Office Lane” and “Berczy Street.” In 1909, Leader Lane was named by the Daily Star as the narrowest way in Toronto to be properly called a street.

While it is natural to think of the regulation in modern terms, this prescription of vehicles implies that automobile traffic was not the by-law’s first intention. But soon, it would be.

The “horseless age” was about to begin in Toronto. In August 1897, The Globe wrote of the interest derived from the presence “of an automobile vehicle, or motocycle, or autocar, the name being as yet unfixed.” In June 1901, the Toronto Automobile Club had its first rendezvous — a cavalcade of eight cars starting at Queen’s Park and driving around Toronto. Its president was John Craig Eaton — then Vice-President (and soon-to-be President) of the T. Eaton Company.

The following decades saw a growth in cars on the streets of Toronto and it was transformational for daily life in Toronto. In 1913, there were 17,000 cars in Toronto; by 1923, the number grew to about 50,000 cars. With it, Toronto refined its rules of the road and its technologies to manage traffic flow. The first version of the modern traffic light arrived in 1925.

On August 5, 1920, By-Law 8485 “To Regulate Traffic on the Public Streets” was passed. It focused on parking allowances and prohibitions, turning and stopping, obeying signals, and even regulated pedestrians (including bicyclists).

It also transformed a number of streets into one-way streets. The list included Leader Lane and many of its surrounding streets and lanes in the financial district: Victoria Street, Colborne Street, and Jordan Street. Other additions included Queen’s Park and Spadina Crescents, which were separated into north- and south-bound streets on either side of their respective islands.

The changes must have spurred a larger discussion about traffic measures. In a traffic conference in June 1923, more one-way streets were urged, including Yonge Street during peak times when parking provisions on the street were also reformed to allow the change. It was the first of nearly a century of schemes and ideas to make Yonge Street one directional. In 1928, the former Chief of Police Samuel J. Dickson raised the idea of making all traffic on Yonge Street travel south between Front Street and St. Clair Avenue. Conversely, strictly northbound traffic would travel along Bay Street, Davenport, and Poplar Plains Road.

Proposals and studies for a one-way Yonge Street arose in nearly every decade in the 20th century. Some, such as in 1968 and 1984, actually came with the idea of reducing the lanes on Yonge and improving the pedestrian arena with wider sidewalks and even pedestrian-only areas. In 1988, it arguably came the closest to a reality: Toronto City Council voted to turn Yonge Street into a northbound road (with Bay Street handling southbound traffic) on a trial basis. However, downtown businesses challenged the plan in court and won. The plan was killed in another council vote in 1989. Most recently, in May 2012, City Councilor and Public Works Committee chair Denzil Minnan-Wong proposed a one-way Yonge, but there was no follow-through. Interestingly, the counter-argument from a fellow councillor was similar to that of businesses in 1988: it would have been disruptive to local commerce.

Other major streets were also targets for traffic regulation reform in the 20th century — to more success. In 1946, the Civic Works Committee recommended one-way traffic on Adelaide and Richmond Streets. The former would apply from York to Jarvis Streets; the latter from Jarvis to University Streets. Unfortunately, while a trial period was proposed, the idea was seemingly forgotten for more than a decade. On Sunday, May 4, 1958, the pilot on Adelaide and Richmond finally began; it was filled with confusion and wrong-way turns. But by Monday, the test was already declared a success by city officials, the Toronto Transit Commission, and Toronto Police. By-Law No. 20418, passed on September 2, 1958, included Richmond, Adelaide, and roughly three hundred entries (that is, also including lanes and parts of streets) under Schedule VIII for one-way streets. The success seemed to have spurred further proposals to create a network of one-way streets in Toronto, which was layered with the movement for expressways as a means of allowing better and safer traffic flow. Today, vehicles in the downtown core travel uniquely west on Richmond Street and east on Adelaide Street.

Today, Toronto’s main streets do not follow a strict network of one-way streets as other Canadian and American cities have adopted. As with many civic improvement projects in Toronto, the approach to the one-way regulation seems to have been a gentle one: beginning small with narrow streets around the financial district and increasing to large changes like Richmond and Adelaide Streets when political appetite allowed it. In that way, Leader Lane truly was a leader.

A special thank you to Francesca Bouaoun of the Toronto Archives and Tony Masucci of By-Law Support for their assistance in retrieving archival by-laws.

Sources

“1-Way Yonge Street South from Davenport Recommended in Study.” Globe and Mail, 26 Mar. 1968, p. 5.

“A Downtown Essential.” The Globe and Mail, 1 Dec. 1959, p. 5.

“After Erring Autoists.” The Globe, 01 June, 1921, p. 9.

“An Automobile Club.” The Globe, 21 Jun. 1901, p. 10.

Baker, Alden. “Expanded one-way street system could be key to narrower Yonge.” The Globe and Mail, 27 Mar. 1984, p. M3.

“Bold Tactics Called For.” Globe and Mail, 5 Oct. 1951, p. 6.

Church, Elizabeth. “Wider Sidewalks, One-Way Traffic Floated as Ways to Improve Yonge Street.” The Globe and Mail, The Globe and Mail, 9 May 2012, http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/toronto/wider-sidewalks-one-way-traffic-floated-as-ways-to-improve-yonge-street/article4105527/.

“City Asks Changes In Municipal Act.” Toronto Daily Star, 18 Feb. 1920, p. 2.

City of Toronto, By-Law No. 4108, To regulate the traffic of Leader Lane (2 July, 1901)

City of Toronto, By-Law No. 8485, To regulate Traffic on the Public Streets (5 August, 1920)

City of Toronto, By-Law No. 20418, To regulate traffic on roads (2 September, 1958)

“City of Toronto Traffic By-Law.” Toronto Daily Star, 2 Mar. 1933, p. 12.

“Congestion of City Streets Demands Control of Traffic.” The Globe, 11 Jul. 1925, p. 13.

“Crosstown Project, One-Way Street Plan, Suggested For City.” Globe and Mail, 10 May. 1962, pg. 5.

“Deer Park Plan: One-Way Yonge St. Would Border Plaza.” Globe and Mail, 20 Sept. 1961, p. 5.

“Demanding Full Consideration.” The Globe and Mail, 1 Feb. 1949, p. 6.

“Discussion Begins Monday” The Globe and Mail, 24 Mar. 1972, p. 5.

Doolittle, Robyn. “Should Yonge, Bay Be One-Way.” Toronto Star, 9 May 2012, pp. GT1–GT2.

“Downtown One-Way Traffic Urged.” The Globe and Mail, 1 Nov. 1946, p. 25.

“Echoes 1968 Plan: One-Way Yonge, Church Proposed.” The Globe, 8 Feb. 1972, p. 5.

“Features About Toronto Streets.” Toronto Daily Star, 9 Jan. 1909, p. 4.

Georgiou, Bob. “A Quick Early History of Toronto’s First Traffic Signals and the ‘right on Red’ Rule.” Scenes From Toronto, 30 Jan. 2022, scenesto.com/2022/01/30/a-quick-early-history-of-torontos-first-traffic-signals-and-the-right-on-red-rule/.

“A Horrible Waterfront.” The Globe, 27 Apr. 1901, p. 26.

“If Yonge Were a One-Way Street.” The Globe, 10 Mar. 1928, p. 17.

MacKenzie, James. “One-way Street Scheme.” The Globe and Mail, 4 Oct. 1970, p. 5.

McIntyre, A. Lorne. “One-Way-Traffic Suggestion Would INclude Street Cars.” The Globe and Mail, 25 Aug. 1938, p. 1.

“More Study Required.” The Globe and Mail, 29 Apr. 1947, p. 6.

“Morning South, Night North Yonge Street One-Way Plan.” Globe and Mail, 17 Feb. 1954, p. 1.

“Motor Car Records Put Toronto Ahead.” The Globe, 28 Nov. 1919, p. 17.

“Old Habits Hard to Break.” Globe and Mail, 6 May 1958, p. 1.

“One-Way Roads For Downtown Urged.” The Globe and Mail, 11 Apr. 1963, p. 5.

“One Side of Yonge To Be Kept Clear.” The Globe, 6 June 1923, p. 13.

“One-Way Streets Speed Traffic in U.S. Cities.” The Globe, 23 Aug. 1947, p. 3.

“One-Way Traffic Experiment Given Sunday Sendoff.” Globe and Mail, 5 May 1958, p. 19.

“One-Way Traffic on Richmond, Adelaide Urged.” Globe and Mail, 5 Feb. 1958, p. 4.

“One-Way Traffic On Yonge Studied.” Globe and Mail, 2 Mar. 1954, p. 5.

Taylor, Paul. “City Votes to Make Yonge, Bay One-Way.” Globe and Mail, 17 May 1988, p. A1.

Taylor, Paul. “Toronto Council Rejects One-Way Yonge Street.” Globe and Mail, 24 Feb. 1989, p. A14.

“Telephone Agreement.” The Globe, 28 May 1901, p. 8.

“To Clear Taxis Off K.E. Stand.” The Globe, 10 July 1920, p. 6.

“The Horseless Age.” The Globe, Aug 28, 1897, p. 15.

“Toronto Motor Car Increase 305 Per Cent Since 1920.” The Globe, 16 Aug. 1938, p. 1.

“Traffic May Be One Way, Reverse on New Yonge St.” Globe and Mail, 14 May 1953, p. 29.

“Wagons in Leader Lane.” Toronto Daily Star, 9 Oct. 1900, p. 3.

“Watch One-Way Streets in City.” The Globe, 2 Oct. 1920, p. 20.

“When Toronto’s Mayor Planned to Make Yonge and Bay One-Way Streets | CBC.” CBCnews, CBC/Radio Canada, 17 May 2023, http://www.cbc.ca/archives/when-toronto-s-mayor-planned-to-make-yonge-and-bay-one-way-streets-1.5559508.

“‘One Way’ Streets Are Recommended.” The Globe, 27 Mar. 1920, p. 8.

Toronto’s Historic Clamour and The City’s “Anti-Noise” Doctor

Note: This article first appeared in Spacing Magazine, Issue 67. It has been reproduced here with permission.

When did Toronto become noisy? One indication might come from the reports of Toronto historic newspapers, which were commenting on the apparent noisiness of the city by the 1890s. The wording used by the Toronto Daily Star, the Globe, and the Toronto World was striking and uniform. They reported on “Anti-Noise Crusades” against “The Noise Nuisance.” And from an early stage, the matter was presented as being more than just an annoyance — it was an issue of public health. In 1894, the Toronto World complained about Toronto Railway Company streetcars, which “must have a serious effect on the nerves”.

In 1910, anti-noise proponents gained a new ally in the City’s Health Department. Dr. Charles Hastings, the new Medical Officer of Health, identified “the question of offensive noises” as being a matter of public health. It was the first time the connection between auditory pollution and wellbeing was made official in Toronto.

The Globe was elated, as now its “ineffective protests against unnecessary and hideous noises” would be heard. In early November, a Globe representative walked the streets of Toronto in the morning and observed several sources of commotion while interviewing citizens and businessmen. His findings identified factory sirens, railway nuisances, and streetcars as problems for Hastings to act on.

Another issue Hastings was asked to investigate: milk delivery in the morning. Dissenters to the status quo advocated for afternoon deliveries to avoid the rattle of the wagons during sleeping hours. But Dr. Hastings rejected the switch to midday milk, because he prioritised another health issue — clean milk. More than noise nuisances, pasteurised milk became an enduring part of Hastings’ legacy. It was personal to him, too – his young daughter had died from consuming contaminated milk nearly a decade prior. The lack of proper refrigeration made leaving milk sitting for several hours for afternoon deliveries a non-starter.

A City Dairy Milk Wagon circa 1900.
Credit: City of Toronto Archives

In his pursuit of noise reduction, Dr. Hastings instead began with another auditory irritant: the crowing of roosters in the morning. In 1912, Hastings proposed a by-law to banish the animal from the city, with the noted exception of breeders’ roosters. The Mail and Empire asked – perhaps derisively – how the top doctor prioritised bird noises over “whistles, bells, honking automobiles, and steam hammers.” Its cheeky answer? “The roosters make so much noise that the doctor can’t hear himself crow over the improvement in the public health since he took over the Health Department.”

The Globe noted the proposed ban would face opposition from citizens, “not only on the score of the danger to roosters, but because it contemplates charging a fee of a dollar for every domestic animal kept within city limits.” In 1919 and 1926, citizens still wrote to newspapers complaining about roosters in the city, indicating that the Health Department had not been very successful. A 1938 by-law finally prohibited noises by “any animal or bird,” such as a crowing rooster or barking dog, “which disturbs the peace, quiet, comfort or repose of any individual in the neighbourhood.”

