In what ways were the Rebellions in the Canadas similar to those in the Atlantic region? To what extent and in what ways might the 1830s be seen as an age of revolution in British North America?
The rebellions that occurred in both Lower and Upper Canada had similarities with the colonies in the Atlantic region. There was a small group of elitists in the society that held the ruling powers while oppressing the rest of the society. As the people came to realize what was going on through respective prominent figures in the colonies, they grew more aware of their unfair situations and demanded a reform of the governing system. The Canadas and the colonies in the Atlantic region demanded for a responsible government where no one was appointed, but had to be elected by the voters. Although the idea was first rejected by Britain’s government and Governors, after spreading awareness through the establishment of the reformists’ newspaper mills, the demand grew for responsible government and it ended in favour of the reformists.
Despite their demand for democratic reform through limited to no violent acts, the 1830s could be seen as an age of revolution because of the varying methods and the then-radical thinking of their demands that the colonies of British North America insisted upon. The differing methods used by the dissatisfied colonies varied as some protested, took up arms, started newspaper mills, and/or pressed the British government and Governor for change. The then-radical thinking was the concept of responsible government where there was an assembly that was elected by the voters, but because of this “extremist” type of thinking back then, the 1830s could have been seen as an age of revolution. However, the extent to which the 1830s in British North America was seen as a revolution was quite restrained compared to the revolutions and wars that occurred outside the colonies, which were the very definition of revolution, such as the America Revolution, French Revolution, and the Napoleon War, where their respective “governments” were overthrown by the people.
Both of these events are similar due to their cause that made the means to an end for this to happen. Both areas were being repressed by what is probably best called an “aristocracy” gone bad or oligarchy really. To bring in an outside example away from lecture, this situation reminds me a lot of Brazil. Profit is made in the country but it goes into the pockets of the few. Obviously, those who benefited from this didn’t want this to be discontinued so there was a lot of struggle in both areas to properly appoint people to make responsible government happen. However it seems both these places adapted some way to give the powerful voice of the people, there was an ability to overcome the voicelessness of the population and people could be properly instilled into positions where they could respond to the peoples need for political change. However, I feel like the economics from place to place differ. In the Atlantic region they seemed to be doing well economically and this created a new class of merchants that really gave voice to some of their political movements. None the less, I don’t feel like this was much of a position in Lower and Upper Canada. I feel like there was land owners and people who worked the land, at least I feel like the merchant class wasn’t really something that was available to them at the time. I also feel as if the Atlantic had a few more advantages in way of cod fisheries etc. that were mentioned through class and large scale fur trades, where as some areas of Upper and Lower Canada wouldn’t have this privileged.
I think it could be seen as an age of revolution because of what people had to go through to get to their desired end. When I think of revolution I think of a straight line, with many different series of checkpoints along the way that lead to a desired end and each check point is a step in the right direction, but they can also be gone back too. I feel like the revolution’s end was responsible government and this demolition of the oligarchy. However it took a very long time and a lot of death, punishments, disputes of power to get there and rebellions. In this way can revolution be seen because it took this desire to reach their end that the people were finally able to change the way that their prospect governments ran and people finally received the political power they had been craving.
They are similar in ways that there were different socioeconomic groups looking out for their own self-interests. Different groups were profiting from certain rules, especially small groups of social elitists and British loyalists that were holding power over the commoners; therefore, it was difficult to reform policies and appointed officials that could benefit the majority. Atlantic colonies had also inherited the same government systems as the Canadas. With the influence of a few prominent figures at the time, the people were starting to realize that they needed a government that better represented their needs and understood the delicacy of the situation in terms of different racial and religious groups. They wanted the right to vote, and the power to elect their own officials. In both instances, the people wanted to establish policies that reflected the social desires of the majority, not just a few in power, and refused to let the British government assumed full control over the rule and decision making. Rebellions in both the Canadas and the Atlantic regions were also concerning similar matters such as landholding and the right to office. The 1830s might be seen as an age of revolution in British North America to the extend that people were dying, punished, and forced to resort to violence to achieve political goals. There were also outbreaks of war, such as the one in Lower Canada, resulting from unresolved conflicts between classes and unsettled political situation. It is a revolution in ways there were death and punishment along the way, and many who fought for democracy were convicted and trailed. Although the original government bodies were not overthrown as in typical revolutions such as the American and French Revolution, policies and systems were reformed in ways that they could finally have better representation of the majority of they people .
