* A Distributed Proofreaders Canada eBook *

This eBook is made available at no cost and with very few restrictions. These restrictions apply only if (1) you make a change in the eBook (other than alteration for different display devices), or (2) you are making commercial use of the eBook. If either of these conditions applies, please contact a https://www.fadedpage.com administrator before proceeding. Thousands more FREE eBooks are available at https://www.fadedpage.com.

This work is in the Canadian public domain, but may be under copyright in some countries. If you live outside Canada, check your country's copyright laws. IF THE BOOK IS UNDER COPYRIGHT IN YOUR COUNTRY, DO NOT DOWNLOAD OR REDISTRIBUTE THIS FILE.

Title: A Short History of the Canadian People

Date of first publication: 1914

Author: George Bryce (1844-1931)

Date first posted: July 31, 2022

Date last updated: July 31, 2022

Faded Page eBook #20220750

This eBook was produced by: Marcia Brooks, Larry, Cindy Beyer & the online Distributed Proofreaders Canada team at https://www.pgdpcanada.net

This file was produced from images generously made available by Internet Archive/Canadian Libraries.
















Régional de l’Institution Ethnographique, Paris; President Manitoba Historical Society

Corresponding Member American Historical Association, and of Montreal Celtic Society;

Author, “Manitoba, its Infancy, Growth, and Present Condition” (1882);

Article, “Manitoba” in “Encyclopædia Britannica;”

“Five Forts of Winnipeg” (Royal Society);

“Mound Builders,” &c.










[All rights reserved]










Crown 8vo, with Illustrations and Maps, 7s. 6d.




Its Infancy, Growth, and Recent Condition.





188, Fleet Street, E.C.









Canadians desire to know more of the early condition of their fathers, of the elements from which the people have sprung, of the material, social, and religious forces at work to make Canada what she is, of the picturesque or romantic in deed or sentiment, and of the growth of the great principles of liberty by which the nation is maintained.

The writer has departed from the usual custom in previous Canadian histories of giving whole chapters on the war of 1812-1815; the rise and fall of administrations, whose single aim seemed to be to grasp power; and on petty discussions which have left no mark upon the country.

Instead of making his work a “drum and trumpet history,” or a “mere record of faction fights,” the author aims at giving a true picture of the aboriginal inhabitants, the early explorers and fur-traders, and the scenes of the French régime; at tracing the events of the coming of the Loyalists, who were at once the “Pilgrim Fathers” of Canada, and the “Jacobites” of America; and at following in their struggles and improvement the bands of sturdy immigrants, as year after year they sought homes in the wilderness, and by hundreds of thousands filled the land.

While a sympathizer with movements for the wide extension of true freedom, and rejoicing that “through the shadow of the globe we sweep into the younger day,” yet the author is a lover of the antique, and finds interest in the unsuccessful experiments of introducing a noblesse into New France, a race of baronets in Nova Scotia, and a “Family Compact” government into the several provinces of Canada.

It has not been possible to give authorities for the many statements made. Suffice it to say that in the great majority of cases the “original” sources have been consulted, and some of the more reliable authorities have been named in the “references” at the head of each chapter.

In the Appendices, Chronological Annals, and Index, assistance for the reader in consulting the work will be found.

To make history picturesque must be the aim of the modern historian. The time has gone by when mere compilation of facts, however accurate, and collections of undigested material will be taken as history. History must be a picture of the working out of human life under its conditions of infinite variety and complexity.

The author aims at viewing Canada from a “Dominion” standpoint. Being a Canadian, born and bred, he wishes to portray the beginnings and growth of life, in the several provinces, from Halifax to Victoria, with patriotic feeling. His extensive acquaintance with the various parts of Canada, and his connections with learned circles in Britain and the United States, have given him exceptional opportunities, in consulting useful manuscripts and original documents.

The author desires to return warmest thanks to Justin Winsor, Esq., Librarian of Harvard College, Cambridge; Dr. Green, of Massachusetts Historical Society; M. Sylvain, of Ottawa Parliamentary Library; Douglas Brymner, Esq., Archivist, Ottawa; and to Messrs. Bain and Houston, Librarians, of Toronto Public and Parliamentary Libraries. The services of these scholarly and obliging gentlemen have been invaluable to him.


SectionI.—Name and Extent1
SectionII.—Boundaries of Canada6
SectionIII.—General Sketch of the Provinces16


SectionI.—Geological Data32
SectionIV.—Notable Voyages and Discoveries55


SectionI.—The Mound Builders85
SectionII.—The present Indian tribes88
SectionIII.—Domestic life of the Indians99
SectionIV.—Language, Manners, and Customs109
SectionV.—Social, Political, and Religious Organization118


SectionI.—The French Colonies of Acadia and Canada128
SectionII.—English Cavalier and Puritan Colonies149
SectionIII.—Colonies of various origins162


SectionI.—Governor and People171
SectionII.—The Church and Missionaries177
SectionIII.—The marvellous Opening of the West181
SectionIV.—Indian Hostilities195
SectionV.—Wars and truces ending in the Conquest of 1759202
SectionVI.—The French Canadian people221


SectionI.—Constitutions and Conventions225
SectionII.—Causes of the American Revolt232
SectionIII.—The Revolutionary War as it affected Canada242


SectionI.—The coming of the Loyalists248
SectionII.—The Friends of the Loyalists262
SectionIII.—The Life of the Loyalists274


SectionI.—Effect of Simcoe’s policy281
SectionII.—From Old World to New288
SectionIII.—Work of noted Colonizers291
SectionIV.—Political and Social Life298
SectionV.—The War of Defence (1812-1815)310


SectionI.—The great Fur-trading Companies327
SectionII.—The Life of the Traders333
SectionIII.—Famous Journeys through the Fur-traders’ Land339


THE MAKING OF CANADA. (1817-1835.)
SectionI.—The great Immigration346
SectionII.—The Family Compact and its Opponents357
SectionIII.—The struggle for Freedom368


SectionI.—Sedition in Lower Canada380
SectionII.—The Rebels in Upper Canada385
SectionIII.—The New Constitution392


SectionI.—Growth in Population398
SectionII.—The Stormy Sea of Politics407
SectionIII.—Keel, Lock, and Rail420
SectionIV.—Field, Forest, Mine, and Sea427
SectionV.—Commercial, Educational, and Social Progress432
SectionVI.—The Federal Union accomplished440


SectionI.—The Affairs of State445
SectionII.—Acquisition of the Great North-West454
SectionIII.—The National Highway460
SectionIV.—Growth of a Military Sentiment466
SectionV.—Literature, Science, and Art474
SectionVI.—Religion and Morals483
SectionVII.—The destiny of Canada490


AppendixA.—Provisions of British North America Act495
AppendixB.—Comparative Table of Governors of Canada508
Chronological Annals511


Map of the Dominion of Canada.





Section I.—The Name and Extent.

(References: Charlevoix, “Histoire de la Nouvelle France,” 6 vols., Paris, 1744; Hennepin, “Nouvelle Découverte,” &c., Utrecht, 1698; Schoolcraft’s “Indian Tribes of North America,” 6 vols., Philadelphia, 1853.)

It was a Frenchman of Brittany who, first of Europeans in historic times, set foot upon Canadian soil and claimed the country for his king, and so for many of his fellow-countrymen who afterwards came to make New France their home. It was a company of English adventurers on Hudson Bay who for two centuries kept for their king and country the almost continuous sovereignty of the land bestowed upon them, and it was a young English general, dying in the hour of victory on the plains near Quebec, who engraved the name of England on Canada—the fairest jewel in the British crown. It was brave Fraser and Montgomery Highlanders, and restless Scottish pioneers, who came as early settlers, the former to carry with French voyageurs the fur-trade from Montreal to distant Athabasca, the latter to reclaim the wilderness along the sea-shore of Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island, as well as elsewhere, who gave elements of energy and thrift to Canada. It was the sweetest poet of Ireland who, gliding with the boatmen down the beautiful St. Lawrence, sang the best-known Canadian song in the land whither many of his countrymen have since come to find freedom and prosperity. Last, and perhaps most important, it was American loyalists who, sacrificing worldly goods, preserved their honour to be an inheritance to their children in New Brunswick and elsewhere along the sea, as well as to be the leaders in laying the foundations of a new community upon the shores of the lakes Erie and Ontario. Ours is the duty of telling the story of this gathering of the races from the several sources named, and of the consolidation of them and their descendants into one people bearing the name Canadian, and who have, under the shelter of Britain, extended the rule of Canada to a region stretching between the Atlantic, Pacific, and Arctic Oceans, including well-nigh half of North America.

No name could have been more appropriate for this vast territory, for the name Canada goes back to within half a century of the discovery of the continent by Colombo. We find it first used in Cartier’s account of his voyage given by Ramusio, 1556. It was used for a century and a half before we find any allusion to its meaning, and this no doubt accounts for the difference of opinion on the subject. It is in the writings of Father Hennepin in 1698, that we are told “that the Spaniards were the first who discovered Canada; but at their first arriving, having found nothing considerable in it, they abandoned the country and called it ‘Il Capo di Nada,’ i.e. a cape of nothing; hence, by corruption, sprang the word Canada, which we use in all the maps.”

About half a century later, Father Charlevoix, in 1744, states that the Bay of Chaleur was formerly called the “Bay of Spaniards,” and an ancient tradition goes that the Castillians had entered there before Cartier, and that when they there perceived no appearance of mines, they pronounced two words, “Aca nada,” nothing here, meaning no gold or silver; the savages afterwards repeated these words to the French, who thus came to look upon Canada as the name of the country.

As regards the voyages of the Spaniards to which reference is made, it has been usual to identify them with those of Velasquez to the coast of Canada. It has now been found that the reputed voyages of this Spaniard are spurious, so that it is evident no reliance can be placed on this as the origin of the name Canada.

Father Charlevoix states in a note that “some derive this name from the Iroquois word ‘Kannata,’ which is pronounced ‘Cannada,’ and signifies a collection of dwellings.” This derivation is borne out by Schoolcraft, who states that the Mohawk word for town is “Ka-na-ta,” the Cayuga “Ka-ne-tae,” and the Oneida “Ku-na-diah,” and these were three members of the Iroquois confederacy. The use of the word Kannata for village, in Brant’s translation of the Gospel by Mark into Mohawk, in the latest years of last century, confirms this derivation; while the detection of Iroquois influence by recent investigators in the villages of Hochelaga and Stadacona, at the time when Cartier first visited them, renders this explanation reasonably certain.

Canada continued sole name of the country discovered by the French on the banks of the St. Lawrence until 1609, in which year the Canadian explorer, Champlain, having given at Fontainebleau before the French king, Henry IV., an account of the country, it received the name “La Nouvelle France.” As the French explorations were continued up the St. Lawrence and along the shores of the great lakes, the name Canada or Nouvelle France became one of wider significance, until towards the end of the seventeenth century it meant all the territory claimed by the French southward to the English possessions, from which it might be said in general terms the Ohio River divided it, and west until the Mississippi was reached.

West of the Mississippi lay Louisiana, seemingly claimed by the French by virtue of their explorations by way of the mouth of the Mississippi. Northward the territory from St. Anthony Falls, on the Father of Waters, was practically unknown till the third decade of the eighteenth century. The northern boundary of Canada was at the time of the Treaty of Utrecht in 1713, regarded as being described by the height of land between the lakes and Hudson Bay. That treaty provided that commissioners should be appointed to lay out this line, but this was never carried out.

It was after the American Revolution, in what, so far as Canada is concerned, may be called the Cession rather than the Treaty of Paris, that the vast territory south and west of the great lakes to the Ohio and Mississippi rivers was deliberately given up to the United States. This seems all the more surprising and unfortunate when it is remembered that the British Parliament had in 1774 extended, by its own legislation, the boundaries of the then Province of Quebec to the wider limits named. A few years after the Treaty of Paris, when Canada had been so shorn of her wide domain, a division was made of the territory remaining, by the Imperial Parliament, into Lower Canada, containing chiefly the French population, and Upper Canada, that portion bounded mainly by the Ottawa River, the Upper St. Lawrence, and the lakes.

It was only in 1867-73 that the name of Canada was given to a wider region than ever before, under the rule of a dominion or confederated government. The Canada, then, of the united Canadian people is the result of the natural ties and patriotic statesmanship of those attached to the British Crown upon the North American continent. It was on Dominion Day, July 1st, 1867, that the Royal proclamation, dated on the 22nd May preceding at Windsor Castle, joined the four leading members of the Confederation, Ontario, Quebec, Nova Scotia, and New Brunswick, into a united Canada. This union not only gave relief from political difficulties then existing, but consolidated British power upon this continent, and awoke to life in the Dominion a young national existence, afterwards bringing in the North-west, Prince Edward Island and British Columbia.

True there are those who lament that among Canadians there is not a stronger sentiment of nationality. There does not seem much ground for this complaint when it is remembered that there were in 1881, out of 4,324,810 of a population in the Dominion, no less than 3,715,492 native-born Canadians, and when it can be stated that there is a far stronger feeling of unity in the Dominion now after its short career of eighteen years, than there was in the United States in 1812, when the republic had been twice eighteen years a nation.

It may be admitted that the Dominion lacked the fierce enthusiasm with which the thirteen British colonies, throwing off the control of the mother country, began their career in 1776, with numbers in both cases not widely differing; but it has been Canada’s advantage that under the ægis of Great Britain she has been compelled to explore no unknown sea of political uncertainty in prosecuting her way.

The new capital at Ottawa, removed from the American frontier, and fairly central for the confederated provinces, had been Queen Victoria’s choice, and the lofty and costly towers crowning the height of Parliament Hill are a centre of national life worthy of any people.

Parliament, like its model in Westminster, is made up of the three estates, the Queen and the two Houses. By the quinquennial appointment of a British nobleman of unblemished character and high distinction as Governor-General the Queen represents herself worthily at Ottawa, and delivers the country from the civil revolution of a ballot-box election, which periodically convulses the United States. By the appointment, aut vitam aut culpam, of eighty-one members by the Governor in Council, from among the men of wealth and political experience of the Dominion, the Senate, or Upper House, is created, without the evils that flow from a hereditary aristocracy, and serving as a protection to the weaker provinces.

The 211 members of the Commons, or Lower House, are chosen by the people by ballot every five years at least, from constituencies adjusted every decade according to the variability of the population in the several provinces. The Dominion Government appoints the Judges of Chancery and Queen’s Bench throughout the country, by which the evils of an elected justiciary are escaped, and a Supreme Court of Appeal has been constituted at Ottawa; while, in order that no subject may be denied justice, and that the learning and freedom from popular clamour of British judges may be available, an appeal is allowed in certain cases to the Privy Council in London.

The military and naval equipment of Canada, which, with a trifling exception, is not of the nature of a standing army, is under the direction of the Dominion entirely, thus escaping complications between the different provinces; and the customs, trade, and currency are under the same authority. Each of the provinces existing before confederation has control of its public lands, forests, and mines, though the fisheries of the whole country, along with the lands, forests, and mines of Manitoba and the north-western territories, are controlled by the Dominion. Matters relating to social life, morality, and education are under the jurisdiction of the several provinces, though the full control of the Indian population is under the Dominion. It is not to be supposed that in the heat of political feeling no conflicts should have arisen between the Central Government at Ottawa and the several Provincial Governments, but a reference to the British Privy Council has secured an impartial settlement of these difficulties.

Section II.—The Boundaries of Canada.

(References: Treaty of Paris, 1783; “Treaties affecting Boundaries, &c.,” Ramsay, 1885; “Boundaries formerly in Dispute,” Sir Francis Hincks, 1885; “Boundaries of United States,” &c.; “United States Government,” 1885; “International Law,” W. E. Hall, 1880.)

It is of prime importance to consider the limits of this larger Canada, and to refer to the circumstances under which these boundaries were settled. During the past 100 years the numerous treaties, conventions, and commissions in which Britain and the United States have taken part have largely been occupied with the adjusting of the international boundary-line.

The most noticeable thing about these negotiations is the fact that it was the former possession of Canada by France, and the line of cleavage thus clearly marked between Canada and the British Colonies, that led Canada to cling to Britain when her own colonies deserted her. It was the existence of boundary-lines, more or less sharply defined, between the English and French Colonies which supplied the data for deciding the boundary-line of Canada. Having succeeded in gaining independence, and this with the hearty approbation of a very important part of the British people themselves, it was in the next year after the British surrender at Yorktown that the United States’ commissioners succeeded in obtaining a provisional agreement as to the leading principles on which the boundary should be decided. The Ministry then in power had as two of its leading members Lord Shelbourne and Charles James Fox, and the very existence of that Ministry was due to the fact that the British people desired to have a harmonious settlement of these differences with the rebellious colonies.

A British merchant named Oswald, well acquainted with America, was the commissioner for Britain, and the negotiations were conducted in Paris. On behalf of the United States there were Franklin, Adams, and Jay, and it is not too much to say that the desire of the British people for peace with their own flesh and blood beyond the sea, as well as the remarkable ability of the American commissioners, gave Canada much less territory than she should have had.

The result of the negotiations was the memorable Treaty of 1783, usually known as the Treaty of Paris. In this the agreement as to boundary was very vague in some parts. This was probably inevitable from the unexplored character of the vast territory under consideration, and many a subsequent dispute has grown out of this want of definite description.

There was a dispute as to the line drawn from the north-west angle of Nova Scotia, which was defined as an angle formed by a straight line north from the source of St. Croix River to the Highlands. The line running thence along the height of land to the north-west head of the Connecticut River, was almost impossible of interpretation. This part of the boundary was not settled for nearly sixty years afterwards. Running from the point reached on the Connecticut River, and down the river to the 45° N. lat., the line followed the forty-fifth parallel to the St. Lawrence. The middle of the St. Lawrence, and of the rivers and lakes from this point up to the entrance of Lake Superior, formed a most natural boundary. From the St. Mary’s River the line of division ran through the middle of the lake, but to the north of Isle Royale, and then indeed the description became vague.

A certain Long Lake is mentioned as an objective point, but no one has ever known of a Long Lake. From this supposed point the line was to have run along the watery way by which at last Lake of the Woods is reached, whose north-west corner was the point aimed at. A west-bearing line was then to be drawn until the Mississippi was reached, but the source of the Mississippi was found to be three or four degrees to the south of the north-west angle named.

No further attempt to fix a boundary was needed westward, for to the west of the Mississippi to the south of 49° N., a line seemingly chosen as very nearly excluding the sources of the Missouri, lay Louisiana, claimed by the French; and to the territory west of the Rocky Mountains the United States at the time of the Treaty of Paris laid no claim.

The indefiniteness of the boundary-line described, and the subsequent purchase of Louisiana and the country on the Pacific coast by the United States, gave rise to dispute after dispute. The definition of the Maine boundary, the finding of the line from Lake Superior to Lake of the Woods, the line to the forty-ninth parallel, and the Oregon difficulty, including in it the San Juan affair, were the chief of these.

In the Treaty of London, 1794, known as that of The Maine Boundary.amity and commerce, the question arose which was the true St. Croix River, whose source was named as a starting point. Commissioners were appointed to examine the ground. They decided in 1798 in favour of the smaller branch, inasmuch as it ran in the most northerly direction, and at the spot agreed upon they caused a monument to be erected.

But next it must be decided where the highlands referred to in the treaty were. The Americans claimed heights even overlooking the St. Lawrence. Britain refused this. The treaty had said the highlands between the streams running into the St. Lawrence, and those into the Atlantic Ocean. The headwaters of the St. John and Restigouche rivers were those relied on by the Americans. “No,” said the British, “the St. John empties into the Bay of Fundy, and the Restigouche into the Gulf of St. Lawrence, neither of them into the Atlantic Ocean.”

So raged the contest. The line running north from the monument was claimed by the Americans for one hundred and forty miles; the British would only allow them forty miles. In 1829 the knotty question was referred to the King of the Netherlands as arbitrator. The arbitrator made an honest effort to decide, but was compelled to return the matter to the parties concerned as inexplicable and impracticable. He at the same time suggested a compromise solution. This was not acceptable.

But the question must be settled. Land and forest were being sought for by settlers, and conflicts between American and Canadian citizens were constant. In 1833 President Jefferson made a proposition to Lord Palmerston, but this was not adopted, as it appeared somewhat ambiguous. A temporary joint occupation was next agreed upon, and in 1842 the contending governments appointed commissioners to consider the matter. The well-known Daniel Webster was the United States’ commissioner, and the Hon. Alexander Baring, afterwards Lord Ashburton, was for the British.

Many have been the criticisms on these national representatives. To have succeeded was in any case to have brought down adverse criticism. Webster was astute, and Baring, belonging to a banking-house, closely connected with American interests, was supposed to have been specially fitted for the work, and seems to have been high-minded and honest. Perhaps he was not sufficiently alive to colonial interests.

The commissioners agreed to take the River St. John and its branch, the St. Francis, as the northern boundary of Maine. This gave seven-twelfths of the disputed territory to the United States, and five-twelfths to Canada.

A curious incident of this boundary dispute was in connection with the part consisting of the forty-fifth parallel. Some years before, this line had been surveyed by two incompetent engineers, Valentine and Collins, and their boundary was a sad commentary on Euclid’s definition of a straight line. Now it was north, now south of the real parallel, and the Treaty of 1842 met the case by following “west along the said dividing line, as heretofore known and understood.” Great satisfaction was expressed by the British on the settlement of the Maine boundary dispute, and Mr. Baring was raised to the peerage in consequence. The Americans were chagrined at the decision, until an event transpired—one of the most remarkable in the history of diplomacy.

The American Congress while discussing the treaty sat with closed doors, and were disposed to reject it. At this juncture Webster laid before the Senate a map which had been discovered among the archives in Paris, just before the beginning of the treaty, by an American litterateur named Sparks. The map had been in Webster’s hands during the progress of the whole treaty. The map in question was the copy of one made by Franklin, as giving the boundaries agreed on in the Treaty of 1783, on which was a strong red line, marking the boundary exactly where the British claimed.

The effect of the map upon the unwilling senators is said to have been magical. The treaty was at once ratified. Severe things have been said in connection with this affair. It has been said that the original map was sent by Franklin to the Count de Vergennes to mislead him at the time. This certainly reflects on Franklin. Others say the map used before the Senate was an invention, to induce it to adopt the treaty. In favour of this view is the fact that since that date the original has never been found in the archives at Paris. Whatever explanation may be accepted, the affair is not creditable to American statesmanship, and has given rise to a strong feeling of injury in the breasts of the Canadian people ever since.

In the Treaty of 1794, to which reference has been made, one of the subjects discussed was the settlement Lake Superior to Lake of the Woods. of the line from Lake Superior to Lake of the Woods. It was not, however, until the Treaty of Ghent in 1814 that the step was taken of appointing commissioners to continue the boundary to the Lake of the Woods north-westward. The commissioners met, but could not agree on this matter. It then remained unsettled until it came up for decision at the time of the Ashburton Treaty. Britain claimed that her territory should extend from the western extremity of Lake Superior northward. The Americans, while unable to point out the Long Lake referred to, fell back on the Treaty of 1783, saying by way of the “water communication” to the Lake of the Woods. The additional fact was in their favour that the line must run north of Isle Royale. It is undoubted, taking these points into consideration, that the Pigeon River route, and by way of the “Grand Portage,” was pointed to by the Treaty of 1783, and so it was decided by Mr. Baring. We have already noticed that though the British commissioner of 1842 cannot be blamed for his decision, yet, taking into account the early explorations of Du Luth and the French explorers, and the occupation of territory south-west of Fond du Lac by the Ojibway or Canadian Indians, the original treaty should have preserved a far greater territory to Canada.

It was by the commissioners appointed in 1794 that the further difficulty was recognized of settling Lake of the Woods to 49° N. the line west of Lake of the Woods. By this time it had been discovered that the Mississippi was many miles south of Lake of the Woods. In consequence of this the parties to that treaty agreed that the question should be settled by “amicable negotiation.” The matter was deferred until 1814, when, near the close of the war between Britain and United States, a peace was concluded at Ghent. It seems fortunate that an understanding was then reached. The battle of New Orleans, fought in 1815, after the treaty was made, so raised the hopes of the American people that an agreement then would have been difficult to reach.

The commissioners appointed at Ghent succeeded in 1818, at what is called the Convention of London, in closing the matter. It was agreed to draw a line due north and south from the north-west angle of the Lake of the Woods until it met the forty-ninth parallel. An unexpected and amusing result of this mode of settlement is that a small peninsula jutting out from Canadian soil has a trifling portion of the extremity cut off by this inflexible line, which thus becomes United States’ territory.

Claiming the lands along its banks from having discovered the Mississippi, France in 1712 gave one 49° N. De Crozat the exclusive right to trade in this region. Five years later the trader surrendered his monopoly. By secret treaty in 1762 France surrendered Louisiana to Spain, seemingly meaning by that the country upon the Mississippi and Missouri rivers. A year later it was settled between Britain, France, and Spain that all the territory lying east of the Mississippi should belong to Britain. In 1800 Spain gave back to France the reduced Louisiana lying west of the Mississippi.

No sooner was this transfer known than the young republic, then under President Jefferson, successfully negotiated with Napoleon, and purchased Louisiana for $12,000,000, and certain “spoliation claims” amounting to 3¾ millions more. The acquisition of this territory by the United States in 1803 immediately opened up the question of boundary between it and the British possessions.

It had been settled in Jay’s treaty of 1794 that the forty-ninth parallel, which was known to be near the Lake of the Woods, should be, until it reached the Mississippi, the boundary. We have mentioned the difficulty arising in this case, and seen that in 1818 the forty-ninth parallel was reached. In the same treaty the line was continued westward to the “stony” (Rocky) mountains. This was again fully stated in the Ashburton Treaty, which, referring to the line starting from the Lake of the Woods, says, “thence, according to existing treaties, due south to its intersection with the forty-ninth parallel of north latitude, and along that parallel to the Rocky Mountains.” It was not till 1872, in the year after the Treaty of Washington, that two parties of engineers—one British the other American—met on this boundary, determined it accurately, and marked it with iron posts for several hundred miles westward.

In 1783 there was no mention made of the Pacific coast in the treaty. The acquisition of Louisiana The Oregon Question. by the United States, however, induced them to claim territory on the west side of the Rocky Mountains. An American authority has thus stated their case: “In treating with Great Britain for the establishment of our northern boundary west of the Rocky Mountains, this region was claimed on three grounds, that of discovery and occupation, the Louisiana purchase, and cession from Spain. On which of these grounds we succeeded in having the boundary established on the forty-ninth parallel will never be ascertained, and is of little moment.”

Their claim of “discovery and occupation” rested on the visit of a Captain Gray, of Boston, who in an American ship in 1792 had entered the Columbia River and sailed a few miles up that stream. In 1804-6 the well-known American expedition of Captain Lewis and Clarke took place to the mouth of the Columbia River. In 1811 the Astor Fur Company established a trading port at the mouth of the Columbia, and though they sold out to the English North-West Company in 1813, yet this was claimed as American occupancy.

The British claim was that the Montreal Fur Company had early crossed the Rocky Mountains, and descending the Columbia had erected posts throughout the country. Britain was quite content to recognize the forty-ninth parallel from the mountains to the Columbia, but then claimed the river as the boundary until the mouth was reached between latitudes 46° and 47° N.

In 1818 it was agreed between Britain and the United States that this territory on the north-west territory of America should for ten years be open to both countries. The Monroe doctrine, that the American continent should not be free to the future colonization of any European power, was about this time being vigorously asserted, and was used in connection with the Pacific coast. In 1824 an attempt was made, though ineffectually, to extend the boundary to the Pacific Ocean. Again in 1826, proposals and counter-proposals between the interested parties were made, but to no purpose.

Between Russia and Britain, towards the north, so early as 1825 a treaty had been made, by which the meridian of 140° + west longitude should be the boundary of Alaska, but that a strip of territory commencing at 60° N. along the Pacific coast, some fifty miles wide, and as far south as 54° 40′ N., should be recognized as Russian territory on account of prior occupation. Inspired by the preposterous Monroe doctrine, the cry of the American people was that they should possess the whole coast up to Russian territory. Their claim was put epigrammatically, “Fifty-four forty, or fight.”

This came up with the other important matters of dispute before the commissioners of the Ashburton Treaty in 1842, but was left unsettled. For several years there was an active correspondence between the rival governments. At last, in 1846, a compromise was offered by the British Government, viz., that the line of 49° N. be taken to the sea, but that the whole of Vancouver Island, a part of which ran nearly a degree to the south, should be British. This proposition was accepted and the treaty ratified.

The American authority quoted above has stated his difficulty in deciding which of the three grounds advanced by the United States was the means of establishing the boundary. We would suggest that possibly none of these, but rather the unblushing assertion involved in the Monroe doctrine agitation was the chief factor.

Happy had the two nations been had all dispute then ended. But it was not so to be. When the The San Juan Affair. district of Vancouver Island came to be explored, it was shown that between its southern extremity and the mainland there were three channels, any one of which might be meant by the Treaty of 1846, viz., the De Haro Channel, nearest Vancouver Island, the Rosario, near the mainland, and an intermediate channel, the Douglas. The British maintained their right to the line through the most eastern channel. The Americans claimed that through the De Haro Channel, which would give them the island of San Juan.

The discussion waxed hot in inverse ratio to the value of the disputed islands. An injudicious American commander, named Harvey, occupied San Juan with an armed force. British men-of-war were sent out, and a collision very nearly ensued. Negotiation, however, led to a joint occupation of the island by a force belonging to each party, and by the Treaty of Washington the matter was referred to the decision of the Emperor of Germany. The arbitrator decided in favour of the United States’ claim. Admitting the terms of the decision of the Treaty of 1846 as to the forty-ninth parallel, there seems no ground for complaint on our side in the matter.

Thus by many a severe dispute and after much national ill-feeling, has our long boundary-line been settled, with the exception of the boundary between Alaska and British Columbia, which still remains undecided. It is true, compared with the blood and treasure spent on European soil to adjust boundaries, we have abundant ground for thankfulness; but Canadians are almost unanimous to-day in the opinion that, at any rate, up to the Treaty of 1871, Canadian interests were too often treated with little consideration.

Too often it has been as in the case on the dispute on the Pacific coast, the British ambassadors have under-valued our possessions. Mr. Packenham, the British Ambassador at Washington, who was also a sportsman, without much regret surrendered the Columbia River, because the salmon in it were said to be so spiritless as not to rise to take the angler’s fly.

Section III.—A general Sketch of the Provinces.

First in age of the seven provinces now happily united in Canadian Dominion is Quebec. Its Quebec. name is got from the ancient capital founded by Champlain in 1608; and as truly as Paris is France, so Quebec, the capital, has been and continues to be Lower Canada. The religion, literature, and politics of French Canadian life all centre in the quaint old city, to equal which in unique resemblance to the time of Louis Quatorze, one searches even Normandy in vain. A titular noblesse, and the patois of the people, connect at once with the time of le grand monarque. French noblemen at that date undertook with alacrity enterprises for building up and extending “Nouvelle France,” French religious orders struggled to extend their faith among the new-world people, and the quiet French Canadian habitants have long been accustomed to take their views of public and social life unquestioningly from their religious teachers.

Suffering as New France did from maladministration under the rule of the French kings, it can have been little less than an exodus from bondage when in 1759-63 she acknowledged the British as her new rulers.

On the immediate borders of the young republic, it could hardly have been expected that the mode of royal government introduced by the Quebec Act of 1774 could have succeeded, and it was within twenty years thereafter that the changing phases of new-world life and the influx of the loyalist population along the Upper St. Lawrence and the lakes, demanded not only a division of the province in 1791, into Upper and Lower Canada, but also the bestowal of a more liberal constitution on each portion.

The influence of the American Revolution is discernible on the temper with which the Imperial Parliament dealt with the Bill of 1791. The Parliament of Lower Canada was to consist of two Houses, viz., the Legislative Council of fifteen appointed members, and the Assembly of fifty members elected by the people. In 1774 it had been claimed that there were not more than 65,000 of a population in Lower Canada, and though this was probably below the true number, yet it can be safely stated that its people in 1791 did not exceed 100,000.

A French province with British rulers was an anomaly for the world to ponder over during such disturbing events as the American struggle for independence, the French Revolution, and the Napoleonic wars. In 1812 Lower Canada was loyal to Britain, and was no doubt prepared by the disquieting events of the outbreak of 1837-8 for uniting, as she did in 1841 under the Imperial sanction, with Upper Canada.

Thus she remained for a quarter of a century, until in 1867 the province to which Britain had granted “ses lois, sa langue, et ses institutions,” entered, with twenty-four members in the Senate and sixty-five in the Commons, most heartily the new confederacy of the “larger Canada,” with the motto “that when the last shot was fired on the American continent for British supremacy, it would be fired by a French Canadian.” One hundred thousand people in 1791 had become 1,360,000 in 1881.

“Wolfe and Montcalm! two nobler names ne’er graced

The page historic or the hostile plain;

No braver souls the storm of battle faced,

None more heroic will e’er breathe again.

They passed unto their rest without a stain

Upon their kindred natures or true hearts.

One graceful column to the noble twain

Speaks of a nation’s gratitude, and starts

The tear that Valour claims and Feeling’s self imparts.”


Next in order of the seven provinces comes Nova Nova Scotia. Scotia. The name is a memorial of the united crown of England and Scotland under James I. The “shambling monarch,” as Macaulay calls him, must needs exalt his Scottish kingdom to the same plane as his new English inheritance. If in the New World there be a New England, so must there be a New Scotland; and James, who was a thorough believer in an aristocracy, created an order of baronets of Nova Scotia as well.

But Nova Scotia was long the battle-ground of English and French in the New World. The names of Louisbourg and Port Royal are almost as suggestive of war as Gibraltar or Quebec. Acadia stands out before us as the poetic region of French rule in North America. It was because of the passionate attachment of the Acadians for their land, and for French power, that Britain took decided steps to compel the loyalty of Nova Scotia. Two measures were adopted, viz., “to colonize with loyalists, and to deport the disloyal.”

In 1749, Lord Cornwallis, with a well-equipped colony of trusty English people, founded on Chebucto Bay the city and arsenal of Halifax, so-called from Lord Halifax, President of the Board of Trade and Plantations. The argument for loyalty presented by such an imposing immigration movement could not be withstood.

In 1755, when, as now fairly shown by Parkman, the French population, by obstinate hostility, proved themselves unworthy even of forbearance, thousands of Acadians were transported to regions where the strife was less critical than the border land of French and English in Nova Scotia. Bands of sturdy Scottish people were attracted to the newer Scotland. The close communication between Halifax and the old city of Boston in Massachusetts, which contained so many loyalists, led to the transfer of many such after the peace of 1783. Germans and other European immigrants have also settled in Nova Scotia, and given their names to various localities. But before Scot, Loyalist, or German had come, the first House of Assembly for Nova Scotia met under Imperial authority in 1758.

So cut off by nature from Nova Scotia, Cape Breton desired separate government, and this was given it in 1784. Cape Breton, however, could not stand alone, and in 1820 again became a part of Nova Scotia. Staunchest of the British Colonies, as we should have expected from its origin Nova Scotia would be, its devotion to Britain during the war of 1812 was most marked, and Nova Scotians have always been noted for industry, intelligence, and public spirit. Nova Scotia has ever been the fruitful school of liberty, and looks to-day with more affection to the statesmen who have served her than perhaps does any province of the Dominion.

In ship-building, the fisheries, and commerce have her sons struggled and gained a name, and Nova Scotia brings into the confederation many of the most needful virtues for building up a strong and noble nation. She is now represented in the Dominion Senate by twelve members, and in the Commons by twenty-one, and, like every other province of the Dominion, has a Lieutenant-Governor of her own. With an uninterrupted provincial existence of a century and a quarter, Nova Scotia ranks as oldest in the Dominion. Judging from past increase, the population of 440,500 in 1881 will, during the present decade, reach half a million.

“Two hundred miles to the south-south-east,

On ‘George’s’ the billows foam like yeast,

O’er shallow banks, where on every side

Lies peril of billow, shoal, and tide.

There, riding like sea-gulls with wings at rest,

Cape Ann’s swift schooners the sharp seas breast,

With their straining cables reaching down

Where the anchors clutch at the sea-sands brown.


There gather when shorten the wintry days,

The fish of a thousand shallow bays;

There men of a score of races reap

Their dear-bought harvest, while billows sweep,

And drear fogs gather, and tempests blow

O’er the fatal sands which shift below

The ever-angry sea, which laves

A thousand wrecks and a myriad graves.


As the frigate steams in where her consort sank,

So when maidens are weeping, and widows are pale,

New vessels are manned for those lost in the gale.

The orphan fears not the restless wave,

Which gave him food, and his sire a grave:

And the soulless veteran soundly sleeps,

Rocked by the rough sea, which sullenly sweeps

O’er the bones of comrade, brother, and son,

Whose long, hard, perilous task is done.”


The remarkable inlet which divides portions of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick—the Bay of Fundy—afforded New Brunswick. the means for the early colonization of New Brunswick. Probably 1766 is the earliest date on which we can certainly fix for the arrival of the settlers in New Brunswick. At that time New Brunswick was still a portion of Nova Scotia, and the district of Sunbury was that first chosen for settlement. Perhaps not more than 800 white persons altogether were to be found within the limits of this province in 1783, the year of the treaty.

The sudden influx after that date was so great, however, that New Brunswick, so named as a protest against the revolt of the rebellious States against the royal house of Britain, may be regarded as the creation of the loyalists.

The following year marked the organization into a 1784.
province distinct from Nova Scotia, and the next year saw the selection of the little town of St. Ann, up the St. John River, as capital, but with its name changed to Fredericton.

New Brunswick is a forest province. The beauty of its woods in autumn has brought forth praises from many visitors, while their vast extent affords a chief means of support to the people. Reared amidst its forests, to be a New Brunswicker is to be one accustomed to the free life and industrious habits of the woodman. And yet, serving the purpose of a large and hardy fishing and ship-building population, New Brunswick has 410 miles of sea-coast, one-half on the Bay of Fundy, the other along the coast exposed to the searching breezes from the Atlantic. This latter coast is familiarly known as the North Shore.

Drawing most of her later population from Great Britain, this province has seen a large portion of its immigration from the north and other parts of Ireland. The Bay of Fundy has afforded the means for a large coasting trade with the northern New England states, and the city of St. John, claiming to be the commercial metropolis of the province, has far outstripped the capital. The amazing tides, which on the opposite side of the bay in the Shubenacadie River rise to a height of seventy-five feet, come up to the docks of St. John, rising forty feet, and are a wonder to all spectators.

New Brunswick retains her old provincial Parliament, with an Upper House of thirteen, and a Lower of forty members. The population had in 1881 become 321,200, and the representation accorded her in the Dominion Senate is twelve members, and in the Commons sixteen.

Fourth of the original confederating provinces in age, though first in numbers and wealth, is the province formerly known as Upper Canada. Being Ontario. an inland province, only reached in the earliest times by a difficult river navigation, i.e. up the St. Lawrence, its growth was slow, though its fertile soil was known. Creeping up the portages of the great river of Canada, or through the water-courses of New York State, bands of American refugees entered Lake Ontario, found a resting-place along its shores, or, more adventurous, crossed the Niagara peninsula, and settled along Lake Erie. It is believed that there were not more than 10,000 souls in the whole province from Detroit to the Ottawa, when it was in 1791 severed from Quebec to make a new province.

Its first Lieutenant-Governor, Simcoe, sent forth his proclamation from Kingston, but called the first Parliament, consisting of a Legislative Council of seven members and an Assembly of sixteen, to meet in Newark, at the mouth of the Niagara River, in 1792. Shortly after, on finding, in 1794, that the fort on the American side of the Niagara River must be surrendered to the United States, and this contrary to the general expectation of Canada, the capital was removed to a position further from the frontier, and the second Parliament met at Little York, now Toronto, in 1797.

On the report of the great military engineer, Bouchette, showing that Toronto was easily accessible to an invading force from the United States, Governor Simcoe determined to again move his capital. Now he chose London, in the inaccessible forests of the western peninsula, on the River de la Tranche, which he, as Governor, changed to Thames, and on it he founded Chatham as the naval port for his new metropolis. This choice was disapproved by the Governor-General of Canada, Lord Dorchester, and ever since Toronto has been regarded as the chief place of Upper Canada.

As to Upper Canada at large, her early history was largely moulded by the loyalists; national spirit was developed by the war of 1812; population increased from the United States, from Great Britain, and Ireland; and in the mettlesomeness of her growing youth the rebellion of 1837-8 took place, not against the young Queen Victoria, then ascending the throne, but against local misgovernment. The two Canadas having been united together in 1841, their prosperity was very great. Between 1842-72 Upper and Lower Canada received 831,000 of a population from the British Isles alone, and of these Upper Canada much the larger number.

The resources of Ontario are varied. Along the northern portion of her territory great forests yield a livelihood to the people, and a revenue to the Government. Deposits of petroleum, salt, iron, and copper are sources of wealth, but farm-life is that best known to the masses of the population. Perhaps no form of civilization can be imagined, bringing a larger amount of comfort to the largest number, than that of the farm system of Ontario. The great number of the farms are of the extent of a hundred acres. These are usually held in fee-simple by their occupants; they yield a sufficient return for the maintenance of their owners without cultivating extravagance, so that it is safe to say nowhere is to be found a more educated, happy, and enterprising population than that of the yeomanry of Ontario. The peaceful sweetness of the Sabine farm of Horace, or Virgil’s pictures of the Georgics and Bucolics, are not more delightful than those to be found in our Ontario homesteads.

To make farming consist in not the mere drudgery of gaining a living, but in the growth of flocks and herds of superior value, in the scientific cultivation of grain and fruit, in the utilization of every process for saving labour, and in the development of a taste for farming and pastoral pursuits, is surely the path of patriotic service for the Canadian family.

Ontario, on entering confederation, took the bold step of dispensing with an Upper House in her local Parliament, and has but one Legislative Chamber of eighty-nine representatives. Her population had grown to be 1,923,000 in 1881, and in the Dominion Parliament twenty-four senators and ninety-two commoners are her contingent.

“I dreamed not then that, ere the rolling year

Had filled its circle, I should wander here

In musing awe; should tread this wondrous world,

See all its store of inland waters hurled

In one vast volume down Niagara’s steep,

Or calm, behold them in transparent sleep,

Where the blue hills of old Toronto shed

Their evening shadows o’er Ontario’s bed;

Should trace the grand Cadaraqui, and glide

Down the white rapids of his lordly tide,

Through massy woods, mid islets flowering fair,

And blooming glades, where the first sinful pair

For consolation might have weeping trod,

When vanished from the garden of their God.”


Midway between the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, so long ago as 1812, a band of Scottish colonists, Manitoba. with a small admixture of Irish immigrants, took up their abode on the banks of the Red River of the north, a tributary of Lake Winnipeg. The colonists were brought thither by way of Hudson’s Bay by the energy of a Scottish nobleman of great patriotism and benevolence—Lord Selkirk.

Their first years were years of much hardship, not entirely on account of the inevitable difficulties of a new land, but because two rival companies, the Hudson’s Bay Company and the North-West Fur Company of Montreal, struggled for supremacy on the same ground, and so involved the colonists. A portion of the colonists attached themselves in their fortunes to each company. The adherents of the North-West Company in 1815 left the Red River and found homes north of Toronto, and in London district in Upper Canada. The portion remaining was reinforced by new immigrants coming by way of Hudson Bay. The conflict between the two companies resulted in an unfortunate collision in 1816, in which the Hudson’s Bay Company’s Governor Semple was killed.

In 1817 Lord Selkirk hastened by way of the lakes to the rescue, being accompanied by a body of discharged soldiers of the German mercenaries remaining in Canada after the close of the war with the United States in 1812-15. In 1821 the warring companies united, a number of Swiss immigrants reached the country in the same year, and under the amalgamated fur companies the colonists who still clung to the country gradually grew into peaceful independence.

In 1835 the first Government was constituted at Fort Garry, under the title of the Council of Assiniboia, Sir George Simpson, the Governor of the Hudson’s Bay Company, being its President. This ruled the country amidst considerable clamour till the time when Canada obtained possession of the North-West by the payment of 300,000l. to the Hudson’s Bay Company. Through a failure of the Canadian Government to satisfy the 12,000 people of Assiniboia, five-sixths of whom had Indian blood in their veins, a rebellion arose in 1869, to quiet which Colonel Garnet, now Lord, Wolseley, was sent out with a joint expedition of British troops and Canadian volunteers by way of Lake Superior and the old Canadian route to Lake of the Woods and the Red River.

The Canadian Parliament next constituted, on the suppression of the rebellion, the new province of Manitoba, and its first Parliament, consisting of a Legislative Council of seven members, and of twenty-four of an Assembly, met in Winnipeg, near Fort Garry, in 1871.

Since that date the population has greatly increased, and it is estimated that in 1885 the 12,000 have grown to 100,000 or 150,000. The completion of the Canadian Pacific Railway in 1886, from Quebec to the Pacific Ocean, thus connecting Winnipeg by rail with the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, is an event of the greatest importance to the Dominion.

Manitoba is the first prairie province, and in it Canadian life is being modified to suit the conditions of a prairie home. The Canadian farm of 100 acres is replaced by one usually of 320 acres’ extent. Fields of golden grain sixty or eighty acres in size are common, and would in July and August satisfy a Roman poet Tibullus, or the English singer of the harvest time. The Manitoba farm is conducted on a much greater scale than that of Ontario. The shorter season, arising from Manitoba lying in 50° N., and the scarcity of labour demand the use of every appliance of labour-saving machinery.

The conflicting claims which arise between the country of wheat-fields on the prairie, and the manufacturing interests of the eastern provinces of The North-West Territories. the Dominion, will call for every resource of the statesmen of Canada to maintain the union intact. The province of Manitoba has now dispensed with its Legislative Council, and has a Legislative Assembly of thirty-five members, while Winnipeg has become as a business centre one of the chief cities of the Dominion.

“These are the gardens of the desert, these

The unshorn fields, boundless and beautiful,

For which the speech of England has no name,—

The prairies, I behold them for the first,

And my heart swells, while the dilated sight

Takes in the encircling vastness. Lo! they stretch

In airy undulations, far away,

As if the ocean, in his gentlest swell,

Stood still, with all his rounded billows, fixed

And motionless for ever.—Motionless?

No—they are all unchained again. The clouds

Sweep over with their shadows, and, beneath,

The surface rolls and fluctuates to the eye

Dark hollows seem to glide along and chase

The sunny ridges. . . . Fitting floor

For this magnificent temple of the sky,

With flowers whose glory and whose multitude

Rival the constellations!”


Always associated with Manitoba are the vast North-West territories, which, though not provinces, yet are entitled in the Dominion Parliament to five members, have a Governor, and along with him a Council, partly elected and partly nominated. These vast extents of prairie reach to the very foot of the Rocky Mountains, and northward even to the Arctic Ocean by way of the Mackenzie River, the Mississippi of the north. This vast region must yet become the home of millions. Already may we descry the dim outlines of the provinces in the divisions that have been made for postal purposes of Assiniboia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Athabasca.

The Governor of these wide territories resides at their capital, Regina, a town upon the Canadian Pacific Railway, 350 miles west of Winnipeg. Localities such as Edmonton, Prince Albert, Battleford, Calgary, and others are becoming known, and may be called the nerve-centres of the future life of the North-West.

Scattered over these territories are many of the original inhabitants divided up into tribes, as Crees, Blackfeet, Ojibways, and Assiniboines, all Indians under treaty with the Canadian Government, and the Chippewyans and Eskimo of the far north. Of the Crees, Blackfeet, and allied tribes, there are 34,520. Of the Chippewyans or Tinné, and Eskimo, there are 26,054, making for the North-West and Manitoba upwards of 60,000 aborigines. There is an air of immensity connected with the Canadian North-West. Vast plains, great rivers, and lofty mountains betoken future movements of the most important kind. As the prairies are occupied one after another shall these territories enter into the sisterhood of confederated provinces, to assist in making our Dominion great in deeds as well as in extent of territory.

The west side of the Rocky Mountains has hitherto been an almost unknown land to the dwellers on British Columbia. the prairies. It is true that well to the north, in the region of the Peace River, the mountain range becomes less elevated, and this river runs through the mountains from the west to the east, where it empties into Lake Athabasca. The currents of trade, following the discovery of the Pacific Ocean by Sir Alexander Mackenzie in his overland journey of 1793, passed for many years by way of Peace River.

New Caledonia, and portions of Alaska, as well as the regions lying along the Fraser and Columbia Rivers, were thus visited by traders from the east of the mountains. Other passes, such as Yellow Head, Kicking Horse, Bow River, &c., further south, have been threaded, but from their difficulty not extensively followed.

Discoverers by sea, such as Captain Cook in 1778, and Vancouver in 1792, came up the west coast of America; but the fur-trade, which developed the country and made it known, was chiefly conducted by the traders over the Rocky Mountains. British Columbia is a vast continuous sea of mountains, its streams run over sands of gold, its mountain-slopes are covered with fir, pine, red cedar, aspen, balsam, and poplar trees, many of them of enormous proportions. Its rivers teem with salmon and other great fishes, such as trout and sturgeon, while on the Island of Vancouver is at once the best coal-field on the Pacific coast, at Nanaimo, and the best harbour on the Pacific, that of Esquimalt.

Not as a land of farmers, but of lumbermen, herdsmen, shepherds, miners, fishermen, and traders will British Columbia be known. Its climate, with roses often blooming at Christmas, is one of the most agreeable. The tremendous gold fever of 1857-8 produced a time of wildest excitement, and the want of connection with Canada has since led to a want of enterprise, but the opening of the Canadian Pacific Railway, whose first through train from Montreal reached the Pacific Ocean on July 4th, 1886, will undoubtedly bring a large population to the Pacific province.

The magnificence of the Rocky Mountains, now pierced by the railway, can only be appreciated by being seen. Vast glaciers, innumerable snow-peaks, lofty cataracts, and palisaded ranges of mountains characterize these Canadian Alps, and fill the imagination as greatly as does Righi or the Matterhorn.

For several years British Columbia and Vancouver’s Island had separate governments, but in 1866 they became one. The Legislature of twenty-five members in one house survives under confederation, into which the province entered in 1871 with three Dominion Senators, and six members of the Commons. The population was in 1881, 49,500, of whom 36,483 are given as Indians.

“The mild, bright moon has upward risen,

Out of the grey and boundless plain,

And all around the white snows glisten,

Where frost and ice and silence reign—

While ages roll away, and they unchanged remain.

These mountains, piercing the blue sky

With their eternal cones of ice;

The torrents dashing from on high,

O’er rock and crag and precipice;

Change not, but still remain as ever,

Unwasting, deathless, and sublime,

And will remain while lightnings quiver,

Or stars the hoary summits climb,

Or rolls the thunder-chariot of eternal Time.”


One of the first portions of Canada to be discovered by Europeans was St. John’s Island in the Prince Edward Island. gulf. With its brick-red clay it strikes the attention of the most unobservant. It is the seventh province of the Dominion. In 1764-6 it was surveyed by the British Government and granted to about one hundred English and Scottish gentlemen as estates. Though they were required to pay a very small quit-rent to the Crown, and to place only one settler on every two hundred acres in ten years, yet even this most of them failed to do. The first settlers of St. John’s Island were chiefly Scottish. In 1770 it was erected into a separate province, and in 1773 its first Legislative Assembly was held.

In 1780 the Governor of the island, a Mr. Patterson, induced the Legislature to pass an Act changing the name of the island to New Ireland. King George III., however, refused to sanction the change of name. It was in the year 1798 that the Legislature passed a new Act calling the island after Edward, Duke of Kent, father of Queen Victoria. The Duke of Kent was the commander of the forces in British North America at the time. In 1800 the name Prince Edward Island came into common use. In 1803, Lord Selkirk, of whom we have already spoken as the philanthropic colonizer of the Red River, brought 800 Highlanders to Prince Edward Island. He gives an interesting account of the colony in his work of 1805.

It is in quite recent years that relief is being obtained from the troublesome system of land tenure early introduced there. The excellent soil of Prince Edward Island supports a hardy agricultural population, while a portion of the people is devoted to pastoral pursuits. The taking of fish and lobsters forms one of the best means of support on the island. Charlottetown is the capital, at which meets the Provincial Parliament.

Thirteen members make up the Legislative Council, and thirty the Assembly, and up to the present universal suffrage has been the method adopted in elections. It was in 1873 that Prince Edward Island entered confederation with her three Dominion Senators and six members in the Commons. Her population, one of the most thrifty and industrious in the whole Dominion, in 1881 numbered 108,200 souls.

Though not a member of the Canadian Confederation, our preliminary sketch would fail in its purpose Newfoundland. did it give no account of Newfoundland. Perhaps the earliest portion of British America to be discovered, it has long been one of the best-known parts of the new continent. It was in 1583 that Sir Humphrey Gilbert undertook to colonize Newfoundland. He took out 260 men—masons and smiths, mineralogists and refiners, and even musicians. On August 4th he took possession of St. John’s harbour, Newfoundland, and erected a monument, on which he fastened the arms of England, engraven in lead. He promulgated three laws: (1) To establish the Church of England; (2) Queen Elizabeth’s right of possession; and (3) Penalty of loss of ears for disloyalty. The colony failed; and the sad loss in mid-ocean of Sir Humphrey himself is known to all.

So early as 1680 there were 2280 people upon the island. In 1728 Newfoundland became a British province, and courts were then established. The whole island is now, as it ever has been, redolent of fish. Shipping, fish, seals, oil, and the like are the every-day thought of the people. Its early fishermen were much beset by pirates, and now independent of Canada, as well as of the United States, though sometimes thinking of Britain, it is the embodiment of a confirmed insularity.

Its population, now almost entirely native-born, is largely of Irish extraction, as after 1798 many refugees from Ireland found in it a peaceful haven. In 1832 its first Legislative Assembly was held, and several minor changes in its constitution have since taken place. Its Legislative Council contains fifteen members, and the Assembly thirty-one. Lying far out toward Britain, its seaward capes serve for the landing of the Atlantic cable. It receives the service of the Allan line of steamships; and its population had in 1881 reached 185,114. Its small debt and distinctly marked insular tendencies will probably long prevent its entrance into the Dominion as one of the provinces.

Seven provinces, and a vast extent of unoccupied but fertile territory await the influx of the hardy The Dominion. and industrious from European lands to become a still more important part of the Greater Britain. True patriotism seems best to find its expression when we find the English race abroad in the colonies. A happy and contented Canada regards the bond that binds her to Great Britain as a tie of love, without even a suspicion of servitude.

              “Witness, too, the silent cry,

The prayer of many a race and creed to clime,—

Thunderless lightnings striking under sea

From sunset and sunrise of all thy realm,

And that true North, whereof we lately heard

A strain to shame us, ‘keep you to yourselves;

So loyal is too costly! friends—your love

Is but a burthen: loose the bond, and go.’

Is this the tone of empire? here the faith

That made us rulers? this, indeed, her voice

And meaning, whom the roar of Hougoumont

Left mightiest of all peoples under heaven?

What shock has fooled her since, that she should speak

So feebly? wealthier—wealthier—hour by hour!

The voice of Britain, or a sinking land,

Some third-rate isle half lost among her seas?”



Section I.—Geological Data.

(References: “Canadian Geology;” Government Reports of Geological Survey, 1863-85; Dana’s “Geology;” Geikie’s “Ice Age;” Nicholson’s “Palæontology;” Publications of Manitoba Historical and Scientific Society; Map of 1884 of Geological Survey.)

The condition of peoples is largely dependent on the soil, climate, and character of the country they inhabit. The Laurentide Island. To attempt the study of the history of the Canadian people without examining the physical features of their country would be to ignore the very explanation of the movements of population within its borders. The geological features of the country give a clue to the causes or failures of settlement. We are thus compelled to look back to a time entirely prehistoric—to a time long antecedent to Norseman, Indian, or voyageur—to find out the reasons for the course which immigration has followed.

At the time when any portion of this continent had reached the stage in its development which it now retains, was undoubtedly ages ago, at the period when there were yet only the Archæan or primitive rocks. Then only the north-eastern part of North America appeared as an island in the midst of the tepid ocean which surrounded it.

The rugged land of Labrador, and the Laurentide hills, and the wilderness country between Hudson’s Bay and Lakes Huron and Superior, extending far away to the mouth of Mackenzie River, and north-eastward to the Arctic Ocean was a rocky waste. Solid gneiss and the variegated granites; lava and obsidian; syenite and serpentine and the like rocks after their kind—all were there. These have contained hidden in them from that primeval day till now the veins of gold and silver and copper and iron which men are discovering to-day, but at the early time referred to not even Mammon, “the least-erected spirit that fell from heaven,” had peered into their glittering crevices.

No trace of plant or animal appeared, unless the beds of transformed carbon or graphite represent the remnants of an early plant life. Mountain chasms and falling streams were all; there was no sound of bird or beast; no fish swam in the heated waters. And ever since, through colder and hotter as the changes have come, those primeval rocks have remained, except that glaciers have since that time ground down their roughnesses, and crushed rock matter has been carried out by the streams upon the ocean and lake beds. These vast fields of unyielding rocks have been the backbone on which the continent has been formed.

At length along the south and west coast-line of this expanse of rocky island in the sea, plants and Silurian Period. animals began to appear, but all seemingly belonging to the sea. At first, no doubt, the wide expanse of rock, rising above the sea, was like the “burning marl” of Milton, but was slowly cooling down. Not highly developed animals, with acute nerves and tender bodies, but hard, thick-plated animals were the first to appear—all were suited to their rough environment. There were great colonies of corals, headless bivalve shellfish, called Brachiopods, in great numbers, hardy cylindrical mollusks with heads, called Orthoceratites, and these dwelt among the fucoids that grew a mass of leathery weeds along the shore. The remains of these and many other animals are found in rocks many thousands of feet thick, which must have taken many years to fall as great mud deposits along the coast. It is hard to conceive the time those plastic beds have taken to form the hard rock masses of to-day.

This first period is called the Silurian, from the fact that rocks of this time, such as we find in Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Quebec, Ontario, Manitoba, the North-West territories, and also British Columbia, were found by the geologists in Wales, the country of the ancient Silures. The region covered by deposits during that first gush of life—for it was a time of much exuberance of the lower forms of life—either rose from the sea by an inner motion of the earth, or was built up by the detritus carried down from the land.

Now with the cooling of the waters and the greater fitness for a higher animal life came in time a Devonian Period. new age, as under changed conditions the southern fringe of this now considerable area of new-made land began to form. Many corals and large mollusks still continued, but there were now changes of species, an armed lobster that swam the salty seas, strong armour-covered fish, and creatures that “tare each other in their slime”—the first animals to appear with brain. Vegetation of the sort of the spore-bearing ferns began, and the dry land was plainly becoming more fit for habitation. An abundant life swarmed in the seas of this time.

This period was known to Hugh Miller, the Scottish geologist, as the Old Red Sandstone, but in Canada it, like the Silurian which preceded it, contains rocks of chiefly white, reddish, or black limestone or of shaly structure. It is more common to call them after the similar rocks appearing in the south of England—the Devonian beds. In the Upper Silurian and Devonian deposits, salt and petroleum are found in Western Ontario and the district of the Mackenzie River.

At the close of the Silurian and Devonian periods the ancient Laurentide Island had been extended by the addition of beds, chiefly of Silurian and Devonian limestone and shale, on its south-east coast fifty miles, a hundred, and at points even of greater breadth, in Ontario, Quebec, Nova Scotia, and New Brunswick. On its south-west side in the district of Manitoba, and the North-West territories, the Laurentide Island also extended its borders, and a band of Silurian and Devonian rocks, from eighty to one hundred miles wide, was formed. A large portion of the fertile lands of Canada lies above these rocks of the early time, though they are covered by a soil or drift belonging to a much later period.

During the succeeding time when the deep sea seems not to have completely surrounded the enlarged Coal Period. island, as in the regions now included in the south-eastern portion of Nova Scotia, as well as in the American States of Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Michigan, a large extent of the country along the shore must have been a dense marsh and jungle, where, during this carboniferous period, great ferns and club mosses, and strangely-marked trees of large size formed the coal measures as they lived and died and were imbedded in the deposits.

In Canada these coal measures proper seem to have been confined to Nova Scotia and Cape Breton. Iron is here, as elsewhere, found accompanying the coal. So far as eastern and maritime Canada are concerned, with these periods of formation the completion of the Laurentide Island was reached, until by a subsequent change the soil was deposited upon much of it.

After a gap of time, the rising ocean bottom appears, in a mighty, shallow, north-western sea, to have extended from Lakes Manitoba and Winnipegoosis, Cretaceous Period. which mark the western limit of the Devonian formation, for 1500 miles unbroken to the west of Vancouver Island, for no rocky mountain range had yet appeared to interrupt this vast expanse. Here, during this Cretaceous period, so called from its being of the same age as the chalk cliffs of the east of England, huge reptiles, whose remains are being unearthed on the banks of the Saskatchewan River to-day, lived and died, and were in part preserved. Ammonites and Baculites, the successors of the cephalopod mollusks of the earlier time, of great size and glistening in their pearly shells, lived in the salty waters of the period.

The whole of this wide sea-bottom seems to have risen gradually, and in time to have become, in parts at least, a marsh, in which an exuberant vegetation lived, died, and accumulated, until coal formations, rivalling in quality many of the earlier carboniferous deposits, were formed. These, spread over the country for hundreds of miles, constitute the largest coal area now known in the world. Along with this coal are now found also extensive deposits of clay ironstone. On Vancouver’s Island is reached the western limit of this great cretaceous coal-field. The eastern limit of the deposits of this secondary age is marked by a range of hills south-west of Lakes Manitoba and Winnipegoosis, comprising Duck and Riding mountains, the Manitoba sandhills, and the Pembina Mountain.

The western and southern portion of this wide coal area seems to have been again submerged, Tertiary Age. and deposits of sandstone are found in which are traced remains of mammals, resembling those now living on the earth. There are also imbedded in the rocks well-preserved leaves and nut-fruits of many trees, such as sassafras, poplar, tulip-tree, oak, yew, and plane-tree. It was during this third age that the Rocky Mountains appeared. This was probably caused by the collapse of the extended plain—1500 miles wide—which, falling in, caused the elevation of the great core of ancient rocks which had been lying below. The fracture thus made must have been enormous, extending as it did from the north to the south of the western hemisphere, and may have led to a disturbance of the centre of gravity of the whole earth, by which the axis may have changed its direction, and the ice age been brought on on account of a new relation of the earth to the sun.

Whatever the cause may have been, the fact remains that after this time an extension of the region of cold to a far more southward point than it The Glacial Period. had hitherto covered took place. This time, known as the glacial period, was, so far as the whole of the territory of the Dominion of Canada is concerned, one of Arctic winter, and of a short and intensely hot summer. Glaciers formed and slid down over the rocks, crushing them to powder, and the melting stream distributed the detritus over the whole extent.

It is to this period we owe our soil. In every part of Canada great striated markings from north-east or north-west toward the south are found, indicating the progress of this powerful crushing process. Boulders of rocks from the north are mixed with the finer soil, and lie scattered in places over the surface of the earth, as described by Oliver Wendell Holmes in his fanciful sketch of the “Dorchester Giant.”

According to Archibald Geikie’s estimate, for 180,000 years this grinding process of the rocky world continued. At length, in common with other temperate regions of the earth, the territory of the Dominion assumed something like its present conformation. In all probability by other great terrestrial changes the icy hand of the glacial epoch became relaxed, and the land of Keewaydin, or the North Wind, was driven back to its former limits. This was the land prepared after untold ages for its earliest Mongolian or Norseland visitors.

Section II. Myths.

(References: “Timæus of Plato,” translated by Professor Jowett; Seneca’s “Medea;” “Fusang,” by C. G. Leland; “Congrès des Americanistes,” 2 vols., Paris, 1875; “History of Wales,” by Dr. Powell; Hakluyt, “Navigations, Voyages, &c., of the English Nation,” 3 vols., London, 1599.)

The earliest accounts of a land lying west of the Straits of Gibraltar go back as far as the time of Plato, Atlantis. the Greek philosopher. Writing less than four centuries before the Christian era, the Athenian philosopher, in his work known as the “Timæus,” gives a part of the tradition to Socrates, viz., what the aged Critias had heard from Solon, one of the seven sages of Greece, who in turn had obtained the story from a body of priests in the Egyptian city of Sais on the Nile.

Following Professor Jowett’s rendering we give the myth of the fabled continent in the Atlantic Ocean.

Said the Egyptian priests to Solon:—

“These histories tell of a mighty power which was aggressing wantonly against the whole of Europe and Asia, and to your city (Athens) put an end. This power came forth out of the Atlantic Ocean, for in those days the Atlantic was navigable, and there was an island situated in front of the straits which you call the Columns of Hercules (Straits of Gibraltar); the island was larger than Libya and Asia put together, and was the way to other islands, and from the islands you might pass through the whole of the opposite continent which surrounded the true ocean; for this sea which is within the Straits of Hercules is only a harbour, having a narrow entrance, but that other is a real sea, and the surrounding land may be most truly called a continent.

“Now, in this island of Atlantis there was a great and wonderful empire which had rule over the whole island and several others, as well as over part of the continent; and besides these they subjected the parts of Libya within the Columns of Hercules as far as Egypt, and of Europa as far as Tyrrhenia. The vast power thus gathered into one endeavoured to subdue, at one blow, our country and yours, and the whole of the land which was within the straits; and then, Solon, your country showed forth in the excellence of her virtue and strength among all mankind, for she was the first in courage and military skill, and was the leader of the Hellenes. And when the rest fell off from her, being compelled to stand alone, after having undergone the very extremity of danger, she disputed and triumphed over the invaders, and preserved from slavery those who were not yet subjected, and freely liberated all the others who dwell within the limits of Heraclea.

“But afterwards there occurred violent earthquakes and floods; and in a single day and night of rains all your warlike men in a body sank into the earth, and the island of Atlantis in like manner disappeared and was sunk beneath the sea. And that is the reason why the sea in these parts is impassable and impenetrable, because there is such a quantity of shallow mud in the way, and this was caused by the subsidence of the island.”

Plato gives in the “Critias” a full detailed account of the island of Atlantis—its people, government, rulers, religion, and physical features. There are several considerations of a geological and ethnological kind which seem to point to a submerged continent in the Atlantic; but its existence, as well as its supposed connection with America, are all shrouded in mythical story.

Among the Roman writers shortly after the Christian era was the philosophic Seneca. He was the Seneca. teacher of the young, afterwards cruel, Emperor Nero. Seneca is said to have been a Spaniard or Iberian, born in Cordova. It is perhaps reasonable to suppose that he, a native of Spain, the country which looks out on the Atlantic Ocean, should have had his attention directed to the possibility of a continent existing in the far west, but the forecast found in his “Medea” is so exact that some have seen in it almost prophetic force.

We give Archbishop Whately’s rendering of it:—

“There shall come a time in later ages when ocean shall relax his chains, and a vast continent shall appear, and a pilot shall find new worlds, and Thulé shall be no more earth’s bound.”

Most of the early stories of America came from the west of Europe. The prosecution of travel in Fusang. Eastern Asia and acquaintance with Mongolian traditions has in the last few years brought to light a story of the visit to some foreign land, far east of China, by Buddhist monks, and which would seem to give an account of an expedition to Mexico about the same time as our Saxon forefathers were invading Britain.

We are indebted to a German savant, Carl Neumann, for the translation of the Chinese record, and follow the English version given by the authorities quoted above. The following is the myth:—

The Kingdom of Fusang (Mexico, Ed.).

“During the reign of the dynasty Tsi in the first year of the period, naming ‘Everlasting Origin’ (A.D. 499), came a Buddhist priest from this kingdom, who bore the cloister name of Hoei-schin, i.e. “Universal Compassion,” to the present district of Huknang and those surrounding it, who narrated that Fusang is about 20,000 Chinese miles in an eastern direction from Tahan, and east of the middle kingdom.

“Many Fusang trees grow there, whose leaves resemble the Australian Dryandra cordifolia; the sprouts, on the contrary, resemble those of the bamboo-tree and are eaten by the inhabitants of the land. The fruit is like a pear in form, but is red. From the bark they prepare a sort of linen which they use for clothing, and also a sort of ornamental stuff. The houses are built of wooden beams: fortified and walled places are there unknown.

Of Writing and Civil Regulations in Fusang.

“They have written characters in this land, and prepare paper from the bark of the Fusang tree. The people have no weapons, and make no wars; but in the arrangements for the kingdom they have a northern and a southern prison. Trifling offenders were lodged in the southern prison, but those confined for greater offences, in the northern. Those men and women who were imprisoned for life were allowed to marry.

“The boys from these marriages were, at the age of eight years, sold as slaves; the girls not until their ninth year. If a man of any note was found guilty of crimes, an assembly was held; it must be in an excavated place. There they strewed ashes over him, and bade him farewell. If the offender was one of a lower class he alone was punished, but when of rank the degradation was extended to his children and grandchildren; with those of the highest rank it attained to the seventh generation.

The Kingdom and the Nobles of Fusang.

“The name of the king is pronounced Ichi. The nobles of the first class are termed Tuilu; of the second, Little Tuilu; and of the third, Na-to-scha. When the prince goes forth he is accompanied by horns and trumpets. The colour of his clothes changes with the different years of his reign. In the two first of the ten-year cyclus they are blue; in the two next, red; in the two following, yellow; in the two next, red; and in the last two, black.

Manners and Customs.

“The horns of the oxen are so large that they hold ten bushels. They use them to contain all manner of things. Horses, oxen, and stags are harnessed to their wagons. Stags are used here as cattle are used in the middle kingdom, and from the milk of the hind they make butter.

“The red pears of the Fusang tree keep good throughout the year. Moreover, they have apples and reeds. From the latter they prepare mats. No iron is found in this land; but copper, gold, and silver are not prized, and do not serve as a medium of exchange in the market. Marriage is determined upon in the following manner: The suitor builds himself a hut before the door of the house where the one longed for dwells, and waters and cleans the ground every morning and evening. When a year has passed by, if the maiden is not inclined to marry him, he departs; should she be willing it is completed. When the parents die they fast seven days.

“For the death of the paternal or maternal grandfather they lament five days; at the death of elder or younger sisters or brothers, uncles or aunts, three days. They sit from morning to night before an image of the Ghost, absorbed in prayer, but wear no mourning clothes. When the king dies the son who succeeds him does not busy himself for three years with state affairs.

“In earlier times these people lived not according to the laws of Buddha. But it happened that in the second year, named “Great Light of Song” (A.D. 458), five beggar monks from the kingdom of Kipin went to this land, extended over it the religion of Buddha, and with it his holy writings and images. They instructed the people in the principles of monastic life, and so changed their manners.”

Thus ends the chronicle. A number of resemblances have been pointed out between the land of Fusang here described and Mexico.

A tree, the American aloe (Agava Americana), would seem to represent the tree called Fusang, which gives its name to the country described. From the leaves of this aloe in Mexico it is said paper is still made, from its sap an intoxicating drink, and its boiled roots are used as food. No iron was found among the Mexicans on their discovery; but it is said two kinds of copper were used, one hard, for tools, the other soft, for pots. Bundles of cacao, containing a certain number of seeds, were used as money. Prescott says the Peruvians found that their houses resisted the effects of earthquakes better by tying the beams of them with thongs of the “manquey.”

The resemblance between the word “Ichi” and “Inca” has also been pointed out. The following facts are cited as showing the possibility of crossing from Asia to America in small vessels, and this bears upon the original settlement of America from Asia as well. In 1832 a Japanese vessel was wrecked on Oahu, one of the Sandwich Islands. In 1833-4 a Japanese junk was washed on the north-west coast of America, near Queen Charlotte’s Islands, and all on board murdered but two persons. The Hudson’s Bay Company sent the two survivors in 1834 to England; from England they were forwarded to Macao. So much for the mythical story of Fusang.

About the time that Richard the Strongbow was going Madoc. forth to conquer Ireland, according to Dr. Powell the Welsh historian, a Welsh prince, named Madoc, sailed away to the West, and discovered what has been claimed to have been America.

The following is the story:—

“After the death of Owen Gwyneth, his sons fell into great disputes as to the succession. Madoc, one of Owen Gwyneth’s sons, left the land which was in contention between his brethren, and prepared certain ships, with men and munition, and sought adventures by seas, sailing west and leaving the coast of Ireland so far north that he came into a land unknown, where he saw many strange things.

“Of the voyage and return of this Madoc there be many fables fained; as the common people doe use in distance of place and length of time rather to augment than to diminish; but sure it is there he was. And after he had returned home, and declared the pleasant and fruitful countreys that he had seen without inhabitants, and upon this contrary part, for what barren and wild ground his brethren and nephews did murther one another, he prepared a number of ships, and got with him such men and women as were desirous to live in quietnesse, and, taking leave of his friends, to his journey thitherward again.

“Therefore it is to be supposed that he and his people inhabited part of those countreys; for it appeareth by Francis Lopez de Gomara that in Acazamil and other places the people honoured the crosse, whereby it may be gathered that Christians had been there before the coming of the Spaniards. But because this people were not many, they followed the manners of the land which they came unto, and used the language they found there.

“This Madoc arriving in that westerne country, into which he came in the year 1170, left most of his people there, and, returning backe for more of his owne nation, acquaintance, and friends to inhabit that faire and large countrey, went thither again with ten sailes, as I find noted by Gutyn Owen. I am of opinion that the land whereunto he came was some part of the West Indies.”

Meredith, son of Rhesus, in 1477 wrote Welsh lines which translated are as follows:—

“Madoc I am, the sonne of Owen Gwynedd,

With stature large, and comely grace adorned;

No lands at home nor store of wealth me plese,

My minde was whole to search the ocean seas.”

The Indian authority, Catlin, has taken much pains to show by comparison of name, language, and customs, and even by physical features, that the Mandans, or, as some have called them, the “white-bearded Sioux” of the Missouri, are the descendants of Madoc’s band who intermarried with an Indian tribe. The prevailing opinion is that the reports of Madoc’s voyages are so vague and uncertain as to be practically valueless.

Thus have we rehearsed Plato’s vague story, Seneca’s fortunate guess, the misty recital of the Buddhist monks of Fusang, and now the unlikely account of Madoc along with Catlin’s improbable suggestion. They must all be consigned to the region of unsupported myth, and are really little more deserving of notice than Jason’s expedition for the Golden Fleece, or the stories of the “men who have their heads beneath their shoulders,” referred to by Shakespeare in the drama of “The Tempest.” We proceed one step nearer fact to

Section III.—Traditions.

(References: Gravier’s “Découverte de l’Amérique par les Normands;” “Antiquitates Americanæ,” by C. C. Rafn, Copenhagen, 1837.)

Few more marked figures are found in history than that of the Scandinavian, or Norse, invaders, The Norsemen. who sallied forth from their northern fjords to be the conquerors of the west coast of Europe. They were physically and mentally all too well fitted for their work of rapine. In Norway, according to a local historian, the rivers flow over a magnetic sand, made by the worn-down rocks, and men drink the iron with the waters, and this may be said to have its influence on the energy of their character.

When the character of the Norsemen is taken into account, as also their adventurous journeys made without map or compass, and their surprising expeditions in the search of plunder, glory, or new lands, some such explanation seems required. Norway is a rugged country, and its people must seek sustenance beyond its borders; its innumerable islands not only render it picturesque, but make its coast navigation dangerous; while from its rocky formation in its sheltered valleys are the only coverts for its isolated villages: one of its chief resources is its abundant fisheries. All these facts contributed to make its people wanderers, warriors, adventurers, and seekers for glory, while a religion dark as the shadows of their frowning mountains turned the intrepid sailor and fisherman into a pirate, or king of the ocean. By his ship the sea-king swore; to himself he gave the name Jarnbardan—the iron weapon; and his familiar name of affection for his weapon was, “Ognar brandur,” or the bloody sword. On his well-built vessels of oak the Norseman looked with pride, and called them “Snekkar,” or “Drakar”—serpents, or dragons.

A celebrated ship, built by Thorberg, the carpenter, had thirty-two rows of oars, and carried ninety men; and the two ships of Olaf could carry 200 men apiece. As successful raids were made to foreign lands, the figures represented on the ships were done in gold and silver. The ships of Cnut carried on the prow such emblems as a lion of gold, a famous bull with gilt horns, and the like. On the sea was the Norseman’s home during his life, and it was not otherwise on his death. When the last rites had been paid to the sea-king his body was placed on his ship, and this being set on fire was sent drifting seawards. Thus, as the historian has said, the ruler of men went to sleep his last sleep in the depth of the sea.

Nor was the piratical life of the sea-king deemed a disgrace. An old author informs us that the Scandinavians gave the name pirates and arch-pirates to these robbers of the sea, as we speak of captains and admirals. The Scandinavians could not but play an important part in the history of Western Europe, and so it came that the banks of the Loire and Seine, the coast of the Cotentin, the lands of Sicily to the south of Italy, the shores of England and Scotland, the Orkney Islands, the Shetland and Faroë Isles, Iceland and Greenland, and according to the Sagas even the coast of North America, were overrun by their prowess.

It must be stated also that crime and jealousy The Sagas. contributed not a little to the settlement of these islands mentioned, and the consequent story of American settlement. The records of the settlement of Iceland and Greenland, and the discovery of America by the Norsemen, have been obtained from old manuscripts containing the Sagas or chronicles from religious houses in Iceland by the diligence of Danish archæologists from Copenhagen. These documents are believed to belong to the 12th century, and if the account of Christianity having been introduced into Iceland at the time they state, viz., A.D. 985, be true, they are very likely to be authentic. At the same time we can only regard them as traditions, and not as reliable history at the best. According to the Saga of Olaf Tryggvison it was from the ambition of Harold Haarfager, or Harold the Fair-haired, that dissension rose in Norway. His 725. tyranny of the people, as well as his partiality among the “jarls,” drove many of his subjects from their native land. Some fled to the Orkneys and settled there, some to the Faroë Islands, others went to Shetland, while others still took up their abode in the Hebrides. It was the Orkney colonists who rebelled against Harold. Harold invaded the Orkneys.

He found beside his rebellious Scandinavian subjects two other elements there. The first of these was then known as the “Peti.” In all probability these were Picts from the neighbouring mainland, and the name seems to survive in that of Pentland Frith. Among the islanders was also a class called “Papae.” These would seem to have been the Culdee fathers, who lived among them as missionaries. According to Dicuil, an Irish monk, who wrote in 825, these priests about 625 had come to the Orkney, Shetland, and even Faroë islands. In 725, Grim Kamban, a Norwegian pirate, had come to establish himself in Faroë, and the Irish anchorites, who had for a century been there, were driven out by that Scandinavian Attila.

It was in 861 that a Norwegian pirate, Naddod by Iceland. name, fleeing from Norway to the Faroë Islands, lost his course, came to a barren island, landed, and on ascending a mountain on it, seeing only a white expanse, called it “Snoeland.” Another Scandinavian freebooter, Flokni Rafna, departed for this “Snoeland,” reached and explored it, found the burning earth and hot springs, but called it “Iceland.” It was afterwards improperly known as “Islande.” The pirate gave a sad account of the island on his return, but a companion of his, Thorolf, took another view of it, and called it a “sunshiny, flowery, fable-land, where the plants dropped of butter.” Some years later, Ingolf, a jarl and noted pirate, also departed for the lonely island, took 874. up his abode at Reykiavik, the present capital, and became the founder of the colony. Ingolf’s tomb is still pointed out in Iceland. In 885 many refugees fled from Scandinavia to Iceland, and in 930 all the habitable parts of the island were taken up.

Three years after the arrival of Ingolf in Iceland, that is in 877, Gunnbjorn, another Norwegian adventurer, Greenland. discovered the white tops which mark the eastern coast of Greenland, and simply visiting a group of rocks lying near the Arctic Circle, gave them his name. The discovery of Greenland and its settlement, as well as the reputed discovery of America, is detailed in the celebrated Saga, of which we give the main features.

Erik the Red.

Thorvald Osvaldson dwelt at Jaeder, on the coast of Norway. His son was Erik the Red. Having brought themselves into disgrace by murder and violence, they fled the country. Reaching Iceland, father and son there took up their abode, and Thorvald died a short time after. Erik married Thorhild, the daughter of an Icelandic colonist, and removed to another portion of Iceland from that where he first dwelt. The spirit of violence, however, was a part of Erik, and from his second Icelandic home he was banished for the crime of murder. Taking up his abode at another point, he soon quarrelled with a powerful neighbour, Thorgest, the quarrel having arisen from his lending him his sea-posts—ornamental beams with “Odin” and “Thor” carved upon the tops of them, used as insignia of rank.

The case being brought before the Thorsnesthing, or popular judiciary, Erik was declared an outlaw in Iceland. Compelled to seek a new home, he sailed out from Snaefellsjökul, the “Snow-hill Glacier,” and sought the land near the rocks discovered by Gunnbjorn, near the Arctic Sea. For two winters he took up his abode at different places on the newly-occupied land, and spent the summers in exploring and naming the mountains and fjords of the coast. Then he returned to Iceland, having called his new home “Greenland,” “for,” quoth he, “people will be attracted thither if the land has a good name.” Now Erik sought colonists to occupy his new land. It was about the year A.D. 970 that the surprising energy of Erik had accomplished so much, that thirty-five ships left Iceland with colonists for Greenland. Only fourteen ships of the fleet arrived, some of the others being driven back, others being lost.

Bjarni Herjulfson.

Herjulf was an Icelandic colonist, the kinsman of Ingolf, the founder of the Icelandic colony. 986.
America discovered.
His son’s name was Bjarni. This Bjarni was a very hopeful man, and when yet young had a great desire to travel abroad. As soon as he had earned enough he spent every alternate season cruising on the unknown seas or going to Norway. It came about that Herjulf undertook a voyage to Greenland in company with Erik. With him in the ship was a Christian man from the Hebrides (probably a Culdee missionary, Ed.), who made a hymn respecting the whirlpool, of which the following is the translation of a verse:—

“May he whose hand protects so well

The simple monk in lonely cell,

And o’er the world upholds the sky—

His own blue hall—still stand me by!”

Herjulf took up his abode in Greenland, calling his place Herjulfness—and had the respect of all. Erik the Red lived at Brattahlid, and was the most influential man in Greenland. Erik had three sons: Leif, Thorvald, and Thorstein. He had also one daughter, Freydis, who was married to one Thorvald, but the marriage was unhappy. At this time all the Greenland colonists were heathens. In the summer of the same year that his father, Herjulf, sailed to Greenland, Bjarni came from Norway to Iceland. The reports of his father’s departure did not please him. But on his companions consenting, he determined to go to Greenland after his father, though indicating the danger by the remark, “Impudent will appear our voyage since none of us has been in the Greenland Ocean.”

Not to be deterred, however, they started. For three days they sailed towards Greenland, but on the fourth, strong north winds and fogs overtook them. For many days they knew not where they were. On the sun reappearing, they sailed another day and land appeared, but Bjarni said it could not be Greenland. He then directed them to sail close to the land, and the land was found to be without mountains, and covered with wood and had small heights. They now left this land on their larboard side, and seem to have gone north-east. For two days they sailed, following up the coast, when they sighted land again.

Bjarni said this could scarcely be Greenland, for it had not ice-hills like Greenland. On their approach to the land they found it flat and covered with trees. The sailors were anxious to land, ostensibly to obtain wood and water, but Bjarni forbade it. Now having left the land, and driven with a south-west wind for three days, they saw at length a band of mountains and high ice-hills. For Bjarni there was here no landing, and he said, “for to me this land appears little inviting.”

They coasted along the land and found it an island. Probably having reached some point on the north-east shore of the island, they turned the stern from the land, and now the breeze freshened. The ship was driven at such a rate that sails were shortened, lest they should be torn away, and after great speed for four days the crew sighted land. Now Bjarni said, “This, according to what I have been told, is the most like Greenland we have seen,” and they rowed for the land. They arrived at a ness, seemingly about the southernmost point of Greenland, and found it to be the very abode of Herjulf, Bjarni’s father. Bjarni now gave up seafaring, and lived with his father while Herjulf lived, and dwelt there also after his father died.

Voyage of Leif Erikson.

The news of Bjarni Herjulfson’s discoveries created much talk in Greenland, but as Bjarni could not describe the lands he claimed to have discovered, not having landed upon them, there was not much credence given to his story, and it became a reproach to him. But Leif, the son of Erik the Red, was of an adventurous disposition, and having heard Bjarni’s story, bought the ship in which he had sailed, and engaged the full complement of men for it, thirty-five in all. Leif’s father, 994. Erik, was now old, but he was so fitted for leader, that his son urged him to undertake the voyage. The veteran at last assented, but riding on his way to embark, his horse stumbled, and the aged hero was thrown off and his foot bruised. Erik the Red then said, “It is not ordained that I should discover more countries than that which we now inhabit, and we should make no further attempt in company.”

Leif now started with his sailors, including one supposed to be a German among them, and in due time found first what Bjarni had found last. They determined to avoid Bjarni’s reproach, and so they landed. There was no grass in the land; it was flat and rocky—a great plain of flat stones from the sea up to the mountains. Leif called it Helluland from the flat stones. Next the party put to sea and came to a land flat and covered with wood, whose beach was an expanse of white sand. This shore was named by the explorer, Markland, from its forests. A short visit paid here, the ship sallied forth to open sea, and, running before a north-east wind, came to an island where they landed and found grass covered with honeydew. Sailing next between a ness and the island until reaching the mouth of a river, they ran up this, and having landed their skin cots upon the shore, erected booths for themselves. Much impressed with the good qualities of their new settlement, they resolved to winter there, and erected considerable houses for their shelter. The salmon in the river were plentiful, and they thought that should they settle permanently, cattle would live through winter without house-feeding, for the grass was green the winter through.

Leif determined next to explore the country; one-half of his men kept the fort, and the others visited different parts of the country. It was while on one of these expeditions under Leif himself, that Tyrker, the German, was found missing. Tyrker had been his most faithful attendant in his father’s house in his youth, and Leif was sad at his loss. At length the party found Tyrker. But Tyrker was excited and seemingly had lost his senses. Leif said to him, “Why wert thou so late, my fosterer, and separated from the party?” After speaking foolishly for a time in German, the wanderer said in Norsk, “I have not been much further off, but still I have something new to tell; I found vines and grapes.”

After retiring for the night, Leif in the morning determined to gather grapes and cut down a cargo of wood for his ship. This he did so readily that the long boat was filled with grapes, and the ship with timber. When spring came the party sailed homeward, and Leif named the land as he left it, “Vinland,” for its grapes. After his departure from the new lands, as Leif drew near Greenland he saw on the coast a shipwrecked party. He determined on their rescue. Arrived near them, he lowered a boat, and found a castaway captain—a Norseman, named Thorer—his wife, Gudrid, and a part of his crew, clinging to the island. The shipwrecked mariners and as much of their cargo as could be taken aboard were carried to Greenland, to Erik’s fjord, and subsequently to Brattahlid, the house of Erik.

Leif was much commended for having rescued the fifteen who were clinging to the rock, and was afterwards known as “Leif the Lucky.” He had now won riches and fame. Erik the Red, and the rescued captain, Thorer, died the following winter, for a plague prevailed. Thorvald, one of the brothers of Leif, was much excited over the accounts brought from Vinland, and so having obtained the prosperous ship from Leif, he set forth to explore the new land further.

Thorvald visits Vinland (1002).

Thorvald, with thirty men, sailed for the new possessions. In due time the booths left by Leif were reached. In the second summer of his residence, Thorvald with a party left the main body and went in the long-boat on a trip of exploration. Driven on shore by a storm, their boat was broken. Going to the top of a promontory, which he called Kulness, upon the land, and finding a beautiful spot, Thorvald said: “Here would I like to raise my dwelling.” Shortly after, they came upon a band of natives, who had skin boats. A conflict there took place, and a number of natives were killed; on further attacks by larger numbers of these natives, who were of a low stature and were called Skraelings, from a Norse word “to cry out,” the Norsemen protected themselves by their big fleka or plank barricade. Thorvald himself was wounded by an arrow under the arm, and before dying, bade them bury him, in their flight, on Kulness, where as it now seemed with prophetic voice he had desired to stay. “On the cliff shall ye bury me,” said the dying viking; “set ye up crosses at my head and feet, and call the place Krossaness for ever in all time to come.” The party returned lamenting to their companions, gathered grapes and vines, and having dwelt there for the winter, came home, and told the sad and stirring news to Leif, the brother of the departed Thorvald.

