Search Website Design and Content © by Eric Krause, Krause House Info-Research Solutions (© 1996)
      All Images © Parks Canada Except Where Noted Otherwise
Report/Rapport © Parks Canada / Parcs Canada  --- Report Assembly/Rapport de l'assemblée © Krause House Info-Research Solutions

Researching the Fortress of Louisbourg National Historic Site of Canada
  Recherche sur la Forteresse-de-Louisbourg Lieu historique national du Canada

POST OCCUPATIONAL HISTORY OF THE OLD FRENCH TOWN OF LOUISBOURG, 1760-1930

By Wayne Foster 

Unpublished Report H D 02

Fortress of Louisbourg

December, 1965

(Note: The illustrations, are available from the Fortress of Louisbourg / 
A noter : les illustrations pourrait être consulter à la
Forteresse-de-Louisbourg.) 

Table of Contents

CHAPTER 1: 1760-1768

ENGLISH GARRISON HABITATION (1760-1768)

On 26 July 1758, the British forces, with New England aid, captured the great French stronghold of Louisbourg. Following its capture, Brigadier General Whitmore was appointed by the Imperial Government as Governor of not only Louisbourg but all of "Cape Breton and St. John's". The 22nd, 28th, 40th, and 45th Regiments [1] were stationed at Louisbourg as a garrison, although later expeditions to Newfoundland led to a reduction in the size of the garrison. During this time, Louisbourg remained one of the chief settlements on the Island as it offered obvious advantages with respect to protection and ready-made dwellings. The garrison seems to have been housed in those buildings that were still habitable following the 1758 siege. Governor Whitmore reported to Sir William Pitt, on 22 January 1759, the following situation with respect to the housing of the garrison:

Before the severity of the weather set in, the Men's Barracks were so far repaired, as to be wind and water tight. And all the artifficers have been constantly employed since, and will be continued until they are in everything as comfortable as possible. ... The men are now but awkwardly provided with quarters, being obliged to be disturbed [sic] all over the houses of the town; the two publick buildings of barracks, which held upwards of two thousand men, during the siege burnt to the ground. It is not for me to determine how far it's proper or not to give orders for the rebuilding of these, as doubtless they will be a great charge to the publick. But in them the men would be much better lodged, and if this continues a British settlement it will be absolutely necessary to make Room for many People that Fishery and Trade will draw hither. [2]

The final demolition of the fortifications took place on 8 November 1760, [3] but Pitt's orders reveal that the houses of the town were not to be destroyed, except those in the way of carrying out the demolition order. [4] A garrison was still to be continued at Louisbourg, according to a letter of Amherst, and was to be quartered in the houses of the town.[5]

During these early years, the garrison of three hundred men was under the command of Lieutenant-Colonel Tulleken of the 45th Regiment. It was during his command that a fire broke out destroying a number of the buildings of the town. Eight days after the event (30 March 1762) Tulleken wrote:

On the 22^d instant about half an hour after nine o'clock in the Morning Wee had the Misfortune here to have a fire break out upon us at our Bakers nearly the centre of the Town. It at first burst forth with such violence. And the houses on all sides being built with wood, that it made some progress before I could get my people together, tho' every body turnd out with the utmost alacrity. It was unlucky, but it so happene'd, that a snow storm commenced with the fire. And the wind blowing very strong at East and withal variable, so as to change two or three Points each way, wee had for some hours great reason to fear that most of the Town would be consumed. It was above four hours before wee was able to master it. There is about Twelve houses burnt down, And four or five pull'd down, which was done to stop the progress of the flames. All the publick buildings our Barracks and store houses are safe. Our loss is little off.[sic]. One or two of the inhabitants lost part of their effects, tho' not much as wee readily give them every assistance in our power. I cannot help observing upon this occasion how much the officers and men of the 45th Regiment are to be commended, As to their readiness Activity and good behaviour it is entirely oweing [sic] that any part of the Town was saved.[6]

Following Lieutenant-Colonel Tulleken as garrison commander, was a Major Milward, who was in charge of the 59th Regiment stationed there as a garrison. He was in command until 1768 when the garrison was removed from Louisbourg to Halifax in response to the threatening actions of the defiant American colonists.

