1698.
Death of Frontenac.
His Last Hours • His Will • His Funeral • His Eulogist and his Critic •
His Disputes with the Clergy • His Character.
In November, when the last ship had gone, and Canada was sealed from the
world for half a year, a mortal illness fell upon the governor. On the
twenty-second, he had strength enough to dictate his will, seated in an
easy-chair in his chamber at the château. His colleague and adversary,
Champigny, often came to visit him, and did all in his power to soothe
his last moments. The reconciliation between them was complete. One of
his Récollet friends, Father Olivier Goyer, administered extreme unction;
and, on the afternoon of the twenty-eighth, he died, in perfect composure
and full possession of his faculties. He was in his seventy-eighth year.
He was greatly beloved by the humbler classes, who, days before his
death, beset the château, praising and lamenting him. Many of higher
station shared the popular grief. "He was the love and delight of New
France," says one of them: "churchmen honored him for his piety, nobles
esteemed him for his valor, merchants respected him for his equity, and
the people loved him for his kindness." [1] "He was the father of the
poor," says another, "the protector of the oppressed, and a perfect model
of virtue and piety." [2] An Ursuline nun regrets him as the friend and
patron of her sisterhood, and so also does the superior of the
Hôtel-Dieu. [3] His most conspicuous though not his bitterest opponent,
the intendant Champigny, thus announced his death to the court: "I
venture to send this letter by way of New England to tell you that
Monsieur le Comte de Frontenac died on the twenty-eighth of last month,
with the sentiments of a true Christian. After all the disputes we have
had together, you will hardly believe, Monseigneur, how truly and deeply
I am touched by his death. He treated me during his illness in a manner
so obliging, that I should be utterly void of gratitude if I did not feel
thankful to him." [4]
[1] La Potherie, I. 244, 246.
[2] Hennepin, 41 (1704). Le Clerc speaks to the same effect.
[3] Histoire des Ursulines de Québec, I. 508; Juchereau, 378.
[4] Champigny au Ministre, 22 Dec., 1698.
As a mark of kind feeling, Frontenac had bequeathed to the intendant a
valuable crucifix, and to Madame de Champigny a reliquary which he had
long been accustomed to wear. For the rest, he gave fifteen hundred
livres to the Récollets, to be expended in masses for his soul, and that
of his wife after her death. To her he bequeathed all the remainder of
his small property, and he also directed that his heart should be sent
her in a case of lead or silver. [5] His enemies reported that she
refused to accept it, saying that she had never had it when he was
living, and did not want it when he was dead.
[5] Testament du Comte de Frontenac. I am indebted to Abbé Bois of
Maskinongé for a copy of this will. Frontenac expresses a wish that the
heart should be placed in the family tomb at the Church of St. Nicolas
des Champs.
On the Friday after his death, he was buried as he had directed, not in
the cathedral, but in the church of the Récollets, a preference deeply
offensive to many of the clergy. The bishop officiated; and then the
Récollet, Father Goyer, who had attended his death-bed, and seems to have
been his confessor, mounted the pulpit, and delivered his funeral
oration. "This funeral pageantry," exclaimed the orator, "this temple
draped in mourning, these dim lights, this sad and solemn music, this
great assembly bowed in sorrow, and all this pomp and circumstance of
death, may well penetrate your hearts. I will not seek to dry your tears,
for I cannot contain my own. After all, this is a time to weep, and never
did people weep for a better governor."
A copy of this eulogy fell into the hands of an enemy of Frontenac, who
wrote a running commentary upon it. The copy thus annotated is still
preserved at Quebec. A few passages from the orator and his critic will
show the violent conflict of opinion concerning the governor, and
illustrate in some sort, though with more force than fairness, the
contradictions of his character:--
The Orator. "This wise man, to whom the Senate of Venice listened with
respectful attention, because he spoke before them with all the force of
that eloquence which you, Messieurs, have so often admired,--" [6]
[6] Alluding to an incident that occurred when Frontenac commanded a
Venetian force for the defence of Candia against the Turks.
The Critic. "It was not his eloquence that they admired, but his
extravagant pretensions, his bursts of rage, and his unworthy treatment
of those who did not agree with him."
The Orator. "This disinterested man, more busied with duty than with
gain,--"
The Critic. "The less said about that the better."
