CHAPTER IX

[21]For a plan of Abraham Martin's property, see,The Story of the Siege and the Battle of the Plains of Abraham, by A. G. Doughty.[22]SeeDeed of Concession, p. 414, Trans. R.S.C., 1899, by A. G. Doughty.[23]Father Mariana, a Jesuit, having published a book entitled,De Regi et Regis Institutione, in which he denounced tyranny and its fomenters, the court ordered that the work should be burnt, under the pretext that Ravaillac, who had assassinated Henri IV, had taken advantage of the Jesuit's authority to excuse his murder. It was certain that the Jesuits were the best friends of the late king. Nevertheless, they had to suffer the hostility of a certain part of the secular clergy. Father Coton, a Jesuit, published at once a pamphlet under the title, "Is it lawful to kill the tyrants?" in which he taught that it is not lawful to kill a king, except he abuses his authority. An answer to the pamphlet, published anonymously, soon appeared, which was a satirical paper rather than a refutation of Father Coton's letter. During the same year a new satirical paper against the Jesuits was printed, entitledL'Anticoton. It was translated into Latin.[24]Raymond de la Ralde who was a Catholic, was the first captain of the island of Miscou, the history of which commenced in 1620. Guillaume de Caën appointed de la Ralde as his lieutenant to protect the trade in the Gulf of St. Lawrence against the Basques and others, especially at Percé, Gaspé, and Miscou. From the year 1627, de la Ralde ceased to be of importance, as his fortunes followed the de Caëns.[25]Champlain died within Fort St. Louis, and the Governor Montmagny had the building restored under the title of Château St. Louis, which name it bore until its complete demolition.

[21]For a plan of Abraham Martin's property, see,The Story of the Siege and the Battle of the Plains of Abraham, by A. G. Doughty.

[22]SeeDeed of Concession, p. 414, Trans. R.S.C., 1899, by A. G. Doughty.

[23]Father Mariana, a Jesuit, having published a book entitled,De Regi et Regis Institutione, in which he denounced tyranny and its fomenters, the court ordered that the work should be burnt, under the pretext that Ravaillac, who had assassinated Henri IV, had taken advantage of the Jesuit's authority to excuse his murder. It was certain that the Jesuits were the best friends of the late king. Nevertheless, they had to suffer the hostility of a certain part of the secular clergy. Father Coton, a Jesuit, published at once a pamphlet under the title, "Is it lawful to kill the tyrants?" in which he taught that it is not lawful to kill a king, except he abuses his authority. An answer to the pamphlet, published anonymously, soon appeared, which was a satirical paper rather than a refutation of Father Coton's letter. During the same year a new satirical paper against the Jesuits was printed, entitledL'Anticoton. It was translated into Latin.

[24]Raymond de la Ralde who was a Catholic, was the first captain of the island of Miscou, the history of which commenced in 1620. Guillaume de Caën appointed de la Ralde as his lieutenant to protect the trade in the Gulf of St. Lawrence against the Basques and others, especially at Percé, Gaspé, and Miscou. From the year 1627, de la Ralde ceased to be of importance, as his fortunes followed the de Caëns.

[25]Champlain died within Fort St. Louis, and the Governor Montmagny had the building restored under the title of Château St. Louis, which name it bore until its complete demolition.

Inspite of Champlain's strenuous efforts, the permanent existence of New France seemed as yet problematical. At a time when internal peace was imperative the domination of the mercantile companies came to increase the distress of the struggling colony. The difficulties of colonization likewise were immense, and Quebec at the period of which we write, instead of being a thriving town, had scarcely the appearance of a small village. In the year 1627 it could boast only six private residences. The Récollets were living at their convent, but the Jesuits had not completed their new building. The Récollets had abandoned the Huron mission as their numbers were diminishing every year, and they were too poor to continue their ministrations without assistance. They still held in charge the missions at Quebec and at Tadousac. Father d'Olbeau, who had been present at the opening of the Récollet convent at Quebec, saw its doors closed. He remained, however, at his post, and rendered valuable assistance to Champlain.

The Jesuits made great personal efforts for the advancement of the colony, and Father Noyrot hadsailed for Canada with a number of workmen and a good store of provisions, but unfortunately his vessel did not reach Quebec.

The negligence of Montmorency's company was the principal cause why Quebec was abandoned to its own resources. Champlain was powerless against the ill-will of the company, and the only redress was in the person of the king. Cardinal Richelieu, who was superintendent of the navigation and commerce of France, resolved to reform the remnant of a company founded in 1626, and composed of one hundred associates, for conducting the commerce of the East and West. As the due de Ventadour had resigned the office of viceroy, the cardinal held a meeting of many rich and zealous persons in his hotel at Paris, whose names would be a guarantee of the success of the colonization of New France, and also of its religious institutions. Among those present were Claude de Roquemont, Sieur de Brison, Louis Hoüel, Sieur du Petit-Pré, Gabriel de Lattaignant, formerly mayor of Calais, Simon Dablon, syndic of Dieppe, David Duchesne, councillor and alderman of Havre de Grâce, and Jacques Castillon, citizen of Paris.

On April 25th, 1627, the cardinal and these personages signed the act which founded the Company of New France. In the preamble it is mentioned that the colonization in New France shall be Catholic only, as this was regarded as the best means of converting the Indians. The associates pledgedthemselves to send two or three hundred men to New France during the year 1628, and to augment this number to four thousand within fifteen years from this date, i.e., by the year 1643. They agreed to lodge, feed and entertain the settlers for a period of three years, and after that date to grant to each family a tract of land sufficiently prepared for cultivation. Three priests were to be maintained at each habitation, at the expense of the company, for a period of fifteen years.

The king granted to the company numerous privileges, the lands of New France, the river St. Lawrence, islands, mines, fisheries, Florida, together with the power of conceding lands in these countries, and the faculty of granting titles, honours, rights and powers, according to the condition, quality, or merit of the people. His Majesty also granted to the company the monopoly of the fur and leather trade from January 1st, 1628, until December 31st, 1643, reserving for the French people in general the cod and whale fisheries. In order to induce his subjects to settle in New France the king announced that during the next fifteen years all goods coming from the French colony should be free of duty.

This act was signed on April 29th, 1627, and the letters patent ratifying the articles were signed on May 6th, 1628. The letters patent also ratified some other provisions made on May 7th, 1627, namely:—(1.) A capital of three hundred thousand livres, by instalments of three thousand livres each.(2.) The society to adopt the name of the Campagnie de la Nouvelle France. (3.) The management of the company to be conducted through twelve directors, with full powers to name officers, to distribute lands, establish factors or clerks, to conduct trade and dispose of the joint-stock.

Of these twelve directors six were obliged to live in Paris. The names of the twelve directors who were elected are here given:—Simon Alix, councillor and king's secretary; Pierre Aubert, councillor and king's secretary; Thomas Bonneau, Sieur du Plessis; Pierre Robineau, treasurer of cavalry; Raoul L'Huillier, merchant of Paris; Barthélemy Quentin, merchant of Paris; Jean Tuffet, merchant of Bordeaux; Gabriel Lattaignant, formerly mayor of Calais; Jean Rozée, merchant of Rouen; Simon Lemaistre, merchant of Rouen; Louis Hoüel, comptroller of saltworks at Brouage; Bonaventure Quentin, Sieur de Richebourg.

