A study of news representations of
the War of 1812 as it happened in
Canada to help us understand how
the media depicts historic conflicts
and to know more about the
beginning of journalism in Canada.
The War of 1812:
A Report on its
Representation in
Canadian
Newspapers,
1812-1815
Association for Canadian Studies
September 2012
The War of 1812:
A Report on its Representation in Canadian newspapers, 1812-1815
Table of Contents
Background for the project ................................................................................................................................... 2
The Canadian newspaper industry: an introduction ............................................................................. 2
Sources for the media research report........................................................................................................... 3
Representation of the War: Three routes ..................................................................................................... 4
Representing the enemy: America .......................................................................................................................... 4
The American character......................................................................................................................................... 5
The American behaviour ..................................................................................................................................... 10
Representing the good side: Great Britain ....................................................................................................... 13
Being worthy of mighty Britain ....................................................................................................................... 13
Growing criticism ................................................................................................................................................... 16
Representing the ‘us’: the emergence of a Canadian identity .................................................................. 18
Canadian gallantry ................................................................................................................................................ 19
Unity in adversity ................................................................................................................................................... 19
Narrative of the struggle..................................................................................................................................... 21
Who is not part of this ‘us’ .................................................................................................................................. 21
Projects to be developed from this media report .................................................................................. 24
Learning guide ........................................................................................................................................................ 24
Travelling workshop ............................................................................................................................................. 24
Next steps ................................................................................................................................................................... 25
1
Background for the project
That which follows is the presentation of the historic representation of the War of 1812 in
the Canadian print media. While there are countless studies of the military and social
aspects of the war, its representation in the press at the time has to be examined. To
adequately portray the views on the War of 1812 in Canada, the Association for Canadian
Studies has examined the newspaper coverage and representation of the conflict in the
country not yet known as Canada, in order to understand more generally how the media
depicts historic conflicts with the War of 1812 as an early case study reflective of a budding
media industry.
The Canadian newspaper industry: a quick introduction
Following the Conquest of New France by the British in 1760, most newspapers distributed
on the newly acquired territory were in essence British-owned and in great part aimed at
Americans who had just moved to Canada following the American Revolution, the
Loyalists.1 The presence of weekly gazettes throughout the provinces was no ‘natural’
development: these papers were based on the original London Gazette which had been
printed since 1665, and were essentially organs for the British government.
The
nineteenth century saw the emergence of independent printers, thanks to a rapidly
increasing market for reading materials and “the availability of cheaper and more efficient
presses.”2 But at the time of the War of 1812, the Canadian independent press was in its
infancy and most newspapers surveyed for this study were arguably all government
sponsored. Printed news consisted essentially of notice of sales or political comments and
was primarily aimed at the “economic and political elites”.3 ‘Plain’ news reporting, devoid
of any value judgment, was quite rare. Indeed, the purely ‘informational’ form of
Chris Raible, The Power of the Press. The Story of Early Canadian Printers and Publishers, Toronto: James Lorimer and
Company Limited Publishers, 2007, 32.
2 Ibid, 35.
3 Lyn Gorman and David McLean, Media and Society in the Twentieth Century. A Historical Introduction, Malden, MA:
Blackwell Publishing, 2003, 12.
1
2
newspaper reporting, the one closely resembling what we read today, only emerged
towards the end of the 19th century.4
In fact, the examination of newspapers from this period shows an industry which would be
completely overhauled only a few decades later. Besides the nature of news reporting, this
period was also peculiar for its “association of particular newspapers with the personalities
of those who published them,” something that would disappear as news became more
‘neutral’ and more ‘global’.5 One example of this more personalized reporting was picked
up in the Acadian Recorder, its editor Anthony Holland updating its readers regularly on his
being sued by another newspaper printer: “Our situation is deplorable – threatened with
writs, Prosecution and (to us) all the unintelligible jargon of lawyers.”6
Newspaper reporting in 1812-1815 was incredibly slow, relying significantly (and
ironically) on American newspapers for European news, given the great delay in receiving
anything from across the sea: “we have only our enemies (generally erroneous and always
exaggerated statements) to look to--months must elapse before our own official accounts
can be transmitted to us through the medium of a London Gazette.”7 With the invention of
the telegraph in 1819 and improvements to printing presses, the pace of news reporting
would increase dramatically, and so would the readership. For the most part an elitist
industry at the time of the War of 1812, newspaper printing was to become more
democratic in some ways, because more people could purchase presses, print their own
newspapers and sell them for much cheaper. This particular study gives us some insight
into newspaper printing before it became an industry; when it was more of a craft than a
business.
David W. Bulla and Gregory A. Borchard, Journalism in the Civil War Era, New York: Peter Lang, 2010, 89.
Ibid, 214.
6 Acadian Recorder, November 12, 1814.
7 Acadian Recorder, January 16, 1813.
4
5
3
Sources for the media research report
Before presenting the findings of this study, it is necessary to explain the choice of
newspaper for this particular project. Some well-known Quebec newspapers such as La
Minerve and Le Canadien could not be used, La Minerve simply because it started in 1826.
Le Canadien was launched in 1806 but stopped publishing in 1810, after the government
seized its presses following accusations of conspiracy against the British government. The
newspaper was published again in 1817 but intermittently. The York Gazette, previously
named the Upper Canada Gazette (est. 1793),8 was surveyed but only produced
fragmentary results because its presses were seized by the Americans at the end of 1812,
during the successful American campaign aimed at destroying the capital of Upper Canada.9
The Kingston Gazette was also examined for this study, but its publishing schedule was
quite irregular, Stephen Miles, the editor often complaining that paper was increasingly
difficult to procure. Nevertheless, this paper was a reliable source of information, the only
one reporting from Upper Canada.
