HERITAGE DESIGNATION REPORT 89 WALKER ROAD WEST TOWN OF CALEDON, ONTARIO SU MURDOCH HISTORICAL CONSULTING

Transcription

1 HERITAGE DESIGNATION REPORT 89 WALKER ROAD WEST TOWN OF CALEDON, ONTARIO PREPARED FOR THE TOWN OF CALEDON SU MURDOCH HISTORICAL CONSULTING 47 RODNEY STREET, BARRIE, ON L4M 4B AND VICTOR R. SNOW HERITAGE RESTORATION & CONSULTING SERVICES FEBRUARY 2014

2

3 SUMMARY Based on the documentary and physical research, it is concluded that the property at 89 Walker Road West is a suitable candidate for consideration under s.29 of the Ontario Heritage Act. The heritage attributes of this property are the estimated 1863 Georgian style, stone house (excluding the north addition and south verandah); the stone outbuilding at the north of the stone dwelling; the stone foundation wall ruin at the north of the dwelling; two stone retaining walls; the remnant row of maple trees marking the 1870s laneway to Mountainview Road; the tree lined laneway from Walker Road West; and the viewshed from the stone dwelling to Walker Road West. This stone dwelling and other heritage attributes are existing and archaeological evidence of the evolution of this property as a 19 th century Ontario farmstead. The final evaluation of this property and the decision on whether to proceed with protection under the Ontario Heritage Act rest with the Town of Caledon municipal council. SU MURDOCH HISTORICAL CONSULTING FEBRUARY

4 SU MURDOCH HISTORICAL CONSULTING FEBRUARY

5 CONTENTS SUMMARY 1.0 REPORT OBJECTIVE AND METHODOLOGY 1.1 OBJECTIVE 1.2 METHODOLOGY 1.3 ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES 2.0 SUBJECT PROPERTY 3.0 EVALUATION CRITERIA 4.0 HISTORICAL OR ASSOCIATIVE VALUE 4.1 TOWN OF CALEDON HISTORY 4.2 PROPERTY CHRONOLOGY ELIZABETH TARBOX (OWNER ) WILLIAM HIGGINSON (OWNER ; ); JOSEPH MILBURN (OWNER ); THOMAS MILBURN (OWNER ) ALEXANDER MCKEE (OWNER ) JAMES AND ANN (MCKEE) WALKER (OWNER ) WILLIAM JOHN WALKER (OWNER ) HENRY SWINTON (OWNER ) WILLIAM JAMES LINE (OWNER ) DUNCAN MCCALLUM (OWNER ) WILLIAM JOHN TAYLOR (OWNER ); EDITH HUFFMAN (OWNER 1929) LEONARD LESLIE, WILLIAM LINE, GEORGE AND SARAH PEGG, AND ALLISON VIPOND (OWNERS ) BRUCE MACNAMARA (OWNER ) ANTOON AND JOANN BOERSEN (OWNER ) CASTLES OF CALEDON CORPORATION (CURRENT OWNER) 5.0 DESIGN OR PHYSICAL VALUE 5.1 DATE OF CONSTRUCTION 5.2 STYLE, FORM, AND MASSING 5.3 ROOF 5.4 FOUNDATION 5.5 MASONRY 5.6 WINDOW OPENINGS 5.7 ENTRANCEWAYS SU MURDOCH HISTORICAL CONSULTING FEBRUARY

6 5.8 INTERIOR 5.9 BARN AND FARM USE OUTBUILDINGS 5.10 STONE OUTBUILDING 6.0 CULTURAL HERITAGE LANDSCAPE FEATURES AND CONTEXTUAL VALUE 6.1 STONE RUIN 6.2 RETAINING WALLS 6.3 LANEWAY 6.4 LANDSCAPE ELEMENTS AND CONTEXT 7.0 ANALYSIS 8.0 RECOMMENDATION SOURCES ENDNOTES SU MURDOCH HISTORICAL CONSULTING FEBRUARY

7 HERITAGE DESIGNATION REPORT 89 WALKER ROAD WEST PART LOT 4, CONCESSION 6, EAST HURONTARIO STREET, CALEDON TOWNSHIP, PART 1 PLAN 43R15202, COUNTY OF PEEL, NOW TOWN OF CALEDON, REGION OF PEEL 1.0 REPORT OBJECTIVE AND METHODOLOGY 1.1 OBJECTIVE This Heritage Designation Report is intended to provide the Town of Caledon with the research necessary to do a final evaluation of the property known municipally as 89 Walker Road West (formerly Walker s Lane) for cultural heritage purposes and to consider its potential for protection under section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act, R.S , c.o18, as amended 2009 ( Act ) (municipal designation of individual property). This property is listed on the Town of Caledon s Built Heritage Resources Inventory as a property of high significance. 1.2 METHODOLOGY This Report was compiled by Su Murdoch Historical Consulting in collaboration with Victor R. Snow Heritage Restoration & Consulting Services. The findings and recommendations are based on information provided by the Town of Caledon, documentary research, and a property title search at the Peel Land Registry Office. A site visit of the property and all buildings was undertaken on August 27, 2013, by both consultants; and in October, the interior of the stone dwelling was examined by Victor Snow. The evaluation of the barn and other outbuildings was undertaken by Victor Snow. 1.3 ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES This report does not undertake the identification and evaluation of any archaeological resources or areas of archaeological potential. As an observation, the stone foundation wall ruin may be of archaeological significance to the understanding of the evolution of building construction on this property. A Stage 1 & 2 Archaeological Assessment of the property was separately compiled. This identified three significant concentrations of Euro-Canadian artifacts in the southeast corner of the property, likely associated with 19 th century occupation of the existing dwelling or an earlier unmapped dwelling. Further assessment of these artifact scatters will be required prior to any redevelopment of the lands. SU MURDOCH HISTORICAL CONSULTING FEBRUARY

