The complicated plan of bringing together at
the same time and at the same place three armies, each faced by a
resolute, if weak, foe, was working out admirably. Amherst's movements
had been the slowest and the most protracted. He had arrived at Albany,
from New York, early in May. But, as we have seen, his colonial levies
came in only slowly, and a long two months passed before it was worth
while for him to go on to Oswego, the point on Lake Ontario where he
intended to embark his forces. At Oswego Colonel Haldimand, an efficient
officer, was in charge of the preparations. Even after Amherst arrived,
it was still another month before his force was ready to set out. Far up
near the west end of the lake the British held Fort Niagara, and from
the St. Lawrence to the Mississippi they were masters. Detroit, on the
route from Lake Erie to Lake Huron, still held out for France. The posts
in the north-western country France also retained. If, however, Montreal
fell, the sources of supplies for these posts would be cut off and they
would fall to the conqueror without a further blow.
For months Colonel Haldimand had waited at
Oswego, making ready for the great enterprise. During the weary time of
preparation, General Gage at Albany had sent on to his brother officers
what news he could glean in America and also welcome supplies of
magazines from Europe. While Haldimand waited, winter had become spring
and spring summer; and now summer itself was wearing away. Slowly the
motley battalions of regulars and provincials
General Geoffrey Amherst
came in and made this fort a busy scene.
On July 23 Sir William Johnson arrived, leading some hundreds of
Indians. Their knowledge of the forest might have made them useful as
scouts in this wild country, but the information which they gathered was
often worthless. For weeks they had been bringing in wild rumours of the
arrival, not of a French but of a Spanish fleet in the St. Lawrence.
Spain was still at peace with England, but a general in a remote
wilderness could not be sure of this, and the rumour caused some slight
disquiet.
If any one could control the Indians it
was Sir William Johnson. He had lived long among them in the colony of
New York and knew thoroughly the half-childish ways of these wild sons
of the forest. The tribes of Iroquois, with whom he came chiefly in
touch, respected him and usually obeyed him. But the remoter tribes,
with whom, during the past months, the British had been carrying on
laborious negotiations, were less easy to manage. Amherst himself
loathed the practices of his savage allies. When they had the chance
they would sometimes dig up even buried corpses in order to scalp them.
'Firmness with these gentry is very necessary' Amherst wrote at this
time, and, in spite of their sulks and threats when crossed, he held
them in check and would not permit any of the outrages that the French
officers, from Montcalm downwards, had not prevented.
The great camp on Lake Ontario could in
time muster more than ten thousand men. The primaeval forest came down
to the shore of the sparkling lake, spreading away to the horizon,
seemingly vast as Ocean itself. The fort with its surrounding clearings
formed but a slight break in the sombre monotony of forest that hedged
it in. Food was sometimes scarce and bad, and insanitary conditions
caused heavy mortality. While there was no corruption on the part of
contractors such as we hear of on the French side, we get an occasional
hint that the shrewd colonial traders were not too scrupulous in their
methods. In this isolated spot the life of the soldiers was tedious, and
it is not to be wondered at that some should plan to desert. The
provincial troops suffered especially from home-sickness, and a good
many of them tried to run away. It was not easy, however. Some offenders
were caught and brought to trial, and the penalty of desertion was
death. On July 29 we have a grim order from Amherst. Eleven men are
condemned to be hanged for desertion, but one of them, John Jones, is to
be pardoned if he will accept the alternative of acting as executioner
to the other ten. These are to prepare for death, and when they have
gone through their devotions one of them is to be hanged. Amherst's
justice was tempered with mercy, for he ordered that, at the moment when
the remaining nine thought themselves on the verge of the grave, they
should be pardoned, with a stern warning never to desert again. It was a
mode of punishment likely to be impressive to the lines of soldiers
drawn up round a hollow square to see the majesty of the law vindicated.
Perhaps hardly less impressive was the
review of the troops for which Amherst issued an order on August 3. For
the complex manoeuvres of a showy parade there can have been little
space on the stump-strewn and somewhat hilly shore of Lake Ontario. The
main thing was to see that the men were well equipped for their
uncertain tasks in descending the river to meet the foe. Along the shore
of the lake and on the banks were lying the hundreds of 'batteaus' and
'whale-boats' necessary to carry ten thousand men on the long journey to
Montreal. The might of Britain on the sea was represented by a fleet of
two ships under Captain Loring, the Onondaga and the Mohawk, three-masted
merchant vessels of the type known as snow'. They were well armed.
The Onondaga carried four nine-pounders, fourteen six-pounders, and one
hundred seamen ; the Mohawk, sixteen six-pounders and ninety seamen.
Some three weeks before Amherst himself set out from Oswego, he had sent
them to seek, and, if possible, to destroy two French vessels which had
the hardihood to appear off Oswego on July 20. But for some time, even
with the best pilots to be procured, the vessels could not find a
channel, and the delay was such that, instead of going down the river
before Amherst, they set out only after he had begun his advance.
Even by August 10 all the boats were not
ready. Amherst, however, determined to start with the regulars and the
artillery, leaving General Gage to follow with the colonial troops. On
the morning of the 10th, therefore, the army embarked at daybreak. The
route was at first along the shore of the open lake. These vast inland
waters can be as tempestuous as the sea itself; this day the lake was in
an ugly mood and one boat was lost. On the whole, however, all went
well. General Gage soon followed with the colonial forces, and by the
12th all were in the comparatively safe waters of the St. Lawrence
River, on that flowing tide which swept for many miles past forest-clad
banks and occasional clearings on to Montreal itself, the end of the
journey.
In all the world, perhaps, there is no
other river so majestic. It discharges the waters of half a dozen mighty
lakes, and its broad current is in very few places less than a mile
wide. At its beginning it wanders through hundreds of islands, the
famous ' Thousand Islands at the present day dotted with summer
residences. Then it plunges into swirling rapids, full of peril for
small boats. At the foot of the last of these, nearly two hundred miles
from the head of the river, the little town of Montreal had grown up.
The task of Amherst was to take his great force in small boats along
those many miles of river. He had three problems to solve. The first was
to overcome the French force which he should find barring his way at
Fort Levis, near La Presentation, now Ogdensburg, some seventy miles
from the entrance of the river. As his second task he would then have to
pass through the rapids, the beginning of which Fort Levis guarded. Last
of all he must crush the French army awaiting him at Montreal. So
overwhelming was his force that the military tasks were really easy. Yet
there were some uncertainties. The two armed French vessels were
hovering near Fort Levis and they might work havoc in the flotilla of
small boats ; moreover, the actual strength of the French force barring
the way was quite unknown to the British, though it could not be
formidable.
Fortune favoured Amherst. Just at the
time when he was drawing near Fort Levis, one of the French vessels ran
aground and was so much damaged as to be rendered useless. When an
Indian brought in this news on the 15th, Amherst hurried on with his
small boats, hoping to capture the other ship while her companion was
disabled. He met her at daybreak on the 17th, trying to pass up the
river towards Oswego. The British attacked her with five rowing galleys
armed with artillery. Since it was calm, the small boats could move
freely, while the large ship lay motionless and almost helpless. There
was a sharp fight, but the French ship soon gave in, and she and her
hundred men, under an officer named La Broquerie, were taken at slight
cost.
On the same day Amherst occupied La
Presentation, which had been evacuated and practically destroyed by the
French. It commanded not merely the trade by the St. Lawrence from
Montreal, but was also convenient of access to the very heart of the
colony of New York. Here for some ten years the Abbe Picquet had carried
on a flourishing mission, chiefly to the Iroquois Indians. The Abbe,
half priest, half politician, had thrown his whole heart into the work
and had dreamed of establishing the sway both of the Church and of
France over all the lands bordering on Lake Ontario. With a statesman's
foresight he had chosen this important strategic point. He had worked
zealously among the Indians, had lived like one of themselves, and had
led hundreds of them to give their adhesion to the Roman Catholic faith.
He had not changed their mode of warfare. The British found in the
Indian habitations at La Presentation many human scalps. This sight
especially incensed the Mohawk allies, and they burned the chapel. The
Indians at La Presentation showed a disposition to make terms with
Amherst, and the Abbe Picquet's dreams for their future were doomed to
complete failure by the British occupation. La Presentation has now
become prosaic Ogdensburg, a thriving American town, with scarcely a
memory of the days when it was a cherished outpost of France in North
America.
Five miles down the river from La
Presentation lay Fort Levis. Here, during the previous winter, the
French engineer, Desandrouins, amidst manifold discouragements that
nearly drove him out of his mind, had toiled to make a strong post. In
the end he had asked for work elsewhere. Then hither to take command had
come in March Pouchot, who had held Niagara until it fell to the
British. We have the story of his hardships told by himself. He had left
Montreal on March 17 to go to Fort Levis. In the earlier campaign he had
lost his personal equipage at Niagara and now was without the common
necessaries. Yet, as he declares, when he was about to set out on the
ice to go to his post, the Intendant Bigot refused to supply him with
even the blanket that he asked for. Obviously he was not in the ring
that was working with Bigot, and all that he obtained from the King's
supplies for his own needs was a keg of wine. Nevertheless he was now
resolved to make a stern fight. Levis had indeed a dim hope that Pouchot
could so delay Amherst as to permit the main French army to defeat
Haviland and Murray in turn before Amherst arrived.
