Has the Shire ever dealt with peasant rebellions?
We follow the viewpoint of the equivalent of the Landed Gentry, the Baggins, Tooks, and Brandybucks, and a Baggins manservant. They're the archetypical noble gentlemen who treats their staff and tenants well, with their favor being returned by people like the Gaffer.
But the vast majority of the residents of the Shire are farmer hobbits that work the land and pay their landlords a share. Tenant Farmers. We know that Farmer Maggot for example, despite his seemingly lowly name is in fact a landowner who has tenants that work for him do not own their own land. Even if the Hobbits generally known as a garrulous people not known for quarreling, there must have been some bad eggs that thought they could get more than their fair share. We see that Hobbits are not immune to greed in the form of Lotho Sackville-Baggins who rules the Shire as a dictator at the end of the Third Age. Tolkien even played into medieval stereotypes by depicting Ted Sandyman, a miller, as a shifty cheat. I mean, the whole stereotype of the criminal and disliked miller comes from the feudal systems where peasants were forced to get their grain from their local mill that was the only one around. I don't see multiple mills around the Shire mentioned (though the fact that it's called the Old Mill does imply a newer one).
Not all Hobbits live in luxurious Hobbit-holes or homes either, as the poorest Hobbits live in earthen pits with no creature comforts besides maybe a window.
So historically speaking, was there a point in the span of the Shire where the gentry and aristocracy pushed their tenants too far and suffered a violent revolt?