It was a momentous occasion. It was looked upon as the triumph of civilization and Christianity over barbarism and paganism. Montreal, so long the beleaguered outpost, the scene of many a bloody onslaught and carnage, was fittingly the arena of the joyous peace celebrations of that evening of August 14, 1701, heralding brighter days for the colony.

In the meantime, while the Indians were gathering at Montreal for the conclusion of the peace, a body of fifty regular soldiers and fifty Canadians left Lachine on June 1, 1701, under the command of Antoine de la Motte-Cardillac and accompanied by Capt. Alphonse de Tonti, the younger brother of Henri de Tonti, and the Lieutenants Dugué and Chacornelle. Not to draw the attention of the Iroquois, the expedition ascended the Ottawa River, entered Lake Huron and thence proceeded to Détroit to the new fort of Pontchartrain (or Détroit) rapidly rising and situated on the strait (Détroit) between Lakes Erie and Huron.

The establishment of this fort was the great desire of la Motte-Cardillac, for he deemed it of utmost importance and had obtained the permission from the secretary of the marine, Jérome Count de Pontchartrain. It secured the communications of the colony with the countries of the Miamis and the Illinois, and thence with Louisiana by the Mississippi. It was the key of the three upper lakes, a most desirable possession for the French. Moreover the climate of the strait was pleasant, the air healthful, the soil excellent and fruitful, and the hunting good. Incidentally the commandant saw an opportunity of enriching himself. But, to make such a settlement profitable, it was necessary to induce the Indians to settle there. At the congress of Montreal, the Governor de Callières, who had at first been hostile to the settlement of Détroit, as he feared with others like Champigny that it would be the ruin of Michillimackinac, invited the Hurons and Ottawas of Michillimackinac then present to change over to the new fort, and finally many of them did so. Thus was born the germ of the present Détroit.

Its founder was a familiar figure in Montreal. Antoine de la Motte-Cardillac belonged to a good family of Languedoc. At first a cadet in the regiment of Dampierre-Lorraine, then lieutenant in that of Clairembault, he passed over into Canada about 1683, desirous of making his fortune, being then not more than twenty-three years of age. His ready wit, intelligence, active ambition and never failing humour soon saw him advanced to a lieutenancy in the colonial troops, then to the rank of ensign of the navy and captain of the troops. Being a thorough Gascon, he gained the confidence of Frontenac, especially as he had no great love for the clergy, particularly the Jesuits. He was a railler, a skeptic and a critic of religion and morality, but knew how to play the game to suit his interests. He had undoubted ability and he acted as the ready tool of Frontenac. On September 16, 1694, he became the governor of Michillimackinac following Durantaye, and de Louvigny de la Port. His reign there was marked with the abuses prevalent among the trading posts of the period, where private commerce and self-interest among the soldiers were of more importance than the good of the natives or the development of the country. His frequent mêlées with the Jesuits, about whom he related contrary accusations of self-interested trading, brought it about that the French court determined to abandon Michillimackinac and when the order was rescinded, La Motte was so chagrined that finding it no longer likely to serve his interests, he refused to return there, being replaced by Alphonse de Tonti. Instead, he went to France to justify himself and to push the establishment of Fort Pontchartrain or Détroit as narrated, for he considered that wealth was in store for Détroit if the fur trade was restricted to it as he desired. This was likely to happen, for the policy of concentration was then in the ascendant, it being intended that the trade should seek the cities, while the western posts were being discouraged. Eventually the new trading company, which had been founded in October by the habitants of the colony for the exploitation of the beaver traffic and had most of the principal men as its shareholders, among them being many Montrealers who desired to concentrate the peltry trade towards Montreal, was restricted to Forts Frontenac and Détroit of the western forts. Finally, owing to trouble with the directors of the company, whom he bitterly accused of no desire but for gain, so that the fields were not sown and the cattle were destroyed, Détroit was handed over to Cardillac as commandant. But his ambitions were clipped, for by the ordinances of June, 1706, he could not trade in castors to more than fifteen to twenty thousand livres a year, so as not to increase the number of beaver skins, with which the company was already overloaded. He was forbidden, moreover, to trade except in his fort. His voluminous letters of this period are full of complaints against the Jesuits, the company and the head of the government. Thus Détroit struggled through a critical infancy but was gaining strength so that it had reached 200 souls, when its founder, [160] by letters of May 10, 1710, was appointed governor of Louisiana to succeed de Bienville.

On the first day of January, 1700, Marguerite Bourgeoys, now in her eightieth year, passed into her agony and on the 12th breathed her last, surrounded by the community she had founded and whose rule of life had at last been approved by Bishop St. Vallier on June 24, 1696. The funeral, which took place on January 13th in the parish church, was attended by all classes of Montreal from the governor general down to the simplest habitant, for she had been looked upon as the universal mother of the community. The vicar general of the diocese and the superior of the seminary, the aged Dollier de Casson, now bent under the weight of fourscore years of life and labours, pronounced the funeral oration. On the tablet of steel placed on the coffin, the epitaph ordered by him read as follows:

Here lies Sister Marguerite Bourgeoys, Teacher,
Founder and First Superior of the Congregation of
Notre-Dame, established in the Island of Montreal
for the instruction of girls in town or country,
Deceased on the 12th of January, 1700.
Pray for the repose of her soul!

Thirty days after the death of Marguerite Bourgeoys a solemn requiem was chanted in the Congregation Church and an eloquent panegyric was delivered by M. de Belmont. After mass the preacher carried the heart of the deceased founder, embalmed in a leaden box, to a shrine prepared in a niche, and solemnly blessed the resting place and then closed the opening with a leaden slab, over which lay a copper tablet, bearing the following lines in French:

Then her daughters hung her portrait over the shrine. For sixty-eight years the sacred relics remained there until a fire broke out in the church and convent of the congregation on April 11, 1768, when the ashes were recovered and placed in a silver box that is still preserved. The memory of the saintly life of Mother Bourgeoys remained long in the land. On December 7, 1878, in the opening years of the pontificate of Leo XIII, a decree of the Sacred Congregation of Rites, at Rome, pronounced Marguerite Bourgeoys, Venerable. The title of "Blessed" was pronounced by Pius X. Her daughters look forward to the day when she may be invoked by them as St. Margaret of Canada.

