The
Reasons for the Rebellion of 1837 in Upper Canada
INTRODUCTION
There was neither big
revolution nor dependence war in the history of Canada. The Rebellion of 1837
was the first and the only one revolt with certain scale, which occupies an
important position in Canada history. In The
Rising in French Canada 1837, Joseph Schull indicates that the Rebellion of
1837 is the mirror of the conflicts among developing national and political
philosophy, different life styles. It’s a test for the people and leaders of
the country. There were two armed uprisings of 1837 which took place in the
lower and Upper Canada respectively. In the lower Canada which was ethnically
heterogeneous, comprising both the French and English colonialists; the revolt
was due to political ethno-exclusivity. The colonial administration treated the
two factions with discrimination. It favored the English colonialists and
neglected the voices of the French colonialists. However, in the Upper Canada,
the concern was about the control over the colonial administration. Wealthier
colonialists wielded dominance over the poor colonialists hence depriving them
of many rights and privileges. In both colonies the urgent clamor for reforms
was rejected, a situation that led to the rebellions. Eventually the British
instituted measures and instruments that gave room to administrative reforms
and a responsible government was formed. In as such this paper aims at
exploring the reasons for the Rebellion of 1837 in upper Canada.1
First of all, the rebellion
is influenced by political factors. The implementation of constitution in 1791
caused that some privilege groups grasped political power and formed political
monopoly. This constitution was still in practice during 1820s and 1830s. It
set vice-governors, an administrative committee, judicial committee and the parliament,
which was an imitation of the constitutional system in Britain.2 Peter Burroughts The weakness of such system
lies in that it involves two political power centers, namely the administrative
committee and the parliament, which demands the coordination between them. At
that time, the government power lied with the governor resigned by the British
King and the administrative committee and judicial committee nominated by the
governor. The governor was the supreme ruler of the colony and was responsible
for the British King, while the colonial parliament formed by election had no
practical function. The members resigned in the administrative committee became
oligarch in officials who were nor responsible for the parliament, so they
wouldn’t be removed from office because of accusing. Such a governmental system
seemed to provide the parliament for people to discuss administration, but it
failed to promise the rights that were necessary for their wishes to come true.
As to the history, Lord Durham also implies that the constitution in 1791
contains the Rebellion in 1837. 3
Lord Durham The conflict between administrative organizations and the
parliament was not solved in Canada during 1830s.
Within the system, though the
governor was the chief of government, he was just resigned by the British
government and spent a little time in the colony. On the other hand, the
members of these two committees were officials, upper monks, big businessmen
and landlords who had close relationship with Britain. Therefore, the governor
always listened to their opinions and they were the actual rulers for the
colony. Gradually the Family Compact in upper Canada was formed by some family
power in these two committees. With the help of power in their hands the Family
Compact pushed the polies that protected the interests of privileged class and
became directly opposed to the masses. 4
Royce Under such circumstances, reformists appeared in Canada, represented by
Robert Baldwin and William MacKenzie. They desired to change the government
forms, overthrow the monopoly rule of Tory government, enlarge the power of
parliament. They desired the parliament becoming the representatives for public
opinions, abolishing the integration of religion and politics, and realizing
business communication within the country and with America on the basis of
mutual benefits. 5 Colin In 1836,
Francis Bond Reid was resigned as the governor in Canada. His fierce conflicts
with the reformists directly led to the rebellion.
Secondly, the reasons can be
found from social and economic aspects. In 1830s, most of the western countries
came across the troubles brought by the financial crisis. In 1837, influenced
by the chaos of international economy, insufficient money supply also appeared
in Upper Canada. The banks asked the government to cancel coin payment. The
residents worried about the safety of deposit and doubted the values of paper
money, so they withdrew large deal of money from the banks. The shortage of
cash led MacKenzie and other reformists to believe that the banks also planned
to be against the public. Besides, as the colony of the Britain, there were
serious restraints on the economic development in Canada. During that time, the
colonies acted as the raw material production places and sales markets for the
manufacturing industry of Britain. The constraints on manufacturing industry,
the tariff and laws of the trade impeded the development of colonial economy.