In 1916, Hastings inaugurated an “anti-noise” campaign. The targets were motorists who wielded a heavy hand in sounding their horns, as well as anyone who made noises that “are not necessary for purposes of carrying on trade and commerce.” The doctor also professed that he could put an end to “unnecessary noises in the city” if he was given the power to do so. In response, Toronto Mayor Tommy Church brought in a resolution at the same meeting enabling proceedings against those who make noises. The Mayor’s resolution was endorsed by the Board of Health.

Dr. Hastings’ tenure in the Health Department often followed a theme of ambitious goals followed by unfortunately minimal results. A lively clash between the Officer of Health and Mayor Church in August 1918 pointed to a potential reason for inaction. The matter at hand was the noise emitted by the Gutta Percha and Rubber Co. factory in Parkdale and its impact on the denizens of West Lodge Avenue.

The mayor made “a rather scornful comment” about the department’s inability to deal with nuisances. After a protest from Hastings, the mayor doubled down, saying that Hastings had not “stopped a nuisance in the city yet.” Hastings argued he had to operate within the law – the Public Health Act – which the mayor conceded was a slow and cumbersome process. It was agreed the Criminal Code was a better tool. In January 1919, in the battle between Gutta Percha and Rubber Co. and West Lodge Avenue residents, Hastings admitted that the Ministry of Health was powerless to “abate necessary noises.” He would ask for reforms to the Public Health Act in 1920.

A machine inside the Gutta Percha and Rubber Co. factory.
Credit: City of Toronto Archives

In the 1920s, calls from the City officials and residents to lessen the noise of the city continued. In 1921, Hastings identified idling motorists outside houses who honked their horns, especially between the hours of 10PM and 7AM, as a particular nuisance. He also targeted door to door fruit peddlers, although he was not as hopeful on this matter since peddlers were licensed.

In 1926, an “anti-noise crusader,” Grenville Kleiser of France, wrote a letter to the Board of Control advocating an “anti-noise” day or week with a set of seven rules to adhere to during the period. The proposal had the support of Mayor Thomas Foster as well as Dr. Hastings, who stated the city needed 52 anti-noise weeks. Hastings acknowledged that the increasing demands of life were having an impact on “the nerves.” Just as he had done five years before, he identified idling and honking motorists as contributors. “The whole tendency of modern life is destructive to the nerves,” he summarised.

Dr. Hastings’ tenure as Toronto’s Medical Health Officer ended in 1929 with his retirement – two years before his death. Although his efforts in abating the “noise nuisances” in the city had mixed results, his legacy as a dedicated public servant who steered the city in a variety of other key issues remains. As for Toronto’s noise nuisances, they continued beyond his tenure with a combination of prior annoyances and new nuisances, accompanied by ever-present campaigns to regulate and quiet the noise.

Old Toronto Sounds Outlawed

Special thanks to Ariella Elema and the Toronto Archives for their assistance in accessing historical by-laws

No. 1514.

A BY-LAW To prevent certain noises calculated to disturb the inhabitants.
[Passed November 3rd, 1884.]

WHEREAS it is expedient and necessary to prevent the unnecessary use of steam whistles within the limits of the City of Toronto;

Therefore the Council of the Corporation of the City of Toronto enacts as follows:

I.No person shall blow or cause to be blown, sound or cause to be sounded, the steam whistle of any steamer while lying at any wharf in the City of Toronto or when approaching or leaving such wharf, except when absolutely necessary as a signal of danger, or in the cases and under the circumstances prescribed by the Laws and Statutes of the Dominion of Canada and the Orders-in-Council (if any) passed in pursuance thereof requiring the use of such whistles.

Commentary: Toronto early bylaws regulated the use of whistles from steamers and trains as they were common in Toronto 19^th– and earl- 20th century auditory environment. Later noise laws also included this prohibition.

No. 2452.

A By-law To prevent certain Noises calculated to disturb the Inhabitants.

PASSED 13th January, 1890.

THE Municipal Council of the Corporation of the City of Toronto enacts as follows :

1. No person shall advertise any sale of merchandize, furniture, or other article, or matter, by the ringing of a bell, blowing of a horn, crying, hallooing, or creating any other discordant noise, in the streets of the City, or on the step of a house or other premises open to the public street, whereby the public are liable to be subjected to inconvenience and annoyance: Provided always, that nothing contained in this section shall be construed to extend to any person duly appointed and authorized by the Council to follow the calling of Police Crier or City Bellman

Commentary: An amendment in 1892 excused milk dealers on weekdays from the ‘ringing of a bell’ clause.

No. 14913.

A BY-LAW Respecting Noises

[Passed March 14th, 1938.]

The Council of the Corporation of the City of Toronto enacts as follows:

II.

For the purpose of Section I, the following noises or sounds, among others, shall be deemed to be unnecessary noises which disturb the inhabitants:

(3) The sound or noise from or created by any radio or phonograph, or any musical or sound-producing instrument of whatsoever kind when such radio or phonograph or instrument is played or operated in such manner or with such volume as to annoy or disturb the peace, quiet, comfort or repose of any individual in any dwelling house, apartment house, hotel or other type of residence.

Commentary: This was part of Toronto’s most extensive noise law to date as the city wished to eliminate any ambiguity from older regulations regarding unnecessary noises. The provision on radio noise reflected the medium’s rise as a commercial sound machine. By-Law 14193, requiring approval from Queen’s Park, was initially rejected by the Province as being too “drastic”. The bill was reintroduced and passed in 1939 after persuasion from city officials. In a separate event, Toronto City Council also amended the law to exclude the Salvation Army from the law, to allow it to hold street corner meetings.

Even More “Old” Streets of Toronto

This is the third article in a series explaining the origins and histories of “Old”-named streets in Toronto. Here is Part I and Part II. You will find an interactive map of the title image here.

Old Kingston Road

Year rerouted: 1922

Kingston Road once followed a “tortuous” route into the Highland Creek valley, also called the ‘West Hill Hollow’. After it passed through the village of West Hill at Morningside Avenue, it took “a sharp, twisting drop down the bank of the valley.” It then followed the floor of the valley in a straight line and crossed over the creek on “a small, concrete bridge.” Up the eastern side, the hill was straight, but with its heavy level of traffic in the summer and its steepness and low visibility, it made for a dangerous drive.

In early 1922, tenders called for a high-level bridge. Construction began with the expectation that the road would be ready the next year. Fortunately, the project was completed quickly and was ready in November 1922. The new route, located south of the old one, added 6,000 feet of new road.

Today, the old route – Old Kingston Road – passes several heritage structures and offers a neat, rural drive. It is a reminder of old Scarborough.

Old Forest Hill Road

Year “rerouted”: 1927

The present Forest Hill Road and Old Forest Hill Road have convoluted histories and geography, which involve the absorption, deletion, and renaming of other roads. The story of Old Forest Hill Road is unlike any of the other “Old” Streets as its changing from old to new (or new to old) did not seem to correct an inconvenience in geography.

In short, a 19th-century largely diagonal road ran through the Baldwin Estate north of St. Clair Avenue to Eglinton Avenue. In the early 20th century, a second road, which may or may not have been part of the old road, grew concurrently with it. While these were both Forest Hill Roads, in the 1920s, the ‘ancient’ road was formalized Old Forest Hill Road.

The Baldwin footpath of the 1800s was originally called the “Trespass Road” (albeit likely not officially). Later, John Wickson (or someone else of the time) named this Baldwin road as ‘Forest Hill’ as it led to his 1860 summer home (or possibly one of Wickson’s pasture) of the same name.

South of Killbarry Road, this road either followed the present Dunvegan Road or a street to the east which aligns to the present Forest Hill Road — or possibly followed both at different times. Whichever is the case, another Forest Hill Road developed south and east (and later north and east) of the older Forest Hill Road beginning in the first or second decade of the 1900s. This meant that, at one time, there were two unconnected Forest Hill Roads. To ease (or complicate) matters more, the older road was sometimes referred to as Forest Hill Road North.

In the 1920s, the matter was cleared as the street grid filled out, and the neighbourhood gained a formal identity. In 1923, the area was organized into the Village of Forest Hill, borrowing its name from the old Wickson home. Old Forest Hill Road began to gain more use, and by 1927, it was the official name for the old road.

North of Eglinton Avenue, Old Forest Hill Road later absorbed part of Whitmore Avenue east of the present Allen Road (the highway bisected the street and its eastern section joined with Old Forest Hill Road). Whitmore was previously Second Avenue. This area is known as Forest Hill North and has the oldest house in the region as a whole: the William Moore House.

Today, Old Forest Hill Road is a beautiful street with some of the most exclusive addresses in Toronto and Canada.

Note: A HUGE Thank You to Kiki M and her amazing resourcefulness and knowledge of Forest Hill . Follow her Toronto History offerings on Instagram and TikTok.

Old Gerrard Street

Year rerouted: 1930

Gerrard Street once ran an awkward course where it crossed Carlaw Avenue. The Canadian National Railway curled northeast through the intersection and made for an indirect east-west path. An eastbound traveler needed to jog southeast onto Carlaw under a 19th century rail subway and then northeast again on Gerrard before continuing straight east towards Pape Avenue.

In 1929, the plan was to straighten Gerrard under the CNR bridge. It would cost $312,000. The idea was as old as the beginning of the decade. In 1930, a second subway was built on Gerrard Street, which finally eliminated the need to jog through the intersection. In 1931, the original subway was also reconstructed to match the new one, giving us the imposing infrastructure we see today.

When the intersection was reconfigured, the old diagonal stretch of Gerrard remained. On old maps, the old jog largely went unlabelled, and in city directories, there was no distinction between the two Gerrards as the street numbering did not have to change when the subway was built. Although it never formally became “Old Gerrard Street,” there were some references to it in name.

In 2002, its northern opening where the two Gerrards crossed was closed to through traffic. Today, the former jog creates navigational issues for motorists who turn too early onto Gerrard and end up in a residential neighbourhood instead of the “main” Gerrard Street.

Old Burnhamthorpe Road

Year rerouted: 1970

The old Concession II was the root of the present Burhamthorpe Road. According to the Etobicoke Historical Society:

“In 1846, it [Concession II] became the Etobicoke and Mono Sixth Line Plank Road, a toll road that began at Dundas Street where Burnhamthorpe Crescent is today, and ran west on Burnhamthorpe Road, then north on Mercer Road (now Elmcrest Road) and west on Base Line East (now Eglinton Avenue West.)”

Etobicoke Historical Society

Burhamthorpe ran northeast from the Etobicoke-Mississauga townline and then dropped southeast before continuing straight east to the Village of Islington at Dundas Street. The route possibly followed old property lines and roads.

By 1970, Burhamthorpe Road was realigned via a new road which offered more direct route between Etobicoke Creek and Renforth Road. The older section was renamed Old Burnhamthorpe Road.

Today, Old Burhamthorpe Road blends into the surrounding post-war neighborhood. The 1820 Mercer House stands at 72 Old Burhamthorpe as a reminder of the route’s former history.

A Quick History & Evolution of Scarboro’ Beach Park

Title Image: 1919 Scarboro Beach, Toronto, Ont., from an aeroplane. Credit: Toronto Public Library

From the late 19th century to the middle of the 20th century, almost half a dozen waterfront amusement parks entertained Torontonians, offering a lost layer of the city’s social life and geography. One of those fun resorts was Scarboro Beach Park, formerly located in the east end of Toronto, on the south side of Queen Street east of Woodbine Avenue. While the story of the park itself is interesting, the evolution of the property it sat on is a story in itself, consisting of at least three major redevelopments.

It started with 40 acres located on Lake Ontario in Lot 3 east of the Don River. In the 1860s and 70s, the property consisted of two equal plots to William Whitten and W. R. Graham. Thomas O’Connor came to own both plots, having an address of 2301 Queen Street East and operating the House of Providence Farm on the large plot.

Upon his death in 1895, the property passed to the Sisters of St. Joseph, of which O’Connor was a benefactor. In 1906, Harry and Mabel Dorsey purchased the waterfront property, earmarking it for a very different purchase.

The Dorseys formed the Toronto Park Company in late 1906. In March of the following year, the company ran a naming contest. The Toronto Park Co. was creating a ‘superb pleasure park’ and offered $100 to the individual who could offer the best name. G. Turner won the contest, in which thousands entered. The winning name was “Scarboro’ Beach.”

