1644. Pages 8, 309, 3.
CONTENTS: Report,—Algonquin Letter, with interlinear Translation;
Founding of Sillery; Tadousac; Five Letters from Père Jogues about his
Captivity among the Iroquois, beginning p. 284, giving, in substance
only, the Latin narrative mentioned below; Declaration of the Company
of New France, that the Jesuits took no part in their trade; Further
notice of Nicolet’s Exploration towards the Mississippi.
[Illustration: THE SITE OF MONTREAL.
From Lescarbot’s map of 1609, showing the Mountain and the Indian
town, Hochelaga, the site of Montreal. Newton Bosworth’s _Hochelaga
Depicta_ was published in Montreal in 1839.]
REFERENCES: Carayon, no. 1,272; Harrisse, no. 81; Carter-Brown, vol.
ii. no. 552; Lenox, p. 6; O’Callaghan, no. 1,222.
COPIES: =CB.=, =F.=, =GB.=, =HC.=, =L.= (two copies, slightly
different), =M.=, =SJ.=, =V.=
Nicolet’s explorations, which have usually been put in 1638-39,
were fixed by Sulté in 1634; cf. his _Mélanges_, Ottawa, 1876, and
Draper’s annotations in the _Wisconsin Historical Collections_, viii.
188, and _Canadian Antiquarian_, viii. 157. This view is sustained
in C. W. Butterfield’s _Jean Nicolet_, Cincinnati, 1881. Cf. Margry,
_Découvertes_, i. 47; Creuxius, _Historia Canadensis_, and the modern
writers,—Parkman, _La Salle_: Harrisse, _Notes_; Margry, in _Journal
de l’Instruction publique_, 1862; Gravier, _La Salle_; etc. See also
chap. v. of the present volume.
=1643-1644.=—VIMONT. _Relation ... ès années 1643 et 1644._ Paris,
1645. Pages 8, 256, 4, 147 (marked 174).
CONTENTS: Report, giving account of the Capture of Father Bressani;
Huron Report by Hierosme Lalemant; War of the Five Nations against the
Hurons.
REFERENCES: Carayon, no. 1,273; Harrisse, no. 83; Carter-Brown, vol.
ii. no. 576; Lenox, p. 6. O’Callaghan, no. 1,223. Recently priced at
$50.
COPIES: =CB.=, =GB.=, =HC.=, =L.=, =M.=, =OHM.=
Father F. G. Bressani was in the country from 1642 to 1645, and in
his _Breve Relatione d’alcune missioni de PP. della Compagnia di
Giesu nella Nuova Francia_, Macerata, 1653, pp. iv, 127, he gave an
account of the rise and progress of the Huron mission. He promised a
map and plates, but they do not appear in the copies known, of which
two are in the Carter-Brown (_Catalogue_, vol. ii. no. 750) and Lenox
(_Contributions_, p. 8) libraries; and others were sold in the Brinley
(no. 67) and O’Callaghan (no. 1,232) sales. Cf. Carayon, p. 1,317;
Leclerc, no. 684 (350 francs); and Shea’s _Charlevoix_, p. 80. Père
Martin had to bring a copy from Rome to make his French translation,
_Relation abrégée de quelques missions ... dans la Nouvelle France_,
Montreal, 1852. This version had the Creuxius map, as already stated;
another of the Huron country (p. 280), and numerous notes, with a
memoir of Bressani by the editor. Cf. Parkman’s _Jesuits_, p. 253, with
references; Shea’s _Charlevoix_, ii. 174, with note, and his _Perils
of the Ocean and Wilderness_, p. 104; O’Callaghan’s _New Netherland_;
Archbishop Spalding’s _Miscellanea_.
[Illustration]
The first martyr of the Huron mission was Père Antoine Daniel,
killed July 4, 1648 (Parkman’s _Jesuits_, p. 373). Field (_Indian
Bibliography_, p. 146) says some curious, though perhaps not very
authentic, information regarding the Hurons can be got from Sieur
Gendron’s _Quelques Particularitéz du Pays des Hurons, par le Sieur
Gendron_, which appeared in Davity’s _Déscription Générale de
l’Amerique_, edited by Jean Baptiste de Rocoles, Troyes et Paris, 1660,
and was reprinted in New York in 1868. Cf. Carter-Brown, vol. ii. no.
873; Lenox, p. 18; and Field, no. 598. A fac-simile of a corner map in
Creuxius’s larger map, giving the Huron country, is given herewith.
Parkman also gives a modern map with the missions and villages marked,
and tells the fate of this people after their dispersement, at the end
of his _Jesuits_. See _Canadian Monthly_, ii. 409.
[Illustration]
Dr. Shea gives the following list of martyrs among the Canadian
Jesuits, with the dates of their deaths: Isaac Jogues, 1646; Antoine
Daniel, 1648; Jean Brebeuf, Gabriel Lallemant, Charles Garnier, and
Natalis Chabanel, 1649; Jacques Buteux, 1652; Leonard Garreau, 1656,
and René Menard, 1661. And of the Sulpitians: Guillaume Vignal and
Jacques Le Maître, 1661. _Les Jésuites-Martyrs du Canada_, Montreal,
1877, includes Martin’s translation of Bressani’s _Relation Abrégée_,
and sections on the “Caractère des Sauvages et de leur pays,” on their
conversion, and on the “Mort de Quelqes Pères.”
_1644-1645._—VIMONT. _Relation ... ès années 1644 et 1645._ Paris,
1646. Pages 8, 183, 1.
CONTENTS: Missions News; Incursions of the Five Nations; Letter from
Lalemant about the Huron Mission, beginning on p. 136.
REFERENCES: Carayon, no. 1,274; Harrisse, no. 84; Carter-Brown, vol.
ii. no. 594; Lenox, p. 6; Dufossé, no. 8,663.
COPIES: =CB.=, =HC.=, =L.=, =M.=, =V.=
_1645-1646._—HIEROSME LALEMANT. _Relation ... ès années 1644 et 1645._
Paris, 1647. Pages 6, 184, 128.
CONTENTS: Report,—Missions to the Iroquois; Jogues among the Mohawks;
Huron Report by Paul Ragueneau, May, 1645, to May, 1646.
REFERENCES: Carayon, no. 1,275; Harrisse, no. 86; Sabin, vol. x. no.
38,684; Carter-Brown, vol ii. no. 619; Lenox, p. 7; O’Callaghan,
1,224; Harrassowitz, 1883 (160 marks).
COPIES: =CB.=, =GB.=, =HC.= (two copies), =K.=, =L.= (two copies),
=M.=, =NY.=, =V.=
Masse died May 12, 1646, and this _Relation_ contains an account of him.
From October, 1645, to June, 1668, there are journals of the Jesuit
missionaries preserved in the archives of the Séminaire at Quebec,
which give details not originally intended for the public eye, but
which now form an interesting supplement to the series for the years
1645-1668, except that there is a gap between Feb. 5, 1654 and Oct. 25,
1656. These journals were printed at Quebec in 1871, as _Le Journal
des Jésuites; publié par les Abbés Laverdière et Casgrain_. Cf.
Carter-Brown, vol. ii. no. 1,009, where it is stated that the greater
part of the edition was destroyed by fire. A continuation of this
Journal was in the hands of William Smith, historian of Canada; but
is now lost. The _Amer. Cath. Quarterly, U. S. Cath. Mag._, and _The
Month_ contain various papers on the missions. See Poole’s _Index_.
=1647.=—HIEROSME LALEMANT. _Relation ... en l’année 1647._ Paris,
1648. Pages 8, 276; paging irregular from p. 209 to p. 228. Some copies
have a repeated _de_ in the title.
CONTENTS: The Mission of Jogues among the Mohawks, and a narrative of
his death begins p. 124; Missions among the Abenakis.
REFERENCES: Carayon, no. 1,276; Harrisse, no. 87; Sabin, vol. x. no.
38,685; Carter-Brown, vol. ii. no. 652; Lenox, p. 7; O’Callaghan, no.
1,225; Harrassowitz, 1883 (160 marks); Dufossé, no. 5,603 (190 francs).
COPIES: =CB.=, =F.=, =GB.=, =HC.=, =J.= (two copies), =K.=, _L._ (two
copies), =M.=, =NY.=, =V.=
After Jogues’ captivity among the Mohawks, and his mutilations, and
his rescue by the Dutch, he wrote an account of _Novum Belgium_ in
1643-1644, which remained in manuscript till Dr. Shea printed it with
notes in 1862, as explained in a note to chap. ix. of the present
volume. Jogues now went to France, but returned shortly to brave once
more the perils of a missionary’s life, and this second venture he did
not survive. His own account of this was preserved, according to Père
Martin, in the archives of the College of Quebec down to 1800, and
according to Dr. Shea passed into the hands of the English Government,
and was used by Smith in compiling his _History of Canada_, Quebec,
1815, and has not been seen since. “It is given apparently in substance
in the Relation of 1646.”—Shea’s _Charlevoix_, ii. 188.
Dr. Shea also edited in English the “Jogues Papers” in the _N. Y. Hist.
Soc. Coll._, 2d ser., vol. iii., including the account of Jogues’
captivity among the Mohawks; and he repeated the narrative in his
_Perils of the Ocean and Wilderness_, p. 16. The original is a Latin
letter, dated Rennselaerswyck, Aug. 5, 1643, of which there is a sworn
copy preserved at Montreal, which differs somewhat from the printed
copy as given in Alegambe’s _Mortes illustres_, Rome, 1667, p. 616
(Carayon, no. 79); and in Tanner’s _Societas Jesu_, Prague, 1675;
and the German translation of it, _Die Gesellschaft Jesu_, Prague,
1683. Cf. Carter-Brown, vol. ii. nos. 1,136, 1,274; Field, _Indian
Bibliography_, 1,530; Stevens, _Bibliotheca Hist._ 2,017. The letter
is badly translated in Bressani’s _Breve Relatione_, p. 77, but Martin
gives it better in his version of Bressani (p. 188). Details, more or
less full, can be found in Andrada’s _Claros Varones_, Madrid, 1666;
Creuxius, _Historia Canadensis_, pp. 338, 378; the Dutch _Church
History_ of Hazart, vol. iv.; Barcia, _Ensayo Chronologico_, Madrid,
1723, p. 205; Carayon, _Première Mission_; the Bishop of Buffalo’s
_Missions in Western New York_, Buffalo, 1862; and of course in
Ferland, Parkman (_Jesuits_, pp. 106, 211, 217, 304), and the other
modern historians. A portrait of Jogues is given in Shea’s edition of
the _Novum Belgium_, and in his _Charlevoix_, ii. 141.
=1647-1648.=—HIEROSME LALEMANT. _Relation ... ès années 1647 et 1648._
Paris, 1649. Pages 8, 158, blank leaf, 135.
CONTENTS: Dreuillettes among the Abenakis; Huron Country Report by
Ragueneau, with accounts of the Great Lakes and the Native Tribes upon
them; The Five Nations; The Delawares (Andastes); New Sweden, Niagara
Falls, etc.
REFERENCES: Carayon, no. 1,277; Harrisse, no. 89; Sabin, vol. x. no.
38,686; Carter-Brown, vol. ii. no. 673; Lenox, p. 7; O’Callaghan, no.
1,226; Sunderland, vol. iii. no, 7,218.
COPIES: =CB.=, =HC.=, =K.=, =L.= (2 copies), =M.=, =NY.=, =V.=
[Illustration]
Father Gabriel Dreuillettes, in the interest of the Abenakis mission,
subsequently made a journey in 1651 to Boston, to negotiate a
league between the New England colonies, the Canadian authorities
and the Abenakis against the Iroquois. The papers appertaining
were recovered by Dr. Shea and printed in New York in 1866, as
_Recueil de Pièces sur la Négociation entre la Nouvelle France et
la Nouvelle Angleterre ès années 1648 et suivantes_. A Latin letter
from Dreuillettes to Winthrop, which makes a part of this book, had
earlier been printed separately in 1864 by Dr. Shea, and again in
1869. The original manuscript was found among the Winthrop Papers,
and is now in the cabinet of the Massachusetts Historical Society.
(Field, _Indian Bibliography_, pp. 460, 461; Sabin, vol. v. p. 536;
_N. Y. Hist. Soc. Coll._, 2d ser., iii. 303.) Mr. Lenox also, still
earlier, privately printed at Albany in 1855, after the original,
“déposé parmi les papiers du Bureau des Biens des Jésuites à Québec,”
Dreuillettes’ _Narré du Voyage_ (60 copies), as copied by Dr. Shea.
Cf. Carter-Brown, vol. ii. no. 713; _Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc._, iii. 34;
xi. 152; Hutchinson’s _Massachusetts Bay_, i. 166; his _Collection
of Papers_, p. 166; _Plymouth Colonial Records_, ix. 199; Parkman’s
_Jesuits_, pp. 324, 330, and his references; Shea’s _Charlevoix_, i.
228, and ii. 214; Hazard’s _Collection_, ii. 183, 184; and _N. Y. Col.
Doc._, ix. 6. The letter of the Council of Quebec and the commission
given to the envoys sent to Boston, are also in _Massachusetts
Archives; Documents Collected in France_, ii. 67, 69, where will also
be found (iii. 21) a letter, dated Quebec, April 8, 1681, on the life
and death of Druillettes.
=1648-1649.=—PAUL RAGUENEAU. _Relation ... ès années 1648 et 1649._
Paris, 1650. Pages 8, 103. There was a second issue, with larger
vignette on title, and some additional pages to the Huron report, pp.
4, 114, 2.
[Illustration]
CONTENTS: Text signed by J. H. Chaumonot; the Huron mission; chaps. 4
and 5 give biographies of Brebeuf and Gabriel Lalemant, killed by the
Iroquois.
REFERENCES: Carayon, no. 1,278; Harrisse, nos. 90, 91; Carter-Brown,
vol. ii. nos. 695, 696; Lenox, p. 7; O’Callaghan, no. 1,228; Dufossé,
1880 (180 francs). Harrassowitz, 1883 (160 marks). The second issue
was recently priced in New York at $60.
COPIES: =CB.= (both editions), =GB.= (first), =J.= (first), =K.=
(second), =L.= (both), =M.= (first), =OHM.= (both).
=1648-1649.=—RAGUENEAU. _Relation_, etc.... Lille, 1650. Pages 121, 3.
Follows the first Paris edition, but is of smaller size.
REFERENCES: Harrisse, no. 92; Lenox, p. 7.
COPIES: =HC.=, =L.=
=1648-1649.=—RAGUENEAU. _Narratio Historica_ ... Œniponti, 1650. Pages
24, 232, 3. A Latin translation by G. Gobat, somewhat abridged, and
differently divided into chapters; smaller than the preceding edition.
REFERENCES: Carayon, no. 1,316; Harrisse, no. 93; Ternaux, no. 703;
Carter-Brown, vol. ii. no. 690; Lenox, p. 7; O’Callaghan, no. 1,227.
Rich, 1832 (15 shillings).
COPIES: =CB.=, =HC.=, =L.=
Further accounts of the martyrdom of Brebeuf and Lalemant will be found
in most of the works mentioned under 1647, in connection with Jogues.