To leave Pouchot serenely alone in his
little island fort would have been wise policy for Amherst. Murray had
left untouched the French at Jacques Cartier and at Three Rivers, when
he ascended to Montreal. Amherst could pass down the river by the north
and south channels unharmed from the guns of the fort, leaving Pouchot
to bombard the air if he liked. But Amherst would leave no unconquered
foe in his rear. Accordingly, on the 18th, when Murray and Haviland,
already near Montreal, were chafing at the delay of their chief, he made
elaborate plans for assaulting Fort Levis. The captured French vessel
anchored within range of the fort. One British column rowed down past it
on the north side and another on the south side. On the first day
Pouchot found himself completely invested. On the second day Amherst
made preparations for attack as elaborate as if he had been besieging a
vital stronghold. He began to construct land batteries on points
commanding the fort. His two vessels, which had been delayed at Oswego,
now appeared at last, and he had three ships at anchor at advantageous
points. He spent day after day in these tasks, and not until August 23
was he ready to open fire from all his batteries and to close in on the
fort with his vessels. Even on that day he did nothing decisive, for '
the going down of the Vessells to the Fort ', he wrote to Pitt, ' was
not effected in the Manner I could wish, and I determined not to pursue
my Plan that day \1 For another and still another day he continued his
bombardment, gradually dismounting the French guns with his fire, until
at last, on the 25th, Pouchot, caught like a rat in a trap, surrendered
at discretion with his three hundred men. He had made a brave fight and
had inflicted some loss on his assailants. Even after the surrender,
Amherst still lingered at the fort which he now renamed Fort William
Henry. On the 26th he took time to write an elaborate letter to Pitt
describing what he had done and enclosing lists of everything found in
the captured stronghold. Then he busied himself in making repairs to the
fort and his boats. Not until the 31st was he ready again to set out. An
army of ten thousand men had been kept occupied for two weeks in
reducing a fort containing three hundred.
Amherst sent to New York the prisoners
taken at Fort Levis, and retained only the pilots, who would be of
service in meeting the dangers of the river. With justice, as the event
proved, he dreaded the descent of the rapids. He questioned the captive
Pouchot anxiously about the perils, and we may be sure learned nothing
from that astute officer which would be very reassuring. On the morning
of August 31 the army was once .more afloat. That day they rowed twenty
miles and passed through two rapids which Amherst thought ' more
frightful than dangerous '. The next day he was not so fortunate. As his
boats neared the Long Sault Rapids, a little above the present Canadian
town of Cornwall, he put ashore covering parties to save his force from
possible ambush by the enemy. The boats passed down the rapids in single
file, and the experience was exciting enough. The rapids were full of
choppy waves which curled over the edge of the boats. These took in
water so freely that some of them were swamped, and a corporal and three
men of the Royal Highlanders were drowned. The next day, September 2,
the army rowed the twenty-four miles across Lake St. Francis, an
expansion of the St. Lawrence. That night there was a great storm, and
on the next day the weather was so bad that the army remained in camp.
Montreal was now not far off. In it the French army was concentrated,
and Murray and Haviland were advancing rapidly to meet their leader
before its walls.
The 4th of September was fine and well
fitted for the most ticklish part of Amherst's task, the passing of the
series of rapids which include the Cedars and the Cascades. Disaster
awaited him. He had the pilots from Fort Levis; he had also some Indians
expert in river navigation. But these pilots were not sufficient in
numbers for the hundreds of boats. None of them spoke English, and the
British steersmen hardly understood perhaps the directions given to them
in a strange tongue. At any rate the boats did not keep at a proper
distance from each other. Some of the men at the helm lost control, and
the tossing boisterous waves wrought havoc with their prey. When night
fell the whole force had not yet passed down, but already sixty-four
boats had been dashed to pieces, among them seventeen laden with
artillery, and no less than eighty-four men had been drowned. The long
row of dead men seemed a dire penalty to pay for lack of skill in
meeting the dangers of the river. The next day, when greater care was
shown, the remainder of the army passed down with ease.
The army was now encamped on Isle Perrot,
and Amherst waited the whole of the 5th to repair his boats. Looking
across Lake St. Louis, the British could see the houses of Lachine, and
Montreal itself was now not twenty miles distant. Isle Perrot was well
peopled, but the inhabitants had run off into the woods and abandoned
their houses. Some of the men who lived on the island had served with
the French forces up the river and they were now in great fear of
retribution from Amherst and his savage allies. But he treated kindly
those who were captured or came in, and restored them to their houses,
when once they had taken the oath of fidelity to King George. ' They
seemed as much surprised with their treatment as they were happy with
it,' says Amherst. They had, indeed, been told by Vaudreuil that they
could hope for no mercy from the cruel and pitiless English.
Soon after daybreak on the morning of the
6th the army was again afloat for the last stage of the advance on
Montreal. There still remained the terrific Lachine Rapids before
Montreal could be reached by water. These were, however, impassable for
'batteaus' and whale-boats ; accordingly Amherst landed at Lachine and
marched overland the short distance from that point to Montreal. Though
some mounted French volunteers had followed him along-shore, when he
started from Isle Perrot, they made no attempt to oppose his landing. In
fact he was soon pursuing them. At three o'clock on the afternoon of the
6th the head of his column appeared before the feeble walls of Montreal.
That night the British army encamped on the open plain before the town,
and the general was busy bringing up his artillery with a view to a
speedy bombardment. A powerful British fleet lay in the river near by.
The sight of a man-of-war with fifty guns was one of the sensations of
the day at Montreal; nothing of the kind had ever been seen there
before. Had it alone opened fire it could soon have ruined the town.
Resistance to the British forces was
hopeless. On the 7th Haviland arrived at Longueuil on the south shore of
the river, and the French officer Malartic looking across from Montreal
saw numbers of the inhabitants hurrying to that village in order to take
the oath of fidelity required by the British as the condition of leaving
the people undisturbed in their homes. From the east, too, the British
were closing in. Murray landed his forces on the island of Montreal,
also on the 7th, and began his march upon the town. The country people
seemed delighted to welcome him. Crowds of Canadians flocked to the
British camp, and they brought horses and saddles for the officers,
horses for the artillery, and carts for the luggage. As the army marched
towards the town, the people lined the road, offering pails of milk and
of water to the soldiers and expressing courteous regrets that they had
no better liquor for the officers. The priest and nuns of a convent
which the troops passed stood at their door and told the British that
they were welcome. Progress was slow, for in the previous night the last
of the French battalions had retired into Montreal, destroying the
bridges behind them. The delay was such that before Murray's column
could appear in front of the trails of Montreal. Amherst was already
treating for its surrender.
As Murray approached, Vaudreuil had tried
a little ruse. Suspecting that Amherst was of sterner stuff than Murray,
and knowing Murray's love of glory, the Governor had sounded him as to
the terms of surrender which he would give, and thus become the
conqueror of Canada. Murray, however, answered that, since Amherst was
so near, it was with him that Vaudreuil must treat. Each side had seen
the inevitable and understood pretty well what terms were possible. On
the night of the 6th~7th Vaudreuil summoned the principal French
officers to attend a meeting at his quarters in Montreal. With British
columns in sight, the tap of the British drum in their ears, and the
roar of British cannon likely to begin at any time, the business was
urgent indeed. The Intendant, Bigot, read a memorandum outlining the
condition of affairs in the colony. The inhabitants of Montreal, fearful
of massacre if taken fighting, now refused to arm, and under cover of
night they had already begun to cart away their effects by wagon-loads.
The Indians were joining the English ; the Canadians had deserted
entirely ; so also had many of the French regular troops; and those now
in the ranks numbered only about 2,400. The situation was desperate.
Bombardment might reduce Montreal to ashes in a single night. For its
defence Levis had only six pieces of artillery. Food and ammunition were
scarce. The disparity in numbers, too, was overwhelming. Vaudreuil
believed, or, at least, said, that there were thirty thousand of the
enemy to face.
In such a situation Vaudreuil urged that
capitulation was necessary. To this the military officers agreed, if
honourable terms could be secured, and Colonel de Bougainville was named
to go early in the morning of the 7th to Amherst, to propose a
suspension of arms until October 1; capitulation was to follow at that
date should news of peace not arrive in the meantime. If Amherst would
not gr^t this, terms of surrender were to be proposed. Amherst writes
that on the 7th ' in the morning two Officers came to an advanced Post
with a Letter from the Marquis de Vaudreuil, referring me to what one of
them, Le Colonel Bougainville, had to say. The conversation ended with a
Cessation of Arms 'till twelve o'clock, at which time the Proposals
came.' 1 Amherst would not listen to the French plan to suspend arms
until October 1, but he was ready to discuss terms of surrender. These
Vaudreuil had long meditated upon, and he now had ready an elaborate
paper guarding carefully the civil and religious interests of the
Canadians and also providing that the French army should be accorded the
honours of war.
Political and religious questions Amherst
was prepared to treat in a generous spirit. He did not forget that
already Canada was practically British territory. Of course Vaudreuil
asked for more than he expected to receive. Amherst would not promise
that the Canadians should always be governed under French law and that
they should pay no new taxes. Vaudreuil's demand that the vanquished
people should remain strictly neutral in any war between Great Britain
and France Amherst brushed aside with the comment that they must become
the subjects of the British King. He refused, too, the absurd demand
that, even should Canada remain British, the King of France should have
the perpetual right to name the Bishop of Quebec. He would not agree
that the Church should retain its right to levy the tithe, but the right
was afterwards yielded by the British Parliament. Though he gave the
communities of nuns special protection, he would not promise to the
Jesuits, Recollets, and Sulpitians, the three orders of priests working
in Canada, anything in regard to their privileges. They must await the
pleasure of the King. Their, and all others of property were, however,
to be respected. The new subjects were to enjoy equal privileges with
the incoming British in respect to commerce. They were to be free to
remain in Canada or to withdraw, and if they chose to withdraw some were
to be helped to go to France. They were to enjoy full liberty for their
Roman Catholic faith. Vaudreuil had said that if the British were
successful the Canadians would be deported from their homes. This
poignant fear Amherst removed ; they were never to suffer the fate of
the Acadians and to be carried away, against their will, to the British
colonies or to England. The Chevalier Johnstone, fighting on the French
side, says that the terms granted by Amherst were 'infinitely more
favourable than could be expected in our circumstances'.