8 June 20, 1987, Survey drawn by Young & Young Surveying Inc. 2.0 SUBJECT PROPERTY The property at 89 Walker Road West is part of the west half, Lot 4, Concession 6, EHS, Caledon Township, now Part 1, Plan 43R15202, Town of Caledon. It is a 49 acre parcel of land that contains an estimated 1863 Georgian style, stone dwelling, a stone outbuilding, a possibly early 20 th century gambrel roof barn, stone wall ruins, stone retaining walls, and three modern barns and sheds. There are elements of its use as a farm, including modified rail fencing, an orchard, retaining walls, fenced yards, and laneways (one existing between the dwelling and Walker Road West; the other a former laneway to Mountainview Road marked by a remnant row of maple trees). Recent landscaping has introduced specimen trees and a pond. The property is on the western edge of the village of Caledon East and bordered by areas of recent residential development. The buildings are now accessed by a long, private, tree lined laneway travelling north from Walker Road West before curving west across the front of the dwelling. The dwelling faces south toward Walker Road West. SU MURDOCH HISTORICAL CONSULTING FEBRUARY

9 3.0 EVALUATION CRITERIA Ontario Heritage Act Regulation 9/06 sets the minimum standard for criteria to be used by municipalities when evaluating the cultural heritage value or interest of a property being considered for designation under s.29 of the Act. One or more of the criterion in the categories of Design or Physical Value, Historical or Associative Value, and Contextual Value must be met for the property to be designated. For purposes of this Heritage Report, the evaluation categories of Regulation 9/06 are used as a framework. Caledon Town Council has the authority to make the final decision on whether to designate or otherwise conserve this property. 4.0 HISTORICAL OR ASSOCIATIVE VALUE 4.1 TOWN OF CALEDON HISTORY The Town of Caledon was established on January 1, 1974, as an amalgamation of Caledon, Albion, and the northern half of Chinguacousy townships. It is the northernmost municipality in the Region of Peel and is largely rural with urban village nodes. The townships of Caledon, Albion, and Chinguacousy were surveyed in and opened for settlement the following year. In the northwest part of Peel County, now the Region of Peel, Caledon Township was divided into west and east sectors by Hurontario Street (Highway 10). The property at 89 Walker Road West is on the east side of Hurontario Street and within the south part of the former township. It is within the Oak Ridges Moraine, a line of glacial silt and gravel deposits that form a hilly terrain with pine forests. According to Walton s Home District Directory, by 1837 there were 750 landowners in Caledon Township living east of Hurontario Street, and 738 living west of Hurontario. By 1842, the population of the township was 1,920, and by 1846, there were three gristmills and one sawmill. 1 The nearest historic community to the subject property is Caledon East, formerly known as Paisley. It was established as a post office in and by 1857 had a population of about seventy five with daily stagecoach service. 3 The development of the village was given a boost by The Hamilton & North Western Railway, completed through Caledon Township by The line entered Caledon East from the west, on a diagonal course across the lot south of the subject property. The last train ran along this line in July Following the removal of the tracks, this right of way was purchased by the Town of Caledon in 1989 and evolved into the present day Caledon Trailway. Caledon East continues as a thriving village. 4.2 PROPERTY CHRONOLOGY ELIZABETH TARBOX (OWNER ) SU MURDOCH HISTORICAL CONSULTING FEBRUARY

10 The Upper Canada Land Records Index lists all transactions between the Crown and an individual prior to the Crown Patent being issued for a lot. The Index lists the west half of Lot 4, Concession 6, EHS, Caledon Township, as being issued to Elizabeth Tarbox, a resident of Markham Township. This was through an Order in Council dated October 15, Elizabeth was the spouse of Elisha Tarbox. The Abstract of Title for the west half of Lot 4 indicates that the two hundred acres of this lot were patented from the Crown by Elizabeth Tarbon [Tarbox]. The Patent was registered on December 18, WILLIAM HIGGINSON (OWNER ; ); JOSEPH MILBURN (OWNER ); THOMAS BURRELL AND JAMES WARBUCK (1840); THOMAS MILBURN (OWNER ) On December 24, 1821, Elisha Torbay [Tarbox] and his wife Eliza sold the west hundred acres of Lot 4 to William Higginson for This value suggests vacant land. All were farmers in Caledon Township at that date. The Tarbox family continued to be associated with the east hundred acres of the lot, minus building lots severed within the boundary of the village of Caledon East. On March 5, 1829, William Higginson and his spouse Mary sold the west hundred acres to innkeeper Joseph Milburn for 50. All were residents of Markham Township. The 1837 Home District Directory lists William [Higeson] with Lot 4, Concession 6, EHS, Caledon (without differentiating between the west and east halves). Joseph Milburn, still of Markham Township but identified as a farmer, sold the west half for the same price back to Higginson on January 22, Higginson was living in Caledon Township at that date. On August 11, 1840, William and Mary Higginson sold the property to Toronto Township farmer Thomas Burrell, and James Warbuck of Albion Township. In spite of this sale, on November 16, 1841, it was William and Mary Higginson of Caledon who sold it to Toronto merchant Thomas Milburn for ALEXANDER MCKEE (OWNER ) In May 1844, Thomas Burrell of Toronto Township, a farmer; James Warbuck of Albion Township, a merchant; William and Mary Higginson of Caledon Township; and Alexander McKee of Chinguacousy Township, a farmer; came to an agreement whereby the Higginsons settled with Burrell and Warbuck and the west hundred acres of Lot 4 was bought by McKee. 5 The disposition of any claim on ownership by Thomas Milburn is unknown. SU MURDOCH HISTORICAL CONSULTING FEBRUARY