The rebellions in the Canadas were similar to dissent in the Atlantic region in that the civilians living in both regions were beginning to demand for an elected assembly that represented the people of both regions and for a more responsive and responsible government. In Upper Canada, power was concentrated in the hands of the Family Compact. In order to keep the colony British and keep American influence to a low level, the Family Compact began to take steps to keep Americans out by telling judges to withhold oaths of allegiance to Americans, therefore rendering them without any political rights. This angered the citizens of the colony which provoked them to demand for a more responsible government instead of having a small group of people, the Family Compact, take decisions and hold majority of the power. In Lower Canada, many francophones began to suspect assimilation efforts by the British as well as resented how immigrants from the British Isles were beginning to populate the area, which caused them to speak out for their own political rights and demand for a responsible government. In the Atlantic regions, as the colonies began to grow, the middle class people of the colony were beginning to develop a sense of community and their own local interests and soon politics came down to the question of how to make appointed bodies more responsive to the elected part of government and the people of the colonies. Therefore, it came down to the objection of the concentration of power in the hands of a few in the Atlantic region and the Canadas. People were beginning to demand for a responsible government that was accountable to them. They wanted to make their voices heard.
The 1830s may be seen as the age of revolution in that the people living in the Canadas and the Atlantic region were beginning to revolt against the rule of the colonists. They were dissatisfied with the way the colonies were being run and therefore they revolted against it, at least in the Canadas they did. The 1830s took on revolutionary qualities as prominent figures began to take steps against the government and began to make their voices and opinions heard. William Lyon Mackenzie can be taken as an example as he put an appeal to small farmers and asked them to come together and lobby for change in the form of a more responsible government. Joseph Howe could also be looked at as an example of a figure who questioned the role of the government by publishing an article about it and got arrested for libel. He was seen as a champion of free speech, free press, and responsible government. As these figures were publicly revolting against the government and calling for drastic change by voicing their opinions, the 1830s can be considered the age of revolution.
The rebellions of Upper and Lower Canada were similar to the reforms in the Atlantic region in that the impetus for change was the same. In Upper and Lower Canada, the established political system had elite members of society controlling the government and making decisions. In Upper Canada, progressive groups made up of newer immigrants and the poorer members of society challenged the elite. In Lower Canada, rebellion was similarly vested in opposition towards the controlling executive powers, but also contained anti-British sentiments that the French Canadian population felt oppressed by. Lord Durham recognized this as an “ethnic” problem as well as a political one. The common goal of both rebellions was for a “responsible government” that put more control over colonial affairs in the hands of those who lived in the colonies as opposed to leadership sent from London. In the Atlantic region, the rebellion was focused on installing a responsible government. A similar situation existed in Atlantic Canada as it did in the Upper and Lower provinces, where control rested in the hands of British-loyal elite. The successful shift to a responsible government saw the executive counsel or cabinet become responsible to the assembly. From the reform movements that took place in the first few decades of the 19th century, Canada experienced its most revolutionary period up until that time. While not all of the movements were successful, each carried influence in shaping the political landscape of the provinces and colony.
Political dissent, elitists ruling the lands, the lack of economy, poor social structure and upheaval were both the mainstays of the rebellions in the Canada’s and the Atlantic region. While were on this we can say that all these factors gave the BNA an age of revolution as well, but more on that later. First we will look at the similarities that led to the uprising. Both of these situations can be called uprisings due to the fact that in both instances small packs of elitists, land holders, absentee proprietors or corrupt government held the power and used it to their very own benefit leaving the poorer without certain and specific rights, to work hard and to suffer while the fat cats got bigger. These uprisings led to responsible governments and better rights for the citizens and voices within their own homes and lands. The upper British, the lower french and the Highlanders from the Atlantic all had differing situations that led to an uprising and movement within their own societies but the one main thing they had in common was a revolution.
