gour, as we have seen, came to an open rupture with Laval respecting the liquor traffic.* For nearly one hundred years afterwards, the succeeding bishops and clergy were seldom in accord with the state authorities on account of this vexed question.†

* The immediate pretext of D'Avaugour for ceasing to enforce the laws was the apparent inconsistency of the Jesuit priests, towards whom, it appears, he entertained a dislike. A person had incurred the penalties attached by law to the act of selling liquor to the savages, and had recourse to their intercession with the Governor. D'Avaugour replied sarcastically, and then added, that he would in future cause no offender to suffer on that account. It should be observed that, a short time before, the Governor had caused three persons to be shot for a similar offence.

+Judging by the accounts of the French writers, the savages who had been partially converted to Christianity became utterly unmanageable and lost through the facility with which "eau-de-vie" was procurable by them from the traders. Under its influence every bad trait of their disposition became enhanced in a tenfold degree, so that, when intoxicated, they committed flagrant outrages. Lalemant (quoted in the " History of the Ursulines of Quebec," vol. i. p. 243) depicts in strong language its effects upon the Indians :--" They have brought themselves to nakedness, and their families to beggary. They have even gone so far as to sell their children to procure the means of satisfying this raging passion. I cannot describe the evils caused by these disorders to the infant church. My ink is not black enough to paint them in proper colours. It would require the gall of the dragon to express the bitterness we have experienced from them. It may suffice to say that we lose in one month the fruits of the toil and labours of thirty years." The traders turned to account the native fondness for liquor in their bargains for skins, obtaining these at far less than their real value. Thus there was the double injury done of defrauding them, and at the same time ruining them morally. In course of time, the use of eau-de-vie, or, as the Indians called it, "fire-water," became known amongst all the Indian tribes who, directly or indirectly, had any intercourse with Europeans, whether French, Dutch, or English, and liquor became an indispensable article of commerce with them. The demoralising results may be imagined when it is stated that the poor natives manifested an appetite for drink far exceeding that of the most depraved classes of civilised people.

CHAPTER XIII.

LOUIS XIV. DECIDES UPON CONSTITUTING CANADA A "ROYAL GOVERNMENT"-COMPOSITION OF THE SUPREME COUNCIL-ITS POWERS AND DEFECTS-LIST OF GOVERNORS, BISHOPS, AND ROYAL INTENDANTS FROM 1663 TO 1760.

*

99. THE attention of the King of France having been gained by the representations which reached him relative to the decay of the Company of One Hundred Associates and the deplorable condition of New France, measures were at length taken for placing the affairs of the colony on another footing. It was, in fact, determined to constitute Canada a "royal government," under the control of a "Supreme Council," like the Parliament of Paris, the principal functionaries of which should be appointed by the King, and be immediately responsible to him. There had already existed a species of council for advising with the Governor, consisting of the chief officials and such of the principal inhabitants as he might choose to summon; but, up to the year 1663, the Governor himself, although, in his military capacity a king's officer, was virtually the head agent of the Company for administering their affairs in the colony, and appointed by the King on their request or nomination. Now, however, the King was implored to resume to himself

* The representations here referred to were those of D'Avaugour, Laval, the inhabitants through M. Boucher, and generally such as had for several years past been made through the King's Minister, M. Colbert. According to some accounts, a special commissioner, named Dumonts, was despatched to New France to report on the condition of affairs before decisive measures of amelioration were adopted. The King is said to have been much moved by the accounts brought to him.

all control, and it was decided to relieve the colony altogether from that of the Company.*

100. On the 15th of September 1663, the principal functionaries who were to govern Canada under the new regime landed at Quebec. The new scheme of government included the following provisions :

(1.) A sovereign (supreme) Council, consisting, in the first place, of the Governor, Bishop, and Royal Intendant, with five councillors, attorney-general, and chief clerk.

(2.) The Governor, representing the King, to have absolute control of the military force; to have special charge of the external relations of the colony, and to be the recognised organ of communication with the parent state.

The Bishop, as head of the Church, to govern in all matters spiritual and ecclesiastical.

The Royal Intendant, to be charged with the regulation and conduct of affairs appertaining to finance, police, and justice.

