CHAPTER IX

BECOMES BISHOP OF QUEBEC

The creation of a bishopric in Canada was becoming necessary, and all was ready for the erection of a separate see. Mgr. de Laval had thought of everything: the two seminaries with the resources indispensable for their maintenance, cathedral, parishes or missions regularly established, institutions of education or charity, numerous schools, a zealous and devoted clergy, respected both by the government of the colony and by that of the mother country. What more could be desired? He had many struggles to endure in order to obtain this creation, but patience and perseverance never failed him, and like the drop of water which, falling incessantly upon the pavement, finally wears away the stone, his reasonable and ever repeated demands eventually overcame the obstinacy of the king. Not, however, until 1674 was he definitely appointed Bishop of Quebec, and could enjoy without opposition a title which had belonged to him so long in reality; this was, as it were, the final consecration of his life and the crowning of his efforts. Upon the news of this the joy of the people and of the clergy rose to its height: the future of the Canadian Church was assured, and she would inscribe in her annals a name dear to all and soon to be glorified.

Shall we, then, suppose that this pontiff was indeed ambitious, who, coming in early youth to wield his pastoral crozier upon the banks of the St. Lawrence, did not fear the responsibility of so lofty a task? The assumption would be quite unjustified. Rather let us think of him as meditating on this text of St. Paul: "Oportet episcopum irreprehensibilem esse," the bishop must be irreproachable in his house, his relations, his speech and even his silence. His past career guaranteed his possession of that admixture of strength and gentleness, of authority and condescension in which lies the great art of governing men. Moreover, one thing reassured him, his knowledge that the crown of a bishop is often a crown of thorns. When the apostle St. Paul outlined for his disciple the main features of the episcopal character, he spoke not alone for the immediate successors of the apostles, but for all those who in the succession of ages should be honoured by the same dignity. No doubt the difficulties would be often less, persecution might even cease entirely, but trial would continue always, because it is the condition of the Church as well as that of individuals. The prelate himself explains to us the very serious reasons which led him to insist on obtaining the title of Bishop of Quebec. He writes in these terms to the Propaganda: "I have never till now sought the episcopacy, and I have accepted it in spite of myself, convinced of my weakness. But, having borne its burden, I shall consider it a boon to be relieved of it, though I do not refuse to sacrifice myself for the Church of Jesus Christ and for the welfare of souls. I have, however, learned by long experience how unguarded is the position of an apostolic vicar against those who are entrusted with political affairs, I mean the officers of the court, perpetual rivals and despisers of the ecclesiastical power, who have nothing more common to object than that the authority of the apostolic vicar is doubtful and should be restricted within certain limits. This is why, after having maturely considered everything, I have resolved to resign this function and to return no more to New France unless a see be erected there, and unless I be provided and furnished with bulls constituting me its occupant. Such is the purpose of my journey to France and the object of my desires."

As early as the year 1662, at the time of his first journey to France, the Bishop of Petraea had obtained from Louis XIV the assurance that this prince would petition the sovereign pontiff for the erection of the see of Quebec; moreover, the monarch had at the same time assigned to the future bishopric the revenues of the abbey of Maubec. The king kept his word, for on June 28th, 1664, he addressed to the common Father of the faithful the following letter: "The choice made by your Holiness of the person of the Sieur de Laval, Bishop of Petraea, to go in the capacity of apostolic vicar to exercise episcopal functions in Canada has been attended by many advantages to this growing Church. We have reason to expect still greater results if it please your Holiness to permit him to continue there the same functions in the capacity of bishop of the place, by establishing for this purpose an episcopal see in Quebec; and we hope that your Holiness will be the more inclined to this since we have already provided for the maintenance of the bishop and his canons by consenting to the perpetual union of the abbey of Maubec with the future bishopric. This is why we beg you to grant to the Bishop of Petraea the title of Bishop of Quebec upon our nomination and prayer, with power to exercise in this capacity the episcopal functions in all Canada."

However, the appointment was not consummated; the Propaganda, indeed, decided in a rescript of December 15th, 1666, that it was necessary to make of Quebec a see, whose occupant should be appointed by the king; the Consistorial Congregation of Rome promulgated a new decree with the same purpose on October 9th, 1670, and yet Mgr. de Laval still remained Bishop of Petraea. This was because the eternal question of jurisdiction as between the civil and religious powers, the question which did so much harm to Catholicism in France, in England, in Italy, and especially in Germany, was again being revived. The King of France demanded that the new diocese should be dependent upon the Metropolitan of Rouen, while the pontifical government, of which its providential role requires always a breadth of view, and, so to speak, a foreknowledge of events impossible to any nation, desired the new diocese to be an immediate dependency of the Holy See. "We must confess here," says the Abbe Ferland, "that the sight of the sovereign pontiff reached much farther into the future than that of the great king. Louis XIV was concerned with the kingdom of France; Clement X thought of the interests of the whole Catholic world. The little French colony was growing; separated from the mother country by the ocean, it might be wrested from France by England, which was already so powerful in America; what, then, would become of the Church of Quebec if it had been wont to lean upon that of Rouen and to depend upon it? It was better to establish at once immediate relations between the Bishop of Quebec and the supreme head of the Catholic Church; it was better to establish bonds which could be broken neither by time nor force, and Quebec might thus become one day the metropolis of the dioceses which should spring from its bosom."

The opposition to the views of Mgr. de Laval did not come, however, so much from the king as from Mgr. de Harlay, Archbishop of Rouen, who had never consented to the detachment of Canada from his jurisdiction. Events turned out fortunately for the apostolic vicar, since the Archbishop of Rouen was called to the important see of Paris on the death of the Archbishop of Paris, Hardouin de Perefixe de Beaumont, in the very year in which Mgr. de Laval embarked for France, accompanied by his grand vicar, M. de Lauson-Charny. The task now became much easier, and Laval had no difficulty in inducing the king to urge the erection of the diocese at Quebec, and to abandon his claims to making the new diocese dependent on the archbishopric of Rouen.

Before leaving Canada the Bishop of Quebec had entrusted the administration of the apostolic vicariate to M. de Bernieres, and, in case of the latter's death, to M. Dudouyt. He embarked in the autumn of 1671.

To the keen regret of the population of Ville-Marie, which owed him so much, M. de Queylus, Abbe de Loc-Dieu and superior of the Seminary of Montreal for the last three years, went to France at the same time as his ecclesiastical superior. "M. l'abbe de Queylus," wrote Commissioner Talon to the Minister Colbert, "is making an urgent application for the settlement and increase of the colony of Montreal. He carries his zeal farther, for he is going to take charge of the Indian children who fall into the hands of the Iroquois, in order to have them educated, the boys in his seminary, and the girls by persons of the same sex, who form at Montreal a sort of congregation to teach young girls the petty handicrafts, in addition to reading and writing." M. de Queylus had used his great fortune in all sorts of good works in the colony, but he was not the only Sulpician whose hand was always ready and willing. Before dying, M. Olier had begged his successors to continue the work at Ville-Marie, "because," said he, "it is the will of God," and the priests of St. Sulpice received this injunction as one of the most sacred codicils of the will of their Father. However onerous the continuation of this plan was for the company, the latter sacrificed to it without hesitation its resources, its efforts and its members with the most complete abnegation.[6] Thus when, on March 9th, 1663, the Company of Montreal believed itself no longer capable of meeting its obligations, and begged St. Sulpice to take them up, the seminary subordinated all considerations of self-interest and human prudence to this view. To this MM. de Bretonvilliers, de Queylus and du Bois devoted their fortunes, and to this work of the conversion of the savages priests distinguished in birth and riches gave up their whole lives and property. M. de Belmont discharged the hundred and twenty thousand francs of debts of the Company of Montreal, gave as much more to the establishment of divers works, and left more than two hundred thousand francs of his patrimony to support them after his death. How many others did likewise! During more than fifty years Paris sent to this mission only priests able to pay their board, that they might have the right to share in this evangelization. This disinterestedness, unheard of in the history of the most unselfish congregations, saved, sustained and finally developed this settlement, to which Roman Catholics point to-day with pride. The Seminary of Paris contributed to it a sum equal to twice the value of the island, and during the first sixty years more than nine hundred thousand francs, as one may see by the archives of the Department of Marine at Paris. These sums to-day would represent a large fortune.

Finally the prayers of Mgr. de Laval were heard; Pope Clement X signed on October 1st, 1674, the bulls establishing the diocese of Quebec, which was to extend over all the French possessions in North America. The sovereign pontiff incorporated with the new bishopric for its maintenance the abbey of Maubec, given by the King of France already in 1662, and in exchange for the renunciation by this prince of his right of presentation to the abbey of Maubec, granted him the right of nomination to the bishopric of Quebec. To his first gift the king had added a second, that of the abbey of Lestrees. Situated in Normandy and in the archdeaconry of Evreux, this abbey was one of the oldest of the order of Citeaux.