Amherst was resolved, however, that the
French army should make one great expiation. It was the general belief
in the British army that the French had allowed, and even encouraged,
outrages by their Indians. After Braddock's defeat in 1755 the French
had joined the Indians in scalping the fallen British. After Montcalm's
victory at Fort William Henry, in 1757, scores of disarmed British
prisoners had been massacred by the savages, and some of the French
officers had been slack in their efforts to prevent the atrocities. A
few days later some British prisoners had been brought by Indians to
Montreal, and there, as Bougainville says,' at two o'clock in the
afternoon in presence of the whole town,' one of them had been boiled
and eaten by the savages, and his fellow Englishmen had been obliged to
partake of the horrid feast.1 While high-minded French officers like
Montcalm and Bougainville bitterly denounced the Indian practice of
scalping, Vaudreuil, no doubt because he was a Canadian long familiar
with savage warfare, was, as we have seen, not greatly shocked at it,
and he constantly reported to the French court the number of scalps
taken in.
There is no doubt that on the British
side, too, guerrilla captains like Rogers had waged war exactly as their
Indian foes waged it. Even Wolfe had permitted scalping when the enemy
were Indians or Canadians dressed like Indians. But, in the regular
operations of war, the British had held the Indians sternly in check.
Amherst disliked them and punished them with something like avidity. At
Montreal, when he caught an Indian in the act of stealing, he promptly
hanged him. Amherst wrote to Pitt that 'not a Peasant, Woman or child
has been hurt by them [the Indians] or a house burnt, since I entered
what was the Enemy's Country'. The Indians were not allowed to commit
'one Single act of Savage barbarity', writes a non-commissioned officer
triumphantly.
Nothing more astonished the Canadians who
saw Amherst's army at Montreal than his strict control of the Indians.
Far other was the tale on the French side. Vaudreuil had been, in truth,
afraid of his own Indians, and he still showed fear of the race. Among
the most insistent terms which he now drew up were those by which the
British were to guarantee protection to the French from the cruelties
and insults of the savages. In regard to this Amherst wrote on the
margin of the proposals: 'There never have been any cruelties committed
by the Indians of our army and good order shall be preserved. . . . Care
shall be taken that the Indians do not insult any of the subjects of his
most Christian majesty.' Resolute himself against savage barbarities,
Amherst was now resolved to punish the French for their slackness. He
would not yield the honours of war to the defeated army. They must
simply surrender and must not serve again during the war.
These terms were hard indeed. It was the
custom of the time to grant honours of war to a garrison which
surrendered before an assault was made. Moreover, the provision that the
French officers and men should not serve again during the war might mean
that for years they should have no military employment. The French
protested vigorously. When Vaudreuil received Amherst's terms, he sent
Bougainville back to ask for some mitigation. Levis declared that the
terms were intolerable, and he too sent Colonel de la Pause to make
representations to Amherst. But, though La Pause was a man of rank and
reputation, Amherst would not listen to his attempt to justify the
protest of Levis. He sternly ordered him to be silent and declared that
'he was fully resolved, for the infamous part the troops of France had
acted in exciting the savages to perpetrate the most horrid and unheard
of barbarities in the whole progress of the war, and for other open
treacheries, as well as flagrant breaches of faith, to manifest to all
the world, by this capitulation, his detestation of such ungenerous
practices, and disapprobation of their conduct.' 'I cannot alter,
in the least, the conditions which I have offered to the Marquis de
Vaudreuil,' he wrote in reply to Levis, 'and I expect his definite
answer by the bearer on his return.'
That night at 7 o'clock the officers of
the French army again held a council of war. There was clamorous
indignation at Amherst's stern terms. They involved for these
unfortunate men not merely military disgrace but also something like
starvation, for if they could get no employment they were likely to
become idle pensioners when they returned to France. In the night La
Pause was sent back to ask that at least the prohibition to serve might
apply only to America. But Amherst would not yield one jot. On the
receipt of the last peremptory message from Amherst, the officers
demanded that Vaudreuil should break off the initiations. It was un]4ard
of, they said, that an army should make such terms before the place it
was defending had been assaulted ; they should either march out against
the British as Murray had done at Ste Foy, or they should await an
assault on Montreal and fight to the last. If either of these courses
should prove to be impossible the officers asked permission to withdraw
to St. Helen's Island, in the river near Montreal, there to fight until
at least honourable terms could be secured. 'We have still enough
ammunition to fight if the enemy wishes to attack us sword in hand,'
Levis wrote to Vaudreuil.
It is not easy to estimate the sincerity
of these protests. The British men-of-war could easily have destroyed
the defences of St. Helen's Island, as the French officers must have
well understood. Levis and others were thinking of their future military
careers and probably hoped that this brave talk would soften the
disgrace of a humiliating surrender. But Vaudreuil had no military glory
in view, and he had to listen to other clamour besides that of the
military. The multitude of refugees in Montreal flocked to implore him
to save them and their goods by quick surrender to the British. These,
and these only, would be strong enough to check the danger of outrage
from the savages whom the weak French army could not now control.
Vaudreuil admitted the inevitable. Amherst's terms must, he said, be
accepted ; this was a duty he owed to the ruined colony. The British
general had named six o'clock on the morning of the 8th as the time for
the final answer, and soon after that hour he received a letter from
Vaudreuil complying with his stern demands. New France had at last
fallen, ami Britain had won half a continent.
Amherst sat up late on the night of the
surrender. Major Barre was to leave at once for England with dispatches,
and there was much to report. To his friend, Major-General Joseph Yorke,
Amherst wrote, in spite of weariness, a brief account of his work :
'I have as much pleasure in telling you
Canada belongs to the King as I had in receiving the capitulation of it
this day, from the satisfaction I know it will give you. The French
troops all lay down their arms, and are not to serve during the war ;
their behaviour in carrying on a cruel and barbarous war in this
country, I thought deserved this disgrace. I have suffered by the
Rapides not by the enemy. I entered the inhabited country with all the
savages and I have not hurt the head of a peasant, his wife or his
child, not a house burnt, or a disorder committed ; the country people
amazed; won't believe what they see ; the notions they had of our
cruelties from the exercise of their own savages, drove them into the
woods; I have fetched them out and put them quiet in their habitations,
and they are vastly happy. I can't tell you how much I am obliged to you
for your good letter to me; but tho' 'tis three in the morning of the
9th, [and] I have not slept these two nights past, I would not let Major
Barre go away with my dispatches without telling this news to you.'
To assert possession of Montreal on
behalf of the British army, Amherst promptly sent Colonel Haldimand, a
Swiss by birth, an officer who knew the French language thoroughly and
who afterwards was Governor of Canada, to hold one of the gates of the
town and to repress any beginnings of disorder. Amherst promptly issued
to his troops an order in which he said:
'The Marquis of Vaudreuil has
capitulated; the troops of France, in Canada, have laid down their arms;
they are not free to serve during this war; and the whole country has
submitted to the dominion of Great Britain. The three armies are all
entitled to the General's thanks on this occasion, and he assures them
he will take the first opportunity of acquainting his Majesty with the
zeal and bravery which has [sic] always been exerted by the Officers and
soldiers of the regular and provincial troops, and also by his faithful
Indian allies.'
He added a note of warning as to the
lawlessness and outrage likely to occur at such a time:
'The General is confident that, when the
troops are informed this country is the King's, they will not disgrace
themselves by the least appearance of inhumanity, or by any
unsoldierlike behaviour of seeking for plunder; but that, as the
Canadians are now become British subjects, they may feel the good effect
of his Majesty's protection.'
Amherst meant this last injunction to be
taken seriously. A British soldier caught in the act of pillage was
promptly hanged.
On the day after the surrender the
inhabitants of Montreal saw a memorable illustration of the fortunes of
war. One by one the French battalions marched to the Place d'Armes and
there surrendered to the custody of the British the weapons used in the
long struggle. One set of trophies Levis was resolved that the victor
should not have, and, on the 8th, when he saw that Amherst intended to
compel a humiliating surrender, he ordered the colours of the French
regiments to be burned. Amherst, writing to Pitt on September 8, had
promised to send him soon the French colours as glorious trophies.
Perhaps he did not realize that it is one of the strongest traditions of
the French army that flags must not be given up to the enemy. As
recently as in France's last great war, that with Germany in 1870, one
of the most indignant charges against Bazaine, who surrendered at Metz,
is that he did not burn his flags rather than let them fall into the
hands of the victors. When Amherst demanded the French flags, both
Vaudreuil and Levis declared that, owing to the difficulties of a
country where there was so much forest, the colours had become useless
and had been destroyed. Amherst insisted that the two leaders should
give him their word of honour that this was the case, and they promptly
did so. It was, of course, true that the colours had been destroyed, but
the French leaders were certainly not frank in their reply to Amherst.
It may be doubted whether the French
officers resertted more the sternness of Amherst or what they considered
the too-ready acquiescence of Vaudreuil in the British demands. Yet he
had acted wisely. By surrendering before an assault was made on
Montreal, he had procured favourable terms for the Canadians, whose
desolate country, after further resistance was hopeless, assuredly
deserved some consideration. They might return to their homes without
penalty, and they were now certain of protection to their property and
of the free exercise of their religion. But, because Vaudreuil was
himself a Canadian, he was suspected by the French officers of
sacrificing the interests of the army to those of his own people. When,
on the day after the surrender, he gave a dinner to Amherst, not a
French officer would accept his hospitality. Nor would they accept
courtesies from Amherst himself. Relations between old acquaintances
were strained. At Quebec Malartic had seen much of Murray, but now he
could accept Murray's hospitality only after securing special
permission. Murray, he says, overwhelmed him with compliments on the
resourcefulness of his countrymen ; the French, Murray said, had covered
themselves with glory in defending through six campaigns what the
British ought to have taken in one.
