Chapter V: Part 5

Lord Aylmer was well aware that this last reservation would be deemed very unsatisfactory; but he considered it most prudent to lay before the Assembly a full and frank statement of the views of government. That body, after inquiring into the mode of collection and amount of these revenues, passed a resolution, that, “under no circumstances, and upon no consideration whatever, they would abandon or compromise their claim to control over the whole public revenue.” Particular objection was also intimated to the support of exclusive religious establishments; doubtless, more strongly felt from the circumstance, that the church to be endowed was different from that of the ruling party. They determined, therefore, for the present, not to grant any permanent supply; and on the 8th of March, 1831, drew up, on the motion of Mr. Neilson, a pretty long list of grievances, which was presented to the governor. He expressed in return an earnest wish to know if these comprised the whole of their complaints; giving them to understand that silence would be construed into an admission of their being so. They were accordingly silent; passed a bill of annual supply; and showed, on the whole, a more favourable tone and temper.

His lordship transmitted the list of complaints, with an admission that many of them were well founded; at the same time eulogising the loyal disposition of the people of Canada. Lord Goderich, in a long reply, dated July 7, 1831, declared that there was scarcely a point which government were not ready to concede; and expressed his satisfaction at the prospect thus afforded of a termination to this long and harassing contest. This despatch was laid before the house, who, in a series of resolutions, declared their gratitude for the expressions of his Majesty’s paternal regard—the proofs of a just and liberal policy—and the feelings of kindness and good-will manifested in it. The different points to which it related were referred to separate committees.

Soon after, a despatch from the Colonial Secretary made known that the act for transferring the funds in dispute had passed the houses of parliament, and received the royal assent. Whether from extreme liberality or total inadvertence, it was so worded as to preclude the imperial treasury from ever exercising any control over them, leaving thus no room for negotiation with the Assembly. Lord Aylmer was instructed, however, to demand in return a grant of permanent salaries to the judges, who were also, according to the Assembly’s desire, to be made independent of the crown; and a similar provision was asked for the governor, and a few of the chief executive officers. This matter being referred to the Assembly, they began, on the 20th of January, 1832, with the first particular. On providing that the judges should be independent of the crown, and, with the exception of the Chief Justice, should not sit in the executive or legislative councils, it was determined that permanent salaries should be paid to them. But, at the same time, a motion of Mr. Neilson was carried by a large majority, that these should be drawn in the first instance from the casual and territorial revenues, which Lord Goderich had expressly reserved to the crown. Lord Aylmer considered it, therefore, necessary to send home the bill, yet with an advice to accept the terms, as the best there was any likelihood of obtaining. It was rejected, however, on two grounds: first, that it did not render the judges really independent of the Assembly, but left an annual vote still necessary. We cannot help suspecting that there was an unhappy misconception. The terms of the bill are, “that the salaries shall be secured to them in a fixed and permanent manner;” and “shall be taken and paid out of the proceeds of the casual and territorial revenue now appropriated by acts of the provincial parliament, for defraying the charges of the administration of justice, and the support of the civil government, and out of any other public revenue of the province which may be or come into the hands of the receiver-general.” It would appear that, according to the plain meaning of language, these terms involved a full warrant for payment. Probably Lord Goderich had legal advice, and some technical terms, usual in British acts, might be wanting; but a provincial legislature could scarcely be expected to be fully aware of these niceties. The legislative body, the governor, and we doubt not also the Assembly, had considered this as a permanent settlement; the latter, had it been so acted on, probably would not, and certainly could not reasonably have objected. The other ground was the encroachment upon the casual and territorial revenue, which, in this indirect manner, was considered peculiarly offensive, though Lord Goderich had been fully apprised of their determination against any agreement in which this article was not included.

The next question which came before the Assembly was—the demand of a permanent provision for the governor, and a certain number of the leading executive officers. After a long debate, however, it was carried by a large majority in the negative. This decision placed the Assembly completely at issue with the crown, and has been represented as a breach of faith on their part. They had not, it is true, come under any formal engagement; yet the report of the committee of 1828, which decidedly connected this arrangement with the cession of the disputed revenues, had always been referred to by them as embracing almost every thing desired; and to this part of it they had never hinted any objection. On the 6th of December, 1830, they had passed resolutions, insisting, indeed, on the control of the entire revenue; but expressing an intention, were this gained, to grant the permanent provision now demanded. That preliminary claim certainly embraced also the casual and territorial branches still withheld; yet these were not of great amount, and the present bill, like that relating to the judges, might have been so framed as to be inoperative without these funds being embraced by it. No reason was assigned; but the view of the Assembly is stated to have been, that the executive, not being dependent on them for a naval and military establishment, would, in case of such a permanent settlement, have been entirely free from that control which they sought to exercise over it. They passed, however, a vote of annual supply, which Lord Goderich, though much dissatisfied with the tenor of their proceedings, thought it expedient to sanction.