Thus passed away one of the earliest figures of the infant colony of Montreal. We may aptly quote Parkman's tribute to this saintly woman: "To this day in crowded schoolrooms of Montreal and Quebec, [162] fit monuments of her unobtrusive virtue, her successors instruct the children of the poor, and embalm the pleasant memories of Margaret Bourgeois. In the martial figure of Maisonneuve and the fair form of this gentle nun, we find the true heroes of Montreal." (Jesuits, p. 202.)

CHAPTER XXXIII

The peace of Ryswick, signed September 20, 1697, was only a temporary lull. Queen Anne began to reign in England on March 8, 1702, and another war with France, that known as Queen Anne's war or the war of the Spanish succession, was declared on the 4th of May, 1702. But it can be said that in Canada the English were not always the guilty causes. The Canadians, even before the declaration, were not adverse to war, as they considered themselves more warlike, better disciplined and could rely on their Indian allies since the peace of 1701. They held the "New Englanders"—a term often applied by them to the British colonists in general—as an easy mark. In their mind's eye they already saw themselves in possession of Boston and New York. Even Le Moyne d'Iberville had such visions and drew up a memoir on the project. On their side the greater number of the English colonists were not anxious for hostilities. Certainly not the New York and Albany Dutchmen, who feared for their trade. Meanwhile the borders of Massachusetts and New Hampshire were the theatre of war. An interesting light is thrown on the subject in the abstract of a dispatch, sent by M. de Vaudreuil, now governor, and M. Beauharnois, November 15, 1703, to be found in the state documents of New York (Doc. Col. Hist. N. Y., IX, p. 755). The minister, Pontchartrain, after the French attack on Wells and other places under Beaubassin, in 1703, has annotated the abstract thus: "It would have been desirable that this expedition had not taken place. M. de Vaudreuil was wishing for it in M. de Callières' time, who would never consent to it. I have a perfect knowledge that the English only want peace, aware that war is contrary to the interests of all the colonies; the French have always commenced hostilities in Canada." Yet Pontchartrain later, when the suffering English retaliated by planning the invasion of Canada, naturally enough was ready to counsel war parties against them.

In 1705 we find Samuel Vetch in Montreal. He had come on a diplomatic mission on the part of Massachusetts. He remained at Quebec from August to the middle of October, having ascended the St. Lawrence to reach the city and returning the same way. He kept his eyes open, and having been educated at Utrecht, he probably knew French, so that he likely discussed Canadian affairs. He boasted afterwards of the completeness of his knowledge of Canada and he made use of it. "Vetch visited Montreal and its governor, de Ramezay, wrote to the minister on the subject, complaining that in Quebec he had been left at liberty to obtain all the information desired; whereas in Montreal, de Ramezay himself had taken care that he should always be accompanied by an officer and an interpreter. There had been old dealings between Vetch and de Ramezay. Vetch, when engaged in his commercial operations for years previously, had advanced de Ramezay the amount of his appointments, paying him in card currency, and had received authority to draw his money in France. The war broke out and the power to obtain the money had been given by de Ramezay to another person in France. It was the object of Vetch in visiting Montreal to be repaid this advance, but de Ramezay professed himself not in the condition to give it back, without the approval of the minister."—Kingsford ("History of Canada"), II, p. 429.

About 1708 the conquest of Canada was designed as a means of bringing the struggles of the English colonists of North America in their desire for supremacy to a close. To the charge of this bold venture Samuel Vetch was appointed, an energetic, astute and ambitious agent for his party, who boasted he knew the St. Lawrence and its shores better than the Canadians themselves. His visit to Montreal had not been in vain. On March 11, 1709, he sailed from England, whither he had gone from the general court of Massachusetts to ask for aid from Queen Anne's government. A squadron bearing five regiments of regular troops was promised. The colonies, too, had to muster their forces, and the plan was to attack Montreal, advancing by way of Wood Creek, Lake Champlain and Chambly on the Richelieu, and to take Quebec by way of the St. Lawrence. The command of the advance on Montreal was entrusted to Col. Francis Nicholson, late lieutenant governor of New York, who had sailed from Portsmouth with Vetch. Nicholson was to proceed to Montreal and wait there until the promised British squadron should arrive at Boston about May.

News of his approach to Wood Creek reaching de Vaudreuil, he sent de Ramezay, the governor of Montreal, with 1,500 Canadians and Indians to surprise his camp. Montreal and Quebec were meanwhile in the greatest consternation, brought on by most exaggerated reports. Nothing less than the total conquest of the colony was feared. The result of the expedition led by the governor of Montreal may be told by Parkman ("A Half Century of Conflict," Chapter VII), relying on state documents of this year, 1709:

"Ramezay's fleet of canoes had reached Lake Champlain and was half way to the mouth of Wood Creek, when his advance party was discovered by English scouts, and the French commander began to fear that he should be surprised in turn; in fact some of his Indians were fired upon from an ambuscade. All was now doubt, perplexity and confusion. Ramezay landed at the narrows of the lake, a little south of the place now called Crown Point. Here in the dense woods, his Indians fired on some Canadians whom they took for English. This was near producing a panic. 'Every tree seemed an enemy,' writes an officer present. Ramezay lost himself in the woods and could not find his army. One Deruisseau, who had gone out as a scout, came back with the report that 900 Englishmen were close at hand. Seven English canoes did in fact appear, supported, as the French in their excitement imagined, by a numerous though invisible army in the forest; but being fired upon, and seeing they were entering a hornet's nest, the English sheered off, Ramezay having at last found his army, and order being gradually restored, a council of war was held, after which the whole force fell back to Chambly, having accomplished nothing."

