Bulletin des recherches historiques : bulletin d'archéologie, d'histoire, de biographie, de numismatique, etc. /, 1 novembre 1933, novembre

LE BULLETIN DES Recherches Historiques VOL.XXXIX LEVIS, NOVEMBRE 1933 No.11 LA FAMILLE JACQUIN DIT PHILIBERT L’histoire de cette famille n’est pas longue mais elle a été rendue tragique et romanesque grâce à la légende et surtout au roman de William Kirby, The Golden Do7.Jacquin dit Philibert paya son acquisition 8000 livres.AI.Jacquin dit Philibert dût faire certaines réparations à la maison qu il venait d acheter puisque 1 année suivante selon une coutume du temps, il plaçait sur la façade de son magasin une pierre avec l’inscription suivante: “ Nicolas Jacquin dit Philibert m’a posée le 25 août 1735.” De 1735 à 1748, l’existence de Philibert s’écoula paisi-I)le et dans l’ombre.Le 21 janvier 1748, le bourgeois Philibert avait une altercation avec Pierre-Jean-Baptiste-François-Xavier Le Gar-deur de Repentigny, officier des troupes de la marine, au sujet d un billet de logement.AI.de Repentigny, se trouvant insulté, sortit son épée et, emporté par la colère, en frappa 1 hihbert.Celui-ci mourut le 22 janvier 1748, en pardonnant généreusement à son agresseur, dit l’acte de sépulture.C est cet episode joint a 1 inscription mystérieuse qui se trouvait sur la maison de Philibert: Je suis un chien qui ronge l’os l'.n le rongeant je prends mon repos 1 n temps viendra qui n’est pas venu Que je monderai qui m’aura mordu.qui a servi de base au roman de Kirby, The Golden dog.Disons en passant, que cette inscription fut placée sur la maison I hilibert probablement par le chirurgien Roussel peut-etre meme avant la naissance de Philibert.Ea veuve l’hilibert se remaria, à Sainte-Foy, le 24 novembre 1/al, à Bernard de Cardenau, ci-devant commis des vivres sur es vaisseaux de Sa Majesté, âgé de 28 ans “ passes , lus de ieu Leon de Cardenau, notaire royal et procu-i eui d office de Gamarde, etc, et de Marguerite de Lonné.Le mariage de la veuve Jacquin dit Philibert âgée de 36 ans, avec le sieur de Cardenau, âgé de 28 ans “ passés ”, dut un peu ennuyer les enfants de la veuve car aucun d’eux n’assis- — 643 ta au contrat de mariage reçu par le notaire Jean-Claude Pa-net, le 22 novembre 1751.Du mariage de Nicolas Jacquin dit Philibert et de Marie-Anne Guérin étaient nés six enfants: 1 Marie-Anne Jacquin dit Philibert née le 2 septembre 1734, et mariée, le 30 août 1751, à Charles-Simon Soupirail, maître chirurgien, fils de Simon Soupirail et de feu Marie-Anne Gautier.Elle décéda le 12 juillet 1756.2° Marie-Madeleine Jacquin dit Philibert née le 2 juin 1736 et décédée le 9 août 1739.3° Pierre-Nicolas Jacquin dit Philibert né le 18 mai 1737.Tl vivait encore en 1751 et signait Pierre Jacquin.Dans son roman, Kirky en fait un officier des troupes de la marine.Il y a bien eu un officier du nom Philibert dans les troupes de la Nouvelle-France, mais il était mort à Québec le 4 septembre 1734, soit trois ans avant la naissance de Pierre-Nicolas Jacquin dit Philibert.4° Pierre Jacquin dit Philibert né le 28 avril 1738 et décédé le 7 juillet 1738.5° Nicolas Jacquin dit Philibert né le 10 novembre 1740.Il était encore à Québec en 1768.Il comparaît à un acte de Saillant le 22 août 1768 et il est qualifié de “bourgeois et négociant à Québec, demeurant à la haute-ville Tl signe : Nicolas Jacquin.6° Marguerite Jacquin dit Philibert née le 30 octobre 1742.Elle est mentionnée au recensement de 1744.mais nous croyons qu’elle décéda peu après.LES DISPARUS Bigot dit Lamothe, François — Mgr Tanguay signale la présence au Cap-de-la-Madeleine, en 1643, d’un notaire royal du nom de François Bigot dit Lamothe.Aucun acte de ce notaire n’a été conservé, toutefois, M.E.-Z.Massicotte a trouvé dans le greffe de Adhémar, à la date du 15 mars 1704, d’un acte reçu par Bigot dit Lamothe où il s’intitule notaire royal de la juridiction des Trois-Rivières et procureur fiscal de la seigneurie de Champlain. — 644 — LETTRES DE L’ABBE PIERRE GAZELLE A L’HONORABLE LOUIS DE SALABERRY (Suite et fin) Londres, 22 juillet 1798 Clipstone Street, , r • - , « .Fitzroy Square.Monsieur très cher & très respectable ami, Je piofite du depart des vaisseaux nient les derniers pour Québec cette année, pour vous renouveller assuiance de mon respect et de ma vive reconnaissance pour les invitations si cordiales, si pressantes, si bien exprimées avec toute l’éloquence de cette sincère amitié qui est si précieuse, pour me presser de retourner en Canada.J’espère que vous aurez reçu les lettres que j’ai eu l'honneur de vous écrire en décembre par Mr Gaife, et à la fin de mars par la flotte.Celle de novembre aura été perdue avec deux autres à Mr Gravé et à la M.S.Alexis qui me marquent ne les avoir point reçu.Je désire de tout mon coeur et j espere que l’air de Montréal n’aura point été contraire au partait rétablissement de votre santé, que celle de madame maintenant dans son pais natal, ne peut qu’en être meilleure' que toute la chère & aimable famille se porte bien.Une chose que je ne désire et n’espère pas (parce qu’on n’a pas à désirer m esperer ce qui existe et ne peut changer) c’est de conserver pour tous ceux qui la composent le plus sincère et le plus tendre attachement toute ma vie.Quoique vous ne manquiez pas sans doute de recevoir les nouvelles d Europe, je crois devoir vous en marquer quelques-unes de celles que peut-être les papiers publiques ne mentionnent pas.L’état de la France pire que jamais.Les dermeres elections tombées sur des Jacobins si atroces que le directoire en a ete effrayé.Les visites domiciliaires ordonnées et continuées tout le mois actuel.Les loix les plus cruelles et peine de mort confirmées et renouvelles contre les pretres non tureurs et émigrés rentrés, et exécutées sur plusieurs connus ici, depuis peu.Plus de deux mois auparavant, une lettre de Bretagne du 9 avril annonçait la mort de 9 prê-ties fusilles a Dol ville de 2400 communiants.En plusieurs 3336 endroits nouvelles destructions d'églises de campagne.En quelques endroits, chiens dressés pour découvrir par 1 odorat les gens cachés dans les maisons.Le malheureux Roi de Sardaigne presque entièrement déthroné par les républiques d'Italie (la ligurienne en particulier) que celle de France met en jeu après lui avoir oté tout moyen de défense, et après que les conspirations secrètes ont échoué.Les suppressions de couvents (les dernières lettres marquent déjà 31 à Rome) les pillages d’église, massacres, etc, ont été et vont leur train en Italie, à Rome et dans le voisinage.Trois petites villes voisines aïant voulu se révolter, les français v ont fait de