These directors were elected for a term of two years, and six of them had to be replaced at each election. The first term of office expired on December 31st, 1629. The election was held in Paris at the house of the intendant, Jean de Lauzon, king's councillor, master of requests and president of the Grand Council. Cardinal Richelieu and the Duke d'Effiat headed the list of the Hundred Associates. We find also the name of Samuel Champlain, captain of the king's marine, of Isaac de Razilly, chevalier de St. Jean de Jérusalem,Sébastien Cramoisy, the famous printer; François de Ré, Sieur Gand, and many important merchants of Paris, Rouen, Calais, Dieppe, Bordeaux, Lyons, Bayonne, and Havre de Grâce.

This association was formed under auspicious circumstances; its members possessed wealth and influence, and they were certainly in a position to remove the difficulties which had hindered the growth of New France from its foundation.26

While these transactions were in progress Champlain was living at Quebec in want of even the necessaries of life. For the past two years Champlain had established a farm for raising cattle at the foot of Cape Tourmente. Some farm buildings and dwellings for the men were erected there, and Champlain visited the place every summer to see that the work was properly carried on. The Récollets had a chapel there in which they said mass from time to time. In 1628 this establishment was in a flourishing condition, and Champlain believed itwould ultimately prove of great value to the inhabitants. The colony in the meantime had to rely upon the mother country for provisions, and for flour which could not be produced in Canada.

The new company sent out four vessels in 1628 under the command of Claude de Roquemont, laden with provisions, munitions, and a number of men. This first shipment cost 164,720 livres or about $33,000 of our currency. This large outlay was proof that the associates were determined to maintain the new Canadian settlement. The fleet sailed from Dieppe on May 3rd, and arrived at Percé about the middle of July. During the voyage Roquemont was often exposed to the attacks of the English and Dutch vessels, but he preferred to alter his course rather than to fight. The vessels stopped at the Island of Anticosti, where the crews landed, and planted a cross in token of their gratitude to God, who had protected them.

Some days afterwards they reached Percé, and a little later entered Gaspé Bay. Roquemont was here informed by the savages that five large English vessels were anchored in Tadousac harbour. It was the fleet of David Kirke,27who was going to make an assault on Quebec, after having devastated the Acadian coast. Roquemont at once sent Thierry-Desdames to St. Barnabé Island, where he had intended to go himself. Roquemont left Gaspé on July 15th, 1628, and proceeded up the St. Lawrence, hoping that he would be able to escape his powerful enemies, as the French vessels were not properly armed for a regular fight. Unhappily, on the eighteenth the French came within cannon shot of the British fleet. For a period of fourteen hours the vessels cannonaded each other, and over twelve hundred shots were exchanged. The French having exhausted their stock of balls used the lead of their fishing poles instead. Finally Roquemont perceivedthat his vessel was sinking, and asked for a compromise. It was decided that no penalties should be exacted, and that the English admiral should take possession of the ships. The French crews were taken on board the British vessels, which continued their route for England. The British commander soon realized that he had too many persons on board, and some of the families and the Récollet fathers were put off on the Island of St. Peter. Among the families were a Parisian named Le Faucheur, who with his wife and five children were bound for Quebec, Robert Giffard, surgeon, his wife and three girls, and fifteen or sixteen sailors. Kirke left them to the mercy of God on this island with some provisions and a small Basque vessel.

The Basques who were hidden in the mountains came down upon the French after the English were out of sight, and threatened to kill them if they attempted to escape in their vessel. They at last agreed to allow them to go elsewhere in consideration of a certain amount of biscuit and cider. They all embarked in a frail shallop, and eventually arrived at Plaisance on the coast of Newfoundland, where some French fishermen conducted them to France.

Some writers have blamed Roquemont for avoiding a fight. His conduct is pardonable, however, to a certain extent, because his mission was not one of war, but to carry provisions to the colony, and he had armed his vessels only for any ordinary attack.Others, like Champlain, thought that Roquemont had unnecessarily exposed himself, and blame him for the following reasons:—(1.) The equipment was made out for helping the fort and habitation of Quebec. In going forward Roquemont not only exposed himself to a loss, but also the whole country, that is to say about one hundred persons who were in distress. (2.) At Gaspé he was made aware that the English admiral had proceeded up the St. Lawrence in command of a fleet much more powerful than his own. He ought, therefore, to have taken the advice of his mariners in order to ascertain whether there was not a safe harbour along the coast which would have seemed a safe retreat. (3.) After having put his vessels in such a harbour, Roquemont ought to have sent a well equipped shallop to observe every movement of the enemy, and await his departure before going higher up the river. (4.) If Roquemont desired to fight, he ought to have laden theFlibotwith flour and gunpowder, and placed on board the women and children, and this small ship, which was sailing fast, could have escaped to Quebec during the fight. Champlain, in setting forth these views, is probably just, for the merit of a captain is not only in his courage, but also in his prudence. Nothing remained of the expedition under Roquemont, which was undertaken with so much courage, and at so much expense. It is certain that if he had been able to reach Quebec with his vessels, David Kirke would not have risked,in the following year, the capture of the habitation of Quebec.

The king of England had granted letters patent to the Company of Adventurers which authorized them to trade, plant, seize Spanish and French vessels, and to destroy the forts of New France. By a singular coincidence the king of France had established the Company of the Hundred Associates at the same time, and they were thus constituted masters of commerce in Canada and Acadia.

Sir William Alexander had equipped three vessels, to which he had appointed David Kirke and his two brothers as captains. They stopped for a time at Newfoundland, and then taking the gulf and river St. Lawrence, they anchored at Tadousac, as we have already seen, during the first days of July, 1628. The news of Kirke's arrival soon reached Champlain, through an Indian named Napagabiscou, or Tregatin, who came in haste to Cape Tourmente. Foucher, the chief of the farmers, proceeded at once to Quebec to confirm the news, and also to inform Champlain that the establishment had been burnt, his cattle destroyed, and all the inhabitants taken prisoners. The prisoners were brought back to Quebec some days after in the custody of six Basques, who delivered to Champlain the following letter:

"Messieurs:—I give you notice that I have received a commission from the king of Great Britain, my honoured lord and master, to take possession ofthe countries of Canada and Acadia, and for that purpose eighteen ships have been despatched, each taking the route ordered by His Majesty. I have already seized the habitation of Miscou, and all boats and pinnaces on that coast, as well as those of Tadousac, where I am presently at anchor. You are also informed that among the vessels that I have seized, there is one belonging to the new company, commanded by a certain Noyrot, which was coming to you with provisions and goods for the trade. The Sieur de la Tour was also on board, whom I have taken into my ship. I was preparing to seek you, but thought it better to send boats to destroy and seize your cattle at Cape Tourmente; for I know that, when you are straightened for supplies, I shall the more easily obtain my desire, which is, to have your settlement; and in order that no vessels shall reach you, I have resolved to remain here till the end of the season, in order that you may not be re-victualled. Therefore see what you wish to do, if you intend to deliver up the settlement or not, for, God aiding, sooner or later I must have it. I would desire, for your sake, that it should be by courtesy rather than by force, to avoid the blood which might be spilt on both sides. By surrendering courteously, you may be assured of all kinds of contentment, both for your persons and for your property, which on the faith that I have in Paradise, I will preserve as I would my own, without the least portion in the world being diminished.The Basques whom I send you are men of the vessels that I have captured, and they can tell you the state of affairs between France and England, and even how matters are passing in France, touching the new company of this country. Send me word what you desire to do, and if you wish to treat with me about this affair, send me a person to that effect, whom, I assure you, I will treat with all kinds of attention, and I will grant all reasonable demands that you may desire in resolving to give up the settlement. Waiting your reply, I remain, messieurs, your affectionate servant,"David Quer."On board theVicaille, July 18th, 1628, and addressed to Monsieur Champlain, Commandant at Quebec."

"David Quer.

