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?
Canada was split up into Upper Canada and Lower Canada, and in both of these, armed struggle shaped political culture and two rebellions overpowered. The Rebellions of Upper and Lower Canada were the result of a non-representative form of government that gave little or no attention to rights or interests of the populations and put power in the hands of elite groups, namely the Chateau Clique which focused on Francophone values and Family Compact which focused on American values. Similarly, Atlantic revolutionaries questioned the legitimacy of the state and power relations in the name of freedom.
In the aftermath of these rebellions, the British Government realized that it needed to take immediate steps to retain the loyalty of its subjects and retained Durham to investigate the uprisings and give viable recommendations. The prime solution of the Durham report was the principle of responsible government and a large self-governing colony. This principle gradually extended to all of the colonies of settlement from the Canadas to the Atlantic colonies including Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, and Prince Edward Island. So, the rebellions were very similar: a fight for freedom and responsible government.
For various reasons, it is fair to say that the 1830s was an “Age of Revolution” in British North America. The first was political change resulting in expanded powers for the elected assemblies. The second was religious toleration which allowed for more diversity. Finally, there was the abolition of slavery, which is by far the best example of British North America’s progressiveness. In the 1820s, slavery had been eliminated from non-rebelling colonies, and in 1833, Britain listed colonies in its Empire where slaves could get compensation, but there were no North American colonies on that list.
The division of Quebec into Upper Canada and Lower Canada, as a consequence of the application of the Constitutional Act in 1791, provides us a window to look more easily at the political and cultural situation of this time. Many changes were in their making because of rebellions rising in both colonies. These dissents found their origins in inequalities at a socio-cultural level, coming themselves from a misrepresentation of the middle class people in the political system, and from a two-speed economic policy.
Indeed, middle class people and liberal professions were oppressed by the governance of elite minorities – Family Compact in Upper Canada and Chateau Clique in Lower Canada –, who held the political power. This situation led people to campaign for the creation of elected Assemblies, more responsive to their electorate. The elite also largely benefited from the land policy in effect: they owned more, better lands, and consequently the voting and political rights which go with it. The question of citizenship through land ownership was essential and subject to many changes at the time.
These rebellions spread to the Atlantic colonies because the issues were similar. Atlantic colonies had inherited the same political system there was in the Canadas, and its flaw at the same time. Power was concentrated in the hands of a small group of elite, a colonial oligarchy governing for their own interest, not the interest of the colonies. Then people wanted reforms to be undertaken for a better representation of the local population in the elected Assembly. There were a lot of struggle about the lands as well. In New Brunswick, the “casual and territorial revenues” and the taxes levied on trees harvested allowed the Council – which was not elected and therefore not representative – to take actions without the consent of the elected Assembly. In Prince Edward Island, William Cooper led an “escheat” movement: the confiscation of land from absentee proprietors and reallocation to people who invested their labour in improving it, to serve local improvement of urban areas and economy.
As a consequence of the rebellions in both Canadas and Atlantic colonies, British North America in the 1830s saw political changes with expanding power for the elected assemblies. Economic reforms also were undertaken. Agreements were found on immigration and religious matters, allowing people more freedom. All these changes are reasons why the 1830s might be seen as an age of revolution in British North America.
Rebellions in the Canadas resulted from constitutional, social-cultural, and economic factors; they were esp made worse in the 1820-30s leading to open insurrection. In the Atlantic, there were also political and economic power issues that led to issues. In both, there is a focus on elites and those who have power controlling what happens. This time was the age of revolution for many reasons. People like Joseph Howe played big roles in lobbying for change; he published the Novascotian which noted the negative aspects of the govt – he was known as the “champion of free speech” b/c of this. Also, acts by other people such as protesting and petitioning led to changes and resolutions. For example, the govt was responsible for territorial revenues in 1854. So with these changes and profound actions by leaders, this was the age of revolution when important changes were implemented.
In the Canadas and the Atlantic region, the rebellions were results of long-existing tensions and the subsequent realizations by the majority of the population of the corrupt nature of the British governments which were controlled by a handful of appointed elites. The tensions were also triggered by the efforts of the government to suppress the majority in terms of economic, political, and social influences. Conservative approaches were replaced with more liberal reforms; people were no longer willing to follow unaccountable and arbitrary power.