The name was an interesting choice. The property did indeed include a beach, but while the new park was located less than a kilometre from the town line, it was not actually in Scarborough itself. The Scarboro’ Historical and Old Boys’ Association raised its objection to the name to The Globe in April 1907, citing:

“In the first place, it forms no part of the beach in front of the township of that name, while near enough to be misleading as to location; also the derviation of the word Scarboro’ from scaur, a hill or cliff, as in Tennyson’s ‘Echo’:

‘Oh, sweet and far from hill and scaur,
Like horns from Elfland faintly blowing’-

and ‘borough’ a town, suggests no connection between the topography of the place and the name. Again it is misleading, as possible patrons might be led to suppose that the bold bluffs which form such an interesting feature of our lakefront, and from which our township derives its name, would be one of the attractions.”

The Globe, April 13, 1907

The park opened in June of that year. Lights, music, people, and ‘entertainment in abundance’ marked the event. There was also a vaudeville performance, daring bicycle riders riding in the inside of a lattice-work globe, and an exhibition on head balancing by a troupe.

The property itself consisted of a middle road from Queen Street through which led to large entrance gates. Beyond them were rides and games and a boardwalk by the water. Close to Queen Street, the property had two open spaces: Athletic Grounds for sports like lacrosse and another, which seemed to host the farmhouse.

While the first season was successful, the following two seasons proved ‘burdensome’ for the Toronto Park Company. By late 1909, a receiver was appointed, and the company’s assets were sold. The buyer was the Toronto Railway Company. The move made sense: the transit company operated the streetcar line on Queen Street that took riders to the park.

The new owners continued to entertain guests for the next decade, making improvements to property. In 1921, the company ended its thirty year franchise. While its successor, the newly formed Toronto Transit Commission, took over its transit lines, non-transit assets — including Scarboro Beach Park – were liquidated. The park’s final season was in 1925. The park’s fate was in the air, with some talk of the city buying it, if only for the waterfront lots.

In the end, the Provident Investment Company purchased the land to turn into a subdivision. Park equipment and building materials of all kinds were put up for sale. Among the attractions and property put up for sale were: the Circle Aerial Swing, Carousel, Cascade, Scenic Railway, Chutes, Joyland Fun House, Whirl of Pleasure Fun House, Rifle Range, Penny Arcades, arcade games, a Laughing Gallery, and 500 wooden park benches.

The first advertisements were released to attract prospective buyers in 1926, with the emerging vision for the area came from local builders, the Price Brothers. The family enterprise consisted of Joseph Price, President, and his sons, E. Stanley Price, Secretary-Treasurer, and Leslie Price, Vice-President. The elder Price had been erecting houses in the East End since about 1902.

The layout of the new $3,000,000 subdivision included the southern extension of Wineva Avenue, Hammersmith Avenue, and Glen Manor Drive, and new streets Avion Avenue, Bonfield Avenue, Selwood Avenue, and Hubbard Boulevard (named for Frederick Hubbard, the manager of the park and son of prominent politician William Peyton Hubbard). There was also a Scarboro Beach Boulevard, which although present in earlier fire insurance maps of park may not have been a formal road as much as it was a path to the park. The streets were laid out by 1926 and drainage was put in the following year.

The subdivision was populated with a mix of housing styles indicative of 1920s Toronto — with one special focal point: duplexes and double duplexes (ie. fourplexes). The distinct facades (dubbed ‘unusual’ and ‘attractive’ by The Globe) were made in the Spanish and Colonial Styles. The houses’ designer was Harry Stevens, a longtime figure with the Prices.

In the July 2, 1928 edition of The Globe, the Prices and the new subdivision were profiled. Among the notes of the new neighbourhood were:

“The beach is as clean and free from debris as if it were 100 miles from Toronto.

Some of the fine old tress that belonged to Scarboro’ Beach still stand in majestic beauty along the waterfront.

It will take over 100 carloads of coal to heat the buildings this winter.

Every single house has automatic heat control. This gives the tenant the heat he desires, even if he wants it at 90 degrees.

All the rooms except the kitchen and bathroom and all the halls are hardwood.

About 1,000,000,000 (one billion) nails are being used to construct the various duplexes and the apartments.”

The Globe, July 2, 1928

Other stunning figures reported to go into the development included 10,000,000 bricks, sixty-two miles of lumber, 6,600 doors, and 3,300,000 shingles.

Today, a stroll through the area and its unique duplexes may pique a curious mind on why such distinct structures exist in this area. A deeper look, of course, reveals the layers of geographic evolution which led to this point. While the road organization on a street level seems to blend in with the surrounding Beach area on a street level, a look from the sky yields distinct rooflines and division of the original O’Connor and Scarboro Beach’ Park property.

Scarboro Beach Park, 1924 and 2024
Credit: Toronto Historic Maps

Sources Consulted

“At Scarboro’ Beach Park.” The Globe, 4 June 1907, p. 14.

Barc, Agatha. “The History of the Scarboro Beach Amusement Park in Toronto.” blogTO, blogTO, 21 Sept. 2020, http://www.blogto.com/city/2011/05/nostalgia_tripping_scarboro_beach_park/.

Bateman, Chris. “The Lost Amusement Parks of Toronto.” blogTO, blogTO, 5 July 2014, http://www.blogto.com/city/2014/07/the_lost_amusement_parks_of_toronto/.

“The Beach and East Toronto Historical Societytbeths.” The Beach and East Toronto Historical Society (TBETHS), tbeths.com/sb-park.asp. Accessed 4 Nov. 2024.

“Building and Supplies.” The Toronto Daily Star, 27 Nov. 1926, p. 38.

“City General News.” The Globe, 9 Oct. 1895, p. 10.

“City Tore Up The Rails.” The Globe, 18 May 1907, p. 5.

“Company Refuses to Sell Scarboro’ Beach Park.” The Globe, 17 Apr. 1920, p. 8.

“Council Wrangles Over Money Spent in Vain Education.” The Globe, 24 Mar. 1925, p. 12.

“Executors’ Notice to Creditors.” The Globe, 2 Nov. 1895, p. 17.

“For Sale Amusement Park Devices and Equipment.” The Globe, 3 Sept. 1925, p. 12.

“For Sale Scarboro’ Beach Amusement Park Devices and Equipment.” The Globe, 5 Sept. 1925, p. 27.

“Happy Children Spend A Full Day’s Pleasure.” The Globe, 15 July 1925, p. 9.

“Kew Beach Presbyterians Issue Call to Rev. G.M. Dunn.” The Globe, 9 Oct. 1925, p. 39.

“Notice to Prospective Buyers.” The Toronto Daily Star, 16 Mar. 1926, p. 30.

“Ontario.” CEC, cec.chebucto.org/ClosPark/ScarBech.html. Accessed 4 Nov. 2024.

“Park To Disappear at Scarboro’ Beach.” The Globe, 24 Oct. 1925, p. 15.

The Price Family – Beach Builders, tbeths.com/pdf/Price-Family-May-1-20.pdf. Accessed 5 Nov. 2024.

“Receiver Appointed For Scarboro’ Beach.” The Globe, 23 Dec. 1909, p. 7.

“Sale of Toronto Park Company Property.” The Globe, 30 Apr. 1910, p. 26.

“Scarboro’ Beach Opens Its Gates.” The Globe, 17 May 1920, p. 8.

“Scarboro’ Beach Park Subdivision.” The Globe, 18 Mar. 1927, p. 19.

“Scarboro’ Beach to Reopen in May.” The Globe, 18 Mar. 1911, p. 8.

“Scarboro’ Beach.” The Globe, 2 July 1928, pp. 10–12.

“Scarboro’ Beach.” The Globe, 30 Mar. 1907, p. 13.

“Scarboro’ Park Sold.” The Globe, 30 Nov. 1910, p. 8.

“Scarboro’s Clever Help.” The Globe, 11 June 1912, p. 8.

Shackleton, Al. “Deja Views: Scarboro Beach Amusement Park Memories.” Beach Metro Community News, 3 Oct. 2024, beachmetro.com/2020/11/22/deja-views-scarboro-beach-amusement-park-memories/

“The Street Railway Muddle.” The Globe, 21 July 1921, p. 4.

Taylor, Katherine. “The Last Ghost of Scarboro Beach Park.” One Gal’s Toronto, 5 Sept. 2021, onegalstoronto.wordpress.com/2021/09/04/the-last-ghost-of-scarboro-beach-park/

“Tenders Wanted.” The Toronto Daily Star, 11 Oct. 1926, p. 31.

“This ‘Want Ad’ Offers.” The Globe, 2 Mar. 1907, p. 8.

“Topics of the Markets.” The Globe, 2 Apr. 1925, p. 6.

“The Toronto Railway Company (In Liquidation).” The Globe, 16 Feb. 1925, p. 14.

“Toronto Railway Company Sells Remaining Property.” The Globe, 6 Apr. 1925, p. 6.

“Toronto’s New Play Ground.” The Globe, 27 May 1907, p. 5.

Warner, Paul. The Prices, 6 June 2020, pricefamily.ca/.

“Why Is It Called ‘Scarboro’ Park?” The Globe, 12 Apr. 1907, p. 3.

Williams, Lorraine O’Donnell. Memories of the Beach: Reflections on a Toronto Childhood. Dundurn, 2012.

“You’ll Like These Homes and Location.” The Toronto Daily Star, 30 Sept. 1926, p. 20.

The City Pound on Eastern Avenue

Note: This article first appeared in The York Pioneer and Historical Society Journal 2022 Volume 117. It has been reproduced here with permission, with minor edits.

Cover image: Plan shewing the Survey of part of the Park East of the Town of York into 1/2 Acre Lots by Command of His Excellency Sir John Colborne, Lieutenant Governor &c By James G. Chewett Surveyor York June 21st 1830. Source: Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Office of the Surveyor General: SR394 [via Distillery Historic District]

For nearly a century, a pentagonal plot of land existed at the foot of Sumach Street on the east side of Toronto. Its odd shape was created by a bend in what is now Eastern Avenue to the north, Cherry Street at its western edge, and a smaller street framing its southern and eastern sides. This space went through multiple uses before disappearing altogether from Toronto’s street grid.

This uniquely shaped lot of about 12 acres was laid out by at least 1830. Before this, the area east of Parliament Street to the Don River was the “Park Reserve” — government land originally intended for ‘other’ uses. South Park Street, the old name for Eastern Avenue, takes its name from this historical locale. An 1830 Plan (see cover image) for the area earmarks its potential original use as “Reserved for a Market”. Few details exist about this history, but it must be noted that the smaller street along its south and east was originally named Market Street.

By the 1850s, the marketplace became “The Pound”. More specifically, it was the City Pound. The City Pound was a very important piece of civic infrastructure in mid-19th century Toronto. The area was reserved for stray animals, namely cattle, which had wandered off from their owners. The related governing law was “The Pound Law,” which outlined the powers and provisions for municipal pounds. It set out which parts of the city were subject to the law, how many pounds were required in the city, the powers of pound keepers, and more. It was amended many times in the 1850s and 1860s. For example, in June 1858, it was proposed: “it should not be lawful for any person to drive cattle to the Pound between the hours of seven o’clock in the evening and six in the morning.” This was to combat cows being taken out of stables during the night and brought to the Pound, which was much to the chagrin of ‘many respectable people’. In April 1863, it was moved that the fine for allowing pigs to roam on the streets be increased from sixty cents to one dollar. In 1876, an alderman motioned to convert the city pound to a cattle market. It was referred to the Committee on Public Markets, but nothing appears to have resulted from the proposal.

By 1880, South Park Street was renamed “Eastern Avenue”. The Eastern Avenue City Pound was relabeled the “East Pound” in the city directories. Curiously, two other entries were also present: at 75 Eastern Avenue: Lackey Jas, caretaker (City stables); and at 77 Eastern Avenue: Corporation Stables. The directories later in decade labelled the stables at 95 Eastern Avenue. An October 1886 Globe article mentioned police horses were “stabled in the city’s old building at the foot of Sumach Street.” Fire Insurance Maps from 1889 show that the plot was built on in the decade, including “city weigh scales.” Other maps from the time also show several buildings on the site at the time.

In 1888, Market Street was renamed Worts Avenue. The Gooderham and Worts Cooperage was located on the south side of the street, east of Cherry Street and north of Front Street. In 1901, George Gooderham built three semi-detached houses on the south side of Worts Avenue.