Thorstein Erikson (1005).

Filled with grief for the loss of Thorvald, the younger brother, Thorstein, set forth with an expedition to obtain his brother’s body, which had been buried in the distant New World, on the cliff of Kulness. He never reached the new land, however, and being driven on the coast of Greenland was compelled to winter there. While wintering, he died, and the remainder of his party returned in spring to Brattahlid.

Saga of Thorfinn Karlsefne (1007).

The journeys of Leif, Thorvald, and Thorstein kept alive the interest in the newly-discovered lands. Another viking, Karlsefne, now undertook an expedition with a large party—it is said, upwards of 150 persons, including a son-in-law of Erik the Red; two ships were now secured, and cattle and sheep were taken. Their journey begun, they reached the Helluland of their predecessors; then Markland; and further on, having landed on the cliff of Kulness, found there the keel of a ship, they called the promontory Kjalarness.

With the company were two Scots, noted for their swiftness. It is said they wore kjafel—a cowl. It has been suggested that these, or one of them, may have been Culdee missionaries. Put on shore, the useful Scots discovered grapes and wheat, and they knew they had discovered Vinland. In three years from the hostility of the natives the settlement was abandoned.

Conclusions from the Foregoing.

Thus much for the Sagas. Admitting their truth, we have as great difficulty in identifying the travels of the various explorers as we had in the much more mythical story of Fusang. A number of American historians have ingeniously endeavoured to make Helluland, Newfoundland, and probably there is a greater agreement on this than on any other point, though the peninsula of Avalon on the south-east of Newfoundland, far from being flat or level, has ice-peaks 1600 feet high.

As to Markland and Vinland there is by no means so great an agreement. The above-mentioned historians consider Markland to have been Nova Scotia, and Vinland the coast of New England. The enterprising Bostonians of Massachusetts even illustrate their guide-books with plates of Leif Erikson sailing in his Norse galley into Boston harbour, and identify Cape Cod with Kjalarness, the burying-place of Thorvald; and Martha’s Vineyard still commemorates, we are told, old Vinland.

An old round tower at Newport has been the subject of poetic efflatus, and of sanguine historical description, but the antiquarian has discovered that it is of much more recent date than even five centuries ago.

The Dighton Rock inscription, found in Western Massachusetts, has been held to be made up of Norse letters. A copy of it is to be seen in the Peabody Museum, Cambridge, Massachusetts, but one acquainted to the least degree with Indian inscriptions may recognize by the style of art, the forms, especially of the human figure, represented as Indian, not Norse.

The rust-eaten armour said to have been found in 1831, which formed the subject of Longfellow’s poem, is far too vaguely described or identified to be the basis of historic certainty. In addition, the distances said to have been made by Thorvald and Leif might well correspond with the north shore of Newfoundland, the peninsula of Avalon, the peninsula of Cape Breton, and the coast of Nova Scotia, as the furthest circuit. And still again, the story might well agree with Newfoundland and the Gulf of St. Lawrence. The island of Orleans was called Bacchus, for its supply of the wild grape, and the cliff of Quebec would well have satisfied the ambitious Thorvald for a burying-place.

All, however, is surmise; the description of the short-statured Skraelings certainly corresponds with that of Cartier of the Eskimo along the north shore of the Gulf of St. Lawrence, while the use of skin canoes agrees far better with a northern people like the Eskimo, than with the Algonquins of New England and Canada, who use the birch-bark canoe.

The most that can be said is that there is reasonable ground for believing that the Norsemen, by way of Iceland and Greenland, discovered the coast of North America in the tenth and eleventh centuries.

Section IV.—Notable Voyages and Discoveries.

According to the theory of the astrologists, a conjunction of fortunate stars led to the discovery of the New World by the great Genoese navigator: the philosophic historian sees in this discovery the full development of forces which had been moulding the west of Europe for half a century or more in anticipation of the important event of history, the finding of a new continent; the Christian scholar regards the discovery of America as the unfolding of the great purposes of the Creator for the enlargement and benefit of the human race.

There seems no difficulty in reconciling at least the philosophic and Christian explanations given. The Crusaders made Europe familiar with a world beyond the bounds of Christendom; the treasures brought back as trophies by the “soldiers of the cross” from eastern lands inflamed the imagination of the west of Europe; the accounts given of the dwellers in heathenesse were as astounding as they were contradictory.

Cathay was to the West the embodiment of a land of diamonds and gold. Cipango was a veritable land of Ophir with peacocks, pearls, and silken fabrics. To the adventurers of Venice, and Florence, and Genoa, cities on the highway from East to West, it was a new joy to hasten to the East in the search for the “Golden Fleece,” and bring back from the Orient those luxuries contrasting so strongly with the angustas res of their own western domestic life.

Either on the banks of the Nile, transported thither by great caravans over the deserts, or at Byzantium, brought by way of the rivers Indus and Oxus, and the Caspian and Euxine seas, did these Argonauts receive their treasures from the Eastern merchants, and hasten back with their spices, jewels, precious fabrics, and articles of gold and silver, to sell them in European marts, in their shops marked by the three gold balls, the arms of their Longobardic ancestors.

The printed book—the vehicle of knowledge—the invention of those centuries, became the means for giving more definite information to a larger number, and also for stimulating the imagination by marvellous recitals. The burning spirit of adventure led some to penetrate the very heart of Asia, and beyond.

Sir John Mandeville, a restless Englishman, who died at Liege in 1372, according to his own account, “viaged through Tartarie, Persie, Ermonie, the little and the great, through Libye, Chaldee, and a great partie of Ethiop; through Amazoyn, Ind the less and the more, a great partie;” and he gives a glowing account of Cathay; while Marco Polo even before the time of Mandeville gives an account of a visit to that wonderland.

The opportune invention of the compass and the adaptation for use by two Portuguese physicians of the astrolabe, gave the intrepid sailors of the time the means of prosecuting their journeys across the pathless waste of waters. It is remarkable to how great an extent the free republics of Italy and the Italian cities took part in this feverish quest for glory and wealth.

The home of religion and learning Italy had been for a thousand years. Even three centuries before that, in old Roman days, she had led the world in letters and in arms. Now she was to yield to the world such names as Colombo of Genoa, Marco Polo of Venice, Toscanelli of Florence, Caboto of Venice, Vespucci of Florence, and Verrazano, a third from the city of the Arno—kings of adventure and geographical knowledge.

The Discoverers.

(References: “Delle Navigationi et Viaggi,” by G. Battista Ramusio, 3 vols., Venetia, 1556; “Historia del Almirante” (Fernando Colombo); “Raccolta completa degli scritti di Cristoforo Colombo” (Torre Lione, 1864); “Memorials of Columbus” (Spotorno, 1823); “Life and Voyages of Columbus” (Washington Irving, 1823); “Le Révélateur du Globe” (L. Bloy, 1884); “Navigations, Voyages, &c.,” by Richard Hakluyt, Preacher, 3 vols., London, 1599; “Vespucci,” by F. Bartolozzi, Firenze, 1789; “Viaggi d’Amerigo Vespucci,” by S. Carnovai, Firenze, 1817.)

Quite recently a devout Frenchman has given in a work of much interest, his grounds for desiring The Prince of Discoverers. that the discoverer of the New World should be raised to the dignity of a saint in the Roman calendar. The name of Cristoforo Colombo, whether canonized or not, will ever be a glorious one.

The family Colombo, belonging to Genoa, had even before Cristoforo famous naval commanders included in its members, but Fernando, son of the discoverer, who writes his father’s life, says that he cannot trace a close connection between his father, who belonged to a poor woolcomber’s family, and these distinguished Genoese. Further, Fernando prefers it should be so, as thus his father Cristoforo founds on the firm basis of his own exploits a family with a loftier patent of nobility.

It has been a common opinion of the many that the discovery of America by Colombo was a lucky stroke, for which there had been no previous preparation justifying such glory as has been attached to the name of the discoverer. A little acquaintance with the subject shows this to be an entire mistake. There had been in Italian cities, and in Spanish and Portuguese seats of learning, much interest and research as to a new continent for the whole half-century preceding the New World discovery.

In the beginning of the 15th century the geographical work of Ptolemy had been translated into Latin, the language of scholars of the time. Prince Henry of Portugal, imbued with a love of study, became a Mæcenas indeed, in his gathering together of learned men, and his care for them. Preferring the allurements of study to even the honour of a crown, he retired to a spot in his dominions near Cape St. Vincent, and established an observatory at Sagres. His abode overlooked the sea, and here he pondered over the task of navigating around the coast of Africa.

In 1474 Toscanelli, the Florentine, had maintained before Portuguese savants that there was an open sea to the west of Europe, by which Eastern Asia could be reached. The Portuguese were at this time engaged in an extensive trade to the coast of Guinea, and various islands along the Atlantic coast of Europe had been discovered. Venice and Portugal, especially, in Southern Europe were during the later part of the 15th century active in maritime affairs.

It was into such a half-century of enterprise that Cristoforo was born, in Genoa, about the year 1436. Early compelled by poor circumstances to leave the University of Pavia where he was studying, he went as a lad of fourteen to sea. In his time piracy on the Mediterranean was common, and desperate sea-fights were the ordinary experience of the young sailor. One of the first expeditions of the young mariner was that of the Duke of Calabria to rescue Naples from the hands of René, its king.

A soldier of fortune, as Colombo now became, he served the King of Naples, and accomplished a daring exploit in cutting out a galley from the port of Tunis. He afterwards saw service in the Island of Scio, but to find scope for his ambition, entered the field of adventure in Portugal, the greatest maritime power of the time.

He arrived at Lisbon in 1470, not entirely to supply charts and maps, which seems to have been his means of livelihood, but to fall in love with a young gentle-woman of his own country, Felipa, the daughter of De Palestrello, one of the most distinguished of Portuguese navigators. Married to Felipa, he was soon, by the death of Palestrello, compelled to reside, at least at intervals, at the newly-discovered island of Porto Santo, where the family of Palestrello possessed an estate. The papers, charts, and journals of the deceased Portuguese captain were open to the ardent young Genoese, and he soon sailed as a naturalized Portuguese commander to Guinea.

It was in the year 1477 that he made an expedition, according to his own account, one hundred leagues beyond Thulé (probably Iceland), which he states was 77° N. lat. He states that the English from Bristol at that time visited Thulé. One can hardly conceive of the inquiring young navigator visiting Iceland, without hearing of the Vinland, and Markland, and Helluland of the Sagas.

Naturally of a vivid imagination and enthusiastic in his projects, with the myths and floating tales of Europe to inflame him, such as those of Plato, St. Brandan, of the Insula Dæmonorum, of the stories of Prester John, and of the Cathay of Marco Polo, the young sailor became thoroughly imbued with the enterprising spirit of Portugal. He had the compass and astrolabe to guide him in his course, and moreover that strong impulse to action—want, as he proposed to John II., King of Portugal, the fitting out of an expedition to find a new world.

The junto of wise men, however, pronounced the scheme visionary, and the council of state, too, condemned it. Notwithstanding this, the perfidious Portuguese, after getting from Colombo his charts and plans, actually sent away in secret a vessel upon the track proposed by him. It took, however, more than the courage of deceivers to find a new world, and the caravel turned back.

Maddened by the repulse of the king and council, and by this act of treachery, being also heavily in debt, with his son Diego, his only solace, for his wife Felipa was dead, he secretly fled from Portugal in 1484 to his native city of Genoa. He obtained no assistance in Genoa, and now came the long six years of his application to the Spanish court, following those twelve wearisome years which had already elapsed since his famous conference with Toscanelli.

Though his chief enemy in Portugal had been a Churchman, the Bishop of Ceuta, yet it is pleasing to find that he found fast friends in Spain, in an Andalusian convent of the Franciscans, that of De Rabida, near the port of Palos. At the end of the six years’ struggle it was to this convent he returned to receive the parting benediction ere he began his great voyage. It was to Ferdinand and Isabella, joint sovereigns of Spain, engaged in their hard task of conquering the Spanish Moors, that application was made on Colombo’s behalf. Through several channels of Churchmen and nobles was request made to the Spanish sovereigns.

On several occasions, just as the thirsty and waiting applicant seemed about to have his thirst quenched by a successful answer, a new turn in the Moorish war dashed from him his cup of Tantalus. Sometimes, indeed, it seemed the obstinacy and unyielding character of Colombo which hindered his success; but Colombo had a distinct purpose, and it is more than likely that his plan was the only successful one. The termination of the Moorish war was an event on which the expedition seemed to hang. And now, when the Spanish flag floated in triumph over the Alhambra, Colombo was doomed to disappointment, by an absolute refusal of his conditions. From Santa Fé the discouraged applicant turned his steed away, and determined to make his way to Cordova, and thence to France to seek new patrons.

It was a Churchman, St. Angel of Aragon, who saw the disheartened mariner depart, and in haste the cleric obtained an interview with Queen Isabella, and the eloquence of the pleader at last drew forth the promise that she would pledge her jewels, to bring such glory as had been depicted to Spain and to the Church. A messenger overtook Colombo, two leagues from Granada, and he returned to take his last steps towards the discovery of the New World.

On the 17th of April, 1492, the required documents were signed by Ferdinand and Isabella, and Colombo became for life, High Admiral, Viceroy, and Governor of all the lands he should discover, with one-tenth of the profits of trade in his admiralty. Unnumbered difficulties were next encountered in obtaining ships and men for so hazardous an undertaking, even with royal favour and means.

Not till the 3rd of August, 1492, did the three ships, the Santa Maria, commanded by the admiral; the Pinta, under Pinzon, a partner in the enterprise; and the Nina, commanded by a brother of Pinzon, take their departure. One hundred and twenty souls, all told, made up the three ships’ companies, as they sailed out of the harbour of Palos, the admiral, captains, and all on board having previously devoutly sought God’s blessing on the undertaking. Delayed by the repairs needed on the Pinta, at the Canaries, it was not till the 9th of September that the admiral lost sight of the Old World to find the New.

It were long to tell of the discouragements of the voyage. There was hopefulness inspired at first, but fear fell upon them as they saw the sedgy surface of the Sargasso Sea. The admiral found encouragement necessary for his crew now, and at other times words of stern command. A bank of cloud seeming to be the land awakened hope, but it was again dashed away as the cloud vanished. Singing-birds came in flocks upon the ship and there was joy, but fear soon followed, lest they should be sailing past the island from which perchance the birds came. All were alarmed by the gale blowing from the east lest they should never reach Spain again, and then there was the fear when the wind ceased that they should be becalmed on the dreaded fabled island of Atlantis.

On one occasion high hopes were raised by finding reeds borne by the current, and a carved image of wood, a live crab, and a bird from the tropics which never sleeps at sea, as well as shoals of tunny fish; but even all these were left behind. With captains and men on the verge of mutiny the admiral held on his undeviating way to the west, turning at last somewhat to the south-west. He was himself alarmed by the variation of the compass, and by the fact that his private chart had been overrun by the distance gone.

He had kept a record open to his crew, differing from his own, but at last it was reserved for the heroic soul, Colombo, himself to see, thirty-two days out from land, a light in the offing in the darkness. Next morning, the 12th of October, appeared an island of the New World. Though overwhelmed with excitement, yet as became Spaniards, they took possession of the island with dignified formality.

The admiral, in scarlet, entered his own boat, bearing the royal standard; in his train followed the other boats, each bearing a flag with the letters F and Y, the initials of the names of their joint sovereigns, Ferdinand and Isabella. The procession having reached the land, all disembarked, and, following the admiral’s example, threw themselves on their knees, kissed the soil in the sight of the astonished natives, who had fled to a place of safe observation. With royal banner unfurled and with drawn sword the admiral took possession for Isabella of Castile, and named the island San Salvador.

We shall proceed with Colombo but little further.

Going from one island to another, he met and traded with the natives, whom he called Indians, thinking he had discovered India. Exchanging trinkets with the natives for gold, of which he found far too little; discovering Cuba, St. Domingo, and other islands; and finding two important products, which he brought back—one a benefit, and the other a bane to the race—the potato and tobacco—the admiral continued his voyage around the West India Islands, until he returned to Europe to receive from his sovereigns and the people of Spain all the honours of a returning conqueror.

Other expeditions and discoveries were made by him, but lawsuits, persecution, and debt were his chief reward. The great discoverer died on the 20th of May, 1506, at Valladolid, but his remains were taken to the New World, and his dust now lies in the Cathedral of Havanna, Cuba. His native city of Genoa has honoured him with a beautiful monument, which the tourist to Italy observes as he enters Genoa from the railway-station. This was erected in 1854.

Colombo stands on a pedestal of his own. No succeeding mariner can ever be called on to show the strength of faith or majesty of resolve which characterized him. He must remain solitary in his greatness. But once the feat accomplished—the egg once firmly poised upon the table—Western Europe was all excitement to explore the New World. A half-century of naval enterprise new to the world was seen, and possessed of an interest and hope such as can never be again possible to the world.

Like little wanton boys—“venturing at times beyond their depth, sailing upon bladders,” England, Portugal, Spain, and France pursued with unsurpassable selfishness their wild career of rivalry and ambition. To Spain, by the success of Colombo, was plainly due the place of prestige. Yet Portugal had been more successful than Spain in its expeditions to the Guinea coast; and these voyages had strongly influenced Colombo. England and France had both the imagination of a Norse viking ancestry to be kindled into life by naval adventure. For half a century the uncertain rivalry continued, till, as we shall see, the palm was claimed, and has ever since been held, by the sailors of our island of Great Britain.

Though first in one great series of voyages, England in this fifty years of naval enterprise stands by no means conspicuous.


To England belongs the honour of being first to reach the Continent of America, whose islands Colombo The Cabotos. had discovered. It was, however, not by island-born, but by Italian navigators that the task was accomplished. John Caboto was a Genoese, born about 1460, but in 1474 became a naturalized citizen of Venice. Given to the study of cosmography, and the practice of navigation, he had gone as a sailor to the Levant, but like Colombo, became possessed with a belief that a new world was to be discovered. About the year 1477 he took up his abode in Bristol, England, at that time a considerable seaport town.

There are grave doubts as to the reality of certain early voyages said to have been made by Caboto. Uncertain Voyages. It is said that in 1480, with a vessel of eighty tons, he went in search of the fabled island of Brezil, but in two months returned unsuccessful. Again, we are told that in 1491 he sailed west in the same quest and with the same result.

It is, however, a voyage attributed to him in 1494 around which rages the war of controversy. In the Imperial Library in Paris is a map dated 1544 made by Sebastian Caboto, son of the older mariner. This map states that at five in the morning on the 24th of June, 1494, with his son Sebastian, John Caboto discovered the island of St. John on the coast of America, and a peninsula of the New World called in Spanish “First Land Seen.”

Numerous good authorities accept this map with its inscription as authentic, but the most careful historians regard the 1494 as an error for 1497. This seems the more likely since the maps with the date usually taken, 1497, have the 24th of June, the same month and day as the map in Paris. Believers in the earlier date state that applications before 1497 were made to Henry VII. by Caboto for lands already discovered. This claim does not seem to be supported.

It is a matter accepted by all, that on the 5th of March, First undisputed Voyage of the Cabotos. 1496, Henry VII. granted letters patent to Caboto, and that departing in May, 1497, with a man-of-war, the Matthew of Bristol, and three merchant-ships—an equipment worthy of the undertaking—John and Sebastian Caboto set sail for the New World, and having come upon Newfoundland, they next coasted Labrador and the American coast for three hundred leagues, and erected upon the coast in token of their early possession the flag of England, and the standard of St. Mark of Venice.

Sebastian Caboto seems to have risen to greatness as a navigator. Under new letters patent from Voyage of Sebastian Caboto. the king given February 3rd, 1498, he undertook not only to revisit the New World, but to plant a colony. He took not less than three hundred persons, mostly victims of the Perkin Warbeck rebellion of the time, and with these he sailed, seemingly, far north on the coast of Labrador, where numbers of them died, but he was driven southward by the ice, and having explored the coast from about 60° N. lat. to 30°, returned with the remnant of his colonists. Such was the unhappy beginning of a vast colonization movement which has since brought “name and fame” to the English people.

Sebastian Caboto remained in England one of the leading seamen of the land till 1512, when he entered the service of Spain, but to return to England in 1516. It was under the young king Henry VIII., and sailing under the English flag, that in 1517 he again conducted, in company with Sir Thomas Pert, an expedition to the New World. The ships reached the North American coast in 67° 30′ N. lat., but though the sea was open, according to one authority on account of timidity, or as one report goes, upon the mutiny of master and mariners, the party returned without any new laurels gained.

In 1518 Sebastian Caboto entered for a second time the service of Spain. While in the Spanish service his voyages included the discovery and exploration of the La Plata River in South America. In 1548 Caboto returned to England, and received from Edward VI. a pension, and is regarded by some as the creator of our British navy, and one of the most adventurous captains of his time.


Irritated at the thought of having been offered the services of Colombo, and at having refused them, Portugal now put forth great exertions to regain her lost prestige. Bound by treaty and by papal decision to allow Spain the discovered portions of the New World in peace, she had at least the first place along the African coast. Following the eastward route, to Portugal is due after all, the honour of first reaching the Cathay after which Colombo panted.

In the same year (1497) in which Caboto discovered the continent of America, the new King of Portugal, Vasco di Gama. who had succeeded King John—Emanuel, the Fortunate by name, determined to send an expedition which should double “Capo d’ buono Speranza” of Bartolomeo Dias, and thus reach the East. Unable to settle in his mind upon a suitable captain, there happened to pass through the hall in which the king was sitting, Vasco, the son of a Portuguese noble, Estevan di Gama, himself a famous sea-captain.

The man for the task was before him, and Vasco di Gama undertook the enterprise. In the cathedral of Lisbon, amidst solemn ceremonies, the king committed to the hands of the navigator the royal standard. The three ships provided bore the names of the three archangels, Raphael, Gabriel, and Michael, and gave omen of a successful voyage. On the 23rd of March, 1497, Vasco di Gama set sail to discover Cathay. The Cape of Good Hope was reached in time, and again the ships failed to round it, and were driven back, so justifying the name it had formerly borne of Capo Tormentosa, or Stormy Cape. The Cape passed in November, in August of the 1498. following year Cathay was reached. A speedy return to tell the tale brought back the captain to Lisbon by the 18th of September, and the honour of Portugal was vindicated.

But Cathay did not satisfy the desire of Portugal. Within two years after Di Gama’s return, on the Cabral.
9th of March, Pedro Alvarez Cabral was sent out in command of a Portuguese expedition. In forty-two days afterwards the navigator was rewarded by the discovery of Brazil in South America. The name of Terra di Santa Cruz was soon given to this newly-found region. This designation was highly pleasing to the Church, and for a time was extended to the whole continent. But for its unwieldiness it would probably have remained till this day.

Desirous of gaining further renown, Portugal fitted out an expedition and placed it under the command The Cortereals. of a representative of the high Portuguese family of Cortereal. There is a story, entirely improbable, given by Cordeyo, a Portuguese historian in 1717, that Joad vas Cortereal had in 1463 crossed the ocean, and discovered the coast of Labrador, which was already known to the Basques. He is said also to have discovered the island of Newfoundland, which he named Baccalaos—a name referring to the cod fishery. A fatal objection to this claim is that the geographer Behaim, whose father-in-law had lived at the Azores, in making his celebrated globe of the earth in 1491, takes no note of this Cortereal’s voyage.

It was one of the sons of the aforenamed Cortereal, Gaspard by name, who now in 1500 undertook 1500. the New World expedition on behalf of Portugal. We are indebted to the Italian Ramusio, writing in 1556, for the information that Gaspard Cortereal sailed to the West with two caravels, seeking a shorter passage to the Spice Islands than that by way of the route around Cape of Good Hope.

He is said to have found about 60° N. lat., a river closed with snow, to which he gave the name Rio Nevado. According to a letter published at Vicenza in 1507, and which has been the subject of much controversy, one of the ships returned the 8th of October, 1501, that is from the second voyage, and reported that the expedition had followed the coast near the Rio Nevado some six or seven hundred miles, that they had carried home seven natives, and that the other caravel was coming with more. It was said that the natives brought a piece of a broken sword, which was gilt and had evidently come from Italy, and that a boy had in his ears two silver plates, which beyond question had been made in Venice. It has been supposed that these were remains of Caboto’s visit, for Lord Bacon speaks in his history of Henry VII. of Caboto’s expedition having been supplied with trinkets—“gross and slight wares”—for trade with the barbarous people. The facts thus far of the Cortereal voyage seem reliable.

An impudent attempt was made in an “Itinerarium Portugalensium,” printed in Milan in 1508, to change the letter named, and connect it with the brothers Zeni, the Venetian navigators. The error thus begun has been copied into various histories and encyclopædias. The unfortunate navigator never returned from his second voyage. His brother Miguel explored in 1502 with three vessels, but in vain, the gulfs and bays of the New World in search of him. It is supposed that the natives of the Labrador coast revenged themselves on the kidnappers, as it is recorded that subsequent explorers found the Eskimo in years after very hostile to foreigners.

The name Labrador was given, it is said, by Cortereal to the coast discovered by him, meaning the land of the labourer,—probably an equivalent expression to “slave coast;” not as an American historian makes it, “a ploughed land,” such a name being a contradiction of the natural features of the coast.

On a Portuguese map of 1503 (Harvard Coll. Collec. 128) the coast of America is marked “Terra de Corte Realle,” and in Freiss’s Atlas of the World, 1525, Labrador is connected with the voyage of Gaspard Cortereal, though the name is given in a corrupted form. There is no doubt, as shown by many old maps, the name “Terra Corterealis” long continued to belong to Labrador. The melancholy fate of Cortereal has joined his name to the somewhat long list of those who have found in the New World an unknown grave.


The age following Colombo was one most glorious for Spain, though disfigured by the cruel rapacity Amerigo Vespucci. of her New World commanders. Contemporaneous with Colombo was the geographer and explorer, Vespucci. Born in Florence on the 9th of March, 1451, the naval enterprise of Spain drew him to that country. In 1493 Vespucci went to Seville, and engaged in the work of equipping vessels for sea.

He succeeded in inducing Ferdinand and Isabella to modify the monopoly given to Colombo as Admiral of New Spain, and on the 10th of April, 1495, permission was given to other Spaniards to explore the New World. In 1497, with a fleet of four vessels, this stirring geographer went to the New World, and returned on the 15th of October of the following year, with a cargo of upwards of 200 slaves. Another voyage was undertaken in 1499, from which Vespucci returned in the next year. These voyages were in the interest of Spain.

The third voyage made by this navigator was under the auspices of Portugal, and it was undertaken from Lisbon on the 13th of May, 1501, and his return was on the 7th of September of the following year. His last voyage was made in 1503, and he arrived in Lisbon on the 18th of June, 1504. In the year 1508 Vespucci retired from the service of Portugal and re-entered that of Spain, being appointed chief pilot with a good remuneration. He did not live long to enjoy his position, for he died at Seville on the 22nd of February, 1512.

Much has been said of the ungrateful part taken by Vespucci in robbing Colombo of the honour of having his name attached to the New World. It is true Vespucci did labour against the monopoly enjoyed by Colombo, but no blame seems to attach to Vespucci in connection with the naming of the continent. Colombo does not seem to have blamed Vespucci, for in 1504 the great discoverer gave the Venetian a most cordial letter to the perpetual gonfalonier of the Republic of Venice.

Vespucci had made a map of Brazil, but does not appear to have inscribed his own name upon it. Without doubt all regard the name of Colombo as that which should have been placed upon the New World, but the almost accidental circumstances resulting otherwise seem to have been as follows. In the cosmography of Itacombo, printed at Strasburg in 1509, the first name of Vespucci, viz. Amerigo, is given to Brazil. A Swiss scholar in 1514 followed in the same course. In Venice, in 1535, Brazil was called Amerigi or America.

The real fault seems to have been with Spain. The Spaniards desired to call the New World “Fer-Isabellica.” No doubt this was the means of displacing the name of Colombo, so that the adoption of America seems to have been a trifling national incident. Ortelius in 1584 gives to that part of the continent the two names, Brazil and America. The name America once firmly fastened on Brazil, its extension to the whole continent was quite natural. The geographer Vespucci, at any rate, seems without blame in the matter.

To Spain belongs not only Colombo’s unequalled exploit, but also the expedition which first circumnavigated Magalhaens. the globe, and yet the leader of it was a Portuguese. Born in Oporto in 1470, Fernan di Magalhaens, or as his name is latinized, Magellan, undertook for the Spanish Government an enterprise of the greatest moment. The necessity of reaching the Spice Islands by a shorter route was the promoting cause of more than one navigator’s zeal. Leaving Seville with five ships, four of them commanded by Spanish captains, and all these hostile to him, gave the Portuguese admiral no easy task.

The expedition sailed for the Moluccas, 1519, leaving Cape Verd on the 10th of August. Brazil was 1519. reached and the harbour now known as Rio Janeiro entered on the 13th of December. It was May of the next year when the explorers found themselves at the southern extremity of this continent. The inhabitants here were gigantic in stature. It was here the hostility of his Spanish crews broke out into open mutiny. Magalhaens acted with decision, and a number of leading mutineers paid the penalty with their lives.

On Monte Cristo, on the coast, the admiral planted a cross, and with religious formalities took possession of the country for Spain. Passing through the straits which have since borne the name Magellan, it was on the 28th of November when the fleet—at least three of the vessels, for two had turned back—entered the Pacific Ocean. In due time the islands of Oceanica were in turn reached and passed, but on the 27th of April an irremediable disaster occurred in the murder of the admiral by the natives.

At this stage of the voyage one of the ships was burned, and another was left behind as leaky and unseaworthy. Upon Sebastian del Cano now devolved the 1522. command, and in charge of one ship, Le Victoria, he arrived at Seville on the 8th of September, and in token of its having been the good fortune of this navigator to be the first to go round the world, he was granted on his coat-of-arms by his sovereign, a globe, and upon it, “Primus circumdedisti me.”

It would be interesting did it come within the scope of our Canadian history to follow the Spanish explorations in Central and South America. We but mention them for the sake of connection. Ponce de Leon, who in old age sought a land of perpetual youth, on the 2nd of April, 1512, discovered and named Florida.

Vasco Nunez de Balboa, who was first—on the 26th of September, 1513—to look upon the Pacific Ocean from the mountain tops on the isthmus, addressed his Spanish followers: “Be as you have hitherto been, faithful and true to me, and, by the favour of Christ, you will become the richest Spaniards that have ever come to the Indies.”

Hernando Cortez, the conqueror of Mexico, who burned his ships on the sea-coast, and on the 16th of August, 1519, penetrated the land of Montezuma. Francisco Pizarro, the cruel invader of Peru, in 1533 entered Cusco, the city of the Incas; and Ferdinand de Soto, the hero of a love-tale, and the discoverer of the Mississippi, died upon the banks of the Father of Waters, on the 5th of June, 1542, to be buried beneath its flood.


Francis I. of France could not be a silent spectator of Jean Verrazano. the discoveries of his Spanish and Portuguese neighbours on the south, or of his English rivals to the west. Unable to obtain the means for carrying on his wars, he thought to obtain treasure for this purpose by sending an expedition to Cathay, or the much-lauded Moluccas.

It was when the first quarter of the fifteenth century was nearing its end that, following the example of his neighbours, who availed themselves of the power and naval skill of sailors trained in the school of Italian adventure, Francis obtained the services of a daring and reckless navigator, sometimes known by the Spaniards, who had reason to remember him, simply as Juan the 1485. Florentine, or by the French as Jean Verrazano. Of his early life we know nothing, except that he seems to have been born in a small town near Florence. Francis seems to have sought an easy way of gaining treasure by attacking the Spanish ships as they returned homeward from the New World. John the Florentine was a fitting agent for the king in this work, for he first captured a Spanish ship returning 1521. 1522. from Hispaniola, and in the next year seven Spanish vessels between Cadiz and the Canary Isles. These, however, he was compelled to relinquish. All the information of a reliable kind possessed by us of Verrazano is a letter written from Dieppe to Francis I. Of this letter we have not the original, but a July, 1524. copy found in Ramusio (1556). So late as 1852 a planisphere of Hieronymus de Verrazano of 1529, was discovered in the College de Propagandâ Fide, in Rome. A letter written by one Fernando Carli, an Italian, from Lyons in France to his father in Florence, on the 4th of August, 1524, has been found confirming the epistle given in Ramusio.

This letter of Carli gives an account of Verrazano’s return, and of his letter to King Francis. It is referred to as having been in the year 1728 in the Strozzi Library in Florence, and was published in 1841. A determined effort has been made to dispute the authenticity of Verrazano’s letter, but, to the mind of the writer, unsuccessfully.

From these authorities we learn that Verrazano, starting with four vessels to explore the New World, was at first driven back by a storm. With one ship, the Dauphine, sailing for the New World, he left Jan. 17th, 1524. the island of Madeira. Passing well north of the Bermudas, and having run 1200 leagues, about the 6th of March (old style) Verrazano saw “a new land never seen by ancient or modern.” This seems to have been about Cape May on the coast of New Jersey. Judging by the description of the land, he passed northward along the coast of New Jersey, New York, and Long Island. An island, triangular in form—like the island of Rhodes—came in view, and this was called “Louisa” after the mother of King Francis.

From the land in 41⅔° N. lat.—about the locality of Newport—the inhabitants of the country were seen by the navigator to be clothed in the skins of animals. The narrative closes thus: “Sailing between east and north for the space of one hundred and fifty leagues, and having consumed all our naval stores and victuals; having discovered five hundred and two leagues, i.e. seven hundred more of new land, supplying ourselves with water and wood, we determined to return to France.” In the appendix Verrazano gives his departure from the coast as having been in lat. 50°.

Hakluyt speaks of seeing “a mighte large old map” in parchment, made, as it would seem, by Verrazanus. There are evidences that Verrazano was still alive in 1526 from an agreement between the admiral of France and the navigator. Two different accounts are extant as to the death of Verrazano. One is that he was caught by the Spaniards and executed for piracy; the Oct., 1527. other, by Ramusio, is that on an expedition to the North American coast the unlucky explorer was captured by the natives and killed, roasted, and eaten by them in the view of his own ships (“furono arrostiti et mangiati”).

Trained in the school of hardy Breton fishermen, Cartier was the fitting instrument for Francis, who, after his return from Pavia, was still filled with dreams Jacques Cartier. of a New World kingdom. Born in 1494 in St. Malo, of a family traceable back for some time in that locality, the young captain, with the reputation of having acquitted himself well in his sea-going expeditions, was plainly suited for the task imposed upon him.

He had married, in 1519, at the age of twenty-five, Catherine, daughter of Messire Honoré des Granches, chevalier of the king, and constable of the town of St. Malo, and so was brought within the circle of royal influence. The young navigator had been presented to Philippe de Chabot, grand admiral of France, and had himself proposed to go on an expedition to Terre Neuve.

On the 20th of April, the voyage which was alike to make Cartier famous and to add New World possessions First Voyage, 1534. to France, was undertaken. Captains, mates, and men of the two vessels, of sixty tons each, were sworn to faithfulness to their commander, Cartier, by Charles de Moüy, vice-admiral of France. Each vessel had sixty-one men, and a good passage awaited them. On the 10th of May a prosperous voyage had brought the explorers to the New World, at Cape Bonavista (48½° N. lat.) in Newfoundland. The ice was, however, so heavy that the vessels made a run for a neighbouring harbour, which they named St. Catherine, now Catalina.

On the 21st of May, running before a west wind, they reached an island called by them “Ile des Oiseaux,” now Funk Island. The navigators so-called the island because of the vast quantity of birds upon it, and they salted for use four or five tons’ weight of this game. Coasting westward, Cartier explored the coast of Labrador, a bleak, rocky shore, of which he says: “This land, I believe, is that which God gave to Cain.” The inhabitants are described as having been clothed with skins of animals; they painted with red colours; their boats were made of a wood resembling oak; with these boats they captured large quantities of sea-wolves.

Coming back again to the west coast of Newfoundland, among the fertile islands, the explorer found them “full of great trees, of meadows, of fields filled with wild wheat, and of peas which were in flower as thick and good as can be seen in Brittany, which seem to have been sown by the husbandman.” Going south-west along the coast, on the 27th of June the Magdalen Islands were passed. On the 8th of July the ships ran up the Gulf of Chaleur, and the sailors traded trinkets, arms, and other merchandise with the natives. The savages consisted of wandering tribes, living chiefly on fish. The explorers declared that they regarded “the country to be better than Spain,” and that it was covered with grain and fruits, “red and white roses,” and other pleasant flowers.

On the 24th of July, ascending the Gaspé headland, the explorers took possession of the country, and it became the property of France. Cartier erected a cross thirty feet high; upon this was fastened a shield, on which were three fleur-de-lis, with the words “Vive le Roy de France” cut into the wood. On their bended knees, and with hands joined together, the explorers adored the sacred emblem.

On the return of the Frenchmen to their ships they were visited by the chief of the district and his leading men, who expressed dissatisfaction with the cross left upon the shore. To allay the fears of the Indian delegation, Cartier made each of them presents of a red “tuque,” a “sayon de couleur” (scarf), and a shirt, as also a metal necklace. On St. Peter’s Day the expedition had advanced up the great river of Canada to a point between Anticosti and Gaspé. All were now anxious to return to France. On turning homeward they were met by a heavy storm, which drove them back into the gulf, but the wind changing they passed through what is now known as the Straits of Belleisle to the north 1534. of Newfoundland, and arrived safely at St. Malo on the 15th of September.

On the 16th of June, 1535, Cartier and the sailors who were to accompany him on the second Second Voyage of Cartier. voyage, with religious rites of confession prepared themselves for another expedition. In the cathedral church they received from the Bishop of St. Malo his benediction. A good wind on the 18th sent the three ships to the west. The first ship of the little fleet was under the Captain-General Cartier himself. This ship was the Herminius (Hermine); it was of 126 tons’ burden; and with the Captain Frosmont there were De Pont Briand—a companion of the Dauphin—De la Pommeraye, Jean Poulet, and other gentlemen. The second ship was La Petite Hermine, about sixty tons’ burden, under Captain Jalobert; and the third, of about forty tons, was L’Emerillon, under the captaincy of William the Breton.

Good fortune accompanied them till the 26th of May, when they suffered severely by stormy weather, even till the 25th of June, when they became separated until they met at “Ile des Oiseaux” on the 7th of July. Discovering and exploring the small islands along the north side of the gulf, it was on the 14th of August that the ship left the little bay on the Labrador coast, called by them St. Laurent, and from the two savages taken by them to France learned that to the south was the route of the previous year, by which they might reach the kingdom of Saguenay, and beyond that Canada.

On the 15th of August they saw to the south a large island, to which they gave the name Assomption Isle—called by the Indians Natiscotee, and which has become now corrupted to Anticosti. The savages stated the river to be, at a certain distance up, of sweet water, and that its source had never been discovered. After having discovered and named Les Iles Rondes and St. John Islands, on the 1st of September the little fleet set sail to ascend the river and make the great discovery of Canada. At the mouth of the river they met four boats from Canada, manned by Indians, which had come to fish in the gulf.

Pushing up the river past the mouth of the gloomy Saguenay they came to an island three leagues Canada discovered. long and two broad, full of “beautiful and large trees.” From the abundance of filberts obtained from the hazel-trees in the island, they called it “Ile aux Coudres,” and here they recorded Canada as beginning. Notwithstanding the fact that no priest accompanied them here or elsewhere, the voyageurs read the service of the mass, and conducted all their dealings in a religious spirit.

Some fourteen islands in the river were visited, among which are Crane Island, Goose Island, Margaret, Grosse Isle, and others, and at last the island of Orleans was reached. Cartier is mistaken in the size he gives it, it being not above seven leagues long, while he makes it ten. The two Indians taken to France on the first voyage, who now accompanied Cartier, announced themselves to the fleeing inhabitants. The confidence of the natives restored, they returned to the ships with great demonstrations of joy (dansans et faisans plusieurs cérémonies), and bringing quantities of eels, fish, with several loads of coarse grain, and many large melons. Presents of small value were bestowed on them.

On the following day the Agonhanna, or lord of the country, Donnaconna by name, came with twelve boats, of which two pulled up alongside the French ships. With violent gesticulations the Agonhanna delivered the usual Indian address. The returned savages of the first voyage then recited the good treatment they had received in France. The ceremonies of introduction past, the explorers coasted along the island, and at the upper end of it found the mouth of the little river to afford a safe harbour. This they named Ste. Croix. The Recollets afterwards, in 1617, called it St. Charles, the name it still bears. The bold point on which Quebec now stands was the abode of Donnaconna, and was called by the people themselves Stadacona. The point was then plentifully wooded with fruit and ornamental trees. On the island in front of Ste. Croix being explored it was named by the explorers, on account of the presence of the wild grape of the country, “L’Ile de Bacchus,” but the name of island of Orleans has quite superseded this.

After consultations many with Donnaconna and his people, Cartier determined to go further up the river. To this the natives were very much opposed, and employed many devices to dissuade Cartier. Donnaconna presented some of his kindred to Cartier as a peace-offering, and three Indians were cleverly dressed up to represent demons, covered with dog-skins, and bearing horns. These came past the vessels of Cartier, and, without a word or look to the ships, passed out of view. Donnaconna and his Indians then appeared and dissuaded Cartier from leaving his ships. The two guides now came from the woods, and with cries of “Jesus,” “Marie,” and the like, appealed to Cartier. On being asked the meaning of this performance, they said their god, Cudouagny, had spoken from Hochelaga, and that the three demons had come to announce that on account of so much snow and ice, all the people of Hochelaga had died.

In spite of threats and persuasions, the explorer on the 18th of September sailed up the river, though without the two Indian guides. The voyageurs were struck with the beauty and fertility of the banks of the river, as well as with the abundance of game. They passed through Lake St. Peter on the 28th of September. Taking the North Channel the shallowness of the water prevented further progress. Landing on the shore, the voyageurs met the natives, and received assurances that they were on the proper course for Hochelaga. Cartier, now convinced that L’Hermine could not navigate the lake, left her some forty-five leagues from Hochelaga, and with his most intimate friends, fitted up the two smaller vessels, with which he arrived, on the 2nd of October, safely before Hochelaga. Cartier was received here as he had been at Gaspé and at the island of Orleans, with gifts of the products of the country and with great demonstrations of joy. He bestowed freely upon the men, women, and children from his store of weapons, beads, and trinkets.

From Cartier’s description it is evident that the people of Hochelaga differed from the ordinary Algonquin The Hochelagans. Indians. They were less wandering in their habits, and were regarded as superiors by the other tribes. The town or village of Hochelaga was three-quarters of a mile distant from the mountain at Montreal. It consisted of a walled enclosure, with barred gates. Around it and halfway to the river were the cultivated fields belonging to the village. The village contained some fifty houses; each of these was upwards of fifty yards long, and from twelve to fifteen wide. The houses were wooden and were covered with the bark of trees. In the midst of each house was a great earthen chamber where the fire was kept.

In the houses were granaries, and from these stores of Indian corn and peas they obtained their food, pounding out the grain to make flour for bread. They used the same material for soups; and they likewise had an abundance of melons and fruits. They had large vessels, probably of pottery, in their houses for keeping fish, of which they stored large quantities for winter. In their houses were beds made of bark, and they used the skins of animals for coverings and clothing. They had also a species of bead or shellwork which they valued highly. This they called Esurgni and was probably the well-known wampum.

The explorers were much interested in the Hochelagans, and gave the name to their mountain of Mount Royal. During this visit their chief was ill: Cartier read the Gospel of St. John and offered prayers for him; and during all, the natives regarded the explorer with reverence. In company with the leaders of the Indians, Cartier and his companions ascended the mountain, and learned of the St. Louis and other rapids up the river, which they could see stretching westward, and were pointed in the direction of the other great river—the Ottawa. The Indians had seen the gold and silver in Cartier’s coat-of-arms, and they informed him that these metals were found up the river. Red copper, they said, also was found. But there were warlike and dangerous tribes living toward the setting sun. After many leave-takings, the explorers departed on the 5th of October.

At the mouth of a tributary of the St. Lawrence they erected a commanding cross, and dropping down the river, on October 11th they arrived at Ste. Croix. On his return to Stadacona, Cartier became familiar with the Indians. He pointed out to them that their Cudouagny was an evil spirit, and that there was only one true God. Many of the Indians on hearing his fuller explanations became anxious to be baptized; but on the plea that he had no holy oil, he deferred the matter, promising on his next voyage to bring priests and all the accompaniments of religion.

During the month of December the people of Stadacona were attacked by a severe disease and some perished; and though they were forbidden to approach the fort which had been erected on the shore opposite the vessels, yet the disease attacked those wintering in the fort. It was evidently some scorbutic disease, but was unknown to the French. Cartier engaged in devout religious services, hoping to drive away the plague. All but three men of the expedition were invalids. The winter proved severe and trying; two feet of ice on the water, and four feet of snow on land, was a new experience.

Cartier was among the well. He saw that Domagaza, one of the guides, who had been under the plague, had suddenly recovered, and ascertained from him that extract of the spruce was a certain remedy for the disease. The result of the application of this remedy was remarkable. Cartier, speaking of its success, says: “If all the physicians of Louvain and Montpellier had been there with all the drugs of Alexandria, they could not have done as much in a year as this wonderful tree did in eight hours;” and he thanks God for the marvellous cure. Canadians are well aware still of the curative power of the balsam of “Epinette blanche.”

On the 3rd of May, 1536, the explorers erected a cross thirty-five feet high, and upon the shield fastened on it, inscribed in ancient letters, “Franciscus primus, Dei Gratia Francorum rex, regnat.” Having done this, Cartier, by a surprise, kidnapped Donnaconna, with the intention of taking him to France. During the night a great number of the Indians came opposite the ships crying, “Agohanna! agohanna!” wishing to speak to him. Cartier assured them he would be absent only twelve or thirteen months, that he would see the great king, and would return with a great present again.

Laden with gifts of fruits the explorers, on May 16th, left Ste. Croix, accompanied by many boat-loads of the subjects of Donnaconna. On being rewarded by Cartier with valuable presents, the Indians returned rejoicing to Stadacona. Passing Ile aux Coudres on the 21st of May, and St. Pierre Islands on June 11th, where they were met by many French fishing-vessels, the expedition on July 16th reached St. Malo, having been twelve or thirteen months absent. Thus finishes Cartier’s most notable voyage.

After the return of Cartier, it was four years before Third Voyage of Cartier. another expedition from France to the New World was undertaken. Donnaconna and the other captured savages had, on reaching France, during the course of these years become Christian, and had been baptized into the faith in Brittany. Unfortunately all of them except a little girl of ten years of age had died. Cartier seemed somewhat unwilling to return, but under the command of the king, undertook the charge of five vessels, under Chevalier de la Rocque, Sieur de Roberval, to whom also had been given the title “Governor of Canada and Hochelaga.”

The fleet having been inspected by De Roberval, and there being further supplies to be received at Honfleur, Cartier, with full authority from his superior, set sail with his five vessels on the 23rd of May, De Roberval 1541. going to Honfleur to obtain two other vessels, with the intention of following after and joining Cartier at Newfoundland. Cartier’s fleet had a stormy passage, the delays were numerous, the cattle on board the ships were worn out with the sea-voyage, and Roberval did not overtake them. Thus hindered, Cartier did not reach Ste. Croix until the 23rd of August.

On inquiry as to what had become of their people by the Stadacona natives, it was replied that Donnaconna had died, and that the others, having been well provided for, were unwilling to return. Cartier now took up new headquarters at Cap Rouge, known as Charlesbourg Royal, some twelve miles above Ste. Croix. The explorer then laid up three of his ships at Cap Rouge, and sent back two, manned by his brother-in-law, Jalobert, and his nephew, Noel, with letters to the king. An expedition was then made up the river on the 7th of September, to visit the various rapids, and in this two gentlemen companions of Cartier took part. (Hakluyt’s record is here incomplete.)

Cartier would seem to have remained in Canada for the year, earnestly waiting for his superior to De Roberval.
arrive. It was not till the 16th of April that De Roberval started for the wide domain of which he was governor. He had now three tall ships, and he was bringing out some two hundred colonists, women as well as men, to build up his possession. Successfully the expedition reached the harbour of St. John, Newfoundland, on June 8th.

Here, to the surprise of the governor and his party, they met Cartier now returning from Canada. He spoke well of the country, showed diamonds and gold obtained in it, but said he had left it on account of the number and disposition of the savages. Ordered by De Roberval to return with the colony, Cartier stole out of St. John Harbour by night, and returned to France. De Roberval went on his way, arrived in Canada, and built a great fort, “Fort France Roy,” at Ste. Croix, four leagues west of Orleans.

In September he sent back two of his ships to France, and with the colony remained to face the winter. During the winter the scurvy again appeared, and about fifty of the colony succumbed to it. The governor seems to have had no lack of occupation in the management of the colony. A number of men and women were whipped, and Michael Gaillon, one of the number, was hanged for theft.

In June, leaving M. Royere as his lieutenant and thirty 1543. of the colonists, he sailed with seventy in search of gold, leaving the colony till his return from the Saguenay. It was the disturbed state of France that led to De Roberval being left without succour. There is a report given by Lescarbot that Cartier was 1543. despatched to Canada, and that Roberval and the whole surviving colony were brought back to France. Engaged in the French wars, De Roberval, the Governor of Canada, was not able till peace returned to seek his New World possession. It is stated that in 1549. company with his brother Achille, another brave soldier of the French king, he started on an expedition for the New World, but that the fleet and all on board were never heard of again.

The supremacy of England on the sea is to us an inheritance mainly of the days of Good Queen English Voyages. Bess. The limits of our work but permit us to name those great captains who made England famous, but whose career was not directly connected with Canada. There is the family of the Hawkinses belonging to Devonshire. William Hawkins in 1530 sailed to the Guinea coast, and obtained a cargo of ivory. His son, Sir John Hawkins, was a buccaneer and slave-trader, whose name was feared on the seas. One reads with a shudder of his carrying slaves in his ship, the Jesus, of Lubeck. Sir Richard, son of Sir John, was a brave commander in the destruction of the Armada. William, the fourth great Hawkins, was the son of Sir Richard, and traded to the East Indies.

Another great captain, and from Devonshire also, was Sir Francis Drake. It was his great honour in 1577 to undertake the voyage in which he succeeded “in first turning up a furrow about the whole world.” It is interesting to Canadians to know that, running up the west coast of America, Drake reached latitude 48° N., and saw in the distance the peaks of our Columbian Rockies.

Passing by in the meantime the names of Frobisher, Davis, Gilbert, and Raleigh, we reach Henry Hudson, whose name and fate have both become historic. He was connected with a family of position which had long been engaged in trading in the great Muscovy Company, but nothing is certainly known of Hudson’s birth and parentage. Four voyages performed by him constitute his fame. Two of these were for the Muscovy Company to the north-east of Britain in Russian waters. 1609. His third voyage was made in the ship Half-Moon, provided by the Dutch.

He had intended to have gone to the north-east, but changed his course and reached Newfoundland. Sailing south he touched Cape Cod, to which, supposing it an island, he gave the name New Holland. Passing Cape Charles, the navigator ran up a roadstead, and then ascended the river which bears his name, until the stream became too narrow for further progress. Returning to England, the Half-Moon was delayed 1610. for ten months, but then proceeded to Amsterdam to give her report. In consequence of the information received, the Dutch sent out agents who took possession of New Netherlands, which name the region bore till afterwards changed, upon its capture by the English, to New York.

In the year of Hudson’s return from America, the English, unwilling to lose the services of the navigator, induced him to leave the Half-Moon, and to undertake a voyage for them. In this, crossing to the April, 1610. west, Hudson discovered the strait to the north-west of Baccalaos Island (Belle Isle).

He determined to follow the opening further up the coast, laid down by Weymouth (1602), which Davis had also marked, and called “the furious overfall.” Through this strait Hudson passed. Entering the bay which, like the strait, now bears his own name, he wintered in latitude 52° N. The motion of the tides caused him to hope that a passage to the westward would be found, but the mutiny of his crew led to his being cast adrift with his son and a few sick companions, and it is a sailor’s story that the spirit of the departed navigator, like an icy spectre, still hovers around the Hudson Bay.

The perfidious crew were thrown into prison on their 1611.
arrival in England, and though, by the direction of the Prince of Wales, three ships were sent out in the following year, in consequence of a hope that the navigator might still survive, the search proved a fruitless one.


(References: “On Mounds;” Publications of Smithsonian Institution and of Manitoba Historical Society; Schoolcraft’s “Indian Tribes” (vide ante); “North American Indians,” by George Catlin, 2 vols., London, 1866; Articles in “Encyclopædia Britannica” (9th edition), by A. H. Keane and Henry Gannett; the most valuable series of “Library of Aboriginal American Literature,” 6 vols., by D. G. Brinton, Philadelphia, 1882, &c.; “Dictionary of Dakota Language,” by Dr. Riggs, Smithsonian Institution, Washington; “Dictionary of Cree Language,” by Father Lacombe, Montreal, 1874; “Dictionary of Ojibway Language,” by Bishop Baraga, Montreal, 1879; “Mémoire sur les Langues de l’Amérique du Nord,” by M. Ponceau, Paris, 1838; Charlevoix, “Histoire de la Nouvelle France” (vide ante); Hennepin (vide ante).)

Section I.—The Mound Builders.

Almost the only remains of a prehistoric people in America are in the mounds of earth which are found along the rivers and lakes extending from Central America to Lake Winnipeg, and from the Atlantic to the Pacific Oceans. Many of these have disappeared without notice in the eastern part of the country, but the regions upon the Mississippi, Ohio, Missouri, Souris, Red, Rainy, and other rivers in more western longitudes have been settled in comparatively recent times, and along these rivers the mounds have been observed in Canada mounds, or bone-pits corresponding to them, have been found on the site of Hochelaga, in the region between Toronto and Lake Simcoe, near London, and no doubt elsewhere in the eastern provinces.

In the Canadian North-West a well-defined mound area has been observed, and to some extent explored. The mounds in Canada have been chiefly found as circular, and were plainly mounds for burial, and also for the purposes of observation. They are generally placed at points of advantage along the rivers, on high cliffs, or where there is a good view of the river up and down to be obtained, or at the junction of rivers, or near rapids and “saults.”

Mounds made in the outline of a serpent, bird, or animal, and seemingly used for defence, have been traced on the Ohio, but not to any extent in Canada. The Canadian mounds vary from six to fifty feet in height, and from thirty to 120 feet in diameter. They are chiefly found in good agricultural regions, whence it has been inferred their builders were tillers of the soil. The mounds are built of the earth in their neighbourhood, and sometimes contain layers of stone if beds of rock are found near. On the Rainy River in North-Western Ontario no less than twenty-one mounds have been observed along some forty miles of the course of that river, and on the Souris twenty in an area of four miles square.

The mounds contain large quantities of human bones, and were evidently used as places of burial. In some cases groups of detached skulls and bundles of leg and arm bones in heaps are found, as if these had been carried from a distance and deposited there. Skulls are found showing their possessors to have been killed by the blows of heavy weapons, and in some cases with red ochre still remaining on the faces. In the large mounds it would seem as if all the bones more than six or eight feet from the surface of the mounds had been reduced to reddish dust. The conception that the mounds were formed by a vast band of men working together like the builders of the Egyptian pyramids is probably a mistaken one, and if the mound grew from one generation to another by the accretion of the remains of the same family or sept, brought perhaps from great distances whither the family had spread, the supposition that a few hundred-weights or tons of earth carried by the mourning relatives in baskets from the neighbourhood to cover the remains deep enough to prevent wild beasts disturbing them, would sufficiently account for what we find.

Among natural products found in the mounds besides human remains are bits of charred wood, Remains. scorched birch-bark, lumps of red ochre, and pieces of iron pyrites, probably regarded as sacred objects. Manufactured articles are also found, such as stone scrapers and gouges, axes and malls, as well as stone tubes of the medicine-men. Horn spear-heads with barbs, used as fish-spears, and in the Rainy River mounds, native copper drills, cutting and scraping knives and chisels, shell ornaments, either from fresh-water clams cut into shape, or small sea-shells pierced and used as beads, are found. The most remarkable remains are those of pottery cups and vessels. In most cases these are broken, but perfect cups have been found occasionally. The pottery seems hand made, and has a considerable variety of markings.

As to the age of the mounds, and the race to which the builders belonged, there has been much discussion: some seek great antiquity, others are satisfied with a few centuries. On many of the mounds trees from two to three feet in diameter are growing, several hundreds of years old, and these may be the successors of other trees. As to race, the mound builders seem extinct, though certain Indian tribes still show certain affinities to them. The supposition that seems most satisfactory on the whole is that they belong to the race of peaceful, agricultural, industrious, pottery-making builders, known as the Toltecs, who are known to have occupied Mexico from the seventh to the eleventh centuries, and seem to have spread up the Mississippi valley from its mouth to the sources of its furthest tributaries.

They would seem to have occupied their northern settlements in Canada from the eleventh to the fifteenth centuries, and to have been swept away by fierce tribes such as the Iroquois and Sioux following in their wake, just as the Aztecs destroyed the parent Toltecan race in Mexico. Probably the Hochelagans of Montreal, who disappeared between the time of Cartier and Champlain, and the Eries who perished just before the French occupation of Canada, may have been the last remnants of this race, who are now pretty generally spoken of by the learned as “The Alleghans.” The Ojibways of Canada speak of the builders of the mounds as having been of a different race from them, and call them the Ke-te-anish-i-na-be, or “very ancient men,” though a number of facts seem to connect the Mandans of the Missouri with the Mound Builders.

Section II.—The Present Indian Tribes of Canada.

On the Continent of America lived, when Colombo, Caboto, and Cartier discovered it, a native race. In appearance and in language this race was so distinct from any people of either Europe, Africa, or Asia known to these commanders, that they were concluded to be the inhabitants of the unknown and sought-for Cathay, and hence Colombo called them Indians.

This guess seems to have been a happy one, for all the latest investigations go to show that the American Indians are of Mongolian type, and came—though, from the wide divergence of their languages from even the Asiatic, it must have been at an ancient date—from the eastern coast of Asia. With abundant hair, black, coarse, and “glossy as a horse’s mane,” slight beard, small dark eyes, narrow arched eyebrows, and prominent cheek-bones and nose, the red man has become of so decided a type as to cause some, though not the majority, to regard him as indigenous to the soil to which so long ago he came a stranger. Without dealing at large with the several American tribes, in Canadian history we meet with some of the most celebrated of all the Indian peoples.

The British or French colonists along the Atlantic first became familiar with various families of the Algonquins. great Algonquin nation. While following the general Indian type the Algonquin is a heavy-boned, somewhat coarse-featured, and far from best-looking Indian of the country. Accustomed to the rocky shore of the Atlantic, and spreading between the Atlantic coast and the Alleghanies, he claimed as his home the rocky and wooded Acadia, as well as the north shore of the St. Lawrence. But little addicted to agriculture, the sea and the forest yielded him his precarious living. Used to the chase, he was accustomed also to war, and turned his weapon readily westward against his hostile native neighbours, or, when wronged, with terrible ferocity against the white intruders.

Known as the Powhattans in Virginia, though introduced to the whites by the mythic story of Pocahontas, these Algonquins soon took up the tomahawk against the colonists, and in the end suffered extinction. The Pequods of Massachusetts, as the Algonquins of that state were called, while kindly receiving the pilgrims, are represented on the coat-of-arms of that commonwealth by a sturdy Sagamore with bow and arrow, but above his head a soldier’s arm with a drawn sword.

The Natics of the same stock have left their only memorial in the dialect in the Bible translation of the apostolic Eliot. The Mohicans of Connecticut and New York, once noted in war, were crushed between the whites on the east and the Iroquois on the west, and the last of them have but lately passed away. The Leni-Lenapes, or Delawares, the “men of men” of the Algonquin stirps, have even been regarded as so representative as to have had their name transferred by some to the whole family in place of Algonquin. A remnant of the Delawares still survives in the Indian territory.

A wretched band of Algonquins known as the Micmaks still flit about the Nova Scotian waste places like returning ghosts of a departed people; while Algonquin Abenakis yet wander over the land of their fathers upon the St. Lawrence and along the gulf in New Brunswick. These and others have been unable to stand the shock of a meeting with the whites. Many tribes and families are only remembered by the names of the rivers, lakes, and headlands where once they dwelt.

A more persistent type of Algonquins have been the famous Ojibway or Chippewa tribes, extending Ojibways. from the St. Lawrence along the north of all the lakes. A hardy, persevering and determined people, they have steadily pushed their way north-westward, have proved an equal antagonist for the Iroquois, and instead of quailing before the Sioux have actually pressed these “tigers of the plains” to the west, and have established themselves south of Lake Superior, on the former territory of the Dakotas.

Inhabiting as they did a most rocky and wooded Ottawas. country, they have been a scattered but self-reliant people, dwelling in their round-topped birch-bark “teepees,” at home on their lakes and rivers in their birch-bark canoes, and living on fish and game—a sturdy race. Closely related to them, if not a part of them, were the Ottawas, who lived at first on the river of that name, but sallied forth westward to Manitoulin Island, and thence to the west side of Huron and Michigan lakes.

The greatest offshoot of these Algonquin Ojibways has been the Crees, known to the early French Crees. and English traders as Kristineaux or Klistinos. They seem in their migrations to have pushed their way up the Ottawa and Nipigon rivers, and to have occupied the great muskegs of the country towards Hudson Bay, in which wide region they are known as the Swamp Crees, or “Muskegons.” So strongly do they seem entrenched in this region that there have been those who have held that here and not to the southward was the true Algonquin starting-point.

As a western branch of the same Cree wave reached Lake of the Woods, Lake Winnipeg, and the Saskatchewan River, these sturdy Algonquins seem to have been modified by the different conditions of the country, and are known as Wood Crees; while a still more adventurous offshoot had facility enough to adapt itself to the changed life of the prairies, where, exchanging their canoes and dogs for horses, and their birch-bark teepees for buffalo-skin and moose-skin tents, they are known as the “Plain Crees,” 700 miles from the mouth of the Saskatchewan, and even to the Rocky Mountains.

When the French traders, early in the 18th century, left Sault Ste. Marie to coast along the shore of Lake Superior, and even to pass by stream and portage to Lake Winnipeg, they were accompanied by Ojibway canoemen, who have formed an intrusive race even as far west as the Winnipeg, and Manitoba lakes, being known as the Saulteaux from their ancestral home at the emptying of Lake Superior. There are said to be 16,000 Crees on the Saskatchewan River alone. The affinities of the 7000 Blackfeet on the South Saskatchewan are doubtful, though some class them as Algonquin also.

Undoubtedly the most distinguished of the Indian races met with on this continent has been the Iroquois. Iroquois, or as it was first known, “Five Nation Indians,” In the territory of what is now the State of New York was the home of this people; and yet they kept up so close a connection with the Ohio River that the impression is becoming stronger that it was up this river they had come in prehistoric times. This race, however, has been closely connected by residence and invasion with Canadian soil.

The five nations, Mohawks, Oneidas, Onondagas, Senecas, and Cayugas, united in a league, were known as the “Ongwehonwe,” or “Superior Men.” And it was this league that gave the Iroquois so remarkable a power, not only in their conflicts with other savage tribes, but in their attacks on the infant colony of New France.

Cultivating their fields of Indian corn, growing, in the cleared openings of the woods, pumpkins and melons, rich in their supply of wampum, gregarious in their mode of life, picturesque in their distinctive games, and cruel in their warlike customs and religious rites, the Iroquois fill up a large space in the early history of New France and New England alike.

It was in 1712 that the Tuscaroras, one of their own tribes, speaking a dialect of the same language, having been forced at some time previous to find a home in North Carolina, rejoined the confederacy to make it the “Six Nations.”

The Iroquois were always attached to the English, though strangely enough about the time of the American Revolution, French influence was gaining ground among them. Identified with British arms in the revolutionary war, a portion of the Iroquois left their old homes in the State of New York, and found after the Treaty of Paris, as we shall see, new homes within our borders, that have made them ever since loyal Canadians.

Straight as arrows, tall and athletic, with clean limbs, more copper-coloured and less swarthy than the Algonquins, with finely cut faces, their dashing warriors and comely women formed a great contrast to the rather coarse-grained Algonquins. A few thousands in Ontario and Quebec—a few of these pure Indians—are memorials of a once powerful race, which on its flight to Canada also absorbed the Nottoways and Tutelas, two Indian fragments of doubtful affinities.

When in 1535 Cartier ascended the St. Lawrence, he found the present sites of Quebec and Montreal Wyandots or Hurons. occupied by the two villages of Stadacona on the cliff, and Hochelaga, the village of the rapids. The palisaded dwellings in which the natives lived were arranged together and were strong for defence against Indian weapons.

We have seen that it was these villages that gave the name to Cartier, by which he called the whole country Canada. It was in the language of the people of these two places that it was so-called. The word, as we have seen, was Iroquois, and the people of these villages were related to the great Five Nations and are known to us as the Wyandots or Huron-Iroquois. It has been lately surmised that the Cayugas, one of the Five Nations, lived at Hochelaga in company with these Hurons.

The besom of destruction had swept them and their villages on the St. Lawrence all away before 1600, and Champlain found only a few Algonquins—no doubt the Algonquins were the destroyers—living upon the village sites. To the west, however, the French found the Wyandots occupying the fertile country to the north of Lakes Erie and Ontario. They especially abounded on the shores of Lake Huron, which bears one of their names, for the story goes that on account of their mode of wearing their hair done up in peaks above their heads, the early French voyageurs exclaimed on seeing them, “Quelles Hures!”—what top-knots!—hence their name. Their language, physical features, and social life were akin to those of the Iroquois.

It was in consequence of an ancient feud, long before the advent of Europeans, that these Huron-Iroquois had separated themselves from the Five Nations. Their tradition was to the effect that originally they consisted of two villages, but that either by subdivision or alliance they grew to four. It is stated by Charlevoix on the authority of the early Jesuit missionaries that they associated with themselves other tribes about them.

It is in connection with the undoubted composite character of the Wyandots that a suggestion has been entertained by some that this union may have been between the remnant of the Mound Builders, and this tribe of the Iroquois on their career of conquest up the Ohio and on their appearance on the shores of the great lakes. This opinion gains much force from the fact that the Hochelagans were constructive in tendency, were agriculturists, were less wandering in their habits than the other tribes, and made pottery. There are traces among the Wyandots of a composite language, for the earliest annalists state that there were some of the Wyandots who called themselves “the people who speak the best language.”

The estimate of 50,000 of a population as given by the early chroniclers as belonging to the Hurons must be received with caution, as there can be no doubt that the good missionaries were in the habit of exaggerating the numbers of all the tribes. The Hurons were seemingly more accessible to the first Jesuit missionaries than their Iroquois relatives, or perhaps the French fathers looked upon them as being more within their district, living, as they did, north of the lakes. And yet it was among the Hurons that the bale-fires of torture rose with such lurid flames in the cruel deaths of the Jesuit fathers, Brébœuf, Lalemant, and others, though at the hands of the Iroquois.

The fierce wrath of the Iroquois was at last too great for the Hurons, and they swept them away like the early snow before the sun. A few Hurons at the “Ancient Lorette” near Quebec are to us the sole Canadian representatives of this once numerous people. With the Wyandots are usually associated as relatives the The Eries. Eries, who in times before the arrival of the French dwelt on the south of the lake bearing their name. This nation were called by the French the “Cats,” from the great quantity of lynx-skins which were obtained from the country they had formerly occupied. A nation called the “Attiwandoronk,” or The Neutrals. “Neutrals,” the kindred of the Hurons, lived on the borders of the Iroquois country. These gained their name from a long refusal to enter into the wars of either the Iroquois or their enemies, but in the end an Iroquois invasion exterminated them. Hurons, Eries, and Neutrals thus melted away before the whirlwind of savage fury of the Iroquois, which well-nigh destroyed New France as well.

It was as the French penetrated the interior, and reached greatest of the lakes, Superior, that The Sioux. they first met a travelling band of a new nation of Indians, of whom they had heard reports from the Ojibways, under the name of the “Nadouessi,” or “Enemies.” It was a band of Sioux, into whose hands Hennepin fell when he discovered the Mississippi, and with whom he ascended that river until they met Du Luth, the intrepid trader pushing his way inland from the western extremity of Lake Superior. These new-found Indians bore to the Frenchmen the characters of the Iroquois, and they were known as “people of the lake,” and were spoken of as the “Iroquets,” or “little Iroquois of the west.” Employing the latter part of the name Nadouessi, the French gave it their own termination and it became “Sioux.”

Not only were there a personal appearance and a warlike disposition in these Indians of the west resembling the Five Nations, but like them, they consisted, and still consist of a confederacy of united tribes. It was in allusion to this political feature that the Sioux nation called themselves “Dakotas,” or “Allies.” Isaunties; Yantons, Teetons, and Sissetons united together in one powerful league, to make themselves as terrible on the prairies as the Iroquois had done in the eastern forests. Not only so, but linguistic resemblances appear between Iroquois and Dakotas, in addition to the lithe, erect figure, aquiline nose, and keen intellectual features, which all who know the two families observe in both.

It is hard to resist the conclusion that Iroquois and Sioux are not different branches of one invading people, who as an American race of fiery Huns swept up the Mississippi valley—the one part ascending the Ohio to their northern home, the other up the Mississippi proper to be the scourge of the plains. We have already mentioned the fierce conflict that subsisted between Ojibways and Sioux. The Ojibways succeeded in pushing their conquests to the shores of Red Lake, the reputed source of the Mississippi itself. The vicissitudes of war and disease have much lessened the great Dakota family, but their numbers are said still to reach to 30,000, and they now live toward the western limit of their former wide domain, many of them in the vicinity of the Missouri river.

Stirred up to vengeance in 1862, against the encroachments of the whites, and by the bad faith of the American Government, the Sioux of Minnesota rebelled, and several exiled bands have in consequence taken up their homes on Canadian soil.

Strangely like the history of the Iroquois also was that of the Sioux, that on its northern limit one of the tribes broke off from the confederacy and lived as borderers on intimate terms with the Crees. These were the Assiniboines, or as their name implies, “Sioux on the Stony River.” Their separation from the Dakota nation took place long before the advent of Europeans, and was caused according to the tradition by a quarrel between two families of the Yantons at Lake Traverse, the headwaters at the same time of the Red River and of one of the branches of the Mississippi. A Dakota traitoress led to the re-enactment of the story of Helen of Troy. A feud of wide and serious extent ensued, and the Assiniboines became the inveterate enemies of the Sioux.

Thrown into intimate relations with the Crees, the two nations were largely intermarried, and dwelt together. Bands of Assiniboines are found scattered along the tributaries of the Saskatchewan River, many of whom are acquainted with the Cree language. The fur-trader, Alexander Henry, Jun., in his unpublished manuscript gives a full account of the Assiniboines along the Saskatchewan, and early in the century numbers them by thousands, popularly known as the “Stonies;” this band of Canadian Sioux live far west of their old haunts, having deserted the tributary of the Red River, which bears their name.

To the north of the country of the Crees live tribes with very wide connections, known as the Chippewyans or Tinné. “Tinné,” or “People,” the name, indeed, borne in their own language by many of the Indian tribes. They are also called Chippewyans—not Chippeways—a name they receive as referring to their own tradition that they sprang from a dog. This derivation seems likely as the Chippewyans have a great aversion to the flesh of the dog, and to the other savages who eat it. This tribe extends from the neighbourhood of Fort Churchill, on Hudson Bay, across the country on the north of the Missinipi, or English River, to Isle à la Crosse, and thence north to Lake Athabasca.

On this “Lake of the Hills” is to be seen Fort Chippewyan, founded as long ago as 1788, and the scene of many a fur-trading adventure. And yet west of this the widespread nation is found, for ascending the Peace River, and following its romantic course as it flows through the Rocky Mountains from the west, scattered Tinné families are still found. On the west side of the Rocky Mountains a race still speaking the Tinné tongue is met even to the Pacific Ocean, like a wedge between the Columbian Indians on the south and the Eskimo, who are driven back far to the north-west of Alaska.

Returning again to the east of our Canadian Alps, on the headwaters of the Saskatchewan, a tribe of Chippewyan affinities is found, known as the Sarcees. Sarcees. The extended character of this people may be seen, when it is stated that in Oregon, Arizona, New Mexico, that fruitful nursery of nations, Colorado, and even in North Mexico itself bands of these Athabascans appear. From their extensive area and remarkable survival, it might have already been inferred that the Chippewyans are a robust race. They are a medium-sized and persevering race; swarthy though their complexion is, they have neither the intensely black hair, nor the excessively piercing eye of the better-known Indians.

Living as they do where scanty nature gives but a meagre supply in return for great exertion, the Chippewyans have not developed a high civilization, though the fish and game are so plentiful that life is sustained easily enough. Sober in habits, timid in disposition, wandering over vast areas, sluggish in temperament, and unambitious so long as their bodily wants are supplied, the Chippewyans have been for upwards of a hundred years the servile dependants of the various fur companies, and have enjoyed the sunshine of peace, even if they have been strangers to an exuberant plenty.

A perfect chaos of race and language meets us as we examine the Indian tribes of British Columbia. British Columbia Indians. This gives colour to the theory that the Pacific coast is the side from which the Mongolian races and those from different Asiatic localities have peopled our continent. A Japanese junk and a drifted boat of natives from the Pacific Isles falling upon our shore but repeats the process of settlement by which the copper races subjugated unoccupied America from the West, as the whites have done from the East.

With this in view it does not surprise us to learn that among the 36,000 and more of British Columbian Indians there are five distinct stocks. To our unfamiliar ears the names of Hydahs and Nutkas, Selish and Sahaptans convey no meaning, but the fifth, Chinooks, is well known, not from their original language, but from a trading jargon which has grown out of it, which it were well to describe more fully. Their habits and modes of life have made a marked difference between these 30,000 or 40,000 Indians. While the fish-eating natives, those who either dwell on the sea-coast or along the rivers, are a dwarfed and despised race, no doubt from their being as constantly in their canoes as the ancient Parthian was on his horse, the inland Indian, accustomed to athletic pursuits and exciting sports, is physically and mentally a much better type of savage.

It but remains to notice among our aborigines on Canadian soil, the hyperborean savages, who Eskimo. with the Tinné reach the number of 26,000 souls. Dressed in a manner like the Christmas Santa Claus of our boyhood days, the Eskimo as we have become acquainted with him, chiefly in absorbing accounts of Arctic adventure, is surrounded by a species of romance.

Habited in his impervious seal-skin suit of clothing, dwelling in the hut built out of congealed snow, coming at times even to the frontier posts of the fur-trader, his wolf-like dogs, so characteristic of the north as to have taken their name from his, as “Huskies,” or “Eskies,” bearing him full speed across glacier or snowy plain, the Eskimo of Labrador, of the Copper-Mine River, of the Arctic Coast, or of the Alaskan Peninsula, awakens the keenest interest.

The seal and walrus on the coast and the reindeer on the land afford him his food, and the Ojibway meaning of his name, “the eater of raw flesh,” shows his notions of cookery. Known among themselves as the “Innuit,” or “People,” the different tribes that make up the homogeneous race, confined almost exclusively to the American continent, stretch along its northern coast for upwards of 3000 miles.

It is a mistake to suppose the Eskimo a race of dwarfs. They range between five feet four inches and five feet ten inches. It is their oily stoutness and thick skin clothing that give them a dwarfish appearance. The Eskimo is far from being the lowest of discovered men. Accustomed as he is rarely to pass beyond twenty-five miles from the sea-coast, it is largely for the sea and from the sea he manufactures his implements. The walrus-tusk and whalebone are worked up by him in a most skilful manner into harpoons, spears, spoons, ladles, ornaments, and trinkets of every description. The “kayak,” or one-seated skin boat of the Eskimo sailor, and the “umiak,” or flat-bottomed boat, rowed by his wife and family, are well known to all readers of Arctic story. Though fierce onsets have been made by the Eskimo on their enemies, they are usually a peace-loving and tractable people.

Our general survey of the Canadian aborigines thus comes to a close. Our 35,000 Algonquins, whether Ojibways, Crees, or Blackfeet; our Iroquois with their different tribal divisions; our Sioux, whether Teetons, Sissetons, or Assiniboines; our widespread Athabascans; our much-dreaded tribes of the Pacific slope, and Eskimo from the Arctic Circle, make up a motley assemblage, all of undoubted Asiatic origin, and with the exception of the last-mentioned, while widely differing in minor customs, yet all presenting physical, social, mental, and, so far, linguistic features, very much after the same type. We now undertake the description of the life and habits of our aborigines.

Section III.—Domestic Life of the Indians.

An old plate in the Ramusio of 1556, in connection with Cartier’s voyages, gives the first diagram we Dwellings. have of an elaborate Indian village. This was the plan of Hochelaga, a village belonging probably to the Alleghans, or, as we have seen, Huron-Iroquois. This had disappeared in three-quarters of a century. It was when he had crossed Lake Ontario, in his hostile expedition against the Iroquois, that Champlain saw the same Indian villages and the “long house” in which dwelt in some sort of communistic harmony, the several related families of the tribes of the Five Nations.

The Indian cornfields and the plots of cucumbers and melons surrounded the wooden erections, and these forest clearings made the Iroquois tenacious residents of the land in which they dwelt. We have already mentioned the birch-bark teepee of the Ojibway. Flattened slips of ash or hickory or some elastic wood were fashioned in the forest, and were thrust with sharpened end into the soil. Joined together at the top or bent over and again fastened in the ground, they formed a round-topped framework for the dwelling. Spread over the frame thus erected, the thick leathery bark of the birch-tree (Betula papyracea) made a covering to shed the rain and keep out the wind, and open enough at the top to allow the smoke from the fire of sticks, in the centre of the tent, to escape freely.

And yet to seek a new hunting-ground, or at the alarm of an advancing enemy, the few ashwood bents and tough birch-bark plates could be hastily folded into a small bulk and carried to another spot; or, if indeed all must be left behind, their place could be easily supplied again by the use of the axe in the forest anew.

Of the Ojibway the teepee was characteristic. When his art was at its best he could erect a central building, covered over with the rough bark of other trees, to be his council-house, or to shelter him in his dances, but this is believed to have been a feature of later times, and the idea to have been borrowed from the whites. When the transition is made to the western prairies by the Algonquin emigrations to localities where the birch-tree is not found, and life is exceedingly nomadic, a firmer material must be sought for tent-making. The skin of the deer or buffalo then becomes the material for the wigwam.

The art of tanning leather was possessed by the Indians, and the softness and suppleness of the tanned skin, produced by the skill of the Indian women, challenges admiration. Carrying their tent-poles in bundles fastened over the backs of their Indian ponies, the free ends dragging on the ground form a frame when tied together, on which are strapped the whole of the camp equipage. The rapidity with which an Indian tribe, in a large encampment of Plain Crees or Blackfeet strikes its tents, when the cry of the buffalo being near is passed about, might well excite the envy of a military quartermaster. Women and children do the work, and, mounted on her pony, the squaw of the prairie, with a papoose clinging to each side, if need be, hastens off at full speed with the ability of a Parthian rider.

The tents made of buffalo-skin are much loftier than the bark teepees of the Ojibways, and are much less likely to subject their occupants to the inevitable smoke of the wigwam, which among the Ojibways causes frequent affections of the eyes. On the skin tents of the plain tribes their owners exercise their decorative art. The exploits of the warrior may be represented in pictorial detail. His totemic symbol or crest marks his tent as it does every other important article of his possessions, and the tent leather is sometimes covered with figures in red and yellow ochre, or made by staining with the juices of certain plants.

The well-appointed tent of a plain Indian is an object of considerable value, and exhibits workmanship of a creditable kind. In order to guard the sleeping occupants of the tent at night from the arrows of an attacking foe, who would, according to Indian custom, approach the camp stealthily, and might dart arrows through the skin of the tent, wide strips two feet or more in width, of very hard and impenetrable leather, are stretched around the base of the tent; these were called by the early French voyageurs “Pour flêches.”

In plain and forest wigwam alike, seated on the ground around the smoky fire, the Indian family passed summer and winter, except that in the summer, in hot and dry weather, the fire might be kindled outside the tent, and in winter the tent was sheltered from the icy winds by being placed in the lee of rock, or thicket, or forest. The efforts of civilization have been exerted towards inducing many of the Ojibways, Crees, and Sioux to surrender their movable and insufficient dwellings, and accept the shelter of log-houses erected by Government and tribal labour; and if the picturesque birch-bark or leather wigwam is to be superseded, the Indian is for a generation likely to return in summer to his tent pitched outside of his log dwelling till the hot weather is past.

It has been said that the Indian from the limits of Canada to the Gulf of Mexico is the same, and General Characteristics. that as when you scratch a Turk you catch a Tartar, so a close examination of the Indian belonging to any of the tribes proves him an Asiatic. The same has been said of the Indian languages, of which we speak at greater length elsewhere. It has been said that one root language forms the basis of all the Indian dialects. Of this also we speak again. It is too early in the course of Indian ethnology to admit either of these positions, except in the most general way. Although the same instincts of reserve, cunning, and revenge may characterize them, yet every variety of character exists among the Indian peoples.

The dark eye of the same colour as the gloomy forests through which the Indian roams, can detect a stranger’s footprint on the ground, the track of the animal he is pursuing, or catch the first movement of enemy or prey at surprising distances. With unerring instinct he pursues the wary moose, or gains the first intimation of approaching game by the sound of moving leaves or crackling branches. With light foot he pursues the trail in the forest or on the prairie, which a white man can scarce discover; and, well accustomed to the indistinct path, the Indian traveller, followed by faithful squaw with her intoed gait, and the young men and maidens of his family, penetrates, for long distances, the forest or prairie in “Indian fashion.”

A sort of trot is the Indian’s favourite manner of journeying, and at the present day the Indian guide will follow the dog-train hastening over the frozen crust of snow for sixty or seventy miles a day with a midday rest alone. His keen powers of eye and ear, and his skilful use of hand and foot, make the Indian an invaluable guide in penetrating the fur-trader’s land, in exploring the unknown regions of the country, in running the rapids, in piloting the “brigade” of canoes, or even the steamers of the interior.

Living as he does in a northern clime, the Canadian Indian Dress. is compelled to protect himself by clothing. The skins of the animals he kills afford him this. If to the Eskimo the reindeer supplies everything needed for bodily use, so to the Indian in the far West, the buffalo, ere the coming of the white man, did the same; while the Algonquin must chiefly depend upon the uncertain supply of the moose or other deer and bear-skins of the chase. No doubt before the coming of the white man the Indian disported himself, except in the severest weather, destitute of clothing.

Of his leather covering perhaps the most distinctive The Moccasin. feature was the moccasin. Shaped exactly to the foot of the Indian it does not impede him on the march, while it protects his foot from the thorn or cutting rock. Made as the moccasin is of well-tanned leather, which is thoroughly soaked in oil, it will withstand much moisture, though dwellers in Indian countries are familiar with the careful Indian using his bare feet to bear him through the damp and mud, with, his moccasins tied together by the strings, carried dangling over his arm. The leggings of the Indian fringed by the leather being cut into thongs, were strong and comfortable, while the skin coat, ornamented with barbaric art, often sewn with coloured thread or decorated with porcupine quills, pleased the savage eye; and the deerskin supplied his mittens for the frosty weather.

The Indian wears his head uncovered, unless decorated for battle or the dance, even in the coldest weather. At times his hair hangs in unkempt locks, at others it is braided into two long plaits, which are tied at the ends with brilliant-coloured thongs and fall from behind upon his breast. On great occasions the head-dress of the Indian is gaudy. Eagles’ or hawks’ feathers are often used for decoration, and are combined into an imposing head-gear.

All Indians are fond of ornament. On special occasions the face is smeared with ochre and grease, and sometimes presents a grotesque appearance. Skilful native artists are able to paint the nose and face so that one view presents the appearance of an eagle’s beak, another the face of an owl, and from the other side that of a dog. The faces of the men are beardless, the hairs of the face being plucked out most persistently. Tattooing has been quite common among some tribes, the figures of animals, as is quite natural, being the usual devices made.

While the warriors often wear ornaments, such as a necklace of bears’ claws or a circlet of the scalps taken in battle, the dress of the women is at times highly ornamental. Necklaces of shells and brilliant stones are common; the petticoats and leggings are covered with high-coloured designs, and the early traders found difficulty in supplying a sufficiency of bandanna handkerchiefs and bright ribbons to satisfy the fair. Bands of silver and copper are often worn upon the arms, bone and horn ornaments are suspended from other parts of the clothing, especially on the breast, and the ear and nose rings are regarded as special objects of beauty.

Judged by their standard of development in the Handicraft. mechanical arts, the Indians rank low. Their wandering habits and the insecurity of life and property among them, have rendered progress impossible. Art and skill can only flourish where peace prevails. Yet the Indian is not lacking in the ability to make implements for his use. In the far past the Mound Builders seem to have possessed a greater knowledge of the arts than most of the present races of Indians. The faculty Pottery. of making pottery from a mixture of the coarse sand and clay found scattered everywhere was possessed by this lost race, as is well shown in their remains. While the Hochelagans of the time of Cartier and the Mandans of the Missouri of the present century have possessed this art, it is not known that any of the tribes now under review have possessed it.

The women of all the Indian tribes are skilled in basket-making, and while their baskets, stained with the juice of certain plants, are coarse and far from elegant, yet they are strong and serviceable. It is not unlikely that the Mound Builders used baskets in carrying together the earth of the mounds.

The instruments of war, fishing, and the chase are Stone implements. those most needed by the Indian, and his ingenuity first showed itself upon the materials lying near his hand. As in the older civilization of Europe, the stone age was also the first among the Indians. All of the Indian tribes seem to have had the knowledge of the manufacture of arrow-heads from the cherty nodules found in the primitive rocks. They have made flint scrapers from the same, formed hard stone chisels, polished and worked-down granite and crystalline limestone into axes and tomahawks, with a groove around the middle by which strong sinews were attached and handles fastened to them for use. Stone hammers formed in the same manner were formerly used, and among some of the western tribes are still considered as of value. The stone-cutters are also able to manufacture from the soft pipestone, sometimes grey, and in the western prairies bright red, pipes for smoking the several kinds of dried leaves and bark used for the purpose.

Among the implements of the earlier inhabitants of the country are found hooks, chisels, knives, Copper. and other articles made of copper. These, however, are usually of the native copper of the Lake Superior region, having, as shown by the microscope, the grains of silver found in that ore. As the copper in these implements was never melted, but had simply been beaten into shape, this manufacture comes rather under the stone age than under any succeeding. The only case known to the writer of an article of the nature of an alloy was found near the falls of Rainy River in the soil, in which a portion seemingly of a cup made with markings similar to those of the Mound Builders’ pottery was unearthed.

The advent of the white trader has largely put an end to the rude manufacture of stone implements. The scalping-knife and tomahawk, made of iron in any form to suit the Indian’s taste, was the first contribution made him by the white trader, and soon these weapons, which have come to be the emblems of Indian cruelty, superseded the wooden war-club, stone hammer, and bow and arrows, where the redman could purchase them.

In time also the trader entrusted, though at exorbitant prices, to the Indian tribes the firearms which were so great a source of wonder at first to the unsuspecting savage. It was the possession of firearms, obtained by the Ojibways from the French, which enabled that tribe to drive the Sioux out of their original possessions on Lake Superior, when the latter were not able to obtain equal weapons. In later years the Indians of the plains have been able to furnish themselves with the deadly Remington rifles, with their eighteen repeating charges.

No article of manufacture of the Indian indicates so much The Canoe. skill as the construction of the birch-bark canoe. The Indian himself so values it that he declares it to have been the gift of the Gitche Manitou, or Great Spirit. With the canoe the Indian can cross the deepest water, as tossed like a duck on the waves, his frail bark survives where heavier and more unwieldy craft would have been swamped. When the wind is favourable, fastening his blanket or skin robe between two poles, he erects them in the bow of his canoe, and is carried at a rapid rate before the wind. When he must ascend the river, and finds paddling against the current too difficult, attaching a long line of buffalo or deerskin to the bow of the canoe, with one in the canoe to steer it, he walks along the shore and “tracks” up the canoe in the shallow water.

