FUR TRADE: Memorandum
from Chief Justice Draper, 1857
Excerpt from page 230
? (Buzz’s notes)
Control of “Canada” was it political or just for the Fur trade?
“ The French Government , it appears, would not agree to the
proposal which would have limited them
to the 49th parallel. Colonel Bladen, one of the British
Commissioners under the Treaty of Utrecht, wrote in 1719 in reference thereto,
“ I already see some difficulty in the execution of this affair, there being at
least the difference of two degrees between the best French maps and that which
the Company delivered us.” No settlement
of the boundary could be arrived at.”
“If the later claim of territorial limits had been advanced
during this negotiation, there can be no doubt it would have been resisted even
more strenuously than the effort to make the 49th parallel the
boundary was, not merely by contending that the territory so claimed formed
part of Canada, and had been treated as such by the French long before
1670, but also that the French King had
exercised an act of disposition of them, of the same nature as that under which
the Hudson’s Bay Company claim, by making them the subject of a Charter of a
Company under the Sieur de Caen’s name, and after the dissolution of that
Company had, in 1627, organized a new Company, to which he conceded the entire country
called Canada. And this was before the
Treaty of St. Germain-en Laye, by which the English restored Canada to the
French. In 1663, this Company surrendered their Charter, and the King, by an
edict of March in that year, established a council for administration of
affairs in the colony, and nominated a Governor; and about 1665, Monsieur Talon, the Intendant
of Canada, dispatched parties to penetrate into and explore the country to the
west and north-west, and in 1671 he reported from Quebec that the “Sieur du
Lusson is returned , after having advanced as far as 500 leagues from here, and
planted the cross, and set up the King’s arms in presence of 17 Indian nations
assembled on the occasion from all parts , all of whom voluntarily submitted
themselves to the domination of His Majesty, whom alone they regard as their
sovereign protector.”
French Advance
The French kept continually advancing forts and trading
posts in the country, which they claimed to be part of Canada: not merely up
the Saguenay River towards James’ Bay, but towards and into the territory now
in question, in parts and places to
which the Hudson’s Bay Company had not penetrated when Canada was ceded to
Great Britain in 1763, nor for many years afterwards. They had posts at Lake St. Anne, called by
the older geographers Alenimipigon; at the Lake of the Woods; Lake Winnipeg; and
two, it is believed, on the Saskatchewan, which are referred to by Sir
Alexander McKenzie in his account of his discoveries.”
Hudson’s Bay Company
Enough, it is hoped, has been stated to show that the limits
of the Hudson’s Bay Company’s territory are as open to question now as they
have ever been, and that when called upon to define them in the last century,
they did not advance th claim now set up by them; and that even when they were defining the
boundary which they desired to obtain under the Treaty of Utrecht, at a period
most favourable for them, they designated one inconsistent with their present
pretensions, and which, if it had been accepted by France, would have left no
trifling portion of the territory as part of the Province of Canada.”
So far as has been ascertained, the claim to all the country
the waters of which ran into Hudson’s Bay, was not advanced until the time that
the Company took the opinion of the late Sir Samual Romilly, Messrs. Cruise,
Holroyd, Scarlet, and Bell.”
No comments:
Post a Comment