Three newspapers represent the bulk of our data, mostly because these are the few that
somehow managed to continue business as usual amidst the conflict. The Montreal Gazette
was launched by Fleury Mesplet in 1785 and remained a fully bilingual newspaper until
1822. According to Chris Raible, even though the Gazette may have been used for
government notices, it was “was anything but an official organ, often critical of the clergy
and the feudalism of Quebec society.”10 One must admit that the open criticism of the
British handling of the War of 1812 in the Canadas can hardly be found anywhere else but
in the Montreal Gazette. The study also relies extensively on the Quebec Gazette, a
newspaper launched in 1764 for the purpose of “bringing about a thorough knowledge of
the English & French language to those of the two Nations now happily united as one in this
Part of the World.”11 The paper was published and edited at the time by John Nelson.
Chris Raible, The Power of the Press, 31.
Bertha Bassam, The First Printers and Newspapers in Canada, Toronto: University of Toronto School of Library Science,
1968, 14.
10 Chris Raible, The Power of the Press, 30.
11 William Brown and Thomas Gilmore, publishers of the Quebec Gazette, quoted in Chris Raible, The Power of the Press,
29.
8
9
4
Finally, there is the Acadian Recorder, which began its operations in January 1813, right in
the middle of the war. As its publisher, Anthony Holland, stated in the first issue, the paper
was “intended to be a weekly paper, containing a summary of these interesting events that
are daily transpiring in the present awful state of human affairs.” 12 Holland is at times
critical of the British defence strategies, but what he is most vocal about is his genuine
hatred of the Americans.
Representation of the War: Three Routes
We have found that the representation of the War of 1812 in Canadian newspapers took
three routes: demonizing the Americans (the enemy), lauding but also criticizing Great
Britain (the motherland) and defining Canada and the Canadian character. These routes are
the basis of this report and it is divided accordingly.
Representing the enemy: America
Given the significantly political nature of news reporting in the early nineteenth century, it
is no surprise that early Canadian newspapers spend quite some time depicting the ‘enemy’
in a negative light. Demonizing the enemy not only serves to clearly demarcate good versus
evil (us versus them), but it also helps motivating the general population in taking up arms
against a despicable enemy. The criticisms towards Americans can be divided into two
general assertions: 1) Americans are a presumptuous, foolish and vain people (American
character) and 2) Americans are acting inappropriately in the context of a war (American
behaviour). The Canadian papers defined the enemy’s character and its inappropriate
behaviour and by doing so, were also indirectly expressing what character traits and
behaviours were acceptable.
12
Acadian Recorder, January 16, 1813.
5
a) The American character
The war between American and Great Britain/Canada was often times considered
‘unnatural’ and ‘foolish’ because America was set to lose, according to several Canadian
editors. The York Gazette explains early on in the conflict how hopeless the situation was
for the American government:
From the province we inhabit to the little island of Bermuda, veteran Britons,
Britain’s sons, and her affiliated Sons will vigorously oppose them…On the
neighbouring frontier (Detroit) a formidable band of Warriors wait for our
permission to avenge repeated injuries. We have a fleet on their coast. Our
provincial marine command the interior waters. A powerful land force will be
speedily furnished if wanted. A hardy population in this and the Lower province
will meet aggression with nearly one hundred thousand men whose loyalty and
veneration for the happy Constitution they live under, will make them emulate
veteran in the service. The numerous people of colour in Maryland, Virginia, etc,
want but a rallying point, and a sanguinary revolt will follow…13
From this, it seems indeed quite foolish to declare war upon Great Britain, which can
explain the general feeling of disbelief noted in the early months of the war. Of course, by
describing the American situation as negatively as possible, newspaper editors were also
helping the Canadian and British cause by encouraging civilians to join in the militia and
participate in a rather unequal war sure to be quickly resolved. As the Quebec Gazette
reported in 1813, the Americans had entered a war “without any probability of obtaining
by the conquest of them, the professed object of the war.”14
As British victories were proudly reported on, newspapers rejoiced in the defeat of
Americans, who thought “those Provinces would be an easy prey.”15 The Americans
were at times even portrayed as being plain stupid for trying to invade the Canadas:
“It is also ascertained that the whole amount of their effective force with which they
approached the borders of this Province, with the threatening appearance of invasion
York Gazette, Saturday, July 4, 1812.
Quebec Gazette, June 24, 1813.
15 Acadian Recorder, January 16, 1813.
13
14
6
did not exceed 10,000 – a number which nothing but ignorant conceit could have
induced them to make an attempt with.”16 Pointing out the many American failures,
the Quebec Gazette editor boasted that “This is the fourth invading army sent against
that Province which has been, nearly, destroyed,”17 and, minimizing the enemy’s
victories, stated that “His whole success in the war, is reduced to the establishment of
his naval ascendancy on Lake Erie.”18 By minimizing the successes of the American
enemy, Canadian newspapers were effectively giving hope to the Canadian population
whose experience on the ground may have been much less glamorous and victorious
than what was depicted in the printed pages.
Perhaps the most recurrent character trait in Canadian newspapers is that of American
vanity. The idea that Americans waged war on a nation who effectively ruled the world at
the time, and that they seemed to think they could conquer the Canadas so easily, could
explain this general consensus about the enemy. Interestingly enough, the American press
is seen as the main ‘engine’ for the dissemination of materials catering to the vain
Americans. The Acadian Recorder dedicates its first front page to describing the immoral
state of the American press, which is purported to print incessant falsehoods and trying to
influence the masses in accepting an unjust war. Its editor states that the newspapers south
of the border serve only to “collect and disgorge the effervescing violence of every wild
theory, every crude conception, every artifice of little cunning … and the aggregated mass
of varied evil that naturally results from the licentiousness of republicanism.”19
The Montreal Gazette editor criticizes the American tendency to inflate their victories. In
July 1813, the Americans were able to capture a British schooner, using a flag of truce as a
ruse to approach the ship. In addition to ‘tricking’ them, reports the editor, the Americans
were also guilty of purposely overestimating the value of their capture: “The enemy rates
the value of this prize at 30,000 dollars, ten times its real worth...”20 In a similar manner,
Kingston Gazette, January 2, 1813.