Cf. also the _Mercure de France_, 1649, pp. 997-1,008; _Catholic
World_, xiii. 512, 623; Le Père Martin’s _Le P. Jean de Brebeuf, sa
vie, ses travaux, son Martyre_, Paris, 1877; Harrisse, p. 88; Shea’s
_Charlevoix_, ii. 221, where is an engraving of a silver portrait bust
of Brebeuf, sent by his relatives from Paris to enclose his skull (cf.
Parkman’s _Jesuits_, p. 389), which is still preserved at Quebec. The
accompanying engraving is made from a photograph kindly lent by Mr.
Parkman. There are other engravings in Shea’s _Catholic Mission_, in
his _Charlevoix_, ii. 221; and in the _Carter-Brown Catalogue_, ii. 171.
[Illustration]
=1649-1650.=—RAGUENEAU. _Relation ... depuis l’Esté de la année
1649 jusques à l’Esté de l’année 1650._ Paris, 1651. Pages 4, 178
(marked 187), 2. Page 171 has tailpiece of fruits. A second issue has
typographical variations, with no tailpiece on p. 171, and on p. 178 a
letter from the “Supérieure de l’Hospital de la Miséricorde de Kebec.”
CONTENTS: Ragueneau’s letter begins p. 1; Lalemant’s, p. 172; Letters
of Buteux and De Lyonne; Huron Mission; Murders of Garnier and Noel
Chabanel; Iroquois defeat of the Hurons, and a remnant of the latter
colonized near Quebec.
REFERENCES: Carayon, nos. 1,279, 1,280; Harrisse, nos. 95, 96;
Carter-Brown, vol. ii. no. 719; Lenox, p. 8; Brinley, p. 139;
Harrassowitz, 1883 (250 marks).
COPIES: =CB.=, =GB.=, =HC.= (first edition), =K.=, =L.= (both), =M.=,
=NY.=
Shea, _Charlevoix_, ii. 231, and Parkman, _Jesuits_, pp. 101, 406,
407, give references for Garnier. Cf. Bressani, _Breve Relatione_, and
Martin’s translation of Bressani, for a table of thirty Jesuit and
Recollect missionaries among the Hurons. Margry’s _Découvertes_, etc.,
Part I., is on “Les Récollets dans le pays des Hurons, 1646-1687.”
Parkman, _Jesuits_, pp. 402, 430, saying that this Relation is the
principal authority for the retreat of the Hurons to Isle St. Joseph,
etc., gives other references.
=1650-1651.=—RAGUENEAU. _Relation ... ès années 1650 et 1651._ Paris,
1652. Pages 4, 146, 1.
CONTENTS: French Settlements and the Missions. A letter signed Martin
Lyonne begins p. 139.
REFERENCES: Carayon, no. 1,281; Harrisse, no. 97; Carter-Brown, vol.
ii. no. 740; Lenox, p. 8; O’Callaghan, no. 1,229; Harrassowitz, 1883
(120 marks).
COPIES: =CB.=, =GB.=, =HC.=, =K.=, =L.=, =M.=, =NY.=
=1651-1652.=—RAGUENEAU. _Relation ... depuis l’été de l’année 1651
jusques à l’été de l’année 1652._ Paris, 1653. Pages 8, 200.
CONTENTS: Chap. i. gives an account of the death of Buteux; Chap. ix.,
War with the Iroquois; Chap. x., Biography of La Mère Marie de Saint
Joseph.
REFERENCES: Carayon, no. 1,282; Harrisse, no. 98; Carter-Brown, vol.
ii. no. 756; Lenox, p. 8; O’Callaghan, no. 1,231; Harrassowitz, 1883
(120 marks).
COPIES: =CB.=, =HC.=, (two copies), =K.=, _L._, _V._
The account of the Réligieuses Ursulines of Canada in this Relation was
repeated, with additions, in pp. 229-315 of _La Gloire de S. Ursule_,
Valenciennes, 1656. Cf. Harrisse, p. 106; Lenox, p. 8; also _Les
Ursulines de Québec_, and Saint Foi’s _Premières Ursulines de France_.
[Illustration]
An account of the missions “in Canada sive Nova Francia” is the
first section of the _Progressus fidei Catholicæ in novo orbe_,
published at Coloniæ Agrippinæ, 1653. The book is very rare; the only
copy noted is in the Carter-Brown Collection, vol. ii. no. 758. The
_Lenox Contribution_, p. 8., says there was a copy in O’Callaghan’s
Collection, but I fail to find it in his sale catalogue; cf. Harrisse,
p. 99.
=1652-1653.=—FRANÇOIS LEMERCIER. _Relation ... depuis l’été de l’année
1652 jusques à l’été de l’année 1653._ Paris, 1654. Pages 4, 184, 4.
CONTENTS: Montreal; Three Rivers; Poncet captured by the Mohawks; Fort
Orange; Peace with the Iroquois.
REFERENCES: Carayon, no. 1,283; Harrisse, no. 101; Sabin, vol. x. no.
39,992; Carter-Brown, vol. ii. no. 775; Lenox, p. 8; O’Callaghan, no.
1,233; Harrassowitz, 1883 (120 marks).
COPIES: =CB.=, =HC.=, =K.=, =L.=, =M.=, =OHM.=
Montreal was organized as a colony in 1653. Cf. Faillon, vol. ii. chap.
10.
=1653-1654.=—LEMERCIER. _Relation ... ès années 1653 et 1654._ Paris,
1655. Pages 4, 176.
CONTENTS: Negotiations with the Five Nations; Le Moyne at Onondaga;
Treaty of Peace, and Discovery of Salt Springs; Letter from the Hurons
at the Isle d’Orléans with a translation.
REFERENCES: Carayon, no. 1,284; Harrisse, no. 103; Sabin, vol. x. no.
39,993; Lenox, p. 8; Carter-Brown, vol. ii. no. 799; O’Callaghan, no.
1,234; Harrassowitz, 1883 (120 marks); _Doc. Hist. N. Y._, i. 33
COPIES: =CB.=, =F.=, =HC.=, =J.=, =K.=, =L.=, =M.=, =OHM.=, _NY._.
Cf. L. P. Tarcotte’s _Histoire de l’ile Orléans_, Quebec, 1867, and N.
H. Bowen’s _Isle of Orleans, 1860_.
=1655.=—_Copie de deux Lettres envoiées de la Nouvelle France._ Paris,
1656. Pages 28. The bearer of the Relation of this year was robbed in
France, and only these two letters were recovered and printed. It, with
the _Relation_ of 1660, is the rarest of the series.
REFERENCES: Harrisse, nos. 108, 425; Carter-Brown, vol. ii. no. 813;
Lenox, p. 9; O’Callaghan, no. 1,974.
COPIES: Those in =L.= and in the Ste. Geneviève at Paris are the only
ones known.
Mr. Lenox printed a fac-simile edition from his own copy, with double
titles, showing variations; and of this there are copies in =CB.=,
=HC.=, etc.
=1655-1656.=—JEAN DE QUENS. _Relation ... ès Années 1655 et 1656._
Paris, 1657. Pages 6, 168.
CONTENTS: A Letter signed by De Quens; Le Moyne among the Mohawks; The
French at Onondaga; War between the Five Nations and Eries; Ottawas at
Quebec; Murder of Garreau.
REFERENCES: Carayon, no. 1,285; Harrisse, no. 109; Carter-Brown, vol.
ii. no. 826; Lenox, p. 9; O’Callaghan, no. 1,237.
COPIES: =CB.=, =GB.=, =HC.=, =L.=, =M.=
Cf. Tailhan, _Mémoires sur Perrot_, p. 229; and the references in
Shea’s _Charlevoix_, vol. ii. Parkman says Perrot is in large part
incorporated in La Potherie; cf. _Historical Magazine_, ix. 205.
=1656-1657.=—=Le Jeune.= _Relation ... ès années mil six cents
cinquante six et mil six cens cinquante sept._ Paris, 1658. Pages 12,
211.
CONTENTS: Begins with a Letter signed by Le Jeune; The Senecas and
the French; Mission to the Cayugas; Dupuis and the Jesuits among the
Onondagas; Le Moyne among the Mohawks; Customs of the Five Nations;
Chap. xxi. has a Letter signed by Le Mercier.
REFERENCES: Carayon, no. 1,280; Harrisse, no. 110; Sabin, vol. x. no.
39,957; Carter-Brown, vol. ii. no. 839; Lenox, p. 9; O’Callaghan, no.
1,238; Harrassowitz, 1883 (125 marks). Recently priced at $60.
COPIES: =CB.=, =GB.=, =HC.=, =K.=, =L.=, =NY.=
[Illustration]
=1657-1658.=—RAGUENEAU. _Relation ... ès années 1657 et 1658._ Paris,
1659. Pages 8, 136. Martin holds that this volume was made up in Paris.
CONTENTS: Two Letters from Ragueneau; French Settlements at Onondaga
abandoned; Journal, 1655-1658, dated New Holland, March 25, 1658, and
signed Simon Le Moine; Routes to Hudson’s Bay; Comparison of savage
and European Customs.
REFERENCES: Carayon, no. 1,287; Harrisse, no. 112; Carter-Brown, vol.
ii. no. 859; Lenox, p. 9.
COPIES: =CB.=, =L.=, =M.=, =NY.=
On the French missions in New York, see Marie de l’Incarnation,
_Lettres historiques_; Parkman’s _Old Régime_, chap. i.; O’Callaghan’s
_New Netherland;_ Shea’s _Charlevoix_, vol. iii.; J. V. H. Clark’s
_Onondaga_ (Syracuse, 1849); Charles Hawley’s _Early Chapters of
Cayuga History, with the Jesuit Missions in Goi-o-gouen_, 1656-1684
(Auburn, 1879), with an Introduction by Dr. Shea. This last book has
a map of the Iroquois territory and the mission sites, by J. S. Clark
(reproduced on an earlier page).
=1659.=—LALLEMANT. _Lettres envoiées de la Nouvelle France._ Paris,
1660. Pages 49, 3.
CONTENTS: Arrival of a Bishop; Algonquin and Huron Missions; Acadia
Mission. The three letters are dated, respectively, Sept. 12, Oct. 10,
Oct. 16, 1659.
REFERENCES: Harrisse, no. 113; Sabin, vol. x. no. 38,683; Lenox, p. 9;
O’Callaghan, no. 1,236.
COPIES: From what was supposed to be a unique copy (since burned
in 1854), in the Parliamentary Library at Quebec, Mr. Lenox had
a fac-simile made, from which he afterward printed, in 1854, his
fac-simile edition; but Harrisse has since reported two copies in the
Bibliothèque Nationale, at Paris. Harrassowitz, in his _Rarissima
Americana_, no. 91, p. 5, notes a copy at 2,500 marks, which is now in
Mr. Kalbfleisch’s Collection.
[Illustration]
De Laval landed at Quebec June 6, 1659, having been made Bishop of
Petra and Vicar Apostolic of New France the previous year. He became
Bishop of Quebec in 1674; resigned in 1688, and died in 1708. Parkman
draws a distinct picture of his character in his _Old Régime_, chap.
v., and describes his appearance from several portraits which are
extant, one of which is engraved in Shea’s _Le Clercq_, ii. p. 50.
A Life of him, by La Tour, was printed at Cologne in 1761; and an
_Esquisse de la vie_, etc., at Quebec, in 1845. Two other publications
are of interest: _Notice sur la fête à Quebec le 16 Juin, 1859, 200eme
anniversaire de l’arrivée de Laval_, Quebec, 1859, and _Translation
des Restes de Laval_, Quebec, 1878. Cf. Faillon, _Hist. de la Colonie
Française_, ii. chap. 13, and Shea’s _Charlevoix_, iii. 20, for
references. In 1874 the second centennial of Laval’s becoming bishop
was commemorated in a _Notice biographique_, by E. Langevin, “suivie
de quarante-une lettres et notes historiques sur le Chapitre de la
Cathédrale,” published at Montreal, 1874.
[Illustration]
The Sisters of the Congregation of Notre Dame were founded this year
at Montreal, and the life of the foundress, Margaret Bourgeois, by
Montgolfier, was published in Montreal in 1818; and was translated and
published in English in New York in 1880. Another Life, said to be by
the Abbé Faillon, was published in 1853. An earlier Life, by Ransonet,
was published at Liege in 1728. Cf. Parkman’s _Jesuits_, p. 201, and
Shea’s _Charlevoix_, vol. v., for her portrait.
The Abbé de Queylus, who was the candidate of the Sulpitians for the
Bishopric, came over in 1657. (Faillon, ii. 271; La Tour, _Vie de
Laval_, 19; Shea’s _Charlevoix_, iii. 20; Parkman, _Old Régime_, 97.)
=1659-1660.=—(Not signed.) _Relation ... ès années mil six cent
cinquante neuf et mil six cent soixante._ Paris, 1661. Pages 6, 202;
paging irregular in parts.
CONTENTS: Letter from Menard; Country of the Five Nations, with Census
of the Tribes; Saguenay River; Hudson’s Bay; Overthrow of the Hurons.
REFERENCES: Carayon, no. 1,288; Harrisse, no. 115: Carter-Brown, vol.
ii. no. 895; Lenox, p. 9; O’Callaghan, no. 1,239.
COPIES: =CB.=, =F.=, =GB.=, =HC.=, =L.=, =M.=, =NY.=
For the dispersal of the Hurons, see Martin’s Bressani, App. p. 309;
cf. Parkman’s _Jesuits_.
For the part relating to traders on Lake Superior in 1658, see
translation, in Smith’s _Wisconsin_, iii. 20; cf. Margry, i. 53.
Menard’s letter, Aug. 27, 1660, on the eve of his embarkation for Lake
Superior, is translated in Minnesota Historical Society’s _Annals_, i.
20; and _Collections_, i. 135.
[Illustration]
=1660-1661.=—LE JEUNE. _Relation ... ès années 1660 et 1661._ Paris,
1662. Pages 8, 213, 3.
CONTENTS: Le Jeune’s Epistle to the King; War with the Iroquois; Peace
with the Five Nations; Mission to Hudson’s Bay; “Journal du premier
Voyage fait vers la Mer du Nort,” begins on page 62; Letters of Le
Moyne from the Mohawk Country, and from a French Prisoner among the
Mohawks.
REFERENCES: Carayon, no. 1,289; Harrisse, no. 117; Carter-Brown, vol.
ii. no. 907; Lenox, p. 10; O’Callaghan, no. 1,240; Harrassowitz, 1882
(125 marks). Recently priced in New York at $50.
COPIES: =CB.=, =HC.=, =K.=, =L.=, =NY.=, =V.=
[Illustration
RELATION
DE CE QVI S’EST PASSE
DE PLVS REMARQVABLE
AVX MISSIONS DES PERES
De la Compagnie de Iesvs
EN LA
NOVVELLE FRANCE
és années 1662. & 1663.
_Envoyée au R. P. André Castillon, Provincial de la Province de
France._
A PARIS,
Chez SEBASTIEN CRAMOISY, Et SEBAST.
MABRE-CRAMOISY, Imprimeurs ordinaires du Roy & de la Reine, rue S.
Iacques, aux Cicognes.
M. DC. LXIV.
_AVEC PRIVILEGE DV ROY_]
=1661-1662.=—LALLEMANT. _Relation ... ès années 1661 et 1662._ Paris,
1663. Pages 8, 118, 1.
[Illustration]
CONTENTS: Letter dated Kebec, Sept. 18, 1662, signed Hierosme
Lalemant; Disputes with two of the Five Nations; Murder of Vignal; Le
Moyne among the Senecas.
