Preserves: The Manitoba Food HIstory PODCAST

CLARENCE GOULD: When I started there was Galperin candy, there was Progress Candy, that is no longer. There was Consolidated Candy that is no longer. There was there was Paulin Chambers. There was Elkin Candy. Then there was another one called Weinshenker. Yeah, and then if you went down on Portage Avenue there was, there was a floral shop called Grandma’s and they sold, they made candy and sold flowers and candy together. And then Eaton’s had their own candy plant in the mail order building. Then you had Picardy’s. ¹

CLARENCE GOULD: Okay, you had a lot of different people you could sell—there was a lot of little stores you know you could sell to. And some of them had their own little people that dealt with them and of course and when you’re competing for orders you know and there was price cutting. I used to say—we used to all get together and then one of them would decide what they wanted the order more than the other one, it’s just a thing in business, hey. But we used to make—there was big business with Woolworth in those days and Woolworth right across Canada. And there was big business with Hudson Bay. Hudson Bay had all the Northern stores. So, there’s was a lot more—then you had Zellers and you had Kresge’s and you had Metropolitan. And we could sell to every little store around. We had salesmen on the road covering Manitoba, salesmen covering Alberta. Places like five and dollar stores, and Penner’s in Steinbach and Winkler Co-op. You know there wasn’t the restriction on who would buy from you in those days. ²

CLARENCE GOULD: Now if you want to do two things you can’t afford to deliver to small stores and because the cost of delivering is too much, and a lot of the big stores now everything has to go through the head office. If it’s not okayed by the head office, you don’t get in. ³

ROY ROBERTSON : Yes, like I say—like I always say that in business—it’s one thing to have the business and promise the business, the other thing is to deliver. Like I’ve had people who have been in competition, they would quote prices that are way lower than me. They would get the business, but they never deliver the product and I said I can give it for nothing If I don’t have to deliver it. And but a lot of people do that, like a lot of big companies call it a common market practice, “you know well we can do you better than you know that and stuff,” but then they don’t ship it. So, so we try to—I would say more of a personal thing that it’s a one-on-one type of thing. Like we try to treat—or—I would like to do business with every individual private candy store, sell them a little rather than selling like Wal-Mart. I mean like, Wal-Mart is great but then like after you’re so busy, they own you. And then you know like you either play by their rules or you are out of the game. ⁴

CLARENCE GOULD: We have a trade built up—we do a lot of American trade; we do some but we ship to New York and Chicago. We do a big business with the American trades. We sell to anybody else, but one of our biggest customers are the United States. ⁵

CLARENCE GOULD: Well, I think we have survived because of the different people like Walter’s dad, doing some uh—getting new machinery and stuff and Walter the same thing. If you want to survive in this world you got to keep moving forward. ⁶

SCOTT MAIER: Chocolate & Peanuts: Is there a better combo out there? Well, it depends on who you ask. I for one, might say cheese and crackers or French fries and vinegar. But if you asked a group of Manitobans over the age of 50, odds are many of them would stand by the classic pairing, citing the Cuban Lunch bar as their reason why.

DAVID INGRAM: And another job that I had there was stirring chocolate, because the Cuban Lunch and Snap Lunch bars, were… The Cuban Lunch had peanuts in them, and of course the peanuts sunk to the bottom of the chocolate, so I had to stir those so that the peanuts would be equally distributed in the bars. ⁷

SCOTT MAIER: I mean, my mom could hardly hold back her excitement upon hearing that long-forgotten name: “Oh my God, Cuban Lunch Bars!? Those were my favourite!” In fact, this Winnipeg native treat, rich with chocolate and peanuts and packaged in what Thiessen explains as a “shallow, rectangular equivalent of a cupcake liner” has a fanbase that reaches much further than just my home. ⁸ Blog pages, YouTube Videos, and even Facebook groups with hundreds of members have been created to discuss, debate, and most importantly, connect over the memories of the deeply missed treat. ⁹ So where did this chocolate bar come from and what made it so special? Well, the answer lies alongside the fascinating history of the Paulin’s Factory.

Let’s start by going a few years back. And by a few years, I mean over one-hundred years, to 1876, the year the Chambers Steam Biscuit Factory was founded. ¹⁰ By starting here, we can discover how Paulin’s came to be, why it grew in popularity, what went on behind its doors, and what eventually halted its operations after more than a century.