By the early 1890s, “The Pound” was made a public park. This park seemed to have several names in the records: St. Lawrence Square/Park (named for its ward), or Coatsworth Park, which is said to be the original name for the park. In June 1894, a large open-air meeting was held in the park for a Labor candidate in East Toronto. In the 1900s, the park hosted concerts from the Cadet Battalion Band, the Governor General’s Body Guard Band, and the Queen’s Own Band. Interestingly, by 1910, the city stables and city pound were moved further east on Eastern Avenue between Cypress Street and the Don River.

In March 1906, it was announced that the Canadian Northern Railway was looking at the eastern central district of Toronto as the site of their new freight shed to serve its James Bay Railway. The railway purchased a large property bounded by Beachall Street, Trinity Street, Front Street, and Eastern Avenue, which included St. Lawrence Square. The sale price of the park was $14,000. The move would have perhaps the most transformative effect on the space.

It does, however, look like St. Lawrence Square endured into the 1910s. The Toronto Playground Association opened the C.N.R. playground in the park in the summer of 1911. The city finally reported the closing and sale of Worts Avenue in 1917 to the Canadian Northern Railway (Canadian Northern merged with Canadian National Railway in 1923). The park no longer appeared in the directories by the end of the decade. In the 1920s, the Dominion Wheel and Foundries Co. occupied the site. With Worts Avenue gone, it spelled the end of the pentagonal plot that once housed the market, city pound, and corporation stables and yard.

In the 1960s, the complexion of the corner changed again, partly to accommodate the new Don Valley Parkway. Sumach Street was rerouted to curve and align with Cherry Street to the south. Eastern Avenue was rebuilt with a new alignment between Sumach and Lewis Street (located east of the river), curving northeast at the former location of St. Lawrence Square. It effectively removed the distinguishable northern corner of the former city pound. The move also closed the old Eastern Avenue Bridge over the Don River (the causeway still stands today, leading to nowhere).

In the late 1980s, as Toronto as a whole moved into a post-industrial era, the area south of Eastern Avenue and east of Cherry Street was earmarked for redevelopment. The industrial and railway lands were to be rezoned for residential use. The original name of the project was “St. Lawrence Square”, later renamed “Ataratiri”. It eventually failed. In the 21st century, the lands finally became the new Canary District development, part of the West Don Lands mixed-use community. The history and geography of the former market, pound, and park is now hidden under an eco-friendly self-storage facility.

A Quick History of Sayer (Chestnut) Street, Toronto

In the annals of Lost Toronto, Sayer Street is a very colourful chapter. It is an interesting case if one only starts from the fact that the name only existed for about thirty years and no longer lives on in any capacity. It gets even more intriguing when we consider that the current version of the street is about a third in length of its older self at its longest in history. Finally, it is most fascinating when we learn that its modern geography contains very few remnants of its historic character.

Beginnings

Sayer Street’s history ultimately begins in the the first half of the 19th century. John Beverley Robinson was the Attorney General of Upper Canada, and owner of approximately 50 relatively empty acres extending east from today’s University Avenue between Queen Street and College Street. In 1828, Robinson donated 6 acres on its south end for the Law Society Society of Upper Canada, a landmark we know today as Osgoode Hall.

Robinson continued to develop and sell off parcels of land north of Osgoode Hall in the 1840s. One of these developments included a street that straddled the lot line. Robinson named this street ‘Sayer Street’ — a variation of his mother’s — Esther — maiden name — Sayre. In 1842, Sayer Street ran from Queen Street to just north of today’s Dundas Street and had several buildings dotted on it. East of Osgoode Hall towards Yonge Street was Macaulay Town, a neighbourhood which came from the holdings of James Macaulay centred around todays Albert, James, Bay, and Elizabeth Streets. The new residential areas that grew out of the Robinson and Macaulay lands — including Sayer Street — came to be part the administrative district of the St. John’s Ward — which was commonly shortened to The Ward.

Life on Sayer Street

Although it is difficult to paint a full picture of life on Sayer Street, a few details emerge about its layout and landmarks. Structures were of modest constructions, usually one-storey and wooden. In 1853, 682 yards of sewer were laid under the street from Queen to Elm along with 14 culverts and “200 rods of eight-feet wide sidewalk” on Sayer’s east side to the College Avenue. In 1855, a petition from R.W. Abbott and others to the Standing Committee on Fire, Water, and Gas recommended a street lamp on the street between Queen and Albert. A year later, the Committee authorized the Gas Company to add three lamps. Some more street improvements were added in 1857 in the form of a bridge and culvert at Christopher Street (the purpose of these were unclear).

Sayer Street School was located on the northeast corner of Sayer and Albert Streets. The schoolmaster was a Samuel Coyne. There are not many details known about this school. In January 1855, its attendance was reported at 105. In May 1854, five churches, including the Primitive Methodist Congregation, applied to use the school as a part of their Sabbath observances.

The 1856 Directory provides names of residents of Sayer Street and their professions. Some repeat jobs include boot and shoe makers, watch makers, labourers, carpenters, grocers, bricklayers, and whitewashers. There were a number of widows listed as well. Some notable names are John Andrews, keeper at Asylum, Edward Stacey, city constable, Jeremiah Taylor, Methodist Minister, and Charles H. Pearce, minister of colored.

Listed at the head of the street was “Aston, John, Burton Ale Brewery”. There was an odd occurrence in March 1859 in which the mentioned tavern keeper John Aston was brought up with a charge of cruelty to animals in an apparently gambling game. There seemed to be “a machine” in which a cat and a dog were tied to it and the dog was made to chase the feline. Another dog was then made to “intercept” the cat. The cat fought off the dogs valiantly and scratched them badly. This did not seem to please Ashton and others, who then placed a dead rat with the cat “with the double expectation that the dog when he saw two of his enemies in the field would renew his assault”. This did not happen. The visiting police officer did not see any bets but noted that “heavy sums occasionally changed hands on the contest.” In his defense, Aston replied, in a very impertinent tone: “I have done it and intend to do it again. it is just for my amusement. You may fine me if you like, but if you do, I shall go home, get my dinner, and just do the same thing again.” The judge fined him $5 and advised he will have the police sharply watching him.

Related, a 1869 Globe article of Toronto’s saloons and taverns lists at least four registered establishments at 118, 135, 206, and 228 Sayer Street.

The Sayer Street Chapel & Toronto’s Early Black Community

In 1845, from land bought from John Beverley Robinson, some community members opened what would become the British Methodist Episcopal Church at 94 Sayer Street — a small wood frame place of worship that would house its congregation. It was a humble structure that would match the character of the street. The church would come to play a big role in the neighbourhood and in the history of the Black community in Toronto.

The gatherings of the community were well documented and start to tell a lively story of life on Sayer Street. In September 1858, two hundred and fifty coloured electors met in Aston’s tavern at the head of Sayer Street to elect a candidate. All but seven votes went to a Mr. Romain.

And there were, of course, happenings at the church, too. The Globe reported in 1852 of an assembly at the church — referred to as the Sayer street Chapel — on Monday August 2 for “their celebration”. The event was, of course, Emancipation Day and included prayers, speeches, and a procession through downtown with stops at Holy Trinity Church, City Hall, St. Lawrence Hall, and back again. Around the time of the 1854 Emancipation Day, prominent activist and newspaper editor Mary Ann Shad attended the church to form the Provincial Union, an alliance of community members with “the common purposes of self-help, racial uplift” and abolition. In the 1858 iteration of the event, the congregation and others marched with music to St. James Cathedral, the University for lunch, and then down Queen and Church Streets to the wharf. There was an excursion to the island and then a final soiree at St. Lawrence Hall (some also ended up at a tavern on Adelaide Street). In 1860, the procession went down Sayer Street to Queen to Bay to King to St. James Cathedral and St. Lawrence Hall. The afternoon continued at the University Park with speeches calling for the end of slavery in the United States before returning to the Sayer street Chapel and ending at St. Lawrence Hall for a soiree. This celebration of the abolition of slavery in the British empire and the denouncing of the continued existence in the United States falls with the renaming of the church to fall in line with support of Britain.

On April 19th, 1865, a crowd filled the Sayer Street Church to mourn the death of Abraham Lincoln. The Globe reported:

“The people assembled appeared much distreesed by the calamity which has caused their meeting, and as the various speakers alluded, in touching terms, to the untimely fate which had overtaken Mr. Lincoln in his efforts on behalf of their enslaved race, there was not a dry eye in the congregation.”
The Globe, April 20, 1865

The congregation and the Black residents of the street were not without unfortunate incidents. In 1854, during a Sabbath day worship, a “band of rowdies” disrupted the congregation. The Globe described it as “Disgraceful Conduct.” Fortunately, some of assailants were caught by Police. In December 1862, a “coloured man,” Washington Carey, was accused of disturbing the congregation. In 1851, a “coloured woman” was found dead in an unoccupied house. While no marks of violence were found on her, the death was mysterious. Her husband had died nine months before, and she was described as “not above reproach.” In 1856, a William Knowles appeared in court while charged with robbing Taswell Robinson, a Black man, of $55.

A Dangerous History of Sayer Street

In its history, Sayer Street had several and somewhat frequent dangerous and criminal episodes. Crimes have included trespassing, larceny, assault, robberies of houses and persons, and generally being a nuisance (such as one tale of disposing one’s litter outside their house). It is unclear if Sayer Street was any more perilous than any other street of the time, but there are notable events.

In an odd episode in February 1856, a Mr. Wiggins was robbed of £200 in the house of a Mary Anne Fawcett (sometimes spelled ‘Faucett’). The woman appears several times in the records, but on this first occasion, she is listed as employing a young man ‘Power’ and other ‘maids.’ Fawcett denied Wiggins was in her house. In September of that year, Fawcett was charged with the robbery. She had some cabmen aid her in the act. At this point, she was described as having a “house of ill fame” and Wiggins ended up in their after having a few drinks. From here, the story diverges of whether she knew he was there, if she had divided up the money with the cabmen, and even if Wiggins was even robbed at all. In the end, Fawcett was discharged. As an odd side story, while detained, Fawcett apparently overheard the escape plans of unrelated criminals. Fawcett was charged again in December 1859 for running a disorderly house; several men and two women who were in the house were arrested. The case was dismissed. Fawcett, immediately after being let go, advised that she had been assaulted by two of the men who were arrested. The group were brought to the bar again, and two of them were fined.

It was not the only brothel in the street’s history and the crime of ‘keeping a disorderly’ arose several times. In February 1863, a William Fraser was charged with running a disorderly house; others were found in the house at the time officers arrived. Later that year, Jane Mathers, a ‘dissolute character’ who kept a ‘den’ (which was possibly a disorderly house’ was arrested for being drunk and disorderly.

There were also references unfortunate references to death, such as a coloured woman Mary Ann Blinden found dead in an occupied house in 1851. She apparently was widowed with no home. She had no markings on her body and the verdict was “a rather undefined one”. In December 1859, a woman, Mary Sheppard, froze to death on the street. She was part of the Brooke’s Bush Gang. The woman had spent the day drinking and was ready to set off to one of the gang’s haunts on Stanley (Lombard) Street when “she got benumbed by the cold” and laid down on the street. She was found and brought to a police station where she breathed her last breath.

In 1870, Mary Lewis, of 112 1/2 Sayer Street, was found to have made “three very determined attempts to destroy herself.” She tried to throw herself in an used well. She was said to have “chronic suicidal mania” after three weeks ago trying to throw herself out a window. Later that year, a Black woman was stopped from throwing herself into the lake at Bay Street. She was married to Richard Lewis, a Black man, who “abused her so much lately.” She was under the influence of alcohol. The individual may have been the same woman — Mary Lewis — in both stories as the surname, suicide attempts, presence of alcohol, and lack of marital cohesion run through both tales.

The Sayer Street Outrage

In the early morning of December 13 1858, two women — Ellen Rogers and Mary Hunt — were assaulted and raped by a gang of twelve men in Rogers’ home on Sayer Street between Osgoode and Agnes Streets. Several men went to the door and demanded entry. When Rogers objected and told them she had no girls there, they burst down the door. Hunt stated that two men held her down while five violated her. The Globe stated that Hunt herself was “not of good character” and the house was of “bad repute”, but both those facts did not “lessen the crime.” Hunt was staying with Rogers, who was violated at the same time in another room. The women fought them off valiantly but the men searched the house before scattering; Rogers had also escaped. A passing officer entered the house following the events.