What these three societies lacked and needed could only be attained by a new social order or an upheaval of the powers that were leading them at that certain point and time. This is what made the 1830’s an age of revolution where the majority saw a need for change and did just that with forcible removal either that included death tolls, voices, freedom of speech and press, political maneuvers and hard stances that the minorities could not deny which eventually led to the changes that people sought out. Thus there were all the ingredients for an age of revolution.
The rebellions in the Atlantic region, and the rebellions in Upper and Lower Canada had significant similarities. In Upper Canada the elite group, the Family Compact, was in control and often used methods to stay in power that were not in accordance with what the people wanted. In Lower Canada, a similar oligarchy existed, the Chateau Clique. Both groups used their power to further benefit themselves and remain in control as long as possible. The situation was similar the Atlantic Region, as the people were controlled by non-elected entities. The people in the Canadas and in the Atlantic colonies both sought out a government that would be responsible to the people. They wanted the executive council and governor to be responsible, and they wanted an elected Legislative Assembly, where most of the power would be concentrated. Initially, the crown ignored the requests, and though some concessions were made, it mostly ended with the people being angrier than before and turning to means of violence. Though all areas did eventually end up getting a responsible government, there were differences in the ways the colonies acted to get this. In Lower Canada for example, once the people that reached their wits end, the first shots were fired in the November of 1837. In Upper Canada, William Lyon Mackenzie took a stance against the government in his radical newspaper, and though the governor, Francis Bond Head did appoint two some what radical reformers to the executive council, no real changes were made and the elections of 1836 were the most violent ever. In the Atlantic regions however, the economy was rather different. Fuelled by the fisheries and the timber trade, a lot of the Atlantic colonies were prospering, and developed a prominent merchant class. When London, witnessed that the people were unhappy with the political situation, more concessions were made because the British Crown had already seen what had happened in Upper and Lower Canada.
The 1830’s can be seen as a revolution because people were unhappy with the way they were being governed, and acted to change it. Through the publication of radical newspapers, protests, and violence, eventually the people prevailed, and every colony eventually received a responsible government. The definition of a revolution according to the oxford dictionary is, “a overthrow of government or social order in favor of a new one”. A new type of governance was definitely established and oligarchies, and suppressive, non –elected governments were overthrown. Though 1830’s revolutions were not necessarily as prominent as those in France and in the United States, they are still valid and important revolutions. Though not all the colonies were united as one to overthrow the British Crown, the people in each of the colonies did share a common goal. In respect, Britain was more lenient to granting the wishes of the colonies than in other circumstances, but that does not make the 1830’s any less of a revolutionary time.
As most rebellions are of the lower classes revolting against the upper ruling classes, the Atlantic Rebellions share these characteristics. In each location and under-represented worker class was taken advantage of by the powers of the colonizing force. The degrees to which different locations were affected by the rebellious fever varied, as the Rebellions of Upper & Lower Canada were put down after only a few weeks, while the American Revolutionary War spanned several years and the Haitian uprising against the French was almost as horrific and bloody as France’s own Revolution. In each case the call (if not the exact words used) reflected that for responsible government. A ruling cadre of elected officials from the local population. (the exception to this may be Haiti, as freedom from abject oppression and slavery was the driving factor behind their revolt)
The Rebellions in Upper & Lower Canada differ from these other instances though in while they did not succeed initially, militarily or otherwise, one of their most important goals, responsible government, was realized despite the failures. (True, it took more than a decade to materialize, but can argue how much longer this would’ve taken had there been no Rebellions.
To characterize the 1830’s as a distinctly ‘rebellious’ period only lends credence to the notion that other rebellions and resistance to colonial over-reach in the past (the Acadians, for example) were not as important to the shaping of Canadian identity. In terms of the noticeable long term effects on what we view today as ‘Canada’ then yes the rebellions of the 1830’s were significant, but I do not believe they represent a particular trend of era, but rather the lasting effects those two rebellions had on our view of Canada.