Quebec Gazette, February 11, 1813.
18 Quebec Gazette, March 3, 1814.
19 Acadian Recorder, January 16, 1813.
20 Montreal Gazette, July 12, 1813.
16
17
7
we learn a few months later that another means for Americans to improve the truth was to
take civilians as war prisoners, a “mode of swelling the numbers of their prisoners which is
disgraceful beyond measure…”21 In the Acadian Recorder, the American vanity was
expressed by their cunning method of fabricating heroic stories on the spot, for example by
“heaving overboard 10 or 12 of [a ship’s] guns, to make the disparity of force greater than it
was,”22 on occasions where American ships were sunk. The editor mused that “For this, a
British Captain would deserve to be shot; an American one will receive the plaudits of his
countrymen!”23
American vanity knows no bounds as its people were castigated for celebrating victories.
Of course, a similar behaviour in Canada was acceptable, if not required. The Acadian
Recorder sneered at the Americans ‘crowing’ over their victories, “as they ludicrously call
them,” and likens heroes south of the border as circus animals that should be paraded until
the public lost its interest.24 A success on Lake Champlain is reinterpreted by Montreal
Gazette editor as no more than a ‘fortunate’ occurrence for President James Madison,
because it would help him and his people forget all about the burning of Washington which
had taken place a few months before. Americans, he says, are “naturally eager to catch at
every means that can tend to prop the views of the administration, the national pride will
be raised, and the vanity of the people will be swelled by the pomp and circumstance, than
by the extent of advantage they gained in the result.25 It is to be noted that the British have
a similar view of Americans, as stated in the London Times in September 1812, “War is an
employment so new to the people of the United States that the humble operations of
General HULL and his army are given with the most minute detail; and the driving in of a
few advanced posts actually delivered in a tone of triumph not unworthy a German
campaign.”26 By depicting how vain Americans were, Canadian newspaper editors were
explaining the enemy’s victories in a way such that people in Upper and Lower Canada
Montreal Gazette, July 12, 1813.
Acadian Recorder, July 2, 1814.
23 Ibid.
24 Acadian Recorder, June 4, 1814.
25 Montreal Gazette, September 22, 1814.
26 London Times, September 11, 1812, 3.
21
22
8
could assume these were exaggerated, or to the very least had no real significance in the
grand scheme of things.
Another recurrent characteristic of the enemy was that of immorality. While vanity may
have helped minimize American triumphs, immorality was quite useful in explaining unjust
victories, in highlighting the good-versus-evil nature of the war, and also in defining what
morality was in the Canadian context. The Quebec Gazette editor described the entire
American society as immoral, but argued that morality actually decreased the more power
one individual had. He stated, “…in America, contrary to that we see in other countries, the
people have less of it than their rulers. As they ascend in rank they descend in morality. The
citizen has more honour than the man in office and each man in office more than the next
above him.”27 Similarly, the Acadian Recorder blamed the American values of liberty and
equality as having corrupted the entire population:
He well knows the atrocious character of the American rulers, the demoralizing
tendency of their government, and the consequent immoral habits of the mass
of the people; their natural repugnance to every kind of necessary restraint,
their inherent aversion to whatever is superior, either in wealth, in genius or
virtue, in dignity of mind, in propriety of conduct or decency of manners; and
their inveterate propensity on all occasions, to bring every excellency down to
the vulgar level of their own base equality.28
In this short diatribe, the editor was not only commenting on the American character but
also indirectly giving advice as to how Canadians should be acting. The ‘aversion’ to all
things superior is clearly making the link that these ‘things’ are Canadian and that the
American aversion to them is quite incomprehensible. Similarly, the value of equality is
depicted here as ‘vulgar’ and hence something that pure Canadians should not seek in any
way.
27
28
Quebec Gazette, August 4, 1814.
Acadian Recorder, January 14, 1815.
9
b) The American behaviour
While many editorial comments about American focused on their despicable character, a
great number also discussed their unacceptable behaviour. In times of war, enemies are
expected to act a certain way, and apparently Americans took pains to do the complete
opposite.
The Americans are most often depicted as acting dishonourably, compared to other
enemies whom, had they been able to defeat the British, would have acted gracefully
throughout. For example on November 24, 1812, the news of the capture of a British stoop
containing some things belonging to the late general Isaac Brock is not dwelled upon as
much as the fact that these items were not returned. The Montreal Gazette editor indeed
writes that “By a noble-minded enemy these would be restored; but such an expectation
can hardly be formed in the present unfortunate instance.”29 Interestingly the ultimate
return of Brock’s private objects at the beginning of December 1812 warrants a mere line
in the newspaper, buried in other news about the war, and no comment on what could be
considered a ‘noble’ gesture on the part of the Americans, according to the previous
critique.30 A similar story is recounted in the Kingston Gazette, where “disgraceful”
Americans tried to steal items from a British Colonel’s home but thankfully were
unsuccessful in doing so: “They broke open and ransacked his trunks, and had his bedding
and other articles carried down to the shore, with an intention of carrying them off with
them; but this was prevented by their officers.”31
According to the Montreal Gazette, Americans seemed to run afoul of every unwritten rule
of honourable war conduct. In October 1813, the taking of Canadian prisoners of war
prompts the editor to comment that the developing ‘American character’ is best reflected in
their treatment of these unfortunate soldiers, a character “inconsistent with the conduct,
and repugnant to the feelings of any honorable soldier, and also disgraceful to the
Government…”32 Upon returning these prisoners towards the end of the war, but having
Montreal Gazette, November 24, 1812.