Yet the advance on Montreal never went beyond Wood Creek. While waiting months and weeks for the order from Boston to proceed to Montreal, Nicholson's little army succumbed to the attacks of pestilence, probably a malignant dysentery, caused by being long penned up in an insanitary palisaded camp during the midsummer heat. It is said on the authority of Charlevoix, that the Iroquois had poisoned the waters of the creek, by throwing into it, above the camp, the skins and offal of the animals they had killed in their hunting. Whatever the cause, when a party of French came later upon the scene they found innumerable graves. The remnant of Nicholson's army turned back, as the British squadron was countermanded for Portugal, where British interests needed it. Thus was Montreal saved and with it Quebec.

In 1711, however, Nicholson was again attempting to move against Montreal. Again great consternation prevailed in the town, for the news had reached Canada early in August, when Vaudreuil had been informed by de Cortebelle, the French commandant at Placentia in Newfoundland, that English prisoners had reported mighty preparations being made by the "Bostonnais" against Quebec by water and Montreal by land. Dismay and confusion seized both towns. Montreal, fortified only by its palisade of stakes and incapable of resisting the artillery of the English invaders, believed that it was on the eve of its death throes, seeing that an army was setting out from New York with 3,000 men with cannons. In these straits the people turned to God, and the priests of St. Sulpice preached penitence to them. The chronicles of the time tell how hearts were moved, how there were penitential processions, in which all the Montrealers joined barefooted and with cords around their necks; it was a time of general communions, voluntary fasting and like mortifications.

Mother Juchereau in the annals of the Hôtel-Dieu of Quebec confesses that "the ladies of Montreal outbid those of Quebec, for the former obliged themselves not to wear ribbons or laces for a year,"—no small sacrifice, doubtlessly. Finally, the young "externe" ladies of the Congregation and others, made a vow that if they were saved from the evils apprehended, seemingly inevitable, they would build in honour of the Mother of God a chapel under the name of Our Lady of Victory. Meanwhile in her self-imposed retirement Jeanne LeBer, the recluse, was acquainted of the disasters impending, and her prayers were besought on all hands. Even the Baron de Longueuil, then governor of the town, and surnamed the "Macchabbeus of Montreal" prevailed on her to compose a prayer which should be inscribed on his standard, which he would take with a handful of men, to prepare, in their desperation, an ambuscade near Chambly, by which Nicholson's men were expected to pass. The recluse, thus prevailed on by her cousin, wrote this inscription: "Our enemies place all their confidence in their arms, but we place ours under the name of the Queen of Angels, whom we invoke. She is terrible as an army in battle array; under her protection we hope to conquer our enemies." The standard was solemnly blessed and put into the hands of M. de Longueuil by M. de Belmont, in the parish church of Notre Dame, whither all the people had gathered for this edifying spectacle.

Bearing this ensign himself, M. de Longueuil set out to encounter General Nicholson's land force, but the latter now retreated, on hearing of the disastrous termination of the expedition of the fleet making for the capture of Quebec. Not finding Nicholson's forces, and ignorant as yet of the cause of his retreat, the Montrealers journeyed down to Quebec to assist that town against the attack by water. There they waited till in the middle of October, when on the 19th the Sieur de la Valterie, who had come from Labrador in September and had been sent down the river again by de Vaudreuil to watch for the English fleet, appeared at Quebec with tidings of joy.

The deposition of François de Marganne, Sieur de la Valterie, before Paul Dupuy, Esquire, king's councillor, on October 19th, relates that, "he had descended the St. Lawrence in a canoe, with two Frenchmen and an Indian, till landing at the Ile aux Oeufs on the 1st of October, they met two French sailors or fishermen loaded with plunder and presently discovered the wrecks of seven English ships, with, as they declared, fifteen or sixteen hundred dead bodies, on the strand hard by, besides dead horses, sheep, dogs and hens, three or four hundred large iron-hooped casks, a barrel of wine and a barrel and keg of brandy, cables, anchors, chains, planks, boards, shovels, picks, mattocks and piles of old iron three feet high." (Parkman, "A Half Century of Conflict.") Later visits to the wrecks brought back news that, though the autumn tides had swept away many corpses, more than two thousand lay on the rocks, naked and in attitudes of despair. Denys de la Ronde, writing to the minister on December 30, 1711, says that nearly one thousand men were drowned, and about two thousand died of injuries. Whatever there is of exaggeration in this, still Colonel Lee of the Rhode Island contingent, writing to Governor Cranston, September 12, 1711, says that a day or two after the wreck, he saw "the bodies of twelve or thirteen hundred brave men, with women and children, lying in heaps."

So perished the ill-fated expedition under Admiral Sir Hovenden Walker, that was to have subjugated Canada. The fleet, which set sail from Boston on July 30th "consisted of nine ships of war and two bomb ketches with about sixty transports, store ships, hospital ships and other vessels, British and Provincial. They carried the seven British regiments, numbering with the artillery train about five thousand five hundred men, besides 600 marines and 1,500 provincials; counting with the sailors nearly twelve thousand in all." Samuel Vetch commanded the provincials—the same who had boasted of his knowledge of the Canadian coasts; but he was no sailor, and the pilots with the fleet had little serious knowledge of the St. Lawrence after all.

How this mighty expedition met disaster at the mercy of the elements leads us too far from Montreal to tell. Suffice it to say that Quebec and Montreal were saved. [163]

The dramatic routing of their enemies was regarded by Canadians as a manifest effect of Divine Providence watching over them. M. de Vaudreuil, writing to the minister on October 22, and November 6, 1712, says: "We are going to give thanks to God for the visible protection which he benignantly granted to this country. All our people, though well determined to defend themselves, agree that God has granted them great favours in the destruction of the English fleet, without it costing a single drop of blood to this colony." In his "Life of Sieur LeBer," M. de Belmont claimed that the Mother of God obtained for the Canadians this greatest miracle, "which has happened since the time of Moses when the Egyptians were swallowed up in the waters of the Red Sea." At Montreal, in thanksgiving, the ladies set about to procure the necessary funds to redeem their vows. The Sisters of the Congregation gave a plot of ground within their enclosure, near to their church, and in 1718 the foundation stone of the little shrine of "Our Lady of Victories" was ceremoniously laid. [164]

