J.S. McLennan, Louisbourg: From Its Foundation To Its Fall (Sydney: Fortress Press, 1969)

© Fortress Press

Chapter 4

While fishing was vigorously prosecuted from Louisbourg and its neighbouring outports, the French fishermen at Isle Madame and the ports to the westward came, during these years, in contact with those of New England in the neighbourhood of Canso. English fishermen had freely used the harbours of Isle Royale, but it soon came to pass that both French and English used the port of Canceau, or, in its modern form, Canso, situated on an island separated only by the narrowest of waterways from the mainland of Nova Scotia. The French had frequented it for a century and a half. [1]

In 1717 there were six French and five English fishing stations there. The next year St. Ovide gave orders to the French to withdraw, but was begged by the New Englanders to leave them, as the latter were threatened by the Indians.[2] In August, George Vaughan, formerly Governor of New Hampshire, was at Canso, and found " all things peaceable and quiet, the French and English fishing with all friendship and love." [3]

Some of the Canso people had, in June, petitioned the Council of Massachusetts to the effect that the French were using Canso, and had threatened the English with removal. [4] The petitioners had thought it their duty to represent this state of affairs to the Council, so that the rights of Englishmen might not be infringed. The authorities thereupon sent to Canso Captain Smart of the frigate Squirrel, which had been sent to protect the shipping of North America from pirates. His instructions were to inquire into the truth of the French encroachments. He carried a letter from Shute, Governor of Massachusetts, to St. Ovide, that Shute expected him to " immediately order the French under his command to pull down their Hutts and also not to fish any more upon y't shoar." [5] 

Smart arrived at Canso on September 6, left on the 7th for Louisbourg, where he had a conference with St. Ovide. The accounts of this interview 

1.  A Captain Savalette of St. Jean de Luz was living a little to the west of Canso in 1565. 
2. The French were inclined to believe the territory was English ; English authorities that it was French. I.R. vol. 3, and the Commissioners of Trade to Townhend, March 14, 1721. 
3. C.O. 5/867
4. C.O. 5/793. 
5. C.O. 5/867. Ad. Sec. In Letters, vol. 2542.

given, on the one hand, by Smart and Southack,'[1] and, on the other, by St. Ovide, are irreconcilable. The Squirrel returned to Canso on the 14th [2] On the 18th Smart seized every French vessel and all French property he could find, and sailed away to Boston with plunder valued at 200,000 £. [3]

News of this exploit was promptly brought to Louisbourg, where their understanding with Southack and Smart seemed to have been generally held to be satisfactory, for no preparations had been made to deal with the conditions which confronted the authorities. The news was as much a surprise at Louisbourg as the event had been to the fishers at Canso. St. Ovide at once took spasmodic action. He impressed a Malouin trading vessel of thirty guns, armed her, and put on board forty soldiers, under Ste. Marie, [4] and sailors from other vessels in the harbour to bring her complement up to two hundred and fifty men. Her captain had none of that spirit which made St. Malo la cité corsaire. He and his crew made so many difficulties that the condition bordered on revolt, and by nightfall, when it was intended she should sail, she was not ready. The weather the next day was bad, and the expedition was abandoned. Such is the account given in the joint letter of St. Ovide and Soubras,'[5] but the latter wrote to the Minister disavowing any share in these preparations, and severely blaming St. Ovide, with supreme authority, for not having overcome the difficulties and delays.[6]

This action of St. Ovide, so deplorably weak that Soubras says he groans while he writes an account of it, was almost inevitable with an ordinary man in charge at Louisbourg.'[7] Its wretched condition must have been evident to Smart ; they had no cannon mounted, they had no men-of-war, they had no provisions, and their troops had been reduced to one hundred and forty-one men. 

Instead of a warlike expedition, St. Ovide [8] sent Ste. Marie and Laforest, a clerk, to Canso. Laforest was to make on the ground a formal protest, to draw up a careful and accurate account of what had happened, on which, if the facts warranted, the right of reprisals might be based. Ste. Marie was to order the French to withdraw, and to remain on the ground until these instructions were carried out. Ste. Marie was further instructed to tell the Indians to behave, to do justice to the English, and to make the French pay their debts before leaving.[9]

1. Southack was with Smart as a representative of Massachusetts. 
2. B.T.N.S. vol. 2 ; I.R. vol. 3.
3. The subsequent proceedings outside Cape Breton are too lengthy to be here narrated. The whole incident will be dealt with in a monograph now in preparation. 
4. I.R. vol. 3, Oct. 19, 1718.
5. I.R. vol. 3, Oct. 1718. 
6. Some suspicion of the accuracy of St. Ovide's version of what the writer calls the " childish conference with Smart " is implied in Soubras emphasizing the fact that he was not present at these interviews. 
7. I.R. vol. 3, f. 186. 8 Soubras, Oct. 18, 1718, I.R. vol. 3, f. 186. 
9. Letter of Oct. 6. 