Next year (1833) the Assembly still granted only an annual bill, in which, according to a requisition of Lord Goderich, they stated the purposes to which each particular sum was to be applied. They added, without its being asked or wished, the individuals to whom it was to be paid; and appended a number of conditions, chiefly bearing, that such persons should not hold any other situation, and should not be members of the executive or legislative councils. This was considered objectionable, because public officers were thus suddenly deprived of situations which they had long held, without any consideration of their claims to compensation; also, because those regulations ought not to have been tacked to a money bill, but made the subject of a separate enactment. On these grounds this bill was negatived by the Legislative Council; and Lord Stanley, who had been placed at the head of the Colonial Office, intimated that, had it reached him, he could not have advised his Majesty to assent to it. In the same session, a measure was introduced for securing independence and permanent provision to the judges, in a form calculated to obviate Lord Goderich’s chief objections; but on the motion of M. Papineau it was rejected, and the speeches of the leaders of the Assembly are said to have implied, that it was no longer considered advisable to exempt these functionaries from their control.

The breach now continually widened. Lord Stanley, considering the conduct of the Canadians as manifesting a resolution to engross the whole power of the state, directed the funds, not yet made over by parliament, to be employed in the partial payment of the civil officers; and he is said to have determined to bring in a bill for repealing the act by which the concession had been made. Meantime the Assembly had raised, and placed in the front of their demands, a new article, which almost entirely precluded all hope of accommodation; namely, the abolition of the present Legislative Council, and the substitution of one elected like themselves by the body of the people. Such an arrangement was without example in any British colony; and the existing state of political feeling in the mother country would have rendered it scarcely possible for ministers to propose it in parliament. It had been first started in March, 1831, when Lord Aylmer had just gone out, with the announced intention of acting upon the report of 1828, and redressing, if possible, every grievance hitherto complained of. There seemed, therefore, room to suspect that the conciliatory disposition shown, instead of producing final satisfaction, had only prompted to higher demands, through the belief that by perseverance they would finally obtain whatever they chose to ask. Yet, though a resolution of the committee to that effect was approved by the members, it was not expressly included in the list of grievances then presented. But on the 20th of March, 1833, a petition to the King, signed by M. Papineau, speaker of the House of Assembly, strenuously urged this measure, and the calling of a body of delegates to arrange the conditions. The leading ones proposed were, a qualification in the electors of £10 in the country, and of £20 in towns; a certain income to qualify the councillor, and the duration of his functions for six years. Lord Stanley, in reply, said this was an object to which, deeming it altogether inconsistent with the very existence of monarchical institutions, he could never advise his Majesty to consent; and he particularly objected to the proposed mode of effecting it, by what he termed “a national convention.” A counter address, however, by the Legislative Council, was censured as intemperate in its language, and appearing to ascribe generally to his Majesty’s subjects, of one origin, views inconsistent with their allegiance. In conclusion, he alluded to “the possibility that events might unhappily force upon parliament the exercise of its supreme authority to compose the internal dissensions of the colonies, and which might lead to a modification of the charter of the Canadas.”

This despatch was submitted to the Assembly, and its entire tenor, particularly the implied threat at the close, excited the highest indignation in that body. They declined this year (1834) to pass any bill of supply whatever, and employed the session in preparing another long list of grievances. They complained that, while those formerly urged were still unredressed, there had been added the partial payment of the civil officers without their consent. They made a preparatory demand of the elective Legislative Council, without which nothing would be accepted as satisfactory. Lord Aylmer’s conduct was reprobated as violent, unconstitutional, and contemptuous, and his recall urgently demanded. The published correspondence assuredly does not bear out this charge. His addresses to the Assembly are particularly courteous; and he recommends generally to the government at home concessions so extensive, that Lord Goderich, himself considered liberal towards the colonies, refused to accede to them. The petition, however, was presented to parliament, and a committee appointed for its consideration.

Meantime, Lord Stanley retired from power, and was succeeded in the colonial department by Mr. Spring Rice. This gentleman renounced the design entertained by his predecessor, of recalling the revenues yielded to the Assembly, and gave intimation, it is said, that he would follow a more conciliatory course. He only asked a little time, till he could make himself master of the subject; and thus the popular leaders were induced to delay taking any strong measures. They bitterly complained, however, that the administration was carried on as before. Lord Aylmer was continued in the government; and, though the Canadian funds were not intrenched upon, a sum of £31,000 was advanced from the military chest for payment of the civil servants, by which their responsibility to the Assembly was equally evaded. Before Mr. Rice had matured his plan, he was removed from office by the accession of Sir Robert Peel to power. He stated that he had it completed, and was ready to submit it to the cabinet on the very day when this change occurred; an assertion which Mr. Roebuck treats with evident scepticism, though seemingly without any adequate ground.

Sir Robert, on assuming the reins of office, early directed his attention to the disturbed state of Canada. After some deliberation, he determined to send out a commissioner, with power to examine on the spot, and redress without delay, every real grievance which should be proved to exist. Even the casual and territorial revenues were to be surrendered, on condition of the settlement of a civil list for at least seven years. The elective Legislative Council, however, and the entire management of the public lands could not be conceded. Viscount Canterbury, the late speaker, was first invited to fill this important appointment; and, on his declining, it was conferred on Earl Amherst. This arrangement, however, was nullified by the vote which led to the resignation of Sir Robert, and the return of Lord Melbourne to power.