Montreal Gazette, December 8, 1812.
31 Kingston Gazette, September 26, 1812.
32 Montreal Gazette, October 19, 1813.
29
30
10
delayed such actions in order to secure the safe return of American prisoners, the American
government’s request is reported as being typical of “that abominable low cunning and
chicane which have invariably marked [its] conduct…”33
Besides adopting an ‘ungentlemanly’ behaviour, the Americans are also guilty of cruelty,
according to the Canadian press. The Acadian Recorder likens the war between the
Americans and Britain as one between a son and his father and hence calls the enemy the
“nation of Parricides.”34 Killing without justification, the Americans seem to be going
against the unwritten rule of war stating that one can only attack soldiers who are already
in a position to attack. The “firing at our sentinels” is thus criticized by the Kingston Gazette
as “perfidious and murderous” cruelty instead of being considered a war tactic.35 Canadian
newspapers not only decry the unjust targeting of sentinels, but also the American way of
increasing the number of prisoners of war. According to the Montreal Gazette, American
soldiers had captured civilians in Niagara, “whose only fault was their attachment to their
country and their property,” in order to inflate their victory.36 The rules of war so dearly
held on to, at least according to newspaper editors across the Canadian provinces, are
completely disregarded by the Americans. Their practice of capturing civilians, but also
that of killing prisoners, “… is not only unsupported by precedent, but directly at variance
with the first principals of the law of nations, and with the doctrins [sic] of the soundest
writers. It is … contrary to the usage of war (in which the indulgence of a parole is
founded).”37 The blatant disrespect for human life on the part of enemy soldiers prompted
Acadian Recorder editor to call them “American white savages” because of their
“inhumanity and wanton cruelty.”38
Such a conduct during times of war was telling of the American character, according to the
Gazette editor, and his reporting was definitely an exercise in defining the enemy, which
“exhibited a want of principle”,39 but also in contrasting this to the more honourable British
Montreal Gazette, June 28, 1814.
Acadian Recorder, October 23, 1813.
35 Kingston Gazette, April 27, 1813.
36 Montreal Gazette, July 12, 1813. [their emphasis]
37 Acadian Recorder, October 16, 1813.
38 Acadian Recorder, January 22, 1814.
39 Ibid.
33
34
11
and Canadian characters. Reporting on a British expedition on Lake Champlain, the Gazette
editor compares the behaviours of the two sides of the war. He states: “Here we cannot but
remark the contrast that is evident between the conduct of our officers and those of our
enemy… the latter invariably grasp at the smallest article with an avidity peculiarly their
own, and consider war as giving sanction to the lowest and most infamous grades of
private robbery….” In comparison, he continues, British officers are said to operate on fear,
not of losing a battle or dying, but of “dishonorable and disgraceful conduct, even to an
unprincipled and dishonorable enemy.”40
By depicting the American behaviour as dishonorable and ruthless, editors could report on
similar actions by Canadians in a positive light. Indeed, even if Canadian or British soldiers
may have been as merciless as their southern neighbours, it was explained in the papers as
justified behaviour. For example, when reporting on the burning of Washington, the Quebec
Gazette editor, evidently happy about what this small victory meant to the Americans,
stated that “It is not impossible that the public buildings at Washington have been
destroyed: the Americans having set the example of their sort of warfare at York, the
capital of Upper-Canada.” Hence whatever happened in Washington was only a response to
despicable American actions. The editor continued, quite ominously: “From their recent
conduct in that Province, the enemy may think himself fortunate if the retaliation is
confined to public buildings.”41 The Montreal Gazette editor also explains what could be
perceived as sanguinary tendencies by previous actions on the part of Americans. Glad to
report that 400 American soldiers were either killed or wounded and that the “the whole of
the enemy’s frontiers from the Fort Niagara to Buffaloe [sic] is laid waste and destroyed,”
the editor argues that “The enemy has most dearly paid for his wanton and inhuman
cruelties and depredations on our side and a just retaliation has at last overtaken him.” 42
Reporting on an unfortunate accident which may have caused five hundred Americans to
drown, the Acadian Recorder editor had trouble hiding his joy: “the just interference of
Providence is manifest – and tho’ we cannot be too grateful, it is a melancholy
Montreal Gazette, August 10, 1813. [their emphasis]
Quebec Gazette, September 8, 1814.
42 Montreal Gazette, January 11, 1814.
40
41
12
consideration that we have not deserved it – we have not “put our shoulders to the
wheels.”43
One should note that there were some instances in which the reporting on Canada’s
southern neighbours was somewhat positive. For example, the Montreal Gazette
recognized the heroism of an American commander “who nobly ordered his Colours to be
nailed to the Staff, and in a few minutes gallantly abandoned them to the mercy of the
assailants”44. On another instance, the York Gazette editor commented early in the war that
Canadians and Americans living close to the border were actually getting along: “On the
borders of Vermont and lower part of New York, the inhabitants have agreed with the
Canadian inhabitants to join in preventing individuals from committing outrages by
plunder or otherwise, and gave resolve to cause such offenders to be given over to the
offended party.”45 Perhaps the negative aspects of the American character were found at
the high levels, but it seemed that the behaviour of regular Americans was not as
reprehensible as some Canadian newspaper made it to be. We should mention however
that in another border region, the behaviours were much different and reflected more
accurately the situation depicted in the news: “We learn that on the arrival of the
Declaration of War at Eastport, the Inhabitants of that place went over to St. Andrews and
took by force all the British Goods they could find. Then the British mustered, came over
the lines and took by force all the flour &c., they could find.”46
Representing the ‘good’ side: Great Britain
a) Being worthy of mighty Britain
On the other side of it all, of course, was Great Britain. And because most newspapers in
Canada served as a communication tool for the British government, the motherland was
more often than not lauded for the courage of its troops and military leaders or its strength
and power as a nation. Canadians were expected to be proud of being British subjects, and
Acadian Recorder, November 6, 1813.