grands massacres, entre autres 500 à Albano.Il v en a eu aussi beaucoup à Rome, surtout au faubourg Transtevere près le Vatican dont les habitants ne pouvant souffrir les outrages faits à leurs femmes et filles ont tué 300 français un après diner.Ceux-ci, comme vous pensés, n’ont pas manqué de prendre leur revanche, ce qui n’empêche pas qu’il n’y en ait beaucoup secrettement assassinés.Les établissements des sujets britanniques y ont été confisqués.On a cependant permis qu’il v eut un vicaire Général du pape pour le diocèse.Une partie des soldats logés dans des couvents d’hommes.On pensait à en prendre de ceux de femmes pour le même objet.Le pape s’est comporté de la manière qui convenait au phis sçavant, au meilleur, au plus grand homme, et j'ajouterais, si c’était un mérite, au plus bel homme que j’aie connu marquait le'Pardinal Maury à quelqu’un ici qui me l’a répété il v a 5 à 6 mois.Tl était malade allité quand on vint lui déclarer que le p "e Romain se déclarait libre.Mes péchés et transgressions méritent pis, dit-il en se tournant, la Ste volonté de Dieu soit faite.On n’a eu aucun égard à l’observation qu il a fait, qu,étant si vieux, il n’y aurait pas d’inconvénient a le laisser qnourir tranquille à Rome.Le général français lui aiant o'dert une cocarde et une pension, jamais je ne changerai l’uworme que je tients de l’cglisc, a-t-il répondu.J’ai peu à vivrTl et je veux mourir sur la cendre.Ainsi je n ai que faire cejvotre pension.Pillés, bridés, ravages, détruises les¦ monuments de la religion, vous ne la détruirez pas.Hile a été avant v$us, elle existera malgré vous et après vous.Conduit par unefescorte à Sienne en Toscane, il leva les yeux au ciel et se tourna vers Rome en jettant sur cette ville un regard 05 — 646 t idie et pieuse compassion.Voilà ce que nous ont appris les lettres du 1er au 30 mars.La Providence l’a conservé à Sienne en permettant qu’il fut hors du couvent S Barbe au moment ou son appartement et l’église ont été renversés par un ti emblement de terre.Une lettre arrivée la semaine dernière.mais que je n’ai pas encore vît, contient le détail des avanies qu .1 a essuyés.Entre autres choses, les français ont ai saisi, et vendre sous ses veux ses papiers, bibliothèques, meubles, bijoux, etc., ont poussé l’audace jusqu’à lui prendre ctux (|U avait sur lu,< lui arracher des doigts ses anneaux.Aiant réclamé l’Anneau du pécheur comme appartenant a son successeur.C’est moi qui suis votre successeur a répondu 1 impudentissime brigand (qu’on dit n’être pas un catholique) et dont la conduite a révolté même les Jacobins Son baton pastoral envoié à l’Assemblée, les huées, etc, etc' c c ¦ 11 fl,t f,ue P,erthler meme en a été touché.Tl v a eu ici une lettre pastorale de l’évêque catholique de Londres qui oidonnait des pneres pour le Pape et que moi-même j’ai lu 1 ,'re ('n f,anCaJs) le 2d dimanche après pâquçs.L’an- s’ii1 nrofin-rn CVr r f TV" revendu au PaPe- "e sait ¦ j pn fl tu a de 1 offre des Espagnols qui ont demandé permission au Lord Jarvis et viennent de laisser passer 2 frégates pour 1 aller prendre à Sienne.Lord Jv.a accompagné Ta permission de l’offre d’en envoïer des siennes pour ie même « > IK' .imprenable Malthe prise sans coup férir a été livrée par quelques chevaliers et surtout Hompcsch allemand grand maître depuis un an, libertin d’ailleurs à qui on a prômfs di de L,WPTe,’S '"’Ù8' 200 mille '• « sénie municipal t icndit d importants services aux petites villes de la ban- heue de Montrcah En 1910, le gouvernement de la province de Quebec le choisissait comme un des commissaires des utA.es publ,qnes Professeur à l'université de iZ réa Dé cede a Montréal le 19 juin 1931.ue — 665.— 1HE PLACE OF CANADA IN FRENCH DIPLOMACY OF THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION I lit I rtnch are an adaptable race.In politics, in private affairs, and often in international dealings, they accept philosophically what cannot be avoided, and build from their misfortunes the foundations of future success.I hey gave ample e\ idence of this adaptibility as a nation after the conclusion of the Ireaty of Paris of 1763.That instrument must have been regarded by eighteenth century Frenchmen in much the same fashion as present-day Germans consider the freaty of Versailles of more recent date.Among the first to attempt the transmutation of hrench losses to gains was the clever Duc de Choiseul, Prime Minister of Louis XV.As early as.1765, in a memoir to his sovereign, Choiseul proposed to aid America in a struggle for independence from Britain (1).1 his was a brave thing for even the Prime Minis- uci of 11 is Most Christian Majesty to propose.It was the changed situation in Canada which emboldened him to the recommendation.With the insight which characterized his political dealings, Choiseul had forseen the budding of colonial discontent into open revolt.He had at the same time realized the added prestige which France would obtain by aiding in the humiliation of Great Britain when such a situation came to pass.• 1 hat h ranee was now in an unhampered position to grant such aid, since she was embarrassed with no territorial possessions contiguous to the American colonies, was the important fact which he recognized as a possible benefit resulting from the Treaty of 63.With the cause of former differences removed, the Americans might now be persuaded to accept the friendship of France But Choiseul had anticipated events.French public opinion was not yet ready to acquiesce in the surrender of all hope of colonial re-establishment in Canada which such a program would entail, nor was it yet ready to grant aid to those same colonists who, but three years previous, had been (1) This memoir is printed by C.Giraud, under the title “Memoir de Choiseul remis au Eoi en 1765” in the Journal des Savants, 1881, 171, 250. 