It should be noted, however, that the 1758-1768 period, in which Louisbourg was occupied by a garrison, still remains as an area for further investigation, as there are many details concerning the regiment commanders and the regiments themselves that remain undetermined, which a closer study of English manuscripts at the Public Archives (Ottawa) and the Public Record Office in London should reveal.

LOUISBOURG FROM 1760-1768: LAND POLICY

Louisbourg must have seemed attractive to outsiders. Its fine harbour, the excellence of the fisheries and its proximity to the coal fields [i.e. Cow Bay] must have been strong factors in its favour. Additionally, the garrison stationed there offered the necessary military protection. The remaining buildings of the old Fortress seemed to offer cheap accommodation for those who might wish to carry on trade or the fishing industry.

The Imperial land policy with respect to Cape Breton did little, however, to encourage settlement at Louisbourg. Instructions from the Lords of Trade and Plantations, in charge of colonial land policy, to Wilmot, governor of Cape Breton and St. John's Island, on 22 November 1763, and 6 March 1764 [7] state that Wilmot was not to grant lands on these islands unless instructed by His Majesty. The Governor was to encourage moderate, temporary establishments to carry on the fisheries but to discourage any attempt to form monopolies in the fishing and coal industries. The great value of the land with respect to the fisheries and the need for a more perfect land survey were given as reasons for the withholding of land grants.

A survey of the island was called for: "We [Lords of Trade and Plantations] must desire therefore that you will forthwith cause an actual survey to be made of these islands, reporting to us in the meantime every circumstance you can collect" - in relation to extent, nature of soil, of rivers and harbours, of their products and advantages, and what place of settlement would be best. [8]

Apparently there were numerous applications from those persons desiring to gain control of the coal and fishing rights in Cape Breton. Lieutenant-Colonel Tullekin referred in a letter [9]  of 25 October 1763, to large numbers of applications for lands to carry on the fisheries and to the success which this industry had the previous year. For example, the Duke of Richmond had made a request for a grant of "Cape Breton and its appurtence", to be held by him and others of the gentry and nobility in fee simple, to be settled by them as the Crown desired. The Lords of Trade and Plantations, in reply, stated that, for the sake of the public good, they felt Cape Breton, because of its large size, should not be given to the Duke of Richmond.[10]

New England at this time was expanding her maritime interests. The fishermen and whalemen were interested in the whole South Shore from Cape Sable to Canso because of its abundant harbors and its nearness to the Banks. Some thought of Cape Breton where the French had been so successful and where at Louisbourg an empty, if sorely damaged, town awaited occupation.[11] British land policy, though it recognized the need for encouraging settlement in Louisbourg and all of Cape Breton, certainly was not designed to foster the interest shown by outsiders. People did, however, take up residence at the fortress, although the population of Louisbourg and all of Cape Breton seemed to be of a transient nature. Many probably came only for the summers to participate in the fisheries. Estimates of the population in Cape Breton vary widely, supporting this theory. In 1766 the total population was estimated at between 707 and more than 1,000; in 1768 at 395 to 700. [12]

The inhabitants of Fort Louisbourg were subjected to heavy taxes, large duties and heavy house rents, which the Nova Scotia government used for the repairing of the public roads; furthermore, they had no voice in the Nova Scotia Assembly. The feelings of the Louisbourg inhabitants were reflected in their petition to the Lords of Trade and Plantations, in 1766. [13] The petitioners described themselves as "Settlers, in the said island since its last reduction" of whom most had assisted in the conquest. The petitioners explained that they were induced to settle on Cape Breton because of the assurance they had been given that they might carry on the fishery with the same privileges as the rest of the inhabitants of Nova Scotia. They complained that the distance of Louisbourg from the capital of Nova Scotia caused great difficulties and inconveniences which the Governors had done nothing to remedy.

The inhabitants of Cape Breton were, apparently, neither consulted nor represented in the Assembly. They complained of grievous taxes on almost every commodity; the rents for dwellings in the city were exorbitant, especially as nothing was done to repair the buildings. There was no court of Justice to which they could apply to obtain redress or to obtain decisions on controversies. They had gone to considerable expense to erect fishing stages on the strength of temporary grants made by Governor Whitmore and succeeding commanders; then, they had heard from Halifax that a grant had been made to a Frenchman of a large part of the island - he was already on his way to take possession. This tract included the environs of Louisbourg and their most valuable improvements; apparently, it deprived the citizens of their commons for their cattle.