Montreal Gazette, May 17, 1814.
45 York Gazette, July 28, 1812.
46 Montreal Gazette, Supplement July 13, 1812.
43
44
13
this showed in some reports where the focus was on the British praising Canada or
Canadians rather than on telling the readers what exactly happened. But towards the end
of the war, we can find open criticism of the British strategy for North America, especially
in the Montreal Gazette. This section is divided into these two Canadian attitudes towards
the British: the seeking of their approval and the subsequently growing criticism which will
end up being instrumental in the definition of ‘Canadianness’ over time.
The American declaration of war on Great Britain stunned everyone, including Canadians.
As mentioned before, the perceived American vanity was based on this decision to wage
war against an extremely powerful nation at the time, if not the most powerful. British
strength and might were referred to often in the newspapers, and its soldiers were
irreproachable: “the British army in this part of the King’s Dominions is in a high state of
discipline, well appointed, well supplied, and ably directed, forming one harmonious whole,
from the Commander in Chief to the private soldier.”47 The Canadian participation in the
war demonstrated the North American colony’s loyalty to the throne and the devotion of its
subject to their mighty (albeit quite distant) king: “They are to defend their King, known to
them only by acts of kindness, and a native country long since made sacred by the exploits
of their forefathers.”48 While newspaper editors made sure to praise Canadians on their
victorious campaigns, at the Quebec Gazette, it was made clear that the British did not need
Canadians to do the same: “We have nothing to say in praise of the British army, we trust
they will never stand in need of it, particularly such as we can bestow.”49
Concomitantly, there was a sense that British approval of Canadian soldiers, performance
or loyalty was quite sought after. For example, on August 24 1812, we learn that Fort
Michilimackinac was successfully captured in the name of Great Britain. Little was told in
the Montreal Gazette about how this undeniable exploit took place, but many lines of this
article were devoted to the praises bestowed upon Canadian soldiers by British Captain
Charles Roberts. We learn that “Capt. R passes very high encomiums upon the gallantry and
unparalleled exertions of the Canadians in accomplishing the different orders given to
Quebec Gazette, September 3, 1812.
Kingston Gazette, May 19, 1812.
49 Quebec Gazette, February 11, 1813.
47
48
14
them…”50 Similarly, in the Quebec Gazette, a May 1814 editorial sings the praise of the
Militia of Canada, which is “the only body of that description which has been associated in
the honours of the British Army; an army which now holds the most distinguished rank in
the eyes of the world...”51
On another instance, the pride of being ‘worthy’ of British admiration overwhelms the
narrative of General Isaac Brock’s victory over the Americans. Brock had successfully
defended Queenston Heights against the invader, but died in battle before he could enjoy
his success. On October 26, 1812, the victory is celebrated for its historical significance in
British history (not Canadian history, it should be mentioned): “Our fellow-subjects in the
U.K. will no doubt appropriate the splendid exertions of their Canadian brethren and will
freely confess that they are worthy of the King, whom they serve and of the Constitution
which they enjoy.”52 It has been argued that the War of 1812 saw the formation of Canadian
identity thanks to the emergence of specifically Canadian heroes such as Isaac Brock. But
let it be said that, in effect, Brock died a British hero: “[The historian] will inscribe the name
of BROCK on the imperishable list of British heroes and class the victory that resulted
among the most brilliant events which adorn the page of British History.”53
Besides highlighting British approval of Canadian actions, the Montreal Gazette also
acknowledged the dependency of Canada on Great Britain’s power. The arrival of
reinforcements from England is of course source of joy throughout the war, given its rare
occurrence. But on May 11, 1813, not only are the British naval officers incensed as a “fine
brigade of Seamen from England under the command of that highly distinguished and
gallant officer Sir James Lucas Yeo” but their deployment is also recognized as a god send
for struggling Upper Canada, “our sister province; rendered now so dependent on their
gallant exertions…”54
Most of these comments were made in the early years of the war. After realising that the
conflict was to be a long one, that the United States were stronger and more resilient than
Montreal Gazette, August 24, 1812.
Quebec Gazette, May 3, 1814.
52 The Montreal Gazette, October 26, 1812.
53 Ibid.
54 The Montreal Gazette, May 11, 1813.
50
51
15
what had been planned for and, more importantly, that Great Britain would not provide as
much support as was expected, Canadians became doubtful of the outcome of the war. This
growing uncertainty was expressed in increased criticism of British policy towards the
defence of the Canadas. While the Montreal Gazette may have been the first to criticize the
motherland, the other newspapers surveyed for this study followed suit at some point.
b) Growing criticism
It can be argued that the very presence of any form of criticism in the Montreal Gazette at
that time is indicative of a greater negative sentiment in Canadian society. Indeed, on
September 7, 1813, the newspaper’s editor commented that “Most dreadful complaints are
made here by some people against this administration in England for their total neglect of
these Provinces.”55 Reporting on what seemed to be increasing public discontent over the
way in which the motherland was treating its “most valuable possession,”56 the editor
called for calm and patience. But to reassure its readers, he did not use the argument that
British reinforcements were coming soon, but the fact that the Americans were not
numerous enough to defeat the troops currently stationed in the two Canadas.57 In a
similar fashion, the Kingston Gazette editor mentioned the many negative reports regarding
the performance of the British army, reports made by people ready to criticize without real
knowledge: “It is very easy for a person to fit in their chimney corner, and tell what they
would do; but put them to the test, and there is not one man out of the fifty that could
perform half of their imaginary exploits.”58 But in the end, he said, we should not trust any
of these.
The central critique directed at the British was its primarily defensive strategy. Of course,
this defensive stance could be explained by the small number of reinforcements sent across
the Atlantic; Great Britain was dedicating most of its military resources to fighting off the
French in Europe. But while Canadians had been aware of this situation, argued the
The Montreal Gazette, September 7, 1813.
