The Story of the Upper Canada Rebellion, John Charles Dent [read a book TXT] 📗

was discussed for seizing the arms in the City Hall, for taking into custody the chief Government officials, and for establishing a Provisional Government with Dr. Rolph at its head. All this, it was believed, could be easily effected without firing a shot, and without the sacrifice of a single life. It was also distinctly understood that private property was to be respected, and that all money in the banks was to be regarded as private property, except such as actually belonged to the Government. It was however expressly stipulated that nobody was to be finally committed to any definite course of procedure until Mackenzie's return from his rural tour with the sanction of the various political unions. No authority whatever was meanwhile given to Mackenzie, either expressly or by implication, to stir the people up to rebellion. He was simply authorized to ascertain their views. At his own urgent request permission was given him to use the names of Rolph and Morrison, but only so far as to state that if the people were really desirous of effecting a revolution, they might depend upon receiving the countenance of those two gentlemen. On this distinct understanding Mackenzie left Dr. Morrison's house, and started the same night or early on the following morning for the north.
FOOTNOTES:
[269] See his Despatch to Lord Glenelg, dated 5th April, 1837, in Narrative, chap. ix.
[270] See his Despatch dated July 14th, 1837.
[271] On the 10th of September.
[272] See the number for June 10th, 1824.
[273] This boast seems to have been made in the columns of _The Constitution_, but I have been unable to find it there. I make the quotation on the authority of Mr. Lindsey's _Life of Mackenzie_, vol. i., p. 395, note.
[274] Mr. MacMullen, writing, doubtless, from honest conviction, endeavours to convey the impression that Bidwell was more deeply implicated in the rebellion than he chose to acknowledge. See his _History of Canada_, p. 446, note. But no substantial proof has ever been offered in support of such a belief, whereas the proof on the other side is unanswerable. There is, first of all, the character of the man. His moral courage was great, and he could stand up for a cherished principle with much firmness and vigour. But he fought with weapons which were not carnal, and would have suffered almost any wrong that could have been inflicted upon him rather than resort to physical violence. Then, there is the fact that he always denied all knowledge of the rising. No man who knew Marshall Spring Bidwell would have hesitated to accept his bare word as against any but the most direct evidence to the contrary, and in this case there can hardly be said to be any countervailing evidence whatever. Again, there is the fact that he declined to act as a delegate to the proposed Reform convention, as subsequently mentioned in the text. But there is no need to resort to circumstantial or conjectural evidence. We have the testimony of Mackenzie himself, who, after his return to Canada, was ready enough to betray the secrets of his somewhile coadjutors, and who would have been only too glad if he could have pointed to Bidwell as one of the number. In his _Flag of Truce_, published in 1853, he says; "The question is often asked me--What part Mr. Bidwell took in 1837"--and his answer is explicit enough: "None that I know." It is quite certain that Bidwell could not have been concerned in the movement without Mackenzie's knowledge. The only circumstances which might be adduced as indicating a knowledge of the intended rising on the part of Mr. Bidwell are two in number, and neither of them will bear a moment's examination. First, it is true that he was consulted by the Radicals as to the lawfulness of their assembling for drill exercise and other purposes. He advised that, under certain restrictions, such assemblies were within the law, and that there could be nothing culpable in rifle-matches involving mere trials of skill. But when his advice was sought there was no intention, even on Mackenzie's part, to rise at any definite period, and Mr. Bidwell may very well have believed that the projects would end as most of Mackenzie's enterprises had ended--in talk. The other circumstance calling for explanation is his allowing himself to be frightened into leaving the country. This will be duly considered in its proper place. Suffice it for the present to say that, taking everything into account, the mere fact of his expatriation affords no evidence either one way or the other; whereas the attendant circumstances afford strong presumptive evidence of his innocence.
In examining the papers of the late David Gibson within the last few weeks _I_ have come upon what may not unfairly be regarded as conclusive evidence that Bidwell was in no manner privy to the rising. Gibson, after his escape to the State of New York, was desirous of obtaining employment as a land surveyor, and, at Dr. Rolph's suggestion, he wrote to Bidwell for a certificate as to his character, and for advice as to the best means of obtaining employment. Bidwell was then in the City of New York, casting about in his mind to what he should direct his attention as a means of livelihood. His reply and the certificate enclosed therein--both in his own handwriting--are now lying before me. The latter is as follows:--
"I was acquainted with David Gibson, Esquire, until the recent disturbance in Upper Canada, and know that by his integrity, good sense and amiable character, he had acquired the confidence and esteem of his neighbours and acquaintances. His services as a land surveyor were highly valued. Since the trouble commenced in Upper Canada I have not been in communication with him, but I have no doubt that the utmost reliance may be placed on his industry, ability and fidelity in all his engagements. I have seen his name mentioned with respect for his humanity in one of the most violent newspapers published in Upper Canada. He has my warmest wishes for his success and happiness.