Although no rebellions occurred in the Atlantic colonies, like the two provinces of Canada they were greatly dissatisfied with the government and were resentful that, also like Upper and Lower Canada, the power still rested in the hands of an elite few who were ruling as an oligarchy. All of the citizens were unhappy when they realized that the government wasn’t responsive to the interests of the people, particularly over the use of public funds and land. They lobbied for responsible government. Although an elected assembly was created, the elites running the government could, at their own will, dissolve the assembly and replace them with their “friends”. Because of this, the presence of individuals calling for political reform strengthened: William Lyon Mackenzie in Upper Canada; Louis-Joseph Papineau in Lower Canada; and Joseph Howe in Nova Scotia. The Atlantic colonies (except Newfoundland) would achieve responsible government around the turn of the 1850s.
The people started finding a voice. They wanted change and saw that they had to come together and fight for what they wanted and believed they deserved. Nothing brings people together more than an attempt to overthrow (or at least significantly change) the government. They wanted a government that listened to them and consulted them on matters affecting their region as a whole – public funds, land, voting power, immigration. They wanted to be recognized as a cohesive citizenry. Although some places did not take up arms, it was the many versus the few in all parts of British North America as they became more aware of the corruption of the government.
General Comments on this week’s question:
Most of you did quite well on this, which is great. You will be asked to synthesize and analyze in just this kind of way on the December exam.
The Rebellions in the Canadas and the political dissent in the Atlantic colonies shared much in common. In both regions discontent centred on the system of landholding and the power of a colonial oligarchy. As well, reformers in both regions saw responsible government as the solution; i.e. a restructuring of government so the appointed part of government was either eliminated or made accountable to the elected part of government. In short, reformers of both moderate and radical persuasions wanted more democracy.
The other similarity that dissent in the Canadas and the Atlantic colonies shared was the central role newspapers and journalists played in giving voice to dissent (Pierre Bedard, William Lyon Mackenzie, Joseph Howe were all newspapermen).
cprimus, 
SteveMoody, and 7 others are discussing.
millyzhu 7:04 pm on October 23, 2013 Permalink | Log in to Reply
The rebellions that occurred in both Lower and Upper Canada had similarities with the colonies in the Atlantic region. There was a small group of elitists in the society that held the ruling powers while oppressing the rest of the society. As the people came to realize what was going on through respective prominent figures in the colonies, they grew more aware of their unfair situations and demanded a reform of the governing system. The Canadas and the colonies in the Atlantic region demanded for a responsible government where no one was appointed, but had to be elected by the voters. Although the idea was first rejected by Britain’s government and Governors, after spreading awareness through the establishment of the reformists’ newspaper mills, the demand grew for responsible government and it ended in favour of the reformists.
Despite their demand for democratic reform through limited to no violent acts, the 1830s could be seen as an age of revolution because of the varying methods and the then-radical thinking of their demands that the colonies of British North America insisted upon. The differing methods used by the dissatisfied colonies varied as some protested, took up arms, started newspaper mills, and/or pressed the British government and Governor for change. The then-radical thinking was the concept of responsible government where there was an assembly that was elected by the voters, but because of this “extremist” type of thinking back then, the 1830s could have been seen as an age of revolution. However, the extent to which the 1830s in British North America was seen as a revolution was quite restrained compared to the revolutions and wars that occurred outside the colonies, which were the very definition of revolution, such as the America Revolution, French Revolution, and the Napoleon War, where their respective “governments” were overthrown by the people.
enorthwood 7:31 pm on October 23, 2013 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Both of these events are similar due to their cause that made the means to an end for this to happen. Both areas were being repressed by what is probably best called an “aristocracy” gone bad or oligarchy really. To bring in an outside example away from lecture, this situation reminds me a lot of Brazil. Profit is made in the country but it goes into the pockets of the few. Obviously, those who benefited from this didn’t want this to be discontinued so there was a lot of struggle in both areas to properly appoint people to make responsible government happen. However it seems both these places adapted some way to give the powerful voice of the people, there was an ability to overcome the voicelessness of the population and people could be properly instilled into positions where they could respond to the peoples need for political change. However, I feel like the economics from place to place differ. In the Atlantic region they seemed to be doing well economically and this created a new class of merchants that really gave voice to some of their political movements. None the less, I don’t feel like this was much of a position in Lower and Upper Canada. I feel like there was land owners and people who worked the land, at least I feel like the merchant class wasn’t really something that was available to them at the time. I also feel as if the Atlantic had a few more advantages in way of cod fisheries etc. that were mentioned through class and large scale fur trades, where as some areas of Upper and Lower Canada wouldn’t have this privileged.