Up to this time the venerable bishop had had many difficulties to surmount; he was about to meet some of another sort, those of the administration of vast properties. The abbey of Maubec, occupied by monks of the order of St. Benedict, was situated in one of the fairest provinces of France, Le Perry, and was dependent upon the archdiocese of Bourges. Famous vineyards, verdant meadows, well cultivated fields, rich farms, forests full of game and ponds full of fish made this abbey an admirable domain; unfortunately, the expenses of maintaining or repairing the buildings, the dues payable to the government, the allowances secured to the monks, and above all, the waste and theft which must necessarily victimize proprietors separated from their tenants by the whole breadth of an ocean, must absorb a great part of the revenues. Letters of the steward of this property to the Bishop of Quebec are instructive in this matter. "M. Porcheron is still the same," writes the steward, M. Matberon, "and bears me a grudge because I desire to safeguard your interests. I am incessantly carrying on the work of needful repairs in all the places dependent on Maubec, chiefly those necessary to the ponds, in order that M. Porcheron may have no damages against you. This is much against his will, for he is constantly seeking an excuse for litigation. He swears that he does not want your farm any longer, but as for me, I believe that this is not his feeling, and that he would wish the farm out of the question, for he is too fond of hunting and his pleasure to quit it.... He does his utmost to remove me from your service, insinuating many things against me which are not true; but this does not lessen my zeal in serving you."

Mgr. de Laval, who did not hesitate at any exertion when it was a question of the interests of his Church, did not fail to go and visit his two abbeys. He set out, happy in the prospect of being able to admire these magnificent properties whose rich revenues would permit him to do so much good in his diocese; but he was painfully affected at the sight of the buildings in ruins, sad relics of the wars of religion. In order to free himself as much as possible from cares which would have encroached too much upon his precious time and his pastoral duties, Laval caused a manager to be appointed by the Royal Council for the abbey of Lestrees, and rented it for a fixed sum to M. Berthelot. He also made with the latter a very advantageous transaction by exchanging with him the Island of Orleans for the Ile Jesus; M. Berthelot was to give him besides a sum of twenty-five thousand francs, which was employed in building the seminary. Later the king made the Island of Orleans a county. It became the county of St. Lawrence.

Mgr. de Laval was too well endowed with qualities of the heart, as well as with those of the mind, not to have preserved a deep affection for his family; he did not fail to go and see them twice during his stay in France. Unhappily, his brother, Jean-Louis, to whom he had yielded all his rights as eldest son, and his titles to the hereditary lordship of Montigny and Montbeaudry, caused only grief to his family and to his wife, Francoise de Chevestre. As lavish as he was violent and hot-tempered, he reduced by his excesses his numerous family (for he had had ten children), to such poverty that the Bishop of Quebec had to come to his aid; besides the assistance which he sent them, the prelate bought him a house. He extended his protection also to his nephews, and his brother, Henri de Laval, wrote to him about them as follows: "The eldest is developing a little; he is in the army with the king, and his father has given him a good start. I have obtained from my petitions from Paris a place as monk in the Congregation of the Cross for his second son, whom I shall try to have reared in the knowledge and fear of God. I believe that the youngest, who has been sent to you, will have come to the right place; he is of good promise. My brother desires greatly that you may have the goodness to give Fanchon the advantage of an education before sending him back. It is a great charity to these poor children to give them a little training. You will be a father to them in this matter." One never applied in vain to the heart of the good bishop. Two of his nephews owed him their education at the seminary of Quebec; one of them, Fanchon (Charles-Francois-Guy), after a brilliant course in theology at Paris, became vicar-general to the Swan of Cambrai, the illustrious Fenelon, and was later raised to the bishopric of Ypres.

Meanwhile, four years had elapsed since Mgr. de Laval had left the soil of Canada, and he did not cease to receive letters which begged him respectfully to return to his diocese. "Nothing is lacking to animate us but the presence of our lord bishop," wrote, one day, Father Dablon. "His absence keeps this country, as it were, in mourning, and makes us languish in the too long separation from a person so necessary to these growing churches. He was the soul of them, and the zeal which he showed on every occasion for the welfare of our Indians drew upon us favours of Heaven most powerful for the success of our missions; and since, however distant he be in the body, his heart is ever with us, we experience the effects of it in the continuity of the blessings with which God favours the labours of our missionaries." Accordingly, he did not lose a moment after receiving the decrees appointing him Bishop of Quebec. On May 19th, 1675, he renewed the union of his seminary with that of the Foreign Missions in Paris. "This union," says the Abbe Ferland, "a union which he had effected for the first time in 1665 as apostolic bishop of New France, was of great importance to his diocese. He found, indeed, in this institution, good recruits, who were sent to him when needed, and faithful correspondents, whom he could address with confidence, and who had sufficient influence at court to gain a hearing for their representations in favour of the Church in Canada." On May 29th of the same year he set sail for Canada; he was accompanied by a priest, a native of the city of Orleans, M. Glandelet, who was one of the most distinguished priests of the seminary.

To understand with what joy he was received by his parishioners on his arrival, it is enough to read what his brother, Henri de Laval, wrote to him the following year: "I cannot express to you the satisfaction and inward joy which I have received in my soul on reading a report sent from Canada of the manner in which your clergy and all your people have received you, and that our Lord inspires them all with just and true sentiments to recognize you as their father and pastor. They testify to having received through your beloved person as it were a new life. I ask our Lord every day at His holy altars to preserve you some years more for the sanctification of these poor people and our own."

FOOTNOTES:

[6] Vie de M. Olier, par De Lanjuere. As I wrote this life some years ago with the collaboration of a gentleman whom death has taken from us, I believe myself entitled to reproduce here and there in the present life of Mgr. de Laval extracts from this book.



CHAPTER X

FRONTENAC IS APPOINTED GOVERNOR

During the early days of the absence of its first pastor, the Church of Canada had enjoyed only days of prosperity; skilfully directed by MM. de Bernieres and de Dudouyt, who scrupulously followed the line of conduct laid down for them by Mgr. de Laval before his departure, it was pursuing its destiny peacefully. But this calm, forerunner of the storm, could not last; it was the destiny of the Church, as it had been the lot of nations, to be tossed incessantly by the violent winds of trial and persecution. The difficulties which arose soon reached the acute stage, and all the firmness and tact of the Bishop of Quebec were needed to meet them. The departure of Laval for France in the autumn of 1671 had been closely followed by that of Governor de Courcelles and that of Commissioner Talon. The latter was not replaced until three years later, so that the new governor, Count de Frontenac, who arrived in the autumn of 1672, had no one at his side in the Sovereign Council to oppose his views. This was allowing too free play to the natural despotism of his character. Louis de Buade, Count de Palluau and de Frontenac, lieutenant-general of the king's armies, had previously served in Holland under the illustrious Maurice, Prince of Orange, then in France, Italy and Germany, and his merit had gained for him the reputation of a great captain. The illustrious Turenne entrusted to him the command of the reinforcements sent to Candia when that island was besieged by the Turks. He had a keen mind, trained by serious study; haughty towards the powerful of this world, he was affable to ordinary people, and thus made for himself numerous enemies, while remaining very popular. Father Charlevoix has drawn an excellent portrait of him: "His heart was greater than his birth, his wit lively, penetrating, sound, fertile and highly cultivated: but he was biased by the most unjust prejudices, and capable of carrying them very far. He wished to rule alone, and there was nothing he would not do to remove those whom he was afraid of finding in his way. His worth and ability were equal; no one knew better how to assume over the people whom he governed and with whom he had to deal, that ascendency so necessary to keep them in the paths of duty and respect. He won when he wished it the friendship of the French and their allies, and never has general treated his enemies with more dignity and nobility. His views for the aggrandizement of the colony were large and true, but his prejudices sometimes prevented the execution of plans which depended on him.... He justified, in one of the most critical circumstances of his life, the opinion that his ambition and the desire of preserving his authority had more power over him than his zeal for the public good. The fact is that there is no virtue which does not belie itself when one has allowed a dominant passion to gain the upper hand. The Count de Frontenac might have been a great prince if Heaven had placed him on the throne, but he had dangerous faults for a subject who is not well persuaded that his glory consists in sacrificing everything to the service of his sovereign and the public utility."

It was under the administration of Frontenac that the Compagnie des Indes Occidentales, which had accepted in 1663 a portion of the obligations and privileges of the Company of the Cent-Associes, renounced its rights over New France. Immediately after his arrival he began the construction of Fort Cataraqui; if we are to believe some historians, motives of personal interest guided him in the execution of this enterprise; he thought only, it seems, of founding considerable posts for the fur trade, favouring those traders who would consent to give him a share in their profits. The work was urged on with energy. La Salle obtained from the king, thanks to the support of Frontenac, letters patent of nobility, together with the ownership and jurisdiction of the new fort.