"On board theVicaille, July 18th, 1628, and addressed to Monsieur Champlain, Commandant at Quebec."

Champlain read that letter to Pont-Gravé and to the chief inhabitants. After mature deliberation, it was resolved that Champlain should answer Kirke with dignity and firmness, but should not give any idea of the poor state of Quebec. "We concluded," says Champlain, "that if Kirke wished to see us he had better come, and not threaten from such a distance. That we did not in the least doubt the fact of Kirke having the commission of his king, as great princes always select men of brave and generous courage."

Champlain acknowledged the intelligence of the capture of Father Noyrot and de la Tour, and also the truth of the observation that the more provisions there were in a fortress the better it could hold out, still it could be maintained with but little, provided good order were kept; therefore, being still furnished with grain, maize, beans and pease, (besides what the country could supply) which his soldiers loved as well as the finest corn in the world, by surrendering the fort in so good a condition, he would be unworthy to appear before his sovereign, and would deserve chastisement before God and men. He was sure that Kirke would respect him much more for defending himself than for abandoning his charge, without first making trial of the English guns and batteries. Champlain concludes by saying that he would expect his attack, and oppose, as well as he could, all attempts that might be made against the place. The noble language of Champlain's letter made a deep impression on Kirke, and he deemed it prudent to start for Europe. Before leaving Tadousac, David Kirke destroyed all the captured French barques, with the exception of the largest, which he took to Europe. Since leaving England he had doubled the number of his vessels, having taken away all that he could from the habitation of Miscou and other seaports frequented by the French.

The news of the departure of the English fleet took some days to reach Quebec, where the minds of the inhabitants were divided between hope and fear. Champlain was determined to await the arrival of the enemy, and to defend Quebec, without considering its weakness. Every one began to work to construct new intrenchments around the habitation, and to barricade the road which led to the fort. Each was given a post in the event of an attack, and a defence was determined upon. Later on Champlain was informed of Roquemont's fate and of Kirke's departure.

The English were, indeed, well compensated for their abandonment of Quebec, for the seizure of the vessels and their provisions was equivalent to the capture of the French colony, since famine threatened them sooner or later. In attacking Quebec Kirke, indeed, would have met with but little opposition, because every one was suffering. Those who were unable to live from the product of their own lands were compelled to ask assistance from the trade agents. Champlain ordered a distribution of pease to be made to each person indiscriminately. The Récollets refused any assistance, and they passed the whole winter subsisting on corn and vegetables of their own cultivation. Champlain succeeded in building a mill for grinding pease. The eel fisheries were productive, and the Indians bought from the French six eels for a beaver skin. In the midst of these perplexities Champlain realized that unless assistance was forthcoming in the spring, it would be advisable for him to accept an honourable capitulation, and to send all the French who wished to return to their country, either to Gaspé or to Miscou.

As soon as the snow had disappeared in the spring of the year 1629, Champlain caused all the arable land to be sown. By the end of May his stock of provisions was nearly exhausted, and he therefore decided to send Desdames to Gaspé with a group of the inhabitants. Hubou, Desportes and Pivert took passage on Desdames' barque, hoping to meet a French vessel at Gaspé. One month later Desdames returned, and confirmed the news that the English vessels had devastated the Acadian coast, and burnt the habitations. Neither Desdames nor his party had seen any French vessel in the gulf, but they had met Iuan Chou, a friend of Champlain, who had agreed to give hospitality to twenty persons, including Pont-Gravé, by whom he was greatly esteemed. The latter was still suffering from gout, and it was with some reluctance that he agreed to leave his position as first clerk, empowered by Guillaume de Caën to take care of the merchandise. Des Marets, who was Pont-Gravé's grandson, accepted his position in the interim.

Before leaving Quebec Pont-Gravé desired Champlain to read publicly the commission which he had received from Guillaume de Caën. After grand mass on June 17th Champlain read Pont-Gravé's commission and his own in the presence of all the people, and he added some words, by which it was easily understood that the king's authority had to be superior to Guillaume de Caën's commissions. Pont-Gravé replied at once: "I see that you believein the nullity of my commission!" "Yes," replied Champlain, "when it comes in conflict with the king's and the viceroy's authority." This petty dispute had no serious consequence, as it was evident that Pont-Gravé, being only the first clerk of Guillaume de Caën, had no other authority than to take care of the peltry and merchandise belonging to his chief.

Before turning their attention to Canada Guillaume and Emery de Caën had belonged to a large company trading with the East Indies. Both were Calvinists. Sagard writes that Guillaume was polite, liberal, and of good understanding. This testimony seems somewhat exaggerated, as we have many proofs of his niggardliness. His nephew Emery was frank, liberal and open to conviction, and was always kindly disposed towards the Jesuits. Guillaume de Caën was the commodore of the fleet equipped by his associates. His greatest fault appears to have been that he neglected Champlain and the colony, and for that reason he should share the responsibility of not having prevented the capitulation of Quebec. However, it is scarcely fair to say of him that he worked directly against the French in New France. After the capitulation of 1629, Cardinal Richelieu wrote of him to the French ambassador in London: "Please examine his actions. Being a Huguenot, and having been much displeased with the new company of Canada, I have entertained a suspicion that he connived with the English. I havenot a sure knowledge of it, but you will please me if you inform me of his conduct."

This suspicion seems unfounded, because Guillaume de Caën was personally interested in the fate of Quebec. His merchandise which was seized by Kirke was valued at about forty thousand écus. If he had made some agreement with Kirke he would have had no difficulty in recovering his goods after the capitulation, but such was not the case.

As to Emery de Caën we must say that he took an active part in the defence of the colony, and perhaps he might have saved Quebec, had not one of his sailors committed a grave imprudence at a critical juncture. The facts are as follows: The Treaty of Suze, which was signed on April 24th, 1629, had established peace between France and England. Being aware of this fact Emery de Caën equipped a vessel for the purpose of bringing back to France all the furs and merchandise which were the property of his uncle. When he arrived near the Escoumins a dense fog obscured the coast, and his vessel ran aground on Red Island, opposite Tadousac. Having succeeded in floating his ship, de Caën went to Chafaud aux Basques, two leagues above Tadousac. Here he was informed that the Kirke brothers were at Tadousac, and he at once made for Mal Bay, where he was informed that Champlain had capitulated. This news lacked confirmation, and so he sent two emissaries to Quebec, who instead of proceeding directly there, amusedthemselves on the shore of the river at Cape Tourmente. They finally arrived at their destination, and were badly received by Guillaume Couillard.

In the meantime Thomas Kirke was sailing down from Quebec to Tadousac, after the capitulation of the stronghold, and meeting de Caën's vessel approached within cannon shot. A fight began, and soon both vessels were stopped by Kirke's order. Previous to this, Champlain and all the French who were on board had been sent below deck, the covers of which had been fastened with large nails, so that they were unable to render any assistance to Emery de Caën, even if they had desired to. The battle continued under some difficulties, and the vessels were grappled only by their foremasts. Kirke's position was becoming untenable, but by a singular blunder instead of being defeated he was allowed to become the master. One of Emery de Caën's sailors having cried "Quartier! Quartier!" or Surrender! Kirke hurriedly answered, "Bon quartier, and I promise your life safe, and I shall treat you as I did Champlain, whom I bring with me." Hearing these words the French hesitated, laid down their arms, and soon perceived Champlain on the deck. Kirke had released him from his temporary jail, threatening him with death if he did not order Emery de Caën to cease his fire. Then Champlain said: "It would be easy to kill me, being in your power. But you do not deserve honour for having broken your word. You have promised to treat mewith consideration. I cannot command these people, neither prevent them from doing their duty, in defending themselves. You must praise them instead of blaming them." Champlain asked them to surrender willingly. They were wise in doing so, as two Englishpatachessoon arrived which would have settled the fight.