The restored ministry followed up, with certain modifications, the plan of their predecessors. A commission was sent out for inquiry only, and without the power of decision, composed of the following individuals: the Earl of Gosford, Sir Charles Edward Grey, and Sir George Gipps. The first, an Irish nobleman, professing principles decidedly liberal, succeeded Lord Aylmer as governor. Lord Glenelg, now the Colonial Secretary, drew up for their guidance a series of instructions, in which he considered the claim to the disposal of the entire revenue somewhat exorbitant, and not warranted by British example; yet was willing, for the sake of peace, to consent to it on certain conditions. These were—an independent provision for the judges, and salaries for the civil officers, fixed for a certain number of years; ten being mentioned as particularly suitable. With regard to the uncleared lands, the whole proceeds arising from their sale were to be placed at the disposal of the Assembly; but government could not consent to part with the management of them, or annul the contract made with the Land Company, though they would be ready to guard against all abuses, and even to receive any suggestions on the subject. The existing pensions were also to be retained, but the future power of granting them would be surrendered. In regard to the critical question of the elective legislative council, it was said: “The King is most unwilling to admit as open to debate, the question—whether one of the vital principles of the provincial government shall undergo alteration?” The right of petition, however, was fully recognized; and his Majesty would not “absolutely close the avenue to inquiry,” even where, “for the present, he saw no reasonable ground of doubt.”

“The Earl of Gosford, having arrived in Canada, lost no time in calling a meeting of the legislature, who were convoked on the 27th of October, 1835; and, in his opening speeches, he professed the most conciliatory views, particularly towards the French, or popular party. He avowed the opinion, that “to be acceptable to the great body of the people, is one of the most essential elements of fitness for public station.” He intimated his readiness to place the whole revenue at the disposal of the Assembly, on the conditions formerly stated. All the other grievances were to be carefully examined and redressed; and allusion was made to “still graver matters,” respecting which the commissioners “were not precluded from entering into an inquiry.”

The Legislative Council returned an answer, which, in all respects, was extremely moderate. They generally concurred in the sentiments of the speech, deprecated the idea that difference of origin should affect political rights, which ought to be equal to all his Majesty’s subjects. But the House of Assembly, while holding conciliatory language, advanced much more lofty pretensions. The change in the Legislative Council was repeatedly pressed, as absolutely essential to the tranquillity and contentment of the province. The entire control of the public revenue was referred to, not as a boon, but an incontestable and essential right; and, while they stated their readiness to consider attentively any measure tending to facilitate the exercise of this right, they avoided all mention of conditions to be performed in return. Notwithstanding the high ground thus taken, the intercourse between the popular leaders and the governor was extremely friendly. He admitted them to his table and his intimacy, and treated them on every occasion with much kindness. They were understood to represent the great body of the people, whom he had expressed his desire to conciliate; and he professed liberal views to those who would understand that term in its widest sense. So decided was the impression produced, that the opposite party loaded him with the bitterest invectives, and even threw out menaces of insurrection; while the leaders of the Assembly went so far as to intimate, that they would relieve the immediate financial embarrassments by granting the three years arrears, and a half year in advance. They attached to the grant somewhat hard conditions, which, however, were not rejected; and, on the remark being made, that these would ensure its rejection by the Legislative Council, an intimation is said to have been given, that it would be accepted directly by address, without being liable to the veto of that body.

This good understanding was suddenly interrupted. The governor’s language above cited, in regard to the Elective Council, had been very different from that of his instructions; not pledging him, indeed, to the measure, yet such as, combined with his other conduct, conveyed to both parties the idea that it was determined upon. This course is defended as the only one by which the supplies, so urgently wanted, could be obtained; and it was hoped, that, by a continued conciliatory course, the Assembly might, when the real intention of the cabinet could no longer be concealed, be induced to waive their demand. Any degree of duplicity in a government, however, must, when discovered, lower its dignity, irritate the deceived parties, and, at the same time, give them an impression of their strength, which had driven those in authority to such an expedient. Unhappily, all these effects followed before any of the expected fruits had been reaped. Sir Francis Bond Head had, at the same time, been sent out to Upper Canada; and, being a very straightforward person, and seemingly unapprized of Lord Gosford’s intentions, had made public a part of his instructions, including that momentous passage already quoted, relative to the Legislative Council. It was such as, though not wholly precluding discussion on the object, left to the popular leaders scarcely a hope of its attainment. Their rage knew no bounds; they complained, not only of disappointment in their favourite object, but of a deception by which they had been nearly misled. It was now determined not to grant the three years’ arrears, but merely a supply for the current half year, allowing only that short period to comply with their demands. This slender boon, too, was clogged with conditions, which, as had been foreseen, induced the upper house to reject it; so that the session, in all respects very stormy, passed over without any provision whatever being made for the public service. The Legislative Council felt naturally indignant at the violent attempts meditated for its overthrow; and instead of studying to show these to be unmerited, the members vented their resentment by rejecting almost every bill sent up from the Assembly. Among these was the vote, continuing the funds for national education, which were thus entirely withdrawn. All the political elements were disturbed, and in violent collision with each other.