When, on September 9, Levis reviewed his
little army for the last time, there were present 1,953 soldiers and 179
officers ; in the hospitals there were besides 241 sick and wounded. No
less than 927 were absent from their regiments. Some, indeed, were
absent on service, but 548 had deserted or disappeared. It was a
somewhat pitiable showing. At Jacques Cartier and Three Rivers there
were still small garrisons, and a handful of French soldiers remained at
Detroit and Michillimackinac, distant posts in the interior. All who
surrendered were to be sent home at once. The married officers and
private soldiers were to have accommodation for their wives and
families. In addition to the military, a few civilians, chiefly the
officers of the French government in Canada, had the right of carriage
to France. These French subjects were not numerous, and allowing for
women, children, and servants, probably four thousand would be a liberal
estimate of the number now to be embarked in Canada for their return
home.
It was not unnatural that the defeated
army should desire to get away as quickly as possible. In the terms of
capitulation, Vaudreuil had stipulated that his whole force should be
embarked for France within fifteen days. Though this was a heavy
undertaking it was possible to carry it out. More than fifty transports
had come up the river with Murray's forces and were now available for
this new task. Moreover, there were other transports at Quebec. The days
following the capitulation saw busy scenes. The British had wished to
send some of the French regiments to New York, there to be embarked. To
this, however, Levis would not assent, for he was sure that on the
journey to that distant port many of his soldiers would desert and be
lost to France. He now kept his disarmed battalions in their own
quarters and drew up elaborate regulations for their governance during
the voyage. The troops embarked at Montreal were not to be allowed to go
ashore at Quebec except under the strictest regulations. Levis
prescribed the measures to be taken on board for preserving both health
and discipline ; and he counselled officers and men to study great
reserve in their communications with the British who were to carry the
army back to France. He promised, and he kept his word, that he would
spare no labour, on his return to France, to secure for these brave and
unfortunate men the payment of the drafts on France which represented
their hard-earned wages during the many months of war.
Vaudreuil had stipulated that, until he
embarked, he should continue to occupy unmolested his own excellent
house in Montreal, the property of his family. He also arranged that the
most comfortable ship available should be provided for himself, his
wife, servants, and suite, and he and Bigot took special care that they
should be allowed to carry away their papers without examination by the
British. Two ships were to be provided for Levis, his chief officers,
and their suites; and they too were to carry away their papers without
examination. It was also provided that Bigot, the Intendant, should have
a ship for himself and his suite. It is perhaps significant of the
quantity of luggage and of papers which Vaudreuil and Bigot were taking
away that three flat-bottomed boats were placed at the disposal of each
of them for conveying their effects to the waiting ships. A similar
courtesy was denied to Levis and his staff until they explained
satisfactorily the disappearance of the colours. Amherst had heard
gossip that the flags were still in existence, and he threatened to
search all the baggage before it was embarked if they were not produced.
As we have seen, however, the colours had really been destroyed.
After three or four days spent in the
preparation of the ships, the work of embarkation began on September 14.
We can picture the water-front of the little frontier town alive with
the movement now going on; the troops of France in their worn and faded
uniforms marching to the points assigned to them to enter the boats; the
many spectators, in the idle days of transition, eagerly watching the
dejection and the exultation that the events of war must always bring in
varying degrees to its votaries. On the side towards the swift river
five gates opened through the wall. The quays were inadequate and some
of the ships could not be brought on shore. This made embarkation
difficult. By th| 16th, however, nearly the whole of the French army was
afloat and on its way down the river. Rearrangements were to be made at
Quebec, where lay other transports. Colonel de Bougainville, the handy
man of the French army, had been sent in advance to Quebec to
superintend the work at that point. On the 17th Levis himself set out
from Montreal in the ship assigned to him, but Vaudreuil and Bigot
lingered a little longer to complete necessary business. On the 15th a
crier went through the town to notify all who had demands for payments
to apply to the Intendant at once. At the same time the Governor and the
Intendant issued a joint statement assuring the Canadians that the King
of France would not fail, in time, to redeem the paper currency now
worthless in their hands. The business affairs of France in Canada were,
as far as possible, closed, and a Commissary was left behind to settle
what was still left open. On the 20th Vaudreuil took ship for his
troubled voyage home, and on the 21st Bigot did the same. During three
weeks some twenty or more British transports laden with French soldiers
were making their way down the river. Some of their names—The True
Briton, The Fanny, The Mary and Jane, The Sally, The Hannah, The
Abigail, and The Young Isaac—must have sounded strangely in French ears.
One vessel engaged in this service had a notable history. It was La
Marie, which alone had escaped from the British during the fight with
Vauquelain. She had now become a British transport.
[Levis preserved carefully a mass of
correspondence, and in later years, when Governor-General of Artois, he
occupied himself with arranging it. In 1888 his great-grandson, Comte
Raimond de Nicolay, presented copies of these papers to the Government
of the Province of Quebec on condition that they should be printed. This
Collection des Manuscrits du Marichal de Livis is of great value for the
history of the period. Upon the Collection much of the present volume is
based. The editorial work on the documents is very defective.]
A few weeks earlier Captain Knox had
delighted in the bright sunshine and the entrancing beauty of the river
scenery as he passed up to Montreal. Now, however, nature was as unkind
to the defeated army as war itself had been. We have a detailed
narrative by Malartic of the journey, and his experiences were similar
to those of the French army as a whole. It was on September 16 that
Mitotic embarked in a schooner with part of the regiment of Bearn. The
next day the ship ran aground in Lake St. Peter and lay helpless for
more than twenty-four hours. She had set out without good pilots, and
with such an inadequate supply of provisions that, after two or three
days, those on board were obliged to send foraging parties ashore to
seek bread and vegetables among the inhabitants. Soon after passing
Three Rivers, on the 19th, the ship encountered a heavy storm from the
north-east, which made progress almost impossible. On the 22nd she ran
aground again and smashed one of her small boats. So incomplete was the
ship's equipment that no hammer or nails could be found on board with
which to attempt repairs. The soldiers went ashore freely and a good
many deserted. The ship crept on slowly in spite of the storm which
lasted many days. Not until October 5, nearly three weeks after leaving
Montreal, did she reach Quebec. During this tempest we hear a plaintive
note from the Intendant Bigot, storm-bound at Batiscan, near Three
Rivers. Madame Pean, the Pompadour of Canada, is, he says, bored to
death by the monotony of life on the small ship, and is moreover
sea-sick ; he himself is also miserable from sea-sickness. He had
provided luxuries for his own party on the journey, but he complains
that the company is half-starved, in defiance of the sacred obligations
which Great Britain had assumed to feed the French leaders as well as
her own officers were fed. Levis, too, was not without female
consolation on the voyage, and he also complains of straitened quarters
and hard fare. Vaudreuil had an even more serious quarrel with fortune.
His ship struck a rock on the way to Quebec and he was obliged to
abandon her.
The troubled journey to Quebec was not a
promising beginning for the longer voyage. In some cases there was now a
hurried transhipment. Malartic was given only one hour to get himself
and a considerable body of the regiment on board a British snow and to
be afloat again Levis pressed the British to give the French army
adequate accommodation, but the result did not prove satisfactory. A
number of vessels, disabled by the terrific storm, could not go to sea ;
and, in consequence, the remaining ships were somewhat crowded. Levis
declares, however, that the English were rigorous in not allowing more
than one man for each ton of a ship. The impoverished French officers
had no money to buy from the traders, now swarming at Quebec, any
luxuries to ease the hardships of the voyage, and, for the most part,
they could secure only the fare of the common sailors. The season was
far advanced and haste was necessary, for, in the late autumn, the St.
Lawrence route is dangerous. Obviously there was no time for niceties in
regard either to the equipment of the ships or in the order of sailing.
At first Levis was resolved to be the last to set out, but in the end he
was obliged to sail when his ship was ready and to leave Bourlamaque in
charge.
The voyage proved tempestuous. Off
Louisbourg the storms were so frightful that the ship of Levis lost a
mast and, for two hours, it seemed certain that she would sink. Malartic
describes the way in which his ship was now becalmed, now lost in fog,
on the St. Lawrence. At one time she came into collision with a larger
ship and nearly sank. After passing out into the Atlantic between Cape
Breton and Newfoundland, she was still five weeks in reaching the shores
of France. Since luxuries were wholly wanting, there was joy when they
met in mid-ocean a great Dutch vessel from Surinam. Her aged captain was
completing his 66th year of voyaging, but he was still acute enough to
sell them rum, sugar, and coffee at a high price. We may wonder where
the impoverished French officers, returning to France almost penniless,
secured the money to pay for these luxuries. At length, late in
November, they cast anchor in the harbour of La Rochelle. Levis arrived
next day, and the other transports came sailing in. Though the weather
had been bad and the ships, in some cases, crowded, the health of the
whole army was surprisingly good on the voyage. Levis says that he
brought back only 1,500 or 1,600 men. The rest had preferred to remain
in the colony, and the captive French leader had been powerless to check
this desertion. A good many of the French-Canadians of the present day
must have in their veins the blood of the soldiers of Levis.
Under the plea of needing rest, Levis
waited at La Rochelle for five or six days. ' I have disembarked only
this moment,' he wrote to the Due de Belle-Isle on November 25; ' I
should have wished to be able to leave for Versailles at once, but the
fatigues and also the dangers which I have undergone in the voyage just
completed oblige me to take five or six days for the recovery of my
health.' The real cause of delay was, perhaps, the lack of money to go
to Versailles. He was soon aided by his powerful connexions, but other
French officers were not so fortunate, and the poor reward of some of
the grizzled veterans of the Canadian campaigns, when they returned
home, was a lapse into hopeless poverty. Those who brought the paper
money with which they had been paid in Canada found it quite valueless
in France. When they demanded relief they were often sent unsatisfied
from department to department. Each department said that it was the
business of another : the Controller-General referred the matter to the
Department of Marine, and M. Berryer, the head of that department, said
the claims must go to the Department of War or of Finance. The
unfortunate men who had suffered great hardships for their country may
well have thought that it was better to starve amid the perils of a
campaign than ingloriously at home. Doubtless many of them were
heart-sick enough in France to regret the life in the Canadian
wilderness where, though half-naked and half-fed, they could still do
something for the honour of their country.
