IMAGE EVALUATION
TEST TARGET (MT-3)

{./

'S?

2e.

1.0

I.I

■ 2.2

nnSS

IL25 i 1.4

2.0

IE
1.6

^>.

Photographic

^Sciences

Corporation

23 WEST MAIN STREET

WEBSTER, N.Y. 14580

(716) S72-4S03

'4^

^.f^

/>>^^

< v^.4?

CIHM/ICMH

Microfiche

Series.

CIHIVI/iCIVIH
Collection de
microfiches.

Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductlons / Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques

Technical and Bibliographic IVotes/Notes techniques et bibiiographiques

The Institute has attempted to obtain the best
original copy available for filming. Features of this
copy which may be bibliographically unique,
which may alter any of the images in the
reproduction, or which may significantly change
the usual method of filming, are checlced below.

Coloured covers/
Couverture de couleur

I I Covers damaged/

Couverture endommag^e

Covers restored and/or laminated/
Couverture restaurie et/ou peliicul^e

I I Cover title missing/

Le titre de couverture manque

I I Coloured maps/

Cartes g6ographiques en couleur

Coloured init (i.e. other than blue or biaclt)/
Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire)

I I Coloured plates and/or illustrations/

Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur

Bound with other material/
Reli6 avec d'autres documents

Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion
along interior margin/

La re iiure serr6e peut causer de I'ombre ou de la
distortion le long de la marge int^rieure

Blank leaves added during restoration may
appear within the text. Whenever possible, these
have been omitted from filming/
II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajout^es
lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte,
mais, lorsque cela 6tait possible, ces pages n'ont
pas 6t6 filmdes.

Additional comments:/
Commentaires suppi^mentaires;

L'Institut a microfilm^ le meilleur exemplaire
qu'il lui a 6t6 possible de se procurer. Les details
de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-dtre uniques du
point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier
une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une
modification dans la methods normale de filmage
sont indiqute ci-dessous.

r~| Coloured pages/

Pages de couleur

Pages damaged/
Pages endom magmas

□ Pages restored and/or laminated/
Pages restaurdes et/ou pellicul6es

Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/

1^1 Pages d^colordes. tachetdes ou piqudes

□Pages detached/
Pages ddtach^es

Showthrough/
Transparence

I I Quality of print varies/

Quality indgale de I'impression

Includes supplementary material/
Comprend du materiel suppi^mentaire

Only edition available/
Seule Edition disponible

Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata
slips, tissues, etc., have been ref limed to
ensure the best possible image/
Les pages totalement ou partieliement
obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure,
etc., ont M fiimies d nouveau de fa^on d
obtenir la meilleure image possible.

The c
to the

Their
possil
of the
filmin

Origin
begin
the la
sion,
other
first p
sion,
or illu

The la
shall c
TINUE
which

IVIaps,
differe
entirel
beginr
right a
requirf
metho

This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checited below/

Ce document est film6 au taux de reduction indiquA ci-dessous.

10X 14X 18X 22X

26X

30X

12X

16X

20X

a4x

28X

32X

ilaire
» details
iques du
nt modifier
xiger une
ie filmage

The copy filmed here has been reproduced thanlcs
to the generosity of:

National Library of Canada

The images appearing here are the best quality
possible considering the condition and legibility
of the original copy and in keeping with the
filming contract specifications.

L'exemplaire filmd f ut reproduit grdce d la
g6n6rosit6 de:

Bibliothdque nationale du Canada

Les images suivantes ont 6t6 reproduites avec Ie
plus grand soin. compte tenu de la condition et
de la nettot6 de I'exempiaire fi!m6, et en
conformity avec les conditions du contrat de
filmage

id/
qu6es

Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed
beginning with the front cover and ending on
the last page with a printed or illustrated impres-
sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All
other original copies are filmed beginning on the
first page with a printed or illustrated impres-
sion, and ending on the last page with a printed
or illustrated impression.

Les exempiaires originaux dont la couverture en
papier est imprim6e sont filmis en commenpant
par Ie premier plat et en terminant soit par la
derniAre page qui comporte une empreinte
d'impression ou d'iilustration. soit par Ie second
plat, selon Ie cas. Tous les autres exempiaires
originaux sont film6s en commen^ant par la
premiere page qui comporte une empreinte
d'impression ou d'iilustration et en terminant par
la dernidre page qui comporte une telle
empreinte.

The last recorded frame on each microfiche
shall contain the symbol -^(meaning "CON-
TINUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "END"),
whichever applies.

Un des symboles suivants apparaltra sur la
dernidre image de cheque microfiche, selon Ie
cas: Ie symbols -^ signifie "A SUIVRE", Ie
symbols V signifie "FIN".

laire

IVIaps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at
different reduction ratios. Those too large to be
entirely included in one exposure are filmed
beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to
right and top to bottom, as many frames as
required. The following diagrams illustrate the
method:

Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuven^ dtre
film6s d des taux de reduction diff6rents.
Lorsque Ie document est trop grand pour dtre
reproduit en un seul cliche, il est film6 d partir
de I'angle sup6riaur gauche, de gauche d droite,
et de haut en bas, en prenant Ie nombre
d'images nicessaire. lies diagrammes suivants
illustrent la mdthode.

by errata
ned to

lent

une pelure,

fapion d

1 2 3

32X

,^.^

j C/

. A

THE

CONDUCT

O F T H E

FRENCH,

With Regard to

NOVA SCOTIA;

From its firft Settlement to the
prefent Time.

In which are expofed the Falfehood and Abfur-
. dity of their Arguments made ufe of to elude
the Force of the Treaty of Utrecht, and,
.fupport their unjuft Proceedings,

In a Letter to a Member of Parliament.

LONDON:

Printed for T. Jefferys, Geographer to His Royal
Highnefs the Prince of Wales, at the Corner of St.
Martin's Lane, near Charing Crofs.

MDCCUV.
(Price One Shilling.)

I 'I

■^

... , , ■ .. -.5,.

i. *v«#

t.v

:,^ i ^^

^,.'4. 4.--

"^ « " f~«

■* 'i 4,-1 1

.i;

xJl' J . 'vJ k , *, ^

U
>' '

THE

CONDUCT

OF THE

FRENCH

. ^.v

With refpeft to the

Britifli Dominions in America,

' particularly Nova Scotia.

S I R,

'-'A

.,:■ .'i:..i./

TH E prefent encroachments of the French
upon Nova Scotia^ one of the moft va-
luable Britijh Colonies, is a matter of fo
extraordinary a nature, and fo injurious to the
nation in general, that every true friend to
his country ought to be fully acquainted with
Ic. For this reafon, as I have mad6 it my bu-
{inefs, tho' a private perfon, to enquire into the
motives of their daring conduct, I thought ic
my duty to communicate to the public my ob-
fervations thereupon ; in which I propofe to make
appear, that the proceedings of the French^ on
this occalion, is one of the moil flagrant infults
upon both the majefly and underftanding of
the Britifl} nation that ever could be atempted.
Their defign is nothing lefs than to Wrefb from us

i^l

a fpaclous province, which was originally our
own *, and which, not many years fu.ce they had
given up, and confirmed, to us, by the moft
lolemn treaties. With this view they have
entered and fettled in the very heart of it, in
defiance of all our remonflrances •, feizing above
two parts in three of the whole. To juftify this
invafion of our territories, they pretend that
we are entitled to no more than the fmall (hare
they have left us, which is at moft the peninfula
or fouthern divifion of Nova Scotia \ and fup-
porting their injuftice by force, have a61:ually
built forts at the entrance of that peninfula,
where we remain, as it were, penned up by them,
till fuch time as, by a due exertion of our power,
they (hall be obliged to withdraw beyond the
river of St, Lawrence, . ,

They have ftuck at nothing to give a colour
to this open infradlion of the Utrecht treaty,
and violation of the faith of nations. Their
geographers and hiftorians have been influenced
to proftitute their pens in the moft fhameful
manner, to ferve the injurious caufe ; and their
principals, who fet them to work, have not been
aihamed afterwards to make ufe of fuch cor-
rupt evidence, confifting of the loweft chicanry
and moft barefaced falfifications, as the chief,
and in efFedt the only arguments on which they
ground their pretenfions. In fliort, their rea-
lons are fo confummately fallacious, inconfiftent
and trifling, that their defence of the injury
ought to be taken for fneer, and is no lefs pro-
voking than the injury it felf.

The Englijhy by right of difcovcry of the
CahotSy in 1497, claim all North America^ ivom

;»»

ave
in

t3]

^4 to 66 or 67 degrees of north latitude; to
^vhich they gave ho name or names, only that
of the Newfoundlands : but ncgledling to fettle in
thofe partis, the French^ conduced by James
Cartior, in 1534, went into the river of Canada
or St. Lawrence^ and took pofleflion. After-
wards, in 1562, they made another fettlement
In Florida^ as it was then called, in the latitude
of 34 degrees, which fell in South Carolina,
To thefe fettlements they pretended a right by
the difcovery of Ferrazzano, in 1524, from 34
to 50 degrees of latitude, altho' it was 27 years
pofterior to that of the Cabots •, to all which extent
of country they gave the name of New France*

After a Ibng interruption of near 100 years, the
French^ in 1603, began to renew their voyages to'
Canada ; arid not content herewith, in a few years
more made fettlements in the country then called
La Cadid^ not only on the fouth coaft of the pen-
infula, and at Port Royal, but alfo on the coafts
to the north of the bay of Argalor Fundy (called
by them Baye St.Francoife,) at the river of Pen^
tagoet 30 leagues fouth-weft of the river St,
Croix. All this while they met with little or no
oppdfition from the Englijb : but in 161 3 the
governor of Virginia finding that the French
had not only intruded northward, within the
Englijh difcoveries, but had alfo encroached
Within his limits, the place above mentioned ly-
ing below the latitude of 45 (to which the grant
in 1606 from King James I. to chief juftice
Popham and others, extended) fent commodore
Argal with 3 (hips, who demolifhed their forts,
ruined their colonies, and carried away feveral of
them prifoners.