Indian women manage the canoe as skilfully as the men. The canoe requires practice to control it well, and is dangerous to those unaccustomed to its use. It is a most interesting sight to meet on the bosom of some inland lake the Indian mother, with her half-dozen children, paddling with rapid speed, the youngest child of three or four years of age sitting statuesque, lest a careless lurch should overturn the uncertain craft. Its lightness is one of the chief merits of the birch-bark canoe when the passage is to be made from one river to another, or a dangerous rapid or fall is to be avoided. The canoe is then unladen; the cargo is carried by way of the portage to the smooth part again, while inverted on the head of the burden-bearing squaw the birch-bark boat is borne by the forest path or trail to the spot where it again receives its load.

When the winter seals up the river or lake, the redman The Snowshoe. is driven to the use of his snow-shoe would he pursue his game. The snow-shoe is as ingenious a device as can well be imagined. So light as to add but little weight to the foot, the frame of the snow-shoe is joined by a network of leather thongs. Its breadth, while compelling an awkward gait, yet effectually supports the walker on the softest snow. On the first use for the winter of the snow-shoes, the awkward step produces after long exercise an excessive soreness of the muscles of the leg, which the French fur-traders knew as the “mal de raquette.”

Living as the tribes we are considering do in their Food. northern home, where nature is not so bountiful as in the tropics, the food supply is always an object of anxiety. In seasons when game and fish are plentiful the Indian prospers; but in the long winter and the scarce seasons the aged, and the wives and children perish from hunger. Among the Indians of the forest the moose and deer are much prized, but are only captured by the well-skilled hunter. The small game, such as rabbits, is snared by the squaws during the times of winter scarceness.

It must be stated that the Indian does not feel bound by any of the strict requirements of the Jewish law as to his diet, and beavers, foxes, squirrels, and even the “gophers” of the plains are not excluded from appeasing his ravenous appetite. The buffalo on the western plains, and cariboo or reindeer of the Arctic regions, as well as the musk-ox of the same latitudes supply, or did until lately, the Indians and Eskimo who live in these localities with sufficient food as well as clothing. The flesh of the buffalo when newly killed, and especially his tongue, gave palatable food to the plain-hunters and their families, and the “dried meat” and “pemican” were prepared for winter use. It is surprising how on the dry plains of the west the flesh of the buffalo, exposed in strips in the open air without salt to preserve it, dries up without decaying.

Pemican was the name given to the most common preparation from the flesh of the buffalo. The flesh was cut in strips and pounded with sharp stones by the squaws. Dried for a short time in the sun, it was next thrust into bags made of the buffalo’s hide, into which, when it was nearly filled, was poured melted fat and marrow of the buffalo. This on cooling consolidated into a mass which will keep for years. The berries of the saskatoon tree (the Amelanchier Canadensis) are mixed with the pounded flesh in some instances, and “berry pemican” is thus formed. Unfortunately the advance of civilization has made in the last decade the buffalo an almost extinct animal. Indians in the Rocky Mountains pursue and capture for food the mountain sheep and goat in addition to the deer which become their prey.

The sea and river have always given of their treasure to the skilful Indian fisherman. The “titimeg” or “white-fish,” and the “ajidaumo” or sturgeon, with the pike or “jack-fish” have ever in the American rivers and lakes supplied a plentiful food. In some rivers of the American continent the sturgeon swarm in such numbers that to catch them requires no skill, and great numbers are slaughtered wantonly in the spring time. In the rivers of British Columbia the salmon are quite as plentiful, and afford food and means of merchandise to the natives.

Among the Iroquois and Hurons the food supplied by the game and fish was supplemented by the corn planted and cultivated by themselves. The beds of wild rice (Zizania aquatica) in many of the lakes and rivers supply food of a most wholesome kind. Where rice is found, the Indian settlements in its neighbourhood are deserted in the month of August, the rice-beds being penetrated by numberless harvesters, and the grain is beaten from the stalks with clubs into the canoes.

The cookery of the Indian is performed over open fires of sticks. Before the advent of Europeans, when clay pots were used, fire could be applied with ease to the well-constructed vessel; flesh was also broiled over the coals and formed what the French voyageurs called a “barbecue,” but the Assiniboine or Stoney Indians, as well as others, are said to have heated stones red-hot and then cast them into holes dug in the earth into which the flesh to be cooked was placed in water. On the Pacific coast the Indians to this day plait strong grass, and from this construct vessels, into which, filled with water, hot stones are thrown, and thus flesh is cooked.

After all, the Indian is largely a flesh eater, and living as he does by the chase the uncertainty of gaining his food has a most unsettling effect upon his habits. With him it is always either a “fast or a feast,” and the scene in a large Indian camp when a supply of buffalo flesh is brought in beggars description. Nothing could exceed the gluttony and over-feeding of these hungry savages.

By some it has been thought that the constant use of animal food has given the Indians their craving for the “ishketewabo,” or fire-water of the white man, while others have attributed it to the want of a regular and satisfying diet. Whatever be the cause, the fact is undoubted that the Indian on the verge of civilization has almost invariably a taste for the deadly strong drink of the trader. Rival fur-traders, and even nations fighting for supremacy in North America, have too often made use of strong drink to advance their projects with the Indians. So universally is this practice condemned that for many years both in Canada and the United States it has been illegal to sell or give spirits to an Indian.

Section IV.—Language, Manners, and Customs of the Indians.

Little can be said of a satisfactory kind of the Indian Language. languages. Sioux and Crees cannot understand each other speaking, though the general structure of their languages have points of resemblance. Cree and Ojibway, however, can hold converse together. The Indian languages seem to have been derived from the Malayan, though since the branching off the Malayan has been greatly developed. This would indicate an ancient date for the peopling of this continent.

And yet the Indian languages are not “isolating or monosyllabic like the Indo-Chinese group, agglutinating like the Ural-Altaic, nor inflexional like the Semitic and Aryan.” Strange as it may seem, according to Keane and Gannett the only language of a similar structure is that of the Basques of the Pyrenees, who speak the only “incorporating” language of the Old World, though the Indian languages far exceed that of the Basques in this peculiarity. The effect of the languages of the whites and Indians on each other has been marked.

Immediately upon the arrival of the whites in America, intelligent men among them began to study, classify, and reduce to a written form the various Indian dialects. Authors. Eliot, the famous missionary, and Heckewelder, of Bethlehem, have preserved for us the dialects of the Indians on the Atlantic coast, who are now extinct. For the languages of the tribes of Canada, we consult the vocabularies in the works of Baron De Lahontan (1690), J. Long (1791), Mackenzie (1801), Jonathan Carver (1774), Daniel Harmon (1820), Keating (1824), and especially the magnificent works of Henry Schoolcraft (1834); recently the Ojibway Dictionary of Bishop Baraga (1879), the Cree Dictionary of Father Lacombe (1873), and the Dakota Dictionary of Dr. Riggs.

One of the most remarkable linguistic phenomena in this connection is the Indian jargon among Chinook. the tribes to the west of the Rocky Mountains. This is a combination of Chinook and Clatsop words with French and English introduced among them. It is used in barter all along the Pacific slope. It resembles in its use the lingua franca of the Mediterranean, or the “pigeon-English” of China. The jargon originated about the beginning of this century, and chiefly from the meeting of the North-West and Hudson’s Bay Companies with the Indians.

Some of the words in use are worthy of notice. “Puss-puss” is the Chinook for cat; “King-Chautshman” is a King George man or Englishman; “Boston” designates an American; “Potlatch” is a gift; “Pasiooks” is a Frenchman; “Piah-ship” is a steamer, a corruption of “fire-ship;” “Cosho” is a pig, from the French “Cochon;” “Tahla” is a dollar, and so on.

The mode of representing his ideas in a pictorial manner is a marked peculiarity of the Indian. Numerous writers have given examples of this. Picture-writing. The “totem” of the Indian is an illustration of it. It is some object, generally an animal, used as a crest. On the “Roches Percées,” a group of remarkable rocks on the prairies, along the forty-ninth parallel, between the United States and the North-West Territories, are figured moose, horse, sturgeon, buffalo-heads, and the like as the totems or “symbols” of visitors, who have cut them on the rocks, as tourists to Niagara Falls and elsewhere do.

Very ingenious uses are made of picture-writing by the Indians. The writer has in his possession a drawing by Mawintopaness, chief of the Rainy River Indians, representing himself as an Indian in the centre, with one eye turned to the right to the missionary to see the way he points out, and the other to the trader on his left to show the necessity of also having an eye towards business; and the poor Indian is divided between the two opposing forces.

The same chief keeps a perfectly accurate account of what the Government gives him from year to year on a sheet of foolscap in pictures. A barrel of pork is a picture of a barrel with a rude drawing of a pig upon it; a box of tea is a square with steam puffing out of one corner of it; oxen and cattle, plough, harrow, saws, &c., are easily recognizable.

In connection with Indian writing a most interesting system, called the syllabic character, was invented The Syllabic. in 1840 by the Rev. James Evans, then a missionary on Hudson Bay. It consists in using triangles, circles, hooks, and other characters as symbols for syllables. It is now extensively used by the Crees of the Saskatchewan, who write letters with it on birch-bark to one another. It may be learned by an intelligent Indian in an afternoon or two, being quite simple.

The British and Foreign Bible Society, the Church of England, and the Roman Catholics use this character in printing Indian books. When Lord Dufferin was in North-Western Canada in 1878, he heard of this character for the first time, and remarked that distinguished men had been given a place in Westminster Abbey for doing less than the inventor of the syllabic characters had done.

Among the Indians it has been the custom to record events by the use of wampum belts or by knots of particular kinds. The Indians have a considerable skill in geography and astronomy, though, like all savage peoples, they regard celestial phenomena with awe. The divisions of time are carefully noted by the various tribes. Some of the nations, such as the Blackfeet, regard the sun as a “Manitou” and worship him. A number of the constellations are known to the Indians.

The mode of reckoning time is by “nights” rather than by days. The greater divisions of time are counted by “moons” or months. Among the Crees the months are as follows: May, “Frog-moon;” June, the moon for birds laying eggs; July, the moulting month; August, the moon when the young birds fly; September, the month when the moose casts his horns; October, rutting moon; November, hoar-frost or ice-moon; December, whirlwind moon; January, very cold month; February, big moon or old moon; March, eagle moon; April, “goose moon.”

A people so devoted to a wandering life as the Indians, must become noted for excellence in violent and Sports. exciting games. It is true the restless tendencies of the Indian tribes found an outlet in the frequent wars carried on. When the young men of the tribe became wearied with “inglorious ease” at home, a war-party was organized, and frequently wars were undertaken with no other motive than that with which a Russian autocrat is said to incite a European war, viz. for the purpose of creating a public interest.

But athletic sports of various kinds are earnestly followed in times of peace. Chief among them is the game of ball, which has been preserved in what may be called the Canadian national sport, that of “lacrosse.” In this the ball is thrown by a “stick,” some four feet long, made of tough wood, bent round at the top, and the hooped part of the instrument, which is ten or twelve inches wide, covered by a network of strong thongs of buffalo or other skin. Among some of the tribes the game is played by each player having a stick in each hand; among others, by the player only carrying one. Any number of chosen players can engage in the game. In the great camps of the western plains as many as 800 players take part in the game. The contestants are divided into two equal parties, and the object is to pass the ball through the opposing goals, which are made by two poles some ten or twelve feet high, with a bar extending across the top. The game is one of the most exciting that can be imagined.

Violent encounters are constantly occurring, in which, amidst the dust and confusion, the ball is for the time entirely lost from sight. Tripping, pushing, and the roughest jostling all seem a part of the game. At times serious conflicts take place at which blood is drawn. The writer has seen a Caughnawaga Iroquois receive a blow with a stick on the face that split his nose completely open.

At times the game of ball with the sticks described, or with instruments resembling those used in the British game of “shinty,” is played upon the ice, and creates great interest, though skill is not so easily manifested in the management of the ball as in true lacrosse. Competitions with bow and arrows are common, and these weapons are handled with great skill in shooting at marks. Races on foot are frequent among the Algonquin and Iroquois young men, but on the western prairies, where horses are abundant in the Indian camps, horse-racing is one of the most absorbing sports, and feats of horsemanship perfectly astounding to the white onlookers are performed.

High-spirited and excitable as the Indians are, almost all their games afford the opportunity for taking Gambling. “wagers”—a custom in which too often the white man in his sports has not succeeded in escaping the savagery of the redman, whom he follows. The ball-play, the foot-race, and the horse-race were formerly marked by the men, women, and children of the camp, and even whole tribes, wagering wampum belts, household utensils and possessions, tents, robes, and even horses, with one another. Wives were at times in the excitement of the game bartered off by their husband.

Leaving the athletic sports of the Indians and coming to the amusements of the camp in quieter times, it may be stated that the Indians are inveterate gamblers. Some element of chance makes almost every game of absorbing interest to the redman. The game of “plum-stones” consists in painting one side of each stone of one particular colour, and then gambling with the parti-coloured stones as dice are used. The game of seeds consists of taking some hundreds of pieces of seeds of the same size, separating them into groups, and selecting in order to obtain a certain lucky number. Another game among the Crees is that of hiding any small object in one of several moccasins, and then leaving the proper one to be guessed, as is done by the thimble-rigger or juggler in society called more civilized.

By these and other like methods the Canadian redman gains mental excitement of as extravagant and wild a kind as do the gamesters of Baden-Baden and Monte Carlo in European society. Indian gamblers will continue their play for forty-eight or sixty hours without rest or food, and in that time will often lose all the money, guns, and horses of which they are possessed.

But probably the most remarkable thing about the social life of the Indians is the elaborate system of dances, many of which indeed lose their character of mere amusements, and are identified with the social and religious ideas of the peoples.

The dance seems to have been, and to be an outlet for the several emotions that rise in the breast of The Dances. the savage in connection with his life. To him, a wanderer, the procurement of food is one of his deepest objects of thought. Accordingly the change of the seasons, the time for seeking the different varieties of game or food, and the abundance of anything ministering to his bodily wants are sufficient reasons for an overflow of animal spirits.

The exciting preparation for war and the victorious return gave rise to a special class of histrionic celebrations. Veneration for the departed, or great admiration of the living were also connected with a special exuberance of feeling.

It is to be noted that the wild passion of an Indian dance is heightened as the sport proceeds, until, like the reeling dervishes of the East, the dancers are brought to a pitch of absolute frenzy. In all the Indian dances there are common features recognizable. Music is an invariable accompaniment. In the earlier times bands of men or women sang, and thus supplied the weird sounds with something of rhythm in them.

In later times a species of tambourine with rattles upon the sides is beaten by bone or stick. This rude instrument, known as the “tom-tom,” is usually beaten by the women, and secures a certain regularity of motion among the dancers.

When the dancers have painted themselves and, fantastically dressed, await the beating of the “tom-tom,” suddenly the dance, which is usually carried on by the men, is begun by any one to whom the impulse comes rising up and slowly beginning to circle round the object which is the occasion of the dance. The motion of the dancer is that of a strange flexure of the body, as if the joints of the lumbar region were all relaxed. As the speed of the dancer increases he accompanies his motions with a strange sound, “E—he—e—he—ye—ye—yeah,” interrupted by an occasional imitation of the scream of some wild bird of prey.

One of the commonest dances is the “beggar’s dance,” in which on receiving bags of flour or flitches of bacon from the settler on the frontier, the redmen indulge their joy for hours together in this wild sport to the delectation of the settler and his family. The fire-dance, probably a relic of some ancient fire-worshipper’s custom, consists in the usual dance, while one of the dancers carries in his wild career around the circle a burning coal of fire between his teeth.

Among the Indians who follow agriculture, the approach of harvest is the occasion for the dance of thankfulness to the “Manitou” for his gift of the cornfield. A boiling pot of maize is placed in the centre of the circle of dancers, and each dancer, armed with a stalk of Indian corn, engages in the wild merriment. Among the tribes of the plains one of the greatest dances was that to the buffalo. This has now almost disappeared from the scarcity of the buffalo. If the buffalo were becoming scarce the Indian council decreed a dance. Then the hunters came forth each with his mask, consisting of a buffalo head and horns, which he wore, while he carried the buffalo spear in his hand. Day after day, by fresh relays of dancers, the dance was kept up until the buffalo come, and the camp again rejoiced in plenty.

As the winter approaches hunger begins to stare the savage in the face; the snow presents obstacles for his pursuing the game with ease. On the fall of the first snow among the Ojibways a pair of snow-shoes is erected on lofty poles in the middle of the ring; the dancers, dressed in leggings of fur, and their feet shod with snow-shoes, show their gratitude to the Manitou for the snow-shoes which enable them to overtake the game.

Another series of these Indian orgies is connected with the paying of honour or respect. When a distinguished visitor is received among the Dakotas, it is the custom for the chiefs and older men to dance in the presence of the honoured guest who is present, and it is said that this is one of the few cases in the prairie country where women are allowed to take part in the dance.

The memory of the departed brave is also honoured by these savage nations in what is called the dance to the medicine of the brave. The companions of the departed brave assemble around the lodge of the widow. The medicine-bag of her departed spouse is hung on a green bush before her door, and under this she sits and weeps while the dancers career in wild fury around the tent. It was, however, to have been expected that the chief extravagances of these savage sports should be observed in connection with war.

The “sun-dance” is the ordeal by which the young braves show endurance and receive their degrees of honour. A booth of branches is erected; the medicine-man directs proceedings; from the centre of the booth and attached to a high post a strong rope or line is suspended; on the end of this is a strong hook; an incision is made under the muscles of the breast of the candidate for honour, and the hook is fastened in it; then while the music prevails the young warrior throws himself back from the hook, and for a considerable time he is held up till the muscle has been drawn out sometimes six or eight inches. If without flinching he endures the ordeal, he is declared worthy of the dignity of a brave, and fit to go upon the war-path. So high is the Indian ideal of endurance!

Among the most characteristic of these Indian symbolic rites is the discovery-dance, also connected with war. This is performed without music. It represents the various stages of an Indian attack: the skulking approach, the creeping up to the unexpecting enemy through the underwood and grass, the falling on the prey, the deadly tomahawking, the snatching off the scalp, and the victorious return. It is indeed a pantomime of Indian warfare, and is often adopted to secure recruits for the warlike expedition by inflaming the imagination of the spectators.

Of all the wild orgies we have described none is to be compared to the terrible scalp-dance. This is performed by the victorious war-party on its return. For fifteen summer nights it is continued, and while engaged the participants are more like demons than men. They leap, howl, and cry like wild beasts, brandish their weapons, dangle the scalps which they have lately taken from their enemies, and become so infuriated in many instances that like raving wild beasts they creep on the ground and seem to be devouring their enemies.

And yet when meek-eyed peace returns, it also is celebrated by the pipe-dance. The medicine-man seats himself with the calumet or peace-pipe and commences to smoke it. As the music begins, the first dancer springs forth, and seizing another drags him into the ring. The two dancers now seize a third; and so on the sport continues until all are gathered into the ring, and with the wildest enthusiasm the return of goodwill and the reign of brotherly love are shown forth. Thus in common life, in honour, and in war, do the savage peoples of America show forth in an ingenious and emphatic manner the ruling emotions that rise within them.

Section V.—Social, Political, and Religious Organization.

The organization of an Indian tribe is one of the things perplexing to the white man. It is a strange mixture of aristocratic precedence and democratic equality. Out of the Indian’s strong respect for age grows the precedence given the old men. The old men, no doubt, lament the waywardness of the young warriors, but the council is the tribunal that decides on war or peace, spares life or thrusts forth to execution, and is the ultimate source of appeal for everything in the life of the tribe.

The family is the basis of the tribal relation, and accordingly there is a hereditary position held by distinguished families, but this seems to be modified by the decisions of the council. Among the Indian races there is a strong sentiment as to the inferiority of woman. Woman is the mother of the family and the slave of the family. Woman must strike the tent and erect it, must do the great share of the burden-bearing on the march, must paddle the canoe on the voyage and portage the cargo about the rapids—she, in short, but attends the footsteps of her stalwart lord, like the spaniel, to fetch and carry. When age creeps over the matron, she is then regarded as a burden, and is but a “mindimoié”—a miserable old woman. To send a woman into the presence of a council to speak with ambassadors from another tribe is to cast thorough contempt upon the visitors.

The young warriors are the hope of the tribe, and through many severe ordeals they are trained to endurance ere they receive the rank of warrior; they must metaphorically win their spurs. In deeds of daring or even of cruelty they must gain the renown which gives them standing. Fondness for her children is a mark of the Indian mother, and consideration for their wives and children is a feature of all the Indian tribes even in times of extremest peril. The mixture of the patriarchal and the democratic in Indian society gives rise to many misunderstandings and heartburnings.

Personal prowess is the guerdon of honour, and is yielded willing recognition. The medicine-man or the war-chief may be more powerful than the chief, and it is often the case that the chief is completely outnumbered and forestalled by the young men or by ambitious disturbers. Family feuds often break up tribes, and many great peoples are but the descendants of separate families who have broken off and set up an autonomy of their own.

Among the Algonquin Ojibways there seems little faculty for political organization. The wandering habit that has distinguished them alike from their eastern limit among the Pequods to the furthest western Crees, has induced a disintegrating tendency among them. No cornfields have held them to one spot; no “long house” has sheltered them in one common village. Their food is game and fish; their birch-bark teepees can be moved with ease; their canoes are always at hand; and if earth or river fail to supply their food they journey far away to other haunts. The Algonquins are the New World gipsies. A Pontiac or Tecumseh may have had his dream of uniting his Algonquin fellow-countrymen into a grand league against the white man, but it was the wild, short vision of a leader sinking with his people into the abyss of extermination.

It has been otherwise with the Iroquois and Sioux. In each of these nations there was a confederation. And yet this seems to have been but little more than a league of peace between the tribal subdivisions, and of co-operation for attacking the other nations, or defending themselves when attacked. The wampum belts must summon the gathering; the council fire must burn; and the general decision be made before war or peace could be determined, but all the personal animosities and the tendencies toward disintegration which distinguished the Highland clans in former days are seen among the members of the confederacy.

The Iroquois seem to have allowed one of their number, the Tuscaroras, to drift away from them, but again in 1712 took back the wanderer, and in later times they became the Six Nations, while known to the early New England settler as the Five Nations. Feud and hatred, as we have seen, separated one of the Dakota nations, the Assiniboines, from their confederation. It is, however, conceded that the Iroquois and Sioux have had more political capacity than the Algonquins or most other North-American Indians.

The deficiency of social or political organization in the best, however, may be seen in the absolute helplessness of the tribe in the presence of the avenger of blood. If by accident or malice life was taken, the manslayer had no protector. The friends of the slain became the avengers—blood alone could atone for blood. No law of restraint, no mode of compensation, in fact no social remedy could be found; and cases have been known where the obligation to take vengeance for some wrong done has been the only barrier from keeping individuals of Indian tribes from attaching themselves to the Christian Church and listening to the entreaties of its missionaries.

The Indian with his strong imagination peoples nature with spirits; but his conception of a Great Religion. Spirit, or “Gitche Manitou,” is probably a purer conception of Deity than that of most savage nations. Like many of the Asiatic peoples, the Indian has a conception of a “Matche Manitou” or Evil Spirit of great power. While he worships the Great Spirit, he is impressed with the necessity of propitiating the prince of evil spirits.

It is out of this latter idea that the office and duties of the “medicine-man” grow. He is in some sense the representative of the priestly class, and yet he is rather a sorcerer or wizard holding converse with the Evil Spirit. He appeals to the superstition of the tribe to gain his own ends. His assumption of peculiar supernatural agency has often led to his being greater than the chief in influence. Ofttimes he rises to the position of war leader or military commander. There have been the Shawnee “prophet,” the brother of Tecumseh, and the Sioux leader, Sitting Bull, who thus rose to pre-eminence.

The mysterious fear of evil is found in the general belief among the Indian tribes of the Wendigo, one who they think has become a cannibal, or one who they believe is thoroughly given over to the Evil One, and who lurks in the forest to seize and devour the unwary traveller. The medicine-man is also the physician of the tribe. With herbs and medicines as well as by incantations he cures the sick. Pretending to suck out the disease through bone or stone tubes, invoking the spirits, and raging in his fury like a priestess of old on her tripod, the medicine-man is a potent factor, usually for evil, in the tribe. The superstitious regard of the Indians for “medicine,” by which they understand “magic,” is amazing.

Several years ago a deputation of chiefs visited the President at Washington from the Far West. On their return they told of such marvellous sights that they were not believed, the opinion of the tribe being that they had been bewitched, or had “great medicine.” A daring North-West trader on the Pacific coast, fearing he would be overcome by the numbers of the savages, produced a bottle, stating that it contained small-pox, and that all he needed to do was to take out the cork and they were doomed. Their superstitious dread was so great that they immediately submitted.

The medicine-men also use their conjuring arts in bringing rain in time of drought, and in stopping rain when there is an excess. The cult of the Indians seems generally Asiatic. The eagle is an object of veneration, and an eagle-dance is performed in its honour.

The dog-feast and dog-dance are also religious rites. The sacrificial character of their dog-feast is very remarkable. If possible the dog must be white and spotless; his flesh is made into broth; in the dance portions of his flesh and liver are eaten raw in the frenzy of the occasion, and much reverence thus gathers round this animal—a companion of man in every clime.

The funeral ceremonies of the Canadian Indians vary considerably. Among the Algonquins the usual method of burial is in graves at prominent points on the river banks, or in beautiful spots in the forest. The grave is dug a few feet deep, and the body, often enveloped in birch-bark, interred therein. Over the grave an erection, like the roof of a house, is built a foot or two high. This is sometimes entirely covered by pieces of wood; at others, with white cotton cloth. At the head of the grave food is placed, and often a piece of tobacco, while weapons for the chase or for defence are buried with the body.

On the western prairies different customs in part prevail. The Sioux mode of burial is to lay the corpse on platforms erected on posts, or constructed on the branches of trees, though the Sioux now bury in graves.

Of primitive beliefs there are several which are very Religious Traditions. widespread among the Indians. One of these is that of the Deluge. The earth was, according to their story, dark for a time; the medicine-man at last saw light in the north; but soon the mountains of waters came rolling over them. All were destroyed except a few families, who built a raft and escaped. The Iroquois, Delawares, and other tribes have variations of this same tradition. All the Indian nations believe in a future state. They believe that the dead must journey far to the west; that a river divides the present from the future; that a narrow and slippery crossing must be passed to reach the other side; that rocks are hurled at all who cross; that from these the good escape and enter into the happy hunting-grounds. The bad who cross are struck by the flying rocks, and, driven from the crossing, fall into the river beneath, which is filled with dead animals and fishes, and all evil things. The lost, they believe, live in sight of the abode of the blessed, but cannot reach it.

Among the Blackfeet some strange religious rites prevail. On a lonely hill a stone with certain circles and other markings is placed. Hither women who have lost their children or husbands retire to worship. A sharp stone lies on the other stone. The worshipper cuts off one or more joints of the finger and offers this as a propitiation to the Deity.

Among the most remarkable traditions of the Indian tribes is one exceeding the wonders of the Arthurian legend, or the Nibelungen Lied. It is evidently a pious and devout tradition. Hiawatha was a person of miraculous birth, and bears this name among the Ojibways. Among other tribes he was called Michabou, Chiabo, Manaboio, and Tarenyawagan. His mission was to clear their rivers and forests and fishing-grounds. He was to teach peace and its arts. The myth is plainly the product of the heart of man universal seeking after some higher power to help it, and the hereditary belief that a celestial visitant was to come to rescue white and red man alike. We are indebted to Longfellow for his making Hiawatha a household word, and we hail such a tradition as showing the common origin of white and red men, and of all the nations which dwell on the earth.

But little value can be attached to the Indian traditions Traditions of Origin. about their own origin. The Algonquin story, where it departs from the general theory that the Gitche Manitou created their nation in their own rock-bound coast, is that their nation emerged from a great opening in the Rocky Mountains. This is probably a shrewder guess as to the direction of their long-lost home in Asia than most of the other tribes possess.

The Sioux hold that they were created in their own land of the Dakotas by the Great Spirit, who is known to them as “Wahkan Tanka.” They have, they say, always occupied their present home. According to their tradition it was a Frenchman who first of white men visited them. He carried a gun which greatly interested them. On his showing its power upon a dog they fled, calling the new visitant “Thunder.”

The Chippewyans believe that the world was all a wide ocean, and only one inhabitant was on it, that a huge bird with eyes of fire, which flashed like lightning, and the flapping of whose wings was thunder. At its mighty touch the ocean heaved up the land; and by it were produced all living creatures, except the Chippewyans themselves, who sprang from the too much-valued ancestry of a dog. They regard themselves as intruders in their present country, having traversed a great lake to escape from a very wicked people in their old home. They suffered greatly on the voyage. Their ancestors lived to a great age, even till their feet were worn out with walking, and their throats had failed from eating.

The Columbian Indians have a still stranger account of their origin. There was a time, they say, when only birds, beasts, and fishes existed on the earth. Whence the first Indian came they know not, but he was of short stature, and had heavy arms and legs. He killed himself—why, it is not stated; but as the worms were devouring the uncovered corpse a bird attacked the destroyers, and the slain man revived. The restored Indian then married the bird, and from the alliance sprang the present Indians.

Such vague and trivial accounts give us no clue to the original home of the Indians; but they are plainly guesses, and as such not so far behind the theories of those who, without the aid of the Creator, make effort to construct the world of things inanimate and animate. It must be toward sources outside of the empty imaginings of crafty medicine-men we must look for any light as to the affinities and original home of the Indian tribes.


(References: “Œuvres de Champlain,” 6 volumes, Quebec, 1871; Charlevoix, “Histoire de la Nouvelle France,” 6 volumes; “Histoire de la Nouvelle France,” Lescarbot, Paris, 1866; “Histoire de l’Acadie Française,” Paris, M. C. Moreau, 1873; “Acadia,[1] a Lost Chapter of American History,” P. H. Smith, 1884; “History of Acadia,” James Hannay, 1879; “History of Canada,” vol. i., F. X. Garneau, 1862; “Short History of the English Colonies in America,” by H. C. Lodge, Harper, New York, 1881; “History of the United States,” B. J. Lossing, New York, 1857; “History of the American People,” Arthur Gilman, Boston, 1883; “Concise History of the American People,” J. H. Palton, New York, 1883; “History of the People of the United States,” J. Bach M’Master, Appleton, New York, vol. i., 1885, vol. ii., 1886.)

[1] The name “Acadia,” in French Acadie or Cadie, is said by some to be derived from “Aquoddie,” the Indian name for a fish found on its shores.

Those were red-letter days when the great English navigators were making the world ring with the account of their discoveries. The Italian Ramusio had done good service in the middle of the 16th century, in keeping a record of the half-century of naval glory immediately preceding his time; and now a Puritan divine, Richard Hakluyt, preacher, laid all succeeding times under obligation by chronicling, in addition, the deeds of the navigators. At the beginning of the 17th century Western Europe was considering what might be secured from these discoveries. To Spain, with her insatiable thirst for gold, Central America became the hunting-grounds for the most bloodthirsty and unprincipled band of marauders the world has ever seen. Spanish America, to this day in revolution and unrest, is paying the penalty of those fearful scenes. The French had a dream of an unbounded empire for church and king. The thought of France in her occupation of the New World was that in Nouvelle France extending to the Mississippi, and in Louisiana to the Gulf, her reputation might be maintained.

The Dutch, famed for their love of gain, looked on New Amsterdam as simply a meeting-place with the natives for the exchange of furs, and for obtaining the excitement that comes to the shrewd in successful bargaining and trade.

To the English, as they conned over the recitals of Hakluyt, dreams of a widely different kind appeared. The merry cavalier, it is true, looked upon the new land as a field for wild adventure. The killing of game and catching of fish in the New World, the masterful striving with the savages, the transplanting across the sea of English sports, and the founding of family names amidst the freshness of a New World life, opened up an enchanting vista to the young gentleman of birth and education.

But there were sober-minded men who read another meaning in Hakluyt’s story—men in whose lives the shadows were more frequent than the sunshine. It became evident to the deeper thinkers among these Puritans that the Stuart line was hostile to liberty, and so across the ocean they looked for a refuge on the rock-bound coast that might prove to them the citadel of God. Amid the chaos of religious thought in England there were others also who in their creed of separation and division desired to be free from all government, and who hoped to find in the New World such a radical Utopia.

Further there were the followers of Fox, who in the intolerant spirit of the time were given but little rest in their attempts to bring society back to first principles, and secure an enforced simplicity. The Quakers looked to the New World for a peaceful haven.

The Roman Catholics, too, finding England a land of possibilities to them, sought, under the distinguished leadership of Lord Baltimore, to found a free state on the American coast; and last, in the untilled acres of the New World, philanthropists like Oglethorpe saw the opportunity not only for strengthening the power of England abroad, but also of giving comfortable homes and independence to many in the Old World, whose lot was one of degradation and penury.

All of the movements named were not only entertained as plans, but all succeeded in gaining foothold on the Atlantic shore, and in forming colonies, and, in some cases, afterwards independent states.

Section I.—The French in America.

Acadia is the land of poetry and legend. Its early Acadia. days were days of fierce conflict, deceit, and blood. It was the border-land of English and French dispute, and even of Catholic and Calvinist bickering. The figure of Champlain appears upon this scene before we find him in Canada; and well had it been had his wisdom and strong arm been retained to Acadia in her misfortunes. It was in the service of a rich merchant of St. Malo, named Du Pont, or better 1599. known as Pontgravé, that Captain Chauvin, of the French navy, first went forth. This was under a patent, subsequent to that of Marquis de la Roche, who in 1598 took up the title of Lieutenant-General and Viceroy of Canada, left vacant by the disaster 1547. of Roberval on his last voyage. The superstitious sailors of Brittany thought the track of the lost Seigneur unlucky. Captain Chauvin having died, 1602. Chevalier de Chaste succeeded him. In the following year (1603) the expedition—a fruitless one—ascended the St. Lawrence to Hochelaga. On that voyage were the men destined to guide the affairs of the French in America. These were Pontgravé, Champlain, and the Sieur de Monts.

De Monts, whose family name was Pierre du Gua, was De Monts. in high favour with King Henry IV. He was a Huguenot or Calvinist nobleman, had seen hard service, and had achieved renown in the French wars. Preferring Acadia to Canada, on account of its supposed milder climate, he obtained, under the charter of the old company, for himself from the king an exclusive grant of the territory from 40° to 46° N., and went forth dignified as Lieutenant-General of Acadia.

Inducing a number of his co-religionist merchants of Rochelle to join him, with four ships and a gay party he went forth to the New World. Champlain commanded the fleet. Led by the novelty of the enterprise, many volunteers had joined De Monts. Of these one of the most distinguished was the Baron de Poutrincourt. His family name was Jean de Biencourt. Like De Monts he also had fought bravely in the wars of the king. He had now resolved to make a new home for himself and family in the New World. The plan of the expedition was that one vessel should go up the St. Lawrence to trade for furs; another under Pontgravé—the indefatigable explorer—was to scour the Gulf of St. Lawrence to drive off poachers on the fishing-grounds; while the remaining two vessels, under De Monts himself, were to carry out the colonists, about 120 in number, consisting of artisans and agriculturists, clergy and gentlemen. The Huguenot leader in charge of so important a company had the March 7th, 1604. honour of going forth to establish the first permanent settlement in the territory now included in the Dominion of Canada.

The expedition had a good voyage, for in one month the New World was reached, though De Monts lost his course, and arrived at Cape la Have, near the present Lunenburg in Nova Scotia. Finding the coast rocky and inhospitable the colony re-embarked, rounded Cape Sable, the south-west extremity of Acadia, entered what they called “La grande Baie Françoise,” now the Bay of Fundy, the “Fond de la Baie” of the old French maps.

Running into the narrow passage known as St. Mary’s Bay, the expedition advanced into a narrow channel between the hills, which opens out into a capacious harbour, which Champlain describes with admiration, and to which, with the foresight of a pioneer, he gave the name of Port Royal. The Baron de Poutrincourt was also captivated with the beauty of the now well-known Annapolis Basin, and obtained a grant of it for himself from De Monts, a privilege afterwards confirmed by the king.

Under Champlain’s leadership much of the neighbouring coast was explored and named, and the mouth of the large river running from the north into the Bay of Fundy, now the St. John of New Brunswick, was reached.

The coast having been largely explored by Champlain, and the patience of De Monts and his colonists exhausted, the choice of a place for settlement was made up Passamaquoddy Bay, on an island of the Ste. Croix River. On their island home operations were at once begun by the colonists. On the north side was built a fort, outside of it a barrack; and other buildings, including residences and a chapel, were erected, while on the west side of the Ste. Croix a mill was built.

The severity of a New World winter was a rude surprise to the unprepared colonists: wood and water failed them; the Indians seemed hostile; and the scourge of Cartier’s early settlement, the scurvy, cut down the colony to forty-four. The spring came to find De Monts sadly discouraged. The disheartened colony determined to seek another situation. Along with Champlain, De Monts explored the coast southward to Cape Cod, but no place excelling in their eyes their first-chosen spot, Port Royal, could be found.

Deserting their buildings on the Ste. Croix, they crossed the Bay of Fundy, and found on the shores of the spacious Port Royal Bay a resting-place. Shortly after Pontgravé arrived from France with forty new settlers and supplies for the colony, and new heart was given to the discouraged colony. Port Royal now seemed to offer everything needed for a successful settlement, beauty and safety of position, plenty of timber, good fisheries, nearness to the rich marsh-land, and a mild climate. Here then dwellings and storehouses were built, and a fort as well.

The colony firmly established, De Monts returned to France. The succeeding winter again proved very irksome to the new settlers, and on the return of spring, at the request of the colonists, Pontgravé again explored the coast to the south, seeking a more favourable spot.

But De Monts found his pathway in France surrounded with difficulties. The Rochelle merchants who were partners in the enterprise desired a return for their investments. The Baron de Poutrincourt, who was still possessed with the desire to make the New World his home, proved of assistance to De Monts. De Poutrincourt returned to Acadia and encouraged the July 27th, 1606. colonists, who were on the verge of deserting Port Royal.

With De Poutrincourt emigrated at this time a Parisian advocate, named Marc Lescarbot, who was of great service to the colony. During the absence of De Poutrincourt on an exploring expedition down the coast, Lescarbot drained and repaired the colonists’ fort, and made a number of administrative changes, much improving the condition of the settlers. The following winter was one of comfort, indeed of enjoyment, for Lescarbot says, “They lived as luxuriously as they could have done in the street Aux Ours in Paris, and at a much less cost.”

In May, however, the sad news reached the colony that the company of the merchants on whom it depended had been broken up. Their dependence being gone, on the 30th of July most of the colonists left Acadia for France in vessels sent out for them. For two years the empty buildings of Port Royal stood, a melancholy sight, with not a white person in them, but under the safe protection of Memberton, the Micmak chief, who proved a trusty friend to the French.

The opposition to the company of Rochelle arose from various causes. In addition to its financial difficulties the fact of De Monts being a Protestant was seized on as the reason why nothing was being done in the colony to christianize the Indians. Accordingly when 1608. De Monts, fired with a new scheme for exploring the north-west passage, turned over the management of Acadian affairs to De Poutrincourt, who was a sincere Catholic, some of the difficulties disappeared. It was not, however, till two years later that 1610. arrangements were made for a new Acadian expedition.

Under the blessing of the Roman Pontiff the new enterprise began. With the reorganized movement was associated Jessé de Fleucher, a priest of Lantage. Soon, dismantled Port Royal was revived again. Houses were occupied along the river by the artisans and labourers, and successful efforts were made to convert the Indians. Twenty-one Indians became Christians in the first summer. Chief Memberton, his son, and his son’s wife were among these, and were baptized with the names of Henri, Louis, and Marie, the names of the King, Dauphin, and the Queen.

Baron de St. Just, eldest son of the Baron de Poutrincourt, was despatched to France with the news of these conversions. Great joy was expressed at Court. Two Jesuit fathers were named to accompany the messenger on his return. An unexpected obstacle intervened. The merchants of Dieppe, who controlled the ship going to Acadia, were Huguenots, and they refused the Jesuits a passage. At this juncture, Madame de Guercheville, a noble lady, purchased the interest of these traders in the ship, and the fathers were allowed to go. Arrived at the colony again, De St. Just took charge of it, and allowed his father to return 1611. to France. At this time it contained but twenty-two persons. Its difficulties and trials were many.

About this time, Madame de Guercheville sent another colony from Honfleur to seek a place on the coast of the New World. The Jesuit father who accompanied it had quarrelled with De St. Just, and it was deemed wise to seek another situation than Port Royal for it. It consisted of forty-eight colonists, and in the ship containing the emigrants were provisions for a year. The spot chosen for settlement was Mt. Desert, an island, now a fashionable summer resort on the coast 1613. of Maine. The name given the new settlement was St. Sauveur.

This attempt was, however, ill-starred. The situation chosen was on territory claimed by the English, and in consequence a Virginian captain, Samuel Argall, fell upon the colony, and showing no mercy, carried fifteen of the colonists away in chains, and turned the remainder adrift on the ocean.

The captain of the French at St. Sauveur had shown to Argall the commission of the King of France to choose the situation he had done. In consequence of this, two ships from Virginia sailed north, and cast down every vestige of French occupation found on Mount Desert. The expedition visited Ste. Croix, and crossing over to Port Royal attacked it and left it in ashes. In the same year the aged Baron de Poutrincourt 1614. arrived in the New World only to see the desolation of Port Royal; he returned to France, to fall 1615. fighting in the wars of his sovereign in the following year. His son, De St. Just, remained in Acadia, became a border ranger, and, with the remnant of the colony, lived among the Indians.

The successful attack by Argall was a heavy blow to French interests in Acadia. It revived the claim of the English to the Acadian coast. The weak hold given by the almost forgotten voyages of Caboto was now insisted on.

The Puritans of King James’s reign had much interest in the New World. It was to Sir William Alexander of Menstry, afterwards Earl of Stirling, a favourite of King James, one claiming to possess royal blood, and Sept., 1621. also a writer of plays and poems, that the territory of Acadia was given, under the name of Nova Scotia, and for which a nominal rent was to be 1622. paid. In the year following, the new Viceroy Alexander sent out a vessel with a Scotch colony, which wintered in the New World, and in the next spring visited the coast of Acadia, but returned to Scotland in July. Some French settlers at this time still seem to have been at Port Royal. The would-be New World monarch, King James, continued to send a vessel annually to the coast of this domain, to trade with the Indians.

King James undertook the foundation of an order of baronets of Nova Scotia, but it was only in the first 1625. year of the reign of Charles I., his successor, that the order was founded. Patents to no less than 200 barons have been granted, of which about 150 still exist. Up to 1635 there were in Nova Scotia Baronets of Nova Scotia. fifteen of these baronets’ estates, thirty-four in New Brunswick, twenty-four in Cape Breton, and thirty-four in Anticosti. Each estate was to have been six miles by three in area, and only to be held on condition of its being settled.

The remnants of the French colony of Port Royal De la Tour. never deserted Acadia. As already stated, De St. Just—perhaps better known by his family name, Biencourt—with a small band of followers, lived a semi-barbarous life on the Acadian shore. Among the colonists at Port Royal had been a man of high 1609. birth—the Sieur de la Tour. Allied to the noble house of Bouillon, this colonist was a Huguenot, who had lost his estates in the civil war in France. His family name was Claude de St. Etienne, and, with his son Charles, he had only cast in his lot for four years with the Port Royal colony, when disaster overtook it.

The Virginian expedition which had destroyed Port Royal ruined the fort in the absence of its possessors, who returned to find their place of shelter in ashes. The De la Tours, father and son, had then established a fort at the mouth of the Penobscot River—Pentagoet—but being on territory claimed by the English, they had been driven from it by the Plymouth colonists. Charles de la Tour, who is almost a romantic figure in the history of Acadia, had then taken to the wild life of Biencourt in the neighbourhood of the destroyed Port Royal. Kindred spirits, so great friends had they become, when the forest-ranger Biencourt died, he left his 1623. rights in Port Royal to the young St. Etienne, then but twenty-eight years of age.

The young leader of the borders was a man active and sagacious—one of those self-reliant men developed always on the border-land of civilization. Two years after Biencourt’s death, Charles St. Etienne married 1625. a Huguenot lady, afterwards the heroine of the shores of St. John. About this time, St. Etienne built a fort, St. Louis, near Cape Sable, on the south-west of Acadia, and the adjoining harbour bears his name, La Tour. Claude St. Etienne, the father, driven away as we have seen from his fort at the mouth of the Penobscot, now resorted to Fort St. Louis with his son, and undertook to carry a message from his son, the real commander of the fort, to the French king, asking for ships and men to preserve Acadia to France.

It was at this juncture that another Huguenot, Sir David Kertk, in the service of the English, made an attack on the French settlements in America. Sieur de la Tour had been successful in his mission to France, and was coming out, bringing eighteen vessels laden with men, cannon, and ammunition. Kertk captured the whole fleet and took the ships to England. Young St. Etienne gathered all the French and Indians he could influence in Acadia into his Fort St. Louis, and stood for its defence in case of attack.

But strange indeed are the vicissitudes of fortune. The elder La Tour taken prisoner, was carried to England. Being a nobleman and a Protestant, he was received at the English Court. Having become friendly with the Nova Scotian pseudo-monarch, Sir William Alexander, he had gone over to the English side, and had obtained for himself and son, baronetcies under the English Crown in Nova Scotia. The estate bestowed on father and son extended along the coast from the present towns of Lunenburg and Yarmouth, with a depth into the interior of fifteen miles, and comprised 4500 square miles. Two baronies were to be established, St. Etienne and La Tour, and a Scotch colony was to be formed.

The new lord of La Tour had married while in England, 1630. an English lady of rank, and embarked with a number of colonists in two vessels for Nova Scotia. On his arrival before Fort St. Louis he acquainted his son with what he had done. His son, however, utterly refused to have any connection with the English. The father used threatening and winning words alternately with his rebellious son, but all to no avail. He even sought to compel his son by arms, but failed in this as well. Chagrined and disappointed, La Tour was compelled to resume his voyage and conduct his colonists to Port Royal, where a son of Sir William Alexander had founded a Scotch colony in 1620.

A few years later this Scotch colony, along with the remainder of Acadia, was surrendered to France. The elder La Tour, now on the invitation of his son, repaired to Fort St. Louis. In the same year in which La Tour arrived from England, a vessel was sent out from France with ammunition and supplies for Fort St. Louis; while the young commander was highly honoured for his devotion to France.

A new undertaking was next entered upon of building a fort at the mouth of St. John River, in what is now March 29th, 1632. New Brunswick. To cap the strange events of this period, Charles I. in order to obtain from France the 400,000 crowns of his queen Henrietta Maria’s portion, basely gave up Acadia in the surrender of St. Germain-en-Laye. It was a part of the policy of the adroit Cardinal Richelieu to retain at all hazards Acadia and Canada as French possessions. He had five years before the Treaty of St. Germain-en-Laye organized “the Company of New France.” The company must for fifteen years send out 200 colonists a year, and thus raise the colony to 4000; all the colonists must be French and Catholics, and they must be supplied with priests. The company received the gift of two men-of-war in addition to other important privileges.

A relative of the Great Cardinal, Captain de Razilly, who bore marks of the king’s favour, was chosen to colonize Acadia, and a vigorous policy was expected. The new commander was furnished with documents to dispossess the Scotch settlers of Port Royal. Artisans and peasants were taken out to strengthen the settlement. Along with De Razilly went two men, whose names are indelibly impressed on Acadian history—these D’Aulnay de Charnissay. are De Charnissay, and the historian Denys. The former of these, D’Aulnay de Charnissay, was an officer of the French navy, who had served with distinction under De Razilly. He was in many ways a competent leader of men, and acted for De Razilly, who had unbounded confidence in him.

The other notable man of the party was Nicholas Denys, born in 1598 at Tours. Little is known of his Denys. early life. He wrote “A Geographical and Historical Description of the Shores of North America, with the Natural History of the Country.” De Razilly in founding his colony did not take hold of Port Royal, but chose La Have Bay, and with his forty families of colonists settled there on account of its better fisheries, and erected his fort. Denys established a fishing-station near it at Port Rossignol. New troubles now arose. The French had begun to claim the coast as far south as Cape Cod; and De Charnissay took possession of the 1635. old French station of Pentagoet at the mouth of the Penobscot River. This annoyed the Plymouth Company.

The other, and yet most prominent figure in Acadian affairs was La Tour. It was soon manifest that the old French element and the new could not agree. It was in 1635 that the “Company of New France” granted to Charles de St. Etienne, Sieur de la Tour, the fort of St. John, and in that year he removed a portion of his goods from his Fort St. Louis, near Cape Sable. The greatest 1636. blow to the internal peace of Acadia at this time was the death of De Razilly.

On his death De Charnissay, or as he is perhaps more commonly called, D’Aulnay, as next in command, and also a relative of the deceased commander, became successor in office. He removed the settlers to Port Royal, but being chiefly a fur-trader, did not encourage immigration. D’Aulnay was now virtually ruler at Port Royal, La Tour at St. John. La Tour lived like a baron. His fort was strong; large numbers of Indians assembled there to trade; fishing with nets was there successful, game of every kind abounded; and Lady La Tour presided with grace in her New World castle. La Tour in 1632 seems to have been a nominal Roman Catholic, though his wife always remained a Huguenot.

Jealous of the distinction of La Tour, D’Aulnay began to poison the minds of the French Court against him. He represented that instead of being the son of the well-known officer, Claude St. Etienne, La Tour was an impostor, being an adventurer named Turgis, the son of a mason of St. Germain, who had gone out as a common soldier to Port Royal; and that he had obtained the goods of Biencourt, some 70,000 livres in value, including the Port Royal Fort, by fraud. La Tour knew nothing of the secret plot to destroy him. In 1640 he had gone 1641. to Quebec, and in the following year he was surprised by a peremptory summons to repair to France to answer the charges made against him. A vessel, the St. Francis, was sent to conduct him to France. Though innocent, La Tour refused to go, on the ground that misrepresentations had been made against him, and he well knew that D’Aulnay had the ear of the French Court.

Seeing no help likely from the French Court, La Tour adopted the bold expedient of calling upon the Puritans of Boston to assist him. The Bostonians, though willing enough to trade with all and sundry, were not disposed to embroil themselves in war. Nevertheless hearty negotiations were maintained between La Tour and the Puritan governor, Winthrop. D’Aulnay had proceeded to France to further his designs, and a strong expedition was being fitted out to punish La Tour. It would seem that religious hate lay at the bottom of the conflict, for now La Tour appealed, and not unsuccessfully, to the Protestant city of Rochelle for help. The Rochelle merchants fitted out a vessel, the Clement by name, and sent out munitions of war and supplies, along with 140 Rochelle troops, to assist the Governor of St. John.

The siege of La Tour’s fort began early in the spring, when D’Aulnay with several ships and 500 men 1643. appeared in front of the fort. A short time after the Clement of Rochelle came up the bay behind the French fleet, but could accomplish nothing. But full of expedients, having left his fort as well defended as possible, the brave La Tour, accompanied by his heroic lady, escaped past the blockading fleet at night in a shallop, boarded the Clement, and set sail in her for Boston.

The vigorous commander succeeded in hiring four New England ships, and in enlisting 100 soldiers, and with these he hastened back to attack the blockading French vessels.

Surprised beyond measure at the turn in events, D’Aulnay saw the hopelessness of his case, and speedily withdrew, running across the Bay of Fundy into Port Royal, pursued by La Tour. The vessels grounded, and a party of the Rochelle and the English troops landing, defeated those of D’Aulnay. A craft laden with furs was also seized and the cargo divided between the Huguenots and Puritans.

But D’Aulnay thwarted was not defeated: he again repaired Port Royal, and went to France to organize another expedition. At the same time Lady La Tour also crossed the ocean and sought to gain assistance for her husband’s cause in Rochelle. D’Aulnay, hearing of her presence there, obtained a warrant for her arrest, which, however, she avoided by flight to England. The unflinching heroine now took ship for America, but was very nearly captured by the vessel being driven on the Acadian coast. By assuming a disguise she eluded the French in Acadia, and sailed with the vessel to Boston. Absent nearly a year, Lady La Tour, having escaped almost every variety of perils, arrived safely at St. John.

D’Aulnay next concluded a treaty with the Bostonians, but it meant nothing, as they still traded with La Tour; for this, however, D’Aulnay afterwards avenged himself upon them.

Soon the last lurid scene of the drama came. D’Aulnay, April 17th, 1645. hearing of La Tour being absent in Boston, attacked the fort at St. John. The lady defended it, herself from one of the bastions directing the cannonade on the vessels. For three days and three nights D’Aulnay’s attacks were driven off with loss, till a traitorous Swiss betrayed the fort while the garrison was at prayers. D’Aulnay offered terms of surrender, which being accepted he basely broke, and hanged the garrison, compelling the lady to be present with a halter around her neck to witness the execution.

Three weeks after the heroine died of a broken heart; her distinguished courage throws a halo of honour around her times. The American poet Whittier has in stirring accents of immortal verse preserved her name. Her husband heard the sad story in Boston. His fort lost, La Tour sought assistance from Sir David Kertk, the Governor of Newfoundland, but in vain.

Driven from Acadia, La Tour went to Quebec, where he was received with much distinction by the governor, 1646. Montmagny. In New France he took a leading part for four years in exploration and border warfare.

Acadia, now completely under D’Aulnay’s control, grew; mills were erected; vessels built; the marshes were dyked; the people increased in resources. Three hundred men were kept as a small standing army to defend the settlements. The victorious D’Aulnay concluded a treaty with Massachusetts amid much demonstration, and left the harbour under a salute from Boston, Charlestown, and Castle Island.

Freed from La Tour, the jealous D’Aulnay must now rid himself of the enterprising Denys. This adventurer had been successful. He had built up two fishing-stations on the Cape Breton coast, and another at Chaleurs Bay. Armed with a high commission, D’Aulnay seized Denys’ property, broke up his establishment, and drove his former friend into exile to Quebec. But justice, though long deferred, overtakes the violent; and D’Aulnay de Charnissay was drowned in Port Royal River. “Rapacity, tyranny, and cruelty” is the terrible trinity in which his life in Acadia has been summed up.

On the death of his rival La Tour hastened to France, and succeeded in obtaining the appointment of Governor of Acadia, with many valuable privileges. There was a prospect of much trouble, arising from the claim of the widow of D’Aulnay to her husband’s property, but at length the difficulty was overcome by marriage, as quaintly expressed in the marriage contract, for the “peace and tranquillity of the country, and concord and union between the two families.” A prospect of peace now seemed to rise before the long-disturbed view of Governor La Tour, but this was soon dissipated.

A creditor of D’Aulnay, who claimed a debt of no less than 260,000 livres, now came to seize the whole of Acadia. This daring man, Emmanuel le Borgne, carrying not sword and fire, but writs and ejectments instead, was the cause of serious trouble, and was about to seize Fort la Tour, at St. John, when an English squadron took possession of the whole of Acadia, in the name of the Lord Protector, Cromwell; it was some 1654. years after, however, restored to the French. Under the English La Tour succeeded in regaining all the old grants made him by Charles I. as a baronet of Nova Scotia, which it will be remembered he at the time refused. In 1660 he still retained his possessions, 1672. and we know but little more of him till the time of his death.


In the last year of the 16th century, two French master-mariners sailed forth to different parts of the 1599. New World. One of these was the short-lived Captain Chauvin, who, as we have seen, entered the St. Lawrence to Tadoussac; the other was a native of the Biscayan coast, sprung of a race of hardy fishermen. This young mariner had risen to be ship’s quartermaster in the French navy, and in this year he found employment in the Spanish service, through the recommendation of his uncle, who by the Spaniards was known in their navy as the “Provençal Captain.” The young quartermaster, who now undertook to go to the West Indies, was the son of Antoine de Champlain.

The young man, of the age of twenty-two, bore the name of Samuel, a name then common among the Huguenot people of Rochelle and its neighbourhood. It was on 1603. his return from the West Indies that the ambitious captain threw himself willingly into an expedition, already named by us, along with the merchant Du Pont to visit the river of Canada. The voyage from Honfleur to Tadoussac occupied from the 15th of March to the 24th of May, and the summer was spent in conference with the natives, in the exploration of the St. Lawrence, and in the examination of the minerals of the country.

We have already noticed that Henry IV., the redoubtable Henry of Navarre, gave a wide commission to a Huguenot favourite, the Sieur de Monts, to especially open up and govern Acadia. Bancroft has well pointed out the remarkable part taken in early colonization by the French Calvinists. It was in the spring of 1604 that the active Santongeois Champlain joined his fortunes to those of De Monts; and during that year the energetic captain had explored a good part of the North American coast along the North Atlantic; and in the next spring as far south as Cape Cod was reached. It was after passing through his Acadian experience that 1607. Champlain accepted the suggestion of his patron to go to Canada, which, from its fewer ports, and from its wide extent of territory, De Monts regarded as better suited for the fur-trade than Acadia.

It was in the next year, as we learn from Champlain’s 1608. own account, that on the 3rd of July he chose the point of Quebec, so-called by the natives, probably from the Algonquin word, “quebio”—the narrows or straits—on which to found what has now come to be known as the “Ancient Capital.” Here he chose a fit place, than which he found none better situated for the habitation of his infant colony. Workmen were at once employed to cut down the nut-bearing trees of the point of land made by the entrance of the St. Charles River into the St. Lawrence. A portion were employed in sawing fit building material, and others in hollowing out cellars and trenches for the dwellings.

A plot to destroy Champlain was discovered by him, but the ringleader, Jean Duval, a Norman locksmith, who had intended flight to Spain, after accomplishing his malicious purpose, paid the penalty with a traitor’s death. Champlain, with twenty-seven or twenty-eight for a company, remained for the winter at his newly-begun capital. Of his choice of Quebec as capital, the Abbé Ferland has well said: “It is the key of the valley of the great river, of which the course is nearly 800 leagues; it is the advanced watchman of the immense French Empire of which Louis XIV. dreamt, and which was to have extended from the Strait of Belleisle to as far as the Gulf of Mexico.” The winter was one of misery and sickness, and in the spring but eight of the colony survived.

In the next year Champlain, with a few Frenchmen, joined the Algonquins and Hurons in an expedition 1609. against the Iroquois on the borders of the lake thenceforward to be known by the name of the explorer. Victorious over the Iroquois, after his return to his capital, Champlain set sail for France. It was on the 7th of March of the year following that, 1610. with a number of artisans, the commander again embarked at Honfleur for Canada. His taste for blood once awakened in the Indian wars, he was, unfortunately for his colony, soon involved in another attack on the Iroquois. Successful in his expedition, towards the close of the year he returned, on account of the death of Henry IV., to France, leaving a garrison at Quebec of only sixteen men.

It was while at home in France on this occasion that Champlain married a young girl of the tender age of twelve, of a Huguenot family named Boullé.

Leaving behind his youthful spouse, in the next year 1611. Champlain, with Pontgravé, again by a long and dangerous voyage reached the New World. It was in this year that Champlain repaired to the “Grand Sault” which Cartier had visited, and the mountain near, which he called Mont Royal. It had been but seventy-six years before that Cartier had visited this island and found a race of natives living, as we have seen, in a fortified camp, in wooden houses, agriculturists, pottery-makers, and much more civilized than their neighbours; but now not one of them remained to greet Champlain. They had been crushed out between the opposing waves of Algonquins from the east, and Iroquois from the south.

The next notable event in the career of the founder 1613. was the voyage by which the hope was awakened that has been the cynosure of many generations since, of finding a north-west passage. Led by the story of a deceiver, De Vignau, Champlain went up the Ottawa, hoping to reach a point on the Northern Sea. Though the expedition never reached the sea, it opened up the country to the French, and brought the Indian tribes of the Ottawa and Georgian Bay into kindly relations with the French. It was now necessary for the daring explorer to return to France, for the affairs of the trading company for which he acted were not in a prosperous condition.

The merchants of three French seaports entered into treaty for the formation of a strong company. The Rochelle merchants not having consented to enter the company, those of Rouen and St. Malo divided the enterprise between them. A charter was obtained from the king, and the Prince of Condé took the title of Viceroy of New France. To forward his enterprise the colonizer now sought to obtain spiritual guides for his colonists. Negotiations were opened with Father du Verger, the Provincial of the Recollets, a branch of the reformed Franciscans, which had taken strong root in France and Belgium. Thus in the spring the Franciscan fathers, Denis, Dolbeau, Le Caron, and a brother, 1615. Du Plessis, came to the barren religious soil of New France to scatter the seed of truth.

It was one of the marks of the French occupation of Canada that priest and explorer were constant companions. On a spot near Champlain’s garden, within a short time of the arrival of the Recollets was erected a small church to keep alive the sacred flame.

It was in the year of return from France that the explorer 1615. ascended the Ottawa, and passed by way of Nipissing and French River to the waters of Lake Huron, the “Attigouantan” of the natives. Leaving its shores, he journeyed southward down the lake now known as Simcoe, and reached our Lake Ontario, known to the Indians as “Entonoron.”

Crossing this lake Champlain encountered the Iroquois, and though twice wounded in the fray, gained the victory. He spent the winter in the Huron country, north of Lake Ontario. In the colony two fruitless years succeeded. Religious disputes between Catholics and Huguenots, represented by the fathers and the Rochelle merchants respectively, retarded the advancement of the colony, although Champlain succeeded, by his frank, true, and fair management, in keeping himself free from all entanglements.

In 1620 the founder brought out his wife and family, believing “that New France was about to put on a new face.” The Prince of Condé, embarrassed by political and private troubles, made over to his brother-in-law, the Duc de Montmorency, the viceroyalty, receiving the solatium of 11,000 crowns; and 1622. in the following year the distractions of trade were removed by all interests being consolidated in one company.

The need for such union was evident, for in this year the whole population of Quebec, old and young, 1624. was but fifty. It was in 1624 that the fort of Quebec was built of stone. It was a considerable structure, 108 feet long, with two wings of 60 feet, and four small towers at the angles of the structure. In the following year the Jesuit fathers, Lalemant and 1625. Brébœuf—names celebrated in the annals of the missions of their society—with two others arrived in Canada from France. Recollets and Jesuits now introduced dissensions, annoying and needless, into the infant colony.

On the arrival at Quebec of Emeric de Caen, a Huguenot, who was in charge of the company’s operations, Champlain, with his wife and family, who for five years had been cut off from the attractions of Parisian society, and were anxious to leave the colony, crossed over to France. The contentions between the old and new associates of the consolidated company so annoyed the Viceroy that he transferred his office to his nephew, De Levis, the Duc de Ventadour. In the same year Champlain returned to Quebec, and finding the fort out of repair, rebuilt it.

At length the distressing differences of the associates, 1628. one part of whom desired to colonize, and the other to prosecute the fur-trade, along with the considerable success of the Huguenots in retaining influence in New France, decided Cardinal Richelieu in favour of organizing a new company. His brilliant scheme, known as the “Company of New France,” required that in the first year two or three hundred citizens should be added to the colony, and that in fifteen years the population should be increased to 4000. Land and seed were to be furnished the colonists, religion must be supported by the company, and, what was the highest object to the cardinal, no heretic must set unhallowed foot on the soil, but all must be Catholic and French.

The following were the main concessions to the company: 1. The possession of New France and Florida; 2. The right to alienate the land, and confer titles with certain restrictions; 3. The monopoly of trade, all previous grants being revoked, except cod and whale fishing in the deep sea; 4. The right to purchase at a certain rate all furs taken by the trappers of the country; 5. The gift of two men-of-war; 6. That artisans should be at liberty to return in six years; 7. Free trade for the merchandise of New France; 8. The distribution of a certain number of titles upon persons recommended by the company.

It was in the first year of the operations of the company that a new danger beset it. This was none other than an attack by the English. Three brothers, David, Louis, and Thomas Kertk, who had left their native country of France in anger at the severe treatment of themselves and their Huguenot compatriots, undertook the task of assisting England against New France. The Duke of Buckingham was making a demonstration 1628. to relieve the beleaguered Protestant town of Rochelle, and Kertk’s attack in the New World was a part of the same campaign against France. Admiral Kertk made a demand by letter upon Champlain to surrender Quebec from so safe a distance down the St. Lawrence as Tadoussac. Though the garrison was at the time on short allowance, Champlain sent an answer of defiance, and the English in that year withdrew from the conflict.

In the following year, however, when famine had done its work, the starving people of Quebec 1629. were peering anxiously from their rocky citadel down the St. Lawrence, past the island of Orleans, for ships with supplies from France, when in July three English ships of war appeared instead.

Champlain had no resource but surrender, and on July 22nd the English ensign waved over the fort of Quebec. Louis Kertk, with 150 men, landed, and was installed governor, while Champlain was taken aboard the admiral’s ship and conveyed to England. The supply ship expected by Champlain’s garrison was encountered and, after a severe contest, captured by the English. The capture of Canada gave great satisfaction to the English people, and to their colonies along the Atlantic, and yet, as we learn from Father Charlevoix, the possession was of little value at the time, for the progress of French Canada had been painfully slow. He mourns thus: “The fort of Quebec, surrounded by several wretched houses, and a number of barracks, two or three huts on the island of Montreal, also perhaps at Tadoussac, and in some other directions on the River St. Lawrence for the convenience of fishing and trade; a commencement of settlement at three rivers . . . behold! in what consisted New France and all the fruit of the discoveries of Verrazano, of Jacques Cartier, of M. de Roberval, of Champlain, of the great expenditure of Marquis de la Roche, and of M. de Monts, and of the industry of a great number of the French!” The population of the capital of the colony at the time was not above 100.

The Treaty of St. Germain-en-Laye, as in the case of Acadia, also gave back Canada to France, not 1632. only to the intense chagrin of Kertk, its captor, but also of the whole English people and colonies. Champlain was for one year after the restoration displaced from his position as governor, in order that De Caen might enjoy the sweets of office, and be recouped for losses. That year Champlain employed in publishing a new edition of all his voyages.

In the next year he was appointed by Cardinal Richelieu as his lieutenant. In March of that 1633. year, with the three ships, St. Pierre, St. Jean, and Don de Dieu, with about 200 colonists, the veteran commander set sail for his beloved Quebec. On his arrival Champlain was received with loud acclamations. A treaty with the Algonquins to secure the fur trade, the building of a new post on the Richelieu River, and greater efforts to convert the Indians were the features of the new French occupation. In gratitude for the restoration of Quebec to his nation, and in fulfilment of a vow, the founder, on the site of the present cathedral of Quebec, erected a new chapel, called “Notre Dame de Recouvrance.”

On Christmas Day Champlain died. As says a pious father, Champlain “took a new birth to heaven 1635. Death of Champlain. the same day as the birth of our Saviour on the earth.” Few men in our Canadian annals have had the enormous difficulties to meet that Champlain encountered. He founded a nationality on the banks of the St. Lawrence, now numbering a million and a half of souls. He seems to have been a shrewd, calm, and patient master of men.

He could work with determined Calvinist and subtle Jesuit alike: he mediated between opposing religious orders, though his sympathies were always with the Franciscans, “who,” he said, “were less ambitious” than their rivals: he harmonized the conflicting interests of fur-traders and colonists to a surprising degree, and soothed the asperities inevitable to the early life of a New World colony. Happy had it been for New France had the governors who succeeded him been of kindred spirit.

Here for a time we must leave the French colony on the St. Lawrence.[2]

[2] From the standpoint of the author it were impossible to understand early Canadian colonization, and especially the later Loyalist movement, without a sketch of what became the independent American colonies.

Section II.—English Cavalier and Puritan Colonies.

An account has been given already of the unsuccessful The Cavaliers. Virginia. 1602. attempt of Raleigh to found colonies at Roanoke Island. The real settlement of Virginia was begun thus. An enterprising Englishman, Captain Gosnold, having built a fort on an island of what is now Massachusetts, led to the formation in England of two companies for colonization. To the London Company was given the coast from 1606. 33° N. to Delaware Bay in nearly 40° N. From Delaware Bay northward, along the coast to the mouth of the Ste. Croix, in lat. 45° N., was bestowed upon the Bristol Company. The dividing-line of the territories was not marked. Captain Gosnold, along with Wingfield and John Smith, were among the leaders of the Virginia colony. On January 1st the company, consisting 1607. of “poor gentlemen, tradesmen, serving men, and libertines,” sailed for the New World. On May 13th they arrived at their new homes, and in honour of their English king, called their settlement Jamestown, and this a year before Champlain had founded Quebec.

From the composition of the colony it could not be but that dissension must soon arise. The man who rose to command among these unpromising elements was John Smith. The account given by himself of his life in his “Generall Historie” is now generally regarded as Falstaffian, and even the thrice-told tale of his deliverance by the fair Indian maiden, Pocahontas, is considered a myth. His strength of character, however, saved the Jamestown colony.

Lord Delaware, an English nobleman, was sent out as governor; but the attempt to transplant the 1610. grandeur of a court into the midst of a handful of ragged settlers proved too ludicrous to continue. Governor Dale, the next governor, ruled with a rod of iron, and ruled well. During his time Pocahontas was married to an adventurer called Rolf, and the Randolphs of Virginia from this union claim descent. The colony grew; women were among the new colonists; industry and plenty followed; the tobacco-plant became the staple of production; and the settlers began to look on their plantations as home. Turbulence and dispute marked the dealings of the colonists one with the other, and with the Home Government; but the colony was in the main royalist in tone. About half a century after the founding of the colony the population numbered some 15,000.

In another fifty years the population had risen to above 40,000, though from one-twentieth of the number being negroes it will be seen of how much value the slave had become in the cultivation of tobacco, the staple of Virginia. The third fifty years of the colony witnessed a wonderful advance. Shortly before the revolution the population numbered half a million, being equally divided between whites and negroes. The existence of slavery to so great an extent shows how thoroughly aristocratic the “Old Dominion” had become in temper. General education was neglected, and one governor of the colony thanked God that there were no free schools within its borders. One college, named from the Prince of Orange and his consort—“William and Mary College”—educated the gentry. The chief form of faith was the Episcopal.

But though framed in their constitution so much after English ideals, the Cavalier colonies asserted as strongly as any of the Puritan communities their right of self-government. The Virginian slave-holding magnates brooked as little interference with their liberties as did the barons at Runnimede. Their mode of life was sybaritic; the planters’ houses were provided with costly plate; their stables contained choice horses; in short, to use the words of a writer of the time, the Virginian proprietors lived “with the splendour and affluence of nabobs.”

The stirring events of Indian warfare cultivated those qualities that made the bordermen a match for British troops, and developed such military genius as that of Washington; while the defence of their provincial rights produced as orators and statesmen, Thomas Jefferson, Patrick Henry, and James Madison. Virginian names such as Lee, Randolph, and Pendleton, have not been unknown in history.

It was to the possession of a coast hemmed in by islands and bars of sand that North Carolina North Carolina. owed her want of success in the struggle with her Virginian sister in forming a new state. Sir Walter Raleigh’s first attempt at colonization had ended miserably in loss of fortune and of hope to the enterprising knight—on the coast of North Carolina. Charles I. at a later time made a grant of the territory to a court favourite, calling it the “Province of 1629.
Carolina.” Not till a quarter of a century later did a company of restless Virginians take up their abode on the soil, and ten years after a party from Barbadoes settle down the coast from the Virginians.

The pleasure-loving King Charles II. rewarded his favourites by giving, as to the company in Hudson’s Bay, to the same and others the sand-dunes of North 1663. Carolina. General Monk, the Duke of Albemarle, the Earl of Clarendon, and Lord Ashley were the leaders of the company, to which was given the charter. Old claims were now made upon the territory, but only to be overruled in favour of the new beneficiaries, and the territory was divided into two counties—Albemarle and Clarendon.

It is one of the amusing incidents of this colonial movement that the philosopher John Locke was employed to elaborate a complete system of government for the colony. This was called the “fundamental constitutions.” The Government had a tinge of feudalism about it with its four orders of “proprietaries, landgraves, caciques, and commons.” It was a most clumsy attempt at government, and with the exception of the one proviso of granting liberty of religious thought, it is safe to say that had Locke’s reputation as a philosopher rested on no sounder basis than his political scheme, it would have been short-lived indeed.

The shortcoming of North Carolina lay in the worthless and unenterprising character of most of its people. Its governors, with the exception of the Quaker Archdale, maintained a grotesque struggle with a quarrelsome and turbulent mob. The summing up of nearly a hundred years of government is given thus: “No reforms, no money.”

The company of proprietors, distressed probably quite as much as the people their subjects, sold out 1731. their rights at length, and about a century from the time of the formation of the company, the population had reached some 200,000, of whom one-quarter were slaves. French Huguenots, Germans, Moravians, Swiss, and Scotch in the hill country, with a few New Englanders and Virginians, mixed with the negroes to constitute the motley throng.

There were no towns and few professional men; society was almost unorganized; tobacco was the chief product; small ships from the North Atlantic coast found their way up the small streams. An attempt was made to establish the Episcopal Church, but a majority of the people belonged to other communions—or in most cases cared nothing for religion. The large number of the population known as “poor whites” is the best exhibit of the ignorance, immorality, and shiftlessness of a people who entered the union of 1776 with little political sentiment, and scarcely a leading man.

When the early settlers under the charter given to Clarendon and Albemarle visited that beautiful South Carolina. coast to the south of Cape Fear, there was a tradition of a former settlement, whose every step had been marked with blood. This was of the Huguenot colony of Coligny, which nearly a century before 1562. had been begun by Jean Ribault. The establishment begun, it had been attacked by a Spanish bigot, Menendez, and his followers, who, coming in Spanish ships, landed on the coast and massacred in cold blood the settlers. Marking the dishonoured corpses, the inhuman Spaniards made inscriptions that the dead “were thus treated not because they were Frenchmen, but because they were heretics and enemies of God.”

A few years afterwards this butchery was avenged by Chevalier de Gourgues, who attacked the 1578. town of St. Augustin in Florida, and put almost all the Spaniards to death. The cruel inscription was then altered to read that the dead had been thus treated “not as Spaniards, but as traitors, thieves, and murderers.” Shame on the barbarism of nations glorying in the name of Christian!

Sayle, the leader of the Albemarle colony, landing at Beaufort, where the unfortunate scenes had years before occurred, began the movement which afterwards 1670. resulted in the founding of Charleston. Governor West, who succeeded one of the landgraves provided for in the “Locke Constitution,” was a good governor, and laid the foundation well. Lured to the spot by the memory of their former unfortunate settlement, numbers of Huguenots joined the English. Between the fights with pirates on the coast, and struggles with Indians on the frontier, the settlers of South Carolina had a difficult task, but the territory was worth defending, and the settlers were on the whole of an energetic and self-reliant class.

A strong immigration of Irish Presbyterians from Ulster, joined with the number of Huguenot settlers, contributed to establish a people determined on preserving their liberties in their religious concerns, and though an Episcopal Church was maintained by the Commonwealth in Charleston, it was almost the only one in the colony. While religious toleration was from the first a feature of its institutions, South Carolina seems to have been always blessed with an active and pious clergy.

A century after the founding of the colony the population had reached upwards of 150,000, of whom, however, not more than one-quarter were whites. Here was a condition of things unique. The life of South Carolina in consequence differed very much from that of Virginia. South Carolina was the typical Southern State. Its laws for the control of the slaves were severe; its planters, who gained their wealth chiefly from rice and indigo, did not live along the low river-bottoms, whence their profits came, but largely around Charleston. The South Carolina traders were strong believers in law and order.

The credit of the State was far ahead of that of its northern sister; the condition of society of the planters is said to have been higher than that of the Virginians; the sons of the rich men were sent to Europe for education; and, indeed, many traces of British connection are still seen to have been strongly impressed on South Carolina. Her leaders were well able to cope with those of any other colony, and South Carolina in her independence and force has always taken a leading place among the States of the Union.

New England is the brain of the United States. The four colonies embraced under the term New The Puritans. England at the time of the Revolution were Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Hampshire, and Rhode Island. Maine (1820) and Vermont (1791) have since that date been admitted into the Union. These six are the New England States, and they are the creation of the English Puritans.

The Pilgrim fathers, seeking a freer worship than James I. was willing to grant, had fled to Holland. They desired, however, wider scope than Massachusetts. Europe afforded. Their journey consecrated by the fervent prayers of their Parson Robinson, they left him behind in Delfthaven, as in the ship Speedwell they sought new homes. At Southampton the Pilgrims re-embarked Nov. 21, 1620. in the Mayflower, which, with 102 souls on board, sailed for the New World. Safely across the Atlantic, when they had arrived at Cape Cod, which “bends, and embraces round, as with a lover’s arm the sheltered sea,” they landed and drew up a compact which formed the basis of their new constitution.

On the bleak coast of Massachusetts Bay they disembarked and stood upon the rock still to be seen at the old town of Plymouth, where also amid many other memorials of their coming is Leyden Street, in token of their stay in Holland. Standish, Alden, and others of their names have become historic. New England families claim it as a patent of highest nobility to have had ancestors in the Mayflower, and articles of trifling value brought from England have become precious heirlooms, if but borne in that vessel, “capacious as another ark for furniture decrepit.”

Religiously these Puritans belonged to the wing of the Independents, and their sentiments were strongly opposed to the Episcopal Church.

Shortly after this another party, known as the Dorchester Company, after many trials found a 1628. resting-place at Salem, on the coast of Massachusetts Bay, under their notable leader, Endicott. A daring Puritan scheme, worthy of the determined men who were of the stock of Cromwell’s Ironsides, was soon undertaken, viz. that of obtaining a royal charter for the Company of Massachusetts Bay. The charter obtained, by a clever and daring act, the company 1630. and its government were, without the knowledge of King Charles, transferred to America. Thus a legal government was in force.

Governor Winthrop with eleven ships brought out 1000 Puritan colonists, who took up their first abode at Charlestown, where now stands Bunker Hill Monument; but, dissatisfied with the situation, many of the colonists soon crossed over the arm of the sea to “Tremontane,” where Boston now stands. Thus besides the Plymouth pilgrims, the Puritan settlements on Massachusetts Bay were Salem, Charlestown, and Boston. These three contained the flower of the Puritans. The settlers had not yet severed their connection with the Church of England. Yet when in their isolated condition they determined to found religious institutions, the circumstances favoured the adoption of the Independent model belonging to their predecessors at Plymouth.

These were men of great fervour, faith, and intelligence. It is said that no less than forty graduates of the English University of Cambridge were among their clergy a few years after its founding in the colony of Massachusetts Bay. Among them were such men of note as John Cotton and Thomas Hooker, driven out 1633. of England to the New World by the fierce threats of Laud. Four thousand people in sixteen towns at this time made up the colony. And now they sought to set up a state after the theocratic model. “I am the Lord thy God, which brought thee up out of the land of bondage,” seemed to be the voice of their Ruler speaking to them from the clouds, and who had delivered them from persecution.

The laws of the Puritans were severe, for the Puritans were men of thoroughness. They would regulate the Sabbath and the family discipline by statute law. They were not quietists. They were the people who ruled a commonwealth, and whose ideas now govern half a continent.

They were narrow for they were zealous; but they showed a remarkable faculty for organization and government. They chose their governor, elected selectmen, condemned eighty-two tenets of theology objectionable to them; sent into banishment, after having cut off from the Church, men and women who were troublers, as they would have plucked out a right eye—these and other important matters, such as the payment of their preacher and schoolmaster, as well as raising levies to fight the Indians, they did by the simple machinery of the “town-meeting.”

They valued education highly; indeed, standing on a granite pedestal on Cambridge Green, near Boston, is a noble bronze statue of the broad-brimmed Puritan, John Bridge, the first Cambridge schoolmaster employed in the first decade of the colony; while in front of the magnificent halls of the oldest university in America, a few hundred yards from Bridge’s statue, sits the figure in bronze of the devout young founder of Harvard College. Bent on dominion, it was not long till 1652. Massachusetts extended her boundaries to the north, and included the territory now in the States of Maine and Vermont.

The unyielding temper of these rulers of the coast may be seen in the severe dealing with the Quakers 1660. and Baptists, whom they regarded as disturbers of the peace. The part of the colony settled by Endicott, about Salem, seems to have been overrun by a witch-burning epidemic, not in any way different from that which was at the time prevailing in England and Scotland. To Massachusetts belonged the chief task of defending British interests on the North Atlantic coast of America. Massachusetts was indeed New England. Her sons valiantly defended her frontier from the Indians, and her coat-of-arms shows an Indian and a military arm and hand grasping a drawn sword above him.

The Massachusetts militia took part in the wars against the French in the New World, and a cross is still displayed at Harvard College, captured from the fortress of Louisbourg. In such a school colonial troops were trained. The sturdy independence of New England is seen in her statesmen. There was a notable succession: Otis, Samuel Adams, Prescott, and Warren. They were of the same stock which made England great—of the same ilk as Hampden, Drake, and Hawkins. Stirred with a sense of injustice, the colonists showed in Boston Bay, Bunker Hill, and Lexington, that they were worthy of their lineage.

The history of the State lying in the valley along the Connecticut River is that of a frontier settlement Connecticut. between the Puritans and Dutch. From the first it was evident that it was to be a bit of Puritan New England. Its first governor, John Winthrop, junior, came out under the patent of Lords Brook and Say and Sele, and pulled down the Dutch arms in the territory. A difference of opinion in the colony of Massachusetts was the cause of the beginning of Connecticut.

One of the best bands of settlers that ever came to the New World was that which arrived to settle in Cambridge, Massachusetts, under Thomas Hooker, known as the Braintree Company, which came with the ministers, John Cotton and Samuel Stone. In their sober Puritan humour they said, “they had all needs for life: they had Cotton for clothing, Hooker for their fishing, and Stone for their building.” But Hooker and his followers did not take kindly to the colony of Massachusetts: perhaps the ministers did not agree, or possibly Governor Winthrop was too dictatorial, but the Hooker colony sold out their houses to a new company, and taking their journey through 100 miles of trackless forest, driving their cattle before, and carrying their sick on litters, they founded Hartford, so-named after the birthplace of Mr. Stone. The new colony bore the brunt of a fierce Indian war with the Pequods.

Another company of settlers of property and respectability coming to Massachusetts also failed to regard with favour its usages and requirements, and 1635. sailed south to settle thirty miles west of the mouth of the Connecticut River. They lived for a year “under no rule but a compact to obey the Scriptures,” and formed the most intensely religious of the Puritan settlements known as the New Haven Colony. This settlement chose a rich merchant, Theophilus Eaton, as their governor.

Thus there were two independent religious democracies, Hartford and New Haven, founded within the same territory. The Governor Winthrop of the Hartford section succeeded by tact and energy in getting a corporation established by Charles II.—“The Governor 1662. and Company of Connecticut.” New Haven resisted the encroachments of this vigorous company, but at last, in order to avoid being swallowed up by the Dutch, took refuge under the charter. On the 1665. visit of the royal commissioner, no course was left but to take the oath of allegiance to the king, and the duty, though disagreeable, was performed by these independent religionists. The colony suffered much from King Philip’s Indian war, but ever bore itself bravely.

The people of Connecticut from the first showed a considerable faculty for self-government, as well as for shrewd diplomacy. While Massachusetts Bay settlements were too assertive to live at peace with the king, Connecticut succeeded, “by bending before the breeze,” in sailing within the limits of the king’s favour, and in consequence retained, though not without difficulty, her free charter. Schools were established and maintained, towns were improved, legislation was wise, debts were paid, and her magistrates were worthy of their office. Taken altogether, Connecticut lived the happiest, most prosperous, and most contented of all the Atlantic States. This arose largely from the respectable and upright character of her first settlers.

Religiously the people seem to have been harmonious, and the foundation of Yale College at Newhaven was an event of national importance. While Massachusetts 1700. was the representative of an outspoken and somewhat quarrelsome nonconformity, Connecticut was the home of a more quiet and peaceable, though none the less determined type of Puritanism.

So early as 1603 the two small English craft, Speedwell and Discoverer, under Captain Pring, who New Hampshire. had traded with the natives along the coast, from Penobscot Bay southward, had discovered the islands along the coast, and found the river of Maine and New Hampshire. The redoubtable Captain Smith had entered, like Captain Pring, the Piscatqua, destined to be the river at whose mouth stands the only port of New Hampshire—Portsmouth.

One of the most energetic of the Plymouth Council, Sir Ferdinand Gorges, associated with himself one Mason, who had been governor of a Newfoundland plantation, and to these two adventurers was given the 1622. country between the Atlantic, the St. Lawrence, the Kennebec, and the Merrimac—a district including the present New Hampshire. Lawsuits on the part of English claimants, and contests with the French, who looked upon this as a part of Acadia, followed in due course. In 1641 the colonists united with Massachusetts.

Fifty or sixty English Hampshire families represented 1653. the whole population, thirty years after the colony was begun; but some time afterwards the settlement was deemed by Charles II. of sufficient importance to be erected into a royal province. 1679. In later years New York and Massachusetts both asserted a claim to portions of the ill-defined territory, until in the following century the boundaries of what is now known as the “Granite State” 1741. were fixed. To this Switzerland of America many a tourist finds his way. Excepting the Irish and French-Canadians of its manufacturing towns, the people of this State are purely the descendants of the original English and Scottish settlers.

From the summer heat of these great religious movements, there follows not only a harvest-time of Rhode Island. useful fruitage, but an after-growth of spurious seeding. As after the German Reformation came the extravagances of Münster and his followers, so out of Puritanism, with its thorough earnestness and power, grew an abundant yield of Separatist fruit. The right of private judgment abused, and unmodified by a principle of charitable cohesion, leads to disintegration in society. Just as in civil government the struggle for freedom in the case of the revolting colonies led to General Washington’s complaint that after the fight of Bunker Hill every colonist soldier thought himself a captain; so in the struggle for the soul liberty it was not surprising that the tendency towards continued disintegration should show itself. Especially might this have been expected among such masterful men as the English Puritans. Even women rose to be leaders of sects. The consciousness of such danger undoubtedly led the Puritan leaders to adopt strong measures.

It is, however, rarely that the divisive tendency spoken of is found so strongly developed as it was in one of such marked private and domestic virtues as Roger Williams. Williams was an English Puritan of great ability and logical power. To him the truth was everything. While the idea of a Puritan theocracy as held in Massachusetts and Connecticut, or on the other hand of an aristocratic Government and State Church, as in Virginia, have perished, among the English of the American continent, Williams’s principle of a severance of Church and State has become supreme.

It will be noticed by careful observers that the grounds for the persecution to which Williams was subjected in Massachusetts, were the conclusions as to civil affairs reached by him as flowing from his religious doctrines. As in religious matters, Williams objected to a fortnightly meeting of the Puritan ministers for the discussion of religious questions lest this should lead to a superintendency or ecclesiastical control; so it was a mark of the civil system established by him that for a time it “would have no magistrates.” While the principle of Williams, in which he differs entirely from the Massachusetts Puritan, that “the civil magistrate may not intermeddle even to stop a church from apostasy and heresy” is undoubtedly correct, yet his antipathy to authority in civil matters led him very near to the position of the “levellers” or “root and branch men.” The colony of Rhode Island, while certainly a school for the development of rigid principles, was also distinguished for its turbulence.

Driven forth by a tyrannical edict of Puritan Massachusetts, in the cold of winter, it was by the kind suggestion of Governor Winthrop that Williams made a new home on the unoccupied shore of Narragansett Bay, where, with pious gratitude, he named his settlement 1636. “Providence.” His settlement proved a city of refuge for religious exiles—and these were not few—from Massachusetts, Connecticut, and New York. It was seven years later that the four towns 1743. already sprung up of Providence, Newport, Portsmouth, and Warwick were united under one jurisdiction, and given a charter by the English Parliament.

To Roger Williams’s colony, by invitation of the founder, gravitated with her adherents the remarkable lady, Anne Hutchinson, the source of such serious trouble in Massachusetts, whose tendencies may be judged by her habit of referring to the Puritan ministers as the “black coats” trained at the “Ninneversity.” But even the mild restraints of Rhode Island drove the Hutchinsons away from the separatist settlement into the wilderness of New York. Rhode Island was the smallest of the original colonies, as indeed it is still the smallest of the American States.

Section III.—Colonies of Various Origins.

