The 'Patriotes' of '37: A Chronicle of the Lower Canada Rebellion — John Shaqi
The 'Patriotes' of '37: A Chronicle of the Lower Canada RebellionDeCelles, Alfred D. (Alfred Duclos)
History
The 'Patriotes' of '37: A Chronicle of the Lower Canada Rebellion
DeCelles, Alfred D. (Alfred Duclos)
Canada -- History -- Rebellion, 1837-1838
The unenviable position of governor and chief royal commissioner was
offered in turn to several English statesmen and declined by all of
them. It was eventually accepted by Lord Gosford, an Irish peer
without experience in public life. With him were associated as
commissioners Sir Charles Grey, afterwards {46} governor of Jamaica,
and Sir George Gipps, afterwards governor of New South Wales. These
two men were evidently intended to offset each other: Grey was commonly
rated as a Tory, while Gipps was a Liberal. Lord Gosford's appointment
caused much surprise. He was a stranger in politics and in civil
government. There is no doubt that his appointment was a last
resource. But his Irish geniality and his facility in being all things
to all men were no small recommendations for a governor who was to
attempt to set things right in Canada.
The policy of Lord Glenelg, the colonial secretary during Gosford's
period of office, was to do everything in his power to conciliate the
Canadian _Patriotes_, short of making any real constitutional
concessions. By means of a conciliatory attitude he hoped to induce
them to abate some of their demands. There is, indeed, evidence that
he was personally willing to go further: he seems to have proposed to
William IV that the French Canadians should be granted, as they
desired, an elective Legislative Council; but the staunch old Tory king
would not hear of the change. 'The king objects on principle,' the
ministers were told, 'and upon what he {47} considers sound
constitutional principle, to the adoption of the elective principle in
the constitution of the legislative councils in the colonies.' In 1836
the king had not yet become a negligible factor in determining the
policy of the government; and the idea was dropped.
Lord Gosford arrived in Canada at the end of the summer of 1835 to find
himself confronted with a discouraging state of affairs. A short
session of the Assembly in the earlier part of the year had been marked
by unprecedented violence. Papineau had attacked Lord Aylmer in
language breathing passion; and had caused Lord Aylmer's reply to the
address of the Assembly containing the Ninety-Two Resolutions to be
expunged from the journals of the House as 'an insult cast at the whole
nation.' Papineau had professed himself hopeless of any amendment of
grievances by Great Britain. 'When Reform ministries, who called
themselves our friends,' he said, 'have been deaf to our complaints,
can we hope that a Tory ministry, the enemy of Reform, will give us a
better hearing? We have nothing to expect from the Tories unless we
can inspire them with fear or worry them by ceaseless importunity.' It
{48} should be observed, however, that in 1835 Papineau explicitly
disclaimed any intention of stirring up civil war. When Gugy, one of
the English members of the Assembly,[1] accused him of such an
intention, Papineau replied:
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account