"MARSHALL S. BIDWELL."
The following is the text of the letter accompanying the certificate:--
MY DEAR SIR:
I received to-day your letter, and have sent you a certificate. I am
unable to refer you to any place or situation for employment. I am
myself unsettled, and _do_ not know what I shall do or where I shall
settle.
I lament the recent proceedings in Upper Canada, and cannot to this
day reflect upon them but with amazement. How men of good sense like
you and others could be involved in so absurd and hopeless a project
fills me with continual surprise. However, I would not upbraid you,
though I shall perhaps be ruined in consequence of these movements.
On the contrary, I wish you well, and have the same kind feelings
towards you as I was wont to have. I trust you may find some
situation where you may be happy.
Yours truly, MARSHALL S. BIDWELL.
David Gibson, Esq., 6th March.
After the publication of this letter--written, it will be remembered, to one of the chief participators in the rebellion--it will hardly be pretended that Bidwell was concerned in the enterprise. It is a characteristic epistle, breathing Christian kindness and good will, and, independently of its bearing upon the question at issue, is well worthy of publication as illustrative of Bidwell's individuality.
[275] For the sake of consistency I adopt a uniform spelling of this gentleman's name, which however is spelt indifferently "Mackintosh" and "McIntosh," in the Journals of Assembly, in various official documents, in the newspapers and advertisements of the time, and even in private correspondence. Walton's Toronto Directory for 1837 gives it as "McIntosh," which seems to have been the form commonly adopted by members of the family.
[276] A part of this building, used as a planing-mill, is still in existence on Bay Street, a short distance north of Adelaide Street.
[277] _Life of Mackenzie_, vol. ii., p. 17.
[278] According to Mr. Lindsey, James Lesslie induced his brother William, who had signed the Declaration, to erase his signature. _See Life of Mackenzie_, vol. ii., p. 18.
[279] See the evidence of John Elliott, on the trial of Dr. Morrison for high treason, at Toronto, in the following April.
[280] _Correspondent and Advocate_ for Wednesday, August 2nd.
[281] These were nineteen in number, and consisted of Dr. Morrison, John Elliott, David Gibson, John Mackintosh, Dr. O'Grady, E. B. Gilbert, John Montgomery, Dr. John Edward Tims, J. H. Price, John Doel, M. Reynolds, Edward Wright, Robert McKay, Thomas Elliott, James Armstrong, James Hunter, John Armstrong, William Ketchum and W. L. Mackenzie.
[282] At a meeting held in the township of Caledon, however, during the second week in August, a very outspoken resolution was discussed. After setting out with some general principles as to the duties of kings, governors and subjects, it ran as follows:--"If the redress of our wrongs can be otherwise obtained, the people of Upper Canada have not a just cause to use force. But the highest obligation of a citizen being to preserve the community, and every other political duty being derived from, and subordinate to it, every citizen is bound to defend his country against its enemies, both foreign and domestic. When a government is engaged in systematically oppressing a people, and destroying their securities against future oppression, it commits the same species of wrong to them which warrants an appeal to force against a foreign enemy. The history of England and of this continent is not wanting in examples by which the rulers and the ruled may see that, although the people have been often willing to endure bad government with patience, there are legal and constitutional limits to that endurance. The glorious revolutions obstinately persisting in withholding from their subjects adequate security for good government, although obviously necessary for the permanence of that blessing, that they are placing themselves in a state of hostility against the governed; and that to prolong a state of irresponsibility and insecurity, such as existed in England during the reign of James II., and as now exists in Lower Canada, is a dangerous act of aggression against a people. A magistrate who degenerates into a systematic oppressor, and shuts the gates of justice on the public, thereby restores them to their original right of defending themselves, for he withholds the protection of the law, and so forfeits his claim to enforce their obedience by the authority of law."--For the text of this resolution I am indebted to Mr. Lindsey. See his _Life of Mackenzie_, vol. ii., p. 27, note.
[283] Mr. Lindsey places the number at two hundred. See _Life of Mackenzie_, vol. ii., p. 32. I have not been able to find any trace of more than 117. Mackenzie seems to have been present at fully half of these.
[284] _Ante_, p. 256.
[285] _Ante_, p. 362.
[286] _The Emigrant_, p. 157.
[287] John Elliott, in his testimony on Dr. Morrison's trial, places the date in October; and I have evidence in my possession that Mackenzie received the intimation mentioned in the text on the second Monday in October. The second Monday fell on the 9th. There would be no delay in summoning the caucus, which would therefore be held on the evening of either Monday or Tuesday.
[288] William A. Dutcher had a foundry on Yonge Street, where a good many hands were employed, most of whom were readers