Rebellions of 1837-38
Rebellions of 1837-38
Were the Rebellions of 1837-38 about Nationalism or Liberalism? Why do we fight?
Describe the causes of the Rebellions and the main events in Lower Canada and Upper Canada.
Compare and contrast those distinct but related events.
Determine key consequences of the rebellions and rank them according to their significance.Â
The Rebellions in Lower Canada (1837–1838) were caused by political, social, and economic discontent among the population, particularly amongst the French-speaking Canadiens. Â
Politically, frustrations arose due to a lack of representation in government, and eventually this caused protests in the form of assemblies and calls for boycotts against British goods.
Socially, the rebellion reflected deep divisions between French-Canadian farmers and the English-speaking elite. The church traditionally supported the colonial government, but even the church was criticized by many. Secret societies were formed, like the pro-British Doric Club and its opposite, the Fils de la LibertĂ©. Â
All this happened during a time when economic factors also played a major role. The hardships brought about by a growing population placed a strain on agricultural land and farmer; the colonial government’s trade policies favored British economic interests; and in general, a desire for economic independence emerged.
All these kinds of difficulties and tensions combine to create the conditions for the Rebellions in Lower Canada.
In 1791, Britain passed the Constitutional Act, 1791, which divided the old Province of Quebec into Upper Canada and Lower Canada and set up elected assemblies in each colony. People (mostly male property owners) could vote for members of a Legislative Assembly. But the Governor and two appointed councils still held most of the power. Because the Governor and these councils were not chosen by voters, the government was not fully responsible to the people’s elected representatives.
In Lower Canada, the elected Assembly was mostly controlled by a group called the Parti patriote, led by Louis-Joseph Papineau. They wanted the government to be fairer and more democratic. But many of their ideas were blocked by the appointed councils, whose members worked with a small, powerful elite often called the Château Clique.
In 1834, the Parti patriote wrote a list of complaints and demands called the 92 Resolutions and sent it to Britain. They wanted changes like a council that was elected instead of appointed. Britain didn’t agree. Instead, in 1837, the British Parliament passed the 10 Russell Resolutions, which rejected most of the demands and allowed the Governor to use money without the Assembly’s approval.Â
After Britain’s response, many people in Lower Canada protested, holding big meetings, including one called the Assembly of the Six Counties. Some Patriotes also called for boycotts of British goods and began preparing for more direct action. At the same time in Upper Canada, reformers led by William Lyon Mackenzie challenged their own political elite, known as the Family Compact. Like the Patriotes, they wanted a government that was more responsible to ordinary people rather than appointed officials.Â
Socially, the rebellions showed deep divisions in Lower Canada. Most of the population was French-speaking farmers, while much of the political and economic power was held by an English-speaking elite connected to the government and business interests. Many French Canadians felt that they had less influence in government and business, even though they made up the majority of the population. They believed they were often excluded from important positions and decision-making.Â
The Catholic Church traditionally supported the colonial government and encouraged order and loyalty. However, some reformers criticized the Church for not supporting political change strongly enough.  Â
As tensions grew in the 1830s, more radical groups began to organize. In 1837, young Patriotes formed a group called the Fils de la Liberté (Sons of Liberty) to promote reform and sometimes more direct action. In response, loyalist supporters of the British government created their own group, the Doric Club, to defend British rule and oppose the Patriotes. Clashes between these groups increased tensions in Montreal. These social and political divisions made compromise difficult. By 1837, conflict between reformers and loyalists had moved beyond debate in the Assembly and into the streets.
By the 1830s, the population of Lower Canada was growing quickly. Many families depended on farming, but farmland was becoming crowded. In some seigneuries, land was divided into smaller and smaller pieces, making it harder for families to earn enough to survive. Because there were few other jobs available outside farming, many young people struggled to find work. This added to frustration in rural areas.Â
The colonial government’s economic policies also added to these problems. Britain controlled trade in the colonies and made decisions that mostly benefited British businesses. The colonies were expected to supply raw materials, such as timber and grain, to Britain while buying manufactured goods from British factories. Many people in Lower Canada felt that this system limited opportunities for local businesses and prevented the colony from developing its own industries.
As a result, some reformers encouraged people to take action. They promoted boycotts of British goods, supported the creation of local manufacturing, and sometimes participated in smuggling goods across the border from the United States. These actions were not just about making money—they also reflected a desire for more economic independence and control over their own lives.
Economic hardship combined with political frustration and social inequality created a tense environment. Farmers, workers, and reformers felt their needs and voices were ignored by the government and by the British elite who controlled trade and decision-making. This economic pressure helped push the population toward supporting the Patriotes and other reform movements, which eventually led to open conflict in 1837.
While the Rebellion in Lower Canada involved large public assemblies, strong French-Canadian nationalism, and major battles in places like Saint-Denis and Saint-Eustache, the conflicts in Upper Canada were different in those respects. In general, the rebellion in Upper Canada was shorter, less organized, and more focused on political reform than on cultural conflict.
In Upper Canada, the main leader was William Lyon Mackenzie. He opposed a small, powerful group called the Family Compact, who controlled the government, courts, and banks. Many Reformers believed elections were unfair and that the colony needed responsible government. Meetings were held across the Home District, the administrative region centered on the provincial capital of Toronto (then called York), and in Newmarket and other rural communities. Reformers organized “committees of vigilance” and even practiced with weapons in back fields.
The rebellion itself centered on Toronto. In December 1837, Mackenzie and his supporters gathered at Montgomery’s Tavern on Yonge Street. They marched south toward the town but were stopped by loyalist forces near present-day Bloor Street during the Battle of Montgomery's Tavern. The fighting lasted only a short time before the rebels scattered. Unlike Lower Canada, where battles such as the Battle of Saint-Eustache were large and destructive, the Upper Canada uprising quickly collapsed. Mackenzie fled toward the Niagara River and later tried to continue the fight from Navy Island.
Both rebellions demanded political change and responsible government. While Lower Canada’s rebellion involved deeper cultural tensions and larger military actions, Upper Canada’s was more limited in size and focused mainly on political power in specific locations around Toronto and the Niagara region.
While we are building this page, visit our larger Curated document collection and various other resources now available below!
Students read documents about events in Upper and Lower Canada, then identify key events by establishing facts, dates, and locations. They place these events in chronological order on a digital timeline in Canva and map their exact locations using Cartograf, adding images, short descriptions, and explanations for their placement choices.
Access this activity here ➦
Note that a small separate student activity using Sketchnote and on the causes of the 1837-38 Rebellion is available courtesy of our RECIT partners.
Read more about this activity and see a video on its in-class use here. Â
The English version of the workbook is now available here! ➦
Students can try the new activity entitled Actor Motivation Chart – The Rebellions of 1837–1838, after they have reviewed several different scenarios using the branching story below!. Teachers should note that this resource is being verified for historical accuracy. It was created as a demonstration example during our last Coffee Break session on branching stories, available on YouTube here. Â
A teacher guide, organizers, documents, and activities have been created for this topic. They are available in the form of a Learning and Evaluation Situation called Rebellionsof 1837-38 - The Most Important Consequences
Secondary-level History Detective strategy slide deck to help students to critically connect facts/concepts in documents with representative online historical images.
Students can use the Historical Discussion game cards to discuss and review various topics related to this time period and to the demands and struggles of Patriotes and others.Â
A Google Slides deck to help facilitate discussion was prepared by our RECIT partners and is now available in English here.