With the approval of the governor, Commissioner Talon's plan of having the course of the Mississippi explored was executed by two bold men: Louis Joliet, citizen of Quebec, already known for previous voyages and for his deep knowledge of the Indian tongues, and the devoted missionary, Father Marquette. Without other provisions than Indian corn and dried meat they set out in two bark canoes from Michilimackinac on May 17th, 1673; only five Frenchmen accompanied them. They reached the Mississippi, after having passed the Baie des Puants and the rivers Outagami and Wisconsin, and ascended the stream for more than sixty leagues. They were cordially received by the tribe of the Illinois, which was encamped not far from the river, and Father Marquette promised to return and visit them. The two travellers reached the Arkansas River and learned that the sea was not far distant, but fearing they might fall into the hands of hostile Spaniards, they decided to retrace their steps, and reached the Baie des Puants about the end of September.

The following year Father Marquette wished to keep his promise given to the Illinois. His health is weakened by the trials of a long mission, but what matters this to him? There are souls to save. He preaches the truths of religion to the poor savages gathered in attentive silence; but his strength diminishes, and he regretfully resumes the road to Michilimackinac. He did not have time to reach it, but died near the mouth of a river which long bore his name. His two comrades dug a grave for the remains of the missionary and raised a cross near the tomb. Two years later these sacred bones were transferred with the greatest respect to St. Ignace de Michilimackinac by the savage tribe of the Kiskakons, whom Father Marquette had christianized.

With such an adventurous character as he possessed, Cavelier de la Salle could not learn of the exploration of the course of the Upper Mississippi without burning with the desire to complete the discovery and to descend the river to its mouth. Robert Rene Cavelier de la Salle was born at Rouen about the year 1644. He belonged to an excellent family, and was well educated. From his earliest years he was passionately fond of stories of travel, and the older he grew the more cramped he felt in the civilization of Europe; like the mettled mustang of the vast prairies of America, he longed for the immensity of unknown plains, for the imposing majesty of forests which the foot of man had not yet trod. Maturity and reason gave a more definite aim to these aspirations; at the age of twenty-four he came to New France to try his fortune. He entered into relations with different Indian tribes, and the extent of his commerce led him to establish a trading-post opposite the Sault St. Louis. This site, as we shall see, received soon after the name of Lachine. Though settled at this spot, La Salle did not cease to meditate on the plan fixed in his brain of discovering a passage to China and the Indies, and upon learning the news that MM. Dollier de Casson and Gallinee were going to christianize the wild tribes of south-western Canada, he hastened to rejoin the two devoted missionaries. They set out in the summer of 1669, with twenty-two Frenchmen. Arriving at Niagara, La Salle suddenly changed his mind, and abandoned his travelling companions, under the pretext of illness. No more was needed for the Frenchman, ne malin,[7] to fix upon the seigniory of the future discoverer of the mouth of the Mississippi the name of Lachine; M. Dollier de Casson is suspected of being the author of this gentle irony.

Eight years later the explorations of Joliet and Father Marquette revived his instincts as a discoverer; he betook himself to France in 1677 and easily obtained authority to pursue, at his own expense, the discovery already begun. Back in Canada the following year, La Salle thoroughly prepared for this expedition, accumulating provisions at Fort Niagara, and visiting the Indian tribes. In 1679, accompanied by the Chevalier de Tonti, he set out at the head of a small troop, and passed through Michilimackinac, then through the Baie des Puants. From there he reached the Miami River, where he erected a small fort, ascended the Illinois, and, reaching a camp of the Illinois Indians, made an alliance with this tribe, obtaining from them permission to erect upon their soil a fort which he called Crevecoeur. He left M. de Tonti there with a few men and two Recollet missionaries, Fathers de la Ribourde and Membre, and set out again with all haste for Fort Frontenac, for he was very anxious regarding the condition of his own affairs. He had reason to be. "His creditors," says the Abbe Ferland, "had had his goods seized after his departure from Fort Frontenac; his brigantine Le Griffon had been lost, with furs valued at thirty thousand francs; his employees had appropriated his goods; a ship which was bringing him from France a cargo valued at twenty-two thousand francs had been wrecked on the Islands of St. Pierre; some canoes laden with merchandise had been dashed to pieces on the journey between Montreal and Frontenac; the men whom he had brought from France had fled to New York, taking a portion of his goods, and already a conspiracy was on foot to disaffect the Canadians in his service. In one word, according to him, the whole of Canada had conspired against his enterprise, and the Count de Frontenac was the only one who consented to support him in the midst of his misfortunes." His remarkable energy and activity remedied this host of evils, and he set out again for Fort Crevecoeur. To cap the climax of his misfortunes, he found it abandoned; being attacked by the Iroquois, whom the English had aroused against them, Tonti and his comrades had been forced to hasty flight. De la Salle found them again at Michilimackinac, but he had the sorrow of learning of the loss of Father de la Ribourde, whom the Illinois had massacred. Tonti and his companions, in their flight, had been obliged to abandon an unsafe canoe, which had carried them half-way, and to continue their journey on foot. Such a series of misfortunes would have discouraged any other than La Salle; on the contrary, he made Tonti and Father Membre retrace their steps. Arriving with them at the Miami fort, he reinforced his little troop by twenty-three Frenchmen and eighteen Indians, and reached Fort Crevecoeur. On February 6th, 1682, he reached the mouth of the Illinois, and then descended the Mississippi. Towards the end of this same month the bold explorers stopped at the juncture of the Ohio with the Father of Rivers, and erected there Fort Prudhomme. On what is Fame dependent? A poor and unknown man, a modest collaborator with La Salle, had the honour of giving his name to this little fort because he had been lost in the neighbourhood and had reached camp nine days later.

Providence was finally about to reward so much bravery and perseverance. The sailor who from the yards of Christopher Columbus's caravel, uttered the triumphant cry of "Land! land!" did not cause more joy to the illustrious Genoese navigator than La Salle received from the sight of the sea so ardently sought. On April 9th La Salle and his comrades could at length admire the immense blue sheet of the Gulf of Mexico. Like Christopher Columbus, who made it his first duty on touching the soil of the New World to fall upon his knees to return thanks to Heaven, La Salle's first business was to raise a cross upon the shore. Father Membre intoned the Te Deum. They then raised the arms of the King of France, in whose name La Salle took possession of the Mississippi, and of all the territories watered by the tributaries of the great river.

Their trials were not over: the risks to be run in traversing so many regions inhabited by barbarians were as great and as numerous after success as before. La Salle was, moreover, delayed for forty days by a serious illness, but God in His goodness did not wish to deprive the valiant discoverers of the fruits of their efforts, and all arrived safe and sound at the place whence they had started. After having passed a year in establishing trading-posts among the Illinois, La Salle appointed M. de Tonti his representative for the time being, and betook himself to France with the intention of giving an account of his journey to the most Christian monarch. His enemies had already forestalled him at the court; we have to seek the real cause of this hatred in the jealousy of traders who feared to find in the future colonists of the western and southern country competitors in their traffic. But far from listening to them, the son of Colbert, Seignelay, then minister of commerce, highly praised the valiant explorer, and sent, in 1684, four ships with two hundred and eighty colonists to people Louisiana, this new gem in the crown of France. But La Salle has not yet finally drained the cup of disappointment, for few men have been so overwhelmed as he by the persistence of ill-fortune. It was not enough that the leader of the expedition should be incapable, the colonists must needs be of a continual evil character, the soldiers undisciplined, the workmen unskilful, the pilot ignorant. They pass the mouth of the Mississippi, near which they should have disembarked, and arrive in Texas; the commander refuses to send the ship about, and La Salle makes up his mind to land where they are. Through the neglect of the pilot, the vessel which was carrying the provisions is cast ashore, then a gale arises which swallows up the tools, the merchandise and the ammunition. The Indians, like birds of prey, hasten up to pillage, and massacre two volunteers. The colonists in exasperation revolt, and stupidly blame La Salle. He saves them, nevertheless, by his energy, and makes them raise a fort with the wreck of the ships. They pass two years there in a famine of everything; twice La Salle tries to find, at the cost of a thousand sufferings, a way of rescue, and twice he fails. Finally, when there remain no more than thirty men, he chooses the ten most resolute, and tries to reach Canada on foot. He did not reach it: on May 20th, 1687, he was murdered by one of his comrades. "Such was the end of this daring adventurer," says Bancroft.[8] "For force of will, and vast conceptions; for various knowledge and quick adaptation of his genius to untried circumstances; for a sublime magnanimity that resigned itself to the will of Heaven and yet triumphed over affliction by energy of purpose and unfaltering hope, he had no superior among his countrymen.... He will be remembered in the great central valley of the West."