Ibid.
57 Ibid.
58 Kingston Gazette, July 22, 1812.
55
56
16
Montreal Gazette editor, “we are nevertheless of opinion, that a much greater effort will be
required by her in the recovery of what she has lost on the continent, than would have been
necessary for its preservation.”59 This similar fear was expressed by Acadian Recorder
editor who argued that “We have been conquered on Lake Erie, and so we shall be on every
other Lake if we take as little care to protect them.”60 And again, in the Quebec Gazette, the
fear that Canada will be conquered because of a British lack of effort was quite obvious: “if
it is not quickly remedied, we are sure that it will not only prove ruinous to these
Provinces, but dangerous to the very existence of British greatness, which has arisen from
the superiority of her naval officers and seamen…”61
The unsuccessful defence of Upper Canada was explained by the inadequate number of
soldiers she had sent, not the performance of Canadian soldiers. In recounting the loss at
Lake Erie, the Quebec Gazette editor indeed explained that soldiers were asked to take part
in a naval battle because there was a crying lack of qualified seamen, “what could be
expected from such a composition in such a crisis,” he stated, “where so much depended on
professional knowledge?”62 It is due to our “own shameful deficiency in gunnery, and ship
working,” argued the Acadian Recorder, that Canadians are not victorious. Given that these
were mostly the responsibility of the British, one could safely assume this was a direct
criticism of the lack of resources from the mother land. He continued: “It is not, that they
fire so uncommonly well; but that we fire so wretchedly bad!”63
A victory in Kingston prompted the Montreal Gazette editor to ask that the “weak system of
passive defence” be abandoned for a more aggressive policy towards the Americans, 64
while the end of the war on European soil inspired him to remind Britain that the Canadas
can “never be settled by defensive operations.”65 Seeing that the defeat of Napoleon failed
to resolve the conflict in the New World, he pointed out again a few months later that “our
operations must carry with them more serious and important effects than have lately been
Montreal Gazette, October 26, 1813.
Acadian Recorder, October 30, 1813.
61 Quebec Gazette, October 14, 1813.
62 Ibid.
63 Acadian Recorder, June 4, 1814.
64 Montreal Gazette, December 28, 1813.
65 Montreal Gazette, May 31, 1814.
59
60
17
witnessed in these Provinces,”66 and that “we cannot allow ourselves to anticipate, during
their interruption, any other than the adoption of a system of more determined efficient
and energetic measures than has distinguished the two last campaigns on the Canadian
frontiers.”67 The same disavowal was found in the Acadian Recorder, whose vision of the
Ghent negotiations was gloomy, to say the least: “We must wait further accounts from
Ghent…[but] for ourselves, we anticipate nothing short of a patched up Peace.”68
So while at the onset of the war Canadians were confident that the United States would
buckle under the pressure of fighting a world power, we can see in the press that this
feeling of confidence slowly transformed itself into faint anger, disbelief and, ultimately, an
essentially Canadian pride. The criticisms as they were voiced in these newspapers were
quite significant, given both the context in which they were written (during a war) and
through which medium (government sponsored papers). One should take notice of this as a
sign of potentially greater discontent voiced in the public sphere and as the root of a
movement seeking greater independence from Great Britain for its last North American
colony.
Representing the ‘us’: the emergence of a Canadian identity
The examination of newspapers in 1812-1815 uncovers efforts on the part of their editors
to depict the ‘enemy’ in such a way to rouse patriotism. It also shows a changing
relationship with the motherland, and a daring propensity to openly criticize Britain
towards the end of the war. A third ‘route’ taken by Canadian newspaper editors during
these difficult years was to reflect on what the Canadian identity should be. While most
articles surveyed still considered Canadians to be British subjects emulating values dear to
the British crown and the culture of the overseas kingdom, we can take note of a few
characteristics specific to Canada and Canadians, most notably a gallant behaviour, a belief
Montreal Gazette, October 20, 1814.
Montreal Gazette, November 3, 1814.
68 Acadian Recorder, February 4, 1815.
66
67
18
in unity in adversity and the now mythical narrative of the constant struggle, what author
Margaret Atwood has termed “survival”.69
a) Canadian gallantry
The foremost quality of Canadian soldiers according to most newspapers editors of the
time was gallantry. This was of course in opposition to the disgraceful behaviour of
Americans and in comparison to a British heritage.
The Montreal Gazette ascribed a victory at Fort Oswego to the “zeal, gallantry and
disciplined evinced by our brave Soldiers and Seamen.”70 It also refers to this quality to
explain a retreat by the Canadians at Fort Erie: “the gallantry of our officers and men in this
unequal contest was highly conspicuous but they were under the necessity of retreating
from such an immense disparity of numbers…”71 For the Kingston Gazette, gallantry is what
contributed in blocking American incursions in British territory. Indeed, it is the “gallantry
of our troops and militia” that caused the enemy to be “completely foiled in a deliberate
and well concerted attempt to intercept and cut them off.”72 This particular character trait
is also mentioned when discussing the conduct of Canadian soldiers during the war, of
course to enhance the difference between ‘us’ and ‘them’. For example, while the
Americans are purported to deal with prisoners of war in a cruel manner, Canadians are
“behav[ing] most gallantly” in that they allowed prisoners to “return home, under a
promise that they would not take up arms during the war.”73 Finally, the devotion to the
cause of defending one’s country was itself a gallant act, as seen in the Acadian Recorder’s
comment on an army captain: “we have beheld with admiration this gallant officer
foregoing the enjoyments of affluence and domestic comfort to serve his country…”74
Margaret Atwood, Survival: A Thematic Guide to Canadian Literature, Toronto: Anansi, 1992, 32.
