A new era of political development was now to dawn on the province, as a result of a more vigorous and remedial policy initiated by the imperial government, at last thoroughly awakened to an intelligent comprehension of the political conditions of the Canadas.  But before I proceed to explain the details of measures fraught with such important consequences, I must give an historical summary of the events which led also to a rash uprising in Upper Canada, simultaneously with the one which ended so disastrously for its leaders in the French province.

SECTION 2.—­The rebellion in Upper Canada.

The financial disputes between the executive and the assembly never attained such prominence in Upper Canada as in the lower province.  In 1831 the assembly consented to make permanent provision for the civil list and the judiciary, on condition of the government’s giving up to the legislature all the revenues previously at its own disposition.  Three years later the legislature also passed an act to provide that the judges should hold their offices during good behaviour, and not at the pleasure of the crown—­a measure rendered possible by the fact that the assembly had made the salaries of the bench permanent.

Nor did the differences between the assembly and the legislative council ever assume such serious proportions as they did in the French province.  Still the leaders of the reform party of Upper Canada had strong objections to the constitution of the council; and a committee of grievances reported in 1835 in favour of an elected body as well as a responsible council, although it did not very clearly outline the methods of working out the system in a colony where the head of the executive was an imperial officer acting under royal instructions.  The different lieutenant-governors, the executive and legislative councillors, and the whole body of officials, from the very moment responsible government was suggested in any form, threw every possible obstacle in the way of its concession by the imperial government.

It was largely the dominant influence of the official combination, long known in Canadian history as the “family compact,” which prevented the concession of responsible government before the union of the Canadas.  This phrase, as Lord Durham said in his report, was misleading inasmuch as there “was very little of family connection between the persons thus united.”  As a matter of fact the phrase represented a political and aristocratic combination, which grew up as a consequence of the social conditions of the province and eventually monopolised all offices and influence in government.  This bureaucracy permeated all branches of government—­the executive, the legislative council, and even the assembly where for years there sat several members holding offices of emolument under the crown.  It practically controlled the banks and monetary circles.  The Church of England was bound up in its interests.