The days of the early English Stuarts were sore upon all who disagreed with the State religion. But while a Puritan like Baxter might be soundly English Catholics in Maryland. berated by a judge, and perhaps condemned to pay a fine, yet he was looked upon only as a member errant of the Church as by law established. But so strong was the feeling against the Papists, as they were derisively called, that they were considered as enemies of the State, and so were not eligible to hold civil office. Like hunted beasts, the Catholics hid themselves in their homes if they were poor, or sought refuge from the intolerance of the age, if they were rich, in the Catholic countries of the Continent, for in the time of the first James or the two Charleses, insult and perhaps legal penalty were meted out to them.

As in times of persecution there are some so constituted as to embrace a cause out of sympathy for the sufferings of its adherents, so Sir George Calvert, an Oxford graduate, a Member of Parliament, an officer of state, and a most active public man, surrendered office on account of a change of opinion, and identified himself with the proscribed Catholics. His high standing and personal qualities retained him some consideration from James I. Like most of the public men of the time, Calvert took an interest in New World settlements. Not only did he belong to the famous Virginia Company, but he had secured a grant of the Peninsula of Avalon, on the barren coast of Newfoundland. He now sought to establish a New World home for his co-religionists.

The most noted feature of his colony was its tolerance of all forms of faith. A strong contrast has always been drawn between the tolerant colony of Maryland and the persecuting Puritan colonies. Yet the case is often misconceived. The Puritans fled not so much to obtain freedom to worship God, for they were gaining ground in England at the time. They desired to rule and could not brook kingly authority. They were desirous of founding a theocratic state. They were masterful men, and the spirit of domination which they showed in the commonwealth they bore to the New World. It is a mistake to regard them as a covey of hunted partridges flying for cover. They neither understood nor tried to understand the principles of toleration. They were narrow; and however wrong and little to be admired, yet they were not inconsistent with their other opinions when they sought by law to repress divergences of belief.

With Calvert, or as he is better known, Lord Baltimore, and his Catholics, the case was different. They had mainly given up hope of regaining England. The severities following the Gunpowder Plot, as well as the previous execution of Mary Queen of Scots, had broken for half a century the expectations of the Roman Church. Lord Baltimore sought for peace. In order to obtain it, he adopted a like expedient, afterwards used by James II. when he became tolerant, threw open his colony to all in order that he and his Catholic colonists might unmolested enjoy their own faith. The law of tolerance, however, only included Christians, for an early law was passed in Maryland, that death should be the penalty for the denial of the doctrine of the Trinity.

Lord Baltimore, finding Virginia proper impossible as a residence for Catholics, turned his attention to the coast lying north of the Potomac. This region he named Maryland in honour of Charles I.’s queen, Henrietta Maria. The territory was bestowed absolutely upon Lord Baltimore, with a feudal obligation to render two arrows and one-fifth of the precious metals found to the king. The charter, however, gave large powers of self-government to the people. The royal gift was now found to conflict with a trading licence previously given to William Clayborne, a surveyor, through the agency of the founder of the Nova Scotia baronetcies, Sir William Alexander. This double grant afterwards produced conflict.

On the death of Calvert, his son Cecil became heir to the territory, and to Calvert the younger was formally granted the charter. It was in two vessels, the Ark and the Dove, that on the 22nd of November Leonard, 1634. brother of Cecil Calvert, with about 200 Catholic gentlemen and their retinues, departed for their New World plantation. Delayed at Barbadoes and elsewhere, it was not till the 24th of February 1635. that they reached Virginia, and not till March that they ascended the Potomac, and planting the cross on an island, took possession of it in the name of King Charles. Kindly relations were at once established with the Indians, and the colony endured but few hardships. Within a year a popular Legislative Assembly had met, the only thorn in the side of the colony being the continued hostility of the claimant Clayborne, whose influence in Virginia and with the Indians was considerable.

The disturbed state of England under the last years of Charles I., and the supremacy of the Puritans in the Commonwealth, gave considerable annoyance to the Maryland Catholics, who were royalists. The uncertainty 1660. as to the allegiance to be required of them resulted in almost supreme authority in their own territory being given to their Legislative Assembly, the king still being regarded as suzerain. Within a few years the population of the country was estimated at about from eight to twelve thousand, these a mixture of Roman Catholics, English and Massachusetts Puritans, and Virginia Prelatists.

No great religious or philanthropic purpose led to the settlement of the New World possessions New York. which had been discovered by Captain Hudson on behalf of the Dutch. It was in the year after the navigator’s return from his last 1610. voyage for the Dutch that a number of Amsterdam merchants sent out a ship to trade with the Indians on Manhattan Island. As a consequence of success in this venture, a small trading village was built where the city of New York now stands.

It was probably in the autumn of 1614 that a small fort was built to protect their trade by the Dutch. Christiannse, Blok, and May are the names of the three chief captains of their early expedition of five ships. Cape May and Blok Island commemorate two of them to this day. In the next year Captain Hendricksen ascended the Hudson River, and built Fort Orange where Albany now stands. In 1621 Manhattan Island was bought from the Indians for twenty-four dollars. Captain May took possession of New Jersey for the 1623. Dutch, erecting Fort Nassau. The colony on Manhattan Island was named New Amsterdam, and the Dutch settlements collectively were known as the New Netherlands.

Soon the claim of the Dutch to the coast extended from Cape Henlopen to Cape Cod. Of Delaware Bay they once took possession, but they were driven out by the Indians, and Lord Baltimore afterwards occupied their territory. On the north the coast of Connecticut was snatched from the Dutch, as we have seen, by English settlers.

It was about this time that another European nation gained, for a time, a foothold on the 1639. Atlantic coast. This was Sweden. Gustavus Adolphus had before his death proposed such a scheme to his countrymen. Two vessels, the Key and Delaware. Griffin, laden with Swedes and Finns, were taken to America by Peter Minuet, the former Dutch governor of New Amsterdam. By purchase from the natives the colony obtained the coast along Delaware Bay, known as Poutaxat. Delaware Bay, it has been often said, was visited by Lord de la Warre in 1610, but this report is not now regarded as authentic.

An Indian war, brought on by a cruel massacre of an Algonquin camp by the Dutch, desolated New 1645. Netherlands. It was when a treaty had been made with the Indians that Peter Stuyvesant, the famous Dutch governor, arrived, finding a colony of some 3000 souls all told. A misunderstanding between 1646. the Swedes and the Dutch on the coast led to the old soldier Stuyvesant organizing an expedition which captured all the Swedish settlements, and New Sweden was blotted out. Stuyvesant ruled his enlarged colony with a somewhat strong hand, but tolerant principles prevailed. It became an asylum not only for the Dutch Protestants, but for Huguenot fugitives and exiles from Bohemia, the Maritime Alps, and Switzerland. A broad foundation was being laid for a commerce which is now one of the world’s wonders at New York.

But England could hardly have been expected to have allowed such colonies to cut her seaboard in twain. Accordingly, the grant of the Dutch coast was given as a part of that conferred upon his brother James by easy-going Charles II. New Netherlands was changed by anticipation to New York, and an expedition of three ships arrived before New Amsterdam, and demanded their surrender to England. The old warrior, Stuyvesant, would have fought, but the people were without hope, and on the 8th of September the commercial city 1664. of the Atlantic seaboard, and the territory of the Empire State, passed over to Britain.

Similar to Delaware in the character of its early Swedish, and Dutch settlers, who had come New Jersey.
even before the Pilgrim fathers landed in Massachusetts Bay to the coast between Long Island and Cape May, New Jersey has been an important State. It was ceded by Charles II. to his brother James, who afterwards passed over the territory bestowed on him to Lord Berkeley and Sir George Carteret, the latter being the governor of the English Isle of Jersey, hence the name of the New World State. The Dutch succeeded in dispossessing the English of it, 1673. but Sir William Penn and other Quakers subsequently purchased it. It was a hard battle-ground during the Revolutionary War.

To their early history do all countries look back as to their golden age. This is usually because, not Pennsylvania. only are the infant strifes forgotten, but the enforced simplicity of the earlier time is in strong contrast to the artificial and conventional state of the later period. In few cases has a golden age better deserved the name than that of the Quaker colony of Pennsylvania. The quietist followers of an English religious enthusiast, George Fox, were democratic without being demagogues, and were believers in an “inner light” without being monomaniacs. They practised the virtues of industry and domestic life, qualities too often wanting in enthusiasts in political and religious matters.

William Penn, the son of the famous admiral who took Jamaica, and grandson of another naval officer, notwithstanding the obloquy and even imprisonment endured by him, forsook the warlike course of his fathers, and became an uncompromising opponent of war, even as the final resort of nations which disagree. Of high scholastic attainments, of first-rate political ability, and one having avenues of honour waiting to receive him, he forsook all to “suffer affliction with the people of God.” A debt owed his father by Charles II. was paid to Penn by the bestowal of a grant of territory in the New World. By his persecuted and suffering co-religionists, 1682. New Jersey, Delaware, and the new State, to be afterwards known by his name, were the centre towards which flight was made from intolerant New England, and the unkind mother-land.

On the northern edge of his famed Philadelphia, the expatriated gentleman and his friends met the Algonquins 1683. of the region with the olive-branch, and showed the brotherly love inculcated alike by his creed and his noble nature. “We are all one flesh and blood,” said the white chief to the redman, and the chiefs of Penn’s forest swore friendship “as long as the moon and sun shall endure.” Not only kings and princes of Europe admired this peaceful Arcadia, but so, too, did the poor and the persecuted from England and Scotland, from Ireland and Wales, from the Netherlands and the upper waters of the Rhine, and thus the foundations were laid of one of the most influential States of the American Union.

Noted alike for its kindly Quakerism and for its sturdy Calvinism, the “keystone” State has distributed swarms of “Pennsylvania Dutch” and Irish-American Protestants to every part of the continent. Two young surveyors, Charles Mason and Dixon, ran the line between Pennsylvania and Maryland, a famous boundary in later anti-slavery discussions. Philadelphia gradually became one of the most important places of the seaside colonies. It was here that the celebrated Congress of the Colonies 1776. met, when the thirteen colonies declared themselves independent of British rule, and Benjamin Franklin became chairman of the Committee of Safety. Not an Indian war, not a case of persecution, nor since 1780 the disgrace of owning a slave, has disfigured the fair fame of this great State, which now contains upwards of 4,000,000 of inhabitants.

Many as we have seen the motives leading to the foundation of new colonies along the Atlantic Georgia. seaboard to have been, none were nobler than those which led to the settlement of Georgia. The penal laws of England against debtors, which had not yet disappeared in their severity even so late as the time of Dickens, were far more severe a century ago. To be a debtor and unable to pay subjected the unfortunate man thus involved to treatment almost as ignominious as that of a Roman client from his patron. The common jail with all its horrors, and that of a quarter of a century before Howard’s work of amelioration, was the home till death came to their relief, of multitudes whose only crime was poverty.

A noble-hearted and generous man was stirred to activity by witnessing the sufferings of the helpless debtors. This was James Oglethorpe, an English general, who had fought against the Turks, and along with Marlborough. The poet Rogers called him “the finest figure of a man you ever saw.” Edmund Burke said he was a more extraordinary person than any he had ever read of. Oglethorpe having had a friend sorely oppressed as a debtor, appealed to Parliament, and gained some modification of the law. But the opening of the prison doors to a large number of these unfortunate debtors but threw them helpless on the world.

The extensive territory from the land of the Iroquois south to 34° N. lat. was surrendered by the 1729.
Cherokee Indians to Britain. From this, three years later, the philanthropic general obtained, under Letters Patent, a territory organized for the purpose of conveying thither a number of the homeless debtors. This he named from the reigning sovereign, George II. In November, with 116 unfortunate emigrants, the general took ship for his new plantation of Georgia, and a peaceful settlement alongside the Creek Indians was made where Savannah now stands.

Religious persecution sent, in the next year, a hundred Bavarian refugees to the new colony. These were 1733. a part of the quiet and industrious Salzbergers, who were expatriated because they swore upon the “host” and “consecrated salt” to be true to their faith, and to the number of some 20,000 in all were driven forth to be scattered hither and thither as rebels. The pious Bavarians named their New World settlement “Ebenezer,” in token of deliverance. In their southern homes they became successful producers of indigo and silk. Through a grant from the English Parliament, and from private subscriptions, $36,000 of a fund was raised for the colony. The colony was popular, and accordingly many of the weak and unsuccessful—not, it is true, the best settlers for a new country—found their way thither.

Hardy Swiss and Scottish Highlanders of a more self-reliant kind were also induced to colonize lands in 1736. Georgia. General Oglethorpe’s second expedition brought considerable numbers to the colony, and, with the others, the brothers John and Charles Wesley, while two years later the celebrated revivalist Whitfield visited the scattered settlements of the colony.

Whitfield founded an orphanage called “Bethesda,” at Savannah, and through his fervid appeals subsequently obtained sufficient for its maintenance. Troublous relations with the Spaniards of Florida afterwards led to bloodshed.

At the very beginning of the colony slavery obtained a foothold, though Oglethorpe had forbidden it 1730. as opposed to the teachings of the Gospel. A royal government and council were appointed by the British Government, and in the year of the 1752. Revolution the colony had so prospered as to contain 70,000 souls. General Oglethorpe, the founder, died in a ripe old age, having lived to see 1785. Georgia a prosperous State of the American Union.


(References: “Notes sur la Nouvelle France,” Paris, 1872, by H. Harrisse; “Decouvertes et Établissements de Cavalier de La Salle,” Paris, 1870, by G. Gravier; “Discovery of the North-West by John Nicolet,” Cincinnati, 1881, by C. W. Butterfield; “Margry’s Original Documents,” 3rd and 4th volumes, Paris, 1879; “Histoire des Canadiens Français,” Montreal, 1882, by B. Sulte; “The Old Régime in Canada,” Boston, 1884, by F. Parkman; “Premier Établissement de la Foi dans la Nouvelle France,” Paris, 1691, by Father Le Clercq, and also Father Membré; “Nouvelle Découverte,” 1697, by Father Hennepin; “La Salle and the Discovery of the Great West,” Boston, 1884, by F. Parkman; “Montcalm and Wolfe,” 2 vols., Boston, 1884, by F. Parkman; “L’Histoire du Canada,” Quebec, 1852, by F. X. Garneau; “History of Canada, French Régime,” Montreal, 1872, by H. H. Miles; “History of Modern Europe,” vol. iii., 1864, by Thomas Henry Dyer; “Manual of Modern History,” London, 1851, by W. C. Taylor; “Documentary History of New York,” vols. x. xi.; “Maple Leaves,” Quebec, 1863, by J. M. Lemoine; “The Conspiracy of Pontiac,” 2 vols., Boston, 1884, by F. Parkman; “Narrative and Critical History of America,” vol. iv., Boston, 1886, by Justin Winsor.)

Section I.—Governor and People.

From the death of Champlain to the close of the French régime in Canada, was nearly 130 years. As regards the improvement of the colonists in comfort and the establishment of stable government, this period presents a melancholy picture. The heartless autocracy of Louis XIV., then flourishing in France, was also felt in Canada, with the difference that its agent, the French Governor, was in the New World playing the tyrant over a handful of miserably poor, nay, hungry colonists.

Successive Governors arrived and departed with but little change; a struggle between the Governor and the bishops and priests of the Church was the rule rather than the exception; working at cross purposes, the Governor and the Royal Intendant often lived at open enmity; and at all this the poor people looked on, usually regarding the quarrels as none of theirs, and knowing that whichever party won, no benefit followed to them.

The records of the time exhibit duplicity, petty spite, and selfishness—a condition of things almost unparalleled. The Colonial Governor always had enemies in the Court of the king plotting against him; at the Governor’s château at Quebec every explorer in the wilds, who had a fur-trading licence, was sure to be traduced by rivals; in the exploring party in the forest mutinous spirits were ever plotting against the leader; and religious orders usually appeared on the surface as having a hand in every dispute. It seemed as if loyalty and trust had deserted New France.

It were useless to follow in detail the appointment and recall of Governors, many of whom left no mark on the country. Our readers will find their names in lists in the Appendix. We but single out some prominent names, and though there were some truly great men during this régime, their fewness shows the barrenness of the period in other respects. Midway in the period Colbert. stands the name of a most remarkable man, who, as Prime Minister, guided the destinies of France. This was Jean Baptiste Colbert. In the year 1651, at the age of thirty-two, Colbert became confidential agent of Cardinal Mazarin. In 1661 the Cardinal’s nominee became the head of the Government, and was some years after appointed Minister of Marine, of Commerce, the Colonies, and the King’s Palace. Colbert reduced French commerce from a state of chaos to order, and likewise built up a marine for his country. It is true his economic ideas were no better than those of his age, but his organizing ability was surprising. Colbert scouted diplomacy; his methods were severe, even unmerciful—so much so, that he was known as the “man of marble.”

New France was under his special control. Having broken up organized corruption in France, the reformer, in 1663, remodelled colonial affairs. “A royal administration” was established in place of the “old company” rule, and the “Sovereign Council of Quebec” was constituted. On this Council were the Governor, the Bishop, and Royal Intendant. At first there were also five councillors; afterwards the number became twelve. These councillors were appointed by the Governor and Bishop conjointly, and their election was annual. When the Council sat as a Court, the Governor presided; on his right sat the Bishop, on his left the Intendant. According to the rules drawn up, the desire of the rulers was to make the Council “neither aristocratic, nor democratic, but monarchic.”

The Council had no power of taxation. This the King retained, though for years it was not exercised. It was not even permitted to the people to impose a tax upon themselves. The King, of his bounty, at times gave over his revenues to the people. The Constitution of 1663 seemed to give some power of electing representatives to the people, but France was too strongly absolutist to allow this to remain. In 1667 the affairs of the colony were again under a monopoly, known as the “West India Company,” and to this were given all the rights of Richelieu’s former company of 100 associates.

At this time the population of the colony did not exceed 2500, from the Saguenay to Montreal. At Quebec there were but 800 inhabitants. Colbert had resolved to send out 300 colonists yearly. In 1663 some 300 persons embarked for New France at Rochelle, but little more than half of them reached France or Acadia. They were “clerks, students, or the classes who had never worked”—not very promising settlers!

Colbert chose capable men for carrying out his plans. One of these was M. Talon, the Intendant. He was sent to introduce the new system. He was not the head of the colony; he was the working head notwithstanding. De Courcelles, an agreeable but indolent man, was Governor. A still higher official, Viceroy of French America, was appointed, having the French West Indies in his jurisdiction as well. This officer was the Marquis de Tracy, a lieutenant-general of the royal army. The Viceroy, Governor, and Intendant all arrived in the colony in 1665.

In this year came a large number of immigrants from France; cattle and horses were also brought—the latter for the first time. With the colonists there was also a body of men of the Carignan Regiment, brave troops who had fought with renown against the Turks. Some of these afterwards settled down in New France, and the officers, who were chiefly noblesse, became seigniors.

It was Talon’s duty to report to Colbert on the state of the country. The Intendant was of the same enterprising spirit as the great Prime Minister. He was a good friend of the explorers, and had enlarged views as to government. He encouraged the fisheries, especially seal-fishing, the export of timber, and the cultivation of the soil. In 1668 Talon obtained leave to return to France, but in the following year was again sent out as being indispensable to the colony. With him there returned 700 emigrants, nearly half of whom were soldiers. In 1672 Talon returned to France. Tired of his Canadian life, De Courcelles was allowed, on his own request, to retire from New France.

In the year that Talon returned there went to Canada the man, after Champlain, most celebrated in Frontenac. early history. This was Louis de Buade, Count de Frontenac et de la Paluau. De Buade was born in 1620. He had served in the French wars in Italy, the Netherlands, and Germany, and had risen to be lieutenant-general. Frontenac was large-hearted, but his high birth and military career had made him haughty and severe. This was the more noticeable as he followed the indolent De Courcelles. He maintained a high ceremony and strictness in the affairs of State.

With stern promptitude the Governor called to account Commandant Perrot, of Montreal, for maladministration, and the wrong-doer was thrown into prison. His case was, however, taken up by some of the Sulpicians of Montreal, notably by the Abbé Fenelon, a relative of the great French Archbishop. Governor Frontenac was loudly denounced in Montreal. The old soldier retorted; Perrot and Fenelon were sent as prisoners to France. Disputes also arose between Frontenac and the Bishop, and between Governor and Intendant. The French Government could restore quiet only by recalling both Governor and Intendant. The Bishop’s party rejoiced greatly at this, but the colony could ill spare Frontenac in its coming troubles.

Failure and defeat marked the course of Frontenac’s successors. M. de la Barre, a distinguished naval officer, soon arrived, but was glad to take his flight from the worry of Indian attacks, and the din of disputes with the clergy, in 1685. His successor was the Marquis de Denonville, an honourable and religious military officer, but misfortune seemed to follow his every step. The Iroquois sorely beset the colony. An expedition was planned with much deliberation against their country, but resulted in nothing of consequence. His recall was imperative, and under the pretence of asking his advice on military matters in France Denonville was relieved, and the veteran Frontenac returned to Canada.

Bracing himself firmly to the task, the Governor checked the British in the border settlements, and held the Iroquois well in hand. With clear eye and undiminished vigour, the aged soldier held his difficult post till his death, November 28th, 1698.

Frontenac’s place was hard to fill. A gallant and cautious officer, the Commandant of Montreal, M. de Callières, succeeded him. He held office only until 1703, when he died, greatly regretted by the French Canadians.

M. de Vaudreuil, who had succeeded De Callières in Montreal, now became Governor-General. Vaudreuil. The new Governor was popular with the colonists. His wife was a French Canadian. It was his lot to be Governor at the time of the Peace of Utrecht. Border wars raged fiercely during his rule. Vaudreuil spent the time in France from the Treaty of Utrecht until 1716. He remained in office till 1725, when he died at Quebec, greatly regretted by the people.

M. de Beauharnois, a natural son of Louis XIV., now became Governor-General. He followed the policy of his predecessor in encouraging exploration, and in seeking peace with the Indians. He was gratified in seeing the population increase to 50,000, and his prosperous rule continued until his recall in 1747.

After short terms of office by several Governors, M. de Vaudreuil, son of the former Governor of the same name, arrived at Quebec in 1755. It was his hard lot to pass through the border struggles and the Seven Years’ War, and to be the instrument of handing over to Great Britain the portion of New France still remaining after the Treaty of Utrecht.

It was under Vaudreuil that M. Bigot reached the height of his power as Royal Intendant, and Bigot. accomplished his scandalous robberies. Having commenced his rascalities at Louisbourg, where he had been Intendant, he had come to Canada in 1747. He was a most vigorous and capable man of affairs, but absolutely corrupt. It was not a new thing in New France for officials to be charged with malversation of office. It had been said of Governor Perrot of Montreal, by the quaint Lahontan, “that he cleverly multiplied a yearly salary of 1000 crowns by fifty, through unofficial traffic with the Indians.” A complaint against the elder Vaudreuil had been sent to France, and the French Minister had only written on the margin in pity, “Well, he’s poor.” Frontenac’s mysterious connection with the trader Duluth, gave rise to suspicions; and Vaudreuil the younger was, after the conquest, charged with having been leagued with Bigot, though he was acquitted.

Bigot’s operations, however, were conducted on a magnificent scale. On the purchase of provisions and equipments, he and his confederates in 1757 and 1758, in two transactions, profited 24,000,000 francs. At the very time when the soldiers were without necessaries the king was charged with rations and equipments which had never been supplied. The pay-rolls were falsified to twice or thrice their true amount; 300,000 moccasins for the savages, costing 30,000 francs, were charged for and not delivered.

These are but instances of the shameless corruption in New France. These wrongs weakened the attachment of the people to the Governor or Montcalm when the supreme struggle came at the siege of Quebec. Bigot, after the loss of Canada to France, was tried in Paris, and condemned to expatriation, and required to restore the enormous sum of 1,500,000 francs; but the remedy was too late. Canada was lost, and it was a blessing to the French-Canadians that it fell into the hands of Britain.

Section II.—The Church and Missionaries.

Mention has been made already of the rivalry prevailing between the several religious orders in the early history of Canada. The Recollets for a time withdrew, but the contest still raged between the Sulpicians and the Jesuits. In the eyes of cultivated France the existence of a government made a bishop necessary. The large missionary operations among the Indians made this desirable also.

It would have been a surprise had no contest ensued over the appointment of this important functionary. The Sulpicians recommended Father Queylus, one of their number. Cardinal Mazarin favoured this father, but the Jesuit influence around the king was too strong, and that society was called upon to name a bishop. Their choice fell upon a highly distinguished and Laval. influential young ecclesiastic. This was none other than the afterwards great Laval.

Pavillon de Montigny, of the noble and ancient house of Laval Montmorency, was born April 30th, 1623. In order to enter the Church he renounced his inheritance 1659. as eldest son. He devoted himself to the asceticism of the vigilant and ultramontane band of young enthusiasts at the “terrestrial paradise of M. de Bernieres” in the Caen Hermitage. He was ordained priest in 1647. Nominated now by the Jesuits, his piety and lofty family connections secured his appointment. According to the custom still prevailing, when missionary bishops are appointed, of giving an eastern title, the young bishop was consecrated by the Pope’s nuncio at Paris, on December 8th, 1658, under the name Bishop of Petræa, and Vicar Apostolic of New France. He arrived at Quebec in the following year to meet the strong opposition of the Sulpicians. Father Queylus, having vigorously opposed his authority, was in the end recalled, and returned to France.

Bishop Laval had extremely high notions of the Church and its offices. He was a Hildebrand in a narrower sphere. His rank, natural disposition, the opposition of the Sulpicians, and the state of morals in the colony, all tended to make Laval unyielding, and even dictatorial in his bearing.

Governor D’Argenson disputed with the bishop as to precedence, both in Church and State. The ecclesiastic asserted the rights of the Church to be supreme. Another Governor, the Baron D’Avaugour, a fiery old soldier, thought the bishop’s opinions on the sale of liquor to the Indians, by which at that time the fur trade was largely carried on, were far too precise. Conflict ensued, when the bishop, hastening home to France in 1662, complained of the laxity of his Excellency’s views, and he was recalled.

The Government, in despair, asked Laval to name his own governor. This he did; and M. de Mesy arrived in 1663 as the bishop’s creature. The Sovereign Council was made up of the bishop’s nominees. Dumesnil, agent of the Company of New France, was at this time pressing the Council for a settlement of debts. The agent was too faithful, and members of the Council were themselves debtors of the Company. At the instance of the bishop the papers of Dumesnil were seized; but this proceeding was more than even Governor De Mesy could endure. He asked that the aforesaid members of Council should be excluded. The bishop refused. The governor persisted. His lordship threatened his Excellency with the loss of the sacraments. De Mesy was aroused, and appealed to the opinion of the people; but so undignified a course in the eyes of majestic France procured his recall.

Bishop Laval will, however, ever be remembered as the founder of the seminary of Quebec. He was a far-seeing prelate, and so laid the foundation of an educated class in New France. The seminary received large donations from France. Laval gave his own valuable possessions, large tracts of land in the seigniories of Petite Nation, Isle of Jesus, and Beaupré, to this child of the fifth year of his episcopate. In 1674 he was made Bishop of Quebec by Pope Clement X. The revenues of the French Abbey of Meaubec were given, according to a usual custom, for the support of this missionary bishopric.

Pious ladies did much for the Church in New France. The Hôtel-Dieu, a sick hospital, had been founded by the Duchesse d’Aiguillon, niece of Cardinal Richelieu, in 1637. The Hôtel-Dieu of Montreal was erected by Madame de Bullion and Mdlle. Mance. The great Ursuline convent of Montreal was founded by Madame de la Peltrie, while under Bishop Laval, a poor but pious sister, Bourgeois, began the congregation of Notre Dame for the education of poor girls.

Bishop Laval met his strongest opponent in the person of the stern old soldier Frontenac. It was the same story of precedence at church and in public meetings. The bishop, as we have seen, rejoiced at Frontenac’s recall. Laval also disputed with the Home Government as to his right of removing curés from parishes to which they had been appointed. He actually once disregarded a royal edict. While these contentions were still in progress Laval returned to Paris, and asked to be relieved of office. In 1688 this request was granted. Laval was not permitted to return to New France at once, though his heart was still there. Four years afterwards the prohibition was relaxed, and the late bishop came to New France again.

The French Government was convinced that a bishop of a different order should be chosen, if peace St. Vallier. were to reign in New France. The choice now fell on a noble and pious priest, well known at Court as the Abbé St. Vallier. Jean Baptiste St. Vallier was born at Grenoble, November 14th, 1653. He was educated in the college of his native town, and became a doctor in the Sorbonne at the early age of nineteen. After serving as almoner to the king, and refusing to be made a French bishop, St. Vallier, after visiting New France, accepted the vacant position there. He was consecrated bishop on January 25th, 1688, in the church of St. Sulpice at Paris.

As Bishop Laval had inclined to education, so St. Vallier was drawn out toward charities. The new bishop founded the General Hospital of Quebec. Claiming certain rights in its administration, he engaged to pay the community of the Hôtel-Dieu 1000l. a year. St. Vallier bestowed upon this institution the houses and lands which he had obtained from the Jesuits. He seems to have lived on good terms with Governor Frontenac, now in his second term of office, and with succeeding governors.

As bishop the Jesuits blamed St. Vallier for hostility to Laval’s seminary; but the death, in 1708, of the doughty old ex-bishop, who had returned to Canada, largely ended the contest. Bishop St. Vallier seems to have been a kind and yet dignified prelate. His death, which took place December 26th, 1727, was greatly regretted. A strange dispute took place as to his interment. In the funeral ceremonies a time had been fixed for his burial. According to appointment, the dignitaries assembled, when it was found that the interment had already taken place. It was next reported that there was doubt as to his having been dead. The tomb was opened, and his body was found supple, but he was dead. The affair found its way into the civil courts, and created much angry feeling.

Up to the time of the conquest there had been in all six bishops. During this time the support of the Church was by tax or tithe. During Bishop Laval’s first years one-thirteenth of everything, “whether born of the labour of man, or what the soil produces of itself,” was demanded. Since 1679, however, the rate has been one-twenty-sixth. Complaint has been made by Roman Catholic historians of the opportunities for education having been “miserably scanty” during this period. In the unsettled state of the country it would have been most difficult to have reached the scattered communities. At the same time it is true that the watchful and unwearied efforts of its early bishops placed the Church on its present firm foundation in Lower Canada.

Section III.—The marvellous Opening of the West.

There is nothing more glorious in the history of France than the zeal and success with which her missionaries and explorers became the pathfinders to vast regions of New France and Louisiana. The successful explorer needs almost every good quality. He must have foresight to provide for such wants as cannot be supplied en route; he must have strength and energy to overcome the hardships of the way; he must have a mixture of suavity and firmness to meet with savage tribes, and must know the points of strength and of weakness of these wild peoples; he must also have the faculty of ruling men and attaching his dependents to him. Wind and wave, hunger and thirst, fatigue and sickness, are by no means the most formidable enemies of the discoverer.

Champlain was the first great explorer of the interior of New France. He ascended the Ottawa, Champlain. passed Lake Nipissing, coasted Georgian Bay—the Mer Douce—threaded the inland lakes and rivers of Ontario, crossed the Lake Ontario, or Frontenac, as it was afterwards called, and also penetrated south to the lake that bears his own name.

Champlain’s west fell far short of that of one of his Nicolet. own followers—Jean Nicolet. This brave man was born at Cherbourg in Normandy. In 1618 he came to New France, and was despatched to the interior. In Champlain’s service he became familiar with the customs of the Algonquins and their language. After dwelling some time among the Nipissings, he visited the Far West; seemingly between the years 1634 and 1640.

In a birch-bark canoe, the brave Norman voyageur crossed or coasted Lake Huron, entered the St. Mary’s River and, first of white men, stood at the strait now called Sault Ste. Marie. He does not seem to have known of Lake Superior, but returned down the St. Mary’s River, passed from Lake Huron through the western détour to Michilimackinac, and entered another fresh-water sea, Mitchiganon or Michigan, also afterwards known as the Lake of the Illinois, Lake St. Joseph, Lake Dauphin, or even Algonquin Lake.

Here he visited the Menomonee tribe of Indians, and after them the Winnebagoes. The last-named were the first Indians of the Dakota stock met by the French, and marked the eastern limit of that great family. Nicolet returned to Canada and lived at Three Rivers, but was drowned near Sillery, on the St. Lawrence, by a squall in 1642.

It has been well pointed out by Parkman that the second generation of Jesuit missionaries was The Jesuit Explorers. widely different from the first, whose martyrdom has become so celebrated. Whilst the names of Lalemant and Brébœuf, from their zeal and lofty piety, ought to be written on the skies, many of the missionaries of later time were of the earth, earthy. They were explorers rather than missionaries. Father Marquette was the connecting link between the fervour of the old school and the worldly wisdom of the new.

The fierce wrath of the Iroquois had driven numbers of the Hurons, Ottawas, and several minor Algonquin tribes westward. The Iroquois, like a wedge, had split the northern tribes into east and west. Sault Ste. Marie became a central point for the refugees. The fleeing Algonquins had even pressed on and driven away the Sioux from the southern shore of Lake Superior or Lac de Tracy, as it was afterwards called.

Another gathering place for the fugitives had been found very near the south-west corner of this great lake. This was La Pointe, one of the Apostle Islands, near the present town of Ashland in Wisconsin.

The Jesuits took up these two points as mission centres. We learn of much of the period from 1671 even to 1679 from one of the ablest of the Jesuits, Father Claude Dablon, in the “Jesuit Relations.” In 1669 the Fathers Dablon and Marquette, with their men, had erected a palisaded fort, enclosing a chapel and house, at Sault Ste. Marie. In the same year Father Allouez had begun a mission at Green Bay. In 1670 an intrepid explorer, St. Lusson, under orders from Intendant Talon, came west searching for copper-mines. He was accompanied by the afterwards well-known Joliet.

When this party arrived at Sault Ste. Marie, the Indians were gathered together in great numbers, and with imposing ceremonies St. Lusson, in the name of his sovereign, Louis XIV., took possession of “Sainte Marie du Saut, as also of Lakes Huron and Superior, the island of Manitoulin, and all countries, rivers, lakes, and streams contiguous and adjacent thereunto.” A cedar cross was then erected, and upon it the royal arms in lead were placed. The Jesuit father Allouez then harangued the Indians, magnifying the sovereign Louis XIV., and telling them “that the great king had 10,000 Onontios as great as the Governor of Quebec.”

The station at La Pointe was occupied by the Jesuit father Marquette, of whom we have more to learn. Shortly after this time the Sioux attacked the mission of L’Esprit at La Pointe, and the young priest and his Indians were driven back to Sault Ste. Marie. Marquette now undertook the new mission of St. Ignace at Michilimackinac, and Father André that of Manitoulin Island.

It was undoubtedly the pressing desire of the Jesuit The Mississippi. fathers to visit the country of the Illinois and their great river that led to the discovery of the “Father of Waters.” Father Allouez indeed had already ascended the Fox River from Lake Michigan, and seen the marshy lake which is the head of a tributary of the Mississippi. At last on June 4th, 1672, the French minister, Colbert, wrote to Talon: “As after the increase of the colony there is nothing more important for the colony than the discovery of a passage to the South Sea, his Majesty wishes you to give it your attention.” This message to the Intendant came as he was leaving for France, and he recommended the scheme and the explorer he had in view for carrying it out to the notice of the Governor Frontenac, who had just arrived.

Governor Frontenac approved and the explorer started. The man chosen for the enterprise was Louis Joliet. Joliet, who had already been at Sault Ste. Marie. He was of humble birth, and was a native of New France. He had been educated at the Jesuit College, Quebec, but had given up thought of entering the Church in order to prosecute the fur-trade. The French Canadian explorer was acceptable to the missionaries, and immediately journeyed west to meet Marquette, who was to accompany him.

Joliet, it is true, in the end received but little—the usual reward of explorers in New France. He was refused a possession in the western land he had discovered, and given a trail on the barren island of Anticosti, where he built a fort. He died before 1737.

M. Joliet met the priest Marquette at St. Ignace Mission, Michilimackinac. Jacques Marquette, Marquette. of whom we have already heard, was born in 1637 at Laon, Champagne, in France. He sprang of an ancient and distinguished family. His mother was the pious Rose de Salle, a relative of De la Salle, the founder of the “Brothers of the Christian Schools.” In 1654 young Marquette entered the Jesuit Society, and in 1666 sailed for Canada. On arriving at Three Rivers he began at once to study the Algonquin language. We have already seen him at Sault Ste. Marie and La Pointe. At Michilimackinac the chapel of “walls of logs and roof of bark” had been erected, and near it the Hurons soon built a palisaded fort.

On May 17th, 1673, with deepest religious emotion, the trader and missionary launched forth on Lake Michigan their two canoes, containing seven Frenchmen in all, to make the greatest discovery of the time. They hastened to Green Bay, followed the course of Father Allouez up the Fox River, and reached the tribe of the Mascoutins or Fire Nation on this river. These were new Indians to the explorers. They were peaceful, and helped the voyagers on their way. With guides furnished the two canoes were transported for 2700 paces, and the headwaters of the Wisconsin were reached.

After an easy descent of thirty or forty leagues, on June 17th, 1673, the feat was accomplished, the Mississippi was discovered by white men, and the canoes shot out upon its surface in latitude 43°. Sailing down the great river for a month, the party reached the village of Akansea, on the Arkansas River, in latitude 34°, and on July 17th began their return journey. It is but just to say that some of the Recollet fathers, between whom and the Jesuits, as we have seen, jealousy existed, have disputed the fact of Joliet and Marquette ever reaching this point. The evidence here seems entirely in favour of the explorers.

On their return journey the party turned from the Mississippi into a tributary river in latitude 38°. This was the Illinois. Ascending this, the Indian town of Kaskaskia was reached, and here for a time Father Marquette remained. Joliet and his party passed on, reached the headwaters of the Illinois, crossed to the Miamis, and descending it reached Lake Michigan. The joyful explorers now hastened on to Michilimackinac, and thence to Montreal, to proclaim their discovery, while Marquette having gained access to the Illinois Indians, returned near the end of September to Green Bay. Joliet’s party were successful on their journey till the rapids of the St. Lawrence above Montreal were reached, where the papers containing the details of the voyage were lost, and the explorer could but make his report from memory.

Father Marquette, now detained at Green Bay by dangerous hemorrhage, was not able to visit the Illinois tribe till the winter of 1674-5. On his way to his missionary work he was overtaken by his disease and compelled to land, build a hut, and take repose for a time. On April 8th, 1675, the brave father reached Kaskaskia, and “was received there as an angel of light.” Returning to Green Bay he was again too ill to proceed. He landed, was seized with his last illness, and died in a bark cabin on the lonely shores of Lake Michigan, May 18th, 1675. His bones were removed to Michilimackinac in 1677.

High encomiums of Father Marquette fill—and deservedly so—the “Jesuit Relations.” We have his autograph map of the Mississippi. This great stream he desired to call “Conception River,” but the name, like those of “Colbert” and “Buade,” which were both bestowed upon it, have failed to take the place of the musical Indian name.

One of the most daring of the early explorers was Daniel Greysolon Duluth, or De l’Hût. Charlevoix Duluth. speaks of him as “one of the bravest officers the king has ever had in this colony.” He was born at St. Germain-en-Laye, though Lahontan calls him a “gentleman of Lyons.” He was a cousin of Tonty, the faithful friend of the explorer La Salle, and came to Canada in 1674, but went back to Europe and was present at the battle of Senef, where he met his after friend, Hennepin. In 1678 he returned to Canada, and soon went west to explore the country of the Sioux. Duluth’s enemy, the Intendant Duchesnau, charges him with having been at this time a freebooter, working in a secret compact with the governor.

Duluth suddenly bursts upon our view in 1680 on the Mississippi, where he appears as the deliverer from captivity of Hennepin and his two companions. The chief scene of Duluth’s activities was in the region about Lake Superior, and the city of Duluth, near the old Fond du Lac, well represents the centre of his work at the mouth of the little river St. Louis, which commemorates his royal master. The charge of the Intendant of being a “leader of coureurs des bois systematically breaking the royal ordinances as to the fur-trade,” would seem not to have been far astray; for he was on mysteriously intimate terms with Governor Frontenac. To Duluth belongs the great distinction of founding Fort Kaministiquia on Thunder Bay, Lake Superior, and this would seem to have been before 1700. Though a terrible sufferer from the gout, Duluth was a doughty warrior against the Iroquois. In 1695 he was placed in charge of Fort Frontenac. Governor Vaudreuil in 1710 announces the death of this famous explorer as having occurred during the previous winter.

Among the brilliant cluster of explorers belonging to this period in New France, none are so Lahontan. unique and amusing, not to say inventive in their narrations, as the Baron Lahontan. He was a young Gascon of good family, born about the year 1667. In the year of his majority he came to Canada, and was an observer and critic of all that went on there. He was “caustic and sceptical.” He had little respect for religion, and might almost be called the Voltaire of New France. He was merciless upon the Jesuits, scoffed and sneered at their work, and rather delighted in the vices and waywardness of the Indians. He was a favourite of Governor Frontenac, and was selected by him to bear the despatch to France announcing Phipps’ defeat in 1690.

The baron travelled in the Far West,—how far is the matter under dispute. He describes the “Rivière Longue,” which he claims to have ascended, from the Mississippi, to the west, and of which he has left a map. It is generally believed that he may have got from Indian description some clue to the great Missouri. As to his having visited such a river, Parkman declares it a “sheer fabrication.” Father Charlevoix, the Jesuit traveller, never forgave Lahontan for the attacks on his order, and says in his spicy manner: “The episode of the voyage up the Long River is as fabulous as the Barataria of Sancho Panza.” Lahontan became in time Deputy-Governor of Placentia (Newfoundland), but quarrelled with his superior, fled to France, and only avoided arrest by another flight. His first work was published in 1703; several editions appeared. It is interesting for its statements about the Indians, and for an Indian vocabulary.

But no doubt the most remarkable and capable of all the explorers of New France was René-Robert La Salle. Cavalier de la Salle. His vast projects were not crowned with success, but La Salle was unsurpassed in the courage with which he met misfortune, and the energy with which he traversed the continent. Indeed one is appalled at the dangers and hardships endured by him. He was born at Rouen in 1643, and was educated among the Jesuits. He even entered the order, and surrendered his paternal fortune in doing so. He afterwards seems to have become bitterly hostile to the Jesuits, and much preferred the Recollets, the “barefoots of St. Francis,” as the Indians were used to call them.

In 1667 La Salle, with his brother Jean Cavalier, a priest, came to New France. Obtaining from the seminary at Montreal a seigniory which he called “St. Sulpice,” La Salle built the village, either at this time or later, called Lachine, as marking the explorer’s dream that up the St. Lawrence was the path to China. In 1669, with the authority of Governor de Courcelles, Seigneur la Salle made a journey up Lake Ontario, and by way of Fond du Lac, now Burlington Bay, crossed the country to the Grand River, reaching it probably near the present village of Caledonia, if not further north, intending to descend to Lake Erie, or Conti, as it was later called.

Here the party met Joliet returning from his first expedition to Sault Ste. Marie. La Salle, under plea of illness, separated himself from Fathers Dollier and Galinée, of the Seminary of St. Sulpice, who accompanied him, and while they thought him returning to Montreal they descended the Grand River to Lake Erie.

At this point comes in the mystery of La Salle. In a paper entitled “Histoire de M. de la Salle,” purporting to be a conversation between La Salle and an unknown writer, it is stated that La Salle turned eastward, went to the Iroquois country instead of Montreal, was conducted by the savages to the Ohio River, and descended it to 37° N. In support of this, Joliet’s map of the Mississippi, afterwards made, states that La Salle descended the Ohio.

Another part of this “Histoire” claims that on this mysterious disappearance of La Salle he likewise by way of the River Illinois, reached the Mississippi and descended it to 35° N. This statement lacks confirmation. A great controversy has raged on this question. The truth of the matter would seem to be that La Salle’s claim to have descended the Mississippi at this time is false, the report having probably taken its birth in the desire of the Recollets to rob Joliet and Marquette of their laurels.

On the arrival of Frontenac as governor, La Salle and he at once fraternized. They were of kindred spirit, they were both men of marked ability, their combination might be of material benefit to both, and in common they disliked the Jesuits. La Salle entered heartily into the governor’s plan of having the fort at Cataraqui replaced by one of solid stone.

In 1674 La Salle went to France and obtained a patent of nobility and a grant of the Seigniory of Frontenac. The fortunate seignior returned and made Fort Frontenac, as the new fort was now to be called, his residence. In time the fortified stone fort was built, and was a considerable establishment. It contained a fair complement of men; nine cannon threatened the intruder from its battlements; outside its precincts a band of settlers was placed; near its walls was built a chapel, and beside this was the priest’s house in which now Father Hennepin dwelt. La Salle visited France again in 1677; on this occasion to obtain authority to advance to the west. He received a patent from the king in 1678. The explorer likewise obtained large loans from relatives and others to carry out his enterprises.

While in France he attached to himself a man who became the right hand of all his undertakings—one of the bravest and most faithful men in the service of France in the New World. This was Henri de Tonty. This man was the son of Laurent de Tonty, an Italian officer, who in the troubles of the time was confined in the Bastille for eight years. From this Italian officer, as its inventor, the Tontine system of life assurance receives its name. Young Tonty entered the French army as a cadet in 1668. In the siege of Messina by the Spaniards the young officer lost a hand by the bursting of a grenade. He obtained afterwards a false hand covered by a glove, and this in his conflicts in the west he used with much effect, and was in consequence named in New France “Main-de-fer.” On the advice of the Prince of Conti, La Salle took Tonty into his service.

On the return of La Salle to Quebec new combinations were made with powerful merchants, and the expedition was begun.

Here joined him Father Hennepin, who had come down from Fort Frontenac to meet him. This father, if Hennepin. not one of the loftiest spirits of the time, was at least one of the most remarkable. Louis Hennepin was born at Roy, in Hainault, about the year 1640. He entered the order of the Recollets. It has been mentioned that he was present at the battle of Senef. He was of an unsettled and adventurous disposition, and came to Canada in 1676. He sailed in company with Bishop Laval, and made a good impression on him. Engaged in various services in the wilds, for which he had a taste, he now, with the approval of his superior, found himself joined to La Salle’s expedition.

La Salle, Tonty, Hennepin, and the party of some thirty left Fort Frontenac for the mouth of the Niagara River in two small vessels at different times, late in the autumn of 1678. At a chosen spot above the Falls of Niagara was built a vessel called the Griffin, named, it is supposed, from Frontenac’s crest. With this it was intended to navigate the upper lakes. In August La Salle arrived, and with him the Recollet brothers, one of whom, Le Membré, has left a memoir of the journey in the “Établissement du Foi.”

On August 7th La Salle and his followers embarked for the west, and their little vessel was an object of terror to the natives as she fired her small cannon. On the arrival of the Griffin at Michilimackinac, the journey was continued to Green Bay, and from this point the vessel, laden with furs, was despatched to Niagara to satisfy La Salle’s creditors, who, urged on by his enemies the Jesuits, had seized Fort Frontenac and all his property. The Griffin was never heard of again.

With a portion of his party La Salle now hastened forward, and near the large Indian village in January, 1680, began his fort. Father Hennepin and two companions were sent in February on an expedition down the Illinois River to reach the Mississippi, and then ascend it. Tonty was to remain in charge of the fort, which La Salle, on account of his misfortune, had called Fort Crèvecœur, or Heartbreak; while the commander himself would return by an enormous land and water journey of 1000 miles to Canada.

Of the trip made by him, Hennepin the Recollet father afterwards in 1684 wrote an account. It must be confessed that a haze of uncertainty surrounds all Hennepin’s recitals. His first published story of his voyages is generally accepted as true; the second, published at Utrecht in 1697, in which he claims to have descended the Mississippi to the Arkansas, is now rejected by most writers. With his two companions, Accan and Auguel of Picardy, the father reached the Mississippi. Here he was captured by the Sioux, and with them went northward to the grand falls, where the city of Minneapolis now stands, and these he named St. Anthony of Padua, in honour of the patron saint of his order, who is also the guardian of sailors. On the Mississippi, as already stated, the captives were rescued by Duluth. It is now generally believed that the forest-ranger had heard of the three Frenchmen in captivity, and had hastened to their rescue.

Tonty had many difficulties at Crèvecœur. The Iroquois invaded the Illinois country, and many conflicts took place, in which the Italian captain proved himself shrewd and valiant. La Salle, as we have seen, had returned to Canada. He was marvellously successful in repairing his shattered fortunes, but while at Fort Frontenac received the bad news that his men at Crèvecœur had mutinied and destroyed the fort. Some of the returning mutineers were arrested by him and imprisoned at Fort Frontenac. Knowing that the faithful Tonty must be in a sad plight, the commander fitted out an expedition to relieve him, which soon arrived at the Miamis River. Tonty on the loss of Crèvecœur had betaken himself, after various wanderings, to a village of the Pottawattamies. La Salle sought long for his faithful Tonty, but at length the rejoiced friends met at Michilimackinac. The unfortunate explorers returned to Fort Frontenac.

But the heart of steel of the commander was hard to break. In December, 1681, the great expedition of which La Salle had long dreamt was planned—this, to find the mouth of the Mississippi. Hastening west by the usual route, the “Father of Waters” was reached on February 8th, 1682. The Arkansas River, the furthest point hitherto gained, was left behind, so also the Natchez Indians, afterwards so celebrated, and sailing out by different mouths of the river upon the Gulf of Mexico, the dream became a reality. On the dry shore of the gulf beyond the mouth, a column was erected on April 9th, 1682, with the usual ceremonies, and the country was claimed for the King of France, and given the name Louisiana.

La Salle returned up the Mississippi and took the route for Canada. On his arrival there he found that the Governor Frontenac had been recalled. The wearied explorer was greatly discouraged, having journeyed 5000 leagues, most of it on foot, lost 40,000 crowns, and endured untold hardships and disappointments. His chief discouragements had been the treachery of his men, and the hatred of his enemies.

Returned to France, the explorer saw the star of hope rise again. It was now determined to colonize the country at the mouth of the Mississippi. In company with Commander Beaujeu, of the Royal Navy, La Salle departed on July 24th, 1684, in four ships with a large number of colonists. After many difficulties, and a severe illness of La Salle, the expedition reached Louisiana, but failed to find the mouth of the Mississippi. On the coast of Texas they built a fort—St. Louis. Beaujeu returned to France, and with him some of the colonists. La Salle, with a chosen band, made an overland expedition, but the mouth of the great river could not yet be found, and his party returned to Fort St. Louis. The disappointed leader now determined to make the great overland journey to Fort Crèvecœur. His faithful Tonty knowing of the coming of the colony to the mouth of the Mississippi, had already descended the river, but meeting no one had returned to the Illinois country.

After journeying many weary days La Salle was waylaid by some of the baser members of his own band and basely shot. The mutineers, however, quarrelled over the booty, and the murderers were killed, for vengeance suffered them not to live. The survivors of the exploring band, including the priest Cavalier, La Salle’s brother, arrived in a miserable plight at Crèvecœur. The St. Louis colonists suffered death or slavery at the hands of the Spaniards. Tonty spent his life among the Illinois, and here disappears from view. Hennepin quarrelled with all his old friends, and even deserting his own country, entered the service of William III. of England, to whom his second or improbable work of 1697 is dedicated. Thus passed away the trio—La Salle, Tonty, and Hennepin, whose fortunes had been so closely bound together.

Following in the train of the great explorers came De la Verandrye, a most successful discoverer. Like Verandrye. Duluth, he found on Lake Superior the scene of his earlier operations. He discovered the rivers of the Canadian North-West, and his sons reached the Rocky Mountains. Pierre Gualtier de Varennes, Sieur de la Verandrye, was born at Three Rivers in 1685, and was the son of the French Governor of Three Rivers. He early went to France, and served as a cadet in the Marlborough wars. He was severely wounded, rose to the rank of lieutenant, and came to Canada, to live in poverty. The fur-trade attracted him as affording the only opening in Canada for a gentleman and a soldier.

While trading on Lake Superior he heard at Nepigon in 1728, from an Indian Ochagach, about the Winnipeg country. A birch-bark map of the country was obtained from this intelligent savage, and forwarded to Governor Beauharnois at Quebec. The Governor was ambitious of equalling his predecessors in discovery, and willingly granted permission to Verandrye to explore, and issued a licence to trade.

At Michilimackinac, a Father Gonor and Verandrye laid their plans, and in 1731 Verandrye’s party proceeded to Lake Superior, left the lake by the Groselliers River, now called Pigeon River, and took the canoe-route to the interior. Reaching in the first year of their journey Rainy Lake, they built Fort St. Pierre at the foot of it. The site of this fort is still pointed out. A descent of the Rainy River was made, and in 1732 Fort St. Charles was constructed on the south-east shore of Lake of the Woods. Across Lac des Bois, or Minitie, as this lake was called, and down the Winnipeg or Maurepas River, brought the explorers to Lake Winnipeg or Ounipique. Having built Fort Maurepas at the mouth of Winnipeg River, the lake was crossed and the Red River was discovered. Ascending this, the Assiniboine, called by the party St. Charles, was reached, and Fort Rouge built about 1735 or 1736, where the city of Winnipeg now stands. Going west on the Assiniboine River, Fort de la Reine was erected at Portage la Prairie, as a good trading post, in 1738.

Verandrye was accompanied by three sons, and his nephew Jemeraye. While one of his sons, with a priest and a number of the party were unfortunately killed on an island in Lake of the Woods by the Sioux, another of his sons with a band of voyageurs ascended in 1742 the Souris, or St. Pierre River, made a portage to the Missouri, proceeded up this great river, and, on the 1st of January, 1743, saw the eastern slope of the Rocky Mountains or “Montagnes de Pierre”—first of whitemen north of Mexico. After this the explorers visited Lakes Manitoba, Winnipegoosis, and Dauphin, and the Saskatchewan as far as the Poskoiac—“the Forks.” The father and his sons gained much honour but little reward for their discoveries. They were overwhelmed with debt. The veteran explorer was on the point of visiting the Upper Saskatchewan when he died—1749. His sons lost their licence, it having been given to Legardeur de St. Pierre, who ascended the Saskatchewan and in 1753 built Fort la Jonquiere, near the site of the present town of Calgary at the foot of the Rocky Mountains.

Section IV.—Indian Hostilities.

Reference has been already made to Champlain’s mistake in involving himself with the Algonquin Indians against their enemies the Iroquois. The valiant founder left a sad heritage to his successors. M. Montmagny succeeded Champlain as Governor in 1636. The Hurons and Algonquins, the allies of Montmagny, called him “Ononthio”—“the Mountain.” The great effort of the Iroquois was to break up the alliance of the Hurons and Algonquins with the French.

The building of Montreal in 1642 by M. Maisoneuve was regarded as a menace by the Iroquois. During the two years succeeding its founding it was in a constant state of siege. The fury of the Iroquois knew no bounds. To the west, near Lake Simcoe, the daring Jesuit fathers had gone, and done much work among the Hurons. Like a forest fire the Iroquois swept down upon the Hurons and their missionaries. Jogues, while on an embassy to the Iroquois in 1646, was put to death; Daniel was killed and his body burnt in 1648; and the two distinguished missionaries, Lalemant and Brébœuf, suffered terrible tortures. “Tearing off the scalp” of Lalemant, his butchers “thrice dashed upon his head boiling water in imitation of baptism. They clove open his chest, took out his heart and devoured it.”

From Tadoussac to Quebec, thence to Three Rivers, and all the way to Ville Marie, there was nothing but traces of blood and havoc. The Hurons were swept out of existence, or driven to the Far West.

An incident of surpassing bravery in 1660 checked the fury of the Iroquois invasion, when it looked as if they were about to exterminate the French. Sixteen Frenchmen, led by one Captain Dollard des Ormeaux, with Hurons and Algonquins made up a war-party of sixty. At a spot north of Montreal, near the bank of the Ottawa, they secreted themselves; 200 Iroquois warriors advanced to attack them and were repelled. Reinforced by 500 more the Iroquois again attacked. For ten days the brave defenders held out. All of Dollard’s party were killed except five Frenchmen and four Hurons, who were reserved for torture. The Hurons escaped to Quebec and told the tale. The Iroquois had already planned with 1200 men to sweep the banks of the St. Lawrence, but the heroism of Dollard’s band seems to have led them to change their minds.

The more peaceful disposition of the Iroquois, and the arrival from France, in response to the frantic cry of the settlers for help, of a company of soldiers in 1662, gave rest to the colony. The Indian country was a source of constant anxiety. When M. de Tracy arrived, as we have seen, as Viceroy in 1665, he had instructions to conquer and exterminate the Iroquois. Four forts were built for protecting the country: St. Louis, at the mouth of the River Richelieu; Fort Richelieu, near the rapids on that river; Ste. Therese, further up the river; and Ste. Anne, on an island in Lake Champlain.

In January, 1666, M. Courcelles penetrated, though with discomfort to his troops, the very country of the Iroquois and brought them to terms. In the following year De Tracy headed a strong expedition, which entered the cantons of the Iroquois and humbled them.

In 1680 the brilliant old warrior Frontenac held a great meeting with the Iroquois at Montreal. Appearing amongst them with great display, he seized their tomahawks from the hands of the Iroquois, threw them into the river, declaring that Hurons and Algonquins as well as Ottawas and Illinois were his friends. He failed, however, in cementing a peace between the Iroquois and Illinois. Trouble with the Intendant and Laval’s opposition, as we have seen, resulted in Frontenac’s recall.

He was followed by a weak administrator, M. de la Barre. The new Governor immediately assembled a meeting of notables; he received their opinion; but a fatal indecision always overtook him. At this time a new element appeared in Indian affairs. The English from New York were gaining a strong influence over the Iroquois. The British undersold the French traders. They stirred up the Iroquois against the French in order to control the Indian trade. Colonel Thomas Dongan, a man of great energy, now became Governor of the colony of New York. De la Barre spent his time negotiating with the Governor, or striving to make peace with the Iroquois. They were simply toying with the French, and waiting for opportunities of advantage.

In the year 1684 De la Barre collected an expedition upwards of 1000 strong to attack the Iroquois. Meeting ambassadors of the French near Oswego, on the Lake Shore, the Six Nations got the advantage in the negotiation, the Senecas’ envoy declaring that the war between his tribe and the Illinois, allies of the French, must continue till one tribe or other should be exterminated. This famous expedition, like that of the French king of renown, “marched up the hill, and then marched down again.”

Shortly after this, when rumours of a Seneca attack were becoming frequent the Governor was recalled, and the Marquis de Denonville, an officer of dragoons, was sent out as Governor-General with 600 troops.

Denonville soon went west to Cataraqui, the fort near where Kingston now stands, and conferred with the Six Nations. He insisted on their making peace with the Illinois: they insolently refused. Denonville now made preparations for a strong force to clear the Iroquois country. This inhuman policy was strongly objected to in a correspondence with the Governor by Colonel Dongan. Colonel Dongan, failing to stop the project, then urged the Iroquois, in their own interests, to attack the French before the reinforcements came. The Governor of New York has been much blamed for this.

But in 1687 the additional troops arrived—800 strong—under Chevalier de Vaudreuil. The Governor had as many more militia and half as many Indians to make up his army. Denonville committed an act of treachery at this juncture which has ever made his name infamous. He induced a number of Iroquois chiefs to meet him in conference at Cataraqui, seized them, and sent them home in chains to France to work in the galleys.

With much pomp the Governor went forward to his work of depopulating the Iroquois country. Beaten in 1687. fight, the Indians quitted the country and went to the west. The devastator ravaged the country, destroyed the standing crops, and slaughtered the cattle. The Senecas suffered the most, losing half their tribe. The Governor moved westward and built a fort at Niagara, but his men perished from disease. Denonville now retired, and the expelled Indians returned to their homes. The Six Nations were more desperate than ever. Every border settlement of French Canada was attacked; fire and tomahawk were everywhere, and all the horrors of an Indian war were upon the country. Governor Dongan advised the Indians to less sanguinary measures, but not to peace. “I wish you,” said he, “to quit the tomahawk, it is true, but I desire not that you bury it; content yourselves with hiding it under the grass.” Not very Christian advice, certainly! However, conferences between the Indians and French were secured in the winter of 1687-8.

At this juncture a wily Huron chief, named Kondiaronk, or “the Rat,” arrived at Cataraqui, and informed the French of his devotion to them. The French, anxious to make peace with the Iroquois, rather slighted Kondiaronk. He said nothing, but hid his revenge. Shortly after a band of Iroquois, coming to Cataraqui, were waylaid, and a number of them killed by “the Rat” and his followers. “Now,” said he, “I have killed the peace.” He then sent back all the prisoners but one to their own people, saying to them that he had made the attack with the authority of the French Governor.

The remaining prisoner he took to Michilimackinac, and gave him over to be put to death by the French commandant, who knew nothing of the peace. An aged Iroquois prisoner was then sent to his own people with the story of this further evidence of French perfidy. The cunning chieftain largely succeeded in his plot, and the Governor of New York fanned the hostile flame among the Iroquois. The spring of 1689 seemed a time of perfect peace, but it was the calm before the storm. On the night of the 5th of August, 1400 Iroquois, amidst rain and hail, silently drew their canoes up to Montreal Island. Stealthily they surrounded every house in the sleeping village of Lachine. A signal given, and fire, and tomahawk, and scalping-knife were doing their dreadful work. Two hundred men, women, and children suffered the horrors of Indian butchery. The scene beggars description. Of the prisoners taken many were roasted alive.

This proved the last year of Denonville’s administration, and no one regretted its being so. Long afterwards it was spoken of as “the year of the massacre.” The veteran Frontenac had been asked to accept the Governorship, and as his old rival, Laval, had resigned in the year before, he accepted the position, and arrived at Quebec on the 18th of October, 1689. War was now declared between Britain and France, and this gave Frontenac an opportunity of striking a blow at the English border settlements, from which no doubt the Iroquois had received their inspiration. Frontenac had found the Iroquois at the gates of Montreal, and even after his coming they had gained certain successes; while he heard with dismay that Cataraqui had been blown up by orders of Denonville.

The presence of Frontenac, however, gave new courage to the Canadians; even women became expert in the use of firearms. Frontenac sent messages to the Ottawas and western allies of the French, after his attacks on the English settlements. The wily Kondiaronk endeavoured to form an Indian league even against the French, his former friends. The diplomacy of Frontenac kept the Iroquois from entering it.

In 1691 a great Iroquois expedition, numbering 1000, came as far as the junction of the St. Lawrence and Ottawa, but accomplished little. In 1692, however, these threatenings prevented the colonists sowing seed in their fields. The colonists were being inured to their own defence. Roused to desperation, the veteran Governor determined to put an end to these continual aggressions of the Iroquois. He assembled in 1696, 2300 men, and with this considerable army went up the St. Lawrence. Tribe after tribe of the Six Nations were driven out, and their country ravaged. The French prestige was completely restored in the west. A Sioux chief, representing twenty-two bands, pledged his service. The order of St. Louis was bestowed on Frontenac, and though he died in 1698, his power over the Indians had become so strong that, at a great gathering in 1701, 1300 Indians, representing all the Iroquois and Algonquins, in the presence of Governor de Callières established, amid salvos of artillery and discharge of small arms, the peace of North America.

The French and English still strove vigorously for control over the various Indian tribes. While Pontiac. the English seemed more powerful with the Six Nations and other Indians to the south, the French retained their influence over the tribes of the upper lakes. This was well seen in the fact that the last blow against the English, sixty years after this great peace, was dealt by the Indian Pontiac and his confederates, whose story Parkman has so well told.

Detroit had been founded by La Motte Cadillac in 1701. The settlement of which it was the centre had in sixty years grown till it numbered 2500 souls. The fort in 1763 contained about 100 houses. The British had captured it in the year after the fall of Quebec. It was a military and fur-trading depôt, and contained about 120 soldiers, and forty or fifty fur-traders and engagés. Two schooners, the Beaver and the Gladwyn, did its trade.

It was to capture this and the associated fort of Michilimackinac that Pontiac laid his plans. Pontiac, we are told, was “king and lord of all the country.” He was born about the year 1713, and belonged to the Ottawa tribe, though his mother is said to have been Ojibway. He lived on a small island near the St. Clair. His plan was to enter Detroit with the appearance of seeking peace; but each of his followers had cut a portion of his gun-barrel off, and secreted the gun under his clothing. The policy to be followed was “to kill every Englishman, but not to touch the scalp of a Frenchman.”

Unfortunately for his plans, the attachment of an Indian girl to Commandant Gladwyn betrayed May, 1763. the secret, and saved the fort. With sixty chiefs as his followers the crafty Pontiac entered the fort, but armed men met him at every turn. He then assumed an appearance of devoted friendship. The danger for this occasion was over, but shortly after the siege of Detroit began. It was conducted with great skill. Pontiac, though the leader of numerous bands, held them together for months by his personal power, issued paper-money, and showed consummate statesmanship.

A part of the plan of war was the taking of Michilimackinac. On the 4th of June, 1763, this fort, under a Commander Etherington, was attacked by the Ojibways during a “ball play,” and many of the unsuspecting residents massacred. The Ottawas rescued some of the prisoners from burning. On the failure of the Indian confederacy Pontiac went, in company with the Indians of the upper lakes, to Oswego, where he met Sir William Johnston and concluded a peace. In 1769 the well-known chief was in the neighbourhood of St. Louis, at Cahokia. The Illinois Indians gave him a feast. An English trader, displeased at this, bribed a worthless Indian with a barrel of whisky to kill him. Thus fell Pontiac in 1769.

Section V.—Wars and Truces ending the Conquest of 1759.

Peace, as we have seen, restored Canada to France in 1632. This was the Treaty of St. Germain-en-Laye. Before a score of years another outbreak Peace of St. Germain-en-Laye.
Treaty of Westphalia.
between the powers had taken place; and now to end the war the Treaty of Westphalia was signed at Münster in 1648—one of the waymarks in the history of modern Europe—the establishment of the idea involved in the “balance of power.” The infant Louis XIV. had then been five years on the throne, and the policy of France was dictated by Mazarin, who followed the great Cardinal Richelieu in his plans. Louis XIV., as he grew, was matured in this school of national aggrandizement. The age of Louis XIV. in France was in military glory, in manners, and in literature one of wonderful brilliancy; in politics and economics it was the age of lead. Napoleon long afterwards revived in a different form the France of Louis XIV., so far as grasping at power was concerned.

Thus grew the wars—and war in Europe meant war in America—with gaily-decorated regiments, and stately men-of-war in Europe, with hungry and badly-equipped troops, and worn-out or condemned old ships in New France. Louis XIV. was at his height when the Grand Alliance was made against him in 1690. It consisted of Germany, Spain, Holland, and England. William III. of England, who was versed in the school of French diplomacy, was the leader of this league. With its European battles we have now nothing to do. Governor Frontenac had but returned on his second term to Canada. He was exasperated with the English of New York for inciting the Iroquois, and New France was in her last gasp. War being declared between the mother-countries gave him the opportunity of striking a blow at the English settlements.

The first expedition was started from Montreal under Le Moyne de Ste. Helene, one of the famous 1690. Longueil family, and with him another Le Moyne, surnamed D’Iberville, of whom more hereafter. The party of 209 was made up of coureurs des bois, with nearly 100 “Christian” Iroquois. In mid-winter they fell on the outpost of Corlaer, or Schenectady, in New York, and silently in Indian fashion a night attack was made, and sixty men, women, and children were slain in cold blood. The second party, commanded by François Hertel, left Three Rivers in the end of January, and on their attack of Salmon Falls, New Hampshire, thirty English settlers were killed or wounded. The third expedition, under M. de Portneuf, started from Quebec. It was twice the size of the Three Rivers party. The town of Canso was sacked, and numbers like those in Salmon Falls were among the fallen.

These were barbarous measures. No doubt they were looked on by the French as retributive, but the customs of border warfare on both sides were unmerciful. The colonists were awed by this mode of warfare, and no doubt it did much to restore the prestige of the French among the Indian tribes.

The Puritan colonies were of too stern stuff to endure quietly such outrageous attacks. They furbished their arms, which had been chiefly used in Indian warfare. Boston, as was usual, took the lead. Ships and money were with some difficulty gathered together. 1690. And now for a Miles Standish or other leader “with a martial air.” The most available officer to command was a rough backwoods captain from the Kennebec in Maine, William Phipps. He was now upwards of forty years of age. He had succeeded after two attempts, with the assistance of friends in England, in fishing up treasure from a sunken Spanish galleon in the West Indies, and thus secured for himself a small fortune and the honour of knighthood. There was much of the ruffian spirit about the vociferous coasting captain. Thirty-two vessels, large and small, were gathered for the expedition, and with pious Puritan services the enterprise was undertaken.

It was decided to strike the first blow at Acadia. Acadia had grown but little. There were not in it at Acadia. this time 1000 people all told. Port Royal, the Acadian capital, was defended by only seventy-two soldiers, and its fortifications were in ruins. In May Sir William Phipps appeared with a forty-gun frigate, and several smaller war-vessels, before Port Royal, and to him it at once surrendered. Other points on the Acadian coast submitted, and Boston, ever forward to seize territory, considered Acadia as now an appanage of its own.

With his fleet of thirty-five sail, and having on board 2000 militiamen, Commander Phipps set out for Quebec. Frontenac was at Montreal when he heard of the approaching fleet. Intelligence had already reached him that the overland expedition against Canada had failed, and thus free, he hastened down the St. Lawrence with 1200 men to defend the capital. On the 16th of October the fleet appeared before Quebec. Sir William sent a messenger demanding a surrender. Frontenac, confident of his strength, refused to submit to the “usurper William III.,” and said “the muzzles of his cannon would bear the answer” to the English demands.

Thirteen hundred men of the New England militia disembarked on the soft flats of Beauport, but could accomplish nothing. The cannonade from Quebec damaged the ships of the Bostonians, while the ships could damage the citadel but little. The siege was raised, the New Englanders returned crestfallen to Boston, and Massachusetts was compelled to issue paper-money to meet the heavy debt incurred. Frontenac sent word to his sovereign of the great deliverance, a medal was struck, the new church of Notre Dame de la Victoire was built in Quebec, and an annual day of rejoicing set apart in memory of the event.

The great failure of the Boston fleet was aggravated still more by disaster from another quarter. This was from the well-directed attacks of an expedition under M. d’Iberville. Pierre le Moyne d’Iberville was one of the most brilliant commanders of his time. He was a native of Canada, his father, Charles le Moyne, first Seignior D’Iberville. of Longeuil and Chateauguay, having come from France in 1641. Pierre was the third son, and was born in Montreal in 1661. He was recommended for a commission in the French navy, and afterwards became captain of a frigate.

After various brilliant naval attacks in previous years, in 1696 his victories over the seaboard forts of the British were most disastrous. The fortress of Pemaquid had been raised at the mouth of the Kennebec as a protection from the French of Acadia. D’Iberville took this, the strongest fort on the Atlantic coast, and demolished it. In this year, 1696, D’Iberville sailed to Newfoundland, where the British still claimed certain possessions. Meeting here other ships from France, the combined fleet fell upon St. John’s. D’Iberville landed, and, taking charge of the assaulting party, seized the fort after a stubborn fight. The winter was spent in subduing Newfoundland.

The task was not quite accomplished, when five ships from France arrived with orders for D’Iberville to take command, and with this fleet to capture the British forts in Hudson Bay. The dashing Frenchman knew the region of Hudson Bay very well. Years before, in 1685, D’Iberville had been one of an overland party which captured the English forts around Hudson Bay, and had taken in one of them 50,000 crowns’ worth of furs.

The expedition for Hudson Bay now set sail from Newfoundland in July. After having trouble 1696. with the ice, the commander entered with his flag-ship Pelican, having been separated from the remainder of his fleet. Here he was met face to face with three English men-of-war. There was no escape from the conflict. Though the Pelican carried but fifty guns she sank the English Hampshire of fifty-six guns, captured the ship Hudson’s Bay of thirty-two guns, and only failed to overtake the Dehring of thirty-six guns. Fort Nelson was next attacked, and Governor Bailey capitulated to the dashing seaman on honourable terms. Thus France had captured the whole of Hudson Bay, to which, indeed, she had always laid claim.

But the Canadian captain’s work was not yet done; he was now but thirty-five years of age. The settlement of Louisiana, which had ended so sadly with La Salle’s expedition, was to be again attempted. With two ships D’Iberville sailed for the Gulf of Mexico, found the mouths of the Mississippi, ascended the river, and returning built a fort at Biloxi, on the coast of Louisiana in 1699. Having again reached France, the successful colonizer was made a Knight of St. Louis and Governor-General of Louisiana. A substantial bastioned fort was built at Mobile in 1701. This remarkable French Canadian ended his life as Governor of Louisiana, and died of yellow fever in 1706.

The European nations had now tired of war, and the Grand Alliance could not continue. In 1696, Treaty of Ryswick, 1697. by the action of Italy, the compact was broken. Louis XIV. took the occasion to make overtures of peace. Accordingly a meeting of plenipotentiaries took place on the 9th of May, 1697, at Ryswick, a village near the Hague in Belgium, and at William III.’s château of Neuburg Hausen there. The treaty gained the acknowledgment by France of William III. as King of England—a matter of much moment—and resulted in the restoration by England and France to each other of the conquests they had made during the war. To what little purpose had been the bloodshed in Acadia, Maine, Newfoundland, and Hudson’s Bay!

The nations had but a short respite. In the last year of the life of William III. of England there 1701. was formed the “Second Grand Alliance,” to check, as the first had done, the greed of Louis XIV. The death of William gave Louis increased hope. He sought to make terms with Holland, and thus break the league. In this Louis failed, and Queen Anne followed out the policy of William. Accordingly England, Germany, and Holland in 1702 declared war against France and Spain. This was the great Marlborough War, or, from one of its causes, called “The War of the Spanish Succession.” The victories gained by the English in Europe were marked and memorable.

In America there was comparatively little bloodshed. The sanguinary Hertel led another expedition against the border settlement of Deerfield in 1704, and Haverhill on the Merrimac, and the peaceful inhabitants were killed and their dwellings burnt. In Acadia, in 1706, and again in 1707, unsuccessful attacks were made by New Englanders on Port Royal. In 1710, however, an expedition with 3500 troops sailed against the Acadian capital from Boston. The defenders of Port Royal surrendered, and, as the captors thought, all Acadia with it. It was Port Royal no more, for its inhabitants to the number of 450 were sent in transports to Rochelle, and the name of the place changed to Annapolis in honour of the sovereign. The loss of Acadia was felt keenly in France, though by an expedition in 1708 France had gained the whole of Newfoundland, except the settlement of Carbonneau.

In 1711 one of the most tremendous failures ever seen in the New World overtook an expedition organized Another Armada. by England to take Canada. It was a New World Armada. The fleet under Sir Hoveden Walker contained eighty-eight sail, and was to carry 6500 troops, among whom were seven regiments of the flower of Marlborough’s army. There was also colonial militia. To co-operate with this there was a land force of 4000 Massachusetts men and 600 Indians. The land army, under General Nicholson, moved to Lake George, there to await the attack on Quebec by the fleet. But the elements fought against Admiral Walker. Eight ships were wrecked, and corpses were thrown up on the gulf islands like those of Pharaoh’s army on the Red Sea coast. Sir Hoveden called a council of war at Cape Breton. The attempt was given up; the colonial vessels returned to Boston, and the British to England. The Massachusetts volunteers retired discouraged to their homes. England was the laughing-stock of Europe!

But now in 1713 the “dogs of war” were leashed again. After much negotiation the great Treaty of Utrecht was signed at the “Ferry Treaty of Utrecht. of the Rhine” on the 11th of April, 1713. By this the Hanoverian line was recognized in England, the fortifications of Dunkirk, which had menaced the British coast, were to be destroyed, and to England was ceded Acadia, Newfoundland, and the country of Hudson Bay. To France alone remained in the New World, Canada, Louisiana, Cape Breton, St. John’s (Prince Edward’s) Island, and certain fishing-rights on the Gulf. It was a day of glory for England; it was a day of dolor for Louis le Grand, though by surrendering the colonies the French king purchased the Spanish throne for his descendant. Louis XIV., sunken into hopeless imbecility, survived this treaty a little more than two years.

But France bereft of these New World possessions Cape Breton. now made a more determined effort to protect what was left to her. The island of Cape Breton was in some sense the gate to the Gulf and to Canada. Its name was now changed to Isle Royale. On the coast of the island a great fort was undertaken by the French. This was the elaborate fortress of Louisbourg, begun at a bay on the coast previously known as “English Haven.” Upon the fortifications of Louisbourg, which were begun in 1720, there were lavished 1,500,000l. sterling. Population gathered round the fort, and at length reached 4000. It was governed by an Intendant subject to the Governor at Quebec.

While Cape Breton was thus being settled and Louisiana. strengthened, Louisiana on the Mississippi was becoming noted. It was looked upon as likely to be an El Dorado—was to be the salvation of heavily-burdened France. France welcomed any scheme to give her financial relief. This want was supplied by a speculative Scotchman, born in Edinburgh in 1681, named John Law. He proposed a French National Bank, on the basis of security given by the fertile lands on the Mississippi in Louisiana.

The scheme rose like a balloon. The stock reached 2050 per cent. When faith seemed departing, efforts were made to sell tracts of land in Louisiana. In 1718 the town of New Orleans was founded by M. de Bienville on the Mississippi; and a most ill-starred emigration to Louisiana resulted in starvation and death to many. In 1720 the bubble burst, and penniless crowds called for vengeance on the “impostor who had ruined France.” The Company of the Indies returned its charter of Louisiana and the Illinois country to the king in 1731.

Peace again took wings. In 1743 Louis XV. declared war against England, on account of the sympathy of the latter for the Austrian queen Maria Theresa. The battle of Fontenoy had been fought in Flanders in 1745; but the Duke of Cumberland defeated there had won Culloden from the Pretender. The New World was in a ferment. French privateers making Louisbourg a rendezvous, inflicted great loss of English and colonial commerce, and, indeed, the people of Cape Breton sought to recapture Acadia. Though Louisbourg was deemed an almost impregnable fortress, having been well-nigh twenty-five years in building, yet the New England States determined to attack the “hornet’s nest.” Governor Shirley, of Massachusetts, succeeded in gathering 4000 colonial troops, and sent them on an expedition against Louisbourg under Colonel Pepperel. Leaving Boston in April, 1745, the colonial forces landed during that month in Cape Breton, and shortly after Admiral Warren arrived with a small fleet, and supplies from England.

Disunion prevailed among the defenders. A night attack was made on May 13th, at an unexpected part of the fortress, and Lieutenant Vaughan and a party of 400 men made a lodgment within the defences. Admiral Warren now captured La Vigilante, a French frigate of sixty-four guns, coming with nearly 600 men as reinforcements from France. This dampened the hopes of the defenders, and though a disaster happened to the besiegers in the loss of nearly one-half of an attacking party of 400 in the neighbouring island of St. John’s, yet the garrison of Louisbourg became discouraged. The commander, Duchambon, capitulated and was allowed to march out with the honours of war. The French troops and about 2000 of the people of Louisbourg were, according to agreement, borne in British ships and landed at Brest in France. Thus fell Louisbourg. It was a glorious victory for the colonial troops, and is still remembered as a story of the grandfathers in the city of Boston.

A strong expedition was sent from France in 1746 to recapture Louisbourg and ravage the New England coast, but a terrible storm played the same havoc as it had done to Sir Hoveden Walker’s fleet, and showed Providence to be impartial between English and French. The European nations were again wearied with Peace of Aix-la-Chapelle. war. After long negotiation at Aix-la-Chapelle, the peace was signed on the 18th of October, 1748—soon to be broken again! To the great disappointment of the New England colonies, restitution was made to France of Cape Breton Island, while England gained the support of the rights of Maria Theresa which had been guaranteed by the “Pragmatic Sanction.”

Out of the ambiguities of the Treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle grew the wars which have resulted in the destruction of the French power in America, and which, terminating in the Seven Years’ War, trailed the French standards in the very dust. The first dispute was as to the boundaries of Acadia, which by the Treaty of Utrecht had been ceded to England, “conformably to its ancient boundaries.” The English claimed as part of Acadia all of what we now know as New Brunswick; the French resisted this claim.

In the west also the English looked upon the banks of the Ohio as belonging to Virginia, while the French regarded the region as a part of Louisiana. Commissioners to settle these disputes met at Paris between the years 1750 and 1755. The colonies were so stirred by the dispute that before the commissioners could decide, hostilities were begun. While previous colonial wars arose from European quarrels, carried to America, the present border disputes led to the Seven Years’ War.

The Governor of New France at this time was the Marquis de la Galissonière. He was a naval officer, and a man of capacity. He had gained the victory over the unfortunate Admiral Byng. Taking up the boundary dispute with warmth he pursued a decidedly aggressive policy. In order to strengthen Canada on the side of Acadia, the French began a movement for the emigration of all the French in Acadia to the north side of the Bay of Fundy in the disputed territory.

The second step was to connect Louisiana and Canada. These were, so to speak, the two bastions of the French power in America. The Governor would unite them by a line of fortified posts up the Ohio River and along the lakes. Having gone on a great expedition to the west of some 1200 leagues, Galissonière understood the country, and saw its deplorable condition. A fort was determined on among the Sioux, another was erected at Green Bay, Detroit was garrisoned, Fort Rouillé was built at Toronto, and a fort at Ogdensburg was erected called “La Presentation.”

It was in 1749 that this energetic Governor was replaced by the Marquis de la Jonquiere, also a naval officer of note. No change of policy from that of Galissonière was made. He would have built forts along Lake Erie, but the royal despatch of 1750 declared “Niagara and Detroit will secure for ever our communications with Louisiana.” The attempt to remove the French from Acadia was succeeding. This was rendered more easy now that Britain had decided to occupy Acadia. In 1749 Governor Cornwallis with 3800 colonists had come to settle Halifax. His proclamation had been that the French in Acadia might remain, provided that, the priests they retained were approved by the British Government, and that the Acadians would defend their homes, and take the oath of allegiance. Not less than 3000 Acadians betook themselves to the north of the Bay of Fundy, and the island of St. Jean. At the isthmus between Acadia and the mainland was the French settlement of Beaubassin. This the English attacked. On a hill near by, the French determined to erect a fort, and this they did, calling it Fort Beausejour.

The Marquis Duquesne, a captain in the Royal Marines, arrived as the new Governor in 1752. A new New Route to the Ohio. route to the Ohio was now discovered. This was by leaving Lake Erie where Erie city now 1753. stands. A road was cut through the woods to French Creek, a tributary of the Alleghany, one of the branches of the Ohio. Here was built Fort Lebœuf, and hither came as commandant, Legardeur de St. Pierre, whom we have seen as a successor of Verandrye on the Saskatchewan. To the officer in charge of this fort was delivered in the next year a message from Governor Dinwiddie, of Virginia, borne by the hands of the afterwards celebrated Washington, now a youth of twenty-one. The message remonstrated with the French for invading British territory.

Washington, on his return journey, chose a site at the union of the Monongahela and the Ohio rivers, where the city of Pittsburg now stands, for an English fort. In February of the following year this fort was begun by the Virginians, but in April 500 Frenchmen captured the stockade and began near it the more extensive French fort of Duquesne.

Here took place a conflict between a body of Virginians under young Washington and a French party under Jumonville, by which the French leader was killed. The report of Jumonville’s death in France caused some excitement, for it will be remembered the two nations were still under a formal peace. Charges of taking an unfair advantage have been made against Washington, but seemingly without ground. Washington was compelled to fall back to a colonial outpost—Fort Necessity. He was here attacked by a large body of French troops, and was compelled to surrender.

The gravity of the state of things on the borders began to press itself on the English colonies. France was aggressive, and was pressing, both along the sea and in the interior, claims which they regarded as preposterous. The colonial voice was in favour of expelling the intruders. Accordingly Dinwiddie and Shirley, the governors of the leading Cavalier and Puritan colonies, agreed upon a plan, and submitted it to the War Department in England. The plan of operations was approved, and consisted of four expeditions to be sent against salient points in New France.

The first of these was against Fort Duquesne. General Braddock. Braddock had lately arrived in Virginia with two British regiments. This man was a blustering, brave, self-opinionated British officer. He despised colonists and colonial manners. With a force of some 1200 men—regulars and militia—on the 10th of June, 1755, he began his march over the Alleghanies to attack Fort Duquesne. He preserved on the march all the features of a European campaign. Axemen opened up the road; the wagons proceeded slowly and with military precision. At length so slow was the progress that he listened to the advice of Washington, one of his officers, to leave the train to follow and to hasten forward with the troops. After the mountains were passed, and some eight miles from Fort Duquesne, just after the Monongahela had been crossed, Braddock’s army was surrounded by French and Indians. The enemy was invisible. The martinet Braddock insisted on his troops fighting in line. His men were cut down like the wheat-field before hail. The officers fought most bravely. After sixty-three of these out of eighty-six had fallen and Braddock himself been mortally wounded, the remnant retreated. It was an absolute and crushing defeat.

The second point of attack was Acadia. On both sides of the Bay of Fundy a considerable French Beausejour. population lingered. Those who had emigrated to the north side were miserably poor. The attack on Acadia was made by a body of Massachusetts militia, under command of Moncton, the agent of Governor Lawrence of Nova Scotia. Colonel John Winslow commanded one regiment. On the 1st of June 1755. the expedition landed at Beausejour. The garrison consisted of but 160 troops, and they, as well as the French colonists, were much discouraged. They were under the command of one De Vergor, but the leading spirit of the defence was a priest, La Loutre, to whose malice and determination most of the troubles of the Acadians at this time may be traced. Little fighting took place, for the garrison judged it wise to capitulate. La Loutre escaped, but was afterwards arrested, and imprisoned in the isle of Jersey for eight years.

And now comes one of the most mournful episodes of history. Governor Shirley, of Massachusetts, Transportation of Acadians. had for some time advocated exportation of the Acadians. Now it was to be done. It is a vexed subject of discussion, and the last word has not yet been said upon it. Undoubtedly the Acadians refused to take the oath of allegiance. That in itself would hardly, however, have justified their expulsion. But it is charged against them that they incited the Indians against the British, that any hostile French expedition found in them sympathizers, and that being on the frontier they were dangerous to the peace and safety of British Acadia. On the verification of these charges, which has hardly yet been done, will depend the judgment on the irreconcilability and dangerous character of the Acadians, that must be given by posterity. Colonel Winslow said their deportation was the most unpalatable work he ever did.

The story of Grand Pré is a familiar one. Winslow shipped from this point up to December, 1755, 2100 men, women, and children—very few families being broken. From Fort Edward 1100 persons were taken in four overcrowded frigates; 1664 exiles were by the end of October sent from Annapolis, while from the district about the captured Fort Beausejour, about 1100 were carried away. Many of the exiles reached Louisiana; some returned to Acadia; others sought the Atlantic States, and some England and France. Six thousand miserable, albeit misguided people were thus thrust forth from their homes. Even though their expulsion may have been justifiable as a war measure, their miseries appeal to us.

The third attack of the campaign was to have been made on Crown Point, on Lake Champlain, the Crown Point. key of Canada. The commander of the expedition was William Johnston, an Irish gentleman in charge of large estates in the State of New York. He had never seen war, but was a natural leader of men. Five Colonial Governments supplied the militia, of whom there were 3000 or 4000. The troops assembled at Albany, and after delays, took up march and encamped on Lac Sacrament, south of Lake Champlain, a name which was afterwards changed to Lake George. The colonial camp was on the water’s edge, and thus only needed defence on three sides. Johnston’s army was a concourse of farmers, all unfamiliar with war. Some of the men had grotesque uniforms; some had none. Their arms were of all descriptions. The French heard of the motley throng, and regarded them as only so much food for powder.

The French army was fairly good. Marquis de Vaudreuil was now Governor, in place of Duquesne. Lake George. Baron Dieskau, a German nobleman, was in command of the French troops, some of which were veterans of France. The delays of the colonial army had been very much to the advantage of the French. Dieskau had reached Crown Point, to find the colonials still at a distance. He sallied forth to meet them. At last he heard of their encampment. Johnston sent out a force to attack the baron, the Indians of the scouting party being under that good friend of the British, Chief Hendricks. This advance party was caught by the French very much as Braddock’s had been, but retired, after severe loss, to their camp.

