The Maltais Farm in Québec’s Chicoutimi Region is an example of a Livestock-Focussed Farm with Grain Surplus. Thomas Maltais (b.1833/ d.1890) reported owning 300 arpents, or 102.6 ha, within the Jonquière census subdivision (CSD) in 1871.^[1] He also owned an additional 140 arpents (47.9 ha) outside the Jonquière CSD. He had two houses, eight barns, stables, or outbuildings, three sleighs or summer carriages, five wagons, five plows, one threshing machine, and one crib.^[2] Thomas and his wife Hermine (b. 1835/d. 1917) had five children in 1871: three daughters, Georgiana, Marguerite, and Philomene, who were 16, 15, and 13 years old respectively, and two sons, Jean, 11, and Louis, ten. They also had a young man, Jean Brapard, age 20, living on the farm. Given the genders and ages of the Maltais children, Jean Brapard was probably working as a farmhand to help Thomas get some of the heavier farm work done. The two brothers, Jean and Louis, farmed the land together after their father’s death in 1890, and they won the gold medal in Quebec’s 1899 Concours Provincial de Mérite Agricole–the 1899 Agricultural Merit Contest. In 1881, Georgiana was still living on the farm, along with her brothers Jean and Louis, Jean’s wife Philomene, and the couple’s child Thomas who was two months old.^[3] The year 1891 found the family diminished due to father Thomas’s death in 1890.^[4] However, the third generation was quickly expanding with seven grandchildren between the two young families.^[5] By then, Jean, Louis, and their families were listed as separate households situated next to each other, and their mother, Hermine, aged 57, was living with Louis and his family. Ten years later, in 1901, Jean and Louis, still listed as separate households situated next to each other, were farming 94 ha together. Each had his own house and outbuildings. Jean’s house had eight rooms, and he had four barns, stables, or other outbuildings. Louis’s holdings were smaller. He had a five-room house and two barns, stables, or other outbuildings.^[6]

The judges of the 1899 Concours Provincial de Mérite Agricole awarded Jean and Louis 92.0 points (out of a possible 100), winning them the gold medal. The next highest score was 91.90. The judges noted that, in general, the cultivation methods of the Maltais brothers did not exceed other farmers. They worked their fields on a five-year rotation. In the first year, a field was sown with cereal along with clover and millet. Years two and three saw the same field in hay, and in years four and five the field was used as pasture. What made the Maltais farm stand out was its orderliness, cleanliness, and the thoughtful consideration given to farm management. In particular, the judges noted the care the Maltais brothers put into preserving the legacy left to them by their parents, Thomas and Hermine. 

Figure 1d: Google Map of Jonquière.

Farm Energy Funds

Thomas Maltais’s 102.6 hectare farm was 100 percent improved (or cleared) in 1871. We don’t know about the development of his 47.9 ha parcel located outside the Jonquière CSD. It may have been improved, may have been in woodland, or may have been a combination of improved land and woodland. For contrast, the Jonquière CSD itself was only 38.8 percent improved in 1871. The Concours Provincial de Mérite judges felt that the Maltais’s land use was typical by 1899, but three decades earlier it was clearly much more advanced than other farms in Jonquière Thomas’s 102.6 ha was also over three times larger than the average farm (32.7 ha) in the Jonquière CSD. Maltais kept horses, oxen, milk cows, other horned cattle, sheep, and swine–the same farm animals reported for the Jonquiere CSD. However, he had approximately four times more animals, no matter the species, on his home farm than other farmers in the Jonquière CSD had on theirs. His focus was on ruminants with 25 bovines and 31 sheep. 

Looking again at Thomas Maltais’s 102.6 ha, he had substantially more land in pasture and hay than did the average-sized farm in the Jonquière CSD. His pasture land was 17.1 ha and his hayland was 6.8 ha, whereas the average-sized Jonquière farm had 4 ha of pasture land and only .7 ha of hayland. The livestock intensity of Thomas Maltais’s 102.6 ha was 16.8 livestock units (LU) per km2, and his farm’s grazing intensity was 1.28 ruminant units per ha of pasture. For the Jonquière CSD it was 9.3 LU/km2 and 1.04 ruminants per ha of pasture. Thomas Maltais had 21 cords of firewood on hand, whereas the average-sized farm in the Jonquière CSD had 43 cords. With two houses to heat, Maltais would have needed more wood than a farm with only one. Likely much of his 47.9 ha parcel was woodland, and this is where he came by his wood. However, with limited farm labour on hand in 1871, the family may have harvested on a neighbour’s property or crown land, or even purchased some of their firewood already cut into lengths. Figure 2b shows that other Jonquière farmers possessed a huge woodland fund (up to 4,222 ha).

Farm Energy Flows

In 1871, the Thomas Maltais farm produced 348 bu of spring wheat, 41 bu of barley, 1,011 bu of oats, 211 bu of peas, and 218 bu of potatoes. The Jonquière CSD produced the same crops, plus fall wheat, rye, beans, buckwheat, corn, turnips, flax, hemp, and tobacco.