The five councillors, to be chosen annually, or to be continued in office as might seem best to the Governor and Bishop, to see that the ordinances of the Supreme Council were duly executed, and to act as judges in petty causes.

(3.) The Supreme Council, in its collective capacity, to have control over all affairs and persons in the colony, and cspecially to be the highest law tribunal and a court of appeal; but the execution of its decisions and measures to rest with the functionaries to whose departments they

* The number of Associates had decreased to forty-five.

The date of the edict replacing the government of the Company of One Hundred Associates by that which is described in the text, was March 21, 1663. The principal functionaries, who came out from France in September of that year, were the new Governor, M. de Mesy, the chief ecclesiastic, M. Laval, vicar-apostolic and subsequently bishop, also a royal commissioner, M. Gaudias. They were accompanied by a number of military and law officers, some soldiers, and several hundred new settlers, bringing animals and implements of husbandry.

This number was afterwards increased to seven, then to twelve.

might refer. The Supreme Council had the disposal of the revenues of the colony.

101. It is remarkable that while the Council was invested with sovereign authority in many respects, yet, in regard to the important matter of taxation, it had no power to levy imposts except by the express permission of the King, who reserved this privilege in his own hands. Nor did the new arrangements comprise any provisions enabling the people to exercise a direct influence over the proceedings of the Council or of its three chief officials.*

In all its enactments relative to the administration of justice the Council was bound to keep in view the laws, customs, and procedure established in the kingdom of France, and, as heretofore, no persons professing opinions hostile to the established religion of the kingdom were to be tolerated in the colony.

102. The Supreme Council, constituted as has been described, was virtually a triumvirate of the chief functionaries—for all real power was lodged in the hands of the Governor, Bishop, and Intendant. It will be seen that these three officials figured conspicuously in the annals of Canada during a century up to the period when it ceased to be a French colony. M. de Mesy and M. Laval, when the council was first established, filled two of those high offices, but the first Royal Intendant never made his appearance at

* The celebrated M. Colbert, who at that time exercised the greatest influence in France, appears to have contemplated embracing in the new scheme of colonial government some slight show of what would now be called municipal freedom. The people were to elect officers for the conduct of certain local affairs, and to represent them before the supreme council. But this virtually disappeared in a short time, owing to the principles laid down in France for the guidance of colonial authorities conformably to a set of regulations recommended by M. de Tracy and M. Talon. It was stated to be necessary "to provide against undesirable revolutions tending to render the young state of Canada either aristocratic or democratic, instead of continuing strictly monarchical."

Quebec.* It will also be seen that the mutual relations of the Governor, Bishop, and Intendant were not so clearly defined as to prevent misapprehensions and discord. By some it has been represented that the original source of the defects of the Council must be ascribed to the jealous and arbitrary disposition of Louis XIV., who then ruled in France, and who was disinclined to delegate to any of his subjects, at home or abroad, such powers as might at any time, even in appearance, render them independent of himself.†

103. The new order of things was at once initiated with due solemnity. M. Gaudias, who had arrived with the Governor and Bishop in the capacity of royal commissioner, took formal possession of the country in the King's name. The same official administered the oath of allegiance to the inhabitants, and established the procedure of courts of judicature. He returned to France with a report of the condition of the colony prepared during his brief sojourn in Canada.

The Supreme Council, which held its first sitting on the third day after the Governor's arrival, caused the new constitution to be promulgated. Various local appointments were made, measures were taken for establishing inferior courts, and for regulating affairs at Montreal and Three Rivers.

* M. Robert was named Intendant in the decree of March 21, 1663. He was succeeded by M. Jean Talon, who arrived in Quebec, and assumed the duties of his office in 1665. Nearly all we know of M. Robert may be summed up by stating that he was a Councillor of State in France.

+ This King, although styled in history "Louis the Great," was far from meriting that distinction in regard to his personal qualities. His overwhelming pride and pretensions involved his country in bloody wars during most of his protracted reign; while at home his selfishness, bigotry, and dissolute life constituted an injurious example to his court and subjects. The infinite evils thus occasioned to the people of the great and loyal French nation were not remedied in the reign of his successor, and, eventually, were instrumental in bringing about a state of things in France which is without parallel in the history of any other country,