It was with deep feelings of joy that Mgr. de Laval, still in France at this period, had read the detailed report of the voyage of discovery made by Joliet and Father Marquette. But the news which he received from Canada was not always so comforting; he felt especially deeply the loss of two great benefactresses of Canada, Madame de la Peltrie and Mother Incarnation. The former had used her entire fortune in founding the Convent of the Ursulines at Quebec. Heaven had lavished its gifts upon her; endowed with brilliant qualities, and adding riches to beauty, she was happy in possessing these advantages only because they allowed her to offer them to the Most High, who had given them to her. She devoted herself to the Christian education of young girls, and passed in Canada the last thirty-two years of her life. The Abbe Casgrain draws the following portrait of her: "Her whole person presented a type of attractiveness and gentleness. Her face, a beautiful oval, was remarkable for the harmony of its lines and the perfection of its contour. A slightly aquiline nose, a clear cut and always smiling mouth, a limpid look veiled by long lashes which the habit of meditation kept half lowered, stamped her features with an exquisite sweetness. Though her frail and delicate figure did not exceed medium height, and though everything about her breathed modesty and humility, her gait was nevertheless full of dignity and nobility; one recognized, in seeing her, the descendant of those great and powerful lords, of those perfect knights whose valiant swords had sustained throne and altar. Through the most charming simplicity there were ever manifest the grand manner of the seventeenth century and that perfect distinction which is traditional among the families of France. But this majestic ensemble was tempered by an air of introspection and unction which gave her conversation an infinite charm, and it gained her the esteem and affection of all those who had had the good fortune to know her." She died on November 18th, 1671, only a few days after the departure for France of the apostolic vicar.



Her pious friend, Mother Mary of the Incarnation, first Mother Superior of the Ursulines of Quebec, soon followed her to the tomb. She expired on April 30th, 1672. In her numerous writings on the beginnings of the colony, the modesty of Mother Mary of the Incarnation has kept us in the dark concerning several important services rendered by her to New France, and many touching details of her life would not have reached us if her companion, Madame de la Peltrie, had not made them known to us. In Mother Incarnation, who merited the glorious title of the Theresa of New France, were found all the Christian virtues, but more particularly piety, patience and confidence in Providence. God was ever present and visible in her heart, acting everywhere and in everything. We see, among many other instances that might be quoted, a fine example of her enthusiasm for Heaven when, cast out of her convent in the heart of the winter by a conflagration which consumed everything, she knelt upon the snow with her Sisters, and thanked God for not having taken from them, together with their properties, their lives, which might be useful to others.

If Madame de la Peltrie and Mother Mary of the Incarnation occupy a large place in the history of Canada, it is because the institution of the Ursulines, which they founded and directed at Quebec, exercised the happiest influence on the formation of the Christian families in our country. "It was," says the Abbe Ferland, "an inestimable advantage for the country to receive from the schools maintained by the nuns, mothers of families reared in piety, familiar with their religious duties, and capable of training the hearts and minds of the new generation." It was thanks to the efforts of Madame de la Peltrie, and to the lessons of Mother Incarnation and her first co-workers, that those patriarchal families whose type still persists in our time, were formed in the early days of the colony. The same services were rendered by Sister Bourgeoys to the government of Montreal.

FOOTNOTES:

[7] Allusion to a verse of the poet Boileau.

[8] History of the United States, Vol. II., page 821.



CHAPTER XI

A TROUBLED ADMINISTRATION

A thorough study of history and the analysis of the causes and effects of great historical events prove to us that frequently men endowed with the noblest qualities have rendered only slight services to their country, because, blinded by the consciousness of their own worth, and the certainty which they have of desiring to work only for the good of their country, they have disdained too much the advice of wise counsillors. With eyes fixed upon their established purpose, they trample under foot every obstacle; and every man who differs from their opinion is but a traitor or an imbecile: hence their lack of moderation, tact and prudence, and their excess of obstinacy and violence. To select one example among a thousand, what marvellous results would have been attained by an entente cordiale between two men like Dupleix and La Bourdonnais.

Count de Frontenac was certainly a great man: he made Canada prosperous in peace, glorious in war, but he made also the great mistake of aiming at absolutism, and of allowing himself to be guided throughout his administration by unjustified prejudices against the Jesuits and the religious orders. Only the Sovereign Council, the bishop and the royal commissioner could have opposed his omnipotence. Now the office of commissioner remained vacant for three years, the bishop stayed in France till 1675, and his grand vicar, who was to represent him in the highest assembly of the colony, was never invited to take his seat there. As to the council, the governor took care to constitute it of men who were entirely devoted to him, and he thus made himself the arbiter of justice. The council, of which Peuvret de Mesnu was secretary, was at this time composed of MM. Le Gardeur de Tilly, Damours, de la Tesserie, Dupont, de Mouchy, and a substitute for the attorney-general.

The first difficulty which Frontenac met was brought about by a cause rather insignificant in itself, but rendered so dangerous by the obstinacy of those who were concerned in it that it caused a deep commotion throughout the whole country. Thus a foreign body, sometimes a wretched little splinter buried in the flesh, may, if we allow the wound to be poisoned, produce the greatest disorders in the human system. We cannot read without admiration of the acts of bravery and daring frequently accomplished by the coureurs de bois. We experience a sentiment of pride when we glance through the accounts which depict for us the endurance and physical vigour with which these athletes became endowed by dint of continual struggles with man and beast and with the very elements in a climate that was as glacial in winter as it was torrid in summer. We are happy to think that these brave and strong men belong to our race. But in the time of Frontenac the ecclesiastical and civil authorities were averse to seeing the colony lose thus the most vigorous part of its population. While admitting that the coureurs de bois became stout fellows in consequence of their hard experience, just as the fishermen of the French shore now become robust sailors after a few seasons of fishing on the Newfoundland Banks, the parallel is not complete, because the latter remain throughout their lives a valuable reserve for the French fleets, while the former were in great part lost to the colony, at a period when safety lay in numbers. If they escaped the manifold dangers which they ran every day in dealing with the savages in the heart of the forest, if they disdained to link themselves by the bond of marriage to a squaw and to settle among the redskins, the coureurs de bois were none the less drones among their compatriots; they did not make up their minds to establish themselves in places where they might have become excellent farmers, until through age and infirmity they were rather a burden than a support to others.

To counteract this scourge the king published in 1673, a decree which, under penalty of death, forbade Frenchmen to remain more than twenty-four hours in the woods without permission from the governor. Some Montreal officers, engaged in trade, violated this prohibition; the Count de Frontenac at once sent M. Bizard, lieutenant of his guards, with an order to arrest them. The governor of Montreal, M. Perrot, who connived with them, publicly insulted the officer entrusted with the orders of the governor-general. Indignant at such insolence, M. de Frontenac had M. Perrot arrested at once, imprisoned in the Chateau St. Louis and judged by the Sovereign Council. Connected with M. Perrot by the bonds of friendship, the Abbe de Fenelon profited by the occasion to allude, in the sermon which he delivered in the parochial church of Montreal on Easter Sunday, to the excessive labour which M. de Frontenac had exacted from the inhabitants of Ville-Marie for the erection of Fort Cataraqui. According to La Salle, who heard the sermon, the Abbe de Fenelon said: "He who is invested with authority should not disturb the people who depend on him; on the contrary, it is his duty to consider them as his children and to treat them as would a father.... He must not disturb the commerce of the country by ill-treating those who do not give him a share of the profits they may make in it; he must content himself with gaining by honest means; he must not trample on the people, nor vex them by excessive demands which serve his interests alone. He must not have favourites who praise him on all occasions, or oppress, under far-fetched pretexts, persons who serve the same princes, when they oppose his enterprises.... He has respect for priests and ministers of the Church."

Count de Frontenac felt himself directly aimed at; he was the more inclined to anger, since, the year before, he had had reasons for complaint of the sermon of a Jesuit Father. Let us allow the governor himself to relate this incident: "I had need," he wrote to Colbert, "to remember your orders on the occasion of a sermon preached by a Jesuit Father this winter (1672) purposely and without need, at which he had a week before invited everybody to be present. He gave expression in this sermon to seditious proposals against the authority of the king, which scandalized many, by dilating upon the restrictions made by the bishop of the traffic in brandy.... I was several times tempted to leave the church and to interrupt the sermon; but I eventually contented myself, after it was over, with seeking out the grand vicar and the superior of the Jesuits and telling them that I was much surprised at what I had just heard, and that I asked justice of them.... They greatly blamed the preacher, whose words they disavowed, attributing them, according to their custom, to an excess of zeal, and offered me many excuses, with which I condescended to seem satisfied, telling them, nevertheless, that I would not accept such again, and that, if the occasion ever arose, I would put the preacher where he would learn how he ought to speak...."

