Toronto city officials have reversed their earlier decision to remove Robert Stapleton Caldecott’s name from the heritage designation of his former home, following new information from his descendants.

In April, the City Council voted to strip Caldecott’s name from the heritage designation of 64 Woodlawn Avenue due to concerns that his early 20th-century views on immigration were restrictive and potentially racist. This decision was part of a broader reassessment of historical figures whose legacies might not align with current values.

The home, designated a heritage building in 2018, was recognized for its architectural significance and its association with Caldecott, a businessman and philanthropist who passed away there in 1907. Designed by renowned architect Eden Smith, the house was celebrated for its unique structural qualities.

The controversy gained traction in 2022 when the 9,000-square-foot house was purchased by Dr. Arnold Mahesan, a fertility specialist of Sri Lankan descent, and his wife, Roxanne Earle, a former Real Housewives of Toronto star with Pakistani heritage. When they sought to modify the house’s steep stairway, they discovered Caldecott’s problematic views on immigration, which led them to request the removal of his name.

Mahesan expressed his distress at discovering that Caldecott, the original owner, held views they found troubling. “Caldecott would be appalled by us living in the house he commissioned,” Mahesan said during a Toronto Preservation Board (TPB) meeting.

The TPB recommended retaining the heritage designation but removing references to Caldecott, based on a report by Michael Akladios, a University of Toronto history lecturer hired by Earle and Mahesan. Akladios found Caldecott’s views restrictive but did not label him outright as a racist.

A 15-page report from Caldecott’s descendants, including Lucelle Schmitz and her husband C. Michael Schmitz, challenged these conclusions. This report, supported by 19 descendants, included private family letters and research not previously considered. It argued that while Caldecott favored restricting immigration to British Empire citizens, his views were not racially motivated. The British Empire at that time included diverse regions such as the Caribbean, India, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka.

Following this new evidence, city officials decided to reinstate Caldecott’s name on the heritage designation. Akladios praised the decision, commenting that the additional material provided a more nuanced view of Caldecott’s beliefs. “I don’t think [Caldecott’s name] should have been removed in the first place,” Akladios remarked.

Earle declined to comment on the decision, citing concerns for her family’s security. Both Akladios and Schmitz hope that future decisions will involve more thorough research to ensure accurate historical representation. Schmitz stressed the need for “thorough research” and “due diligence” in such matters.

City staff indicated that their actions were in compliance with the Ontario Heritage Act, which specifies time frames for responding to heritage site requests.