“LE CONSEIL SPÉCIAL EST MORT, VIVE LE CONSEIL SPÉCIAL!” THE SPECIAL COUNCILS OF LOWER CANADA, 1838-1841 by Maxime Dagenais Dissertation submitted to the School of Graduate Studies and Research in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the PhD degree in History. Department of History Faculty of Arts Université d’Ottawa\ University of Ottawa © Maxime Dagenais, Ottawa, Canada, 2011 ii ABSTRACT “LE CONSEIL SPÉCIAL EST MORT, VIVE LE CONSEIL SPÉCIAL!” THE SPECIAL COUNCILS OF LOWER CANADA, 1838-1841 Maxime Dagenais Supervisor: University of Ottawa, 2011 Professor Peter Bischoff Although the 1837-38 Rebellions and the Union of the Canadas have received much attention from historians, the Special Council—a political body that bridged two constitutions—remains largely unexplored in comparison. This dissertation considers its time as the legislature of Lower Canada. More specifically, it examines its social, political and economic impact on the colony and its inhabitants. Based on the works of previous historians and on various primary sources, this dissertation first demonstrates that the Special Council proved to be very important to Lower Canada, but more specifically, to British merchants and Tories. After years of frustration for this group, the era of the Special Council represented what could be called a “catching up” period regarding their social, commercial and economic interests in the colony. This first section ends with an evaluation of the legacy of the Special Council, and posits the theory that the period was revolutionary as it produced several ordinances that changed the colony’s social, economic and political culture This first section will also set the stage for the most important matter considered in this dissertation as it emphasizes the Special Council’s authoritarianism. During this period, Lower Canadians lost all political rights and the decisions taken by the Special iii Council were made by non-elected councilors. The second section therefore considers the various ordinances the council passed, its obvious favoritism and authoritarianism, and the opinions of Lower Canadians towards them. The following questions are considered: did the British and French-Canadians react differently to the dissolution of their legislature and the suspension of their constitution? Considering the fact that many people, habitants and British alike, did not support the rebellion, did they view the council as a necessity in restoring peace and stability to the colony, and therefore accepted its authoritarianism, and even supported it? More importantly, did French- Canadians submit to the Special Council and all of the new laws and institutions it imposed in the years following the failed rebellions? Evidence suggests that French- Canadians were very vocal in their opposition to the Special Council. iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank all of those who have supported and assisted me throughout the writing of this dissertation and throughout my doctorate. In particular, I would like to thank Dr. Peter Bischoff whose passion for Quebec history made this entire process much simpler, and whose challenges and criticisms, widened the scope of this dissertation; Dr. Sylvie Perrier of the University of Ottawa who was always there to offer moral support and discuss important Montreal Canadiens-related issues; the entire staff of Library and Archives of Canada and the McCord Museum Archives whose professionalism made my research trouble-free and relatively painless; more specifically, I would like to thank Patricia Kennedy whose valuable advice when searching for petitions (in RG4, RG7, and MG11) made my research much more efficient; Nicole St-Onge for directing an eye- opening, albeit very intense, field on Canadian history; Evelyn Kolish for answering my many questions and offering her time; SSHRC, OGS and the University of Ottawa for its financial support; Beatrice Craig and Donald Fyson (external examiner) for valuable editing advice; and finally, to Allan Greer, Steven Watt, Brian Young and numerous other Canadian and European historians whose insights contributed to the creation of this dissertation, and whose works made my own research possible. I would also like to thank my wife, Severine Craig, whose emotional and moral support was invaluable when my patience and morale was running extremely low. v TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ABSTRACT ii AKNOWLEDGEMENTS iv TABLE OF CONTENTS v LIST OF TABLE vii INTRODUCTION: “LE CONSEIL SPÉCIAL EST MORT, VIVE LE CONSEIL SPÉCIAL!” THE SPECIAL COUNCILS OF LOWER CANADA, 1838-1841 0.1: Historiography 5 0.2: Thesis Topic 18 0.3: Sources/Methodology 23 0.4: Outline 33 CHAPTER 1: THE COLBORNE EXPERIMENT: COLBORNE’S FIRST COUNCIL, APRIL TO JUNE 1838 35 1.1: Colborne’s Councilors 36 1.2: The Rise of the Constitutionalists 41 1.3: Day-to-Day Operations and Ordinances Passed 53 CHAPTER 2: “MY ACTS HAVE BEEN DESPOTIC, BECAUSE MY DELEGATED AUTHORITY WAS DESPOTIC:” LORD DURHAM AND THE SPECIAL COUNCIL OF LOWER CANADA, JUNE TO NOVEMBER 1838 65 2.1: Durham’s Council and Councilors 66 2.2: Day-to-Day Operations 75 2.3: The Bermuda Ordinance Controversy 82 2.4: Links with the CAM 94 CHAPTER 3: COLBORNE RETURNS, NOVEMBER 1838 TO APRIL 1839 99 3.1: Colborne’s First Session 101 3.2: Colborne’s Second (and Final) Session 111 CHAPTER 4: THE “BUSY” ROAD TO UNION: CHARLES POULETT THOMPSON AND THE SPECIAL COUNCIL, OCTOBER 1839 TO FEBRUARY 1841 121 4.1: Thompson’s First Session 122 vi 4.2: Thompson’s Second Session 131 4.3: Thompson’s Third Session 136 4.4: Thompson’s Fourth Session and the End of the Special Council 147 4.5: Was the Era of the Special Council a Revolution? 