In 1876, the Chambers Steam Biscuit Factory was founded at 158 Main Street, in Winnipeg, Manitoba by John H. Chambers, who originally came from Peterborough Ontario. ¹¹ Over the course of the next few years, Chambers would relocate his business several times within the city and even face a devastating factory fire which completely gutted the interior of his establishment. ¹² Within that same time frame, another baker, W.H Paulin, had opened up a competing bakery just down the street. ¹³ The two bakers decided to join forces on Ross Avenue, merging their companies in 1884 and incorporating as the Paulin-Chambers Factory, or as most people called it, Paulin’s, in 1899. ¹⁴

Chambers’ string of bad luck would be broken, as his new joint venture with Paulin would see substantial growth over the next three decades. One aid to their success might have been their lack of competitors; being the first biscuit maker and confectioner in Western Canada, the Paulin-Chambers Company had little competition, at least in the beginning. ¹⁵ Another reason for their quick growth could have been their timing: according to Murray Peterson, a heritage officer from Winnipeg, Paulin’s opened directly after an economic boom which was triggered by the province’s railway construction. ¹⁶

Regardless of the reason why, the fact was Paulin’s was doing well. Very well. Thiessen’s book Snacks tells us that “by the 1930s, Paulin’s was making seventy different types of biscuits and 200 kinds of confectionery, employing 200 people.” ¹⁷ This was no small operation—Paulin-Chambers warehouses were scattered across the country and the factory had been expanded to six storeys, with different, exciting treats being made on each floor. David Ingram, who worked at Paulin’s as a teen, shared some of the jobs he, and presumably many of the other Paulin’s employees, performed during their time at the factory:

DAVID INGRAM: Yes, I also had a job in one of the candy rooms, throwing sugar on spearmint leaf candies, and sugar on spearmints. Another job I had there was pulling toffee or caramels for those yucky Halloween candies, the orange wrapped ones that we all hate! But yeah, doing those…¹⁸

SCOTT MAIER: All sorts of other treats were being made at the factory too, such as Christmas candy, ju-jubes, toasted marshmallows, and hard candies. ¹⁹ For many people looking in, working at the Paulin-Chambers factory seemed like a dream job; I mean, who wouldn’t want to work in a candy factory? And for the most part, employees truly were happy working at Paulin’s. Despite not allowing employees to organize a formal union, Paulin’s still did a lot for their staff—Christmas and Thanksgiving meals were an annual treat, along with fishing trips, free restaurant meals, and complimentary Christmas cookies during the holiday season. ²⁰ They even paid above the industrial average, with employees earning between ten and fourteen dollars an hour. ²¹ But not all employees shared in the positive experience. When blogging about her time working at Paulin’s, a former employee by the name of Joan wrote that “it was hell.” ²² The realities of working in mass production were not necessarily as rewarding or joyful as they may have seemed, even if what was being produced were sweet treats. Even David Ingram remembered having to keep up with the machines, decades after he was employed:

DAVID INGRAM: When it came to the ones that were turning over cornstarch, that was the machine—as quickly as you could put in the trays of cornstarch, they took them away. When I was doing the caramels, it was quite, well I thought it was fairly automated, that the machines did a lot of that. And with the chocolate, it was the machines doing that too and I just had to make sure I kept up with them. ²³

SCOTT MAIER: What couldn’t keep up, as the years went by, were small, privately-owned businesses and factories. Although there were 194 confectionery plants in production across Canada in 1961, by the end of the century there were only 94 left operating. ²⁴ This was caused by what the Canadian Encyclopedia explains as “the steady phasing out of smaller, obsolete production facilities and their replacement with fewer, larger, highly efficient operations.” ²⁵ Author and historian David Carr writes in his book Candy Making Canada that “the leading eight companies [in the confectionery industry] produce close to 87 percent of the value of shipments.” ²⁶ Successful companies, such as Paulin’s, were no match against national retail chains, who effectively controlled shelf-space across the country. ²⁷ Grocery retailers needed to save money, and therefore moved away from manufacturers such as Paulin’s, leading to their eventual demise. ²⁸ After successfully operating and bringing joy to countless families for over a hundred years, the Paulin-Chambers factory finally closed their iconic doors in 1991. ²⁹