The Rebellions in the Canadas unfolded between the Anglophone minorities against the American and French populations in Upper and Lower Canada respectively. Land and property holding was the main issue, and with this came the political segregation of the English and Americans in Upper Canada, and the English and French in Lower Canada. Essentially, the American settlers and Francophones were denied equal political opportunities and the British appointed councils in both colonies were focused on assimilation as well as bringing in new British immigrants. Also, the Francophones in Lower Canada began to reject the Catholic Church, foreshadowing the modern secular state. The reformists in the Canadas were particularly critical of their government systems; despite the existence of elected assemblies, their influence was minimal due to the fact that the appointed councils, which were made up of a small group of British elites, had the ultimate ability to veto decisions and thus, impose more authority. Similarly, the colonies in the Atlantic region were experiencing the same situation. Although land was not as much an issue and despite the population’s overall economic prosperity, like the reformers in Upper and Lower Canada, the Atlantic regions did not approve of the unequal distribution of political involvement and influence. They wanted more representation and accountability. In all these areas, major reform leaders (Mackenzie, Papineau, Howe) significantly led the rebellions in directly refusing the appeasement attempts by the governors and the appointed councils; they were adamant for change.
The rebellions in the Canadas and the Atlantic region were similar in their concern for making the appointed councils more accountable and stressing for the need to implement responsible government. The 1830s can definitely be seen as an age of revolution in British North America as the colonies eventually were able to adopt the system of responsible government, and in all cases, the British governments as well as London were made pertinently aware of the need to respond to the needs of the majority, and that accountability was necessary in order to prevent further rebellion and potential violence.
The rebellions in Upper and Lower Canada occurred because of the want for responsible government due to an appointed system that mainly served the elite class. The dissent in the Atlantic colonies existed because of the appointed government and the power of the elite class as well. The dissent in the Atlantic, and the rebellions in the Canadas both brought about more responsible government in the 1840s and 1850s. The similarity of the governance in the colonies before reform and the similarity of the reform movements in the colonies, show that they had similar political and societal goals.
The 1830s, the time of this rebellion and dissent in the Canadian and Atlantic colonies could be seen as a time of revolution in British North America, because people were active in calling for reform, in the form of protests, and attempts to overthrow the government in Upper and Lower Canada. In the Atlantic colonies, the dissent took the form of criticism, which eventually caused political change in the colonies. Each of these colonies eventually received and achieved political change that led to more responsible government which served society with more equality towards the middle class that wanted the reforms.
The Rebellions in the Canadas have many similarities, in social, cultural and constitutional tensions arising. Both were stands against an appointed system, allowing the elite to dictate what they want, at the cost of the rest of the members of the colony. Upper Canada showed a distinct issue with the Family Compact, in their distribution of land to friends and others in the colony for the means of greater political power. In Lower Canada, the seigniorial system of land tenure was not well liked. Atlantic Canada became highly critical of it’s governing body, especially after seeing the steps Upper and Lower Canada were taking, on an issue almost all the same.
The Canadas, each in a different way, fought against an unequal system. Although they had some elected officials, the power of majority was still in the hands of the wealthiest in the region, who had little concern for the rest of the community. They both fought for a responsible government; to have their own voices heard.
The 1830’s could most definitely be classified as a revolution in British North American. For the first time, the settlers were speaking out against the imposed system, and striving for a voice of their own. Both political and economic changes resulted from the Rebellions (although there was far less bloodshed in the Atlantic regions). On top of political reform, also came religious reform. Religious tolerance was increased as the Francophone people began to reject the Catholic Church. The stands which Mackenzie and Papineau took ultimately lead to Durham’s recommendation that the Canadas should be granted a responsible government. After all, revolution is defined as “a forcible overthrow of a government or social order, in favour of a new system”, and despite different means, this is precisely what Upper, Lower and Atlantic Canada achieved.
General Comments on this week’s question:
Most of you did pretty 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).
mwaldron, 
lindseyaw, and 4 others are discussing.