The commissioners, in March 1836, viewing this state of things, and seeing no prospect of obtaining money to carry on the government, without immediately yielding to every demand of the lower house, considered it indispensable to obtain it without their consent. This, they thought, would be best accomplished by parliament repealing the act passed on the motion of Lord Goderich, by which funds to the amount of £38,000 had been made over to the Assembly. This would, indeed, excite bitter resentment; but, with the other reserved revenues, it would, at least, enable the government to proceed without any grants from that body. Lord Glenelg was not forward to act on this recommendation. He wrote to the Earl of Gosford, expressing a hope, on grounds which do not very distinctly appear, that the violent resolution complained of had been induced by the partial and imperfect knowledge of the instructions, and that a communication of the whole might lead to more favourable views. He expressed a wish, therefore, that the provincial parliament should be again called, and an opportunity afforded for retracting before recourse was had to extreme measures. The meeting was accordingly held on the 22d of September, 1838; but the majority soon presented an address to the governor, denying that, according to the apprehension expressed in his speech, they laboured under any kind of misconception; they saw nothing to make them change their views, or prevent them from insisting on the same demands, particularly that of the Elective Council. They adverted in an indignant manner to certain pretended authorities, as they termed the commission, and maintained that they themselves were the legitimate and authorized organ of all classes of inhabitants; that they had used their power in such a manner as ought to have secured confidence; and to them, not to a few strangers, ought to have been committed the fate of the country. They declared it their imperative duty to adhere to the contents of their last address—“and to them do we adhere.” They finally expressed a resolution not only to do nothing more in regard to supply, but to adjourn their deliberations altogether, unless government should commence the great work of justice and reform, particularly in regard to the second branch of the legislature.

Matters had now reached an extremity, which seemed to render it no longer possible to delay an interposition. The stoppage of the supplies, like the granting of them, was no doubt a right inherent in a representative assembly. Yet it is one, the exercise of which is attended with such formidable evils, that the Commons of England, during more than a century, had merely kept it in the back ground as a last resort, and never brought it into actual operation. The constitutional character of the measure became still more questionable, when employed, not to control the abuses of the executive, but to overthrow a separate and co-ordinate branch of the legislature, deriving its existence from the same source with the Assembly itself. This was a mighty change, amounting to a kind of revolution, and to be effected only with the utmost deliberation. The stopping the whole machine of government, and not allowing even an interval of time to effect it, was a measure of extreme violence. Had the popular leaders listened to the dictates of prudence and moderation, they might, availing themselves of the conciliatory disposition shown by the new governor, have obtained all their substantial objects. They would have gained the chief control in the executive, after which the Legislative Council, whom they continually reproached with subserviency to the latter branch, were not likely to persevere in unavailing opposition.

Ministers now determined no longer to delay measures for counteracting the proceedings of the violent party, and placing the executive government in a state of regular action. Parliament having assembled, and the reports of the commissioners laid on the table, Lord John Russell, on the 6th of March, 1837, moved a series of resolutions, on which acts were to be founded. After a statement of the actual posture of affairs, it was proposed that the sum of £142,000 should be taken out of the provincial funds locked up by the Assembly, and applied to the payment of the judges and other civil officers, down to the 10th of April. It was afterwards agreed, not, as the commissioners had recommended, to resume any part of the ceded monies, but, by a strict economy, to carry on the government from that date with the casual and territorial revenues, which circumstances had now raised to about £28,000. The elective Legislative Council, and the direct responsibility of the executive one to the Assembly, were both declared inexpedient; though it was stated as desirable, that considerable improvements should be made in the composition of both. These suggestions gave occasion to very warm debates. The Tories, while they supported the proposals of government, accused them of an imprudent indulgence and want of energy, which had emboldened the factious party to proceed to extremities. On the other hand, a small but active section of the popular leaders justified all the claims and proceedings of the Canadian Assembly, denounced the resolutions as unconstitutional and tyrannical, and predicted as their result civil war and the loss of the colonies. The motion of Mr. Leader, however, in favour of an Elective Council, was negatived by 318 to 56, and the cabinet measures were carried by overwhelming majorities;—but the death of William IV. intervened before they could be embodied in acts of parliament. The necessity of a dissolution, and the unwillingness to begin the government of a young and popular Queen by a scheme of coercion, induced ministers to substitute the expedient of advancing the amount by way of loan from the British revenue, in the prospect of being ultimately reimbursed from the provincial funds.

As an interval was to elapse between the passing of the resolutions and their being acted on, Lord Gosford was instructed to make a last trial of the Assembly, in hopes that, seeing such a vast majority in parliament against them, they might be induced of themselves to vote the money, and thus save the necessity of any unwonted interference. Already, however, several violent demonstrations had taken place. Meetings were held in the counties of Montreal and Richelieu, in which it was affirmed, that the votes of the Commons had put an end to all hopes of justice; and that no further attempts should be made to obtain redress from the imperial parliament. They considered the government as now only one of force, to be submitted to from necessity during their present weakness; and in order to reduce as far as possible its power, they declared that all consumption of British manufactures, and of all articles paying taxes, ought to be discontinued; and, finally, that a general convention should be held, to consider what further measures were advisable.