An interesting comparison of the two great races contending at this time for the mastery of the north of this continent may be here quoted from the "Journal d'un voyage en Amérique," Vol. V, published in 1744, and written by the Jesuit historian of Canada, Charlevoix. He is describing the condition prevailing about this period. "There reigns in New England and in the other provinces of the Continent of America, belonging to the British Empire, an opulence which, it seems, they do not know how to profit by; while in New France there is poverty hidden by an appearance of easy circumstances, which appears unstudied; commerce and cultivation of the plantations strengthen the first, the industry of the inhabitants sustain the second, and the taste of the people spreads around infinite comfort. The English colonist amasses wealth and makes no superfluous expenditure; the Frenchman enjoys what he has and often makes a parade of what he has not. The former labours for his heirs, while the latter leaves his in the same necessity in which he finds himself, allowing them to get out of the situation as well as they can. The English Americans do not desire war, because they have much to lose; they do not humour the savages, because they do not believe they have any need of them. The French youths for contrary reasons detest peace and live on good terms with the aborigines of the country, whose esteem they easily secure during periods of war, as well as their friendship at all times."

NOTE

THE CHATEAU DE RAMEZAY

Claude de Ramezay, eleventh governor of Montreal, appointed 1703, was born in France, 1657, and came to Canada in 1685, with a number of other young officers, in the suite of Governor de Denonville. He was then a lieutenant in de Troye's company of marine troops, which later took part in the expedition to Hudson's Bay. His promotion was rapid, being captain in 1687, later colonel, then commandant of troops, and finally governor of the town and its district.

In 1687 he took part in the expedition against the Iroquois and in 1690, when Phipps appeared before Quebec, he brought over 800 men from Montreal for the defense of the former town.

History tells of the spirited defense made by Frontenac and his gallant officers, the latter, no doubt, being encouraged by the bright smiles of some of Quebec's fair daughters who, it seems, lost no time in rewarding their brave defenders with their heart and hand. Scarcely had the last of Phipp's fleet disappeared around Point Levi, than de Ramezay led to the altar Melle Marie-Charlotte Denys, a daughter of Denys de la Ronde, one of the wealthiest families of Canada. His companion in arms, de Vaudreuil, at the same time married Louise, daughter of Pierre de Joybert de Soulanges. Could they have seen into the future their happiness would have been clouded by sorrow, for it was destined that a son of de Ramezay should be the one to open the gates of Quebec to the English in 1759, and a son of de Vaudreuil should do likewise, at Montreal, the following year.

De Ramezay was one of the most prominent men of this time, occupying an official position in Canada for a term exceeding forty years. He was Seigneur de la Gesse, de Montigny, et Boisfleurent in France, and in Canada was Seigneur de Monnoir and de Ramezay, Knight of the Military Order of St. Louis, governor of Montreal, and commandant of all the militia in the country, and was administrator of the governor-generalship during the two years' absence of de Vaudreuil in France.

The château was built in 1705. It is a long, low, cottage-built building, standing quaintly out of date before the city hall. The neighborhood was then the fashionable part of the town, and was occupied by the Baron de Longueuil, the Contrecœurs, d'Eschambaults, d'Aillebousts and Madame de Portneuf, the widow of Baron Becancourt. Situated on a hill, and opposite to the magnificent garden of the Jesuits, this plain unembellished house had an open view to the river front. The vaults were of ancient castle construction. Even the attic floors were of stone slabs.

Under de Ramezay's régime, 1703 to 1724, this venerable edifice was the hall of entertainment of the illustrious of the country. The many expeditions to the distant fur fields, the voyages of discovery of new lands, the councils of war, the military expeditions, the conferences with the Indians, the annual fairs and fur trading market, attracted to the shores of Montreal not only the governor general, the intendant, and their suites, but a considerable number of the most important people of the country, including all classes of society. To one and all the portals of this hospitable mansion were ever open. To the lowly Indian and his squaw, and to the exalted nobleman and his consort, the noble and beneficent Ramezay and his family showed equal attention. Fearless to the Indian or enemy, his bravery and charity were equally exemplified in the personal care and attention he and his family gave to the suffering citizens of Montreal during the pest which devastated the town in 1721.

De Ramezay died in 1724, and his family sold the château to the Compagnie des Indes in 1745. The latter retained possession until the cession in 1763, when it was bought by William Grant, who, in turn, disposed of it to the English government for the sum of 2,000 guineas. It thus became again the residence of the governors, and remained such up to 1849.

In 1775-6 the château was the headquarters for the Continental Army under Montgomery, and in the spring of 1776 there came Benjamin Franklin, Carroll of Carrollton, and Samuel Chase, envoys sent by Congress to influence the French Canadians to join the colonies in the revolt against British rule. Then came Benedict Arnold, who occupied the château for several weeks. The mark of the old reception dias is still seen on the salon walls.

Lord Metcalfe was the last resident governor, but for some years after his establishment in a new government house the château was used for departmental offices. When the government was withdrawn from Montreal, the château served several purposes. For some years courts were held here, and later the normal school, then courts again.

In 1894 the château was sold by the Provincial government and purchased by the Corporation of the City of Montreal for the Numismatic and Antiquarian Society, which in 1895 obtained the building for the purpose of founding their historical portrait gallery and museum.

Next to the Château de Ramezay on the west stood the house of the Baron de Becancourt, built at the beginning of the 18th century. It also passed into the hands of the Compagnie des Indes, and became their commissariat. In 1800 this building came into the possession of the McGill family and was long known as the "Old McGill House."