• -' v^' . ■• B a ■■-'^ To

[ 4 ]

To fecure this country more effcdlually ta
the crown of England^ a few years after, Sir
Ferdinando Gorges being governor of New Eng-
glands perfuaded Sir fVilliam Alexander^ fecretary
of ftate for Scotland (afterwards earl of Stirling
and vifcount Canada) to obtain from King James
I. a grant of all the country to the north of the
Virginia patent, or beyond 45 degrees, and to the
fouth of Canada^ under the name of New Scot^
land» Sir TVilliam accordingly applied to the
King, and in 1625 obtained a grant of the lands
bounded on the weft by the river St, Croix \ on
the north by the great river of Canada *, on the
caft by a line drawn through the gulph of St,
Laurence to the eaft of Cape Britain iiland, which
therefore became a part of it ; and on the fouth
by the ocean : which country (confidered before
under the common name of Virginia) whofe
bounds are "with great minutenefs and preciOon
afcertained in the faid patent*, the King ap-

pointed

* The words of the patent, fo far as relate to the fubjeft
in queltion, are as follow. Dedimas, conceiTimas, et difpO'
fuimusy teneroqae prsefentt chartae ncftrae, damaSf concedi-
mus, et difponinius pra:fe£lo domino WjlHelmo Alexandro^
hxredibus fuis vel aflignatis quibufcunquc hsredttarie, omnes
«t fingulas terrav!, continently, ac 'infu1as,ficuatas et Jacentes in
'America, iciter caput feu promOntoriutn, communiterCap.de
Sable appellatum, jacens prope htitudinem quadragihtt trium
graduum, aut ab eo circa, ab equiaoxiali linea verfus fepten-
triohem, a quo promontorio verfus littus maris tendentis ad.
occidentem, ad ftationem Santas Mi^rise navium (vulgo St.
Mary*s bay) ; et deinceps verfus feptentrionem per dire£(sftn
lineam introitum five o(^ium tnagMe illius ftationis navittffly
trajiciehtem, quae excurrit in terrse Orientalem Plagam, intfet
regionis Suriquorum et EtechemmOrum (vulgo Suriquois «t
Etechemines), ad flitvium Vulgo nomine Sani^ae'Crucis appef-
latiim, et ad fcaturigenem remotiflimam, five 'fontem ex oc-
cidentali parte ejufdem qui fe primum praediflo Auvto im-
niifcert unde p^r imaginariam dire^am lineam, quae pergere

. per

[ 3 1

pointed for ihp future fliould be called New
Scotland, And King Charles I. created after-
wards for this new kingdom an order of Baro-
nets, which dill fubfills.

As this country is naturally divided by a great
gulf or arm of the fea into two parts *, to the
north the main land, and to the fouth a large
peninfula; Sir William^ purfuant to the power
which he had by his patent, divided it accord-

per terram, feu currere verfus feptentrionem concipietur ad
proxinjam navium ftationem Huvium vcl rcaturiginem in
magno fluvio de Cannada fefe exonerantem. £c ab eo per-

tendp verfus orientem per maris oras littorales ejufdem fluvii
e Cannada, ad Ruviuin ftationem navium portum aut littus
communiter nomine de Gachepe vel Gafpie notum et appeU
latum ; et deinceps verfus Euronotum ad infulas Bacalaos vel
Cap. Briton vocatos, relinquendo eafdem infuias a d^xtra, cc
voraginem di£li magni fluvii de Cannada, Ave magno ftationis
navium, et terras de Newfoundland, cum infulis ad eafdem
terras pertinentibus a fmiftra : et deinceps ad caput five pro-
montorium de Cap. Briton prsediftum, jacens prope latitudi-
nem quadraginta quinque graduum, aut eo circa. Et a di£to
promontorio de Cap. Briton, verfus meridiem et occidentem
ad prsediflum Cap. Sable, ubi incipit perambulatio, includenda
et comprehenda intra di£)as maris, oras, littorales, ac earum
intra didlas maris, oras, littorales, ac earum circumferentigs
a mari, ad omnes terras continentis, cum Humipibus, torrfsi)-
tibus, finubus, littoribus, infulis aut maribus jacentibus prope
infra fex leucas ad aliquam earundcm partem, ex occidental],
borealif vel orientali partibus, orarum, littoralium, et pras'
cinfluum earundem. £t abeuro noto (uti jacet Cap. Britton)
et ex auftrali parte ejufdem ubi efl Cap. de Sable omnia maria
ac infulas verfus meridiem intra quadraginta leucas diftarum
orarum littoralium earundem magnam infulam vulgari-
ter apellatam Ifle de Sable, vel Sablon, induden, jacen-
verfus carban (vulgo fouth-fouth-eaft), circa triginta leu-
cas a dido Cap. Britcon, in mari, et exiilcn. in latitudine
quadraginta quatuor graduum, aut eo circa. Quae quidem
terrx praediftae omni tempore a futuro nomine Nonja
Scotiee in America gaudebunt ; quas etiam praefatus dominus
Willielmus in partes et portiones, ficut ei vifum fuerit divi-
der, iifdemque nomina pro beneplacito imponet, una cum
omnibus fodinis, turn regalibus, auri et argenti, quam aliis
fodinis, ferri| plumbi, cupri, ftanni, aeris, &c.

B 3 ingly

.en

ingly into two provinces, and gave new nances
to almoft all the rivers and ports, and even
tranflating the names of thole given by the
fettlers into Englifo^ that no traces, if poflible,
of the French might remain in the country ; as
appears by the map of Nova Scotia *Jlill extant^
which by his orders was made and publifhcd.
Thefe then are the ancient or rather the moft an-
dent bounds of New Scotland : but not all which
the Englijb, under that name, claim by the treaty
of Utrecht,

Charlevoix^ whofe late hiftory of New France.
is the fund of falfehood and error, from whence
the French on this occafion draw all their argu-
ments, acknowledges, " That in feveral treaties
*' he finds the name of New Scotland afcribed
" fometimes to the peninfula, exclufive of the
" fouth coafl + [or country lying to the fouth
" of the river] of Canada^ and fometimes to
** that coaft, exclufive of the peninfula ;" but
fays, " it cannot be proved by any authentic me-
" moir, that they both went by that name at the
'' fame time." Here is now an authentic memoir :
I mean the patent granted to Sir William Alex-
ander^ corroborated by his map, in which that re-
quifite is found. And this fingle evidence is
fufHcient to (hew the vanity of all that author's
fuggeftions.

To take away the force of the obje^lion
which might be brought from his confeffion,
that the name of Nova Scotia has been given

* This map is inferted in Purchas's colledlion of voyages,
Vol, iv. p. 1872.

•f By fouth coaft is to be underftood all the country
fouth of the river St. L:urei:ce, fee p. 410. par. ^. of CJbark-
voix Hift. Gen. de la Nowv. Franc, tho' he ufes the ambiguous
expreffion, in order to miilead or deceive his reader.

ledion
:ffion,
given

[Oyages,

[country
Charle-
[ibiguoiis

[7]

m treaties to the continent as well as the pen-
infula, he fays they are modern changes ; where-
as the difpute between the Englifh and the French
is about the ancient bounds oF Acadia or Nova
Scotia, he ought to have faid of Nova Scotia or
/icadia ; on which occafion he affirms, that what
the Englijhjirft named Nova Scotia, was no more
than the coafiof ho.z.'^xz.^from Cafe Sable (or Cape
Sandy ^ as 'tis called in Sir PFilliam Alexander %
map) to Camceau *. Now the falfity of this is
proved from the above-cited evidence, by which
it appears that the firft time the name of Nova
Scotia was ufed by the Englifh^ it was given
by them to all the country in cjuedion fouth of
the river of Canada, This is fomething de-
cifive : there was nothing then to be done, but
either to allow this evidence to be good, to deny
its validity, or elfe produce it in favour of his
aflertion. The firft he would not do, the fecond
he could not do, but the laft he ventured on ;
accordingly he has the front to affirm, that in
England it felf the name of Nova Scotia is given
folely to the peninfula : for that^ adds he, " William
*' Alexander earl of Stirling having received a
" grant of what had been taken from France, in
this part of Canada, divided the Jame into
two provinces, calling the peninfula New Scot-
land, and gave to the reft the name of New
Alexandria." For this he quotes Be Laet, a
very eminent author, who has, as he fays, in-
f^rted the grant it felf.

Here the jefuit is guilty of great prevarica-
tion -, firft, he fuppreffes what appears from De
Laetf, that the general name of the country,

* Charlev. Hill Gen. de la Nouv. Fran. torn. i. p. 113.
f See his Novus Orbis, L. ii. c. 23.

B 4 which

((

which was fo divided by Sir William Alexanderi
was called New Scotland, 2. If D^ Laet had
faid the contrary, yet he knew, by the words
of the patent it felf, inferted by that author,
that the name of New Scotland was ordered
from thenceforth to be given to the whole ; and
therefore could not be given by the Englifh only
to a part. 3. Be Laet calls the peninfula New
Caledonia^ not New Scotland, into which Char-
levoix has changed it, that his readers fhould
think the fame name being given to a part, could
not be given to the whole •, altho* this is a com-
mon cafe. 4. Charlevoix has fupprefled the
mention of the map of New Scotland^ from
whence De Laet fays he took thofe particulars,
that the reader might not look after this map i
whence it may be concluded that Charlevoix
had himfelf feen it. Ought any credit to be
given to fuch an abandoned writer as this ?
Or any ufe made of his authority ? The map
referred to by De Laet, who wrote in 1631^,
was no doubt the fame we have already men-
tioned 5 for he fays it was but lately pub-
lished, and that befides changing the names of
provinces, new names are given to other places,
conformably to what hath been already oblerved.
In that map, the names of the two provinces of
Alexandria and Caledonia are engraved in fmall
roman letters, and that of New Scotland in
large capitals, diftributed into both provinces.

"Whether Charlevoix faw this niap, or not, he
muft have been either wilfully or ignorantly
blind to excefs, in affirming that the Englifh
give the name of Nova Scotia folely to the pe-
ninfula, fince the contrary may be feen in their
maps; and even in the maps of the French
themfelves, at leaft, thofe made when the country

I 1

lot, he
)rantly
Inglijh
^he pc-
their
\ French
lountry

[9]

was in Englijh hands. In a chart of the gulph
of St. Lawrence and Canada^ made by Le Cordier^
at Havre de Grace^ in 1696, and publilhed by
authority of the admiral, the name of New
Scotland is given to the North Main^ or that part
called New Alexandria^ in Sir William /Alexander's
map. But, fuppofmg him ignorant of this, and
many more inftances in maps made before his
time, how could he be ignorant of what is in-
ferted in his own work, and pafled under his
own eye ? I mean the map of the Eaftern part
of New France or Canada^ (as it is intitled) made
in 1 744 by Mr. Bellin^ for his hiftory of that
country, wherein the name of Nova Scotia is
given to the North Main ?

On this occafion, it may be obfervcd as a
common rule, that they who confefs againft
themfelves, are more to be believed than thofe
who deny/cr themfelves. But, in thus oppofing
onQfrench authority to another, I do not quote
one of their ordinary geographers : for Mr.
Bellin is hydrographer to the marine, as well as
cenfor royal j and his contradidling the author
whom he was employ 'd to illuftrate, gives a
double force to his authoiity. — If therefore, in a
fubfequent map of the fame country, he hath
omitted the name of Nova Scotia, it was not,
as may be prefumed, in confequence of being
better informed, but becauie he was othcrwidig
directed or inclined.