• 

• 

The Maltais farm had over three times the amount of land in crops (78.3 ha) as he did fodder (23.9 ha). In the larger Jonquière CSD, these two land uses were roughly equal in size. Both areas reused virtually all of their fodder (Figures 4a and 4b) and at least two-thirds of their grains (72% on the Maltais farm). Maltais’s large concentration of ruminant livestock meant that he still had a feed deficit of 664,114 MJ. Figures 3a and 3b do not include peas in the feed balance, so it is likely that a tenth of his deficit was satisfied by the farm’s pea harvest. Due to the large amount of straw available from Maltais’s oat and wheat crops his litter deficit was zero. In contrast the Jonquière CSD’s feed deficit was 53,052,435 MJ and the litter deficit was 11,677,115 MJ. However, those deficits were relatively small per farm (276,314 MJ feed per farm and 60,818 MJ litter per farm). In the case of Maltais, who had abundant crops, including, for example, 1,011 bu oats–a significant cash crop–it would have been relatively easy to cover the cost of bringing in hay to cover any feed deficit. There is also the possibility that some of his additional property (47.9 ha) was in hay (and/or pasture) which could have addressed the Maltais farm’s bovine feed deficit in particular.

• 

• 

In 1871, Thomas Maltais reported having one horse over the age of three, one colt or filly, four working oxen, nine milk cows, eight swine, 13 other horned cattle, and 31 sheep. He slaughtered three cattle, 14 swine, and 16 sheep and produced 500 pounds of butter and 80 pounds of wool. This was more butter than his family would need, so there must have been gate sales of butter from the farm, and the same could be true of milk. The average farm in Jonquière CSD had, as did Thomas Maltais, one adult horse. Beyond this category, the Maltais farm surpassed the average farm in Jonquière on every count. The average-sized farm in Jonquière had .2 colts or fillies, .2 working oxen, 2.5 milk cows, 2.6 swine, 2.4 other horned cattle, 6.4 sheep; slaughtered .4 cattle, 2.5 swine, and .25 sheep; and produced 42.5 pounds of butter and 14 pounds of wool. In energetic terms, the Thomas Maltais farm’s animal products greatly exceeded the average producer in the Jonquière CSD. For example, the energy of Maltais’s butter and milk combined was 41,506 MJ. The same combination for the Jonquière CSD was 1,965,733 MJ or 10,238 MJ for the average-sized farm. This is because Thomas had nine milk cows compared to the 2.5 of the average-sized farm. Whereas, in 1871, the Thomas Maltais farm produced no hand-made flannel or linen (yet 80 pounds of wool had been produced), the average-sized farm in the Jonquière CSD produced 21 yards of home-made flannel and six yards of linen. It may be that the 80 pounds of wool produced on the Maltais farm were sold to a local textile mill. Although the Maltais farm did not have textiles on hand in 1871, this changed over time: the judges of the 1899 Concours Provincial de Mérite Agricole noted that Jean and Louis’s 20 ewes provided enough wool for homemade fabrics needed to satisfy their families, suggesting that they were producing wool flannel in 1899.

• 

• 

Conclusion

In 1871, Thomas Maltais’s farm was very prosperous compared to the average farm in the Jonquière CSD. He hired a farmhand, Jean Brapard, to assist with farm labour. His wife, Hermine, and his older children, daughters Georgiana, Marguerite, and Philomene, probably also got work done on the farm, possibly milking and churning butter. His sons Jean and Louis, who were eleven and 10 at the time would have had farm chores. Not only did Thomas Maltais have two parcels of land that were 150.5 ha in size combined, but he also had eight barns, stables, and other outbuildings, plus carriages, farm wagons, plows and other farm equipment on his land. The Jonquière CSD does not list a dairy in the industrial schedules of the 1871 census, meaning there was no large dairy operation with more than five employees in the area. There may, however, have been small dairy operations to which Maltais transported his milk, perhaps on a weekly basis. Thomas Maltais’s energy strategy was to put over 70 percent of his improved land in crops–spring wheat, barley, oats, peas, and potatoes–of which the surplus could be sold for a profit. The grain crops produced large amounts of straw which is why the Maltais farm’s litter deficit was zero. Excess litter would have been another farm production that Maltais could sell. After meeting the demands of his own livestock, Maltais’s crops would have been exported to urban centres for consumption. The wheat and potatoes were for human consumption, but the oats and litter would have helped to meet the demands of urban horses.^[7] A highly successful farmer, Thomas Maltais was not only raising crops for his family’s and local consumption, but also for profit.

---

^[1] “Thomas Maltais,” 1871 Canada Census, RG31, C-10349, Library and Archives Canada (LAC).

^[2] Whereas schedule 1 of the 1871 Canada Census lists the land a person occupies within the CSD in which he or she resides, schedule 3 lists all the land a person owns in the Dominion of Canada. Thomas Maltais reported 300 arpents (102.6 ha) on schedule 1, but 440 arpents (150.5 ha) in schedule 3. Therefore, the difference (47.9 ha) had to be outside the Jonquiere CSD, but it  was probably close by to his farm. Schedule 3 is also where houses, barns, plows, and other farm implements were reported.

^[3] “Thomas Maltais,” 1881 Canada Census, C-13208, LAC. Jean’s wife’s first name was the same as Thomas and Hermine’s daughter who was no longer listed as living on the farm.

^[4] Thomas Maltais,” Ancestry Family Tree, Ancestry.ca.

^[5] “Jean Maltais” and “Louis Maltais,” 1891 Canada Census, T-6391, LAC. Jean and Philomene had five children: Maria, eight, Lya, seven, Alice, four, Luce, two, and Francois, five months old. Louis was also married by this time to Magdeleine, and the couple had two children, Rose-Anna, five, and Elie, one.