On the news of the words which were pronounced in the pulpit at Ville-Marie, M. de Frontenac summoned M. de Fenelon to send him a verified copy of his sermon, and on the refusal of the abbe, he cited him before the council. M. de Fenelon appeared, but objected to the jurisdiction of the court, declaring that he owed an account of his actions to the ecclesiastical authority alone. Now the official authority of the diocese was vested in the worthy M. de Bernieres, the representative of Mgr. de Laval. The latter is summoned in his turn before the council, where the Count de Frontenac, who will not recognize either the authority of this official or that of the apostolic vicar, objects to M. de Bernieres occupying the seat of the absent Bishop of Petraea. In order not to compromise his right thus contested, M. de Bernieres replies to the questions of the council "standing and without taking any seat." The trial thus begun dragged along till autumn, to be then referred to the court of France. The superior of St. Sulpice, M. de Bretonvilliers, who had succeeded the venerable M. Olier, did not approve of the conduct of the Abbe Fenelon, for he wrote later to the Sulpicians of Montreal: "I exhort you to profit by the example of M. de Fenelon. Concerning himself too much with secular affairs and with what did not affect him, he has ruined his own cause and compromised the friends whom he wished to serve. In matters of this sort it is always best to remain neutral."

Frontenac was about to be blamed in his turn. The governor had obtained from the council a decree ordering the king's attorney to be present at the rendering of accounts by the purveyor of the Quebec Seminary, and another decree of March 4th, 1675, declaring that not only, as had been customary since 1668, the judges should have precedence over the churchwardens in public ceremonies, but also that the latter should follow all the officers of justice; at Quebec these officers should have their bench immediately behind that of the council, and in the rest of the country, behind that of the local governors and the seigneurs. This latter decree was posted everywhere. A missionary, M. Thomas Morel, was accused of having prevented its publication at Levis, and was arrested at once and imprisoned in the Chateau St. Louis with the clerk of the ecclesiastical court, Romain Becquet, who had refused to deliver to the council the registers of this ecclesiastical tribune. He was kept there a month. MM. de Bernieres and Dudouyt protested, declaring that M. Morel was amenable only to the diocesan authority. We see in such an incident some of the reasons which induced Laval to insist upon the immediate constitution of a regular diocese. Summoned to produce forthwith the authority for their pretended ecclesiastical jurisdiction, "they produced a copy of the royal declaration, dated March 27th, 1659, based on the bulls of the Bishop of Petraea, and other documents, establishing incontestably the legal authority of the apostolic vicar." The council had to yield; it restored his freedom to M. Morel, and postponed until later its decision as to the validity of the claims of the ecclesiastical court.

This was a check to the ambitions of the Count de Frontenac. The following letter from Louis XIV dealt a still more cruel blow to his absolutism: "In order to punish M. Perrot for having resisted your authority," the prince wrote to him, "I have had him put into the Bastille for some time; so that when he returns to your country, not only will this punishment render him more circumspect in his duty, but it will serve as an example to restrain others. But if I must inform you of my sentiments, after having thus satisfied my authority which was violated in your person, I will tell you that without absolute need you ought not to have these orders executed throughout the extent of a local jurisdiction like Montreal without communicating with its governor.... I have blamed the action of the Abbe de Fenelon, and have commanded him to return no more to Canada; but I must tell you that it was difficult to enter a criminal procedure against him, or to compel the priests of St. Sulpice to bear witness against him. He should have been delivered over to his bishop or to the grand vicar to suffer the ecclesiastical penalties, or should have been arrested and sent back to France by the first ship. I have been told besides," added the monarch, "that you would not permit ecclesiastics and others to attend to their missions and other duties, or even leave their residence without a passport from Montreal to Quebec; that you often summoned them for very slight causes; that you intercepted their letters and did not allow them liberty to write. If the whole or part of these things be true, you must mend your ways." On his part Colbert enjoined upon the governor a little more calmness and gentleness. "His Majesty," wrote the minister, "has ordered me to explain to you, privately, that it is absolutely necessary for the good of your service to moderate your conduct, and not to single out with too great severity faults committed either against his service or against the respect due to your person or character." Colbert rightly felt that fault-finding letters were not sufficient to keep within bounds a temperament as fiery as that of the governor of Canada; on the other hand, a man of Frontenac's worth was too valuable to the colony to think of dispensing with his services. The wisest course was to renew the Sovereign Council, and in order to withdraw its members from the too preponderant influence of the governor, to put their nomination in the hands of the king.

By the royal edict of June 5th, 1675, the council was reconstituted. It was composed of seven members appointed by the Crown; the governor-general occupied the first place, the bishop, or in his absence, the grand vicar, the second, and the commissioner the third. As the latter presided in the absence of the governor, and as the king was anxious that "he should have the same functions and the same privileges as the first presidents of the courts of France," as moreover the honour devolved upon him of collecting the opinions or votes and of pronouncing the decrees, it was in reality the commissioner who might be considered as actual president. It is, therefore, easy to understand the continual disputes which arose upon the question of the title of President of the Council between Frontenac and the Commissioner Jacques Duchesneau. The latter, at first "President des tresoriers de la generalite de Tours," had been appointed intendant of New France by a commission which bears the same date as the royal edict reviving the Sovereign Council. While thinking of the material good of the colony, the Most Christian King took care not to neglect its spiritual interests; he undertook to provide for the maintenance of the parish priests and other ecclesiastics wherever necessary, and to meet in case of need the expenses of the divine service. In addition he expressed his will "that there should always be in the council one ecclesiastical member," and later he added a clerical councillor to the members already installed. There were summoned to the council MM. de Villeray, de Tilly, Damours, Dupont, Louis Rene de Lotbiniere, de Peyras, and Denys de Vitre. M. Denis Joseph Ruette d'Auteuil was appointed solicitor-general; his functions consisted in speaking in the name of the king, and in making, in the name of the prince or of the public, the necessary statements. The former clerk, M. Peuvret de Mesnu, was retained in his functions.

The quarrels thus generated between the governor and the commissioner on the question of the title of president grew so embittered that discord did not cease to prevail between the two men on even the most insignificant questions. Forcibly involved in these dissensions, the Sovereign Council itself was divided into two hostile camps, and letters of complaint and denunciation rained upon the desk of the minister in France: on the one hand the governor was accused of receiving presents from the savages before permitting them to trade at Montreal, and was reproached for sending beavers to New England; on the other hand, it was hinted that the commissioner was interested in the business of the principal merchants of the colony. Scrupulously honest, but of a somewhat stern temperament, Duchesneau could not bend to the imperious character of Frontenac, who in his exasperation readily allowed himself to be impelled to arbitrary acts; thus he kept the councillor Damours in prison for two months for a slight cause, and banished from Quebec three other councillors, MM. de Villeray, de Tilly and d'Auteuil. The climax was reached, and in spite of the services rendered to the country by these two administrators, the king decided to recall them both in 1682. Count de Frontenac was replaced as governor by M. Lefebvre de la Barre, and M. Duchesneau by M. de Meulles.



CHAPTER XII

THIRD VOYAGE TO FRANCE

Disembarking in the year 1675 on that soil where as apostolic vicar he had already accomplished so much good, giving his episcopal benediction to that Christian throng who came to sing the Te Deum to thank God for the happy return of their first pastor, casting his eyes upon that manly and imposing figure of one of the most illustrious lieutenants of the great king, the Count de Frontenac, what could be the thoughts of Mgr. de Laval? He could not deceive himself: the letters received from Canada proved to him too clearly that the friction between the civil powers and religious authorities would be continued under a governor of uncompromising and imperious character. With what fervour must he have asked of Heaven the tact, the prudence and the patience so necessary in such delicate circumstances!

Two questions, especially, divided the governor and the bishop: that of the permanence of livings, and the everlasting matter of the sale of brandy to the savages, a question which, like the phoenix, was continually reborn from its ashes. "The prelate," says the Abbe Gosselin, "desired to establish parishes wherever they were necessary, and procure for them good and zealous missionaries, and, as far as possible, priests residing in each district, but removable and attached to the seminary, which received the tithes and furnished them with all they had need of. But Frontenac found that this system left the priests too dependent on the bishop, and that the clergy thus closely connected with the bishop and the seminary, was too formidable and too powerful a body. It was with the purpose of weakening it and of rendering it, by the aid which it would require, more dependent on the civil authority, that he undertook that campaign for permanent livings which ended in the overthrow of Mgr. de Laval's system."