155 CHAPTER 5: THE QUIET MASSES: COLBORNE’S FIRST COUNCIL 158 AND THE PEOPLE 5.1: Opinions on the Special Council in General 163 5.2: Opinions on Specific Ordinances 188 5.3: Conclusion 194 CHAPTER 6: LORD DURHAM’S COUNCIL AND THE PEOPLE 196 6.1: General Opinions towards Durham and his Council 196 6.2: Opinions towards Durham’s Ordinances 235 A: Police Ordinance 235 B: Bermuda Ordinance 243 6.3: Conclusion 254 CHAPTER 7: COLBRONE’S SECOND COUNCIL AND THE PEOPLE 256 7.1: Opinions on Ordinances Passed 258 A: The Habeas Corpus Controversy 258 B: “l’Ordonnance monstre des cahots” 284 7.2: Conclusion 294 CHAPTER 8: THOMPSON’S COUNCIL AND THE PEOPLE 296 8.1: Opinions on Thompson’s Council in General 296 8.2: Opinions on Ordinances Passed 306 A: The Judicature Ordinance and the Trois-Rivières 306 Controversy B: Seminary Ordinance and the End of the Feudal System 316 C: The Union of the Canadas and the Anti-Union Movement 328 8.3: Conclusion 347 CONCLUSION 348 BIBLIOGRAPHY 356 vii LIST OF TABLES Page Table 1: List of Special Councilors in Colborne’s First Council 38 Table 2: Ordinances Passed during Colborne’s First Council 56 Table 3: Durham’s Special Councilors 72 Table 4: Ordinances Passed during Durham’s Council 76 Table 5: New Members of Colborne’s Second Council 102 Table 6: Ordinances Passed in the First Session of Colborne’s Second Council 104 Table 7: Ordinances Passed in the Second Session of Colborne’s Second Council 111 Table 8: New Members of Thompson’s Council 123 Table 9: Union Vote in the Special Council 128 Table 10: Ordinances Passed in the Second Session of Thompson Council 134 Table 11: Ordinances Passed in the Third Session of Thompson’s Council 137 Table 12: Ordinances Passed in the Fourth Session of Thompson’s Council 148 Table 13: Canadian Newspapers that discussed the Special Council 160 Table 14: Breakdown of Letters to the Editor 163 Table 15: Number of Signatures in the District of Quebec 331 Table 16: Number of Signatures in the District of Trois-Rivières 332 1 INTRODUCTION “LE CONSEIL SPÉCIAL EST MORT, VIVE LE CONSEIL SPÉCIAL!” THE SPECIAL COUNCILS OF LOWER CANADA, 1838-1841 In November 1837, Louis-Joseph Papineau, leader of the Patriote party, and his followers took up arms against the British. Although the Rebellion started with a great victory at Saint-Denis on 23 November, it was soon crushed following defeats at Saint- Charles and Saint-Eustache. In the weeks that followed, the British Government attempted to make sense of what was happening in its North American colony. The British cabinet simply did not know, at that time, why the people of Lower Canada revolted and therefore did not have the information necessary to make wise decisions about the colony’s future. According to historian Steven Watt, the government established a Special Council that would restore order and govern the colony while it tried to figure out what to do. 1 The Special Council itself was “conceived as a tool for Lord Durham to use for the passage of necessary provincial legislation while he investigated and reported on the constitutional problems of British North America.” 2 While in Canada, Durham was not only expected to investigate the causes of the rebellion, but also to sit at the head of the council, restore peace, and prevent any further bloodshed. To facilitate this mission, Prime Minister Lord Russell created a Special Council, which, it was hoped, would enable Durham to pass any law or ordinance that would aid and assist him in his difficult 1 Steven Watt, “Authoritarianism, Constitutionalism, and the Special Council of Lower Canada, 1838- 1841.” Master’s Thesis. McGill University, 1997, pp. 18-19. 2 Ibid. , p. 19. 2 task. 3 On 15 January 1838, Durham accepted his appointment as Governor General and High Commissioner to British North America and head of the Special Council. On 10 February 1838, “An Act to Make Temporary Provision for the Government of Lower Canada” was passed, which made “temporary provision for the Government of Lower Canada, in order that Parliament may be enabled, after mature deliberation, to make permanent arrangements for the Constitution and Government of the said Province upon such a basis as may best secure the rights and liberties, and promote the interests of all classes of Her Majesty’s subjects in the said Province.” 4 The act’s provisions regarding the replacement of the colonial legislature by the Special Council were initially to be in force until 1 November 1840.