Montreal Gazette, May 17, 1814.
71 Montreal Gazette, July 12, 1814.
72 Kingston Gazette, September 19, 1812.
73 Kingston Gazette, October 24, 1812.
74 Acadian Recorder, June 12, 1813.
69
70
19
b) Unity in adversity
Besides gallantry, a popular characteristic of Canadians is that of unity in adversity. This
perceived (or prescribed) unity gives much credence to the idea that the War of 1812 was a
founding event for ‘Canadianness’. The Montreal Gazette editor reports on the entire
population of the city coming together to defend its frontier: “all classes of individuals …
have flown to the standard, with the determination of supporting their national character,
and defending their country from the unhallowed grasp of the enemy.”75 Similarly in the
Kingston Gazette, everyone seems to have rushed into town to help, independently of their
class or background: “persons of every age flocked into town from every quarter, eager to
repulse the invaders from our peaceful shores.”76 For the Acadian Recorder, this unity was
something that took the Americans by surprise and contributed in keeping them out of
Canadian territory: “instead of finding our Canadian fellow-subjects disaffected, they have
proved them to be loyal, united and brave…”77
Not only is the local population said to be united in defending Canada, but newspapers also
report on inter-province collaboration, or at least sympathy. The editor of the Quebec
Gazette, for example, comments on the support coming from the far away provinces of
Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, stating that “Though placed at a distance from the scene
of operations, they have uniformly viewed our cause as theirs, they have applauded our
efforts, rejoiced in our successes, and pitied our misfortunes.”78 Reflecting on what this
could mean more broadly, he mused “One of the happiest results of the present war will be
the sentiment of a community of interest binding us all in one harmonious whole, ever
ready to render one another mutual service.”79
Canadians are helping with the defence of Canada and supporting their distant fellow
citizens, and they are also helping each other. The Kingston Gazette, the Quebec Gazette and
the Montreal Gazette all report on the Loyal and Patriotic Society of Upper Canada, a
charitable organization focusing on “relief for families of militia, awards of merits and
Montreal Gazette, November 16, 1813.
Kingston Gazette, April 27, 1813.
77 Acadian Recorder, January 16, 1813.
78 Quebec Gazette, March 10, 1814.
79 Ibid.
75
76
20
commemorate exploits.”80 Because Canadians are all fighting for the same cause, they
should also all help each other for the same reason, especially those in Upper Canada who
are bearing the brunt of the war. As the Kingston Gazette editor states,
This cause is the same throughout all the Provinces; but the inhabitants of
Upper Canada have been the first to suffer by the war; they are now more
immediately threatened than any of us, with the malice of our enemies, and they
have undoubtedly the first claim to our assistance; nor can we give a stronger
earnest of the sincerity of our intention of affording relief to those who may
hereafter want it; than by making an immediate and liberal donation to the
people of Upper Canada.81
By ‘reporting’ on the unity of the Canadian provinces, newspaper editors were also
encouraging it, if not creating it in some ways. By highlighting the common cause of British
North Americans across the territory, newspapers were in effect providing the material on
which to build national pride.
c) Narrative of struggle
The War of 1812 represents an instance among many others where the Canadian character
is best illustrated by a narrative of struggle and hardship. The mythical explorers and
settlers, battling the harsh weather and inhospitable terrain, are at the root of the Canadian
“survival” narrative as Margaret Atwood would put it.
According to the author’s
examination of early Canadian literature, it seems heroism in Canada was, and arguably
still is, about struggle more than triumph, and we can see this story emerging in the
coverage of the War of 1812.
Most accounts of the battles highlight the unequal force between Canada and the United
States, enhancing the Canadian victories, but also serving to justify the Canadian losses. In
the York Gazette, early on in the war it is reported that “Our forces, though a handful
compared with those of the enemy, were not intimidated but bravely resisted like men who
had a king and a country to defence.”82 Similarly in the Montreal Gazette we read that
Canadian heroes have “heroically upheld the British name, and caused its banner to wave
Kingston Gazette, January 23, 1813,
Kingston Gazette, April 27, 1813.
82 York Gazette, October 17, 1812.
80
81
21
over the American eagle, upon the walls of a strong fortress garrisoned with four times the
number of troops that invested it.”83 The victory at Queenston Heights is retold as a “little
band of heroes who so nobly defended this devoted portion of the British Empire,”84 while
a smaller scaled battle is the story of “not of a General with his thousands or his hundreds,
but of a lieutenant with his tens only.”85
d) Who is not part of this ‘us’
Even if the War of 1812 is often mentioned as a seminal event in the development of a
Canadian identity, and was so even as it happened, there are groups and individuals who
were not part of this newly emerging identity. In the press coverage of the war, we can see
hints of the non-inclusion of some groups when editors talked about Lower Canada and the
francophones, women, lower classes or First Nations. In a sense, the newspapers we
surveyed illustrate very well the masculine, white and elite character of those who
consumed and produced these papers. It should be noted that the non-inclusion of these
constituencies in the developing Canadian identity is not surprising; rather, it is reflective
of the period.
Reporting on the draft in Lower Canada, the Montreal Gazette editor laments that “young
men were dissuaded and even prevented from marching by some ignorant and obstinate
persons, who pretended that not having voted at the elections, they were not bound by the
Militia Law,” thus sadly getting the parish of St. Joseph of Nouvelle Beauce involved in this
‘disgrace’.86 The Quebec Gazette reports negatively on the Lachine riots, especially the
episode in which some French Canadians tried to ‘liberate’ one of their own, stating that
“these gentlemen happened to fancy that they had better rights to some deserters from the
Embodied Militia at La Prairie than the party that had apprehended them.”87 It is not
necessarily that French Canadians were criticized or excluded from being Canadians, but
Montreal Gazette, August 31, 1812.
Montreal Gazette, October 26, 1812.
