directed against Montreal, the success of which would have placed in
their hands the whole of Upper Canada. In this enterprise two armies
were destined to cooperate; one, consisting of nearly 6,000 men, under
Major-General Hampton, from Lake Champlain; the other, amounting to
8,800, under Major-General Wilkinson, from Grenadier Island, near
Sackett’s Harbour, on Lake Ontario. As the city was defended by a very
small proportion of the regular soldiers, who were chiefly employed in
the upper province, Hampton hoped, by pushing vigorously forward, to
capture the place with little difficulty. But having passed the frontier
in the end of October, he found on the banks of the river Chateauguay
the advanced corps of 800 British, with 172 Indians, commanded by
Lieut.-Colonels De Salaberry and M^{c}Donnell. These officers posted
their troops so judiciously amid woods, and so skilfully concealed the
smallness of their number, that the Americans, though they made several
brisk attacks, were always repulsed; and Hampton, believing himself
opposed by a large force, determined to retreat.
[Illustration: _Copp’s Ferry,_
near Georgeville.]
Meantime, the larger expedition, under General Wilkinson, having crossed
Lake Ontario, entered the river St. Lawrence. At Williamsburg, two
considerable detachments were landed, in order at once to clear the
banks and to lighten the boats while descending the rapids. On the 11th
of November, one of these, under Major-General Boyd, encountered
Lieut.-Colonel Morrison, with an inferior British force. A very
obstinate conflict ensued, in which both parties claimed the victory.
The English seemed to have gained the chief honour; but their success
was not so decisive as to prevent the enemy from continuing to descend
the river towards Montreal. Near Cornwall, the commander received
despatches from General Hampton, intimating that he declined the
expected cooperation, and intended to fall back upon Lake Champlain.
Wilkinson then conceived it necessary to give up for this season any
attempt upon Montreal, especially as he found the population altogether
hostile to the States, and attached to the British government. He
therefore placed his army in winter quarters, near French-mills, on the
Salmon river, where he formed a plan for attacking Prescott and
Kingston; but finding himself much straitened for provisions, was
induced to fall upon Plattsburg.
Meantime, the employment of the main army of the Americans in this
abortive expedition, enabled their opponents to resume the offensive on
the Niagara frontier. On the first intelligence of the disasters
sustained in the west, General Vincent had been ordered to fall back
upon Kingston; but he considered that circumstances now justified him in
maintaining his position. The enemy’s force in this quarter was not only
reduced, but was under the command, it was said, of an officer of little
spirit or enterprise. On the advance of a strong detachment under
Colonel Murray, he first fell back upon Fort George, then abandoned that
post, previously to which he reduced the adjoining town of Newark to
ashes. Murray was not content with driving him beyond the river; he
crossed it, surprised and stormed Fort Niagara, taking above 400
prisoners, with a large quantity of arms and stores. The English
afterwards surprised and plundered the villages of Lewiston, Black Rock,
and Buffalo, where they retaliated, not very considerately, the outrages
of this officer at Fort George.
Operations were recommenced early in the spring of 1814. Lieut.-Colonel
Williams, with 1,500 British, having taken post at La Colle, on the
river Richelieu. Wilkinson, who had upwards of 4,000 men at Plattsburg,
determined to attack them. On the 30th of March, he completely invested
a large mill, which the British had converted into a fortress. All his
attempts to carry it were, however, fruitless. Major Handcock even made
two attacks on the artillery posted in a wood, though without success.
The American general finally gave up the undertaking, and fell back upon
Plattsburg. In the beginning of May the British gained another
advantage, carrying, though with some loss, the fort of Oswego, where
they captured a considerable quantity of ammunition and stores.
The main effort of the Americans during this campaign was made on the
Niagara frontier, where about 5,000 men were placed under Major-General
Brown, an officer who had distinguished himself on several occasions. On
the 3d of July, he crossed and summoned Fort Erie, which, with its
garrison of 170, immediately surrendered. He then marched towards
Chippeway, and beat at Street’s Creek the advanced guard of
Major-General Riall, which had endeavoured to stop his progress. The
English general was then obliged to retreat to Fort George, and thence
in the direction of Burlington Heights. Brown hereupon laid siege to the
fort, but finding it stronger than he expected, and being disappointed
of assistance from Sackett’s Harbour, he fell back upon Chippeway.