While their doors remain closed, the memories of Paulin’s are not forgotten. The legacy of the Paulin-Chambers factory lives on both in the physical and social spheres. The historic building still stands in Winnipeg’s exchange district today and has been used to house city records for the last couple of decades. However, talks of redevelopment have been floating around over the past few years, as a Winnipeg development agency called CentreVenture has reportedly put the building up for sale in hopes of commercial redevelopment. ³⁰ Regardless of the physical space’s future, people will never forget their fond memories of Paulin’s’ treats. As David Carr explains in his book, “the penny candy culture is about more than candy. It is childhood memories of bike rides on lazy summer afternoons to invade the corner store in some distant neighbourhood.” ³¹ No closure, redevelopment, or mega-retail chain can ever take away those memories.

If after hearing all this, you too are yearning for a healthy dose of Paulin’s nostalgia, you’re in luck—the Cuban Lunch Bar has made a mighty return! Yes, you heard that right. It might not be the original, but Crystal Regehr Westergard has made sure her recreation of the bar is as close to accurate as she can get it. It all started when she wanted to find a way to cheer up her 85-year-old-mother. Crystal started making homemade batches of the chocolate bar, which were her mom’s favourite. Her recreation ended up being so good that she decided to buy the trademark and sell them on a bigger scale. ³² The bars, which are currently being sold in select provinces across the country, have been flying off the shelves, outselling popular bars like KitKat in local grocery stores. ³³ Even if the flavour isn’t an exact match, it’s the feeling that comes with eating the Cuban Lunch Bar that counts. And this special feeling is one that continues to unite Winnipeggers, Manitobans, and Canadians to this day.

LYNDA HOWDLE: But we weren’t known as people—well, we had numbers. Like I was 256. I could still tell you some of the people that I worked with. You know when your schedule is done it would say 270 is here, 271, 236 and you know. ³⁴

MATTHEW FRANK: Picture this, the year is 1945 and World War Two has just ended. It’s V.E. or Victory in Europe Day and you’re a woman manufacturing munitions. You stepped up when the call was put out for workers to fill the roles of the men who went off to fight. You stepped up to do your part during the war, to serve your country. You stepped up to make the bullets the soldiers would shoot, the tanks they would drive and the planes they would fly. You worked yourself to the bone, shedding sweat and blood to make sure Canada didn’t fall to the enemy. And now it’s all over. The war has been won and you helped win it through your hard work, work that was seen just as valuable as the work of the soldiers across the ocean. You proved that you could do the same work as men and do it just as good.

Clarence Gould: Yes, all men were the candymakers—because it was a lot of lifting. Sugar in those days were not 40 kilos, there was no such thing, we were all working with pounds and sugar was in 100 pound bags. ³⁵

When Canada entered World War II, the effects of the Great Depression were still wreaking havoc across the country and the unemployment rate was at unseen levels. Over 900,000 men were unemployed out of the 3.8 million working-age men in Canada. ³⁶ The need for soldiers provided a quick solution to high unemployment levels, through funneling fighting age men into the Canadian military. Sure, the unemployment problem was solved, but at the same time the need for fighting men eventually caused nationwide labour shortages. With the federal government needing to keep its war economy wheels spinning, it turned to the next possible labour force: Canadian women.

Canadian women were viewed as a reserve labour force that the government could dip into when country headed toward dire straits. ³⁷ It wasn’t so much about wanting to bring women into the workforce, but it was just simply a necessity to keep the country functioning and fighting. ³⁸ The idea of calling upon women to work only when it was absolutely necessary also existed also within the candy industry. In the case of Ganong Bros., women were hired for short seasonal work during busy seasons and when large orders were expected.³⁹ Soon after these busy periods were finished and factory work slowed down, the women were released and sent back home to carry on with their “womanly duties.”