^[6] “Jean Maltais,” and “Louis Maltais,” 1901 Canada Census, T-6518, LAC.

^[7] Clay  McShane and Joel A. Tarr, Horse in the City: Living Machines in the Nineteenth Century (Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press, 2011), 129.

The Maher farm in Ontario’s Windsor County is an example of a Timber Extraction Enterprise with Supporting Livestock and Hay. In the 1871 Census of Canada, Philip Maher (b. 1832/ d. 1907) was reported as a tenant on a 40 acre (16.2 ha) farm. However, schedule 3 of the same census indicates that Philip owned 400 acres (161.8 ha) outside the division within Windsor in which the farm he occupied as a tenant was situated. These 161.8 ha were likely located nearby to where he and his family lived, and he was probably using them for timber extraction. The enumerator put him down as a lumberman, not a farmer nor cultivator. When combined, Philip’s two parcels of land totaled 178 ha. The 16.2 ha that Philip occupied was small compared to the average-sized farm (41.8 ha) of the Windsor census subdivision (CSD) in which it was located. However, when combined with his larger 161.2 ha parcel, the resulting 178 ha unit was 4.25 times the size of the average farm in the Windsor CSD. Philip’s parents, James Maher and Mary Ann Maher (nee Quigley) were both born in Ireland.^[1] Philip, however, was born in Quebec, as were his two wives, both Quebecois, and all his children.^[2] Sometime before 1853, Philip married Marie Ann Lemaitre dit Duhaime and they had six children, George (b. 1861/ d.unknown) being the eldest son. Philip’s second wife was Mary Julie Millette, and the couple had five children.^[3] Philip emigrated to Penobscot, Maine, USA, in 1886, and naturalized in 1892.^[4] He was accompanied by Julie, but it is unclear how many of his children made the move with them. His eldest son George was 25 years old at the time, and he had been reported as a clerk five years earlier when the 1881 census had been taken.^[5]

Over the course of 20 years (and three Canada censuses, 1861, 1871, and 1881), Philip’s occupation changed, he became more heavily involved in forestry, and he and his family moved to new localities within the region. In 1861, Philip was a cultivator in Ontario’s Durham County; in 1871, a lumberman in Quebec’s Windsor County; and, in 1881, a timber merchant in Quebec’s Southward County. Philip was a very large firewood producer, reporting 21,500 cords of firewood in the 1871 census when he was located in Windsor. Some of these 21,500 cords were probably extracted from the 161.8 ha of land he reported as owning. However, given the large amount, it is also probable that much of it came from other lands and that he was stockpiling the wood. Philip’s son George may have kept the books for his father Philip’s forestry-based business. Perhaps they were selling cordwood via railway to Montreal customers? Indeed, Philip frequented Montreal’s Albion Hotel, staying there every two to three weeks in the late 1870s and early 1880s, which suggests recurring business trips.^[7] A decision in an 1878 Montreal court case showed Philip unscrupulous in an attempt to get land, probably for access to timber.^[6] It may also be that the cordwood (no matter how he came by it) was sold to Windsor Mills, a pulp mill in the area that was owned by the Canada Paper Company (Figure 1b). Philip passed at 74 years of age in Maine, USA, and was put down as a lumberman in his death record.^[8] His son George, who at some point had also moved to the United States, entered Canada in 1919 and, as reported in the 1921 Census of Canada, was working in Campbellton, New Brunswick, as the manager of a pulp company.^[9] Fifty years previous to George’s entry to Canada (in 1871), George’s father Philip had been the “head” of a three-generational family: George was 11 years old at the time, and Philip’s father James who lived with them was 72. James, who was reported to be a farmer in the census, was probably farming the 16.2 ha occupied by his son Philip, and Philip, reported to be a lumberman, was working in forestry. Thus, within three generations, the work of the family had moved from farming, to a mix of farming and forestry, to the management of a forestry-based pulp and paper company. However, our energy profile of this operation illustrates the role of a farm during one year, 1871, of a life spent in wood.

Figure 1d. Google Satellite Image of Windsor CSD and surrounding area.

Farm Energy Funds

In 1871, Philip Maher’s 16.2 ha of occupied land was one hundred percent cleared and virtually all dedicated to hay. However, because we do not know about the 161.8 ha that he owned outside the census division in which the 16.2 ha was located, we cannot ascertain how much of this second parcel was cleared. Nevertheless, we assume Philip was timbering the 161.8 ha and that when it was cleared of forest, he would sell it, perhaps to a settler recently arrived and in want of land.

Philip Maher did not have many animals, at least not on his home farm. He reported having one horse, two swine, three milk cows, and 12 sheep. The draught horses and/or oxen he would have needed in order to extract the cordwood from his 161.8 ha, plus these animals’ feed and litter, must have been reported by another person, perhaps a business partner or the owner of a company Maher was doing the work for, such as a pulp mill. Maher’s livestock intensity was 2.6 animals per km2. The absence of any pasture suggests that Philip’s farm animals loafed in a barn with internal divisions for his horse, swine, milk cows, and sheep. There may have been small paddocks adjacent to a barn for them, as well. The Windsor CSD’s livestock intensity was 4.1 animals per km2 and the grazing intensity was 0.73 ruminants per ha of pasture. Maher’s woodland, we suspect, was the 161.8 ha previously mentioned. The average-sized farm in the Windsor CSD had 26.44 ha of woodland. Maher reported a small garden that was .1 ha in size which is the same size of a garden or orchard for the average-sized farm in the Windsor CSD. Maher did not report any fruit products, so it is plausible that all of this .1 ha was vegetables.