REFERENCES: Carayon, no. 1,290; Harrisse, no. 119; Carter-Brown, vol.
ii. no. 929; Lenox, p. 10; O’Callaghan, no. 1,241; Quaritch, no.
12,365 (£8 10_s_.); Harrassowitz, 1882 (150 marks).
COPIES: =CB.=, =HC.=, =J.=, =K.=, =L.=
Cf. Shea’s _Charlevoix_, iii. 45, note.
=1662-1663.=—LALLEMANT. _Relation ... ès années 1662 et 1663._ Paris,
1664. Pages 16, 169, with some irregularity of paging.
CONTENTS: Meteorological Phenomena: Earthquake of 1663 [see Harrisse,
p. 118] and Solar Eclipse, Sept. 1, 1663; War with the Iroquois;
Outaouaks; Death of Menard.
REFERENCES: Carayon, no. 1,291; Harrisse, no. 121; Sabin, vol. x. no.
38,688; Lenox, p. 10; Carter-Brown, vol. ii. no. 950; O’Callaghan,
no. 1,242; Dufossé, no. 5,602 (180 francs); Harrassowitz, 1882 (120
marks). Recently priced in New York at $50.
COPIES: =CB.=, =HC.=, =K.=, =L.=, =M.=, =NY.=
Cf. Shea’s _Charlevoix_, iii. 48, 57.
Menard had established a mission at St. Theresa Bay, Lake Superior,
in 1661. Cf. Smith’s _Wisconsin_, vol. iii., for a translation;
cf. further, on Menard, Perrot’s _Mœurs des Sauvages; Historical
Magazine_, viii. 175, by Dr. Shea, and his edition of _Charlevoix_,
i. 49; _Minnesota Hist. Soc. Coll._, by E. D. Neill, i. 135. Cf. J.
G. Shea on the “Indian Tribes of Wisconsin,” in the _Wisconsin Hist.
Coll._, iii. 125; and a criticism by Alfred Brunson in vol. iv. p. 227.
=1663-1664.=—LALLEMANT. _Relation ... ès années 1663 et 1664._ Paris,
1665. Pages 8, 176, with some irregularities of paging.
CONTENTS: Missions among the Hurons, Algonquins, and Five Nations; War
of the Mohawks; Iroquois Embassy to the French.
REFERENCES: Carayon, no. 1,292; Harrisse, no. 123; Sabin, vol. x. no.
38,689; Carter-Brown, vol. ii. no. 964; Lenox, p. 10.
COPIES: =CB.=, =HC.=, =L.=, =M.=, =NY.=
=1664-1665.=—LEMERCIER. _Relation ... ès années 1664 et 1665._ Paris,
1666. Pages 12, 128.
CONTENTS: M. de Tracy’s Voyage; Strength of the Five Nations;
Comets; Vignal’s Death; Nouvel among the Savages. What is called a
second issue has in addition a “Lettre de la R. Mère Supérieure des
Réligieuses Hospitalières de Kebec du 23 Octobre, 1665,” 16 pp., which
is not reprinted in the Quebec edition of the _Relations_. A map of
Lakes Ontario, Champlain, and adjacent parts, with plans of the forts
on the Richelieu River. A part of the map and plans of the forts are
given herewith. Martin assigns these plans to the following _Relation_.
REFERENCES: Carayon, no. 1,293; Harrisse, nos. 124, 133; Sabin,
vol. x. no. 39,994; Carter-Brown, vol. ii. no 978; Lenox, p. 10;
O’Callaghan, no. 1,243; Dufossé, no. 2,175 (200 francs).
COPIES: =CB.=, =HC.=, =L.= (both issues), =M.=, =OHM.=, =NY.=
[Illustration]
=1665-1666=.—LEMERCIER. _Relation ... aux années mil six cent soixante
cinq et mil six cent soixante six._ Paris, 1667. Pages viii, 47, 16.
CONTENTS: Courcelles’ Expedition, January, 1666, against the Oneidas
and Mohawks; De Tracy’s Interview with Garacontie, and his Expedition,
September, 1666, against the Mohawks.
[Illustration]
REFERENCES: Carayon, no. 1,294; Harrisse, no. 126; Sabin, vol. x. no.
39,995; Carter-Brown, vol. ii. no. 992: Lenox, p. 10; Harrassowitz,
1882 (150 marks).
COPIES: =CB.=, without the “Lettre.” =K.=, with the “Lettre.”
[Illustration]
Harrisse says the copies in the Bibliothèque Nationale and the Ste.
Geneviève Libraries in Paris contain also a “Lettre de la Révérende
Mère Supérieure des Réligieuses Hospitalières de Kebec, du 3 Octobre,
1666,” 16 pp., which is called for in the contents-tables of copies in
which it fails, and it is not included in the Quebec edition of the
_Relations. Historical Magazine_, iii. 20.
[Illustration]
=1666-1667=.—LEMERCIER. _Relation ... les années mil six cens soixante
six et mil six cens soixante sept._ Paris, 1668. Pages 8, 160, 14. The
title is without the usual vignette of storks.
[Illustration: THE FORTS.
A section in fac-simile of the map in the _Relation_ of 1662-63,
showing the position of the forts. These may be compared with the
_Carte dressée pour la Campagne de 1666_, accompanied by plans of forts
Richelieu, St. Louis, and Ste. Thérèse, which Talon sent with his
despatch of Nov. 11, 1665, and which is engraved in Faillon, _Histoire
de la Colonie Française en Canada_, iii. 125, where will also be found
a map to illustrate the campaign of 1666.]
CONTENTS: Allouez’ Journal to Lake Superior; The Pottawatomies and
other Western Tribes; Missions to the Five Nations; Thomas Morel’s
Account of the Wonders in the Church of St. Anne du Petit Cap. A
second issue has appended, a “Lettre de la Révérende Mère Supérieure
des Réligieuses Hospitalières de Kebec du 20 Octobre, 1667,” 14 pp.,
which is omitted in the Quebec edition of the _Relations_.
REFERENCES: Carayon, no. 1,295; Harrisse, no. 127; Sabin, vol. x. no.
39,996; Carter-Brown, vol. ii. no. 1,011; Lenox, p. 11; Harrassowitz,
1882, without the “Lettre” (100 marks).
COPIES: =CB.= (2d issue), =HC.= (2d issue), =J.=, =K.= (1st issue), L.
(both), =M.=, =NY.= (1st issue), =V.=
A translation of Allouez’ journal is in Smith’s _Wisconsin_, vol.
iii.; cf. Shea’s _Charlevoix_, iii. 101, and his _Discovery of the
Mississippi_, and _Catholic Missions_; Margry’s _Découvertes_, i. 57.
For the early missions in the far West, see _Wisconsin Hist. Soc.
Coll_., vol. iii.; E. M. Sheldon’s _Early History of Michigan_;
Lanman’s _Michigan_; James W. Taylor’s History of Ohio. Cf. Field’s
_Indian Bibliography_, nos. 856, 1,398, 1,535, 1,688.
[Illustration]
It has been claimed that Archbishop Fénelon (b. 1651) may have been a
missionary among the Iroquois from 1667 to 1674; cf. Robert Greenough
in _N. Y. Hist. Soc. Proc_., 1848, p. 109; 1849, p. 11. A half-brother
of Fénelon is known to have been in Montreal; cf. Abbé Verreau on “Les
deux Abbés de Fénelon,” in the Canadian _Journal de l’Instruction
publique_, vol. viii.; Parkman’s _Frontenac_, pp. 33, 43. The evidence
fails to establish the proof of the Archbishop’s presence here. Cf. _N.
E. Hist. and Geneal. Reg_. xvi. p. 344, and xvii. p. 246.
[Illustration: TRACY’S CAMPAIGN, 1666.
This sketch follows the principal part of a manuscript map in Mr.
Parkman’s collection (No. 6) in Harvard College Library. It is called
_Carte des grands lacs Ontario et Autres, et des costes de la Nouvelle
Angleterre et des pays traversés par M^{rs}. de Tracy et Courcelles
pour aller attaquer les Agnez_, 1666. Key:—
1. Saguenay.
2. Tadoussac.
3. Quebec.
4. R. du Sault de la Chaudiere.
5. R. des Etchemins.
6. Les 3 Rivières.
7. Fort de Richelieu.
8. R. St. François.
9. Fort de St. Louis.
10. Montreal.
11. Lac de St. Louis.
12. Lac des deux Montagnes.
13. Rivière par ou viennent les Outaouacs.
14. Lac St. François.
15. Sault.
16. Rapides.
17. Otondiala.
18. Ochouagen R.
19. Commencement du lac Champlain, ou est le fort S^a Anne du quel M.
de Tracy escrit et est party le 4^{eme} Octobre, 1666.
20. Lac du St. Sacrement.
21. Habitations Iroquoises que les troupes du Roy doivent attaquer.
Trois villages des Agniez Iroquois.
22. Petit village hollandais.
23. Orange Midy.
The _Catalogue_ of the Library of Parliament, 1858, p. 1614, gives a
map, probably this one, as copied from the original in the archives at
Paris.
Cf. on this campaign, Parkman’s _Old Régime_, p. 186. Harrisse, no.
125, following Faribault, no. 808, cites a _Journal de la Marche du
Marquis de Tracy contre les Iroquois_, Paris, 1667, as an account of
the third expedition against the Iroquois, of which Tracy took the
command, Sept.-Nov., 1666, in person,—the earlier expeditions having
been unsuccessful. Cf. documents in Margry, i. 169; Charlevoix, liv.
ix., and Brodhead, vols. i. and ix. Cf. Colden’s _Five Nations_, and
authorities enumerated by Shea in his _Charlevoix_, iii. 89, etc.]
=1667-1668.=—LEMERCIER. _Relation ... aux années mil six cens
soixante-sept, et mil six cens soixante-huit._ Paris, 1669. Pages 8,
219. Has the stork vignette of the Cramoisy press on the title, and it
is the last _Relation_ in which that sign is used.
CONTENTS: The several Missions; Drowning of Arent van Curler; Letter
of De Petrée, Bishop of Quebec; Death of the Mère Cathérine de St.
Augustin.
REFERENCES: Carayon, no. 1,296; Harrisse, no. 128; Sabin, vol. x. no.
39,997; Carter-Brown, vol. ii. no. 1,029; Lenox, p. 11.
COPIES: =CB.=, =HC.= (2 copies) =L.=, =M.=, =OHM.=, =NY.=
Père Paul Ragueneau’s _La Vie de la Mère Cathérine de St. Augustin_,
was published at Paris in 1671. Cf. Harrisse, no. 133; Carter-Brown,
vol. ii. no. 1,069; Leclerc, 1878 (500 francs). There was an Italian
translation printed at Naples in 1752.
=1668-1669.=—(No author.) _Relation ... les années 1668 et 1669._
Paris, 1670. Pages 2, 150 (last page 140 by error). The title vignette
is a vase of flowers.
[Illustration: THE JESUIT MAP OF LAKE SUPERIOR.]
CONTENTS: Missions among the Five Nations; Letter from Governor
Lovelace, “Gouverneur de Manhate,” from Fort James (New York), Nov.
18, 1668, to Father Pierron, on the sale of ardent spirits to the
Indians.
REFERENCES: Carayon, no. 1,297; Harrisse, nos. 129, 530; Carter-Brown,
vol. ii. no. 1,049; Lenox, p. 11; O’Callaghan, no. 1,244.
COPIES: =CB.=, =HC.=, =L.=, =M.=, =OHM.=, =NY.=
The question of selling liquor to the Indians was one of large
political bearing at times. Cf. Faillon, iii. chap. 21.
=1669-1670.=—LEMERCIER. _Relation ... les années 1669 et 1670._ Paris,
1671. Pages 10, 3-318. Part i. pp. 3-108, in larger type than part ii.
pp. 111-318.
CONTENTS: Missions to the Five Nations; The Iroquois and Algonquin
Difficulties; The Mohawk and Mohegan War, 1669; The Père d’Ablon’s
“Relation des Missions aux Ovtaovaks;” A chapter on the Dutch begins
p. 145; Lake Superior and the Copper Mines; Letter from Jacques
Marquette on the Western Tribes.
REFERENCES: Carayon, no. 1,298; Harrisse, no. 135; Sabin, vol. x. no.
39,998; Carter-Brown, vol. ii. no. 1,070; Lenox, p. 11; O’Callaghan,
no. 1,245; Dufossé, no. 2,176 (200 francs).
Copies: =CB.=, =F.=, =HC.=, =L.=, =M.=, =NY.=, =V.=
[Illustration]
Translations of portions on Western explorations are in Smith’s
_Wisconsin_, vol. iii.
=1670-1671.=—CLAUDE D’ABLON. _Relation ... les années 1670 et 1671._.
Paris, 1672. Pages 16, 189, 1, with errors of paging. The title
vignette is a basket of fruit.
CONTENTS: The Missions; The Western Country occupied by the French,
and the Country described; the Mississippi River described from the
Reports of the Indians.
[Illustration]
It has a folding map of Lake Superior (a fac-simile of it is annexed),
of which, says Parkman (_La Salle_, pp. 30, 450), “the exactness
has been exaggerated as compared with other Canadian maps of the
day.” Bancroft (UNITED STATES, original edition, iii. 152) gives a
reproduction of it. Others are in Whitney’s GEOLOGICAL REPORT OF LAKE
SUPERIOR, and in Monette’s MISSISSIPPI. vol. i. Harrisse (no. 201)
notes a map of Lake Superior, dated 1671, and preserved in Paris.
REFERENCES: Carayon, no. 1,290; Harrisse, no. 138; Carter-Brown,
vol. ii. no. 1,084; Lenox, p. 11; Dufossé, no. 2,177 (200 francs);
Harrassowitz, 1882 (110 marks).
COPIES: =CB.=, =HC.=, =K.= (without map), =L.=, =M.=, =NY.=
Cf. the “Relation de l’Abbé Gallinée” in Margry, _Découvertes_,
etc., part i. p. 112, and separately with the Abbé Verreau’s notes,
Montreal, 1875. St. Lusson’s ceremony in taking possession of the
country on the Lakes is noted in _Ibid._ i. 96.
[Illustration: MADAME DE LA PELTRIE.
Copied from a photograph owned by Mr. Parkman of a painting of which
there is an engraving in _Les Ursulines de Quebec_, i. 348.]
=1671-1672.=—D’ABLON. _Relation ... les années 1671 et 1672._ Paris,
1673. Pages 16, 264.
CONTENTS: Arrival of Frontenac; Huron and Iroquois, Lower Algonquin,
and Hudson’s Bay Missions; Overland Journey from the Saguenay. On page
207 begins “La Sainte Mort de Madame de la Peltrie.”
REFERENCES: Carayon, no. 1,300; Harrisse, nos. 139, 340; Carter-Brown,
vol. ii. no. 1,097; Lenox, p. 12; O’Callaghan, no. 1,246;
Harrassowitz, 1882 (150 marks.)