666 — directly responsible for the loss of the American possessions of France.The plans and ideas of M.de Choiseul did not, however, disappear forever from the stage of European politics.In 1774.w ith the accession of Louis XVI to the throne of his grandfather, new ministers took office, and a new foreign policy in particular was adopted.Into the shoes of the mediocre Due d’Aiguillon, successor of Choiseul, stepped Charles Gravier, Comte de Vergennes, late ambassador of I lis Most Christian Majesty to the Court of Sweden With the passing of the years since M.de Choiseul had envisioned French co-operation with the American colonies, those colonies had advanced along the path of open revolt to the terminus of arme ! conflict.French national sentiment had, at the same time, transferred its antipathy from the Colonies to the Mother Country.That this was clearly realized by the new Minister of Foreign Affairs was evidenced shortly after his installation as Minister when, in company with the Minister of War, he sent a request to Louis XVI that certain papers of the preceding reign, ordered destroyed, be saved for possible future use.Tt is significant that the papers so favored was the plans of a descent upon England, carefully "•orked out bv the Duc de Choiseul, to be used in case of French co-operation with America against England ('ll.Early in his period of service as Foreign Minister, Vergennes came to the conclusion that Franco-American co-operation against England was simply a matter of time, a question of awaiting the opportune moment.As he waited, he observed, and among his observations.Canada occupied an important place.TTis first mention of that part of North America was in a letter of August 7.1775 to the Comte de Guines, French ambassador in London.De Guines had reported that the English were considering the possibility of making war on France as a means of reuniting the colonies to the Mother Country.Tt was argued in London that a war (1) TTenri Onniol.TTintnirr tic hi participation tie la France t) Vâta-hlhtscmcnl fir a Ktatx-Fni.i H'AmMnnc .(Paris, S vols.& Sunt., 1R8fi-!)0), T, 24.Under date of “Février 1775”. — 667 — against Louis XVI, resulting in success fur French arms would mean the re-establishment ol French power in Canada, against which contingency the Colonies would go to any extreme, even to that of surrending the principles for which they were contending (1).In reply Vergennes’ letter of the seventh read : Quant à 1 épouvantail qu’on voudroit faire de nous aux Américains, il ne faut pas une habillité, même médiocre, pour imaginer ce moyen de rassurer ce peuple si jaloux de sa liberté et de son indépendance, le conseil du roi d Angleterre se trompe grièvement s il se persuade que nous regrettons autant le Canada qu il peut se repentir d’en avoir fait l’acquisition (2).In another paît of the same letter is to be found a more emphatic statement of French policy towards Canada.The suggestion had been made some time before by the French ambassador in London that France secretly send an unofficial observei to I hiladelphia, in order that the ministry might be better instructed concerning North American affairs.I lie man De Guines recommended for this task was a M.de bonvouloir, former officer in the French forces, who was able to assume the role of an European merchant searching for business opportunities in the Colonies.Royal approval was granted to the mission, and informing the Ambassador of this fact, Vergennes instructed him as follows: Vous voudrez bien réduire ses instructions, qui ne devront être que verbales, à deux objets qui me semblent les plus essentiels: l’un, de vous rendre un compte fidèle des événements et de la disposition la plus générale des esprits; l’autre, de rassurer les Américains contre la frayeur qu’on cherchera sans cloute à leur donner de nous.Le Canada est le point jaloux pour eux, il faut leur faire entendre que nous n’y songeons point du tout, et que loin de leur envier la liberté et l’indépendance qu’ils travaillent à s’as- (1) De Guines to Vergennes, July 28, 1775.Ibid 110 (2) Ibid., 120. 668 — surer, nuus admirons, au contraire, la grandeur et la noblesse de leurs efforts.(1) The writings and expressions of prominent Americans of the time justified the fears of France concerning the possible attitude of the colonists.These people, brought up in an anti-Gallican atmosphere of the most virulent type, were not able to put aside their prejudices overnight.As late aa March 4, 17/6, John Adams, in the best Adams manner, reasoned with himself as follows: is any assistance obtainable from France ?W hat connection may we safely form with her ?1.—No political connection.Submit to none of tier authority; receive no governors or officers trom her.2.—No military connection.Receive no troops from her.a.—Only a commercial connection; that is, make a treaty to receive her ships into our ports; let Her engage to receive our ships into her ports; furnish us with arms, cannon, saltpeter, powder, duck, steel (2).There is evident in this passage as decided a distrust of France as though the eminent New Englander had specifically stated the reasons for his conclusions.A month later, April 14, another member of the Continental Congress, Carter Braxton, delegate from Virginia, wrote to his uncle, Lan-don Carter : Independency and total seperation (sic) from Great Britain are the interesting Subjects of all ranks of men and often agitate our Body It is said by the Advocates for Seperation (sic) that France will undoubtedly assist us after we have asserted the State, and therefore they urge us to make the experiment.Would such a blind precipitate mea- (1) rm„ iso.(2) “Notes of Debates” in the Continental Congress.Worthington C.Ford and Gaillard Hunt, eds„ Journal* oj the Continental Congress (Washington.27 vols., 1904-28), VI, 1074. — 669 — sure as this be justified by Prudence, first to throw off our connexion with G.Britain and then to give ourselves up to the Arms of France?Would not the Court so famous for Intrigues and Deception avail herself of our situation and from it exact much severer terms than if we were to treat with her (G.B.) before hand and settled the terms of any future alliance.Surely she would, (1).These expressions, choosen at random, are not the most rabid of those which might have been selected, but are quoted merely as indices of the trend of official opinion in America.It was this feeling that France was obliged to overcome.The process of quelling American fears was consequently begun.There was being carried on between the Colonies and France a clandestine trade in munitions and military supplies of various kinds, for the success of which the French Government was largely responsible.While waiting for the development of colonial affairs to the point where active intervention might become effective, Vergennes kept in constant touch, through his English-speaking secretary, with the American deputies in Paris, at first Silas Deane, and later Deane.Franklin and Arthur Lee.As the idea of alliance and intervention developed, the French Government made it plain to the Americans that Canada and its recovery concerned them but little.Fishing rights on the Newfoundland Banks wx're the only privileges desired.French delav in con eluding alliance with the Americans misled the deputies of Congress as to France motives, just as it has misled many American historians since that date.The proper moment had not yet arrived, and the concurrence of Spain had not ^•en obtained.The co-operation of the latter power was ne-••er whole-hearted, and when the proper time for intervention °ame, France was obliged to act alone.But in the meantime, paAicularly during the year 1777, the American deputies, cooling their heels in Paris, became restless.Doubts entered their minds as to the motives of French delay, fear (1) Edmund O.Burnett, ed., Letters of Members of the Continental Congress (Washinpt°n.5 vols., 1021-19111), T, 420-421. 