At the camp barricades of logs had been thrown around the three sides, and the artillery had been mounted on a rising ground to rake the approach. The French came close upon the heels of the retiring scouting party, and for five hours a general fight from behind logs and trees ensued. Baron Dieskau was wounded and taken prisoner, and was brought into camp. Johnston had received a flesh-wound, and was confined to his tent. The French were defeated and fled. The losses were about equal, being 200 or 300 men on each side. King Hendricks, the Iroquois leader, was slain in the advance; and the well-known French explorer, Legardeur de St. Pierre, it is said, on the side of the French. Johnston failed to take advantage of the state of the enemy, and made no movement on Crown Point. The colonial troops, however, gained in prestige. Johnston was made a baronet, and received a grant of 5000l. from the British Parliament.

The fourth enterprise was that against Niagara. It was Niagara. made up of the three regiments, the Jersey Blues, Pepperel’s, and Shirley’s. Governor Shirley, of New York, commanded the whole. The expedition went on its way till it reached the portage where now the town of Rome stands, in New York State. But the danger of attacking Niagara lay not only in the 1200 men, many of them Indians, defending it, but in the fact that Fort Frontenac lay in the rear, and might cut the party off from its supplies entirely. And so, after bravely considering the matter, Shirley and his councillors allowed their discretion to rule, and making no demonstration against Niagara, returned quietly home.

In addition to these border conflicts, the British war-vessels had captured some 300 French ships. It thus happened that when, on the 17th of May, 1756, a formal declaration of war was made, by which Britain and Frederick the Great’s kingdom were combined against the remainder of Europe, the relations of France and England were but little changed. France braced herself more firmly for war, and sent General Montcalm to command the forces in America.

Louis Joseph, Marquis de Montcalm-Gozon de St. Veran, was born at Nismes, in the South of France, on the Montcalm. 29th of February, 1712. Privately educated, at the age of fifteen he entered the army as an ensign. He married the Lady Louise Talen, and had a family of ten children. Montcalm was a good father, a true soldier, and was devoted to his country. He fought in Italy and Germany, and had been severely wounded. With 1000 regulars and 400 recruits the general embarked for Canada, which he reached in May, 1756. Sixteen hundred soldiers had arrived from France in the year before, so that the forces under Montcalm at this time numbered about 4000 men. Two officers, afterwards well known, accompanied Montcalm, viz. the Chevalier de Levis-Veran, and M. de Bourgainville.

After full conference it was decided to fortify Niagara; and to make Fort Frontenac, on Lake Ontario, and Ticonderoga (Carillon), on Lake Champlain, the two central camps of defence. Louisbourg was defended by 1100 men and much needed strengthening in its defences, but this was never accomplished. Great Britain now threw herself, as never before, into the colonial war. Governor Shirley had planned another great expedition against Forts Frontenac and Niagara; but as 16,000 men were asked, the States voted nay. This bustling leader was now superseded by the Earl of Loudon, who added little to the lustre of British arms in America. With General Loudon came also General Abercrombie.

On the opening of the campaign Montcalm attacked and took without difficulty Fort Oswego, which, though not so disgraceful as Braddock’s defeat on the Monongahela, was a greater strategic loss. In 1757 the French determined to secure the positions about Lake Champlain. An attack was made by Montcalm on Fort William Henry. The English garrison was reduced to want, small-pox entered among the defenders, their cannon were disabled; and as Montcalm was soon to open on the fort with his artillery, the garrison surrendered. Thus to the very south of Lake George the French flag floated triumphant. The French cause was now most hopeful, although a total failure of crops in Canada left the people in a state of famine.

In 1758 the English made an attempt to regain the Lake Champlain forts. General Abercrombie, with 16,000 men, made an attack on Ticonderoga. Montcalm arrived in time, however, to take command of the 3500 troops in the besieged fort. Behind the defences of Carillon he awaited General Abercrombie’s attack. After a most determined series of onsets by the British, they were compelled to retire without accomplishing anything, having lost 2000 men in killed and wounded, while the French had not suffered to the extent of one-fifth. The British, however, took and destroyed Fort Frontenac; they also drove the French from Fort Duquesne and off the Ohio, and compelled a retreat to Fort Erie.

In the end of May, 1758, Admiral Boscawen, arriving at Halifax, met General Amherst, who had been sent by General Abercrombie to take Louisbourg. In the preceding year Louisbourg had been threatened, but the attack was abandoned. Now, on the 2nd of June, Louisbourg was reached. It was still a great fortress. The British, after a severe encounter, effected a landing. A siege and bombardment by the assailants resulted in a capitulation on the 27th of July, 1758, of the entire force of the 6000 soldiers and sailors in the garrison. Great joy was shown in England over this capture.

At the taking of Louisbourg there leaped into prominence Wolfe appears. a young officer, who was the “life of the siege.” This was Colonel James Wolfe, aged thirty-two years. At fifteen he had entered the army, fought in the battle of Culloden at the age of twenty-three, and at that age became a lieutenant-colonel. Though of a most delicate constitution, he was “all life.” The remarkable statesman, William Pitt, who then guided the destinies of England, had much confidence in the young soldier. He now appointed him to command the expedition against Quebec, made him a major-general, allowed him to choose his own staff, and sent him a strong contingent of Scottish Highlanders, “les sauvages des Écossais,” a new class of British troops organized by Pitt’s suggestion after 1745.

The last of the fleet, with some 8000 or 9000 troops under To Quebec.
Wolfe, left Louisbourg Harbour on the 6th of June, the soldiers drinking to the toast, “British colours in every French fort, post, and garrison in America.” The taking of Quebec by Wolfe is now an oft-told tale. In Canada proper the French arms had been very successful. Now there were to meet in a desperate struggle the two armies—one flushed with success in the interior, the other fresh from capturing the French stronghold on the sea. There were two brilliant opposing commanders—Montcalm and Wolfe. It was a supreme crisis. The French forces had been concentrated at Quebec. The whole city was now a fort, and for ten miles along the shore from Quebec to Montmorenci Falls was an armed camp. The River St. Charles was obstructed by sunken hulks and a “boom of logs.” A hundred cannon and more defended the walls of the fortress. The French fleet had retired up the river for safety—a mistake, as it afterwards appeared. Fourteen thousand regular French troops, colonists, and Indians manned the Beauport works, or defended the city. Montcalm had full delegated authority from Governor Vaudreuil, who, however, was present also.

On the 26th of June, 1759, the English fleet anchored off the island of Orleans, near Quebec. Wolfe soon landed, and took a reconnaissance from the west end of the island. It was a discouraging prospect for him. High in front of him lay the threatening fortress, and to the right the elevated coast was an extended camp. He was outnumbered by the defenders. The French soon attempted to burn his fleet by sending down the tide vessels filled with combustibles, but they wasted their fierce strength in vain. The British took possession of the south shore of the St. Lawrence at Levis, opposite the city, and from this point battered the lower town to pieces. Wolfe next landed below the Montmorenci Falls, and took a strong position. The young general was thus much divided, having Montmorenci, Orleans, and Levis in possession, and his fleet as an object of anxiety beside. Montcalm, however, obstinately refused to attack the English; his plan was one of determined defence. Wolfe made a proclamation favourable to the French Canadians, and thus weakened the defenders somewhat.

On the 18th of July Wolfe accomplished a feat which was to change the campaign. The vessel Sutherland, under a heavy fire, successfully passed the batteries of Quebec, and now lay above the city. Boats were taken by portage by the British across Point Levis, and thus Montcalm was compelled to send troops to different points up the river, and occupy exposed points. Thus far Montcalm seemed to have the best of it, and Wolfe was no doubt in much perplexity. An attack had been made by Wolfe near Montmorenci. The British seized the redoubt on the water’s edge, but could not take the heights above. Failing to draw forth Montcalm, Wolfe now ravaged the country, and, with a doubtful morality, burned houses and turned forth homeless families.

Montcalm was immovable. Wolfe was continuing his movement of vessels above the city. De Bourgainville had been detached by Montcalm with 1500 men to guard the shore above Quebec. By the end of August both sides were in despair, though to cheer the British somewhat Wolfe had recovered from a dangerous attack of illness, and to comfort the French news had arrived from the interior that the expedition against their forts had failed. Wolfe now adopted the hazardous, but in the end successful, plan of evacuating Montmorenci, and, with his twenty-two ships above the city, effected a lodgment on the north shore.

On the night of the 12th of September, boats laden with chosen men dropped down the stream. After Wolfe’s victory. meeting with challenge after challenge, and through the skill of one of Fraser’s Highlanders, who knew French, evading them, the advance-guard of twenty-four volunteers scrambled up a path at Wolfe’s Cove, a few miles west of Quebec, overpowered the sleepy guard, and by the morning Wolfe’s army of between 3000 and 4000 men was on the high plateau—the Plains of Abraham. During the night Admiral Saunders had bombarded the Beauport shore, and Montcalm and the bulk of his troops had been drawn in that direction. In the morning Montcalm was surprised on coming towards Quebec to see the redcoats and Highlanders on the heights, drawn up in line. He calmly remarked, “This is a dangerous affair.”

With haste his attack was made. The steadiness of the British troops was marvellous. They stood silently under the fire of the approaching enemy, and at forty yards discharged two or three murderous volleys, and the work was done. Wolfe, thrice wounded, died, having been informed by his attendants of his victory; and Montcalm, shot near the city, was led in, supported on his black charger—led in to die! Rarely have two nobler spirits met in battle-array than Montcalm and Wolfe.

The rout of the French was complete. Bourgainville, coming down the river shortly after with 2000 men, retired precipitately. The British troops proceeded to entrench themselves. Vaudreuil had sent for De Levis, and had gone to meet him, the scattered, fleeing troops having concentrated at Jacques Cartier, thirty miles above Quebec. Ramesay, the commandant, with a hundred or two of troops, still held the city. He was compelled, under threat of immediate attack, to capitulate. A body of British artillery occupied the city, and the British flag was unfurled at the top of Mountain Street.

Vaudreuil withdrew to Montreal, and, to his disgrace, threw the blame of the defeat on the dead soldier, Montcalm. Brigadier-General Murray now remained in command of Quebec. In the following year De Levis attacked Quebec, coming from Montreal. The British forces left Quebec, and received the attack at Ste. Foy, near the city. The French were successful. The British fell back on the city. A pillar at Ste. Foy commemorates this victory of De Levis. The arrival of a British fleet made De Levis’ efforts hopeless. This fleet destroyed the six French vessels above Quebec. It but remained to take Montreal. Generals Amherst and Murray, coming from Schenectady by way of Oswego and down the St. Lawrence, landed on Montreal Island, and invested the city on the 6th of September, 1760. On the 8th of September Governor Vaudreuil yielded, and New France became a dependency of Britain, so that by 1761 French rule had ceased in every part of Canada, having endured for a century and a half.

Section VI.—The French Canadian People.

At the time of the conquest the French-Canadians were already children of the soil. It is estimated that not more than 8000 immigrants came from France to Canada, all told. As we have seen, the chief colonization period was in Colbert’s time, and under his wise and energetic guidance. The population had now at the conquest grown to be 65,000. Three generations had passed away, so that not only had the people been fused into one, but their fathers’ graves held them to the soil.

Nor had the population of French Canada been of a very mixed kind. At one time during his autocracy, Laval had objected that heretics from Rochelle were being sent to the colony, and at once the French rulers turned to the north-western provinces of France for the new settlers. From Normandy the greater number came. As the traveller drops off the railway from Dieppe to Paris, at the city of Rouen, he is in the midst of the fatherland of French Canada. He sees there much that is the prototype of style and general outline of the French Canadian homes.

The Government was really active in sending forth emigrants in Colbert’s day. Many ruined gentlemen and half-pay officers went to Canada. As governors and officials men of high rank were sent—“noble dukes, proud marquises, great sea-captains, and engineer officers” were all found in Canada. Baron Lahontan said he “preferred the forests of Canada to the Pyrenees of France,” and Louis XIV. boasted that “Canada contained more of his old nobility than the rest of the French colonies put together.” It was the avowed object of the king in 1663 to “infuse a more liberal spirit into the colony, to raise the quality and character of the settlers, and to give a higher tone to society.”

It was a part then of the plan to transplant feudal institutions to Canada. De Tracy—the Viceroy—always appeared in public with a “Garde Royale” of twenty-four men. The Governor and Intendant each had a splendid equipage. Of the Carignan officers, as already said, many were noblesse. On the recommendation of Governor De Courcelles, four families in Canada were ennobled, and five more on the recommendation of the Intendant. Seigniories were bestowed upon those considered deserving of them, and the other colonists must receive their tenures from the seignior.

The “censitaire,” or settler, must come to the seignior “without sword or spurs, with bare head, and one knee on the ground,” must repeat his lord’s name three times, bring his “faith and honour,” and pledge himself to pay “seignorial and feudal dues.” If he sold out his right to another, the feudal lord was entitled to one-twelfth of what he received. Then the “censitaire” must grind his flour at the seignior’s mill, bake his bread in the seignior’s oven, give one fish in every eleven caught, and work for his lord one or more days in every year.

A somewhat highly organized society was thus at once formed. But the Government could induce but few families to emigrate. The lonely settlers in their cabins longed for society. Colbert was equal to the emergency. In 1665, 100 French maidens were sent out to the colony, and married at once. In 1667 eighty-four girls from Dieppe, and twenty-five from Rochelle, went out to Canada, and so in other years. These were jocularly called the “king’s girls;” but, notwithstanding the sneers of the cynical Lahontan, they seem to have been generally honest peasant maidens. There were exceptions, however. Mother Mary, who had charge of them, in an offhand way called them “mixed goods,” and at last a rule was enforced that each should bring from her parish priest a certificate that she had not been married before. As soon as the maidens were married, and that was usually very soon after arrival, to each new family was given by the Government an ox, cow, pair of swine, pair of fowls, two barrels of salted meat, and eleven crowns in money.

Further, to encourage marriage in the colony, twenty livres were given to each young man married before twenty years of age, and to each girl married before sixteen. This was known as the “king’s gift.” This was independent of the dowry also bestowed. In addition, there was a bounty given to the parents of every child. The practical plans of the Government resulted, as we have mentioned, in a rapidly increasing and moral community. It is rather remarkable that the custom of early marriages is a prominent feature of Lower Canadian society to this day. A good Jesuit father informed the writer that he has seen a grandmother among the French Canadian peasantry at the age of twenty-eight.

Undoubtedly, the system of a peasantry dependent on the noblesse has made the French-Canadians a peaceable, industrious, and light-hearted people; but it has likewise taken away the mainspring for action, the hope of rising in society, and while their life may be compared to a “pastoral idyl,” yet it would be all the better for some enlivening or even discordant strains.

The same trustful spirit with which the peasant in Lower Canada looks on the higher classes is transferred to the priest or curé of the parish. The curé baptizes the children, and keeps a most careful register by a system which has resulted in the industrious Abbé Tanguay being able to make a genealogy of upwards of a million of French-Canadians. The curé marries, confesses, and advises all, and at last speaks the words, “Dust to dust” over their graves. This is the uneventful life of the French Canadian habitant.

The language of the French Canadian peasantry is by no means the “patois” some would have us believe. One of their writers has said, “Our French Canadian peasantry talk better French than half the peasantry of France.” The first settlers of Canada left France when literature was at its zenith under Louis XIV. The French-Canadians of to-day retain the “simple old Norman songs” in all the purity with which their fathers brought them; and it is worthy of note that requests have come from France to have them collected, as not occurring now in any part of France.

The French-Canadians had few regrets for “la belle France,” for they had all been born in Canada, and the French officials went to France after the conquest. As already said, the French Revolution rudely severed French Canada from the mother-land. It was in contemplating this fact in 1794 that Bishop Plessis of Quebec “thanked God the colony was English.”


(References: “Capitulation of Governor Vaudreuil,” 1760; Manuscript, Ottawa Library, “Treaty of Paris,” 1763; Appendix, Miles’s “History of Lower Canada;” “The Quebec Act, Statutes of Imperial House of Commons,” Ottawa Library; “Debate on the Quebec Act,” London, 1839; “History of Lower Canada,” vol. i., Quebec, 1848, by Robert Christie; “The Remembrancer,” vol. i., London, 1775; “Prior Documents, 1764-1775,” London, 1777; “Controversy between Great Britain and her Colonies reviewed,” London, 1762; “Précis on the Wars in Canada,” London, 1862, by Major-General Carmichael Smyth [the author follows this high authority closely for war 1775-7]; Manuscript, “Recitals of the U.E. Loyalists,” 2 folio vols., Ottawa Library.)

Section I.—Constitutions and Conventions.

The task of establishing satisfactory government was not free of difficulties in the older colonies Constitution of Nova Scotia. along the Atlantic. From the first the colony of Massachusetts had been ruled by the democracy. In other cases a strongly royalist government had been established. The Nova Scotian Government, begun in 1749, was the first in any of the provinces of the Dominion. In this case, with a military officer, Governor Cornwallis, at the head of it, it was strongly monarchical in type.

In the proclamation made on behalf of his Majesty King George II. for settling the Province of Nova Scotia, it was stated that a civil government would be established with all the “privileges granted to other colonies in British North America.” It required a struggle in after years to obtain an Assembly under this promise, and a still greater agitation to secure responsible government in Nova Scotia.

The formation of French Canada into a British province Lower Canadian Convention. in so short a space of time was most remarkable. The terms granted to Governor Vaudreuil at the capitulation of Montreal, on the 8th of September, 1760, and the provisions of the Treaty of Paris, 1763, were the basis of this Convention. In the Articles of Capitulation the French were granted the free exercise of their religion. Their priests were continued in their functions as before the conquest. Quiet possession of property was guaranteed to the “new subjects,” as the French were called, except in the case of the Jesuits’ estates. These Articles did not preserve to the people the system of French law, known as the “Custom of Paris;” but it was guaranteed that “inhabitants and merchants were to enjoy all the privileges granted to subjects of his Britannic Majesty.”

The Treaty of Paris, which was put in force in Canada King’s Proclamation, 1763. by his Majesty’s proclamation, dated St. James’s, 7th of October, 1763, says nothing about religious rights, offers liberal grants to military officers and soldiers of Britain, directs the establishment of courts, “as near as may be agreeable to the laws of England,” and provides for the calling of “assemblies as used and directed in those colonies and provinces in America which are under our immediate government.” Though not so stated in the proclamation, yet in the 4th Article of the Treaty of Paris, Treaty of Paris, 1763. 1763, the king promises “to give the most effectual orders, that his new Roman Catholic subjects may profess the worship of their religion according to the rites of the Roman Church, as far as the laws of Great Britain permit.”

The first Governor of Canada under the British was General Murray. He selected, according to his instructions, an Executive Council. They were all of British extraction, except one—a French Canadian. As there were 65,000 French, and they had expected to become possessed of all the rights of British subjects, the French complained of this, and spoke for years after with much severity of the four years succeeding 1760, which they called the “rule of the soldiery.” General Murray was popular among the French-Canadians. In 1766 Brigadier-General (Sir Guy) Carleton became Governor. The British system of jurisprudence was being introduced. Against this the French complained. They also represented that the means of obtaining justice under the new method were not equal to those under the old. When we take into account that the Canadians were a conquered people it is marvellous that they so soon became reconciled to their lot. Nine years passed away. There was complaint enough among the new subjects, but nothing like rebellion or hostility to Britain.

But now Governor Carleton, who, as we have seen, well understood the Canadians, and was much trusted by them, in company with Chief Justice Hey, crossed the ocean, and with ex-Attorney-General Maseres, a distinguished English lawyer, who for three years assisted Carleton, undertook to bring before the Houses of Parliament a measure for the organization of the province, and the settlement of certain disputed points. This Act became the celebrated “Quebec Act of 1774.” It was a great experiment. We know now, that The Quebec Act of 1774. taken altogether it was a successful venture, and we are fortunate in having preserved for us full accounts of the discussions connected with its becoming law. It was first introduced in the House of Lords, and afterwards there received the opposition of Chatham.

On coming to the House of Commons also it received strong opposition. Its provisions as to the boundary of the province, the use of French law, the granting of no Assembly, and the propositions for supporting the Roman Catholic faith were the chief subjects of discussion. Petitions were presented against the bill on behalf of the State of Pennsylvania, objecting to the encroachment on the Ohio country. A plea in favour of New York was also entered. The merchants of London petitioned against it on the ground that the use of the French law would prejudice the rights of capitalists who had already invested money in the province.

The Hon. Thomas Townsend, afterwards Lord Sydney, spoke against the oligarchic principle of an Executive Council without an Assembly. Edmund Burke opposed the introduction of French law. The answer to Burke was, that the French-Canadians objected to the principle of trial by jury of the English law. “They thought it strange that the English residing in Canada should prefer to have matters of law decided by tailors and shoemakers mixed up with others rather than by a judge.” The evidence given before the Committee of the House as to the desire of the Canadians for an Assembly was conflicting. Chief Justice Hey said the French-Canadians “look upon the House of Assembly as a house of riot, calculated for nothing but to disturb the Government and obstruct public servants.” On the other hand Mr. Maseres and a French seignior who was present, M. Lotbiniere, believed the Canadians would prefer the Assembly.

But Governor Carleton understood the case. He would conciliate the Canadians as to law and religion, but as a military man would keep the government very much out of their hands. He believed them to need training before being ready to govern themselves. Lord North, after modifying the Bill as to the conflict of boundaries, and making it nevertheless to include the Ohio and Illinois country so far, succeeded in carrying it.

Not only the free exercise of their religion was granted the Roman Catholics, but, says the Act, “the clergy of the said Church may hold, receive, and enjoy their accustomed dues and rights with respect to such persons only as shall profess the said religion” (Sec. V.). Provision is also made “for the encouragement of the Protestant religion” (Sec. VI.). The criminal law of England, having been in force more than nine years, is to be preserved (Sec. 11). “That in all matters of controversy, relative to property and civil rights, resort shall be had to the laws of Canada as the rule for the decision of the same” (Sec. 8). This preserved the Custom of Paris. An Executive Council of not more than twenty-three nor less than seventeen was authorized, but Parliament decided in the face of the advocates of the people, as the Act declares, that “it is at present inexpedient to call an Assembly.” Governor Carleton returned to Canada greatly delighted with the Act passed, and the French-Canadians hailed his return with loud acclaim. As we shall afterwards see, the Continental Congress, meeting at Philadelphia this year, commiserated with the Canadians on the tyrannical character of the Act.

The Quebec Act had been in force in Canada for The Constitutional Act of 1791. seventeen years. During that period changes of greatest moment had taken place in America. Britain had lost her old colonies; the French people had accepted British rule, and, so far as they were concerned, there was no great inquietude in Canada. In 1784 the loyalist immigration to Canada took place. Petitions were in that year presented to the king and Parliament of Britain asking for a “representation of the people” in the government of the province. These petitions were largely from the English-speaking residents of Montreal and Quebec.

But there were two shades of English opinion in Canada—that of the Loyalists, who desired a separate province in the west, and that of the English of Montreal and Quebec, who feared that division would leave them in a helpless minority with the French. The Bill proposed in response to the king’s speech of 1791 was in the direction of granting more self-control to the Canadian people. There were many reasons at the time for this. The republic of the United States was now side by side with Canada—a pure democracy. The U.E. Loyalists, though attached to the king, were yet accustomed to popular assemblies, and the demand for the rights of the people, which had blazed forth like a devouring flame in the French Revolution, was in the same direction. It was wise to bestow a more liberal constitution on Canada, though it must be said the French-Canadians, uneducated in politics, were listless about it.

The chief opponent of the Bill was a merchant of Quebec, Adam Lymburner, Esq., who came as the chosen representative of the English party in Quebec. Mr. Lymburner was a native of Kilmarnock, Scotland, had come to Quebec as a merchant before 1776, and had now long been a member of the Executive Council. He was especially desirous that the Quebec Act of 1774 should be repealed as a whole. This Act continued the Custom of Paris as a system of law in Canada, and he would have it blotted out. He contended that this should be done on account of the uncertainty of knowing what the “laws of Canada to the conquest” were. Lord Dorchester (Sir Guy Carleton), who had left Canada in his first term of office in 1778, and had been reappointed in 1786, had, in 1787, inquired into the working of these laws. He found some judges were following English procedure, others the French code, and still others administering justice according to no law.

Mr. Lymburner was especially strong against a division of the province and the establishment of two legislatures. He prophesied many evils as likely to overtake both provinces, and caricatured the new western province with its small population of 10,000. Yet the aspirations of the Loyalists and the opinion of Lord Dorchester were for a new English province. Mr. Lymburner, in pleading for free government, objected to the proposed hereditary Council, and also to the power given by the Bill to the Governor of fixing the bounds of electoral divisions. After full discussion the Constitutional Act passed, and was undoubtedly a blessing to Canada.

Its main provisions are worthy of note. It divided Canada into two provinces, Upper and Lower, on the line still existing between Ontario and Quebec. A Legislative Council was to be appointed in each province by the king, its members being for life. The king was authorized to confer titles, whose possession should entitle to membership of this Council. This provision for a House of Lords was fortunately never carried out. Each province was to have an Assembly, of members chosen from districts set apart by the Governor—a property qualification being required for electors. No clergyman could be a member of the Assembly, though, as will afterwards be seen, this restriction did not apply to the Legislative Council. Power was given the Governor to convoke and prorogue or dissolve these Houses of the Provincial Parliament. The Assembly could not continue more than four years. We shall see how arbitrarily this power of the Governor was sometimes exercised.

It was further decreed in the Act that an allotment of Crown lands in each province for the “support and maintenance of a Protestant clergy” be made, to be one-seventh of all the Crown lands granted. The governors of the several provinces were also empowered to “erect parsonages and endow them, and to present incumbents of ministers of the Church of England.” Here lay the germ of the greatest political question that ever agitated Canada. The land grants of the crown in Upper Canada, and in Lower Canada if desired, were in freehold. The British Parliament, in the Act, reserved the power of regulating duties on navigation and commerce, but left to each province “the exclusive appropriation of all monies so levied.” The “Quebec Act,” except the portion relating to an Executive Council, continued in force.

Lord Dorchester obtained leave and went to England in August, 1791. Alured Clarke, Esq., Acting-Governor, declared the “Constitutional Act” in force, establishing Upper and Lower Canada, Dec. 26th, 1791. This day was celebrated with great rejoicing in Quebec. The city was illuminated. All were agreed that distinctions between “old” and “new” subjects should be forgotten, and the 160 gentlemen who attended the public dinner in Quebec formed themselves into the “Constitutional Club.” The subdivision of the provinces into counties went on apace. In 1792, as we shall see, the new Governor of Upper Canada, John Graves Simcoe, arrived—a great day indeed for Upper Canada. In due course, in that year the elections were held, and the Provincial Legislatures met.

A striking incident took place on the 27th of June, 1792, as the election for Charlesbourg, near Quebec, was closing. Prince Edward, the Duke of Kent, and father of Queen Victoria, was in Canada at this time, and was present at this gathering of the electors. High feeling prevailed and a riot seemed inevitable. The prince, seeing the danger, rushed to a prominent place, and called for silence.

He then in pure French called out, “Can there be any man among you that does not take the king to be the father of his people?” A shout of “God save the king” greeted the question. “Is there any man among you,” then asked his Highness, “that does not look on the new Constitution as the best possible one, both for the subject and the Government?” Loyal shouts were again repeated. “Part then in peace. I urge you to unanimity and concord. Let me,” continued the speaker, “hear no more of the odious distinction English and French. You are all his Britannic Majesty’s Canadian subjects.” The effect of this speech was magical. Harmony was at once restored. Happy for Canada had the princely advice been always followed.

Section II.—Causes of the American Revolt (1775).

The thirteen British colonies along the Atlantic were becoming strong. In the year preceding the Seven Years’ War, they had at their own expense carried on a series of border campaigns. Virginia and Massachusetts especially were populous and growing in wealth. The differences arising from origin were disappearing, and common enterprises and common dangers were bringing the separate colonies together.

As a colony grows strong a feeling of independence is sure to manifest itself. The older land patronizes the new. It must be so. The father never can forget that his son is his junior, remembers him as an infant, knows the pranks of his youth, never can regard his actions as those of an equal. The young colony is conscious of strength. Its life, it is true, is raw and crude, but it is bred amidst difficulties, and these it has fought and, to some extent, overcome. It is a young giant, and is anxious to try its strength with those older and less vigorous than itself. The rise of the spirit of independence often is the evidence of a capacity for self-control. The colony is frequently foolish; far better remain a little longer a child. But who can eradicate the waywardness of youth? Besides their experience in border wars, the thirteen colonies now had a population of some four millions of souls.

It must not be forgotten, moreover, that the colony of Massachusetts had been founded by a determined and assertive people. It was, so to speak, established in the face of the King of England. The desire of leadership among the colonies was ever a feature of Massachusetts. Her lust for power was seen in the energy with which the Puritan province carried on the war against Acadia in 1745, the Phipps’ expedition against Quebec, and met the cost of these contests.

Undoubtedly the ties binding the American colonies to the mother country would not have been severed so soon as they were had it not been for the exercise of arbitrary power on the part of Britain. A strong party in England at the time was opposed to these measures, and posterity is unanimous on the subject. In 1764 the British Ministry determined to enforce Customs regulations more strictly in the Atlantic colonies. A most lucrative trade had sprung up between the English and Spanish colonies in America. An exchange of products and merchandise between our colonies and those of the French in the West Indies was also growing. British manufactures taken to our colonies were carried to the West Indies and the Spanish main, and England as well as the colonies was benefitted. By the Act of 1764 Spanish goods were excluded from the English colonies, and heavy duties placed on French West Indian products. This seemed to the Americans an unwise and tyrannical procedure. In the same year an Act was passed in the Imperial Parliament “to restrain the currency of paper-money in the colonies.” These were blows at the very prosperity of the colonies. In the making of such laws the colonies had no voice, though no doubt they had an interest in the Seven Years’ War for which the tax was being raised.

But it was not in 1764 that the disposition to tax the colonies for war expenses was first manifested. There is indeed some evidence that the project originated with the official classes in the colonies themselves. In colonial life it is often seen that the greatest tyrant of the people is the colonial official. The British official abroad is often an absolute bureaucrat. We find that so early as 1754, when Dr. Benjamin Franklin was in Boston, Governor Shirley of Massachusetts communicated to him as a profound secret, the “great design of taxing the colonies by Act of Parliament.”

Franklin’s written answer was decided and statesmanlike. “To tax the people in Parliament,” said he, “where they have no representative, would give dissatisfaction; That while the people were willing to contribute for their own defence, they could better judge of the force necessary and the means for paying them, than the British Parliament at so great a distance; That parliamentary taxes once laid on are often continued longer than necessary; That colonists are always indirectly taxed by the mother country, which enables her to pay taxes; That the colonists have at personal risk extended the empire, increased her wealth, and should not be deprived of the native right of Britons.”

This is but a part of the document, but it shows the nature of the colonial contention. Some parts of the reasoning may be specious, rather than solid, but such were the opinions of the most intelligent of the colonists nine or ten years before the close of the Seven Years’ War.

At the close of this war the Governor of Massachusetts was Sir Francis Bernard. He was an astute, ingenious, and dignified Governor, but an absolutist in principle, and a constitutional tyrant. He had been transferred from the governorship of the loyal colony of New Jersey, to check the troublesome Puritans of Massachusetts Bay. After Bernard was the deluge! It was from Governor Bernard that the project came, to the financier of the British Ministry, “driven out of his wits for ways and means,” of which Shirley had spoken to Franklin ten years before. The “official junto” in America wished taxes levied by Parliament, and the salaries of Governors, Judges of Admiralty, Judges of Common Pleas, and other high officials paid by the Imperial Government.

It was also recommended that the colonies should be combined into fewer but larger provinces, under a new system of royal government. This last proposition was in order that the too popular constitutions of some of the colonies might be remodelled. Governor Bernard strongly maintained the right of the Parliament of Britain to tax without representation; and in ninety-seven propositions laid down extreme reactionary principles, even recommending the establishment of a nobility in America. Can it be wondered at, that great statesmen like Chatham, Burke, and others who defended America, were roused to patriotic denunciation, when they saw those who should have been the defenders of colonial rights, plotting for their destruction.

There was another element in the case. In the war which had but closed and for which taxes were asked, there had been much feeling between the regular and colonial troops. The British officials and soldiers had despised the provincials. No provincial troops had taken part either in the successful attack on Louisbourg, or in Wolfe’s victories at Quebec. No doubt it was showing jealousy and littleness of soul for the colonists to complain, when all had ended so well for them. But there is much human nature in the colonies!

It was in March, 1764, that in a thin House and without much discussion, the British House of Commons passed a bare resolution, “that it was proper to charge certain stamp duties in the colonies and plantations.” No sooner had the news of this reached America, than the Assemblies of Massachusetts and New York adopted strong remonstrances. On their receipt, the Privy Council advised the young king George III. to lay them before Parliament. The request was not granted: the petitions were suppressed. In March, 1765, the Stamp Act was passed in the face of opposition by the American agents in London.

Speaking of the Americans, Mr. Grenville, who had charge of the Bill in Parliament, said,—

“ ‘These children of our planting,’ nourished by our indulgence until they are grown to a good degree of strength and opulence, and protected by our arms, will they grudge to contribute a mite to relieve us from the heavy load of national expense which we lie under?”

Colonel Barré, who had been in America, certainly replied with plainness of speech:—

“ ‘Children planted by our care!’ No, your oppression planted them in America; they fled from your tyranny into a then uncultivated land. . . .

“ ‘They nourished up by your indulgence!’ They grew by your neglect of them; as soon as you began to care about them, that care was exercised in sending persons to rule over them.” (Then follows a denunciation of these officials.)

“ ‘They protected by your arms?’ They have notably taken up arms in your defence, have exerted their valour amidst their constant and laborious industry for the defence of the country. . . . The people in America are, I believe, as truly loyal as any subjects the king has; but a people jealous of their liberties, and who will vindicate them if they should be violated.”

We quote these rather extreme words to show that the American case had a hearing in England.

As soon as the passage of the Stamp Act was known in America the whole Atlantic seaboard was in a flame. Virginia, the great cavalier colony, passed dignified but decided resolutions, declaring the action of the British Parliament to be “illegal, unconstitutional, and unjust, and having a manifest tendency to destroy British as well as American freedom.”

The text of the Act was printed and scattered throughout the streets of New York, headed, “The folly of England, and the ruin of America.” In Providence, Rhode Island, the stamp-officer was compelled to refuse to serve. In a published gazette, protesting against the Act, was the motto, “Vox populi, vox Dei,” “Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.” The Constitutional Courant had an emblem of a snake cut in pieces, each piece having on it the initial letter of the name of a colony, and under this inscribed, “Join or die.”

In Boston the feeling was intense. Effigies of the three Stamp Commissioners were burned under a gallows. The stamped paper was by the law required for all contracts, bills, promissory notes, and other legal documents thereafter made in America. No one would take the paper from the ships bringing it from England to Boston. The Assembly was asked to receive it but refused. At last the Governor took it in charge to the castle, with the understanding that it remain unopened.

Assembly after Assembly throughout the colonies declared against the Act; and commissioners from nine provinces met in a Congress at New York—the first Congress of the United States—on the 7th of October, 1765. While professing loyalty to the King of England, yet the Congress passed fourteen resolutions distinctly laying down their rights, and objecting to “taxation without representation.” Riots and disturbances took place in all parts of the colonies.

The agitation compelled the attention of the English Parliament. Mr. Pitt thundered forth in behalf of the colonists. The House out of mere fright repealed the Act on the 17th of March, 1766, but at the same time passed an Act which declared, “that the Parliament of Great Britain had a right to bind the colonies in all cases whatsoever.” The expression of opinion in the House of Lords was especially strong for the preservation of the prerogative.

The arrival of the news of the repeal of the Act was received with loud acclamations in America. In three years, however, on the 29th of June, 1769, a new Revenue Act was passed, which revived the old opposition. In the harbour of Boston, a colonial sloop, the Liberty, was seized by the revenue officers for a breach of the law. This was done in an arbitrary manner. In addition, several men were pressed into the navy in Boston. Boston was all excitement. There was danger of riot.

To be ready for emergencies a body of regular troops was sent to Boston. It was against an Act of Parliament to quarter these in the city. The Governor, on his own authority, quartered them in the State House, and two field-pieces were placed in front of it. In 1767 the English Parliament asked that inquiry be made in Massachusetts as to the treason existing there, and that offenders be sent to England. This irritated the people, and Faneuil Hall, Boston, which has been called the “Cradle of Liberty,” again rang with angry denunciations. Governor Bernard’s recall at this time gave great satisfaction in Boston.

Lord North, coming into power in 1770, repealed all the port duties except that on tea. In March of this year an unfortunate collision took place in Boston, between the military and the citizens. The soldiers opened fire, and several citizens were killed. The excitement rose to fever heat. A public funeral was given the dead, and a great crowd attended the funeral. In 1772 the judges’ salaries were paid out of amounts from the Revenue Tax by the British Government. Much anger was aroused in Britain in 1772 by an outrage in Rhode Island. A revenue cutter, the Gaspée, ordered the Providence packet to lower her colours. The packet refused. The Gaspée fired on her. The packet led the Gaspée into shallow water and escaped. The Gaspée ran aground, as the tide went out. At night the Rhode Island fishermen attacked the Gaspée, took Commander Doddington and crew ashore, and burnt the vessel. In 1773, Governor Hutchinson debated with his two Houses of Assembly as to the supreme legislative authority of Parliament. This was interesting, but not profitable.

In 1773 the dénouement came. In that year ships laden with tea arrived in Boston Harbour, with the duty unpaid. All the colonies had previously agreed not to admit tea at all. The people in Boston insisted on the ships returning to Britain with their cargoes. Governor Hutchinson refused to allow the ships to return. Then according to local tradition in Boston happened the “tea-party.” It is said a public meeting was in progress in the Old South Meeting House, when some one cried out, “What kind of a mixture would salt water and tea make?” Immediately some say, a few days later others, fifty men, dressed as Mohawk Indians, boarded the vessels and emptied the boxes of tea into Boston Bay. A specimen of the submerged tea may still be seen in the rooms of the Massachusetts Historical Society.

The British Parliament was now roused in turn. A Bill was brought in closing Boston Port, and removing 1774. the Custom House to Salem; another Bill subverting the constitution of Massachusetts, and next a Bill for bringing those guilty of sedition to England for trial. All these Bills passed. It was at this juncture the “Quebec Act” became law. Hence, probably, its illiberal features.

Next, the colonists in Boston and elsewhere sought to retaliate. They agreed to stop all imports and exports to and from Great Britain, Ireland, and West Indies, until the obnoxious Bills were repealed. So greatly were all the colonies stirred, that a Continental Congress met in Philadelphia, under the presidency of Peyton Randolph, of Virginia. That meeting of Congress was the beginning of the end. A resolution was passed approving of the conduct of the people of Massachusetts in resisting the encroachments of arbitrary power. A declaration of rights was adopted.

Addresses were passed to the people of Great Britain, to the American people, to the king, and to the Canadian people. The address to the French-Canadians of Lower Canada overflowed with tenderness. It sympathized with them in the arbitrary character of the “Quebec Act,” over which the French-Canadians were in raptures. It was, indeed, rather amusing to see provinces which had been hostile to New France for 150 years hoping to make them friends by a circular letter. As there were no printing facilities in Canada the letter never reached the French-Canadians.

An Act was passed in the British Parliament now to restrain the trade of New England, and prohibiting her from carrying on fisheries on the banks of Newfoundland. Most of the other provinces hurried to the support of New England. A second Act was passed in Britain, including all the other provinces in the same condemnation, except New York and North Carolina.

There seemed now no alternative but war. Throughout the colonies arms were collected, companies formed, and preparations for the worst were made. Nor had they long to wait. The colonists seem to have shrewdly determined that on the royal party should lie the onus of beginning war. General Gage, on the 19th of April, 1775, sent out a detachment of 800 men, under Major Pitcairn, to destroy colonial stores being collected at Concord, eighteen miles from Boston. At five in the morning the troops encountered about 100 colonials assembled at a meeting-house. “Disperse, d—— you, rebels, disperse,” cried the choleric major. Firing began, and eight men were killed and a number wounded. Having proceeded to Concord and destroyed the stores, the regulars were beset by the provincial militia. The old New England drums, which had beat in Acadia and on the borders, were now heard again. The fight was severe, and nearly 100 killed and 200 wounded marked the course of Pitcairn’s detachment back to Boston.

An early movement of the provincials on the 9th of May was that of Ethan Allen and Benedict Arnold, by which Ticonderoga and Crown Point were seized, and the shipping in Lake Champlain captured. In the second letter of the Continental Congress to the French-Canadians reference is made to this unbrotherly act, and asking them not to keep in mind so trifling an occurrence. With the progress of the war, the raising of the Republican army, the large reinforcements sent over from Britain, and the battles and varying fortunes of the campaign, we have here nothing to do.

The Congress of 1775 had voted to equip 20,000 men. Bills of credit to the extent of 3,000,000 dollars were issued on the credit of the “United Colonies,” and General George Washington, of Monongahela fame, was appointed Commander-in-Chief. In July, 1775, under the historic elm-tree in Cambridge, near Boston, shortly after the battle of Bunker’s Hill, General Washington took command of the American army.

In November, 1775, intelligence reached the Congress that the second petition to the British Parliament had been rejected. Independence began to be considered as the only remedy for their grievances. A brochure, entitled “Common Sense,” by a loose-principled English immigrant, named Thomas Paine, had a wide circulation, and prepared the people for what was coming. On the 4th of July, 1776, after full consideration, the Declaration of Independence was made by the Continental Congress, and a new and mighty nation was born.

This Declaration, which has become a historic document, speaks for itself. Fault has been found with it, that it too distinctly lays the blame of the arbitrary course of Britain to her colonies on the head of King George III. The Declaration says: “In every stage of these oppressions we have petitioned for redress in the most humble terms; our repeated petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.”

These are strong words. Yet they are probably no stronger than truth demands. Letters of the king show that these words do not misrepresent him. The king afterwards stated to John Adams, the first Ambassador from the United States to England, “that he was the last man in his dominions to consent to the recognition of their independence.” Sad to think of the havoc and bloodshed caused by our old King George III., who was in many other ways so worthy. Independence, however, must, in the nature of the case, have come sooner or later.

Section III.—The Revolutionary War as it affected Canada.

As Massachusetts was the head, Boston was the brain of the revolutionary movement. The few British troops in the old colonies were in Boston, for here General Gage had been sent to enforce obedience when Boston port was closed, and the charter of the State of Massachusetts annulled by the British Government. Colonial troops, such as these Shirley or Pepperel had led against Acadia, or perhaps even less disciplined than they, surrounded Boston, and sought to cut it off from influencing the surrounding country.

On the 17th of July the British army strove to dislodge 1775. the colonial forces from Bunker’s Hill, a rising ground in Charlestown, a suburb of Boston. The “rustic” irregulars made so bold a stand, and did so well, that, though compelled to retire, they were encouraged by the trial of strength. General Gage awaited reinforcements. In this suspense it occurred to the colonial leaders that their greatest obstacle would be removed were Canada subdued, and thus a safe base of operations taken from the British.

The border wars had opened the roads by which Canada could be reached. One of these old routes at least was chosen. General Montgomery, with 3000 men, would go down Lake Champlain, and attack Montreal; while General Arnold, with 1200, was to seek the headwaters of Kennebec River, cross the height of land, and descend the Chaudière to the very gates of Quebec. The brave General Carleton, who had been with Wolfe at Quebec, was now in command of the forces of Canada—if 500 British regulars and a few hundred militia might be so denominated. No doubt Governor Carleton with his small army undertook too much. He sought to defend the way to Montreal by holding Fort St. John, and that to Quebec by defending Chambly. Both these places fell before the Americans.

General Montgomery pushed on down the River Richelieu and occupied Sorel, throwing forces across the St. Lawrence, and erected batteries on both sides to prevent intercourse between Montreal and Quebec. Montreal, now defenceless, was compelled to surrender on the 13th of November, and eleven British vessels were given up to the enemy. It was really a dark hour for Canada. General Carleton has been severely criticized for dividing his forces. The truth is, the attack was so unexpected, and so soon after the outbreak of the rebellion, that no plans of defence for Canada had been laid. It was the knowledge of this fact that caused such prompt action on the part of the Americans. General Carleton himself escaped from Montreal, and, in a boat, passed the Sorel batteries with muffled oars under cover of night.

The general had but reached Quebec in time. The expedition of Arnold had already gained the St. Lawrence on the side opposite the “Ancient Capital.” The energy displayed by Arnold’s men was remarkable. The Kennebec is a series of rapids. Its swift current hurries over dangerous rocks at every turn. The highlands when reached consist of swamps and rocky ridges covered with forest. The Chaudière proved worse than the Kennebec, and the current being with the boats, dashed them to pieces on the rocks. Arnold’s men, on their six weeks’ march, had run short of food, and were compelled to eat the dogs which had accompanied them. Not much more than half Arnold’s army reached the St. Lawrence.

Arnold’s force crossed the St. Lawrence, landed at Wolfe’s Cove, and built huts for themselves on the Plains of Abraham. On the 5th of December Montgomery joined the Kennebec men before Quebec. The united force was of some 3000 men, supported by about a dozen light guns.

Carleton had, for the defence of Quebec, only one company of regulars, and a few seamen and marines of a sloop of war at Quebec. The popularity of the Governor was such that he easily prevailed upon the citizens, both French and English, to enrol themselves in companies for the defence of their homes. He was able to count upon about 1600 bayonets.

The defences of Quebec were, however, too strong for the Americans. On the night of December 31st a desperate effort was made to take the city by escalade. Four attacks were made simultaneously. Arnold sought to enter by the St. Charles, on the north side of Quebec, and Montgomery by the south, between Cape Diamond and the St. Lawrence. Two feints were to be made on the side toward the Plains of Abraham. The hope of the commanders was to have forced the gates from the lower to the upper town in both cases. Arnold failed to reach the lower town, and in a sortie the defenders cut off nearly the whole of his column. He escaped wounded. Montgomery was killed at the second entrenchment of the lower town, and his troops retired in confusion. The American generals have been criticized by experts for not making their chief attack on the wall facing on the Plains of Abraham. Canadians may be well satisfied with the plan of attack.

General Arnold remained before Quebec, though his troops had become reduced to 800 men. General 1776. Carleton pursued a policy of acting strictly on the defensive. If he retained Quebec it would be his greatest success. General Arnold sought to gain the sympathy of the French Canadian seigniors and people, but without any success. Three thousand troops, however, came to reinforce Arnold early in the year, and 4000 occupied Montreal, St. John’s, and Chambly.

But on the 6th of May relief came from England: men-of-war and transports, with three brigades of infantry, besides artillery, stores, and ammunition. The Americans withdrew to Sorel. The British troops followed them, and a brigade encamped at Three Rivers. The Americans attempted to surprise the force at Three Rivers, but were repulsed with heavy loss. The Americans now fell back from Montreal, deserted all the posts down to Lake Champlain, and Governor Carleton had the pleasure of occupying Isle-aux-Noix as the outpost, leaving Canada as it had been before the first attack in the year before.

A strong movement was now to be made on the British from Canada by way of Lake Champlain, 1777. to take Albany, and open communications with New York. General Burgoyne, an officer of good reputation, was in command. In the official correspondence of the time serious charges are made by Sir Guy Carleton that Burgoyne had succeeded in inducing the British war authorities to transfer the chief command from himself to Burgoyne. Burgoyne denies the charge, and states that General Carleton’s duties as Governor-General prevented him leaving the province on an offensive expedition. Sympathy has usually been with Carleton. With 7000 regular troops, and militia and Indians making 1000 more, Burgoyne pushed his way down Lake Champlain, taking, in a gallant manner, Crown Point, Ticonderoga, Port Independence, and Fort George—the old Fort William Henry. The American shipping on Lake Champlain was all captured or destroyed. The prospects of the campaign were brilliant indeed for the British.

Much delay now followed in bringing up boats with supplies. Every day of delay but allowed the American army to gather reinforcements. Burgoyne had left 900 men to garrison Ticonderoga. The British force was now on the east side of the Hudson. The road to Albany lay on the west. A company of 500 men were sent across the river to seize a convoy of the enemy’s stores, but were fallen upon by the Americans and nearly cut to pieces. This greatly encouraged the colonial troops. General Burgoyne delayed nearly a month, for provisions in plenty to be brought up.

The British army now crossed to the west of the Hudson on a bridge of boats, and immediately met the enemy in a drawn encounter. On the 7th of October, the Americans, who were now much reinforced, attacked Burgoyne. Fearing he would be outflanked, the British general fell back upon Saratoga. He was now quite surrounded by the American army of 16,000 men, under General Gates. His force was reduced by heavy casualties, by sickness, and desertion, to 3500 men. There was no hope of deliverance, and Burgoyne capitulated on the 16th of October.

The co-operating British expedition, which ascended the river by Oswego, never passed the Carrying Place, but was compelled to withdraw from the siege of Fort Stanwix, after investing it. This command, which, under Colonel St. Leger, consisted of 700 regulars and 1000 Indians, fell back upon Oswego, and thence to Montreal. The campaign, so far as the British were concerned, was badly conceived, and is counted by the Americans, and rightly so, one of the chief successes of their revolutionary war.

Had Burgoyne succeeded in reaching Albany, a considerable rallying of loyal men would have taken place to his standard, for the population along the Mohawk and Hudson Rivers was mainly loyalist in sympathy. The same state of feeling prevailed largely in New Jersey, while in North Carolina there was the same loyal sentiment. Britain began to experience the impossibility of conquering a vast territory like the United States with the majority of the people bent on independence. Almost the last words of the great Earl of Chatham in the House of Lords were, “You talk of conquering America—of your powerful forces to disperse her army. I might as well talk of driving them before me with this crutch.”

As the war continued year after year, the lines of social division became more and more strongly marked. The loyal minority began to find their lot an unpleasant one. The most of the clergy of the Episcopal Church were loyalists, though many of the leaders of the Revolutionary party, notably Washington, belonged to that communion.

The clergy of the other religious bodies were almost exclusively republicans. A most interesting journal, in manuscript, in the Parliamentary Library of Ottawa, gives an account of the sufferings and annoyances of the loyal clergy throughout the United States during the years immediately preceding the Treaty of Paris, 1783.

It is related by one of these faithful shepherds, that on one occasion Washington was passing Sunday in the town where he dwelt. A leading officer on Sunday morning called upon the clergyman to state that Washington would be in church that same day, and asking that the denunciations of the rebels be a little milder than usual for that day. The sturdy loyalist refused to modify in one jot or one tittle.

In the year 1783 it became evident that the Republic must be declared independent. Tory officials, officers in the British army, regiments such as Butler’s Rangers, Sir John Johnson’s Corps, the Queen’s Rangers, and others all made up of loyal Americans, were compelled to look abroad for homes. Accordingly, not only on the Canadian border, but especially in the city of New York, which the British held till the autumn of 1783, were crowds of loyalists waiting, not knowing what the day or the hour might bring forth.


(References: “Travels in North America in 1795-6-7,” vol. ii., 1807, by Isaac Weld; “Description of Nova Scotia,” 1825, Anon.; “British Dominions in North America,” 3 vols., 1832, by Joseph Bouchette; “Life of Joseph Brant,” 2 vols., 1838, by W. L. Stone; “Settlement of Upper Canada,” 1872, by William Canniff; “Toronto of Old,” 1873, by Henry Scadding; “The Loyalists of America and their Times,” 2 vols., 1880, by Egerton Ryerson; “Canadian Portraits,” 4 vols., 1881, by J. C. Dent; “American Loyalists,” by Col. Sabine; “Haldimand Papers,” Manuscript (large collection), Canadian Archives, Ottawa; “Accounts of the U.E.’s,” 2 vols., Manuscript, Parliamentary Library, Ottawa.)

Section I.—The Coming of the Loyalists.

The refugees who thus fled from the now independent colonies were, many of them, of the highest intelligence and standing. As the traveller to-day passes through the vicinity of the city of Boston, Massachusetts, in the suburbs of Cambridge, Newton, Dorchester, and Charlestown, and other towns, fine old mansions attract the eye. As inquiry is made as to the history of these square-built, rather antique-looking houses, the answer is given that one was the residence of a Tory in the Revolution, in whose house General Burgoyne, when a prisoner, was quartered; in another Tory dwelling General Washington at one time held headquarters; and in this abode the poet Longfellow afterwards dwelt; and that, said a guide, is where two Chief Justices of Massachusetts lived, and they were of the straitest Tory opinions. And so it was those of official position, leaders in society and intelligence in the old colony days, as was quite natural, who at last took sides with Britain, and when British power fell in the thirteen states fell with it.

As already stated, a number of the best regiments in the American war fighting for Britain consisted of loyal colonists. Against these the feeling of the rebellious, but now successful Americans was most intense. A British redcoat was an object of detestation, for he was a foreign opponent; but a colonial soldier of King George was despised as a traitor to his country. It was inevitable that these regiments of the king, officials holding positions under the royal government, as well as the large circle of non-combatants who held like opinions with these leaders on the loyalist side, and had expressed them, must seek some other home than the now independent commonwealths of Virginia, New York, or Massachusetts.

Accordingly, as is well known, there flocked largely into New York city great numbers of the unfortunate outcasts fleeing from the fury of their several localities. The circumstances of their flight precluded their having any great amount of property. Their houses and lands had been left behind; a war of eight years had reduced the colonies to penury; no more indigent class of dependants were probably ever left upon the hands of a government than these brave but unfortunate people. Yet they were possessed of an inflexible purpose: contempt for the republican government which had been established was commingled with the recollection of their own lost positions.

They were the New World Jacobites. A sense of higher standing was added to the powerful sentiment gathering around the glory of their lost cause, and of their still being attached to the land of their ancestors and the land of unequalled prestige.

Utilitarians have read them many a lecture on the folly of pursuing phantoms, and the wisdom of being practical, but the United Empire Loyalists, as they delighted to style themselves, never deigned to look at such considerations, so strong were their anti-republican antipathies.

Nor were these sufferers for conscience’ sake without active and influential sympathizers in Britain. Leading peers, whose names we now find commemorated in different Canadian localities, spoke in terms of highest praise. Said Lord Stormont, “Britain is bound in justice and honour, gratitude and affection, and by every tie, to provide for and protect them.” Viscount Townsend declared, “To desert men who have constantly adhered to loyalty and attachment would be a circumstance of such cruelty as had never before been heard of.” While Lord Walsingham said “he could neither think nor speak of the dishonour of leaving these deserving people to their fate with patience.” True, as we have seen, the anxiety of the British Government for peace had led to the sacrifice of the interests of these loyal subjects, but all in Britain admitted the justice of giving them new homes under their own flag.

The means were already prepared for the settlement of all who chose to leave the land now so detested by them. In the “famous” proclamation of George III., 7th of October, 1763, provision had been made for dispensing the king’s bounty from the waste lands. To every person of field-officer’s rank 5000 acres was promised; to a captain, 3000; to subalterns, 2000 acres apiece; to each non-commissioned officer, 200 acres; and to every private man, fifty acres.

These terms were afterwards modified, remaining the same for non-commissioned officers, being 100 acres for privates; and the amounts for officers less than in the original proclamation. The refugees were now offered all the advantages mentioned, were taken by sea in British ships, or overland in parties, to a safe resting-place, and were supported by Government rations for a considerable time.

Gathered in the seaports along the Atlantic coast, crowds of the helpless exiles awaited the ships for their relief. The country about the Bay of Fundy, which on both sides was at that time known as Nova Scotia, afforded ample room for settlement. Towards the end of 1782 the loyalists had begun to see from the negotiations in progress that their departure would be a hurried one. The first instalment of refugees arrived on the 18th of May, 1783, off the mouth of the River St. John, in what is now New Brunswick, and before the end of that summer not less than 5000 had found homes along the river from the mouth, which, after the Governor of Nova Scotia, was called Parr Town, up to St. Ann’s, now Fredericton.

In Nova Scotia proper extensive settlements were made. In the south-west of the peninsula, in the old locality of La Tour and De Razilly, now the county of Shelbourne, in 1783 arrived 500 families of loyalists. On Shelbourne Harbour they erected with great energy a town which was to be the Carthage of the loyalists. This increased in the course of a year so greatly that its population reached some 12,000. Now a deserted spot on the spacious bay marks the site of this transient town, which indeed within two or three years from its founding began to decay.

The busy season of 1783 was said in September to have resulted in 13,000 loyalists having taken up their abode in Nova Scotia and St. John’s, now Prince Edward’s Island. In the following season a like activity prevailed. The township of Digby in the Annapolis region was settled, Aylesford and Rawdon both received large additions of settlers, the Douglas settlement was filled by disbanded soldiers of the 84th Regiment, while Clements County was largely taken up by disbanded Hessian soldiers and refugees.

On the coast above Halifax, in the county of Sidney, in Coventry Harbour, the refugees erected a town, to which they gave the name “Stormont” in honour of their British defender and friend. Guysborough, in that county, was similarly settled, as well as Preston in Halifax County.

During the same period the importation of British dependants continued up the St. John River, in New Brunswick. The 8th, 98th, and 104th Regiments, and New Jersey Volunteers of Colonial Militia, all having been disbanded, were given lands in this region, while the “Queen’s Rangers,” the regiment second to none in distinction, was also quartered on holdings here.

There can be little difficulty in admitting that 20,000 of the U.E.’s from the seaboard found their new homes in Nova Scotia, and numbers of these afterwards journeyed westward to Upper Canada, yet the large number remaining, and their descendants, have taken an important part in the conduct of affairs in the provinces by the sea, as the names of Howe, Tupper, Wilmot, Chandler, Williams, and Robinson abundantly testify.

No sooner had the loyalists taken possession of the north shore of the Bay of Fundy and settled the River St. John, than they began to clamour for self-government. Governor Parr was much opposed to the division of the province, and removed a number of the loyalist agitators to the south side of the Bay of Fundy, but it was of no avail, and in 1784 New Brunswick was set apart, as we have before seen, as a separate province.

The character of the loyalist settlers of St. John River may, as has been pointed out, be seen from the following of the twelve members of the first Council of New Brunswick. “Chief Justice Ludlow had been a judge of the Supreme Court of New York; James Putnam, one of the ablest lawyers in America; Rev. and Hon. Jonathan Odell, Provincial Secretary, had been chaplain in the royal army; Judge Joshua Upham, a graduate of Harvard, had been a colonel of dragoons; Judge Israel Allen had lost an estate in Pennsylvania, and been a colonel of New Jersey Volunteers; Judge Edward Winslow was a colonel in the royal army; Beverley Robinson, who had lost great estates on the Hudson River, had raised the Loyal American Regiment; Judge John Saunders, of a cavalier family in Virginia, had been captain in the Queen’s Rangers, and afterwards studied law in the Temple, London; David Bliss had been a commissary in the royal army.”

When the loyalists were flocking to Nova Scotia and Cape Breton. New Brunswick, the British Government forbade the Governor of Nova Scotia to settle any Loyalists in Cape Breton Island, which was then a part of his province. The Hon. Thomas Townsend, who in 1784 became Secretary of State, and was raised to the peerage as Lord Sydney, separated Cape Breton from Nova Scotia at the same time as New Brunswick was set apart. The first Governor of Cape Breton was Major Desbarres, a brave officer who had gone through the Seven Years’ War, and had been for years on the coast survey of Nova Scotia. The Governor gave up Louisbourg, the former capital of the island, and founded Sydney, which possesses a safe harbour, and which he named after the Secretary of State.

A band of the refugee loyalists now obtained leave through the kind offices of Abraham Cuyler, formerly Colonial Governor at Albany, to settle in Cape Breton. These to the number of 140 souls, calling themselves the “Associated Loyalists,” sailed in three vessels under Colonel Peters, Captain Jones, and Mr. Robertson, who had been officers of the Royal Rangers. Some of them settled at Baddeck, others at St. Peter’s, and still others at Louisbourg. It is stated that 800 loyalists followed this band of pioneers to Cape Breton. The statement made by Governor Desbarres, that three or four thousand loyalists came to Cape Breton, is generally discredited.

Much hardship was endured by these first settlers. In the winter of 1785-6, the colonists would certainly have starved had it not been for a Quebec vessel, which remained ice-bound in Aricha Harbour, and whose cargo of provisions was purchased for the perishing settlers. In the year 1788, Prince William Henry, afterwards William IV., to the great delight of the loyalists, visited Sydney in his frigate, the Andromeda.

The Governor-General of Canada at the time of the flight of the loyalists was General Haldimand. Their natural leader, Sir Guy Carleton, had been relieved of his command of the British troops on the appointment of General Burgoyne in 1777, having regarded that appointment as a personal slight to himself. He had resigned his governorship of Canada in 1778, had returned to England, but was in 1782 appointed to succeed Sir Henry Clinton in command of the British troops in America. He arrived in New York in May of that year, and was in command of New York at the time of its evacuation. Captain Simcoe, the late friend of the loyalists, had returned from America to Britain. Governor Haldimand, a Swiss by birth, much maligned by a troublesome wrong-doer, Du Calvet, will yet have justice done him for his noble assistance to the Loyalists. Nova Scotia and New Brunswick had been filled to repletion by the large influx of loyalists in so short a period. The loyalists remaining in the places yet held by the British, now turned their eyes to the west.

At the close of the war a proclamation had been made to the effect that those who had remained loyal to Britain should rendezvous at convenient stations along the Canadian frontier. This had been intended mainly for those living inland, who might not be able to avail themselves of the transport offered from the seaports to Nova Scotia. The centres named were Sackett’s Harbour, Carleton Island or Oswego, Niagara on Lake Ontario, and Isle-aux-Noix on Lake Champlain.

Even from the seaboard did the exiles now seek their way to these new homes which had been offered them. The yet undivided province of Quebec became their place of destination. An U.E. Loyalist, named Grass, son of Captain Michael Grass, has left us an account of this turning of the emigration from Nova Scotia toward the Upper Province. From Bishop Richardson we have his words: “My father had been a prisoner among the French at Frontenac (now Kingston), in the old French war (1756-63), and at the commencement of the American Revolution he resided in a farm on the borders of the North River, about thirty miles above New York. Being solicited by General Herkimer to take a captain’s commission in the American service, he replied sternly and promptly that he had sworn allegiance to one king, meaning George III., and could not violate his oath or serve against him. For this he was obliged to flee from his home and take refuge within New York, under British protection. . . .

“On the return of peace, the Americans having gained their independence, there was no longer any home there for the fugitive loyalists, of which the city was full; and the British Governor was much at a loss for a place to settle them. . . . Their immense numbers made it difficult to find a home for them all in Nova Scotia. In the meantime the Governor, in his perplexity, having heard that my father had been a prisoner among the French at Frontenac, sent for him and said, ‘Mr. Grass, I understand you have been at Frontenac in Canada. Pray tell me what kind of a country it is. Can people live there? What think you?’ My father replied, ‘Yes, your Excellency, I was there a prisoner of war, and from what I saw I think it a fine country, and that people might live there very well,’ ‘Oh! Mr. Grass,’ exclaimed the Governor, ‘how glad I am to hear that for the sake of these poor loyalists. . . . Will you undertake to lead thither as many as may choose to accompany you? If so I will furnish a conveyance by Quebec and rations for you all till such time as you may be able to provide for yourselves.’ ”

The loyalist captain, having taken three days to consider the Governor’s offer, accepted it, and notice was posted throughout the city with an offer to conduct as many as desired to go to the Upper Province of Quebec. Two shiploads of men, women, and children soon after started.

These were the pilgrim fathers of Canada. They may be called the founders of Upper Canada. Their service was as conspicuous to Canada, their bravery was as great, and their devotion to their principles was as strong and beautiful as anything that can be seen in the heroic and much-lauded course of the Pilgrims of Plymouth Rock. It was shortly before the evacuation of New York by the British, which took place on the 25th of November, 1783, that the two ships sailed up the shore of New England, entered the Gulf of St. Lawrence, and landed their precious cargo at Sorel, a town, as we have seen, some miles below Montreal on the St. Lawrence.

The ships had been convoyed by the British brig, Hope; Captain Grass led the one party, and Captain Van Alstine the other. At Sorel log-huts were built for the winter, and the colonists, along with others who had come down the Richelieu, awaited the opening of the next season, suffering in the meantime from the scourge of small-pox. The opening spring saw these pioneers undertake in flat-bottomed boats the toilsome journey up the river. They worked manfully, suffered many privations, and at times were compelled to leave their unwieldy craft and “track” them up the bank, especially at the “Cedar Rapids” and the Long Sault. Passing through the Thousand Islands, the wanderers from New York were captivated by the beauty of the region, and settled just above them, on “Indian Point,” near Fort Frontenac, where the city of Kingston now stands. The first survey of the new district to be settled had been begun in 1783. Deputy-Surveyor Collins seems to have conducted it, but a new survey was needed in 1784 to correct this. It was not till July that the land was ready for distribution.

But not only by way of the St. Lawrence, but through the waterways of the State of New York also did the loyalists reach Upper Canada. Not more were Loyalist Routes. the Thames, the Humber, and the Trent, the arteries by which the Saxon peoples penetrated England, than were the several lines of water communication and portage between the Hudson River and Lake Ontario, the means by which the loyalist refugees reached their new homes.

The best-known route was that up the Hudson River on its western branch to Fort Stanwix, now the town of Rome—thence by a portage to Lake Oneida; through this lake and down the River Oswego to the town of the same name where the river enters Lake Ontario. From Oswego any station on the borders of Lake Ontario could be reached by boat.

A second route was that by which, leaving another branch of the Hudson, the Black River was gained by a short portage. At the mouth of this river was Sackett’s Harbour, which lay on the lake shore between Oswego and Kingston.

Another line by which Canada was approached was by following up the east branch of the Hudson and crossing the Adirondack Mountains. Across the mountains to the west, a tributary of the Black River was reached, by which again Sackett’s Harbour could be gained.

By a track a little more to the north, through the Adirondacks, the Oswegotchie River was found, which led down to Ogdensburg—the old fort “La Presentation”—on the St. Lawrence.

A fifth route through the interior was by the military road, a relic of the French wars, which ran along the west shore of Lake Champlain. From this road the traveller might proceed westward to Cornwall, or continue his journey down the Richelieu River to Sorel, the rallying-point, as we have seen, for the refugees coming up the St. Lawrence. It was the first of these routes—that leading to Oswego—which was most popular, although there were those who followed a still more westerly way, as they came from Pennsylvania, from the headwaters of the Susquehanna to Lake Erie and Niagara. But as in England all roads lead to London, so all the routes named converged on the new land of hope, where a united empire might still be maintained.

At Sorel, we have said, several bodies of refugees gathered, as well as those who came up the St. Lawrence from New York. Many of these were disbanded soldiers, whose families had joined them. Sir John Johnstone was the officer in charge of one body. This officer was the son of Sir William Johnstone, of fame in the Seven Years’ War. Like his father he had been an ardent supporter of British claims.

Johnstone had raised a force 800 strong of his own neighbours and dependants, from the Johnstone estates on the Mohawk River. This regiment was known as the “84th Royal New York”—or “Royal Greens.” The war over, the 84th had been stationed at Isle-aux-Noix on Lake Champlain. The wives and children of the soldiers had come from the Mohawk River overland, through great hardships, to join them. Late in 1783 the refugees passed down the Richelieu and reached Sorel, the meanwhile rendezvous.

In 1784, in company with the other exiles, they ascended the St. Lawrence, and the first battalion took up its location in what is now the county of Dundas, in the townships of Cornwall, Osnabruck, Williamsburgh, and Matilda. The latter two townships afterwards received these names from King George III.’s third and fourth children. Almost all of the first battalion of the “Royal Greens” were of German origin.

Westward on the St. Lawrence, went to the adjoining townships the remaining part of the first battalion of the Johnstone regiment, known as “Jessup’s Corps.” These were chiefly of British parentage in New York State. Their townships were afterwards called Edwardburgh, Augusta, and Elizabethtown, the names being given after the fifth, sixth, and seventh children of the king. It was on the 20th of June, 1784, that the first of the disbanded soldiers of the 84th landed in the townships named. The second battalion continued its way up the St. Lawrence and arrived in a few days after at Fort Frontenac.

It was in July, 1784, that on “Indian Point” at Fort Frontenac, there met together the contingents of Captains Grass and Van Alstine, Sir John Johnstone, and Colonels McDonell and Rogers, to receive their lands. The townships beginning at Fort Frontenac were numbered westward up to five. It has been suggested that the fifth, lying along the Bay of Quinté, gave its Latin equivalent, Quintus, to the bay. This, however, is a mistake. In the old maps of 1776 the Indian name of the river running into the bay is the “Kentio,” no doubt the original of Quinté.

The leaders of the several companies having assembled, to Captain Grass, as the original suggester of the region, was given the first choice. He selected township one, to which in honour of the sovereign was given the name Kingston. Township two, named Ernesttown, after the king’s eighth child, was given to Sir John Johnstone. Colonel Rogers and his party took the next in order, which from the next in order of the royal family was called Fredericksburgh. The New York City party, under Major Van Alstine, obtained township four, which in its turn was named Adolphustown. The Van Alstine contingent was of the very best of the U.E. stock. It seems to have been composed of even a more intelligent and energetic class than that of the military settlers. Several distinguished Canadians, among others Judge Hagerman and Sheriff Ruttan, have sprung from it.

The fifth township, known as Marysburgh, from another child of the numerous family of fifteen belonging to the sovereign, lay along the Bay of Quinté. It was but partially settled by Colonel McDonell and his disbanded men of the 84th, and in the next year 1785, a body of Hessian mercenaries, who had remained in Lower Canada, took up the remainder of the township. They were a turbulent and dissatisfied body of settlers.

So soon as the townships along the river and lake were filled with loyalists, the sons of the U.E.’s, who were entitled on coming of age to 200 acres of land apiece, settled in the second range of townships such as Winchester, Mountain, and others.

For several years after the first coming of the refugees there continued fresh arrivals of the friends of the earlier settlers. These found suitable localities for settlement in Sophiasburgh and Ameliasburgh townships, still following the royal family in their names. Thus also were settled Sidney, Thurlow, and Richmond. To have been among the first exiles in their western Hegira was deemed a special honour, and to those who came in from year to year was given the name “Late Loyalists.”

The saying of the New York refugees as they left their country to go into exile to Canada was Lake Erie Settlements. that they were going to “a country where there were nine months of winter and three months of cold weather every year.” This remark but serves to show the unselfish devotion to principle which animated the U.E.’s. They were, however, on coming to Western Canada agreeably disappointed. They found a region capable of producing the melon, the grape, Indian corn, and even the peach plentifully. But the portion of country about Fort Frontenac, so largely settled by the new immigrants, was far from being the best part of what is now the province of Ontario.

So early as 1750 numbers of disbanded soldiers from the French army, who knew the interior of New France well, had passed by Fort Frontenac and taken up their abode near Fort Detroit, which nearly fifty years before that—in 1701—had been founded by Cadillac, in the fine region between Lakes Huron and St. Clair. And so now there were those among the more enterprising of the U.E.’s who came through, as we mentioned, from the headwaters of the Susquehanna to Lake Erie, and by other routes, who crossed the lake and sought new homes on the west of the Essex peninsula.

The earlier French settlers of Sandwich township had surveyed their lands into narrow strips along the river bank, in French Canadian fashion, in order that they might build their houses more closely together; nor was this plan a bad one in a country infested by wild beasts and treacherous redmen. It was in 1784, the same year as Kingston was settled, that a band of U.E.’s took up the most south-westerly township of what was afterwards Upper Canada, viz. that of Malden. That the number of settlers was considerable may be seen from the fact that in the same year Colchester, Gosfield, and Mersea, all contiguous townships bordering on Lake Erie, were to some extent occupied.

It must, however, be borne in mind that the population was very sparse, each settler choosing some spot attracting him, even if it were miles from his neighbour’s abode. As we shall see, the U.E.’s had little feeling of community with the earlier French Canadian settlers, and so not only kept the former occupants at a respectful distance, but likewise called their own townships “the new settlement.”

The fact that Fort Niagara had been named as a point The Niagara Settlers. of rendezvous in the proclamation at the close of the war was the cause likewise of a settlement of refugees being begun in the Niagara peninsula. So early as 1782 the township of Caistor, in the centre of the Niagara peninsula, received its first settlers.

It was in that red-letter year of the loyalists, 1784, that the townships along the River Niagara from Lake Erie to Lake Ontario all received their first settlers. These townships are Bertie, Willoughby, Stamford, and Grantham. They were chiefly occupied by the disbanded soldiers of Butler’s Rangers.

It is not strange that a number of the U.E.’s should have sought to escape the hardships of a Loyalists in Lower Canada. long and wearisome journey inland by settling near Lake Champlain close to the boundary line. St. Armand is a district which was taken up by the loyalists in 1784. The greatest number of these settlers consisted of those who had been under arms on the king’s side; they were chiefly of German origin, and were born on the Hudson River. Many of this first band of refugees became leaders of colonies, which afterwards occupied a group of 100 or more townships lying near the forty-fifth parallel of latitude, largely held now by English-speaking people, and known as the “Eastern Townships.”

That this district was not more largely settled by the U.E.’s was no doubt owing to the contiguity of the French Canadians, and the desire lying at the root of the loyalist movement of having a new British province under U.E. control; as well as the unwillingness of Governor Haldimand to have them on the frontier. Several of the families who had made Sorel, at the mouth of the Richelieu, their rendezvous, remained there, and the town, at times called by the name William Henry, son of King George third, long retained a military tone.

Section II.—The Friends of the Loyalists.

Some 10,000 refugees had in 1784, and the few years following, found homes in Western Canada, just as it is estimated, as already mentioned, that 20,000 had settled in the provinces by the sea. Assuming full responsibility for the care and present support of her devoted adherents, Great Britain opened her hand cheerfully to assist them. The Treaty of 1783 had made no provision for the indemnification of the losses of the loyal refugees. Yet the Parliament at Westminster of 1783 unanimously passed an Act appointing commissioners to inquire into the losses of those “who had suffered . . . in consequence of their loyalty to his Majesty and attachment to the British Government.”

The latest time for presenting claims was at first the 25th of March, 1784, but this was again and again extended until in 1790 the matter received final disposition. The tedious and expensive process, however, discouraged many. There were 3225 applications presented, of which about nine-tenths were recognized, though not to the full amount of the claims. The sum paid by the British Government to the suffering refugees was about $15,000,000—an amount whose mention for ever redounds to the honour and justice of Britain. But the 30,000 homeless refugees, who had no resource, were, perhaps, a greater charge to the Government. To prevent absolute starvation daily rations were issued to the loyalists, in some cases for three years after their flight.

For the several settlements there were, it is said, provided portable steel mills for grinding their flour. Implements for building their houses were supplied as required. A plough and a cow were bestowed upon each family; spades and hoes were given out liberally, and axes, but the last were, unfortunately, provided with such short handles, that they would have broken in a day the back of a Canadian woodman. And not only were the new settlers dependent for their means of subduing the forest and erecting dwellings, but the very coarse garments and shoes worn by them were the gift of the Government.

The co-operation of the many to help the one was a principle early introduced, and the “logging-bee” was one of the earliest customs of the new province.

The “clearing” of the first spot in the forest afforded the “logs” for the settler’s house; a few panes of glass made the one window of the settler’s “shanty.” The log walls were surmounted by a roof formed of strips of bark, laid upon the frame work of poles; and flat stones, found upon the surface of the ground, supplied the materials for the rude chimney and an ample hearth, to admit the blazing yule-logs. The interstices between the walls were “chinked” with small splinters; and clay from the neighbouring “clearing,” used as plaster, kept out the winds of winter.

This settler’s shanty, introduced by the U.E.’s, has been the mode of entrance to Canada of hundreds of thousands of her sons, and who, in the midst of opulence to-day, look back to the “first shanty,” as did the Roman to the shepherd’s hut that sheltered the infants that afterwards became the founders of Imperial Rome.

In the case of the loyalists it was as it has so often been seen in the history of new settlements—their first attempts at cultivating the soil were failures. It seems as if the wildness of an unbroken and untilled soil needs for a time to be battled with, before it yields to man’s desire. In 1787, probably the first year in which the new settlers expected to depend upon their own crops, there was an absolute failure, so that in 1788 the greatest distress prevailed, and for many years afterward the famine season was spoken of as the “hard summer,” the “scarce year,” or the “hungry year.” Roots of wild plants were dug up and eaten; pottage of wheat-bran was prepared; fish and game, if obtainable, gave much assistance; the butter-nut and well-known weed, “lamb’s quarters” were in much demand; and the succulent heads of the new growing barley were sacrificed to keep away hunger.

It was in the year 1789 that it was ordered by the Government that a list of all the refugees who for the five years preceding had fled from the United States to the British Provinces should be made out, to be known as the “U.E. List,” and to be a record of all who should be entitled on coming of age to the same privileges which their fathers had received in coming to the country.

Few have been accustomed to look upon the Six Nation Indians as U.E. Loyalists, and yet in Brant and the Six Nations. all real particulars they belong to the refugee patriots. The name of their leading chief, Joseph Brant, or Thayendanagea, has always been bound up with their history and removal to Canada. In that very part of New York State whence we have seen came a large part of the early settlers of the Kingston and Bay of Quinté regions, viz. the district about Fort Stanwix, and under the influence of Sir William and afterwards of Sir John Johnstone, lived many of the Six Nations. To the Mohawks of this region Thayendanagea belonged. He was, however, born in 1742 on the banks of the Ohio, but was carried back with the hunting party on which his parents were to his ancestral home at Canojoharie, in the Mohawk Valley. Soon after, his father died. The name of his foster-father is said to have been Nickus Brant, hence his well-known name—Joseph Brant.

The troublous border wars involved those of tender years within them, and at the early age of thirteen Brant was present with Sir William Johnstone’s troops at the memorable battle of Lake George in 1755, at which, it will be remembered, the French were defeated, and their leader, Baron Dieskau, mortally wounded. Brant was also present at the Niagara campaign four years afterward, and greatly distinguished himself.

But the time of trial came when the colonial rebellion approached, in 1775. The Oneidas, one of the Six Nations, inclined toward the colonial side; so did other Indian tribes. In 1775 Brant visited England. He was there received as a person of some distinction, and appeared on public occasions in full Indian costume. He was admitted into the presence of “The Great King,” as the Indians called George III. He returned to America about the 1st of April. He was now decided to “take up the hatchet” on the side of the Crown, as Generals Guy Carleton and Haldimand had desired him to do before his visit to England. He landed at New York, and secretly pursued his visit to Canada.

Brant now took an active part in the war; but was, for an Indian warrior, uniformly humane. The poet Campbell, in connection with the story of Gertrude of Wyoming, made a false aspersion on his name by calling him the “Monster Brandt.” Brant was not present at Butler’s terrible expedition to the Susquehanna, nor did his general character justify such an appellation.

During the war the strong spirit of leadership of Thayendanagea exhibited itself both as a warrior and councillor. The war over, and the year of the cessation of hostilities, 1782, having come, the articles of peace were found not only to have neglected making full provision for the white loyalists, but even the faithful Indian allies of the Six Nations and others were not provided for in the treaty; and as their memorial stated, “the ancient country of the Six Nations, the residence of their ancestors from the time far beyond their earliest traditions, was included within the boundary granted to the Americans.”

But British officers had made strong pledges to the Indian allies. Sir Guy Carleton had promised at the beginning of the war to restore the Mohawks to their native valley. In 1779 General Haldimand had over his own signature and seal pledged himself to carry out Sir Guy’s promise. At the close of the war the Mohawks were residing on the American side of the Niagara River, alongside their closest allies, the Senecas. The latter, indeed, urged them to remain beside them on the Genesee River. The Mohawks, however, were intensely British in feeling—to use the words afterwards used by Captain Brant, and which have become historic, they determined “to sink or swim” with the English.

Captain Brant journeyed to Quebec to claim the fulfilment of his promise from General Haldimand. The Mohawks desired a tract of land in the Bay of Quinté. This the Governor promised to grant. On Brant’s return to Niagara the Mohawks were induced to seek a dwelling-place nearer the Senecas. Being sent back by the council of his own people, Brant again journeyed to Quebec. Now he sought the district lying along the Grand River, or Ouse, with which his name has ever since been associated.

A purchase was made of this region from the Chippewas by the Government, and the Governor promised to the Six Nations “six miles on each side of the river, from the mouth to its source.” Brant paid another visit to Quebec in 1784, before General Haldimand had quit the country, and secured a grant of the land desired; and as the document runs, “which the Mohawks and others of the Six Nations, who had either lost their possessions in the war, or wished to retire from them to the British, with their posterity, were to enjoy for ever.” The Grand River settlement was thus of the same date as that of Kingston and the Bay of Quinté.

The Six Nations did not all remove thither; but evidently the Mohawks may be said to have completely joined the loyalist province, for they have to this day in their possession the silver communion service presented to their tribe in 1710 by Queen Anne, and which they only saved from falling into the hands of the Americans by burying for a time in the earth. We learn from the account of a faithful witness who visited the Six Nations at their Grand River home in 1785, that there were 700 old and young in their settlement. The Mohawk church was built in 1786, and was the first church erected in Upper Canada. The Indian Reserve on the Grand River now contains several thousands of fairly civilized Indians, though, as we shall afterwards see, the greater part of the broad territory assigned to them was opened up and transferred to the whites.

A portion of the Six Nations also lives at Tyendinaga, on the Bay of Quinté. Joseph Brant continued to live near the western extremity of Lake Ontario, at Burlington, till his death, on the 27th of November, 1807. He was buried at the Mohawk church, near Brantford, where his tomb, since renewed, may still be seen. A Canadian county and township, as well as the thriving city named, commemorate his better-known name of Brant, while the township referred to preserves his Indian name as that of one of Britain’s most faithful allies. A county and township also keep alive the name of Governor Haldimand, who proved himself so firm a friend to the Indian.

If the New World has provided a grave for many an explorer, soldier, and pioneer, it has also added Sir Guy Carleton (Lord Dorchester). laurels to many of the adventurous and deserving. Probably few have had such opportunities for distinction, or by natural disposition and heroic deeds have gained such renown on American soil as Sir Guy Carleton. He seems to have had the genius for commanding irregular troops in a difficult country, and also for ruling mixed peoples. He has been called “the founder and saviour of Canada;” nor does it seem easy to withhold this very high encomium from him. Though not Governor at the time of the loyalist movement, he yet had much to do with its success.

An Irishman, born at Strabane in 1722, Carleton early entered the army, and served on the Continent. In Wolfe’s great campaign of 1759, an expedition in which distinguished generalship was shown, Carleton shone out conspicuously. He had been given an important command under Wolfe, though the king was unfavourable to him. Wolfe was to Carleton ever a most intimate friend. Wounded himself at the taking of Quebec, Carleton saw Wolfe received his mortal wound. Carleton became, for his valour at Quebec, a brigadier-general.

The war over, and Governor Murray, the first Governor of Quebec, having continued but a short time, General Carleton was, in 1766, appointed Governor. Governor Carleton dismissed worthless officials, and undertook the organization of the chaos resulting from the old French régime and the war combined. After a few years’ study of the province and its wants the Governor crossed over to England, and in 1774, in the face of such influential men as Thurlow and Burke, succeeded, as mentioned, in carrying the “Quebec Act” through the British Parliament.

On his return in October, 1774, he was received with loudest plaudits by the French-Canadians. The skill with which this Governor conducted affairs in Canada during the trying times of the revolutionary war in the thirteen neighbouring British colonies, has always received much notice. With a people but lately subdued from France, his defence of the country with but two regiments—in all not 1000 men—against an attacking foe of three times its numbers, must ever be regarded with favour.

It was a matter of greatest surprise that after his brilliant achievements he should have been, in 1777, superseded as commander-in-chief by General Burgoyne. He resigned his appointment as Governor, and, Achilles-like, in 1778 retired to his tent at home. But little success followed the British arms after his retirement. It was unfortunate that in 1783-4, the time when the deportation of the loyalists was taking place, that Governor Carleton was not at the helm, although as commander in New York he was of service to the loyalists leaving that port. The mistake of the Government in its treatment of their devoted servant was recognized in Britain, and in 1786 Carleton was raised to the peerage as Lord Dorchester, and in the same year was asked to accept the positions of Governor-General of Canada and Commander-in-Chief of the Forces in North America. His return was most opportune.

The loyalists had so increased in number in the western part of the province that they desired to be set apart in a province of their own. Immediately on his arrival as Governor he had made some attempt at organizing the western part of the province of Quebec, where the loyalists had settled. He had directed the part afterwards formed into Upper Canada to be divided into four districts. With that fine sense of recognition even of national prejudices so characteristic of the man, he had, in compliment to the U.E.’s, so many of whom were of German origin, as we have seen, called the four divisions Lunenburgh, Mecklenburgh, Nassau, and Hesse. He had likewise in these districts established courts, and appointed a judge and sheriff in each. With the same genius that had recognized the aspirations of the French-Canadians at the time of the passing of the Quebec Act seventeen years before, Lord Dorchester saw the opportunity of founding a strong English province.

With the same courage as before he met the views of many opponents, and by representations to the British Government, succeeded in obtaining the Act of 1791, by which Upper Canada became a new province. It is true this measure met the strenuous opposition of the English-speaking people in French Canada, but it was undoubtedly as wise and expedient for the time as the Quebec Act had been when it was passed.

Though the immediate administration of affairs in the new loyalist province of Upper Canada was, as we shall see, committed to a Lieutenant-Governor, yet Lord Dorchester was ever the friend and advocate of those who, like himself, had fought so hard for British supremacy in America. In 1796 he retired from Canada, but with the unbounded admiration of all classes of the people. He lived a peaceful old age in England, and died in 1808. The county and town of Carleton in Upper Canada commemorate his name, and a county and town in Lower Canada—Dorchester—his title.

But the friend and most earnest advocate of U.E. Loyalists was Governor Simcoe. It was he to John Graves Simcoe. whom the task was committed of organizing the new province of Upper Canada, which had been established by the Act of 1791. We shall see he was suited by disposition, habit, and former association for the important task assigned him. Born in the year 1752, the future Governor of Upper Canada was the son of an Englishman, Captain Simcoe, who, seven years after the birth of his son, died of disease on board ship in the St. Lawrence River, before Quebec, shortly before the capture of that city by General Wolfe.

The orphan boy with his mother removed to Exeter, and he was brought up to look upon Canada as the scene of his father’s career and death. Ending his education in Oxford, he entered the 35th Regiment of foot as ensign, and he was sent to win his first laurels in the Revolutionary War in America. He was present at the battles of Bunker Hill and Brandywine, and was wounded in the latter.

Soon after, on his recovery, he was appointed in command of the new provincial corps of “Queen’s Rangers,” a regiment which attained the highest distinction in the war, and received, as we have seen, honourable recognition, and grants of land on the St. John River in New Brunswick.

The war over, the battle-scarred colonel returned to England, and, in 1790, entered Parliament for a Cornwall constituency, and was an enthusiastic supporter of the Act for the division of the province. No more suitable person could have been found for organizing the new province, and so, on the 1st of May, 1792, Colonel Simcoe sailed for the New World, as first Lieutenant-Governor of Upper Canada. He called the first Provincial Parliament together on the 17th of September, 1792, at Niagara. We are told by an early traveller that the capital, though first called Niagara, was next called Lenox, then Nassau, afterwards Newark, and at last again Niagara.

The first session of Governor Simcoe’s Parliament was memorable. It extended for about a month. Its members have been described as “plain, homespun-clad farmers and merchants from the plough and the store.” This session was remembered for the eight Acts it passed. These were: Act 1. Introducing English Law. 2. Establishing trial by jury. 3. Regulating millers’ tolls. 4. For recovery of small debts. 5. For erecting a gaol and court-house in each district, and for renaming the districts. 6. For regulation of weights and measures. 7. For regulating the Court of Common Pleas. 8. To prevent accidents by fire.

It was Governor Simcoe’s good fortune to have much to do with the names adopted for the various subdivisions and localities of Upper Canada. The lake, county, and town bearing his name commemorate him, though given in some cases by others. He had married a Miss Gwillim, and his wife’s name survives in three townships, East, West, and North Gwillimbury.