Having reduced the ancient bounds of Nova
Scotia to one of it's fouthern coafts, it was
neceflary to make thofe of Acadia tally with
them ; that the EngUJh might not be intitled to
more, under one denominaticnj than they could

claim

r,c

claim by the other. In attempting to do this,
Charlevoix has difcovered no Jefs ignorance and
fourberie, than in the former inftances. He is
wilhng indeed to allow, " t\\^t Acadia [to whofe
bounds he would confine Nova Scotia'] in-
cludes the whole peninfula, in the opinion of
all the beft geographers and hiilorians, par-
ticularly Be Laet^ excepting Champlain and
Tienys. The firfl", he fays, gives, in his voya-
ges, chap. 8. the name of Acadia to no more
than the fouth-coaft of the peninfula ; which
he proves from thefe words, The fieur de Pont^
with the commiliion of the fieur de Monts^
*' went to Cancecu^ and along the coaft of Cape
*' Briton : the fieur de Monts fhaped his courfe
*' more at large towards the coafts of Acadia*,^*
From this jefuitical logic we learn two things.
I. That the coafts of a country are the whole
country ; or that France having coafts, is no-
thing but coaft. 2. That failing towards the
coafts of a country, implies failing towards the
fouth coafts of it: confequently to the coaft of
Languedoc and Provence^ if applied to France,
What accuracy may we not exped from an hi-
ftorian fo acute in his reafonings, and juft in
his diftindions ? I might add fo quick lighted
and difcerning : for he did not fee that his falfe
aflertion is refuted by the very palfage which he
produces to prove it jfince, \i Acadia be no more
than coafts, the ifland of Cape Briton muft be
no more, nor fo much : It muft be only a fingle
coaft, while Acadia will confift of feveral coafts.

But, what muft be thought of the honefty of
this jefuit, who perverts the meaning of an
author in one place, to make him contradidt

* Charlevoix, ibid p. 112, -

j^ what

En]

what he has declared in feveral places ? At the
pnd of that very chapter from whence he has
made the above quotation, ChampUin tells us
*' that he was three years and a half in Acadia^
*' part of the time at St. Croix^ [which is on the
" north main] and part at Port Royal* " And
purfuant to his promife in the fame place, which
IS at the end of his firft book, employs his
whole fecond book, to defcribe Acadia conform-
able to that declaration. 'Tis true Champlain only
defcribes the coafts : but fo far was he from limit-
ing Acadia to a bare coaft, that he exprefsiy fays
p. 6^. the great River St. Lawrence r«»j along the
Jide 0/ Acadia and Norimbegua; which is, in other
words, tq fay that thofe provinces extended fo
far, or that it bounded them to the north. This
ought to be allowed for a definitive fentence in
the cafe, and from which there fhould be i^>o
appeal : fince Champlain having been 27 years
jn thofe parts, and for a long time governor of
them, cpuld not poffibly be miftaken in this
point ; and as he went over with the firft dif-
coverer De Monts, in 1603, muft have been ac-
quainted with the ancient bounds of Acadia^
which it may therefore be prefumed are thofe
which he mentions.

* II ne fera hors de propos de defcrire les defcouvertes de
ces coftes, pendant trois ans & demy que je fus a PJcaJis,
tant a I'habitation de Sainte Croix, q'au Port Roya/, ou j'eus
moyen de voir, et defcourire le tout, comme il le verra au
livre fulvant. p. 48. Thefe words confirm what is lef*
explicitly delivered in the page foregoing, where he fays that
** fince De Monts would not fettle on the river St. Lnnjorence,
he ought to have fought out a place not fo liable to be de-
ferted as was St. Croix and Port Roml."" He adds, that
in cafe De Monts had taken fuch precaution, the people
** would not have abandoned the country in three years and a
f* half, as they had done Acaiia,'' namely St. Croix and
Fort Royal.

«<

((

I II

[ 12 ]

If it fhould be faid, the paiTage only proves^
that the river St» Lawrence was the northern
boundary of Acadia^ when he wrote, but not
that it was the ancient or moft ancient boundary :
we fay that is begging the queftion, and will be
of no avail, unleS they can fhew, from exprefs
authority, that before his time it had a different
boundary. ' ^ -

•i 1.-

But this cannot be done from the authority
of any contemporary voyager to the fame parts :
for neither the author of De Month voyage, nor
Lefcarbot^ afcertain the bounds of Acadia, The
reafon is, becaufe they do not enter into a geo-
graphical defcription of it, and only fpeak of
it's limits occafionally ; which is the cafe indeed
with Champlain himfelf: for altho' he men-
tions the northern bounds of Acadia^ he does
not tell usprecifely what the weftern were ; we can
only gather by inference in general, that it was
bounded on that fide by the province of Norim-
hegua^ from the circumftance of the river St.
Lawrence waftiing the borders of that province
«s well as thofe of Acadia, '

However, the defed here may be fupplied
from the authority of Count D'Eftrades^ who ia
his conferences with King Charles II. relating to
the bounds of this country alledged, " That in
♦' confequence of the treaty of St, Germain^ in
1632, reftitution was made to France [of all
the country] from ^ebek to the River of
Noremherg [or Penobfcot'] where PentagoU
is built, which, fays he, is the firft place of
Acadia*'\ >

* See his letter of March 13, 1662, to the king, in his
Ambair. et Negotiat. torn. ii. p. 368.

)roveS4
>rthern
ut not
ndary :
will be
exprefs
ifFerent

ithority
I parts :
ige, nor
2. The
I a geo-
peak of
i indeed
e men-
he does
; we can
It it was
I Norim-
•iver St.
)rovincc

fuppUed
who in
ating to
That in
main, in
e [of all
liver of
'entagoU
Iplace of

bg, m

his
It

f 13]

It is plain therefore, that this objcdlion is of no
force. Neither can it be pretended, that becaufe
this edition of Cbamplain*s voyage to New France ■
was publiflied in 1 63 2, the year in which the treaty
of 5/. Germain was figned, therefore Champlain
fpeaksnot of the original bounds oi Acadia, but of
thofe eftablifhed by L^jXIII. after that treaty :
for the grant to Razilly, which firft afcertained
the bounds of Acadia, by regal authority, was
not made till the year following. Befides, by
Lewises grant Norimbegua was incorporated with
Acadia, as being comprized under that name ;
whereas Champlain fpeaks of it as a diftind pro-
vince, feparate from it. It is more likely there-
fore that Lewis followed the authority of Cham*
plain for the bounds of Acadia^ than that he
followed the king's.

Let us now return to Chadevoixy andafk; whe-
ther is it more likely that thefe things could
cfcape his obfervation, or that he wilfully over-
looked them? This hiflorian of New France
thought it better, it feems, to let authors appear
to differ in their accounts, and leave the bounds
of Acadia undetermined, than produce the tefti-
mony of Champlain which he knew would at
once overthrow all his fcheme ; as he is revered
and ftiled by the French, the father and founder
of their fettlements in Canada. But what could
be his view by fuch condud ? Nothing fure but
to perplex the caufe for a time : for he could not
but well know that this paflage as well as others
of Champlain, which .he had fuppreflfed, would
e'er long be produced againft him, out of that
author's voyages.

As for Be Laet\ opinion, about the bounds of
Acadia^ it mull be confidered that his Nova

Orbis

'" • i ^ '

■

4J1

?-4
» i

* 1

: i!

Or^/V was printed before he faw the edition

of Champlain^s voyages pubhfhed in 1632, al-
though his own work was not publiihed till th^
year after: this appears from hrs own words, I. 2.
c. 22. where he fays he had made ufe of Cbam^
plain's memoirs, but could find no account of the
French affairs, after the year 1616; confequently*
the voyages he confulted were thofe printed in
1614, or in 1 61 9, in 8vo. Had he feen the others
he would never have limited Acadia to the penin-
fula, but have fix'dits northern bounds at the river
St, Lawrence. But, fuppofing he had not ; his
diflent, tho* a learned and judicious Writer, yet
would not in the leaft have alter!d the cafeorlelTen'd
the authority of Champlain. For, after all, quef-
tions of this nature are to be decided folely by the
relation of travellers. The opinions of geogra-
phers are not to be regarded farther than as they
appear to be fupported by the authority of fuch per-
fons i from whom they ought to take their infor-
mation.

But to proceed : if Denys then is of the fam6
fentiments with Champlain.^ with refpedl to the
ancient bounds or extent of Acadia^ as Charle-
voix affirms ; thofe fentiments muft be widely
different from what that candid author affirms
they are, for he fays Denys alfo reduced them to
a bare coafl. After fo many flagrant inllances of
his want of truth, it may be prefumed that the
reader will not take his word for any thing ;
and we might be fpared the farther trouble of
giving any of his aflertions a formal refutation :
but as it mufl have cofl him no fmall pains to
broach fo many glaring falfehoods, it would
be doing injuflice, both to his abilities and la-
bours that way, not to make the public tho-
roughly acquainted with them.

the edition
n 1632, al-
fhedtill th^
wotds, 1. 2.
fe of Cham^
count of the
:onfequently
fe printed in
n the others
:o the penin-
s at the river
ad not J his
5 Writer, yet
afeorleflen'd
ter all, quef-
folely by the
1 of geogra-
than as they
yoffuchper-
e their infor-

of the fam6

^fpe6t to the

3, as Charle-

be widely

thor affirms

ced them to

inllances of
ned that the

any thing;
er trouble of

refutation :
lall pains to
it would

ities and la-

public tho-

[ «5]

To fupport his faid aflertion, with refpeA to
Denys, he has inlerted the following paragraph^
in his hiftory. " This perfon (Denys) divides
" into four provinces, all theeaft and fouth part
*' of Crt;Wrt, which in his time had four proprie-
*' taries, who were lieutenant-generals for the
*' king. The firft (extending) from Pentagoet to
** St. John\ river, he named the province of the
*« Etechemins^ and is that which was formerly call-
" ed Norembegua : to the fecond, from St. John's
^'' river to Cape Sable, he gave the name of
*' French Bay : the third, according to him, is
" Acadia, from Cape Sable to Camceaux\ and
*' that is It which the Englijlo at firft named Nova
•< Scotia, on the occafion which I fhall men-
" tion p efently : the fourth, which was his own
" property, and government, from Camceaux to
" Cape Rofiers, he called Bay St. Lawrence^
*' which others have called Gafpefie*,

Now taking things as Charlevoix reprefents
them, this was only an occafional divifion of the
country, made by the proprietaries ; in which,
for diftindion*s fake, the name of Acadia was
given to one of the provinces : but he does not
make Denys fay that the bounds which are here
given to it are the original bounds of Acadia \
nor does it follow from the divifion itfelf being
fo made, that the name of Acadia did origi-
nally extend no farther : for in the partition of
countries the bounds of provinces are frequently
changed, contracted or enlarged ; of which
Charlevoix furnifheth an inftance, with refpc6l to
Acadia itfelf. For in another divifion, which he
mentions elfewhere f , of the country into three

* Hill. Gen. de la A'sav. France^ vol. i, p. 113, edit. 1744.
t P. 4'0-

parts.

I V

*— .

;■•- I

^=*^

[i6]

parts, and in which alfo Denys was concerned*
the lecond, which was given to La Tour, con-
tained half, or perhaps more, of the peninfula :
for *' he hady fays the jefuit, Acadia^ properly fo
*' called, from Port Royal to Camceaux :'* that
is, as it mull be underftood, by a line drawn from
one place to the other ; fo that all to the fouth of
it belonged to La ^our.

That there was fuch a divifion as this we fhall
not difpute : but fuppofing this to have been the
carlieft of the two divifions (which we are at
liberty to do, fmce there is nothing faid in the
place which requires the contrary) it overthrows
Charlevoix's aflertion, that Acadia was only a bare
coaft ; much more his afHrming that it extended
only from Cape Sable to Camceaux, It goes farther,
and, from the expreflion Acadia proper^ implies,
what we have above fuggefted, that this was only a
part of a larger country, which went by the
name of Acadia^ in general, according to a known
rule in geography.