The part which the Indians of Nova Scotia took in the next incident at Canso makes it desirable to indicate briefly their relations to the European colonists of the Atlantic seaboard. This was one of extreme friendliness to the French and hostility to the English. The Pax Gallica, which for so long existed throughout so large a part of the wilds of North America, is an enduring monument to the sagacity of French administrators, the self-sacrifice of French missionaries, and the savoir-faire of French traders and fishermen. The effects of this have been indicated by reference to the attacks on the English fishing vessels on the coast of Nova Scotia, the safety which the English fishers found at Canso in company with the French, and the fact that at the same time Frenchmen had no fear of living among these savages along this stretch of the coast on which the English only could land in peril.[1]

"MEM'L OF CAPT. CYPRIAN SOUTHACK to GOV'R JOSEPH DUDLE 
AND THE COUNCIL AT BOSTON, SEPTEMBER 15, 1715

"On 30 Ap. 1715 he sailed with 2 sloops & one two mast vessel for a fishing voyage to Nova Scotia. 14th May arrived at Port Rossway & landed 17th, vessels sailed on their fishing 18th. Welcomed by Mons. Tarranguer & Joseph Muess. 23rd. Welcomed by the chief captain of Cape Sables & 8 Indian Officers. 25th. M. Tarranguer came and threatened to lead 100 Indians to capture all the fishing vessels on the coast. 28th June received news of capture of an English vessel and men. 3rd July. Informed of the capture of another fishing sloop by the Indians, who threatened him with capture and death saying Costabelle had given to the Indians a great present. 11th July. 2 vessels came in and told him of a capture of 7 sail at Port Seigneur, that the Indians were on their way to capture him & his, would kill him. They refused to carry him, his people & effects away, unless he first gave them a bill of 500 current money of Boston & £125 to be p'd in Boston. Agreed to. . . . Loss sustained at Port Rossway - £450 & the fishing season." [2]

This condition of affairs has certain causes which are fairly well defined, chief among which is the different attitude of the French and English to the aborigines. The former recognized them as independent allies, not as subjects, acknowledging them as sovereign owners of the land, who permitted the usufruct of it to their allies. Pownall, Governor of Massachusetts, says the English, on the contrary, [3]

"with an unsatiable thirst after landed possessions, have got Deeds and other fraudulent pretences, grounded on the abuse of Treaties, and by these Deeds claim possession, even to the exclusion of the Indians, not only from their Hunting Grounds (which with them is a right of great consequence) but even from their house and home. . . . Upon these pretences they have drove the Indians off their Lands : the Indians unable to bear it any 

1. See also Arceneau's account of his voyage to Cape Breton in 1714. 
2. B.T.N.S. vol. 2, f. 7. 
3 C.O. 5/518.

longer told Sir William Johnson that they believed soon they should not be able to hunt a bear into a hole in a tree but some Englishman would claim a right to the property of it as being his tree ... this is the sole ground of the loss and alienation of the Indians from the English Interest : and this is the ground the French work upon : on the contrary the French possessions interfere not with the Indian's Rights, but aid and assist their interest and become a means of their support." 

The splendid heroism of the French missionaries had made these Indians, as well as those of the tribes of Canada, Roman Catholic, and a passion for the orthodoxy of that church made their savage converts more hostile to the heretic than priests and administrators of French origin. St. Ovide objected to the employment of Swiss troops at Louisbourg, as this toleration of heretics would have a bad effect on the Indians.[1] Vaudreuil [2] expresses the French policy in these phrases : " But as Father de la Chasse says, grace among the Indians has often some help from man, and among them worldly gain serves as a channel of doctrine " (" Mais comme me margue le père de la Chasse la grâce parmis les sauvages a souvent de la co-opération de l'homme, et parmis eux l'intérêt temporel sert de la (sic) véhicule à la foix.") 