The Act of subdivision retained the four districts into which Lord Dorchester had divided the English-speaking section of the province, though it changed their names. Lunenburgh, extending from the River Ottawa to the Gananoque River, was changed to Eastern, and was also known as Johnstown, District. Mecklenburgh, lying next to the west, and reaching the River Trent, became Midland District, also called Kingston. The third district, extending through a most important section of country from the limits of the Midland District as far as Long Point Peninsula, on Lake Erie, was made Home, or more familiarly, Niagara; while the remainder of the province was known as Western District, or sometimes “Detroit.”

The names, as in the case of Stormont, Dundas, Glengarry, Leeds, Addington, Lenox, Prince Edward, Hastings, Northumberland, Durham, York, Lincoln, Norfolk, Suffolk, Essex, Kent, and Grenville, given to seventeen counties, were in honour of distinguished friends of Canada in the British Parliament or of localities in Britain, but it is questionable whether Indian names would not have been more appropriate, such as was bestowed on but one of the two remaining of the nineteen, Frontenac and Ontario. Who can wonder that Niagara has distanced its three Old World competitors in the race, that Toronto has superseded Little York, or that Ottawa has been adopted for Bytown? Who would have regretted if Cataraqui had replaced Kingston, or if London had been known by some name like Pontiac or Brant, or the still more sonorous Thayendanagea?

In the very year of his appointment Governor Simcoe issued a proclamation which resulted in a large increase to the population of Upper Canada. From his knowledge of the people in the old British colonies he concluded that a large number remained behind who shared the same opinions as the loyalists who had taken leave of the now independent States.

Accordingly he at once issued a proclamation stating that he was prepared to grant free land to all who chose 1792. to come to the new province. The rule of settlement was that the new settler should satisfy the authorities of his or her ability to cultivate a specified portion of the soil, and take the oath: “I, A. B., do promise and declare that I will maintain and defend to the utmost of my power the authority of the king in his Parliament as the supreme legislature of this province.” The result showed that there were many willing to throw in their lot with the new province.

It is estimated that 12,000 was the full number of those in the province in 1791, but that by the end of the four years of Governor Simcoe’s term of office the population had risen to 30,000.

Colonel Simcoe was an active and successful administrator. Reference has been already made to the successive changes in the capital of the province. The arrival of numerous settlers and their settlement, the passage of such practical legislation as we have mentioned, an Act for the abolition of slavery in 1793, and the general exploration and development of the province, entirely occupied the mind of this “people’s” Governor. Encouraged by Governor Simcoe, various bodies of more or less notable settlers came to Upper Canada. One party of sixty-four families of German settlers from the State of New York came over in 1794 under the leadership of Mr. William Berczy, and settled in the township of Markham, near Toronto.

These Germans had emigrated from Hamburg to settle on the Pulteney estates in New York, but had been induced to seek the new province. Their leader, Berczy, was a man of cultivation and energy; he opened out a road to his settlement on Yonge Street as he had already done into the interior of New York. He became involved for the benefit of his colony in erecting the expensive “German mills” in Markham, and from the complications thus arising he was only extricated by his death in New York in 1813. Markham has become one of the most thriving portions of Upper Canada.

Captain Samuel Ryerse began another loyalist settlement in Norfolk County in 1794. He was led to Canada by the proclamation of his old friend and fellow-soldier, Governor Simcoe. Says his daughter in her graphic account of the coming of her family, “On my father’s arrival at Niagara, at that time the seat of Government, he called on his Excellency General Simcoe, who had just returned from a tour through the province of Canada West, then one vast wilderness. He asked General Simcoe’s advice as to where he should choose his resting-place. He recommended the county of Norfolk—better known for many years as Long Point—which had been recently surveyed.”

Even from England were there those who responded to the invitation of the Governor. The relatives of the genial historian of Toronto, Dr. Scadding, old acquaintances of Governor Simcoe in Devonshire in England, represent an early English immigration to Upper Canada. These early settlers took up their abode in what is now the town of Whitby, which was at first known as Windsor.

The Governor himself examined with greatest minuteness the portions of wilderness in Upper Canada. A manuscript map is preserved of various expeditions made by him on foot and in canoe. He was accompanied on many of these journeys by one, as secretary, whom we shall notice at a latter stage as identified with the progress of settlement in the province, Lieutenant, afterwards Colonel Talbot. Associated with Governor Simcoe very intimately also was the Chief Justice, the first in Upper Canada. His name is commemorated in Osgoode Hall, the centre of law for the province of Ontario.

One journey of Governor Simcoe is memorable. Crossing the peninsula from Niagara, and coasting along the north shore of Lake Erie, the Governor and party disembarked at the nearest point to the Thames River, lying to the north in the dense forest. The river reached, and standing on the spot where London now is, the Governor drew his sword and said, “This will be the chief military depôt of the west, and the seat of a district. From this spot,” pointing with his sword to the east, “I will have a line for a road run as straight as the crow can fly to the head of the little lake,” meaning the station where the town of Dundas now stands.

This plan was afterwards carried out, and the highway opened is still called the “Governor’s Road.” Governor Simcoe indeed won distinction as a road-builder, and though the roads begun were far from being like the military highways of an Agricola or a Vespasian, yet they were important factors in the progress of the country.

In 1793 an Act was passed in the Legislature for “laying out, amending, and keeping in repair the public highways and roads.” Yonge Street, named after the English Secretary of War and a Devonshire friend of the Governor, was built largely by the assistance of the Governor’s regiment of Queen’s Rangers, from Lake Ontario to Lake Simcoe, having been surveyed by Surveyor Jones, the father of the afterwards well-known half-blood Canadian, the Rev. Peter Jones.

Governor Simcoe indeed planned a great military road from one end of the province to the other, to which, though he never saw it completed, he gave the name still familiar to Canadians, “Dundas Street.” No doubt the habitué of London society, or even the visitor from the winding thoroughfares of Boston looked with pity on these struggling Upper Canadian settlements and poverty-stricken homes of Upper Canada, in the closing years of last century, yet in these were laid the happiness and comfort of the present generation of Canadians.

Section III.—The Life of the Loyalists.

A visitor who takes the trouble to examine one of the collections of historic articles in Pilgrim’s Social Life. Hall in Plymouth, Massachusetts, or in the old South Church, Boston, will have no difficulty in explaining the social life and customs of the loyalists and their descendants in Canada. In these collections will be found the originals of the household utensils, the chimney and the fireplace, the articles of furniture, the quaint needlework, and the fashion and shape of garments belonging to the first generation of loyalists in Canada and preserved by their descendants.

The American of the Atlantic States now delights in reproducing the life and customs of the “Old Colony days,” and certainly the history and circumstances of the loyalists would incline them to cling more tenaciously to these than would be the case among those whose opinions were a reversal of all those preceding. Where the difficulties of the journey had not prevented the carrying abroad of the “ancient timepiece,” it was, so soon as suitable surroundings and a convenient leisure allowed, again erected in the corner in “its case of massive oak,” and became a reminder of the old home.

Even to the present time as you draw near the homestead of an old U.E., one of the first things to catch the eye is the high wooden beam or lever erected, having suspended from it “the old oaken bucket, the iron-bound bucket, the moss-covered bucket which hangs on the well.” When time and means had come to replace the first rude log-hut of the loyalist by a dwelling of greater pretensions, it was to his old home in New York or Pennsylvania he looked for the model of his new erection. Around his homestead he planted trees just as they had grown before his childhood’s eye, and in due time he had reproduced the vanished scene where

“Stands the old-fashioned country seat,”

and where

“Across its antique portico

Tall poplar-trees their shadows throw.”

Near his dwelling had been planted apple and pear trees, and before the grey heads of the first generation of loyalist settlers had been lowered in the dust, the farmer had cut down the maple, the oak, and the elm trees, had reduced to a state of subjugation the acres of his woodland farm, and needed no more to long for

“The orchard, the meadow, the deep tangled woodland,

And every loved spot which his infancy knew.”

Steps were taken, too, as soon as possible by these intelligent pioneers for the education of their children. The first newspaper in Upper Canada was printed in Niagara in 1793, and was the chief vehicle of official news throughout the widespread settlements.

Nor were the loyalists—white or Indian—left entirely without the consolations of religion in their new homes and amidst their hardships. Though made up of those holding different creeds, probably the predominant element among the new settlers was Episcopalian. A noble clergyman, the Rev. John Stuart, who had been formerly a missionary among the Mohawks on the Hudson, followed the refugees to Canada, and on the 2nd of June, 1784, the friend of the pioneers set out to visit the loyalist settlements along the St. Lawrence, near Kingston, and to the west of Lake Ontario.

Already that season, as we have seen, bands of refugees—numbering not less than 3500—had preceded him up the St. Lawrence from Montreal. He visited the Mohawks at their village on the Grand River, where a church was being erected, and his reception by his old parishioners was most hearty. In August, 1785, Mr. Stuart took up his abode at Kingston, and with his family became thoroughly identified with the loyalists. He has been called “the father of the Upper Canada Church.”

During this early period three other Episcopal ministers were associated with Mr. Stuart in the wide field of Upper Canada. The Rev. John Bethune, the Presbyterian chaplain of the 84th Regiment, and who had endured imprisonment and much suffering on account of his loyalist opinions, came in 1787 as the second legalized clergyman in Upper Canada. He had come from North Carolina and settled at Williamstown, so named from Sir William Johnstone, near Cornwall. By him the first Presbyterian Church in Upper Canada was built in 1796. In the graveyard at this church are monuments erected in 1785.

Many of the loyalists being Germans and Lutherans it is not surprising that they should have erected the first church east of Kingston so early as 1790, and that a clergyman was obtained by them in that year.

The first regular minister of the Methodist Church was a loyalist named Losee, who in 1790 undertook a mission in the Bay of Quinté district. As we shall afterwards see, it was difficult for the settlers to maintain educational and religious institutions among themselves, but their increasing prosperity has enabled the Canadian people in the present generation to support these important objects with great generosity.

We are fortunate in having several pen pictures of early Canadian life taken for us by eye-witnesses. These are of much value to us.

So early as 1795, one of these tells us that “Kingston contains a fort and barracks, an English Episcopalian Kingston in 1795. church, and about 100 houses, the most of which last were built, and are now inhabited by persons who emigrated from the United States at the close of the American War. Some few of the houses are built of stone and brick, but by far the greater part of them are of wood. The fort is of stone and consists of a square with four bastions. From sixty to one hundred men are usually quartered in the barracks.

“Kingston is a place of very considerable trade, and it is consequently increasing most rapidly in size. All the goods brought up the St. Lawrence for the supply of the upper country are here deposited in stores, preparatory to their being shipped on board vessels suitable to the navigation of the lake: and the furs from the various posts at the nearer lakes are likewise collected together, in order to be laden on board bateaux, and sent down the St. Lawrence. The principal merchants resident at Kingston are partners of old-established houses at Montreal and Quebec. A stranger, especially if a British subject, is sure to meet with a most hospitable and friendly reception from them as he passes through the place.

“On the borders of the bay at Kingston there is a king’s dockyard, and another which is private property. Most of the British vessels of burthen on Lake Ontario have been built at these yards. Belonging to his Majesty there were on Lake Ontario, when we crossed it, three vessels of about 200 tons each, carrying from eight to twelve guns, besides several gunboats; the last, however, were not in commission, but laid up in Niagara River; and, in consequence of the ratification of the treaty of amity and commerce between the United States and his Britannic Majesty, orders were issued shortly after we left Kingston for laying up the other vessels of war, one alone excepted.

“The commodore of the king’s vessels on Lake Ontario is a French Canadian, and so likewise are most of the officers under him. Their uniform is blue and white, with large yellow buttons stamped with the figure of a beaver, over which is inscribed the word ‘Canada.’

“The town of Niagara contains about seventy houses, a court-house, gaol, and a building intended for Niagara in 1795. the accommodation of the legislative bodies. The houses, with a few exceptions, are built of wood; those next the lake are rather poor, but at the upper end of the town there are several very excellent dwellings, inhabited by the principal officers of Government. Most of the gentlemen in official stations in Upper Canada are Englishmen of education, a circumstance which must render the society of the capital agreeable, let it be fixed where it will.

“Few places in North America can boast of a more rapid rise than the little town of Niagara, nearly every one of its houses having been built within the last five years. It is still advancing most rapidly in size, owing to the increase of the back-country trade along the shores of the upper lakes, which is carried on through the places, and also owing to the wonderful emigrations into the neighbourhood of people from the States. So sudden and so great has the influx of people into the town of Niagara and its vicinity been, that town lots, horses, provisions, and every necessary of life have risen, within the last three years, nearly fifty per cent. in value.” (Weld).

A well-known writer has said: “On Holland’s great manuscript map of the province of Quebec, Toronto, 1791-6. made in 1791, and preserved in the Crown Lands Department of Ontario, the indentation in front of the mouth of the modern Humber River is entitled ‘Toronto Bay;’ the sheet of water between the peninsula and the mainland is not named, but the peninsula itself is marked ‘Presqu’isle, Toronto;’ and an extensive rectangular tract, bounded on the south by Toronto Bay, and the waters within the peninsula, is inscribed ‘Toronto.’ ”

In Mr. Chewett’s Manuscript Journal we have, under date of Quebec, 22nd of April, 1792, the following entry: “Received from Governor Simcoe a plan of points Henry and Frederick, to have a title-page put to them; also a plan of the town and township of Toronto.” In 1793 the site of the trading post known as Toronto had been occupied by the troops drawn from Niagara and Queenston. At noon, on the 27th of August, in 1793, the first royal salute had been fired from the garrison there, and responded to by the shipping in the harbour, in commemoration of the change of name from Toronto to York—a change intended to please the old King George III. through a compliment offered to his soldier son Frederick, Duke of York (Scadding).

The year 1796 was one of ill-omen for the people of Canada. In that year Lord Dorchester whose later term of office had but endeared him the more to the mixed community of French and English over whom he was called to rule in Lower Canada, retired to Britain. And in the same year the friend and compatriot of the loyalists—Governor Simcoe—was appointed to another position under the Crown in St. Domingo. No doubt there were greedy land-seekers who desired his removal, and the American Government regarded him as only too successful an advocate of British interests, but the people of Upper Canada were devotedly attached to him.

When he came to the province it was rudis indigestaque moles, when he left it in four years it had nearly trebled its population, had been mapped out in subdivisions, its great roads had been built or planned, its legislature had been organized and had passed numbers of useful laws, sites of new towns had been laid out, and the forerunner of powerful Canadian newspapers of to-day had already begun in the Upper Canada Gazette, a small sheet, with a circulation of from fifty to one hundred and fifty copies.

It is not to be wondered at, that Governor Simcoe has been called “the father of constitutional, pure, and progressive government in Upper Canada.” With his departure we regard the U.E. Loyalist period as closed, for though other loyalists did come in the few years immediately succeeding, they were but the aftermath of the noble harvest of patriots whose coming gave Canada her tendencies as a people for all future time.


(References: “Acts of the Legislature of Upper Canada;” “Travels of Duc de la Rochefoucault Liancourt,” 2 vols., 1799; “The Eastern Townships,” by C. Thomas, 1866; “The Eastern Townships,” by C. N. Day, 1869; “Statistical Account of Upper Canada,” by R. Gourlay, 3 vols., 1822; “Life of Colonel Talbot,” by E. Ermatinger, 1859; “History of County of Pictou,” by Dr. Patterson, 1877; “Murdoch’s History of Nova Scotia,” 1867; “Scot in Canada,” vol. ii., by A. Rattray, 1882; “Toronto of Old,” by Dr. Scadding, 1873; “History of Nova Scotia,” by T. C. Haliburton, 2 vols., 1829; “Highland Emigration,” by the Earl of Selkirk, 1805; “Manitoba,” by G. Bryce, 1882; “History of Lower Canada,” vols. i. and ii., by R. Christie, 1848; “History of Cape Breton,” by R. Brown, 1869; “Dundas,” 1861, by James Croil; “History of the United States,” New York, 1855 (Lossing and Williams); “History of the United States,” London, 1838, by John Frost; “History of the United States,” vols. iii. and iv., 1884, by Bancroft; “1812,” by Colonel Coffin.)

Section I.—Fruit of Governor Simcoe’s Policy in Upper Canada.

The founding of Upper Canada had been auspicious. Governor Simcoe, as we have seen, had entered with great enthusiasm into the task of settling the wilderness. The continued influx of the loyalists suggested to him an inexhaustible supply of excellent immigrants from the still disturbed states. The loyalty of the first settlers of Upper Canada to the British Crown made it safe, in the Governor’s estimation, to invite, even from the republican states, as many as chose to come, provided they were of good character. Largely brought as the newcomers were by their knowledge of the loyalists as old neighbours or friends it was likely they would partake of their loyal sentiments.

Governor Simcoe’s proclamation issued in 1792 began in the last years of the century to be widely known both in Britain and the States. Its terms, already quoted, run in favour of all such as can “make it appear that they will be useful settlers.” Those who accepted its offers were required to promise to maintain and defend “the authority of the king.” The good report of the loyalist settlers found its way back to New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania, whence they had mainly come, telling of their land of promise. Undoubtedly, too, the time had come when many who were obtaining a mere existence from the ungenerous soil of the land along the sea were beginning to be stirred by the desire, which has during the present century become so strong, of going to the west.

Even before the termination of the pioneer Governor’s term of office in 1796 many British and American immigrants had responded to the invitation of the proclamation. Rochefoucault, a French nobleman, and a trustworthy authority, who visited Canada in 1795, gives us a glimpse of Governor Simcoe’s method. Says this observer: “The admission of new inhabitants who present themselves is rather difficult for the Governor, and especially of those who come from the United States. For this reason he sends such colonists as cannot give a satisfactory account of themselves into the back country, and stations soldiers on the banks of the lakes which are in front of them. He would admit every superannuated soldier of the English army, and all officers of long service who are on half-pay, to share in the distribution of such lands as the king had a right to dispose of. He would dismiss every soldier now quartered in Canada, and give him 100 acres of land as soon as he should procure a young man to serve as his substitute. With his views to increase the population of the country he blends the design of drawing young Americans into the English service, by which he will augment the number of American families attached to the King of Great Britain.”

While in company with the Governor, Rochefoucault met an American family, which, with some oxen, cows, and sheep, was emigrating from New York State to the new province. “We come,” said they to the Governor, whom they did not know, “to see whether he will give us land.” “Aye! aye!” the Governor replied. “You are tired of the Federal Government. You like not any longer to have so many kings. You wish again for your old father (King George). You are perfectly right. Come along, we love such good royalists as you are; we will give you land.”

Thus across the Niagara frontier, by way of Oswego and up the lakes and up the St. Lawrence, a steady stream of settlers came. The emigrant’s covered wagon, his small herd of cattle, and his household effects were slowly taken westward over the unmade and well-nigh impassable roads to the new home in Western Canada.

Such townships as Walpole, Charlotteville, Burford, and the like, some along the shores of Lake Erie, others inland, received their first settlers in 1793; Windham, Woodhouse, Flamborough, and others in 1794, and Delaware in 1795. The older U.E. settlements also received additions in population.

The greatest blow struck at the development of Upper Canada was, however, the removal of Governor Simcoe. Lord Dorchester, who was Governor-General, and lived in Montreal, was influenced by various agencies all hostile to the high-minded Governor of Upper Canada. Simcoe was a thorough loyalist, and did not conceal his hostility to the United States. He was blamed by the Americans with instigating the western Indians against the Republic.

His vigorous immigration policy was not very acceptable to certain interests. The first loyalists looked on Canada as their patrimony. They even regarded with suspicion those loyalists who had not found it convenient to remove from the States for some years after 1783. The detestation of republican doctrines by the earlier loyalists was so great, that they feared lest the later arrivals might bring the new leaven to Canada. They freely declared that it was the fertile acres of Upper Canada, and not political principle that was bringing the new people. Fearing then lest a sentiment hostile to Britain and favourable to the new Republic should grow up amongst them, they distrusted the Governor’s too generous policy.

To the less scrupulous loyalists, also, the honest administration of Governor Simcoe did not afford the opportunities for self-aggrandizement which they desired. While the “land-speculator” is the worst enemy of all new countries, yet he is always found ready with eagle-like rapacity to seize the prey awaiting him. For this class Governor Simcoe was much too precise.

Moreover there was a party in England much opposed to the settlement of Upper Canada. Lord Sheffield in the debate on the Bill of 1791 in the Imperial Parliament, had said “he thought it not justifiable on any principle of policy or colonization to encourage settlement in the anterior parts of America. It had been much doubted whether colonies were advantageous to the mother country.” He observed that “it could not be the interest of Great Britain to form a settlement of farmers in a country which grows the same articles as our own.”

Thus malign influences from so many directions came against the good Governor, that even before his full term of five years had quite expired he was appointed to another position under the Crown in the British West Indies. Bending before the storm, Simcoe left Canada with regret; the rising party of spoilers rejoiced, but every patriot must confess that it was a sad day for Upper Canada when its first Governor left it.

The effect of Governor Simcoe’s wise measures did not cease with his removal. Currents of immigration once set in motion are not easily checked. The party in power no doubt repudiated the promises to new settlers which the late Governor had made, and failed to carry out the excellent projects of connecting the main points of the province with good roads, which had been one of Simcoe’s most cherished plans. The lands which had been reserved along the projected highways by the Governor, and with which as an encouragement to new settlers he had hoped to have built the roads, were bestowed upon favourites of the ruling party.

Nevertheless the immigration continued. As was to have been expected, the neighbourhood of Little York, now Toronto, the capital, received a numerous population. The townships of Scarborough, Markham, Vaughan, and Whitchurch received the first patents for lands to settlers in 1796, King in 1797, Etobicoke in 1798, North Gwillimbury and East Gwillimbury in 1800. During the late Governor’s time settlement in these townships had been begun, and there was a steady flow of settlers to them until 1811.

Some of these accessions to the population were of the later loyalists, but the greater number of them were without any pronounced political feelings. In Whitchurch a considerable portion of the people were Quakers from Pennsylvania, while other Quakers settled also in different parts of the province, as in the township of Norwich in the Gore district.

Equalling in number the Quakers of Whitchurch, there came to dwell beside them certain of the descendants of the Anabaptists of the Reformation. These were chiefly of German or Hollander origin, and were known as Mennonites or Tunkers. Agreeing with the Quakers in their peace principles, these sects practised various religious rites peculiar to themselves. Almost all of these were from the United States. While a peaceful and most desirable element of the population, their principles were completely at variance with those of the true loyalists.

In 1800 a number of “Pennsylvania Dutch” settlers opened up the Waterloo district, and in 1802 they were joined by a number of Mennonites. Of these elements such names as Clemens, Shantz, Bowman, Erb, and others have become well known.

Undoubtedly the most remarkable class attracted to Canada during these years was a number of French colonists of very high rank. Driven from France by the excesses of the Revolution, these émigrés, as they were styled, had fled to England. Accepting the bounty of the British Government they had come to Upper Canada, and were allotted holdings in the year 1798 in the “Oak Ridges,” a locality on Governor Simcoe’s projected road of Yonge Street.

Most noted among them was Comte de Puisaye, whom Lamartine declared to be an “orator, diplomatist, and soldier,” and who, we may add, became an author of some note. With him were Comte de Chalûs, who had been a major-general in the royal army of France, another General de Farcy, and six others of rank.

The romance of “a lodge in some vast wilderness” soon passed away, and the locality chosen, though romantic, was unsuited for agriculture. Most of the émigrés in a short time departed for more congenial scenes. But one of these families—that of Quetton de St. George—is now known to be connected with Canadian life.

During these years, the influx of immigrants from New York State took place largely across the Niagara River to the regions between Lakes Erie and Ontario, and even into the London district. The Indian lands on the Grand River were leased to whites for 999 years, and the country for a hundred miles was settled by Americans. Such names as Sturgis, Ellis, Westbrook, Fairchild, Nelles, Culver, Olmstead, and the like, are distinctive of this period.

In Lower Canada, the region known as the Eastern Townships filled up largely during this period. Lower Canada. General Haldimand had, in introducing the loyalists into Canada in 1783-4, pursued a different policy from that we have seen followed by Governor Simcoe. Haldimand was unwilling that the U.E. Loyalists should settle along the frontier of Lower Canada, lest strife should arise between them and their American neighbours. He had accordingly, as much as possible, taken the loyalists to Upper Canada, and left the Lower Canadian border townships unoccupied. Now when the American influx began, these vacant lands were taken up.

The system of settlement followed in the Lower Canadian lands, during these years, was an offshoot of the modified feudal system, whose outlines we have traced in a preceding chapter. The Government transferred a township to one responsible person, called “the leader,” whose duty it was to obtain settlers, perform certain conditions, and thus become a virtual seignior of the district.

St. Armand, which had been partially occupied by the loyalists, was now filled up. Dunham was granted to a company of associates in 1796, many of them from New Jersey. Sutton was bestowed on individual settlers, and became an established township in 1802. Brome was given to an American “leader” in 1797. Potton, settled by Vermonters, New Yorkers, and New Hampshire families, became a township in 1797; while in the same year Bolton was begun and settled by the same class of Americans. Thus the Eastern Townships were occupied by an industrious and intelligent class of Americans.

Into the provinces along the sea came, along with the loyalists from the United States, numbers of Maritime Provinces. negroes. There was, even before their arrival, a considerable body of freed negroes in Nova Scotia. It was found, however, that the climate of Nova Scotia was not agreeable to these immigrants. Accordingly, in 1792, 1200 of them were taken to Sierra Leone. There were fifteen vessels engaged in this work of deportation, and the British Government paid some 14,000l. in connection with the removal of the blacks.

It might have been supposed that no more negro immigration would have been led to Nova Scotia, but in 1796 a colony of Maroons, about 500 in number, arrived from Jamaica. These were negroes whose ancestors, in the seventeenth century, when the Spaniards took Jamaica, had fled to the mountains and lived a wild, free life. Misunderstandings between them and the British Government had resulted in war; the Maroons had been defeated, and were now brought to Nova Scotia.

They were employed in Halifax upon the fortifications. Earnest efforts for their Christianization were put forth. These seemed, for a time, likely to be successful. The climate was, however, unsuitable, as in the case of the other negroes. Governor Wentworth, in the year 1800, was compelled to send the Maroons, in the wake of their countrymen of a few years before, to Sierra Leone. Almost all of them accordingly emigrated thither.

After the time of the loyalists there was but little tendency on the part of the Americans to colonize the Maritime Provinces. Indeed Governor Simcoe did not conceal his desire to draw as many as chose to come from the sea-coast provinces to his new land in the interior.

A considerable re-emigration of the loyalists of New Brunswick did take place to Upper Canada, during the years succeeding Governor Simcoe’s régime. The incoming flood of Americans to Upper Canada and the Eastern Townships of Lower Canada may be estimated from the fact which we find stated by a competent authority that Upper Canada alone had, in 1811, increased to very near 77,000 in population.

Section II.—From Old World to New.

While Canada owed much during this period to the American element which entered it, there came many colonists, especially to the Maritime Provinces, from Great Britain and Ireland. The disturbed state of Ireland contributed to produce a large emigration. England also sent many people to the United States, and a limited number to Canada.

From Scotland, however, much the largest amount of emigration to Canada flowed. In 1745 the second Jacobite rebellion had been suppressed. The British Government stationed soldiers in the Highlands and determined to break up the clan system. A number of the more determined Jacobites fled abroad. Numbers of them emigrated to the American cavalier colonies of Virginia and the Carolinas. Some of them found their way to Lower Canada. The return of peace in the Highlands led to a surplus of population towards the end of last century. The conditions of life were hard. In Scotland, as in Ireland, there was commercial stagnation. The peasantry endured much suffering. The necessity for emigration was admitted by all.

The Scottish Loyalists of the Johnstone settlement from the Mohawk river—the Grants, McLeans, Glengarry. Murchisons, Roses, and McKays, had settled in Williamstown, Upper Canada. Thither were attracted in 1786 and succeeding years the Hays and Macdonells as “later Loyalists,” as well as McGillises from Morar, Scotland, and Clanranald Macdonalds, who having reached Quebec came by a toilsome foot journey of 250 miles along the St. Lawrence, towing their families and baggage in flat boats. The locality became a famous Scottish settlement. Families of the McPherson clan from Badroch also settled here, and Cameron Highlanders in 1796 entered upon and named Lochiel.

Among those who saw an opening for his countrymen in Canada was Alexander Macdonell, afterwards Roman Catholic Bishop of Upper Canada. Born in the Glengarry Highlands in 1762, and educated in Spain, it was his lot to be in 1791 ministering as priest in Lochaber, Scotland. While here he had been the means of removing 600 evicted Highlanders to obtain work amongst the manufactories of Glasgow. The evictions still continued. “It was not uncommon,” wrote the benevolent priest, “to see 200 families evicted to make one sheep-farm,” so that in the Celtic idiom, “150 or 200 smokes went through one chimney.”

When occupation among the manufactories next failed his people, the priest advised the Highlanders, under their chief, Macdonell, to offer their services to the Government as soldiers. This was done, a regiment formed, and in 1798 the Glengarry Fencibles were sent to Ireland to quell the rebellion there. On their work being finished the regiment was disbanded, and the priest Macdonell, their chaplain, induced them, in 1804, to emigrate to Canada. After an Atlantic voyage, in three ships, of four stormy months, some 800 soldiers and 300 of their kinsfolk from Kintail, Knoidart, and Glengarry arrived among their Scottish friends in Upper Canada, and called the region Glengarry. The indefatigable priest became afterwards the bishop of his people, for whom he spent a most laborious and unselfish life. He took, as we shall afterwards see, a prominent part in public affairs.

The Highland emigration to Nova Scotia began at even Nova Scotia. an earlier date than that to Upper Canada. So soon as 1773 the Hector, an old Dutch ship, in bad condition and poorly equipped, took some 200 emigrants, chiefly from Ross-shire, Scotland, and landed them under an emigration company’s auspices, where the town of Pictou now stands. Disease had carried away some of their number, but the large proportion of those, who had embarked, landed. This was the first shipload of immigrants to the province during this portion of her history. After the usual difficulties of early settlement the colony prospered. It has become one of the most moral and prosperous communities of the New World.

In the year 1783 a number of additional families arrived in Pictou from the old land, and a regiment of regulars, the 82nd, commanded by one Colonel Robertson, and lying at Halifax, at the time of the peace in 1783 was disbanded, and many of the soldiers became settlers.

In the early years of this century the same “Highland clearances” which led to the settlement of Glengarry in Upper Canada, brought large numbers of Celts to Nova Scotia. During the years from 1801 to 1805, two or three ships a year arrived laden with these settlers. In one year not less than 1300 souls were landed in the one county of Pictou.

In 1801 two vessels, the Sarah and the Pigeon, came, bearing 800 persons. Many of these were Roman Catholics, and they sought out a separate settlement for themselves in Antigonish.

The privations of the shiploads of men, women, and children who thus ventured to the New World were often extreme. The vessels used in this service were old and unseaworthy, were ill-ventilated, and badly provisioned. Smallpox frequently carried its ravages among the poor sufferers; and so many and so serious were the grievances of the passengers, that this traffic carried on between the Old World and the New was long known as the “white slave trade.” Thus was Nova Scotia like Upper Canada, largely peopled by a poor but honest people, who in a generation became prosperous and contented.

Cape Breton, as we have seen, still preserved a separate government from Nova Scotia. In 1791 two Cape Breton. ships had reached Pictou with the first Roman Catholic Highlanders who had come to Nova Scotia. They were induced to settle in Antigonish. Not satisfied with this locality, some of them crossed over to Cape Breton, and settled near Margarie. Others followed, and usually coming by way of Pictou, they took among other localities those of Judique and Mabou, on Cape Breton Island.

In 1802 a ship arrived directly at the Bras d’Or Lakes, and landed her 299 passengers at Sydney, the capital of the island. Up to the year 1817 a steady flow of this immigration came to Cape Breton. The best lands had all been taken up by 1820, but even till 1828 there were new parties of immigrants arriving, and those settling in situations remote from the sea became known as the “Backlanders.”

It is said that not less than 25,000 Scottish settlers came to Cape Breton at this time. This population has much increased in comfort, and where they have done the least so, it is true as has been said by a late writer, “Even the log-hut in the depths of the forest is a palace compared with some of the turf cabins of Sutherland or the Hebrides.”

Section III.—Work of Noted Colonizers.

The Halifax settlement in Nova Scotia in 1749 was the earliest example of an organized system of McNutt and the Philadelphia Company. colonization to that province. In the year 1751, 958 Germans arrived at Halifax, and in the year following 1000 more. In 1753, 1500 of these removed to Lunenburgh, Nova Scotia. Since that date Canada has owed much to individual colonizers and companies for having begun and carried out schemes of colonization. No doubt abuses have often characterized such movements, but the organizers deserve credit notwithstanding.

At the conclusion of the Seven Years’ War many persons of influence took up the subject of sending colonists to Nova Scotia. Six vessels arrived from Boston with 200 settlers, and four schooners from Rhode Island with 100. New London and Plymouth sent 280. An enthusiastic Irishman, Alexander McNutt, was largely instrumental in settling Truro, Onslow, and Londonderry, and brought in 300 colonists from Ireland. In company, in 1765, with a number of prominent residents of Philadelphia, McNutt received a grant of 200,000 acres in Nova Scotia between Tatamagouche and Pictou. No less than 1,600,000 acres were reserved for McNutt in other parts of Nova Scotia.

In 1767 virtually the whole of Prince Edward Island was granted to proprietors in a single day. Almost the whole of the Nova Scotian counties of Pictou and Colchester was given over to grantees about the same time. McNutt’s grant in Pictou County was called the “Irish Grant,” and the township of Pictou was first known as “Donegal.”

What has generally borne the name of the “Philadelphia Grant” in Pictou, became celebrated. While McNutt failed to settle the land obtained by him and was compelled to allow it to revert to the Crown, the Philadelphia Company succeeded in bringing in its excellent colonists. Among them were families bearing such well-known Nova Scotian names as Archibald, Patterson, Troop, Rogers, and Harris.

It was in 1767 that the little brig the Hope, since become historic in consequence, bore its precious freight, the seed of the noted Pictou Colony sent by the Philadelphia Company. It sailed from Philadelphia in May and called at Halifax. On the 10th of June, Pictou Harbour was reached. Several young men from Truro passing the mountains, crossed through the woods and built fires on the shore to attract the attention of the vessel. Fearing Indians the vessel stood off the shore; a closer inspection showed the party on shore to be friends. There were six families on board, among them being those of Dr. Harris, Squire Patterson, Rogers. In Pictou graveyard stands the monument, erected in 1809, of a son of Rogers, born the night before the landing, and marked “The first descendant of an Englishman born in Pictou.”

Along with Governor Simcoe in his visits through the wilderness of Upper Canada, usually went Thomas Talbot. a young Irishman, Thomas Talbot. He was an officer of the 24th Regiment, and was as enthusiastic as was the Governor himself in the task of subdividing, naming, and settling the various parts of the province, and in road-making, which, like his chief, he viewed largely from a military standpoint. After his patron had gone from Canada, Talbot returned and received his first grant of 5000 acres on the shores of Lake Erie, on condition of settling it.

His first settlement was in 1803, and with his own hands he cut the first tree on his estate at Port Talbot. His abode was sixty miles from Long Point, the nearest settlement at that time. Colonel Talbot’s plan was to settle deserving colonists, come from what source they would, and he was allowed 200 acres for every settler he placed on an allotted fifty acres. The grant to the settler was afterwards increased to 100 acres on certain improvements having been made. It was not till 1809 that settlers began to enter on the Talbot lands, and then but slowly.

After 1810 settlement became more rapid, and Talbot was much assisted in his plans by a land surveyor, a native of New Jersey, Colonel Burwell, who afterwards became a member of the Legislature. Colonel Talbot was for many years a member of the Legislative Council of Upper Canada, and the patriotic officer commanded the militia of the district in the war of 1812. Among the Talbot settlers was the afterwards celebrated Dr. Rolph, who came from England and took up his abode in the district in 1813. The first shop in the Talbot settlement was begun in 1817. The main line of communication from east to west along Lake Erie through this section is still known as Talbot Street.

Some notion of the magnitude of the operations of the odd but patriotic Colonel Talbot may be got from the fact that twenty-eight townships were settled under his superintendence, containing now probably some 200,000 people. The 21st of May was long celebrated in the Talbot district, in somewhat of old baronial style, in honour of the “Founder.”

Among the most enthusiastic of the colonizers of this period was the Earl of Selkirk. While at Edinburgh University he had, as a fellow-student The Earl of Selkirk. of the then young Walter Scott, been drawn to examine the case of the suffering and evicted peasants of Ireland and Scotland. In 1802 he addressed a letter to Lord Pelham, Home Secretary, proposing his scheme for the removal of these sufferers to the vacant lands of the New World.

Possessed of wealth, and being moreover of a most philanthropic spirit, the young earl organized companies to seek homes in British America. He seems also to have had in view the diversion of the stream of emigration which was flowing from Britain to the United States, and even the drawing away from the States the British subjects who had already gone thither.

His lordship’s first intention had been to send his emigrants by way of Hudson Bay to the Red River country, having become convinced from Sir Alexander Mackenzie’s work of 1801, of the suitability for settlement of that region. The British Government interposed shortly before the sailing of his first ship, and compelled him to select a portion of the vacant lands not so remote as those of Red River.

It was in 1803 that three ships, carrying some 800 colonists, left Britain under Lord Selkirk’s Prince Edward Island. direction for Prince Edward Island. Most of the settlers were from the islands of Skye and Uist, and a number from Ross, Argyle, and Inverness. Lord Selkirk arrived on the scene shortly after the landing of the first ship’s company.

An old Acadian village site was the place of settlement. Work was begun at once. Fever broke out in the colony, but a medical man was in attendance, provided by the Earl. Provisions were for a time served out by an agent. Though their destination was reached so late as August, by the middle of September all the colonists had been settled on their lots. Five thousand people in Queen’s County, Prince Edward Island—the descendants of that band of 800 pilgrim fathers—are to-day among the most prosperous of the inhabitants of the island.

Having seen his colonists provided for on Prince Edward, Lord Selkirk immediately visited Baldoon. Canada and the United States. He seems previously to have secured a block of land in Upper Canada, at a point fifteen miles north of the mouth of the Thames, in the most westerly county of Upper Canada. This was named “Baldoon,” from a portion of his lordship’s estates in Scotland.

In 1803 some twenty families from Prince Edward Island settlement, numbering 110 souls, proceeded to Baldoon. The locality was swampy, and one-third of the colonists perished in the first season from malaria. During the war of 1812 the settlement was laid waste by the Americans. In the townships of Dover and Chatham, near Baldoon, Lord Selkirk also purchased some 70,000 acres of land.

A further tract of land, forming the township of Moulton, situated at the mouth of the Grand River, The Grand River. and comprising 30,800 acres, was purchased by Lord Selkirk for 3850l. from Mr. William Jarvis, who had obtained it from the Indians in 1803.

In 1804 Lord Selkirk proposed to Governor Hunter at York to build a road from the Grand River to his Baldoon settlement, or if the Government preferred, from York to Baldoon. It was estimated that the work would cost 40,000l., the distance being nearly 300 miles. The Earl offered to accept in payment wild lands on each side of the road to be built. The project was not acceptable to the Government.

For several years the troubled state of Europe prevented the colonizer following up his plans of The birth of Manitoba. emigration. In 1811 he obtained a controlling interest in the Hudson’s Bay Company. From this Company he purchased a vast district lying on the Red River, of 116,000 square miles. This he called Assiniboia, and in 1811, by way of Hudson Bay, despatched a party of Highlanders, with a few Irish colonists from Sligo. The pioneers did not reach their destination till 1812. During the following years other bands took up their abode beside them on Red River.

The relation of the new settlers and their patron to the Hudson’s Bay Company stirred up the opposition of the North-West Fur Company of Montreal, which occupied many posts throughout the region to the north-west of Lake Superior.

A clever movement, by a Nor’-Wester officer named Cameron, succeeded in 1815 in inducing about 150 souls, or about three-fourths of the Selkirk Colony, to desert the Red River, and come by the canoe-route to Lake Superior and thence along the shores of the lakes to Penetanguishene in Upper Canada. The descendants of these fickle colonists are still living in Gwillimbury, north of Toronto, and in Aldboro’ and adjoining townships in the London district.

The settlers who refused to join Cameron were reinforced by an addition to the Selkirk settlement, in 1815, nearly making up the number lost. In 1816 the animosity of the North-West Company, which contained many of the French half-breeds, who called themselves “the new nation,” became so great that an attack was made on Fort Douglas, the centre of the Selkirk Colony, and Governor Semple, the officer in charge, was killed.

Lord Selkirk, who had been in Montreal during the winter of 1815-16, was hastening to reinforce his beleagured colony, when he heard the sad news. He had taken 100 men of the disbanded German mercenaries called De Meurons, whom he had obtained in Canada, and with these was proceeding westward. He seized the Nor’-Wester post Fort William, wintered there, and early in 1817 advanced to the Red River by way of Rainy Lake and Lake of the Woods.

Lord Selkirk soon reduced the troubled affairs to order, made a treaty with the Indians of the Red River, consoled his settlers, and returned by way of the Mississippi, and through the Western States to Canada again. Thus was begun the province of Manitoba, though for nearly sixty years after its founding it bore the name, the Red River Settlement.

As already stated, the grant had been made by General Haldimand in 1784 to the Six Nations Indians Lands of the Six Nations. of the vast tract from the source to the mouth of the Grand River. This is one of the most beautiful portions of Canada. The covetous eye of the new settler soon fell on this wide domain. The Indians occupied but a small portion of it, and regarded it as useless to them.

It was thought that by the sale of a part of the lands an annuity might be obtained for the tribes. The British Government was, with greatest difficulty, induced to consent to this sale, and then only in part. In November, 1796, the chiefs and warriors of the Six Nations gave power of attorney to Captain Joseph Brant to sell such lands as he saw fit for their benefit.

Block one, afterwards comprising the township of Dumfries, and embracing 94,305 acres, was sold to Philip Stedman. Another block, as we have seen, fell into the hands of the Earl of Selkirk, while four other blocks, comprising nearly a quarter of a million of acres, were sold to others.

Local report has always been to the effect that Captain Brant was somewhat imposed on by the white settlers, and that the old chieftain, on one occasion at Niagara, offered 1000 acres of land for 10l. in a time of special need. On the Six Nations’ tract there lived an ingenious German settler from New York State, who was a good violinist, and who was accustomed to invite the Captain now and then to a sumptuous feast. When the old warrior had reached the height of exhilaration, his entertainer succeeded again and again in obtaining his signature to leases of one after another of choice lots of land.

In 1803 Governor Hunter ordered an investigation into the condition of the Indian lands, and again in 1804. In 1806 Governor Gore ordered a statement of the moneys invested in English three per cents. for the Indians to be laid before the Legislature of Upper Canada, and it was but little above 5600l. The report given to the House, by Dr. Strachan and Mr. J. B. Robinson, long after Brant’s death, suggests that but poor care had been taken of the interests of the Indians.

Section IV.—Political and Social life.

During the period before us, the introduction to Canada of so mixed a population produced the inevitable result of conflict and heartburning. Race jealousy, local dissatisfaction, and the lack of representative government gave rise to loud complaints. It does not seem to have been so much the want of skill on the part of the Governor and Council in each of the provinces, as fault with the system of government that produced the discontent. There are evident signs in this period of an expanding political life, and a determination on the part of the people to gain self-government.

The plan of the Imperial Government was to appoint a Governor-General, with jurisdiction over the six provinces in existence at the time in British America. Under this chief officer was, in each province, a Lieutenant-Governor. In Lower Canada the office of Lieutenant-Governor was not always filled, as the Governor-General lived in Montreal or Quebec, though from 1808 to 1822 the office of Lieutenant-Governor of Lower Canada was held as a sinecure by an absentee at a comfortable salary.

In each province there was a Legislative Assembly elected by the people, and a Legislative Council appointed by the Crown. There was also an Executive Council appointed by the Crown, which was not responsible to the Legislature. The struggle for power between the popular branch of the Legislature and the Legislative Council, led by the Executive, took place in each province, though each provincial struggle had peculiarities of its own.

In Lower Canada after the departure of Lord Dorchester, the idol of the people, in 1796, the government Lower Canada. was carried on very successfully by General Prescott, though he was at times compelled to check his Executive Council for selfishness. He was succeeded by Mr. Milnes, who occupied the position for five or six years. Governor Milnes was not strong enough to cope with the heady and self-seeking Executive, which was steadily building up a structure of tyranny, which in the end must be levelled by the people. After Milnes’ departure in 1805 the President of the Council, Hon. Thomas Dunn, filled the vacancy in the Governorship till a successor was appointed.

From the special features of Lower Canada it was to have been expected that the political struggle would be very severe. Lower Canada was largely French Canadian. Its population was considerable, and its people had a vigorous social and religious life. It was made up of a conquered people. It was impossible to tell what might at any time arise in the complications of Britain with the United States. The leading business men of the province were British merchants living in Montreal and Quebec. Many of these were associated together in the vast fur-trade to the interior. The British Governor most naturally chose his Executive Council from this class. To make matters more secure, the Governor and Council appointed a safe majority of the Legislative Council from among the British residents.

The theory of this system, that the French-Canadians were a conquered people and to be distrusted, was not quite accurate. The French of Lower Canada had found their attachment to France rudely severed by the events of the French Revolution. Atheistic France could have few attractions for French Canada, still holding to its ancient church. Sentiment and interest continued to make the French-Canadians loyal to Britain. Having become British, the French-Canadians clamoured for the rights of self-government, and the Assembly was chiefly French Canadian.

The Executive and Legislative Councils were a strong-willed and united oligarchy. The cry of the French Canadians for self-government was interpreted by it as disloyalty to Britain. It is thus an oligarchy usually protects itself. The people thus charged next regarded the steps taken by the Governor-General for the protection of the country as tyrannical. The Governor and his councils misunderstood the people, and the people, through the Legislative Assembly, misjudged the authorities.

The Montreal Gazette, which had been established in 1778, was an organ of the Government. In April, 1805, it contained an account of a banquet given to the Representatives of Montreal in the Legislature, in honour of their opposition to the action of the Assembly in passing a certain Bill. At the meeting toasts had been proposed which were regarded as hostile to the French. The Assembly took notice of the matter. It voted the proceedings at the banquet to be “a false, scandalous, and malicious libel . . . tending to lessen the affections of his Majesty’s subjects towards his Government in this province.”

The Assembly in this action evidently made a mistake. Its order for the arrest of the giver of the toasts at the banquet and of the editor of the Gazette could not be justified, though the order was never enforced. The extreme action of the Assembly drew forth a criticism from the Quebec Mercury, another Government newspaper. The Assembly again erred in ordering the editor of the Mercury to be taken into custody, though he was soon liberated. Such proceedings as these but widened the breach between the opponents.

The French-Canadians next undertook what was a far more sensible mode of defence than the exercise of the prerogative of the Assembly. This was the establishment of a newspaper, Le Canadien, to defend their views. The new journal began its career in November, 1806; it was decidedly anti-British in tone, and regarded the British residents of Lower Canada as “étrangers et intrus.” Le Canadien was conducted with ability, became popular, and gave umbrage and uneasiness to the Government.

Amidst the din of this race-conflict sounds of war were heard. As we shall afterwards see, the British doctrine of the “right of search” produced irritation. H.M.S. Leopard in 1807 had boarded the Chesapeake, an American frigate, and killed a number of American citizens. The preparations for war for the time drowned the noise of provincial turmoil. President Dunn gave orders for drafting one-fifth of the militia for active service. French and English vied with each other in being ready for defence. Bishop Plessis issued his mandement to be read in all the Roman Catholic churches, supporting the Government action.

It was at this juncture, in October, 1808, that Lieutenant-General Sir James Craig arrived in Canada as Governor-General. He was of good Scottish family, had seen the whole of the Revolutionary War, had served in the Cape of Good Hope and India, and had gone through the campaigns of the British forces on the Mediterranean in the wars of Napoleon. He was at the time of his arrival in Canada in poor health. By the year 1809 the war-cloud had partly blown over, and Governor Craig found himself in the midst of political instead of martial strife.

The Assembly had returned to its querulous mood. The Governor was easily persuaded that the French population and later American immigrants were unsafe elements in the country.

In order to carry out its ends the Assembly proposed to exclude the judges, who had been members of Assembly. In this the action of the Assembly is vindicated by the state of subsequent opinion. A less excusable act of the popular branch of the Legislature was the exclusion from their House of the member for Three Rivers—a most worthy gentleman—on the ground of his being a Jew.

The session had progressed five weeks with no better result than the measures named, when Governor Craig, in Cromwellian humour, went to the House, and informed the members of his intention to dissolve Parliament. That they wasted in fruitless debates the time and talents to which the public had an exclusive title, was the reason given for their dismissal. Dismissed accordingly they went to their constituents. The elections were held and the French party returned stronger than before. Le Canadien, the exponent of French opinion, waxed violent. The country was in an uproar. Rumours of secret meetings of a disloyal kind became current, though they seem to have been without foundation.

On the 17th of March, 1810, the press and material of Le Canadien were seized by Government order, the printer was apprehended, and M. Bedard and two other members of the Assembly were arrested on a charge of treasonable practices. For a considerable time Bedard languished in prison, though strenuous efforts were made by the Assembly for his release. Governor Craig refused the application on the ground that the “security, as well as the dignity of the King’s Government required” his imprisonment. On the prorogation of the Assembly the prison doors were opened to M. Bedard.

Undoubtedly the action of Governor Craig and his advisers in this matter was tyrannical. During the year the Governor, at his own request, was recalled. He has always been regarded as having been an honest, frank, and philanthropic man. With the training of a soldier, he had high ideas of prerogative. It is useless, however, to condemn Governor Craig for this fierce struggle; it was begun before his arrival, and both parties were to be blamed. The French having taken high-handed measures against the Gazette and Mercury, found the same treatment applied to Le Canadien and M. Bedard. “They that take the sword shall perish with the sword.”

The birth of political life in Upper Canada was no less troubled than in Lower Canada. On the departure Upper Canada. of Governor Simcoe, in 1796, the government was administered during the vacancy, until 1799, by the Hon. Peter Russell. The spirit of rapacity which had opposed Simcoe found its embodiment in the new President. He was, according to a very reliable historian, “helluo agrorum”—a “land-glutton.” A list of lands patented by the Hon. Peter Russell, the Acting-Governor, to the Hon. Peter Russell, the private citizen, is extant, and is remarkable.

In 1799 arrived the new Lieutenant-Governor, General Peter Hunter. He remained in office till his death in 1805. He administered the government with a firm hand. The influx of Americans during his term of office began to create a real anxiety among the loyalists. Not that the new immigrants committed overt acts, but uncertainty was everywhere prevalent. It was in 1804 that this suspicion became embodied in the well-known “Sedition Act” of that year. This Act gave the power to arrest any person who had been less than six months in the province, who had seditious intent to disturb the tranquillity of the province. The Act became a fitting instrument, in after years, for the destruction of personal liberty.

The death of Governor Hunter was followed by the appointment in 1806 of Mr. Francis Gore, who continued, with the exception of three years in 1812-14, Lieutenant-Governor till 1818. Governor Gore seems to have been an estimable and well-meaning man, but he was quite unable to cope with the determined spirits who during his time laid the foundation of the fabric of Upper Canadian misrule. In English history freedom had often to be regained, which had been lost under weak and amiable kings. So this Governor’s administration was not favourable to liberty. Governor Gore’s period of government had many features in common with that of his contemporary in Lower Canada, General Craig.

The weak Governor was, on his arrival, surrounded by the combination of office-holders, land speculators, and so-called persons of good society in the capital of Little York. He became their bond-slave. This knot of professional politicians and hereditary rulers, as they regarded themselves, looked with contempt on the inhabitants of the rural districts, especially on the later American immigrants. They saw imminent danger to the State in those who failed to see their superior excellence.

Their wrath was first visited on one of the circuit judges. This was Mr. Justice Thorpe. He Mr. Justice Thorpe. had recommended himself by his just decisions throughout the country. The people had much confidence in the sympathetic judge. As he went from court to court the grand juries laid their grievances before him, and he became the exponent of the rights of the people. His popularity was so great that, contrary to the will of the government, he was elected to the Legislative Assembly. The Governor and his councils, as well as the Government newspaper, the Upper Canada Gazette, bitterly opposed the judge. In 1807 a new journal, the Upper Canadian Guardian, was begun, to vindicate the people’s cause. Unfortunately for the popular party, Judge Thorpe was, by the influence of Governor Gore, recalled by the British Government.

An enterprising Irishman, Joseph Willcocks, Sheriff of the Home District, was a strong though extreme supporter of Judge Thorpe. The Government was so incensed against him that he was removed from office. It was he who became the editor of the Guardian. His strong utterances brought upon him a prosecution for libel, but he was acquitted. Having been elected to the Assembly, he was, for the too free expression of opinion, committed to prison.

In the year 1809 another act of arbitrary authority subjected the Governor and Executive Council to severe criticism. An English gentleman, John Mills Jackson, who possessed lands by inheritance in Lower Canada, and by purchase in Upper Canada, visited the country. He was much displeased by what he saw. On his return to England he published a pamphlet on Canada, referring to the severe treatment of Judge Thorpe and Sheriff Willcocks, and to the corrupt state of political affairs in Upper Canada.

He stated, moreover, that it had been declared publicly, on behalf of the Executive, that should any man sign any petition or address whatever he should be sent to prison. His information in all cases, except the last mentioned, was correct, and possibly in this case constructively so. He closed his pamphlet saying, “I have no private interest or passion to gratify: I call for investigation as a duty to my king and country.”

The Upper Canadian Assembly agreed to present an address to the Lieutenant-Governor, expressive of its “abhorrence and detestation of an infamous and seditious libel signed ‘John Mills Jackson.’ ”

In the light of the freedom now permitted to owners of newspapers and writers of pamphlets, it is surprising to us that what on the whole was a true, though earnest presentation of grievances, should have been so strongly condemned, and certainly Mr. John Mills Jackson was fortunate in being beyond the reach of the angry legislators in his Englishman’s home of liberty.

The struggle of the Nova Scotian Legislature with the Executive was likewise severe, though the Nova Scotia. questions at stake seem to have been less important than those in the Upper Provinces. The loyalist Governor, Parr, of Nova Scotia, died in 1791, and was succeeded by Sir John Wentworth. Sir John was a native of New Hampshire, and had been British Commissioner of Woods and Forests in America. He had likewise been Governor of his native province in the colonial days before the Revolution.

Sir John was of the courtly class of old-time governors. There was not only a dignity, but also a knowledge of affairs, and a facility of administration, in those trained in the old school of Government officials, largely wanting in later times. Sir John lived for the people, and yet he considered them worthy of consideration simply as they were submissive. Englishmen, or those trained in the old colonial school, could alone make efficient governors, to his mind. He was distrustful of public gatherings, and regarded public discussion as closely bordering on sedition. He inveighed against “meetings convened in the country composed of uneducated tradesmen, labourers and farmers, who, from the nature of their industry, cannot have any real information.”

Sir John disliked the popular leader in the Assembly, Mr. Cottnam Tonge, and exhausted every device to counterwork his influence. This “tribune of the people,” though charged with seditious intent, preserved his place even in the face of the official opposition. The warlike rumours of the time, and possibly also the irritation caused by Governor Wentworth’s distrust of the people, led to the appointment of General Sir George Prevost in his stead in 1808. Sir John Wentworth, after some opposition in the Legislature, was voted a pension of 500l.

The preparation for the expected war occupied the minds of the people and Legislature. Governor Prevost, on the recall of Sir James Craig, was promoted to the Governor-Generalship, and Sir John Coape Sherbrooke became Governor of Nova Scotia. On the death of Governor Prevost in 1816, in Lower Canada, Governor Sherbrooke became his successor in office there. At the end of this period the population of Nova Scotia had reached 82,000.

The loyalist province of New Brunswick was under its first Governor, Col. Thomas Carleton, the New Brunswick. brother of Lord Dorchester, from the time of its founding until 1802. Six governors in four years succeeded Carleton. After this succession of changes a military officer, General Hunter, held office. As in the other provinces, so in New Brunswick, a struggle took place between the Legislative and Executive Councils and the Assembly.

The subject of dispute was nothing greater than whether the members of Assembly should receive a payment of 7s. 6d. per day during the sitting of the House. The British Colonial Secretary declared this “derogatory to the dignity of members, as being wages.” From 1796 to 1799 there was a “deadlock” between the two Houses; but in the end the popular branch gained its contention. During this period imprisonment for debt was still in vogue in Canada, but on the prisoner making oath that he was not worth 5l. he was entitled to be discharged. Slavery was permitted in Lower Canada under licence; but in Upper Canada in 1793 further importation of slaves was forbidden, and gradual abolition introduced.

To the many visitors to the British provinces during this period colonial life seemed very unattractive. The Old World traveller cannot sympathize Social progress. fully with the difficulties of new settlers. To him their crude life seems the result of improvidence. He has never seen the unbroken forest, and worked out in his experience the steps required to bring it into the form of the cultivated field, or the pasture-land supporting flocks and herds. He can assume the rôle of critic, can ever act as the kind adviser, and regards the colonist who fails to respond to his suggestion as boorish and lacking in spirit.

The colonist in turn, knowing the difficulties which have been encountered, and seeing the injustice of the criticisms, has usually received with coldness, if not with resentment, books of travel written on the colonies.

The British colonies during the period before us, except in the neighbourhood, perhaps, of Montreal, Quebec, or Halifax, were just emerging from their primitive condition. The loyalists and British settlers were alike poor. From the circumstances of the case the loyalists had most intelligence; but, on the other hand, the British settler was more accustomed to labour. The beautiful dream of an Arcadia was found by half-pay officers, French émigrés, and needy scions of nobility to be a delusion. Would they obtain homes they must work with their own hands—

“He who by the plough would thrive

Himself must either hold or drive.”

Yet the pluck and self-denial exhibited by the early settlers of these provinces prove them to have been true men. When there is no accumulated capital, or no rich friends in England from whom assistance may come, progress must be slow.

Lower Canada was at this time, from its earlier settlement, in a position of advantage, though its French Canadian inhabitants have never been distinguished for enterprise. It was an event marking a new era when, on the 4th of November, 1809, the steamer Accommodation arrived in Quebec from Montreal, the first steamship ever seen on the St. Lawrence. “No wind or tide can stop her” was the admiring comment of the newspaper of the time.

In Lower Canada five newspapers were issued in 1810. These were the Gazette, the oldest newspaper in Canada, the Mercury, and Le Canadien, all in Quebec; and the Gazette and Courant in Montreal. The Gazette and Guardian were the newspapers of Upper Canada, and even during this period the Constellation, the Herald, and others, we are informed, had “expired of starvation.”

The country advanced in business and manufactures. The chief exports were wheat, potash from the ashes of the burnt forests, and furs. There were two iron-works near Three Rivers—the St. Maurice Forges. In 1811 the manufacture of leather, hats, and paper had been introduced. There were no considerable factories for cloth-making, but the farmers largely manufactured their own clothing, known as “homespun.” Tobacco-smoking was common, and in 1810, 100,000 pounds of tobacco were imported, subject to duty, in Upper Canada. Before 1817 there was not a bank in British America, but in 1822 one had been established at Kingston, and two in Montreal.

Many of the early settlers having been soldiers, and no light liquors being obtainable, the consumption of ardent spirits was large. The liquors used were largely manufactured in the country, and were very destructive. Duelling was not uncommon, and in some circles he was accounted a hero who had “killed his man.” A strange custom, that of “charivareeing” newly-married people, was common. This was a senseless beating of drums, blowing of horns, firing of guns, and drunken shouting about the dwelling of those who were the victims. The 4th of June, being King George III.’s birthday, was observed as a holiday, and this even during the times of his successors. It was the custom to summon the militia for roll-call and inspection on that day.

In Lower Canada the mass of the people were French Roman Catholics, and even numbers of the Religion. Fraser and Montgomery Highlanders who had intermarried with the French, adopted their ancient faith. Churches at this period were well supplied to the people.

In Nova Scotia the first Bishop of the Church of England, Dr. Charles Inglis, arrived in 1787, and died about the end of this period. In the year previous, the well-known Dr. McGregor, the father of the Presbyterian Church in Nova Scotia, arrived from Scotland. In Upper Canada there were at the end of the period from six to ten clergymen of the Church of England, and a like number in Lower Canada. There were six Presbyterian ministers, and probably not less than thirty or forty itinerant Methodist preachers, with a number of Baptists and others in smaller numbers. These clergy wandered over the settled parts of the country, were very devoted, and were of much service in restraining wrong and laying the foundation of the present religious condition of Canada.

In Lower Canada education was from the first an adjunct of the Church, and hence was not in this Education. province so much a matter of discussion as in the other provinces. In Nova Scotia, King’s College, at Windsor, had been established by Royal Charter so early as 1802. In 1811 an Act to aid Common Schools was passed, and another to establish ten county grammar-schools, in addition to that already in existence in Halifax.

In Upper Canada, Governor Simcoe had planned a higher educational institution. Under his auspices, the afterwards celebrated Bishop Strachan, was brought out. His patron having gone, the Scottish dominie on arriving in 1799 was disappointed. He, however, began the Kingston and afterwards the Cornwall Grammar School, in which many of those afterwards active in public affairs were educated.

In 1803 arrived in Nova Scotia, Dr. McCulloch, the educational Nestor of Nova Scotia. In 1807 an Act was passed granting 100l. a year to each of eight schools in the different districts of Upper Canada. An Act was passed also in 1816 establishing common schools throughout the country, and 6000l. a year was granted as assistance in supporting these schools.

In 1818 there was established on the banks of the Red River, by two Roman Catholic fathers, a school in which the “humanities” were taught, but there was not for several years after an English school. Thus were laid the foundations of the social, religious, and educational fabric of to-day.

Section V.—The War of Defence (1812).

A passionate dislike of the British still remained among the masses of the American people. The long War for Independence had burned the events of those eight years into the people’s hearts. The veterans of the Revolutionary War, some of them as cripples bearing ineffaceable marks of their valour, still lived throughout the States, and told the tales of a grandfather to the second generation of young Americans.

Ten years only after the Peace of Paris (1783), warm sympathy had arisen in America for the struggling French Republic. France had sent La Fayette to help them, now they would return sympathy to her people in the throes of revolution. A corresponding hatred for Britain thus became stronger. Washington and the leading statesmen of the Republic had sought to allay the hostile feeling against Britain. They saw that the prosperity of their people depended on the existence of good feeling toward Britain. What to their minds was most to be feared in the United States was a reaction among the people, and the tracing of all business and social troubles to the severance of the colonies from the great mother-land. The excesses of the revolutionary party in France alienated much sympathy from them in puritan New England, and Washington succeeded in making a commercial treaty with England. But the “father of his country” retired from public life in 1796.

Despite all efforts, the old cleavage-line between North and South was beginning to appear in the Republic. Nothing but the fierce heat of revolution could have welded them together. It was marvellous that cavalier and puritan had cohered so long. The removal now of the common danger allowed the old provincial jealousies to break forth anew. In 1801, Jefferson, the distinguished framer of the Declaration of Independence, was elected President by the Democratic party, whose strength lay among the cavaliers. The feeling against Britain was purposely fanned into a flame.

Britain was at this time engaged in a gigantic war. She felt her fleet—of 1000 ships on all seas—to be her strongest resource. She saw her advantage over her foes in cutting off the supplies of war coming by sea, and in enforcing the law of nations that no neutral may assist with supplies either combatant in a war. Accordingly in 1806 Britain declared the coast of France and Holland, from Brest to the Elbe, under a blockade, and sent Lord Keith with 160 ships to enforce it. In November, 1806, Napoleon retaliated in his so-called “Decrees,” issued from Berlin, forbidding English goods to be brought upon the continent of Europe.

In 1807 Britain retorted, and by the celebrated “Orders in Council” put all countries, under the power of France, under blockade. In November, 1807, Napoleon thundered forth his Milan Decrees, declaring the whole British Islands blockaded. Britain had declared any French possession blockaded, whether actually blockaded or not, on the theory that her fleet was in every sea. Napoleon’s blockade of Britain was made, without his having one ship of the line to carry out his threat. Looking at this affair from the standpoint of international law, there can be no doubt that the “constructive blockade” introduced by both parties was an absurdity. The check placed on commerce irritated the Americans, and though both France and England were equally blamable, France plainly was the favoured country in the United States.

On the 22nd of June, 1807, H.M.S. Leopard, of seventy-four guns, cruising off Virginia, made formal requisition upon the United States’ frigate Chesapeake to deliver up deserters known to be aboard her. The American commander denied having any deserters, when the Leopard opened fire, killed three men, wounded eighteen, and having boarded the disabled ship, took off the culprits. Even according to British doctrine this was an outrage. The Leopard had no right to use force in her search. Britain disavowed the act, and offered reparation. This conflict increased the national excitement.

Giving way to hostile sentiment, President Jefferson refused to ratify a treaty of commerce, amity, and navigation concluded by the American Minister at 1807. London with the British; and on the 27th of November the President in his message to Congress freely denounced England for her “Orders,” but said nothing of Napoleon’s “Decrees.” Congress responded to the President’s bad advice, and passed an embargo not allowing American ships to leave their own ports, the plea being that it was necessary to gather together for emergencies all American ships. By this, great distress was caused in New England ports, where the people depend on the sea.

In 1809, after Jefferson had served as President for two terms, Madison was elected to that office. He was said to be less anti-British than his predecessor. The embargo was repealed, but a law of non-intercourse passed, providing that if England or France withdrew restrictions on commerce, the United States would also. The refusal of Britain to change her course was severely felt in New England. War seemed now to be more likely than before, and Britain began to prepare by sending as governors to the British provinces, military officers.

In 1810 the sky grew darker still, though the strong sentiment in the New England States was for peace. An unfortunate occurrence hastened the conflict. The President, an American frigate of forty-four guns, attacked a small British vessel, the Little Belt, of eighteen guns. The attack seems to have been unprovoked. Thirty-two men were killed or wounded, and the little sloop was battered to pieces. Negotiations continued during 1811. In the autumn of this year the Congress of the United States met, and determined to increase the army from ten to thirty-five thousand, and to borrow 11,000,000 dollars.

Early in 1812 national feeling was roused by the disclosures of one Captain John Henry, who in 1809 had gone as a spy to the United States for Governor Craig, but who, on not receiving what he claimed from the British, agreed to sell his correspondence to the President for 50,000 dollars. This is probably one of the poorest investments ever made by the United States. The information was of little value, but its supposed evidence of a plot was used to inflame the minds of the people.

On June 19, 1812, Congress declared war against Great Britain, though, strange to say, about the same time England repealed the obnoxious orders. The legislatures of Massachusetts, Connecticut, and New Jersey protested against the war, but New York, Philadelphia, and Baltimore were ardently for it. This division of opinion paralyzed the American forces during the whole war, and it is significant that no attack was made on Canada east of Lake Champlain. Of the additional 25,000 troops authorized by Congress not more than one-fourth were enlisted, and great difficulty was experienced in inducing the militia to move.

The action of Canada was very different. She was on her defence, and all classes banded together to repel the invader. Lower Canada numbered some 220,000 people. Sir George Prevost was now Governor-General, having been promoted from Nova Scotia. Prevost was very popular. He conciliated the French-Canadians, and restored to office certain persons removed by his predecessor. The Assembly, though much divided on general politics, very heartily united in passing credits for 250,000l. Prevost found that the French-Canadians preferred being drafted for service, going very willingly if selected; the English preferred to volunteer.

Prevost raised four battalions of militia, and authorized a regiment of Canadian voltigeurs under the valorous French Canadian, Colonel De Salaberry. This brave man, one of our Canadian noblesse, had seen service in the British 60th Regiment as captain in different parts of the world. He now devoted himself to his native province. In Nova Scotia the loyalty of the people asserted itself. The Legislature for defence and militia voted 60,000l. In Upper Canada there was dismay at first, but the spirit of the U.E. Loyalists led to liberal supplies being granted. To defend 1700 miles of frontier there were only in Canada 4550 regulars. Of these about 1450 were in Upper Canada, and there were 1800 active militia. In Lower Canada there were some 2000 militia. In Upper Canada, Governor Gore had returned to England in 1811.

The American plan of attack was along three lines. General Dearborn, the commander of the “Army of the North,” was to move from Albany and strike Lake Ontario on the River St. Lawrence. General Van Rensselaer commanded the “Army of the Centre” to operate against the Niagara frontier, while Brigadier-General William Hull, Governor of the Territory of Michigan, led the “Army of the West” against the Detroit border.

The defence of Upper Canada was in the hands of Sir Brock. Isaac Brock, Acting-Governor. His was no easy task. This heroic man was born in 1769, in the British island of Guernsey. He had served in the West Indies, in Holland in 1799, and in Lord Nelson’s attack on Copenhagen. He had been with his regiment in Canada since 1802, and had become essentially Canadian in feeling. His zeal, bravery, singleness of purpose, and beauty of character made him a favourite with his followers, something such as Wolfe had been. While Brock was engaged in July with the business of the province, General Hull with 2500 men appeared at Sandwich in the West. He was kept in check by Colonel Proctor with some 350 men and a band of Indians. An extra session of the Legislature at York delayed Governor Brock.

Suddenly like a brilliant rocket in the North-West lakes flashed out the Canadian victory at Michilimackinac, the key of the upper lakes. Captain Roberts, of the North-West Company, and Agent Pothier, of Fort St. Joseph—French and English combined—with thirty-three regulars and 160 Canadian voyageurs, with fowling-pieces and old muskets, and two rusty three-pounders, surprised the American fort at Mackinaw, and captured seventy-five men, and a large quantity of stores and valuable furs. The capture was most timely. It attached the Indians to the Canadians, and threatened Hull’s army in the rear. It was a good beginning.

At Detroit General Hull issued a proclamation, most impudent and insulting. It threatened and cajoled in turn. This commander imagined the Canadians were being oppressed by the British, and would flock to him as a liberator. Governor Brock issued a dignified and reassuring proclamation in reply. Parliament over, he hastened to Detroit. With a few regulars and 300 militia he urged his boats along Lake Erie and reached Amherstburg.

Here he met Tecumseh, chief of the Shawnees. This Tecumseh. remarkable man was born about 1768, in the valley of the Miami, Ohio. Of Shawnee parentage, his name signifying “Shooting Star,” he divided with his brother, Elskwatawa, better known as “the Prophet,” enormous influence over his own and other tribes of Indians. In 1808 Tecumseh and his brother removed to the Tippecanoe River. These Indian statesmen sought to band the Indians together in a great league, specially hostile to the Americans. Their power was broken in their defeat by General Harrison in the battle of Tippecanoe, November 7th, 1811. Tecumseh was of lofty and benevolent character, and now became a faithful ally of the English.

Hull had suffered reverses even before Brock’s coming. Hull. In boastful pride he had crossed over to the Canadian side and encamped. Tecumseh and his band had intercepted his supplies by capturing Van Horne’s convoy. Hull had then retired to Detroit. In the captured train were Hull’s despatches expressing misgivings as to his expedition. Hull had 2500 men, Brock 330 regulars and 400 militia, while Tecumseh had some 600 Indians. Brock on August 15th, with his characteristic pluck, summoned Hull to surrender. The American general refused. That night Tecumseh crossed the river with his warriors and cut off Hull’s southern connections. On the next day (August 16th) Brock crossed with his force, having the assistance of a small sloop of war, the Queen Charlotte. The Americans first abandoned an outpost, and soon sent out a flag of truce offering to capitulate. Michigan Territory, Fort Detroit, a ship of war, thirty-three cannon, stores, &c., and 2500 troops were surrendered to General Brock. It was an electric shock for Canada. The general who had threatened a war of extermination was led through Canada to Montreal with lamb-like gentleness.

Brock was prevented from following up his victory by the armistice, arising from a conference between Queenston. Britain and the United States. Negotiations, however, failed. Brock was placed at a disadvantage. The trusted leader was now at Fort George, in Niagara. The American army on the Niagara was 6000 strong. On October 13th, before daybreak, the Americans under Van Rensselaer made an attack at Queenston. Two British regiments and 200 York Militia held the landing-place; under cover of artillery some 1300 men effected a landing. A deadly fusillade now took place. Brock having heard the firing from Fort George rode hastily up. The force had been withdrawn from the Queenston heights above to defend the landing. An American captain and a small force had clambered unseen up the river side of the height, and now commenced firing on the rear of the defenders. This force must be dislodged. The regulars charged up the height.

Brock, who was much exposed, had just uttered the words, “Push on the brave York Volunteers!” when he fell, shot in the breast. Lieut.-Col. John Macdonell, his aide, was shot from his horse by the American troops above him. The Americans now held the heights, behind them the precipice of 160 feet: the Canadians sullenly prevented their escape.

General Sheaffe, from Fort George, by a flank movement gained the heights to the west about noon. With him was now a band of the Six Nations Indians. He had 800 men all told. Gradually the semicircle of Sheaffe’s men narrowed in on the entrapped Americans, and 1100 officers and men surrendered. Four hundred had been shot, bayonetted, or driven over the precipice, to be impaled on the trees below. Queenston Heights was a signal victory, but all its glory was bedimmed by the death of Sir Isaac Brock and his gallant Canadian aide, young Macdonell. No memorial represents a truer sympathy than Brock’s monument on Queenston Heights.

General Smyth, as great a braggart as Hull, now assumed command of the 4500 troops on the Niagara frontier. His theory was that the Canadians should immediately lay down their arms. They obstinately refused, and repulsed all his landing-parties, and when December came, the Americans retired into winter quarters. General Smyth, threatened with “tar and feathers” by his own men, hurried to the south, and left the service.

Thus ended the first campaign. Its advantages, says an American historian, rested altogether with the British, though the Constitution and Wasp, American vessels, made naval captures. Throughout the whole British Empire sympathy was aroused. A society for the relief of the distress caused by the war, known as “The Loyal and Patriotic Society of Upper Canada,” was begun. For it were raised upwards of 14,000l., and a perusal of its minutes, now very rare, leads to the belief that it accomplished much good.

The war-spirit had continued to strengthen in the 1813. United States. Many who had opposed the war now acquiesced, in order to avoid national Frenchtown. disgrace. The loss of Michigan had especially aroused Ohio, Kentucky, and the neighbouring states. Early in January General Harrison threatened Colonel Proctor, who held Detroit. Proctor had now about 1000 troops, and 1200 Indians and militia. General Winchester had advanced from his supports toward Detroit, when Proctor fell on him at Frenchtown, and captured, after a desperate struggle, upwards of 500 men, while the enemy lost some 400 killed and wounded. Roundhead, the Huron chief, captured the American general.

In the eastern campaign a gallant deed was done in the capture of Ogdensburg, as a reprisal for a nocturnal raid on Brockville. At Prescott there lay a force of some 500 militiamen, and the Glengarry Fencibles, Ogdensburg. the revival of Chief Macdonell’s disbanded regiment of the same name to which reference has been made already. It was their practice to drill upon the ice opposite Prescott. On the 22nd of February in two parties, with artillery, they made, by crossing on the ice, an unexpected dash on Ogdensburg, and after a severe fight took it, the garrison having chiefly escaped. The military stores taken were of value, and four ships were burnt.

The American fleet on Lake Ontario had been increased, York. and in 1813 controlled the lake. General Sheaffe had succeeded Brock as Governor as well as commander of the forces. Some 600 troops were in York, the capital. York had about 1000 inhabitants, and was not regarded as of strategic importance. The Americans, however, set sail from Sackett’s Harbour with sixteen sail and 2500 men to attack it. The enemy landed to the west of the town, and General Sheaffe evacuated the works, and retired down the Kingston Road. The Americans invested the town, and though skirmishing took place, had an easy victory. The land force was under General Pike, an officer well known as having, when a lieutenant, explored the sources of the Mississippi. Just as the Americans had well filled the fort, the powder-magazine exploded with violence, killing and wounding about 250. General Pike, struck in the breast by a flying stone, died soon after. The Americans contrary to the articles of surrender, shamefully burnt the town, and retired from York on the 2nd of May, 1813. While the squadron was absent, Sackett’s Harbour was attacked by a strong force. The garrison seemed to be on the point of surrendering the fort, when Sir George Prevost, to the surprise of all, ordered a retreat.

Little York taken, Commodore Chauncey then crossed the lake to Fort George at the mouth of the Fort George (Newark). Niagara River. General Vincent commanded the fort. Twenty-four of Hull’s guns frowned from its bastions. Its defender had 1340 men. The American army on the Niagara frontier numbered 6000. Chauncey had eleven war-vessels and 900 seamen. On the 27th of May the expected day came. Vincent drew his men out about a mile from the fort and awaited the attack. He was overpowered and retired, having lost nearly 450 soldiers.

The Canadian force retired to a strong position, “Beaver Dams,” twelve miles from Niagara on the heights, having given up Fort Erie and Chippewa and blown up Fort George. Vincent had now 1600 Stoney Creek. men, and with these he retired to Burlington Heights, near the present city of Hamilton. An American army of 2500 men followed General Vincent to Stoney Creek. On the night of the 8th of June, Colonel Harvey of the British force, with upwards of 750 men, fell stealthily on the sleeping American army, scattered the troops, killed many, captured the American generals Chandler and Winder, and about 100 men, along with guns and stores. The adventurers then retired to their camp. The scattered American soldiers reassembled in the morning and retired in a disorderly manner down the country to Fort George.

Vincent now followed the retreating army and reoccupied Beaver Dams. One of his outposts Beaver Dams. was held by Lieutenant Fitzgibbon and thirty men. Smarting with defeat, the American general sought to surprise this station as a basis for future attacks. He secretly despatched Colonel Boerstler with nearly 700 men to capture it. A wounded militiaman, living within the lines at Queenston, heard by chance of the expedition. The cripple could not acquaint the Canadian army of the danger. His wife, Mrs. Mary Secord, volunteered to go.

At three in the morning she left home, passed with difficulty the American lines, and for twenty miles hurried through the forest, afraid to follow a road. Her danger was now from the British sentry and the Indians. The Indian chief was very doubtful, but at last took her to Fitzgibbon. The alarm was given, and that night the men lay on their arms. Early next morning the American party came, but an ambuscade had been prepared for them, and after severe fighting, 542 men surrendered into the hands of some 260. General Dearborn soon after retired from the command of the American army, to be succeeded by General Boyd.

British parties captured Fort Schlosser and Black Rock on the Niagara River at this time, though at the latter place with the loss of Colonel Bishopp, the idol of his men. Colonel Scott, in command of troops on board Commodore Chauncey’s fleet, again scoured Lake The Fleet. Ontario. Landing at Burlington Heights on the 31st of July, they did nothing more than reconnoitre the works and depart. Afterwards the second attack on York was made and the barracks burnt. After this a trial of strength took place between Sir James Yeo’s fleet, now sent forth from Kingston Harbour, and Chauncey’s squadron. The Americans lost two vessels in a squall, and two were captured by the British, but the result between the two fleets was indecisive.

During this summer of 1813 two most disastrous events befell the Canadians. The first of these was the Lake Erie. loss of the British fleet on Lake Erie. Hitherto Britain had controlled this lake. The Americans, however, continued to build vessels at Presqu’isle, now Erie City. Commodore Perry had ten ships in harbour, but they could not pass the bar with their guns aboard. Captain Barclay, the British commander, knew this, and lay with his fleet near by. A gale having scattered the British fleet, Perry escaped and loaded his ships with their guns from lighters outside the harbour. On the 10th of September, 1813, the squadrons met at Put-in-Bay, Barclay with but six ships, and two-thirds the number of men of his opponent. At first Barclay had the advantage, Perry’s flag-ship having struck her flag. The wind shifted and the fortune of battle changed. Barclay fought with bull-dog courage. In his fleet, “every officer, in fact, commanding vessels and their seconds, were either killed or wounded so severely as to be unable to keep the deck.” The whole squadron was compelled to surrender to Perry, and Barclay was court-martialed, but was acquitted with honour.

The disaster on Lake Erie left Proctor at Detroit defenceless. Winter was coming on, and he Proctor and Tecumseh. determined to retreat on Burlington Heights. He dismantled Malden, Windsor, and Sandwich, removed his guns from Detroit, and left that scene of his former successes on the 28th of September. The heavy baggage was sent up the Thames in boats, and with his 540 regulars and 290 militia, he retired in company with Tecumseh who led 500 Indians. General Harrison followed Proctor with 3500 men, 1500 of them the famous Kentucky mounted riflemen. Proctor’s progress was slow, for the roads were unspeakably bad.

Proctor halted at Moravian Town, and was here overtaken, 5th of October, by the stronger and more exultant American force. The British force was advantageously situated. The Thames was on his left flank; 300 yards to the right of the road was a dense cedar swamp. This Tecumseh’s Indians occupied. But there was no spirit left in the troops; they surrendered with the most trifling losses. The Indians alone proved valorous. Their brave chief Tecumseh fell, and no man knows his grave. That his body was mutilated by the Americans is not generally believed. A Canadian poet has lately embalmed the name and deeds of Tecumseh in a drama of much merit. Proctor retired with his staff to Burlington, was court-martialed, condemned, and suspended from the service.

The third operation of the American army was the most formidable, but proved the least successful. Chateauguay. The army of the north was divided into sections, one to move on Montreal by way of Lake Champlain, the other to pass by way of Lake Ontario and the St. Lawrence to the same point. The force on Lake Champlain numbered some 7000, with ten field-pieces. It was the intention of General Hampton, who commanded the expedition, to advance by the mouth of the Chateauguay River, and cross to Montreal Island above Lachine.

The brave De Salaberry was hurried forward to attack the American camp on the Chateauguay River. This he did, and checked the enemy. Colonel De Salaberry commanded about 1800 Canadians and 170 Indians, and took up a strong position with his small force. On the 26th of October Hampton advanced with 3500 men to annihilate the foe. The French-Canadians, holding an advance-post, with their accustomed vivacity fired as the bugles sounded. Their position was very perplexing to the Americans. De Salaberry alarmed the enemy by his ruse de guerre of sounding the advance with bugles at different points in the abattis. The Americans supposed a large force of Canadians to be advancing. Hampton withdrew his forces, leaving 300 French-Canadians masters of the field. This army was thus checked in its advance on Montreal. Unfading glory covers the name of Chateauguay for the French-Canadians; the British Prince Regent presented a stand of colours to each regiment engaged.

The army to descend the St. Lawrence from Lake Ontario consisted of 8000 men under Wilkinson. For three months the operations were delayed at Sackett’s Harbour. On the 3rd of November a flotilla of 300 boats, escorted by gunboats, passed by Kingston, and descended the St. Lawrence. In order to clear the course for the expedition, a force of 1200 men was Chrysler’s Farm. landed to accompany the boats along the north shore. The British immediately sent a force of 800 from Kingston to hang upon the rear of the American army and harass it. Colonel Harvey, the hero of Stoney Creek, accompanied it. On the 10th of November the American army turned upon the British advance at Chrysler’s Farm, but was completely vanquished. This was considered the most scientifically fought battle of the war. The fleeing army overtook its advanced force at Cornwall, and there heard of De Salaberry having checked General Hampton. The attack on Montreal was abandoned, and the American army crossed the St. Lawrence and went into winter quarters.

The Maritime Provinces were free from annoyance from land attacks, but were frequently excited with news from the sea. Halifax was the station of the British for the North Atlantic. The Americans were, considering the prestige of Britain on the ocean, very successful in 1813. The American frigates, President, Congress, and Essex, made many and valuable captures. The British brig Pelican, however, captured the American ship Argus, on the 14th of August, but the great event which threw Halifax into transports of joy was the result of the duel between H.M.S. Shannon and the U.S. frigate Chesapeake on the 18th of June. Captain Broke of the Shannon challenged Lawrence of the Chesapeake to leave Boston Harbour, and try conclusions on the open sea. The challenge was accepted. The Shannon was manned by a splendidly trained crew. Though the British vessel seemed to be getting the worse of the cannonade, yet on coming to close quarters the British seamen boarded their American antagonist, and soon brought her a prize to Halifax, where the captain and lieutenant were buried. Though the fortunes of war varied in 1813, it was plain to both contestants that the United States were not able to capture Canada. A portion of the western peninsula was in the hands of the enemy, but the war of defence had been thus far remarkably successful.

Early this year the American force, on Lake Champlain, 1814. made an advance, 5000 strong, on Lacolle Mill, near the borders of Lower Canada. Canadian Militia, the Voltigeurs, and a few companies of regulars bravely defended the mill, and also assumed the defensive, at times even issuing against the foe in sorties. The American force was obliged to retire without accomplishing anything. In March, much to the delight of the British, an embassy of chiefs of the Ottawas, Ojibways, Shawnees, Delawares, Mohawks, Sacs, Foxes, Kickapoos, and Winnebagoes, from the Upper Lakes, arrived in Montreal, pledged their faith to Britain, and urged that no peace be made with the “big knives” till the Indian lands, taken by fraud by them, should have been restored. This was encouraging to Canada, and showed how in the Indian mind the fortunes of war were going.

The campaign opened briskly in Upper Canada. Sir Gordon Drummond and Sir James Yeo sallied forth with their fleet from Kingston, and early in May captured the fort of Oswego, carried away the stores, and dismantled the fort. The British fleet had now supremacy on Lake Ontario.

The Americans made great efforts to take the Niagara frontier. Their object in this was to prevent the Amherstburg region being occupied by the British. They likewise planned an attack on Michilimackinac, which, from the beginning of the war, had been held by the British. The Niagara frontier captured, and Michilimackinac taken, they would then fall on Kingston. This threefold project was a very small season’s work, compared with what they had proposed at the opening of the war.

Michilimackinac had not been forgotten by the Canadians. Unable to pass Lake Erie, Colonel McDowall had in May conducted some ninety men and supplies from York to Lake Simcoe, thence to Georgian Bay, and by open boat across Lake Huron to Michilimackinac. In August 900 Americans attacked this fort, but were repulsed, and two schooners taken from them.

On the Niagara River, Fort Erie soon fell into American hands, though the British held Fort Niagara on the American side. On the 5th of July General Riall, the British commander, with 2000 men and a number of guns, attacked the large army of Americans near Chippewa, but was repulsed and fell back on the road toward Burlington Heights. Reinforced, he advanced a few miles, and threw 900 of his men to the high ground near Niagara Falls. This force was attacked by the Americans. He advanced to Queenston, and sent word to the detachment to fall back on him there.

On the very day of these occurrences Sir Gordon Drummond, with reinforcements, had come across the lake from York. He arrived to meet the retreating force near Queenston. Countermanding the retreat, with 1800 men he advanced against the enemy, and the fighting was severe till nine o’clock. Riall’s division now joined them, and with 3000 British troops, against 5000 Americans, the severest battle of the war was fought till eleven at night. The Americans retired with precipitation across the Chippewa, and the next day, Lundy’s Lane. throwing baggage, camp equipage, and provisions into the rapids, cut the bridge behind them and retired to Fort Erie. Upwards of 800 men were killed on each side. Few old men yet remain to tell their descendants of the hand-to-hand encounter they fought in the dark at Lundy’s Lane on the 26th of July, 1814.

The British commander invested Fort Erie, but losing heavily in two severe encounters, fell back to Chippewa. On the 5th of November the Americans evacuated Fort Erie and crossed the Niagara River. On Lake Champlain the British squadron, on the 11th of September, attacked the American fleet, and a land force advanced against Plattsburg. Disaster overwhelmed the British ships, and the army was compelled to retire, to be dispersed at Isle-aux-Noir, St. John’s, Chambly, and Laprairie. This was a severe blow to our army.

The Nova Scotians saw, during this year, the noble British squadron which made the Americans in their unjustifiable war on Canada feel the power of Britain. British ships battered to pieces the fortifications of the American seaboard. From Maine to Mexico was blockaded. Fort McHenry before Baltimore was bombarded, and New York, Boston, New London felt the sea-king’s power, which also captured and burnt Washington, the Federal capital. The British expedition against New Orleans was repulsed by General Jackson. On the 24th of December, 1814, the British and American plenipotentiaries signed at Ghent the articles of peace, which provided for a “mutual restitution of conquered territories or possessions.” The war gave to the several provinces self-respect and a feeling of confidence in their future. It taught the Americans that it is hard to conquer a people, though few, in their own country, and also that Britain will defend all parts of her empire.