Nadir Surani 11:12 am on October 23, 2013 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Canada was split up into Upper Canada and Lower Canada, and in both of these, armed struggle shaped political culture and two rebellions overpowered. The Rebellions of Upper and Lower Canada were the result of a non-representative form of government that gave little or no attention to rights or interests of the populations and put power in the hands of elite groups, namely the Chateau Clique which focused on Francophone values and Family Compact which focused on American values. Similarly, Atlantic revolutionaries questioned the legitimacy of the state and power relations in the name of freedom.
In the aftermath of these rebellions, the British Government realized that it needed to take immediate steps to retain the loyalty of its subjects and retained Durham to investigate the uprisings and give viable recommendations. The prime solution of the Durham report was the principle of responsible government and a large self-governing colony. This principle gradually extended to all of the colonies of settlement from the Canadas to the Atlantic colonies including Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, and Prince Edward Island. So, the rebellions were very similar: a fight for freedom and responsible government.
For various reasons, it is fair to say that the 1830s was an “Age of Revolution” in British North America. The first was political change resulting in expanded powers for the elected assemblies. The second was religious toleration which allowed for more diversity. Finally, there was the abolition of slavery, which is by far the best example of British North America’s progressiveness. In the 1820s, slavery had been eliminated from non-rebelling colonies, and in 1833, Britain listed colonies in its Empire where slaves could get compensation, but there were no North American colonies on that list.
Pierre-Marie B. 8:36 pm on October 24, 2013 Permalink | Log in to Reply
The division of Quebec into Upper Canada and Lower Canada, as a consequence of the application of the Constitutional Act in 1791, provides us a window to look more easily at the political and cultural situation of this time. Many changes were in their making because of rebellions rising in both colonies. These dissents found their origins in inequalities at a socio-cultural level, coming themselves from a misrepresentation of the middle class people in the political system, and from a two-speed economic policy.
Indeed, middle class people and liberal professions were oppressed by the governance of elite minorities – Family Compact in Upper Canada and Chateau Clique in Lower Canada –, who held the political power. This situation led people to campaign for the creation of elected Assemblies, more responsive to their electorate. The elite also largely benefited from the land policy in effect: they owned more, better lands, and consequently the voting and political rights which go with it. The question of citizenship through land ownership was essential and subject to many changes at the time.
These rebellions spread to the Atlantic colonies because the issues were similar. Atlantic colonies had inherited the same political system there was in the Canadas, and its flaw at the same time. Power was concentrated in the hands of a small group of elite, a colonial oligarchy governing for their own interest, not the interest of the colonies. Then people wanted reforms to be undertaken for a better representation of the local population in the elected Assembly. There were a lot of struggle about the lands as well. In New Brunswick, the “casual and territorial revenues” and the taxes levied on trees harvested allowed the Council – which was not elected and therefore not representative – to take actions without the consent of the elected Assembly. In Prince Edward Island, William Cooper led an “escheat” movement: the confiscation of land from absentee proprietors and reallocation to people who invested their labour in improving it, to serve local improvement of urban areas and economy.
As a consequence of the rebellions in both Canadas and Atlantic colonies, British North America in the 1830s saw political changes with expanding power for the elected assemblies. Economic reforms also were undertaken. Agreements were found on immigration and religious matters, allowing people more freedom. All these changes are reasons why the 1830s might be seen as an age of revolution in British North America.
Susanna Chan 10:40 pm on October 24, 2013 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Rebellions in the Canadas resulted from constitutional, social-cultural, and economic factors; they were esp made worse in the 1820-30s leading to open insurrection. In the Atlantic, there were also political and economic power issues that led to issues. In both, there is a focus on elites and those who have power controlling what happens. This time was the age of revolution for many reasons. People like Joseph Howe played big roles in lobbying for change; he published the Novascotian which noted the negative aspects of the govt – he was known as the “champion of free speech” b/c of this. Also, acts by other people such as protesting and petitioning led to changes and resolutions. For example, the govt was responsible for territorial revenues in 1854. So with these changes and profound actions by leaders, this was the age of revolution when important changes were implemented.
geenalee 11:54 am on October 25, 2013 Permalink | Log in to Reply
In the Canadas and the Atlantic region, the rebellions were results of long-existing tensions and the subsequent realizations by the majority of the population of the corrupt nature of the British governments which were controlled by a handful of appointed elites. The tensions were also triggered by the efforts of the government to suppress the majority in terms of economic, political, and social influences. Conservative approaches were replaced with more liberal reforms; people were no longer willing to follow unaccountable and arbitrary power.