670 — gripped their hearts as to the ability of the United Colonies to maintain their independence.Acting under instructions from Congress, they ottered France carte blatiche in drawing up the terms of the alliance for which they were pleading.On the fifth of January, 1777, over the signatures of B.Franklin, Silas Deane and Arthur Lee, appeared a letter addressed to the Comte de Vergennes, the last paragraph of which read in part: North America now offers to France and Spain her amity and commerce.She is also ready to guarantee in the firmest manner to those nations all her present possessions in the West Indies, as well as those they shall acquire from the enemy in a war that may be consequential of such assistance as she requests (1).France, however, was not yet ready to act, and no definite step towards actual alliance was taken until December, 1777, at least as far as the Americans were aware.Throughout the whole negotiation, from the earliest days of French relations with the new republic, Vergennes was careful to disabuse American minds of fear of France, particularly of fear of French aggression in Canada.When the commis-sionners, on December 8, 1777, ventured to remind the French Foreign Minister that they were still awaiting a definite reply to their suggestions of alliance, made the preceding January, negotiation began anew.They were carried on with such despatch that by the eighteenth the American representatives could write to the Congressionnal Committee of Foreign Affairs to the effect that the King of France had given his consent to the conclusion of a treaty, and that in this treaty no advantage would be taken of our present situation to obtain terms from us which otherwise would not be convenient for us to agree to; his majesty desiring that the treaty, once made, (1) Francis li.Wharton, ed., The Revolutionary Diplomatic Correspondence of the United States (Washington, 6 vols., 1889), IT, 24fi. — 671 — should be durable, and our amity subsist forever ( 1 ).On this basis the treaties were negotiated and signed, February 6, 1778.Under the terms of the Treaty of Alliance.one of the three instruments signed on this date, France renounced claim to all of that territory relinquished by the Treaty of Paris of 1763, otherwise known as Canada.The treaties once consumated, with alliance an accomplished tact, the question of actual co-operation arose.Hitherto Canada had been concerned in the situation only because of the necessity which rested upon France to prove to the Americans that she had no territorial aspirations in that part of the world.Hers was entirely a passive interest.She had succeeded in this task, and Franco-American alliance was consequently made possible.With the alliance effective, however, Canada became an active issue in French calculations.From the begining of the movement for independence she had held an important position in all American plans of action.From the very first the Continental Congress had contemplated the winning of Canada to the cause of independence, either by persuasion or by force.Such an idea was still very much alive in the minds of the colonists when France tied herself to the destinies of the United States, and was consequently fated to take a prominent, though unwelcome, part in French diplomacy.The Government of Louis XYI would have preferred to disregard Canada, to leave that territory to the British, and to concentrate their efforts upon securing the safety of the United States and the consequent downfall of English prestige.Friday, the thirteenth of March, 1778, proved an unlucky day for Flis Majesty, King George III of England.On that date there was officially announced to him the recognition of the United States by France, and the negotiation of the Treaty of Amity and Commerce between the two nations.The Treaty of Alliance had been kept secret, but the British (1) Ibid., 452. — 672 — Government, through the services of Franklin’s secretary, Dr Bancroft, (1) was completely informed of its existence.Hostilities between France and England did not break out at once, but were deferred until June.In the meantime, both nations exerted themselves to obtain the allegiance of the United States.The former colonies were by no means unanimous in support of the French alliance; many of them, as well as numerous influential individuals, were inclined towards reconciliation with England rather than alliance with France.To consolidate French sentiment in America became the task of the French Government; to sow dissension among the colonists, the task of the English Government.To reach their differing goals, the two nations sent ambassies to America with all possible haste.Great Britain sent a commission of three members to treat of reconciliation on terms just short of absolute independence.France sent a minister plenipotentiary, the first ever accredited to the new Republic.The man chosen to till this responsible post was Conrad Alexandre Gerard, secretary to the Comte de Vergennes.Gerard, completely ait courant with American affairs because of his dealings with the Commissioners at Paris, was extraordinarily well-fitted for the position.The instructions to the French representative at Philadelphia necessarily dealt with actualities, with problems of the moment and of the immediate future.Consequently they included mention of Canada’s place in Franco-American relations, since Yergenties realized that the territory to the north occupied a large place in the minds of the colonists, particularly of the New-Englanders, who were, incidentally, the least well-disposed towards France.On this subject then, Vergennes directed Gerard as follows: Les députés du Congrès avoient proposé au Roi de prendre l’engagement de favoriser la conquête que les Américains entreprendroient du Canada, de la Nouvelle-Ecosse et des Florides, et il y a lieu de (1) For proof of the perfidy of Dr Bancroft see: Samuel F.Bemis, “Rritish Secret Service and the Fronch-American Alliance”, American Historical Iterieu', XXXIX, 474-495.Concerning premature English knowledge of the Franco-Amerioan treaties, see particularly p.490. — 673 - croire que ce projet tient tort à coeur au Congrès.Mais le Roi a considéré que la possession de ces trois contrées ou au moins du Canada par l’Ang.