This seems to have been the 20,000 acre grant made by Benjamin Green, Commander in Chief in Nova Scotia or Acadia and its Dependencies, in the name of the Crown, to the Sieur Gratian D'Arrigrand who had received such a grant from the French King in 1751 and desired its renewal. D'Arrigrand's old age was in his favour. The grant was "in the harbour of Louisbourg ... Beginning three hundred feet from High Water mark, at the Head of a Cove which lies about half a mile to the Eastward of the Grand Battery; and from thence to run West ten chains; thence North West one hundred and fifty eight chains; thence North eight hundred and eighty chains; thence South West one hundred and fifty eight chains; thence West ten chains till it meets the first mentioned boundary ..." He was charged 1/2 penny quit rent annually.

An interesting condition of the grant was that the Grantee was to "settle the lands hereby granted with protestant settlers or Inhabitants within ten years from the date of the grant, in the proportion of one person to every two hundred acres" or the grant was to revert to the Crown. The grant was dated 8 July 1766. [14] The petitioners expressed the hope that no grant would be given which was prejudicial to the interests of the settlers then present in the island. They pointed out that they had been unsuccessfully applying for absolute grants of their possessions.

Their last grievance related to the high tax on "spirituous liquors", so essential for carrying on the fishery because of the "intemperate climate". They explained that this tax by the legislature of Nova Scotia, in which they were not represented, discouraged people from entering the fishery, the only trade for which the island was suited. The petitioners referred the Lords of Trade and Plantations to the testimony of Colonels Tullesken and Pringle and Captain Holland, the Surveyor General on that coast, who were aware of "the justice" of their complaints. The signers were Moses Freeman, Sam Blackden, Richard Wheeler, W. Russell, I. Rockett, Alexander Teg, Thomas Merthe [Mortho] Matthers [Matthew ?]  Roe, John Moss, John Ley, Lawrence Kavanagh, William Brimizion. [15] [Most of these names appear in the habitation records of the Fortress].

Friction between the government at Halifax and the Louisbourg inhabitants is evident in the Council Minutes of the 1760's. There were clashes between the influential George Cottnam, in his capacity as tax collector at Louisbourg, and the inhabitants. Alexander Ley and Moses Freeman made a complaint at Halifax against Cottnam for his "ill language" to them and the injury done to their reputations because of his statements. [16] There are several references in Council Minutes at Halifax of actions taken against "delinquents of Louisbourg for duties of Impost and Excise. [17] There is also recorded in the Council Minutes an order to the Attorney and Solicitor General to prosecute, on the behalf of the government, in the case of Rockett, for Rum imported by him into Louisbourg and not legally entered". George Cottnam, Collector, had made the seizure [18] - an act which tended to make him extremely unpopular with many of the inhabitants.

In answer to the petition of the Louisbourg inhabitants airing their complaints, the Lords of Trade and Plantations defended their policies in a letter to Shelburne. [19] They argued that when Cape Breton was annexed to Nova Scotia after the Treaty of Paris directions had been given for a survey to be made of the island in order to determine the best mode of settlement, but until the survey had been completed, the Governor of Nova Scotia had been instructed to forbid the granting of land or allowing any settlement in the area. Due to the advantageous fishing location and the expediency of having troops at Louisbourg, many temporary licences had been issued, however. In order for Cape Breton to maintain some type of civil government, it had been declared part of Halifax County. In 1765, due to a rapid increase in the population and its remoteness from Halifax, Cape Breton was made a separate "County of Cape Breton". At this time, a Commission had been issued to hold a Court of Quarter Session and a Court of Common Pleas, and two representatives were to have been chosen from "the county of Breton". The Lords of Trade and Plantations concluded that Cape Breton inhabitants had no foundation for their complaints and recommended that their requests not be granted.