Lord Glenelg, in consequence of this state of things in Canada, had resolved to send out two additional regiments; but afterwards, finding this to be inconvenient, he gave authority to apply to Sir Colin Campbell for such force as could be spared from Nova Scotia and New Brunswick. On the 6th of May, the governor replied, that he had not the least expectation of anything serious, though, in case of a dissolution, he admitted that “there might be some broken heads.” On the 10th of June, however, upon learning that a system of organization was carrying on under the influence of Papineau, he applied to Sir Colin for a regiment, which arrived early in July. He had already issued a proclamation, warning the people against all attempts to seduce them from their allegiance. Meetings, numerously attended, were held in Montreal and Quebec, condemning the violent conduct of the House of Assembly, declaring attachment to British connexion, and deprecating any breach of the public peace.

On the 18th of August, Lord Gosford again called the provincial parliament. The resolutions were laid before the Assembly, with the expression of a hope that its proceedings would supersede the necessity of their being acted on. The changes in the constitution of the councils had been unfortunately delayed by difficulties as to certain appointments; but these improvements were solemnly promised. Warm debates ensued. Mr. Andrew Stuart, one of the members for Quebec, proposed a compliance with the request of government, which was negatived by 63 to 13. An address was then moved by M. Taschereau, a representative of the county of Beance, expressing a willingness to give a trial to the means proposed for amending the Legislative Council, but declining any grant till they were brought into operation. Another address, breathing the most determined hostility, was then moved, and carried by 46 to 31. It denounced the step now taken as an absolute destruction of the representative government in the province,—a total refusal of all the reforms and improvements demanded. If these resolutions were carried into effect, the colony, it was said, would no longer be attached to the mother country by feelings of duty, of affection, and mutual interest, but solely by physical force. In this conjuncture, they could see no motive for the slightest departure from their intention to withhold the supplies; and they adhered in every respect to their resolutions of 30th of September, 1836. Lord Gosford, in reply, gave utterance to his deep regret at measures which he considered a virtual annihilation of the constitution, and immediately prorogued the Assembly.

The popular leaders seem now to have formed the resolution of having recourse to arms. They, as well as their organs in this country, had often asserted, and seem at length to have believed, that only an effort was required to sever the colonies from the mother country. This was a most hasty and inconsiderate conclusion. The example of the American colonies was referred to; but they were much stronger than the Canadians are now, while the power of Britain, on the other hand, was considerably smaller. Yet it was only after a long and calamitous contest of eight years, that they established their independence; and their success would have been doubtful, had they not been aided by a most powerful European confederacy. The aid of the United States was, indeed, held forth; but the latter had been so little disposed to intermeddle on such occasions, that they remained neutral during the long contest between Spain and her colonies, although her situation gave them little to dread from her resentment. It was therefore very unlikely that they should now engage single-handed in a contest with the whole power of Britain.

The meetings, in pursuance of these views, were not held on so great a scale, or in the same public and ostentatious manner, as formerly. They were numerous, however, and breathed the most hostile spirit, renouncing all hope of redress from the parent state, and pointing directly to a separation. A central committee was formed at Montreal, whose proceedings were, in a great measure, secret; and preparations were understood to be making for a general convention. It was nearly vain to attempt repressing the most violent demonstrations against the government, since no petty jury could be found to convict; and in two instances, when the evidence was considered perfectly conclusive, the bills were ignored by the grand jury. The governor, however, learning that numerous individuals, holding her Majesty’s commission, had taken a share in those meetings, caused letters to be written to them demanding an explanation. On receiving none that was satisfactory, he dismissed eighteen magistrates and thirty-five militia officers. Among the latter was Papineau, whose answer was couched in the most defying and contemptuous terms. He, it is observed, had now gone such lengths, as made it impossible for him to recede without losing all his influence—he must either be put down, or allowed to put down the government. In the beginning of October, the new arrangement of the two councils was carried into effect, at least to a great extent; but it excited little interest, and was rejected by the violent leaders as wholly unsatisfactory.

The malcontent party became every day bolder. An association was formed, under the title of “The Sons of Liberty,” who, without committing violence, paraded the streets of Montreal in a hostile and threatening manner. They emitted a proclamation, containing the most violent expressions. “The wicked designs,” said they, “of British authorities have severed all ties of sympathy for an unfeeling mother country.”—“A glorious destiny awaits the young men of these colonies;” and this was explained to be, “to disfranchise our beloved country from all human authority, except that of the bold democracy residing within its bosom.” They alluded to “the struggle for life and liberty, in which the day of glory arrives that will see us emerge from a long dark bondage to the splendour of light and freedom.” At the same time, in the county of Two Mountains, the people determined not to obey the magistrates appointed in the room of those displaced; an organization was formed of _pacificator_ justices, to compose differences without recourse to the constituted authorities, and in whose decisions all true patriots were required to acquiesce. Meanwhile, the militia in that district were organized in a new form, under officers of their own selection, including those recently dismissed; and an active training was carried on. All loyal and neutral residents were, by violent measures, compelled either to join the malcontents or quit the territory, throughout which British authority entirely ceased.