The Orator. "Who made the fortune of others, but did not increase his
own,--"
The Critic. "Not for want of trying, and that very often in spite of his
conscience and the king's orders."
The Orator. "Devoted to the service of his king, whose majesty he
represented, and whose person he loved,--"
The Critic. "Not at all. How often has he opposed his orders, even with
force and violence, to the great scandal of everybody!"
The Orator. "Great in the midst of difficulties, by that consummate
prudence, that solid judgment, that presence of mind, that breadth and
elevation of thought, which he retained to the last moment of his
life,--"
The Critic. "He had in fact a great capacity for political manœuvres and
tricks; but as for the solid judgment ascribed to him, his conduct gives
it the lie, or else, if he had it, the vehemence of his passions often
unsettled it. It is much to be feared that his presence of mind was the
effect of an obstinate and hardened self-confidence by which he put
himself above everybody and every thing, since he never used it to
repair, so far as in him lay, the public and private wrongs he caused.
What ought he not to have done here, in this temple, to ask pardon for
the obstinate and furious heat with which he so long persecuted the
Church; upheld and even instigated rebellion against her; protected
libertines, scandal-mongers, and creatures of evil life against the
ministers of Heaven; molested, persecuted, vexed persons most eminent in
virtue, nay, even the priests and magistrates, who defended the cause of
God; sustained in all sorts of ways the wrongful and scandalous traffic
in brandy with the Indians; permitted, approved, and supported the
license and abuse of taverns; authorized and even introduced, in spite of
the remonstrances of the servants of God, criminal and dangerous
diversions; tried to decry the bishop and the clergy, the missionaries,
and other persons of virtue, and to injure them, both here and in France,
by libels and calumnies; caused, in fine, either by himself or through
others, a multitude of disorders, under which this infant church has
groaned for many years! What, I say, ought he not to have done before
dying to atone for these scandals, and give proof of sincere penitence
and compunction? God gave him full time to recognize his errors, and yet
to the last he showed a great indifference in all these matters. When, in
presence of the Holy Sacrament, he was asked according to the ritual, 'Do
you not beg pardon for all the ill examples you may have given?' he
answered, 'Yes,' but did not confess that he had ever given any. In a
word, he behaved during the few days before his death like one who had
led an irreproachable life, and had nothing to fear. And this is the
presence of mind that he retained to his last moment!"
The Orator. "Great in dangers by his courage, he always came off with
honor, and never was reproached with rashness,--"
The Critic. "True; he was not rash, as was seen when the Bostonnais
besieged Quebec."
The Orator. "Great in religion by his piety, he practised its good works
in spirit and in truth,--"
The Critic. "Say rather that he practised its forms with parade and
ostentation: witness the inordinate ambition with which he always claimed
honors in the Church, to which he had no right; outrageously affronted
intendants, who opposed his pretensions; required priests to address him
when preaching, and in their intercourse with him demanded from them
humiliations which he did not exact from the meanest military officer.
This was his way of making himself great in religion and piety, or, more
truly, in vanity and hypocrisy. How can a man be called great in
religion, when he openly holds opinions entirely opposed to the True
Faith, such as, that all men are predestined, that Hell will not last for
ever, and the like?"
The Orator. "His very look inspired esteem and confidence,--"
The Critic. "Then one must have taken him at exactly the right moment,
and not when he was foaming at the mouth with rage."
The Orator. "A mingled air of nobility and gentleness; a countenance that
bespoke the probity that appeared in all his acts, and a sincerity that
could not dissimulate,--"
The Critic. "The eulogist did not know the old fox."
The Orator. "An inviolable fidelity to friends,--"
The Critic. "What friends? Was it persons of the other sex? Of these he
was always fond, and too much for the honor of some of them."
The Orator. "Disinterested for himself, ardent for others, he used his
credit at court only to recommend their services, excuse their faults,
and obtain favors for them,--"
The Critic. "True; but it was for his creatures and for nobody else."
The Orator. "I pass in silence that reading of spiritual books which he
practised as an indispensable duty more than forty years; that holy
avidity with which he listened to the word of God,--"
The Critic. "Only if the preacher addressed the sermon to him, and called
him Monseigneur. As for his reading, it was often Jansenist books, of
which he had a great many, and which he greatly praised and lent freely
to others."
