Canadian Historic Sites: Occasional Papers in Archaeology and History No. 11

The Battle of Châteauguay

by Victor J. H. Suthren

Introduction

On Tuesday, 26 October 1813, between 10:00 A.M. and 3:00 P.M., a force of some 1,000 Canadian regulars and militia under British command occupied defensive positions near and in the present village of Allans Corners, Quebec. They succeeded in repulsing an attack by an American army of over 4,000 men, thus halting the American force's descent of the Châteauguay River to the St. Lawrence, and thwarting a planned junction with another army descending the St. Lawrence toward Montreal. The engagement has come to be known as the Battle of Châteauguay.

On the face of it, the history of the Battle of Châteauguay immediately brings into question its validity as a battle. The engagement was a product of the Napoleonic era: Napoleon's success in dominating continental Europe led Britain to undertake her policies of maritime blockade and impressment which are cited as irritants important enough to help lead the United States to the declaration of war. But in the scales of mortal combat of its age, and indeed of other North American conflict to come, the fight at Châteauguay appears as little more than a skirmish: there are no lists of heavy casualties, no prodigious sweeps of infantry or cavalry across great battlefields. It is in the meaning of the fight, its nature and consequences, that Châteauguay earns its right to recognition. For a nation continually vigilant and sensitive to its political independence as well as the historical background of that concept, it stands as a genuine example of co-operation, although small in scale, between the principal founding cultural groups of Canada, in repelling a distinct threat to that independence.

One may quite rightly quote the immense casualty figures of the European struggle against Napoleon to diminish the physical scope of Châteauguay; but one cannot deny the reality that a large and powerful United States military force, sizeable enough to sweep before it all opposition which might have stood between it and its goal of Montreal, was attempting to sever the vital artery of the St. Lawrence and to capture the core of British North America; and that it was induced, or forced, to abandon this aim through the efforts of the Canadians at Châteauguay.

Had Major General Wade Hampton swept aside the defences at Châteauguay and marched on to Montreal, or successfully joined with General Wilkinson's army, it is unlikely that the Canadian territories west of Montreal could have remained long out of American control. The loss of this territory would have effectively confined British influence in the lower basin of the St. Lawrence, and the future growth of the North American hinterland would have progressed largely under American auspices. The Rupert's Land holdings of the Hudson's Bay Company notwithstanding, it is unlikely that the British government would have received much return for its North American colonial investment if denied access to the interior, and the anti-colonial approach of the first half of the 19th century would possibly have accelerated to a degree favourable to American continental interests. In short, the loss of the St. Lawrence would have meant the loss of future national identity for Canada.

1 The Châteauguay battle monument, Allans Corners, Quebec.

American military policy in prosecuting the land war against Canada never really questioned the saliency of this one strategic requirement: sever the St. Lawrence artery. American problems revolved more around recognizing this aim and coordinating efforts toward achieving it than questioning it, and this remained true for the duration of the War of 1812. British and Canadian interests lay in doing the utmost possible with minimal resources to either repulse or inhibit American attempts to carry out their aim. The Battle of Châteauguay is a successful result of this policy in action.

Châteauguay also offers an example of the Canadian sense of uniqueness as a nation, and of the capacity of its people from differing cultural backgrounds to unite successfully in a common task. The principally French-speaking participants in the battle stood shoulder to shoulder with English-speaking individuals of Scottish or Irish descent as well as Loyalists, and the officers were similarly of a broad ethnic origin. Châteauguay in no way diminished the very real tensions of post-Conquest Canada, as events some 24 years later were to reveal; but it did show how a cool realization of a common danger could lead to a successful unity of purpose and action.

To French-speaking Canadians, the reality of what occurred at Châteauguay is important, for it is another stone in the edifice of a powerful cultural pride which, in turn, deserves its place in the historical pride of Canada as a whole. To detractors whose arguments are founded on misconceptions of history, prejudice, or outright political expediency, Châteauguay offers no countering half-truth; simply the reality of pragmatic men fitting realistic thought to action with a successful result. The purpose of this study is to provide a narrative through which this may become self-evident.