For the defeated leaders, fate had
varying fortunes. Since crimes may be forgiven only to success, shame
was in store for the discredited plunderers of the colony. In the France
to which Bigot, Cadet, and a dozen others had so longed to return in
affluence, they found a stern reception. The loss of the colony had
caused general indignation, and the Government was only too glad of the
excuse of alleged fraud to find scapegoats. When Bigot presented himself
at Versailles before Berryer, the Minister of Marine, he was greeted
angrily with the charge that it was he who had lost Canada by his
criminal plundering of her resources, and that the rigours of justice
awaited him. Vaudreuil, too, met with a stormy reception. He wrote from
Brest on December 10 a plaintive letter to excuse his conduct and to
explain the loss of the colony. But his words did not avail. By the
King's command he was censured for surrendering Montreal, in spite of
the protests of Levis, and he was one of the many persons accused of
fraud. Twenty-three were sent to the Bastille, among them Vaudreuil,
Bigot, Cadet, and Pean. There they remained, at a daily cost to the King
of a hundred and sixty-four livres, for about three years, until final
judgement was rendered. Durance in the Bastille involved, for at least
the well-to-do class, less rigour than the Paris mob supposed when it
destroyed that famous prison some twenty-five years later. Vaudreuil had
his negro servant with him and a supply of books, and he was allowed to
take exercise in the open air. We get glimpses of Bigot and Pean also
with servants in attendance. The prisoners were permitted to have
tobacco and wine. A surgeon attended twice a day upon one of them who
was ill. Special permission was accorded to Bigot, Cadet, and others to
go to mass. Assuredly they had need of repentance.
The trial was not begun until more than a
year after the fall of Canada. The case came before the Court of the
Chatelet. Twenty-seven judges, named for the trial, were engaged fifteen
months in the examination of the papers. The proceedings attracted the
attention of Europe. The accused persons numbered fifty-five, and each
of them prepared a Memoire in his own defence. That of Bigot runs to
nearly twelve hundred printed quarto pages. He traversed the whole
ground of his term of office in Canada, and denied boldly that he had
been a party to any fraud. He attacked Cadet as the chief criminal in
the affairs of New France. He declared too that Vaudreuil, his superior
in rank, was, for that reason, more responsible than he for anv seeming
official collusion in fraud. Bigot so traduced the memory of Montcalm
that the mother and the widow of the dead soldier petitioned the Court
to impose a fine on the former Intendant for the libel. Vaudreuil
answered the charges with dignity. His lineage he declared should have
placed him above the suspicion of sordid fraud ; he had been wholly
occupied with military matters; he had not been concerned with finance
and had had no interest in contracts. He defended with eloquence the
officers of the regular army, dead and living, who lay under suspicion.
It was to him, he said, that these poor men, who had shed their blood
for France, had the right to look for defence. They were now the victims
of base calumny and he should himself be base if he did not stand forth
as a witness to their talents, their virtues, and their innocence.
Judgement was rendered in December, 1763.
The prosecution asked for Bigot a punishment truly mediaeval—that, clad
only in his shirt and placarded as a thief, he should be made to kneel
before the principal gate of the Tuileries, with a rope round his neck,
and to proclaim aloud his own guilt, and that, after this, his head
should be struck off. He was, of course, found guilty, but a sentence
less severe was imposed upon him. He was to pay a fine of 1,500,000
livres and to suffer the loss of all his goods by confiscation. It is
not clear how, with his goods confiscated, he was to pay the fine. In
addition, and worst of all, when we remember his dream of a life of
luxury in France, he was condemned to perpetual banishment. Cadet was
banished for nine years from Paris, and, since his stealings were on a
colossal scale, was ordered to restore six millions to the King's
Treasury. Varin had to pay back 1,600,000 livres, and he, too, was
banished. Pean was condemned to restore 600,000 livres and to remain in
prison until he did so. He paid the money at once and was set free.
Lesser rascals were also punished, but two of the worst, Deschenaux and
St. Sauveur, seem to have escaped because they had chosen to remain in
Canada.
Fortune seemed to treat the plunderers of
Canada with rigour. The Government instructed its servants to hunt out
the stolen property in all the provinces of France. There was something
like a scramble among persons of rank to secure the silver plate of
Bigot, his soup and entree dishes, his wine-coolers, his candlesticks,
and dozens of other objects of luxury. Some of the criminals, now
penniless, and unable to pay their fines, remained in jail, and we hear
from their destitute families piteous appeals to the King for help. The
way of transgressors was hard for some, but not for all. The sentence of
banishment upon Cadet was soon cancelled. In 1764 he was granted
permission to go to Canada. After his return he purchased extensive
lands in France. He had the hardihood to claim from the French
Government no less a sum than 9,000,000 livres, as due to him. He was
prosperous for a time, but his mania for speculation, and perhaps, too,
for sport, since he was fond of good horses, in the end brought ruin. He
died a bankrupt in 1781. His two daughters married into two of the
oldest families of France. For Bigot we find no less a person than the
Bishop of Blois interceding in 1774, and, though we know little of his
later career, it seems that he was allowed to return to France and to
end his days there with some appearance of prosperity. It is worth
noting that the France which dealt so gently with some of these guilty
men, was, at the same time, relentless towards an innocent man who had
tried to build up her empire. After a brave struggle, the Comte de Lally
had been defeated in India and carried a prisoner to England. When
allowed to return to France in 1761, he was sent to the Bastille, a
fellow prisoner of the accused men from Canada. By faults of temper
Lally had made enemies, and it was now charged that he had sold
Pondicherry to the English. There was no real evidence against him, but
he was sentenced to death. This brave and innocent Frenchman, handcuffed
and gagged, was taken in a dung-cart to the scaffold and executed with
every accompaniment of horror. Cadet, a real criminal, became a seigneur
in France, and but for his own bad judgement might have ended his days
in luxury.
Among those who were declared guiltless
of fraud in Canada we are glad to find Vaudreuil. He was liberated in
December, 1763. Choiseul wrote to him in the following May to express
the King's pleasure that his conduct had been found without reproach. He
received a pension of 6,000 livres; and he also received what he greatly
prized, the Grand Cross of St. Louis, which carried with it a further
pension of 6,000 livres. Drafts on the French Treasury which he held had
not been honoured, and without his pensions he would have been poor. His
later years were sad. His brother, a distinguished admiral, died shortly
before the verdict of acquittal; so also did Madame de Vaudreuil; and he
was left a lonely old man. 'I am well convinced', he wrote to a friend
in March, 1764, 'of the instability of human affairs and should be
indifferent to life but for the kindness of relations and friends.' He
lived on until 1778. Perhaps posterity has been a little unkind to the
memory of the fussy, ineffective, but well-meaning Governor who loved
Canada with all his heart and spared himself no labour in the interests
of the ruined colony.
The lot of Levis was happier. His
connexions were very influential, and, like the rest of the French
world, he paid court to Madame de Pompadour. His friends made
representations at the British Court in order to remove the prohibition
to serve in the French army before peace was made. Levis himself
protested that he and the other French officers had treated generously
their British captives and had done their utmost to prevent Indian
outrages in America. In the end Pitt cancelled the disability placed on
Levis to serve again during the war. The action was hardly pleasing to
Britain's ally, Frederick the Great, who soon found Levis taking an
active and distinguished part on the French side in the campaigns in
Germany. After the war closed he was named Governor of Artois. He became
Marshal of France and Due de Levis, and died at the age of sixty-seven,
in 1787, just before the Revolution began. Two years later, in 1789,
when the Revolution broke out, his body, buried at Arras, was torn from
the grave and his bones were scattered. The Revolution swallowed up many
of his family. He had married a wealthy lady after his return from
Canada, and his widow and two of his three daughters perished on the
scaffold during the Terror. His son, a deputy for the noblesse in the
States-General of 1789, fled as an emigre to England and lost his
property. He returned to France with Louis XVIII on the fall of Napoleon
and had the honour to become a member of the French Academy. His father
had died on the eve of the first fall of the Bourbons, and he died in
1830, just before their second fall. His son, the last Due de Levis,
born in London in 1794, died without issue in 1869 in the arms of the
Comte de Chambord, the Bourbon claimant to the French throne.
The most conspicuous lieutenant of Levis,
Bougainville, was extremely fortunate in his career. He was born in
1729, and early showed a varied range of talents. In 1754 he was
Secretary of the French Embassy in London. Already, when he went to
Canada in 1756, he had published a treatise in two volumes on the
Integral Calculus, had been made a Fellow of the Royal Society of
England, and, to please his family, had become also an advocate. After
his return from Canada in 1760, he secured leave from the British
Government to serve in the existing war, and he took an active part in
the campaign on the Rhine in 1761. He was offered the post of Governor
of Cayenne, but declined it because he had another project in mind.
Britain with her navy, stronger now than the combined navies of the rest
of Europe, needed only, it was said, to master the South Seas in order
to establish that universal monarchy which was supposed to have been
also the ambition of Louis XIV. Bougainville planned that France should
be ahead of her in the South Seas. When already thirty-four this scholar
and soldier began the life of a sailor. As soon as peace was concluded
in 1763, he set out, a naval captain, on an adventure as colonizer and
discoverer. He founded in the Falkland Islands a French colony which,
however, the protests of Spain soon obliged France to withdraw. But in
1766 Bougainville set out again, and this time penetrated into regions
more remote and made important discoveries of hitherto unknown regions
in the South Seas. By 1769 he had completed a voyage round the world,
two years before Captain Cook, who had also served in Canada at the time
of the fall of Quebec, returned from his famous voyage. Bougainville
commanded the first French squadron to go round the world. His Voyage
autour du Monde, published in 1771, showed close observation of nature
and won a prodigious success. He had a share in the crushing defeat of
the British at Yorktown in 1781. We are impressed with his versatility
when we find him commanding a naval squadron at Brest in 1790. He soon
retired from scenes of war, however, and under Napoleon became a Senator
of France. He died in 1811, shortly before the fall of the Empire.