CHAPTER XXXIV

M. Philippe de Rigaud Marquis de Vaudreuil, as governor of Montreal (1698-1703), early renewed some of the old trouble of infringing on the authority of the governor general, for in 1700, on May 5th, the king's minister wrote to Vaudreuil that His Majesty did not wish him to interfere directly or indirectly in the administration of justice, nor would the king pardon him for putting the inhabitants in prison without the orders of M. de Callières. [165] Otherwise the ordinary administration of the town progressed. We have preserved the granting of a Montreal tavern license from May 5th to Pierre Billeron de Lafatigue and Marie Fortier, his wife, to sell and retail drinks, a pot et a pinte," and refreshments par assiette" (plate), with the injunction, "not to intoxicate the savages, and to make observed among them the regulations of our seigneurs of the council, with the prohibition of giving drink and food during the celebration of divine service or past 9 o'clock in the evening." License holders were to allow the police to inspect and they were to keep copies of these regulations posted in their inns. The civil, military and ecclesiastical hours of the day were told by the parish church clock, which had existed up to 1701; its remains were found in a lumber room in 1770. But about 1701, the superior of the seminary, M. de Belmont, brought from France the famous timepiece at the cost of 800 francs, about the value of the same number of dollars nowadays. In 1751 it got out of order for the first time but it was thoroughly renovated during Montgolfiers' rule of the seminary and it served faithfully as the only public clock till recent times. [166]

A permit to marry, granted by de Callières to a soldier coming to the Montreal district, and dated from Quebec, January 7, 1702, gives us a glimpse of the military jurisdiction of the time. "We give permission to one named Poitevin, a soldier of the company of Longueuil, to espouse the daughter of Julien Blois of Long point. The civic seigneur will not make any difficulty in marrying them.

(Signed) Le Chevalier de Callières."

At this time M. de Vaudreuil was thinking of building his château in Montreal, and on May 6th, the minister writes to the Intendant Champigny "that the King has granted 1,000 livres to help M. de Vaudreuil to build his home." On the same day he wrote to the latter telling him "that as the inhabitants of Montreal are too far from the sea to take up the fishery industry otherwise than by associating themselves with those of Quebec, he should urge his people to the cultivation of the soil and especially of hemp, which the Kingdom of France has to import from the northern countries." On the same day, the minister wrote to de Ramezay, [167] who had recently arrived, congratulating him on the good condition of the 300 recruits taken by him from France. M. de Ramezay at the same time was appointed, in the absence of de Callières and de Vaudreuil, to the command of the whole extent of the colony, thus clearly designating him for future honours.

Montreal's destiny as the head of navigation was early forced upon the attention of the enterprising missionaries and traders who embarked from Montreal for the West. The rapids of the Sault St. Louis presented an initial difficulty, and eyes had long been cast on the possibility of avoiding them by constructing a canal, connecting the lac à loutre on the west side, by a channel, to the Lake St. Louis, so that canoes could start from the Little River St. Pierre, near Place Royale, and pursue their way inland and westward until they reached the Lake St. Louis. Thus, therefore, was evolved the first attempt at a Lachine Canal in 1700.

M. Ernest Marceau in 1906 gave the results of some of his investigations among the papers of the Sulpicians, for the history of the efforts of the seigneurs of Montreal to overcome the difficulties of the navigation between Lachine and Montreal. He relates these as follows: [168]

"A few years only had elapsed since the establishment of the French at Montreal, when the necessity for bettering the means of communication between the rising city and the settlements already existing at Lachine, Ste. Anne, etc., became apparent. The young colony was too poor, however, to think of building a canal with locks to overcome the very considerable fall in the nine miles of river from Pointe-à-Callières to Lachine.

"The route followed by the canoes at the time was along the north shore of the St. Lawrence, but it was exceedingly dangerous, and many portages intervened between navigable stretches. Even in these so-called navigable stretches, towing had to be resorted to. A number of accidents had already happened, in which men and canoes had been lost. In the year 1700, the Superior of the Sulpicians, Mr. Dollier de Casson, [169] undertook to improve the Little River St. Pierre, and to make it navigable for canoes, from its mouth to Lake St. Pierre, a shallow body of water lying about half way between Montreal and Lachine (this lake has long disappeared, owing chiefly to the works done in connection with the Lachine Canal), and to open up a cut from the lake to a point on the St. Lawrence above the worst part of the rapids.

"A notarial contract was passed, between the contractor, Gédéon de Catalogne, [170] and Mr. Dollier de Casson, for the excavation of a canal twenty-four arpents, or about one mile, in length, twelve feet wide at the surface of the ground, and of varying width at the bottom, according to the depth of cutting. The water flowing through the canal was to be at least eighteen inches deep, at the period of lowest water in the St. Lawrence.

"The work was begun in October, 1700, and in February of the year following the contractor failed, after having performed the greater part of his contract, the whole of the cut being completed at the time, except for a depth of three or four feet on some 2,400 feet in length.

"The canal was excavated for about one-third of its length through clay mixed with boulders, the balance being through quarry rock.

"A settlement was made with the contractor in the Spring, the amount paid being 12,500 livres, which represents about $15,000 of our present currency.

"The work was left in this unfinished condition, notwithstanding the repeated attempts to push it to completion, the Sulpicians' revenues, which were very unimportant at that time, finding better use in other directions.

"In 1708, Louis XIV ordered plans and estimates of the work to be submitted to him, the undertaking having been recognized as devolving upon the royal authorities, but, owing to the conditions of affairs in France during the latter part of the reign, the scheme had to be again postponed.

"Almost every year after this, the Canal de la Chine is mentioned in the correspondence between the superiors of the Montreal house and the head of the Sulpician Order in Paris, as also in letters addressed to the Governors of the colony.

"In 1717, Mr. Chaussegros de Léry, who had charge of all military and civil engineering works in Montreal, reported that three-fourths of the work was done. The Crown could not yet at the time give the necessary help to perfect the canal, but instructions were given not to abandon the idea.

"Again in 1733, the same engineer made a complete survey of the route and prepared fresh plans and estimates. The old line had evidently been abandoned, as the probable cost of the work is put down at 255,000 livres, or about $300,000. The new scheme contemplated a canal with locks. Unfortunately, no copy of the report of Mr. Chaussegros is on record in the documents referred to.

"From that date nothing can be found in the Seminary papers relating to the canal, which would seem to indicate that the work was never completed. It is quite likely, however, that the imperfect channel could be used by canoes during the periods of high water. Be that as it may, traces of it in the shape of a half-filled ditch, are still to be seen in a field near the Canadian Pacific Railway embankment at Rockfield."