No long time passed before this course of proceeding was imitated in the more populous portion of the Montreal territory, lying southward of the St. Lawrence. On the 23d of October, a meeting was held of the five counties on the Richelieu and the Yamaska, when a petition was presented from L’Acadie, to be admitted as a sixth. The petitioners used the most intemperate language, declaring themselves prepared to sacrifice every thing most dear to them in this world, to emancipate from a vile slavery the land that gave them birth. They renounced all principles but those of the purest democracy, and desired to place themselves under the guidance and behind the buckler of L. J. Papineau. At the meeting of the six counties, the numbers attending were variously estimated from 1,500 to 5,000, of whom a proportion were armed. Their resolutions, without absolutely announcing rebellion, went to place everything in preparation for it. The recent appointments to the two councils were declared wholly unsatisfactory, while the introduction of an armed force into the province was stigmatized as a new and enormous grievance. The magistrates and militia were to be organized after the model of those of the Two Mountains; and the example of the Sons of Liberty was also recommended, “that they might be prepared to support each other with promptitude and effect, should circumstances require them to protect and defend their threatened liberties.” A similar address was drawn up on the following day, and circulated through the province. The same course was followed, of compelling, by violence and threats, the officers to resign their situations or leave the country.

Government could not remain passive while its authority was openly set at nought, and insurrection matured under its very eye. Applications were made to Sir Colin Campbell for two additional regiments, and likewise for what force could be spared from the upper province. The zealous offers of the loyal inhabitants to place themselves in arms, which had been long declined from motives of prudence, were now accepted, and volunteer corps were zealously and rapidly organized. The catholic clergy took a decided part in the support of order and peace; and an address was published by the Bishop of Montreal, exhorting his flock against the violent and illegal proceedings now in progress. This, among a religious people, though it did not stop the career of those who had so deeply committed themselves, had probably a powerful effect in arresting the spread of the disorder, and keeping it confined, as it still was, to Montreal district.

The first blow was struck at the town now mentioned, between the Sons of Liberty, and a loyal association formed in opposition to them. The former were completely worsted, and pursued through the streets; none were killed, but several severely hurt, particularly Brown, from New York, who had assumed the title of their general. Papineau’s house, which the victors attempted to burn, was saved, but the office of the Vindicator newspaper was destroyed. Exaggerated reports of this affair being spread throughout the country heightened the general ferment; and it was announced from various quarters that resistance was daily extending, and assuming a more organized form.

It was now obvious that, unless some decisive steps were taken, the malcontent cause must continually gain new strength, and the connexion of the colonies with the mother country become seriously endangered.

The course deemed most effectual, was immediately to arrest the most active leaders. A warrant was accordingly issued at Montreal against twenty-six, of whom seven were members of Assembly, including Papineau and Viger. Nine were apprehended; but the arch-agitator himself had disappeared, and doubts were even entertained if he were still in the province. This step necessarily led to a crisis, especially as some of the warrants were against persons residing in the heart of the disturbed territory. Two being in the vicinity of St. John's, on the Richelieu, a party of eighteen volunteer militia were despatched thither to apprehend them. An oversight seems to have been committed in sending so small a force, not regular, into the midst of a hostile country. They succeeded, however, in capturing the parties; and an armed body of thirty, who appeared near Chambly, made no attempt to intercept them. Near Longueuil, however, they found a field on the right of the road occupied by 300 well-armed men, protected by a high fence. From this assemblage a fire was immediately opened upon the detachment, which, from its position, could not be returned with effect. Several were wounded, the rest retreated, and the two prisoners were rescued by the insurgents.

The standard of insurrection having been thus openly raised, it became necessary to act with the utmost promptitude. Information was received that Papineau, Brown, and Neilson were at the villages of St. Denis and St. Charles, on the Richelieu, which had been occupied by the armed inhabitants; and accordingly Sir John Colborne, the commander-in-chief, sent strong detachments under Colonels Gore and Wetherall, to attack these places. The former, on the 22d of November, having conveyed his force in a steamer to Sorel, proceeded up the river against St. Denis; but being obliged to take a circuitous route, through tracks which, from the previous rain, were knee-deep, the troops arrived in a very jaded state. Though the whole country was in arms, no serious resistance was encountered till they reached the village, the entrance to which was defended by a large stone house strongly fortified, from which, as well as from others on each side, a heavy fire was opened. A howitzer was brought up against it, whence round shot was fired, with a view to batter it down, but without effect. Captain Markham, with the advance, had gallantly cleared the way, and taken an adjoining house, but was then severely wounded, and obliged to quit the field. Finding that no impression could be made on the main barrier, that his ammunition was nearly exhausted, and that the troops were overpowered with fatigue, Gore considered a retreat unavoidable. It was effected without serious inconvenience, though it became necessary to leave a cannon on the road, while his loss was six killed, ten wounded, and six missing. No blame seems to have been attached to the colonel, whose means, especially in ammunition, were scarcely adequate; but this second advantage, gained by the rebel cause at the opening of the contest, was a most unfortunate circumstance, and, unless counteracted, might have spread disaffection to an alarming extent.