“! seroit un principe utile d’inquiétude et de vigilance pour les Américains, qu'il leur fera sentir davantage tout le besoin qu’ils ont de l’amitié et de l’alliance du Roi et qu’il n’est pas de son intérêt de le détruire.D’après cela S.Mté pense qu’elle ne doit prendre aucun engagement relativement à la conquête dont il s’agit (1).Immediately after arriving in America Gérard had occasion to write to Vergennes concerning Spanish attitude on the same question.In keeping with his instructions, the French minister to the United States had entered into communication with Don Juan de Mirales, a business man of Havana resident in Philadelphia as unaccredited representative of the Spanish Government.From Don Juan he had received an outline of the territorial aspirations of the Spanish branch of the House of Bourbon.These aspirations included the surrender to Spain of Florida and the eastern bank of the Mississippi River ceded to England in 1763, and more important, the retrocession of C anada to France.In a despatch of July 25, 1778 to Vergennes, Gérard describe^ his interviews with Mirales, adding: “J ai eu quelque peine à.rectifier ses idées sur le Canada” (2).French policy was resolutely opposed to any attempt o" the part of the allied forces to conquer Canada, either for the benefit of France or of the United States.With this attitude made obvious to those who were interested, it was t.o have been expected that for a time at least, the agitation in Congress for Canadian expeditions would be held in check.This was the case, and the respite from such an embarrassing subject might have lasted longer had not the whole question been reopened, or rather initiated for the first time since the Alliance, by a loyal subject of Louis XVT, the Marquis de Lafayette.(T) Doniol, op.cit., TIT, 156.March 29, 1778.(2) Ibid., 294. W hen Gerard came to America there accompanied him a squadron of vessels under command of the Comte d’Es-tamg.D’Estaing’s summary of his instruction (1) read in part : /e chef — Refus que je dois faire de contribuer a la conquestte du Canada autrement que par une cioisière et par des attaques de posttes; mais dans le cas où je serais convaincu que les Etats î éussiroient dans cette attaque, authorisation de donneî des déclarations au nom du roy pour pro-mettie aux Canadiens et aux Sauvages la protection de Sa Majesté s'ils cessent de reconnaître la suprématie de F Angleterre.Further intimations concerning the exact character of the instructions are to be found in a similar summary of supplementary instructions entrusted to D’Estaing: de chef — Fuut en m’ordonnant de me pretter a 1 expédition du Canada et en me disant que Sa Majesté ne ni astreint pas rigoureusement à ce que les instructions précédentes me prescrivent, chaque expiession désigne la répugnance que le Roy a pour cette entreprise.J he success o! the naval expedition was disappointing in the extreme.Through an unfortunate combination of circumstances, the fleet under the Comte d’Estaing was rendered practically useless.It so happened that Lafayette was stationed in Rhode Island, close to the anchorage of D’Estaing’s fleet.This \oung ai istocr:',., enthusiastic and headstrong, desired action, because fame does not come to the sedentary.Tt is no detraction from the character of his services to the United States to find the motivation of his acts in a desire for personal tame rather than in a disinterested love of liberty.Whatover various possibilities of concerted action by the Franco-Ameri- 1) The only trace of II Estâmes instructions and their supplement o lreh can he found Ok ay ,s a summary extract submitted by the AdnTrnl V i ?,érarf1 '1,,r'n* "T vova^ America.The quotations used are taken from th,B summary, which is printed i„ I)„niol, op.HI IH 217 “ 675 — can to the country of his adoption (1).The juxtaposition of the Admiral of the unsuccessful French ileet and the French commander of inactive American troops naturally gave rise to certain flights of fancy on the part of Lafayette.Talking aver various possibilities of concerted action by the Franco-American forces which might draw the two gallant soldiers from an irritating inaction to fields of glorious renown, Lafayette acquainted D’Estaing with the ideas of various French officers in America who were faced with a similar problem.During 1777 these men, with Lafayette in the lead, had planned a descent upon Canada as a bid for the fame they desired.I laving failed to obtain their object, they let the matter rest, but had not deserted it.Lafayette was now more than ever convinced that the most profitable use which might be made of his and D’Estaing’s forces would be in an expedition against Canada.In this belief he was not supported by his older, more experienced, and more patient Commander-in-Chief.On September 2a, 177S.General Washington, in a note that would do justice to a diplomat of career, wrote to his young subordinate: If you have entertained thoughts, my dear Marquis, of paying a visit to your court, to your lady, and to your friends this winter, but waver on account of an expedition into ( anada, triendship induces me to tell you, that I do not conceive that the prospect of such an operation is so favorable at this time, as to cause you to change your views.Many circumstances and events must transpire to render an enterprise of this kind practicable and advisable (2).The trend of the discussion between D’Estaing and Lafayette was altered by Washington's opposition.The Marquis, however, did not surrender the idea of Canadian con- m Lafayette admitted the influence of these motives upon his conduct.For that acknowledgement, and for a justification of ins actions, see his letter to Maurepas, January- 25, 1780, hi., TV, 311.(21 Worthington C.Ford, ed., The Writing* of George Washington (New-York, London, 14 vols., 1889-1893).VIT, 200. 