Lieutenant Governor Francklin writing to the Lords of Trade and Plantations in 1766 referred to the grievances of the Louisbourg inhabitants. [20] He explained the complaint, that they were not represented in the Assembly, by stating that qualified electors must own landed property, but on a writ sent to Cape Breton, no one was found qualified. When annexed, Cape Breton was joined to the County of Halifax; thus, strictly speaking, Cape Breton inhabitants were represented by that county's representatives. Mention was also made of a difficulty in finding people to act as judges of the Court of Common Pleas and to form juries, necessitating the appointment of such persons as circumstances permitted. Francklin concluded, somewhat optimistically, with the hope that once the island was divided into lots, the inhabitants would be "better disposed".

The policy of withholding grants of land in Cape Breton had been designed partly to prevent exploitation of the coal mines. The mines were used to supply coal for the garrisons of Halifax and Louisbourg. Governor Campbell was not even allowed to use the mines as a source of revenue for building roads. [21] As a matter of course, smuggling of coal soon became serious in the late 1760's and the 1770's. Louisbourg inhabitants were responsible for a great deal of this illegal traffic and as a result conflict with Imperial authorities took place. "... A large quantity of coal had been smuggled from Cape Breton to New England by one Alexander Lee [Ley] of Louisbourg [March 22, 1767, Alexander Lee was prosecuted by the Attorney-General for having, contrary to the Governor's proclamation, dug and carried away a large quantity of coals from Cow Bay, in the Isle of Cape Breton (Minutes of Council)] which brought down the price ...." [22]

Captain William Owen, in the narrative of his journey to Cape Breton in 1767 on the subject of coal deposits in Cape Breton explained, "The collieries are not permitted by Government to be wrought, unless barely for the use of the garrison of Louisbourg, and the Governor's house at Halifax". Owen offered the explanation that the Government's reservation of the Cape Breton coals was probably dictated by a fear that "lest in process of time the collieries at home should be exhausted; or probably upon a supposition that burning them might retard the clearing of the lands of the neighbouring Colonies, w^ch, in a state of nature, are well known to be overgrown with wood, and to be cleared, even with the help of fire, only by dint of much labour, industry, and expense". [23]

Louisbourg reached the year 1768 in a state of unpleasant circumstances, brought about mainly by an unsound land policy on the part of the Imperial authorities. This policy of withholding grants of land in Cape Breton kept the island in a barren state, which seems to have been at least one of the aims of the British government. In Letters to Lord Stanley, Secretary of State for the Colonies [24] the "one persisting cause" of the "restraint on settlement" is designated as having been the fear of the government of the competition Cape Breton coal would provide for those manufacturers in England. For this reason, settlement in Cape Breton was discouraged. Even 'bona fide' inhabitants about the fort at Louisbourg could get no title to the lands they had improved.

Samuel Holland's Description of the Island of Cape Breton and its Dependencies done in 1767 gives a good picture of the state to which Louisbourg had sunk by that time as a result of Imperial policy:

... scarce any resemblance remains of its former state: the Demolition of the Fortifications and the little encouragement it met with, have concurred in reducing its Buildings, Fisheries and Trade to a very low Degree. It is difficult on a slight inspection to believe that there were 300 shallops, and as many decked Vessells for the Banks once employed in the Fishery but the many Conveniences that have been made at immense Labour and expense too plainly show what it once was ...

There seems to be little Hopes that this place will ever be able to retrieve his former prosperity, or indeed any part of it, unless some methods more vigorous and Salutary than what has hither to appeared be speedily taken. And indeed without some extraordinary encouragement and so long as Newfoundland affords more immunities it must always be what it is at present, without any person of Substances to support any public Improvement, without any Trade to the Mother Country, and a retreat for none but those whose Characters are an Impediment to their residing in any other place -- Those that Supply the Fishery with any thing have all their necessaries through two or three different Channells which obliges them to charge so much additional Price that the wages of the Fishermen is enhanced thereby to so great a degree as makes it impossible any quantity of Fish, that can be [ , ] should be able to leave any reasonable profit to the Adventures. [25]

Holland depicted Louisbourg as abounding "with nothing but Brush Rocks and Swamps, ... visited in Summer by a continued Fog, and in Winter by a long severity of Cold, etc.".

He described the Town as being "on one of the worst spots of the Island, for Soil and Climate for which Reason, if once the other Towns are encouraged to be settled, the Inhabitants of this will flock to those places which can be prevented by no other means than the making it the seat of Justice and public Business for the Island, as it is for this Country".

Holland made another point, which helps to explain the reluctance of the Imperial government to make at that time grants of lands in Louisbourg and its environs.