Meantime, Colonel Wetherall, with his detachment, proceeded by way of Chambly to St. Charles, a point higher up the river. He was delayed in a similar manner by the badness of the roads; and, on reaching St. Hilaire, found it necessary to procure another company from Chambly, and even to send a messenger to Montreal, we presume, for further aid. Having reason, however, to consider his communications with that place intercepted, he determined, on the 26th, to advance to the attack. About 1,500 insurgents, under the command of Brown, had posted themselves in the village, and surrounded it with a strong stockade. The English commander, on his arrival, drew up his force at a short distance, in the hope of producing some defection; but none taking place, and a heavy fire being opened upon him, he pushed forward to the assault. In about an hour the intrenchment was carried, the fortified houses and palisades were set on fire, the troops were masters of the town, and the rebels fled in every direction. The carnage was great; the entire loss of the malcontents being about 300. Charges have been made of severe and vindictive proceedings, which we should hope are exaggerated. Another body took up its position in his rear, with the view of cutting off his return to Chambly; but when he approached them, on the 28th, they broke and dispersed at the first onset.

The affair of St. Charles decided the fate of the contest. A general panic spread among the peasantry, and they began to consider themselves betrayed by leaders, who did not show the courage expected of them in the hour of trial. Colonel Gore, strongly reinforced, again advanced upon St. Denis, which he entered without resistance on the 2d of December, Neilson and Brown having quitted it on the preceding evening. He then marched upon St. Hyacinth, but found it also undefended, and made a vain search for Papineau. The chiefs, renouncing their hopes, were already seeking safety in the territory of the United States. Brown reached it with great difficulty—through many perils; Neilson was taken in a barn, conveyed to Montreal, and thrown into prison. Papineau could not be traced; nor is there any record of his having compromised his personal safety in a contest which he had been the main instrument in exciting.

Attempts, however, were made to support the cause from a quarter which, under certain circumstances, might have proved very formidable. The United States contained many individuals disposed to sympathize deeply with the Canadians, and many restless spirits were inclined to join them, allured by the promise of large lots of confiscated land. Even in the present hopeless circumstances, 200 passed the frontier; but before Sir John Colborne could send a force against them, a party of the volunteers of Missiqui county, under the command of Capt. Kemp, took arms, and drove them back with some loss. Thus, the whole of the six counties, so lately in open rebellion, were in a fortnight reduced to perfect tranquillity.

There remained still the districts of Two Mountains and Terrebonne, north of Montreal, where insurrection had been first organized, and still wore its most determined aspect. Sir John Colborne had judiciously postponed operations against this quarter, till, the south being completely tranquillized, he could direct thither his whole force. On the 14th of December, he marched in person, with about 1,300 regular and volunteer troops, against the large village of St. Eustache. The disasters of their brethren elsewhere had spread a well-founded alarm; and the greater number of the men and their leaders, including Girod, the supposed commander-in-chief, fled precipitately. About 400 of the most desperate, however, continued to occupy a church and adjoining buildings, which had been carefully fortified; and here so obstinate a stand was made, that a British detachment was at one point made to recede. But fire having reached the adjacent edifices, soon spread to the church itself, the defenders of which were thereby speedily dislodged; while the troops, being protected by the houses, did not lose more than one killed and nine wounded.

Colonel Maitland now marched towards St. Benoit, the chief village of the Grand Brulé district, which had been the focus of insurrection; but on his way he met a deputation, tendering the most humble submission, and he entered the place without resistance. Unfortunately, the loyal inhabitants, who had been plundered and driven out of the country, could not be restrained from acts of violence, and a considerable portion of the houses were reduced to ashes. Maitland, after occupying St. Scholastique, returned to Montreal, leaving the district in a state of perfect tranquillity. The people, complaining that their chiefs, after instigating them to revolt, had deserted them, seemed determined not to be again seduced into such a course. Several of the leaders were taken; Girod himself, being surrounded, so that he could not escape, committed suicide.

Upper Canada, meantime, had become the theatre of important events. For a considerable time, especially since the residence there of M. Gourlay, a party had existed supporting extreme political opinions. These, it is true, were not embittered by any feelings arising from difference of race; but many of the inhabitants had emigrated from the United States, to whose institutions they were naturally partial. They gained over a number of the British residents, influenced by the usual motives, and who complained especially of the favouritism shown in the granting of land. These grounds of discontent were carefully investigated by the committee of 1828, and instructions issued by Lord Goderich, which here, as in the lower province, gave general satisfaction. The discontented party, however, proceeded from one step to another, till Mackenzie, Duncombe, and other leaders, scarcely made any secret of their desire to separate from Britain and join the American Union. In 1834, this party, for the first time, obtained a majority in the Assembly; and though they had hitherto confined themselves to complaints on particular subjects, they now commenced a general opposition to the royal government; and at length, as in the other province, came into violent collision with the Legislative Council. They transmitted to the King a long and elaborate list of grievances, complaining that the officers in the colony were too numerous, too highly paid, and the holders removable at the pleasure of the crown; that support had been unduly given to particular religious establishments; and that Lord Goderich’s recommendations had been by no means fully acted upon. They also urged, with the same vehemence as in the sister colony, the demand for an elective legislative council.