General Riall, on his part, having received some reinforcements,
advanced; the armies came close to each other, and on the 25th the
republicans commenced the attack. The battle of Lundy’s Lane was fought
long, obstinately, and with various fortune; a great part of it amid
thick darkness, which caused several strange mistakes. The American
general and his second in command were wounded; and Riall, on the other
side, was taken prisoner. By a singular accident, in the midst of the
conflict, Lieut.-General Drummond arrived with a reinforcement from
York, which restored the battle. Both sides claim a dearly-bought
victory; but the real issue seems clearly indicated by the retreat of
the Americans to Fort Erie. On the night of the 14th of August, Drummond
made an attack on the place in two divisions; but his men, in both
cases, were repulsed with very severe loss.
Meantime, another part of Canada became the theatre of important
operations. After the successes of the allied powers in Europe, the
capture of Paris, and the abdication of Napoleon, Britain was enabled to
turn her whole strength against the United States, over whom a full
triumph was then anticipated. A strong detachment from the south of
France arrived in Canada, and enabled Sir George Prevost to place
himself at the head of 11,000 men, with whom he undertook to carry the
war into the enemy’s country. He proceeded to the attack of Plattsburg
on Lake Champlain, defended only by 1,500 troops, the rest having been
sent to the upper province. Macomb, the American commander, on being
pressed by this superior force, fell back on his main position, which he
strongly fortified. Sir George, on the 11th of September, arrived in
front of it; but a flotilla, under Capt. Downie, destined to cooperate
with him, was attacked by the enemy, and, under his very eye, completely
defeated and captured. Conceiving, after this disaster, that any success
in storming the enemy’s position would be fruitless, as to ulterior
objects, and a useless sacrifice of men, he immediately withdrew his
army. This course was not approved by all; and the general result, so
contrary to expectation, gave rise to much discontent and recrimination.
The Americans were still strong in Upper Canada. On the 17th, General
Brown sallied from Fort Erie, and, though driven back, caused a severe
loss to the British, who soon after raised the siege. Being pressed by a
large additional force under Izard, General Drummond retreated to the
old position at Burlington Heights; but receiving a reinforcement,
consisting of a detachment of the troops newly arrived from Europe, he
again advanced. Izard evacuated Fort Erie, and took up winter quarters
on the opposite side of the river. During this autumn the republicans
gained some advantages on Lake Erie, but were repulsed with considerable
loss in an attempt to recover Fort Michillimakinac.
The war, meantime, in other parts of America was productive of important
events. The British obtained possession of Washington, where they
destroyed the public edifices and property; but they were defeated in
their attacks upon Baltimore and New Orleans. Thus, while one party felt
itself engaged in an unequal contest, the other had not reaped the
expected advantages from its superior means. Both became inclined for
peace, which was concluded at Ghent on the 24th of December, 1814, upon
terms, which, after this long and chequered contest, brought back the
two powers to exactly the same position as when they had commenced.
Sir George Prevost was succeeded in April, 1815, by Sir George Gordon
Drummond, under whom some discontents began again to appear. These
referred chiefly to the conduct of the judges, whom the Assembly viewed
with such jealousy, that they had impeached at one time the heads of the
court both at Quebec and Montreal. In 1816, Sir John Coape Sherbrooke
went out as Governor-General; and under his administration, at once
vigorous and conciliatory, harmony was little interrupted. In 1818, he
was instructed by Earl Bathurst to accept the offer formerly made, to
pay the whole civil list out of the funds of the province; and he
applied, not for a permanent settlement, but merely for the sum
necessary to meet the current expenses. This was readily granted; and,
in order to raise it, new taxes were imposed, of which, however, the
Assembly reserved to themselves the appropriation. Sir John, being
obliged by severe illness to return to England, was succeeded in 1818 by
the Duke of Richmond. This amiable nobleman, though personally popular,
introduced an innovation, which led to the long and serious conflict
between the Crown and the Assembly. Instead of submitting, like his
predecessors, a detailed estimate of every object of expenditure, he
divided the whole into chapters, each comprehending a head or branch,
the entire amount of which was alone specified. The Assembly refused to
sanction such a change, and passed a vote according to the estimate of
the former governor, stating each payment in detail. The legislative
council, however, withheld their concurrence from this resolution; and
the Duke, expressing his displeasure with the Lower House, had recourse
to the irregular measure of drawing upon the receiver-general for the
sum which he had demanded.