After referring in his general order to the army, to its having fallen to the lot of the small Canadian army “to struggle through an arduous and unequal contest, remote from succour, and deprived of many advantages experienced in the more cultivated countries of Europe,” Sir George Prevost says: “At Detroit and at the River Raisin two entire armies, with their commanding generals, were captured, and greatly superior armies were repulsed. The several battles of Queenston, Stoney Creek, Chateauguay, Chrysler’s, La Colle, Lundy’s Lane, near the Falls of Niagara, and the subsequent operations on that frontier will ever immortalize the heroes who were on those occasions afforded the opportunity of distinguishing themselves. The capture of Michilimackinac, Ogdensburg, Oswego, and Fort Niagara, by assault, are trophies of the prowess of British arms.”


(References: “Report of Committee of Imperial Parliament on Hudson’s Bay Company,” London, 1857; “Voyage from Montreal, with Account of the Fur-trade,” by Sir Alexander Mackenzie, London, 1801; “Astoria,” by Washington Irving, London, 1870; “The Columbia River,” by Ross Cox, 2 vols., London, 1832; “Canadian Trials,” by A. Amos, London, 1820; “Unpublished Letters of Nor’-West Traders among Canadian Archives, Ottawa;” “Documents on Boundary Dispute,” published by Ontario, 1879; “Hudson’s Bay,” by Arthur Dobbs, London, 1744; “Six Years on Hudson’s Bay,” by Joseph Robson, London, 1759; “Accounts of Journeys,” published by Samuel Hearne (1795), Captains Lewis and Clark, London (1815), Lieutenant Z. Pike (1811), Keating (Major Long), London (1825), Sir John Franklin, London (1834), Sir George Back, London (1836), P. Dease and T. Simpson, London (1843), Sir John Richardson, New York (1852), Dr. John Rae, London (1850), Lord Milton and Dr. Cheadle, London (1865).)

Section I.—The great Fur-trading Companies.

Far away from the strife of contending political parties, and unvisited, except on Hudson Bay, with the din of border wars, sleeps under its coat of snow the vast kingdom of the fur-traders. Overhead is the dazzling brightness of a northern sky, which at night is covered to the very zenith with dancing auroras. In summer for two, three, or more months, the streams are unbound, a luxuriant vegetation bursts forth, and the summer green is as intense as the wintry whiteness had been.

Here the fur-trader must remain king. Mink and beaver, marten and otter, wolves, foxes, and bears are his subjects, and, as in the case of all autocrats, the subjects exist for the profit of the ruler. “Pro pelle cutem” is the motto of the Hudson’s Bay Company.

Perhaps one-quarter of North America will always remain the fur-traders’ preserve. If a line be drawn from Moose Factory, at the foot of Hudson Bay, to Norway House, at the northern end of Lake Winnipeg, thence to Fort Resolution on the Great Slave Lake, and westward to the Stikeen River on the Pacific Ocean, the boundary of a region will be marked to the north of which is found the fur-traders’ kingdom.

It is true this fur-traders’ line has for two centuries been moving northward. Time was, as we have seen, when the region of the great lakes from Ontario to Superior and Michigan was the home of the trader. It was for the fur of this large area that the early governors of New France and New York plotted and fought. So more recently Rupert’s Land was kept by the Hudson’s Bay Company closed under fur-trading conditions.

By the opening up of this region by the Dominion of Canada, the fur-line was moved north six to ten degrees. Perhaps from the physical condition of the country, as unsuited to agriculture and possessed of a severe climate, the region north of the line traced above may always remain undisturbed to the fur-trader. Of this, however, no one can speak certainly, for the same declaration was made of New York, then of Canada, and later still of Rupert’s Land.

More than two centuries ago, a colonial captain, Zachariah Gillam, taking with him two French explorers, Groselliers and Radisson, who had journeyed through New France, departed, under the direction of English merchants, to plant a post on Hudson Bay, which as we have seen had been discovered sixty years before by Captain Hudson.

It was in 1668 that Captain Gillam sailed from Gravesend in his ship, the Nonsuch. The New England captain reached the southern extremity of Hudson Bay, and, where Rupert’s factory afterwards stood, built a small stone erection, which he named Fort St. Charles, and returned to Britain in 1669.

The merchants interested then obtained the assistance of Prince Rupert, the king’s cousin, of General Monk, Hudson’s Bay Company. whom the king had made Duke of Albemarle, and of the skilful Lord Ashley, in obtaining from Charles II. a charter, which they claimed on the ground of their having erected Fort St. Charles; and thus was begun the Company of Merchant Adventurers trading into Hudson Bay. The great fur company was incorporated on the 2nd of May, 1670, under Prince Rupert as first governor.

Fifteen years afterwards the Hudson’s Bay Company possessed five forts on Hudson Bay, viz. Albany, Hayes, Rupert, Nelson, and Severn. Their trade was conducted entirely on the shores of the bay, the Indians coming down the rivers from Lake Athabasca and the country of the Christinaux beyond Lake Winnipeg.

We have seen how greatly the fur-trade was disturbed by the inroads of the bold D’Iberville during the last quarter of the seventeenth century. Though for a certain period all their forts were in the hands of the French, yet from time to time the “Merchant Adventurers” comforted themselves with a dividend of fifty per cent.

In 1749 the successful trade carried on stirred up the envy of rival merchants, and in that year the English Parliament appointed a committee to investigate such charges as that the Hudson’s Bay Company was failing to develop trade as fully as might be done. Several works were at this time written on Hudson Bay, and the Blue-book of 1749 contains the report of the committee. While the Company was, in the main, exonerated, yet no doubt the investigation led to the exploration of the interior country a few years after.

Perhaps the strongest influence leading the Hudson’s Bay Company to penetrate the interior was the The rival Traders. successful fur-trade of rival merchants. These were the North-West traders of Montreal. So early as 1766 the Scottish merchants of Montreal, Curry and Findlay, followed the route of Verandrye already described, and leaving Lake Superior, reached Lake Winnipeg, and points so far north as English River and the Saskatchewan. The Hudson’s Bay Company began to find their trade diminishing, just as the French trade with the Iroquois had been cut off at its sources by Governor Dongan and his English traders of New York.

The fur merchants from Montreal, to prevent rivalry among themselves, for there were no less than six houses in Montreal engaged in this trade, agreed to unite, and thus Messrs. Frobisher, McTavish, McGillivray, Gregory, McLeod, and others became, in the year 1787, the famous North-West Company, or, as they were familiarly called, the “Nor’-Westers.” With surprising ability and success this company carried its trade, and built forts along the route from Montreal up the Ottawa River, on the upper lakes, through the Rainy River region, and to the very Saskatchewan and Athabasca districts. In a few years after, the company pushed on across the Rocky Mountains as far as the Columbia River on the Pacific coast.

The Nor’-Westers became at this time the chief influence in trade, and in public affairs as well, in French Canada. The Executive and Legislative Councils of Lower Canada were made up of Nor’-Westers or those under their influence. Even the judges on the bench must bow before this powerful combination. About the year 1788 the company took permanent hold of trade in the Red River district.

Jealousy, however, entered into the North-West Company councils after a few years, so that in 1796 a section broke off from the old company, calling themselves The X Y Company. the “New North-West Company,” or better known as the “X Y Company.” The leaders in this new association were the Messrs. Gregory, and such afterwards well-known traders as Sir Alexander Mackenzie and the Hon. Edward Ellice. With much energy the young company built trading-posts alongside of their two older rivals, especially beside the Nor’-Wester posts, carried on a vigorous trade, and, sad to say, during this period the use of spirituous liquors as a means of trading with the Indians became more common than ever before.

After a few years the keen rivalry ceased, for in 1804 the old and new North-West Companies united. Their union was followed by the best results, for dispensing with rival posts at many points they were able to occupy localities hitherto unvisited, and to build more substantial forts.

Early in this century the North-West Company, by way of Peace River, crossed to the Pacific slope, following the course of their noted partner, Sir Alexander Mackenzie. Simon Fraser, a pioneer trader, discovered the river, which bears his name, in 1806, and built on it the first trading-house in British Columbia, Fort Fraser. David Thompson, the astronomer and surveyor of the North-West Company, crossed by the same route, discovered the British Columbian river, named from him, and chose sites for forts on the Columbia River in 1811.

It was at this time that John Jacob Astor, a leading The Astor Company. merchant of New York, began the company which bears his name, but which was also known as the “Pacific Fur Company.” In 1810, led by the prosperity of the Montreal traders, Mr. Astor engaged a number of Scottish and French Canadian clerks and trappers in Montreal, and sent them by the ship Tonquin, by way of Cape Horn and up the west coast of America, to the mouth of the Columbia River to engage in the fur-trade. Here their fort “Astoria” was built. They met many reverses; their ship was seized by the natives, and almost all on board were massacred.

The North-West Company, regarding the Astor Company as intruders, boldly opposed them, stirred up the Indians against them, occupied the headwaters of the various streams, and succeeded so well that in 1813 Mr. Astor was glad to sell out to these determined traders of Montreal. Washington Irving has given a vivid sketch of the sufferings of the Americans in his “Astoria.”

We have already hinted that it was self-preservation The H. B. Company awakened. which induced the Hudson’s Bay Company to ascend the streams from Hudson Bay to the interior. In 1774 Fort Cumberland was built on the Saskatchewan by the Hudson’s Bay Company. With true British perseverance, when once undertaken, the movement inland was carried on with great success.

Before the end of the century Fort Edmonton (1795) had been built almost in view of the Rocky Mountains, Carlton (1797) not far from the forks of the great Saskatchewan, Brandon House (1794) at the junction of the Souris and Assiniboine, a fort on Lake Winnipeg (1795), another on the Assiniboine (1796), and it is asserted that even on the Red River a Hudson’s Bay Company fort was built in 1799.

In the year 1812 a new element entered into the operations of the Hudson’s Bay Company. This Conflict of the Companies. was the colonization movement of the Earl of Selkirk. Lord Selkirk was the controlling spirit of the Hudson’s Bay Company, having bought much of their stock. His great aim was to build up a colony, but though the colony on the Red River was to be kept separate from the fur-trade, yet in the eyes of their opponents they were one. Governor Miles Macdonell of the Colony, anxious for the support of his colonists, forbade the export of pemican from Red River by the Nor’-Westers, but promised to pay for what the colony required. The proclamation to this effect was issued in 1814. New misunderstandings constantly arose between the companies. Attacks, arrests, and reprisals were the commonest events in the Red River settlement. At length came, as we have seen in 1816, the skirmish of “Seven Oaks,” near Fort Douglas, where the governor, Macdonell’s successor, was killed.

Lord Selkirk, after visiting Red River in 1817, returned to Canada. Arrests were made on account of the disturbances which had taken place in the upper country. At the instance of Lord Selkirk a number of Nor’-Westers were tried at York, Upper Canada, and an action was brought against the Earl himself in Sandwich, Upper Canada, in 1818, in which, by the influence of the Nor’-Westers, the verdict, with damages, was given against his lordship.

The affairs of the two companies were becoming desperate. The whole North-Western territories were in confusion, and trade was well-nigh ruined. Lord Selkirk died in 1820 in France; and largely through the efforts of the Hon. Edward Ellice, a reconciliation between the hostile companies took place, and a union was formed on the 26th of March, 1821, under the name of the older or Hudson’s Bay Company. The new company, combining the stability of its English and the energy of its Canadian parentage, was placed under the governorship of a man of great energy and mark, well known in later years as Sir George Simpson. Born in Ross-shire, Sir George Simpson. young Simpson had early gone to London, and become a clerk in a City house. The task was a difficult one, for which the young clerk was selected in being sent out to harmonize the companies, and his secret instructions were very flexible. A man of immense determination Simpson soon became the king of the fur-traders. With the self-possession of an emperor he was borne through the wilderness. He is said to have made the canoe journey from Montreal to the Red River forty times; and in 1842 crossing the continent, the experienced traveller visited the Sandwich Islands, the coast of Alaska, passed through Siberia, and made his way to London, having travelled round the world. On the introduction of a local government into the district of Assiniboia, or the Red River settlement, Governor Simpson became the president of the council. For his distinguished management of the Hudson’s Bay Company affairs, and for his services to the trade of Canada, Governor Simpson was knighted, and he died in 1860, a man who would have been of mark anywhere, but developed greatly by his well-nigh forty years of responsible service.

Section II.—The Life of the Traders.

There is a strange fascination about the life of the fur-trader. Placed in charge of an inland fort, surrounded and ministered to by an inferior race, and the leader of a small band of employés, his decisions must be final, and his word taken as law. As a monarch of his solitude he has great responsibility. His supply of goods must be obtained. There are places in the Yukon region where, a short time ago, nine years were needed from the time goods left London until news of their receipt came back to London again. It required wisdom and foresight to manage a post so remote.

Often also the merchandize is sold to the Indians on credit, and though the poor savages are honest, yet such a system needs watchfulness. The Indians, too, are fickle, jealous, and complaining, and much shrewdness is required in dealing with them. The food supply is in many regions a subject of serious thought. There are places in the Hudson’s Bay territories where the trader and his men never see a pound of flour in the year. On the bay thousands of geese are killed and salted for winter use, and form the almost exclusive food. On certain rivers a fish diet is the chief means of sustenance. In Arctic regions the reindeer or musk-ox is the mainstay, and bread and vegetables are at some Hudson’s Bay Company posts unknown.

Yet it is a joyful sight to the traveller in the distant wastes of the North-West to see the fur-trader’s fort, with the flag floating over it flaunting the well-known letters H.B.C. Though the forts of the fur-traders vary greatly, some being of wood, others of stone, there is a family resemblance in them all.

A well-appointed post contains a considerable enclosure. It may be from fifty to a hundred yards along each side, and is a square or often an oblong. This space is contained by a stockade, consisting of posts some twelve or fifteen feet high, driven into the earth closely side by side, and fastened by an inside breastwork. The posts or pickets are of such wood as the locality may afford. Oak is preferred if it can be had.

In the middle of one side of the enclosure is the gate, with over it very often a watch-tower or guérite as the French call it. The buildings within the stockade are arranged around the sides, having a free space in the middle. There is needed a larger building for the store or shop. Near this, or perhaps on the side opposite the gate, is seen the residence of the chief officer or bourgeois as the Nor’-Westers called him.

Several houses, the number depending on the importance of the fort, are needed for the men: these also face the open square. If of sufficient importance the fort may have a blacksmith’s forge, and in troublous times the smith have charge of the two or three rusty four-pounders that frown from prominent positions upon all assailants. Kitchens, outhouses, and stables, complete the buildings arranged in order around the open space.

In the busy season scores of Indians, squaws, and children, may be seen in groups seated on the ground in the midst of the fort, their encampment being a group of tents, bark or skin, outside the stockade.

On the site of the present city of Winnipeg there have been five forts, which may well illustrate the progress, slow though it may have been, made in the fur-trade.

About 1736, Verandrye’s post, Fort Rouge, was hurriedly built on a wooded point at the junction of the Red and Assiniboine Rivers, and on the south side of the latter. It was merely an erection of logs, and was soon deserted.

In 1806, after the union of the North-West and X Y Companies there was erected on the north side of the Assiniboine River at its “forks” with the Red River a considerable post, Fort Gibraltar. Its stockaded walls were about 200 yards in length on each side. While eight houses were arranged around the square, the front of the chief trader’s residence extended for sixty-four feet. This fort was levelled to the ground by Governor Semple in 1816.

In the year 1812 had been begun, about a mile below Fort Gibraltar, facing on Red River, Fort Douglas, bearing Lord Selkirk’s family name. Small at first, it grew to be a considerable fort. The material of Fort Gibraltar, on its destruction, and of a fort at Pembina, was floated down the river, and used in the enlargement of Fort Douglas.

About the year 1822 was built, near the former site of Fort Gibraltar, the original Fort Garry, so called from a prominent director of the Hudson’s Bay Company. The building of this fort was the result of the happy union of the North-West and Hudson’s Bay Companies. It was a strong fort, had heavy oak bastions, large and well-constructed wooden buildings, but was replaced in thirteen or fourteen years.

The Hudson’s Bay Company found it necessary to relieve Lord Selkirk’s heirs of the colony of obligations in which they were involved, and in 1835, the year in which a government was established at Red River, the later Fort Garry was built, to the west of the older fort, on the rising ground. Surrounded by walls of solid masonry ten or twelve feet high, with its four circular bastions, with loop-holes for cannon and firearms, and presenting on its prairie side its gateway of castellated masonry, Fort Garry had a formidable appearance.

The five forts of Winnipeg are now things of the past, but they are types of the advance made in exploration and trade. York Factory and Prince of Wales or Churchill Fort on Hudson Bay saw similar mutations. Lower Fort Garry, Cumberland House, Edmonton, Fort Ellice have each their tale to tell; but, being the centres of accessible or fertile regions, their glory as fur-trading posts has passed away.

Near the mouth of the Souris River the traveller up the Assiniboine, into which the Souris flows, may trace the outlines of three forts. These represent the three rival movements of which we have spoken as in existence at the beginning of this century. Brandon House, the first of these, was the fort of the Hudson’s Bay Company, and the site of every building of it may still be traced. Less distinct, but still quite visible, are the ruins of Assiniboine House and Fort à la Souris, the rival posts of the North-West and X Y Companies.

On Hudson Bay the York Factory of 1812 was the successor of several forts which had been built in its neighbourhood. The fort of this date was an enclosure 400 feet long by 300 feet wide, and contained a considerable “pile of buildings.” The master’s residence was, we are told, a house of two stories in height, badly built, heated entirely by grates, having “not an American or Swedish stove” to resist the severity of the climate. Near the water’s edge was a launch-house or canoe-store, in danger of being carried away by the ice every year, for the site of the fort is described as “marshy.” There was no garden at the fort, and the whole was enclosed by a stockade of cedar posts, some sixteen feet above the ground, but of little use for defence.

The most western of the fur-traders’ posts was that of Fort Victoria, erected so late as 1849, at the time when Vancouver’s Island was given over to the Hudson’s Bay Company. It was a square enclosure of 100 yards length on each side, was protected by cedar pickets, twenty feet high, and had octagonal bastions, on each of which six-pounder iron guns were mounted on the north-west and south-west angles. The buildings of the fort were eight in number, and of considerable magnitude.

Just as now the site of the fur-trader’s post at Fort Orange, Albany; or Cataraqui, Kingston; or Rouillé, Toronto is sought for by the curious, so Fort Garry, or Fort William, or Brandon House, or Fort Victoria is a memorial of the trade which has retreated from the more southern fur-trading districts to the banks of the Churchill, the Mackenzie, or the Yukon rivers.

And yet, that early fur-trade and its picturesque scenes should not be forgotten. Sometimes it was carried on in the ponderous York boat, of which it was one season’s work to leave Brandon House, and by way of Lake Winnipeg and the Nelson River reach York Factory, and return, laden on the way down with furs, and on the way up with bales of goods; at other times it was by way of Lachine, up the Ottawa by canoes, through Lake Superior, and thence north-westward. But by whatever route conducted, it was a powerful agent in preparing for the opening up and colonization of north-western Canada.

Washington Irving has described in “Astoria,” the picturesque and somewhat hilarious life of the fur-trader in the Nor’wester capital of Montreal. Factors, traders, and voyageurs revelled in their liberty till the advance of the season compelled the voyage to be again undertaken. They sang at Ste. Anne as they entered the Ottawa River “their parting hymn,” prayers were said to the patron saint of the voyageurs, the priest’s blessing was received, and they hied away to face the rapid, décharge, or portage of their difficult route. When Fort William, on Thunder Bay, Lake Superior, was reached, they turned over their merchandize to new relays of men.

A French-Canadian trader, Franchère, who went to the Pacific coast in the Astor Company and returned overland, has given a picture of the Fort William of the Nor’westers in 1814. This fort, named from the Hon. William McGillivray, was the rendezvous of hundreds of traders, trappers, and Indians. Whether judged by the great gathering from the wilds, the storehouses filled with valuable furs, the supplies stored away for distribution to the far-away posts, or from its being the headquarters where all the partners met once a year and decided on the plans and business of the company, the fort on the Kaministiquia should ever be remembered.

The wild traders, who brought the furs to Fort William, and carried their bales of merchandize to the interior, looked with contempt on the patient French-Canadians, who toiled up the lakes to Fort William, and sneeringly called them “pork-eaters,” still a term of reproach in the north-west. The traders north and west of Fort William rejoiced in the name “runners in the woods,” and many of them had Indian blood in their veins.

The French-Canadians and Indians blended well together in producing a lithe, hardy, and wild-spirited race. This mixed people became faithful adherents of the enterprising merchants, the hot-blooded Celts of the Scottish element in Montreal.

In the Hudson’s Bay Company trade from Hudson Bay to the interior there was far less of the French or Highland dash, but there was the steady, toilsome labour of a faithful race. For more than a century the Hudson’s Bay Company has taken its employés from the Orkney Islands. Of Scandinavian origin the Orkney labourers of the fur company could endure any hardship, and are of most peaceable and tractable disposition. Like the French-Canadians, many of them have intermarried with the Indian women. Their descendants are a quiet, ease-loving people. While the French half-breed may be compared to a wild mustang, the Orkneyman or English-speaking half-breed is the patient roadster.

Scattered throughout the whole fur-trader’s territory will be found the half-breed of French-Canadian or Orkney origin. Some beautiful lake, or sheltered bend in the river, or the vicinity of a trader’s post, has been selected by him as his home, and partly as an agriculturist or gardener, but far more of a hunter or trapper, he rears his dusky race. Sometimes, when the engagé had served his score or two of years for the company, he retired with his Indian spouse and swarthy children to float down the streams to the older settlements, to what has been called “the paradise of Red River,” and there, building his cabin on land allotted by the fur company, spend his remaining days.

Whatever may be said of its influence on the white man, the fur-trade has been a chief means in cementing the alliance between the white and red man. The half-breeds are a connecting link between the superior and the inferior race.

For many years it was the inflexible regulation of the Hudson’s Bay Company to allow no half-breed to become an officer, but the rule could not be maintained, and on account of the Hudson’s Bay Company having always assisted in the education and Christianization of the native people, many of them have risen to high places in the fur-trade, as well as in other spheres of life.

Section III.—Famous Journeys through the Fur-traders’ Land.

To Verandrye and his sons, as we have seen, belongs Verandrye, 1731-1749. the honour of discovering the Canadian north-west. They explored, in the surprisingly short time of eighteen years, several thousands of miles of the “watery way,” north-west of Lake Superior, named all the important lakes or rivers of the fertile prairie section, and built forts at the chief centres of trade.

The first adventurer who successfully explored the La France, 1738-1742. river and lake route between Lake Superior and Hudson Bay was Joseph La France, a French-Canadian half-breed, born at Michilimackinac in 1704. He was an unlicensed trader or freebooter. Having been arrested by the French Governor on Nipissing River, he escaped, fled by Verandrye’s route to Lake Winnipeg, joined the Indians in the interior, became their captain, and with them, in birch-bark canoes, floated down the Nelson River, reaching the English Hudson’s Bay Company traders at York Factory, June 29th, 1742.

It was a notable day when the Hudson’s Bay Company Hearne, 1769-1774. determined to leave the sea-coast to which they had clung for a hundred years, and penetrate the interior with exploring and trading parties. This was done under the leadership of Samuel Hearne, who has, on account of his successful journeys, been called the “Mungo Park of Canada.” Leaving Prince of Wales Fort, at the mouth of Churchill River, after two previous unsuccessful attempts, in 1771 Hearne reached the Coppermine River, and having descended it to its mouth, arrived at the Arctic Sea, and may be called its discoverer. From defective knowledge of instruments he placed the mouth of the Coppermine in 71° N.—three or four degrees of a mistake. It was Hearne, who, in 1774, conducted the expedition which built Cumberland House on the Saskatchewan.

Led on by Hearne’s heroic journey for the Hudson’s Mackenzie, 1789. Bay Company, Alexander Mackenzie, of the North-West Company, determined to seek the Arctic Sea. Pursuing the fur-trade at Fort Chippewyan, on Lake Athabasca, in 1789, he fitted out four canoes, and manning them with French-Canadian To the Pacific Coast, 1792-1793. voyageurs and Indians, left the fort in June, and descending the river which bears his name, after many dangers and trials, near the end of July reached its mouth, and looked out upon the Arctic or Polar Sea. Finding himself hampered by his want of scientific knowledge, the persevering explorer went to Britain in 1791, and, prepared by his year of study, returned to Lake Athabasca in the following year. He now ascended with a trusty party the Peace River, spent the winter trading on its banks, and in the early spring passed by way of the Peace River through the Rocky Mountains, and first of white men north of Mexico crossed the continent to the Pacific Ocean. In letters of red vermilion he inscribed on a rock on the Pacific Coast, “Alexander Mackenzie, from Canada by land, July 22nd, 1793.” For his great discoveries the explorer was honoured by his sovereign, thus becoming Sir Alexander Mackenzie, and he was long a representative Nor’wester officer.

Three most important expeditions were sent by the American Government to explore the fur-traders’ United States’ Expeditions. land, after the acquisition of Louisiana by the United States in 1803, for it must be remembered that the Louisiana of the French extended to the territory of the Hudson’s Bay Company. The first of these was that of Captains Lewis and Clark, who in 1804, leaving St. Louis, ascended the Lewis and Clark, 1804-1806. Missouri, crossed from its sources over the Rocky Mountains to the mouth of the Columbia, on the Pacific Coast, and returned by nearly the same route, reaching the mouth of the Missouri in 1806.

The second expedition was that of Lieutenant Pike, who, with a small party of United States’ Infantry, Pike, 1805. ascended the Mississippi from St. Louis, in 1805, and explored Lake Travers, or, as the Indians call it, Otter-tail. Pike found it to be the headwaters of the Red and Mississippi rivers, and on February 13th, 1806, took an observation at the same point where David Thompson, the astronomer of the North-west Company, had taken it for the British in 1798. Substantially agreeing with Thompson, the explorer thus fixed one source of the Mississippi.

The third expedition was that of Major Long, in 1823. The exploring party left Philadelphia in April, passed overland to Prairie du Chien, on the Mississippi, ascended that river, descended the Red River to Pembina, and there took an observation to ascertain the Long and Keating, 1823. 49th parallel. On August 8th an oak post was erected on the boundary, on the north side of which were the letters G.B., and on the south U.S. On this memorial the American flag was hoisted. The party not being able to follow the 49th parallel to Lake Superior, on account of swamps, descended the Red River to the Selkirk settlement, and returned by way of Lake Winnipeg to Lake Superior. Coming down the lakes and crossing the country, Major Long reached Philadelphia in October, having accomplished this remarkable journey in less than six months.

The fame of Captain, afterwards Sir John, Franklin was largely gained by two overland journeys in the fur-traders’ country. The first of these Captain John Franklin, 1819-1822. was in 1819. Accompanied by explorers, afterwards so well-known as Richardson and Back, Captain Franklin went by the ship belonging to the Hudson’s Bay Company to York Factory, and proceeding by winter journey the party had all reached Fort Chippewyan by July, 1820. In October the expedition had erected a winter station, which they called Fort Enterprise, near the headwaters of the Coppermine River. By descending the Coppermine the Polar Sea was reached in July, 1821, and Hearne’s mistake was corrected, the mouth of the Coppermine being settled as in nearly 67° 48′. The coast-line eastward along the sea was followed by more than six degrees to Cape Turnagain. After much suffering, the expedition once more reached Fort Enterprise, and found its way home to Britain in 1822.

The second journey of this great explorer was, with the same leading companions, undertaken in 1825. Having again reached Fort Chippewyan, the journey Franklin’s Second Journey, 1825-1827. northward was continued, and the winter spent at their erection, called Fort Franklin, on Great Bear Lake. The party next divided, Captain Franklin leading a portion which descended the Mackenzie to the sea and coasted westward to Return Reef, hoping to have reached Captain Cook’s Icy Cape of 1778, but failing, Dr. Richardson conducted the other party, which went to the mouth of the Mackenzie, and coasted eastward to the mouth of the Coppermine, which he ascended. By September both parties had regained Fort Franklin, where the second winter was spent. In September, 1827, the successful discoverers returning reached London.

One of Captain Franklin’s most trusted lieutenants was Mr. George Back. In 1829 Captain Ross Back, 1833-1835. had gone by sea to seek the north-west passage. For three years no tidings had come of him. Captain Back was sent overland to seek him on the Arctic coast by descending the waters from the height of land near Great Slave Lake. Arrived at Fort Chippewyan in July, 1833, the Indians and traders tried to dissuade him from making the attempt. Back yet persevered, built Fort Reliance, and wintered there, descended the river which bears his name, and which is also called Great Fish River. News reached him of the rescue of Captain Ross by a whaler, and he returned to England in 1835.

One of the most successful journeys of exploration of the wild Northland was that planned by the Hudson’s Bay Company itself in 1836, and conducted by two Hudson’s Bay Company officers, Peter Dease and Simpson, 1836-1840. Dease and Thomas Simpson. Descending the Mackenzie River to its mouth, the expedition followed the Arctic coast westward, passed Franklin’s “Return Reef,” reached Boat Extreme, and Simpson made a foot journey thence to Cape Barrow. After coming again to the mouth of the Mackenzie, that river was ascended, and from it the voyage was made to the head of Great Bear Lake, where Fort Confidence was built.

Having wintered here, in the following spring the party descended the Coppermine River, and coasting eastward along the Polar Sea came to Cape Turnagain in August, 1837. Retracing their steps, the expedition regained Fort Confidence, and wintered there. In the next year, 1838, bravely venturing to the sea-coast again, and resuming their eastward journey, the explorers reached new ground, passed Dease’s Strait, and discovered Cape Britannia. Taking two years to return, Simpson arrived at Fort Garry, and, disappointed at not receiving further instructions, departed for Britain a few days afterwards. While en route, he was killed, either by his half-breed companions or his own hand, in Minnesota, in 1840. He is buried at St. John’s, Winnipeg.

No events have so bound England to our northern land as the search for Sir John Franklin. His last voyage, in 1845, was with two ships, Search for Franklin, 1848-1859. the Erebus and Terror, and 130 men, to seek a north-west passage. With the many voyages by sea in search of the lost commander, we have here nothing to do. His old companion, Dr. Richardson, hastened in 1848 by land journey to seek him. Reaching Fort Chippewyan, the route by Great Bear Lake and the Coppermine River was followed. With his companion, Dr. Rae, the coast of the Arctic Sea was searched by Dr. Richardson without finding any traces of the lost commander.

It was in 1854 that Dr. Rae, leading an expedition along the coast of Hudson’s Bay, obtained on the west side of Melville peninsula, plate and the silver decorations of the lost captain, from the Eskimo. Dr. Rae received a portion of the reward offered by the British Government. The painful uncertainty was finally set at rest by an expedition under Captain McClintock, in 1859, finding, west of King William’s Land, a packet, stating that Sir John Franklin had died in 1847, and leaving no doubt as to the fate of the party, not one of whom had survived.

Not many years before the Hudson’s Bay territories Milton and Cheadle, 1862, 1863. passed into the hands of Canada, Viscount Milton and Dr. Cheadle, descending the River by canoes to Fort Garry, organized an overland expedition, going by Red River carts over the plains to Fort Carlton, and wintered at the post they had built near it, called “La Belle Prairie.” In spring they crossed by the Yellow Head pass through the Rocky Mountains to British Columbia, and after enduring the greatest hardships, reached the Fraser River, which they descended to New Westminster, after which they soon arrived at Victoria, Vancouver’s Island.

By journeys such as these have British courage and self-denial been made plain to the world, and the features of the vast interior made known to us.


(References: “Imperial Papers on Emigration,” London, 1847-48; “Correspondence with British Quartermaster’s Department, Archives, Ottawa;” “British America,” by Joseph Bouchette, 3 vols., London, 1832; “Autobiography of John Galt,” 2 vols., London, 1833; “Three Years in Canada,” 2 vols., by J. McTaggart, London, 1829; “Hints to Emigrants,” by William Bell, Edinburgh, 1824; “Early Settlement of Peterborough,” by Dr. Poole, 1867; “Galt and its Neighbourhood,” by James Young, M.P.)

Section I.—The Great Immigration.

Napoleon was now a prisoner in St. Helena. The defence of Canada had been successful. Britain was at peace. Social discontent is more heard in times of peace than amidst the din of war. Industries which supply the material of war are stopped, and hardships come to the unemployed. Disbanded soldiers in large numbers naturally appeal to the State for support, and are not disposed to be industrious, even should employment be found them. The Napoleonic wars had lasted for nearly twenty years, and while their continuance had blighted many a home, yet their cessation caused widespread suffering also.

In 1815 the Imperial Government must devise a remedy, and emigration was that decided on. Lord Bathurst, Secretary of State, with much zeal undertook to work-out the plan of relief. The Government was willing to give settlers a choice of land in either Upper Canada or Quebec. This was far from being a pauper emigration, however. All who were accepted by the Government must be of good character, and each head of a family was required to deposit 16l. with the Government, besides two guineas on his wife’s account. To clergymen and schoolmasters free grants of land were promised; and in the case of considerable colonies, provision was made for the support of a church and school.

To those who had complied with the conditions the Government then gave a free passage in ships to Canada, assigned lands to each family, provided tools for clearing and cultivating the soil, and dealt out rations until after the first harvest had been reaped. These were certainly liberal conditions.

The best known, and perhaps most prosperous of the different groups of colonists, was that called Perth Settlement. the “Military Settlement.” This was formed in Upper Canada in 1816, in the townships of Bathurst, Drummond, Beckwith, and Goulburn, these names being those of the British officials closely connected with the movement.

By the close of the year, 230 men and 708 discharged soldiers had been placed on their holdings, and these, with women and children, made up a population of 1890 souls. Largely Scottish, the colonists were from Perthshire, Lanark, and adjoining shires, and in consequence “Perth Settlement” gradually became the name of the military colony. Many settlers from Paisley, Scotland, driven from home by the bad state of trade in the manufactories, joined the colony. In 1820 no less than 1100 persons from Glasgow and Lanarkshire settled in the townships of Lanark and Dalhousie. A portion of the colonists were induced to settle at Grantham, Wickham, and Wendover, on the St. Francis, in the eastern townships of Lower Canada. In 1819 there were 292 houses erected in these townships. In the neighbouring settlement of Drummondville there were, in the same year, 235 souls. The whole of these settlements were under military control, continuing in charge of the British Quartermaster’s Department until 1822.

Another settlement of this period was the Highland McNab Colony. colony at the Lac des Chats, up the Ottawa, under the chief McNab. Here “the McNab” sought to maintain the former glories of his clan. High on the bold and abrupt shore of the lake stood the chieftain’s picturesque residence, Kinell Lodge. He had received the grant of a whole township, and brought out his clansmen at a considerable expense to settle it. When on his visits to little York, the capital of the province, the chieftain wore his “bonnet and feather, tartan and sporran, and besides his bright scarlet vest with its silver buttons.” The chief was always attended by his piper, and was really a bright spot amid the sombre hues of backwoods life. The efforts to maintain a feudal establishment in McNab township ended in failure, though a visitor in 1828 speaks of the characteristic hospitality of “the McNab.”

During this period Bytown was laid out, in 1826, in Bytown. the township of Nepean. The township was called from British official of that name, and the town from the well-known Colonel By, the royal engineer who constructed the Rideau Canal. The town of Hull, on the opposite bank of the Chaudière Falls, had been begun in 1806 by Philemon Wright, Esq., from Boston, who brought thither plentiful means and a colony of his countrymen. Bytown early became a chief seat of the lumber industry. Its streets, Wellington and Rideau, were on the line parallel to the river. Above Bytown, on the river, was the large estate of Captain Le Breton, called Britannia. Through its situation, being remote from the frontier, Bytown was in later years chosen as capital of Canada, and its name changed to Ottawa.

During this period a large and dependent Irish Irish immigration. element of the population found its way to Canada. A writer of the time attempts an explanation of the movement from Ireland thus: “The increase of the operative population in Great Britain and Ireland rapidly outstripped the demand for their labour; and the application of new agents in manufactories, and the more general use of machinery, increased the evil to a degree that arrested the attention of Parliament, and measures were adopted to alleviate the distress of the country by encouraging emigration.”

The benevolent British Government of 1823 provided for the removal, at a cost of 12,500l., of 580 souls from Ireland to the British American colonies. A U.E. Loyalist Commissioner, Hon. Peter Robinson, brother of the Chief Justice, conducted the movement. The settlers were provided with homes mainly in the townships of Ramsay, Huntley, Goulburn, Packenham, and Beckwith, in the region lying between the Perth colony and the Ottawa river.

The continuation of this Irish immigration led to the occupation of a most important region of Peterborough. country in the Newcastle district of Upper Canada. This took place in the year 1825. Previous to this date a few families had entered the townships north of Cobourg. A number of Cumberlandshire people had settled in Smith township (1818). First settlements had been made in North Monaghan (1818), Otonabee (1819), Asphodel (1821 or 1822), and Douro (1822). At the date mentioned there were not more than 500 souls in the whole region north of Rice Lake.

It was in May of this year that, under the guidance of Commissioner Robinson, 415 Irish families sailed in ships from Cork, and, by way of Quebec and the St. Lawrence, came to Upper Canada. A hundred acres of land was granted to each family of settlers. Roads were cut through the forest, and for each family a “shanty” was built. Rations were issued for eighteen months. To each family was given a cow, tools for farming, and a small quantity of seed for the land. An excellent mill was built for the colonists by the Government.

Of the whole party, nearly 1900 settled in the Newcastle district. From the “Imperial Papers on Emigration,” published in 1848, we learn that this colony cost the Imperial Government upwards of 43,000l., and also that the town of Peterborough was laid out in 1826. “Speculators,” we are told, “flocked to the neighbouring townships in all directions, mills were built, stores opened, and life, bustle, and spirit were evident on every side.” By this, but the beginning of a large Irish emigration to Canada, the townships named were colonized, and also Emily and Omeemee.

The beginning of by far the most important movement of the time is thus noticed by a vigorous contemporary Canada Company. writer:—“In 1825, famous for speculations, schemes, and companies in the City of London; when the bowels of the Mexican mountains received strong purgatives in order to free them of ingots of gold and silver; when the pearl-oyster of the Orient seas yawned with surprise at the appearance of diving-bells; and when golden sands, said to be brought from the shores of Africa, were spread in the courts and alleys of Lombard Street to allure the unreflecting—the wilderness of Canada was opened before the public, and, contrary to all expectation, received a considerable share of attention.” In 1826 the Canada Company was incorporated under an Imperial Act, with a capital of 1,000,000l. sterling.

The antiquarian wandering along the eastern part of King Street, Toronto, sees an old-fashioned building, with “Canada Company” on the door, which touches his heart with something of the feeling that the “South Sea office” affected Charles Lamb. The magnitude of the operations, the striking personality of its first Canadian officials, and the royal manner in which its operations were conducted, as well as the provincial hostility which rose against it, make the company memorable.

The company purchased an enormous quantity of land in Upper and Lower Canada, and a revenue of between 250,000l. and 300,000l. accrued to the Government. In the Parliamentary Library of Ottawa may be seen the original township maps, with the lots of the Canada Company coloured green on them. In these maps are represented company lands to the extent of 1,300,000 acres. The most notable portion of the Canada Company’s lands was the “Huron tract,” which contained upwards of 1,000,000 acres, not included in the before mentioned amount. For the lands in large tracts the company must open roads, build mills, and make certain expenditures, which gave a considerable patronage.

A gentleman, not more distinguished for his active administration of the affairs of the company than for his literary zeal, became the Secretary of the company, in June, 1826. This was John Galt, Esq., a native of Ayrshire, Scotland. He was a most prolific writer. His romances, “Laurie Todd,” the “Ayrshire Legatees,” “The Entail,” and “The Annals of the Parish,” are perhaps the best of his abundant efforts. We have his autobiography, a work of interest also in connection with the Canada Company. Mr. Galt was a man of too much genius to conduct very long the affairs of a large joint-stock land company. His decisions were often hasty, his projects rather visionary, and his humour variable.

Another officer of the company was the eccentric Dr. Dunlop, who meets us as a character in Professor Wilson’s “Noctes Ambrosianæ.” He was appointed by the company “warden of the woods and forests.” Dunlop surveyed a considerable portion of the company’s tract. He was assisted in this by Captain John Brant, son of old Thayendenagea, and two energetic lieutenants, Messrs. Sproat and Macdonald.

The vast Huron tract was surveyed into twenty townships. These, such as Hullett, McKillop, Logan, Ellice, Easthope (N. and S.), Downie, Fullarton, Tucker Smith, Biddulph, Usborne, Blanshard, Bosanquet, Williams, McGillivray, Stanley, Goderich, and Colborne, were named after the directors of the company or prominent officials of the Government.

The town, now the City of Guelph, was founded by Galt himself, accompanied by a number of friends, amidst great hilarity, in the year 1827. It was the centre of the Halton Block of 42,000 acres. Its plan, which was somewhat unique, was then made. Its name was given by Galt, in honour of the reigning house of England, and the epithet “Royal City,” now attaches to Guelph. A considerable commotion arose over its naming. The British Board of Directors had decided to name their new burgh after Lord Goderich. The news arrived in England that the new town had been called Guelph. Orders were immediately given to change the name. As deeds to purchasers had been issued, this could not well be done, and the secretary’s naming remained. The chief river of the Huron tract is called by the Indians, Menesetung, but on account of its difficult pronunciation, Dr. Dunlop called it, from the governor’s name, the Maitland. The eccentric warden, in 1827, laid out a new town at its mouth, calling it Goderich, and here took up his abode.

The lands of the Canada Company, being generally of good quality, were sold to the immigrants who were arriving from Britain by thousands. Their Huron tract, being the most remote and in a block, was last to be settled. In 1835, there were not more than 3000 souls upon the Huron tract. The possession of so great quantities of land by non-residents, gave rise to much complaint throughout Canada. It was said that capitalists were able to hold as wild land what was being made more valuable by the labour and self-denial of the actual settler. Political agitation has always set in, in the new world, as the result of the establishment of large land-holding companies, and a somewhat bitter sentiment remains among the people in Western Canada against the Canada Company even to-day.

Joseph Brant, as we have already seen, sold the large The Dickson Settlement. township of Dumfries to Philip Stedman. From the heirs of Stedman, the estate was purchased, in 1816, by Hon. William Dickson, a Scottish gentleman, and a member of the Legislative Council of Upper Canada, at a price of little more than one dollar an acre. The better to carry out his plans of settlement, Dickson chose as his agent a young American, named Absalom Shade.

Desiring to see the purchased tract of land, Dickson, accompanied by his manager, came up the Governor’s road from Dundas until the Grand River was reached at Paris. Turning northward into the forest, the travellers journeyed and were specially struck with the beauty and fitness for a new business centre of the spot where now stands the town of Galt. From the mill, which was soon erected, the place took the prosaic name of Shade’s Mills, until after the visit of John Galt, Esq., in 1827 when, in recognition of that gentleman’s popularity, the place was named from him. Dickson now began to encourage immigration to his estate.

Numerous articles appeared in Scotland in Chambers, Journal and the regular press. In 1820 one John Telfer, a retired Nor’wester trader, went to Scotland to induce immigration, and a large colony was obtained for the Galt settlement from Roxburgh and Selkirk shires. In 1825 this movement was still in force, and even in 1831 and succeeding years the flow to Dumfries continued. In 1831 there was devised a plan of connecting Galt, which stands on the Grand River, with Lake Erie, by navigation. Flat-bottomed boats such as are still used in the shallow streams of the western prairies were constructed. These were known as “Arks,” but their navigation was slow and difficult.

In the year after the death of Joseph Brant (1807), a block of 29,000 acres of the land of the six Fergusson Settlement. nations of Indians, on the upper part of the Grand River, was sold to Colonel Thomas Clarke. Of this tract the township of Nichol formed a part. In the year 1833 a portion of the township was purchased by Messrs. Fergusson and Webster, and the village of Fergus, named from the former, was begun. Immigration to this region continued for years after, and many farmers from Aberdeen and Mid-Lothian in Scotland, found homes here.

This part of the country has become very celebrated for agriculture, so that it has been at times called the “Lothians of Canada.” Such townships as Garafraxa, Eramosa, and Erin were occupied in a similar manner. A township, lying to the south of this tract, that of Wilmot, was settled by Mennonist Germans from Munich in Bavaria, who were under a German leader, Naffzinger.

A most interesting colony was that of disbanded The Adelaide Military Settlement. soldiers led by their retired officers, who, in 1832, settled a considerable region in the London district in Upper Canada. While the townships were being reached and roads opened out, a camp some 400 strong was formed. Officers and men were chiefly Irish of a highly intelligent class. The officers had commuted their half-pay before leaving Britain into a sum in hand, and on arriving in Canada received a grant of 400 acres each. Junior officers received 200 acres each, and the men 100 acres apiece. The townships settled were those of Adelaide, Warwick, Carradoc, and Plympton, and roads were cut by the pensioners through to Egremont. Officers and men set to work with vigour. It is related of an old colonel that he never could learn to chop, but his sons became famous woodmen.

A unique “logging-bee” is described as having taken place in which one afterwards Chief Justice of Upper Canada, another in time a county judge, the colonel aforesaid, and a young man now an episcopal rector, did their share with axe or handspike, while the actual rector of the settlement drove the oxen. As might have been expected, men possessed of the courage and hardihood thus to hew out for themselves homes in the forest, were the first to spring to arms when the standard of rebellion was raised a few years afterwards, and have many of them risen to places of influence in the country.

In the year 1832 a committee was formed in Sussex, Petworth or Sussex Colony. England, under the direction of the Earl of Egremont, to conduct a band of English emigrants to Canada. Each colonist for the sum of 5l. was conveyed to his destination in Upper Canada. During that year three ships, the Lord Melville, Eveline, and the England sailed from Portsmouth, having on board upwards of 760 emigrants. A number of these went to Adelaide, while others betook themselves to the different settlements in the western peninsula of Upper Canada.

It was a remarkable movement this overflow of population The Influx of 1829-1833. from the British Isles to Canada, though again repeated fifteen or twenty years later. Its causes are not far to seek. Political ferment in the agitations for Catholic emancipation, modification of tithes, and the Reform Bill, were at the same time the result of overpressure of population, and a means of driving many to the New World. Grievances produced the agitation, and agitation made the grievances more real. Sir Archibald Alison, writing in Blackwood in 1831, says, “the emigration from Ireland this year amounts to 18,000. No reason can be assigned why it should not be 180,000.” As a matter of fact, the immigration to Canada alone in the year 1831, reached 34,000.

In that year not only did disturbed and overburdened Ireland send her quota, but England and Wales sent abroad to Canadian shores 10,000 of their children, and Scotland 5000 more. During the four years of the great influx the colonists who arrived at Quebec from the British Isles reached the extraordinary number of 160,000.

Though the fertile soil and English-speaking race of Lower Canada Shares. Upper Canada were strong forces drawing the British immigrants thither, yet the desolate places of Lower Canada received a good proportion. In the year 1831, for example, 300 respectable families, chiefly Irish, went into the region south of Quebec City, known as the County of Megantic. One thousand persons of the newly-arrived colonists settled in Valcartier, Port Neuf, and Stoneham in the immediate neighbourhood of Quebec City. Fifteen hundred of the homeless found rest on the St. Francis River and in the Eastern townships in Lower Canada, while some 5000 settled in the neighbourhood of Montreal.

Two events cast a lurid light over the Canadian immigration The great Miramichi Fire. of these years. The first is the terrible “Miramichi fire,” which took place on the banks of that river in New Brunswick. For two days preceding the 7th of October, 1825, the air had been intensely close; there was a dead calm. Towards evening a rumbling sound was heard, then a breeze, and last a hurricane bringing flames, cinders, ashes, and hot sand, so that simultaneously several hundreds of square miles were wrapt in one blaze. The town of Newcastle was swept away almost entirely. Vessels in the river were cast ashore, and a number burnt. Hundreds of men, women, and children were overtaken in the flames and perished. The Governor-General advanced upwards of 2000l. for relief, which was cheerfully assumed by Lower Canada, Nova Scotia appropriated 750l., and military stores to the value of many thousands of pounds were sent to the miserable survivors.

The other calamitous event was the breaking out of The Plague in 1832-1834. Asiatic cholera among the immigrants seeking a home in Canada in 1832 and 1833. On the 8th of June the terrible news reached Quebec that a ship, the Carrick, from Dublin, had arrived at Grosse Isle, the quarantine station, with fifty-nine deaths from cholera, out of 133 passengers. Next day came the infection as if borne by the wind, and cases broke out in Quebec. On the 10th it had reached Montreal, and so on through the towns and villages of Upper Canada.

The plague seized Canada with peculiar severity. In Quebec city upwards of 3000 persons perished in this year, and in Montreal a proportionate number. An agitation grew out of this visitation and other causes to connect Montreal with Upper Canada, but the French Canadians opposed it. In 1834 a second attack of the cholera took place of equal virulence with that of two years before. Quebec and Montreal suffered greatly, as well as cities and towns in the Upper Province. During these two terrible visitations persons of every age and in all portions of society fell as victims of the plague.

This period we have called the “making of Canada.” The making of Canada. We have done so because it marks the era in which the various elements in the British Isles took possession of the vacant lands in Upper and Lower Canada, as they had done at an earlier period in Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island. It is true an enormous immigration, of which we shall speak, took place afterwards, in the years preceding 1850; but these later immigrants were simply distributed among the sparse settlements already formed. The U.E. Loyalists had given the force of their ideas to the rising provinces, but they were relatively few in number. In the period before us we have a filling up of the waste places, the rise of organized society, the reaching out after a fuller political life, and the foundation of a real provincial existence.

Section II.—The Family Compact and its Opponents.

The Family Compact manifestly grew out of the principles of the U.E. Loyalists. It was the union of the leaders of the loyalists with others of kindred spirit, to rule Upper Canada, heedless of the rights or wishes of its people. We have admired the patriotic, heroic, and sentimental side of U.E. loyalism; but plainly, as related to civil government, its political doctrines and practices were tyrannical.

Its prominent members belonged to the class which in the American colonies, in the persons of Governors Bernard and Hutchinson, and many others of high office and standing, had plotted to destroy the liberties of the people, and had hastened the American revolution. No Roman patrician ever looked with more contempt upon the Roman plebs as they retired to Mons Janiculum, than did the U.E. Loyalist upon the American democracy and the young republic.

That famous representative of the governing class, Sir John Wentworth, the aforetime Colonial Governor, and as we have seen for years Governor of Nova Scotia, detested such a dictum as that “Government must be by the people, with the people, and for the people,” as thoroughly as he despised Thomas Paine’s fierce attacks on the Christian religion or the doctrine as to witchcraft held by the early Puritans. Wentworth, too, was not a passive opponent of such doctrines. He would meet fire with fire; he would adopt measures, as complete to dispense with the popular will, as those of that older Wentworth who, in the time of Charles I., formed the plan with the suggestive name of “Thorough.”

Inheriting such views, having fought for their success, having made the great sacrifice of leaving home and gone into exile to maintain them, living in the immediate neighbourhood of their republican opponents, and fearing lest they should be outnumbered, or lest their children should imbibe the poison of republicanism, it is no wonder that the U.E. Loyalists desired and strongly endeavoured to maintain an oligarchy in Upper Canada. An oligarchy, such as the rule of the Family Compact, was the natural fruit of the U.E. Loyalist tree.

Nor did the circumstances of the time leave the U.E. Loyalists without excuse. The great influx of Quakers, Mennonites, and other non-combatants, was a weakness in case of hostilities with the United States. The thousands of American settlers, who, with no pronounced views in favour of British connection, had come in to enjoy the fertile lands of Canada, might create a sentiment in favour of the United States. Time and again, as in the case of Hull’s proclamation in 1812, the American Government counted on this sentiment in Canada as one favourable to them, though it is true they counted without their host.

It had been the custom in Governor Simcoe’s time to carefully examine into the principles of new settlers, and to send those of unpronounced views into the interior, and to settle the border with trusty men. About the year 1800 much alarm was created in the minds of the loyalists by this large immigration, and we have seen that in 1804 the “Alien” or “Sedition Act” was passed by the Legislature. It was dread of the popular sentiment that led to the severe treatment of Judge Thorpe and Mr. Willcocks in 1809. During the war of defence, especially in the end of 1813, when the American arms were victorious in the London district, it was found that while the people were loyal in the main, yet there were traces among the later American immigrants of favour for the United States.

On the other hand the war of 1812-1815 had brought the U.E. Loyalists and their immediate friends into closer acquaintance with one another. Cornwall, Kingston, York, and Niagara had formed new attachments. Concerted action in war opened the way to combined action in peace. Watchful leaders in the Church saw the opportunity of using the loyalist sentiment to their advantage. Thus by the years 1818 or 1820 a junto or cabal had been formed definite in its aims, and firmly combined together, known as the Family Compact, not to its best leaders seeming an embodiment of selfishness, but rather set for patriotic defence, and hallowed with the name of religion.

But while the bands of privilege were thus being drawn closely around the self-appointed rulers, there arose from the people those who remembered that they were Britons, and the inheritors of “Magna Charta” and “Habeas Corpus” rights, and who knew that in the end the people must rule. These were of no special creed or race, even some of U.E. Loyalist parentage were amongst them, and they included men who for education and respectability might well compare with the best of the oligarchy, while they far surpassed them in political knowledge and soundness of judgment.

It has been often the case that in great movements it falls to the lot of the extreme and the eccentric to hasten forward the crisis of events. It was thus in the Puritan conflict in England, in the American revolt, and in the French revolution. It was in 1817 that a Scottish adventurer, Robert Gourlay, came to Canada. Born in Ceres, in Fifeshire, a gentleman, and possessed of considerable estates, he had met misfortune, having lost his property in 1815. He was a visionary, a plotter, and somewhat skilled in the ways of demagogism. Ruined in Scotland, Gourlay had gone to Wiltshire in England, and undertaken the management of an estate. In this he had failed to satisfy the proprietor, and so determined to leave Britain, and followed in the wake of the military colonists, who at this time we have seen were coming to Canada. Gourlay was pleased with the country, and saw its suitability for settlement. He determined to establish himself as a land-agent, and no doubt in doing so, from his ardent and controversial nature, would become a troublesome and powerful opponent of the Family Compact.

In order, as he declared, the better to prepare himself for the work of encouraging immigration, the Fifeshire exile sent out to every township in Upper Canada a list of thirty-one queries asking for information. The last of these questions became celebrated in connection with after events. It was, “What, in your opinion, retards the improvement of your township in particular, or the province in general, and what would most contribute to the same?”

The Family Compact is not to be blamed for having endeavoured to counterwork the agitator in so far as they chose legal methods. The questions certainly occasioned much excitement throughout the province. In the townships of the Home district the influence of the Government was sufficient to prevent meetings of the people being convened. But generally in the other districts meetings were held, and the replies to the queries showed much dissatisfaction. Gourlay advised the people to send commissioners home to Britain to represent their grievances there, and a convention was held in York.

The heather was now on fire, and the Family Compact determined at any cost to drive Gourlay from the country. He was prosecuted for libel in 1818 in Kingston, but the jury acquitted him, and a similar arrest and acquittal took place in Brockville. In that year an Act was passed by the Legislature forbidding the holding of conventions. But it occurred to the pursuers that the “Sedition Act” of 1804 was suited to their purpose of following Gourlay. The man had been in the province for two years, and yet a member of the Assembly named Swayze, at the instigation of the Hon. Messrs. Dickson and Claus, took oath that the Fifeshire exile was a seditious person, and came within the provisions of the Act.

The doomed agitator was accordingly arrested and thrown into prison, where he remained for more than seven months before trial. In August, 1819, at Niagara, before Chief Justice Powell, his most exciting trial was witnessed. The prisoner was a picture of misery; he was emaciated, his mind was plainly giving way, and amidst the solemnity of the court the prisoner burst into loud maniacal laughter. But his persecutors were men of determined and bitter spirit. He was found guilty by a prejudiced judge and jury, and was condemned to leave the country. This the unfortunate man did; but, though the trial was conducted in the name of law, a fire was kindled that day that in twenty years had swept out of existence the system that permitted such a travesty of justice.

In the same year as Gourlay’s trial the Earl of Selkirk, through the North-West Company abetted by the Family Compact, was prosecuted in the town of Sandwich for the troubles in the North-West. Chief Justice Powell not only administered justice unfairly, but, as President of the Legislative Council, secured legislation by which he was able to condemn the cause of the chivalrous earl.

Not only did Gourlay’s persecution stir up feeling in the country, but his queries had struck the weak point in the supposed invincible armour of the Family Compact. The Executive Council was not responsible to Parliament, and yet this select body of men had power to bestow the lands of the country upon whom they pleased, paid the officials without heed to the Council or Assembly, and could actually create a permanent Church establishment, as we shall see in the time of Sir John Colborne. In the year 1836 a return was made to the Assembly showing that the Executive Council had bestowed vast tracts of land upon themselves and their favourites. So that the Family Compact was seen to exist not merely to hold power, and exercise influence in the country, but was engaged in enriching its members and their friends at the public expense. Among the leaders of the Family Compact two or three stand out as its head and front.

While, as we shall see, a crafty ecclesiastic was the Chief Justice Robinson. brain of the compact, John Beverley Robinson was its right arm. This well-known Canadian was the son of an officer of the Queen’s Rangers, who with the other loyalists had gone to New Brunswick, but had afterwards come to the western provinces. He was born at Berthier, Quebec, in 1791. As a boy he was a scholar of the afterwards famous man, Bishop Strachan. Beverley Robinson studied law in York, and was present as a lieutenant with Brock at the taking of Detroit. He was, on the recommendation of William Dummer Powell, the Chief Justice, made Attorney-General at the age of twenty-one.

In 1821 he entered the Assembly as the first member of York, and in the following year was sent to Britain to negotiate in some important affairs. During succeeding years he filled the trying position of Attorney-General, and proved himself a shrewd, capable, and unyielding advocate of Family Compact principles. He was a Bourbon of the Bourbons. Popular tumult had no terrors for him; he was incapable of learning by experience. After serving his cabal in many a doughty fight, he accepted, in 1829, the position of Chief Justice, in which, removed from the arena of conflict, he gained the character of a thoroughly wise and upright judge, though he was still a power behind the throne. He was made a baronet in 1854, and passed away full of years and honours in 1863.

There was no man during this period in Canada of Bishop Strachan. such striking personality as John Strachan. Born in Aberdeen, Scotland, in 1778, his father an Episcopalian, and his mother a Presbyterian, the afterwards first Bishop of Toronto attended King’s College in his native town, where he graduated in 1796. Engaged as teacher of the parish school in Kettle, Fifeshire, he received an offer to go to Canada from the Hon. Richard Cartwright, of Kingston, to found an academy, “afterwards to become a college under the patronage of the Government of the Province.”

When young Strachan arrived in Canada in 1799, Governor Simcoe, the patron of education had gone, and the young Scottish teacher was disheartened. A school on a private basis was, however, soon after begun in Kingston, which was transferred to Cornwall in the year 1804, when John Strachan was ordained a priest in the Church of England. His school was the nursery of the Family Compact. Such well-known loyalist and Family Compact names as Robinson, Macaulay, McLean, Boulton, Jones, Sherwood, Cartwright, Ruttan, Bethune, and the like occur on its lists.

In 1812 Dr. Strachan removed to York, where he took a prominent part in the war of defence. It is said his representations to the American officers saved York from being burnt. He also did a good work in organizing the “Loyal and Patriotic Society,” In 1815 the courageous rector was made a member of the Executive Council, and, in 1820, of the Legislative Council of Upper Canada. Unquestionably most of the movements against the democratic tendencies of the time were originated by Dr. Strachan. He was a politician of the most ardent type. He added the persistency of his Scottish nature to the uncompromising principles of loyalism.

Bravery, perseverance, astuteness, and ingenuity were the prominent features of the ecclesiastical legislator and councillor. It is easy to imagine with what gusto, in his Aberdonian dialect, the clerical politician, when it was suggested to him that the law did not permit the house to expel a refractory member, would declare, “The law! the law! never mind the law—turn him oot; turn him oot!”

In his later years the bishop quite believed he had overcome the peculiarities of his mother-tongue, and often admonished the students of the college which was so dear to him, Trinity, to avoid “awc-cent!” avoid “awc-cent!”

He was thoroughly a man of affairs. On one occasion the parishioners of one of his clergy, came complaining that their clergyman had on several occasions preached the same sermon. The shrewd old bishop asked them to repeat the text, which, none being able to do, they were advised to return and hear the discourse again.

Dr. Strachan made numerous visits to Britain, wrote extensively in the newspaper and pamphlet field, took part in all public and charitable movements, kept up fraternal relations with the oligarchy of Quebec, gave his advice on every question in the Legislative and Executive Councils, took a leading part in the Clergy Reserve controversy, and moreover managed for many years the ecclesiastical affairs of Upper Canada. He was a man of marvellous industry and unbounded energy, and well deserved to be made the first Bishop of Toronto in 1839. His aged form was well known in Toronto in quite recent years, for he died so lately as 1867.

One of the well-known names of the Family Compact Boulton. cabal was that of Boulton. The name and family are English, and the head of it in Canada was D’Arcy Boulton, who was in turn Solicitor-General, Attorney-General, and Justice of the King’s Bench. The better-known member of the family was Henry John Boulton, who was born in London in 1790, studied law in England, and came to Canada, where he commenced the practice of law in 1816. In 1829 the York lawyer became Attorney-General. It was a troublous time: it was difficult to fill the place of Beverley Robinson; but by pluck and readiness, and a somewhat vociferous style, the new Attorney-General held his place, though his abusive manner brought him into conflict with the Home Office. He was not in the first rank of the leaders of the Compact, but was a working member of it.

The Highlanders of Glengarry and their trusted Bishop Macdonell. clerical leader, Bishop Macdonell, have been noticed before. The first settlement of the loyalist Highlanders had been chiefly disbanded soldiers. The name Macdonell is of fame among those in the Queen’s Rangers, and also in the Glengarry Fencibles. Bishop Macdonell was strongly loyalist in sentiment. The British Government recognized his services after the war by approving of his appointment of bishop, and providing 600l. annual support.

It was not till 1829, when the Family Compact began to feel the pressure of its opponents, that Bishop Macdonell became a member of the Executive Council of Upper Canada. As a pensioner of the Government he had always been a strong supporter, and rendered a sort of feudal homage to the Family Compact. After the rebellion he seems to have somewhat been still a favourite of Government, for he went to Britain on an emigration mission with Dr. Thomas Rolph in 1839, where he died suddenly in 1840.

The name of Bidwell is one honoured by the present Bidwell. generation, and yet one which brings a blush to the face of every true Canadian for the severe treatment of the Bidwells by the Family Compact. They were Americans who came over to the county of Addington in 1810. Barnabas Bidwell, the father, had been a member of Congress in the United States, and was noted for his eloquence. Falling into business difficulties, in which he maintained to the last there was no moral stain upon his name, he had come to Canada.

He was the author of a part of Gourlay’s statistical work on Upper Canada, and when in 1821 the eloquent American exile was elected a member of the Canadian Assembly, the oligarchy determined on his exclusion from the House. He was assailed in the Assembly with vituperation, excluded by vote, and an Act passed that no one having held a principal office in a foreign state was eligible for election. A new election was held in the county of Addington, and, as the father had been unjustly excluded from the Assembly, his son, Marshall Spring Bidwell, a young man but twenty-one years of age, was a candidate. Once defeated, and on a second occasion elected, young Bidwell was not allowed to take his seat by the obnoxious Act of 1823, but so loud was popular clamour that the Act was repealed, when in 1824 the future leader of the opponents of the Compact was elected.

Few men in public life in Canada have for nobility of character, loftiness of aim, soundness of judgment, high legal knowledge, and commanding eloquence been more esteemed. For eleven years Marshall Bidwell remained in political life, a part of that time the dignified Speaker of the Assembly. During the stirring times of the rebellion of 1837 Sir Francis Bond Head, who always took strong ground against Bidwell, informed him that on account of suspicions against him, and yet on account of his high character, he desired him to leave the country. Bidwell should not have yielded, but fearing injustice consented, retired to the United States, and could not even be induced to take up his abode in Canada again, though offered a judgeship.

Bitterly opposed to the Canadian oligarchy were, we have said, the sons of a number of the loyalists. Perry. Most prominent and influential of these was Peter Perry, born in the U.E. Loyalist township of Ernesttown, near Kingston, in 1793. He was an intimate friend of the Bidwells, but lacked their polish and solidity. He was one of the “fighting men” of the opponents of the cabal. His fluent, impassioned diatribes against the Compact made him a favourite among the farmers of the midland and eastern districts, though his manner was homely. In 1824 Perry was elected for the united counties of Lenox and Addington. This tribune of the people did not favour the rebellion, but desired only to redress wrongs by the use of constitutional means. He entered the House a second time after a considerable absence, and died in 1851.

One of the stainless names among those of the public Baldwin. men of Canada is Robert Baldwin. The son of an Irish physician in York, he was born in 1804. His father was for a time in public life, but the son was much the more celebrated. Young Baldwin studied law, and was called to the bar in 1825. In that trying year, 1829, when the public temper was highly roused, Baldwin was returned as one of the representatives from York.

Called into the Executive Council by Sir Francis Bond Head, he was too high-minded to occupy a seat while the Governor sought others than his constitutional advisers. During the time of the outbreak the dignified position taken by Robert Baldwin, and his subsequent wisdom, made him one of the most valuable men Canada has ever known.

One of the most subtle-minded and diplomatic of the opponents of the oligarchy was Dr. John Rolph. Rolph. He was born in Gloucestershire in England in 1793, and, as we have seen, took up his abode as a physician in the Talbot settlement. In 1821, having studied law, he was called to the bar, and seems to have practised both law and medicine. He was among the new members in the popular Assembly elected in 1824, being chosen for Middlesex. Rolph took a prominent place in the House, as was to have been expected from his high scholastic attainments, finished eloquence, and smoothness of manner.

The rebellion era was a time of special trial for Rolph. There seems little doubt that while apparently against the insurgents, he secretly encouraged them. He remained until 1857 in public life, but retired from it to practise his profession of medicine. This father of reform became in time the founder of a medical college, and many hundreds of the physicians of Canada still speak of the erudite and accomplished lecturer who led them into Esculapian mysteries. The doctor remained a well-known feature of Toronto for many years, and died in 1870.

Small in stature, but large in energy, honest in purpose, Mackenzie. but hasty in temper, keen in intellect, but unsafe in counsel, a hater of wrong, but a bitter antagonist, pitying the poor or unfortunate, but not of humble disposition, a warm friend, but a dangerous enemy, was William Lyon Mackenzie. In distinct personality, perhaps, he was the only man of his time who might dispute the palm with Bishop Strachan. He was born of humble parents near Dundee, Scotland, in 1795. Possessed of a thirst for knowledge, he had, by his own exertions, on his arrival in Canada, in 1820, become a man of marked intelligence.

After certain moderately prosperous ventures in that memorable political year, 1824, he began the publication of a newspaper, The Colonial Advocate. This, after November, 1824, was issued in York, the provincial capital. Now began his work of ferreting out Canadian grievances. Many were the trials of the irrepressible Radical. In 1828 he entered Parliament, but time and again was expelled by the dominant majority in the Assembly.

He became the father of the Upper Canadian rebellion, was estranged for a time from his old friends, was an exile; but returned to spend his last days in the province, which, after all, he loved, and died in 1861. There are those who would drag to light the differences between Rolph and Mackenzie. The advocates of both will find in their respective heroes a character a long way indeed from perfection, but our counsel would be “Nil nisi bonum de mortuis.”

Section III.—The Struggle for Freedom.

(References: “Story of the Upper Canadian Rebellion,” 2 vols., by J. C. Dent, Toronto, 1885; “Story of my Life,” by Egerton Ryerson, Toronto, 1883; “History of Lower Canada,” by Robert Christie, vols. iii. and iv., Quebec, 1850; “Seventh Report of Grievance Committee,” Toronto, 1835; “Act to Reunite the Provinces of Upper and Lower Canada, &c., British Statutes,” London, 1840.)

The trial of Gourlay sent a thrill through the breasts of the people of Upper Canada. The Family Compact had chosen their ground well. Niagara had been settled by Butler’s Rangers, who had done bloody work in the war of the revolution, and what neither Brockville nor Kingston had ventured to do, Niagara permitted, viz., the absolute destruction of personal liberty. The persecution of Lord Selkirk by the Family Compact was a similar wrong. But the cabal was all powerful.

It was only in 1824 that the voice of the people spoke out loudly against the junto. In that year was elected, amidst much excitement, an Assembly, which may be called the People’s Assembly. It contained a majority against the Family Compact, and the opposition succeeded in electing the speaker. But the Government was not responsible to the Assembly. The Executive could defy the will of the Assembly, though it should be a unit. The Governor, instead of being an arbiter between contending parties, found association with the Family Compact most congenial.

The name of Governor Maitland will ever remain one little favoured in Canada. Born in Hampshire Governor Maitland. in 1777, young Peregrine Maitland entered the army as ensign in 1792. He gained distinction in the Napoleonic wars, and rose to the rank of major-general. On the retirement of Francis Gore, who had returned to Upper Canada after the war of defence in 1815, and had continued in office until 1818, Sir Peregrine came as his successor. Governor Maitland was the son-in-law of the Duke of Richmond, the Governor-General, having married, as his second wife, after eloping with her from Paris, the Lady Sarah Lennox, the duke’s daughter.

As seems to have been usually the case in our provincial struggles, the newspaper press took a chief part in the troubles. A monument to Sir Isaac Brock was being reared on Queenston Heights. In the base of the structure a copy of the Colonial Advocate had been placed, The “Colonial Advocate.” and William Lyon Mackenzie had taken part in the ceremonies of the occasion. Sir Peregrine Maitland ordered the cavity to be reopened and the Radical newspaper to be taken out, and it was done. The Advocate next attacked fiercely the action of Judge Boulton and his son, the Solicitor-General, in a case before the court—calling it the Star Chamber, and suggesting parallels with the detested names of Scroggs and Jeffries. The opposition majority in the Assembly in 1825 was thus urged on to severe criticism of the Governor and Council.

And yet the Colonial Advocate, not basking in the smile of Government patrons, was unremunerative, and its editor, Mackenzie, was in financial difficulties. At this juncture a band of the younger members of the Family Compact, in open day, on June 8th, 1826, entered the printing-office of the Advocate, tore the furniture to shreds, and threw the type into Toronto Bay. The nine culprits were brought to trial, and compelled to pay 625l. as damages to the agitator Mackenzie. Subscriptions were taken up among the official class to pay the fine, but the receipt of the amount named gave new life to the Colonial Advocate.

The Governor and Council were now roused to counterwork the agitators. Spies were employed to watch the anti-ministerialists. The weight of the Family Compact The Matthews Case. wrath fell upon Captain Matthews, an outspoken British half-pay officer, representative of Middlesex, who had thrown in his lot with the opposition. In 1825 the captain, in company with others in a hilarious mood, had attended a theatrical performance given by a band of strolling American players in York, and called upon the orchestra to render certain American airs. This was charged as the most flagrant disloyalty. The most of the party having been in an oblivious state of mind, it was difficult to ascertain the truth, but Captain Matthews was summoned by the British Government to repair to England, and though a Committee of the Assembly cleared him of disloyalty, his half-pay was stopped by the War Department.

In 1827 there arrived in Canada a querulous and somewhat The Troubles of Judge Willis. pompous English lawyer, who had been appointed to be Judge of the King’s Bench, in the expectation that an Equity Court would be established, over which he would preside. This was John Willis. He was married to Lady Mary Willis, daughter of Lord Strathmore. Judge Willis seems to have taken a dislike to Beverley Robinson, Attorney-General, and Lady Mary Willis was no admirer of Lady Maitland. It was evident that the Belgravian circles of York would soon be in a state of torrid temperature.

In a libel suit against a troublesome printer, Collins, Attorney-General Robinson was engaged in conducting the case. Judge Willis took the opportunity to administer a rebuke to the Attorney-General for neglecting to prosecute other cases which involved injury to certain friends of the Family Compact. The scene in court was most unbecoming to all parties. It was now announced in the press of the time that Judge Willis was preparing a treatise on the system of jurisprudence in Upper Canada, and the motto chosen, “meliora sperans,” was supposed to reflect upon the code then in vogue.

But the crisis came when Judge Willis professed to have discovered that, in the absence of the Chief Justice, who had gone to Britain, the sitting of the court was illegal, and he announced this to the assembled Bar, refusing at the same time to sit. The relations between the two ladies already mentioned, who both desired to be leaders of York society, had also become very unhappy. The Governor and Council decided to remove Judge Willis. This was done, and Justice Hagerman was appointed his successor. The contention of Judge Willis was shown afterwards to be wrong, and his temper and mien were far from commendable, but the opposition regarded his as a case of persecution, and this also did much to render the Family Compact unpopular in the country.

Another unfortunate occurrence soon took place. A greedy innkeeper at Niagara Falls, named Forsyth, The Forsyth Affair. in order to prevent visitors to that interesting locality from seeing the Falls without passing through his hostelry, built a high fence along the front of his property, thus shutting in the Government reserve of one chain in width along the river, and hiding the view of the Falls. Ordered by Sir Peregrine Maitland, as Commander of the Forces in 1828, to remove the barrier, he refused. A serjeant and a fatigue party soon after appeared, threw down the fence, demolished one of Forsyth’s houses, which was built on his own property, and threw the materials over the bank into the river beneath. Though Forsyth was in the wrong, yet the employment of military, and the high-handed procedure aroused strong opposition to the Governor, and very nearly led to a conflict between the British soldiers and the colonists such as had been seen in Boston.

Complaint was made to the Legislature. The Assembly summoned certain Government officials to give evidence, who, instructed by the Governor, refused to attend before the Committee of the House. The officials were arrested by the Assembly and imprisoned for several days, when the Governor prorogued the House and liberated the prisoners. Sir Peregrine had been wrong both as to the destruction of Forsyth’s property and the instructions given to the official witnesses. The other charges against the despotic governor were constantly urged. The popular excitement was great, so that the storm raised chiefly by the unworthy innkeeper resulted in the Governor’s recall by the British Government, and his being sent to Nova Scotia.

It was assuredly no bed of roses which Governor Sir John Colborne. Maitland left to his successor. A high officer, Sir John Colborne, known in his later life as Lord Seaton, was sent to replace Maitland, and to quiet the disturbed province. John Colborne was born in 1777, in Hants county, England. He had early entered the army, and had gained great distinction in the French wars, having risen to the rank of major-general. Sir John arrived in York in 1828. His predecessor had left him a troublesome heritage in the Collins case.

This was that of a Roman Catholic printer, Francis Collins, editor of a radical paper, the Canadian Freeman, which, from 1825, pursued a constant course of vituperation against the Family Compact. Its fierce attacks had, if possible, exceeded those of the Colonial Advocate. Several libel suits were brought against Collins, when he in revenge raised a charge against Solicitor-General Boulton for having killed in a duel one Ridout. This affair had happened many years before. The trial took place, but Boulton was acquitted. Collins now charged the Colonial Advocate rioters with their crime, which had not been tried. They were found guilty, and a slight fine imposed upon them by Judge Willis. The libel suits against Collins were allowed to drop.

Collins now became more ferocious than ever in his attacks. Beverley Robinson urged a charge The Collins Libel. of personal libel of himself as Attorney-General against Collins. The Family Compact judge, Sherwood, who was accused of being partial, charged severely against Collins, and the prisoner was found guilty. Heavy fines and imprisonment were visited on the libeler, and a sentiment among the people somewhat similar to that in the Gourlay case, followed the unfortunate man to prison, while contempt fell on the Attorney-General. It was at this juncture that Sir John Colborne arrived at York. The people, by public subscription, had paid Collins’ fine, and now petitioned the Governor for his release. The requests of the people, and even Collins’ respectful petition to the Governor for himself and his helpless family, fell without effect on a man who had beheld the bloody scenes of the Peninsula and Waterloo.

The Assembly, in 1829, took up the case, and made a strong appeal to Sir John in Collins’ behalf, but in vain. Though the final appeal of the Assembly was successful, the people never forgave the hard-hearted governor. In 1829 the struggle continued between the “People’s House” and the Family Compact Executive Council. Allan McNab, the son of a U.E. Loyalist, and Solicitor-General Boulton fell under the displeasure of the Assembly, on account of their having refused to give evidence before a committee of the House as to a riot in Hamilton. The Assembly acted with decision. McNab was committed to prison, and became a favourite of the Cabal; the occasion of Boulton’s reprimand by Mr. Speaker Bidwell is said to have been one of the most impressive scenes in Canadian Parliamentary life.

About this time began to appear a line of cleavage between Mackenzie and his radical followers and the more moderate men of the Bidwell and Baldwin type. Family Compact Reaction. In consequence, in the elections of 1830 the Family Compact gained ground, indeed had a majority in the Assembly. In 1831 the “Everlasting Salary Bill,” rendering the judges and Executive Council independent, as to salary, of the Assembly was passed. In this year Mackenzie, who had been elected in the new Parliament for York, notwithstanding the political slaughter of Baldwin, Rolph, and Matthews, became an object of special hatred to the majority. Thrice was the virulent editor of the Colonial Advocate expelled from the Assembly, and as often was he re-elected. William Lyon Mackenzie became the People’s Tribune, and on going to England the British authorities admitted the injustice of the action of the Assembly, as shown in a despatch of Lord Goderich in 1833. The Assembly still refused to admit the obnoxious member. Again was he elected; and followed by a great body of his constituents, he demanded admission to the House, but was still refused. Mackenzie became the most popular man in Canada, and in 1834 was chosen to be Mayor of Toronto, as York, incorporated as a city, was now called.

But the burning question of all these years was one connected with religion. Strange that the The Clergy Reserve Dispute. bitterest conflicts of the race have risen out of religious differences. We have already seen that in the discussion of the Treaty of 1763 and the Quebec Act of 1774, a religious establishment was continued to the Roman Catholic Church among its French people. In the Quebec Act a vague provision was made also for the support of a Protestant clergy. By the Constitutional Act of 1791 definiteness was given to this proviso. One-seventh of all unoccupied lands was granted for the support of a “Protestant clergy,” and power was given to erect parsonages or rectories according to the establishment of the Church of England.

Out of these short clauses grew a struggle lasting more than three decades, ending only in 1854, which might be called the Thirty Years’ Religious War of Upper Canada. Shortly after 1791 lands to the extent of nearly 2,400,000 acres in Upper Canada, and approaching a million in Lower Canada, were thus set apart for a “Protestant clergy.” In Gourlay’s agitation the first sounds of discontent were heard. Some little attention had before this been given the matter in Lower Canada. In 1819 a small body of Scottish Presbyterians in Niagara, having lost their church by fire, petitioned Governor Maitland to grant them 100l. from the Clergy Reserve Fund, or any other available fund. Lord Bathurst replied that such grants might be made to the Church of Scotland as well as the Church of England, but not to dissenters.

This question, as to the original meaning of the expression “Protestant clergy,” has been much discussed. There seems some evidence that in the Parliament of 1791 it was a compromise phrase, whose interpretation might be thrown over on posterity. Lord Grenville certainly at the time informed Viscount Sandon that the Bill “meant to provide for any clergy that was not Roman Catholic,” and yet many members of both Houses of Parliament understood it to mean for the clergy of the Church of England exclusively. One half of our difficulties arise from the compromises and ambiguities of our ancestors. The matter became one of public interest in 1823, in which year William Morris of Perth, a member of the Assembly, introduced resolutions, which were carried, claiming equality as to the Clergy Reserve Fund for the Church of Scotland with the Church of England. The Legislative Council disapproved of these resolutions, though Governor Maitland had at the time received a despatch—kept secret for the time being—from Lord Bathurst justifying this interpretation of the Act.

In this year the redoubtable Dr. Strachan petitioned the House of Lords, and forwarded an “Ecclesiastical Chart,” whose facts were indignantly denied by all the other Canadian churches. At this time arose a man who wielded a weighty pen, and as the leader of the Methodist body took a leading part in this controversy. This was Egerton Ryerson. Born in 1803, in the county of Norfolk, the son of a U.E. Loyalist officer of the New Jersey Regiment, who had first gone to New Brunswick, and came to the shore of Lake Erie in 1799, young Ryerson, at the age of twenty-three, entered the ministry of the Methodist Church.

It was in the year 1826 that Dr. Strachan preached a sermon, the third effort in the same direction as his ecclesiastical chart. Young Ryerson, at the suggestion of his brethren, prepared for the press a review extending to the length of some thirty octavo pages, and signed it “A Methodist Preacher.” This at once made the “boy preacher” famous. In that year the Assembly passed resolutions declaring that the funds from the Clergy Reserves should be used for the support of the “Christian religion generally . . . . of whatever denomination.” In this year also the Home Government granted the contention of the Assembly, so far as the Church of Scotland was concerned, and provision was thereafter made for the payment annually of 750l. to the Church of Scotland, and also to the Roman Catholic Church, from funds of the Canada Company. In 1827 the Assembly of Upper Canada asked that the Clergy Reserves be used for schools, a provincial seminary, and in aid of the erection of places of worship for all denominations of Christians. In each of the three years following, the popular agitation resulted in the Assembly making similar requests. For many years in Canada marriages could not be celebrated by the Methodist clergy, as, in addition to the clergy of the establishments, only “Lutheran and Calvinist” ministers might marry, and then only those of their own faith. In 1829 Mr. Bidwell succeeded in carrying a Bill extending this privilege to all. The power to hold church property and burying-grounds was also bestowed on this numerous body. Year after year both sections of the opposition, the more radical led by Mackenzie, the more moderate by Bidwell, had coalesced on the Clergy Reserve question.

Ryerson, who had become a political leader of influence, about the year 1834 became hostile to Mackenzie and had many followers. One chief cause of this was a letter of sympathy from Joseph Hume, the great English radical, to Mackenzie, on the occasion of his expulsion from the Assembly, in which the English politician said such proceedings must “terminate in independence and freedom from the baneful domination of the mother country.” The whole letter was published in leaded type in the Colonial Advocate. This alarmed Ryerson and the more moderate opponents of the Family Compact, and the Christian Guardian, a newspaper begun by Ryerson in 1829, now fiercely denounced Mackenzie.

This schism in the opposition gave the Family Compact an advantage, but notwithstanding, in the General Election of 1834, the Compact was defeated, and Mr. Bidwell was chosen Speaker by thirty-one to twenty-seven votes in the Assembly, the minority containing five or six Independents. The Assembly immediately appointed a “Special Committee on Grievances,” with Mackenzie as Chairman, and in April, 1835, the “Seventh Report of the Grievance Committee,” was brought in, and this is the storehouse from which, along with Gourlay’s statistical account, the chief materials for the history of the period are drawn.

This famous report called the attention of the Home Government to the lamentable state of the country, and led to Sir John Colborne’s recall in 1836, to be followed, as we shall see, by that paragon of eccentricity and blundering, Sir Francis Bond Head. Sir John Colborne’s last act was one for which he was never forgiven by the Canadian people. Taking advantage of the provision in the Act of 1791, permitting the endowment of rectories out of Clergy Reserve lands, the departing Governor determined to erect fifty-seven rectories. But forty-four of the patents for these were signed, the reason, it is said, having been that a clerk, engaged in preparing the documents, informed Mr. Bidwell, who at once made the matter known, and the enormous wrong was not completed. The time is drawing on apace when the crisis in provincial affairs must come.

As shown in a previous chapter, the conflict for free government in Lower Canada was intensified Lower Canadian Struggle. by the fact that while the Assembly was chiefly French-Canadian, in the Legislative and Executive Councils there was a British majority. The Earl of Dalhousie, who had been for some years Governor of Nova Scotia, arrived in Lower Canada in 1820. Belonging to the class of high disciplinarians, though he had shown himself a friend of education and social progress in Nova Scotia, he was yet, as has been said, a soldier rather than a statesman. The Lieutenant-Governor of Lower Canada, Mr. Burton, was popular, but the French Canadians were never reconciled to the stern commander. Lord Dalhousie was much hampered by the vacillating policy of the British ministry, and as he was a man with whom there was no finesse or intrigue, his position was often unenviable.

The Lower Canadian Assembly, year after year, passed resolutions declaring their grievances, the people sent “monster petitions;” the French Canadian press, and an English newspaper published in Montreal, the Vindicator, constantly excited the populace to discontent. The idol of the French-Canadians at this time was Mr. Speaker Papineau, of whom we shall hear more anon.

In the excited state of public feeling, Papineau had given expression to opinions about the Governor which, as proceeding from the Speaker of the Assembly, especially from one who had served as speaker in six parliaments, were considered disrespectful to the Crown. On the summoning of the new House, in 1827, though it was known that Lord Dalhousie disapproved of him, Papineau was, by a large majority, chosen Speaker of the Assembly. The Governor refused to recognize the agitator. The House persisted in its course, when the old soldier prorogued the Assembly. Lord Dalhousie also deprived a number of the militia officers of their commissions for insolence. In 1827 petitions, largely signed, were presented to the King, asking for legislative control of Lower Canadian affairs. Delegates were sent to lay their requests at the foot of the throne.

In the meantime (1828), Lord Dalhousie was transferred to the command of the forces in India. In the same year the Imperial Parliament appointed a Committee to consider the petitions from Lower Canada, as well as those from Upper Canada. The report of this “Canada Committee” is a most able document, and recommends concessions which, if they had been adopted, would probably have prevented the outbreaks in both provinces. Their recommendation that the “legislative assemblies and the executive government of Canada be put on a right footing,” was the solution of the whole difficulty. But the remedy was too late in its application. For several years a chronic case of difficulty tried the Lower Canadian Legislature. Robert Christie, chairman of the Quebec Quarter Sessions, was, in 1829, the object of the French-Canadian hatred, for having advised the dismissal of certain French-Canadian magistrates, and wrongly influenced Lord Dalhousie. On his subsequent election to the Assembly, as member for Gaspé, he was again and again expelled, to be in each case re-elected.

The Assembly, in the year 1834, spent its time chiefly in the consideration of the famous “ninety-two” resolutions, which may be spoken of as their “claim of right.” Another Committee of the Imperial Parliament, in 1834, examined Canadian grievances, but without any material profit.

New fuel was added to the flame by a statement of Sir John Colborne to the Upper Canadian Legislature, in his last message, to the effect that the Lower Canadian agitation had filled his mind with deep “regret, anxiety, and apprehension,” and had done injury to the country. The Lower Canadian Assembly repudiated these statements, and in 1836, Speaker Papineau addressed to Mr. Bidwell, Speaker of the Upper Canadian Assembly, a lengthy letter, defending their agitation, and adding certain remarks which were regarded by some as seditious. It was unfortunate that Sir John Colborne, a natural despot, should have been at this juncture appointed to Lower Canada to command the forces.

The evils of oligarchy were not unknown in the Maritime Nova Scotia and New Brunswick. Provinces. Society there was, however, in a more settled condition on account of the older settlement. The agitations in the upper provinces began to be felt in the lands by the sea, but their struggles took place a few years later, when the rebellions in the upper provinces had done their troublesome work.


(References: The “Rolph Papers,” Canadian Archives, Ottawa; “Story of the Upper Canadian Rebellion,” 2 vols., by J. C. Dent, Toronto, 1885; “Story of my Life,” by Egerton Ryerson, Toronto, 1883; “History of Lower Canada,” by Robert Christie, vols. iii. and iv., Quebec, 1850; “Seventh Report of Grievance Committee,” Toronto, 1835; “Act to Reunite the Provinces of Upper and Lower Canada, &c., British Statutes,” London, 1840.)

Section I.—Sedition in Lower Canada.

The agitation among the French-Canadians began to assume a serious aspect. Loud appeals were Lower Canadian Rebellion, 1837. made for an equality of rights with their British fellow-subjects. The Assembly, which was chiefly French-Canadian, threw off all reserve, and by all classes sentiments hostile to Britain were freely uttered from the platform and upon the streets. The cry was that the Legislative Council should be elective, and that the Assembly ought to control the provincial exchequer. The control of the revenue had been, in 1832, given over to the Assembly by the British Government to quiet the clamour. Now it was determined by the Assembly to compel further concessions by refusing to pay the judges and other executive officers.