A flurry of aggressive and persuasive propaganda and labour recruitment campaigns were commissioned by the federally mandated National Selective Service, which was founded in 1942. The goals of these campaigns were to instill a patriotic duty for women to do their part to help “the boys beat the Nazis” and to the highlight the importance of their work.⁴⁰ This campaign could be easily misunderstood as female empowerment and as progress for women’s rights. The reality was simply that the government just saw women as the next exploitable work force.⁴¹ Women never gained the right to work the jobs previously held by men, they were just obligated to do so. The NSS’s propaganda was used to show that every Canadian woman was expected to do their fair share of work to support the war effort. ⁴³ The NSS prioritised the hiring of young single women as they were not dependent on childcare and they could put their domestic duties aside to work full time. ⁴⁴ Once the NSS exhausted that labour pool, they moved on to married women as their next demographic, even providing part time work and childcare so that the maximum amount of women could work.⁴⁵ At the height of the war, over 250,000 women worked in war industries. ⁴⁶ Much like the NSS, candy factories saw single women to be the most capable workforce for employment for when extra labourers were needed. At Ganong Bros., almost all of the women were who were initially employed were single women.⁴⁷ As employment shortages continued, the factory turned to married women to supplement its work force, with number of married women working in the factory swelling to 40% of the total women employed in 1945.⁴⁸

As victory was coming into view, the federal government and Canadian companies were preparing for the post war economy. There were significant fears of another depression and another wave of unemployment floating around the halls of parliament.⁴⁹ It was seen to be a priority to ensure that veterans were able to come back to the jobs they once had.⁵⁰ However, there was a presiding feeling that Canadian women would stay involved in the work force, just not in the same jobs as men. To address this new reality, the federal government, under Prime Minister Mackenzie King, created The Subcommittee on the Post-War Problems of Women. This committee was mandated to look at how women will integrate permanently into the work force. But all of the committee’s suggestions were sabotaged by government bureaucracy and there never was really any real desire to have progressive reforms for women in the workforce.⁵¹

Even Prime Minister King held very traditional views of women, saying in his diary “I spoke to H.E. (The Governor General) about the organization of women for war work. Felt strongly that a man should be at the head of the work.”⁵² This mindset was typical of the time, with the common opinion that women who stayed home were the reason for healthy children and healthy families, with the men being the primary breadwinners.⁵³ As quickly as women were ushered into the labour force, they were forced out of it once the war ended. Married women were encouraged to leave the workforce to start families, funding was cut for childcare, tax breaks were denied for married women who worked, and government campaigns recommended the preferential hiring of returning veterans over women.⁵⁴

Despite these efforts and ideals within post war Canada, women stayed a fixture within the work force. The new consumer-centered economy saw many married women work to supplement their husbands’ wages. Most of the women working had to defend their need to work and their absence from their “domestic duties” by stating it was a necessity to work for them to support their families.⁵⁵ Jobs were available for women, but they were limited to just clerical, domestic, and factory work.⁵⁶

The candy industry was a large employer of women within post war Canada. When war-time labour shortages hit the factories, many candy factories turned to single and married women to fill the gaps left by men.⁵⁷ Much of the candy industry was still struggling with the strict rationing of sugar despite the high demand for chocolate after the war.⁵⁸ Even though there were struggles within the candy industry, production persisted, with candy main stays like Ganong Bros. and Moir’s expanding their operations.⁵⁹ This expansion and the return of men to the workforce brought with them greater gender divisions in labour and a return to the pre-war norms.

Much of the work within the candy factories was divided along gender lines. The gender lines were influence by five different factors. One, operating patterns were already established when there was a smaller, mainly male workforce.⁶⁰ Two, women’s employment was seen as less important to their domestic roles.⁶¹ Three, jobs that paid better and had more opportunities should always go to men.⁶² Four, since production was seasonal, large numbers of workers were needed for short periods.⁶³ Five, the dominant management styles at the time were very conservative and very traditional.⁶⁴

At Ganong Bros., the average wage for men was almost 50% more than what women earned.⁶⁵ Factory Owners explained the lesser pay by pinning it on the women’s family responsibilities, absenteeism, lack of supervisor skills, not having more technical skills, temporary positions, and being too emotional.⁶⁶ The majority of jobs within the candy factories were split between “skilled” and “unskilled work”. Predictably, the skilled work, like candy making and apprenticing was exclusively for the men, while decorating, packing, and weighing candy was left for the women.⁶⁷ If men and women did do the same jobs, that work was usually seen to be less significant.⁶⁸ Women had almost zero opportunities for promotion while men could start at entry level positions, like a “gopher”, and theoretically, work their way to the highest positions, like candymaker.⁶⁹