I think it could be seen as an age of revolution because of what people had to go through to get to their desired end. When I think of revolution I think of a straight line, with many different series of checkpoints along the way that lead to a desired end and each check point is a step in the right direction, but they can also be gone back too. I feel like the revolution’s end was responsible government and this demolition of the oligarchy. However it took a very long time and a lot of death, punishments, disputes of power to get there and rebellions. In this way can revolution be seen because it took this desire to reach their end that the people were finally able to change the way that their prospect governments ran and people finally received the political power they had been craving.
angieL 6:44 pm on October 24, 2013 Permalink | Log in to Reply
They are similar in ways that there were different socioeconomic groups looking out for their own self-interests. Different groups were profiting from certain rules, especially small groups of social elitists and British loyalists that were holding power over the commoners; therefore, it was difficult to reform policies and appointed officials that could benefit the majority. Atlantic colonies had also inherited the same government systems as the Canadas. With the influence of a few prominent figures at the time, the people were starting to realize that they needed a government that better represented their needs and understood the delicacy of the situation in terms of different racial and religious groups. They wanted the right to vote, and the power to elect their own officials. In both instances, the people wanted to establish policies that reflected the social desires of the majority, not just a few in power, and refused to let the British government assumed full control over the rule and decision making. Rebellions in both the Canadas and the Atlantic regions were also concerning similar matters such as landholding and the right to office. The 1830s might be seen as an age of revolution in British North America to the extend that people were dying, punished, and forced to resort to violence to achieve political goals. There were also outbreaks of war, such as the one in Lower Canada, resulting from unresolved conflicts between classes and unsettled political situation. It is a revolution in ways there were death and punishment along the way, and many who fought for democracy were convicted and trailed. Although the original government bodies were not overthrown as in typical revolutions such as the American and French Revolution, policies and systems were reformed in ways that they could finally have better representation of the majority of they people .
nkular93 10:22 pm on October 24, 2013 Permalink | Log in to Reply
The rebellions in the Canadas were similar to dissent in the Atlantic region in that the civilians living in both regions were beginning to demand for an elected assembly that represented the people of both regions and for a more responsive and responsible government. In Upper Canada, power was concentrated in the hands of the Family Compact. In order to keep the colony British and keep American influence to a low level, the Family Compact began to take steps to keep Americans out by telling judges to withhold oaths of allegiance to Americans, therefore rendering them without any political rights. This angered the citizens of the colony which provoked them to demand for a more responsible government instead of having a small group of people, the Family Compact, take decisions and hold majority of the power. In Lower Canada, many francophones began to suspect assimilation efforts by the British as well as resented how immigrants from the British Isles were beginning to populate the area, which caused them to speak out for their own political rights and demand for a responsible government. In the Atlantic regions, as the colonies began to grow, the middle class people of the colony were beginning to develop a sense of community and their own local interests and soon politics came down to the question of how to make appointed bodies more responsive to the elected part of government and the people of the colonies. Therefore, it came down to the objection of the concentration of power in the hands of a few in the Atlantic region and the Canadas. People were beginning to demand for a responsible government that was accountable to them. They wanted to make their voices heard.
The 1830s may be seen as the age of revolution in that the people living in the Canadas and the Atlantic region were beginning to revolt against the rule of the colonists. They were dissatisfied with the way the colonies were being run and therefore they revolted against it, at least in the Canadas they did. The 1830s took on revolutionary qualities as prominent figures began to take steps against the government and began to make their voices and opinions heard. William Lyon Mackenzie can be taken as an example as he put an appeal to small farmers and asked them to come together and lobby for change in the form of a more responsible government. Joseph Howe could also be looked at as an example of a figure who questioned the role of the government by publishing an article about it and got arrested for libel. He was seen as a champion of free speech, free press, and responsible government. As these figures were publicly revolting against the government and calling for drastic change by voicing their opinions, the 1830s can be considered the age of revolution.