11 The Caledon Township entry in Brown s Directory for lists four persons on Lot 4, Concession 6, without differentiating between EHS and WHS or the east and west halves of the lot. These were Elijah Tarbon [Tarbox], John McLain 6, Henry McLeod, and William Stone. James Walker and Walker's Lane An agreement dated October 9, 1851 (registered April 2, 1864) has Elisha and Elizabeth Tarbox granting James Walker of Caledon the full rights, title, and privilege of using for passing through a certain road which is to be one and a half rods wide. The price was five shillings plus Walker s making of about forty or fifty rods of a fence in the east half of Lot 4. The road, which seemingly is to be built by Walker, cuts southwest across the east half of Lot 4 to the west half, north of the south boundary of the lot. It became known as Walker s Lane, now Walker Road West: To commence at the east end of said lot adjoining the township line between Albion and Caledon to commence between the house now occupied by the said Elisha Tarbex and the house occupied by Henry Christorphenson to continue a southwesterly direction through the whole length of the said lot until it extends to the west half of the said lot number four, without let or hindrance or molestation of the said Elisha and Elizabeth Tarbex his heirs, executors, administrators or assigns. The document was witnessed by Caledon farmer James Walker Senior 7 and Albion blacksmith John Maguire. The connection between Alexander McKee and James Walker (Jr.) is that on March 6, 1846, James Walker married Ann McKee, the daughter of the owner of the west half of Lot 4, Alexander McKee. 8 Ann was born in Monaghan, Ireland, in Since McKee owned the west half of Lot 4 from May 1844 and the marriage was in 1846, the subject property may have been associated with Walkers from as early as 1844, but developed enough by 1851 to require road access through the east half of Lot 4. The 1851 census indicates that an Alexander McKee still lived in Chinguacousy Township at that date JAMES AND ANN (MCKEE) WALKER (OWNER ) The 1851 personal census for Caledon Township lists James Walker as a farmer, age 33, born in Ireland, and Ann, 30, also born in Ireland. In the household were their children Jane, 8; Alex, 5; James, 3; and Mary, 1, all born in Upper Canada. They lived in a one storey log house. The Walker family attributes James (Jr.) with building this house. The census lists a James Walker, Sr., 65, a widower, leaving nearby. There is no surviving copy of the 1851 agricultural census for Caledon with which to confirm their location in the township. Alexander and Jane McKee sold the west hundred acres of Lot 4 to James Walker on July 15, 1854, for 225. It was about this time that James Munsie [Munsey] acquired the southeast SU MURDOCH HISTORICAL CONSULTING FEBRUARY

12 quarter of Lot 4 from Tarbox. The publication Settling the Hills 10 includes an account of the history of the west half of Lot 4, Concession 6, EHS, and a Walker family photograph. Not all of the information is accurate: In 1854, James Walker Sr., a Scot, bought the west half (100 acres) of Lot 4 (part of the original Elisha Tarbox property which had been sold to William Higginson) from Alexander McKee for 225. In 1840 Higginson had sold to Thomas Burrell, who in turn sold to Alexander McKee in Walker may have been leasing this land since He built a log cabin near a small feeder stream of the Centreville Creek at the midway point of Lot 4, about half a mile west of Caledon East. In 1857, to give Walker easier access to the village, Elisha Tarbox granted him a road privilege one-and-a-half rods wide (24 feet) for five shillings and other considerations. In 1878, Caledon Township council paid James Walker, Sr., $150 for a right of way through his farm and Thomas Cunnington was appointed overseer of this new road, Walker's Lane. This is the present Walker Road West. Sometime in the 1860s, James Walker, Sr., erected a one-and-a-half storey, split-level fieldstone house with cut-sandstone window and door opening lintels, near the site of his earlier log cabin. The stonework in this building is very similar to that in the nearby Caledon Inn on Airport Road and was probably built by the same stonemason. In spite of its age, Walker's house is in a fine state of preservation. An interview with Matilda Walker, a daughter of James and Ann, was conducted in June 1933 by Peel County historian William Perkins Bull. It provides some historical information about the James Walker family: 11 SU MURDOCH HISTORICAL CONSULTING FEBRUARY

13 My mother s name was Ann McKee and my father s name was James Walker. The McKees came from Monaghan and the Walkers from Armagh. My grandfather James Walker came with his only son James to Philadelphia and from there he came to Caledon East. The son (my father) was 11 years old when they came over. My grandfather Alex McKee worked on the Canal (ask Mrs. Scott) then he took up land, he owned 200 acres. He got the Crown Deed and the others bought land from him. Grandfather McKee s children were [other children listed]: Ann McKee My mother was born in Ireland and married James Walker. Children: Jane married Allan Burkholder in They had six children. Jane was born in Alexander born in 1846 and died in Dakota. He married May Haines. Four children. Alex d Mary Ann born Married Wm. Monds in They had two children, John, a minister and Wm. James born in 1848, of Caledon East. Married Liza Mills in Died when her baby was born. Baby died too. Then James married Liza Mills sister Bella Mills in There were 4 children of the second marriage. Thomas b.1855 d Married Susan Alice Hunter of Brampton in They had 2 boys who are now living in Galt. Isabella b.1857 Married John Mitchell in Two children, Maxwell who is in Oregon and Ethel on the Prairie. Isabella died in Samuel b Married Eliza Martin. Children Wilson, Emerson, Elspith (a girl), Robert and Andres. William John b Married. One boy, Walter. Matilda (myself) b Unmarried. Robert b.1865 d Killed with a Threshing machine in Albion. Andrew b Married a nurse from Winnipeg. One child. SU MURDOCH HISTORICAL CONSULTING FEBRUARY

14 My mother died 1901 and my father died Both buried in Providence Cemetery, Sandhill. After my grandfather came up from Philadelphia he lived with his brother in Mono, but my father settled on the W ½ of Lot 4, Con. 6 and built a log house. In 1863 be built a stone house with stones that he obtained on the farm. The old log house stood for many years after that but was never used and finally fell. All the children were born in the log house except my two youngest brothers. My grandfather was a weaver. He used to use a little back kitchen on father s farm for a shop. I can remember my mother used to scold about having to wind the bobbins for him. We children used to spin and I have blankets that we spun. I often heard my mother say that she could handle a sickle better than anybody around. She could beat any [ ] The log barn was on our farm when we left there. Three of my brothers taught school practically all their life. Alex. at Cheltenham, Thos. at a school near Brampton and Andrew taught at Camilla above Orangeville and at Cargill. Only two of my brothers were Orangemen. They were staunch members of Caledon East lodge. None of the rest of the boys or the father joined though. My father didn t know they joined and one 12 th of July they had to go and parade. It was right in the middle of haying too when my father and the boys were the busiest. My father wished they were far enough. I can remember my sister, Mary Ann, and I walking down to Sandhill to the Orange Parade. Why, the 12 th of July and Christmas were the two biggest days in the year. The 1859 Tremaine map for Caledon Township (shown right) indicates James Walker on the west half of Lot 4, James Munsie in the southeast quarter (east half), and Elisha Tarbox in the northeast quarter (east half). There is a store on the east half, at Paisley (Caledon East village). A 1859 SU MURDOCH HISTORICAL CONSULTING FEBRUARY

15 building is plotted on the west half, near the centre of the whole lot, on the west bank of the creek (indicated by the narrow blue arrow). Its location would be north of the Walker's Lane right of way. This is presumed to be the Walker log house. The 1861 personal census for Caledon Township lists James Walker as a farmer, age 40. His wife Ann was 30. Their children were Jane, ; Alex, 14; James, 12; Mary, 10; Matilda, 7; Thomas, 5; all born in Upper Canada. They are listed with a frame, two storey, single family house. 13 The 1861 agricultural census for Caledon lists Thomas Munsey with 47 acres of Lot 4; Elisha Tarbox with 50 acres; and James Walker with 100 acres. Walker's property was valued at $3,000 with 45 acres cultivated. This is slightly higher than average for a hundred acre farm in the area enumerated at this time. In 1870, James Munsie sold the southeast quarter (south fifty acres of the east half) of Lot 4 to James Walker. The 1871 personal census lists James as 51, born in Ireland and of Canada Presbyterian faith. His wife Ann was 48, also born in Ireland and of the same faith. In their household were Mary, [20], Jane, 17; Thomas, 15; Isabella, 13; William, 11; Samuel, 9; Robert, 5; and Andrew, 2. They occupied 145 acres of Lot 4 with 100 acres cleared. There were two barns and one house. The 1877 map of Caledon Township (shown right) identifies James Walker on the west half and southeast quarter of Lot 4. A building and orchard are plotted 1877 in the northwest quarter of the lot, with a laneway access from the concession road (5 th Line, now Mountainview Road) on the west (not from Walker Road). A row of maple trees that survive west of the gambrel roof barn and paralleling Walker Road may have lined this earlier farm lane. 14 The dwelling plotted in 1877 is believed to be the stone dwelling now known as 89 Walker Road West. In the southwest quarter there is a second building that fronts on the 5 th Line concession road. The 1881 personal census for Caledon lists James, 61, born in Ireland and of Canada Presbyterian faith. His wife Ann, 58, was also born in Ireland and of the same faith. Their children were Matilda, 24; William, 20; Isabella, 18; Samuel, 16; Robert, 14; and Andrew, 12, all born in Ontario. SU MURDOCH HISTORICAL CONSULTING FEBRUARY

16 James Walker (Jr.) died on May 18, His Last Will and Testament is dated April 7, He bequeathed to his daughter Matilda cash and a cow; daughter Isabella, cash; son Robert, cash; son Andrew, cash plus an education allowance; and son Thomas, cash. He left the hundred acres (less the road right of way) of the west half of Lot 4 to his wife Ann. At her death, the farm would transfer to son William John. He directed that the east quarter of Lot 4 be sold as soon as convenient and when a reasonable price can be ascertained. The sale of this fifty acres was to pay the mortgage on the west half and the legacies WILLIAM JOHN WALKER (OWNER ) The 1891 census for Caledon Township lists W.J. Walker as the head of household for the Lot 4 farm. In the household were Ann, 68, a widow (his mother), and Matilda, 35 (his sister). They occupied a two storey, stone house, with seven rooms. This is the subject dwelling. On March 29, 1893, the heirs of James Walker agreed to the sale of the farm to William John. The other heirs at that date were Jane Burkholder of the County of St. Clair in Michigan; James Walker of Caledon; Mary Ann Monds of Caledon, a married woman; Matilda Walker of Caledon, a spinster; Thomas Walker of the Village of Elmvale, a teacher; Isabella Mitchell of the City of Toronto; Samuel Walker of Caledon, a hardware merchant; and Andrew Walker of Caledon, a student. A son, Robert Walker, died October 12, In 1893, the property was 150 acres composed of the west half of Lot 4 and the south half of the east half of Lot 4, Concession 6, EHS, Caledon HENRY SWINTON (OWNER ) On December 14, 1894, Ann and her son William John, a bachelor, mortgaged the 150 acres. In March 1897, they became financially insolvent and assigned all their real and personal property to Walter Samuel Morphy in trust for the creditors. Morphy advertised the property as two parcels (the west hundred acres and southeast fifty acres) for sale by public auction in April Henry Swinton, a drover in Caledon Township, paid $2,200 for the west hundred acres, less the public roadway through the property, and took legal possession in September. In April, Morphy sold the southeast fifty acres of the Walker property to William Beamish. Ann (McKee) Walker died on March 30, The 1901 census for Caledon Township still associates 96 acres of Lot 4, Concession 6, with the Walkers. The enumerator listed James Walker, 15 born December 27, 1848, another son to James and Ann. In the household were James' wife, Isabella, born April 22, 1853, and their children Emerson (March 10, 1880); Martha J. (October 5, 1882); Ann (February 19, 1890); and Robert L.S. (January 11, 1893). SU MURDOCH HISTORICAL CONSULTING FEBRUARY