There are not wanting indications that,
next to Montcalm himself, the most efficient of the soldiers who served
on the French side during the war was Bourlamaque. He was the intimate
personal friend of Montcalm, who unburdened his mind to him with
self-revealing frankness. Bourlamaque was less intimate with Levis, and
it is quite clear that the quiet, painstaking, hard-working soldier had
not too much confidence in the military genius of his superior officer.
No one could doubt Bourlamaque's courage and honesty; he had a high
sense of dignity, and gossip and slander left him alone. At the time of
the capitulation, Bourlamaque, who was very poor and had no other means
of livelihood, begged Amherst to except him from the prohibition to
serve again during the war. Both he and Levis declared that they had
given no countenance to the outrages by the savages. Bourlamaque had,
indeed, risked his life more than once to save British prisoners.
Amherst proved inexorable, but, a little later, the British Government
removed the prohibition from Bourlamaque, as they did from Levis and
Bougainville. On returning to France, Bourlamaque, with other officers,
was invited to serve in Malta, menaced at that time by the Turk. He did
not live long enough to win further distinction. He was sent as Governor
to Guadaloupe and died there in 1764.
The fate of the brave sailor, Vauquelain,
was tragic. It is said that even when a certain Duchess begged Berryer,
the Secretary of the Navy, to do something for the heroic seaman, the
minister was obdurate. There were so many people of good birth, he said,
who wanted places that he had nothing to spare for any one not noble; it
was true that Vauquelain was a hero, but what could one do ? Since
Vauquelain had been trained in the merchant service, he should now go
back to it. Better counsels, however, soon prevailed. In 1761, Berryer
himself retired from the navy, much to the advantage of that service.
The Due de Choiseul took his place and infused new life into French
naval policy. In 1763 Vauquelain was sent on a mission to India with the
rank of an officer in the royal navy. Great was the tumult among the
officers of noble birth at this appointment. There is much obscurity
about the later events. This, however, is certain, that on Vauquelain's
return from India, in 1763, he was assassinated when only thirty-seven
years old.
We get glimpses of a few others who
played their part in the war. Ramezay was attacked savagely because he
had surrendered Quebec. He begged for leave to publish a defence, but
this was refused on the ground that it would only cause others to
explain themselves and perhaps to contradict him. Only a hundred years
later was the defence of Ramezay published, when the old controversies
had long been dead. Though the unfortunate officer was miserably poor he
was allowed a pension of but 300 livres. By 1771 he had died, apparently
while serving in Cayenne, and his widow was then petitioning for help
for herself and her children.
Some of the French officers lived to take
part in triumphant over the victor who had humbled them in Canada.
Desandroinns, the engineer who had built Fort Levis, was, like
Bougainville, at Yorktown in 1781, when a British army under General
Cornwallis, many times more numerous than that of Levis at Montreal, was
forced to surrender. At Yorktown the French fleet had, for the moment,
the command of the sea, and played the same decisive part that the
British fleet had played in the St. Lawrence. It is, indeed, well to
remember that the victor of 1760 was the vanquished in 1781. France had
proved but feeble in Canada against a foe who revealed boundless energy,
but France was not exhausted. Before the Seven Years' War ended, a plan
for reviving the navy was making great progress under the energetic lead
of Choiseul. The agitation resulted in an active campaign for help and
in liberal gifts for the fleet. The estates of Languedoc offered a ship;
trade guilds, chambers of commerce, great capitalists, took up the
question. Even the clergy voted a million. In all 14,000,000 livres were
contributed.
Canada, however, France had lost for
ever. As soon as Montreal fell the British reached out to grasp what was
to prove in the end more important than the territory they had actually
occupied. At points of vantage on or near the great lakes of the
interior, at Detroit, St. Joseph, and Michilimackinac, the French flag
still waved. These places commanded that great west, destined to provide
homes for so many millions. Amherst sent Major Rogers at once with two
hundred rangers to occupy these forts. In accordance with the terms of
the capitulation, Vaudreuil wrote letters to the commandants ordering
them to transfer the posts to the British. It was at these places that
the corrupt ring in New France had reaped such great profits. But, in
spite of these evils, the French had attached to themselves a good many
of the Indian tribes. These did not like the change to the British and
mutterings soon began. Did the victors, they asked, then claim that, by
a paper signed at Montreal, the whole western country, the country owned
by the Indians themselves, should suddenly become British? Naturally the
French did nothing to check the misgivings of the savages. The result,
two or three years later, was an outbreak under the chief Pontiac, which
caused a barbarous frontier war.
It was in accordance with the methodical
accuracy of Amherst that, as soon as he held Montreal, he should have
set to work at once to find out how many people lived in the country
which he had conquered. On October 4 he sent a report to Pitt on this
subject. There were, he said, 108 parishes, inhabited by 76,172 people,
of whom 16,412, or more than one person in five, were enrolled in the
militia. It is not possible now to verify these figures. They do not
include the Indians in the country or the French in the interior. On the
other hand, they probably make no allowance for the wastage of the war.
It is, on the whole, doubtful whether there were more than 70,000
persons of European origin dwelling in the vast regions which now fell
to Britain. Yet only after six severe campaigns had their country been
mastered. At this time, as one hundred and forty years later in South
Africa, it was made clear that a people reared in the hardening
conditions of pioneer life, accustomed to the use of arms, fighting for
their homes on their own ground and scattered over a great area, could
hold out for a long time against overwhelming numbers.
Not many of the Canadians went back to
France. The people who crowded into the returning ships in the autumn of
1760 represented chiefly the classes whose occupation was gone in
Canada—French soldiers and officials of the French Government. It is
true that some of the landowners left Canada. In the first pangs of
defeat there were, of course, men who despaired of their country and
were resolved to abandon it. In all, however, little more than a hundred
of the Canadian seigneurs left the country. When they knocked at
official doors in Paris they always received smooth words. The French
Government showed much sympathy for the sufferers and continued for many
years to bestow largess upon needy families. But men accustomed to be
masters in Canada were unwilling to fill the role of beggars in France.
It might, after all, be easier to gain a livelihood on the banks of the
St. Lawrence than on the banks of the Seine, and some of them recrossed
the ocean. In any case, whatever a few seigneurs may have done, the
farmer, the real producer in Canada, never thought of leaving the
country, and remained to keep strong the traditions of the social life
of old France.
The British took up the task of governing
Canada with their usual energy. As soon as their flag was raised over
Montreal, they sent parties to survey the St. Lawrence from Isle Perrot
downwards to Quebec. The French, Amherst says, had made little use of
the river for water carriage, and, until the previous year, when their
ships had been forced to ascend it to escape from the fleet of Saunders,
they had not known that large vessels could come up to Three Rivers and
Montreal. Amherst sent Colonel Burton to be Governor at Three Rivers ;
General Gage was to stay at Montreal; Murray was to remain as Governor
at Quebec. Sir William Johnson departed with his Indians, after they had
received such trinkets as Johnson thought necessary to satisfy their
childish tastes. Amherst ordered the works at Isle aux Noix to be
completely destroyed, and everything of value in the fort was taken to
that solid fortress which he had built at Crown Point. He himself soon
went to New York. Three weeks after Montreal fell he wrote to Pitt that
Canada was as quiet and secure as any other portion of the King's
dominions.
The dispatch sent to Pitt by Major Barre
announcing the surrender of Montreal reached England on October 3. The
news was received with joy, but the public had expected it and did not
go into the transports that marked the unexpected news of Wolfe's
victory a year earlier. Three weeks passed before, on October 24, Pitt
wrote to congratulate Amherst on his success. With a great display of
capital letters Pitt expressed ' the universal Applause and Admiration '
at the outcome of ' that masterly Plan, which you had, with such
unwearied Application and Diligence, formed '. The terms of the '
Capitulation of Montreal are highly becoming the Humanity, Magnanimity,
and Wisdom of His Majesty '. By this time, however, Pitt was thinking of
other plans. Further efforts must be made against France, and his active
mind was already occupied with the problem of a renewed attack on the
French islands in the West Indies. France still retained, too, a footing
in the North American Continent, for the lower portions of the
Mississippi remained in her possession. Pitt pressed Amherst to secure
any information that might aid in further attacks on the French. He did
not realize that a crushing blow to his own power was about to fall. On
October 25, the day after Pitt wrote the letter to Amherst, King George
II, a model of regularity, rose as usual at six and drank his chocolate.
At a quarter past seven, a servant, hearing a noise in the King's room,
rushed in and found that he had fallen and was lying dead on the floor.
His death meant the end of Pitt's rule. The new king, George III, meant
himself to rule and would have no servant all-powerful, and the end of
the sway of the great minister was not far off.
Pitt, however, was still minister and was
still all for war. But war soon wearies those who bear its real burden.
In the spring of 1761 the new military levies, on which Pitt insisted,
caused at Hexham a riot so serious that forty-two persons were killed.
One obstacle to peace was that Pitt had taught the nation to expect the
complete humiliatiorj of France. 'Some time ago' he said, 'I would have
been content to bring France to her knees; now I will not rest till I
have laid her on her back.' Yet France, as we know, was far from being
completely exhausted. The young king, George III, did not share Pitt's
views, and showed at once another temper. In the draft of the King's
speech to be read at the opening of Parliament in November, 1760, the
war was spoken of as ' bloody and expensive Owing to Pitt's protest, the
war was called instead 'expensive, but just and necessary'. To attack
the war remained, however, the policy of the King and his friends. Pitt
was received coldly at court, and it was clear that he was no longer the
real master.