In September, 1819, his Grace’s life and government were suddenly
terminated by an attack of hydrophobia. After short intervals, under the
Hon. James Monk and Sir Peregrine Maitland, the Earl of Dalhousie, in
1820, was removed from Nova Scotia to Canada. This nobleman, possessing
a high military reputation, and an amiable disposition, had been very
popular in his former station; yet, sharing with his advisers, it is
probable, those extreme monarchical ideas which had hitherto prevailed
in the colonies, he was ill-fitted to meet the new crisis that had
arisen. Having estimated 22,000_l._ as the amount necessary for the
public service, in addition to the revenues vested in the crown, he
solicited this sum as a permanent grant; but the Assembly refused to
pass more than an annual bill of supply, in which they specified every
item. The council again rejected their vote, with the entire concurrence
of the governor, who hesitated not to draw upon the treasurer for even a
larger amount than had been asked from the Assembly.
Earl Bathurst, on receiving notice of these proceedings, did not
disapprove of Lord Dalhousie’s conduct, but strongly recommended
economy. He directed also that two estimates should be presented; one,
embracing the government expenses, to be defrayed by funds of which the
crown claimed the entire disposal; the other to be employed on popular
objects, in regard to which the members might be left uncontrolled. At
the same time it was enjoined, that both of these should be given in
full detail. This arrangement was well received, the required sum was
voted, and the session terminated amid mutual courtesies.
In the year 1823, the popular cause was strengthened by the insolvency
of the receiver-general, Sir John Caldwell; an inquiry into whose
accounts had been vainly demanded by the Assembly, and who proved to be
indebted to the public nearly 100,000_l._ When, in the following year,
the governor presented his estimates, the representatives assumed a high
tone; disputing the right of the crown to select the objects on which to
employ its revenue; condemning the unlawful appropriation of public
money; and materially reducing the amount of the sum demanded. These
proceedings drew forth a strong expression of displeasure from Lord
Dalhousie.
In 1825, the government, during his lordship’s temporary absence, was
administered by Sir Francis Burton. This officer, anxious to conciliate
the Lower House, yielded nearly all the points in dispute. He sanctioned
a bill of supply, in which no distinction was made between the
government and the popular expenditure; an annual grant being made, with
considerable reductions, so that a virtual control over the whole
revenue was thereby conceded to the members. Accordingly, they now
openly claimed the right to appropriate all that was raised within the
province, denying the privilege hitherto exercised by government—of the
uncontrolled disposal of certain branches. These were the produce of
duties on imports, imposed by act of parliament in 1774, and yielding
annually about 34,000_l._, with some of smaller amount, arising from the
sale of land, timber, and other casual sources. Earl Bathurst strongly
disapproved of the concessions made by Burton; and Lord Dalhousie,
having resumed office in 1826, disallowed a bill in which the above
claim was incorporated.
Lord Goderich, who, in 1827, received the seals of the Colonial Office,
though he maintained the right of government to dispose of the disputed
revenue, yet directed that an offer should be made of resigning it to
the Assembly, on their granting an annual civil list of 36,000_l._ On
the meeting of that body, however, M. Papineau was elected speaker—an
appointment which, on account of his violent opposition to the measures
of administration, Lord Dalhousie refused to sanction. The consequence
was, that no session of either house was held in the winter of
1827-1828.
Discontent had now risen to an alarming height; and in the latter year a
petition was presented to the king, signed by 87,000 inhabitants,
complaining of the conduct of successive governors, particularly of the
Earl of Dalhousie, and urging a compliance with the demands of the
Assembly. Mr. Huskisson, who had become Colonial Minister, moved that
this petition should be referred to a committee of the House of Commons.
