The commandant of a Place De Guerre was permitted to order the arrest and imprisonment of any soldier regardless of his corps or his company, though he was required to notify the captain of the man's company within 24 hours of the arrest. Other officers were authorized to put in prison only soldiers of their own corps or companies, and they were not permitted to secure the release of any soldier without the permission of the commandant or a Conseil de Guerre, if one was called for. Soldiers, therefore, who were arrested in the act of committing a crime or without the direct order of one of their officers were to be taken to the corps de garde until the order to remove them to the prison was obtained. [1] In Louisbourg it would appear that officers of one company were allowed to imprison a soldier of another. A soldier in Duhaget's company was placed in prison by his sergeant in 1740 on the order of Enseigne en pied Bellemont, although the latter was serving with Captain De Gannes. [2]

When a soldier was arrested by civil authorities for a crime against a civilian or involving some non-military matter, his commanding officer was to be notified so that he might attend the instruction (preliminary hearing) and jugement (sentencing) of the accused. The major de place was also to be notified so that he might be present at the proceedings. [3] One major, Bourville, complained in 1722 that there were occasions in Louisbourg when soldiers were tried for crimes against inhabitants without his being notified until it was time for sentence to be passed. Since he had not been present for the instruction he refused to attend the jugement. The Conseil de la Marine was asked by the major to intervene to stop this disregard for proper procedure. [4]

On a soldier's arrest for a military crime, an écroue (entry in the prison register) was to be made which included the reason for his detention, his name, and the name of the person by whom he was charged. It was to read:

In the year ..., on the ... day of ..., we, Major ..., in execution of the King's orders dated ..., arrested one deserter from the ... Regiment, or pursuant to the letter of Sieur ... dated ..., arrested one ... suspected of being a deserter from the ... Regiment, whom we have consigned to prison and left in the custody of ..., keeper of the prisons of ... Done at ... in the year and month aforesaid.

The security of the prison belonged to the caporal de garde of the nearest guardhouse. In Louisbourg this was the corps de garde of the Place D'Armes, and since Louisbourg had no civilian prison, the corporal's responsibility included civilian as well as military prisoners. When a soldier was escorted to the prison by the corporal and two soldiers from the guard, the major or the procureur général, depending on whether the offence was military or civil, would accompany them. With the door to the prison open, the major or procureur would admonish the caporal. de garde to keep "good and safe custody" of the prisoner and to instruct the corporal who would relieve him to do the same. The door to the cell would then be closed. [6] D'Hericourt suggested that whenever the major or any other officer was obliged to visit the prison, he should remove his sword at the prison door. Officers, he declared, were in the habit of wearing their swords on such occasions, thus causing "inconveniences" to occur. [7] As early as 1720 De Mézy identified the need for a civil prison in Louisbourg separate from the military one. He also wished to appoint a jailer "who would collect from each prisoner four livres in accordance with the usage in Canada, instead of the 10 livres collected by the major and a sergeant ... " The military at Louisbourg, he noted, had only a sentry at the prison door as was customary in all Places De GuerTe. [8] Seven years later the problem was described in more desperate terms : the military prisons, it was said, were "impracticables;" they were dirty and leaked terribly when it rained. Moreover, the soldiers fought continually with sailors or civilians put in the cells with them. [9] No such separate prison was ever established. 

While the civil crimes of many soldiers are known through the court records, those of a military nature are more obscure. This is due, in part, to the limited number of the courts martial (Conseils de Guerre) proceedings available for the Louisbourg garrison. [10] These records would undoubtedly provide interesting details of the life of the soldiers of Ile Royale, however, Conseils de Guerre were required only if the penalty for an offense was a serious one such as death or the galleys. Punishment for lesser crimes could, with the permission of the commandant, be meted out in summary fashion by the culprit's superior officer. A man could be made, therefore, to mount the wooden horse or pass "par les baquettes" without benefit of a trial. [11] As a result, access to the proceedings of the Conseils de Guerre held in Louisbourg would not provide much information about the majority of those who found their way into prison for such things as drunkenness, fighting, insubordination, selling clothing issued to them, or minor thefts from comrades.