Colbert, in fact, was too strongly prejudiced against the clergy of Canada by the reports of Talon and Frontenac. These three men were wholly devoted to the interests of France as well as to those of the colony, but they judged things only from a purely human point of view. "I see," Colbert wrote in 1677 to Commissioner Duchesneau, "that the Count de Frontenac is of the opinion that the trade with the savages in drinks, called in that country intoxicating, does not cause the great and terrible evils to which Mgr. de Quebec takes exception, and even that it is necessary for commerce; and I see that you are of an opinion contrary to this. In this matter, before taking sides with the bishop, you should enquire very exactly as to the number of murders, assassinations, cases of arson, and other excesses caused by brandy ... and send me the proof of this. If these deeds had been continual, His Majesty would have issued a most severe and vigorous prohibition to all his subjects against engaging in this traffic. But, in the absence of this proof, and seeing, moreover, the contrary in the evidence and reports of those that have been longest in this country, it is not just, and the general policy of a state opposes in this the feelings of a bishop who, to prevent the abuses that a small number of private individuals may make of a thing good in itself, wishes to abolish trade in an article which greatly serves to attract commerce, and the savages themselves, to the orthodox Christians." Thus M. Dudouyt could not but fail in his mission, and he wrote to Mgr. de Laval that Colbert, while recognizing very frankly the devotion of the bishop and the missionaries, believed that they exaggerated the fatal results of the traffic. The zealous collaborator of the Bishop of Quebec at the same time urged the prelate to suspend the spiritual penalties till then imposed upon the traders, in order to deprive the minister of every motive of bitterness against the clergy.

The bishop admitted the wisdom of this counsel, which he followed, and meanwhile the king, alarmed by a report from Commissioner Duchesneau, who shared the view of the missionaries, desired to investigate and come to a final decision on the question. He therefore ordered the Count de Frontenac to choose in the colony twenty-four competent persons, and to commission them to examine the drawbacks to the sale of intoxicating liquors. Unfortunately, the persons chosen for this enquiry were engaged in trade with the savages; their conclusions must necessarily be prejudiced. They declared that "very few disorders arose from the traffic in brandy, among the natives of the country; that, moreover, the Dutch, by distributing intoxicating drinks to the Iroquois, attracted by this means the trade in beaver skins to Orange and Manhattan. It was, therefore, absolutely necessary to allow the brandy trade in order to bring the savages into the French colony and to prevent them from taking their furs to foreigners."

We cannot help being surprised at such a judgment when we read over the memoirs of the time, which all agree in deploring the sad results of this traffic. The most crying injustice, the most revolting immorality, the ruin of families, settlements devastated by drunkenness, agriculture abandoned, the robust portion of the population ruining its health in profitless expeditions: such were some of the most horrible fruits of alcohol. And what do we find as a compensation for so many evils? A few dozen rascals enriched, returning to squander in France a fortune shamefully acquired. And let it not be objected that, if the Indians had not been able to purchase the wherewithal to satisfy their terrible passion for strong drink, they would have carried their furs to the English or the Dutch, for it was proven that the offer of Governor Andros, to forbid the sale of brandy to the savages in New England on condition that the French would act likewise in New France, was formally rejected. "To-day when the passions of the time have long been silent," says the Abbe Ferland, "it is impossible not to admire the energy displayed by the noble bishop, imploring the pity of the monarch for the savages of New France with all the courage shown by Las Casas, when he pleaded the cause of the aborigines of Spanish America. Disdaining the hypocritical outcries of those men who prostituted the name of commerce to cover their speculations and their rapine, he exposed himself to scorn and persecution in order to save the remnant of those indigenous American tribes, to protect his flock from the moral contagion which threatened to weigh upon it, and to lead into the right path the young men who were going to ruin among the savage tribes."

The worthy bishop desired to prevent the laxity of the sale of brandy that might result from the declaration of the Committee of Twenty-four, and in the autumn of 1678 he set out again for France. To avoid a journey so fatiguing, he might easily have found excuses in the rest needed after a difficult pastoral expedition which he had just concluded, in the labours of his seminary which demanded his presence, and especially in the bad state of his health; but is not the first duty of a leader always to stand in the breach, and to give to all the example of self-sacrifice? A report from his hand on the disorders caused by the traffic in strong liquors would perhaps have obtained a fortunate result, but thinking that his presence at the court would be still more efficacious, he set out. He managed to find in his charity and the goodness of his heart such eloquent words to depict the evils wrought upon the Church in Canada by the scourge of intoxication, that Louis XIV was moved, and commissioned his confessor, Father La Chaise, to examine the question conjointly with the Archbishop of Paris. According to their advice, the king expressly forbade the French to carry intoxicating liquors to the savages in their dwellings or in the woods, and he wrote to Frontenac to charge him to see that the edict was respected. On his part, Laval consented to maintain the cas reserve only against those who might infringe the royal prohibition. The Bishop of Quebec had hoped for more; for nothing could prevent the Indians from coming to buy the terrible poison from the French, and moreover, discovery of the infractions of the law would be, if not impossible, at least most difficult. Nevertheless, it was an advantage obtained over the dealers and their protectors, who aimed at nothing less than an unrestricted traffic in brandy. A dyke was set up against the devastations of the scourge; the worthy bishop might hope to maintain it energetically by his vigilance and that of his coadjutors. Unfortunately, he could not succeed entirely, and little by little the disorders became so multiplied that M. de Denonville considered brandy as one of the greatest evils of Canada, and that the venerable superior of St. Sulpice de Montreal, M. Dollier de Casson, wrote in 1691: "I have been twenty-six years in this country, and I have seen our numerous and flourishing Algonquin missions all destroyed by drunkenness." Accordingly, it became necessary later to fall back upon the former rigorous regulations against the sale of intoxicating liquors to the Indians.

Before his departure for France the Bishop of Quebec had given the devoted priests of St. Sulpice a mark of his affection: he constituted the parish of Notre-Dame de Montreal according to the canons of the Church, and joined it in perpetuity to the Seminary of Ville-Marie, "to be administered, under the plenary authority of the Bishops of Quebec, by such ecclesiastics as might be chosen by the superior of the said seminary. The priests of St. Sulpice having by their efforts and their labours produced during so many years in New France, and especially in the Island of Montreal, very great fruits for the glory of God and the advantage of this growing Church, we have given them, as being most irreproachable in faith, doctrine, piety and conduct, in perpetuity, and do give them, by virtue of these presents, the livings of the Island of Montreal, in order that they may be perfectly cultivated as up to now they have been, as best they might be by their preachings and examples." In fact, misunderstandings like that which had occurred on the arrival of de Queylus were no longer to be feared; since the authority to which Laval could lay claim had been duly established and proved, the Sulpicians had submitted and accepted his jurisdiction. They had for a longer period preserved their independence as temporal lords, and the governor of Ville-Marie, de Maisonneuve, jealous of preserving intact the rights of those whom he represented, even dared one day to refuse the keys of the fort to the governor-general, M. d'Argenson. Poor de Maisonneuve paid for this excessive zeal by the loss of his position, for d'Argenson never forgave him.

The parish of Notre-Dame was united with the Seminary of Montreal on October 30th, 1678, one year after the issuing of the letters patent which recognized the civil existence of St. Sulpice de Montreal. Mgr. de Laval at the same time united with the parish of Notre-Dame the chapel of Bonsecours. On the banks of the St. Lawrence, not far from the church of Notre-Dame, rises a chapel of modest appearance. It is Notre-Dame de Bonsecours. It has seen many generations kneeling on its square, and has not ceased to protect with its shadow the Catholic quarter of Montreal. The buildings about it rose successively, only to give way themselves to other monuments. Notre-Dame de Bonsecours is still respected; the piety of Catholics defends it against all attacks of time or progress, and the little church raises proudly in the air that slight wooden steeple that more than once has turned aside the avenging bolt of the Most High. Sister Bourgeoys had begun it in 1657; to obtain the funds necessary for its completion she betook herself to Paris. She obtained one hundred francs from M. Mace, a priest of St. Sulpice. One of the associates of the Company of Montreal, M. de Fancamp, received for her from two of his fellow-partners, MM. Denis and Lepretre, a statuette of the Virgin made of the miraculous wood of Montagu, and he himself, to participate in this gift, gave her a shrine of the most wonderful richness to contain the precious statue. On her return to Canada, Marguerite Bourgeoys caused to be erected near the house of the Sisters a wooden lean-to in the form of a chapel, which became the provisional sanctuary of the statuette. Two years later, on June 29th, the laying of the foundation stone of the chapel took place. The work was urged with enthusiasm, and encouraged by the pious impatience of Sister Bourgeoys. The generosity of the faithful vied in enthusiasm, and gifts flowed in. M. de Maisonneuve offered a cannon, of which M. Souart had a bell made at his expense. Two thousand francs, furnished by the piety of the inhabitants, and one hundred louis from Sister Bourgeoys and her nuns, aided the foundress to complete the realization of a wish long cherished in her heart; the new chapel became an inseparable annex of the parish of Ville-Marie.