Emery de Caën, and Jacques Couillard de l'Espinay, his lieutenant, took passage on Kirke's vessel, and submitted themselves to the enemy's conditions. De Caën was compelled to abandon his ship, which was full of provisions intended for Quebec. In less than two hours every hope of fur trading had disappeared. De Caën had lost not only his vessel, but also five hundred beaver skins and some merchandise for traffic. This loss was valued at fifty-one thousand francs. Emery de Caën returned to France. He came back to Quebec in the year 1631, with permission from Richelieu to treat with the Indians. But the English commander expressly forbade the trade, and placed guardians on his vessel during the period of trading.

[26]All that relates to the formation of the Company of New France is contained in a series of documents entitled,Edits, Ordonnances royaux. The first document is entitled,Compagnie du Canada, establie sous le titre de Nouvelle France, par les articles du vingt-neuf auril et sept May, mil six cens vingt-sept. We find it in theMercure François(t. xiv., part ii., p. 232) and also in theMémoires sur les possessions Françoises en Amérique(t. iii., pp. 3, 4, and 5). This document is double, the first containing twenty articles, and the second thirty-one, which essentially differ. The act of April 29th, 1627, exposes the designs which had engaged the king to establish a new company, its obligations, and the advantages which it will get from Canada. The act of May 7th is the deed of association, which contains the whole organization of the company, its rules, and all that concerns the administration of its funds. The acceptation of the articles of April 29th, 1628, was officially known by an act passed on August 5th, 1628, and the acceptation of the articles of May 7th took place on August 6th, of the same year. These articles had been confirmed by an order-in-council, on May 6th, 1628, at La Rochelle. On the same day Louis XIII had issued patents confirming the order-in-council. On May 18th Richelieu had ratified the articles of April 29th and of May 7th.These various documents were published in 1628, one part of them in theMercure François, and the other in a pamphlet, large in quarto of twenty-three pages. The list of the Hundred Associates was also printed in a small pamphlet of eight pages, bearing as title:Noms, surnoms et Qualitez des Associez En la Compagnie de la Nouvelle France, suyvant les jours et dates de leurs signatures.[27]About the year 1596 Gervase Kirke, of Norton, county of Derby, married Elizabeth Goudon, of Dieppe, and had issue five boys and two girls. The eldest boy was named David, the second son was Louis; and the third, Thomas; the fourth, John; and the fifth, James. In the year 1629 David was thirty-two years of age, Louis was thirty, and Thomas twenty-six years of age. These are the three heroes of the Quebec assault.Gervase Kirke was a member of the Company of Adventurers, and he died on December 17th, 1629. In 1637 David received as a concession the New-found-land. After some difficulties which he had to suffer, David Kirke died in the year 1656. His widow claimed the sum of £60,000 for the part that the Kirkes had taken in bringing about the capitulation of Quebec, but the king paid no attention to these claims, and the Kirke family became poor.

These various documents were published in 1628, one part of them in theMercure François, and the other in a pamphlet, large in quarto of twenty-three pages. The list of the Hundred Associates was also printed in a small pamphlet of eight pages, bearing as title:Noms, surnoms et Qualitez des Associez En la Compagnie de la Nouvelle France, suyvant les jours et dates de leurs signatures.

[27]About the year 1596 Gervase Kirke, of Norton, county of Derby, married Elizabeth Goudon, of Dieppe, and had issue five boys and two girls. The eldest boy was named David, the second son was Louis; and the third, Thomas; the fourth, John; and the fifth, James. In the year 1629 David was thirty-two years of age, Louis was thirty, and Thomas twenty-six years of age. These are the three heroes of the Quebec assault.Gervase Kirke was a member of the Company of Adventurers, and he died on December 17th, 1629. In 1637 David received as a concession the New-found-land. After some difficulties which he had to suffer, David Kirke died in the year 1656. His widow claimed the sum of £60,000 for the part that the Kirkes had taken in bringing about the capitulation of Quebec, but the king paid no attention to these claims, and the Kirke family became poor.

Gervase Kirke was a member of the Company of Adventurers, and he died on December 17th, 1629. In 1637 David received as a concession the New-found-land. After some difficulties which he had to suffer, David Kirke died in the year 1656. His widow claimed the sum of £60,000 for the part that the Kirkes had taken in bringing about the capitulation of Quebec, but the king paid no attention to these claims, and the Kirke family became poor.

Wehave somewhat anticipated events, so we now retrace our steps, and place ourselves within Champlain's defenceless stronghold as its fatal hour approached. On Thursday, July 19th, 1629, a savage named La Nasse by the French, and Manitougatche by his own people, informed the Jesuits that three English ships were in sight off the Island of Orleans, behind Point Lévis, and that six other vessels were anchored at Tadousac. Champlain was already aware that some ships were at Tadousac, but he was surprised to learn that the enemy had approached Quebec, and at first he thought that they might be French ships. There was no one in Fort St. Louis at the time he received this news, as every one had gone out in search of plants which were used as food; he therefore sent for Father Le Caron and the Jesuits to consult with them as to what measures should be taken. In the meantime the English fleet was steadily approaching, and at length drew up at a certain distance from the city. A shallop was then sent out from the admiral's ship, carrying at her mainmast a white flag. Champlain caused a similar flag to be run up over the fort, and Kirke's emissary came ashore and presented to Champlain the following letter:—

"Monsieur:—In consequence of what our brother told you last year that sooner or later he would have Quebec, if not succoured, he has charged us to assure you of his friendship as we do of ours; and knowing very well the extreme need of everything in which you are, desires that you shall surrender the fort and the settlement to us, assuring you of every kind of courtesy for you and yours, and also of honourable and reasonable terms, such as you may wish. Waiting your reply, we remain, monsieur, your very affectionate servants,"Louis and Thomas Quer."On board theFlibot, this July 19th, 1629."

"Louis and Thomas Quer.

"On board theFlibot, this July 19th, 1629."

Champlain immediately prepared his answer, the terms of which had previously been agreed upon by the fathers. Kirke's representative did not understand a word of the French language, but he had a fair knowledge of Latin. Father de la Roche d'Aillon was therefore requested by Champlain to act as interpreter, and he asked the following questions:—"Is war declared between France and England?" "No," replied the English representative. "Why, then, do you come here to trouble us if our princes live in peace?" he was asked.

Champlain then requested Father de la Roche to go aboard the English vessels to ascertain from the chiefs what they intended to do. The interview between Father de la Roche and Louis Kirke wascourteous, but the answers of the latter were far from being satisfactory. "If Champlain," said the English captain, "gives up the keys of the fortress and of the habitation we promise to convey you all to France, and will treat you well; if not we will oblige him by force." Father de la Roche tried to obtain fifteen days' delay, or even eight days, but it was of no avail.

"Sir," said Louis Kirke, "I well know your miserable condition. Your people have gone out to pick up roots in order to avoid starvation, for we have captured Master Boullé and some other Frenchmen whom we have retained as prisoners at Tadousac, and from whom we have ascertained the condition of the inhabitants of Quebec."

"Give us a delay of eight days," said Father de la Roche. "No," replied Thomas Kirke, "I shall at once ruin the fort with my cannon." "I desire to sleep to-night in the fort," added his brother Louis, "and, if not, I shall devastate the whole country." "Proceed slowly," said Father de la Roche, "for you are deceived if you believe you will easily gain the fort. There are a hundred men there well armed and ready to sell their lives dearly. Perchance you will find your death in this enterprise, for I assure you that the inhabitants are determined to fight, and they derive courage from the conviction that your invasion is unjust, and that their lives and property are at stake. Once more I warn you that an attack might prove dangerous to you."