Farm Energy Flows

Philip Maher had three crops, namely potatoes for his family and a small amount of turnips and mangel-wurtzel for his animals, probably his milchers who would benefit from an enriched diet. Conversely, crops grown in the Windsor CSD displayed a much greater variety. Farmers grew turnips (instead of mangels), potatoes, oats, barley, wheat, carrots and other root vegetables, tobacco, peas, apples and other fruits, turnips, beans, rye, buckwheat, and corn.

• 

• 

Maher had no pasture whatsoever, whereas the Windsor CSD had 709 ha of pasture, or approximately 6 ha of pasture per farm, when averaged. Maher had 16 ha in hay, which was 2.8 times greater than the average farm that had 5.7 ha in hay. The Windsor CSD had 677 ha in hay, overall. Maher’s feed deficit was 12,572 MJ, which would have been for the few animals housed on the 16.2 ha he occupied. In contrast, the feed deficit for the Windsor CSD was 15,372,774 MJ, or 129,183 MJ per farm. It may be that by keeping his number of animals low and by putting all his cleared land in hay, rather than combining it with pasture, he had a relatively low feed deficit. The mangels he grew would have supplemented the hay with roots throughout the winter. The remaining feed deficit could have been easily met by bringing in feed from elsewhere. The feed deficit of the average farm in Windsor CSD (129,183 MJ ) was ten times larger than Maher’s.

• 

• 

In 1871, the Philip Maher farm produced more slaughtered meat, except for mutton, and more butter and wool, than the average farm in the Windsor CSD. Maher reported slaughtering two cattle and two swine, and producing 300 pounds of butter and 50 pounds of wool. For the Windsor CSD, the average farmer slaughtered 1.2 cows, 4.1 sheep, and 1.3 swine per farm. The Windsor CSD also had 23,683 pounds of butter and 2,581 pounds of wool, which is 199 pounds of butter and 21.7 pounds of wool per farm. The Windsor CSD additionally produced 1,200 pounds of homemade cheese, 1,502 pounds of honey, 1,935 yards of homemade cloth or flannel, and 16,073 pounds of maple sugar. Maher’s reported 21,500 cords of firewood was 83.67 percent of the total 25,694 cords of firewood reported by the entire Windsor CSD. The average Windsor farm produced approximately 36 cords of firewood, which is more than the average household needed for cooking and warmth. Farmers could sell their surplus firewood to those in the area who needed it–professionals, such as teachers and lawyers, who may not have lived on farms. They may have also shipped their surplus wood via railway to supply Montreal with firewood, sold it to nearby pulp mills, or sold it to timber suppliers such as Philip Maher.

• 

• 

Conclusion

The Windsor CSD had poorer agricultural land than did townships located closer to the St. Lawrence River. This may be why the Windsor CSD was relatively undeveloped at the time the 1871 Census of Canada was taken. Philip Maher may have realized that because of poor soils farming in the area would never provide more than subsistence living. Montreal, an urban centre located approximately 100 km away by rail, was in need of firewood for cooking, heating, and industry and Maher may have set about to meet that need by providing firewood from his 161.8 ha of land. He may also have been supplying wood to local pulp mills. According to testimony given during a court case between the Canada Paper Company and the British American Land Company that took place May 26, 1882 stumpage was worth about $.20 cents per cord.^[10] Maher’s 21,500 cords listed on his 1871 census return would have been worth, by 1882 prices, $4,300. Moreover, if one acre (.4 ha) of forest yields approximately 20 cords of wood, then Maher’s 21,500 cords represented 1,025 acres of deforested land. Finally, Maher’s 161.8 ha would have produced 8,000 cords, 13,500 less than he reported. Therefore, Maher must have had tickets to clear other tracts of land but was stockpiling the cordwood on his 161.8 ha parcel. Maher does not report any oxen or draught horses on his 16.2 ha. Thus, he must have outsourced this element of his forestry business. By keeping the number of his farm animals low, doing away with pasture entirely, and putting all his cleared land in hay, he was able to keep his feed deficit low. Being situated near a railway not only made it relatively easy to transport firewood, but it also made it relatively easy to acquire any grains needed to satisfy his animals’ feed deficits. Whereas a family farm provides a place to put down roots and for generations to live on overtime, the business of forest extraction does not necessarily offer the same advantage. As Maher moved from farming into the timber business, first as a lumberman, and later as a timber merchant, he and his family moved to new locations as stands of forest were cut and Maher sought new forests to exploit. Eventually, he moved his family to the State of Maine, just across the border from where he had conducted his Canadian business. Given that he had been in trouble with the law in 1878 over an unscrupulous acquisition of land (see note 6), one wonders if he left Canada, not only to continue and expand in forestry, but to leave the court’s jurisdiction and, thereby, avoid legal altercations.

---

^[1] “Philip Maher,” Maine, U.S., Death Records, 1761-1907, Ancestry.com. The death certificate form asks for the name and nationality of the parents of the deceased person.

^[2] “Philip Maher,” 1881 Census of Canada, RG31, C-13199, Library and Archives Canada (LAC). Philip’s first wife Marie Anne Lemaitre dit Duhaime’s birth record confirms that she is Quebecois. See “Marie Anne Lematire Dite Duheme,” Quebec Vital and Church Records (Drouin Collection), 1621-1967, s.v. “Marie Anne Lemaitre dit Duhaime,” Ancestry.ca. Philip’s second wife Jane is listed as French in the 1871 Canada Census. See “Philip Maher,” 1871, LAC.

^[3] “Philip Maher,” Ancestry Family Trees, Ancestry.ca.

^[4] “Philip Maher,” U.S. Naturalization Record Indexes, 1791-1992,” Ancestry.ca.

^[5] “Philip Maher,” 1871, LAC. George eventually married a Quebecois woman, Eva (Olivia), but in 1886, when his father Philip left for Penobscot, she would only have been 13 years old. See “George Maher,” Sixth Census of Canada, 1921, RG 31, Folder 34, Census Place 34, Restigouche and Madawaska, page 30, Ancestry.ca. George and Eva (Olivia) had two children, Margaret born in 1902 and George Jr. born in 1908.

^[6] “Superior Court — Judgements,” Montreal, April 12, 1878,” Gazette (Montreal, Que.), May 2, 1878. In his search for land to timber, Philip Maher may have been unscrupulous. In the court case Henry Alymer vs Philip Maher, et al, he was found guilty by Judge Johnson of trying to defraud General (Henry) Alymer of Bath, England, of several lots and parts of lots in the Townships of Melbourne, Brompton, and Cleveland. Maher was in cahoots with Henry Alymer Jr. who had “sold” him the land sans any exchange of money without the knowledge of the General. Judge Johnson cancelled the nefarious deed of sale and ascribed costs to the two defendants.

^[7] “Hotel Arrivals,” Gazette, (Montreal, Que.), June 12, 1879. Philip Maher frequented The Albion Hotel in the late 1870s and early 1880s. On this particular date both father and son, Philip and George Maher (indicted by the Gazette to be from Sherbrooke), were staying at the hotel.

^[8] “Philip Maher,” Maine Death Records, Ancestry.com.

^[9] “George Maher, Jr.,” Sixth Census of Canada, 1921, Ancestry.ca. The note that George Maher Jr. entered Canada in 1919 when he was 11 years old only comes up on his particular file. We assume that because of his young age, he arrived in Canada at the same time as the rest of the family. George’s obituary places him in Millinocket, Maine, USA at the time of his death. He was Director of the Public Works Department, and had been working there for 30 years. His wife, who survived him, was Jeannette. His parents were George and Olivia Maher (nee Roy). See “George Maher,” Death and Funerals, Bangor News, (Maine), August 19, 1976.

^[10]  “Legal Intelligence,” Gazette (Montreal, Que.), May 26, 1882.

The Orser Farm in Ontario’s Northumberland County is an example of a Forest Product Farm with Supporting Livestock and Crops. John Orser (b. 1808/ d. 1877) reported owning 220.5 acres, or 89.2 hectares, on “Orser’s Island, Rice Lake,” in 1871.^[1] Orser’s Island was likely an early name for what is now White’s Island. Orser married Lucy Ann White April 1, 1836.^[2] By 1871, the couple had four children: William age 29, David age 27, Martha age 24, and Gilbert age 22. A fifth child, 11-year-old Lucy White whom they had adopted, also lived with them.^[3] Lucy was the daughter of Lucy Ann’s brother George White and George’s wife Marabah (nee Sickles).^[4] Lucy was, therefore, Lucy Ann’s niece.^[5] Her parents George and Marabah had recently relocated to Wiikwemikong on Manitoulin Island. The move was likely because particularly harsh weather of 1866 resulted in crop failures, and they chose Manitoulin in part because Maribah had band membership.^[6] However, whereas John and Lucy Ann’s children were all in their 20s by 1871, George and Marabah’s children were all young (Figure 1b).^[7] It may be that George and Marabah did not have enough help on the farm for it to be productive. After a few years at Wiikwemikong, George and Marabah relocated to Ten Mile Point, Manitoulin Island, and George timbered cedar and tamarack from the surrounding area. He supplied many of the squared railway ties for the Algoma Eastern Railway.^[8]

The focus of this profile is on John and Lucy Ann Orser, the family that remained on Orser’s (White’s) Island. Like his brother-in-law, John mixed farming and forestry. In 1871, he reported 200 census standard pine logs, 20 census standard spruce or other logs, and 200 cords of firewood. This was the largest amount of logs and firewood reported by a landowner in Alnwick, in 1871.^[9] Orser likely sold the firewood as fuel for the small steamships that plied Rice Lake (Figure 1a). It may be that he supplied cord wood to Zack (Zaccheus) White, his wife Lucy Ann’s cousin, to fuel Zack’s steamship The Firefly.^[10] Orser also reported in the 1871 census that he owned two town building lots, two houses, three barns or stables, two cars, wagons, or sleds, five ploughs or cultivators, one thrashing machine, one fanning mill, and four of his own boats (described by the census only as pleasure or common boats).

Figure 1d. Google Map of Alnwick, Northumberland County, Ontario.

Farm Energy Funds*

At 89.2 ha, John Orser’s farm was more than double the average-sized farm in Alnwick (41.7 ha). As well, 77 percent of Orser’s land was cleared, compared to 40 percent of the Alnwick Census Subdivision (CSD). Additionally, his farm had five times more land in pasture and hay (37.2 ha) than did the average farm in the Alnwick CSD (7.3 ha). The livestock consuming these resources amounted to 23.4 units per square kilometer (LU/km2), with a grazing intensity of .66 ruminant units per hectare of pasture. In contrast, the Alnwick CSD contained 16.2 LU/km2 and a grazing intensity of 1.09 ruminants per hectare of pasture. Orser’s grazing intensity was a little lower than another Eastern Ontario farm profiled here (see the Yuill farm in Lanark County). This suggests that the island’s pastures, like the Yuill farm, were less productive than pastures in other parts of the country.

Farm Energy Flows*

With his relatively large wood production, Orser’s farm was an example of agri-forestry. In contrast to Orser’s 200 cords of firewood, the Alnwick CSD had 4,846 cords, or approximately 24 cords of firewood per farm. The wood he produced almost certainly came from forests beyond his own 20 hectares on the island. The Alnwick CSD contained another 2,364 hectares of woodland on farm holdings alone, plus a good deal of forest in non-agricultural holdings. In winter, when Rice Lake was frozen and men turned their attention to work in the woodlands, it was relatively easy to transport wood over ice by sleigh pulled by oxen or draught horses.

Both Orser and the greater Alnwick CSD had feed and litter deficits. In terms of energy, Orser’s feed deficit was 567,772 MJ and his litter deficit was 148,583 MJ. For the Alnwick CSD, it was 38,442,555 MJ and 10,786,178 MJ respectively, which was a 194,154 MJ feed deficit and a 54,476 MJ litter deficit per farm. Both Orser’s farm and the Alnwick CSD had residues from fodder crops and pasture, but the deficits meant that Orser and his neighbours had to bring in feed and litter to satisfy the requirements of their livestock. The railway that terminated at Harwood, which was just south-west of Orser’s, or White’s, Island plus the steamboats that plied Rice Lake, must have transported feed and litter to the Alnwick area, as well as transported farm products from Alnwick to larger centres.

In 1871, John Orser’s farm produced 180 bu spring wheat, 150 bu fall wheat, 100 bu oats, 300 bu peas, 200 bu potatoes, and 6 bu pears, plums, and other fruit. He also had two beehives. The Alnwick CSD produced the same crops, plus farmers from the area reported barley, rye, beans, buckwheat, corn, turnips, mangel-wurtzel, carrots, and other root crops. There were 34 beehives reported in total, which was approximately one hive for every six farms.

In 1871, Orser reported having two horses over three years old, six oxen, two milchers, fourteen other horned cattle, twelve sheep, and six swine. He slaughtered four each of cattle, sheep, and swine. He had 200 pounds of butter and 50 pounds of wool. For each of these categories the Orser farm exceeded the average farm in the Alnwick CSD. Most  notable was the number of livestock Orser had compared to the average farm in the area. For example, where Orser had six oxen, the average farm had .61 of an ox, and where Orser had 14 other horned cattle, the average farm had 3.62. The energy of the 12 animals Orser slaughtered (four each of cattle, swine, and sheep) was 8,200 MJ. In contrast, the energy of slaughtered cattle, swine, and sheep for the Alnwick CDS was 1,128,800 MJ, which averaged 5,701 MJ per farm.

• 

• 

Conclusion

John Orser’s farm was large and prosperous compared to the average farm in the Alnwick CSD. His adult children–three sons, William, David, and Gilbert, plus his daughter Martha and adopted daughter Lucy–provided labour on the farm. His sons must have also assisted Orser with the forestry that he undertook in winter. The six oxen kept by Orser, which amounted to three teams of two, allowed Orser and his sons to draw logs out of the forest and transport them to the Orser farm for storage. Although the 1871 Canada Census does not distinguish the breeds of any livestock, it may be that the two horses over the age of three reported by Orser were draught horses and that, therefore, they constituted a fourth team. By having pasture, hay, and other vital feed for his livestock, such as oats for his horses, and peas for his oxen, Orser’s farm supported his wintertime work in forestry.

* For an explanation of terms in this profile, see the farm energy profiles project home page.

---

^[1] “John Orser,” 1871 Canada Census, RG31, C-9984, Library and Archives Canada (LAC), Ottawa.The enumerator noted that Orser was located on Orser Island, Rice Lake. The largest island in Rice Lake, White’s Island is approximately 99 ha. Possibly, ten hectares of White’s Island was owned by another person.

^[2] “John Orser,” Ontario, Canada, Marriages, 1785-1935, Ancestry.com.

^[3] “John Orser,” 1871, LAC.The enumerator also noted that Lucy White was an adopted child.

^[4] “Maribah Sickles,” Ancestry Family Trees, Ancestry.ca.

^[5] “George White,” 1861 Canada Census, C-1054, LAC. In 1861, George and Marabah White had four children, all girls. One-year-old Lucy was the youngest.  George’s mother and father, Martha and David, aged 66 and 77 respectively, were also living with them. Martha died about the time the census was taken, and David died in 1865.

^[6] Michelle Caesar, “White family history letter a delight to read,” Manitoulin Express, June 27, 2018, https://www.manitoulin.com/letters-white-family-history-letter-a-delight-to-read/. The 1871 Canada Census for Alnwick shows that there were many Indigenous people (designated “Indian”) enumerated as well as settlers whose origins were put down by the enumerator as, for example, Scotch, Dutch, and English. Wiikewemkong is a First Nation located on Manitoulin Island. It is unceded territory. The enumerator also noted in schedule 3 of the 1871 census that one farm located in the same division as the John Orser farm had suffered from crop failure.

^[7] “White,” 1861, LAC; and “George White,” 1881 Canada Census, C-13281, LAC. George White and his family are missing from the 1871 Canada Census, possibly because they were located on Wiikwemikong at the time. However, by combining the results of the 1861 and 1881 censuses, it is apparent that George and Marabah had several children by 1866, the eldest, Martha, was aged 13, and the youngest, William Norman was aged one. Marabah’s widowed father William Sickles was living with them in 1881 at the age of 90.

^[8] Ibid.

^[9] “John Orser,” 1871, LAC.

^[10] Mary Jane Muskratte Simpson, “The Story of a Lake,” A History of the Rice Lake Indians,www.totemconsulting.ca, https://www.ricelakereserves.com/page29.html. An investigation using databases linked to Ancestry.ca shows that Lucy Ann and her brother George were descended from David G. White (b. 1784/ d. 1865) and that Zaccheus was descended from David’s younger brother Joseph C. White (b. 1786/ d. 1850). Both David and Joseph were born in the United States but had immigrated to Alnwick in the early nineteenth century. Ancestry.ca databases also indicate that Zack White was a “mariner.” See “Zacheus White,” Ontario, Canada, Deaths and Deaths Overseas, 1869-1948, Ancestry.ca. Ancestry.ca databases further show that Zack White’s father, also named Zaccheus, was involved in forestry. He is put down on his son Zack’s birth registration as a “lumber merchant.” See “Zacchens Ostrum,” Ontario, Canada Births, 1832-1915. s.v. “Zaccheus White,” Ancestry.ca. Zack’s mother’s maiden name was Ostrum. There has obviously been trouble transcribing this database so that some items are misspelled and others appear on the wrong line.

The Yuill farms in Lanark County are an example of a livestock intensive energy strategy in the Upper Ottawa Valley agroecosystem.  Joseph Yuill (b. 1838 / d. 1905) is listed in the Dictionary of Canadian Biography as a farmer, breeder, butter producer and educator.^[1]  Joseph Yuill’s father, Alexander, emigrated with his parents and siblings from Glasgow to Ramsay Township in Lanark County in 1821, as part of a government-supported scheme to relocate Scots to aid industrial relief at home.^[2]  Although the quality of land in Lanark County was often poor and settlers were continually petitioning for better land, neighbour William Dowrie found his land “excellent” and found his situation much improved over life in Scotland.^[3] 

The Yuills seem to have prospered, however, and were well-represented on the maps of Ramsay township in 1863 and 1880 (Figures 1a and 1b).  Alexander Yuill settled on 200 acres on lot 9, concession 6 (7th Line Road), approximately 3 miles NW of Carlteon Place, and by the time of the 1871 census, had given 100 acres to son Joseph and his wife Margaret.^[4] The farms were located along the southern edge of a wetland called Wolf Grove on both contemporary maps, and known today as the Wolf Grove Wetland Complex, owned in part by Nature Conservancy of Canada.^[5] The farms were bounded and likely intersected in places by Ramsay Creek (now Wolf Grove Creek), which flowed down to the town of Almonte in the Lowlands subwatershed of Ontario’s Mississippi River.

Figure 1c. Google Map of Ramsay CSD, Lanark, Ontario.

As early as 1868, Joseph and Margaret started breeding Ayrshires; as he reported to the Ontario Agricultural Commission in 1880^[6]:

“If the Ayrshire does not bring as much for beef, it costs less in proportion to feed them than the Durham.  If going into cattle feeding for market, I would prefer the Galloways or Polled Angus. They are thriftier animals for our bare pastures in summer, and hardier in winter. … against the native stock, the Ayrshires would be better for milk by one-third.  The skim milk is very good for raising calves.”

The Yuills entered their Ayshires at local and provincial Agricultural Fairs, eventually winning prizes at the World Fair in Chicago in 1893. Joseph wrote articles for agricultural journals and became President of the Dominion Ayshire Breeders Association from 1891 to 1893.^[7]   By the 1890s, Joseph and Margaret expanded into education with a “traveling dairy” that included demonstrations on butter churning and talks on farming, [8] and by the late 1890s Ottawa businesses were advertising Yuill “Choice Table Butter” (Figure 1c).

At the time of the 1871 census, though, Joseph and Margaret were in the early stages of building their herd, and they still shared farming responsibilities with father Alex. All farm products were reported against Alex’s 100 acres, although they would have shared the farms’ production. This profile considers both farms together.

Farm Energy Funds*

In 1871, Alex Yuill and son Joseph farmed 200 acres or 81 hectares, whereas the average farm in Ramsay Township was 51.5 ha.  Of this total, 70 percent (57 ha) had been cleared. Of the cleared land, 18.6 ha were given over to pasture, and they reported 0.2 ha of gardens.

Jointly they reported 2 horses, 6 milk cows, 15 other horned cattle, 32 sheep and 5 swine, resulting in a livestock density ratio of 22.3 (livestock units per km2), slightly higher than the livestock density ratio of 16.1 for the district. With an emphasis on building their Ayrshire herd, the Yuills had both a larger quantity and higher quality of cattle than the average Ramsay farm.  The average number of ruminants grazing the pasture was the same for the Yuills as the district as a whole, at .82 livestock units per hectare (LUr/ha); however, if the milchers were purebred Ayrshires, we should also assume that they were receiving an enriched feed supply and producing significantly higher levels of milk than the standard yields estimated in AMPA. As Yuill stated in 1880 (see above), he expected a 33 percent higher milk output from their Ayrshires.

Farm Energy Flows*

The Yuills reported 53 acres (21.5 ha) of hay over the two farms, producing 50 tons of hay or .9 tons per acre. The district average of 15 acres (6.1 ha) of hay per farm, with a similar production of .8 tons of hay per acre, was significantly less. This hay yield is among the lower rates in Canada, but what Alex and Joseph lacked in quality they made up in quantities of hay and lower grazing intensity on their pastures. These land use strategies partly explain why they did not require residues for feed as the average farmer in the CSD would have (Figure 3b).

• 

• 

Although the majority of their lands were dedicated to hay and pasture for their cattle and sheep, the main farm also grew a relatively diverse output of crops: oats, wheat, and peas as well as smaller vegetable, potato, and barley crops.  Fifty-eight percent of the grains and crop biomass was reused for feed and litter, although that would be higher if one considers peas as a livestock feed, as a certain proportion almost certainly was.  Ramsay township as a whole had very similar energy flows in both crop production and feed and litter demands. The main difference, as the charts show above, was that other Ramsay farmers likely used more crop residues as fodder to meet those feed demands.

• 

• 

The Yuills produced approximately 46,000 MJ of energy from meat (cattle, sheep, and swine), and dairy products (butter and cheese) which was higher than the Ramsay average of 32,000 MJ per farm but comparable given their relative acreage.  More than half of this energy was milk.  Their flows were consistent with the district as a whole, although the Yuills generated more energy from cattle as they were starting to develop their business in Ayrshire breeding.

• 

• 

Given the wool industry of Lanark county, the Yuills reported a typical amount of wool production (200lbs) but no home-made cloth and flannel. Margaret Yuill apparently often helped with shearing and processing wool, but as her obituary explained (Figure 6), the presence of textile mills such as The Rosamond Woolen Company in Almonte created nearby markets for their wool.^[9] As farmers and cattle breeders, the Yuills did not apparently use their woodlot beyond personal use in the two households, reporting 20 cords of firewood for both households, well below the household average of 34 cords per farm in Ramsay. Ramsay farmers’ average firewood outputs were higher than national averages because of the commercial opportunities the steamship waterways of Eastern Ontario provided to petit producers.

Conclusions

The Yuill farms were consistent in energy strategy with Ramsay township as a whole in 1871, showing the initial inputs required to develop a prize Ayrshire herd and reputation for butter production. 

Unfortunately, Joseph Yuill’s sons showed less interest in maintaining their parents’ prize Ayrshire herd: after his father’s death in 1905, son Alexander sold the herd^[10] but Andrew continued to farm some of the property.^[11] Margaret would remain active in the community until her death in 1936.

“Meadowside” was later purchased by Alan and Betty Thompson, who by the 1970s were providing farm vacations on their property to supplement the farm income.^[12]  Today’s Google Maps shows a patchwork of fields and woodlots, and a nearby nursery business at Ramsay Creek, which once ran through the Yuill farms.

* For an explanation of terms in this profile, see the farm energy profiles project home page.

---

[1] S. Lynn Campbell and Susan L. Bennett, “YUILL, JOSEPH,” in Dictionary of Canadian Biography, vol. 13, University of Toronto/Université Laval, 2003–, accessed July 19, 2021, http://www.biographi.ca/en/bio/yuill_joseph_13E.html

[2] Reid, Richard M. Upper Ottawa Valley to 1855. Montréal: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 1990. p. xxv.

[3] Reid, p. 22

[4] “Joseph Yuil”, 1871 Census of Canada, C-10018, Gatineau, QC: Library and Archives Canada.

[5] “Webber Woods of Wolf Grove Trails,” Ontario Nature Trails, Jun 12, 2019 https://ontarionaturetrails.com/trail/webber-woods-of-wolf-grove-trails/

[6] Ontario, Agricultural Commission, Report of the Commissioners, 1880 (C. B. Robinson, 1881), p. 264. https://archive.org/details/reportcommissio02woodgoog/page/n349/mode/2up

[7] Linda Seccaspina, “Notes on Alexander and Joseph Yuill.” https://lindaseccaspina.wordpress.com/2021/05/06/notes-on-alexander-and-joseph-yuill/

[8] Campbell & Bennett, Dictionary of Canadian Biography

[9] Richard Reid, “The Rosamond Woolen Company of Almonte: Industrial development in a rural setting,” Ontario History LXXV (September 1983): 266-89.

[10] Linda Seccaspina, “Farm Real Estate etc 1903-1908”, https://lindaseccaspina.wordpress.com/tag/real-estate-2/

[11] “Andrew Yuill”, 1921 Census of Canada. Source: Ancestry.com

[12] Linda Seccaspina, “Alan and Betty Thompson Meadowside Farms 7th Line Ramsay.” https://lindaseccaspina.wordpress.com/2018/01/28/alan-and-betty-thompson-meadowside-farms/