As the Garrison of Louisbourg has no Market to Supply it, it is obliged to be provided from the Continent with live Stock, and if the lands were granted away it would be distressed for Hay, to maintain them, which they have represented to me, and as there is a tract of 2500 Acres remaining, that could not be well appointed for a Town Division, I have laid it out under the title of the Garrison lot which if approved of, may be appropriated to His Majesty for that Use, and when the Country is better settled it may be for the Maintenance of an Academy or Public School.

The land on the Fortress site and near it was needed to feed the livestock for the fortress garrison, and if these lands had been granted away, the garrison would have had no easy means to support its livestock. For this reason, it must have seemed advisable to maintain the lands under the control of the Crown.

By the survey done by Holland, the Island was laid out in Townships and town lots. The District of Louisbourg had 5,800 acres laid out for the Town of Louisbourg [lots apparently extending around the harbor] and 2,500 acres for the Garrison Lot. [26] The Imperial government's long awaited survey had been carried out. Grants of land, however, for reasons before stated were not issued.

The miserable state of Louisbourg by 1768 roused Governor Campbell of Nova Scotia to write to the Imperial officials at Whitehall recommending that grants be made to the inhabitants of Louisbourg of the land in which they resided in order to "revive the large town of Louisbourg which is now going to ruin". He suggested that Town lots at Louisbourg be granted "under certain fines and reserved rent". The hardships confronting the people of Cape Breton were referred to also. His great desire for instructions to issue proper land grants at Louisbourg was supported by his warning that if these grants for the partitioning of Louisbourg were not issued, Louisbourg would continue a "decayed city". Since Cape Breton had been annexed to the government of Nova Scotia, the inhabitants had been obliged to pay the duties of import and excise, as they had not been granted any lots of land or houses there. Additionally, he argued, there were many people at Louisbourg who would be glad to purchase a house, if only they were permitted. The results, to Campbell's way of thinking, would have been an increase in the town's growth, increased trade, the encouragement of a good harbour for fishing, as well as providing a service to the provincial revenues, for, the people, as he expressed it, "no longer think much of paying taxes when they have got property granted to them".[27]

CHIEF INHABITANTS DURING THE
BRITISH GARRISON OCCUPATION

Most of the information concerning the civilian population can only be found in selections and memorials of the time. The petition of Louisbourg inhabitants in 1766 gave the names Moses Freeman, Sam Blackden, Richard Wheeler, William Russell, I. Rockett, Alexander Ley, Thomas Wheeler, Thomas Merthe [?], Matthew Roe [Rowe?], John Moss, John Ley, Lawrence Kavanagh, and William Brimigion. [28]

An enclosure in a letter of Lieutenant-Governor Francklin to Imperial authorities in 1767 gave a list of inhabitants of Louisbourg, who had been residents in that area for at least seven to eight years, and who had been granted, by the Government of Nova Scotia, licences of occupation for land to be used in the extension of their fisheries. Francklin expressed the wish that the expenses of these people be considered in order that they "may not become sufferers when a distribution of these lands shall take place". The names designated were John Robin, who received "a fish lot at Peter de Grale"; G. Cottnam, who was issued "six hundred acres at Little Lorembec or Gordon Harbour"; William Russell - "a Lot at the north East Point of Louisbourg Harbour with sixty acres adjoining a lot on the harbour of Labaleine. A lot in Little Bradore with the Gardens belonging to them, and five hundred acres at said Bradore"; Lawrence Cavanaugh and James Gethings - "Five hundred acres between the west end of Little Saint Peters and the East end of Port Lewis". [29] All seemed to have been expanding their fishing operations beyond the bounds of Louisbourg.

On 10 February 1764, Francis Albertus Strasburg (formerly Town Adjutant at Louisbourg) and William Phipps (a trader at Louisbourg) were appointed Justices of the Peace "at the Island of Cape Breton in the County of Halifax". George Cottnam, Gregory Townshend and William Russell were appointed Justices of the Interior Court of Common Pleas on 16 December 1765. Samuel Holland, who was making a survey of the island, was appointed Justice of the Peace for Cape Breton, as was James Gethings, in 1768. "Holland was merely a temporary resident, Gethings a transient ...".[30]

The character of many of the inhabitants seems to have been open to doubt if we accept Samuel Holland's words that Louisbourg was a "retreat for none but those whose Characters are an Impediment to their residing in any other place". [31] The coal smuggling activities of Alexander Ley and the rum running business of I. Rockett probably made them good examples of the type Holland had in mind.