For example, in 1768, Britain prohibited the clothes manufacturing industry in
Canada. In 1784, Britain intended to make constraints on the colonial
businessmen who had trade communication with America and the west India. The
navigation act guaranteed all goods being carried by the ships from Britain. 6 Greg In The Colonial Advocate, MacKenzie
also explained why the colony had dependence and lagged behind. According to
him, the business of colony was grasped by the British capitalists, and wood
trade was to support breaking down ship industry. Such constraints had aroused
dissatisfaction among reformists, so it’s inevitable to overthrow the system.
Moreover, the land monopoly
system is also an important reason for the rebellion. Since the manufacturing
industry was forbidden, people had to live on agriculture; however, most of the
land was used for speculation and sales at high price. Most of the land was in
the hands of privilege groups, so people had no land to use. Much land was sold
to immigrants for them to establish houses, which caused rising price of the
surrounding land. Insufficient roads made it even harder to construct schools,
churches, hospitals and stores. For most immigrants who couldn't buy land, they
had to become tenants and worked on the land of the churches. People were in
urgent need of land, while most of the land was grasped by a small number of
people. The dissatisfaction for these privilege power groups was inevitable.
Thirdly, the divergence among
British and French Upper, Lower Canadians is also a reason for the rebellion.
Since the election in 1792, French Canadians had occupied the majority in the
parliament. After the second war between Britain and America in 1812, they
began to try to increase their power in the government. French Canadians even
stopped the financial investment in some big programs. For example, the plan of
constructing canals put forward by the British Canadians had been obstructed by
French Canadians for many times. 7
Dustin But at that time, British
governor still held power, so the governor tended to give more job
opportunities for the government to British Canadians. According to Lord Durham’s
report on both the Lower Canada and Upper Canada uprisings, The Lower Canada
rebellion was a more fierce revolution, fundamentally different from the upper
Canada rebellion. The insurrections in the lower Canada were instigated by the
profound racial identities, with the colonial government favoring the English
colonialists and relegating the pertinent needs of the French colonialists.
Ethnic tension stemming from resource and power conflicts culminated into a powerful
uprising. The colonial government in turn encountered this with a more brutal
and forceful government and militia forces to neutralize the rebellion.
The Lower rebellion was a
precursor to the upper rebellion which started about a month later than the Lower
Canada rebellion. The dissidence and resentment demonstrated in the Lower
Canada rebellion could have contributed immensely on the latter since the
rebels could have been inspired by the former rebellion.
Fourthly, the rebellion was
also influenced by bourgeois democracy thoughts. With the impacts of the
independence war in America and the bourgeois revolution in France in the 18th
century, bourgeois democracy thoughts were spread in Canada. As the development
of the bourgeois in Canada, the newly rising bourgeois class in Canada was
increasingly dissatisfied with the savage rule of British colonial officials,
the landlords, big businessmen and churches. So the voice of reform began to
appear in both Upper and Lower Canada. The representative MacKenzie in Upper
Canada and Louis Joseph Papineau in Lower Canada won certain support from the
masses from lower class. In 1834, the reformists won in the election. In 1837,
the situation had been stuck in serious deadlock, so the rebellion broke out led
by the reformist leaders.
The Rebellion in 1837 had
neither unified organization and leadership, nor careful plans and
preparations, it happened hastily. There was a wide gap between the strengths
of rebels and government army. Under the military suppress of colonial
government, there was definitely no possibility of success, as a result, the
rebellion failed. Though the rebellion failed, it had touched the rule of
Britain as a reform movement seeking for democracy and opposing to colonial
domination.
In a colony considered to
have ethnic homogeneity as opposed to the multi-ethnic Canada, Capitalism, was
a major catalyst to the upper revolt. The wealthy Catholic clergy perpetuated a
status quo of an old order of an agrarian society thus opposing economic and
political liberalization. The system which natured political and economic
repression of the poor and middle class, was preferred by the clergy to
safeguard their economic interests; as a result the poor and middle class
became resentful and hence communicating their grief through rebellion.
