Featured Article Summary #147

The Ancaster incident was an attack on George Rolph, a senior government figure in Upper Canada, on June 3, 1826. He was dragged from his home by members of the Tory elite and was tarred and feathered, driven by accusations and personal hostility. When the case went to court, key government officials chose not to prosecute and instead withdrew from the process or helped the accused, so the legal proceedings did not lead to criminal punishment. Rolph ultimately received compensation, but his attempt to get a higher amount failed. Reformers used the event to claim the Tories were using political violence to stay in power, which they said helped contribute to their gains in the 1828 elections. The incident also led to questions in the legislature about the misuse of authority and is often described by historians as reflecting growing conflict between the ruling elite and ordinary farmers. In the 1820s, people across the world questioned government reforms proposed by ruling aristocrats. In Upper Canada, the ruling group known as the Family Compact (the Tories) held power through appointments, while reformers wanted wider rights for citizens, especially newer immigrants from the United States. This struggle threatened Tory influence, and George Rolph, a reform-minded clerk in Gore County, became a target of Tory hostility because he refused to fully support their social and political aims. Rolph’s brother John, also a reformer, pushed for Legislative Council members to be elected rather than appointed, which would make it harder for Tories to control government. Mrs. Evans, who travelled to Canada with George Rolph and said she was escaping an abusive husband, lived in his home and sparked rumours that Rolph was having an affair. A week before the incident, Evans’s husband came to Dundas trying to get her to return to England. On the night of June 3, 1826, a group of Tory men met at James Hamilton’s home and planned to tar and feather William Rolph. After drinking, they went to the inn where Mr. Evans was staying, then traveled to Rolph’s home in Ancaster around midnight, wearing disguises to hide their identities. They bound and blindfolded Rolph, dragged him outside, covered him with tar and feathers, threatened further brutal harm, and left him half-conscious, while a later trial noted Mrs. Evans was not in Rolph’s bed during the raid. Rolph hired his brother, John Rolph, as his lawyer. John advised delaying criminal charges because it would likely come down to Rolph’s word versus the accused attackers’, so they waited until others were told about the assailants’ involvement. In November, Rolph sent an affidavit to Lieutenant Governor Peregrine Maitland naming Hamilton as an attacker, but Maitland said he could not act until a jury found Hamilton guilty and suggested a civil lawsuit instead. Ten months after the incident, George brought a civil lawsuit in the District of Gore Assizes Court against three identified attackers—Simons, Hamilton, and Robertson—for £1000 over trespassing and assault. The trial began on August 25, 1827, with Judge James B. Macaulay, and national and international attention, though several defence-related witnesses refused to testify to avoid self-incrimination. Although Rolph raised concerns that some accused were lawyers involved on the defence side, Maitland said the trial would be fair.