Certain of these inhabitants played prominent roles at Louisbourg following the departure of the garrison in 1768, and will be discussed more fully later.

THE RESULTS OF THE GARRISON DEPARTURE

On the tenth of August, 1768, the garrison at Louisbourg under Major Milward was recalled. [32] "General Gate, the commander-in-chief in America, had ordered all the troops from the outposts to be concentrated at Halifax in readiness for embarkation to Boston". [33] The resulting decline in population following the withdrawal of the 59th Regiment caused much concern to Governor Campbell who expressed, in a letter to the Earl of Hillsborough, his fears that "unless measures are taken to restore order, total desertion of the inhabitants will occur for want of the appearance of military protection".

Not only decline of population but lawlessness seemed probable to Governor Campbell. He substantiated these fears by referring to the fact that "Orders not to touch the coal mines in and around Louisbourg have been disregarded. Since the peace, Louisbourg has been the receptacle of adventurers in the fishery; many who have settled there". Holding opinions similar to that of Holland in regard to the character of Louisbourg inhabitants, Campbell explained that these people had little acquaintance with any form of government, but since the withdrawal of the troops he feared "total anarchy and confusion" would result, for the civil magistrate would now have nowhere to turn for protection in the execution of his office. [34]

Rev. Mr. Kneeland, army chaplain to the 59th Regiment at Louisbourg [35] reported the population of Cape Breton, in 1766, to be 1,000 with Louisbourg having 500, including 120 under fourteen years of age. [36] Samuel Holland reported in 1767 that there were "upwards of 700 Inhabitants of which Number about 500 reside at Louisbourg". [37] [A return for the various counties in Nova Scotia, enclosed in a letter of Franklin to Shelburne in 1767, gave a similar number of 707 as the total of Cape Breton inhabitants [38]]. Comparison of the figures for these years with the "65 English and 4 French" recorded as being at Louisbourg by Lieutenant-Governor Franklin in August 29, 1768, following the garrison's departure, would suggest that a radical reduction in population occurred as a result of the removal of the military garrison. Of course, the 1768 figures do not include women and children; they are given separately for the whole island; nevertheless, the great abandonment of Louisbourg is indicated quite clearly. By that time, the chart indicated, there were only thirty tenable houses at Louisbourg and sixty repairable. Lieutenant-Governor Franklin's letter, similar to that of Governor Campbell's stated, "The wealthier inhabitants intend to leave now that the troops are gone", leaving as the majority of people on the Island "the drags of the English and French garrisons". In order to induce people to stay, Franklin suggested that the occupation of the houses at Louisbourg be made free until His Majesty adopted some plan for its settlement. [39]

Louisbourg had, indeed, reached a low ebb by the end of 1768.

THE STATE OF THE BUILDINGS
AT LOUISBOURG IN 1766, 1767, AND 1768

It should be noted here that a knowledge of the state of the old French buildings is valuable for this period, for those people who did take up residence at Louisbourg would have surely inhabited those buildings so fit. As the land was not theirs, new inhabitants would not feel inclined to build new houses. For this reason the remaining houses at Louisbourg must have seemed desirable.

Thos. Wright's "View of the Town of Louisbourg" in 1766, [40] gives us some idea of a portion of the fortress. One is able to see in some detail all the houses in the west end of the city. "The houses in area A and B are shown, with a very good view of the Ordonnateur's Palace, which is labelled the Engineer's house, and the old storehouse. The Bakery appears to have been burned. Buildings labelled include the Château de St. Louis, the blockhouse, the convent, the church of the parish, the Ordonnateur's Place, the Island Battery, and the lighthouse".