17 4.2.7 WILLIAM JAMES LINE (OWNER ) On October 31, 1908, Henry Swinton and his wife Susannah sold the west hundred acres of Lot 4 to Albion Township farmer William James Line. The purchase price was $4,200. In June 1910, Line leased the property to George Shaw. 16 The 1921 census for Caledon indicates that William Line, 48, a Methodist, was married to Bertha, 38, Church of England. They were both born in Ontario. Their post office was Caledon East. They occupied a stone house and were farmers. It is possible that the Lines were occupying the subject property DUNCAN MCCALLUM (OWNER ) William Line and his wife Bertha Levina sold 96 acres of Lot 4 on March 1, 1924, to Duncan McCallum. All were Caledon Township farmers. Duncan died May 24, 1925, leaving his widow Alma Gertrude McCallum, a daughter Alma Etoile, and two minor aged daughters Grace Gertrude and Irma Mary WILLIAM JOHN TAYLOR (OWNER ); EDITH HUFFMAN (OWNER 1929) In 1925, the two Alma McCallums granted the 96 acres to Esquesing Township farmer William John Taylor for the token value of a dollar but subject to payment of the $4,550 mortgage. William Taylor and his wife Fanny were living in Caledon Township when on May 23, 1929, they sold the property to Edith Lila Huffman, wife of Allen Wesley Huffman, of Nelson Township. This was still subject to the mortgage of $4,550 held by William J. Line LEONARD LESLIE, WILLIAM LINE, GEORGE AND SARAH PEGG, AND ALLISON VIPOND (OWNERS ) In December 1929, the Huffmans sold to Leonard Archibald Leslie of the City of Toronto. William Line foreclosed on the property in December 1935 due to a default on the mortgage and sold to George and Sarah Pegg (registered December 17, 1943).The Peggs sold in August 1944 to Allison Vipond BRUCE MACNAMARA (OWNER ) On March 28, 1945, Allison Vipond was identified as a married woman living in the City of Toronto when she sold the property to Bruce Donald MacNamara, also of Toronto. In August 1948, MacNamara, by then a farmer in Caledon, transferred ownership to The Director, The Veterans Land Act, as collateral for a Veteran's mortgage. When the mortgage was paid in SU MURDOCH HISTORICAL CONSULTING FEBRUARY

18 Above: South facade of 1863 stone house, set back from the stone retaining wall fronting on the laneway from Walker Road West. The enclosed verandah/sunporch is a 20 th century addition. Below: Looking northwest toward the south and east facades of the 1863 stone house. The south retaining wall beside the laneway is on left. SU MURDOCH HISTORICAL CONSULTING FEBRUARY

19 Above: East facade of 1863 stone house and later north addition, showing east retaining wall and stone outbuilding at the north. Below: East and north facades of 1863 stone house and north addition, showing east retaining wall. SU MURDOCH HISTORICAL CONSULTING FEBRUARY

20 Above: L: Faux 6x6 panes, double hung sash (window) on east side of north addition. R: Original 6x6 panes, double hung sash window on west side of north addition Below: L: East and north facades; R: west and north facades SU MURDOCH HISTORICAL CONSULTING FEBRUARY

21 West Facade SU MURDOCH HISTORICAL CONSULTING FEBRUARY

22 November 1961, the property returned to MacNamara s ownership. It was then described as two parcels of land: the 60 acres north of Walker Road; and a part south of Walker Road described as follows: Commencing at a point in the west limit of said lot four distant 150 ft from the south limit; thence north along the west limit a distance of ft to a point; thence easterly and parallel to the south limit of Walkers Road a distance of 200 ft to a point; thence northerly and parallel to the east limit of the said lot 4 a distance of 150 ft to the south limit of Walkers Road; thence easterly along the south limit of Walkers Road a distance of 126 rods more or less to the line between the E ½ and W ½ of Lot 4 a distance of ft more or less to the south limit of lot 4; thence westerly along the south limit of lot 4 a distance of 126 rods more or less to a point 200 ft east of the west limit of lot 4; thence northerly parallel to the west limit of lot 4 a distance of 150 ft to a point; thence westerly parallel to the south limit of lot 4 a distance of 200 ft to the point of commencement ANTOON AND JOANN BOERSEN (OWNER ) In August 1963, Bruce and Mary MacNamara sold the two portions of Lot 4 (north and south of Walker Road) to Antoon and Joann Maria Boersen of Caledon. The Boersens moved to Downie Township and in December 1976 sold the Caledon acreage to A. & A. Boersen Farms Ltd. The plan of subdivision Plan 43R was registered on December 14, The subject property was Part 1 Plan 43R-15202, comprised of 49 acres north from Walker Road West CASTLES OF CALEDON CORPORATION (CURRENT OWNER) The 49 acre parcel was purchased by Castles of Caledon Corporation on December 27, A new reference plan was registered on January 30, 2014, wherein the subject property is now described as Part 1 Plan 43R DESIGN OR PHYSICAL VALUE 5.1 DATE OF CONSTRUCTION In the Perkins Bull interview conducted in June 1933, Matilda, daughter of James and Ann Walker, states that the stone house was built in 1863 to replace the use of the log house on the property. The log house "was never used and finally fell." The log house is likely what is plotted on the 1859 map of Caledon (shown previously). As with all reminiscences, the recall of the date 1863 may not be exact. SU MURDOCH HISTORICAL CONSULTING FEBRUARY

23 In 2013, Vic Snow examined the interior of the stone house and concluded that the woodwork, plan, construction technology, and materials could confirm a 1860s date of construction. Some elements are late in use for this date, such as the earlier technique of hand split (not machine cut) lath and the Rumford style fireplace in the west gable end. The Town of Caledon Heritage Resource Officer Sally Drummond noted similarity in the style, design, age, materials, and craftsmanship of the subject house to the nearby Caledon Inn at Airport Road (now known as Villa Caledon Inn) on the east half, Lot 7, Concession 6, EHS, Caledon Township. Originally a farmhouse, the latter is also a bank type structure. Census records indicate it was constructed between 1851 and 1861 by farmer James McCarty. If as noted in the 1891 census the Walker farmhouse at that date had seven rooms, the current interior suggests these were three rooms on the first floor and four rooms on the second floor. Since the Walkers mortgaged the property in 1894 and were insolvent by 1897, the likelihood is that the existing north addition was built after Its window openings are a more modern horizontal and square shape and the masonry is of inferior workmanship, with a higher use of cement mortar. 5.2 STYLE, FORM, AND MASSING The 1863 stone house is in the architectural style tradition of Georgian. This is the foundation style of residential architecture in early Ontario. This example has the characteristic elements of a balanced facade, in this case a 3-bay front facade composed of a centre doorcase and flanking window openings, with gable end chimneys. The doorcase is in the traditional Classical Revival style. The modest visual scale of the south facade belies the fact that this is a 1.5 storey house with a basement that is above grade on the east and north elevations. It is termed a "bank house" for its inset into a natural slope on the property that rises in elevation to the southwest, resulting in the lower height of the south and west facades. Matilda Walker noted, "My grandfather was a weaver. He used to use a little back kitchen on father s farm for a shop." As there is physical evidence of other structures in close proximity, a north addition may not have been needed in the original plan of the stone house. 5.3 ROOF Typical of Georgian style dwellings, the roof is a medium pitched, gable type. It has returned eaves, SU MURDOCH HISTORICAL CONSULTING FEBRUARY

