Me Fang You
New member
Rebellions of 1837
It wasn't the nicest way to voice their opinions. It was a desperate grasp for government and for power. Was it worth it? The rebels thought that it was, because they felt as though they had very few rights or power. The people who rebelled in Upper and Lower Canada thought it was their last hope for responsible government and rights. The revolt happened as a result of government structure, public works, clergy reserves and the language/culture in Lower Canada. Although the rebels weren't a great success, were their actions right? Were the rebels justified?
Events outside of Canada contributed to the desire for change in Upper and Lower Canada greatly. For example, previously the people saw the desire for change in the French Revolution, the Great Migration, and the Industrial Revolution. The French Revolution began in 1789 and lasted until the defeat of Napoleon in 1815. The revolution called for democracy. The three goals of the revolution were: liberty, equality, and fraternity. They rebelled against the kings and nobles, and were successful. Due to the success of people in the French Revolution ideas went into peoples minRAB. The idea caught on everywhere including Canada. People thought they could bring about similar or possibly more rights for themselves. Another example is the Great Migration, where many people migrated to Canada. The increased population meant more people and more thoughts and ideas heading towarRAB rebellion. A third example is the Industrial Revolution. It began in Britain, then spread through Europe and North America. The Industrial Revolution brought much change in Britain. That was exactly what the Canadians were looking for. Once Britain had it, they wanted it, too. With the new population increase, they would try to get it through revolution. People as a result of these reasons were immigrating to Canada and with them bringing their ideas. A last example is the American Revolution, where the Americans rebelled against Britain and were victorious in their quest for independence. Success was what the people looked at most- not how many rebellions had failed, but how many had been successful.
Rebels felt that armed conflict was necessary because of the structures of government in Upper and Lower Canada. The structure in Canada looked like this in 1791 after the Constitutional Act. (Diagram above) The system of government in Canada in 1791 wasn't very fair. First of all only a select few people were allowed to vote. (white, wealthy landowning males) The legislative asserably, although chosen by the people, held no real power because the groups above them had veto power and could turn down anything they wanted to. These groups that had veto power were called the Executive Council, the Legislative Council, and the Governor. This was exactly the opposite of what the lower class people wanted. They wanted responsible government, not the E.C./L.C./G who were frienRAB of the British Government and Governor, who would do anything necessary to keep their position including rejecting the Legislative Asserably's suggestions.
Clergy reserves were another reason for armed rebellion. A clergy reserve is a piece of land that the clergy could sell to raise money for the church. Land was set aside for the Anglican Church. Under terms of the Constitutional Act, one-seventh of all land was supposed to pay the costs of churches, schools, and other activities of the church. They were intended to keep British traditions alive in Canada. Some didn't like this very much because they wanted independence from Britain and their own form of government, which kept the best land for itself, not for the upper class and the church. People who were not involved in the church did not like all this land and money being used by the church. The rebels thought this was very unfair, so they thought rebellion was the best, and possibly the only way to handle the situation.
Public works projects were a bone of contention. Groups of people such as the Family Compact in Upper Canada, and the Chateau Clique in Lower Canada had most of the control of everything and would do everything they could to benefit and profit themselves, not the middle and lower class people. A great illustration for this is in an imaginary story involving the colony of Good Hope. It is in Canada and is under the same form of government as the Canadiens were in 1791. The trouble in the colony is that the government has $100,000 to spend on a public works project. There are two options on which they can spend this money. A bridge to unsettled land owned by the upper class, or a highway built to connect the colony to the town of Blood Sweat and Tears which is what the lower class people want. Due to the balance of government power, the bridge will be the one the money is spent on. It is because the upper class controls the government, and it benefits it's merabers. The story gives you a sense of how things really were back then- how the upper class got what they wanted and the lower class didn't. The two groups who controlled the government in Upper and Lower Canada wanted the Canadiens to accept a British lifestyle. The rebels and others in Canada did not agree with this or like it, so they chose to rebel. The upper class could do pretty much whatever it wanted because of the form of government through the legislative asserably in which only selected people could vote. (Only white male wealthy landowners). Others had no power and were not respected. They felt as though they had no other option besides rebellion.