85 Montreal Gazette, July 6, 1813. [their emphasis]
83
84
86
87
Montreal Gazette, April 6, 1813.
Quebec Gazette, July 4, 1812.
22
there was already a sense in 1812 that the population of Lower Canada was different from
the rest of the new nation.
The coverage of the War of 1812 also indicates that economic classes were still quite
entrenched in the social fabric, the most vivid example of that was illustrated in the
structure of the army itself, where those who could attain commanding posts seemed
‘worthy’ of being named. In reporting a drowning accident, the Montreal Gazette editor
spoke of the victims in this way: “Ensign Rottot happily saved himself by clinging to the
canoe until assistance was procured from the shore. The late Mr. Panet was a meritorious
officer; and we understand the two Militiamen have the best character in the Battalion.” 88
As we can see here, the Militiamen had no name and were to be forgotten quite quickly.
This was not something unusual; the newspapers of the period were reflective of their
social and political environment.
A similar observation can be made with regards to women, who were completely absent
from the war narrative during these years, and consequently absent also from the
definition of ‘Canadianness’ as it was developing. Again, this was not a surprising statement
given the attitudes of the time and the position of women in society. Take for example the
Quebec Gazette editor reprimanding its readers for criticizing the Canadian and British
performances during the war: “To complain … at past misfortunes, is a womanish
weakness, and the anticipation of nothing but evil for the future, can only serve to enervate
the mind and damp the spirit of exertion…”89 Acting like a women was pictured here as a
ridiculous manner with which to deal with losses during the war, illustrating quite clearly
that women had no (perceived) role to play.
While Canadian women and the lower classes were not mentioned often in the story of
1812, First Nations were actually acknowledged repeatedly for their immense contribution
to British victories. In the Montreal Gazette, we can read that “We cannot forget to do
justice to the faithful tribes of Western Indians, who have been co-operating with our army.
88
89
Montreal Gazette, May 18, 1813.
Quebec Gazette, October 21, 1813.
23
They deserve that humane protection which Great Britain has ever afforded them.”90
According to the editor, they also deserved proper compensation for their troubles: “their
short period of service with the army has been attended with eminent success and entitles
them to the warmest thanks of the country and a handsome compensation from
Government, which they will undoubtedly be rewarded with.”91 But as history would
ultimately demonstrate, the ‘compensation’ never came, nor did the ‘humane protection’.
But if one looks more closely, while newspapers acknowledged the help provided by First
Nations, they were also reminding readers of their savage nature, again something that
should not be surprising in the context of early nineteenth century press coverage. In a few
instances, readers were told that these allies needed to be restrained: “In the above attack a
large body of warriors from the different tribes of the Western nations were engaged, and
although wrought up to the highest pitch by their war songs and yells … were however
restrained from committing any acts of violence,”92 or in the case of American prisoners
who, having been taken hostage by ‘Indians’, avoided death thanks to “British humanity in
the person of colonel Young [which has] rescued them by the purchase of their lives from
the captors.”93 What these few quotes are meant to show is that as these elements of
gallantry, unity in adversity and the story of constant struggle crystallized into an emerging
Canadian identity, they served, inevitably perhaps, to exclude some groups from the
definition of ‘Canadianness’.
Conclusion
This newspaper research has uncovered several key points relevant to both Canadian and
media history. Looking at the War of 1812 coverage as it happened has allowed us to
confirm in many ways how crucial the War was in defining the Canadian identity. As we
have seen this identity was beginning to form at this point. By spending some time
describing the enemy, editors were defining what Canadians were not (or should not be, to
Montreal Gazette, August 31, 1812.
Montreal Gazette, July 12, 1813.
92 Montreal Gazette, August 24, 1812.
93 Montreal Gazette, August 3, 1813.
90
91
24
the very least). By increasingly criticize Great Britain and its treatment of the British North
American colony, they were transforming a unified identity, under the British Crown, into
two separate and distinct ones. Hence the War of 1812 did indeed serve in defining
Canadians as different from their neighbours to the South and from their motherland.
This research also allowed us to take a snapshot of what news making looked like in the
early 1800s, right before it snowballed into an industry. Events were reported on a few
weeks after their occurrence, using other newspapers from the United States or London to
substantiate the stories. Events were not only reported, but commented upon: more than a
source of information, newspapers were primarily a tool for disseminating opinions.
Projects to be developed from this media report
a) Learning guide
As a follow up to our War of 1812 Learning Guide, we wish to develop a new Learning
Guide based on the findings of this media report. This Guide would focus on the history of
the Canadian media and the War of 1812 would serve as its starting point. This Learning
Guide could serve as a teaching tool in both history and communications, because it will
use historical events as case studies for particular periods in Canadian journalism/media
and for particular reporting styles. As it was established in the few previous pages, the
coverage of the war of 1812 illustrates what the Canadian press looked like before its
democratization and concomitant broadening of the industry and the public. We would
perform a similar research project for the coverage of the Confederation negotiations in
several Canadian newspapers, to illustrate the quick and significant development of the
industry; we would take a look at war reporting in Canada in 1914-1918; the 1930s and the
arrival of radio broadcasting; the 1950s and television, etc., all examined through the lens
of a specifically Canadian event.
b) Travelling workshop
25
Based on the findings of this report and the subsequent research used to develop this
learning guide, the ACS would construct a workshop on Canadian media history. We would
use primary sources such as those uncovered during the media research on the war of
1812 to show the attendees the evolution of reporting techniques, and of the industry in
general. We would submit workshop proposals in history, journalism and educationfocused conferences across the country in order to disseminate this knowledge to a broad
audience.
Next steps
Upon approval by Canadian Heritage, we will make this report available on our website and
subsequently on our 1812 dedicated website as well.
We will seek partners to help us fund a similar research project on the press coverage of
the Confederation negotiations, as well as of the First World War.
26