Not a jot, however, did Pitt abate in his
ambitions or resolve. France must be trampled in the dust. She set great
store by the Newfoundland fishery, largely because it was a nursery for
her seamen, but Pitt declared that she must give up any share in it.
During negotiations for peace in the summer of 1761, Pitt, who had
recently recovered the use of his right hand, said that he should regret
this recovery if he should use the hand to sign any document that left
France a shadow of right not merely in Canada and Cape Breton but even
in Newfoundland. France was equally determined. Choiseul declared that
he would be stoned in the streets of Paris if he gave up the fishery,
and he simply refused to listen when the question was broached. France
now secured a new ally, for in August, 1761, she signed a treaty with
Spain by which each country guaranteed the possessions of the other. The
treaty was secret, but Pitt got wind of it and urged the British Cabinet
to declare war on Spain and use British sea power to occupy Cuba and the
Philippines before Spain was ready.
Most of Pitt's own colleagues were
alarmed at his aggressive policy. These ambitions for world-wide empire,
said Hardwicke, the Lord Chancellor, would alarm her nations and cause
them to unite against the ambitions of Britain as they had united
against those of Louis XIV. On one occasion, at least, a meeting of the
King's Council to debate the problem of peace lasted for six hours. Pitt
banged the table with his fist, declared that he would not be
responsible for what he did not control, and threatened to resign if his
will was not done. We may doubt whether the peers who then governed
England had ever before been addressed in this style. Nearly all of
them, including Pitt's own nominal leader, the Duke of Newcastle, were
opposed to an extreme policy. Newcastle had raised the money for the
war, while Pitt had spent it with a lavish hand. In the spring of 1760,
when Pitt had been aiming his final blow at Canada, Newcastle had
declared that Britain could not stand the strain for another year. At
this Pitt had flown into a violent passion. ' In short, there was no
talking to him,' wrote Newcastle at the time. Now, however, some of
Pitt's colleagues talked to him. Hardwicke believed that Pitt was trying
to make his own resignation inevitable. He had led the nation to expect
so much that now he could not be a party to a peace that was reasonable
without losing his popularity. When his colleagues voted against him in
regard to the proposed attack on Spain, he carried out his threat and
resigned on October 5, 1761. Only one minister, Earl Temple, his
brother-in-law, retired with him.
Thus ended the sway of the minister to
whom, more than to any one else, it is due that Canada and India are
to-day British. Even a hostile king did what honour he could to the
great minister. He was offered the post of Governor of Canada, with a
salary of £5,000 a year. We must not suppose that any one thought Pitt
would go to Canada to govern on the spot. It was intended that he should
remain in England and be Governor only in name. The offer to create such
a post shows, however, that Britain was resolved to rule Canada. Pitt
refused this honorary post, refused indeed, to take any office or any
title. But he accepted a pension of £3,000 a year, and, though he would
not himself become Lord Chatham, he allowed his wife to be made Baroness
Chatham. The acceptance of these favours tied his hands. It was a very
mild Pitt who criticized the policy of the new ministers.
Even with Pitt out of office, the war did
not end at once. The new leader was the Earl of Bute, and events were
too strong for him and the young king. They found themselves obliged to
make war on Spain, the new ally of France. Even with this added enemy to
meet, the matchless weapon for war which Pitt had forged did its work.
Men whom he had inspired remained in the Cabinet. The British fleet
continued to be superior to all the other fleets of Europe combined. In
1762 Britain took both Cuba and the Philippines from Spain. She took
Martinique from France, and shattered the last remnant of French power
in the West Indies. But the new ministers almost regretted these
successes, since they served to show that Pitt had been right. This is
not the place to pursue the story. George III and Bute wanted peace,
peace at almost any price, though Britain was the victor. Bute tried to
negotiate peace with Austria behind the back of his own ally, Frederick
the Great. He cut off from Frederick the subsidy which had supported
60,000 Prussian troops. He abandoned the war in Germany with no regard
to the safety of Hanover, the apple of the eye of George II. In
November, 1762, the King's speech referred to the ' bloody and expensive
war ', the words rejected two years earlier through Pitt's urgency.
George III bought a majority in the House of Commons who would vote for
peace ; in a single morning £25,000 was paid in bank-notes to members of
the House of Commons to secure their support. The measure of the King's
grasp of the far-reaching problem of peace, as it affected Canada, is
perhaps to be found in his remark that in North America France would
make the Mississippi the boundary and would demolish all the forts on
the Ganges.
It is not impossible that, in view of the
resolve of George III to have peace at almost any price, France might
have retained Canada. The British had conquered Guadaloupe, one of the
French West India islands, before they had conquered Canada, and voices
were now raised to urge that, if some of the conquests must be given up,
it were better to yield Canada than Guadaloupe. With a much larger
population than Canada, Guadaloupe was a better market for British
goods. 'Pray what can Canada yield to Britain . . . but a little
extension of the fur trade? Whereas Guadaloupe can furnish as much
sugar, cotton, rum, and coffee as all the islands we have, put
together.' Britain was warned that to take Canada and drive France from
North America was to make inevitable the loss of the English colonies.
As soon as these had no need of the support of the motherland against a
foreign neighbour they would demand independence. When, in the summer of
1762, France sent a naval force to Newfoundland and captured St. Johns,
the French ministers talked as if that island now belonged to France and
as if the reconquest of Canada was not impossible. The navy of France
was certainly reviving under the strong lead of Choiseul. She could not,
however, hold St. Johns when the British realized what had happened. Nor
was it clear that she even wished to recover Canada. The frauds of Bigot
and Cadet were much in the public mind in 1762, and Canada seemed like a
bottomless pit in which France had already lost vast sums to no profit.
When Berryer had heard of the loss of Canada he had shown satisfaction
because there would be a charge the less. Voltaire, the masB-spirit in
the French lierary wot(1 of the timd declared against retaining Canada,
which would only be an eternal cause of war and of humiliation. When the
public was clamouring for peace he said,' I am like the public; I care
more for peace than I care for Canada, and I think France can be happy
without Quebec.' 'The effect of colonies' said Montesquieu, 'is to
enfeeble the country from which they are drawn without peopling those
where they are sent.' France was, in truth, sick of colonial adventure,
and, with hardly a pang, was ready to give up Canada.
The Treaty of Paris was signed on
February 10, 1763. To the ministers responsible for British policy for
the moment it hardly mattered that the Duke of Bedford, who negotiated
the Treaty at Paris, went much beyond his instructions in admitting the
French to a share in the fisheries of North America. France thus
obtained what Pitt had declared she should not have ; she continued to
hold the rights in Newfoundland which had remained to her under the
Treaty of Utrecht. These rights were interpreted to mean the exclusive
use of the west shore and became at a later time the source of angry
disputes. France secured also two islands near Newfoundland, St. Pierre
and Miquelon, but undertook not to fortify them. Canada ' with all its
dependencies Cape Breton and all else in the vast region about the St.
Lawrence and the Great Lakes, passed to Britain. The Mississippi River
was to be the western boundary, and Britain was to have everything east
of that river except the land about the town of New Orleans. The peace
was such that neither country had much reason to be pleased with its
rulers. In France it was not the King, but the King's foe, Frederick the
Great, who was praised by the indignant populace. When, to commemorate
the peace, an equestrian statue of Louis XV was put up with four
allegorical figures of virtues at its base, a wit wrote:
Grotesque monument, infame
piedestal:
Les vertus sont a pied, le vice est a cheval.
In England, too, the public was not
pleased. The storm of anger raised by the Treaty forced Bute to retire.
But George III remained, to wreck an empire in the years to come.
Of the leaders on the British side during
the struggle, Amherst, as was perhaps fitting, had the most prosperous
career. He received the thanks of Parliament and became Governor-General
of British North America, a term which then included the colonies
destined soon to become the United States. Amherst, whose chief merit
was his quality of slow thoroughness, found himself face to face in 1763
with a situation requiring skill which he did not possess. Then the
western Indians, who, under the chief Pontiac, had formed a league in
protest against the British claim to own their country, attacked
settlers and soldiers and committed many brutal outrages. Amherst had
always despised the Indians, and he now raged against what he called
their despicable and inhuman villany. In his savage anger at their
methods he himself made the barbarous proposal to destroy them by
distributing among them blankets tainted with small-pox. The victor who
denounced at Montreal the methods of the French had assuredly stepped
down from his pedestal. Amherst returned to England in 1763, leaving
Gage to direct the war against Pontiac. Amherst was made Governor of
Virginia, but of course had no thought of going to Virginia to govern.
When the Jesuit order was abolished, George III granted to Amherst their
great estates in Canada, but the Chancellor refused to sign the patent,
on the ground that, since Canada had been bought with the blood and
treasure of the people, the Jesuit estates were their property and not
that of the sovereign to give away. Amherst long treasured a grievance
over his failure to get these lands. He became Earl Amherst and
Commander-in-Chief of the British army. The seat of his family in Kent
is still known as Montreal.
Murray's connexion with Canada was more
vital than that of Amherst. He remained as Governor at Quebec for five
or six years and played a considerable part in the early period of
British rule. Though he wrote to Pitt after the fall of Canada to say
that he was a poor soldier of fortune without a friend at Court, he yet
managed, in some way, to acquire at least six great seigniories in
Canada, and he appears to have become in time a man of substance. The
siege of Quebec was not the only one which he had to endure from a
French army. In 1781, when he was Governor of Minorca, the French laid
siege to the island. His force of two thousand men was, in time,
terribly reduced by scurvy and other diseases, and, when almost none of
them remained fit for duty, he was obliged to surrender. Levis, who was
still living, must have noted with a certain satisfaction this
humiliation of the enemy who had baffled his own attacks.