The Orator. "He prepared for the sacraments by meditation and retreat,--"
The Critic. "And generally came out of his retreat more excited than ever
against the Church."
The Orator. "Let us not recall his ancient and noble descent, his family
connected with all that is greatest in the army, the magistracy, and the
government; Knights, Marshals of France, Governors of Provinces, Judges,
Councillors, and Ministers of State: let us not, I say, recall all these
without remembering that their examples roused this generous heart to
noble emulation; and, as an expiring flame grows brighter as it dies, so
did all the virtues of his race unite at last in him to end with glory a
long line of great men, that shall be no more except in history."
The Critic. "Well laid on, and too well for his hearers to believe him.
Far from agreeing that all these virtues were collected in the person of
his pretended hero, they would find it very hard to admit that he had
even one of them." [7]
[7] Oraison Funèbre du très-haut et très-puissant Seigneur Louis de
Buade, Comte de Frontenac et de Palluau, etc., avec des remarques
critiques, 1698. That indefatigable investigator of Canadian history, the
late M. Jacques Viger, to whom I am indebted for a copy of this eulogy,
suggested that the anonymous critic may have been Abbé la Tour, author of
the Vie de Laval. If so, his statements need the support of more
trustworthy evidence. The above extracts are not consecutive, but are
taken from various parts of the manuscript.
It is clear enough from what quiver these arrows came. From the first,
Frontenac had set himself in opposition to the most influential of the
Canadian clergy. When he came to the colony, their power in the
government was still enormous, and even the most devout of his
predecessors had been forced into conflict with them to defend the civil
authority; but, when Frontenac entered the strife, he brought into it an
irritability, a jealous and exacting vanity, a love of rule, and a
passion for having his own way, even in trifles, which made him the most
exasperating of adversaries. Hence it was that many of the clerical party
felt towards him a bitterness that was far from ending with his life.
The sentiment of a religion often survives its convictions. However
heterodox in doctrine, he was still wedded to the observances of the
Church, and practised them, under the ministration of the Récollets, with
an assiduity that made full amends to his conscience for the vivacity
with which he opposed the rest of the clergy. To the Récollets their
patron was the most devout of men; to his ultramontane adversaries, he
was an impious persecutor.
His own acts and words best paint his character, and it is needless to
enlarge upon it. What perhaps may be least forgiven him is the barbarity
of the warfare that he waged, and the cruelties that he permitted. He had
seen too many towns sacked to be much subject to the scruples of modern
humanitarianism; yet he was no whit more ruthless than his times and his
surroundings, and some of his contemporaries find fault with him for not
allowing more Indian captives to be tortured. Many surpassed him in
cruelty, none equalled him in capacity and vigor. When civilized enemies
were once within his power, he treated them, according to their degree,
with a chivalrous courtesy, or a generous kindness. If he was a hot and
pertinacious foe, he was also a fast friend; and he excited love and
hatred in about equal measure. His attitude towards public enemies was
always proud and peremptory, yet his courage was guided by so clear a
sagacity that he never was forced to recede from the position he had
taken. Towards Indians, he was an admirable compound of sternness and
conciliation. Of the immensity of his services to the colony there can be
no doubt. He found it, under Denonville, in humiliation and terror; and
he left it in honor, and almost in triumph.
In spite of Father Goyer, greatness must be denied him; but a more
remarkable figure, in its bold and salient individuality and sharply
marked light and shadow, is nowhere seen in American history. [8]
[8] There is no need to exaggerate the services of Frontenac. Nothing
could be more fallacious than the assertion, often repeated, that in his
time Canada withstood the united force of all the British colonies. Most
of these colonies took no part whatever in the war. Only two of them took
an aggressive part, New York and Massachusetts. New York attacked Canada
twice, with the two inconsiderable war-parties of John Schuyler in 1690
and of Peter Schuyler in the next year. The feeble expedition under
Winthrop did not get beyond Lake George. Massachusetts, or rather her
seaboard towns, attacked Canada once. Quebec, it is true, was kept in
alarm during several years by rumors of another attack from the same
quarter; but no such danger existed, as Massachusetts was exhausted by
her first effort. The real scourge of Canada was the Iroquois, supplied
with arms and ammunition from Albany.