The action of candy factories hiring women for cheap work went against the post-war ideals of women sticking to their domestic roles as child raiser and homemaker while men were the primary breadwinners. When men were surveyed about their wives working outside of the home, they replied saying that their masculinity and pride would be damaged.⁷⁰ They justified it by saying that history always had the man being the breadwinner and the woman at home and that’s just way its always been.⁷¹ Many working men saw it ridiculous for women to do physical labour and that their femineity would be in danger if they worked too hard.⁷²

LINDA DOOLEY: It didn’t pay anything for starters; it was kind of an awful job: it was boring, it was hot, and it was smelly, and not a bad smell. I mean for a summer it was fine, but I had no desire to do it for any longer than I did it. I didn’t get up every morning thinking, “Oh God I would have to do this again.” On the other hand, there was certainly nothing that would’ve entice me to go back again.⁷³

One critic perfectly summarized the feelings after the war, "Well, girls, you have done a nice job; you looked very cute in your overalls, and we appreciate what you have done for us; but just run along; go home; we can get along without you very nicely.”⁷⁴

SOURCES

¹ Clarence Gould, interviewed by Sarah Story, April 21, 2015 in Winnipeg, MB. Digital Audio Recording. 00:42:20-00:45:29. Snack Foods: A Canadian Social History, “Confection Interviews," Oral History Centre Archive, University of Winnipeg, Winnipeg, MB.

² Clarence Gould interview, 00:48:34-00:51:29.

³ Clarence Gould interview, 00:51:29-00:52:05.

⁴ Roy Robertson, interviewed by Janis Thiessen, August 14, 2013 in Truro, Nova Scotia, Canada. Digital Audio Recording. 00:20:20-00:21:41. Snack Foods: A Canadian Social History, “Confection Interviews," Oral History Centre Archive, University of Winnipeg, Winnipeg, MB.

⁵ Clarence Gould interview, 01:08:50-01:09:25.

⁶ Clarence Gould interview, 01:09:33-01:09:55.

⁷ David Ingram, interviewed by Janis Thiessen, July 12, 2012 in Winnipeg, MB. Digital Audio Recording, 00:06:54-00:07:11. Snack Foods: A Canadian Social History, “Confection Interviews,” Oral History Centre Archive, University of Winnipeg, Winnipeg, MB.

⁸ Janis Thiessen, “The ‘Romance’ of Chocolate: Paulins, Moirs, and Ganong,” In Snacks: A Canadian Food History, (Winnipeg: University of Manitoba Press, 2017), 122.

⁹ Thiessen, “The ‘Romance’ of Chocolate,” 122.

¹⁰ Murray Peterson, Rep. “Paulin Chambers Building” (Winnipeg: City of Winnipeg Historical Buildings & Research Committee, 2018), 7.

¹¹ Peterson, “Paulin Chambers Building,” 7-8.

¹² Thiessen, “The ‘Romance’ of Chocolate,” 112.

¹³ Thiessen, “The ‘Romance’ of Chocolate,” 112.

¹⁴ Thiessen, “The ‘Romance’ of Chocolate,” 112.

¹⁵ Peterson, “Paulin Chambers Building,” 9. Thiessen, “The ‘Romance’ of Chocolate,” 113.

¹⁶ David Ingram interview, 00:06:18-00:06:52.

¹⁷ Thiessen, “The ‘Romance’ of Chocolate,” 115.

¹⁸ Thiessen, “The ‘Romance’ of Chocolate,” 114, 119.

¹⁹ Thiessen, “The ‘Romance’ of Chocolate,” 114.

²⁰ Thiessen, “The ‘Romance’ of Chocolate,” 125.

²¹ David Ingram interview, 00:17:53-00:18:20.

²² Robert F. Barratt, “Confectionery Industry,” The Canadian Encyclopedia,” February 6, 2006.

²³ Barratt, “Confectionery Industry.”

²⁴ David Carr, Candymaking in Canada (Toronto: Dundurn Press, 2003), 97.

²⁵ Thiessen, “The ‘Romance’ of Chocolate,” 115.

²⁶ Thiessen, “The ‘Romance’ of Chocolate,” 115.

²⁷ Thiessen, “The ‘Romance’ of Chocolate,” 114.

²⁸ Bartley Kives, “ City Puts Old Cuban Lunch Factory up for Sale to Kick-Start Redevelopment of Northwestern Exchange, Chinatown.” CBC News, May 13, 2019, 4.

²⁹ Carr, Candymaking in Canada, 122.