In the year 1703, on May 26th, de Callières died, and M. de Vaudreuil succeeded him on August 1st as governor general, while M. Claude de Ramezay replaced the latter as governor of Montreal, being appointed by the king as such in August. The minister, this same month recommended de Vaudreuil, Beauharnois and the Marquis d'Alogny to make use of his advice in regard to the police and the management of the troops.

In 1704 we hear of an ordinance of the Governor General de Vaudreuil, dated December 12th, being sent to Montreal to forbid seditious assemblies. It had been brought to his notice that there had been a large gathering of the inhabitants near Montreal for the purpose of obliging the merchants to furnish them salt and other merchandise at a lower price. But on the explanation of the Governor de Ramezay and the superior of the seminary, M. de Belmont, that there had been nothing seditious in the meeting which had been called simply to protest and to draw attention to their complaints, things went no further than the issue of the ordinance, although the "meeting" was still the subject of letters to France in 1705. In that year de Ramezay had been having his troubles with the authorities of Quebec. In a letter from the minister (Pontchartrain) the latter strongly disapproves of his conduct in heading a cabal against de Vaudreuil and Beauharnois, and of the impropriety of raising himself up as a reformer of the higher powers of the colony.

An insight into the hardships experienced at Montreal as a result of the wars with the English colonies, may now be presented. The vessel, La Seine, which was carrying to Canada provisions and merchandise of all kinds and the cargo of which was estimated at a million livres (tournois), left Rochelle in the summer of 1705 and was captured by a Virginian fleet in spite of the heroic resistance of the Chevalier de Maupeon. The vessel was seized and its passengers, among whom was Mgr. de St. Vallier, were taken as prisoners to England. Such and similar disasters made living conditions dear at Montreal and famine was frequent. A missionary of this period says that wearing apparel and houses were of an extraordinary price at Montreal. The innkeepers made their fortune in diluting the drink, especially that which they sold to the Indians, who drank all that they could get, in exchange for their peltry. "You have served me out of the savages' barrel," grumbled one of the workmen to the servant who had just given him some liquor.

The scarcity of clothing material, caused by the loss of La Seine, brought with it, however, an advantage to the colony. On the suggestion of the Intendant Raudot, the king's council permitted the inhabitants to make linen and druggets with the homemade yarn and worsted of the country. For hitherto France had insisted on the right of supplying Canada with its manufactured articles. It forbade home industries. Even the wool gathered on the St. Lawrence banks was shipped to France and returned in the form of a coarse cloth. All clothing therefore had been very expensive in the colony. Necessity became, therefore, the mother of invention and we thus find Madame de Repentigny, who had greatly contributed to the progress of this industry, writing in 1708: "There is at present a considerable quantity of handicrafts which work at making linen in Canada. Women and men work at them. The men have a taste for deerskin clothing, which costs them much less than the cloths from France; they nearly all wear it with homemade drugget surtouts over it." On his side M. Bigot wrote in 1714: "There are in Montreal as many as twenty-five looms for making linen and worsted goods. The Sisters of the Congregation have shown me the collender which they have made for their clothing, which latter is as fine as that made in France; there are also made here, materials of black for the clothes of the priests, and of blue for those of the 'pensionnaires.'"

How the ladies of Montreal were participating in the industrial progress of the city may be seen in the letters of the minister, the intendant and to Madame de Repentigny. In 1706 he writes to Intendant Raudot, asking for samples of the cloth which Madame had made from nettles and bark and which she says is better than that made from linen and hemp. On June 30, 1707, he writes to Madame de Repentigny that he has received the samples of cloth and the little tablets of cotton syrup; that he has noticed with pleasure what she has told him of the number of cloth workers in the Island of Montreal, but he finds the price of her cloth too high. [171] He is pleased to be informed of the sugar that is made in Montreal and of the blue earth that has been found by the Indians thirty leagues from Montreal. Another year, he records his pleasure at her discoveries of dye woods near Montreal and on July 7, 1711, he writes of his satisfaction at her zeal for the progress of the colony. On June 29th he writes that he will recommend her son for the post of ensign and encourages her to redouble her efforts for the increase of her manufactures.

A survey of the various ordonnances issued by the intendants of this period supplies much insight into the life of the city. During the months of June and July, 1706, Jacques Raudot was in Montreal. The ordonnances issued by him there are of valuable historical usefulness in providing an insight into conditions then prevailing. That dated June 22d concerns the streets, primarily. "Having learnt," it begins, "on arriving in this town the state of disorder in which the streets are, being almost impracticable at all seasons not only for foot passengers, but for carriage and cart traffic, and this on account of the mire which is found in the said streets, and which comes not so much from the bad nature and inequality of the land as from the filth which the inhabitants throw there daily, and being persuaded that this comes from not giving the streets the slope necessary for the flow of the drainage, not being able to do anything of more utility for the town than to remedy these disorders, and having conferred with Sieur de Bellemont (sic), superior of the seminary, Fleury Deschambault, lieutenant general, Raimbault, King's procurator of the department of Justice Royale of this town, we order that, hereafter, there shall be given the following slopes." Then follow the list of streets to be altered, directions for the remaking of the roads and footpaths, and the sharing of the expenses, the order for the observance of the new alignments, penalties for throwing rubbish into the streets, etc.

Then also follow penalties and confiscations for keeping pigs in the houses, and for allowing cattle to stray in the streets. The renewal of the prohibitions against unlicenced liquor houses is also made. It concludes with instructions for the establishment of a market on the place d'Armes to meet the needs of the growing town. The market days are to be on Tuesdays and Fridays, weekly. This is for the convenience of the country vendors, who are not to sell their produce elsewhere, in private stores, as formerly. In order to enable the inhabitants to purchase in the market and to prevent the hotel keepers and cabaretiers from buying up everything before the citizens were astir, Raudot enjoins, that the former shall not buy in the market before 8 o'clock in the morning under a penalty of 3 livres.

Another ordonnance of July 2d settles the disputes amongst themselves of the inhabitants as to the use of the commons of the island vis à vis their homes.