676 quest, but continued to believe in its importance.Eventually, he thought, the necessity of such an expedition as he was interested in would become apparent to General Washington.He therefore continued to discuss with the Admiral his ideas on this subject, resolving at the same time to take advantage of the leave offered him to further his plans in that direction.Convinced by the attractive arguments of Lafayette, 1) Estaing apparently became converted to his way ot thinking, and between them, the two decided upon a plan of procedure by which Lafayette, on his impending trip to 11 ranee, should request the despatch to America under his command of six thousand troops, to be transported by the ( ointe d Estaing.Once upon American soil, D’Estaing, Lafayette and his French troops, and the Americans would unite m an attempt to detach Canada from English dominion.I lu pei sistence of General Lafayette in this matter caused no little embarrassment to the French Foreign Office and to General Washington.Though it has not been generally recognized, the Comte de Vergennes and General George Washington were very much in accord upon the objectives of the military campaigns.Both believed that the urst goal to be achieved should be the freedom of colonial territorial from British occupation.France had entered the uai to pintect the integrity of the colonies themselves, and to establish firmly their independence, not to indulge in wars of agression in order that the United States might add more territory to her already great extent.In the calculations of (ioth Washington and Vergennes.therefore, the acquisition ot Canada was placed in the background, possibly for different _ motives, but nevertheless subordinated to what they considered more immediate and pressing concerns.Had Lafayette kept his plan to himself until he reached France, ven' probably the French Government would have succeeded in nreventmg any discussion of such an undertaking.Why I ) Estaing concurred, after remarking that the King strongly opposed Canadian expeditions, is hard to explain on other grounds than that of lack of the diplomatic sense.Being a — 677 — military man, he may have thought that the Monarch’s repugnance to such an operation was based upon its technical difficulties, which he now saw swept away under the flow of Lafayette’s eloquence.Whatever the cause of his conversion of the extent of his enthusiasm, D’Estaing was the soul of moderation when compared to the fiery Marquis.Assured of the approval of \\ ashington being given an application for leave, Lafayette repaired at once to Philadelphia to ask the Congress for permission to return to Prance while maintaining his rank in the Continental army.Incidentally it gave him an excuse to present in person his plea for an expedition against Canada.In the latter part of September, 1778, a committee of the Congress was appointed to hear his plans.By October 20, he was successful enough in his undertaking to write to the Comte d’Estaing that: “ Ils se détermineront à demander des troupes pour le Canada " (1), referring, of course, to the Congress.This was somewhat too enthusiastic, but there is no question that the Philadelphia assembly was greatly taken with his proposition.Invasion ot Canada was no new idea to the Americans, and many members of Congress were glad to welcome its suggestion by one not of their number, particularly one so prominent in the ranks o the French aristocracy.Nevertheless, there was considerably more caution exercised than Lafayette had foreseen, ns-tructions with reference to Lafayette’s suggestions were to be included in the general instructions of Benjamin hrank-lin recently appointed ministei plenipotentiary to îance.But those insrtuctions were submitted, during the course of their drafting, to the scrutiny of M.Gérard.The process of filtration which he applied to such measures as were contrary to French policy altered somewhat the proposals with ie-gard to Canada.Nevertheless, the instructions sent to Franklin included a paragraph as follows: You shall constantly inculcate the certainty of ruining the British fisheries on the Banks of (1) Doniol, op .cit., TTT, 417-418. — 678 — Newfoundland ( 1 ), and consequently the British marine, hy reducing Halifax and Quebec; since by that means they would be exposed to alarm and plunder, and deprived of the necessary supplies formerly drawn from America.The plan proposed to Congress for compassing these objects is herewith transmitted for your more particular instruction (2).The plan referred to in the instructions was essentially a development of the ideas of Lafayette and D’Kstaing, in fact, a note at the end advised Franklin to refer Vergennes to La-favette for any further information he might desire concerning it (3).In short.Franklin was instructed to suggest the advisability of a conquest of Canada, and in case that suggestion met with approval, he was furnished with more concrete proposals for placing it into operation.This was far less emphatic than the request for co-operation which Lafayette had desired, and thought he ad assured.\ still more decided blow was dealt to Lafavette’s proposal, and this by the hand of his superior officer, General W ashington.The plan of descent upon Canada which had been worked out by the Congressional committee in consultation with Lafayette was sent to the Commander-in-Chief for his opinion.Under date of November 11.1778.he sent his official reply to Henry Laurens, President of Congress.It confined itself to the militarv aspects of the situation, and demonstrated the .impossibility of success at the time proposed.\\ ith this official letter came another from Washington addressed to Henry Laurens in his private character’and dated the fourteenth.This communication discussed matters which could not be included in the official letter, and gave further reasons for Washington’s reluctance to attack Canada m co-operation with a French force.He said: “Thf' 'xJïïïd A Pr^rhnfôî^toP?Cw«ïï,,A“UbJ^: In.ler.-mta;,*»" In Dallas 1).Irvine, in the September (19.12) mnnl^ToMhe Canadian Hutoncal Krricir.Vol.XI11.Xn.:t.268-284 nnDer or the (2) Wharton, op.cit.II.807-809.October 26, *1778.t O lord and Hunt, Jour.Cont.Conti., XII, 1042-1048 — 679 I have one objection to it, (the Canadian expedition) untouched in my public letter,.1 his is the introduction of a large body of French troops into Canada, and putting them in possession of the capital of that Province, attached to them hy all the ties of blood, habits, manners, religion, and former connexion of government.1 fear this would he too great a temptation to be resisted by any power actuated by the common maxims of national policy.1 am heartily disposed to entertain the most favorable sentiments of our new allv, and to cherish them in others to a reasonable degree.Put it is a maxim, founded on the universal experience of mankind, that no nation is to be trusted farther than it is bound by its interest; and no prudent statesman or politician will venture to depart from it (1).The policies