It is not at all unjuflifiable in us, to fuppoie
this to have been the firft divifion of the two i
fmce it was in the time of Razilly^ to whom it
was granted in 1633, and Charlevoix does not tell
us which was the firft. But the truth is, that
the quadrupartite divifion was a forgery con-
trived by that jefuitical hiftorian, only to cor-
roborate his mifconftrudion of the words of
Champlain, and fupport one falfehood by another :
for Denys mentions no fuch divifion of the
country, much lefs under the name of Canada^
sjs Charlevoix jaffirms ; nor indeed any divifion at
all of it, eitheir in his firfl book, or the map pre-
fixed

II
t(
ri

:onccrnedf
tour^ coa-
penin(ula :
properly fo
lUx:" that
irawn from
he fouth of

his we (hall
ive been the
we are at
; faid in the
[ overthrows
i only a bare
t it extended
goes farther,
per, implies,
hiswasonlya
vent by the
g to a known

^, to fuppofe
of the two i
;, to whom it
ix does not tell
truth is, that
forgery con-
only to cor-
the words of
od by another :
vifion of the
Tie of Canada^
any divifion at
r the map pre-
fixed

[17]

fixed to it. In the body of his book he never, to
the beft of our recollection, mentions Canada, nor
ever Acadia, except it may be in the fixth chap-
ter of hi:, firft volume j where he fays, i\\^x.Long
IJle makes a paffage trom French Bay to the land
(not the coall) cf Acadia -, and that at the Forked
Cape, 12 or 15 leagues thence, there is more
cod than in any other place of Acadia*. But it
does not follow from thence, that Acadia begins
there, or extends no farther northward ; much
lefs does it prove that he fpeaks of any fuch
province as is mentioned in this pretended qua-
drupartite divifion, for either Long IJlandox the
Forked Cape, He many leagues to the north of
Cape Sable, where Acadia, according to the faid
divifion begins. Neither does this imperfed: ac-
count of Denys agree better with the bounds
alligned by Charlevoix to Acadia, in the tripartite
divifion recited hereafter : for they were to be-
gin at Port Royal', whereas the Forked Cape lies
many leagues fhort, or to the weft of that place.
Nor does Benys mention where Acadta ends,
much lefs does he fay it terminated at Camceaux.
But fuppofing he had fpoken of Acadia, under
any fuch contracted bounds as are found in ei-
ther of the aforefaid divifions, it could only
have proved, that there was in his time another
couniTy oi Acadia, stnAcadia-proper, or province fo
called: fince, in the patent granted as afore-
I laid to Razilly, a cotemporary governor with
him in Acadia at large j and yet more exprefly
in that of the fedentary or fettled fifhery grant«d
to himfelf January 3CX, 1654 ; the river .S/. Law-
rence is declared to be the northern boundary of
Acadia, and Kinibek river the weftern.

* See Denys Defer Geogr. & Hilt, des Cotes de rAmerl-
qucfe|:ten. p. 56. &6i.

C Lenys

[ i8 ]

Denysis fo far from faying, in his defcriptlon ■
of the coafts, that the name of Acadia was limit-
ed to any part of the peninfula, or that it was
a part of Canada^ taken in a proper fcnfe* •, that
in his dedication to the King, he not only con-
fiders them as two diftindl provinces into which
New France was divided, as Champlain before
him feems to have done ; but alfo, under the
name of Acadia^ clearly comprizes, conformable
to the faid grants, all the main-land to the
fouth of St. Lawrence river, and eaft of New
Englandy which he bounds with the river Pen-
tagoet or Penohfcot, For, after telling Lewis
XIV. " it was owing to his, (the King's) care,
" that Canada began to breathe again, and that
*' Acadia was no longer in the hands of their
*' neighbours," he adds, " that the country
*' which he defcribes, made the principal and
*' moft nfeful part of New France,''* Thefe laft
words are quite unfuitable to a piece of coaft.
Befides, as the country which Denys defcribes
comprizes the north-main, as well as the penin-
fula, and both had been in the hands of the
EngliJJo but a little before, till ceded by the
treaty of Breda, in 1667, it follows, that he
comprizes both parts under the name of Acadia ;
and confcquently, that he confidered Acadia as
the general name of the whole country, even
fuppofing it had been given fpecially to one of
the three provinces. If he had done otherwife
he would have adtcd inconfiftently, and in con-
tradidion to the king's grants, by which he
held his government ; and which it. was no more
in his power to alter, than it was his intereft to
alter it, if he could.

* That is taken as a part of A'irau France; not as fynony-
mcui) with the whole, as iome authors take it.

With

Jefcriptlon •
was limit-
hat it was
nfe* i that
only con-
nto which
lain before
under the
>nformable
nd to the
(l of New
river Pen-
ing Lewis
ing*s) care,
1, and that
ds of their
^e country
Incipal and
Thefe laft
e of coaft.
s defcribes
the penin-
nds of the
ed by the
/s, that he
of Acadia 5
I Acadia as
ntry, even
' to one of
e otherwife
and in con-
which he
^as no more
J intereft to

lot as fynony-

With

t 19 ]
With regard to the quadrupartlte divifion
which Charlevoix fo formally and fo falfely fa-
thers upon Denys^ we (hall only obfervc far-
ther, that this author's book does not afford
the lead room for fuch a partition ; on the con-
trary, if our jefuit had grounded it on the other's
manner of dividing the coafts, or his defcrip-
tion thereof, into parts, he ought to have made
lix or eight provinces, inftead of four.

It muft be confeffcd that this difhoneft jefuit,
thorough -paced in the arts of deceiving, has
ftuck at nothing, on this occafion, to ferve his
caufe : but with all his cunning he could not
fee, that in employing fo much chicanry and
fraud, to do injuftice to us, he has been only
labouring to undermine himfelf, and overthrow
the very point which he intended to eftablifli ;
as what he alledges from authors differing
among themfelves, concerning the bounds of
Acadia^ ferves only to prove that originally it
had no determinate bounds ; and confequently
that none of thofe which he trumps up, in cafe
they really were to be found in the books
which he refers to, could be confidered as its
ancient limits. He was likewife blind to ano-
ther point of importance, namely, that the
whole country to the fouth of Canada river,
called by the Englijh Nova Scotia^ and a great
deal more, went under the name of Acadia^ at
the very fame time in which he was reducing
its bounds to a bare coaft : for, all that country
was, i<i 1633, granted to Razilly, under the
name of Acadia^ by Lewis XIII. and the divi-
fions he mentions, according to his own account,
were not made till after the arrival of Benys^
who had a (hare in them, which was not before

C 2 the

K I

'I:

[ 20 }

i\\c year 1635, as will be (hewn prefently : from
whence it appears, that this jefuit's penetration
and honeily were much of a fize. In reality,
there is in all, which this author has written on
the fubjedt, fo great a mixture of ignorance and
difingenuity, that it is fomctimes difficult to
tell to which of them his errors are to be a-
icribed.

Sir JVilUam Alexander obtained a fecond grant
for Nova Scotia, under the fame limits, from
King Charles I. dated 12 July 1625 : but ncg-
kding to fettle eflfedually, the French continued
to trade as before, and ipread themfelvcs in fc-
veral parts of the country, till 1627 ; when war
breaking out, on account of the fiege of Ro-
chelky Sir David Kirk was fent with a fleet, not
only to clear Nova Scotia of the French^ (which
he did, except at Cape Sable^ where La Tour
was fettled) but alfo to drive them out of Ca»
naday or the country north of St, Lawrence
river; which noble projeft, of his own forming,
he effeftually executed the next year, by the rc-
du6tion of ^ebek. After this, he gave up to
Sir JVilliam the pofleflion of Nova Scotia^ or all
the country fouth of the river Canada^ in its
full extent •, and kept all Canada, or the country
to the north of that river to himfelf, appointing
Sir Lewis Kirk governor of ^ebeky where he
refided for a time. This may be called the
Englijh fecond right by conqueft to Nova Scotia,
But foon after a peace taking place, both Kirk
and his grand atchievement, were facrificed to
the French: for both countries were inglori-
oufly given up again, without any apparent rca-
fon, or proper fatisfa(5bion ; and what is flill
more fhameful, all the lands to the weft of Nova

3 Scotia f

'1^

y: from
letration
reality,
rittcn on
ince and
[icult to
to bea-

\d grant
ts, from
but neg«
ontinuedi
^cs in fc-
vhen war
5 of Ro-
[leet, not
>, (which
La Tour
it of Gi-
Lawrence
forming,
)y the re-
ive up to
ia^ or all
day in its
e country
ppointing
where he
:alled the
7va Scotia.
both Kirk
iriBced to
; inglori-
>arent rea-
lat is ftill
I of Nova
Scotia^

tit 3

Scoiia^ as far as the river Penobfcot : as hath
been already fhewn from the letters of Count
D'Eftrades ; altho' Canada only was infiftcd on,
according to Charlevoix ; who feems to wonder
at the eafinefs with which Acadia was yielded
by the Englijh *, as if they wanted to get- rid
of it.

Sir William Alexander, forefeeing what would
happen, in 1630 fold his right and title in all
Nova Scotia, excepting Port Royal, to Claude de
la Tour (who by his permiflion had fettled at
St. John's) to be held by him of the crown of
Scotland, Two years after, the 1 7 th of March 1632,
a treaty was figned at St, Germain en Laye, be-
tween Lewis XIII. King of France, and Charles
I. King of Great Britain, for ** yielding up
*' all the places poflcfled by the fubjcdls of
" England in New France, Acadia and Canada ;*'
of which places only Port Royals Fort ^ebek
and Cape Briton are mentioned ; nor does it ap-
pear by the grant that there were any more to
be delivered up. By this treaty it feems mani-
feft that Nova Scotia was comprehended under
the name of Acadia, for New France was the
general name under which Canada^ Acadia, and
all their other poflefllons in America then went,
as they do at prefent. But if there could be
any doubt on that head, it would be removed
by the paflages above cited from Champlain, and
Count lyEJirades \ v/hich make it evident that
Acadia was at that time bounded by the river
St, Lawrence, on the north, and Penohfcot, pn
the weft.

Hift. Gen. de la Nouv. Fran. vol. i. p. 176.

. f 1

111 :l^

[ 22 ]

In the opinion of Lewis XIII. Acadia had
yet much larger bounds ; at leaft he was re-
folved they (hould have fuch. That prince, not
content with thofe which cuftom, before his
time, had given to it, and which had been
yielded to him by the treaty of St. Germain^
pretended that they reached as far as the borders
of New England \ and prefuming on the eafinefs
with which fo much had been given up to him
almoft unafked, took upon him to extend them
fo far. Accordingly, in the patent and com-
milTion by which he prefently after confirmed
the purchafe of Acadia to La ^cur, the boun-
daries are exprefsly mentioned, and fixed *' to
*' begin at Cape Gafpe^ or the mouth of the
^' river St. Lawrence^ and to extend weft as far
*' as Cape Malabar •," now Cape Cod, in New
England : fo that not only all Nova Scotia was
included in the patent, but Lewis had extended
his grant over one third more of the Englijh
dominions than by the treaty was given up.
According to Count UEJlrades (who was am-
baflador in England, after the reftoration) Mr.
De Razilly was fent to take pofTefTion of all
Acadia, in confequence of the treaty of St.
Germain, and appointed lieutenant-general of
the province*-, probably becaufeL^ Tour was a
proreftant. This, according to Charlevoix, 'Wi^.s
in the year 1635, when, to ufe his words, " Aca-
" dia was granted to the commander Z)<? i?<z-
" zilly, one of the principal members of the
*' company of New France -, on condition that
*' he Ihould make a fettlement, which he did.