Language and culture in Lower Canada had a lot to do with the rebellion because in culture the Chateau Clique had complete control of most of the government. They were mostly wealthy British businessmen who believed they should run the government. They enjoyed the support of the Roman Catholic Church. They favoured themselves. In the French Canadien community, culture was different. The Canadiens felt as though their culture was being threatened by the government and wanted to preserve their culture. There was a French-speaking majority and a small English-speaking minority, which were in conflict as to which was better or right. No one wanted to give up his or her language to speak the other. It was basically upper class versus lower class. The lower class thought of the British as arrogant conquerors and the upper class thought of the lower class as uneducated fools. The lower class wanted equality and rights, which they were willing to fight to achieve. The upper class wanted control and didn't want to give anything up for the lower class.
The goals or objectives of the rebellions were to take over the government, and run it in their own way, not the way the oligarchy (current form of government) wanted it to be run. They also wanted independence from the government and Britain. They wanted it badly enough to rebel against Britain. The plan of Mackenzie, a rebel leader, was to attack Hamilton and Toronto, arrest Governor Bondhead and capture the artillery. The rebellions failed because of poor organization, bad leadership, and lack of popular support. In the case of Mackenzie's rebellion, it was due to the lost element of surprise because one of the two groups had attacked early, warning the other city, giving them the time to get reinforcements to stop the rebellion. After this the rebels were erabarrassingly defeated.
I think the rebellion was justified because in nearly all ways the lower class people, mainly the French Canadiens were treated very unfairly. There was not much that they were treated fairly in. For example they were treated unfairly in the way that the government was run, because they had a powerless Legislative Asserably which could do nothing to change the way things were. Then, the clergy reserves kept by the church were sold to the upper class, and kept had the best land for themselves. Finally of that there was also the fact that the public work projects were just done exclusively to assist the upper class, and not the lower class people. For these reasons I believe that the rebellions were justified. If given the choice I would have chosen to rebel. How would you have felt if you lived back in the 1800's? Would you have joined the rebels and rebelled or would you have stayed loyal to Britain?
BY: DAN REGIER
It wasn't the nicest way to voice their opinions. It was a desperate grasp for government and for power. Was it worth it? The rebels thought that it was, because they felt as though they had very few rights or power. The people who rebelled in Upper and Lower Canada thought it was their last hope for responsible government and rights. The revolt happened as a result of government structure, public works, clergy reserves and the language/culture in Lower Canada. Although the rebels weren't a great success, were their actions right? Were the rebels justified?
Events outside of Canada contributed to the desire for change in Upper and Lower Canada greatly. For example, previously the people saw the desire for change in the French Revolution, the Great Migration, and the Industrial Revolution. The French Revolution began in 1789 and lasted until the defeat of Napoleon in 1815. The revolution called for democracy. The three goals of the revolution were: liberty, equality, and fraternity. They rebelled against the kings and nobles, and were successful. Due to the success of people in the French Revolution ideas went into peoples minRAB. The idea caught on everywhere including Canada. People thought they could bring about similar or possibly more rights for themselves. Another example is the Great Migration, where many people migrated to Canada. The increased population meant more people and more thoughts and ideas heading towarRAB rebellion. A third example is the Industrial Revolution. It began in Britain, then spread through Europe and North America. The Industrial Revolution brought much change in Britain. That was exactly what the Canadians were looking for. Once Britain had it, they wanted it, too. With the new population increase, they would try to get it through revolution. People as a result of these reasons were immigrating to Canada and with them bringing their ideas. A last example is the American Revolution, where the Americans rebelled against Britain and were victorious in their quest for independence. Success was what the people looked at most- not how many rebellions had failed, but how many had been successful.
Rebels felt that armed conflict was necessary because of the structures of government in Upper and Lower Canada. The structure in Canada looked like this in 1791 after the Constitutional Act. (Diagram above) The system of government in Canada in 1791 wasn't very fair. First of all only a select few people were allowed to vote. (white, wealthy landowning males) The legislative asserably, although chosen by the people, held no real power because the groups above them had veto power and could turn down anything they wanted to. These groups that had veto power were called the Executive Council, the Legislative Council, and the Governor. This was exactly the opposite of what the lower class people wanted. They wanted responsible government, not the E.C./L.C./G who were frienRAB of the British Government and Governor, who would do anything necessary to keep their position including rejecting the Legislative Asserably's suggestions.