Four men — Robert Gregg, William Ross, Alexander Diog, and John Hellem — were charged with “committing an atrocious outrage” and subsequently held at the bar in Police Court and tried the Winter Assizes. Testimony was provided by Rogers, Hunt, the prisoners, and witnesses. Gregg was the lead man, indicted for the rape of Rogers. Mr. Eccles, representing the prisoners, argued that the womens’ reputation meant they could not be relied on and “how easy it was for women to seduce misguided young man and then turn upon them and charge them with one of the most repulsive crimes known to the law.” Mr Cameron, representing the crown, iterated there was sufficient evidence, but should the jury not believe it, the charge of assault was adequate. Gregg and the others as accessories were found not guilty; there was cheering in the room. There was an unsucceful attempt to prov breaking and entering and buglary. In being called as a witness, an angry and crying Ellen stated she did not see the point if “she was not worthy of belief”

Ellen Rogers and Mary Hunt were interesting characters. In May 1858, Rogers was charged with running a disorderly house on York Street. She seemingly later moved to Sayer Street were she ran another brothel. Only month after the trial above, a man reported a robbery at the house of Rogers; her, Hunt and other “women of bad repute” were arrested. The next year, Rogers and Hunt were charged with defrauding a man, farmer Obadiah Rogers, of $100. The complainant accompanied Hunt to the house and his pockets were rifled through during the night. Hunt pleaded guilty to theft and Rogers was found guilty of receiving. Rogers was sentenced to four months in prison and Hunt to 3 months and two weeks; the complainant received $65 back. In 1860, Rogers — listed as a woman of abandoned character – was charged with bigamy, after marrying John Irwin, while her first husband, David Rogers, was alive and in Kingston Penitentiary. The first marriage was in Kingston in November 1856 while the second in January 1860. It must be noted that it unclear if this is the same Ellen Rogers from the Sayer Street Outrage as Rogers is listed as having a companion named Irwin — but this is a George Irwin. Also, her husband a year prior to the outrage left her. Nonetheless, she is listed as not of the greatest character in both. An Ellen Rogers appears in 1861 Census as living on Parliament Street and is listed as 38 years, married, and Roman Catholic.

The Murder and Arson on Sayer Street & The Greenwood Trial

On the morning of April 15, 1863, the body of Catherine Walsh was found in her home at 156 Sayer Street. She was strangled to death. A novel, “The English Country Gentlemen” was found in the house with the name “William Greenwood.” An inquest was conducted at Mr. James Ramsay’s tavern and the man was brought in but denied his involvement. Another dead body – the child of Walsh – was found in a cupboard.

William Greenwood was 26 years old, a gardener, and worked for George Leslie’s Nurseries in modern day Leslieville. He was then employed as gardener of J.H. Cameron. Greenwood knew Walsh when she was servant and nurse for the Camerons. Walsh, 32 years old, came from Ireland to Canada about 10 years ago. Following the Camerons, she left to work for Mrs. Shanly and others on Sayer Street.

Greenwood knew Walsh and co-habited with her, but stated he did not kill her. He found her dead in her house. He moved her body to the bed and accidently knocked a candle under the bed, which started the fire.

Greenwood was found not guilty of killing Walsh but was culpable on the arson and received jail time of seven years. But in the midst of the murder proceedings, it was revealed that Green committed infanticide. This was the child of Agnes Marshall, who was working for Cameron and was intimate with Greenwood. Marshall seemed to have an illegitimate child and Greenwood help her hide it. He hid it in a water closet where it died and then wrapped it in one of Marshall’s aprons and threw it an apron.

He was sentenced to hang for it. In a twist, Greenwood ended his own life by hanging himself in his cell with a towel and cell bars.

Sayer Street Transformed

In 1870, Sayer Street was made into Chestnut Street. The reasons for the renaming is unclear, although other renamings have occurred to alter the public perception of a street. And it appears the renaming was somewhat controversial.

Someone writing to The Globe after the announcement complained of the change:

“Is it possible that the Corporation is not aware that Sayer street was so called by the late Chief Justice Robinson who wished to perpetuate a beloved mother’s maiden name in connexion with a property he owned, and many acres of which he presented to the city in the shape of the streets — reserving to himself and trifling and necessary privilege of naming them? It is not unseemly to wipe out from our city map the name of that mother who gave to Canada one of her most distinguished sons — of her who resided in Toronto from its earliest settlement and who has within it now upwards of fifty descendants?”
The Globe, April 12, 1870

Famed Toronto historians Henry Scadding and John Ross Robertson echoed this lament:

“But the modern Chestnut Street has nothing about it in the past or present associated with chestnuts of any kind. The name “Sayer” should have been respected.

It is unfortunate when persons, apparently without serious retrospective thought, have a momentary chance to make chances in local names. Chancery might well be invoked to undo in some instances what has been done, and to prohibit like inconsiderate proceedings in the future. Equity would surely say that a citizen’s private right should be sustained, so long as it worked no harm to the community; and that perplexity in the registration and description of property should not needless be created.”
Henry Scadding, Toronto of Old, 1878

“Chestnut Street was originally Sayer street, and there was no call for the change as it never had any association with chestnut trees.”
John Ross Robertson, Landmarks of Toronto, 1894

Today, nothing remains of the old Sayer Street. Its southern end was absorbed and removed by the new city hall and civic square and its northern end by the hospital district. The remaining street with its residences eventually gave way to parking lots, hotels, condos, office blocks, and new businesses.

At the current foot of the street, however, the new provincial courthouse stands over the former locale of the Sayer Street Chapel. In the excavations to the prepare for the building, artifacts were found related to the site and The Ward, including a former inscription stone to the church. On Google Maps, as of this writing, an entry appears for the British Methodist Episcopal Church on its former site.

Sources Consulted

“The 25,000 Loan.” The Globe, 26 Sept. 1857, p. 2.

“An Act of the Municipality of the City of Toronto.” The Globe, 7 May 1853, p. 219.

“Additional Lamps in the City.” The Globe, 1 Oct. 1856, p. 2.

Arthur, and Otto. Toronto: No Mean City. University of Toronto Press, 1986.

Backhouse, Constance B. “‘The Sayer Street Outrage’: Gang Rape and Male Law in 19th Century Toronto.” Manitoba Law Journal, vol. 20, 1991, pp. 46–68.

“Board of School Trustees.” The Globe, 22 May 1854, p. 3.

“Board of School Trustees.” The Globe, 8 Nov. 1854, p. 2.

British Methodist Episcopal Church – Infrastructure Ontario, http://www.infrastructureontario.ca/uploadedFiles/_CONTENT/News/New_Toronto_Courthouse/British%20Methodist%20Episcopal%20Church.PDF. Accessed 1 Mar. 2024.

“Canada West.” B.M.E. Church | Canada West, 1 Jan. 1970, library2.utm.utoronto.ca/otra/canadawest/content/bme-church.

“The Celebration.” The Globe, 5 Aug. 1852, p. 374.

“Charge of Bigamy.” The Globe, 7 Feb. 1860, p. 2.

“City Corporation Proceedings.” The Globe, 24 Oct. 1855, p. 1012.

“City News.” The Globe, 10 Dec. 1862, p. 2.

“City News.” The Globe, 19 Dec. 1863, p. 2.

“City News.” The Globe, 2 Jan. 1866, p. 1.

“City News.” The Globe, 24 Sept. 1870, p. 1.

City of Toronto. “The Black Community in St. John’s Ward.” City of Toronto, 24 Jan. 2018, http://www.toronto.ca/explore-enjoy/history-art-culture/black-history-month/the-black-community-in-st-johns-ward/.

“City Police Court.” The Globe, 4 Jan. 1858, p. 2.

City Police, 27 May 1865, p. 1.

“City Police.” The Globe, 11 Feb. 1860, p. 2.

“City Police.” The Globe, 12 Feb. 1859, p. 3.

“City Police.” The Globe, 13 Dec. 1859, p. 2.

“City Police.” The Globe, 14 Mar. 1859.

“City Police.” The Globe, 15 Aug. 1859, p. 2.

“City Police.” The Globe, 16 Dec. 1859, p. 2.

“City Police.” The Globe, 17 Feb. 1859, p. 2.

“City Police.” The Globe, 20 May 1858, p. 3.

“City Police.” The Globe, 21 May 1858, p. 3.

“City Police.” The Globe, 26 May 1865, p. 1.

“City Police.” The Globe, 3 Aug. 1857, p. 2.

“City Police.” The Globe, 3 Feb. 1863, p. 2.

“City Police.” The Globe, 4 Sept. 1856, p. 2.

“City Police.” The Globe, 5 Apr. 1859, p. 3.

“City Police.” The Globe, 5 Sept. 1856, p. 2.

“City Police.” The Globe, 9 Dec. 1859, p. 3.

“City Police.” The Globe, 9 Feb. 1859, p. 3.

“The Conviction of Greenwood.” The Globe, 9 Jan. 1864, p. 2.

“Determined Attempt to Committ Suicide.” The Globe, 14 May 1870, p. 1.

“Disgraceful Conduct.” The Globe, 3 Feb. 1854, p. 2.

“Emancipation Day In Toronto.” The Globe, 2 Aug. 1860, p. 2.

“Emancipation Day.” The Globe, 3 Aug. 1858, p. 2.

“The Executioner Anticipated.” The Globe, 23 Feb. 1864, p. 2.

“The Greenwood Trial.” The Globe, 16 Nov. 1853, p. 2.

“The Greenwood Trial.” The Globe, 17 Feb. 1864, p. 1.

Henry, Natasha. “Freedom Abound: Celebrating Emancipation Day in St. John’s Ward, 1845–1860.” Spacing Toronto, 31 July 2018, spacing.ca/toronto/2018/08/01/freedom-abound-celebrating-emancipation-day-in-st-johns-ward-1845-1860/.

“Horrible Outrage On A Woman.” The Globe, 15 Dec. 1858, p. 2.

“Inquest.” The Globe, 20 Sept. 1851, p. 451.

John Lorinc Special to the Star, et al. “Toronto’s Black History Unearthed in Excavation of Landmark Church.” Toronto Star, 15 Feb. 2016, http://www.thestar.com/news/insight/toronto-s-black-history-unearthed-in-excavation-of-landmark-church/article_b6a17af4-1ec5-535f-8efd-c5f3454ed118.html#:~:text=of%20landmark%20church-,The%20British%20Methodist%20Episcopal%20church%20on%20Chestnut%20St.,and%20largely%20forgotten%20%E2%80%94%20until%20now.

“Keeping a Disorderly House.” The Globe, 12 Dec. 1859, p. 2.

“The License Act.” The Globe, 8 Mar. 1869, p. 1.

Lorinc, John, et al. The Ward: The Life and Loss of Toronto’s First Immigrant Neighbourhood. Coach House Books, 2015.

“Lot 11, 1st Concession from the Bay – Osgoode Hall.” The Law Society of Ontario, lso.ca/about-lso/osgoode-hall-and-ontario-legal-heritage/exhibitions-and-virtual-museum/historical-vignettes/osgoode-hall/lot-11,-1st-concession-from-the-bay-osgoode-hall. Accessed 29 Feb. 2024.

Loucks, Don, and Leslie Valpy. Modest Hopes: Homes and Stories of Toronto’s Workers from the 1820s to the 1920s. Dundurn Press, 2021.

Martelle, Holly, et al. Ward Uncovered: The Archaeology of Everyday Life. Coach House Books, 2018.

McAree, J.V. “Toronto Murders.” The Globe and Mail, 8 Apr. 1957, p. 6.

“Meeting in St. John’s Ward.” The Globe, 16 Sept. 1858, p. 2.

“The Murder and Arson on Sayer Street.” The Globe, 10 Apr. 1863, p. 1.

“The Murder and Arson on Sayer Street.” The Globe, 18 Apr. 1863, p. 1.

“The Mysterious Case on Sayer Street.” The Globe, 17 Apr. 1863, p. 1.

Osgoode Hall, osgoode-hall.stqry.app/en/story/97858. Accessed 29 Feb. 2024.

“Police Court.” The Globe, 18 Aug. 1859.

“Police Court.” The Globe, 19 Aug. 1870, p. 1.

“Police Court.” The Globe, 21 Dec. 1858, p. 3.

“Police Court.” The Globe, 24 Sept. 1859, p. 2.

“Police Intelligence.” The Globe, 2 Sept. 1856, p. 2.

“Police Intelligence.” The Globe, 9 Feb. 1856, p. 2.

“Recorder’s Court.” The Globe, 2 Apr. 1859, p. 2.

“Recorder’s Court.” The Globe, 9 Apr. 1859, p. 2.