The standard form of the " véhicule à la foix " was an annual giving of presents of practical utility to the Indians. These presents were dependent in amount on the number of warriors in the tribe, and consisted of powder, lead, flints, and axes. The occasion of the distribution was an important one for conference, and in the earlier years took place frequently at St. Peter's, but on at least one occasion St. Ovide contemplated going to Antigonish on the mainland of Nova Scotia, but was deterred by the not unreasonable objections which might be made by Phillips.[3]

This system was more potent in keeping the friendliness of their allies than the occasional efforts made by the English to win them over. These efforts were never satisfactory, and the punishments of the Indians for wrongdoings by the English were, as all punishments of that epoch, harsh, and in addition they were humiliating and irritated the Indians. The scalp bounties of the colonies included rewards for the killing of Indian women and children, although a lesser money value was set on the scalp of a woman or child than on that of a man.[4] The strange conditions, in which we find a benign and devout clergyman praying that the young men who have joined the Mohawks in a scalping expedition against the French and Indians may go in the fear of the Lord, and regarding the bringing in of French scalps as a good omen, were such as made it easy for the French to retain the goodwill and affection of their allies. There seemed to have been no resentment among the Indians 

1. "Que l'on ne retient que par des motifs de Religion." 
2. To Minister, September 16, 1714. 
3. 1721, I.R. vol. 5. 
4. Reference to this gruesome subject is made in the Appendix. William's Diary, Parkman MSS., May 1747. 

 when any of their number were punished by the French. The only important case in Isle Royale was the murder of Count d'Agrain by two Indians in his employment ; [1] the criminals were apprehended and executed, without apparently causing any irritation among the other members of the tribe. 

The attitude of the French Government was throughout consistent. It is indicated in a reply of the Council to a letter of Costebelle [2] in which he says : " The savages of the French mission on the shores of Acadia are such irreconcilable enemies of the English people, that we cannot, with our most peaceable speeches, impress them not to trouble their trade." The Council's memorandum of reply was to maintain the savages in this state of mind, namely, " to allow no English settlement in Acadia or fishing on its shores, but this should be done prudently and secretly." This was continued for a generation. St. Ovide was reprimanded for having conveyed to the Indians, at a somewhat later time than this, the impression that the small garrison at Isle St. Jean was to help them in their raids against the English ; [3] but in 1727 Father Gaulin was suspected of assisting the Indians in making peace with the English, and although he was an old man, broken with years of service as a missionary, the report seriously irritated Maurepas.[4]

The difficulties inherent in such a situation were increased by braggart and turbulent Frenchmen, who threatened the English at Canso and elsewhere on the coast with Indian attacks and made free in their menaces with the names of Costebelle and St. Ovide. All French accounts of expeditions in which the Indians took a part show that they were intractable, capricious allies, following the French leader when his movements suited them ; at other times, when his persuasions and threats failed, making him yield to their views. Therefore, while the correspondence gives the impression that the earlier French authorities were sincere in not encouraging their allies to deeds of violence, and in protecting the victims when these occurred, with such allies, it was inevitably the more humane side of their policy which failed.[5]

The number of Indians in Nova Scotia was small ; an itemized statement makes in 1721 the total number 289 [6] (Isle Royale 36, Antigonish 48, Beaubassin 47, Mines 58, La Have 60, Cap de Sable, 40). The following year, [7] however, in connection with a proposal made by Gaulin the missionary, to remove the Indians to that island in the Bras d'Or Lakes, which is still their rendezvous, the total number of savages bearing arms is spoken of as 265, and the entire Indian population as 838. It seems incredible that so small a number could have caused such widespread dismay among the English, and so seriously 

1. Jan. 22, 1722.
2. Sept. 9, 1715, I.R. vol. 1, f. 336.
3. B, vol. 54, f. 517.
4. March 11, 1727, I.R. B, 50.
5. See journals of Marin and Boishébert. 
6 I.R. vol. 5, Sept. 15, 1721. 7 I.R. vol. 6, DCC. 27, 1722. 1 Jan. 22, 1722- 3 

hampered their operations. In many cases the crew of a fishing vessel would have been as numerous as any of the bands which attacked them. It is to be expected that fishermen on shore would be at a disadvantage when attacked by savages skilled in the ways of forest warfare ; but it is surprising to find that the Indians of Nova Scotia were bold and skilful at sea. In the outbreak of 1722 the Indians captured trading vessels both in the Bay of Fundy and off the coast of Nova Scotia.[1] They then cruised on the Banks with the captured sloops, forcing the prisoners to serve as mariners. They threatened to attack Canso, and the fishermen were breaking up the fishery, when Colonel Phillips persuaded them to join him in fitting out two sloops, each with a detachment of troops. In the course of three weeks all the sloops and prisoners, with the exception of four, were recaptured. In one of these encounters fifteen Indians fought for two hours with Phillips' schooner manned by sixty men. Ten of the Indians escaped by swimming ashore. The heads of the other five were cut off and stuck on the pickets of the redoubt at Canso.[2]