It is likely that the difficulties accompanying the replacement of men lost through capital punishment or a term on the galleys made the 4tat major and officers at Louisbourg willing to settle for less severe penalties whenever possible. Soldiers charged with such things as desertion while on guard duty had to be prosecuted to the full extent of the law, but for many other infractions lesser sentences could be rendered. The suggestion was made in 1725 that deserters too have their sentences commuted in Ile Royale in return for working in the coal mines. The minister rejected this proposal because he felt that it would cost more to set up a place for them to work and to have guards watch over them than their labour would produce. 12 One soldier, executed in Louisbourg in 1720, had a record of a long list of offences committed in Canada and Port Dauphin for which a variety of punishments had been inflicted before he finally went too far and escaped from prison in Louisbourg, where he was being held for several thefts. Most of his earlier punishments had been less than the offence was supposed to merit, but now as a captured deserter he had to face a death sentence. [13]

[Endnotes: Arrest and Imprisonment, 1 D'Hericourt, Elemens De L'Art Militaire, Vol. 2, p. 206; Diderot et D'Alembert, Encyclopédie ..., Tome 4, p. 11; 2 A.N., Outre Mer, G2, Vol. 197, dossier 135, 1740; 3 D'Hericourt, Elemens Dé L'Art Militaire, Vol. 2, p. 209; Côde Militaire, Vol. 1, pp. 279-80; Diderot et D'Alembert, Encyclopédie ..., Tome 4, P. 11; 4 A.N., Colonies, C11B, Vol. 6, fols. 97-97v., 7 juillet 1722; 5 D'Hericourt, Elemens De L'Art Militaire, Vol. 2, p. 207; 6 A.N., Outre Mer, G2, Vol. 182, fols. 148-357; 1733; ibid., Vol. 183, fols. 78-91, 1734; ibid., Vol. 187, fols. 9-72, 1742. Wording of original form: "L'an ... le ... jour du mois d ... nous Major ... en exécution des ordres ... du Roi en date du ... avons arrêté le nommé ... déserteur du Régiment ... ou bien en vertu de la Lettre du Sieur ... en date du ... avons arrêté le nommé ... soupçonne être déserteur du Regiment ... lequel nous avons écroué & laissé à la charge d ... concierge des prisons d ... fait à ... les ans 9 mois susdits". The original quote further down the page is "Bonne et Sure Garde"; 7 D'Hericourt, Elemens De L'Art Militaire, Vol. 2, p. 208; 8 A.N. , Colonies, C11B, Vol. 5, fols. 70-74, 13 août 1720. Original quote: "qui reteréroit de chaque prisonnier 4 # suivant l'usage de Canada, au lieu de 10 # qui retirent le Major et un sergen; 9 Ibid., Vol. 9, fols. 260-60v., 1727; 10 Ibid. , Vol. 5, fols. 78-98v. , 22 août 1720; ibid. , Vol. 7, fols. 78-93, 18 octobre 1724; ibid., Vol. 6, fols. 79-96v., 17 juillet 1722; ibid., Vol. 17, fols. 296-315, 1736; A.N., Outre Mer, G2, Vol. 179, fols. 93-125, dossier 12, 1725-26, ibid., fols. 463-502, 1727; 11 D'Hericourt, Elemens De L'Art Militaire, Vol. 2, p. 235; 12 A.N., Colonies, B, Vol. 48-2, fols 947-50, 25 juillet 1725; 13 Ibid., C11B, Vol. 5, fols. 78-99v., 22 août 1720.] 

[Source: Margaret Fortier, Fortress Security and Military Justice at Louisbourg, 1720-45, Unpublished Report H E 14 (Fortress of Louisbourg, 1980), pp. 54-56]