of Vergennes and of Washington were the same, but were actuated hv different considerations.France and America were growing powers at this period; success in arms would establish the influence of both—of France m the councils of Europe, of the United States in America.Tt was consequently necessary that the leaders of the two allied nations exercise caution in dealing with each other in order that the gains of one might not infringe upon the rights and gains of'the other, and that the seeds of future discord be not sown by their own act.Here and elsewhere may be found ample material for a close comparison between the diplomatic abilities of Washington and those of Vergennes whom manv Frenchmen consider the greatest of modern French diplomats.In spite of this declaration on the part of Washington, the Congress at Philadelnhia was loath to surrender immediately their ideas concerning Canada.Partly out of consideration for Lafavette, chiefly because of their own desire to win the Canadians to their cause, thev again reverted to the (7) Ford, Writing, VTT, official letter 230-259; letter to Laurens 260-254. 680 • subject during the first days of December.On the fifth rf that month, Congress adopted a resolution vhich acknowledged the justice of Washington’s objections, then, by a devious and utterly unfounded line of reasoning, directed Washington to .cause every Preparation to be made with all convenient Speed for the Subjection of that Fortress v Quebec) .He was also directed to communicate with Lafayette and with Franklin in order that measures of Franco-American co-operation might be concerted (1) Washington’s answer to this astounding order was prompt and effective.Refusing to write to Franklin on the ground that his abilities did not extend to foreign affairs, he asked for an interv ew with Congress to discuss the Canadian expedition and the situation of the army generally (2) His request was granted, explanations were given to a special committee from the Congress, and on January 1, 1779, the report of that committee, supporting Washington’s criticisms, was approved by Congress.The project of sending an expedition to Canada was definitely dropped by the Americans, never to be successfully revived during the continuation of the War.Lafayette, in the meantime, had sailed for France, where he arrived at the beginning of February, 1779.On the twelfth of that month he was at Versailles.As he had suspected in desiring to return to Europe, he found the Court ralking of a combined Franco-Spanish descent upon England.He was placed in command of a contingent of French troops destined for this expedition, and for the time beino-the project demanded his full attention.As the months passed, however, and the success of the proposed expedition became more problematical, plans of peace began to be talked of.! he Marquis voiced his opposition to any capitulation on the part ot hranee and her allies, and in doing so, reverted -or .e ",rst t,1nie.111 ll,s official correspondence to the idea of rreeing Canada from English control.June 10, 1779 he pro-tested to \ ergennes that the rumoured peace, which would Diace America under the guardianship of France during the pernod of a long truce, was not an honorable solution of th- (1) (2) Ford Ford, and Hunt, Jour.Coni.Cong., XU, 1910-11)11 Writings, VII, 285-289.December 13, 1778.' difficulties faemg the allied powers, and that the basis of any peace, should be “l’indépendance de l’Amérique, Canada compris” (1).The attempt to invade Lngland was destined to fail, and as soon as this fact was borne in upon Lafayette, he turned his attention to securing: the despatch of an expedition to America, supposedly with the idea still prominent in nis thoughts of leading an invasion into Canada.The opportunity to air his ideas on the subject was first offered him by the Secretary of Foreign Affairs during an interview which took place toward the latter part of June 1779, probably two weeks after the letter just quoted.Vergennes had been informed by Gérard of the propositions made to Congress bv Lafavette concerning the despatch of a French armv to America, and he now desired to discuss them personally with the Marquis.Unfortunately the records of that interview are not to be had, but Lafavette’s cherished plan of Canadian activity must have been discussed.He was evidently given to understand that an expedition such as he had previously suggested to the American Congress was not in keeping with the policy of either France or Spun.Whether his ideas on the subject were changed by his ovn volition, or, as is almost certainly the case, bv the suggestions of M.de Vergennes, a memoir written bv the voting general two weeks later at the request of the Foreign Minister demonstrates conclusively that thev had been considerably altered during the month which had elapsed dnce his letter of Tune (2) He still considered necessary the sending of a tenth military expedition to America, but he no longer insisted upon the use of that expedition against Canada.His statt ment concerning the necessity of capturing Halifax offers evidence in point.He wrote: .sous prétexte d’en vouloir au Canada, nous tâcherions d’enlever Hallifax.(3).Henri Doniol, careful student of Franco-American relation* (1) Written from St.Jean d’Angely.Doniol, op.vit., IV, 236.(2) Memoir of July 18, 1779.(3) Stevens’ Facsimiles of Manuscripts in European Archives Relat-ting to America, Vol.XVII, No.1609.Italics Lafayette’s. 682 during this period agrees with these conclusions, tie writes that Lafayette avail rêvé la reprise du Canada pai la trance, et en ce moment encore il ne cédait sur ce point-la qu a cause de l’idée contraire du gouvernement de Versailles ( 1 ).Although M.de Lafayette failed to received official support for his plan of Canadian invasion, the rest of his proposal was seconded by both Washington and Vergennes.In February, 1780, the decision to send an army to America under the' leadership of the Comte de Rochambeau was largely the result of Lafayette’s efforts.The Marquis himself was disappointed in not being chosen commander of the expeditionary force, but was reconciled to this rejection of his anbitions by his appointment as liasion officet between Washington and the commander of the new French army.To hi'n"was entrusted the task of preparing the Americans for the arrival of Rochambeau and his men, and of conceiting plats of future military operations with V ashington.March 14, 1780, Lafayette sailed from France on his return voyage to America, bearing with him information for the use of General Washington concerning the statue of the French in America.