1840 On the Canada Bill by John Beverley Robinson, former Attorney-General of Upper Canada.
Analysis of the Document - (The Document follows below the Analysis)
In 1840, John Beverley Robinson, the former Attorney-General of Upper Canada and one of the colony’s most influential legal and political figures, delivered his reflections on the Canada Bill, also known as the Act of Union. This document encapsulated Robinson’s deep anxieties about the future of British North America and reflected the tensions that accompanied the proposed political unification of Upper and Lower Canada. At the heart of Robinson’s concerns was the fear that this union, by merging the French-speaking, Catholic population of Lower Canada with the English-speaking, Protestant settlers of Upper Canada, would destabilize the colonial political system and erode the British character of the provinces. His reflections on the Canada Bill reveal the complexities of Canadian identity, the fears of cultural and political assimilation, and the growing debate about governance in the colonies that would reverberate throughout Canadian history. In many ways, Robinson’s views on the Canada Bill reflect the broader challenges of constructing a unified nation from diverse cultural and linguistic groups, a theme that would shape Canada’s political development for decades to come.
Robinson’s background made him a key voice in the debates surrounding the Canada Bill. Born in 1791 to a Loyalist family that had fled to Upper Canada during the American Revolution, Robinson was deeply committed to British imperial values. He served as Attorney-General of Upper Canada from 1818 to 1829 and later became the Chief Justice of Upper Canada. His legal career was distinguished by his staunch defense of British constitutional principles, and he became a leading figure in the Family Compact, the conservative oligarchy that dominated the politics of Upper Canada during the first half of the 19th century. As a conservative, Robinson believed in the preservation of British institutions, a hierarchical society, and the maintenance of colonial ties to the Crown. His legal and political philosophy was shaped by his deep-seated belief that the colonies should remain fundamentally British in character, and any threat to this identity was a threat to the stability and prosperity of British North America.
The Canada Bill, introduced by the British government in 1840, aimed to address the deep political unrest that had characterized the Canadas in the years following the Rebellions of 1837-38. These uprisings in both Upper and Lower Canada were driven by demands for political reform and greater democratic representation. In Lower Canada, the rebellion was led by French-speaking nationalists, while in Upper Canada, reformers such as William Lyon Mackenzie sought to challenge the entrenched power of the Family Compact. In the aftermath of the rebellions, Lord Durham was sent to investigate the causes of the unrest, and his Durham Report famously concluded that the primary cause of discontent in Lower Canada was the “two nations warring in the bosom of a single state”—the French and English populations, whose political and cultural differences were irreconcilable under the existing political system.
The Canada Bill, influenced by Durham’s recommendations, proposed to unify Upper and Lower Canada into a single political entity, the Province of Canada, with a single legislature and an equal number of representatives from each region. The idea was to reduce the political power of the French-Canadian majority in Lower Canada by merging them with the smaller, English-speaking population of Upper Canada, creating a balance that would favor English dominance in the new political arrangement. The Act of Union was intended to quell the unrest in both colonies and create a more stable, unified political system. However, for figures like Robinson, the Canada Bill represented a threat to the very foundations of British rule in North America.
In his critique of the Canada Bill, Robinson articulated a fear that uniting the two Canadas would dilute the British character of Upper Canada and threaten its distinct identity. He saw Upper Canada as a bastion of British values and governance, rooted in Protestantism, the English language, and a legal system based on British common law. By contrast, Lower Canada, with its predominantly French-speaking, Catholic population, operated under a different legal tradition, based on French civil law, and maintained a distinct culture that had little in common with the British settlers of Upper Canada. Robinson feared that by merging these two distinct societies, the union would create an unworkable political arrangement in which the cultural differences between French and English Canadians would lead to continual conflict and instability.
Robinson’s concerns were not merely about the cultural and religious differences between Upper and Lower Canada. He also believed that the Canada Bill would undermine the political structure of Upper Canada by reducing the influence of the loyalist, conservative elite—of which he was a leading figure—in favor of a more democratic and populist political system. The Act of Union was designed to create a more representative government, but Robinson, like many members of the Family Compact, feared that this would open the door to radical reforms that would weaken the established social order. He was particularly concerned that the equal representation of Upper and Lower Canada in the new legislature would give too much power to the French-speaking population of Lower Canada, who he believed had fundamentally different political values and allegiances than the British settlers of Upper Canada.