COPIES: =CB.=, =HC.= (without map), =K.=, =L.=, =M.=, =NY.=, =V.=
Harrisse says the two copies in the Bibliothèque Nationale have the
same map as the preceding _Relation_. O’Callaghan says all copies
ought to have it. Lenox says the map in this edition is sometimes, but
rarely, found with variations, the position of some of the missions
being changed, and new stations added on the plate.
Parkman (_La Salle_, p. 29) speaks of the change now taking place in
the character of the _Relations_, which are still “for the edification
of the pious reader, filled with intolerably tedious stories of
baptisms, conversions, and the exemplary deportments of neophytes;
but they are relieved abundantly by more mundane subjects,— ...
observations on the winds, currents, and tides of the Great Lakes,
speculations on a subterranean outlet of Lake Superior, accounts of its
copper mines,”[690] etc.
A _Life of Madame de la Peltrie_ (Magdalen de Chauvigny), by Mother St.
Thomas, was published in New York in 1859.
A companion of Madame de la Peltrie was commemorated in _La Vie de
la Vénérable Mère Marie de l’Incarnation, première Supérieure des
Ursulines_ (Paris, 1677), by her son, Claude Martin. She was in Canada
from 1639 to 1672. (Harrisse, no. 143; Lenox, pp. 13, 14; Dufossé, no.
6,763, 125 francs.) In 1681 a series of _Lettres de la Vénérable Mère
Marie de l’Incarnation_ was printed, and they cover many historical
incidents. (Harrisse, no. 148; Dufossé, no. 3,166, 110 francs.) A
selection of them was published at Clermont Ferrand in 1837. Charlevoix
published a Life of her in 1724; and in 1864 one by Casgrain was
printed in Quebec, and in English at Cork in 1880. In 1873 the French
text was included in _Œuvres de l’Abbé Casgrain_, tome i. Another by
the Abbé Richardeau was printed at Tournai in 1873. There is a likeness
of her in _Les Ursulines de Québec depuis leur Etablissement jusqu’a
nos jours_. A. M. D. G. Quebec, 1863. 4 vols. Shea (_Charlevoix_,
i. 82; ii. 101; iii. 184) enumerates other authorities: Juchereau,
_Histoire de l’Hôtel-Dieu de Québec_. Another History of the
Hôtel-Dieu, by Casgrain, was published in 1878. An account of steps to
procure her canonization is in the _Catholic World_ (New York), August,
1878. Cf. Parkman’s _Jesuits_, 174, 177, 199, 206.
[The contemporary printing of these Relations stopped with this for
1671-1672. The series in continuation has since been printed in
various forms, as follows.]
=1672-1679.=—_Mission du Canada; Relations inédites de la Nouvelle
France_ (1672-1679), Paris, Ch. Douniol, 1861. 2 vols.; 2 maps, one of
them a fac-simile of Marquette’s map. [These volumes are vols. iii. and
iv. of _Voyages et Travaux des Missionaires de la Compagnie de Jésus_.]
Cf. Field. _Indian Bibliography_, p. 276; Carter-Brown, vol. ii. no.
1,085, 1,198; Lenox, p. 14; O’Callaghan, no. 1,252.
=1673-1679.=—CLAUDE DABLON. _Relation de ce qui s’est passé de
plus remarquable aux Missions des Pères de la Compagnie de Jésus en
la Nouvelle France les années 1673 à 1679. A la Nouvelle York. De
la Presse Cramoisy de Jean-Marie Shea_, 1860. Pages 13, 290, with
Marquette’s map.
Martin describes the original manuscript (147 pages, pp. 109-118
wanting) preserved at Quebec as being divided into eight chapters. It
has an account of the heroic death of Marquette. Cf. Field’s _Indian
Bibliography_, no. 396; Carter-Brown, vol. ii. no. 1,197; Lenox, p. 16.
Some misrepresentations having been made regarding the Cramoisy series
of Dr. Shea, it is fair to say that the expense of the whole series
was borne by himself alone. There are enumerations of the volumes in
Field’s _Indian Bibliography_, the _Menzies Catalogue_, no. 1,811, and
in the Brinley _Catalogue_, no. 146, etc.
=1672-1673.=—DABLON. _Relation_, etc. New York, 1861.
This concerns the missions to the Hurons near Quebec, to the Iroquois,
and beyond the Great Lakes. It is also printed in the _Mission du
Canada_, vol. i. Cf. Harrisse, nos. 597, 605; Carter-Brown, vol. ii.
no. 1,098; Field, no. 1,070; Lenox, p. 17.
=1673-1674.=—DABLON. _Relation_, etc. In the _Mission du Canada_; and
an English translation is in the _Historical Magazine_, v. 237.
=1673-1675.= _Récit des Voyages et des Découvertes du R. Père Jacques
Marquette, de la Compagnie de Jésus, en l’année 1673 et aux suivantes:
La Continuation de ses Voyages par le R. P. Claude Allouez, et Le
Journal autographe du P. Marquette en 1674 et 1675. Avec la Carte de
son Voyage tracée de sa main._
Printed for Mr. Lenox after the original manuscript preserved in
the Collége Ste. Marie at Montreal. Cf. O’Callaghan, no. 1,246a;
Carter-Brown, ii. 1,126; Lenox, p. 12.
=1675.=—“État présent des missions pendant l’année 1675,” in the
_Mission du Canada_, vol. ii.
=1676-1677.=—_Relation ... ès années 1676 et 1677. Imprimée pour la
première fois, selon la copie du MS. original restant à l’Université
Laval, Québec._ [Albany, 1854.] Pages 2, 165.
CONTENTS: Missions among the Iroquois, Outaouacs, and at Tadousac.
This _Relation_ was printed for Mr. Lenox. Cf. Lenox, p. 13;
Carter-Brown, vol. ii. no. 1,172; O’Callaghan, nos. 1,247, 1,975.
=1677-1678.=—_Relation_, etc. This is printed in the _Mission du
Canada_, i. 193.
CONTENTS: Joliet’s account of his Journey with Marquette, and their
discovery of the Mississippi in 1673, as edited by Père Dablon, with
an account of a third journey to the Country of the Illinois, by
Claude Allouez.
An English version of Allouez’ journal is given in Shea’s _Mississippi
Valley_, p. 67, with a sketch of the missionary’s life. Cf. Margry’s
“Notice sur le Père Allouez, 1665-71,” in his _Découvertes_, etc., Part
I. p. 59. For Joliet and Marquette, see chap. vi.
=1684.=_—Copie d’une Lettre escrite par le Père Jacques Bigot, de la
Compagnie de Jésus, l’an 1684._ Manate [New York], 1858.
[Illustration]
The letter was written in behalf of the Abenakis of the St. Francis
de Sales mission, to accompany offerings to the tomb of their patron
saint at Annecy. The original letter is preserved in the Archives du
Monastère de la Visitation à Annecy. Cf. Harrisse, no. 725; Lenox, p.
17; O’Callaghan, no. 1,972; Carter-Brown, vol. ii. no. 1,278.
=1684.=—JACQUES BIGOT. _Relation ... l’année 1684._ À Manate, 1857
(100 copies).
The Abenakis mission of St. Joseph de Sillery and the new mission
of St. Francis de Sales, and follows the original manuscript in
the Collége Ste. Marie. Cf. Harrisse, no. 726; Field, no. 130;
Carter-Brown, vol. ii. no. 1,277; Lenox, p. 15.
[Illustration]
=1685.=—BIGOT. _Relation ... l’année 1685._ À Manate, 1858.
The St. Joseph de Sillery and St. Francis de Sales missions, and
follows the original manuscript in the Collége Ste. Marie. Cf.
Harrisse, no. 727; Carter-Brown, vol. ii. no. 1,307; Lenox, p. 15;
Field, no. 131.
=1688.=—JEAN DE ST. VALIER (Evêque de Québec). _Relation des Missions
de la Nouvelle France._ Paris, 1688.
REFERENCES: Harrisse, no. 159; Carter-Brown, vol. ii. nos. 1,366,
1,367; O’Callaghan, no. 2,218; Sunderland, no. 268; Lenox, pp. 12, 13.
COPIES: =CB.=, =HC.=, =L.=, etc.
This work has sometimes the following title instead: _Estat présent
de l’Eglise et de la Colonie Françoise dans la Nouvelle France._ De
St. Valier had succeeded De Laval, but before consecration visited the
country, and wrote this account of it.[691]
=1688.=—J. M. CHAUMONOT. _Vie, écrite par lui-même, 1688._ New York,
1858.
[Illustration]
One of Dr. Shea’s Cramoisy series. The original manuscript is preserved
in the Hôtel-Dieu, Quebec. It was followed by _Suite de la vie de P. M.
J. Chaumonot, par un père de la Compagnie_, believed by Dr. Shea to be
Rale. This was printed at New York in 1858, and continues the story to
1693. Cf. Carayon, _Le Père Chaumonot_; also, Harrisse, no. 753; Lenox,
p. 16; Carter-Brown, vol. ii. nos. 1,348, 1,349; Field, no. 288.
=1690-1691.=—PIERRE MILET. _Relation de sa Captivité parmi les
Onneiouts en 1690-91._ Nouvelle York, 1864.
Cf. Lenox, p. 17; Harrisse, no. 776; Field, p. 274. It follows a copy
found in Holland by Henry C. Murphy. See Vol. III. p. 415.
=1693-1694.=—JACQUES GRAVIER. _Relation ... depuis le Mois de Mars,
1693, jusqu’en Février, 1694._ À Manate, 1857.
[Illustration]
The mission of the Immaculate Conception among the Illinois. Cf. Lenox,
p. 15; Carter-Brown, vol. ii. no. 1,466; Field, no. 622.
E. Carré, the minister of the French Church in Boston, printed in 1693,
with a preface by Cotton Mather, _Eschantillon de la doctrine que
les Jésuites enseignent aux Sauvages du nouveau monde_, drawn from a
manuscript found at Albany. Sabin, vol. iii. no. 11,040.
=1696-1702.=—_Relation des Affaires du Canada en 1696; avec des
lettres des Pères de la Compagnie de Jésus, depuis 1696 jusqu’en 1702._
Nouvelle York [Shea], 1865.
It was printed from copies of manuscripts preserved at Paris, made
for H. C. Murphy, and covers the war with the Iroquois, the Sault St.
Xavier, and other missions. A portion of it appeared without authority
the same year, as _Relation des affaires du Canada en 1696, et des
Missions des Pères de la Compagnie de Jésus jusqu’en 1702_. Cf. Field,
p. 325; Lenox, p. 17; Carter-Brown, vol. ii. no. 1,489.
=1700.=—_Relation ou Journal du Voyage du R. P. Jacques Gravier en
1700, depuis le pays des Illinois jusqu’à l’Embouchure du Mississippi._
Nouvelle York, 1859.
Printed by Dr. Shea as one of his series, and translated by Shea in
his _Early Voyages up and down the Mississippi_ (Carter-Brown, vol.
ii. no. 1,604). Dr. Shea also printed in 1861 De Montigny de St. Cosme
and Thaumur de la Source’s _Relation de la Mission du Mississippi du
Séminaire de Québec en 1700_, giving an account of the attempt of the
Quebec Seminary to found missions on the lower Mississippi. Cf. Field,
no. 1,084; Carter-Brown, vol. ii. no. 1,619. An English version is in
Shea’s _Early Voyages_, etc.
=1701.=—BIGOT. _Relation ... dans la mission des Abnaquis à l’Acadie,
1701._ Manate [Shea] 1858.
Cf. Field, p. 33; Carter-Brown, vol. ii. no. 1,628. Shea also printed
_Relation_ (1702) in 1865.
=1717-1776.=—_Lettres édifiantes et curieuses, écrites des missions
étrangères._ 32 vols. in 34 parts.
REFERENCES: Carayon, p. 55; Field, no. 919; Brunet, p. 1028;
_Catalogue Library of Parliament_, 1858, p. 1192; Shea’s _Charlevoix_,
p. 88; Sabin, vol. x. pp. 294, 395; Muller, _Books on America_,
(1877), no. 3,680.
This serial contains various accounts supplementing the Jesuit
Relations: as under 1712, Father Marest’s voyage to Hudson’s Bay in
1694-1695 with D’Iberville; under 1722 and 1724, much about Rale, etc.
[Illustration]
As regards the date, 1717, for the beginning of this series, Dr. Shea
writes:—
“This date, though generally given, is, I am convinced, erroneous. The
first Recueil was approved by the Provincial in 1702, and obtained
the Royal license to print Aug. 23, 1702. The approval of vol. iii.
is dated in 1703. It is clear that vol. i. must have appeared in 1702
or 1703. I possess a translation of vol. i. in English: ‘Edifying and
Curious Letters of some Missioners, of the Society of Jesus, from
Foreign Missions. Printed in the Year 1707. 16º.’ Of course the French
preceded this translation.”
Brunet says it is not easy to find the series complete. A second
edition, Paris, 1780-1783, is in twenty-six volumes, but the prefaces
and dedications of the original volumes are not included. There
were other issues in 1819 and 1839. Stöcklein’s _Brief-Schriften_,
etc., 1726-1756, is in part a translation, with much else besides.
Carter-Brown, vol. ii. no. 390, and vol. iii. no. 994, where a Spanish
translation is noted.
CHAPTER VII.
FRONTENAC AND HIS TIMES.
BY GEORGE STEWART, JR., F.R.S.C.
COURCELLE was succeeded as governor of New France by a man of
remarkable individuality, energy, and purpose. Louis de Buade, Count of
Palluau and Frontenac, is beyond any doubt the most conspicuous figure
which the annals of early colonization in Canada reveal. He was the
descendant of several generations of distinguished men who were famous
as courtiers and soldiers. He was of Basque origin, and the blood of
nobles flowed in his veins. His grandfather was Antoine de Buade, a
favorite of Henri IV., and one who performed the delicate mission, in
1600, of carrying to Marie de Médicis the portrait of her royal lover.
He stood high in his sovereign’s estimation, was a counsellor of state
and chevalier of the noble order of the King, and the wearer of several
other titles of dignity and honor. By his wife, Jeanne Secontat, he
had several children, among whom was Henri de Buade, an officer of
the court of Louis XIII., who succeeded to the barony of Palluau, and
became colonel of a Navarre regiment. This Henri married, in 1613,
Anne Phélippeaux, the daughter of the Secretary of State. The future
governor of New France, the fruit of this union, was born in 1620.
The King acted as godfather to the babe, and bestowed on him his own
name. When the child had attained his fifteenth year he entered the
army, and was sent to Holland to fight under the Prince of Orange. Four
years later he was conspicuous among the volunteers at the stubborn
siege of Hesdin; and at the age of twenty he displayed great gallantry
during a sortie of the garrison at Arras. In 1641 he conducted himself
with equal bravery at the siege of Aire, and one year later, when
he was only twenty-two years of age, he took part in the struggles
before Callioure and Perpignan. He was colonel of his regiment at
twenty-three, and during the sharp campaign in Italy commanded in
several hard-contested battles and sieges. Through all this martial
career he was often wounded, and at Orbitello had an arm fractured.
He became a maréchal de camp (brigadier-general) in 1646, and shortly
after this the first part of his military career came to a close, and
he lived for a while in his father’s house in Paris.