Rhodes, Jane. Mary Ann Shadd Cary: The Black Press and Protest in the Nineteenth Century. Indiana University Press, 2023.

“The Sayer Street Church.” The Globe, 20 Apr. 1865, p. 1.

“The Sayer Street Outrage.” The Globe, 18 Dec. 1858, p. 2.

Smith, Wendy. “The Toronto Park Lot Project.” The Toronto Park Lot Project by Wendy Smith, parklotproject.com/. Accessed 29 Feb. 2024.

“Street Names.” The Globe, 12 Apr. 1870, p. 3.

“To The Chairman and Members of the Board of School Trustees.” The Globe, 19 Jan. 1855, p. 2.

“Toronto Assizes.” The Globe, 4 May 1857, p. 2.

“Toronto Winter Assizes.” The Globe, 14 Jan. 1859, p. 2.

“Trial of Greenwood for Arson.” The Globe, 7 Jan. 1864, p. 1.

“Trial of Greenwood for Murder.” The Globe, 2 Nov. 1863, p. 1.

“Trial of Greenwood for Murder.” The Globe, 3 Nov. 1863, p. 1.

“Trial of Greenwood for Murder.” The Globe, 31 Oct. 1863, p. 1.

Wardmuseum. “Life Story of Rev. Thomas Henry Jackson.” The Ward Museum, The Ward Museum, 23 May 2017, wardmuseum.ca/picturingtheward/jackson/.

“Wm. Greenwood.” The Globe, 23 Feb. 1864, p. 1.

“A Woman Frozen to Death.” The Globe, 30 Dec. 1859, p. 2.

The Evolution of Castle Frank Hill, Toronto

Note: This is the second article in a series which aims to describe the 230-year evolution of the Castle Frank area. The first part is available here.

“The Sugar Loaf hill stands alone in the Don Valley. It is still covered with woods that join with those of Castle Frank, a quarter of a mile off in the woods, between the two hills, is a pine-tree in whose top is a deserted hawk’s nest. Every Toronto school-boy knows the nest, and, excepting that I had once shot a black squirrel on its edge, no one had ever seen a sign of life about it. There it was year after year, ragged and old, and falling to pieces. Yet, strange to tell, in all that time it never did drop to pieces, like other old nests.”
E.T. Seton, Wild Animals I Have Known

In 1898, author, naturalist, and artist Ernest Thompson Seton released his famous Wild Animals I Have Known, a compilation of short stories from his time exploring Toronto’s wilderness in the 1880s and 90s. In particular, Seton spent a lot of time in the Don Valley and Castle Frank Hill. English-born Seton grew up in nearby Cabbagetown.

E.T. Seton’s tales recounted the stories of the certain wildlife inhabiting the district, including Silverspot the Crow, Red Redruff the Patridge. He also noted other animals such as the blue jay and rabbit. Prevalent in Seton’s characterization of the fauna of the area were the old pines, hemlocks, grapes, and berries, altogether painting a pristine picture of the hill.

Decades later, another Don Valley explorer, conservationist Charles Sauriol also recounted the hill:

“The visitor who glanced down from the ramp of the viaduct, sees the top of the hill almost level with the floor of the bridge. The C.N.R. line flanks the hill on the east. North-westwards, a panorama of woodland (Old Drumsnab), becomes in summer a vista of undulating waves of billowy leafage extending towards Rosedale Ravine.”
Charles Sauril, Tales of the Don

Sauriol spent his summers between the 1920s and the 1960s in a cottage in the Don Valley. He was an advocate for the preservation of the valley.

The Castle Frank that Seton knew and explored was during a period in which the hill was largely untouched since the activities of the Simcoes and others, but would be on the cusp of major changes. The last two decades of the 1800s saw a transformation of and debate over the future of the hill and valley(s) below. As history moved into the following century, it would see an intensification in housing, three major public works projects, and an institutional additional – all that would change the complexion of the hill snd its surrounding area forever.

A New…and Newer Castle Frank

Walter McKenzie was the Clerk of the County Clerk for Toronto. He was also a former soldier. By the 1850s, he had taken up residence on Castle Frank Ridge. Along with a house, which he also called “Castle Frank,” there was an orchard and vineyard overlooking the Don River, located north of the spot where Mr. Simcoe built his cottage. It was the first permanent home on the hill since the ancient Castle Frank burned down in 1829.

In 1857, McKenzie placed an advertisement in The Globe selling “About Four Hundred Standing Pines,” located on the forested hill. McKenzie was a well-connected man in Toronto, particularly in the law profession; his son-in-law John Hoskins, also a lawyer, lived in the nearby “Dale” estate. Drumsnab, the other neighbour 19th century prominent estate, was also occupied by lawyers, first William Cayley and then Mr. Maunsell B. Jackson. McKenzie passed away in 1890.

Albert Edward Kemp was a very successful businessman who founded the Kemp Manufacturing Co., metal located at Gerrard Street East and River Street. In 1900, he entered federal politics, rising to prominence as Minister of Militia, a role that led to his knighting. In 1902, as a member of Toronto High Society, he built “New Castle Frank” on the site of McKenzie’s Castle Frank. Kemp died in 1929; his mansion stood until the 1960s.

Castle Frank Brook & Rosedale Valley Road

“Immediately under the site of Castle Frank, to the west, was a deep ravine containing a perennial stream known and marked on plans as ‘Castle Frank’ Brook, which entered the Don at one of the ‘Hog’s Backs’ referred to, where also was a small island form in the river…”
Henry Scadding, 1895

The Don River tributary known as Castle Frank Brook ran in a northwesterly direction to its heads near Dufferin and Lawrence. It is also known by other names: Severn Creek and Brewery Creek after the Severn Brewery, formerly located where the stream crossed Yonge Street. It also has gone by Davenport Creek, possibly because it passed through the Davenport estate.

Plans for a road and sewer through Castle Frank Brook ravine began in the late 1880s. The reasons for its transformation were twofold. First, following a general public health phenomenon in the city which called for the burial of polluted open waterways and creeks, it was decided to put Castle Frank Brook into a culvert. The creek’s state had deteriorated as the “northern district” had developed. Second, the idea of the road gained traction following a general movement towards “park drives” or “parkways.” The eventual Rosedale Valley Road married the two goals.

The Globe reported:

The plan for the Davenport Creek ravine drive provides that it shall leave the road near the Winchester street bridge, on the way to the Silver Creek drive, and descending in the ravine follow near the line of the present creek. After passing St. James Cemetery, the drive will go through the property of Mr. Walter Mackenzie. After crossing the Castle Frank road it passes through the property of John Hoskin, S James, Margaret James, H J Clark, J L Thompson, R K Burgess, Alfred Chapman, William Croft, George and James Murray and F E Hodgson.”
The Globe, March 5, 1887

In 1887, Toronto City Council approved the expropriation of “a sixty-six foot roadway through it [Rosedale Valley] on the local improvement principle and the laid the sewer in the new street.” St. James Cemetery agreed to give the city any lands without any cost to the city. In the 1890s, the area was graded and the necessary construction took place. Awards were made to property owners by the city.

But the road construction was not without controversy. The City expropriated parts of the estates listed above — or so it thought. A clerical error did not properly register the expropriation, making it and the opening of the street illegal. The by-law outlining the expropriation was sent to the Registry Office to be registered in 1888. However, it should have been accompanied by a plan by Unwin Sankey and Browne, showing the land to be expropriated so that the affected properties could be identified. The plan was not sent, and the expropriations were not registered. The error was not discovered until a decade later. Rosedale Valley Road was opened without officially expropriated the needed lands.

The affected owners protested about their requirement to pay their share to open the road. The idea seems to be that Rosedale Valley Road was to be opened as a ‘local improvement project’, meaning that affected residents of the area were supposed to fit the bill to build the road. With this error, the courts quashed residents of any obligations – effectively placing the City of Toronto and its general tax base on the hook. In early 1899, the city registered a new bylaw regarding Rosedale Valley Road, and the lawsuits continued regarding the “debentures” of the street. It is unclear how the matter was resolved.

In 1897, the road was described as “…one of the coolest, shadiest and most beautifully picturesque roads in or near this city.” It is a description that holds today.

In 1905, it was briefly proposed by Alderman McBride to make Rosedale Valley Road into a ‘speedway’ for horses from Park Road to Winchester Street. St. James Cemetery stated they would have never donated the land for the road if this would be the plan.

The Cemetery & The Park

St. James Cemetery opened in 1844 across the ravine opposite Castle Frank on donated land from the Scadding estate (previously the Simcoe estate). By 1897, a proposal existed to expand the cemetery’s grounds north of Rosedale Valley on Castle Frank Hill. The plan proved to be very controversial.

The proposal at heart looked to convert the land on Castle Frank Ridge into parkland and space for graves. The problem was the hill was subdivided with lots and owners by at least the start of the decade.

In 1897, Mayor Fleming and a contingent of politicians and ‘leading citizens’ toured Toronto by motorcar as they assessed potential park sites. They began at Queen Street and Logan Avenue. Reaching and crossing the Don, they scouted Sugar-Loaf Hill, a thickly wooded triangular hill that was said would make a picnicking area as part of the ‘Parks Plan.’ Next, they noted “the steep and wooded eastern side of Castle Frank, for the securing of which the Mayor is negotiating with owners of the St. James’ Cemetery, who have bought that whole district from Dr. Hoskin.” This latter point is important as it signaled a disputed future for Castle Frank Hill.

A NATURAL PARK

As one drives up the Ravine road on the right hand, as far east as the Don, all this territory, undesecrated by the end of man, with its three and a half acres of indescribably lovely side-hills and twenty-three acres acres of additional property on the summit, is to be virtually owned as a public park by the city of Toronto on certain conditions.

The three and a half acres is to be a gift to the city from Dr. Hoskin. The owners of the St. James’ Cemetery will control the flat at the top and provide for its beautification and maintenance. They ask that the city allow them to use the level land on the Castle Frank eminence as a burial ground, and that the city build a road from the drive to the top of the hill, so that a hearse can safely ascend the incline. This road will cost about $2,000 and a fence to enclose the whole cemetery park another $1,000. This is really the sole cost to the city for this magnificent park.
The Evening Star, July 17, 1897

In September 1897, the owners of lots 28 to 31 Castle Frank Avenue made a protest to the city about the cemetery extension, which they argued would destroy their property as it would be located adjacent against a cemetery.

Then, a Mrs. Mary Hebden, owning 10-13 Castle Frank Avenue of plan 686, filed a formal suit:

“…to restrain the city and the churchwardens of St. James’ from passing any by-law or resolution to permit burial on any of these lots, or to allow the churchwardens to enlarge the cemetery, or to perform any interments within the city limits, outside the limits of the present cemetery.

It also sought to prevent the city from amending any standing by-law as to burials within the city limits.”
The Evening Star, October 19, 1897

Mrs. Hedben’s suit against the city was heard several months later. Her lawyer, Mr. Hodgins, asked for an order to prevent the cemetery from adding more lands and for any agreement to exist between the cemetery and the city. This was denied as City Council could vote how it wanted. Hodgins then argued a statute that prevented cemeteries from being established within city limits but the law did not apply either.

In October 1897, the cemetery was anxious to have the by-law passed. Its trustees met with the City Board of Control to negotiate terms. City Council also met at the Castle Frank table to go over the boundaries of what would be park and what would be cemetery; property owners, led by Mr. Jackson of Drumsnab, were there to protest. By November, talks between the city and cemetery had broken off as the city found the trustees unreasonable in their terms. The cemetery in the meantime began to make arrangements with Dr. Hoskins to bury in the property they did own. Eventually the scheme was dropped entirely by the city. The matter was finally reopened in the following October with new negotiations.

In December 1898, the Globe reported the City had finally reached an agreement with St. James Cemetery to add forty-two acres of parkland in the Rosedale Ravine. At a special Board of Control meeting to discuss the plan, Mr. Jackson again argued his objections, stemming from a loss of taxes on would-be property, the need for a clause to compensate property owners, and a letter from medical men advocating that cemeteries should not be established within city limits. The agreement was referred to council.

By early 1899, it was advertised The McIntosh Granite and Marble Co. a mausoleum built on the Castle Frank section of the cemetery for a W.R. Brock, Esq. In July, the city and cemetery entered into an agreement for the city to lease some cemetery property for parkland in return for permission to bury in Castle Frank. It was opposed by a Mr. J. G. Ramsey who owned property at Castle Frank and Mackenzie Avenues and argued it would “render his property comparatively valueless.” A very animated Mr. Jackson also spoke against it. The plan was sent to council without recommendation as no consensus was reached.