These most precious advantages were recognized on November 6th, 1678, by Mgr. de Laval, who preserved throughout his life the most tender devotion to the Mother of God. On the other hand, the prelate imposed upon the parish priest the obligation of having the Holy Mass celebrated there on the Day of the Visitation, and of going there in procession on the Day of the Assumption. Is it necessary to mention with what zeal, with what devotion the Canadians brought to Mary in this new temple their homage and their prayers? Let us listen to the enthusiastic narrative of Sister Morin, a nun of St. Joseph: "The Holy Mass is said there every day, and even several times a day, to satisfy the devotion and the trust of the people, which are great towards Notre-Dame de Bonsecours. Processions wend their way thither on occasions of public need or calamity, with much success. It is the regular promenade of the devout persons of the town, who make a pilgrimage there every evening, and there are few good Catholics who, from all the places in Canada, do not make vows of offerings to this chapel in all the dangers in which they find themselves."

The church of Notre-Dame de Bonsecours was twice remodelled; built at first of oak on stone foundations, it was rebuilt of stone and consumed in 1754 in a conflagration which destroyed a part of the town. In 1772 the chapel was rebuilt as it exists now, one hundred and two feet long by forty-six wide.



CHAPTER XIII

LAVAL RETURNS TO CANADA

Mgr. de Laval was still in France when the edict of May, 1679, appeared, decreeing on the suggestion of Frontenac, that the tithe should be paid only to "each of the parish priests within the extent of his parish where he is established in perpetuity in the stead of the removable priest who previously administered it." The ideas of the Count de Frontenac were thus victorious, and the king retracted his first decision. He had in his original decree establishing the Seminary of Quebec, granted the bishop and his successors "the right of recalling and displacing the priests by them delegated to the parishes to exercise therein parochial functions." Laval on his return to Canada conformed without murmur to the king's decision; he worked, together with the governor and commissioner, at drawing up the plan of the parishes to be established, and sent his vicar-general to install the priests who were appointed to the different livings. He desired to inspire his whole clergy with the disinterestedness which he had always evinced, for not only did he recommend his priests "to content themselves with the simplest living, and with the bare necessaries of their support," but besides, agreeing with the governor and the commissioner, he estimated that an annual sum of five hundred livres merely, that is to say, about three hundred dollars of our present money, was sufficient for the lodging and maintenance of a priest. This was more than modest, and yet, without a very considerable extension, there was no parish capable of supplying the needs of its priest. There was indeed, it is true, an article of the edict specifying that in case of the tithe being insufficient, the necessary supplement should be fixed by the council and furnished by the seigneur of the place and by the inhabitants; but this manner of aiding the priests who were reduced to a bare competence was not practical, as was soon evident. Another article gave the title of patron to any seigneur who should erect a religious edifice; this article was just as fantastic, "for," wrote Commissioner Duchesneau, "there is no private person in this country who is in a position to build churches of any kind."

The king, always well disposed towards the clergy of Canada, came to their aid again in this matter. He granted them an annual income of eight thousand francs, to be raised from his "Western Dominions," that is to say, from the sum derived in Canada from the droit du quart and the farm of Tadousac; from these funds, which were distributed by the seminary until 1692, and after this date by the bishop alone, two thousand francs were to be set aside for priests prevented by illness or old age from fulfilling the duties of the holy ministry, and twelve hundred francs were to be employed in the erection of parochial churches. This aid came aptly, but was not sufficient, as Commissioner de Beauharnois himself admits. And yet the deplorable state in which the treasury of France then was, on account of the enormous expenses indulged in by Louis XIV, and especially in consequence of the wars which he waged against Europe, obliged him to diminish this allowance. In 1707 it was reduced by half.

It was feared for a time by the Sulpicians that the edict of 1679 might injure the rights which they had acquired from the union with their seminary of the parishes established on the Island of Montreal, and they therefore hastened to request from the king the civil confirmation of this canonical union. "There is," they said in their request, "a sort of need that the parishes of the Island of Montreal and of the surrounding parts should be connected with a community able to furnish them with priests, who could not otherwise be found in the country, to administer the said livings; these priests would not expose themselves to a sea voyage and to leaving their family comforts to go and sacrifice themselves in a wild country, if they did not hope that in their infirmity or old age they would be free to withdraw from the laborious administration of the parishes, and that they would find a refuge in which to end their days in tranquillity in a community which, on its part, would not pledge itself in such a way as to afford them the hope of this refuge, and to furnish other priests in their place, if it had not the free control of the said parishes and power to distribute among them the ecclesiastics belonging to its body whom it might judge capable of this, and withdraw or exchange them when fitting." The request of the Sulpicians was granted by the king.

It was not until 1680 that the Bishop of Quebec could return to Canada. The all-important questions of the permanence of livings and of the traffic in brandy were not the only ones which kept him in France; another difficulty, that of the dependence of his diocese, demanded of his devotion a great many efforts at the court. The circumstances were difficult. France was plunged at this period in the famous dispute between the government and the court of Rome over the question of the right of regale, a dispute which nearly brought about a schism. The Archbishop of Paris, Mgr. de Harlay, who had laboured so much when he was Bishop of Rouen to keep New France under the jurisdiction of the diocese of Normandy, used his influence to make Canada dependent on the archbishopric of Paris. The death of this prelate put an end to this claim, and the French colony in North America continued its direct connection with the Holy See.

Mgr. de Laval strove also to obtain from the Holy Father the canonical union of the abbeys of Maubec and of Lestrees with his bishopric; if he had obtained it, he could have erected his chapter at once, assuring by the revenues of these monasteries a sufficient maintenance for his canons. The opposition of the religious orders on which these abbeys depended defeated his plan, but in compensation he obtained from the generosity of the king a grant of land on which his successor, Saint-Vallier, afterwards erected the church of Notre-Dame des Victoires. The venerable prelate might well ask favours for his diocese when he himself set an example of the greatest generosity. By a deed, dated at Paris, he gave to his seminary all that he possessed: Ile Jesus, the seigniories of Beaupre and Petite Nation, a property at Chateau Richer, finally books, furniture, funds, and all that might belong to him at the moment of his death.

Laval returned to Canada at a time when the relations with the savage tribes were becoming so strained as to threaten an impending rupture. So far had matters gone that Colonel Thomas Dongan, governor of New York, had urged the Iroquois to dig up the hatchet, and he was only too willingly obeyed. Unfortunately, the two governing heads of the colony were replaced just at that moment. Governor de Frontenac and Commissioner Duchesneau were recalled in 1682, and supplanted by de la Barre and de Meulles. The latter were far from equalling their predecessors. M. de Lefebvre de la Barre was a clever sailor but a deplorable administrator; as for the commissioner, M. de Meulles, his incapacity did not lessen his extreme conceit.

On his arrival at Quebec, Laval learned with deep grief that a terrible conflagration had, a few weeks before, consumed almost the whole of the Lower Town. The houses, and even the stores being then built of wood, everything was devoured by the flames. A single dwelling escaped the disaster, that of a rich private person, M. Aubert de la Chesnaie, in whose house mass was said every Sunday and feast-day for the citizens of the Lower Town who could not go to the parish service. To bear witness of his gratitude to Heaven, M. de la Chesnaie came to the aid of a good number of his fellow-citizens, and helped them with his money to rebuild their houses. This fire injured the merchants of Montreal almost as much as those of Quebec, and the Histoire de l'Hotel-Dieu relates that "more riches were lost on that sad night than all Canada now possesses."