^ See his letter au Roi, 13 Mars, 1662.

H at

fr^mmmmam

4cadia had
le was re-
prince, not
before his

had been
f. Germaifty
the borders
the eafinefs

up to him
;xtend them
: and com-
' confirmed
, the boun-

fixed '' to
luth of the
weft as far
)dj in New
I Scotia was
ad extended
the Englijh
5 given up.
bo was am-
ration) Mr.
jffion of all
eaty of St.
t- general of

Tour was a
%rlevoix^ was
3rds, " Aca-
ider Ve Ra-
bers of the
ndition that
lich he did,

^^ at

[23]
** at the Port of La Have -, but it was of no

" great importance*.'*

As thofe mentioned by Champlain are the
moft ancient bounds of Acadia^ fettled by cu-
ilom ; fo thefe prefcribed by Lewis XI 11. are
the moft ancient eftablifhed by regal authority.
If we confider them comparatively, in rcfpecfl
to time, the former will be the mofi ancient^ and
the latter the ancient bounds of Acadia: but
this will not ferve Charlevoix ; he will, for the
ancient bounds of Acadia^ hav'e a more ancient
bounds than the ancient^ or thofe of Zfzc'/jXlII.
which he feemsto take no notice of, as if out of
the queftion -, and having fupprefled thofe prior to
them, mentioned by Champlain^ would fubfti-
tute, m the room thereof, other fi(5titious boun-
daries of his own, by extending thofe of Ca-
nada over all Acadia ; under pretence that both
provinces were originally included by the In-
dians^ under that denomination : accordingly he
affirms, without any proof but his ufual ef-
frontery, " That from the earlieft times the
*' favages gave the name of Canada to all the
*' country on both fides of the river of Canada^
** or St. Lawrence^ particularly from its mouth
" V^a Saguenay\ y

Supposing this to be fadl, and that we are
to be determined in this point by the cuftom of
the natives, Acadia could have no bounds at all \
or rather fuch a country never did exift : but we
Ihall fhew, at the end of this memoir, that what
he affirms on this occafion, is all falfe, like the
reft i that Canada^ when Cartier went thither in
1534, comprized no more than a fmall part of

^ Hift, Gen, de Nouv.Ftan. vol. i. p, 173. \ tfiil. p. 1 1-

C 4 the

Si '

[ 24 ]

the country to the north of the river Hqjhelaga^
as St. Lawrence was then called ; and lay to the
weft of Saguenay river or province, not towards
the eaft of it, or the mouth of St, Lawrence
river, as he falfely afferts.

To proceed therefore: in 1635, the people
of New England highiy refented the little re-
gard Ihewn to their interefts by the King's giving
up to France more than was infifted on ; and
were much more incenfed at Lewis's ufurping a
great deal more than was granted him by the
treaty. In 16^5 the council of Plymouth agreed to
furrender their grant of A^cy^w^'fr 1621 (which
gave them all the country from 40 to 48 de-
grees of latitude) on condition that the gran-
tees fhould have particular grants. Sir William
Alexander^ being one, had his allotment from
the river of St. Croix, the weft boundary of
Nova Scotia, to the river Kinneheck, bounding
New England to the eaft; and from thence to
run north to the river of Canada or St, Law-
rence : which country was to take the name of
Nova Scotia *\ and by this means Nova Scotia
came to be co-extended with Acadia, as bounded
by Lewis XIII. in his grant to Razilly, two
years before. Soon after this, the tripartite di-
vifion of Acadia, before mentioned, muft have
taken place, according to Charlevoix's account,
whofe words are thefe, " All which the Englijh
had taken in Acadia, and on the neighbouring
coaft, during the war of Rochelle, and before,
having been reftored in 1632 ; all that part

* This part of Noim Scotia being granted in 1663 ^X l^'J^g
Charlesll. to hi> brother the Duke of Tork, it took the name
of the Duke of Torkh land : and on his afcending the throne,
the King's land. It has fince been annexed to the province
of Mnjfachujea bay \ and is by fome called the province of
Sagadahok, >

((

y to the
towards

'^awrence

t people
little re-
's giving
on *, and
furping a
n by the
agreed to
I (which
:o 48 de-
:he gran-
r William
lent from
indary of
bounding
thence to
St, Law-
s natne of
wa Scotia
> bounded
zillyy two
partite di-
nuft have
account,
he Englijh
^hbouring
nd before,
1 that part

663 by King
00k the name
g the throne,
the province
e province of

«f

[*5] _

" of New France was divided into three pro-
" vinces, the government and property of
" which were granted to the commander De
" Razillyy young La Tour and Mr. Denys. The
" firft had for his fhare Pert Royals and all to
«' the fouth, as far as New England ; the
" fecond had Acadia properly called, from Port
" Royal to Camceaux •, and the third had the
*' eaftern coaft of Canada from Camceaux
** to Gafpe *." This tranfaciion is ^related by
our jefuit in a very impcrfedl, confufcd and fal-
lacious manner, conformable to his impofing
fcheme. Thofe v/ords the eaftern coaft of Canada
are inferted, that it might not be thought the
name of Acadia was given to the country fouth
of St. Lawrence river ; altho* it was the pro-
vince oi Acadia which was then fo divided.

It was doubtlefs with the fame view, that

we find, at the beginning of the paragraph, a

diftindlion made between Acadia and the North-

Main^ under the denomination of the Northern

■ Coaft, In which he would infinuate two falfities.

I. That neither in the grant which was made

to Razilly fingly of Acadia^ nor in that which

was made to him and his partners, ^if they were

different grants) was any part of the North-Alain^

comprehended under that name. 2. That fo

much of the North- Main as fell within his

government, was only the coaft, as far as New

England.

If in either of thofe places that author had
mentioned the time of that grant, or the bounds
of the province affigned to each of the three
governors, as he ought to have done, it would
have been eafy to decide the queftion j but he

5 Charlev. ubi fupr. p. 4[o.

hath

•I

I f:

[26]

hath taken all the pains imaginable to perplex
the cafe, and keep his readers from coming at
the truth, by jumbling things together. How-
ever not fo entirely obfcuring them, but that
we may be able to bring light out of darknefs,
and refute him out of his own mouth ; for elfe-
where, fpeaking of the chev. de Grand Fontaine^
three years after, he fays, " The bounds of
*' his government extended from §uinfehque
*' to the river St. Lawrence^ conformable to the
*' poflefljon taken in 1630, [it fhould be
" 1633.] in the name of JJewts XIII. by the
*' commander Tie Razilly *." From whence it
is plain, after all his fhuffling and cutting, that
Acadia^ which he fays was granted to Razilly^
comprized not only the fouth coaft of the North
Main, but alfo what he calls the eaftern coaft
of^ Canada ; and, in fliort, all the country in quef-
tion to the fou^h of the river St. Lawrence.

I (hall not ftay to fliew how inaccurately our
author has defcribed the provinces or fhare? be-
longing to the three proprietors, efpecially the.
firft and third 5 the laft of whom, by his account,
muft have had much more of the country than
the other two. What can one underftand by
his faying Razilly had Port Royal^ and all to the
fouth as far as New England ? fince the country
which lies to the fouth of Pert Royal., is the
part of the peninfula which fell to La 'Tour^ he
ought to have faid the lands to the north weft
on the continent •, and to have afligned, after
Denys, the river Pentagoet or Penobfcot^ rather
than New England, for its weftern boundary. But
perhaps he did not care to have it thought that

• Ibid. p. 417.

Lewis

[*7]
Lewis XIII. had granted to that commander
more than the Englifh had given up.

' I have taken the pains to trace our jefuit thro'
his long windings and doublings, not fo much
to prove the point in quell ion, as to expofe the
fcandalous arts ufed by this dilhoneft hiftorian
(if one fo ill qualified, and who fcldom quotes
his authors, fcarce ever regularly, can be called
an hiftorian) for we are in poffeffion of the
commiflTion granted to Grand Foptame^ which will
be produced prefently.

After Razilfy's death, Charles de Manou^ Cheva-
lier Sieur Daulnayy or Daunay de Charnefey, took
pofleffion of his property, by an agreement made
with the brothers of the deceafed •, and in 1 647
obtained a grant for the government of Acadia :
but this, fays Charlevoix^ " muft, in all likeli-
** hood be underftood only of that part of the
*' peninfula which more properly bore the name
*' of Acadia,^ as I have already often remark-
" ed." Here is another flagrant inftance of
this author's falfehood : for we are able to pro-
duce the original grant or commiffion to Dau"
nay^ under the fign manual of Lewis XIV.
which confirms him governor and lieutenant-
general in all the countries, territories, coafts,
^nd confines, of La Cadia^ " to begin from
the river St, Lawrence^ including as well
the fea-coaft and the adjacent ifles, as the
inland parts, as far as the i^irgines" meaning
Virginia ; and in another part of the fame com-
mifllon he is impowered to traffic with the In-
dians^ '* throughout the whole extent of the
'' lands and coails of Acadia, fron the river
\^ St. Lawrence to the fea, as far as the Firgines."

«c

-r^'

[ 28 ]

In the preamble to the commi/Tion, the rea-
fons fpecified for granting it are, his having
expelled the foreign religionaries from Pentazoet
fort, which they had feized ; that he had taken
St. John^s fort from Charles St. Etienne de la
Tcur, who held it in rebellion, in favour of
foreign religionaries ; and had built four forts
againft them. However, La Tour finding that
• to be a protcftant and a rebel was the fame thing,
made his peace *, and changing his religion in
163 r, was made governor oi Acadia^ in as ample
a manner as Charnefey had been before, by the
King of France, who in the fame commiflion
coniirmed him his pofleiTion in that country.

From what has been faid, I think It is clear
to a demonllration, againft Charlevoix and his
followers, that the relations of the firft dif-
coverers are fo far from confining Acadia to the
peninlula, much lefs to a fingle coaft of it,
that Champlain^ who was the chief and moll
eminent of them, on account of his having long
refided, as well as been governor, in thofe parts,
exprefly declares that the river St. Lawrence was
its northern boundary, and that of Norembegua
or Penohfcot the weftern : whence it follows.

1. That it not only included all Nova Scotia, but
extended weftward above 20 leagues farther.

2. That the firft time the government of
Acadia was granted, or its limits afcertained by
royal authority, the river St. Lawrence was,
according to Champlain^ information, declared
to be its northern boundary, and the river Ki-
nibek its weftern : confequently it comprifed,
according to the ideas of the French, all the coun-
try fouth of 6V. Lawrence river, lying between

s rea-
laving
ttazoet
taken
de la
)ur of
• forts
ig that
thing,
ion in
ample
)y the
niflion

s clear

md his

ft dif-

to the

of it,

I moil

g long

: parts,

nee was

mbegua

oUows.

ia, but

arther.

nt of

ned by

xe was,

eclared

vtr Ki-

prifed,

; coun-

etween

th^

C29]

the gulf of that name and New England. 3.
That as the fettling of thofe bounds by Lewis
XIIL was antecedent to both the divifions men-
tioned by Charlevoix^ which confine Acadia to
part of the peninfula, confequcntly the country
or countries whi^h fince that time have been
alledged by the French writers as the whole of
Acadia^ ought only to be confidered as a part
or parts thereof bearing the fame name.