24 now boxed and clad in modern materials. The north addition also has a gable roof with the ridge running north south. The roof cladding is 20 th century, overlapping metal panels. The soffits are the modern, metal, ventilated type. The existing fascia board and gutter system are not original. The examination of the interior indicates that the dwelling had a large fireplace in the west gable end (requiring a chimney). There was a smaller chimney in the east gable end (see Snow report). The existing chimneys have early brick and some corbelling, but as evident in the attic, are smaller in dimension than the originals. The west chimney has been parged. 5.4 FOUNDATION The foundation is not visibly distinct from the masonry of the exterior walls, likely due to the gradual rising of the grade level by seasonal layers of vegetation. The foundation is hidden on the interior by the modern finished basement. 5.5 MASONRY Matilda Walker stated in 1933 that the pink to grey colour rubblestone used in this dwelling was found on the acreage. The workmanship of the main section of the dwelling is well executed with split stones laid in a way to give the impression of horizontal courses. The surrounding areas are infilled with smaller dimension stones. As is typical, the front facade has the best stonework. The largest stones are used at the corners to create quoining (shown right). Large cut and dressed stones are used as lintels over the door and window openings. The mortar is a lime mix with some tooled incising or scoring visible. The intent of the coursing and incising was to create the illusion that this is a more expensive, cut stone building. The north addition is of inferior craftsmanship. The mortar has a higher cement content and the mortar to stone ratio is higher than in the main house. 5.6 WINDOW OPENINGS Considering the large massing of the west and east facades, there are few window openings in SU MURDOCH HISTORICAL CONSULTING FEBRUARY

25 Left: A faux, 6x6 panes, double hung sash window with metal frame on the front facade of the dwelling. On the left is a hinged/pen 8- pane window on the enclosed porch likely dating to the early to mid 20 th century. Below: Two types of basement windows Left: The metal storm window over the larger, 4-panes wood sash type (example shown is on the south facade). Note the depth of the wall cavity. Right: The smaller dimension sash in deep wells is on the west facade. SU MURDOCH HISTORICAL CONSULTING FEBRUARY

26 this structure. The west facade has only two openings on the second storey; the east facade has two in the same position, plus two on the basement level. This is due, in part, to the large main floor fireplace on the west interior wall. There are two window openings on each of the north and south facades. Each window opening has a stone lintel and lugsills that appear to be wood (or stone) with some modern metal cladding. The storm systems are metal, behind which may be wood frames. Most of the sashes are thermalpane, in the faux 6x6 panes, double hung style (as shown previous page). Vic Snow noted in his 2013 inspection of the interior: Only the two windows in the large room appear original, double hung with 6 over 6 panes type glazing in the sashes. While they are correct in every detail, there is no sign of weathering on the exterior and the glass does not appear to be early, so they pose an enigma. Original basement, single sash windows with four glass panes survive. The windows just above grade in the exposed basement are the original openings with four pane sashes. The basement windows at grade (where the basement is not exposed) are in deep stone wells and smaller in dimension (as shown previous page). 5.7 ENTRANCEWAYS The south (main) entranceway (exterior side shown right and next pages) is a Classical Revival style doorcase with lower panelled and upper glazed sidelights, a moulded cornice, a diamond glazed transom (shown below right), and panelled recesses (embrasures or sides). The door is a replacement. The glazing in the sidelights is not original. On the exterior, the cornice is immediately above the door and applied to the door framing. The transom above is hidden behind the lower ceiling of the 20 th century, enclosed verandah. The enclosed verandah is essentially a sunroom with continuous casement style, wood windows, and a modified hip roof (shown next page). The entranceways are described by Vic Snow: The inset Georgian entrance at first glance appears quite simple with sidelights having SU MURDOCH HISTORICAL CONSULTING FEBRUARY

27 contemporary glass with vertical ripples. The cornice on the outside is immediately above the door, seemingly lowered to cover the transom to accommodate the lower ceiling of the more recent porch. However, this position is original. On the inside, the transom is visible and reveals an uncommon diamond glazing pattern. The actual glass panes have been individually covered on the inside but the muttons showing the diamond pattern remain partially visible (shown previous page). The original front door has been replaced and the original back door is missing. Since locks and keepers are absent, an important element in dating the house is compromised. There are two other original entranceways, one on the east side of the north addition entering the main house from the rear deck; and the other on the east at grade into the basement. Both have replacement doors. 5.8 INTERIOR Vic Snow's findings about the interior of the stone house are contained in his following report: Plan The house has a "centre hall plan" with a very fine staircase featuring a landing with return where the "run" reaches the back wall. It rises on the left side of the hall and survives in unusually good condition given the years of use. Also, it is enclosed on the right from the stringer to the floor with panels having inset mouldings. To the right [east] of the centre hall is a single room now serving as kitchen and dining room. A partition originally divided this room into a parlour and a second room, usually a bedroom. It appears that the door to access the bedroom was located in the missing partition. Access to this room is now through a double width opening rather than the original single door. Part of the casing and jamb from the original bedroom door has been carefully reused on the left to form the wide opening which is a 20 th modification. The three room floor plan of the first floor is the most common in 1.5 storey Georgian houses (stone, timber frame, or log) built by immigrants originally from Britain or via the United States. Access to the basement is by way of a low door under the central staircase, which is typical. The door has two elongated raised panels (not fielded). All second floor doors SU MURDOCH HISTORICAL CONSULTING FEBRUARY

28 Photographs of the interior are by Vic Snow in South Doorcase Entranceway Above: Exterior showing cornice, moulding, upper section of sidelights with new ribbed glazing, embrasures (panelled sides) Below: Interior showing painted diamond glazing of transom above door (not visible on the exterior) SU MURDOCH HISTORICAL CONSULTING FEBRUARY

29 Interior Woodwork Note embrasures (panelled sides) on window shown below right. SU MURDOCH HISTORICAL CONSULTING FEBRUARY

30 SU MURDOCH HISTORICAL CONSULTING FEBRUARY

31 Left: Modernized fireplace in original location on west end wall. Below: Original split lath above modern basement ceiling tiles. SU MURDOCH HISTORICAL CONSULTING FEBRUARY

32 Basement Above: Ceiling showing markings of plaster over hand split lathe Left: Small, 4-pane, basement window Below: Modern finished basement (at grade) SU MURDOCH HISTORICAL CONSULTING FEBRUARY

33 Above: Covered fireplace pier in basement Below: Chimney in attic SU MURDOCH HISTORICAL CONSULTING FEBRUARY

34 have four raised panels, not fielded and without inset mouldings. Woodwork The interior woodwork has been carefully stripped of its original paint (and/or paint graining). Fireplaces and Chimneys On the left [west] is a single room with a contemporary fireplace centred in the gable wall. A large chimney visible in the attic is partly integral to the stone wall, four bricks wide with the width therefore being about 35 inches (a brick plus one mortar joint = 8.75"+/-) being an indication of an original Rumford type, cooking fireplace in this location. In accordance with Rumford's formula, if the depth into the stone wall of the chimney is 2.5 bricks, then the flue could serve a very large fireplace. The continuous thick layer of vermiculite insulation covering the ceiling joist in the attic made it impossible to move beyond the central access point to closely examine the chimneys. The contemporary fireplace likely defines the width of the original. Presumably the hearth extended about 32 inches (eight rows of bricks) and there is indication of this visible in the rough plastered basement ceiling. Carpeting prevented examination of the wood flooring, assuming a "scar" where the hearth bricks were removed. In addition, there is a fireplace pier in the basement, although enclosed with drywall evidently on stud framing. It appears that the pier supported only the mass of the fireplace that projected beyond the stone wall with the hearth supported by wood planks nailed to the floor joist, somewhat less common but requiring much less work than a full width stone pier. The bricks of the hearth were likely set in sand thus allowing easy replacement of cracked or worn bricks over time. The chimney in the right [east end] gable, visible in the attic, appears to transition from three bricks wide on the right side, being slightly off-centre apparently to clear an original central partition on the first floor (now missing), to four bricks wide at the top. Above the roof, the two chimneys would have been identical in size thus providing perfect Georgian style symmetry, as is the full exterior. The smaller flue of the right chimney would have likely served a "box" stove or perhaps a more elaborate parlour stove. Window Openings The two windows in the large room on the left [west] have embrasures with panels and inset mouldings. Embrasures that slope to make the window opening larger on the inside are typical in stone houses with thick walls. The windows in the room on the right [east] are more simple with only pine boards and no panels forming the embrasure. Only the two windows in the large room appear original, double hung with 6 over 6 panes type glazing in the sashes. While they are correct in every detail, there is no sign of weathering on the exterior and the glass does not appear to be early, so they pose an enigma. Original basement, single sash windows with four glass panes survive. SU MURDOCH HISTORICAL CONSULTING FEBRUARY

35 Basement The basement has been modernized into a recreation room on the right with a dropped ceiling. Two layers of ceiling tiles have been installed but careful lifting of some suspended tiles revealed early lime plaster on hand split cedar lath secured with cut nails. A similar ceiling, crudely plastered, remains fully visible on the left side. Hand split lath (riven with a froe) is usually indicative of an early date, but old ways sometimes continued long after they were outdated, often due to being too far a distance from saw mills and cost. Perhaps the balance of the house had or may have "accordion" lath installed and plastered by skilled tradesmen. Summary While cooking stoves were in common use by the mid 1850s, thus generally replacing large cooking fireplaces, I have seen a large Rumford cooking fireplace in a house built in 1865 (confirmed by the datestone) as well as smaller Rumford heating fireplaces in houses built in the 1860s. I also know of many houses from the 1850s that had only wood stoves since they heated more efficiently and provided greater ease in cooking and baking. If the existence of the fireplace is removed from consideration in dating the house, then based on the rather elaborate nature and extraordinary workmanship of the staircase (exceeding other woodwork in detail and execution and more typical of later staircases), I suspect that the house dates to about The interior is in excellent condition in every respect, even with level floors throughout. I would recommend that all original existing interior components be included in the designation. In my view, sidelights in the diamond pattern, the cornice in its original position and a period door and hardware are important considerations. 5.9 BARN AND FARM USE OUTBUILDINGS There are four barns and farm use sheds on this property. Only the gambrel roof barn was evaluated for its cultural heritage value or interest. The other three buildings are recent constructs. The following is Vic Snow's report on the gambrel roofed barn. Gambrel Roof Barn The only historic/vintage barn on the property is in the gambrel style example with a smaller "ell" gable style addition. The timber frame of the main large barn is entirely of circular sawn components, at least where any original framing is visible. The barn has four levels in the framed portion, all extensively boarded on the walls and low ceilings. So little of the timber frame is visible that it is impossible to determine what of the original framing actually survives. The conversion to a chicken coop highrise has completely SU MURDOCH HISTORICAL CONSULTING FEBRUARY