Another of the same date relieves the habitants of Notre-Dame des Neiges from an obnoxious clause in their concessions of land, granted by the seigneurs, by which these would be confiscated if they sold spirituous and intoxicating liquors to the savages. They represented that this clause was now useless, since the prohibitions had been made so severe by the king's ordonnances, they were not likely to do so, but they might falsely be accused and thus their lands might be in danger of confiscation. With the consent of Mr. Cailhé, (Caille), who acted for the seigneurs, their petition was granted.

On the same day another order from Raudot straightened out the doubts of some habitants as to the meaning of clauses in their concessions, granting the seigneurs rights of claiming lumber. It was decided on the representation of M. Cailhé that the seigneurs would be content with lumber rights on one arpent in every location of sixty arpents, never having meant to claim universal rights. They still, however, reserved all their rights to claim from the habitations all the wood that was necessary for their own buildings and for public works.

Again on the same day: "the Seigneurs are justified in demanding their rents and arrears from certain habitants holding concessions from them, who had claimed that their lands were not staked out." The seigneurs prevailed, representing that the dearth of landmarks was the fault of the land owners, who had to provide them and had failed to pay for them, rather than through any difficulty on the part of the seminary.

The growth of Montreal brought new settlers who wished to set up in business; in consequence, Jacques Raudot, in 1706, drew up an ordonnance on July 20th, limiting the number of tanners, shoemakers and butchers. "Seeing that the town of Montreal is daily growing in the number of inhabitants who come to establish themselves, and that the number of every kind of trade increases in proportion, while awaiting the pleasure of His Majesty in establishing a corps de métier, we believe that it is fitting time for us to prescribe certain rules, particularly for the tanners and shoemakers, the observation of which, while being useful to the inhabitants, in that it will provide the workers themselves with emulation, while giving them the means of a livelihood, and of confining them to the special functions of their separate trades, we ordain:

"I. That there shall only be two tanners in the town, viz., Delaunay and Barsalot, so that they may both have work; the five butchers who are at present in business will share in equal portions both in number and in quality the skins of all the beasts slaughtered on their premises unless the said tanners prefer to make an arrangement among themselves to have the skins furnished to each by two butchers apiece whom they shall agree upon, and the fifth butcher to furnish his share every six months.

"II. That the said tanners shall be obliged to give the said skins all the necessary and required dressings, so that the public may have good merchandise, and this under penalty of 3 livres for each hide not found, on our prescribed visits, to conform to the quality demanded by our present ordonnance.

"III. We forbid the said butchers to retain any skins and make French shoes, under a penalty of 3 livres for each skin retained, but we permit them to retain some of an inferior quality to make shoes for the savages.

"IV. We forbid them to purchase skins from those coming in from the country, whom we order to take their goods to the market set up in this town, where they shall be exposed for sale for tanners only.

"V. While awaiting an opportunity to make regulations, to confine each to his allotted trade, we permit Delaunay, in consideration of the business set up by him, to have only three garçons shoemakers and one apprentice, etc."

On the 28th of the same month Raudot ordered thirteen who had rented lots from the seigneurs on "lower" street, either to pay their rent or to hand them over by a certain date to the seigneurs on the reimbursement of the expenses for the buildings thereon and other improvements, the value of the same to be settled by experts mutually agreed upon.

The students of mercantile economy will find that on November 11, 1707, the Intendants Raudot (père et fils), writing to the Minister Pontchartrain, speak of the sad state of the country produced by the low price of the beaver, but still more by the loss of 50 per cent on the money given in France for the Canadian letter of exchange. In 1709 M. de Pontchartrain is surprised to hear that Montreal is filled with English merchandise—a thing not to be tolerated. This was not surprising, seeing that the Canadians were not producers, and the purchase of all their supplies from France became very expensive. A memoir of Raudot of July, 1708, gives an explanation that suffices. Too much reliance had been placed on the beaver trade which had been the pivotal point of the prosperity of the country, but it was necessarily a precarious resource. Sooner or later, there must result either a rarity of this product or a decrease in price. At present the colony was suffering from the latter. Agriculture, he pointed out, should be the principal object, but it was only an accessory. The beaver had been the gold mine of the country. The inhabitants had sought the woods first, preferring an adventurous and profitable life to a laborious one on the soil. Thus they had cultivated laziness and negligence. There was, however, a great quantity of cattle and easy food supplies, but a great scarcity of clothing. The trade of the country turned on a sum of 600,000 livres and it was with this sum that it had to settle for its purchases in France. This is too little for a population of eighteen to twenty thousand souls. Everyone pays in kind for the merchandise bought in France, in such a way that money does not even come this way. Merchandise is very dear and the habitant will not work except for a fat salary, saying that he uses up more wearing apparel in working than he can gain by his work. The remedy for this state of affairs is, to urge the population to the production of wheat, cattle, timber, oils, ships, by finding a market for Canadian products. He further deprecates the policy then in vogue of thinking too much of the trade interests of France. He urges the minister to be wide-minded, and to realize that by providing a wider field for the colony, the interest and prosperity of the colony ought sooner or later increase the prosperity of the mother country.

If France had learned this lesson of colonization, there would never have been the loss of this country to the English a half century later. The pupildom of New France was continued far too long by an overstrained, narrow and jealous paternalism.

We have made these lengthy notes on the trade relations of the colony because Montreal was the center of the beaver traffic. Indeed, as we have seen, there were not wanting those who were opposed to the expansion of the colony through outlying posts, but wished to concentrate in the lower part of the colony—the same principle already prevailing, which was to stand in the way of the growth and development of Ontario and Upper Canada in later years under the British rule.