Curiously, as the city moved into the twentieth century, the records are silent on what happened next regarding this contentious episode. It must be noted that by the end the decade and into the 1910s, houses began to sprang up on Castle Frank Avenue on the ridge and there are no references to the cemetery. The City of Toronto today lists the area south and east of the street as parkland.

The Bloor Viaduct

While the earliest mention of a bridge across the Don Valley joining Bloor Street and Danforth Avenue was in 1897, proposals on how to make it happen came about in the following decade. With the likely need to traverse Rosedale Valley as well, Castle Frank Hill would become an important part of the project. One idea involved two bridges running west and east from Castle Frank Crescent, connecting with Howard Street over Rosedale Valley and Winchester Street over the Don Valley, respectively. However, a prominent idea was put forward by City Engineer C.H. Rust which recommended a one mile-long bridge straight from Sherbourne Street to Broadview Avenue and another shorter viaduct extending from Parliament Street to meet it a “T”. Arguments over the impact it would have on Rosedale Valley by the Guild of Civic Art and Civic Improvement Committee as well as Rosedale resident concerns led to a “no” vote in referenda in 1910, 1911, and 1912.

Sources: The Toronto Daily Star, Nov 28, 1906; The Toronto Daily Star, June 6, 1917; The Globe, Dec 29, 1910; The Globe Dec 28, 1911; The Globe Jan 1, 1913

On January 1, 1913, the Toronto electorate voted to finally build the Bloor Viaduct. Construction began officially in 1915, although preliminary work was done in the years that preceded. The eventual design relied on two separate bridges to cross both ravines as well as the extension of Bloor Street between Sherbourne and Parliament Streets, which would be facilitated by landfill terraces. The bridges consisted of a ‘diagonal’ Rosedale section between Parliament to Castle Frank and a ‘straight’ Don section between Castle Frank and Broadview Avenue. Both sections were similar in aesthetic, made of concrete and steel, and highlighted by large arches. A lower level for a future streetcar line was added to both bridges. The bridge opened in sections with the entire structure – officially The Prince Edward Viaduct – being available on October 18, 1918.

The eventual changes to the geographic imprint of the area extended past just the additions of the new bridges and roads. In order to facilitate those additions, several losses had to take place. There were several residences razed for the Bloor Street extension, including the Castle Frank gatehouse at Parliament Street, its neighbour at 102 Howard Street, and other structures at Glen Road and Sherbourne Street. On the Castle Frank Hill, it appears that at least one or two residences on Castle Frank Road — such as number 87 — were lost where the new street was set to go in and parts of other lots gave way for the new street layout. In 1922, Castle Frank Road south of the Bloor Viaduct was renamed to Castle Frank Crescent (ironically, a name it once held before it was combined into Castle Frank Road).

Castle Frank, pre and post-Bloor Viaduct, 1913 & 1924.
Source: Goads Toronto

The Don Valley Parkway & The Destruction of Sugar Loaf Hill

The middle of the 20th century saw a string of major civic projects which would collectively change the local complexion of the Castle Frank Region. The first of these was a freeway through the adjacent Don Valley. Planning began in 1954. This would be a different kind than the parkway built through the Rosedale Valley nearly sixty years prior. In the lower valley, the project consisted of the main highway which would run on the east side of river and the southern extension of Bayview Avenue running parallel to it on the west side of the river beside the train tracks.

A product of the creative destruction of the Don Valley Parkway was the removal of Sugar Loaf Hill, the conical mound located north of Castle Frank that the Simcoes, E.T. Seton, and Charles Sauriol all noted and explored. It would be levelled to make way for the Bayview Extension. Several lamenting articles appeared in newspapers over the event. In 1958, during the construction of the highway, Globe writer Scott Young wrote:

“Soon it will be gone and fast bright cars on the Don Valley Parkway will stream north and south over one more vanished place where boys once roamed alone, every step an adventure, and even the crows had names.”
Scott Young, The Globe and Mail, May 8, 1958

Young also spoke to Charles Sauriol about the loss:

“As he says, nobody seriously contends that a hill that few people ever even look at, or use much (although a worn path twisting to Sugar Loaf’s top ends now suddenly in the wake of a bulldozer) should stand in the way of a needed roadway.

Yet it is an item of history. Going, going, gone.”

Young, like Ron Haggart writing for the Toronto Daily Star, referenced E.T. Seton and Silverspot. Haggart was writing on the eve of the opening of the Don Valley Parkway in August 1961:

It will be open in time for the afternoon rush hour. And, not seeing with the same eyes as Ernest Thompson Seton, we can drive over the 137,000 tons of asphalt which now lay in the Don Valley, skirting the Don River bright with the chemicals of the paper mill under the 600 towers of the fluorescent lighting standards, which never will house an old hawk’s nest known by every school boy.

‘I’ll tell you what the Don Valley was,” Frederick Gardiner said once, when someone on his Metropolitan council, mourned for the passing of the woods by Castle Frank, “the Don Valley was a place to murder little boys, that’s what it was”
Ron Haggart, The Toronto Daily Star, August 30, 1961

Frederick “Big Daddy” Gardiner was the Chairman for Metro Toronto Council and was a bold and controversial figure who was involved in several public works projects, including the Don Valley Parkway and the elevated downtown highway which would later bear his name.

The DVP’s other impact was a long offramp for the Bayview/Bloor exit that would wind its way across the valley and down to Castle Frank Road. The ramp would absorb part of the Drumsnab property (the old estate house is visible on the right as one drives south on the ramp) as well as part of Drumsnab Road.

Castle Frank area, 1963.
Source: City of Toronto Archives

A New Subway

The next time a major infrastructure project touched Castle Frank was in the 1960s, when an east-west, cross-town subway line was planned for Toronto. With the Bloor-Danforth corridor ultimately chosen for the project, decisions would need to be made about how it would cross the Don and Rosedale Valleys and a location for the station itself. Construction began in 1962.

As a cost-cutting method, the route was chosen to run under the lower deck of the existing viaduct. At least, it would be on the Don section. The turns on the Rosedale section were deemed too sharp for trains. Thus, a separate structure – a covered bridge – ran between Castle Frank Station and the infilled Bloor Street over Rosedale Valley. The elevated tunnel was encased to minimize noise concerns for the nearby Kensington Apartments (which were incidentally built on the site of John Hoskin’s Dale, demolished in the 1940s or 50s).

The station itself was built on the northwest corner of Bloor Street East and Castle Frank Road. At least four residences were removed to make space for the station and a bus station. The station opened on February 26, 1966 along with the rest of the line.

The Castle Frank School

Lady Kemp passed away in 1957, twenty-eight years after her husband, Sir Edward Kemp. Their palatial Castle Frank was put up for sale; executors of her estate put a sale price of $1.2 million. The City of Toronto, Metro Council, and the Toronto Transit Commission turned down opportunities – likely because of the price tag – to turn the site into a park, a parking garage, or a subway station. The Toronto Civic Historic Society pitched to Ontario Premier Frost to turn it into a residence for the Lieutenant-Governor. It was also proposed as a museum for York County.

The emerging proposal came from prolific Toronto developer Reuben Dennis in late 1958. His vision was to raze the mansion to erect a 21-storey, 972-unit luxury apartment building. Residents of Castle Frank Crescent, whose homes backed onto the property, opposed the rezoning of the single-family residential area. The affected residents included some of Canada’s most prominent citizens, such as former Prime Minister Arthur Meighen, Mr. Justice Gibson of the Ontario Court of Appeal, Lew Haymen, the managing director of the Toronto Argonauts, and Mrs. H..J. Cody, the wife of the late former president of the University of Toronto. The residents – who called the plan “ghastly, revolting, and a great pity” – organized into the South Rosedale Ratepayers. The battle continued in 1959 with the Toronto Planning Boarding rejecting the application and the Ontario Municipal Board being asked to change the zoning.

By July 1960, Castle Frank was back on the market. The new plan was for a vocational type school for a “lower middle group of secondary school-age pupils and others who do not plan to go university.” The Kemp estate accepted a $700,000 offer. The Globe and Mail described:

In the beginning, Castle Frank will operate with an experimental program designed to build up an approved curriculum for its 500 students. The new Boulton Avenue School could become the second of this type in Toronto.

Castle Frank and the junior vocational schools are based on the concept that slow learning or emotionally disturbed pupils have a special place in a modern society with a rapidly changing technology.

Castle Frank also takes into account that there are many intelligent students who do not want to go to university and need some educational medium other than the existing academic, technical or commercial high school
The Globe and Mail, November 17, 1960

Castle Frank School was opened in 1963. It operated until the 1990s when “an organized abandonment” led to a change in model. A rebrand in name also came with the move: Rosedale Heights Secondary School, later Rosedale Heights School For the Arts. The institution that stands today, housing a salvaged piece of the Kemps’ residence and a plaque. The principal at the time of the shift hoped to name the new school after Elizabeth Simcoe.

Remembering Castle Frank

Today, the Simcoes’ 1790s summer residence is honoured in name by Castle Frank Road, Castle Frank Crescent, and Castle Frank Subway Station. In 1954, the Don Valley Conservation Authority (of which Charles Sauriol was a member) erected a cairn dedicated to Castle Frank in Prince Edward Viaduct Parkette on the south side of Bloor Street. The monument dons the image of the home and reads:

“Castle Frank

The country home of Lieutenant Colonel John Graves Simcoe first Lieutenant Governor of Upper Canada 1791-1796, stood on these heights just south of this site 1794-1829. Named after Francis Gwillim Simcoe, son of Lieutenant Governor and Mrs. Simcoe, who died in the year 1812, serving under the Duke of Wellington.”

The Ontario Heritage Trust also erected one of their iconic blue plaques in honour of Elizabeth Simcoe. It stands inside the grounds of the Rosedale Heights School, which might have bore her name at one time. The plaque says:

“ELIZABETH POSTUMA SIMCOE 1766 – 1850

The wife of the first Lieutenant-Governor of Upper Canada, Elizabeth Posthuma Gwillim was born at Whitchurch, Herefordshire, England. Orphaned at birth, she lived with her uncle, Admiral Samuel Graves, and subsequently married his god-son, John Graves Simcoe. She accompanied her husband to Upper Canada where she travelled extensively. Her diaries and sketches, compiled during these years, provide a vivid description and invaluable record of the colony’s early life. In 1794, near this site, Mrs. Simcoe and her husband erected a summer house which they named “Castle Frank” in honour of their son. Returning to England in 1796, Mrs. Simcoe devoted her later years to charitable work. She is buried beside her husband at Wolford Chapel, Devon.”

Castle Frank, in its post-contact era, began as a beautiful hilltop locale, hand-picked by Toronto’s top administrator to house his residence. The layers of activity over the next two centuries continued to prove its desirability, facilitated in part by its central location and unique situation between two valleys. These commemorations mark a place and people important to the early colonial history of Toronto. The events that point in time added intriguing layers which together tell an interesting story.

Sources Consulted

“About The City.” The Globe, 3 June 1890, p. 8.

“Apartments Planned for Historic Site.” The Globe and Mail, 18 Dec. 1958, p. 5.

“Ask OMB to Amend Castle Frank Zoning.” The Globe and Mail, 30 Oct. 1959, p. 4.

Bateman, Chris. “That Time Toronto Opened the Don Valley Parkway.” blogTO, blogTO, 10 Aug. 2013, http://www.blogto.com/city/2013/08/that_time_toronto_opened_the_don_valley_parkway/.

Bateman, Chris. “The Modernist Bloor-Danforth Line at 50.” Spacing Toronto, 25 Feb. 2016, spacing.ca/toronto/2016/02/25/subway-modern-at-50/.

Berchem, F. R. The Yonge Street Story: 1791-1860: An Account from Letters, Diaries and Newspapers. Natural Heritage/Natural History, 1996.

“The Bloor Street Viaduct.” The Globe, 13 June 1913, p. 6.

“The Bloor Viaduct Conference.” The Globe, 19 Jan. 1912, p. 6.

Bonnell, Jennifer. Reclaiming the Don: An Environmental History of Toronto’s Don River Valley. University of Toronto Press, 2014.

Boylen, John Chancellor. The Story of Castle Frank, by J.C. Boylen. Illus., from Original Sketches Painted by Mrs. John Graves Simcoe.

Brace, Catherine. “Public works in the Canadian city; the provision of sewers in Toronto 1870–1913.” Urban History Review, vol. 23, no. 2, 1995, pp. 33–43, https://doi.org/10.7202/1016632ar.