In October, 1648, Frontenac espoused the young and beautiful Anne
de la Grange-Trianon, a maiden of imperious temper, lively wit, and
marvellous grace. She was one of the court beauties of the period,
the intimate friend and companion of Mademoiselle de Montpensier,
grand-daughter of Henri IV. Her portrait, painted as Minerva, now
adorns one of the galleries at Versailles. The marriage, which took
place at the church of St. Pierre aux Bœufs, in Paris, was contracted
without the knowledge of the bride’s parents. Some of Frontenac’s
relatives witnessed the ceremony; but the young Countess’s friends
were greatly chagrined when they were informed of the event, though
their anger did not last long, and a reconciliation soon followed. Not
many months had elapsed before the painful discovery was made that
the young couple were unsuited to each other. The bride conceived a
positive dislike of her husband; and very soon after her son[692] was
born she left his roof, and accepted Mademoiselle de Montpensier’s
friendly offer to join her suite. But the attachment between the two
high-spirited ladies did not continue long. They quarrelled, and the
fair Countess was dismissed from the court. The parting caused her
some real sorrow. Afterward, it is said, she intrigued to have her
husband sent out of the country. The Count had the ear of the King.
He was a fine courtier, polished in manner and chivalrous in spirit.
He was reputed to be one of the many lovers of the haughty beauty,
Madame Montespan, the favorite mistress of Louis XIV. He had, however,
a most ungovernable temper, and extravagance had left him a poor man.
In 1669 Turenne, the great soldier of Europe, selected him to conduct
a campaign against the Turks in Candia, where he displayed much of
his wonted courage and dash, but to small purpose, for the infidels
triumphed in the end. The prestige of Frontenac, however, remained
untarnished, and his reputation as a military leader increased. In 1672
the King further rewarded his fidelity by appointing him Governor and
Lieutenant-General of New France. Various stories have been told as
to the immediate cause of his appointment. Several chronicles affirm
that the King had detected his intimacy with Madame de Montespan, and
resolved at all hazards to get his dangerous rival out of the way.
Saint-Simon takes a different view of the situation, and says that
Frontenac “was a man of excellent parts, living much in society, and
completely ruined. He found it hard to bear the imperious temper of his
wife, and he was given the government of Canada to deliver him from
her, and afford him some means of living.” The Countess had no mind to
brave the rigors of her husband’s new seat of power, and accordingly
she accepted the offer of a suite of rooms at the Arsenal, where
she went to live with her congenial friend, the lively Mademoiselle
d’Outrelaise. During her long life at the Arsenal, she and her friend
gave a tone to French society; her _salon_ became famous for its wit
and gayety, and _les Divines_, as the ladies were called, were sought
after by the first people of the kingdom. Though she did not live
with her husband, and held him in some aversion, she never forgot
that she was his wife. She corresponded with him on occasion, and it
is established that often she proved of signal service to him in the
furtherance of his ambitious plans and projects. It was at the Arsenal
she died, at the advanced age of seventy-five.
When Frontenac sailed for the colony he was a matured man of the world,
and fifty-two years of age. “Had nature disposed him to melancholy,”
says Parkman, “there was much in his position to awaken it. A man
of courts and camps, born and bred in the focus of a most gorgeous
civilization, he was banished to the ends of the earth, among savage
hordes and half-reclaimed forests, to exchange the splendors of St.
Germain and the dawning glories of Versailles for a stern gray rock,
haunted by sombre priests, rugged merchants and traders, blanketed
Indians, and the wild bushrangers. But Frontenac was a man of action.
He wasted no time in vain regrets, and set himself to his work with the
elastic vigor of youth. His first impressions had been very favorable.
When, as he sailed up the St. Lawrence, the basin of Quebec opened
before him, his imagination kindled with the grandeur of the scene. ‘I
never,’ he wrote, ‘saw anything more superb than the position of this
town. It could not be better situated as the future capital of a great
empire.’” Such was the striking condition of Quebec when Frontenac
sailed into the port to assume the functions of his office. The King,
his powerful minister Colbert, the Intendant Talon, and the Governor
himself regarded the colony as a great prize, and one destined for a
future which should in no small degree reflect the glory and grandeur
of the old monarchy. Vast sums of money had been expended in colonizing
and defending it. Some of the best soldiers of the kingdom and many
desirable immigrants, inured to toil and hard work, were sent by Louis
to build up the new country and to develop its resources. Frontenac,
imbued with the same spirit as his sovereign, proceeded to bring
his enormous territory to a state of order. He convened a council
at Quebec, and administered an oath of allegiance to the leading
men in his dominions. He sought to inaugurate a monarchical form of
government. He created, with much pomp and show, three estates of his
realm,—the clergy, nobles, and commons. The former was composed of
the Jesuits and the Seminary priests. To three or four _gentilshommes_
then living in Quebec he added some officers belonging to his troops;
and these comprised the order of nobility. The commons consisted of
the merchants and citizens. The magistracy and members of council were
formed into a distinct body, though their place properly belonged to
the third estate. This great convocation took place on the 23d of
October, 1672, and the ceremonies were conducted in the church of
the Jesuits, which had been decorated for the purpose by the Fathers
themselves.
[Illustration: FROM LA POTHERIE.
[This view appears in the 1722 edition, i. 232; 1753 ed. ii. 232. It is
also in Shea’s _Le Clercq_, ii. 313. Harrisse (no. 240) notes a view on
the margin of a map in 1689.
Faillon, in his _Histoire de la Colonie Française_ (iii. 373), speaks
of two early plans of Quebec which are preserved, one of 1660,
the other of 1664. They resemble each other, except that the last
represents a projected line of fortifications across the peninsula; and
in engraving the latter, Faillon’s engraver has given the plate the
date of 1660, instead of 1664: _Plan du Haut et Bas Québec comme il
est en l’an 1660_. The _Catalogue_ of the Library of Parliament, 1858,
p. 1614, shows copies of plans of these dates copied from originals
in the Paris Archives. Cf. Harrisse, nos. 192-195, and no. 199 for a
manuscript map of 1670, _La ville haute et basse de Quebeck_, also
preserved in the same Archives; while the _Catalogue_ (p. 1614) of the
Canadian Parliament gives three of 1670, copies from originals at Paris.
Harrisse also notes (no. 220) as in the French Archives a _Carte du
Fort St. Louis de Québec_, dated 1683; (no. 221) a _Plan de la basse
ville de Québec_ (1683),—both by Franquelin: (no. 224) a _Plan de
la Ville et Chasteau de Québec, fait en 1685, ... par le Sr. de
Villeneuve_; and (no. 230) a _Carte des Environs de Québec ... en 1685
et 1686, par le Sr. de Villeneuve_. Cf. also the _Catalogue_ of the
Library of Parliament, pp. 1615, 1616.
Plans growing out of Phips’s attack in 1690 are mentioned elsewhere.
Of subsequent plans, Harrisse (no. 249) cites a _Plan de la Ville
de Québec_, 1693, as being in the French Archives, and others (nos.
252-254, 369) of 1694, 1695, and 1699. The _Catalogue_ of the Library
of Parliament also gives manuscript plans of 1693, 1698, 1700, and
1710. Cf. J. M. Le Moine, _Histoire des Fortifications et des Rues de
Québec_, 1875 (pamphlet).—ED.]]
Frontenac, who spoke and wrote well, made a speech to the citizens,
indicating the policy which he meant to pursue, and scattering advice
to the throng before him with a liberal hand. The three estates which
he had founded listened to an exhortation of some length. The priests
were urged to continue their labors in connection with the conversion
of the Indians, whom they were advised to train and civilize while
they converted. The nobles were praised for their culture and valiant
conduct, and urged to be assiduous in the improvement of the colony.
To the commons he recommended faithfulness in the discharge of their
duties to the King and to himself. After solemnly taking the oath, the
assembly dissolved. The Count next established municipal government
in Quebec, on a model which obtained in several cities of France. He
ordered the election of three citizens as aldermen, the senior of whom
should rank as mayor. This body was to take the place of the syndic,
and it was provided that one of the number should retire from office
every year. The electors would then fill the vacancy with some one of
their choice, though the Governor reserved the right to confirm or
reject the successful candidate. He then, with the assistance of some
of the chief people about him, framed a series of regulations for the
government of the capital, and notified the inhabitants that a meeting
would be held twice a year, where public questions would be discussed.
Frontenac’s reforms were exceedingly distasteful to the King, and the
minister very clearly conveyed his Majesty’s views on the subject,
in a despatch written on the 13th of June, 1673. Talon, who knew the
temper of the Court in such matters, had wisely abstained from taking
an active part in the Governor’s scheme, and feigned illness as the
cause for his non-attendance at the convention. Colbert wrote: “The
assembling and division of all the inhabitants into three orders or
estates, which you have done, for the purpose of having them take the
oath of fidelity, may have been productive of good just then. But
it is well for you to observe that you are always to follow, in the
government and management of that country, the forms in force here;
and as our kings have considered it for a long time advantageous to
their service not to assemble the States-General of their kingdom, with
a view perhaps to abolish insensibly that ancient form, you likewise
ought very rarely, or (to speak more correctly) never, give that form
to the corporate body of the inhabitants of that country; and it will
be necessary even in the course of a little time, and when the colony
will be still stronger than it now is, insensibly to suppress the
syndic, who presents petitions in the name of all the inhabitants, it
being proper that each should speak for himself, and that no one should
speak for the whole.” Louis’ policy was unmistakable. He assumed to be
the autocrat of his dominions, and anything which might be construed
into an attempt to weaken the principles of his policy met with a stern
rebuke. Frontenac’s colonial system might have benefited New France:
it was capable of being wisely administered, and rich developments
might have ensued; but the King would not have it, and the Governor was
forced to withdraw his plan.
Arbitrary and domineering to a degree, always anxious to preserve
his dignity and to exact respect from his subordinates in office and
from those about his court, whether lay or clerical, and a martinet
in compelling the observance of all rules of social and military
discipline, Frontenac, as may be supposed, did not get on well with
all parties in the colony. He made the fatal mistake of quarrelling
with the Jesuits and the Seminary priests,—the two religious orders
which at that time held the greater sway in Canada, and whose influence
among the people, and sometimes at court, was important, and not
easy to dispel. An enemy was also found in the Intendant Talon, who
suspiciously watched every movement which the Governor made, and
regularly reported his impressions to France. Talon, however, was
recalled before the quarrel had assumed very formidable proportions,
and Frontenac was well rid of him. A more dangerous element, and one
which could thwart him and upset his schemes, remained, however, to
tantalize him. He had his religious convictions, and was accounted a
good-living man, in the ordinary acceptance of the term. He regularly
went to Mass, and followed the observances of the Church; but his
Catholicism was framed in a more liberal school than that of the
followers of Loyola. His enemies said that he was a Jansenist. He
leaned towards the Recollect Fathers, attended their place of worship,
and often called on the King for additional priests of that order,
and took every opportunity to show them attention and marks of his
favor. When the Jesuits appeared too strong in number, he sent to
France for more Recollects, and through them he neutralized to some
extent the influence of the former. But the Jesuits were powerful,
diplomatic, and insidious. They constantly watched their opportunity,
and changed their mode of warfare according to the circumstances of
the hour. When the gloved hand answered their purpose, they used it;
but they had no scruple to strike with stronger weapons. Had Frontenac
chosen at the outset of his career to conciliate them and to play
into their hands, his administration might have been less fretful to
himself and vexatious to others. He might have fulfilled his original
intention, and bettered his fortunes in the way he desired. He might
have carried out some of his cherished reforms, for his zeal in that
direction was really very great, and he had his heart in his task; but
his haughty disposition would not be curbed, and he preferred to be
aggressive towards the Jesuits rather than conciliatory. The result
may be foreseen. Enemies sprang up about him on every side, and often
they were more dangerous than the Iroquois tribes who constantly
menaced the colony, and far more difficult to check than the English
of Massachusetts or of Albany. He early began writing letters to the
minister about his trials with the clergy. On the 2d of November,
1672, he wrote: “Another thing displeases me, and this is the complete
dependence of the Grand Vicar and the Seminary priests on the Jesuits,
for they never do the least thing without their order; so that they
[the Jesuits] are masters in spiritual matters, which, as you know, is
a powerful lever for moving everything else.” He complained of their
spies, and proceeded to resist their influence wherever he found it
asserting itself. The Sulpitians fared no better at his hands, and he
waged as bitter a warfare against them and those who followed their
teachings. He befriended the Recollects so warmly, that it is not
strange that they eagerly lent him all the assistance they could to
further his efforts in breaking down the power of their rivals. It is
said that at first he favored them out of a mere spirit of opposition
to the Bishop and his allies, the Jesuits; but as time wore on, his
favor deepened into affection, and he more than once declared to the
King that the Recollects ought to be more numerous than they were. He
told Colbert that their superior was a “very great preacher,” and that
he had “cast into the shade and given some chagrin to those in this
country who certainly are not so able.” He charged the clergy with
abusing the confessional and intermeddling with private family affairs,
and expressed his dislike in strong terms of their secret doings in the
colony, and their attempts to set husbands against wives, and parents
against children,—“and all,” he wrote to the minister, “as they say,
for the greater glory of God.” It is clear that the Count distrusted
the “Black Gowns” from the very first, and resolved to hold them at
arm’s length. Much of his energy was wasted in trying to lessen their
influence at court; and the King and his minister were kept pretty busy
reading and answering the recriminatory letters of the Governor and his
unsympathetic intendants, whose feelings always prompted them to side
with the Jesuits and the Church, and against Frontenac.
[Illustration]
A policy of Louis XIV. was the civilization of the Indians, and
Frontenac was, early in his career, instructed to take means to
civilize them, to have them taught the French language, and to
amalgamate them with the colonists. At that time the Count knew very
little about Indian nature; but he embarked in the scheme with all his
energy and zeal. He soon gained a mastery over the most savage tribes,
taught the warriors to call him father, and succeeded in inducing the
Iroquois to intrust him with the care of eight of their children,—four
girls and four boys. The former were given to the Ursulines, while he
kept two of the boys in his own house, and placed the others, at his
own cost, in respectable French families, and had them sent to school
to be educated. He tried to get the Jesuits to assist him in this task,
but they failed to respond cordially to his urging; and he complained
bitterly of their want of sympathy with the movement, even charging
them—not very accurately, it must be admitted—with “refusing to
civilize the Indians, because they wished to keep them in perpetual
wardship.”
But a new question now arose, and Frontenac’s mind was turned towards
western exploration. He warmly favored the idea, and, relinquishing
for the moment all thought of his trials with the priests, he gave
his whole attention to the proposals of that bold and self-reliant
explorer, the Sieur Robert de la Salle. This young man was poor in
pocket, but his head was full of schemes. There was much in common
between the two men. Both had strong will and ability of no mean
calibre. They were not easily discouraged, and having once engaged in
an undertaking, they had sufficient determination to carry it through.
Frontenac greatly liked La Salle, and the two remained fast friends
for many years. A short time before the Governor arrived in Canada,
the Iroquois had made an attack on the French, and Courcelle had been
compelled to punish them. To keep them in check and to facilitate the
fur-trade of the upper country, he decided that a fort should be built
near the outlet of Lake Ontario. This determination had also been
reached some time before by the Intendant Talon, and both officers
had submitted the suggestion to the King. Frontenac was not long in
perceiving the advantages which the establishment of such a fort
presented, and he resolved to build it, as much to protect the colony
as to augment his own slender resources, which were running very low.