“ Le corps de troupes françoises sera purement auxiliiire et cù ce titre n’agira que sous les ordres du général Washington ” (2) Tn addition to this manifestation of complete faith in Washington’s ability, there was handed to Lafayette second set of instructions in which the coup de grâce was giver, his plans concerning Canada.The operAig paragraph in this private communication reads as /ollows : Quoiqu’il soit dit dans l’instruction remise à M.de la Fayette qu’on ne veut proposer aucune opération et qu’on s’en rapporte à cet égard au général Washington et à son conseil de guerre, cependant on croit devoir lui communiquer une idée, (1) Dcmioî, tip.cit., ‘V, 271.(2) Instructions remises à M.de LaFapcttc le 5 mars 1780, Doniol, op.cit., IV, 316. — 683 laquelle si elle est d’une exécution praticable semblerait également servir la politique et la guerre.Deux considérations politiques paraissent devoir diriger les opérations offensives des Etats-Unis; Tune d’éloigner le plus qu’il est possible l’ennemi de leurs frontières et d’empêcher qu’il ne les cerne de partout comme il le fait en effet en occupant la Floride, partie fin Mississipi, le Canada et la Nouvelle-Ecosse: l’autre de se rendre intéressant à l’Espagne et de l’attirer à leur alliance, ce qui ne peut se faire qu’en contribuant à ses avantages (1).The instructions continued, suggesting a co-operative Fran-co-American attack against the English in Florida.The carrying out of such a program would effectively have put an end to any plans against the English in the north bv drawing the center of operations far to the south.The proposition agreed perfectly with French commitments to Spain._ These commitments had been tacitlv entered into in 1778 when Fiance was endeavoring to secure the co-operation of the other branch of the House of Bourbon.October fifteenth of that vear the Comte de Montmorin, ambassador of France at Madrid, had interviewed Florida Blanca, the Spanish Prime Minister, concerning mediatory peace negotiations which the latter was undertaking on behalf of France.Florida Blanca had suggested that, as a basis of negotiation.the two powers should guarantee to England the possession of Canada and Acadia, or Nova Scotia, as it is known today.His argument in support of this advice was that such a stipulation, if accented, would be to the ultimate advantage of both France and Snain.Tn the words of Montmorin’s official report of his interview; il en regarde l’exéeution comme le seul moïen de maintenir les colonies dans une sorte de dépendance.en leur rendant continuellement nécessaire l’assistance des deux Couronnes (2).(1) Projet particulier remis à M.st ainsi du'elie épelle son nom.Los autres membres de cette famille écrivent “ Sonimillard ” et parfois “ Soomillard ”, (2) Dans le dictionnaire Tanguay.I ‘>20.on lit: "F.Fortin dit Tienne!.d° St-TTermel ” Dans les registres il y a Plermel, pfp.A notre avis, il fnudrait Plocrmel, pt Saint-drrncî.Voir ces noms dans les encyclopédies.ta) Marguerite Sommülard périt an cours de l'incendie du couvent de la Congrégation dp Notre-Dame, le 7 décembre 1083. — 703 — l’ar son contrat de mariage, le notaire Fleuricour déclarait adopter les enfants de sa future femme ; il ajoutait meme que s ü devenait père, les enfants du premier comme du second mariage se partageraient également les biens qu’il laisserait.Le document porte les signatures de l'abbé Séguenot, du curé Barthélemy, de trançois Boulard, des futurs époux et de deux des demoiselles bortin: Marie-Catherine, âgée de 15 ans et Marguerite, âgée de 13 ans.* * Du fait que le contrat est dressé par le curé de la Riviè-re-des-Prairies, ou demeure la future avec sa famille, le mariage doit avoir été célébré en cette paroisse, cependant on n’en peut relever l'acte, pas plus que celui de la sépulture de François Fortin, premier mari de Louise Sommillar, parce que les registres de la Rivière-des-Prairies des années 1689 à 1701 sont disparus.Cela est regrettable, car la Rivière-des-Prairies eut à subir des assauts meurtriers, au cours des années 1689 et 1690; avec les susdits registres nous aurions probablement quelques noms à ajouter à la liste des colons martyrs de la période héroïque de notre histoire.Quoiqu’il en soit, du mariage Fleuricour - Sommillar naquirent trois enfants: une fille, née en 1693, un fils né en 1695 et une dernière fille, née en 1697.Celle-ci, prénommée Marguerite, épousa à la Rivière-des-Prairies, le 23 janvier 1719, Urbain Richard (Mgr Tanguay n’a pas la date de ce mariage, dans son volume VI, p.558.) * * * Le sieur Fleuricour avait reçu sa commission de notaire en 1669.Néanmoins, il s’adonnait à la culture, car il possédait une terre qu’il vendit, en 1688, au valeureux chirurgien Jean Jalot, mort au champ d’honneur, lors du fameux combat de la coulée de Jean Grou, en juillet 1690 (1).(1) Voir: “Héros oubliés”, dans Faits curieux de Y Histoire de Montréal, par K.-Z.M. — 704 — Le premier octobre 1691, un an après son mariage, Fleuricour était autorisé à exercer comme huissier sans cesser d’être notaire.A l’âge de 74 ans, il alla se faire traiter à l’Hôtel-Dieu de Ville-Marie, rue Saint-Paul, mais les bons soins des hommes de l’art et des religieuses hospitalières ne purent lui rendre sa vitalité et il succomba le 15 novembre 1709.E.-Z.Massicotte Cl 1ARLES-CA P, R T EL 1 ’111 LIBERT Charles-Gabriel Philibert était né à Saint-Martin de la Place, diocèse d’Angers, du mariage de Pierre-Paul Philibert et de Perinne Gaultier.Tl obtint une commission d’enseigne en second dans les troupes de la marine servant en Canada , le 26 mai 1723, mais il devait avoir une expectative de ce grade depuis nuel-nues années puisque dans un rapport au ministre daté de Québec le 26 octobre 1722, le gouverneur de Vaudreuil disait du sieur de Philibert: “ Le sieur Philibert, âgé de 45 ans.Tl est fort bon officier en état de servir et qui mène une vie fort réglée.” En 1733, l'enseigne Philibert fit un vovage en France et revint à Québec à la fin de l’été de 1734 sur le vaisseau du Roi le Rubis.Malade, il se fit transporter chez le sieur Jolv, maître boulanger, où il décéda le 4 septembre 1734.La veille, il avait fait venir le notaire Barolet et lui avait dicté son testament.Tl donna cent livres pour faire dire des messes basses pour le repos de son âme et une somme de vingt livres aux pauvres honteux de Québec.Tl donna le reste de ses biens aux “ sieurs de Vanmne la Vérendrve, veuve Livilliers et Silvain, ses cousins et cousines germaines Tl choisit comme exécuteur testamentaire l’abbé Plante.chanoine de Québec.