This union of the two provinces, pushing with equal zeal the most extreme measures, brought affairs into a somewhat hazardous position. When Lord Gosford and the commissioners were sent to Lower Canada, the ministry placed the upper province under Sir Francis Head, a man of literary talent, and of peculiar firmness, shrewdness, and energy of character. Having arrived early in 1836, as already related, he took the straightforward course of at once publishing the extent and limits of his instructions; at the same time assuring the people of his most zealous efforts to remove every practical grievance. The Assembly, however, were by no means satisfied; and another ground of contest soon arose. Sir Francis added to the executive three members, whose appointment was highly satisfactory to the popular party; but, as several weeks elapsed without their having been consulted on any subject, they stated in a letter that they considered themselves thus rendered responsible for measures in which they were allowed no share, and therefore tendered their resignation. While accepting it with regret, he maintained that he lay under no obligation to consult them on every measure; but was at perfect liberty to judge of the occasions on which the public interest might require their aid. The House of Assembly immediately took up the affair, and having, agreeably to request, been furnished with a copy of the correspondence, drew up a report, and afterwards a long address to the King, strenuously controverting the governor’s doctrine; and, in the course of it, broadly charging him with “deviations from truth and candour.” Proceeding in the same hostile spirit, they, for the first time, stopped the supplies; in consequence of which Sir Francis reserved all their money bills for his Majesty’s decision, and rejected the application for payment of their incidental expenses.

All hopes of accommodation being thus closed, he determined, on the 28th of May, to make an appeal to the people by a new election. It was contested by an extraordinary ardour; and a war of manifestos, proclamations, and addresses was forthwith waged between the parties. Perhaps no ruler ever effected more by writing than Sir Francis. The frank, energetic, and popular style in which his addresses were penned, produced an extraordinary effect; and already the peaceable inhabitants had begun to shrink from the extremes into which the popular leaders were hurrying them. These several causes produced the important result, that, in the new Assembly, a decided majority supported the constitutional side. The demagogues complained to the ministry that this effect had been produced by illegal means—by extraordinary grants of land, and even by violence and bribery. The Assembly, however, after strict inquiry by a committee, declared these allegations to be utterly false, expressing, at the same time, the strongest attachment to the mother country and to the governor.

During this tranquil and satisfactory state of Upper Canada, insurrection broke out in the lower province; and Sir Francis being requested to state what force he could spare, his answer was, “_All._” He considered it not only practicable, but desirable, that every soldier should be removed out of his district, and a full display thus made of its loyal and peaceful condition. He caused the arms to be deposited in the city-hall of Toronto, under charge of the mayor, declining even to place a guard over them to prevent sudden capture. In this state of things, Mackenzie determined to make an attempt upon the capital. Having a number of small detached parties throughout the province, who were ready to obey his mandate, and had even been trained to the use of weapons, he ordered them to assemble on the 4th of December, on the great road, called Yonge-street, leading to Lake Simcoe. Hurrying by cross-paths through the forest, they mustered at Montgomerie’s Tavern, about four miles from Toronto. Their numbers, at first estimated at 3,000, are not supposed to have exceeded 500. With the view of effecting a surprise, they attacked every one going to the city; among whom, Col. Moodie, a distinguished officer, was wounded, and died in a few hours. Alderman Powell, however, having shot one of his assailants, escaped, roused the governor, and gave the alarm; upon which Sir Francis ran to the town-hall, where he found the chief-justice with a musket on his shoulder, surrounded by a band of brave men, who had hastily assembled. The arms being unpacked and placed in their hands, they posted themselves in a defensive attitude at the windows of the building, and of others flanking it. But Mackenzie, presuming that Powell would instantly give notice, did not venture to advance—a pusillanimous resolution, assuredly, since he could never again expect so favourable an opportunity. By morning 300 royalists were mustered; and in the course of the day Mr. Allan M^{c}Nab, speaker of the House of Assembly, arrived with sixty from the Gore District, and others from different quarters raised the number to 500. On the 6th, the force was considered sufficient for offensive operations; but the governor, anxious to avoid the effusion of blood, sent a message to the insurgents, inviting them to lay down their arms. Mackenzie offered to comply, on condition that a national convention should be called, allowing till two o’clock for the answer; but as no reply could be given to this proposition, arrangements were immediately made for an attack on the following day.

On the 7th of December, at noon, the whole force marched out. In this civic array, principal commands were held by Col. M^{c}Nab, the present, and Mr. Justice M^{c}Lean, the late speaker of the Assembly; while the clerk of the House officiated as adjutant-general. The rebels had occupied an elevated position in the front of the tavern, where, being in some degree protected by houses, they endeavoured to make a stand; but the militia advancing to the charge, with the utmost enthusiasm, soon broke the whole corps, which dispersed in every direction, Mackenzie himself escaping with extreme precipitation. They were pursued four miles; two of the chiefs were taken; the tavern was burnt to the ground; and the revolt was so completely quashed, that Sir Francis considered he might safely exercise the attribute of mercy, by dismissing the greater part of the misguided prisoners.

The militia, meantime, had been marching toward Toronto in vast numbers; 2,600 from the Newcastle district; and in all upwards of 10,000. Immediate notice was now issued, that they might return to their homes; and those of the eastern districts were authorized to give their aid to Lower Canada. As it was understood, however, that Duncombe had assembled a corps in the London district, which had been a main seat of faction, Col. M^{c}Nab was sent thither with a sufficient force. On its approach, the chiefs disappeared, and about 300 of their followers laid down their arms, expressing deep regret, and even a readiness to serve in the royal army.