A British Commission was appointed in 1835 to inquire into the state of Lower Canada, and the possibility that a report favourable to French-Canadian desires might be made, led the British people of Montreal, Quebec, and the English settlements in Lower Canada to organize themselves into “Constitutional Associations.” The main questions of liberty were now obscured. The leaders of the French-Canadians appealed to their following to support the cause of their down-trodden race.

On constitutional questions, such as the executive council being responsible to the Assembly, many of the English people of Lower Canada agreed with the French-Canadians, but it seemed as if the French leaders were making the matter one of British connection and British influence rather than of executive reform. In consequence, the appeals of the “Constitutional Associations” were much more moderate and statesmanlike than the wild denunciations of the authors of the “ninety-two resolutions.” And yet the success of the British party, in their contention, meant the welding the fetters of an oligarchy upon the people. It was a perplexing case for British statesmen.

On the report of the “Commission” coming before the Imperial Parliament, Lord John Russell, in 1837, moved four resolutions, reciting that the Lower Canadian Assembly had granted no supplies since 1832, that upwards of 142,000l. was due to the judges and civil servants, that the request to have the Legislative Council made elective be not granted; but that that branch of the Legislature be changed, that it might secure a greater degree of public confidence.

The so-called “patriots” were infuriated, when the news of this action reached Canada. The Vindicator declared, “Henceforth, there must be no peace in the province—no quarter for the plunderers. Agitate! Agitate! Agitate! Destroy the revenue; denounce the oppressors. Everything is lawful when the fundamental liberties are in danger. The guards die—they never surrender!” These were certainly extravagant expressions. They were the outburst of feeling after five years of agitation. The leader of the movement was, as we have said, Speaker Papineau.

Louis Joseph Papineau was born in Montreal, 1789, and was educated in the Seminary at Quebec. Papineau. At the early age of twenty he was elected for the Assembly for Kent, now Chambly. In 1812 the young parliamentarian commanded a militia corps in the war of defence. In 1817 he was elected Speaker of the Assembly, and with one short interval continued so until the rebellion. Papineau was a brilliant orator, an energetic and useful member of Assembly, a political student, though somewhat vain and aggressive, and on the whole lacking in balance of mind.

At this juncture of the Russell resolutions Papineau was prepared to go wildly into anything—even independence or annexation to the United States. Associated with the rebellious Speaker in the agitation was a man of very different qualities—this was Dr. Wolfred Nelson.

Wolfred Nelson, born in 1792, in Montreal, belonged Wolfred Nelson. to a respectable English family, and his mother was a U.E. Loyalist. Educated in Montreal, he began the practice of medicine at St. Denis, St. Hyacinthe county, in 1811. Having served with the British army in the war of defence as a surgeon, he had acquired a knowledge of military tactics. Induced to enter public affairs, he was, in 1827, able to defeat Attorney-General Stuart for the division of William Henry (Sorel). Dr. Nelson had accumulated a considerable fortune, and was the owner of a large property at St. Denis. He was a man of high scholastic attainments, of calm and ready judgment, was highly respected, and had a boundless influence over the people in the southern counties of Lower Canada.

Believing that the struggle in Lower Canada was one for liberty, and that the oligarchy in the lower province was as tyrannical and self-seeking as the Family Compact in Upper Canada, Nelson had allied himself with Papineau and the French-Canadians.

At a great indignation meeting of 1200 persons, held on the 7th of May, 1837, on the Richelieu River, near St. Denis, at which Dr. Nelson presided, strong resolutions were adopted against the course taken by Lord John Russell. The example of the Irish patriot, Daniel O’Connell, was held up for admiration, and it was agreed that all should rally around one man as their chief—and that man, Papineau.

Encomiums were passed on Papineau’s force of mind, eloquence, hatred of oppression, and love of country, and it was determined, with much enthusiasm, to give up the use of imported articles, in order that the revenue might be crippled. With much zeal the assemblage decided to raise a fund, to be known as the “Papineau tribute,” for the support of their idol. Similar meetings to that at St. Denis were being held throughout the country, when Lord Gosford, the Governor-General, becoming alarmed, issued a proclamation forbidding such gatherings, and summoning those loyal to the country to support his action. This but increased the agitation. “Anti-coercion meetings,” as they were now called, were widely held. The young French-Canadians organized themselves into societies, known as the “Sons of Liberty,” while the loyal inhabitants, by meeting and petition, threw back the rebellious challenges.

The provincial parliament assembled in August. Numbers of the French members appeared in Quebec, dressed in homespun (étoffe du pays) according to their resolution. One, M. Rodier, was an object of great remark. He was dressed in a coat of granite-coloured homespun; trousers and waistcoat of the same material, striped blue and white, straw hat and beef shoes, with home-made socks completed his attire. This determined patriot wore no shirt, having been unable to smuggle or manufacture one. Other members also thus showed their desire to “destroy the revenue.”

A most important meeting of the agitators took place at St. Charles, on the Richelieu, on the 23rd of October, including delegates from the “six confederated counties.” There were present at the meeting, it is estimated, 5000 persons. Dr. Nelson presided, and his outspoken declaration, the extravagant resolutions adopted, and the excited speeches delivered, left no longer any doubt as to the intentions of the agitators. A handsome column, surmounted with a “cap of liberty,” was erected at this time in honour of Papineau at St. Charles.

The threatening clouds of sedition now grew so heavy that the Roman Catholic Bishop, Mgr. Lartigue, a relative of Papineau, issued an earnest pastoral, imploring the people to avoid the horrors of a civil war. The agitators continually grew bolder, and began to drill at different points throughout the country. In the meantime several additional French-Canadians were placed upon the Legislative and Executive Councils, but the concession had come too late to abate the excitement.

The “Sons of Liberty” and the “Constitutionalists” met in conflict in the streets of Montreal in November of this year, and the odds were slightly in favour of the former. Proclamations forbidding the drilling of the patriots were issued. Sir John Colborne had now made his headquarters in Montreal, and in October all the British troops in Upper Canada had been brought to his aid, while the loyalists of Glengarry had tendered their services to the general.

Soon the blow fell. News came that bands of insurgents were collecting at St. Charles and St. Denis, and an expedition under Colonels Wetherall and Gore was sent against the rebels.

At St. Denis, on the 23rd of November, Dr. Nelson St. Denis. had fortified a stone distillery, three stories high, belonging to himself, had cut down the bridges, and awaited the attack of the approaching troops, of whose movements he had learned from despatches taken on Lieut. Weir, a captured officer. The attack on the improvised fort was made, but without success, Dr. Nelson showing himself a skilful tactician. After several hours’ fruitless effort, the troops retired. By their success the insurgents were encouraged.

At St. Charles was the more important centre of St. Charles. revolt. A “General” Brown was the rebel leader. The insurgents are said to have had at this point 1500 men, two 24-pounders, and a well provisioned fort. The attack was made upon the rebel position by Colonel Wetherall, and after a severe struggle resulted in the taking of the fort, the defenders losing 150 killed and 300 wounded. Brown escaped to Vermont.

The arrival at St. Denis of the news from St. Charles, caused Nelson’s followers to vanish like the mist, and the brave St. Denis leader, seeing all lost, fled towards the American boundary, but was captured in the county of Shefford. Papineau, who was at St. Denis, is said to have escaped to the United States while the fight at the fortified distillery was still going on. It is of interest to know that among Nelson’s followers at St. Denis was young George Etienne Cartier—afterwards a prominent statesman of Canada.

A most tragic occurrence took place at St. Denis. A dashing young officer, Lieut. Weir, carrying despatches for Colonel Wetherall, had lost his way and fallen into the hands of the rebels at St. Denis. For safe keeping he had been placed under the charge of three French-Canadian guards. His keepers were removing their prisoner to a distance from the scene of conflict, when the mettlesome young officer attempted to escape. Thinking themselves justified by Weir’s insubordination, the guards fell upon their prisoner, shot him with their pistols, and cut him to pieces with sabres. This cruel deed was enacted without the knowledge of the leader, Dr. Nelson, who deeply regretted the outrage. In revenge for the barbarities practised on Lieut. Weir, the infuriated loyal soldiery burnt Dr. Nelson’s extensive buildings at St. Denis.

The insurgents made unsuccessful demonstrations at St. Eustache and St. Benoit, in the district north-west of Montreal, as well as along the international boundary-line. Though an attack, led by Robert, the brother of Dr. Wolfred Nelson, was made at Odelltown from across the boundary-line in the following year, which was easily suppressed by Sir John Colborne, yet the danger to Canada was over when St. Charles had been taken. Though troops were during the winter of 1837-8 sent through the wilderness from New Brunswick to Quebec, their services were but little required. Thus ended the appeal to arms—a mad attempt at the best!

Section II.—The Rebels in Upper Canada.

Great expectations were indulged by the opposition in The Upper Canadian rising. Upper Canada, when in place of the discredited Governor Colborne, it was learned that a more liberal-minded Lieutenant-Governor was on his way to York. Their supposed “crowning mercy” was Sir Francis Bond Head, a retired army officer, and late poor-law guardian. The new appointee had a taste for book-making, and had written certain very readable books of travel. His previous experience, however, did not in any way justify his appointment as ruler of a province on the verge of rebellion. The reasons for his selection have always been a mystery, and the shortest explanation of it is that it was a Downing Street blunder.

Sir Francis boasted of having no political views, and of having had no political experience. He was a man whose shallow nature, flippant letters and despatches, and speedy subserviency to the Family Compact rendered him in the end an object of detestation in Canada. Denunciation too severe can scarcely be visited upon a man who deliberately proceeds to aggravate and irritate a disturbed community. The new Governor was surprised, as he himself tells us, to see in large letters on the walls of Toronto on his arrival, “Sir Francis Head, a tried reformer,” and before four months had elapsed those who had made the placards were possessed with still greater surprise and vexation when they looked back at what they had done.

The departing Governor, Sir John Colborne, received tokens of the favour of the adherents of the Family Compact, on his way down to Montreal from Toronto, especially in Kingston and Cornwall, the centres of oligarchic influence. A considerable following of the Glengarry people made up his train as he entered Lower Canada, and a strong British escort came from Montreal to meet him and return with him to the city.

Governor Head, shortly after his arrival, was called on to fill three vacancies in the Executive Council, one-half of the offices being already held by adherents of the Family Compact. The Governor, passing over Mr. Bidwell, for whom he from the first took a strong dislike, called to the council Messrs. Baldwin, Rolph, and Dunn. Soon finding that Chief Justice Robinson and Dr. Strachan, who were not in the Executive Council at all, were the virtual advisers of the Governor, the new councillors resented the interference and resigned in three weeks time. The new governor was no more independent than Sir John Colborne had been, and was less dignified.

Sir Francis concluded, soon after his arrival, that the oppositionists were not a party of gentlemen, and was in a short time engaged in discrediting them before the country, utterly forgetful of his position. The Assembly sought to protect itself, and adopted a formal deliverance, charging the Governor with “deviations from truth and candour.”

A general election was soon to follow, and the opposition found to their cost that the provincial electorate had much changed since the year 1830. Since that date the population of Upper Canada had nearly doubled. The new inhabitants were largely from the British isles, and were strongly monarchic in their views. While a section of the opposition desired a constitution which would be “an exact transcript” of that of Great Britain, it was well-known that some of them favoured an approximation to republican forms. Bidwell and perhaps Mackenzie were among the latter.

Governor Head threw himself heartily into the struggle in the election of 1836, and no doubt honestly Governor Head a politician. believing there was a section of the late Assembly disloyal to Britain, stirred up the new British electors, who had not a single principle in common with the Family Compact, to look upon Bidwell, Mackenzie, and their followers as untrue to British connection, pointing as he did to the disloyal letter from Papineau, which had been read by Mr. Speaker Bidwell in the Upper Canada Assembly.

But the Governor, though but “winning his spurs” as a political manipulator, showed evidence of talent in not trusting to appeals to sentiment alone. He used the stronger inducements of self-interest. It was given out that settlers, who voted with the government, would receive the patents for their lands, for which in some cases they had waited long, and these patents were openly distributed on the days of polling. The Family Compact organized the “British Constitutional Society” in Toronto the more effectually to fasten the charge of disloyalty on their opponents. “Hurrah for Sir Francis Head and British Connection” was their rallying-cry. The influence of that redoubtable politician Egerton Ryerson was likewise thrown in the same direction.

The election was a political Waterloo for the Governor’s opponents. Bidwell, Perry, Lount, and even Mackenzie were all defeated. The Family Compact had changed a minority of eleven in the late Assembly into a majority of twenty-five in the new, and now they were able to contend that constitutional harmony between Governor, Executive and Legislative Councils, and the Legislative Assembly had been completely restored.

Mackenzie was exasperated, revived his Colonial Advocate, under the name of the Constitution, and was now more fierce in his attacks than he had ever been before. Those in power, confident of their majority, heard his denunciations without attempting to repress their vilifier. Soon the Governor’s influence began to wane. Even the parliament elected through his interference, to some extent asserted its liberties as against his arbitrary control, and the whole population saw the error that had been committed in returning a legislature subject to the Family Compact.

Now was the time for wisdom and self-control on the part of the leaders of the opposition. Sad indeed was it for the country that the unwise and unpatriotic counsel of Mackenzie was that which asserted itself most strongly. No doubt the malign influence of the Lower Canadian party of sedition, led by Papineau, with whom Mackenzie and others were in constant communication, was felt in Upper Canadian affairs. The French-Canadians spoke with the utmost freedom of a resort to arms should their demands be refused.

About the end of July, 1837, an organization, known as the “Committee of Vigilance,” was formed in Upper Canada, and William Lyon Mackenzie was chosen as “Agent and Corresponding Secretary.” This society did not professedly aim at rebellion; the great majority certainly did not suspect outward violence; a few ardent spirits may from the first have intended sedition. Mackenzie was most active: he stirred up the province from end to end by incendiary addresses, and professed to have obtained thousands of names of those willing to make a hostile demonstration against the Governor, and to form a provisional government.

Bidwell would have nothing to do with violent measures; Rolph played a double part. He was in secret with Mackenzie planning mischief, and was the man selected by the plotters to be the head of the new government proposed, but he succeeded in imposing on the Governor as to his loyalty.

The Governor had but invited a rising by allowing the British troops to go to Sir John Colborne’s aid in Montreal. Everything favoured the fulfilment of Mackenzie’s schemes. The rising in Lower Canada brought on the crisis in Upper Canada, or more correctly the two movements had been concerted in order to help one another. On November 24th, less than twenty-four hours before the St. Charles defeat, Mackenzie left Rolph’s house in Toronto to rouse his followers. Next day a revolutionary appeal was printed, headed, “Proclamation by William Lyon Mackenzie, chairman pro tem. of the Provisional Government of the State of Upper Canada,” and containing such incendiary sentiments as “Rise, Canadians! Rise as one man, and the glorious object of our wishes is accomplished.” The document stated that the “patriots” had established a provisional government on Navy Island, in the Niagara River. The well-known names of Mackenzie, Gorham, Lount, and Duncombe were attached to the manifesto, and it was stated that two or three other names were, for powerful reasons, withheld from view.

Samuel Lount was appointed a commander, and a well-known resort, “Montgomery’s Tavern,” on Yonge Street, a few miles north of Toronto, was made the rebel rendezvous. The outbreak was planned for December 7th, 1737. Mackenzie, who knew the country well, and had been hither and thither for several days, returned to Montgomery’s to find that the time of the rising had been ante-dated by Dr. Rolph to the 4th of December. At that time the first detachment of insurgents arrived under Lount, eighty or ninety strong.

Blood was soon shed. One Captain Powell, a loyalist, had been taken prisoner by the rebels, but escaped from their hands by shooting his guard—a man named Anderson. A most sad event was the death of Colonel Moodie, a Family Compact favourite. He had rashly attempted, on horseback, to force the rebel line on Yonge Street. He was fired upon, and fell from his horse mortally wounded.

The insurgents numbered at length 800 or 900. Had they marched at once on Toronto, it must have fallen into their hands, for though a place of 12,000 people, the apathy was so great that none of its citizens took up arms to defend it, but were content to rely for defence upon the men of Gore district from the west. The Governor sought to gain time by negotiating with the rebels. He asked the assistance of Bidwell, who refused the commission.

At last, by the hand of Baldwin and Rolph, a flag of truce was sent, and a reply brought to the Governor with certain demands of the insurgents. The Governor refused to grant the requests made. It was in carrying back Governor Head’s unfavourable answer that Dr. Rolph showed his duplicity. Though acting as the Governor’s messenger, he took aside certain of the rebel leaders and secretly encouraged them to attack Toronto.

An advance was made to within a mile of the city, when a collision took place, and the rebels retired to Montgomery’s. Mackenzie succeeded in a sally on the western mail in capturing certain important letters. The delay in attacking Toronto made Rolph’s position very precarious, and so he hastened from Toronto, professedly to the western district, but really to seek shelter in the United States.

The time for action was allowed to slip by the aforetime courageous regulators. Colonel Allan McNab arrived in Toronto from Hamilton, with his militia, and without delay attacked the rebels remaining at Montgomery’s. After a short but severe skirmish, the militia were victors; the motley gathering of discontented farmers fled; and Mackenzie, on whose head a reward of 1000l. had been set, after a toilsome and adventurous journey, escaped to the United States by way of the Niagara frontier.

The Provisional Government was now organized on Navy Island, in the Niagara River. The patriot flag, with twin stars and the motto, “Liberty and Equality,” was hoisted, and planted in the face of Colonel McNab, who held the Canadian shore. A daring action was performed on December 29th by Captain Drew, R.N., one of McNab’s command. The insurgents had made use of a vessel, the Caroline, in carrying supplies from the American shore to Navy Island. The vessel lay moored for the night under the very guns of Fort Schlosser, indeed the shadows of the fort enveloped the Caroline. With seven boats, carrying some sixty men in all, who were armed with pistols, cutlasses, and pikes, the captain boarded the ill-fated vessel, captured her, but not being able, on account of the current, to bring her to the Canadian side, sent her flaming over the Niagara Falls. The vessel proved to be an American bottom, and so Britain was compelled to disavow the seizure, but nothing could blot out the bravery of the deed.

The ardent leader, Dr. Duncombe, succeeded in gathering some 300 men on Burford Plains, intending to pass by way of Brantford, and seize Hamilton, and thus advance the rebel cause. Colonel McNab, however, with 500 men, hastened west, and reached the village of Scotland, but the insurgent band melted away on his approach. For some time afterward, an irritation continued along the Niagara frontier, a number of characterless scoundrels seeking to keep up strife for the sake of plunder. The arch-rebel Mackenzie was at length seized by the law authorities of the State of New York, and tried at Albany, “for setting on foot a military enterprise against Upper Canada.” He was found guilty, and sentenced to one and a half years’ imprisonment, but was released in response to numerous petitions after some ten months had expired.

The utter want of tact, and even of fair dealing, shown by Sir Francis Bond Head, resulted in his recall. He was succeeded by Sir George Arthur, who had in Hobart Town been accustomed to rule the convict settlements. He was harshness itself. Lount and Matthews, two of the rebel leaders, were well regarded by all classes of the people, notwithstanding their false movement in the rebellion. Large petitions in their favour were presented to the Governor, and Lount’s wife made before Sir George a most heart-rending appeal for her husband, but all was of no avail, and they were hurried to the gallows, April 12th, 1838. On June 28th, an amnesty was granted to all suspected persons, who had not been actively engaged in the rebellion. It was not till 1843 that Rolph, Duncombe, Morrison, Gibson, Gorham, and Montgomery were pardoned, though the general amnesty was not granted until 1849. Thus in reality terminated this wretched affair, dishonouring alike to the enemies of liberty who forced it on, and reflecting only disgrace on those who conceived and so badly executed it.

Section III.—The New Constitution.

Few things so stir British statesmen as a colonial The need of Concession. rebellion. The memory of Lexington and Bunker’s Hill at once revives. At certain eras it seems to have been the only means of quickening the Downing Street conscience. One of the rising statesmen of Britain was at once despatched to Canada, with power as the benevolent young queen’s Lord Durham. High Commissioner, for Victoria had but lately ascended the throne, June 20th, 1837. This was the Earl of Durham.

John George Lambton, born in 1792, in the north of England, entered the House of Commons in 1813. He was a pronounced Liberal in his views, a champion of popular rights, and one of the leaders in carrying the Reform Bill of 1832. A political associate of Earl Grey, the tie was cemented with that great leader by the marriage of Lord Durham with a daughter of that statesman. He had served as ambassador to St. Petersburg, from 1835-37, and though of advanced political views was æsthetic in his tastes, and inclined to habits far from Spartan.

With a large retinue the new Governor-General arrived at Quebec, May 29th, 1838, amid much splendour. The constitution of Lower Canada had been suspended by the Imperial parliament on account of the rebellion. Lord Durham’s first difficulty was in dealing with the prisoners taken during the rebellion. Sixteen of the leaders had removed themselves from his jurisdiction by flight. The amnesty proclaimed only excluded eight leaders. It was in dealing with the exceptions that Lord Durham erred. Trusting to his powers as special commissioner, he broke the law by sending the eight prisoners retained, among whom was Dr. Wolfred Nelson, into exile to Bermuda. Lord Brougham and his other rivals in England denounced his action as illegal and unjustifiable. It was really unfair that Lord Durham, in the midst of such grave difficulties, should have been so severely taken to task. The contemptuous title, “Lord High Seditioner,” was hurled at him by his enemies. The high-spirited earl was led into another act of unwisdom by his annoyances, viz. of issuing a proclamation containing criticisms as to the action of the British ministry in disallowing the exile-ordinance which he had passed. And yet these blunders were but the spots on the sun of Lord Durham’s glorious achievements for Canada.

It is true Lord Durham was imperious, mettlesome, and at times obstinate; he was, moreover, sensitive and irritable, this, no doubt, arising from his delicate state of health, but no British delegate ever showed such capacity for dealing with the difficulties of colonial life, or for suggesting remedies for improvement, as Lord Durham. As has been pointed out, the period of his rule was the shortest ever served by a Governor-General, viz. six months, and yet no Governor ever did so much for Canada.

The enormous mass of information to be found in the The Great Report. folio proceedings of the House of Lords, embodying Lord Durham’s report and its elaborate appendices, is a wonderful monument of industry.

Lord Durham did not hesitate to express his opinions openly. He declared, “that the same grievances to a large extent prevail in all the provinces; while the present state of things is allowed to last, the actual inhabitants of these provinces have no security for person or property, no enjoyment of what they possess, no stimulus to industry.”

As to Lower Canada, the report speaks with remarkable clearness. Lord Durham admired the mild, well-mannered French-Canadians, but saw the political danger from their being “an utterly uneducated and singularly inert population.” “They remain,” said he, “an old and stationary society in a new and progressive world.” While clearly pointing out the wrong features of Lower Canadian oligarchy, he nevertheless declared, “that in Lower Canada the real struggle was not one of principles, but of race.”

Great Britain, he maintained, was largely responsible for this, for to preserve Canada against the United States, Britain “had cultivated Lower Canadian nationality.” The report declares that the natural state of government in “all the colonies,” those by the sea as well as those inland, “is that of collision between the executive and the representative bodies.” Such collisions show a deviation from sound constitutional principles. Lord Durham declared that “since 1688 the stability of Britain had depended on the responsibility of the government to the majority of the legislature.”

We cannot pretend to give even a sketch of this remarkable report. It is, undoubtedly, one of the greatest state documents in existence. Its grasp of principles is masterly, and not a feature of the social, religious, industrial, or political life of the people, in any of the British American provinces, escaped the keen-eyed statesman, and his able assistants, chief of whom was Mr. Charles Buller.

The various remedies for the government of the country are discussed in the report. At first Lord Durham had favoured a federal constitution, but in the end he recommended a legislative union. Far-seeing statesman that he was, he foreshadowed a union of all the provinces, though for the settlement of the pressing difficulties of Upper and Lower Canada, he recommended their immediate union, and the establishment in them of “responsible government.”

All true Canadians must regret that the founder of their liberties, for such Lord Durham was, should have been received so ungraciously by the British Government on his return to England. True, he had in his vexation over the disallowance of his exile-ordinance, sailed for Britain without leave, but to have refused his lordship a salute on landing such as was customary to returning governors, was surely a high indignity. The British people, however, on the landing of his lordship, gave him a right royal welcome.

Lord Durham’s report was so important that a Bill was founded on its recommendations, and introduced into parliament in 1839, by Lord John Russell. Before the final passage of this Bill, it was deemed wise that it should be submitted to the Colonial governing bodies. To accomplish this end a shrewd diplomatic envoy, Mr. Charles Poulett Thompson, a relative of the famous Lord Ashburton, was sent to Canada, September 13th, 1839.

The Council of Lower Canada accepted the proposed constitution, though, had the Assembly, which had been suspended during the rebellion, been in existence, the result would have been different. Even the Upper Canadian legislature needed much skilful management by Mr. Thompson in order to induce it to accept the Bill, for the Loyalists saw that they would be greatly outnumbered in United Canada. A strong appeal to their patriotism, however, at length gained their approval.

The Imperial parliament then again took up the matter, and the “Act to reunite the provinces of Upper and Lower Canada” became law, July 23rd, 1840. Under this new constitution, there was provision made The New Constitution. for a Legislative Council, whose members would be appointed for life by the Governor, while the Legislative Assembly was to consist of an equal number of members from Upper and Lower Canada. Toronto, Montreal, and Quebec were to elect two members each, the towns one member, and to the Governor was given the power of fixing the limits of the constituencies. The English language alone was permitted in the legislative records, but this provision was changed in after years. In order to make the constitution stable, it was provided that no change in the number of members of the Assembly could be made, unless by a two-thirds vote.

By the new constitution a fixed civil list, amounting to 75,000l. annually, was made, over which the Assembly had no control, but all other expenditure must be under its direction. Amounts due the clergy were not subject to the vote of the Assembly, and ecclesiastical rights were under the protection of the crown. Taxes on the people could only be levied for the benefit of the province, and with the assent of the two Houses of parliament. Provision was made for the full establishment of courts of law. To the Governor belonged the power of fixing the place of meeting of the Canadian legislature.

The longing desire of the people was that the new constitution should provide for the Executive Council being made responsible to the Assembly, and so to the people. In the new Act this was not provided for in so many words, but it was provided that the Governor should only exercise power according to instructions from her Majesty. To supplement these important provisions, upon the Act coming into force by proclamation, on the 5th of February, 1841, a despatch was forwarded by Lord John Russell to the Governor-General that “the Governor must only oppose the wishes of the Assembly when the honour of the crown or the interests of the empire are deeply concerned.”

The moderate opponents of the Family Compact were in transports of delight over the new constitution; the rebel party of Upper Canada regarded it as but a half-measure, their aforetime compatriots in Lower Canada were much dissatisfied, and sent a petition with 40,000 signatures against the new Act to Britain, while the Loyalists looked suspiciously upon it, regarding it as the beginning of a Canadian Republic. The British Ministry, through Lord Durham’s aid, had undoubtedly reached the happy mean; Mr. Thompson was raised to the peerage as Lord Sydenham for his successful management, and under his wise guidance the new constitution was launched to go on its perilous way.


(References: “Roughing it in the Bush,” by Mrs. S. Moodie, London, 1854; “Twenty-seven Years in Canada West” (Strickland), London, 1854; “The Staple Trade of Canada” (Timber), by G. H. Perry, Ottawa, 1862; “The Last Forty Years,” by J. C. Dent, 2 vols., Toronto, 1881; “History of Prince Edward Island,” by Duncan Campbell, Charlotte Town, 1875; “Reminiscences of Sir Francis Hincks,” Montreal, 1884; “Life and Speeches of the Hon. George Brown,” by the Hon. A. Mackenzie, Toronto, 1882; “Canada,” by A. Lillie, Toronto, 1855; “Canadian Economics by British Association,” Montreal, 1885; “History of Nova Scotia,” by Duncan Campbell, Montreal, 1873; “Vancouver Island and British Columbia,” by J. D. Pemberton, London, 1850; “Vancouver Island and British Columbia,” by M. McFie, London, 1865; “British Columbia,” by R. C. Mayne, London, 1862; “Hudson’s Bay Company Reports,” London, 1857; “Confederation of Canada,” by J. H. Gray, Toronto, 1872.)

Section I.—Growth of Population.

Canada, as we have seen, was from the first largely a military colony. Not only were the Carignans, The Half-Pay Officers’ Legion. and the Fraser and Montgomery Highlanders, an important element in Lower Canada, but disbanded Royalist soldiers, Hessians, Glengarry Fencibles, De Meurons, and the soldiers of many British regiments which were reduced from time to time, filled up large districts in all of the Canadian provinces. And while the rank and file thus colonized many portions of British America, there was a large element of the military officer class, which also threw in its lot with Canada.

The traveller in the Canada of a generation ago constantly met with, representatives of these decayed gentlemen in all the settlements. They were in general very poor, often very ill-suited for a new country, while their wives, compelled to labour with them, knew little of domestic economy, and especially as practised amid the scanty provision of the backwoods. But the younger generation of these families, born and bred in the new settlements, learned to make a livelihood, and their intelligence and refinement were not lost, but gave them many advantages in the new communities. Almost invariably this element, which in the whole of Canada might be numbered by thousands, sympathized with the Family Compact. This was not remarkable.

In some cases the needy officers were taken into the favoured circle, and enjoyed its sweets. The rebellion of 1837 brought this class very much to the front, and provided military employment for a time. An illustration, showing how great a boon to the poor officers the rebellion was, may be found in Mrs. Moodie’s interesting book, “Roughing it in the Bush.” In Perth, Argenteuil, Peterborough, Talbot, Adelaide, and many other settlements, British officers became an influential element in their communities. As the country grew in wealth, many of these and their descendants obtained public positions, and to-day constitute a considerable percentage of the official class in Canada.

In the train of the U.E. Loyalists, and of the respectable The reckless American Contingent. Americans of Simcoe, an important immigration, came a large body of very undesirable settlers from the United States. These were the sutlers and camp-followers of the movements, and must be carefully distinguished from many thousands of Canada’s best citizens, who were Americans. Illiterate in the extreme, immoral, untrustworthy, and scandalously lazy, they were the complete counterpart of the “poor whites” found in North Carolina and Georgia, whom the respectable negro population designate as “white trash.”

These Americans, of whom many thousands were scattered through Canada, occupied the borders of the main highways throughout the country. Almost all the wayside taverns on Dundas Street, the Governor’s Road, Talbot Street, Yonge Street, Kingston Road, and the like, fell into their hands. Too indolent to work, possessed of a certain shrewdness and smartness got by contact with the world, the position of “mine host” in a rough backwoods hostelry was very congenial to them. Profane and unscrupulous, the work of providing for their customers the vile spirits then manufactured in the country but debased them the more.

Others of this class were more shiftless still. They took up wild lands, sometimes as mere “squatters,” were regular visitors at the taverns of their compatriots, but did little work. Accustomed to the gun and rifle, the forest supplied duck, pigeon, or partridge, as well as squirrels, and occasionally a deer. Their children were ignorant, unkempt, and dressed in rags, and their homes were the abodes of squalor. It is this element that such writers as Talbot, McTaggart, Bonnycastle, and others describe as the Americans of Canada. To them the wayside tavern-keeper and his claquers seemed to be the people of the country.

Travelling through the country hastily, it was not surprising that these strangers should have been shocked by the profanity, and disgusted with the conceit of those they saw, and have concluded that the large body of the farming population belonged to this class. The American innkeeper expressed his opinions very freely, did not conceal his thorough contempt for “kings and dookes,” and did this in his nasal vernacular. This element, too, in its poverty, proved a band of parasites to the incoming population. They pursued a system of “borrowing” that was almost equivalent to levying blackmail. Mrs. Moodie has left us a dismal picture of her afflictions in this respect. “A persistent neighbour,” says Mrs. Moodie, “borrowed of me tea, sugar, candles, starch, blueing, irons, pots, bowls—in short every article in common domestic use.”

The young men of this class, in many localities, constituted a band of petty desperadoes. No fruitful plum or peach-tree, or exposed melon-plot was safe from their depredations. Valuable dogs were poisoned, cattle maimed, and even horses shot by these wanton disturbers. Night was made hideous by their “raccoon-hunts,” and “husking bees,” and “charivarees.” The religious sugar-maker, who left his caldron of half-boiled maple-sugar in the forest during Sunday to go to church, found it “sugared off” and stolen, on Monday morning, by these local outlaws.

Yet these bad elements constituted but a small part of the population. As well declare that because an “artful dodger” should make a visitor to the east of London his victim that all Londoners are thieves, or because a large portion of the frequenters of the Salt Market in Glasgow are dissipated that the Scottish people are drunkards, as that the Canadians at the time of these passing travellers were the pestilential element they describe.

The Bidwells, Burwells, Shades, and Duncombes rather, were the representatives of an American element which has been of the highest service to Canada. For the vicious and lawless class described, the advance of civilization became too strong. The church and school did their work among the young. Public sentiment became too powerful for the evil-doers to persevere in their vandalism, and this immoral American element has well-nigh disappeared from Canadian society.

The Canada Company, as already stated, were gradually obtaining settlers for their lands in the Huron The Huron tract. tract. The population in 1841 had become 5600, and nine years later had grown to 26,933. The company was fiercely attacked for the slow development of its lands. Its advocates, in the year 1850, in defending themselves, declared that in twenty-three years the “Huron tract” had made more progress than Lower Canada had done in 104 years up to 1721, when its population did not reach 25,000. The argument, we must confess, is not very convincing.

Among the first settlers in the Huron tract had been Colonel Von Egmont, the commander-in-chief, in 1837, of the rebels who followed Mackenzie. Von Egmont had been a colonel in the Imperial army, and had led a Belgian regiment at Waterloo. Soon after his settlement the officers of the Canada Company had been invited to visit his prosperous farm; and Madame Von Egmont, in the presence of the official gentlemen, cut with a sickle, and bound up herself the first sheaf in what is now the populous and fertile Huron district.

The outcry against the Canada Company on the part of the people, in the years succeeding the rebellion, The Queen’s Bush. induced the Government to open for settlement the region north and east of the Huron tract. This had been described as a great swamp, and the Canada Company itself had regarded it as valueless. Roads were opened through the new townships, and the means of access were found by way of Guelph and the Garafraxa road. Two vast counties were laid out in the new district, Bruce, on the shore of Lake Huron—a memorial of Lord Elgin’s family name—and Waterloo, which extended from the township of Wilmot even to the shores of Georgian Bay.

In 1857 the new counties of Waterloo, Wellington, and Grey were formed, the two former, with the township of Wellesley in the same region, reminding us of the Iron Duke. To the Queen’s Bush, as this district was called, in the years 1855 to 1865, the flow of population was continuous, both of British immigrants and of residents from the older counties. This formerly discredited portion of the country now contains an enormous population, the counties of Grey and Bruce alone, in the year 1881, having had upwards of 100,000 people.

From the time of the union of the Canadas and before, The Back Counties. even to the present day, there has been a steady settling-up of the “Back Counties.” This has gone on in Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Ontario, and, to some extent, in Lower Canada. The policy of the Government has been at all times to encourage this. Counties in Upper Canada, back of Kingston, Peterboro’, Toronto, and those in Lower Canada lying to the rear of Montreal and Ottawa, have thus been occupied.

For example, the county of Simcoe was set apart in 1843; St. Vincent township was at first known as Zero; the townships of Flos, Tiny, and Tay were so named from the three lap-dogs of my lady of Government House. A road from Bradford northward, and another to the west were opened in the large county of Simcoe, and by the year 1850 the population had grown to 25,000. At the same date there were upwards of a quarter of a million of acres of unoccupied crown land in Simcoe, Wellington, and Grey.

Even in the closing years of last century the negro could boast that when his foot touched Canadian Negro Settlements. soil the shackles which had been fastened upon him by the laws of the United States fell from his limbs. In consequence, the 300 negroes who had come with the U.E. Loyalists to the British provinces were followed by numbers of their race. To Nova Scotia, and to the neighbourhood of Chatham and Windsor, in the western district of Upper Canada, most of the immigrants came. In 1848 a tract of 18,000 acres in Raleigh, near Lake Erie, was, through the influence of Lord Elgin, set apart as a refugee settlement under the Elgin Association.

The Rev. William King, a Presbyterian clergyman, who had owned slaves in Louisiana, liberated them and came to Canada to begin in this district the “Buxton Settlement,” so named from Thomas Buxton, the philanthropist. Another colony of negroes was formed on the borders of Kent and Lambton counties, the founder being the Rev. Josiah Henson, the original of Mrs. Stowe’s character of “Uncle Tom.” In 1881 the negro population of Canada exceeded 21,000, of whom upwards of 7000 were in Nova Scotia, and above 12,000 in Ontario.

The increasing flood of immigration from Britain reached 125,000 souls in the five years preceding The St. Lawrence immigrants. the rebellion of 1837. In the two years of the rebellion the numbers fell to less than 3000 in first year, and to some 7000 in the second. The passage of the Union Act, in 1840, and the prospect of peace thus given, immediately restored the confidence in Canada as a settlers’ home. In the ten years from 1840 to 1850, there landed at Quebec, from the Old World, no less than 350,000 souls, of whom from one-third to a half took advantage of the Canadian route to reach the Western States. In the year 1847, which succeeded the distress by the potato famine in Britain, upwards of 98,000 immigrants landed at Quebec.

In the period from 1850 to 1867 the date of confederation, there were upwards of 450,000 persons entered by the port of Quebec. It was by this vast multitude, an army of conquerors, coming up the St. Lawrence Valley to subjugate the forest and the soil, that Huron district, Bruce, Wellington, Grey, Simcoe, and other “back counties” of Ontario were settled, as well as by the sons and daughters of the pioneers who in previous generations had endured hardships to make Upper Canada what she had become.

The forests of New Brunswick sought their share of the Old World’s overflow of population. New Brunswick. Between the years 1834 and 1840 the increase of population was above 30,000, and in the next eleven years it was 37,000. During the latter period, in 1844 and three succeeding years, there landed no less than 34,000 persons in New Brunswick, but about half of this number sought the United States. In the last of these years ninety-nine vessels arrived direct from Ireland with immigrants. These settlers were in a most destitute condition, and were the victims of the “ship fever,” which is still remembered by older colonists as but little less deadly than the cholera.

In that year, of the 17,000 who shipped for New Brunswick from Britain, 2000 died of this plague, and in the same year upwards of 5000 died on shipboard, proceeding up the St. Lawrence to Quebec. Of those sent from Ireland, many had not enough of clothing to cover their persons, and Lord Elgin’s despatch states that the fever was brought on board the ships in most cases, and did not originate on the voyage. Canadian municipalities passed resolutions, protesting against this immigration, and the different provinces adopted severe quarantine laws. In New Brunswick the chief localities receiving the new population were Richibucto, Tabishintac, Soumouche, New Bandon, and Bathurst.

A burning land question was the chief feature of Prince Edward Island. Prince Edward Island. As already mentioned, the whole island, except a small Government reservation, was given out by ballot, in 1767, to proprietors who had claims on the ground of military or other public services. As a condition of tenure the land must be settled within ten years. In 1770 there were on the island but 150 families and five proprietors. The owners were required to pay quit-rents to the Government, and the proprietary system, so alien to the spirit of New World settlement, was fixed upon the unfortunate island. Efforts were made early to collect these rents, but the influence in England of the owners, and their ability to combine to resist the enforcement of the Government’s demands, resulted in their dues being actually reduced, and in their firm consolidation, not only as a privileged class, but in what is its most odious form—an absentee oligarchy.

In 1802 the feelings of the people are said to have risen “in paroxysms of just indignation against the proprietors.” Agitation followed agitation. In 1860, in the legislature of the island, it was agreed to submit the questions between proprietors and tenants to a commission of three persons, one to be named by the legislature, another by the proprietors, and a third by her Majesty. The Hon. Joseph Howe was chosen commissioner for the tenantry. During this same year the estates of the Earl of Selkirk, consisting of upwards of 62,000 acres, were purchased by the Prince Edward Island Government at a little above 2s. an acre. In 1861 the Land Commissioners, after holding a Court, taking evidence, and examining the condition of the island, recommended a recognition of the claims of the proprietors, not being able to advise the escheatment of any of the original grants on the ground of nonperformance of conditions of settlement. To extinguish the proprietors’ claim it was recommended that the Imperial parliament guarantee a loan of 100,000l. for the purpose. The Commissioners, on giving in their suggestions, declared their belief that if relief were obtained for the island, “Prince Edward Island would yet become the Barbadoes of the St. Lawrence.”

At this date the population of the island was found to be 80,856. The Imperial parliament refused to permit the Act of the Prince Edward Island legislature, embodying the Commissioners’ report, to become law. Negotiation with the proprietors was now the only hope of a settlement. A delegation, in 1863, went to Britain from Prince Edward Island. It is interesting to know that one of the chief proprietors was Sir Samuel Cunard, of the celebrated steamship line. The matter was not settled until, by the entrance of Prince Edward Island, into Confederation in 1873, 800,000 dollars were set apart by the Dominion for the extinguishment of the owners’ claims, and a Court was constituted in 1875 which estimated the amounts due, and thus this troublesome question was removed, after having been a subject of contention for a whole century.

At Fort Garry, the centre of the Red River, or Selkirk Settlement, on the 12th of February, 1835, a Red River Settlement. Civil Government was erected and a Court established. Assiniboia was the name of the newly-organized district, and Sir George Simpson became President of the Council, which consisted of fifteen members selected from the leading men of the Selkirk settlers and English and French half-breeds making up the settlement. At this date the population had reached about 5000, in 1865 it was estimated at 6500, and, on the erection of Manitoba as a province by the Dominion in 1870, the population was found to be about 2000 whites, 5000 English-speaking, and 5000 French half-breeds. Of the population, which arrived in the country between the years 1817 and 1821, several hundreds were Lord Selkirk’s disbanded De Meuron soldiers, or Swiss immigrants, who had come out by way of Hudson Bay. Almost all of these deserted the country about 1827.

The agitation arising out of the Oregon question, and the loud boasting of the people of the United States, resulted in the force of 500 British regulars, chiefly of the 6th Royals, being sent to Fort Garry in 1846. Two years after, on the departure of the troops, a body of seventy pensioners was sent to the country, to whom were given small holdings in the neighbourhood of Fort Garry. A serious outbreak took place at Fort Garry in 1849, arising from the attempt of the Hudson’s Bay Company to enforce their rights of monopoly in the fur-trade.

Vancouver Island was in 1849 granted to the Hudson’s Bay Company, and Mr. Richard Blanshard British Columbia and Vancouver Island. being sent out as Governor remained for two years. There were not more than thirty settlers on the island, other than Hudson’s Bay Company employees, when Governor Blanshard, in a dispirited state of mind, left the island. The well-known officer of the fur company, afterwards Sir James Douglas, succeeded to the governorship. The Hudson’s Bay Company was expected to undertake the colonization of the island, and provision was made for the establishment of a Legislative Council and Assembly, having power to levy taxes.

The trading licence on the Pacific mainland, which had some years before been given to the Hudson’s Bay Company, was in 1858 revoked, and the province of British Columbia established. In the succeeding year the grant of Vancouver Island, which had been made ten years before to the fur-traders, was recalled, and the Pacific island became a crown colony, with Victoria as its capital, as New Westminster was the capital of the mainland colony of British Columbia. By Imperial Act, in 1866, Vancouver Island and British Columbia were joined into one province, under the name of the latter, and remained a united crown colony until their entrance into Confederation in the year 1871.

Section II.—The Stormy Sea of Politics.

Lord Sydenham was set to work-out the new constitution Responsible Government. which was the result of Lord Durham’s report. He was a man of delicate health, great devotion to business, and lived in constant fear lest his plans of government should fail. The first election after the union of the Canadas had resulted in a most heterogeneous parliament. There were only seven members of the whole eighty-four who had belonged to the now discredited Family Compact, but the Radicals among the Upper Canadians and the rebellious Lower Canadians were uncertain quantities in the new House of Assembly. The Governor chose his Executive Council from those of different shades of opinion.

Robert Baldwin became the leading figure in Upper Canadian politics. His moderation but made his tenacious hold of the principle of responsible government the more admirable. Unwilling to enter the Executive Council with any of the former absolutists, he accepted office for a time, in order to satisfy the new Governor, along with Mr., afterwards Chief Justice, Draper, but soon resigned. On the opening of the House, Draper was severely pressed as to whether he was an adherent of the new constitution, and would insist on “responsible government.” Of an acute mind, the leading executive councillor made fine distinctions, but was supposed to have accepted the popular principle. The House, which had been summoned by Lord Sydenham to meet at Kingston on the 14th of June, 1841, adopted resolutions declaring for the new principles, but less explicit than Baldwin desired. The Governor became much enfeebled in health; his anxieties consumed him; by a sad accident he was thrown from his horse while riding, and his reduced frame succumbed on the 19th of September, 1841. Lord Sydenham was a capable, fair-minded, and useful Governor.

The next Governor-General was Sir Charles Bagot, who only survived a year, dying from a painful disease in the year 1843.

Earl Stanley, the Colonial Minister, was regarded as hostile to the new constitution, and it was no surprise when, in the year of Governor Bagot’s death, his successor was appointed from the reactionary school of politics. Lord Metcalfe. Lord Stanley’s protégé was Charles Metcalfe. Charles Theophilus Metcalfe was born on the 30th of January, 1785, at Calcutta. He was the son of an army officer, who was in the East India Company’s service. Educated at Eton he had returned to India in his sixteenth year, had been employed in the East Indies in important Government offices, and had then come to Jamaica as Governor of that island. Having ruled over inferior races, Governor Metcalfe was despotic in his tendencies, and unsuited for Canada at this juncture. He jeered at “responsible government,” and declared his position no better than “an Indian Governor, compelled to rule by means of a Mahommedan Ministry and a Mahommedan parliament.”

Indeed it was the usual rôle of the opponents of liberty to sneer at popular government. One of the Family Compact wits described it as a “trap set by rogues to catch fools,” and Sir Francis Bond Head, who had said about himself, “I was no more connected with human politics than the horses that were drawing me,” gloried in the contrary principle, “that the Executive Council is not responsible to the people.” Governor Metcalfe was defended in his assumptions by Egerton Ryerson, who seems to have developed into a more adroit politician than the great clerical statesman Strachan.

The crisis soon came. Robert Baldwin maintained that the acts of the Governor must be in harmony with the advice of his Executive Council. The Governor took opposite ground, and on the 23rd of November, 1843, made an appointment to office without the advice of his Council. Popular indignation rose strongly against the valorous autocrat, who, notwithstanding his intense suffering from a cancer on his face, was willing to try conclusions with that hydra-headed opponent of tyrants—the people. At this studied insult the Ministers resigned, and it was with great difficulty that the Governor obtained a new Executive Council.

Amidst much excitement parliament met in 1844 in Montreal. At the general elections the Canadian Ministry had been but barely sustained. The British Ministry looked with approval on the action Governor Metcalfe had taken, and rewarded the plucky absolutist by raising him to the peerage as Baron Metcalfe of Fern Hill. Finding that he had fallen in the estimation of the people, Lord Metcalfe resigned and retired to England, where he died soon after. Of a kind and benevolent disposition, Lord Metcalfe was not without his Canadian admirers, but the attempt to interfere needlessly with a constitution which had been obtained by the exile of a number of leading Canadians and the blood of others, stirred up the strong feeling of the best elements of Canadian society against this propounder of absolutist theories.

The struggle for responsible government in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia was virtually one with New Brunswick and Nova Scotia. that in Canada. In a despatch from Lord Glenelg, the Colonial Secretary in 1838, to Sir Colin Campbell, the Governor of Nova Scotia, it had been plainly set forth that no judge could hold office in the Colonial Parliament, and also that the power must be allowed each Assembly to control the provincial revenue. The Governor chose to be members of his Executive and Legislative Councils only those belonging to the oligarchy, which in Nova Scotia as well as in Upper Canada was known by the name “Family Compact.” The Assembly remonstrated with the Governor, who stubbornly refused to be advised, and notwithstanding Lord Glenelg’s instructions, pursued his own course. But the cause of liberty had able advocates in Nova Scotia. Such names as Uniacke—Young—and especially Howe, stand out among her defenders.

Joseph Howe, born in Halifax, December, 1804, was the Howe. son of a U.E. Loyalist. Compelled to seek his own way in life, he, in 1817, became a printer’s apprentice, and had in ten years become the publisher of a vigorous newspaper—the Nova Scotian. In the year 1835 this journal made a fierce attack on the Halifax magistracy, charging that body with dishonest official conduct. An accusation of libel was brought against the outspoken printer. The case was so clearly against him that no lawyer would undertake his defence. Thrust into the breach, Howe defended his own cause; his address to the jury occupied more than six hours, and was at once a model of forensic and popular eloquence. The jury brought in a verdict of “Not Guilty.”

In 1836, Howe was elected to the Assembly. In the Maritime Provinces, it was not till after the adoption of Lord Durham’s report that the battle for free government was really fought. New Brunswick had always been strongly loyalist. Sir John Harvey, the Governor of New Brunswick, had, on the receipt of Lord John Russell’s despatch of the 16th of October, 1839, regarded it so highly as “a new and improved constitution,” that he proceeded to introduce its principles into the government of his province. Strange to say, the New Brunswick Assembly, by a small majority, refused to accept the principle, not valuing the freedom offered it.

In Nova Scotia, however, the old soldier named, who held the reins of power, on the other hand suppressed the despatch, and made no allusion to its having been received. In 1840, in the Nova Scotian Assembly, Howe introduced four resolutions asserting the doctrine of responsible government, and declaring want of confidence in the existing Executive Council. The resolutions were adopted by a vote of thirty to twelve.

Representations were thus made to Sir Colin, but he declared himself satisfied with his advisers. The obstinacy of the Governor drew forth an address by the Assembly, calling attention to Lord Russell’s despatch. The Governor informed the Assembly that his interpretation of the despatch differed from theirs. The Assembly then reluctantly, but firmly, requested the recall of the Governor, which took place in 1840, and Viscount Falkland came in his stead. Fierce personal contests next took place between Howe and the new Governor; but, through much heat and conflict, the battle of free government was won, and even in New Brunswick the popular cause became triumphant.

The sad rebellions of Upper and Lower Canada left a heritage of discord in the losses which had Rebellion Losses Bill. been occasioned by the outbreak. The undertaking to meet, on the part of the Government, the losses of loyalists had originated in this party, when it gained under Lord Metcalfe’s rule a small majority in 1844. Among those who had been made prominent by service to his party and zeal in repressing the rebellion of 1837, no one stood out more markedly than the Speaker of the new house, the afterwards well-known Sir Allan McNab.

Allan McNab, born at Niagara in February, 1798, was McNab. the son a U.E. Loyalist lieutenant of the famous Queen’s Rangers. His grandfather had been a captain in the 42nd or Black Watch Highlanders. McNab grew to manhood in York, the Upper Canadian capital, saw as a boy the sacking of the town during the war of defence, and, even so young, joined the small Canadian army. Suffering the ills of poverty, he at length began the practice of law in Hamilton, Upper Canada. His alleged persecution, already referred to, was the making of young McNab; for, on his being elected for Wentworth to the Assembly, the Family Compact found in him a trusty friend.

For his persevering and brave service during the rebellion, McNab was made a baronet, and his residence in Hamilton, called Dundurn from his grandfather’s small estate in Scotland, was well known. Lavish in his expenditure, the baronet was always impecunious.

He was a man of action and decision, and after the union became a striking personality in Canadian affairs. It is related that on one occasion he was called upon by Chief McNab, of whom we have spoken, from the Ottawa. The chieftain, claiming his right, sent in his card as “The McNab.” The haughty baronet wrote on the reverse of the card “The Other McNab,” and returned it to his visitor. Sir Allan continued many years in Canadian politics, and passed away in 1862, when an unseemly strife was created by the Roman Catholic bishop claiming his remains as those of a convert to Rome.

The return, as we have said, of the loyalist party to power was the signal for the demand for compensation for the losses incurred eight years before. The new Ministry, under the leadership of Mr. Draper, in 1845, carried a measure in the house to devote the tavern and other licences toward the payment of the loyalist claims in Upper Canada, amounting to 40,000l. Sufferers by the rebellion in Lower Canada now claimed consideration. The Ministry could not evade the demand, and appointed Commissioners to estimate the losses in Lower Canada, but clothed them with limited powers. Upwards of 240,000l. of claims were reported, but with a comment of the Commissioners that in their opinion 100,000l. would meet the real losses. Mr. Draper now agreed to repay the losses of “certain loyal inhabitants of the lower province,” and parliament sanctioned the issue of some 10,000l. in debentures, to be met from the “Marriage Licence Fund.” This small concession was regarded by the Lower Canadians as mere solemn trifling.

The Draper Ministry was in 1848 tottering to its fall. The constant cry of the loyalists that the rebellion losses fund would be administered in Lower Canada as an amount for rewarding rebels alienated the French-Canadians. Into the heat and turmoil of party strife had been thrown, in the year before, a Governor, whose memory is still fragrant in Canada, as having been, perhaps, the best administrator ever in Canada. This was Lord Elgin.

James Bruce, Earl of Elgin, was born in London the 20th of July, 1811. He was son of the celebrated Lord Elgin. Earl, who was an ambassador to Constantinople, and who removed from Athens the valuable marbles which still bear his name in the British Museum, and have given so great an impulse to English art. Educated at Eton and Oxford, young Bruce gained the highest University honours, and was appointed Governor of Jamaica in 1842. Four years after, on leaving Jamaica, he was married to Louisa, daughter of Canada’s benefactor, the Earl of Durham, and was thus closely bound up in opinion and interest with that distinguished statesman. Lord Elgin, in 1847, went as Governor-General to Canada, possessed, as he himself tells us, with the high aim of working-out successfully the scheme of government which the genius of his father-in-law had propounded, and which Lord Metcalfe had sought to destroy.

The Governor’s Ministry had been defeated several times in the session of 1847, and at the general election in the following year suffered a crushing defeat. The leadership of the French had been transferred from the aforetime rebel Papineau, who was now in parliament, again to the Hon. L. H. Lafontaine.

The Lafontaine-Baldwin ministry was formed, and the full development of ministerial responsibility was now the acknowledged principle. One of the earliest measures to be introduced was that providing for the payment of the rebellion losses in Lower Canada. The loyalist opposition now raised the cry again that the object of this bill was to compensate those who had actually taken part in the rebellion. The Ministry denied having any such intention. The fury of the opposition knew no bounds: “No pay to rebels” became their watchword; and indignation meetings stirred up the passions of the people.

At this juncture occurred one of the most disgraceful episodes ever known in Canadian politics. The oppositionists, who had so rung the changes on the cry of loyalty, actually signed a manifesto declaring their readiness for annexation with the United States. It was the cry of loyalty that was debased to bring to death the purest one the world ever saw, but the annexation fiasco of 1849 serves to show how meaningless the continual harping on the string of loyalty may be. We pass over the names, some of them since prominent, without mention, of those who signed the disloyal document, for their act brings a blush to the face of every true Canadian.

Notwithstanding the most determined opposition, the “losses bill” passed by a considerable majority. The loyalist party in Toronto attacked the houses of prominent supporters of the measure. Lord Elgin proceeded to the house which is now St. Ann’s Market, Montreal, and assented to the objectionable act. His carriage was beset by ruffians, though protected by cavalry. In the evening, amidst the wild excitement of the “canaille,” the parliament-house was sacked; a rioter seated himself in the speaker’s chair and cried out, “I dissolve this house;” and, to end all, the buildings were set on fire and burned to the ground, Sir Allan McNab, the Speaker, with difficulty saving the mace, and a valuable picture of her Majesty.

Violence was shown also towards the leading members of the Ministry, and a disgraceful attack was made upon his Excellency on his entering the city on his public duties. There seemed a repetition of the excesses of a Jacobin mob in Paris, but one is grieved to state that the rioters were British. Montreal was punished by the immediate removal of the capital to Toronto for two years, and after that for four years to Quebec, and its claim to be made the capital of Canada was never again received with favour.

The infamous act of Sir John Colborne, in 1835, in establishing the rectories was one of the most The Clergy Reserves again. irritating of the wrongs which incited the radicals of that time to rebellion, for it was entirely out of harmony with a despatch of Lord Ripon, in 1832, which had promised that no action would be taken in the matter. Immediately after the rebellion the question of the Clergy Reserves rose again. Lord Sydenham was exceedingly desirous of having this difficulty settled before the union of the provinces in 1841. His reasons were convincing. The introduction of a large French element into the new parliament, which had no interest in the matter, was a sufficient ground for haste.

Accordingly, in 1839, Lieutenant-Governor Arthur, of Upper Canada, was successful in having a bill passed re-vesting the Clergy Reserves in the crown, and transferring the power of appropriating the funds from their sale “to the Imperial Parliament for religious purposes.” The Act was, however, disallowed by the Imperial authorities. But again, in 1840, the Governor-General sent a message to the Assembly of Upper Canada, proposing a new measure for settling this vexed question. This was to devote the proceeds of the clergy lands, one-half to the churches of England and Scotland and the other half among religious bodies desirous of sharing it.

It was at this juncture that Egerton Ryerson failed to stand firm to the principle of secularization he had before advocated by accepting this proposal. He thus incurred the wrath of the leading popular advocates throughout the country. This proposition of the Governor-General was accepted by the Assembly, but on being submitted to the judges by the House of Lords was declared illegal. The Upper Canada Assembly, according to the judges, had power, by the Act, 1791, to vary the mode of disposing only of lands yet unsold, not of those previously sold.

But a new bill was passed through the Lords by the Bishop of Exeter and Lord Seaton, the aforetime Sir John Colborne of “Rectories” fame, with the consent of Lord John Russell, carrying out Lord Sydenham’s proposal, at least so far as the lands still remaining were concerned. Thus was what was regarded as an act of spoliation by nearly all the claimants for the time being agreed upon. No doubt the weak attitude of Ryerson and his friends was the cause of the disaster. They had been hoodwinked and disappointed.

The revenue accruing from the reserves proving trifling, Bishop Strachan, in 1843, began an agitation for Renewed agitation. the amendment of the Act of 1840. He was encouraged to do this by the fact that in that year the Church of Scotland had been weakened by the secession of the Free Church. Ryerson was opposed to the reopening of the question, knowing that secularization must result. In 1846 it was proposed to divide up the lands among the several religious bodies. This caused a great ferment in Canada. The Bishop madly persisted in his efforts to obtain a readjustment, and as might have been foreseen, the Assembly, in 1850, passed an Act asking the repeal of the Imperial Act of 1840. Strachan proved himself far less astute than the other reverend champion.

In 1853 the control of the clergy lands was again transferred by Imperial Act to the Legislature of Upper Canada. The Hincks-Lafontaine administration in power in Canada was thus compelled to meet the question anew. The French-Canadians were much averse to secularization, fearing a similar turn of events in connection with the support of the clergy in Lower Canada. But the people of Upper Canada were clamorous. In 1854 this question, along with that of the Seigniorial Tenure in Lower Canada, were the means of defeating the Hincks’ Government.

The new cabinet, called the McNab-Morin ministry, entered office pledged to settle these troublesome matters, and thus Hincks, on account of his entangling alliance, was deprived of the pleasure of settling the question for which he had so strenuously fought for nearly twenty years. Sir Allan McNab, uniting with a number of Hincks’ followers, had “dished the Whigs” by taking up their old policy, and in 1854 an Act securing the life-interest of the clergy of the Churches of England and Scotland was passed, giving the excess of the fund to the support of educational objects. Thus ended the thirty years’ religious war of Canada. It was a long and tedious struggle, and was made more so by the craft, instability, and selfishness of those who should have been models of simplicity and sincerity.

The French régime left its heritage of trouble to this period. Seignior and censitaire sought to overreach Seigniorial Tenure agitation. one another. The age of feudalism had passed away; now the tenant asked pertinent questions as to the rights of the seignior to charge him rent. Under the French régime, as we have seen, there was an Intendant, who exercised control over the seigniors, and might interfere on behalf of the censitaires. In 1852 a bill was introduced and passed through the Assembly limiting the amount of rents, and leaving the seignior to recover by legal process his rights, if any, to be reimbursed from the public treasury, but this failed to pass the Legislative Council.

Mr. Hincks desired to abolish all rents and compensate the seigniors, but his Lower Canadian colleagues refused, and, as we have seen, the weakness of the Hincks’ ministry on this as well as the Clergy Reserve question caused its defeat. It was the good fortune of Sir Allan McNab to settle this question also in the year 1854 by the purchase of the rights of the seigniors at a cost to the country of two and a half millions of dollars. Henceforth the French-Canadian is as free in the possession of his homestead as the Anglo-Saxon.

The inequalities of representation as arranged after the Act of 1840 were most unfair. The older constituencies Representation by population. were in many cases small in population, but equal in representation to those with teeming numbers. It was largely this inequality which led to the increase by a two-thirds vote of Legislative Council and Assembly, as required by the Union Act, from eighty-four members to 130 in the Assembly, sixty-five being from each province. The cry of the French-Canadians against the Union Act had been that while Upper Canada had 170,000 fewer people she had equal representation, and now the “whirligig of time” brought round punishment to Upper Canada, for, in fifteen years after the Union, Upper Canada had an excess of population of 250,000. Now the complaint arose from the Upper Canadians. It was while the veteran Sir Allan McNab was in power that the demand for a change arose, in 1855 and succeeding years.

The leader in the crusade was the Hon. George Brown. Born in Edinburgh in November, 1818, young George Brown. Brown was the son of a cultivated and ardent politician, Peter Brown. His father came to New York in 1838 and commenced a newspaper there—the British Chronicle. Attracted to Canada in 1843, old Peter Brown began a Presbyterian newspaper—The Banner. In the following year, in March, George Brown undertook the well-known newspaper the Toronto Globe, which has ever since been, with varying excellence, a powerful advocate of popular rights. Like many others in Canada Mr. Brown gained notoriety by a libel suit which was brought against him in 1849. Defeated in Haldimand in 1851 by William Lyon Mackenzie, Mr. Brown became a strenuous opponent of the Hincks’ administration. He defeated the Hon. Malcolm Cameron of that ministry in 1851 in Lambton, and took his seat in the House.

Through a combination with Allan McNab, Hincks was defeated by Mr. Brown and his small band of ultra, or as he claimed, true reformers. Mr. Brown was somewhat chagrined at the union of Sir Allan McNab with a number of Mr. Hincks’ late followers, and turned the weapons of tongue and newspaper against the Coalition Ministry.

The fierce cry of injustice was constantly a feature of Mr. Brown’s advocacy. With a great power of mind, a fearless disposition, determined grasp of principles, and great ability as a public speaker, Mr. Brown was, until the time of his death in 1880 when he fell by the assassin’s bullet, perhaps the most prominent figure in Upper Canadian politics. Though constitutionally an oppositionist, and but little acquainted with the rewards of office, perhaps no man has left so strong an impression on Upper Canadian institutions as he.

There now came into prominence as a strenuous opponent of Mr. Brown on the question of representation Sir George Cartier. one whose bronze statue stands on Parliament Hill, Ottawa—the Canadian statesman, Cartier. George Etienne Cartier was born in September, 1814, in Vercheres County, Lower Canada. He was of the family of the brave explorer of St. Malo, who discovered Canada. Educated in Montreal Seminary young Cartier studied law, and began its practice in Montreal in 1835. Becoming involved, as we have seen, in the rebellion of 1837 he fled to the United States, but soon returned, and did not enter political life till 1848.

He became a member of Sir Allan McNab’s coalition cabinet in 1855. Soon after he distinguished himself by the codification of the confused civil laws, and laws of procedure of Lower Canada, and took part in the Seigniorial Tenure settlement. In 1858 he formed, in conjunction with John A. Macdonald, a new cabinet. The Seigniorial Tenure settlement required a much larger sum for its completion than had been expected—amounting, as has been said, to several millions of dollars. As this was taken from the fund of United Canada, and was purely a Lower Canadian object, Mr. Brown and his followers denounced it as “robbery.” This and like questions quickened the demand for representation by population, and in 1861 the question was urged on the House.

Cartier, who was a vivacious, astute, and determined politician, defended Lower Canada. On the charge by Mr. Brown that the one county of Bruce with 80,000 people had not one representative, Cartier retorted that if heads were to be counted, then, taking in the codfish in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, Lower Canada had the majority. In 1862 representation by population was a burning question. Though Cartier was defeated on a Militia Bill, yet the fierce spectre of “rep. by pop.,” conjured before the French people, made a stable Government by either party impossible. Upper Canada by a double majority demanded her rights. Lower Canada almost unanimously stood on the constitution.

Cartier died in 1873, and though his own claim was that he was an “Englishman speaking French,” yet his dogged perseverance and unflinching “Here stand I,” did a hundred times more to cement the bonds of the Lower Canadians as an exclusive nationality in Canada than all the narrowness of Bedard, or the frenzied appeals of Papineau, for the many years which had preceded. Representation by population received its recognition in confederation.

Section III.—Keel, Lock and Rail.

Canadian Shipping.

Her ships make Canada Britain’s truest child. On the ocean and on her inland waters Canada’s ships were so numerous that after confederation, Great Britain, the United States, and Norway were the only countries in the world exceeding her in tonnage. It was by steady industry, with but little capital, that Canada’s marine was built up. In the bays and fjords of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, a few skilful workmen placed the stocks, and built such craft, staunch and seaworthy, able to breast the wild waves of the gulf currents or of George’s Reef. The fishing and sailing vessels were built not usually in great ship-yards, but in the mouths of creeks and inlets, and thus the people of the whole coast, as ship-builders and sailors, looked upon the sea much as our Norse ancestors regarded it. On the Bay of Fundy and in the town of St. John there are great seafaring populations.

At Quebec wooden vessels were built in large numbers in the mouth of the St. Charles. In the upper lakes, as well, good schooners were constructed to carry on the trade, and though oak was once brought from England by a stupid Admiralty order to build vessels on Lake Ontario, this was repaid by Canada sending home her timber to build British bottoms. The first steamer, as already stated, ran on the St. Lawrence in 1809. It was in the year 1819 that the Savannah, an American ship of 350 tons burthen, left port, the first steamer to cross the Atlantic; she crossed in twenty-four days, but the trial was a commercial loss, and for twenty years the venture was not repeated. In 1838 two English steamers crossed the Atlantic, and in 1840 a Thames-built steamer, the President, left New York for Europe, but was lost. But to Nova Scotia, true to her British origin, belongs the honour of the most successful steamship line on the Atlantic—the Cunard line.

Samuel Cunard was born in Halifax, in November, Cunard steamers. 1787, the son of a West India merchant. Having gained by persevering effort a knowledge of shipping, and accumulated a small capital, Cunard became possessed with the grand idea of founding a fleet of steamers. With the aid of Robert Napier, the Glasgow engineer; the Messrs. Burns, of Glasgow; and McIver, of Liverpool, the enterprise was begun in 1840, and the task undertaken by the Cunard Company of running a fortnightly line from Liverpool to Halifax and Boston. With the four vessels—Britannia, Acadia, Caledonia, and Columbia, each of 1200 tons, the great undertaking commenced, and for 197,000l. in all of an annual subsidy, the line was extended to New York. A magnificent fleet of fifty vessels now represents the Cunard line. The distinguished founder of it was made a baronet in 1857, and died eighteen years after.

The Cunard line could hardly be called Canadian, however. Its founder was a Haligonian and its point of call was Halifax, but its commerce was chiefly that of the United States. To make a distinctively Canadian line was a far more difficult enterprise. Wiseacres declared that the icebergs of the Newfoundland banks, the rocks of Belle Isle, Anticosti, and scores of dangerous reefs rendered it impossible. The man and the occasion, however, overcame the difficulty.

Hugh Allan was the son of an Ayrshire captain. He Sir Hugh Allan. was born in September, 1810. In 1840, in the firm of Miller & Co., Montreal, he was employed in ship-building. In 1851 he was engaged in building iron-screw steamships, and the first of the great Allan fleet, the Canadian, was built in 1853. The Allan line was begun three years after with that vessel and the Indian, North American, and Anglo-Saxon. Disaster threatened the failure of the line. Misfortune after misfortune occurred. Brave men like Sir George Simpson, who held stock in the line, began to waver. Hugh Allan without faltering bought out their stock. He stood like a lighthouse amidst the waves. The tide of fortune turned, and the Allan line, with its grand fleet of vessels, is the boast of every true Canadian.

There are in all in the registers of the Dominion upwards of 7000 Canadian vessels. If the extent of sea-coast be the measure of a nation’s commerce, Canada claims a high place, as her sea-coast, which requires fog whistles, bell-buoys, automatic and other buoys, and beacons, is 3200 miles, and her inland lake coast 2600 miles. Her light stations number upwards of 500. She employs upwards of 650 lighthouse-keepers, and has sixteen lightships. From Sable Island to British Columbia are scattered beneficent provision of the most scientific kind for those who venture on the deep waters.

Our Canals.

The enormous water-stretches throughout the inland parts of Canada have led to the improvement of these channels by artificial means to a very great extent. While Lord Durham gave the great public works of the country as a chief element of difficulty in conducting honest government through corrupt expenditure, Canada would to-day have been largely a wilderness but for her public works.

The famous Lachine rapids stood an obstacle at the very gate of the St. Lawrence above Montreal.

In 1821 was begun the Lachine Canal, nine Lachine. miles long with its six locks, under the chief direction of the great engineer Telford. It was completed in three years at a cost of 115,000l. by a private company, but with the aid of the Provincial and Imperial Governments.

The success of the Lachine Canal immediately suggested The Welland. the extension of the system further inland. The mighty cataract of Niagara—“thundering water”—had its name affixed to it by wondering savages long before La Salle beheld it. Its height of 160 feet but represented a portion of the fall between Lakes Erie and Ontario. It was a U.E. Loyalist who with amazing perseverance succeeded in overcoming this obstacle by projecting the Welland Canal. William Hamilton Merritt, born in 1793 in New York State, was the son of refugee loyalists who had at first fled to New Brunswick. Sent again to New Brunswick to be educated young Merritt returned to Niagara in 1809, and became captain by the end of the “war of defence.” He was a man of moderate opinions, and though he called the rebellion of 1837 a “monkey war,” yet his sympathies were largely with the people.

He began considering his project in 1818, but did not succeed in organizing an incorporated company till 1825, to undertake the great scheme. In 1829 two vessels passed through the canal, and by way of Welland River reached Buffalo from Lake Ontario. Several changes were made upon the course, such as connecting it with the Grand River, and also of making a direct line to Lake Erie. A half-million pounds were spent upon it up to the year 1841, at which date it was assumed by United Canada. The canal from lake to lake is now twenty-seven miles in length; it has cost in all more than thrice the sum named; it was enlarged after the union and also since that time, and is one of the grandest triumphs of Canadian enterprise.

The campaigns of the “war of defence” conducted up Rideau. the St. Lawrence River, which in part forms the boundary of the United States, suggested to the Imperial Government the necessity of a safe communication between Montreal and Lake Ontario. It was found that to the foot of Chaudière Falls on the Ottawa River and Kingston on Lake Ontario, a distance of 135 miles, streams ran in two directions from an upland sheet of water, twenty-eight miles in length called Rideau Lake. The fall northward was 283 feet, southward 153.

By a system of dykes, dams, and aqueducts Colonel John By, and his assistant, a young Scottish engineer, McTaggart, demonstrated to the British Government the feasibility of connecting the inland waters with the lower St. Lawrence. In 1827 work in earnest was begun by the Imperial Government. The cost of the enterprise was, as is usual in such cases, much under-estimated. When the canal had been mainly built in 1832, or finished in 1834, the cost had reached one and a half millions of pounds, nearly thrice the original estimate.

As a part of this great project the Imperial Government Grenville. also undertook works at the Grenville rapids on the Ottawa River. The upper canal, that of Carillon, is about one and a half miles long; the middle, Chute au Blondeau, a mile; and the lowest is that to avoid the Long Sault of the Ottawa, which is twelve miles below Carillon. Upper Canadians should ever bear in mind this generous expenditure on the part of the Imperial Government, a showing very different from that of the Manchester colonial school.

Canadian commerce, however, found the Ottawa and St. Lawrence. Rideau route from Montreal to Upper Canada too round-about and tedious. Accordingly the Canadian Government undertook three canals nearly forty-four miles long on the St. Lawrence—the Williamsburg, between Prescott and Dickenson’s Landing; the Cornwall, to avoid the “Long Sault” of the St. Lawrence; and the Beauharnois, to overcome the “Coteau,” “Cedars,” and “Cascades” rapids. Up to 1852 the cost of the St. Lawrence canals was set at one and a half millions of dollars.

In computing the cost of all our canals, who shall say that the fifteen or twenty millions of dollars have not been well spent in enabling vessels of moderate size to pass from Britain by way of the St. Lawrence and lakes, and with the aid of the short canal of Sault Ste. Marie, completed by the Americans, thus to reach the western extremity of Lake Superior, 1400 miles above Montreal, in the very heart of the continent.


For the vast distances in Canadian territory, and the opening up of new regions remote from the water-courses, another agent than the canal must be employed. What the Roman roads were to the Roman empire, as shown by their all being computed from the golden milestone near the Roman forum, railways are to America.

It was in 1832 in Canada that the first railway company was incorporated—and that a railway along the Richelieu River, and from its termini called the St. Champlain and St. Lawrence railway. In the following year the Huron and Ontario line was formed, and in the next again the Great Western of Canada.

But it was in 1849, after the repeal of the Corn Laws and the relaxation of the restrictions on navigation, that a great movement towards opening up Canada by railways took place. It has been usual to trace much of this to the enlightened policy and suggestive mind of Lord Elgin. But credit is also due to one whom we have already met as a political leader—Mr. Hincks.

Francis Hincks belonged to an English family which Hincks. had been settled for a generation or two in Ireland. The son of a Unitarian minister in Cork, he was born in that city in 1807. His father became master in the Royal Belfast Academy, and after completing his education there, Francis Hincks entered trade and went abroad; and, after visiting Canada, returned with his young wife now to settle in the province in 1832. At the time of the rebellion Hincks was manager of “The Bank of the People;” but in 1838 began a newspaper, the Toronto Examiner, which we find bore the motto of “Responsible Government and the Voluntary Principle.”

In 1841 the young Irishman was elected member for Oxford in the first Union Parliament, and by the year 1842 had been appointed Inspector-General. As Hincks had begun the Toronto Examiner, so he afterwards founded the Montreal Pilot. It was in 1849 that Hincks had the distinction of introducing a measure to grant Government assistance to railways. In 1850 there was in operation only some forty miles of railway, and while the country cried out for development, private enterprise could not provide it. In 1851 the Northern railway, the first Upper Canadian line of rail, was begun, and the Countess of Elgin turned the first sod.

It was in the same year that Mr. Hincks, with great energy, devoted himself to carry out a plan for “a main trunk line of railways throughout the whole length of Canada.”

If the originator of a grand idea be a greater man than the hundred men who afterwards work it out, Francis Hincks deserves special recognition for his broad policy of railway expansion. He set aside waste lands for the construction of the Canadian trunk line. In ten years a marvellous transformation had taken place in Canada.

The means for this great development was provided by the Municipal Loan Fund Bill introduced by Mr. Hincks, by which, though the Canadian municipalities plunged themselves into a burden of debt of 10,000,000 dollars, the country was opened for commerce. In ten years after the passage of the Railway Guarantee Bill of 1849 there had been added to Canada no less than 2100 additional miles of railway.

The great promoter of railways, however, passed for a time from the scene of Canadian politics, being made Governor of Barbadoes and the Windward Isles in 1856, and after an absence of thirteen years returned to public life in Canada, and died so lately as 1885 in the small-pox scourge in Montreal.

Sir Francis Hincks was the Colbert of later Canadian affairs. Two noble memorials of this era remain to Canada: the well-known suspension bridge by which the Great Western railway crosses the Niagara River. This was opened in 1855, and bridges in a single span the chasm 800 feet wide. The other great work is the magnificent Victoria bridge, opened in 1860, crossing the St. Lawrence at Montreal, with its twenty-four piers extending nearly two miles in length. Greater, these, than the ancient world’s seven wonders!

Section IV.—The Field, the Forest, the Mine, and the Sea.

God speed the plough! is our oldest Canadian motto. In so widespread and diversified a country as Canada every variety of agriculture exists. Six leading areas, characterized by special climatic influences, may be found. The Anticosti shore; the gulf region, including most of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick; the Quebec region; the lake sections, comprising chiefly Ontario; the prairies; and the Rocky Mountain and British Columbian valleys.

In the whole Dominion upwards of 20,000,000 acres are under cultivation, while the improved pasture area is 7,000,000 acres. Mixed farming is probably the most common.

The farm yielding its products by a steady rotation of grain, grass, and root crops, with a certain amount of stock raising, a moderate dairy product, and some attention to the growth of fruit and vegetables, is certainly the Canadian ideal. That it is folly to have all the eggs in one basket is the housewife’s dictum usually accepted by Canadian farmers. Yet different parts of the country are being found suitable for special productions.

Nova Scotia on its west coast, and the western peninsula of Ontario are celebrated for apple growing and the yield of small fruits; the sea meadows of the Bay of Fundy supply rich hay-fields; the eastern townships of Quebec cultivate horse and cattle-breeding successfully; careful husbandry of the idyllic type is the beau-ideal of Lower Canadian life; dairy farms of a large size are springing up in Ontario and Quebec, and a great output of cheese and butter have resulted; our western prairies are becoming the granaries not only of Canada but of America; the foothills of the Rocky Mountains—the Canadian Piedmont—and the western prairie section have in ten years become a wonderful “ranching” country; and no doubt the Western Saskatchewan plains will yet be vast sheep-runs, as well as the abode of herds of cattle and horses.

The enviable pre-eminence of Canada in agriculture has not been attained without effort. In 1818 appeared in the Nova Scotian newspapers a most notable series of letters by “Agricola,” which attracted the attention of the Governor, Lord Dalhousie, and of all leading Nova Scotians, and gave an impetus to agriculture.

One of the most beautiful pictures of Canadian life is the return of the “Autumn Fairs,” in which the products of the earth are brought together in the leading cities and towns. At these exhibitions prizes are awarded, and a desire for excellence in farming is cultivated. No feature so well brings out the prosperity and comfort of the Canadian farmer as a view of the thousands of burly farmers and their wives, the well-dressed lads and maidens who gather together in holiday attire, engaged in rendering homage to Ceres, the presiding divinity in hundreds of local centres from Nova Scotia to Manitoba.

The lofty pine, that suggests to Virgil its pre-eminence The forest. in the forest, certainly deserves in the eyes of Canadians a prominent place, as the source of enormous wealth. Where the farmer cannot penetrate may still be the fruitful field of the lumberer. About the beginning of this century a settler from Massachusetts, named Philemon Wright, bought in Montreal a considerable quantity of forest lands on the Ottawa River, on the strength of certain documents, afterwards found to have been forged. The Government of Lower Canada, sympathizing with Mr. Wright in the severe loss he had met, bestowed on the pioneer, on condition of his developing it, a large tract on the Ottawa River, north of the Chaudière Falls.

Thus began the lumber trade, which has grown to such great proportions on the Ottawa; for it was in June, 1806, that the first raft of logs went down that river.

Between the parallels of 43° and 47° grows largely the white or Weymouth pine, the Pinus Strobus of the botanists. Throughout Canada is found also the red or Norway pine much used in ship-building, and especially for masts, which with the oak and tamarack afford a great part of the lumber of the Canadian trade.

Bands of men, hardy and rough, hasten in winter to the “woods” in the lumber-man’s “timber limits,” build their “shanties,” live on “pork and beans,” and engage in hewing down the forest monarchs, which give us our wealth. Each “gang” is divided into “hewers,” “liners,” “scorers,” and horse and ox teamsters. The logs are drawn to the water-courses, and in spring-time “driven” (i.e. guided in the stream) singly to the mills, or joined together in “rafts” when the larger streams are reached. These are then sawn into lumber or taken uncut to Quebec on the St. Lawrence, and sent to Britain, under the direction of a public official—the “supervisor of cullers”—being shipped and stowed away in the ocean vessels by men called “stevedores.”

The recognition of the lumber trade was first made by the Government under Lord Dalhousie placing an export tax upon it in 1823. In order to overcome the Chaudière Falls, “slides,” by which logs can be safely taken down stream, were built in 1829 by Mr. Ruggles Wright. In succeeding years “timber licences” have been issued to lumberers by the Provincial Governments, by which a very considerable public revenue is obtained.

On the Ottawa River alone, no less than 25,000 men are engaged in the lumber trade. Large firms, such as the Messrs. Booth, Gilmour, Eddy, Bronson, Weston, and McLaren, carry on this great business, whose export alone in deals, logs, planks, boards, joists, and square timber amounted in 1884 to nearly 26,000,000 dollars.

Nor have Canadians been deterred by the hard The mine. character of their Laurentian and Huronian rocks from “rifling the bowels of their mother-earth for treasures.” The thirst for gold has led to gold-mining both on the eastern and western borders of the Dominion.

The discovery of gold on the Upper Fraser River British Columbia. in British Columbia, in 1858, caused in a few weeks such an excitement that “Every one seemed to have gone gold mad. Victoria appeared to have leapt at once from the site of a promising settlement into a full-grown town.” Thousands of miners, attracted from all parts of the world, had in a short time hastened to the “diggings.” Including Chinese, nearly 5000 men were in the year 1861 engaged in the various processes of alluvial washing. The mines of British Columbia will, no doubt, secure greater development by the easy access to them now given by the Canadian Pacific railway.

Gold was also discovered in Nova Scotia in the year Nova Scotia. 1861, but unlike British Columbia, the precious metal was embedded in a hard quartz matrix. A number of companies erected mills for crushing the rock, and in the year 1867, 27,000 ounces of gold were obtained. In five years more the production had fallen off, but during later years, robbed of its glamour, gold crushing has become a settled Nova Scotian industry, and one mine has in three recent years yielded upwards of 10,000 ounces of treasure.

Silver is mined in Ontario and Quebec, and about 100 tons a year are produced; copper in Quebec upwards of 4000 tons annually; while the iron mines of Ontario in Madoc and Kingston regions yield annually 40,000 tons, and those of Nova Scotia even a quarter more of ore.

The petroleum and salt deposits of Western Ontario are exceedingly prolific, there having been produced in the latest reported year 15,000,000 gallons of the former and nearly 200,000 tons of the latter. The recent development of the lime phosphate industry in the province of Quebec along the Ottawa River, the crushed apatite being used as a fertilizer, is remarkable, and has already reached an annual yield of upwards of 14,000 tons.

The coal of Nova Scotia is produced from the mines at the rate of about a million and a half of tons a year, while the enormous development of coal at Nanaimo mines in Vancouver Island, and on the Saskatchewan in Assiniboia, and on the Bow River in Alberta, is one of the surprises of recent years.

The Dominion of Canada owns the largest and richest The sea. fisheries in the world, and they, in the year 1883, yielded seventeen and a half millions of dollars’ worth of fish. Our deep-sea fisheries in Nova Scotia and British Columbia have, it is estimated, not half the available sea-coast worked. The cod fishery stands first in importance: it is carried on by means of hand lines, or by “bultows,” i.e. set lines. Canadian dried codfish supply the Catholic countries of Europe. The herring fisheries, yet very imperfectly developed, amount to 2,000,000 dollars annually, while the mackerel fishery is being rapidly extended.

In ten years, from 1871 to 1881, the lobster fisheries of Canada, almost unknown at the former date, had grown to employ at the latter more than 600 factories, curing yearly fifty-two and a half millions of lobsters. The fishermen of Labrador and the Magdalen Islands are the only Canadians engaged in seal catching, while 10,000 Newfoundland seamen pursue this interesting and lucrative industry.

The fresh-water fisheries include the wonderful catch of salmon, “food alike for the poor man’s cottage and mansion of the rich.” While a staple article of food along the rivers of the sea-coast, the salmon affords sport for the dilletante fishermen who spend their holidays in New Brunswick; but the catch of salmon in British Columbia quadrupled in the three years preceding 1882, in which year 12,000,000 pounds’ weight were exported.

The fish of the inland lakes of Canada afford food to many thousands of her population. Trout and white fish are caught in large numbers, and in a recent year four and a half millions of these palatable fish were sent fresh to market, while 40,000 barrels of sturgeon, pike, and other varieties were salted for sale. The fresh-water fisheries of the Dominion have reached the annual value of 4,000,000 dollars.

The products of “the soil, the forest, the mine, and the sea,” were those of which a free interchange The Reciprocity Treaty. was effected between Canada and the United States, by the Reciprocity Treaty, obtained through the wise negotiation of Lord Elgin, in the year 1854, to continue for ten, or at the most eleven years. Free use of water-courses, canals, and fisheries were granted to one another by the contiguous countries.

It was a mutual benefit; but through some mistaken view, or narrow trade policy, the United States refused to continue the treaty after the year 1866. Its cessation created a considerable derangement of trade between the two countries, but the compulsory development of many branches of home industry by Canada has given a self-dependence and energy to Canadians, which Reciprocity would not have cultivated.

Section V.—Commercial, Educational, and Social Progress.

The business of Canada is conducted chiefly by commercial institutions native to the soil. Out of forty-four banks doing business in Canada, with their many branches, only two have their headquarters out of the Dominion. The Bank of Montreal is the oldest in Canada, having been begun in 1817, while the Quebec bank was undertaken in the same year to facilitate the carrying on of the timber trade.

At the time of the establishment of municipal institutions in the upper province in 1834, the Bank of Upper Canada—a provincial institution—was commenced, while a similar local, or perhaps more strongly national feeling in Lower Canada, resulted in the founding of “La banque du peuple.”

The banking system of the maritime provinces has been rather after the manner of the American banking customs, to establish branches in many small places.

To the Bank of British North America, with its headquarters in London, Canadian bankers give the credit of introducing amongst Canadians the best elements and methods of British banking. The Merchants, Nova Scotia, Imperial, and Commerce are now, in addition to those previously mentioned, the leading banks of Canada.

For many years Canada used what was called “Halifax currency,” in which the nomenclature of sterling money was that employed, but having a pound of this currency valued at four dollars. The Canadian banking system has always been conducted on a gold basis. The Canadian banks are required to report regularly to the Dominion Government, and are under strict Government regulations. The Dominion Government issues on its own credit all notes for one, two, and four dollars, while the banks are confined to those of higher denominations.

A system of post-office savings banks was introduced by the Canadian Government at eighty-one of the larger places throughout the country. Large sums of money are invested throughout the different provinces by loan companies. The first of these in Canada began operations in 1855, and there were seventy-three with many branches doing business in the year 1883. Canadian enterprise has also shown itself in the organization of fire and life insurance companies, of which the “Canada” and “Confederation” companies rank equal to the strongest British or American societies.

Notice has been already taken of the beginnings of Education in the Maritime Provinces. educational life in the provinces by the sea. It was in comparatively recent years that the free school movement swept along the seaboard. To New Brunswick seemingly belongs the palm in the maritime provinces for organizing a thoroughly flexible and workable system including the whole population, Roman Catholics and Protestants. Nine hundred excellent schools were in operation in 1865. After confederation a most vigorous attempt was made by the Roman Catholics of New Brunswick to obtain separate schools. The movement resulted in nothing. The Douay Bible is allowed for use in schools where the population is chiefly Catholic.

It was not till 1864 that Nova Scotia could boast of a successful school system. As in the case of New Brunswick no provision is made for separate schools. In Prince Edward Island, where, in 1767, almost the whole territory was given out by lot to the proprietors, a reserve was made in each township for the support of schools. Though assistance was given from time to time, it was not until 1852 that a system of the same character as that found in the sister provinces was established. Agitation to obtain special privileges by the Roman Catholics took place here also, but was repressed. And thus the lower provinces, with a strong sentiment for a thoroughly provincial system, with well organized normal schools, are becoming more and more an enlightened and cultivated people.

New Brunswick has carried the principle of her public school system into higher education also. Organized as a Church of England institution by the New Brunswick Loyalists, King’s College was established in 1828, but in 1860 it was made provincial, and has become the University of New Brunswick. Prince Edward Island possesses no university. The crown