The Rebellions in the Canadas unfolded between the Anglophone minorities against the American and French populations in Upper and Lower Canada respectively. Land and property holding was the main issue, and with this came the political segregation of the English and Americans in Upper Canada, and the English and French in Lower Canada. Essentially, the American settlers and Francophones were denied equal political opportunities and the British appointed councils in both colonies were focused on assimilation as well as bringing in new British immigrants. Also, the Francophones in Lower Canada began to reject the Catholic Church, foreshadowing the modern secular state. The reformists in the Canadas were particularly critical of their government systems; despite the existence of elected assemblies, their influence was minimal due to the fact that the appointed councils, which were made up of a small group of British elites, had the ultimate ability to veto decisions and thus, impose more authority. Similarly, the colonies in the Atlantic region were experiencing the same situation. Although land was not as much an issue and despite the population’s overall economic prosperity, like the reformers in Upper and Lower Canada, the Atlantic regions did not approve of the unequal distribution of political involvement and influence. They wanted more representation and accountability. In all these areas, major reform leaders (Mackenzie, Papineau, Howe) significantly led the rebellions in directly refusing the appeasement attempts by the governors and the appointed councils; they were adamant for change.
The rebellions in the Canadas and the Atlantic region were similar in their concern for making the appointed councils more accountable and stressing for the need to implement responsible government. The 1830s can definitely be seen as an age of revolution in British North America as the colonies eventually were able to adopt the system of responsible government, and in all cases, the British governments as well as London were made pertinently aware of the need to respond to the needs of the majority, and that accountability was necessary in order to prevent further rebellion and potential violence.
lindseyaw 2:39 pm on October 25, 2013 Permalink | Log in to Reply
The rebellions in Upper and Lower Canada occurred because of the want for responsible government due to an appointed system that mainly served the elite class. The dissent in the Atlantic colonies existed because of the appointed government and the power of the elite class as well. The dissent in the Atlantic, and the rebellions in the Canadas both brought about more responsible government in the 1840s and 1850s. The similarity of the governance in the colonies before reform and the similarity of the reform movements in the colonies, show that they had similar political and societal goals.
The 1830s, the time of this rebellion and dissent in the Canadian and Atlantic colonies could be seen as a time of revolution in British North America, because people were active in calling for reform, in the form of protests, and attempts to overthrow the government in Upper and Lower Canada. In the Atlantic colonies, the dissent took the form of criticism, which eventually caused political change in the colonies. Each of these colonies eventually received and achieved political change that led to more responsible government which served society with more equality towards the middle class that wanted the reforms.
mwaldron 4:39 pm on October 25, 2013 Permalink | Log in to Reply
The Rebellions in the Canadas have many similarities, in social, cultural and constitutional tensions arising. Both were stands against an appointed system, allowing the elite to dictate what they want, at the cost of the rest of the members of the colony. Upper Canada showed a distinct issue with the Family Compact, in their distribution of land to friends and others in the colony for the means of greater political power. In Lower Canada, the seigniorial system of land tenure was not well liked. Atlantic Canada became highly critical of it’s governing body, especially after seeing the steps Upper and Lower Canada were taking, on an issue almost all the same.
The Canadas, each in a different way, fought against an unequal system. Although they had some elected officials, the power of majority was still in the hands of the wealthiest in the region, who had little concern for the rest of the community. They both fought for a responsible government; to have their own voices heard.
The 1830’s could most definitely be classified as a revolution in British North American. For the first time, the settlers were speaking out against the imposed system, and striving for a voice of their own. Both political and economic changes resulted from the Rebellions (although there was far less bloodshed in the Atlantic regions). On top of political reform, also came religious reform. Religious tolerance was increased as the Francophone people began to reject the Catholic Church. The stands which Mackenzie and Papineau took ultimately lead to Durham’s recommendation that the Canadas should be granted a responsible government. After all, revolution is defined as “a forcible overthrow of a government or social order, in favour of a new system”, and despite different means, this is precisely what Upper, Lower and Atlantic Canada achieved.
Tina Loo 2:26 pm on November 4, 2013 Permalink | Log in to Reply
General Comments on this week’s question:
Most of you did pretty 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).