- We ihali next (hew how careful Lewis XIV.
and his minifters were, to aflert and prefer ve
thofe limits, on all occafions of difpute or treaty
between the two nations, from thence down to
the treaty of Utrecht^ when he was obliged to
give up Acadia to the Englijh,

In 1654, Cromwell^ difapproving of the alie-
nation of iVi^v^ ^r^//V7, and moved by the injuftice
done the vidorious Kirks ^ who in vain applied
to the court of France for the fums which
were agreed by treaty to be paid them, fent
Major- General Sedgwicky who with the affiftance
of New England, recovered almoft all that coun-
try to the Englijh dominion ; diflodging the
French^ who were fettled in and about Port
Royal, St, Jean and Pentagoet. The French
minifters at Paris made prefling folic! tations
for the reftitution of this country : but he would
not fuffer his ambaflador to give the leaft ear
to fuch inftances, infifting that it was the an»
dent inheritance of the crown of England (which
word Ancient refers, perhaps, beyond King
James I.'s grant to the time of Cabofs difcovery).
This he thought fo undeniably clear, that, by
the 25th article of the treaty concluded with
Lewis Xiy. in November 1655, he made no

difficulty

fWH^^

r"**

.J'l-

[30]

difEculty tofubmit the right of the Englifh crown
to the three forts above mentioned to the decifion
of three commilTioners, who were to meet in
London^ and determine it in fix months, pro-
vided the French fhould think fit to proceed in
that affair ; but they never did, -i

However, Crcmwell afterwards granted to
Mr. St, Etiennede la Tour^ in confideration of his
father Claude's purchafe, Colonel Temple and fFil-
liam Crown, for ever, " The country and terri-
tories called Acadia, and that part of the coun-
try called Nova Scotia, from Marlegajhy on
the eaft, to the port and cape of Heve, lead-
ing along the coaft to Cape Sable to a certain
point now called La Tour, heretofore named
Lomney*; thence following the coaft and
ifland to the cloven cape and river Ingogen ;
following the coaft to Port Royal, and then
following the coaft to the bottom of the bay ;
and thence along the bays into St. John's^
to St. Jchnh fort ; and thence all along the
coaft to Pentagoet and the river St. George,
unto Mufcongus, fituated on the confines of
New England, on the weft -, and extending
from the fea-coaft up in the land, along the
limits and bounds aforefaid, one hundred
leagues ; and further, unto the next planta-
tion made by the Butch or French, or by the
EngliJJ:) of New England, With all and An-
gular the lands, territories, iflands, rivers,
feas, pifcaries, woods, i^c. jurifdidlion of
admiralty, Gfr. and alio thirty leagues into

(C
C(

c«

«c

' * R?*her T.omerotty fo called from a perfon of that name,
who lived there before the time of La four. See Denys^t

Defer. Amer. Septent. Ch. 3. p. 61.

the

crown
ecifion
eet in
pro-
:eed in

:ed to
of his
id Wil-
d terri-
e coun-
ijhi on
lead-
certain
named
ift and
ngogen ;
id then
le bay ;
, Jobn%
ong the
George^
ifines of
tending
3ng the
liundred
planta-
r by the
and fin-
, rivers,
flion of
ues into

:hat name,
ee Denys'%

f* the

N
[ 3« J

** the fea, all along the coaft aforefaid." With
fole right of trade, and many other advantages.

Crcmwell feenjed to have been of the fame
fentiments with King Charles 1. that, by the
treaty of St. Germain nothing but the places
were given up : fince by this grant he difpofes
of not only all the /^ccJia of Le'vois XIII. but
alfo great part of the country of Canada it felf.
In 1656 he, by warrant, made Colonel Thomas
temple governor of St, Jobn^Sy Pert Royal and
Pentagoety which are faid to be in Acadia^ com-
monly called Nova Scotia in America, And in
1662, Sir 27?c»i^j was again appointed governor
of Nova Scotia and Acadia^ by King Charles II.
During this time the French were earneftly fo-
liciting to have Acadia reftored to them •, and
the Englijh as ftrenuoufly oppofed it. The
people, of New England particularly, fent over
deputies with a petition to the king and par-
liament of Great Britain \ in which they ailedged
many ftrong arguments againft the reftitution
o^ Acadia (this we are told by Count D^EJirades^
in a letter to Lewis XIV. bearing date 27 Feb^
ruary 1662) ; they were among other things dif-
gufted at the French^ who, under the name of
Acadia, ceded by the treaty of St. Germain,
had claimed not only Nova Scotia, but all the
country between it and New England, as before
hath been related : however, as all the country
had been given up, according to J^Efirades, as
far weft as the river Noremherg or Penoh*
fcot, that minifter demanded fo much, in con
fequence of the treaty of Breda. Thus, in his
letter but now mentioned, he tells them, "That
*' he had demanded of the commiTioners reftitu-
" tion of all Acadia^ containing 80 leagues of

country :

■ b IM>I

[ 30 . .

country, and that the forts of Pentagoetj
Port Royal and La Heve^ (hould be rcftored in
the fame condition as they were when taken."
In another to the king, December 25, 1664,
where he rcafons in favour of a league with
England^ he fays, *' By fuch a treaty you may
** get Acadia reftored from Pentagoet to Cap
" Breton, containing 80 leagues * of coafl.

The treaty of Breda was figned July 21,
1667 •, by the loth article of which ^^ Great
" Britain is obliged to reftore and give up to the
" King of France the country caWcd Acadia, in
*^ North America, which the molt chriftian
*' king formerly enjoyed." Purfuant to this
treaty an inftrument for reftitution of Acadia
was executed by Charles II. February the 1 7th,
i66|, by which he furrenders, " all that country
•' called Acadia, in North America, which the
*« French king did formerly enjoy, as namely,
<• the forts of Pdntagoet, St. John\ Port Royals
" La Heve, and Cape Sable, which the French did
*' enjoy till the Englijh poflefled themfelves of
" them." The forts were inferted at the requeft
of Mr. Rouvigny the French commiffary, as ap-
pears from thofe words written in the margin
oppofite to the names.

In confequence of this inftrument or obliga-
tion, an order was ilTued out 8 March 1668, com-
manding Sir Thomas Temple to reftore Acadia to
the French. Under this onder reftitution was
demanded by Mr. Mourillon du Bourg. Sir Tho^
mas, feeing himfelf unjuftly deprived of his right,
by an alienation which King Charles had no

He mi^ht have fald double that number, or more.

power

'^'»«<4»Bi

[ 33 ]

poVi^ei* to make *, and as by the treaty of Breda
the country of Acndia fimply was to be reftored,
without any mention oi' Nova Scotia^ he takes
advantage of the diftin^tion which feems to
be made between them in Crom'-jueWs arrant of
1655, and refufes to give up the forts o^ Pen-
tagoety St. Johrit Port Royals and the reft ;
alledging that they did not belong to Acadia.
On this occafion Dtt Bourg, in his letter (iiys,
" that Sir Thomas made Nova Scotia to extend
from Marlegajh to Pcntagoet -, and Acadia
from Marhgafi) by Cape Breton^ to the river
" of ^tchck or St, Lawrence'**

On what ground that diftinflion in CrotnweU\
grant was made, does not appear : but Mr. Colbert^
the French ambalFador, infilled that Acadia in-
cluded all Nova Scotia^ as was evident from the
grants of both the Leu-is^ to that time. Here-
upon King Charles ililied another order, under his
fign manual, attefced by Lord Arlington^ which
bears date Augufi the 6th 1669, requiring Sir Tho-
mas^ without delay to deliver tfie faidcountry of
Acadia^ which formerly belonged to the French
king, namely the fores and habitations of Pen-
tagoet, St. John^s, Port Royal, Lc Heve, and
Cape Sable, which the French enjoyed till dif-
porteffed by the Englifi in 1654 and 1655,
according to the loth and nth articles of the
Breda treaty."

((

Sir Thomas then , complied ; and, being fick,
did, by his deputy-governor William V/alkcr,
deliver the faid country to Hubert Bandigny che-
valier J^ Grand Fontaine (who on the 2 2d of July
the fame year was commifTion'd under the great
feal of France^ to receive Acadia) as apptMts by
the certificates acknowledging the delivery of

I) the

-1 1

I'l "

ft.;. . !

W :i
1^

[ o4 ]

the three foits of Pert Royals Pentrgoet and
Gcwfcck •, which lall was upon i^t. Jcbn's river,
maiiy leagues within land. By the treaty of
BrediJi therelorc, and the execution of it, it is
clear that the French extended the bounds of
ylcadia over all Nova Scotia ; that is, over both
the countries which were I'uccefl'ively granted to
Sir William /jkxandtr^ under that name.

Cbarldvoix^ who is obliged to take notice of
this tranliidion, cannot help confefling fo much :
yet has the confidence, in contradidtion to the
very treaty, to deny that it ought to be fo ; and
endeavours to fupport his faliity in his ufual
way, by alledging Irivolous reafons, or conceal-
ing lads. He fays, *' That Sir ff^i Hi am Tcviple

figncd at BcjJon an inRrument to the chevalier
' ae Grand Fontaine, which fecured to France

all the country from Pentiigoet to Cape Breton
" inclufively *." He adds, that the whole
had been comprifed in the treaty o{ Breda, under
the name of yJcadia ; and allows that the neigh-
bouring coafts were Ibmetimes comprehended
(or, as he terms it, confounded) under that
name : yet would pretend, Pcntagoet did not be-
long to /Icadia •, for which he had no other au-
thority but Sir IVilliam^s faying fo, as above •, and
vv'hich, tho' it might be of ufe to Sir JVilUamy
btcaufe granted by him as part of Nova Scotia
dlftin^l from Acadia, as before obferved, can
be of no avail to the French : becaufe they infifted
that it did belong to Acadia, and had it furrender-
ed as fuch, conform.able to the treaty, which, as
the fame author confefles, included it under that
name. The fourberie of this author is farther

* Hift. de la Xowv. Fran. Vol. i. p. 417.

fcen

^^N

oet and
j*s river,
reaty of
it, it is
>unds of
,'cr both
anted to

notice of
b much :
1 to the
fo •, and
lis ufual
conceal-
';/ Temple
chevalier
:o France
pe Breton
le whole
da, under
he neigh-
)rehended
nder that
id not be-
other au-
)Ove *, and
• WilUam^
iva Scotia
rved, can
ey infixed
furrender-
which, as
under that
is farther

[ 35 ]
fcen in what he relates prcfcntly after, ** That
" the commifTion by which the 77^;;^/?' governor,
** Grand FovtahiCy took pofleffion of that place
*' [Pe»tagoet] is dated March the 5th 1670,
*' and marks the bounds of his govern ir.ent from
'* the Kiniheki to the river St. Lazuraice, confor-
*' mable to the pofTefilon taken thereof in i6jO
*' [1633] by the commander De Razilly, for
" Lewis Xm*."

