included a statement on the rationale, academic framework, and philosophical

foundation for Canadian studies. Volume 2 discussed Canadian studies abroad and in community colleges. It examined the nature o f archival and audiovisual resources for Canadian studies. It also discussed the importance of private financing for academic studies. Volume 3 included three

fact that the Commission was never formally mandated to study archival institutions in depth. But the Commission had come to realise that archival resources were ‘the foundation o f Canadian studies.’ This foundation was shaky; the Commission was critical o f the ad hoc nature o f archival development in Canada. It noted that ‘the holdings o f many archival institutions are often haphazard, incomplete or composed o f quite unrelated accumulations o f documents.’ At the same time, archivists o f earlier years were praised for ‘adopting a broad interpretation o f their role’; they were commended for not limiting themselves to the custodianship o f institutional records. The Commission encouraged an expansion o f the acquisition orientation o f public repositories, a recommendation reminiscent o f those o f the Massey and Glassco Commissions.'^^ But the Symons Commission parted with tradition by recommending that universities, not government repositories, were the institutions best suited to acquire and care for archival records.

The first responsibility o f university archival repositories, the Commission argued, was the management o f their own records. The Commission urged the development o f university records management programmes, encompassing a wide range o f materials. The university’s archives should house not only the official records o f the university but also audiovisual records such as tapes, films, and photographs, either produced by or relating to the university. As well, university archives should preserve the research data o f resident scholars or faculty members. They should also acquire microform copies o f records held in national or provincial archives. All these materials were ‘an essential source o f support and information for the study o f Canadian higher education.

chapters: the first on scholarly communication, the second on the nature of the Canadian

university, and the third on the citizenship and academic qualifications o f teachers and students at Canadian universities. Volume 4 included a chapter on Canadian studies and native peoples, a chapter on Canadian studies in elementary and secondary schools, and a chapter on publishing and Canadian studies. Also in Volume 4 was a chapter on library holdings and other resources for Canadian studies, and a chapter on the value o f Canadian cultural property, including art, architecture, and artifacts, as resources for Canadian studies.

Symons, To Know Ourselves, vol. 2, pp 69-74. Ibid., vol. 2, pp. 73-74.

The Commission then recommended that universities expand their scope. They should become regional archival repositories. The historical and research materials o f a particular region should be concentrated in one university-based repository ‘to avoid rivalries, duplication o f effort and unnecessary expense.’ The archives could borrow copies and originals o f records from each other as needed. The placement o f regional archives within universities was encouraged because, to draw virtually verbatim from the Public Archives’ brief, ‘university staff and students would be among the prime users o f archival material.’ The Commission agreed with the Public Archives’ plea that these university-based regional repositories should be open to all ‘serious’ researchers, including the general public. In instances where regional archives had to be established outside o f a university, ‘close ties’ should be established between the institutions."^^

Universities could make another significant contribution to the development o f Canadian archives. They could develop graduate programmes to train professional archivists and conservators. The Commission was critical o f existing training programmes. Although some programmes helped to meet basic training needs, many archives were staffed by individuals whose ‘formal qualifications’ were ‘non-existent.’ University-based education programmes would replace the previous apprenticeship system and ensure that the ‘clerk custodian’ was replaced by ‘a trained and sophisticated expert.

The Commission wrote from a strongly academic perspective. Universities would provide leadership, serving not just as the regional archives but as the channel through which archival resources could be disseminated across the country. By these means, universities could assist their communities to achieve the ‘self-knowledge ... essential for health and growth in the lives o f both individuals and societies.’"^ Archival records were necessary to serve scholarship. Academic progress depended on the expansion o f archival repositories within a university environment.

Ibid., vol. 2, p. 72. Ibid., vol. 2, p. 74.

The Symons Commission agreed that the Public Archives o f Canada was an ‘indispensable source for research.’ However, to serve as keystone in this new decentralised system, that institution would have to make several changes. The legislation in force since 1912 had to be updated to allow for an expanded archival programme. A new building was required, with sufficient space for future growth, and preferably adjacent to but not part o f the National Library. Adequate funding was also needed for the Archives’ diffusion programme and for continuation o f the Union List o f Manuscripts in Canadian Repositories and its companion, the National Union Catalogue o f Maps, begun in the early 1970s."^^ The Archives should also produce ‘a comprehensive national guide to all known archival resources in Canada,’ whether in government repositories, businesses, or private hands. The National Film Archives, established in 1972, should be accorded permanent status within the Public Archives and should become the official repository for materials produced by public and private filmmakers, including the National Film Board and the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation."^^

The Commission also offered more general recommendations about archival management. Businesses and organisations should be encouraged to preserve their historical records and ensure public access to them. They should also establish records management and archival programmes, ‘to be administered either internally or through the facilities o f an established archival institution.’ A ‘Committee on the Development o f Native Archival Resources,’ should be created, with representatives from archives, academic institutions, native communities, government agencies, and relevant private organisations. A court o f arbitration should be formed to deal with conflicting acquisition claims and reduce the competitive environment 'within archives. Newspapers should be better preserved, as they were ‘primary sources’ o f historical information. And government departments should adopt an ‘open door policy,’ allowing freer access by researchers to their internal collections o f books and records."^^

See B. Kidd, ‘A Brief History of the National Map Collection at the Public Archives o f Canada,’

Archivaria 13 (Winter 1981-82): 3-22.

Symons, To Know Ourselves, vol. 2, pp. 71, 75. Ibid., vol. 1, pp. 71, 79, 131.

The Commission praised Canadian archivists for their work in organising themselves into regional associations. It also congratulated the Canadian Historical Association’s Archives Section on its decision to separate into an independent society o f Canadian archivists. The Commission encouraged a scholarly focus for this new association and urged that the relationship between archivists and historians be ‘maintained and further cultivated.’ It also encouraged archivists to cooperate with each other and with individuals and organisations ‘throughout the Canadian academic community.

The Commission made clear that the expanded role it envisioned for university archives, or any o f the programmes recommended, could not be achieved without adequate financial support. Federal and provincial governments must provide increased resources for teaching and research in Canadian studies, including the expansion o f Canada Council funding for research and bibliographic work. But funding for Canadian studies was not solely the responsibility o f the public sector. The Commission stated that ‘government by itself cannot, and indeed should not, bear the whole burden o f assistance for the growing needs o f Canadian studies. The active support o f the private sector is also vital.’ While Canadian universities traditionally received little private funding, the Commission argued that ‘the money is there. It is up to the universities to go and get it.’"^^ The Symons Commission’s vision o f archives, then, was all inclusive. All types o f records, in all media, were to be preserved for their research use. Beyond original records, archival repositories should also be responsible for copies o f records and for films, newspapers, and microfilm. The primary users o f archival materials were considered university-based academics, although the general public was not to be excluded. The Commission felt that It was only sensible, therefore, that universities act as the focus o f a regional archival programme. The custodians o f archives were to be properly trained, through university education programmes. Both public and private

Ibid., vol. 2, p. 82.

agencies had to provide financial support. Only in this way would the resource material critical to Canadian studies be preserved.