Cabbagetown Uncovered: Simcoe Family Built Castle Frank … – Toronto.Com, http://www.toronto.com/news/cabbagetown-uncovered-simcoe-family-built-castle-frank-in-the-wilderness-near-the-don-river/article_77f1bdbc-722d-54d4-b638-d34a0ca2b7d4.html. Accessed 4 Jan. 2024.

“Canada.” The Globe, 13 Sept. 1871, p. 4.

“Castle Frank Apartment Plan Turned Down.” The Globe and Mail, 6 May 1959, p. 5.

Castle Frank, http://www.lostrivers.ca/points/CastleFrank.htm. Accessed 3 Jan. 2024.

Caswell, Thomas. “Notice Is Hereby Given.” The Globe, 21 Jan. 1899, p. 8.

“Cemetery Deal Off.” The Globe, 1 Nov. 1897, p. 5.

“The City Is Leading.” The Evening Star, 18 Nov. 1897, p. 1.

City of Toronto. “Bridging the Don: The Prince Edward Viaduct.” City of Toronto, 14 Apr. 2023, http://www.toronto.ca/explore-enjoy/history-art-culture/online-exhibits/web-exhibits/web-exhibits-architecture-infrastructure/bridging-the-don-the-prince-edward-viaduct/.

“City’s Proposed Plan For Crossing The Rosedale Ravine – And Another.” The Globe, 29 Dec. 1910, p. 7.

“Colleges Free of Taxes.” The Globe, 22 Oct. 1897, p. 5.

Commemorative Biographical Record of the County of York, Ontario: Containing Biographical Sketches of Prominent and Representative Citizens and Many of the Early Settled Families, Illustrated. J.H. Beers, 1907.

“Company Plans Caste Frank Veto Appeal.” The Globe and Mail, 14 May 1959, p. 5.

“Council Must Decide.” The Globe, 21 Oct. 1897, p. 5.

“Council Passes St. Lawrence Market Report.” The Evening Star, 21 July 1899, p. 8.

Don River Valley Historical Mapping Project, maps.library.utoronto.ca/dvhmp/castle-frank.html. Accessed 3 Jan. 2024.

Early Canada Historical Narratives — John Graves Simcoe, http://www.uppercanadahistory.ca/simcoe/simcoe1.html. Accessed 3 Jan. 2024.

“Evocative Images of Lost Toronto.” UrbanToronto, UrbanToronto, 19 Nov. 2023, urbantoronto.ca/forum/threads/evocative-images-of-lost-toronto.11018/page-170.

“The Expensive By-Law Plan, and Another.” The Globe, 28 Dec. 1911, p. 7.

Filey, Mike. Toronto Sketches 3: “The Way We Were.” Dundurn Press, 1994.

“Finds Building Apartments Fascinating Job.” The Globe and Mail, 27 Oct. 1959, p. 18.

“A Fine New Park.” The Evening Star, 11 Oct. 1898, p. 8.

“For A Drive in Rosedale.” The Globe, 11 Dec. 1905, p. 7.

“For Public Park.” The Globe, 10 Dec. 1898, p. 17.

“For Sale.” The Globe, 1 Jan. 1857, p. 4.

“Governments Share Costs of Castle Frank School.” Toronto Daily Star, 29 Mar. 1961, p. 39.

Haggart, Ron. “Earnest Thompson Seton And The New Parkway.” Toronto Daily Star, 30 Aug. 1961, p. 7.

Hamilton, James Cleland. Osgoode Hall–Reminiscences of the Bench and Bar. Nabu Press, 2010.

Henderson, Elmes. “BLOOR STREET, TORONTO, AND THE VILLAGE OF YORKVILLE IN 1849 .” PAPERS AND RECORDS, Ontario Historical Society, XXVI, 1930, pp. 445–456.

“Here’s A Pretty Mess.” The Globe, 2 Nov. 1898, p. 8.

“A Historic Landmark.” The Globe, 28 Mar. 1928, p. 4.

“Horses and Cemetery.” Toronto Daily Star, 3 Feb. 1905, p. 7.

“In Commitees.” The Globe, 10 Mar. 1899, p. 8.

“In Committee.” The Globe, 8 Mar. 1899, p. 4.

Information Regarding Doctor John Hoskin K. C. , L. L. D. & His/Her Family, harris-history.com/tree/2226.html. Accessed 3 Jan. 2024.

Jones, Morland. “Fight Seen Over Historic Site: Plan to Raze Castle Frank Estate For 21-Story Luxury Apartments.” The Globe and Mail, 18 Dec. 1958, pp. 1–2.

“Lady Kemp’s Will $481,549, Kin to Get Husband’s 7,718,000.” Toronto Daily Star, 1 Oct. 1957, pp. 1–2.

“Lamb on the Defensive.” The Globe, 21 Sept. 1897, p. 5.

“The Law and the Graves.” The Evening Star, 19 Oct. 1897, p. 1.

“Letter to Sir Joseph Banks (President of the Royal Society of Great Britain) Written by Lieut.-Governor Simcoe, in 1791, Prior to His Departure from England for the Purpose of Organizing the New Province of Upper Canada.” Google Books, Google, http://www.google.ca/books/edition/Letter_to_Sir_Joseph_Banks_president_of/TZUOAAAAYAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=%22parliament%2Bstreet%22%2B%22castle%2Bfrank%22&pg=PT3&printsec=frontcover. Accessed 3 Jan. 2024.

“Link to the Past Severed by Death.” The Toronto Daily Star, 28 July 1927, p. 9.

“Local News.” The Globe, 26 Apr. 1887, p. 8.

Lundell, Liz. The Estates of Old Toronto. Boston Mills Press, 1997.

MacIntosh, Robert. Earliest Toronto. General Store Pub., 2006.

“Madge Merton’s Page.” The Toronto Daily Star, 22 Sept. 1900, p. 12.

“Minutes of Proceedings of the Council of the Corporation of the City of Toronto.” Google Books, Google, books.google.ca/books?id=tr1EAQAAMAAJ&pg=RA3-PA510&dq=bloor%2Bviaduct%2Bexpropriation&hl=en&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwj-3Za9s5eDAxW3BDQIHY__Bs8Q6AF6BAgKEAI#v=onepage&q=bloor%20viaduct%20expropriation&f=false. Accessed 3 Jan. 2024.

Murnaghan, Ann Marie. “The city, the country, and Toronto’s Bloor Viaduct, 1897–1919.” Urban History Review, vol. 42, no. 1, 2013, pp. 41–50, https://doi.org/10.3138/uhr.42.01.03.

Murnaghan, Ann. “The City, the Country, and Toronto’s Bloor Viaduct, 1897–1919 – Urban History Review / Revue d’histoire Urbaine.” Érudit, Urban History Review / Revue d’histoire urbaine, 3 Feb. 2014, http://www.erudit.org/en/journals/uhr/2013-v42-n1-uhr01125/1022058ar/.

“‘Never Wanted to Do Anything Else’: Toronto Principal Marks 40+ Years at the Helm.” Toronto, CTV News, 2 May 2023, toronto.ctvnews.ca/never-wanted-to-do-anything-else-toronto-principal-marks-40-years-at-the-helm-1.6380455.

“New Homes in Toronto.” The Globe, 18 Jan. 1913, p. A1.

“The New Market.” The Globe, 13 July 1893, p. 7.

“New Plan to Bridge The River Don.” The Toronto Daily Star, 17 June 1907, p. 6.

“Now The Market.” The Globe, 14 July 1899, p. 6.

“Opposes The Park.” The Evening Star, 14 Dec. 1898, p. 1.

Osbaldeston, Mark. Unbuilt Toronto a History of the City That Might Have Been. Dundurn Press, 2008.

“The Parks Plan.” The Evening Star, 17 July 1897, p. 5.

“Parks The City Should Have.” The Toronto Star, 17 July 1897, p. 4.

“Parliament Buildings of Ontario.” The Globe, 30 May 1893, p. 4.

“Plan for the Proposed Bloor Street Viaduct.” The Globe, 1 Jan. 1913, p. 8.

“Preparation Are Made For Bloor Street Viaduct.” The Globe, 2 June 1914, p. 9.

“Ravine Bridge Scored.” The Globe, 22 Dec. 1909, p. 5.

“The Ravine Drives.” The Globe, 5 Mar. 1887, p. 16.

READ, D. B. Life and Times of Gen. John Graves Simcoe: Commander of the “Queen’s Ranger’s” during the… Revolutionary War, and First Governor of Upper Can. FORGOTTEN BOOKS, 2018.

“Real Estate Now Is Satisfactory.” The Toronto Daily Star, 19 Jan. 1901, p. 7.

“Revised Subway Plan Approved by Board.” The Globe, 29 Oct. 1960, p. 3.

Robertson, J. Ross. Landmarks of Toronto: A Collection of Historical Sketches of the Old Town of York from 1792 until 1833, and of Toronto from 1834 to 1898. Mika, 1974.

“Rosedale and the Cemetery.” The Globe, 18 Sept. 1897, p. 20.

“Rosedale and The Cemetery.” The Globe, 25 Sept. 1897, p. 6.

“Rosedale Valley Drive.” The Globe, 11 Nov. 1898, p. 4.

Sauriol, Charles, and Vivian Webb. Tales of the Don. Natural Heritage/Natural History Inc., 2016.

Sauriol, Charles. Remembering the Don: A Rare Record of Earlier Times within the Don River Valley. Consolidated Amethyst Communist Communications, 1981.

Scadding, Henry. Supplement to Rev. Dr. Scadding’s Story of Castle Frank, Toronto. 1896.

“Seeking A Route For The Viaduct.” The Globe, 29 Jan. 1912, p. 9.

Senter, James. “Vocational-Type School Planned for Castle Frank Site: Estate Accepts $700,000 Offer.” The Globe and Mail, 10 Nov. 1960, p. 5.

Seton, Ernest Thompson. Wild Animals I Have Known. Gibbs Smith, 2020.

Simcoe, Elizabeth, and Mary Quayle Innis. Mrs. Simcoe’s Diary. Dundurn, 2007.

Smith, Anne. “‘Let’s Keep What’s Left of Rosedale.’” The Globe and Mail, 24 Dec. 1958, p. 6.

“Special Committee Approves: Replacement Planned for Boulton.” The Globe and Mail, 17 Nov. 1960, p. 5.

St. John, J. Bascom. “THE WORLD OF LEARNING: PROGRAM FOR DROPOUTS.” The Globe and Mail, 14 May 1964, p. 7.

“Story of Castle Frank.” The Globe, 8 May 1895, p. 6.

“That New Hotel.” The Globe, 1 July 1899, p. 32.

“Three Proposals to Cross Ravines to North-West Section.” The Toronto Daily Star, 28 Nov. 1906, p. 8.

Toronto of Old, by Henry Scadding – Gutenberg, gutenberg.ca/ebooks/scadding-torontoofold/scadding-torontoofold-00-h-dir/scadding-torontoofold-00-h.html. Accessed 4 Jan. 2024.

“Two Contracts For Subway Are Awarded.” The Globe and Mail, 16 Jan. 1963, p. 4.

“Two Streets, But One Name.” The Globe, 26 Sept. 1922, p. 13.

“Under Rough Roof, Gay Days: Cairn to Mark Site Of Simcoe’s Castle.” The Globe and Mail, 6 Mar. 1954, p. 10.

“W.A. Murray & Co.” The Globe, 2 Jan. 1899, p. 7.

Westall, Stanley. “Metropolitan Toronto: A Castle on Bloor St.” The Globe and Mail, 28 July 1960, p. 7.

“Will Fight Rezoning Of Castle Frank Area.” The Globe and Mail, 11 Feb. 1959, p. 5.

“A Winchester Viaduct.” The Globe, 3 Feb. 1912, p. 6.

“Would Buy Land For Viaduct.” The Globe, 26 Mar. 1912, p. 9.

“Writing the Environmental History of Toronto’s Don Valley Parkway.” Jennifer Bonnell, jenniferbonnell.com/writing-the-environmental-history-of-torontos-don-valley-parkway/. Accessed 3 Jan. 2024.

YEIGH, FRANK. Ontario’s Parliament Buildings: Or a Century of Legislation, 1792-1892. FORGOTTEN BOOKS, 2018.

“York Pioneers.” The Globe, 1 Feb. 1870, p. 1.

Young, Scott. “In the Road: Sugar Loaf Soon Thing Of Memory.” The Globe and Mail, 8 May 1958, p. 27.