³⁰ Lauren Krugel, “Revived Cuban Lunch Bars Met with Huge Demand, Wrapper Supply Snafus,” CBC News, December 26, 2018.

³¹ Elisha Dacey, “Woman behind Cuban Lunch Bar's Revival Hopes to Unravel Mystery Ingredients in Original,” Global News, May 17, 2019.

³² Lynda Howdle. Interviewed by Sarah Story. December 7, 2014 in Winnipeg, MB. Digital Audio Recording. 00:23:36-00:24:16. Snack Foods: A Canadian Social History, “Confection Interviews,” Oral History Centre Archive, University of Winnipeg, Winnipeg, MB.

³³ Clarence Gould interview, 00:09:40-00:10:20.

³⁴ Ruth Pierson. “Women's Emancipation and the Recruitment of Women into the Canadian Labor Force in World War II,” Historical Papers/Communications historiques 11, no. 1 (1976), 142.

³⁵ Pierson, “Women's Emancipation and the Recruitment of Women,” 141.

³⁶ Gail Cuthbert Brandt, “Pigeon-Holed and Forgotten: The Work of the Subcommittee on the Post-War Problems of Women, 1943,” Histoire Sociale/Social History 15, no. 29 (1982), 241.

³⁷ Margaret E. McCallum, “Separate Spheres: The Organization of Work in a Confectionery Factory: Ganong Bros., St. Stephen, New Brunswick,” Labour / Le Travail 24 (1989): 82.

³⁸ Pierson. “Women's Emancipation and the Recruitment of Women,” 151.

³⁹ Pierson. “Women's Emancipation and the Recruitment of Women,” 141.

⁴⁰ Pierson. “Women's Emancipation and the Recruitment of Women,” 142.

⁴¹ Pierson. “Women's Emancipation and the Recruitment of Women,” 150.

⁴² Pierson. “Women's Emancipation and the Recruitment of Women,” 143.

⁴³ Pierson. “Women's Emancipation and the Recruitment of Women,” 149.

⁴⁴ Brandt, “Pigeon-Holed and Forgotten,” 241.

⁴⁵ McCallum, “Separate Spheres,” 77.

⁴⁶ McCallum, “Separate Spheres,” 77.

⁴⁷ Brandt, “Pigeon-Holed and Forgotten,” 257.

⁴⁸ Brandt, “Pigeon-Holed and Forgotten,” 243.

⁴⁹ Brandt, “Pigeon-Holed and Forgotten,” 257.

⁵⁰ Brandt, “Pigeon-Holed and Forgotten,” 257.

⁵¹ Joan Sangster, Transforming Labour: Women and Work in Post-War Canada (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2010), 17.

⁵² Sangster, Transforming Labour, 18.

⁵³ Sangster, Transforming Labour, 16.

⁵⁴ Margaret Anne Mulrooney, “Femininity and the Factory: Women’s Labouring Bodies in the Moir’s Candy Plant, 1949-1970,” (M.A. thesis, Dalhousie University, 2021), 34.

⁵⁵ McCallum, “Separate Spheres,” 77.

⁵⁶ Carr, Candymaking in Canada, 70.

⁵⁷ McCallum, “Separate Spheres,” 85.

⁵⁸ McCallum, “Separate Spheres,” 85.

⁵⁹ McCallum, “Separate Spheres,” 85.

⁶⁰ McCallum, “Separate Spheres,” 85.

⁶¹ McCallum, “Separate Spheres,” 85.

⁶² McCallum, “Separate Spheres,” 80.

⁶³ Mulrooney, “Femininity and the Factory,” 21.

⁶⁴ Mulrooney, “Femininity and the Factory,” 36.

⁶⁵ Mulrooney, “Femininity and the Factory,” 36.

⁶⁶ McCallum, “Separate Spheres,” 78.

⁶⁷ Sangster, Transforming Labour, 41.

⁶⁸ Sangster, Transforming Labour, 41.

⁶⁹ Sangster, Transforming Labour, 39.

⁷⁰ Linda Dooley, interviewed by Sarah Reilly, April 17, 2013 in Winnipeg, MB. Digital Audio Recording. 00:23:36-00:24:16. Snack Foods: A Canadian Social History, “Confection Interviews,” Oral History Centre Archive, University of Winnipeg, Winnipeg, MB.

⁷¹ Brandt, “Pigeon-Holed and Forgotten,” 259.