La Salle had gained the confidence of the Governor, who had listened
to his overtures, and manifested great interest in everything he said.
“There was between them,” says Parkman, “the sympathetic attraction of
two bold and energetic spirits; and though Cavelier de la Salle had
neither the irritable vanity of the Count nor his Gallic vivacity of
passion, he had in full measure the same unconquerable pride and hardy
resolution. There were but two or three others in Canada who knew the
western wilderness so well. He was full of schemes of ambition and
of gain; and from this moment he and Frontenac seem to have formed
an alliance which ended only with the Governor’s recall.” The fort
recommended by Courcelle, if built, might be employed in intercepting
the trade which the tribes of the upper lakes had begun to carry on
with the Dutch and English of New York. This trade Frontenac resolved
to secure for Canada, though it must be said that those who would have
control of the fort would monopolize the larger share of the traffic
to themselves, to the great displeasure of the other merchants, who
resolutely set their faces against the project. Frontenac knew this
perfectly well, for it was principally with a desire to benefit himself
that he had given the plan countenance. La Salle understood the
western country, and was familiar with Lake Ontario and its shores.
He soon convinced the Governor that the most suitable spot for the
contemplated fortified post was at the mouth of the River Cataraqui,
and there, where the city of Kingston now stands, the fort[693] was
built, in July, 1673. La Salle had told Frontenac that the English were
intriguing with the Iroquois and the tribes of the upper lakes to get
them to break the treaty with the French and bring their furs to New
York. This statement was true, and it hastened the Governor’s action.
With his usual address, he announced his intention of making a tour
through the upper parts of the colony with a strong force of men, that
the Iroquois and their associates might be intimidated, and with a view
to the securing of a more permanent peace. He had no money to carry on
this crusade, so he issued an order to the people of Quebec, Montreal,
and Three Rivers, and other settlements within his jurisdiction,
calling on them to supply him, at their own cost, with men and canoes
as soon as the spring sowing had passed. The officers in the colony
were requested to join the expedition, and they dared not refuse. On
the 3d of June Frontenac left Quebec, accompanied by his guard, his
staff, some of the garrison of the Castle of St. Louis, and a band of
volunteers. Arriving at Montreal, he tarried there thirteen days with
his following. There were some matters which required his attention,
and he speedily set about to arrange them in a manner which should at
least be satisfactory to himself.
La Salle had been despatched to Onondaga, the political stronghold
of the Iroquois, on a mission to secure the attendance of their
chiefs at a council convened by the Governor, to be held at the Bay
of Quinté, situated on the north of Lake Ontario. While the intrepid
traveller was on his way, Frontenac changed his mind about the place
of rendezvous, and sent a messenger after him, calling the sachems to
meet at Cataraqui, where he decided to construct the fort. The Governor
of Montreal received Frontenac with suitable honors. He met him on
shore with his soldiers and people, a salute was fired, and the judge
and the syndic pronounced speeches of interminable length, but loyal
and patriotic in sentiment. The priests of St. Sulpice received him at
their church, where an address of welcome was presented. The _Te Deum_
was sung, and the Count then retired into the fort, and began preparing
for his coming journey. It was not long before he discovered that his
project found little favor in the eyes of the people of Montreal, who
feared that much of their trade might be diverted from them by the
construction of the new post. The Jesuits, too, were opposed to the
rearing of forts and trading posts in the upper districts, and they did
what they could to discourage the scheme. Frontenac was warned that
a Dutch fleet had captured Boston, and would soon proceed to attack
Quebec. Dablon was the author of this last rumor; but the Count turned
a deaf ear to remonstrance and report, and continued his preparations.
His followers and their stores were already on the way to Lachine, and
on the twenty-eighth of June the Governor-General himself set out. His
force consisted of four hundred men, including the Mission Indians, and
one hundred and twenty canoes and two flat-bottomed boats. The voyage
was an arduous and difficult one. Without the Indians, it is a question
whether it could have been accomplished at all. The fearful journey
was full of perils and hardships, and, to add to their discomfiture,
before the place of destination was reached rain fell in torrents.
Frontenac’s management of the Indians approached the marvellous. They
worked for him with genuine zeal, and showed by their toil as much as
by their manner that they respected his authority and admired him as
a man. He divined the Indian nature well, though he had been in the
country but a few months; and the longer he remained in the colony,
the greater his influence over them became. He knew when to bully and
when to conciliate, when to apply blandishments and when to be stern.
It was a happy thought which prompted him to call himself their father.
It gave him the superiority of position at once. Other Onontios were
brothers; but the great Onontio was the father.[694] He really liked
the Indians, and could enter into their ways and customs with a spirit
born of good-will. He was a frank, and often fiery soldier, and a true
courtier; but he could be playful with the Indian children, and it was
not beneath his dignity to lead a war-dance, should policy demand, as
it did sometimes. He seemed to know the thoughts of his dusky friends,
and they felt that he could read what was passing through their minds.
His control over the tribes, friends and foes alike, was certainly
never surpassed by any white man.
[Illustration]
He was, moreover, true to his allies; and on more than one occasion
refused to make peace for himself with the ferocious Iroquois, when he
could easily have done so, unless they complied with his terms, and
included in the treaty the Indians friendly to the French. He would
never abandon his friends to save himself; and the tribes, hostile and
friendly, early in his career learned this, and it served to establish
his fame as a man of fair dealing and chivalrous principle. He never
yielded his point even when his savage enemies were many and his
own forces few and feeble. He maintained his ascendency always, and
lecturing his children, pointed out the duties they should observe.
Such was his personal magnetism, that they listened and obeyed him
when their following was five times as great as his own. The secret
of Frontenac’s supremacy over savage nature seemed to lie in the fact
that he never ceased to have perfect faith and belief in himself. He
had fiery blood in his veins, and an iron will, that the blandishments
which he employed at times never quite concealed. Even when reduced to
severe straits, he did not lose that boldness of demeanor which carried
him through so many perils. The Iroquois gave him most trouble. They
were fond of fighting, and when they were not attacking the French,
they were waging war on the Illinois and Hurons, and on other tribes
whose aid was often found on the side of Frontenac. The Confederacy
preferred to sell their peltries to the English and Dutch of Albany,
than to the French. They drove with the English better bargains and
secured higher prices, and the English encouraged them to bring to them
their beaver skins. But the tribes who were friendly to their white
enemies had by far the richest product of these furs, and La Salle’s
fort of St. Louis, the mission of Michillimackinac, and other posts
really controlled the trade. To gain this traffic, and to divert it
into the hands of their newly-found friends, the English and Dutch,
the five tribes of the League proceeded in 1673 to make war on the
Indians who engrossed it. Great anxiety was felt in the colony when
this determination on the part of the Confederacy became known, and the
tribes interested—the Illinois, the Hurons, and Ottawas—manifested
the utmost fear. Frontenac deemed a conference advisable, and he
invited the Iroquois to come to him and discuss affairs; but the
arrogant warriors sent back an insolent answer, and told the messenger
that Frontenac should come to them,—a suggestion which some of the
French, who were terror-stricken, urged the Governor to act upon. But
the Count had no such intention, and refused to make any concession. He
sent them word that he would go no farther than Montreal, or, at the
utmost, to Fort Frontenac, to meet them. In August, he met the Hurons
and Ottawas at Montreal in council. There had been jealousy among the
tribes, but the Count warned them against dissension among themselves,
called them his children, and exhorted them to live together as
brethren. A celebrated Iroquois chief came next, with several of his
followers. This was Decanisora, who invited Frontenac to Oswego to meet
the Five Tribes. The Count, determined to hold his ground, replied
with firmness, “It is for the father to tell the children where to
hold council, not for the children to tell the father. Fort Frontenac
is the proper place, and you should thank me for going so far every
summer to meet you.” He then conciliated the chief with presents and a
wampum belt, telling him that the Illinois were Onontio’s children, and
therefore his brethren, and that he wished them all to live together
in harmony. There was peace for a brief space, but it did not continue
many months.
When Frontenac neared the end of his toilsome journey, and had reached
the first opening of Lake Ontario, he made up his mind to show the
Iroquois the full extent of his power, and to make as imposing a
display as possible. He arranged his canoes in line of battle, and
disposed of them in this wise: four squadrons, composing the vanguard,
went in front and in one line; then the two bateaux followed, and after
them came the Count at the head of all the canoes of his guard, of his
staff, and of the volunteers attached to his person. On his right, the
division from Three Rivers, and on his left, the Hurons and Algonquins
were placed. Two other squadrons formed a third line, and composed the
rear-guard. In this order they proceeded about half a league, when
an Iroquois canoe was observed to be approaching. It contained the
Abbé d’Urfé (who had met the Indians above the River Cataraqui, and
notified them of the Count’s arrival) and several Iroquois chiefs, who
offered to guide their visitors to the place of rendezvous. After an
exchange of civilities, their offer was accepted, and the whole party
proceeded to the spot selected. The Count was greatly pleased with the
locality, and spent the rest of the afternoon of the 12th of July in
examining the ground. The Iroquois were impatient to have him visit
them that night in their tents; but he sent them word that it was now
too late, but that in the morning, when it would be more convenient to
see and entertain each other, he would gladly do so. This reply was
considered satisfactory. At daybreak the next morning, the _réveillé_
was sounded, and at seven o’clock everybody was astir and under arms.
The troops were drawn up in double file around Frontenac’s tent, and
extended to the cabins of the Indians. Large sails were placed in front
of his tent for the savage deputies to sit on, and to the number of
sixty they passed through the two files thus formed to the council.
They were greatly impressed with the display, and “after having sat,
as is their custom, and smoked some time,” says the journal of the
Count’s voyage, “one of them, named Garakontie, who had always been the
warmest friend of the French, and who ordinarily acted as spokesman,
paid his compliment in the name of all the nations, and expressed the
joy they felt on learning from Sieur de la Salle Onontio’s design to
come and visit them. Though some evil-disposed spirits had endeavored
to excite jealousy among them at his approach, they could not, they
said, hesitate to obey his orders, but would come and meet him in the
confidence that he wished to treat them as a father would his children.
They were then coming, they continued, as true children, to assure
him of their obedience, and to declare to him the entire submission
they should always manifest to his command. The orator spoke, as
he claimed, in the name of the Five Nations, as they had only one
mind and one thought, in testimony whereof the captain of each tribe
intended to confirm what he had just stated in the name of the whole.”
The other chiefs followed, and after complimenting Frontenac, each
captain presented a belt of wampum, “which is worthy of note,” says
the chronicle, “because formerly it was customary to present only some
fathoms of stringed wampum.”
The Count replied in a form of address very similar to theirs. He
assured them that they did right in obeying the command of their
father, told them to take courage, and not to think that he had come
to make war. His mind was full of peace, and peace walked by his side.
After this harangue, he ordered six fathoms of wampum to be given to
them, and a gift of guns for the men, and prunes and raisins for the
women and children. The great council took place later on. Meanwhile,
the construction of the fort began, and the workmen pursued their
task with such ardor and speed, that by the 17th of July, the date
fixed for the grand council, it was well advanced. The work was done
under the supervision of Raudin, the engineer of the expedition. The
Indians watched the building of the fort with curious interest. The
Count regularly entertained two or three of the principal Iroquois at
each meal, while he fondled the children and distributed sweetmeats
among them, and invited the squaws to dance in the evenings. The
great council assembled at eight o’clock in the morning. The ceremony
was the same as that which had been observed at the preliminary
meeting. Frontenac wore his grandest air. He entreated them to become
Christians, and to listen to the instructions of the “Black Gowns.”
He praised, scolded, and threatened them in turn, and drawing their
attention to his retinue, said: “If your father can come so far, with
so great a force, through such dangerous rapids, merely to make you a
visit of pleasure and friendship, what would he do if you should awaken
his anger, and make it necessary for him to punish his disobedient
children? He is the arbiter of peace and war. Beware how you offend
him.” He further warned them not to molest the allies of the French, on
pain of chastisement. He told them that the storehouse at Cataraqui was
built as a proof of his affection, and that all the goods they needed
could be had from there. He could not give them the terms yet, because
the cost of transportation was so far unknown to him. He cautioned them
against listening to men of bad character, and recommended the Sieur de
la Salle and such as he as persons to be heeded. He asked the chiefs
to give him a number of their children to be educated at Quebec, not
as hostages, but out of pure friendship. The Indians wanted time to
consider this proposition, and the next year they acceded to it. At
intervals, during the delivery of his speech, Frontenac paused and gave
the Indians presents, which seemed to please them. The council closed,
and three days later, the Iroquois started on their journey homeward,
while Frontenac’s party returned in detachments. The fort was finished,
and the barracks nearly built. Frontenac would have left with his men
for home sooner than he did, but a band of Indians from the villages on
the north side of Lake Ontario being announced, he remained with some
troops to receive them. He treated them as he had treated the others,
and pronounced the same speech. Leaving a garrison in the fort, he then
set out for Montreal, which he reached on the 1st of August.[695]
The enterprise cost the King ten thousand francs, and Frontenac
regarded the investment as a good one indeed. He hoped that he had
impressed the savages with fear and respect, that he had obtained a
respite from the ravages of the Iroquois, and that the fort would be
the means of keeping the peltry trade in the hands of the French, its
situation affording the opportunity of cutting it off from the English,
who were making efforts to secure it for themselves. Frontenac wrote to
the minister in November, that with a fort at the mouth of the Niagara
and a vessel on Lake Erie, the French could command all the upper lakes.
François Perrot, the Governor of Montreal, owed his position to Talon,
his wife’s uncle, who had induced the Sulpitians, the proprietors and
feudal lords of Montreal and the island, and in whom the appointment
rested, to give the place to him. Knowing that the priests could at
will depose him, he sought to protect himself by asking the King to
give him a royal appointment. This Louis did; and the Sulpitians
could now make no change without consent of the King. Perrot was a
man of little principle, selfish and unscrupulous, who turned every
movement to his own advantage. His passion was for money-making, and
his position as governor gave him many opportunities. One of his
first acts, with that object in view, was to set up a storehouse on
Perrot Island, which gave him full command of the fur-trade. This post
was situated just above Montreal, and directly in the route of the
tribes of the upper lakes and their vicinity. A retired and trusted
lieutenant, named Brucy, was placed in charge, whose chief business
it was to intercept the Indians and secure their merchandise, to the
no small profit of the Governor and himself, and the great scandal of
the neighborhood. The forests were ranged by _coureurs de bois_, who
also trafficked with the savages, and bore off the richest peltries
before the real merchants of Montreal had had the opportunity. King
Louis had in vain attempted, by royal edicts of outlawry and stringent
instructions to his representatives and subordinates, to dislodge the
bushrangers and to put an end to their doings. The _coureurs de bois_,
however, were hardy sons of the soil; some of them were soldiers who
had deserted from the army; all of them were men of endurance, and
accustomed to brave the sternest hardships. They loved their wild life
and the adventurous character of their calling. They were, moreover,
on very excellent terms with Perrot, who connived at their escapades
and shut his ears to all complaint. He had no motive to heed the order
of his sovereign, so long as the wayward rangers shared with him the
proceeds of their dealings with the Indians. This, on their part, they
were very willing to do.