In the next attack, 1725, which they made on Canso, after the first onslaught, the English armed a vessel to go in pursuit of the Indians who were cruising in two of their captures, in which they had taken eight or nine small fishing craft. In another case [3] they took an English schooner from Newfoundland and brought her back to Isle Royale, while from their establishment on the Bras d'Or Lakes they made annual excursions in open boats to the Magdalen Islands. The advantages to French industry of these raids is shown by the statement that the capture of one English fishing vessel off Isle St. jean by Indians [4] caused eighty others to leave its waters and return to Canso, and the view of Maurepas, that in this he saw no inconvenience, is easily understood. The success of the Indians against the fishermen of New England was probably the chief reason for the contempt for the military skill of the British colonists, expressed up to 1745 by the Louisbourg people. 

Disturbing as had been the exploit of Smart, its effects lasted longer in diplomatic circles than it did at its scene. The French returned, or possibly continued, to fish at Canso. In 1720 Young again visited that port, and says that there were ninety-six English and two hundred French fishermen off Canso. He then went to Louisbourg and saw St. Ovide, who said that he would prevent the French going, as contrary to the Treaty. At the same time it would seem evident that the fishing was held in common, for the English frequented Petit de Grat and other places on Isle Madame,[5] which was unquestionably French territory. But while the conditions were not different from those of 1718, the disturbance of the peace in 1720 came from the Indians.

1. B.T.N.S. vol. 4, Phillips from Canso, September 19, 1722. 
2 I.R. vol. 6, f. 22. 
3. I.R. vol. 7, f. 179. 
4. B, 54, 517 1/2. 
5.B.T.N.S. vol. 3, f. 20. 

" On [1] the 8th of August 1720 the port of Canso was attacked by a body of Indians and some fifty or sixty French. About one or two in the morning the Indians sprang on the English fishermen, scarcely giving some of them time. to put on their breeches, and making many prisoners, placed them in the house under guard. The remainder were driven into the boats and then the French stepped in and assisted. Everything was pillaged-fish, goods, clothes, bedding and even pockets, the loss being said to amount to about £18,000. The onset commenced at Capt. Richards' Island, which they made the place of rendezvous. The fishing vessels having assembled, one was manned to save Capt. Richards' ship, which was deemed in danger, but after firing on both sides she was forced to retire. "

"During this affair 2 Englishmen were shot dead in escaping to the boats, & one was drowned. At 2 in the afternoon a deputation went to Louisbourg to represent the grievance, but the Gov'r made light of it, saying any Fr. taken in the act sh'd make satisfaction, but was not responsible for the Indians.

"In the mean time Capt. Richards had fitted out two small ships, in which he bad pursued the assailants & captured six shallops with plunder on board & 15 Frenchmen. Two captured Indians said M. St. Ovide bad encouraged them & ordered them to rob the settlem't. 

" One Prudent Robicheau, inhabitant of Annapolis, declared that a rumor had been current in St. Peters that the Indians would fall upon Canso some time in the summer & he had warned 2 Eng. masters bound to Canso. The firing at Canso was heard at St. Peters. He left that place in a shallop, with Father Vincent on board, on the 9th of Aug., & met a shallop with Indians who boasted of having taken Canso & forced the fishermen off their boats, killing 1 and wounding 4. They had much plunder on board, Father Vincent rec'd presents from them & applauded their actions. The Indians stated that 70 Indians in 40 canoes had driven 500 men on to their ships. A master of one of the ships, being set on board his vessel, fired on the Indians & forced them to retire. They seized an Eng. shallop and took some of the plunder in her. 

" Not receiving any assistance from the Gov'r of Cape Breton, they sent Mr. Henshaw to Gov'r. Phillips, and five French prisoners with him. Mr. Henshaw returned with Arms and Ammunition & provisions, accompanied by Major Lawrence Armstrong. The latter was directed to go to Canso & take all necessary measures for restoration of peace & security. He was afterwards to proceed to C. Breton & deliver the letter to the Gov'r demanding restitution to the people & the arrest of the principal actors and their ships, until the decision of the two Courts can be received. To return with the Gov'r's answer, calling at Canso on the way. 