A memoir presented to M. de Pontchartrain in 1710 makes this position clear, while the replies in the margin by M. de Vaudreuil, the governor, and MM. Raudot (father and son), joint-intendants, show the opposite view. The memoir hopes that the congés or permits to trade up-country will not be repeated; they have been the source of all the evils, lawlessness and pernicious traffic in eau de vie and of the stagnation of agriculture, contrary to the aim of this colony, which was to humanize and evangelize the savages. This suppression of congés would have the effect of raising the value of beaver skins, whose present abundance cheapens the market at this time. It would be of more avail to allow the Indians to bring their poultry to Montreal in exchange for merchandise, for the expense of transporting merchandise to them in the West raised the price so much that the Indians were constrained to go to the English for their supplies. The English did not allow their people to trade far afield. It was because M. de La Barre had not followed a similar policy that the French had had a war of fourteen years with the Iroquois.

The Marquis' reply was to the effect that it was the abuse of the congés, too frequently granted, and not their moderate use that was at fault. Rightly exploited and curtailed, they would favor the conversion of the Indians, the increase of the colony and the preservation of peace. The chief thing was to stop the liquor traffic. As for the savages going to the English, three or four hundred leagues, for cheaper merchandise, that was unreasonable if the goods were taken to them. But if they were not, and the choice lay between Montreal and Orange, then they would certainly choose the latter place because of cheaper prices. The fourteen years' war was not a result of the congés, but of M. de La Barre's action in allowing the Iroquois to pillage the French. It is true that the English do not mingle with the affairs of the Indians, but prefer to allow them to destroy one another; thus they are not loved and have no influence. Our policy is otherwise, and hence our strength. We maintain the peace of the whole West. If Michillimackinac had been reestablished, the "sauteux" would not have attacked the Pottawatomies, or attempted to cut the ears of the Iroquois—a failure which may still lead us to war again. What restrains the Iroquois from striking a blow at any of the savage tribes is, that they know, that by our efforts they will not have the opportunity of destroying these nations one after another, as they did formerly, but that they will have all of them on their back, at one and the same time.

A picture of a Sunday morning or feast day crush at the church door after service is to be found in an ordonnance of Jacques Raudot of January 21, 1708, when on account of the disorders arising, from those habitants with carriages and those on horseback, urging their horses to depart so quickly that they butt into one another and even into the foot passengers, to the risk of wounds and even of life, he enjoins under a penalty of 10 livres, applicable to the local parish church, that none should put their horses into a trot or a gallop until they are ten arpents from the church. This notice was fixed at the door of Notre Dame. It is to be hoped the curé had no occasion to look for any fines, after it had been sufficiently promulgated.

Road traveling in 1709 was no easy thing at all times, but in the winter least of all. [172] Yet it was necessary to keep up communication between Montreal and Quebec, so we can appreciate the wisdom of Jacques Raudot's ordonnance of December 13th of this year, enjoining all the habitants of the country in the districts north of the St. Lawrence to cut out, each one, before his habitation, a roadway in the places most convenient, as well as to make a roadway across the lake in the accustomed places. [173]

In 1709 we find Raudot dealing a blow at horse breeding. In an ordonnance of June 13, 1709, being informed that the habitants of the government of Montreal are rearing too great a number of horses to the detriment of horned and wool bearing cattle, whose pastures are eaten by the horses and whose number was decreasing, and as the attention of the government ought to be principally directed to their increasing abundance, it is ordered that each inhabitant shall not have more than two horses, or mares, and a colt, after the seeding time of the year 1710, to give time to get rid of the superfluous ones; after which they will be obliged to slaughter those not disposed of.

Pigs straying in the streets, in 1710, brought an ordonnance from Raudot of June 29th; they had been the cause not only of filth, but of sanitary disorders and infection, and owners were given five days to enclose them, otherwise the pig were to be permitted to be killed and the proceeds to go to the poor of the Hôtel-Dieu. On the 4th of August, Raudot enjoined on all the owners of pigs in the colony to put muzzles on them so that those found doing damage to grain or field produce, without their muzzles on, could be killed for recompense.

The licencing permits of Montreal were overhauled by Antoine Denis Raudot, conjoint intendant, during his stay in Montreal in June, 1710, when by an ordonnance dated June 23d, having found that there were many selling liquors without permission of the local government, he ordered that there should only be ten licenced "cabaretiers-aubergistes," who shall sell all kinds of drink to the French, but not after 9 o'clock in the evening, and never to the Indians, under penalty of losing their licences.

In addition, he licenced nine other innkeepers, to sell beer only, and then in moderation, to the Indians, three for those of the St. Louis district, two for that of Sault-au-Récollet, two for the Nepissingués, and two others for the Abenakis, Ottowans and other savages, who came to the town to trade. Those with this beer licence had to refuse liquor to the Indians after the retraite battue, and never to let them take drink away with them; while they were obliged to give lodging to the savages if they wanted to stay. This second set of licence holders, however, had the privilege of selling any kind of drink to the French. We can imagine that these latter outlying saloons were in danger of being disorderly. Yet the number of illicit "houses" increased so that in 1726 Claude Thomas Dupuy issued an ordonnance, dated November 22d, which affected Montreal as well as other cities in the regulation of the sale of liquors. By this new order, which contained fourteen articles on the subject of innkeepers and liquor sellers of all kinds, from the fashionable hôtel of the time to the humbler vendor of wine who had his piece of evergreen bush outside his door—a bundle of pine sprigs, maybe, to show that drink was served inside. Even all those who had been given licences previously by local authorities were now to send in their titles and credentials before receiving in return a new licence expressly signed by the intendant himself. It was a necessary measure borne in upon him by many officers of troops, masters and fathers of families, who complained that the numerous cabarets were turning the youth, the soldiers and the servants away from duty, respect and service. Hence the intendant's drastic measure in striking at the root of the evil by putting down illicit vendors and restricting the legitimate licences.

As an instance of the methods of the day we may cite an instruction of the king to MM. de Vaudreuil and Bégon of June 15, 1712. "M. Bégon will take in hand the reduction of the number of horses. The habitants have only need of them to till the soil, to haul their timber and to transport their wheat. It is not natural that the inhabitants should make use of them during the winter to communicate with other places instead of going on snowshoes, as they ought to do. Too great attention cannot be paid to make the people take to this usage, now almost a lost art, and the habitants should be prevented as far as possible from leading an easy life by these soft methods, since such diminishes their strength and breaks down their courage."