The king had the greatest desire for the future reign of harmony in the colony; accordingly he enjoined upon M. de Meulles to use every effort to agree with the governor-general: "If the latter should fail in his duty to the sovereign, the commissioner should content himself with a remonstrance and allow him to act further without disturbing him, but as soon as possible afterwards should render an account to the king's council of what might be prejudicial to the good of the state." Mgr. de Laval, to whom the prince had written in the same tenor, replied at once: "The honour which your Majesty has done me in writing to me that M. de Meulles has orders to preserve here a perfect understanding with me in all things, and to give me all the aid in his power, is so evident a mark of the affection which your Majesty cherishes for this new Church and for the bishop who governs it, that I feel obliged to assure your Majesty of my most humble gratitude. As I do not doubt that this new commissioner whom you have chosen will fulfil with pleasure your commands, I may also assure your Majesty that on my part I shall correspond with him in the fulfilment of my duty, and that I shall all my life consider it my greatest joy to enter into the intentions of your Majesty for the general good of this country, which constitutes a part of your dominions." Concord thus advised could not displease a pastor who loved nothing so much as union and harmony among all who held the reins of power, a pastor who had succeeded in making his Church a family so united that it was quoted once as a model in one of the pulpits of Paris. If he sometimes strove against the powerful of this earth, it was when it was a question of combating injustice or some abuse prejudicial to the welfare of his flock. "Although by his superior intelligence," says Latour, "by his experience, his labours, his virtues, his birth and his dignity, he was an oracle whose views the whole clergy respected, no one ever more distrusted himself, or asked with more humility, or followed with more docility the counsel of his inferiors and disciples.... He was less a superior than a colleague, who sought the right with them and sought it only for its own sake. Accordingly, never was prelate better obeyed or better seconded than Mgr. de Laval, because, far from having that professional jealousy which desires to do everything itself, which dreads merit and enjoys only despotism, never did prelate evince more appreciative confidence in his inferiors, or seek more earnestly to give zeal and talent their dues, or have less desire to command, or did, in fact, command less." The new governor brought from France strong prejudices against the bishop; he lost them very quickly, and he wrote to the minister, the Marquis de Seignelay: "We have greatly laboured, the bishop and I, in the establishment of the parishes of this country. I send you the arrangement which we have arrived at concerning them. We owe it to the bishop, who is extremely well affected to the country, and in whom we must trust." The minister wrote to the prelate and expressed to him his entire satisfaction in his course.

The vigilant bishop had not yet entirely recovered from the fatigue of his journey when he decided, in spite of the infirmities which were beginning to overwhelm him, and which were to remain the constant companions of his latest years, to visit all the parishes and the religious communities of his immense diocese. He had already traversed them in the winter time in his former pastoral visits, shod with snowshoes, braving the fogs, the snow and the bitterest weather. In the suffocating heat of summer, travel in a bark canoe was scarcely less fatiguing to a man of almost sixty years, worn out by the hard ministry of a quarter of a century. However, he decided on a summer journey, and set out on June 1st, 1681, accompanied by M. de Maizerets, one of his grand vicars. He visited successively Lotbiniere, Batiscan, Champlain, Cap-de-la-Madeleine, Trois Rivieres, Chambly, Sorel, St. Ours, Contrecoeur, Vercheres, Boucherville, Repentigny, Lachesnaie, and arrived on June 19th at Montreal. The marks of respectful affection lavished upon him by the population compel him to receive continual visits; but he has come especially for his beloved religious communities, and he honours them all with his presence, the Seminary of St. Sulpice as well as the Congregation of Notre-Dame and the hospital. These labours are not sufficient for his apostolic zeal; he betakes himself to the house of the Jesuit Fathers at Laprairie, then to their Indian Mission at the Sault St. Louis, finally to the parish of St. Francois de Sales, in the Ile Jesus. Descending the St. Lawrence River, he sojourns successively at Longueuil, at Varennes, at Lavaltrie, at Nicolet, at Becancourt, at Gentilly, at Ste. Anne de la Perade, at Deschambault. He returns to Quebec; his devoted fellow-workers in the seminary urge him to rest, but he will think of rest only when his mission is fully ended. He sets out again, and Ile aux Oies, Cap-Saint-Ignace, St. Thomas, St. Michel, Beaumont, St. Joseph de Levis have in turn the happiness of receiving their pastor. The undertaking was too great for the bishop's strength, and he suffered the results which could not but follow upon such a strain. The registers of the Sovereign Council prove to us that only a week after his return he had to take to his bed, and for two months could not occupy his seat among the other councillors. "His Lordship fell ill of a dangerous malady," says a memoir of that time. "For the space of a fortnight his death was expected, but God granted us the favour of bringing him to convalescence, and eventually to his former health."

M. de la Barre, on his arrival, desired to inform himself exactly of the condition of the colony. In a great assembly held at Quebec, on October 10th, 1682, he gathered all the men who occupied positions of consideration in the colony. Besides the governor, the bishop and the commissioner, there were noticed among others M. Dollier de Casson, the superior of the Seminary of St. Sulpice at Montreal, several Jesuit Fathers, MM. de Varennes, governor of Three Rivers, d'Ailleboust, de Brussy and Le Moyne. The information which M. de la Barre obtained from the assembly was far from reassuring; incessantly stirred up by Governor Dongan's genius for intrigue, the Iroquois were preparing to descend upon the little colony. If they had not already begun hostilities, it was because they wished first to massacre the tribes allied with the French; already the Hurons, the Algonquins, the Conestogas, the Delawares and a portion of the Illinois had fallen under their blows. It was necessary to save from extermination the Ottawa and Illinois tribes. Now, one might indeed raise a thousand robust men, accustomed to savage warfare, but, if they were used for an expedition, who would cultivate in their absence the lands of these brave men? A prompt reinforcement from the mother country became urgent, and M. de la Barre hastened to demand it.

The war had already begun. The Iroquois had seized two canoes, the property of La Salle, near Niagara; they had likewise attacked and plundered fourteen Frenchmen en route to the Illinois with merchandise valued at sixteen thousand francs. It was known, besides, that the Cayugas and the Senecas were preparing to attack the French settlements the following summer. In spite of all, the expected help did not arrive. One realizes the anguish to which the population must have been a prey when one reads the following letter from the Bishop of Quebec: "Sire, the Marquis de Seignelay will inform your Majesty of the war which the Iroquois have declared against your subjects of New France, and will explain the need of sending aid sufficient to destroy, if possible, this enemy, who has opposed for so many years the establishment of this colony.... Since it has pleased your Majesty to choose me for the government of this growing Church, I feel obliged, more than any one, to make its needs manifest to you. The paternal care which you have always had for us leaves me no room to doubt that you will give the necessary orders for the most prompt aid possible, without which this poor country would be exposed to a danger nigh unto ruin."

The expected reinforcements finally arrived; on November 9th, 1684, the whole population of Quebec, assembled at the harbour, received with joy three companies of soldiers, composed of fifty-two men each. The Bishop of Quebec did not fail to express to the king his personal obligation and the gratitude of all: "The troops which your Majesty has sent to defend us against the Iroquois," he wrote to the king, "and the lands which you have granted us for the subsidiary church of the Lower Town, and the funds which you have allotted both to rebuild the cathedral spire and to aid in the maintenance of the priests, these are favours which oblige me to thank your Majesty, and make me hope that you will deign to continue your royal bounties to our Church and the whole colony."

M. de la Barre was thus finally able to set out on his expedition against the Iroquois. At the head of one hundred and thirty soldiers, seven hundred militia and two hundred and sixty Indians, he marched to Lake Ontario, where the Iroquois, intimidated, sent him a deputation. The ambassadors, who expected to see a brilliant army full of ardour, were astonished to find themselves in the presence of pale and emaciated soldiers, worn out more by sickness and privations of every kind than by fatigue. The governor, in fact, had lost ten or twelve days at Montreal; on the way the provisions had become spoiled and insufficient, hence the name of Famine Creek given to the place where he entered with his troops, above the Oswego River. At this sight the temper of the delegates changed, and their proposals showed it; they spoke with arrogance, and almost demanded peace; they undertook to indemnify the French merchants plundered by them on condition that the army should decamp on the morrow. Such weakness could not attract to M. de la Barre the affection of the colonists; the king relieved him from his functions, and appointed as his successor the Marquis de Denonville, a colonel of dragoons, whose valour seemed to promise the colony better days.



CHAPTER XIV

RESIGNATION OF MGR. DE LAVAL

The long and conscientious pastoral visit which he had just ended had proved to the indefatigable prelate that it would be extremely difficult to establish his parishes solidly. Instead of grouping themselves together, which would have given them the advantages of union both against the attacks of savages and for the circumstances of life in which man has need of the aid of his fellows, the colonists had built their dwellings at random, according to the inspiration of the moment, and sometimes at long distances from each other; thus there existed, as late as 1678, only twenty-five fixed livings, and it promised to be very difficult to found new ones. To give a pastor the direction of parishioners established within an enormous radius of his parish house, was to condemn his ministry in advance to inefficacy. To prove it, the Abbe Gosselin cites a striking example. Of the two missionaries who shared the southern shore, the one, M. Morel, ministered to the country between Berthier and Riviere du Loup; the other, M. Volant de Saint-Claude, from Berthier to Riviere du Chene, and each of them had only about sixty families scattered here and there. And how was one to expect that these poor farmers could maintain their pastor and build a church? Almost everywhere the chapels were of wood or clapboards, and thatched; not more than eight or nine centres of population could boast of possessing a stone church; many hamlets still lacked a chapel and imitated the Lower Town of Quebec, whose inhabitants attended service in a private house. As to priests' houses, they were a luxury that few villages could afford: the priest had to content himself with being sheltered by a respectable colonist.