Captain Louis Kirke seemed a little disheartened on hearing this firm and vigorous language. After having consulted the chief officers of his fleet he asked Father de la Roche to attend a council of war at which an ultimatum was presented in these words:—"Champlain must surrender at once, but he shall have the privilege of dictating the terms of capitulation." Three hours were granted within which his reply was to be given. The Récollets were promised protection, but no conditions were accorded to the Jesuits, as it was the admiral's intention to visit their convent, which he believed to contain a quantity of beaver skins.

Father de la Roche returned to Fort St. Louis, and gave an account of his interview. It was plainly evident that it would be useless to rely upon delays in the face of an enemy determined to see the end of the affair. Food was almost exhausted, and it was calculated that there were not more than ten pounds of flour in Quebec, and not more than fifty pounds of gunpowder, which was of inferior quality. Opposition would have been not only useless, but ridiculous. Champlain realized this, and at once resolved to surrender.

Champlain drew up the following articles of capitulation, which were forwarded to the Kirke brothers:—

"That Quer (Kirke) should produce his commission from the king of England to prove that war actually existed between England and France; andalso to show the power of his brothers, who commanded the fleet, to act in the king's name."That a vessel should be provided to convey Champlain, his companions, the missionaries, both Jesuits and Récollets, the two Indian girls that had been given to him two years before, and all other persons, to France."That the religious and other people should be allowed to leave with arms and baggage, and all their furniture, and that a sufficient supply of provisions for the passage to France should be granted in exchange for peltry, etc."That all should have the most favourable treatment possible, without violence to any."That the ship in which they were to embark for France should be ready in three days after their arrival at Tadousac, and a vessel provided for the transport of their goods, etc., to that place."These articles were signed by Champlain and Pont-Gravé. After having read them Louis Kirke sent this answer: "That Kirke's commission should be shown and his powers to his brothers for trading purposes. As to providing a vessel to take Champlain and his people direct to France, that could not be done, but they would give them passage to England, and from there to France, whereby they would avoid being again taken by any English cruiser on their route. For the sauvagesses, that clause could not be granted, for reasons which would be explained. As to leaving with arms andbaggage, the officers might take with them their arms, clothes, and peltries belonging to them, and the soldiers might have their clothes and a beaver robe each. As for the holy fathers, they must be contented with their robes and books."L. Kirke."Thomas Kirke."The said articles granted to Champlain and Du Pont, I accept and ratify them, and I promise that they shall be executed from point to point. Done at Tadousac, August 19th (new style), 1629."David Kirke."

"That a vessel should be provided to convey Champlain, his companions, the missionaries, both Jesuits and Récollets, the two Indian girls that had been given to him two years before, and all other persons, to France.

"That the religious and other people should be allowed to leave with arms and baggage, and all their furniture, and that a sufficient supply of provisions for the passage to France should be granted in exchange for peltry, etc.

"That all should have the most favourable treatment possible, without violence to any.

"That the ship in which they were to embark for France should be ready in three days after their arrival at Tadousac, and a vessel provided for the transport of their goods, etc., to that place."

These articles were signed by Champlain and Pont-Gravé. After having read them Louis Kirke sent this answer: "That Kirke's commission should be shown and his powers to his brothers for trading purposes. As to providing a vessel to take Champlain and his people direct to France, that could not be done, but they would give them passage to England, and from there to France, whereby they would avoid being again taken by any English cruiser on their route. For the sauvagesses, that clause could not be granted, for reasons which would be explained. As to leaving with arms andbaggage, the officers might take with them their arms, clothes, and peltries belonging to them, and the soldiers might have their clothes and a beaver robe each. As for the holy fathers, they must be contented with their robes and books.

"L. Kirke."Thomas Kirke.

"The said articles granted to Champlain and Du Pont, I accept and ratify them, and I promise that they shall be executed from point to point. Done at Tadousac, August 19th (new style), 1629.

"David Kirke."

The clause forbidding the soldiers to take their arms, coats and peltry, excepting a castor robe, was a severe trial to them, as many of them had bought skins from the Hurons to the extent of seven to eight hundred francs, and preferred to fight rather than lose their fortune.

Champlain had agreed to capitulate without firing. Some openly reproached Champlain, saying that it was not the fear of death that actuated his course, but rather the loss of the thousand livres, which the English had agreed to give him if he abandoned Quebec without striking a blow.

Champlain was informed of all the murmurs and discontent which were expressed amongst his people by a young Greek, who was charged to inform him that they did not wish to surrender, and even if they lost their fort, they desired to prove to the English that they were full of courage. Champlainwas annoyed at these exhibitions of insubordination, and he instructed the Greek to give the people this answer:—"You are badly advised and unwise. How can you desire resistance when we have no provisions, no ammunition, or any prospect of relief? Are you tired of living, or do you expect to be victorious under such circumstances? Obey those who desire your safety and who do nothing without prudence."

Brother Sagard makes these remarks upon the condition of affairs:—"It is true that there was a great scarcity of all things necessary for the habitation, but the enemy, too, were weak, as Father Joseph perceived after having examined the whole crew, which consisted of about two hundred soldiers, for the most part, men who had never touched a musket, and who could have been killed as ducks or who would have run away. Moreover they were in a wretched condition, and of a low order. The weather was favourable to the French, as the tide was low, and the wind from the south-east was driving the vessels towards France, so that there was no assurance for either the vessels or the barques. Champlain, however, deemed it more expedient to surrender than to run the risk of his own life or of being made a prisoner while defending a fort so badly armed."

If, as the veracious Brother Sagard says, the fort and the habitation were distressed, it is not proved that the English could be easily defeated. Therewere at Quebec only fifty men capable of bearing arms, and only a small quantity of gunpowder in store, while provisions were absolutely wanting. How was it possible to sustain a siege without ammunition, without bread and without soldiers?

On the enemy's side there were two vessels well equipped, and two hundred men. If the men were desperate or wretched, they would be the more dangerous. Even supposing that the two vessels had proved insufficient for a protracted siege, the four vessels at the disposal of David Kirke would have surely come to their assistance.

It would have been a foolish act to have resisted such a powerful enemy. Besides, Champlain had another foe to contend against, for Nicholas Marsolet, Étienne Brûlé, Pierre Reye, and others, had betrayed him, and were leagued with Kirke. Champlain understood the difficulties of his position, and his responsibilities, for he had in his hands the lives of one hundred persons.

Of the eighty persons living in Quebec at this time, only two-thirds had private interests to safeguard, and it was a matter of indifference to them whether they remained in Canada or whether they returned to France. The families who had nothing to gain by leaving Quebec were those who deserved the governor's sympathy, and it was for their safety that Champlain would not agree to offer resistance, as the result must have proved disastrous to them. By the articles of capitulation these families wouldbe able to live quietly at home, awaiting the issue of negotiations.

On the day following the preliminaries, Champlain went on board Louis Kirke's vessel, where he was to see the commission of Charles I, which empowered the Kirke brothers to take Quebec and the whole country by assault. Both parties then signed the articles of capitulation, and the English troops, conducted by Champlain, came in shallops near to the habitation. The keys were delivered to Louis Kirke, and then they all proceeded to the fort, which was delivered to the admiral. Quebec was definitely put under the authority of the English, who had not fired a single shot. Louis Kirke placed Le Baillif, who had been dismissed by Guillaume de Caën for his bad conduct, in charge of the storehouse. This was the first reward for his treason. Champlain asked the English commander to protect the chapel of Quebec, the convents, and the houses of the widow of Louis Hébert and of her son-in-law, Guillaume Couillard, and he offered him the keys of his own room within the fort. Louis Kirke refused to accept the latter, and left Champlain in possession of his room. This courteous action was followed by another one, when Kirke delivered to Champlain a certificate of all that he had found within the fort and the habitation. This document was found useful later on, when it was necessary to settle the value of the goods.