mosachoff 1:35 am on October 25, 2013 Permalink | Log in to Reply
The rebellions of Upper and Lower Canada were similar to the reforms in the Atlantic region in that the impetus for change was the same. In Upper and Lower Canada, the established political system had elite members of society controlling the government and making decisions. In Upper Canada, progressive groups made up of newer immigrants and the poorer members of society challenged the elite. In Lower Canada, rebellion was similarly vested in opposition towards the controlling executive powers, but also contained anti-British sentiments that the French Canadian population felt oppressed by. Lord Durham recognized this as an “ethnic” problem as well as a political one. The common goal of both rebellions was for a “responsible government” that put more control over colonial affairs in the hands of those who lived in the colonies as opposed to leadership sent from London. In the Atlantic region, the rebellion was focused on installing a responsible government. A similar situation existed in Atlantic Canada as it did in the Upper and Lower provinces, where control rested in the hands of British-loyal elite. The successful shift to a responsible government saw the executive counsel or cabinet become responsible to the assembly. From the reform movements that took place in the first few decades of the 19th century, Canada experienced its most revolutionary period up until that time. While not all of the movements were successful, each carried influence in shaping the political landscape of the provinces and colony.
kenthen 10:05 am on October 25, 2013 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Political dissent, elitists ruling the lands, the lack of economy, poor social structure and upheaval were both the mainstays of the rebellions in the Canada’s and the Atlantic region. While were on this we can say that all these factors gave the BNA an age of revolution as well, but more on that later. First we will look at the similarities that led to the uprising. Both of these situations can be called uprisings due to the fact that in both instances small packs of elitists, land holders, absentee proprietors or corrupt government held the power and used it to their very own benefit leaving the poorer without certain and specific rights, to work hard and to suffer while the fat cats got bigger. These uprisings led to responsible governments and better rights for the citizens and voices within their own homes and lands. The upper British, the lower french and the Highlanders from the Atlantic all had differing situations that led to an uprising and movement within their own societies but the one main thing they had in common was a revolution.
What these three societies lacked and needed could only be attained by a new social order or an upheaval of the powers that were leading them at that certain point and time. This is what made the 1830’s an age of revolution where the majority saw a need for change and did just that with forcible removal either that included death tolls, voices, freedom of speech and press, political maneuvers and hard stances that the minorities could not deny which eventually led to the changes that people sought out. Thus there were all the ingredients for an age of revolution.
alexwickett 3:43 pm on October 25, 2013 Permalink | Log in to Reply
The rebellions in the Atlantic region, and the rebellions in Upper and Lower Canada had significant similarities. In Upper Canada the elite group, the Family Compact, was in control and often used methods to stay in power that were not in accordance with what the people wanted. In Lower Canada, a similar oligarchy existed, the Chateau Clique. Both groups used their power to further benefit themselves and remain in control as long as possible. The situation was similar the Atlantic Region, as the people were controlled by non-elected entities. The people in the Canadas and in the Atlantic colonies both sought out a government that would be responsible to the people. They wanted the executive council and governor to be responsible, and they wanted an elected Legislative Assembly, where most of the power would be concentrated. Initially, the crown ignored the requests, and though some concessions were made, it mostly ended with the people being angrier than before and turning to means of violence. Though all areas did eventually end up getting a responsible government, there were differences in the ways the colonies acted to get this. In Lower Canada for example, once the people that reached their wits end, the first shots were fired in the November of 1837. In Upper Canada, William Lyon Mackenzie took a stance against the government in his radical newspaper, and though the governor, Francis Bond Head did appoint two some what radical reformers to the executive council, no real changes were made and the elections of 1836 were the most violent ever. In the Atlantic regions however, the economy was rather different. Fuelled by the fisheries and the timber trade, a lot of the Atlantic colonies were prospering, and developed a prominent merchant class. When London, witnessed that the people were unhappy with the political situation, more concessions were made because the British Crown had already seen what had happened in Upper and Lower Canada.