Also, global economic
recession played a key role in motivating both upper and Lower Canada
rebellions. The decline in monetary value and cash flow coupled with massive
crop failures in the period of 1836-1837, impoverished farmers and plunged them
into debts. The wealthy input merchants reined them with lawsuits regarding
debts accruing from yield loss, which caused the formation of political unions
ostensibly to air the farmer’s grievances.
Corruption and injustice
escalated under political alienations and crave political control. The local
politicians the so called, Family compact, perpetuated the vices. Corruption
and injustice degrades the societal values and beliefs apart from slowing
economic development. The Upper Canada rebels desired a more responsible and
accountable government without corruption and injustice. Nevertheless the
rebels were not somewhat genuinely convicted of their grievances. Their plight
was aligned to the liberalization of the United States and thus contravening
the torry values of the Canadian colonies.
Lastly, American
liberalization and immigration; the Upper Canada was majorly comprised of
British Canadians and American immigrants. It is apparent the American
immigrants played a role in radicalization of the upper Canadians into
rebellion. As revealed in the rulings of Sir. John Robinson, chief justice, the
crown as a protector of lives, liberty and prosperity of its subjects was
entitled to a legitimate demand for loyalty and allegiance to its authority,
and that those who preferred republicanism were free to emigrate. As such the
rebel prisoners were convicted of treason. As if that is not enough, most
rebels including their leader Mckenzie indeed fled to the United States.
After the rebellion failed,
the government of Upper Canada continued the persecution of rebels and the
reformists. Many leaders in the rebellion had to run to America. However, the
rebellion still gave a heavy blow to the oligarchy groups and it became
difficult for them to continue with original domination. The persecution of rebellion
couldn’t solve problems in the essential. Even though the majority of people
refused to choose violent rebellion following the radical reformers, the legal
ways to realize reforms still exist according to the British system. If the
problems existing in the system were not solved, peace in colonies was
impossible and the second rebellion was also inevitable. The British government
was forced to adjust its policies. As a response to the rebellion, the British
government dismissed Reid from his post and resigned talented Lord Durham as
the governor, also granted him all the power for administration and
investigation. After investigation, Lord Durham made the well-known Durham
Report. Thus a new age of reform and self-administration government in Canada started.
ENDNOTES
1.
Joseph Schull, The Rising in French Canada
1837 (Toronto: Macmillan of Canada, 1971), 6.
2.
Peter Burroughs, The Colonial Reformers and
Canada 1830-1849 (McClelland and Stewart Limited, 1969), 107.
3.
Lord Durham, Report on the Affairs of British
North America (McClelland and Stewart Limited, 1963), 56.
4.
Royce McGillivray and Roger Hall, Ontario
History (The Quarterly Journal of the Ontario Historical Society, 1980).
5.
Colin Read and Ronald J. Stagg, the Rebellion
of 1837 in Upper Canada (Ottawa: Carleton University Press, 1988), 4.
6.
Greg Keilty, 1837: Revolution in the Canada’s
(NC Press Limited, 1974), 40.
7. Dusti Jeffery, Rebellions of 1837 (http://www.angelfire.com/crazy4/rebellions,
2007).
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Burroughs, Peter. 1969. The
Colonial Reformers and Canada 1830-1849. Toronto: McClelland and Stewart
Limited.
Keilty, Greg. 1974. 1837: Revolution in the Canadas. NC
Press Limited.
Jeffery,Dustin. 2007.
Rebellions of 1837.
Lord Durham. 1963. Report on
the Affairs of British North America. Toronto: McClelland and Stewart Limited.
MacGillivray, Royce and Hall,
Roger. 1980. “Ontario History”. The
Quarterly Journal of the Ontario Historical Society 12(4).
Read, Colin and Stagg,
Ronald. 1988. The Rebellion of 1837 in
Upper Canada. Ottawa: Carleton University Press.
Schull, Joseph. 1971. Rebellion; the Rising in
French Canada 1837. Toronto: Macmillan of Canada.
Comments