Captain William Owen on a tour of Cape Breton in 1767 with Lord William Campbell [41] aboard the R.N. Ship "The Mermaid" referred to "Major Milward and the corps of officers of the 59th Regiment, the whole of which we found in garrison here [Louisbourg] except one company at Placentia in Newfoundland, and another at the Island of St. Jean". Owen, in his narrative, also described the town as being "half a mile in length, and two in circuit; the houses ... for the most part built with stone, the streets ... regular and broad, with a large parade at a little distance from the citadel, the inside of which is a fine square of 200 feet every way. The Governor's and Intendant's houses, the Church, Nunnery, Hospital and Barracks were good buildings when the place was possessed by the French, but were now going fast to decay".

A plan of Louisbourg surveyed and drawn by George Sproule in 1767 gives a good impression of the condition of the buildings and their use on that date. [42] I have attempted to summarize the information using the old French system of numbering the blocks. Only those structures identified have been mentioned. It is to be noted that in 1767 approximately eighty-four houses were occupied, as well as approximately fifty-six stores and stables. Approximately seven buildings were utilized for the use of the garrison as guard houses, barracks, a mess house, store house, and a block house.

SUMMATION

FRENCH BLOCK NO.

BLOCK I

- (1) three buildings designated as "King's Arsenal and Victualing stores"

- (X) house entirely in ruins

- (K) Engineer's House now the mess house of the garrison

- (Z) A well just outside the east boundary

- (Y) Two structures labelled as "Stores and Stables occupied at present"

- A garden (dotted green)

- To the west of the western boundary of the Block are some buildings (5?) entirely in ruins, as well as a coal yard.

BLOCK II

- (1) Intendant's house much out of repair

- (v) Four inhabited houses (at present)

- (y) Seven stores and Stables occupied at present

- (Z) Two wells

- Several gardens

BLOCK III

- (S) Quay Guard House

- (W) Three Houses uninhabitable

- (V) Three Houses at present inhabited

- Several gardens

BLOCK IV

- (Y) Four stores and Stables occupied at present

- (V) Nine Houses at present Inhabited

- Several gardens

NORTH OF BLOCK IV --- an area containing:

- (Y) Ten "Stores and Stables at present occupied"

- (V) One house at present inhabited

- Several gardens

BLOCK V and area: --
North of it extending around the land jutting out into Mary's Pond:

- (V) Six houses at present Inhabited

- (X) Five houses entirely in ruins

- (W) Five Houses uninhabitable

- Many gardens

North of that a coal yard if designated and in that area is an inhabited "Store and Stable".

At the end of Rue D'Orleans - (n) Two Guard Houses almost in ruins on near the ruins of the East Walls. Either side of the street.

BLOCK XII

- (W) One uninhabitable house

- Gardens

BLOCK XIII

- (M) Grand Hospital much out of repair

BLOCK XIV

- (V) Eight Houses at present Inhabited

- (Y) Five "Stores and stables occupied at present"

- (Z) One well

- (X) One House in ruins

- Gardens

BLOCK XV

- (V) Five Houses at present Inhabited

- (W) One House uninhabitable

- (Y) Three "Stores and Stables occupied at present"

- (X) Many houses in ruins (especially those facing on Rue St. Louis)

BLOCK XVI

- (X) Many houses in ruins, especially those facing on Rue St. Louis

- (V) Four Houses at present Inhabited

- (Y) Four "Stores and Stables occupied at present)

- Gardens

BLOCK XVII

- Many Gardens

- (Y) Five stores and stables occupied at present

- (V) Five Houses at present Inhabited

BLOCK XVIII

- (Z) One well

- (h) Grand Parade

BLOCK XIX

- (V) Five Houses at present inhabited

- (W) One House uninhabitable

- (Y) One "Store and Stable occupied at present"

- (X) House or two entirely in ruins

- Gardens

BLOCK XX

- (V) Six Houses at present Inhabited

- (Y) One "store and stable occupied at present"

- (X) Two areas designated as Houses entirely in ruins (nunnery probably one)

- (S) Five Alley

BLOCK XXI

- (W) Five House uninhabitable

[Split in middle by street - Rue D'Hospital?]

- (V) Four Houses at present Inhabited

- (X) One area designated as "Houses entirely in ruins"

- Gardens

BLOCK XXII

- (V) Three (?) Houses at present Inhabited

- (W) One uninhabitable house

- (Y) One "Store and stable occupied at present

PROBABLY BLOCK XXIII

- (X) One area designated as Houses entirely in Ruins

- Gardens

A large area along the ruins of the Eastern 
walls, south of Rue D'Orleans               - this area is designated as a meadow.