Clergy reserves were another reason for armed rebellion. A clergy reserve is a piece of land that the clergy could sell to raise money for the church. Land was set aside for the Anglican Church. Under terms of the Constitutional Act, one-seventh of all land was supposed to pay the costs of churches, schools, and other activities of the church. They were intended to keep British traditions alive in Canada. Some didn't like this very much because they wanted independence from Britain and their own form of government, which kept the best land for itself, not for the upper class and the church. People who were not involved in the church did not like all this land and money being used by the church. The rebels thought this was very unfair, so they thought rebellion was the best, and possibly the only way to handle the situation.
Public works projects were a bone of contention. Groups of people such as the Family Compact in Upper Canada, and the Chateau Clique in Lower Canada had most of the control of everything and would do everything they could to benefit and profit themselves, not the middle and lower class people. A great illustration for this is in an imaginary story involving the colony of Good Hope. It is in Canada and is under the same form of government as the Canadiens were in 1791. The trouble in the colony is that the government has $100,000 to spend on a public works project. There are two options on which they can spend this money. A bridge to unsettled land owned by the upper class, or a highway built to connect the colony to the town of Blood Sweat and Tears which is what the lower class people want. Due to the balance of government power, the bridge will be the one the money is spent on. It is because the upper class controls the government, and it benefits it's merabers. The story gives you a sense of how things really were back then- how the upper class got what they wanted and the lower class didn't. The two groups who controlled the government in Upper and Lower Canada wanted the Canadiens to accept a British lifestyle. The rebels and others in Canada did not agree with this or like it, so they chose to rebel. The upper class could do pretty much whatever it wanted because of the form of government through the legislative asserably in which only selected people could vote. (Only white male wealthy landowners). Others had no power and were not respected. They felt as though they had no other option besides rebellion.
Language and culture in Lower Canada had a lot to do with the rebellion because in culture the Chateau Clique had complete control of most of the government. They were mostly wealthy British businessmen who believed they should run the government. They enjoyed the support of the Roman Catholic Church. They favoured themselves. In the French Canadien community, culture was different. The Canadiens felt as though their culture was being threatened by the government and wanted to preserve their culture. There was a French-speaking majority and a small English-speaking minority, which were in conflict as to which was better or right. No one wanted to give up his or her language to speak the other. It was basically upper class versus lower class. The lower class thought of the British as arrogant conquerors and the upper class thought of the lower class as uneducated fools. The lower class wanted equality and rights, which they were willing to fight to achieve. The upper class wanted control and didn't want to give anything up for the lower class.
The goals or objectives of the rebellions were to take over the government, and run it in their own way, not the way the oligarchy (current form of government) wanted it to be run. They also wanted independence from the government and Britain. They wanted it badly enough to rebel against Britain. The plan of Mackenzie, a rebel leader, was to attack Hamilton and Toronto, arrest Governor Bondhead and capture the artillery. The rebellions failed because of poor organization, bad leadership, and lack of popular support. In the case of Mackenzie's rebellion, it was due to the lost element of surprise because one of the two groups had attacked early, warning the other city, giving them the time to get reinforcements to stop the rebellion. After this the rebels were erabarrassingly defeated.
I think the rebellion was justified because in nearly all ways the lower class people, mainly the French Canadiens were treated very unfairly. There was not much that they were treated fairly in. For example they were treated unfairly in the way that the government was run, because they had a powerless Legislative Asserably which could do nothing to change the way things were. Then, the clergy reserves kept by the church were sold to the upper class, and kept had the best land for themselves. Finally of that there was also the fact that the public work projects were just done exclusively to assist the upper class, and not the lower class people. For these reasons I believe that the rebellions were justified. If given the choice I would have chosen to rebel. How would you have felt if you lived back in the 1800's? Would you have joined the rebels and rebelled or would you have stayed loyal to Britain?
BY: DAN REGIER