Here Charlevoix, to prevent contradidting
what he aflcrts jud before, fupprefles the name
given to this country in Grand Fontaine^ commif*
lion : but from the circumftance of Razilly
it is plain it muft have been Acadia •, fince it was
granted to Razilly under that name, and alfo
to La Tour his afTociate, as hath been before fct
forth.

In fhort, this author (who has falfified, mifre-
prefented, and miftaken f > many things in his
relation, that it may be faid to be a hifLory (^f
his own invention, rather than of real fuels)
pretends that Acadia, with the forts of St, Joh:i
and Pentagoet, retaken by Ibme EnglifJj in 1674,
having been furrendered to France a fourth time,
not long after about the year 1 680, " Mr. Chcim-
" bly, who was made commander after Grand
Fontaine, built a little town at Fort Royal,
which from this time became the capital ot
that government -, wb''^H, over and above
Acadia, comprehended an the fouthern coaft
of Fiew France i'." Here then, at lafl, we
meet with the province or government to wh ch
he will have thofe Forts to belong : but then it

«(

((

fcen

Ibid.

f Ibii^462.

..ff^*

'Ij

Ij
'li'i

III-

\ fir

[ 36 ] -

a province without a name, Hnce he will not
allow it that of Acadia \ tho', according to cuf-
tom, he fhews no rcafon why. But, to the au-
thority of this bare iffe dixit we may oppofe
that of Mr. V/illiam Be UJJle^ premier geographer
to the King of France^ wlio, in his maps o\ North
America and New France, the firft publiflied in
1700^ the latter in 1703, calls the country in
queftion Acadia : whole bounds he extends over
more than one third of the North-Main, in-
cluded within the river Kinibeki and St. John's^
by a line drawn at fume difbance to the north
of this lafl: river ; and which being carried thro'
the lilhmus of Shignikto along the coail, ter-
minates oppofite to the north entrance of the
gut of Canfo,

You fee by what lame and abfurd methods
this errant ftory-teller endeavours to eftablifli
a falfehood, on his own bare allertion, in direct
contradiction to treaties, numerous ads of his
kinss, and declarations of their minillers, as
well as other good authority. But, fuppofing
him ignorant of all thefefads, and confequently
unqualified for the hiltory which he undertook
to write •, yet *tis fcarce poffible he could have
been unacquainted with the following paflages
of the bai on De La llontan, an author made
life of in his hiftory, who hath, inferted a par-
ticular defcription of Acadia, as well as Canada,
in his voyages to North /Imerica, from 1683 ta
1694. This author, defcribing the bounds oi Aca-
dia, fays, " the coaft thereof extends from 76";//-
'' l^ek, one of the frontiersof iV/fw England, to Uijle
'' Pi rcce, or the Pierced IJlc, near the mouth of the
*' river 67. Laurence* He adds, that thisfea- coall

* in li!5 tlercrijHJon of Canad^iy towards the beginning, he
Tiiys thli river is held to be tbe greut boundary vvlucli lepa-

I runs

€(

I 37 ]
runs 300 leagues in length j and lias upon
*' it two great navigable bays, the bay Fra?ir
*' coife and Bay des Chaleurs*." The firft is the
bay of Argalov Fundy^ the latter is in the bay of
St. Lawrence^ near the mouth of the river of the
fame name. We fee by this, that the French
themfelves, in Canada^ confidered Acadia in the
fame extent as they did in Europe ; and confe-
quently, that the forts of Pentagoet and 6'/. Johyi
belonged to it. This is more particularly confirm-
ed by what he fays afterwards, " That the three
*' principal favage nations, the Ahenakis^ the Alik-
" maks and thcKanibas^ dwell on the coafc ofyf •
*' cadia ;" On which coail thofe forts are ficuated.
Obferve alfo, that the words Coa,il cf Acadia^
are far from implying that Acadia is nothing
but coafl, as Charkvoix would pretend they
are to beunderftood, in his quotation homCbam-
^lain.

What La Hontan fays is confirmed by La
Potherie ; an author much efteemed by the French
for his integrity, and particularly by Charlcooixy
in his lift of authors. In his hiftory of North
America^ wherever he fpeaks of the Ahenaguais
(or Ahenakis) who poflefs all the country between
the river 5/. Lawrence and the fca, to the eaft
of New England^ he aim oft always calls them
the Abenakis of La Cadia -f- ; and fpeaking
of the expedition of Sir William Phipps againft
Canada^ in 1690, fays, " That the laft motions

rates the F/f;/f^ colonies from the Englip. Pie likcwife, in
his map, gives a fituation to Acadia anlwerable to what he
docs in his defcription.

* L-d Hantan New, voy. to Ko'th Amer. Vol. i.p. r.20.

f La Path. l\\i\. dVUner. Septenc. Vol. iii. p. ^6, and
lijcughout.

J) 3 ** which

..ft^*"^'

W ,' I

*:!::

[ 3« ]

'' which the EngliJJj made hi La Cadia terminat-
" ed at the Pierced IJland^ which is at the en-
" trance of 6"/. Lawrence river*." He Hke-
wiie places St. John^s^ where Villchon was go-
vernor, m UAcadia\. From thcfe teftimonies
it appears, that not only the foiuh coafb, but
alio the eaft coaft, in the bay of St, Lawrence ^
and in fliort, the whole country from the mouth
of the river of that name to the river Kini-
heki bounding New England., belonged to Acadia ;
or went as low down as the year 1 708, when La
Poiherie returned to France., under that deno-
mination : fo that for Cbarkz-oix to deny a fa6t
fo well known and attefod by the very authors
whom he pretends to make ufe of in his hiftory,
is a proof either of his corrupt principles or
great ignorance •, and how little knowledge he
acquired by his voyage to Cancida. This re-
mark is confirmed by the great imperfc6lions,

i\\

as welJ as errors,
country.

of that

which are tound in his hiftory

After the furrender of Pentagoet., which had
been furprized and taken by a Tingle adventurer \
the EnglijJd., to fecure the country to the weft-
ward, built a good fort at Peniaquid., a peninfula
lying about midway between the rivfr Penta-
gcet ■cm<\ that of Kinibcki: from whence, watch-
ing their opportunity, on lAw Chiimhlyh remove
from Pejitagoct^ in 1680, they took that fort,
with thofe of St. Johnh and Pert Rr.yal^ then
governed by La Fa Hi ere -, *' And thus, fays
*' Cbarlevc'ix, became the fiU.h time makers of
" Acadia, and all the country which lies be-
*' tween it and New England !|." This concef-

* P. 90. t ]\ 188. II Hili iXouoJ. Fran.

Vol.i. p. 463.

fion

[39]
fion of Charlevoix removes an objef;icn vvliich
hath been ftarted by fonie, that altho' the En-
glijh took thole places, it does not follow that
they fubdued or were in pofTeffion of the country.
But we think that effect does follow ; tor we
know no other way of fubduing a counr.ry, and
becoming poflefied of it, but by taking the
forts and fettlements, as the gallant, but ill re-
quited Kirk did, when he fubdued Canada in
1629.

In i68r, a difpute arifing about the fifhery,
the French ambaffador in his memorial fays,
" that the coaft of Acadia^ or Nova Scotia ex-
" tended from Vlile Pcrcce [near Ccjpc Rojiers]
" to Sl George's ifiand [or river] and was polTcfs-
" ed L/ the French, till taken in 1664, [meaning
*' 1654] and rcftored again in i66j."

In 1686, King James II. figned a neutrality
with Lewis XIV. for all North America, by
which thofe forts were again given up to the
French : but the Englijh, not able to digeft the
incroachments of thofe reftlefs and artful neigh-
bours, in extending their bounds weilward be-
yond Nova Scotia, under pretence of its being
part of Acadia (by which name only it was
given up by the two preceding treaties oi St. Ger-
fnain and Breda) ihcvdore m 1687, the governor
of New England difpoiYeffcd the baron St. Cajiin,
who had repaired the fort of Pentagoet (which
the Dutch iome years before had demolifhed) al-
ledging that all the country, as far as the river of
St. Croix, belonged to his government *. On this
occafion,the'fame year,Meflieurs Bar Hhn and Bon-
rep.is ambaflador and envoy extraordinary, ap-
pointed commilTiopers to fettle the neutrality a-
* Ibid, p. 5 20.

D 4 greed

ill!

[ 40 ]
greed on in 1686, with regard to American limits,

complained in a memorial againft the Eriguj

*' for feizing the fliips and goods of CaJUn at
Pentagoeti fituated in the province of Acadia ;
and exprefly declared that Acadia belonged
to their king; and that, by the treaty o^ Breda,

*' Art. 10. and 11. it was delivered as fuch
by Sir Thomas 'Temple to Le Grand Fontaine,
and by name the fort and habitation of Pen-
tagoet " reciting that tranfa^tion at large, as

before fet forth.

«c

The French, unable of themfelves to preferve
the coaft from Peniagcei to Kmibeki, llirred
up the Ahnaqui Indians, who furprifed not only
Pernaquid fort, but feveral other little ones,
■which the Engli/h had on the Kinibeki. I'his
condu6t fo enraged the colony of Bcfton, that
governor Phipps refolved to make an abfolute
conquefl of the whole province of Nova Scotia,
or Acadia, which he effeded in 1690; but in
1 69 1, it was retaken by Viilabon. However,
the EngliJJj this year recovered Pemaqtiid, which
Viilabon in vain attempted the next. In 1696
it v/a«? furrendered, by governor Cbiib, to the
French joined by the fame Indians.

In 1697, the peace of Ryfivick was concluded :
in confequence of which Nova Scotia was given
up, tho' rot exprefly named in it -, the French,
in all the furrenders made to them, contriving
to have the name only of ylcadia employed, as
well to avoid acknowledging that uled by the
F.nglifo^ as becaufe the fupprefiion of it might
better ferve their views. Accordingly the French
ambailiidor at Fondon infilled (as Colbert had
elone ati.r the treaty of Breda) " That its ancient

" bounsd

limits,
Eriglijh,
aft in at
Acadia ;
elongcd
f Breda^
as fach
^ontaiitey
of Fen-
arge, as

[41 1

*' bounds were from Cape Rojfiers^ nigh Gafple^
" to the river Kinihek :" And Mr. Vlllabon^
French governor of Acadia^ in a letter to gover-
nor ^toughton^ di-M^^ the 5th of SepUmher^ 1698,
complaining of the incroachment of New Eng-
land^ fays, " I am likevvife exprefly ordered,
" on the part of his Majelly, to mantain the
*' bounds which are between Nezv England and
" us, which are from the head of the river Kini-
*' heki to its mouth, leaving the ftream free to
** both nations."

preferve
, ftirred
not only
[le ones,

i. This
^on^ that

abfolute
'ja Scotia^

, but in
-iowever,
f-'i, which

In 1696
/-, to tlie

Dncluded :
was given
le Fi^nch,
contriving
ployed, as
led by the
it might
the French
^dhcrt had
its ancient
" bounsd

But altho' tiie French did not get all .vhich
they demanded by this treaty, yet they gained
fomewhat more than they had by that of Breda-,
for the limits of Acadia were fixed at the river
St. George^ about half a degree more weft than
Pentagoct^ and within 1 2 miles of Pemaquid.