Gage, who succeeded Amherst in the
command in North America, played a part in the early stages of the
revolt of the British colonies. He had returned to England, but he was
sent out to Boston in 1774 as Governor-in-Chief. His first task was to
put military pressure on the colonists who had recently shown their
anger at the tax on tea by throwing cargoes of tea into Boston harbour.
When Gage found the colonists arming, in fear, as they said, with astute
humour, of war with France, and sent to seize their arsenal at Concord
in Massachusetts, they attacked his force at Lexington and thus brought
on the first battle of the revolutionary war. The battle of Bunker Hill
which quickly followed was the result of orders from Gage. He soon
returned to England, and took no further conspicuous part in affairs.
More important than any success or
failure of individuals was the destiny of the conquered colony. New
France had fallen and it had deserved to fall. The cause of failure was
not that the French had no genius for colonization. On the contrary they
fitted in admirably with conditions in the New World. They took
naturally to the life of the forest and were good hunters and good
woodsmen. They were not good farmers, in the sense of knowing much about
soils and about the rotation of crops, but they knew how to wrest a
livelihood from mother earth in the hard conditions of pioneer life. It
is still true that the tenacity of the French-Canadian to hold what he
has and to press on into new fields is a cause of jealous alarm to his
rivals of British origin in Canada. Not because of his lack of vigour,
but because of the tyranny and corruption of those who ruled did the
life of the colony languish. The author of the pungent Memoires sar le
Canada declares that posterity would not believe the tale of what he
himself saw. Those who governed showed slight regard for law. Patronage
did everything; merit was persecuted; so-called justice was sold. The
people were under a stern military rule and had no shadow of political
rights. The old regime in the mother-land of France was, we may be well
assured, not wholly evil, and it certainly meant well by the colonies.
The officials in old France took endless pains with the tangled affairs
of New France. They were paternal in their counsel and admonitions. All
was dependent, however, not on them, but on the man on the spot ; and
the man on the spot, named by favour and not by merit, ruined the
colony. When a clever rascal was sent across the sea, it was not easy to
know that he was doing evil. Democracy has its faults; it is often
extravagant, inefficient and corrupt; but those who appeal to it must,
at least, create some kind of public opinion, and they must profess
virtue, however much they may disdain to practise it. Democracy, too, is
many-eyed to see and many-mouthed to denounce what it dislikes. It is
incredible that if the people of New France had controlled their own
affairs they would have borne ills which involved their ruin and sapped
all devotion to the mother-land.
The Canadians had remained densely
ignorant. The coureurs de bois who ranged the forests, the hardy men of
the axe who cleared the ground that they might sow and reap, had learned
much of the cunning of nature, but they knew nothing of books. Probably
not one in twenty of those who served in the one hundred and seventy
companies of militia could read or write. Owing to the work of the
convents the women, then as now, in French Canada were better educated
than the men. There was not a newspaper in the land, and outside of the
two or three large towns there were practically no books except books of
devotion. Oddly enough the Canadians were freer in respect to the
conduct of the business of the Church than of the State. The people of
the parishes had a real voice in electing those who administered the
temporalities of the Church, while in civil affairs they had as yet no
shadow of political liberty.
For a time it was expected that the
Canadians would become not merely British in political allegiance but
also in outlook and spirit. The Bishop of Quebec, Monsignor Pontbriand,
had died during the summer of 1760, those last dark days of New France.
For a time the British would not permit the appointment of a Roman
Catholic bishop. There was to be a Protestant Bishop of Quebec, and
sanguine people were sure that in time the Canadians would accept the
Protestant faith. It was a naive hope which had never even the
beginnings of realization. The Canadians had many reasons for wavering
in their devotion to France, for they had been cruelly harassed by the
secular power. The Church, however, had been their steadfast friend. The
priests in the parishes were devoted men, mindful of the sacred duties
committed to them. They had, it is true, no thought of religious
liberty. It is almost amusing to read of the excited alarm shown by the
cures at the idea that a Protestant might appear among their flocks;
that would be a contagion worse than any plague of physical disease. No
Protestants, however, appeared. New France had remained Catholic to a
man. Her people had not the education or the taste for religious
speculation, and the Church was to them the universal mother. The fall
of French power only deepened their devotion. In the days of adversity
the priests had words of consolation for an afflicted people. With the
old secular authority gone and the new one not yet known or trusted, the
Church was the one institution which remained deeply rooted in their
traditions. Her rulers wisely accepted the new regime. Prayers in the
language of France for 'our most gracious sovereign Lord King George'
were offered in the churches from the first days of the conquest, as
they are offered still. The British soon found that the Church was their
best friend in securing the allegiance of the people. Murray had not
long been Governor at Quebec before he was urging the British Government
to rebuild the ruined cathedral at Quebec and to encourage the religious
communities. In the end the Church regained her old privileges, and to
this day she collects the tithe from her members with all the sanction
of law as she did when Canada was under the Bourbons.
On the civil side, too, there was reason
for the Canadians to be content with British rule. No longer was
commerce in the control of corrupt monopoly. Traders from the British
colonies arrived at Montreal with the army of Amherst. As soon as the
place surrendered, Amherst sent notices broadcast inviting the colonial
merchants to occupy the new field opened to their enterprises. They were
quickly flocking to the chief centres, and the Canadian farmer benefited
by the wider competition. It is true that he needed little from
commerce, for he built his own house, made his own wagon and most of the
other things which he used, while his wife clothed the family in
garments home-woven and home-made, with no call on the outside world.
Still he bought something. The British goods were cheaper and better
than the French had been, and the frugal Canadian housewife soon had the
potent argument for British rule that under it a scanty store of money
would go much further than it had gone in the days of the old regime.
There was, moreover, no longer a Cadet to descend upon a parish and
plunder and despoil in the name of the King. The British paid for what
they needed in good yellow gold coin and not in the worthless paper
money with which Cadet had paid when he paid at all. Moreover, the
shadow of war was now removed. After the surrender of Montreal, the
military levies ceased, and the farmer could remain at home, to till his
fields and harvest his crops. The former rulers had often shown little
regard for legal rights. Now persons with a strong sense of law were in
control. There were doubts for a time whether Canada was under French or
under British law, but the victors at least recognized that it was under
law. The capitulation, too, gave rights which the vanquished claimed and
the victors acknowledged. Canada, it is true, remained under military
rule for some years, but it had always been under something like a
military regime. The British military courts judged in accordance with
the laws and customs of the country and took counsel from those who were
versed in the practices of New France.
The shadow of Bigot's finance hung long
over Canada. Traders, farmers, even officers in the army held the
ordinances, the equivalent of present-day bank-notes, which he had
issued in his own name, promising to pay sums ranging from a few to a
great many livres. The Court of France refused to pay not merely this
fugitive money but even the drafts which he had drawn on France during
the latter part of his administration. Murray estimated in 1762 that
80,000,000 livres were still owing. We can imagine the anxiety of the
man who had in his strong-box, let us say, 50,000 livres of this money,
and remained in doubt whether it might not be worthless. Everything
depended on what the French Government would do. While the war Hagjfll
on it delayed and did nothing. Holders of the paper money journeyed to
France from Canada in order to present their case. They were sent from
one official to another, but could get nothing done. Meanwhile the money
sold sometimes for one per cent, of its face value. When peace was
concluded in 1763 the question had not been settled. In 1766 a
Convention was concluded between the British and the French Governments
to the effect that British holders of the paper money should receive up
to, but not after, October 1, 1766, 50 per cent, of the face value of
their bills of exchange and 25 per cent, of the face value of their
ordinances. This, however, did not apply to the French holders. We find
the Marquise de Montcalm begging for payment of money due to the
General, and for years we get glimpses of needy officers urging their
claims. France's promises to pay were thus not fully honoured and many
Canadians suffered.
The Canadians had been told that the
British would inflict upon them every outrage and would deport them from
their homes as they had deported the Acadians. The vanquished people
found instead a security and a justice to which they had long been
unaccustomed. The kindliness of the new rulers astonished the Canadians.
During the war the British had already shown, indeed, a most creditable
magnanimity. In the autumn of 1759 the bankrupt French Government
withdrew its accustomed allowances to the French prisoners in England,
who numbered about twenty thousand. A public subscription was taken up
for them, and within a few weeks the British public had contributed
funds sufficient to reclothe this considerable army. 'It was', says
Smollett, 'one of the noblest triumphs of the human mind.' During the
winter after the surrender of Montreal, when a good many Canadians were
in a half-starving condition, the British soldiers gave cheerfully from
their scanty means a day's pay in each month to relieve the distress of
their former enemies. The reconciliation was in consequence rapid. It
was not long before many of the Canadian militia officers who had fought
against the British were proud to wear the British uniform. In 1762, as
we have seen, a French squadron appeared in Newfoundland, captured St.
Johns, took nearly five hundred British vessels of all kinds, and
inflicted damage on British shipping to the extent of a million
sterling. An advance to Canadian waters seemed possible. General
Haldimand says, however, that, had such a squadron appeared in the St.
Lawrence to reassert the claims of France, it would have caused
consternation among the French inhabitants of Canada. They did not wish
to be disturbed in their new allegiance. 'Never in the history of
nations', says a recent observer, 'did a province change its nationality
with less of a shock. For this there are various reasons; the isolation
of New France; the development of an [independent] colonial spirit; but
above all the wisdom and tact of the conquerors.' The war in South
Africa, one hundred and forty years later, was followed by a
reconciliation equally rapid. Britain, to be busy, soon after 1760, in
taxing unwilling colonists and forcing them on to revolt, was Britain at
her worst. She was at her best in the large tolerance shown in the
moment of victory in Canada. Her conduct at such a crisis goes far to
explain the secret of her dominion. |