- (X) One area in this meadow is designated as houses entirely in ruins

- (O) Church formerly a Magazine much out of repair

BLOCK XXXI

- (W) Two Houses uninhabitable

- (V) Two Houses at present Inhabited

- (Z) One well

- Many Gardens

BLOCK XXXII

- (V) Four Houses at present Inhabited

(Split by Rue D'Hospital)

- (X) Two areas designated as houses entirely in ruins

- (W) One House inhabitable

- (X) Two "Stores and Stables occupied at present"

- (Z) Three wells [two on southern boundary of block]

- Many gardens and a grassland [meadow?] area

BLOCK XXXIV

- (Y) Eight "Stores and stables occupied at present"

- (X) Two areas designated at "Houses entirely in Ruins"

- (V) Three Houses at present Inhabited

- Gardens

BLOCK XXXV

- Governor's Garden

BLOCK XXXVI

- (X) The buildings facing on Rue de l'Etang are entirely in ruins

- (Y) Two "Stores and stables occupied at Present (Bakehouses in 1768?]

- (V) One House at present inhabited

- Gardens

West of BLOCK XXXVI

- (X) Area designated as Houses entirely in ruins

Near Wall (West)

- (Z) One Well

BLOCK XXXVII

- (V) Three Houses at present inhabited

- (W) Three Houses uninhabitable

- Many gardens

- (Z) One Well

BLOCK XXXVIII

- (V) Two Houses at present Inhabited

- (X) A number of houses facing on Rue de Scatarie are entirely in ruins

- Many Gardens

South of BLOCK XXXVIII

- (Z) One Well

- (X) Areas designated as houses entirely in ruins

Northeast of BLOCK XXXVIII

- (N) Guard House almost in Ruins

An area south of BLOCK XXXVII

- A meadow surrounded by Burned Barracks

THE PROJECT OF THE CITADEL BASTION

(Copied from Plan)

• A,      Blockhouse already built
• b,b,    The two blockhouses which, at present, are at some distance from the town, but to be transported here.
• c,c.    Flanks
• d,d.    Two places on the Flanks of the Bastion where cannons planted might command the town
• e,       A fleche on a commanding ground for merely a spur or place
• f.        The remains of the Governor's house which may [be] repaired for the Officers Barracks
• g.      The Barracks where the Garrison now Lodge
• h.      Main Guard

Following the departure of the garrison, the Lieutenant Governor, Michael Franklin, wrote to the Earl of Hillsborough, on September 26, 1768, enclosing "a plan of the Town of Louisbourg together with an actual state of the publick Buildings and other houses, corrected to the tenth of August last when His Majesty's Troops were withdrawn from thence ..." [43] This plan is meant to be read in conjunction with Samuel Holland's map of Louisbourg in 1768, filed in the Louisbourg Restoration Section's Map collection as #146.

Franklin made the plan and offered suggestions for the encouragement of settlement in the Island in response to Hillsborough's orders of June 21, 1768. He described the inhabitants as "Tenants at pleasure". In the past they had paid a trifling rent, but "now are in fact living rent-free". In the Fortress, there were 142 buildings, 19 of which were stone and 123 of wood. Of the stone buildings, six were in good repair, nine in tolerable repair, three in bad repair, and one was in ruins. Of the wooden buildings, nine were in good repair, fifty-nine in tolerable repair, fifty-three in bad repair, and two were in ruins. One hundred and twenty of the buildings had been occupied by the French as private dwellings and two had been used as private stables. Twenty of the buildings were used by the French as official or public buildings. The number of buildings occupied as of 10 August 1768 were twenty-eight. The Coal Wharf was said to be in ruins and Fort Frederick Wharf tolerable. The terms "good" in reference to buildings meant they wanted "much Expense to make them really so"; "tolerable" meant "much out of repair", "bad" meant the buildings had "for the most part the Floor(s), partitions taken away for Fuel". Those called "in Ruins" were totally irrepairable "but yet the Materials will be of Use to the Settlers who may have them ...".

The following is an attempt to relate the houses designated in the plan and map of 1768 (MAC 146), prepared by Lieutenant-Governor Franklin and Samuel Holland, respectively, to the Block numbers used by the French: