Community
Caroline Gaetz and Mother’s Day 1908
Michael Dawe
May 13, 2018
Caroline Gaetz and Mother’s Day
On Sunday, May 13, people across North America will be celebrating Mother’s Day. It is a time when all mothers are honoured, along with the concept of motherhood and all the bonds of nurturing, caring, sharing, etc. that are part of that universal life experience.
The first modern Mother’s Day was celebrated in May 1908 at St. Andrew’s Methodist Church in Grafton, West Virginia. Its leading proponent was Anna Jarvis, who wanted to honour her late mother and all her mother’s work on behalf of peace, family health and other related social causes.
Anna Jarvis was purportedly inspired by a line in a prayer her mother used: “I hope and pray that someone, sometime, will found a memorial mother’s day commemorating her for the matchless service she renders to humanity in every field of life. She is entitled to it.”
One person who exemplified many of the wonderful attributes associated with motherhood was one of Red Deer’s first residents, Caroline Hamilton Gaetz, who settled in 1884 with her husband and family on a farm in what is now downtown Red Deer.
Caroline Blowers Hamilton was born on April 2, 1845 near Maitland, Nova Scotia. She was very bright and exceptionally musical. At a time when most young women did not have a chance to pursue an education, she attended Acadia College in Wolfville, majoring in music.
Caroline first met Leonard Gaetz when he was on his way to Acadia College, where he was studying for the ministry, and stopped at the Hamilton farm for a drink of water. A strong connection was quickly made and Leonard was soon making frequent visits to the Hamilton home.
Leonard started his ministerial career in New Brunswick, but in 1862, he got a new ministerial position at Maitland. The relationship between Caroline and Leonard had blossomed into a full-fledged love affair. The two were married on July 14, 1865.
Leonard’s next posting was to his home town of Musquodoboit Harbour, Nine months later after their arrival in their new home, the Gaetz’s first son, Raymond was born. Twelve more children were to follow over the next eighteen years (two of whom passed away in the 1870’s).
Leonard quickly distinguished himself as an outstanding preacher and his career advanced very rapidly. Hence, the family moved from Musquodoboit Harbour to Pictou, Fredricton and then Yarmouth. In 1875, Leonard became the minister at St. James Street Church in Montreal, often referred to as the Cathedral of Methodism because of its size and importance.
Life for Leonard and Caroline, with their rapidly growing family, seemed to have reached a pinnacle. Then disaster struck. The stress and strain caused Leonard’s health to break down. Leonard was also in the early stages of developing diabetes. In 1878, the Gaetz’s moved to a church at Hamilton. They also purchased a rather poor quality farm near the city.
In 1881, Leonard had recovered enough to accept a new ministerial posting at London, Ontario. Unfortunately, he soon suffered a complete breakdown and was forced to leave the ministry.
Life for Caroline and Leonard now plunged to a nadir. They returned to the farm at Hamilton, but it was not productive enough to support the family. However, despite the challenges of taking care of ten children and an ill husband with virtually no money, Caroline’s devotion to Leonard and her children never faltered.
Then a new opportunity emerged. The Saskatchewan Land and Homestead Company, a Methodist colonization scheme, offered Leonard the job of managing the 180 sections of land that had just been purchased at Red Deer, Alberta. Leonard was also able to secure the fertile flat, in what is now downtown Red Deer, as his personal farm. In the spring of 1884, although Caroline was six months pregnant, the family moved to their new home.
Despite many challenges, it was a move they never regretted. Life became very good again. The farm prospered. In 1890, Leonard gave a half interest in the farm to the C. &.E. Railway Company for a townsite. That meant that every time a lot in the new town of Red Deer was sold, the Gaetz’s got half the proceeds. Leonard and Caroline became quite well-to-do, so much so that they were able to give many of their children each a house on 56th Street as a wedding present.
In 1895, Leonard tried one more return to the ministry, this time at Brandon, Manitoba. However, now it was Caroline’s health which was starting to fail. In 1900, they returned to Red Deer.
A small new house was built on 56 Street. That way Caroline and Leonard were in close proximity to many of their children and grandchildren. The new residence included a small library annex where Leonard could visit with family and friends when Caroline needed to rest in the main part of the house.
On December 20, 1906, Caroline sat down after an enormous pre-Christmas family supper to rest. She had a sudden heart attack and died.
Leonard did not long survive her. Suffering the loss of his life partner and the dehabiliating effects of diabetes, he passed away on June 9, 1907. Caroline and Leonard are buried next to each other in the Red Deer Cemetery.
In 1910, when the new Gaetz Memorial Methodist (later United) Church was completed on Ross Street, the Gaetz family decided to gift a magnificent pipe organ, Red Deer’s first, in memory of their mother. They felt it was a fitting tribute both to their mother and her life-long love of music. The cost was $2500, a sum equal to the cost of a good-sized farm at the time.
Community
SPARC Red Deer – Caring Adult Nominations open now!
Red Deer community let’s give a round of applause to the incredible adults shaping the future of our kids. Whether they’re a coach, neighbour, teacher, mentor, instructor, or someone special, we want to know about them!
Tell us the inspiring story of how your nominee is helping kids grow up great. We will honour the first 100 local nominees for their outstanding contributions to youth development. It’s time to highlight those who consistently go above and beyond!
To nominate, visit Events (sparcreddeer.ca)
Addictions
‘Harm Reduction’ is killing B.C.’s addicts. There’s got to be a better way
From the Frontier Centre for Public Policy
B.C. recently decriminalized the possession of small amounts of illicit drugs. The resulting explosion of addicts using drugs in public spaces, including parks and playgrounds, recently led the province’s NDP government to attempt to backtrack on this policy
Fuelled by the deadly manufactured opioid fentanyl, Canada’s national drug overdose rate stood at 19.3 people per 100,000 in 2022, a shockingly high number when compared to the European Union’s rate of just 1.8. But national statistics hide considerable geographic variation. British Columbia and Alberta together account for only a quarter of Canada’s population yet nearly half of all opioid deaths. B.C.’s 2022 death rate of 45.2/100,000 is more than double the national average, with Alberta close behind at 33.3/100,00.
In response to the drug crisis, Canada’s two western-most provinces have taken markedly divergent approaches, and in doing so have created a natural experiment with national implications.
B.C. has emphasized harm reduction, which seeks to eliminate the damaging effects of illicit drugs without actually removing them from the equation. The strategy focuses on creating access to clean drugs and includes such measures as “safe” injection sites, needle exchange programs, crack-pipe giveaways and even drug-dispensing vending machines. The approach goes so far as to distribute drugs like heroin and cocaine free of charge in the hope addicts will no longer be tempted by potentially tainted street drugs and may eventually seek help.
But safe-supply policies create many unexpected consequences. A National Post investigation found, for example, that government-supplied hydromorphone pills handed out to addicts in Vancouver are often re-sold on the street to other addicts. The sellers then use the money to purchase a street drug that provides a better high — namely, fentanyl.
Doubling down on safe supply, B.C. recently decriminalized the possession of small amounts of illicit drugs. The resulting explosion of addicts using drugs in public spaces, including parks and playgrounds, recently led the province’s NDP government to attempt to backtrack on this policy — though for now that effort has been stymied by the courts.
According to Vancouver city councillor Brian Montague, “The stats tell us that harm reduction isn’t working.” In an interview, he calls decriminalization “a disaster” and proposes a policy shift that recognizes the connection between mental illness and addiction. The province, he says, needs “massive numbers of beds in treatment facilities that deal with both addictions and long-term mental health problems (plus) access to free counselling and housing.”
In fact, Montague’s wish is coming true — one province east, in Alberta. Since the United Conservative Party was elected in 2019, Alberta has been transforming its drug addiction policy away from harm reduction and towards publicly-funded treatment and recovery efforts.
Instead of offering safe-injection sites and free drugs, Alberta is building a network of 10 therapeutic communities across the province where patients can stay for up to a year, receiving therapy and medical treatment and developing skills that will enable them to build a life outside the drug culture. All for free. The province’s first two new recovery centres opened last year in Lethbridge and Red Deer. There are currently over 29,000 addiction treatment spaces in the province.
This treatment-based strategy is in large part the work of Marshall Smith, current chief of staff to Alberta’s premier and a former addict himself, whose life story is a testament to the importance of treatment and recovery.
The sharply contrasting policies of B.C. and Alberta allow a comparison of what works and what doesn’t. A first, tentative report card on this natural experiment was produced last year in a study from Stanford University’s network on addiction policy (SNAP). Noting “a lack of policy innovation in B.C.,” where harm reduction has become the dominant policy approach, the report argues that in fact “Alberta is currently experiencing a reduction in key addiction-related harms.” But it concludes that “Canada overall, and B.C. in particular, is not yet showing the progress that the public and those impacted by drug addiction deserve.”
The report is admittedly an early analysis of these two contrasting approaches. Most of Alberta’s recovery homes are still under construction, and B.C.’s decriminalization policy is only a year old. And since the report was published, opioid death rates have inched higher in both provinces.
Still, the early returns do seem to favour Alberta’s approach. That should be regarded as good news. Society certainly has an obligation to try to help drug users. But that duty must involve more than offering addicts free drugs. Addicted people need treatment so they can kick their potentially deadly habit and go on to live healthy, meaningful lives. Dignity comes from a life of purpose and self-control, not a government-funded fix.
Susan Martinuk is a senior fellow at the Frontier Centre for Public Policy and author of the 2021 book Patients at Risk: Exposing Canada’s Health Care Crisis. A longer version of this article recently appeared at C2CJournal.ca.
-
Health2 days ago
Transgender activists are threatening the author of scathing UK report on child ‘sex changes’
-
conflict1 day ago
Col. Douglas Macgregor torches Trump over support for bill funding wars in Ukraine and Israel
-
Frontier Centre for Public Policy1 day ago
The end of Canada: The shift from democracy to totalitarian behavior in the ‘pandemic era’
-
COVID-192 days ago
Inquiry shows Canadian gov’t agencies have spent $10 million on social media ads for COVID jabs
-
International1 day ago
Biden admin expands Title IX to include ‘gender identity,’ sparking conservative backlash
-
Alberta1 day ago
Alberta’s baby name superstar steals the show again
-
Business12 hours ago
Don’t be fooled by high-speed rail
-
Alberta12 hours ago
Activity-Based Hospital Funding in Alberta: Insights from Quebec and Australia