In the meantime the English crew robbed the convent of the Jesuits, but they did not find the beaver skins, as they expected. Kirke and the Lutheran minister took for their own use the nicest volumes of the library, and three or four pictures. The Récollets had filled a leather bag with the ornaments of their church, and had hidden it underground, far in the woods, thinking that they might return sooner or later.

On the Sunday following the capitulation, July 22nd, Louis Kirke hoisted the English flag over one of the bastions of the fort, and in order to render the official possession of Quebec more imposing, he placed his soldiers in ranks along the ramparts, and at a precise hour a volley was fired from English muskets. In the afternoon, Champlain, the Jesuits, and the greater number of the French took passage on theFlibotfor Tadousac, leaving behind the families of Couillard, Martin, Desportes, Hébert, Hubou, Pivert, Duchesne the surgeon, some interpreters and clerks, and Pont-Gravé who was too sick to leave his room. It was understood that all those who desired to return to France should start on the day fixed by Kirke.

The fate of the colony was thus decided. Those who had any authority, by reason of their character or their official mission, were compelled to leave. The others were at liberty to remain, especially the interpreters, who would be useful in trading withthe Indians. Before Champlain's departure, some had taken his advice. Would they remain in Quebec under a new régime, with nothing to hope for? Who was this victorious Kirke, so captivating in appearance? Perhaps a lion clothed with the skin of a lamb! They knew the Kirke brothers had been guilty of burning the habitation at Cape Tourmente. Knowing that they were Protestants, they could not expect sympathy on the score of religion. A danger existed from every point of view. Nevertheless, Champlain advised many of them to remain at Quebec in order to save their property. The only objection was that they would be obliged to observe their religion for an indefinite time without the ministrations of their priests.

Three years were to elapse before a French vessel again appeared at Quebec, with authority to hoist the white flag of France. Champlain's advice was not prejudicial to any one, at least not in temporal matters. This small nucleus became the great tree whose branches and leaves extend to-day over the whole American continent. If France had seen the complete depopulation of Canada, perhaps the king would not have made the same efforts to have his colony restored. Champlain himself, in spite of his great zeal and his love for the country which he had founded, had been discouraged by the difficulties. He could foresee better than any other the obstacles which the future would present, and it caused him much uneasiness, and offered little consolation. Athis age most men would have preferred to rest after an agitated life of thirty years, in the pursuit of an idea which it seemed impossible to realize on account of the manifold difficulties by which it was constantly beset.

"Sincethe English have taken possession of Quebec," writes Champlain, "the days have seemed to me as long as months." This dreariness is easily explained. The unsettled state of affairs, of which he was an eye-witness, had rendered his life at Quebec intolerable. Louis Kirke, however, treated him with respect and courtesy, and had given him permission to bring to Tadousac his two adopted girls, Espérance and Charité. It was a favour wholly unexpected, especially as by one of the clauses of the act of capitulation he renounced claim to them. Champlain, however, was ready to buy their liberty, if necessary, as he wished to civilize them and convert them to Christianity. Having no desire to stay longer in a place where even the beauties of the sunset seemed to remind him of his humiliation, Champlain only resided temporarily at Tadousac, and was anxious to reach France. He left Quebec on July 24th, and on the following day he perceived a vessel sailing near Murray Bay. This was Emery de Caën's ship, which, as we have already stated, was proceeding to Quebec to claim the peltry in the storehouse which belonged to his uncle. This vessel, as hasbeen described, was captured by Kirke, and the same fate happened to Captain Daniel, who had crossed the ocean from Dieppe with four vessels and a barque laden with provisions and ammunition. Having heard on the passage that a Scottish fisherman named James Stuart, had erected a fort on Cape Breton, in a place called Port-aux-Baleines, to protect his countrymen during the fishing season, Daniel went out of his way to destroy this fort, and to build one at Grand Cibou to check the intruders, instead of proceeding directly to Quebec, as was his duty. He left at this place forty men and two Jesuits, Father Vimont and Father de Vieux-Pont, and then having set up the arms of France, he returned to his country without having taken any care of the Quebec habitation. This was his first fault, but nevertheless it was a great misfortune.

The Jesuits had prepared at a great expense a shipment for Quebec. Father Noyrot brought with him Father Charles Lalemant, who was returning after an absence of nearly two years, Father de Vieux-Pont, Brother Louis Malot and twenty-four persons. Driven by a terrible storm, their barque was wrecked near the Island of Canseau. Fourteen were drowned, including Father Noyrot and Brother Malot. The others miraculously escaped.

The Chevalier de Razilly was finally ordered to assist Quebec, but it was found that an agreement had been concluded between France and Englandon April 24th. Razilly had his commission cancelled and proceeded to Morocco.

The failure of these three expeditions, together with that of Emery de Caën, occurring at the same time under unfortunate circumstances, resulted in the loss of the colony for France, and won at least temporary prestige and importance for the Kirke family.

Champlain relates some remarkable events during his sojourn at Tadousac. Religious fanaticism displayed itself in its worst form. The French had with them Father de Brébeuf, who was quite competent and willing to champion the cause of the Catholic faith, and especially when assailed by his own countrymen. A French Huguenot, named Jacques Michel, apparently headed a crusade against the Jesuits. One day Michel said to a party that the Jesuits had come to Canada to annoy the Sieurs de Caën in their trade. "I beg your pardon," replied the father, "we had no other design in coming here than the glory of God and the conversion of the savages." To which Jacques Michel answered still more audaciously: "Yes, convert the savages, say rather, convert the beavers." "It is false," replied the priest, somewhat vexed. Michel, who was angry, raised his arm to strike the father, at the same time saying, "If I were not restrained by the respect due to my chief, I would slap your face for your denial." "I ask your pardon," said the father, "it was not in my mind to injure you, and if my answer hasvexed you, I regret it." Michel was not satisfied and began to blaspheme, so that Champlain was scandalized, and said: "You swear much for a Reformer." "It is true," replied the Huguenot, "but I am furious against this Jesuit for his denial, and if I hang to-morrow I will give him the blows he deserves." During the day, however, Michel drank heavily and was attacked by apoplexy, from which he died thirty-five hours later, without exhibiting any signs of repentance.

The commander Kirke appears to have acted somewhat strangely on this occasion, for instead of having Michel quietly buried, he ordered a splendid funeral, accompanied with military honours. When the remains were lowered into the grave, a salute of eighty guns was fired, as if the deceased had been an officer of high rank. Whatever may have been the reasons for showing these tokens of honour to the remains of Michel, we know not, but the savages seem to have resented the proceedings, for they unearthed his body and gave it to the dogs. Michel had been a traitor to his country and to his God, and this was the method of his punishment.

We have already mentioned the names of the Frenchmen who betrayed Champlain, particularly Étienne Brûlé, Le Baillif, Pierre Reye and Marsolet. Let us examine their conduct. Étienne Brûlé, in his capacity of interpreter, had rendered many good services to his compatriots. Unfortunately, his private actions while dwelling with the Huronswere not above reproach, and he would certainly have been compelled to expiate his offences had he not been adopted as one of their family. Brûlé worked for the benefit of the Hurons, and their gratitude towards a good officer perhaps outweighed their memory of an injury. On retiring from the Huron country in 1629, Brûlé went to Tadousac, where he entered the service of Kirke, and some years after he was killed by a savage.

Marsolet's case is nearly identical with that of Brûlé, although it is not proved that he was as licentious during the time that he lived with the Algonquins. He and Brûlé asserted that they were compelled by Kirke to serve under the British flag. Champlain severely blamed their conduct, saying: "Remember that God will punish you if you do not amend your lives. You have lost your honour. Wherever you will go, men will point at you, saying: 'These are the men who have threatened their king and sold their country.' It would be preferable to die than to live on in this manner, as you will suffer the remorse of a bad conscience." To this they replied: "We well know that in France we should be hanged. We are sorry for what has happened, but it is done and we must drain the cup to the bottom, and resolve never to return to France." Champlain answered them: "If you are captured anywhere, you will run the risk of being chastised as you deserve."

Nicholas Marsolet became a good citizen, and hisfamily alliances were the most honourable. Pierre Reye, a carriage maker, was a bad character, "One of the worst traitors, and wicked." His treason did not surprise any one, and nothing better was expected of him. Le Baillif was not only vicious, but a thief. On the night after the seizure by Kirke of the goods in store, he took from the room of Corneille de Vendremur, a clerk, one hundred livres in gold and money, a silver cup and some silk stockings. He was suspected of having stolen from the chapel of the Lower Town, a silver chalice, the gift of Anne of Austria. Though he was a Catholic, Le Baillif ate food on days of abstinence, in order to please the Protestants. He treated the French as if they were dogs. "I shall abandon him," says Champlain, "to his fate, awaiting the day of his punishment for his swearings, cursings and impieties."

The treachery of these four men greatly affected Champlain, who was at a loss to understand how those to whom he had given food and shelter could be so ungrateful; but their conduct, however reprehensible, played no part in the loss of the colony. Kirke employed them to further his purposes without giving them any substantial reward.

The sojourn of the French in Tadousac lasted many weeks, and the delay caused Champlain much annoyance. David Kirke spent ten or twelve days on his visit to Quebec, where he wanted to see for himself how his brother Louis had disposed ofeverything, and what advantage he was likely to gain from the acquisition of the new country. Believing himself to be the supreme ruler and master of New France, he outlined a brilliant future for the colony, looking forward to the day when he could bring settlers to take advantage of its natural resources.

Returning to Tadousac, the general invited his captains to a dinner, at which Champlain was also a guest. The dinner was served in a tent surrounded with branches. Towards the end of the banquet David Kirke gave Champlain a letter from Marsolet to inform him that the chief savages, gathered at Three Rivers in council, had resolved to keep with them the two girls, Espérance and Charité. This was a severe trial to Champlain, who had hoped to be able to take them to France. All his efforts, however, were useless, as there was a plot organized by the traitor Marsolet. These children loved Champlain as a father, and were inconsolable when they realized that their departure for France was impossible.

Champlain relates many things that do not redound to Kirke's credit, amongst other things that Kirke blamed his brother Louis for giving the Jesuits permission to say mass, and afterwards refused the permission. Again, at the moment when the Jesuits embarked for Tadousac, Louis Kirke ordered a trunk to be opened in which the sacred vessels were contained. Seeing a box which contained a chalice Kirketried to seize it, but Father Massé interfered, and said to him: "This is a sacred object, do not profane it, if you please." "Why," said Kirke, "we have no faith in your superstition," and so saying he took the chalice in his hands, braving the Jesuit's advice. The Catholics were also denied the privilege of praying in public. This intolerant action was condemned by Champlain. During their stay at Tadousac Champlain and the admiral went out shooting. They killed more than two thousand larks, plovers, snipes and curlews. In the meantime the sailors had cut trees for masts, and some birch which they took to England. They also carried with them four thousand five hundred and forty beaver skins, one thousand seven hundred and thirteen others seized at Quebec, and four hundred and thirty-two elk skins. The French had not given up all their skins; some had hidden a good many, and others kept them with Kirke's consent. The Récollets and the Jesuits were returning poorer than when they came. Champlain alone was allowed to retain all his baggage. At the commencement of September the admiral fitted out a medium sized barque with provisions for Quebec, with instructions to bring back the Récollets who were scattered throughout the country, and also some of the French who had intended to remain at Quebec and other places.

On September 14th the English fleet set out carrying Champlain, the Jesuits, the Récollets, and two-thirds of the French, that is to say, nearly thewhole of the colony. The passage was short though difficult, and eleven of the crew died from dysentery. On October 20th the vessels reached Plymouth, where Kirke was much disappointed to learn that the treaty of peace signed on April 24th had been confirmed on September 16th. All the French, except Champlain, took passage for France at Dover. Champlain proceeded directly to London, where he met the French ambassador, M. de Chateauneuf, and related to him the events which had taken place in Canada, and urged him to take steps for its restoration to France.

The fathers disembarked at Calais at the end of October. Father Massé returned to his former position of minister at the college of La Flèche. Father Anne de Noüe went to Bourges. Father de Brébeuf entered the college of Rouen, where he had laboured previously, and three other Jesuits whom we find afterwards in Canada, Father Charles Lalemant, Father Jogues and Father Simon Lemoyne, were at that time professors in this college. Father Massé and Father de Brébeuf were soon to resume their ministration in this country, which they were forced to abandon at a time when they had hoped to see the realization of their noble mission. L'Abbé Faillon has written that the family of Hébert alone remained at Quebec after the surrender, but this is incorrect. The truth is that at least five families remained in Quebec. It was God's will that the most prominent and influential menshould leave for France, but He also ordained that a few heroic settlers or possessors of New France should remain. If their remaining was favourable to France Champlain deserves the credit, for he did more than any of his countrymen to bring it about. The population of Quebec or of the whole colony in July, 1629, was divided as follows:—Inhabitants, twenty-three; interpreters, eleven; clerks, fourteen; missionaries, ten; domestics, seven; French, arrived from the Huron country, twenty. This makes a total number of eighty-five persons.

The following persons remained at Quebec:—Guillaume Hubou and his wife, Marie Rollet, widow of Louis Hébert; Guillaume Hébert; Guillaume Couillard, and his wife Guillemette Hébert, and their three children; Abraham Martin, and his wife, Marguerite Langlois, and their three children; Pierre Desportes, and his wife, Françoise Langlois, and their daughter Hélène; Nicholas Pivert, his wife, Marguerite Lesage, and their niece; Adrien Duchesne and his wife; Jean Foucher, Étienne Brûlé, Nicholas Marsolet, Le Baillif, Pierre Reye, Olivier Le Tardif. The missionaries who returned to France were: Three Jesuits, two Récollets, two Brothers Jesuits and three Brothers Récollets, ten in all. Their names were: Fathers Jesuits Enemond Massé, Anne de Noüe and Jean de Brébeuf, Fathers Récollets Joseph de la Roche d'Aillon, and Joseph Le Caron, Brothers Jesuits François Charton and Gilbert Burel, and the Récollet Friars Gervais Mohier,Jean Gaufestre and Pierre Langoissieux. Among the clerks who returned home were Corneille de Vendremur, Thierry-Desdames, Eustache Boullé, and Destouches.

Since the year 1608 there had been only seven births, three marriages, and forty deaths. One man had been hanged, six had been murdered, and three drowned. A Récollet father, called Nicholas Viel, had perished in the Sault au Récollet; and there had been sixteen victims of the scurvy.