Frontenac was jealous of Perrot’s advantages, and though he had but few
soldiers in his command with whom to enforce obedience, he determined
to strike a blow at the bushrangers, and make an attempt to execute
the King’s orders. Perrot had of late grown despotic and tyrannical.
He was comparatively beyond the reach of his superior, and had matters
pretty much under his own control. The journey from Quebec to Montreal
sometimes occupied a fortnight, and the Governor-General, as he well
knew, was not able to strike heavily with the shattered remnants of
forces who served under him. Perrot was therefore bold and defiant;
but he miscalculated the temper of his chief, and it was not long
before the arms of Frontenac were long enough to reach him. Perrot,
in a fit of temper, had imprisoned the judge of Montreal because that
functionary had dared to remonstrate against the disorders which had
been perpetrated by the _coureurs de bois_. The affair caused much
excitement; and with other acts of the Governor, the Sulpitians were
soon convinced of the grave error they had made in their choice of
a chief magistrate. They were powerless, however, to unseat him.
Frontenac now wrote to the minister, and asked for a galley, to the
benches of which it was his intention to chain the outlaws as rowers.
He then ordered the judge at Montreal to seize every _coureur de bois_
that he could find. Two of them were living at the house of Lieutenant
Carion, a friend of Perrot’s, and when the judge’s constable went to
lay hands on them, Carion abused the officer, and allowed the men
to escape. Perrot indorsed the conduct of his lieutenant, and even
threatened the judge with arrest, should he make a similar attempt
again.
[Illustration: CANADIAN ON SNOW-SHOES.
A fac-simile of a print in Potherie, vol. i.]
Frontenac, when he heard of the manner in which his orders had been
treated, flew into a passion. He despatched Lieutenant Bizard and three
soldiers to Montreal, charged to arrest and convey to the capital the
offending Carion. Bizard succeeded in making the arrest, and left a
letter in the house of Le Ber the merchant for Perrot, from Frontenac,
giving notice of what had been done. Perrot was, however, earlier
advised of the arrest. He hastened with a sergeant and three or four
soldiers, found Bizard, and indignantly ordered him under arrest. Nor
did Le Ber fare better, for, because he had testified to the scene he
had witnessed, he was thrown into jail. These arrests produced much
excitement in the place, and Perrot after a while was aware that he had
acted with inconsiderate rashness. He released Bizard, and sent him off
to Quebec, the bearer of a sullen and impertinent letter to the Count.
In due time an answer came, in an order to come to Quebec and render an
account of his conduct. Frontenac also wrote to the Abbé Salignac de
Fénelon,[696]—a zealous young missionary stationed at Montreal, one of
whose uncles had been a firm friend of Frontenac during the progress
of the Canadian war,—and desired him to see Perrot and explain the
situation. The Abbé’s task was a delicate but congenial one, and he
pursued it with such good effect that the Governor was induced to
accompany him to headquarters. They made the journey on snow-shoes,
and walked the whole distance of one hundred and eighty miles on the
St. Lawrence. The interview with the Count was short. Both men were
choleric and easily excited. Perrot was disappointed at his reception,
after taking the trouble to come so far, and at such a season of the
year. Frontenac was stubborn and angry, and the position of his rival
at his feet did not mollify his passion, but rather increased it. He
put an end to the interview by locking up his offending subordinate in
the château, and ordering guards to be placed over him day and night.
A trusty friend of Frontenac, La Nouguère by name, was despatched to
Montreal to take command. Brucy was seized and cast into prison, while
a determined war was made on the _coureurs de bois_. The two who had
been the main cause of the recent trouble were captured and sent to
Quebec, where one of them was hanged in the presence of Perrot. The
end of this war of extermination soon came, and Frontenac informed the
minister that only five of these rangers of the wood remained at large;
all the others had returned to the settlements, and given up their
hazardous calling.
The old jealousy between Quebec and Montreal now showed itself again.
The Sulpitians thought that Frontenac had acted a high-handed part in
placing La Nouguère in command over their district without as much as
consulting them. Perrot was still their selected governor, and they
revolted against the arbitrary conduct of the Governor-General. They
roused the colonists against Frontenac’s course, and the Abbé Fénelon,
who possessed many of the indiscretions of youth, and who felt that
he had been trapped, became the most bitter of the Count’s enemies.
Before he left Quebec to return home, he gave his former friend a good
deal of abuse; and his first act on reaching Montreal was to preach
a sermon full of meaning against Frontenac. Dollier de Casson, the
superior of the congregation, reproved the preacher and disclaimed
the sermon. Fénelon, in turn, declared that bad rulers in general,
and not Frontenac in particular, were meant; but his future conduct
belied his words. He made the cause of Perrot his own, and was active
in his behalf. Frontenac summoned him before the council on a charge
of inciting sedition. The Abbé d’Urfé, a relative of Fénelon, tried
to smooth matters over with the Count, but he fared very ill, and was
shown the door for his pains.
And now ensued a remarkable trial before the council at Quebec. Perrot
was charged with disobeying the royal edicts and of treating with
contempt the royal authority. The other offender was the Abbé Fénelon.
Frontenac had a pliant council to second his wishes. The councillors
owed their positions to him, and as he had power to remove them when
he willed, they soon ranged themselves on his side, and showed that
they were friendly to his cause. Perrot challenged the right of the
Governor-General to preside over the case, on the ground that he was
a personal enemy. He moreover objected to several of the councillors
on various pretexts. New judges were appointed for the trial, and
Perrot’s protests continuing, the board overruled all his exceptions,
and the trial went on. Other sessions proceeded to try the impetuous
Abbé. Frontenac presided at the council-board. When Fénelon was led in,
he seated himself in a vacant chair, though ordered to stand by the
Count, and persisted in wearing his hat firmly pressed over his brows.
Hot words passed between the Governor and his prisoner, the result
of which was that the Abbé was put under arrest. The priest assumed
that Frontenac had no right to try him, and that the ecclesiastical
court alone had jurisdiction over him. The war grew fierce, and the
councillors, half afraid of what they had done, at length decided to
refer the question to the King himself. The Governor of Montreal and
the vehement Abbé were accordingly despatched to France, and all the
documents relating to the case were sent with them. Frontenac presented
his side of the argument in a long despatch, which, considering his
provocation, was moderate in tone and calm in judgment. The Abbé d’Urfé
accompanied the prisoners to France, and as his cousin, the Marquise
d’Allègre, was shortly to marry Seignelay, the son of Colbert, he hoped
much from his visit. Perrot, too, was not without friends near the
King: Talon, his wife’s relative, held a post at court. Besides these
influences the Church had other means at work.
In April, 1675, the King and Colbert disposed of the Perrot question.
They wrote calmly and with dignity. His Majesty condemned the action of
Perrot in imprisoning Bizard, and had the offender confined for three
weeks in the Bastile, “that he may learn to be more circumspect in the
discharge of his duty, and that his example may serve as a warning to
others.” He had already endured ten months of imprisonment in Quebec.
The King also told Frontenac that he should not, “without absolute
necessity,” cause his “commands to be executed within the limits of
a local government, like that of Montreal, without first informing
its governor.” Perrot was sent back to his government, and ordered to
apologize to Frontenac. Colbert informed the Count of the approaching
marriage of his son with the heiress of the house of Allègre, and
hinted at the closeness of the connection which existed between the
Abbé d’Urfé and himself. Frontenac was urged to show the Abbé “especial
consideration,” and also to treat with kindness the priests of
Montreal. Fénelon was sustained in his plea that he had the right to be
tried by an ecclesiastical tribunal; but his superior, Bretonvilliers,
absolutely forbade him to return to Canada, and wrote a letter to the
members of his order at Montreal, telling them not to interfere in
worldly matters, but to profit by the example of M. Fénelon. He advised
them “in matters of this sort” to “stand neutral.”
[Illustration]
The King now resolved to make some administrative changes in New
France, with a view, it is probable, of lessening the hold of Frontenac
on the body politic of the colony. He announced that the appointment of
councillors should rest with him alone in future, and promptly filled
the vacant office of Intendant by appointing M. Duchesneau whose duty
it was to watch the Governor-General, and to manage certain details in
executive work. Bishop Laval, who had been absent from Canada for some
time, also returned to his see; and Frontenac, who had ruled alone,
without bishop, without intendant, and with a subservient council,
viewed the new aspect of affairs with ill-concealed disgust. It was
not long before the threatened outbreak came. The question of selling
brandy to the natives, which had disturbed previous administrations,
became again a contention between governor and prelate.[697] The
Intendant promptly sided with the Bishop and the clergy, while the
latter stood aside at times, and allowed their secular ally to lead
the contest, content themselves to give him arguments and advice. One
question after another arose. Many of them were of trivial import, but
all of them were vexatious and troublesome, and to an imperious mind
like Frontenac’s galling in the extreme. The old rivalry of Church
and State in the matter of honors and precedence became troublesome.
Colbert wrote strongly to Duchesneau, and ordered him not to make
himself a partisan of the Bishop, and to pay proper respect to
Frontenac. The latter was commanded to live in harmony and peace with
the Intendant. The King was incensed at the constant bickerings, and
ordered Frontenac to conform to the practice prevailing at Amiens, and
to demand no more. The Intendant was roundly berated by the minister,
who told him that he ought to be able to understand the difference
between a governor and an intendant, and that he was completely in the
wrong as regards the pretensions he had assumed.
But if the religious quarrel was settled for a time, a civil difficulty
arose. The council no longer remained a mere body for registering the
Governor’s decrees. The new order of things gave him a council of men
who were opposed in many respects to his views and interests. The
King had reinstated Villeray,—a former councillor, and a man wholly
under Jesuitical influence. Frontenac, who thought him a “Jesuit in
disguise,” called him “an intriguing busybody, who makes trouble
everywhere.” The attorney-general was Auteuil, another enemy of the
Governor. Tilly was a third member, and the Count at first approved of
him; but his opinion was destined to change. Under the ordinance of
Sept. 23, 1675, the Intendant, whose official position entitled him to
rank as the third man in the colony, was appointed president of the
council. His commission, dated June 5, 1675, read: “Présider au Conseil
Souverain en l’absence du dit Sieur de Frontenac.” Frontenac was styled
in many of the despatches which reached him from the Crown, “Chief and
President of the Council.” A conflict of authority immediately arose,
and both Governor and Intendant claimed with equal right (one would
suppose from the royal documents in their possession) the position
of presiding officer. Frontenac bided his time, and remained patient
until late in the autumn, when the last vessel cleared for France.
Then he asserted his claim to the title of chief and president, and
demanded to be so styled on the records of the council. In support of
his contention he exhibited a letter from Louis dated May 12, 1678. The
Intendant, supported by the clergy, opposed the claim. The Governor
refused to compromise, scolded Duchesneau, and threatened to teach
him his duty, while he ordered Villeray, Tilly, and Auteuil to their
houses, and commanded them to remain there until he should give them
permission to leave.[698] Auteuil begged the King to interfere, and
the wearied monarch wrote to his representative: “You have wished to
be styled Chief and President on the records of the supreme council,
which is contrary to my edict concerning that council; and I am the
more surprised at this demand, since I am very sure that you are the
only man in my kingdom who, being honored with the title of governor
and lieutenant-general, would care to be styled chief and president of
such a council as that of Quebec.” So the King refused the title of
president to either, and commanded that Duchesneau should perform the
duties of presiding officer. He also said that Frontenac had abused
his authority in exiling two councillors and the attorney-general for
so trivial a cause, and warned him to be careful in future, lest he be
recalled from office. Several other disputes in the council followed.
They were mostly about matters of small moment, but they created great
storms while they lasted. The imprisonment of Councillor Amours by
order of the Count for an alleged infringement of the passport law, and
the presence of his wife with a petition to the council for redress and
a speedy trial, caused much discussion and provoked very strong feeling.
Duchesneau was the object of Frontenac’s constant displeasure. On him
was visited his fiercest wrath; but the Intendant bore it all with
varying moods,—sometimes disputing with Frontenac, at others abusing
him, and occasionally treating the diatribe of vituperation which
flowed from the Count’s lips with lofty disdain and scorn. He wrote
letters to the Court, and lodged complaint after complaint against
the Governor, who, in his turn, pursued the same course. Out of the
council quarrels others involving more important issues sprang up,
and nearly all the people in the colony were in time driven to one
side or the other. With Frontenac, as Parkman points out, were ranged
La Salle and his lieutenant, La Forêt; Du Lhut, the leader of the
_coureurs de bois_; Boisseau, agent of the farmers of the revenue;
Barrois, the Governor’s secretary; Bizard, lieutenant of his guard;
and others. Against him were the members of the council, Aubert de la
Chesnaye, Le Moyne and his sons, Louis Joliet, Jacques Le Ber, Sorel,
Boucher, Varennes, and many of the ecclesiastics. Duchesneau received
replies from the Court, and they must have been galling to his pride
and self-respect. He was plainly assured that though Frontenac was
not blameless, his own conduct was far more open to censure. In this
strain Colbert’s letter continued, and he said: “As to what you say
concerning his violence, his trade with the Indians,[699] and in
general all that you allege against him, the King has written to him
his intentions; but since, in the midst of all your complaints, you
say many things which are without foundation, or which are no concern
of yours, it is difficult to believe that you act in the spirit which
the service of the King demands,—that is to say, without interest and
without passion. If a change does not appear in your conduct before
next year, his Majesty will not keep you in your office.” The King
returned his usual advice to Frontenac, told him to live on good terms
with the Intendant, and prohibited him from trading with the Indians.
But neither the letters of the King nor the minister had much effect
apparently, for the Governor and Intendant continued to war against
each other. At last the King wrote thus sharply to the Count:—
“What has passed in regard to the _coureurs de bois_ is entirely
contrary to my orders, and I cannot receive in excuse for it your
allegation that it is the Intendant who countenances them by the trade
he carries on, for I perceive clearly that the fault is your own. As I
see that you often turn the orders I give you against the very object
for which they are given, beware not to do so on this occasion. I
shall hold you answerable for bringing the disorder of the _coureurs
de bois_ to an end throughout Canada; and this you will easily succeed
in doing if you make a proper use of my authority. Take care not to
persuade yourself that what I write to you comes from the ill-offices
of the Intendant. It results from what I fully know from everything
which reaches me from Canada, proving but too well what you are
doing there. The Bishop, the ecclesiastics, the Jesuit Fathers, the
supreme council, and, in a word, everybody, complain of you; but I am
willing to believe that you will change your conduct, and act with the
moderation necessary for the good of the colony.”
Frontenac felt the ground slipping under him, but he continued his
suicidal policy, while he wrote to some friends in France to recount
his woes, and to solicit their good offices with the Court.
[Illustration]
Seignelay came to power in 1681. He was the son of Colbert, and a man
of very good abilities, matured under the eye of the great minister.
He soon received long letters from Frontenac and the Intendant, filled
with accusations and countercharges. Affairs had gone badly during
the spring and summer of 1681. Some blows were struck, and a resort
to sharper weapons was hinted at. The Intendant, Frontenac said, had
barricaded his house and armed his servants. Duchesneau declared that
his son had been beaten by the Governor for a slight offence, and
afterward imprisoned in the château for a month, despite the pleadings
of the Bishop in his behalf. These matters, and much more, were
regularly reported to the new minister. Both officials stated that furs
had been carried to the English settlements, and each blamed the other
for it. The Intendant maintained that the faction led by Frontenac
had spread among the Indians a rumor of a pestilence at Montreal, for
the purpose of keeping them away from the fair, and in order that
the bushrangers might purchase the beaver-skins at a low price. The
allegation was groundless, but it had its effect at court. The King,
tired at last of the constant strife, recalled both Frontenac and
Duchesneau in the following year.