36 Gambrel roof barn, all facades (Vic Snow) SU MURDOCH HISTORICAL CONSULTING FEBRUARY

37 Contemporary farm use buildings of no heritage value or interest SU MURDOCH HISTORICAL CONSULTING FEBRUARY

38 compromised any heritage value of the structure, which was likely minimal in any case. The smaller extension is the same although some earlier hewn components have been recycled for use in its construction. All window openings in the walls, presumably added to provide air and light to each level, are completely covered so the interior is in darkness and viewing requires a flashlight. There is a series of three staircases with landings rising to the third level but the fourth level is an attic without apparent access. A small opening in a difficult position in the ceiling of the third floor allows some visibility into the attic, where circular sawn components are also present. The exterior is clad with narrow width vertical boarding and covered with Insulbrick, likely installed at the same time as other modifications to convert the barn into a giant chicken condo, all in the interest of making the barn weatherproof and presumably warmer. Insulbrick was in use from the 1930s to the 1960s. The poor condition of the Insulbrick does suggest an early date, therefore probably installed in the 1940s. The foundation has some large quoins but the stonework is of poor workmanship, with rubblestone with more mortar than stone visible. There are large cracks, as often found in barn foundations. The barn also has the usual earthen ramp to access what would have originally been the threshing floor. The ramp appears to be part of the natural terrain although possibly with modification. The first floor joists and mud sills are primarily cedar (required scrapping of whitewash) although some mudsills may be white pine. All are large in dimension and in an excellent state of preservation. One floor joist measures about 20 inches in width, so wide that a circular saw blade about 42 inches in diameter (considering the arbor and nut/washer) was used to cut it and even then could not saw through the entire log. The foundation level has the usual array of stalls and pens. In summary, the barn dates to the late 19 th century or more likely the early 20 th century. It has been so seriously modified that a heritage designation should not be considered. There is value in salvaging some of the materials (notably the large dimension, cedar joists and large stones in the quoins). It is interesting to note that the stonework of the back addition to the house and the shed immediately behind are somewhat similar to the barn and may have been built about the same time. Other Barns and Farm Use Sheds All other barns and farm use sheds are contemporary and have no heritage value. SU MURDOCH HISTORICAL CONSULTING FEBRUARY

39 Stone outbuilding north of the house, shown clockwise from top left: East facade showing makeshift rail barricade and section of iron fence along deck between stone outbuilding and the 1863 house View of east facade, looking south toward the house South and west facades North facade SU MURDOCH HISTORICAL CONSULTING FEBRUARY

40 Above: The east composition of the house, north addition, retaining wall, outbuilding, and stone foundation wall ruin. Note how some of the stones have been recycled as a barbeque (centre). Below: This stone ruin is a section of wall with door and window openings. It may date to the 1860s and be the source of the stone used in the north addition to the house and possibly the stone outbuilding. SU MURDOCH HISTORICAL CONSULTING FEBRUARY

41 5.10 STONE OUTBUILDING Vic Snow examined the north addition of the house, the stone outbuilding immediately north of the house, and the stone wall ruin (shown previous pages). The following are his findings: Outbuildings - The rear rubble stone addition [the north addition to the house] is much later in construction and of inferior workmanship. Also the rubble stone shed immediately behind the house is likewise very poorly constructed. It has a full basement that contains a furnace from the 1960s with underground hot water piping to the house. There are additional stone walls that extend to the right of the shed in the natural bank of the terrain. Whatever structures that existed on these foundations are long gone. The stone outbuilding may be 20 th century in origin or a 20 th century makeover of an older building (the makeover possibly being contemporary with the north addition and the front verandah). The gable ends of the roof are vertical boards and the window in the east gable appears to be a remnant of a larger sash, cut and turned on the diagonal. There is a large sliding door on the west facade for entry. 6.0 CULTURAL HERITAGE LANDSCAPE FEATURES AND CONTEXTUAL VALUE 6.1 STONE FOUNDATION WALL RUIN The stone foundation wall ruin abutting the east end of the stone outbuilding (shown previous page) is a remnant of a building that may be earlier than or contemporary to the 1863 house. The wall section has a door opening and a window opening at grade. The thickness of the stone walls suggests they may have served as a foundation for a timber frame (possibly log) structure above. Of note is the red and buff coloured brick infill in the upper east corner. This ruin has archaeological value. It may contribute to some understanding of the original configuration of the area north of the main section of the 1863 house, including additions and adjacent outbuilding(s). 6.2 RETAINING WALLS The east retaining wall supports the modern deck at the north side of the 1863 house. The deck has a cement pad with a modern handrail, but the stone support wall may be, in part, original to this location. The south retaining wall is between the north side of the laneway from Walker Road West, and the south facade of the dwelling. The stonework may be contemporary with the east retaining wall. Further investigation of all the masonry would be useful in determining and grouping dates of construction. SU MURDOCH HISTORICAL CONSULTING FEBRUARY

42 The tree lined lane from Walker Road West crossing in front of the front facade of the house The laneway continues west to the gambrel roofed barn and north/northwest to the farm use outbuildings. Orchard north of the house SU MURDOCH HISTORICAL CONSULTING FEBRUARY

43 Above: The fencing is primarily rebuilt rail fencing tied to metal posts with wire. Below: New development on the south side of Walker Road West is visible in the distance SU MURDOCH HISTORICAL CONSULTING FEBRUARY

44 6.3 LANEWAYS In 1844, Alexander McKee bought the west hundred acres of Lot 4. In 1851, Elisha and Elizabeth Tarbox, who owned the east hundred acres, permitted McKee through an agreement with James Walker (presumed to be occupying McKee's west hundred acres) the right of road access through the east half to the west half. The 1859 Tremaine map of Caledon Township plots a building north of where this laneway entered the west half. This makes Walker's Lane, now Walker Road West, the original access between Walker's pre 1863 log dwelling and the north edge of the village of Paisley (now Caledon East). At the village, this road may have served the occupants of several building lots severed by Tarbox from his east half acreage. The 1877 map of Caledon Township indicates that the laneway to what is believed to be Walker's 1863 stone house ran east from the 5 th Line concession road (now Mountainview Road). Archaeological fieldwork may determine if the location of the log and stone dwellings is the same and this is simply a reorientation of the site to the concession road, rather than Walker's Lane. As shown above, there is a remnant row of old maple trees in the field south of the gambrel roof barn. These trees are believed to delineate the location of the early laneway from Mountainview Road to the west. In 2014, the primary laneway to the house is from Walker Road West. This gravel laneway leads north from the road, then turns west to pass the front (south) facade of the house and continues west to the gambrel roof barn or north to the modern farm buildings. It is in keeping with the original access to the dwelling. This type of long, tree lined laneway is typical of 19 th century farmsteads. SU MURDOCH HISTORICAL CONSULTING FEBRUARY