"Gov'r Phillips' Letter to M. St. Ovide, dated 29th Aug. 1720, acknowledged the receipt of St. Ovide's letter in reply to the deputation from Canso, and informed him that 5 Frenchmen had been captured with some of the Eng. plunder in their possession. From the depositions of these prisoners, copies of wh. are sent to him & also to the King of Gt. Britain, it is evident that the Fr. were not only the framers and promoters of the violation of the peace at Canso, but also the principal actors, the prisoners declaring they were ordered by their Masters, Philibert, Massey, &c., to pillage the Eng. goods, to load the shallops with them, with their Arms in their hands, powder & shot being distributed to the Natives as in a time of war. He stated that one Renaud had previously 

1. B.T.N.S. vol. 3. 

arranged the onslaught with the natives, & questions whether this could have been done without support from high authority. The Indians who took part had (all but four) come from Cape Breton, where the affair had been openly discussed for 3 mos. previously. He cannot credit the assertions of 2 Indian prisoners that Mr. St. Ovid was the one who encouraged them. Proofs of his desire to preserve the peace demanded his making full restitution for the losses at Canso, & due satisfaction made on the chief actors, who with their ships, &c., should be arrested & await the decision of the two courts." [1] 

Armstrong went to Louisbourg, where, notwithstanding the peremptory tone of his demands, he was received with politeness. St. Ovide, with the action of Smart and the British authorities before him, was determined to show the "road of equity" to the English in this transaction. He sent De Pensens, who was accompanied by Armstrong, to Petit de Grat, where he examined the French who knew about the affair. It was proved by their evidence that the Indians were destroying the cod and other property, or giving it to them. Arquebel thought it only right to make good his losses through Smart, and therefore took cod. Two other men said the Indians forced them. Another man saw Indians destroying a good sail, asked for it and they gave it to him ; and still another had lost by the English in 1718. The property that had been taken was restored to Armstrong to the value of  £1600.  [2]

As two years had elapsed since the first outrage at Canso, and it was still unatoned for, the English authorities were not in a position to notice this incident,[3]  in which, granted the fact that the French had such allies as the Indians, the conduct of their local authorities was honourable, straight-forward, and the action that they took towards righting the wrong was all that could be expected of them. 

The view which St. Ovide wrote to the authorities at home as to the reason of the outbreak at this particular time was, that the Indians were incensed by British treatment of their brothers, the Acadians. On the face of it this does not seem probable. It receives some confirmation from Phillips, who reports with bitterness that Lieutenant Washington, one of his officers at Annapolis, went about saying that his severity to the Acadians brought on this attack.[4] Phillips took prompt action. He sent in the autumn a company to remain at Canso all winter. These he reinforced the following year with two companies, built a small fort, which he armed with cannon borrowed 

1. B.T.N.S. vol. 4, Nov. 20, 1720.
2. The Court approved this action of St. Ovide (B, vol. 44. f. 557, June 20, 1721). 
3. The Commissioners of Trade, nevertheless, wrote to the Lords justices, speaking of the Indian attack as reprisals by the French, and urged that restitution be demanded before satisfaction be given Mr. Hirriberry, the chief victim of Smart (B.T.N.S. vol. 31, Oct. 18, 1720).
4. N.S. vol. 4, f. 7.

from the vessels, and thereafter held the place, on the ground that it was necessary to protect the fishermen from Indian hostilities. He thus made Canso, on his own initiative, British territory. 

These events at Canso have been set forth in some detail, for they may be regarded as indicating with clearness the course of the future relations of the two peoples in North America, which culminated in the obliteration of French power. On the one hand, there was the commercial aspect ; the people of both nationalities engaged in the peaceful exploiting of the fisheries, which were so rich that both together had ample room, and indifferently used the harbours and waters which belonged to both Crowns. On the other hand, there is the action of the Governments ; that of Massachusetts, energetic and forceful, which took steps on false information, for the French were not on the mainland of Nova Scotia, and in the trouble which followed their action, an unscrupulous naval captain was vigorously supported by the Admiralty. On the French side one marks the leaning on the broken reed of English respect for the law of nations, and a supineness in considering an insult to the French flag in colonial waters as of little consequence. It is not to be wondered at that a writer [1] on French colonial policy, should have a chapter on the contempt for the colonies in the eighteenth century. The history of the French action at Canso would justify the heading of his chapter, as well as the matter he publishes therein. 

Again, no comment is necessary on the significance of the action of the officials. St. Ovide waited for instructions from the Court and supplies from France. Phillips, as ill-equipped as the French Governor, threw a garrison into Canso without waiting for instructions, and, without artillery, made those interested contribute guns from their vessels for its defence. These are examples of the working out of the two systems on which colonies were governed, quite as striking as any found elsewhere in the history of New England and New France. 

1. Schon, La Politique Coloniale.