Robinson’s reflections on the Canada Bill also reveal his broader concerns about the future of British North America within the British Empire. For Robinson, the strength of the colonies lay in their connection to Britain, and he feared that the Act of Union would weaken this bond by creating a more autonomous political structure in Canada. He believed that any move toward greater self-government in the colonies was a step toward separation from Britain, a prospect he viewed with deep alarm. Robinson’s vision for British North America was one of continued loyalty to the Crown, with the colonies remaining firmly under British control. In his view, the union of Upper and Lower Canada was a dangerous experiment that risked undermining the stability and prosperity of the colonies by introducing democratic reforms and reducing British oversight.
Despite Robinson’s vocal opposition, the Canada Bill was passed by the British Parliament in 1840, and the Act of Union came into effect in 1841. In the years that followed, Robinson’s fears of political instability and cultural conflict were, in some ways, realized. The union of Upper and Lower Canada did not resolve the tensions between French and English Canadians; rather, it exacerbated them. The equal representation of the two regions in the new legislature, despite the larger population of Lower Canada, led to frequent deadlock and political paralysis. French-Canadian leaders, such as Louis-Hippolyte Lafontaine, worked to protect the rights of the French-speaking population, while English-speaking reformers, such as Robert Baldwin, pushed for responsible government and greater political reform. The political divisions between French and English Canadians persisted, and the question of how to reconcile the two groups would continue to dominate Canadian politics for decades.
However, while Robinson’s fears of political instability were justified to some extent, the Act of Union also set the stage for the eventual development of responsible government in Canada. In 1848, under the leadership of Baldwin and Lafontaine, the Province of Canada achieved responsible government, a critical milestone in the evolution of Canadian democracy. Responsible government meant that the executive branch of government was accountable to the elected legislative assembly rather than to the appointed governor, a significant step toward greater self-government. This development, though opposed by conservatives like Robinson, was a key moment in the gradual evolution of Canada from a British colony to a self-governing dominion.
The long-term implications of the Canada Bill and Robinson’s opposition to it are deeply intertwined with the broader narrative of Canadian history. Robinson’s concerns about the cultural and political divisions between French and English Canadians foreshadowed the debates over Canadian identity that would emerge in the decades leading up to Confederation in 1867. The question of how to accommodate the distinct identities of French and English Canadians within a single political framework would remain central to the Canadian experience. The Act of Union, by forcing these two groups into a shared political structure, laid the groundwork for the tensions and compromises that would define Canadian federalism.
Robinson’s reflections on the Canada Bill also speak to the broader tensions between colonial elites and reformers that characterized the political landscape of British North America in the 19th century. As a leading member of the Family Compact, Robinson represented the conservative, loyalist elite who sought to preserve British institutions and maintain the colonial relationship with Britain. The Act of Union, by introducing democratic reforms and reducing the influence of the colonial elite, marked the beginning of the end of the Family Compact’s dominance in Upper Canadian politics. The rise of reformers like Baldwin and Lafontaine, who advocated for responsible government and greater political representation, signaled a shift away from the oligarchic rule of the colonial elite and toward a more democratic and inclusive political system.
In conclusion, John Beverley Robinson’s reflections on the Canada Bill of 1840 offer a window into the anxieties and debates that shaped the political landscape of British North America in the mid-19th century. Robinson’s fear that the union of Upper and Lower Canada would undermine the British character of the colonies and destabilize the political system reflected broader concerns about cultural assimilation, political reform, and the future of British rule in Canada. While the Act of Union did not resolve the tensions between French and English Canadians, it set the stage for the development of responsible government and the eventual creation of a unified Canadian state. Robinson’s opposition to the Canada Bill highlights the complexities of Canadian identity and governance, themes that would continue to resonate in Canadian history long after the Act of Union.