Throughthe exertions of Champlain negotiations were soon entered into for the purpose of restoring the colony of New France to the French. Champlain had visited the French ambassador, M. de Chateauneuf, when in London, and had laid before him a statement of the events which had recently taken place, together with the treaty of capitulation and a map of New France, so far as it was explored. According to Champlain, the country comprised all the lands which Linschot thus describes: "This part of America which extends to the Arctic pole northward, is called New France, because Jean Verazzano, a Florentine, having been sent by King François I to these quarters, discovered nearly all the coast, beginning from the Tropic of Cancer to the fiftieth degree, and still more northerly, arboring arms and flags of France; for that reason the said country is called New France."

Champlain was not quarrelling with the English for the Virgines, although this country had been occupied by the French eighty years before, and they had also discovered all the American coast, from the river St. John to the peninsula of Florida.No one can deny that Champlain had given names to the rivers and harbours of New England as far as Cape Cod, about the fortieth degree of latitude.

After having spent about five weeks with the ambassador in furnishing him with information to guide him in his negotiations with the English authorities, Champlain resolved to visit France, as he had a reasonable hope of seeing his designs accomplished. He left London on November 20th, and embarked at Rye, in Sussex, for Dieppe. Here he met Captain Daniel, who had just returned from his expedition to Canada, and it was here also that he received his commission of governor of New France, which had been forwarded by the directors of the Company of New France.

Champlain paid a visit to Rouen, and then went to Paris, where he had interviews with the king, with the cardinal, and some of the associates of the company. A prominent topic of discussion was, naturally, the loss of New France, and the best means of recovering it. Champlain's ideas were excellent, and he did his best to have them acknowledged and agreed to by all those who were interested in the fate of New France.

Events progressed favourably, and Champlain was pleased to learn that Doctor Daniel had been sent to London with letters for King Charles I. Louis XIII demanded the restoration of the fort and habitation of Quebec, and the forts and harbours of the Acadian coast, for the reason that they had beencaptured after peace had been concluded between the two countries. Doctor Daniel returned to France, bearing despatches by which Charles I answered that he was ready to restore Quebec, but no mention was made of Acadia. The directors of the company immediately ordered Commander de Razilly to equip a fleet, and, as we have already stated, to take possession of Quebec by force or otherwise.

The Hundred Associates subscribed sixteen thousand livres for the freighting of the vessels, and the king granted the balance of the expenses. The news of these extraordinary war-like preparations caused alarm in London, but the French ambassador stated that these vessels were not being sent to trouble or disturb any of the English settlers who had taken possession of the French habitations. This explanation relieved the public mind in England, and Charles I promised to give back to France its ancient possessions in America, as they were on April 24th, 1629, the date of the signing of the Treaty of Suze. In justice to England it may be said that two English vessels were seized by the French at about the same time that Kirke had forced Champlain to surrender. There was, therefore, illegal action on both sides, and both countries had claims to be regulated.

The English would have preferred to have retained possession of Canada, at least until the following year, as the Kirke brothers and their associates hoped to be able to realize considerable sums from theirtrade with the Indians. This condition of affairs is explained in a letter addressed by Cardinal Richelieu to Chateauneuf, on December 20th, 1629: "They assure us that they cannot restore Canada at once; this is the reason for our delay in restoring these vessels." And he adds: "If they agree to the restitution of Quebec without any condition, you shall take it for granted, if not, it is better to put a delay to the settlement."

It is obvious that Charles I had twice promised to restore Quebec, and when Chateauneuf retired from his position of ambassador in the month of April, 1630, he had obtained "every assurance of restitution of all things taken since the peace." The Marquis of Fontenay-Mareuil, who succeeded Chateauneuf on March 13th, received special instructions from the cardinal on this subject: "His Majesty's design is that, continuing the negotiations of Chateauneuf, you continue to ask for the restitution of Canada, and of all goods and vessels taken from the French since the peace."

The new ambassador could not urge the claims of France with greater activity than his predecessor. During the space of two months, Chateauneuf had prepared five documents relating to Canadian affairs, to which the commissioners appointed to settle the matter had replied on February 11th. These officials were Sir Humphrey May, Sir John Coke, Sir Julius Cæsar, and Sir Henry Martin. Their conclusion regarding Canada was that His Majesty had notchanged his mind concerning the restoration of places, vessels and goods taken from the French, according to the first declaration he had made through a memorandum in Latin, communicated some time since to the French ambassador.

Louis XIII was at this time engaged in war with Austria, and Richelieu was too busy to attend to Canadian matters, which were of less importance than the European questions which occupied his time. Interior dissensions were soon added to the trouble which France had to undergo. Gaston, the king's brother, was compromised, and the Duke of Montmorency, who took part in a plot against the king, was seized and put to death.

The negotiations commenced in 1629 were not resumed until 1632. In the meantime the English authorities had not been idle. Charles I had not forgotten his promise, and even if he had, there were men in France who had a good memory. On June 12th, 1631, Charles I addressed a long letter to Sir Isaac Wake, ambassador to France, respecting the restitution of Quebec and Acadia. The terms were as follows:—

"That which we require, which is the payment of the remainder of the money, the restitution of certain ships taken and kept without any colour or pretence, and the taking of arrests and seizures which were made in that kingdom against our subjects contrary to treaty, being of right and due. And that which is demanded of us concerning theplaces in Canada and those parts, and some few ships of that nation (French) which remained yet unrestored, but have passed sentence of confiscation in our high Court of Admiralty upon good grounds in justice, being things of courtesy and good correspondence."

According to her marriage settlement the Queen Henrietta possessed a dowry of eight hundred thousand crowns, equivalent to eight hundred thousand écus de trois livres, French currency. The half of that sum had been made payable on the day before the marriage in London, and the other half a little later. The marriage took place on June 13th, 1625, and the first instalment was then paid. In the year 1631 the second instalment had not been paid, and Charles I claimed it as one of the conditions of settlement.

Some historians have stated that the king took this opportunity to have a money question solved. If, however, the debt was legitimate, France was obliged to pay it, and the difficulties that had occurred in the meantime had nothing to do with the deed of marriage upon which the claim was based. Chateauneuf had promised to pay the claim. Unless, therefore, there was any doubt as to the right of the king to claim the sum, it is difficult to understand why the king should be blamed.

In his letter to his ambassador at Paris Charles I alludes to documents exchanged between Chateauneuf and Fontenay-Mareuil on the one side, and thelords commissioners appointed to give a ruling. In this document it is noticed that Guillaume de Caën had discussed with Kirke the value of the goods and peltry that had been taken out of the stores at Quebec. They disagreed both as to the number and value. De Caën claimed four thousand two hundred and sixty-six beaver skins which had been captured by Kirke, while Kirke pretended to have found only one thousand seven hundred and thirteen, and that the balance of his cargo, four thousand skins, was the result of trade with the Indians.

According to the books of the English company, Kirke had bought four thousand five hundred and forty beaver skins, four hundred and thirty-two elk skins, and had found in the stores one thousand seven hundred and thirteen beaver skins. The difference in the calculation is due to the fact that the English only mentioned the beaver skins registered in their books, and the French included all the skins which belonged to them when the fort surrendered, making no mention of those that they had taken out of the fort with the permission of the English. Guillaume de Caën valued each skin at twelve pounds ten shillings, and Burlamachi had written from Metz to representatives of the English company, that he had been compelled to accept de Caën's estimates, as under the terms of an Act of Private Council, he was bound to make them good. The king had promised to reimburse de Caën for his losses by the payment of the sum of fourteenthousand three hundred and thirty pounds, of which eight thousand two hundred and seventy pounds were for his peltry and goods, and six thousand and sixty pounds for the vessels which had been captured. David Kirke strongly opposed the payment of this sum on the ground that it was excessive, but the king through his councillors ordered the payment to be made.

Back to Index Next