[Illustration]
[Illustration]
Frontenac’s successor was Le Fèbvre de la Barre, a soldier of repute
who had already rendered his country good service in the West Indian
war, where he had gained some notable successes against the English.
For reducing Antigua and Montserrat and recapturing Cayenne from the
enemy, he had been promoted to a lieutenant-generalship. He arrived
at Quebec with Meules, his intendant, at a most inopportune time. The
great fire of August 4, 1682, had laid waste fifty-five houses, and
destroyed vast quantities of goods.
[Illustration]
The new Governor took up his residence in the château, while Meules
went to live in a house in the woods. La Barre was a very different man
from Frontenac. He had nothing of that soldier’s peculiar energy or
determination. He was a temporizer, cold and insincere, and no match
for Indian diplomacy or duplicity. The Indians gauged his capacity
before he had been in Canada many weeks, and as compared with Frontenac
they felt that they had a child to deal with. The King had given him
pretty plain instructions. He was ordered not only to apply himself
to prevent the violence of the Iroquois against the French, but also
to endeavor to keep the savages at peace among themselves, and by all
means to prevent the Iroquois from making war on the Illinois and
other tribes. He was further told that his Majesty did not attach
much importance to the discoveries which had lately been made in the
countries of the Nadoussioux, the River Mississippi, and other parts
of North America, deeming them of but slight utility; but he enjoined
that the Sieur de la Salle be permitted to complete the exploration
he had commenced, as far as the mouth of the Mississippi, “in case he
consider, after having examined into it with the Intendant, that such
discovery can be of any utility.”
It was not long before La Barre exhibited his total incapacity for
governing Canada. He lowered the French prestige in the eyes of the
Indians of the Confederacy, and left his red allies to their fate. He
was jealous of La Salle, and hated him cordially. Charlevoix accounts
for his incapacity by saying that “his advanced age made him credulous
when he ought to be distrustful, timid when he ought to be bold, dark
and cautious towards those who deserved his confidence, and deprived
him of the energy necessary to act as the critical condition of the
colony demanded when he administered its affairs.” He was not very
old, being little more than sixty years of age at the time. He found
the Iroquois flushed with victory over their enemies, and displaying
an arrogant bearing towards the French. He wrote a braggart letter to
the King; said that with twelve hundred men he would attack twenty-six
hundred Iroquois, and then begged for more troops. To the minister he
wrote that war was imminent, and unless those “haughty conquerors”
were opposed, “half our trade and all our reputation” would be lost.
He was always talking about fighting; but those about him knew that
he rarely meant all he said. He developed a remarkable predilection
for trade, and soon after his arrival allied himself to several of the
Quebec merchants, with that object in view. This gave grave offence
to all those who could not participate. The tables were turned, and
the old enemies of Frontenac now reigned, while La Salle and La Forêt
were deposed. Du Lhut, the leader of the _coureurs de bois_, and a
quondam friend of the Ex-Governor, transferred his allegiance to the
new authority. La Barre soon showed his feeling towards La Salle.
Jacques Le Ber and Aubert de la Chesnaye were early despatched to Fort
Frontenac, which La Forêt commanded, with orders to seize it and all it
contained, on the flimsy pretext that La Salle had failed to fulfil the
conditions of his contract. La Forêt was offered his former position
as commander of the fort; but he refused to be false to his chief, and
sailed for France in high dudgeon.
On the 10th of October a conference on the state of affairs with the
Iroquois was held. There were present the Governor, Intendant, Bishop
of Quebec, M. Dollier, Superior of the Seminary of St. Sulpice of
Montreal, Father Dablon, the Governor of Three Rivers, and others. The
meeting was harmonious, and the importance and danger of the situation
seemed to be understood. A most uninviting prospect lay before the
little colony. The Iroquois, well armed and equipped, could strike
first the Illinois, and in turn all the tribes in alliance with the
French, and so divert the peltry trade into other channels, and finally
fall upon the French themselves. It was stated at the conference that
the English were responsible for this, and that they had been urging
the Iroquois on for four years, in order to ruin Canada, and to secure
for themselves and the Dutch the entire peltry trade of the continent.
It was determined to make an effort to prevent the Iroquois from
bringing upon the friendly Indians the fate they had previously dealt
upon the Algonquins, the Andastes, the Abenaquis, and others. It was
finally thought that the war might be averted for a time, and meanwhile
the King was urgently importuned for troops and two hundred hired men,
besides arms and ammunition.
The attack came sooner than had been expected. In the early spring the
Seneca Indians were reported to be moving in considerable force on the
Illinois, the Hurons, and the Ottawas of the lakes. La Barre, greatly
excited, hastened his preparations. He wrote to France, explaining the
posture of affairs, and demanding more troops. Du Lhut was sent with
thirty men, with powder and lead, to Michillimackinac, to strengthen
the defences there, and to guard the stores, of which there was a
great quantity. Charles Le Moyne was despatched to Onondaga with a
mission, which so far succeeded that forty-three Iroquois chiefs went
to Montreal to meet the Governor. They arrived on the 14th of August. A
council was held, and over two thousand crowns’ worth of presents were
distributed among the Indians. La Barre demanded friendship for the
Ottawas, the Algonquins, and the Hurons; but there was no firmness in
his demands. He was timid, and when the fierce Senecas declared that
the Iroquois made war on the Illinois because they deserved to die, he
said nothing, and his silence sealed their doom. The delegates were
asked to agree not to plunder French traders who were provided with
passports. They agreed to this. It was a suggestion of La Chesnaye, and
evidently aimed at La Salle, though La Barre denied that he gave the
Iroquois liberty to plunder and kill the explorer. By a sort of poetic
justice, the first captures the Iroquois made under their agreement
were two boats belonging to La Chesnaye, which had gone up the lakes
during Frontenac’s reign, and had no passports. On the 30th of August
the deputies left Montreal.
La Barre continued his trading operations. He and La Chesnaye
anticipated the annual market at Montreal, by sending up a large fleet
of vessels, and securing enormous quantities of furs, a great part of
which was clandestinely sent to Albany and New York. The Governor’s
persecutions of La Salle went on, and in the spring he sent the
Chevalier de Baugis, with canoes and soldiers, to seize his fort of St.
Louis; but his scheme suffered defeat. La Barre now prepared in earnest
for war, and was resolved to attack the Senecas in the following
August (1684). On the 31st of July the King wrote that he had sent him
three hundred soldiers.
It has been said that the English colonists of New York had instigated
the Iroquois to make war on the French. Colonel Thomas Dongan, Lord
Tyrconnel’s nephew, and a Roman Catholic, was governor of New York.
Though he had respect for the King of France, he nevertheless thought
himself entitled to a share of the fur-trade, which had so long
remained a monopoly of the Canadians, and he decided to make some
effort to obtain it. The Duke of York warned him against offending
the French governor; but while Dongan publicly professed to observe
his Grace’s injunction, he was really in frequent intrigue with the
enemies of the French, and did all he could to provoke the Iroquois
into making war on La Barre and his allies. The English had secured
the allegiance of the five tribes of the Confederacy; the hatchet had
been buried, and the song of peace had been sung. Dongan was wily, and
got the Iroquois to recognize his king as their lawful sovereign. This
would give him the command of the country south of the great lakes.
The Indians readily promised, but without any intention of keeping
their word. Their motive evidently was to make the most out of either
party, and yield nothing. La Barre complained of the Senecas and
Cayugas, and wrote to Dongan, telling him not to sell the offenders any
arms or ammunition, and saying that he meant to attack the tribes for
plundering French canoes and attempting a French fort. Dongan wrote in
reply that the Iroquois were British subjects, and if they had done
wrong, reparation should be made. Meanwhile he urged La Barre not to
make his threatened attack, and begged him to keep the peace between
the two colonies. Next he laid the complaints of the French governor
before the chiefs, who on their part declared that the French had
carried arms to their foes, the Illinois and the Miamis. Dongan handled
the question with tact, and played upon the fears of the Indians so
well that he got them to consent to his placing the arms of the Duke of
York in their villages, which he said would save them from the French.
They further agreed that they would not make peace with Onontio without
consent of the English. In return for this, Dongan promised aid in case
their country should be invaded.
The English Governor was a believer in prompt action, and he hastened
to have the Iroquois’ subjection to King Charles confirmed. To that end
he despatched a Dutch interpreter, Arnold Viele by name, to Onondaga.
But Charles Le Moyne and the crafty Jesuit Jean de Lamberville, who
knew the Indian character well, were there before the envoy of the
English arrived. Le Moyne had been sent to invite the tribes to a
conference with La Barre. The chief of the Onondagas was Otréouati,
or Big Mouth, a famous orator and influential warrior, and ranking as
one of the ablest Indians of the Confederacy. He was unscrupulous as
regards keeping promises, but his valor and astuteness were beyond
question. The two Frenchmen had spent some days in trying to induce
the Onondagas to get their Seneca confederates to make peace with the
French. The Senecas at first would not hear of it; but finally they
succumbed to Big Mouth’s eloquence, and gave the Onondagas power to
complete a treaty for them. Viele appeared on the scene; but he was
no diplomat, and he shocked the pride of the Onondagas when he told
them, with more arrogance than policy, that the English were masters of
their territory, and that they had no right to hold council with the
French without permission. It was natural that Big Mouth should become
indignant: he asserted the independence of his tribe, and told his
warriors and chiefs not to listen to the proposals of a man who seemed
to be drunk, so opposed to all reason was what he uttered. The end of
it was that Big Mouth and his sachems consented to accompany Le Moyne
to meet La Barre.
The French Governor was ready for the campaign, having seven hundred
Canadians, a hundred and thirty regulars, and two hundred mission
Indians under his command. He was to be reinforced by a band of Indians
on the way, and a company of _coureurs de bois_ led by Du Lhut and La
Durantaye. More warriors were to join him at Niagara. He declared that
he intended to exterminate the Senecas; but his Intendant, Meules, had
no faith in his promises, and kept urging him on, as if he feared that
he would make peace without striking a blow,—a fatal course in his
eyes. He wrote to the Governor two letters on the subject, concluding
the second one thus: “If we do not destroy them, they will destroy
us. I think you see but too well that your honor and the safety of
the country are involved in the results of this war.” He also sent
a despatch to Seignelay, which contained the customary complaints
against La Barre, and some vigorous comments on his conduct in trading
against the orders of the King, and his warlike pretensions which
meant nothing. “I will take the liberty to tell you, Monseigneur,”
he wrote, “though I am no prophet, that I discover no disposition on
the part of Monsieur the General to make war against the aforesaid
savages. In my belief, he will content himself by going in a canoe as
far as Fort Frontenac, and then send for the Senecas to treat of peace
with them, and deceive the people, the Intendant, and, if I may be
allowed with all possible respect to say so, his Majesty himself.” La
Barre proceeded on his way with his army, and after encountering a few
adventures _en route_, finally reached Fort Frontenac, where the whole
party encamped. A malarial fever broke out among the French, and many
died. La Barre himself was greatly reduced and wasted by the disease,
and so disheartened that he abandoned his plans, and sought to secure
peace on the most favorable terms that he could get. He no longer
thought of punishing the Senecas, nor had he the courage to invite them
to council. He crossed over to La Famine with a few men, and sent Le
Moyne to beg the tribes to meet him on their side of the lake. Here
provisions grew scarce, and hunger and discontent prevailed among his
followers. Several soldiers languished through disease; others died.
La Barre awaited the return of his envoy with fear and suspense. When
at last he came on the third of the month, with Big Mouth and thirteen
deputies, the Governor received the party with what grace he could.
He had sent his sick men away, and told the Indians that his army was
at Fort Frontenac; but the keen-witted savages were not deceived, and
one of their number, understanding French, gathered during the evening
from the conversation of the soldiers the true condition of affairs.
The council was held on the 4th of September; and Baron La Hontan, who
was present, gives a long account of what took place. The Governor
related the offences of the Iroquois; charged them with maltreating
and robbing the French traders in the country of the Illinois, with
introducing the “English into the lakes which belong to the King, my
master, and among the tribes who are his children, in order to destroy
the trade of his subjects,” and with having made “several barbarous
inroads into the country of the Illinois and Miamis, seizing, binding,
and leading into captivity an infinite number of those savages in time
of peace.... They are the children of my king,” he said, “and are not
to remain your slaves. They must at once be set free and sent home.”
Should such things occur again, he was ordered, he said, to declare
war against the offending tribes. He agreed to grant them terms of
peace, provided they made atonement for the past, and promised good
conduct for the future; otherwise he would burn their villages and
destroy them. Big Mouth rose and replied. He very soon convinced La
Barre of the hopelessness of his task. “Listen, Onontio,” he said. “I
am not asleep, my eyes are open; and by the sun that gives me light I
see a great captain at the head of a band of soldiers who talks like
a man in a dream. He says that he has come to smoke the pipe of peace
with the Onondagas; but I see that he came to knock them in the head
if so many of his Frenchmen were not too weak to fight. I see Onontio
raving in a camp of sick men, whose lives the Great Spirit has saved by
smiting them with disease. Our women had snatched war-clubs, and our
children and old men seized bows and arrows, to attack your camp, if
our warriors had not restrained them, when your messenger, Akouessan,
appeared in our village.” The savage refused reparation; said that his
tribe had been born free, and that they depended on neither Onontio nor
on Corlaer, the governor of New York. “We have knocked the Illinois
in the head,” he continued, “because they cut down the tree of peace
and hunted the beaver on our lands. We have done less than the English
and the French, who have seized upon the lands of many tribes, driven
them away, and built towns, villages, and forts in the country.” La
Barre, greatly disgusted, retired to his tent, and the council closed.
In the afternoon another session was held, and in the evening a treaty
was patched up. Big Mouth agreed to some reparation, which, however,
he never made; but he would not consent to make peace with La Barre’s
allies, the Illinois, whom he declared he would fight to the death.
He also demanded that the council fire should be removed from Fort
Frontenac to La Famine,—a concession yielded by La Barre without
hesitation, but which Frontenac would never have granted.
The Governor returned home the next day, broken and dispirited; his
men followed, wasted by fever and hunger, as best they could. This
disgraceful truce was treated with contempt by all, the allies of the
French included; and for a while it was thought that the friendly
tribes would go over to the enemy in a body, make peace with their
old rivals, and divert the channel of trade from Montreal to Albany.
Lamberville only indorsed the Governor’s conduct, and styled him the
“savior of the country” for having made peace at so critical a time.
Meules and the others viewed the matter differently, and the former
wrote to the minister that the Governor’s excuses were a mere pretence;
that he had lost his wits, had gone off in a fright, and since his
return his officers could not abstain from showing him the contempt in
which they held him. The King, much annoyed, recalled La Barre, and the
Marquis de Denonville, a colonel in the Queen’s regiment of Dragoons,
full of piety and a devoted friend of the Jesuits, was sent to succeed
him.
[Illustration]