One was accordingly named, composed, in a great degree, of members
attached to liberal principles; who, after a very elaborate
investigation, gave in a report, in which they strongly condemned the
practice of appropriating large sums, taken from the public revenue,
without the sanction of the representatives of the people. With regard
to the main portion of the disputed income, being that produced by the
duties of 1774, its disposal appeared, from the report of his Majesty’s
law officers, to be vested in the crown; yet the committee judged, that
the real interests of the province would be best promoted by placing the
whole under the control of the Assembly. At the same time, they
distinctly expressed their opinion that the governor, the judges, and
the executive council, should be made independent of the annual votes of
that body. They recommended that a more liberal character should be
assigned in a more beneficial manner. Generally admitting that the
grievances complained of were more or less well-founded, they advised a
thorough and effectual redress.
This report appears to have given very decided satisfaction in the
colony, and the Assembly ordered it to be printed, and 400 copies
distributed. In a series of resolutions, passed on the 19th of March,
1830, they seem to limit their demands to the complete fulfilment of its
provisions. Sir James Kempt, who was sent out in 1828, had been
furnished with instructions to carry the recommendations of the
committee into effect with as little delay as possible, and generally to
follow a conciliatory system. He appears to have proceeded with zeal and
efficiency in the prescribed course. Three new members were added to the
legislative council, who are said to have been agreeable to the popular
party. The judges, with the exception of the Chief Justice, whose advice
on legal questions was considered desirable, were requested, with some
earnestness, to resign their places in that body. They declined
compliance, but agreed to take no share in its deliberations, and did
not afterwards attend its sittings. New members were also added to the
executive council, in which seats were even offered to Neilson and
Papineau, the leaders of the opposition. The act, transferring to the
Assembly the revenue in dispute, could not be obtained immediately, but
it was promised on the first meeting of parliament. The Assembly,
however, in voting the supplies of 1829, had proceeded on the
supposition of having the whole at their disposal, and cut off several
thousand pounds from the governor’s estimates; but as the vote did not
appear to involve any absolute recognition of their claim, and as it
seemed inexpedient to dispute a point virtually given up, Sir James
yielded his assent. This step, though not approved by Sir George Murray,
was not, under the peculiar circumstances of the case, positively
disallowed. The governor is said to have treated the ruling party in the
Assembly with a courtesy of manners to which they had not been
accustomed; and on his departure, in 1830, addresses were presented to
him by the most respectable inhabitants of Quebec and Montreal, which
were signed by Papineau and other popular leaders.
Lord Aylmer immediately succeeded to the government. His communications
with the Assembly were of the most friendly description; and though
circumstances, consequent on the death of George IV., had still
prevented the passing of the proposed act, it was promised with all
practicable speed. Lord Goderich, who now presided in the Colonial
Office, directed that the items, which had been again rejected in 1830,
and amounting now to 7,500_l._, should not be longer pressed, but a
compensation be requested for several individuals who had been thereby
deprived of their income. On the 24th of December, his lordship sent two
despatches, intimating his intention to bring in a bill, which should
empower his Majesty to place the proceeds of the duties in question at
the disposal of the Assembly. In return, that body was expected to make
a permanent provision for the judges, as well as for the principal
officers of government. The demand was fixed, according to a very
moderate estimate, at 19,100_l._, which, by a grant of 5,000_l._, made
in 1795, for the support of the civil government, would be reduced to
14,100_l._ It was intimated, however, that the casual and territorial
revenues, arising from the sale of land, the cutting of timber, and
other sources, were still to be considered as belonging to the king.
They had amounted in the previous year to 11,231_l._, but were reduced,
by expenses of collection and other deductions, to about 7,500_l._ This
sum it was proposed to employ chiefly in paying the stipends of the
clergy of the established church, hitherto drawn, not very
appropriately, out of the army extraordinaries. It was urged, that these
funds belonged legally and constitutionally to his Majesty, whose
employment of them upon objects, not of mere patronage, but closely
connected with the interests of the province, could not be reasonably
objected to.
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.