The 1830’s can be seen as a revolution because people were unhappy with the way they were being governed, and acted to change it. Through the publication of radical newspapers, protests, and violence, eventually the people prevailed, and every colony eventually received a responsible government. The definition of a revolution according to the oxford dictionary is, “a overthrow of government or social order in favor of a new one”. A new type of governance was definitely established and oligarchies, and suppressive, non –elected governments were overthrown. Though 1830’s revolutions were not necessarily as prominent as those in France and in the United States, they are still valid and important revolutions. Though not all the colonies were united as one to overthrow the British Crown, the people in each of the colonies did share a common goal. In respect, Britain was more lenient to granting the wishes of the colonies than in other circumstances, but that does not make the 1830’s any less of a revolutionary time.
SteveMoody 4:00 pm on October 25, 2013 Permalink | Log in to Reply
As most rebellions are of the lower classes revolting against the upper ruling classes, the Atlantic Rebellions share these characteristics. In each location and under-represented worker class was taken advantage of by the powers of the colonizing force. The degrees to which different locations were affected by the rebellious fever varied, as the Rebellions of Upper & Lower Canada were put down after only a few weeks, while the American Revolutionary War spanned several years and the Haitian uprising against the French was almost as horrific and bloody as France’s own Revolution. In each case the call (if not the exact words used) reflected that for responsible government. A ruling cadre of elected officials from the local population. (the exception to this may be Haiti, as freedom from abject oppression and slavery was the driving factor behind their revolt)
The Rebellions in Upper & Lower Canada differ from these other instances though in while they did not succeed initially, militarily or otherwise, one of their most important goals, responsible government, was realized despite the failures. (True, it took more than a decade to materialize, but can argue how much longer this would’ve taken had there been no Rebellions.
To characterize the 1830’s as a distinctly ‘rebellious’ period only lends credence to the notion that other rebellions and resistance to colonial over-reach in the past (the Acadians, for example) were not as important to the shaping of Canadian identity. In terms of the noticeable long term effects on what we view today as ‘Canada’ then yes the rebellions of the 1830’s were significant, but I do not believe they represent a particular trend of era, but rather the lasting effects those two rebellions had on our view of Canada.
cprimus 4:52 pm on October 25, 2013 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Although no rebellions occurred in the Atlantic colonies, like the two provinces of Canada they were greatly dissatisfied with the government and were resentful that, also like Upper and Lower Canada, the power still rested in the hands of an elite few who were ruling as an oligarchy. All of the citizens were unhappy when they realized that the government wasn’t responsive to the interests of the people, particularly over the use of public funds and land. They lobbied for responsible government. Although an elected assembly was created, the elites running the government could, at their own will, dissolve the assembly and replace them with their “friends”. Because of this, the presence of individuals calling for political reform strengthened: William Lyon Mackenzie in Upper Canada; Louis-Joseph Papineau in Lower Canada; and Joseph Howe in Nova Scotia. The Atlantic colonies (except Newfoundland) would achieve responsible government around the turn of the 1850s.
The people started finding a voice. They wanted change and saw that they had to come together and fight for what they wanted and believed they deserved. Nothing brings people together more than an attempt to overthrow (or at least significantly change) the government. They wanted a government that listened to them and consulted them on matters affecting their region as a whole – public funds, land, voting power, immigration. They wanted to be recognized as a cohesive citizenry. Although some places did not take up arms, it was the many versus the few in all parts of British North America as they became more aware of the corruption of the government.
Tina Loo 2:30 pm on November 4, 2013 Permalink | Log in to Reply
General Comments on this week’s question:
Most of you did quite well on this, which is great. You will be asked to synthesize and analyze in just this kind of way on the December exam.
The Rebellions in the Canadas and the political dissent in the Atlantic colonies shared much in common. In both regions discontent centred on the system of landholding and the power of a colonial oligarchy. As well, reformers in both regions saw responsible government as the solution; i.e. a restructuring of government so the appointed part of government was either eliminated or made accountable to the elected part of government. In short, reformers of both moderate and radical persuasions wanted more democracy.
The other similarity that dissent in the Canadas and the Atlantic colonies shared was the central role newspapers and journalists played in giving voice to dissent (Pierre Bedard, William Lyon Mackenzie, Joseph Howe were all newspapermen).