Obferve, in what a Aiding manner Ckarlevci^
relates this tranfadion : " Altho'," fays he, " the
bounds of ISIew France^ on this fouthcrn coafb
[he won't call it either Acadia or Nova Scotia']
had been fixed [neither will he tell us when
or how] at the river Kinibeki -, and that they
had lately driven the EngliJJj out of Pemquif
[Pemaquid] which ought to have belonged
*' to them by virtue of the treaty, yet, as the
" EngUflj had returned thither again, Meflieurs
" De Tallard and BUIcrbaut^ the king's com-
" milTioners, v\ere obliged to remove their fron-
** tiers backward, and fix them at the river
*• St. George, fituated almoft midway between
" Kinibeki and Pentagoet. This was fettled in
" 1700, by Mr. De Villncu^ on the part of the
"^ moft Chriftian King; and by Mr. Soudrie, on
" the part of his Britannic Majefiy

((

«(

((

» >9

* Tom. 2. p. 236.

What

„A^.

Ill

ii '
ll ■

[ 42 ]

What this author would iinjuflly conceal,
viz. that the country fo bounded by St. George's
river, and which he denominates the fouth coaft
o[ Nczv FrariCC^ was Acadidj appears from the
alternatives !'proporcd, /Ipril the 9th, 1700, to
f^crctary Vernon, reL^tiii^^ to AwcricaH limits.
'Pile iirtt article has thcle words : " In this cafe
'" the hmits of France^ on this fide of Acadia^
" fliQuld be reilraincd to the i iver St. George.''^

Durir.g (IXjcen Anne'^^ war with France^ feveral
attempts were made to recover Noi-a Scotia j but
at length-, in 1710, general NuFolfon \vd.s fcnt,
who reJiiced Fort Royal ^ and brought Nova
Scct'id once more under the obedience of F.ng-
land. On examining the commiffion of Suher-
(tijje-j the governor from Lewis XIV. it was found
to be addreO.i'd thus, '' To Daniel Auger de
*' Suherc^jfc, Knight of St. Lewis^ governor of
*' Acddio.y o\ C^pe Breton., the iflands and lands
" adjacent, from Cape Rcjier of the great river
" ^SY. Lazvreneey as far as the eaft parts of ^ini-
*' bee.''' And, in an obligation for fafe con-
dud to the EngUfJj., who v.ere to convoy him
to Fra7ice, he itiles himfelf governor of Acadia^
(yc, in the fame terms with his commiffions.
From hence we fee that, notwithftanding the
formal agreement in 1700, which fixed the
bounds of Acadia at the river St Croix, the
French, in their commiffions given to the go-
vernors of Acadia., ftili kept up their claim to
the ancient bounds affigncd it by Lcjiis XII [.
after the treaty of 6"^. Germain : As if they
made fuch agreement only to ferve a prefent
turn, without any defign of keeping it longer
than they thought it for their conveniency

not

onceai,

h coaft
)m the
30, to
limits.
his cafe

rge. .

, feveral
'a i but
IS fenf,

if £;zo-
' Siiher-
s found
'//^fr de
irnor of
id lands
iat river

fe con-
oy him
Acadia^
niffions.
ing the
xed the
?f.Y, the
the go-
claim to

if they

L prefent

It longer

veniency

not

I 43 ]

not to break it •, and their condudl fince has
verified tais remark.

Not long after this, negotiations for peace
were let on foot \ and on June the loth, 1712,
Leivis XW. propofed to give up " Placcntia
*' Fort^ ail Newfoundland and its fiihery, the
" ifles of St. Mnrtin and Bartholomew, if
" Queen Anne would confcnt to reltore Acadia^
*' of which the river St. G>(^rg-^llioald thereafter
" be the bounds.'* But Queen Anne, rejecting
that offer, infilled that all Nova Scotia Ihould
be given up, and its name inferted in the treaty,
as well as that of Acadia ; likewife that Port
Royal, lately taken, fhould be exprefly mention-
ed : which things were accordingly done in the
i?th article ot that treaty, in the following

terms

•*

" Art. 12. The mod Chriftian King
" (hall take care to have delivered to the Qiieen

* Dominus Rex Cl.riflianinimus. eodem quo pads prefen-
tis rati habitioncs comnuitabunrur die doniin:e rt-gir.ffi Viagiia:
B itannia; literas tabulafve, folenncs et auihenticas tradendas'
CJrabir ; quarum vigr)re iniulani St. Chnltophoii per fub-
diro.-; Eritannico?, fi^il!atim de hinc polfiJendam, Novam
Scotiam quoque five AcadiaiTi totain, iimitihus Jui< antiquis
comp\henfi.im, ut et poitus rcg'i urbem, nunc Annapolia
i'^egiam dii^am, caifeiafqiie omnia in iiii- regionibus quae ab
iiiJeni terris ct iniali pendent, unaciin earundem infularum
terrarurrt et locorum douiinio, propticia'e, polTeiriorie et quO'
cuh'IHi; jurf, Jive per pa,Ua, fi'ue alii mod') qui^fito, quod Rex
ChrillianiHimab Coioiiae Gallis aut ejuiclem labditi quicunque
ad diftas infj'as, ter'as et !oca eoiomqae incolas ha<^enu9
habuerunr, Reginx Magnse Brirannis ejuTdemque coronas in
pe p tuum cedi confUbir ettraribfcrri, proviteadem omnia nunc
cedicac transfeit RexChrillian'iiimu-, itlo le tarn amplis modo
et fb ma, ut Regis Chiiftianifiimi labuiiis in ditHs maribus
finubii?, aliifqiie locis ad littora Nova^ Scotias, ea nempe quae
Eiiriim refpiciunt, intra triginta leucas incipiendo ab infula
viilgo Sable dida, eaque iuclul'a et Africum vcrfus pergendo,
omnis pil'catura interdicatur.

« of

((

«(

((
cc
c<
cc
cc
c«
cc
cc
cc
«c
cc
cc
cc
cc
cc
cc
cc
cc
cc
cc
cc
cc

[44}

of Gre^i Britain on tlie fame day tliat the rati-
fication of this treaty fliall be exchanged,
I'olcmn and authentic letters or inftrumints,
by virtue whereof it Ihall appear, that the
ifland of St, Chrijlophers is to be pofTefled
alone hereafter by BritiJJj Suhjetls •, likewife
all Nova Scotia or Acadia^ with its ancient
boundaries ; as alfo the city of Port Royal^
now called Annapolis Royal^ and all other things
in thofe parts ^ which depend on the faid lands
and ijlands ; together with the dominion, pro-
perty and poflefllon of the faid iflands, lands
and places : and all right ivhatfoevcr by treaties^
or by any other way obtain' d^ which the mofi
Chrijlian King, the crown of France, or any
the fubjeSis thereof have hitherto had to the
faid iflands, lands and places, and the inha-
bitants of the fame, are yielded and made
over to the Queen of Great Britain, and to
her crown for ever, as the moft Chrijlian King
doth at prcfent yield and make over all the
particulars above-faid •, and that, in fuch
ample manner and form, that the fubjefls of
the Mofi Chrifiian King fliall hereafter be ex-
cluded from all kind of fifhing in the faid
feas, bays, and other places on the coafts of
Nova Scotia •, that is to fay, on thofe which
lie towards the eafl, within 30 leagues, be-
ginning from the ifiand commonly called
Sable, and thence ftretching along towards
the fouth- weft."

It was thought now, by a treaty fo ftrongly
worded, and in which the name of the country
ufed by the Englifh, as well as French, had been
inferted, that all pretence for cavils or difputcs
would have been prevented : but in 1719, the

French

the ratl-

:hanged,
rumt^nts,
that the
polTefTed

Ukewile
i ancient
r/ Royaly
her things
''aid lands
ion, pro-
ids, lands
y treaties^

the. moft
e, or any
ad to the

the inha-
ind made
n^ and to
ijiian Kijig
er all the
in fucb
fubjedts of
ter be ex-
1 the faid
J coafts of
lofe which
agues, be-
nly called
g towards

"o ftrongly
lie country
, had been
or difputes

1719

the

French

[ 45 3

French began to raife objeflions about the
bounds of Nova Scotia^ and conimiflioners were
appointed \ but thofe on their fide did not meet.
The reafons why, are not mentioned : but we
fuppofe it was, becaufe they were afliamed to
offer the obje6tions communicated to them, if
they were fuch barefaced falfehoods and ridi-
culous quibbles, as thofe mentioned by Charle-
voix and his followers : for France^ to be fure,
has men of honour, as well as other countries.
However that be, it may be prefumed that Mr.
William De UJJle, the King of France's principal
geographer, had inllrudions to curtail the limits
affigned by the Engliflj to Nova Scotia ; for in
his map of //;«mc<3, publiflied in 1723, he re-
ftrains the name of Acadia to a little lefs than
the peninflila, which, in his maps of North
America and New France^ publifhed in 1 700 and
1703, as before mentioned, he had extended
over more than one third part of the North
Main,

This condu(Sl: is not to be w^ondercd at in Mr,
De VJjle^ who took all occafions to defraud the
Englijh^ fo far as he was able to defraud them,
of their rights. In the two maps laft cited he
hath exhibited Acadia two thirds lefs than he
ought to have done, according to the authority
of Champlain, and the fubfequent grants of his
Kings, corroborated by treaties. But I'uppofing
this to have been owing more to want of car-
rying his refearches deep enough, than to dcfign,
we have not room to think fo favourably of
him, wich refpe6t to his map of Louifiana^ pub-
iilhed in 171 8. For he has there transferred all
Carolina to his ov/n nation, by inclofing ic
within the green line, as part of Louijiana^

altho',

.-^-^

I J

1:46 ]

altho', in Ms map of Mexico in 1705, he places
it among the EngUjh territories. '1 o luppoit
this bold geo^',raph!cul cie{)redation with a co-
lour c>t juitice, iindtr the name of Carolina he
writes •■' Tlut it was ib called in honour of
*' Charles IX by the French \ who dii'covered,
" took p jfleirionof it, and fettled there, in 1 5 ."
By the defect in the date, Mr. l)e Vljle lecms
on this occafion to have depended tor the whole
on his memory, w'hich doubtlefs had deceived
him. In Laudonniere^ voyage we meet indeed
with a fort built by him in 1564, at the mouth
of the river May^ which he named La Caro-
line \ but not one word of giving that apptlla-
tion to the country. Our neighbours are very
dextrous at either expanding, or contrading ;
for, whenever they pleafe, they can turn a fingle
fort into a large country, and reduce a large
country into a piece of coaft. The author of
the late fix flieet map of America^ has taken
notice of his infinrerity in fupprefling the king-
dom of ISlew Albion on the weft coaft of Ayiie-
rica^ and changing the name of Bay Sir Fran-
cis Drake, into that of Si. Francifco. I fay of
"mceritv : for in his map of the countries

map

fjuatedto the north weft^ made in 1696 *, he in-
ferts the country of New Albion, and gives to

the port the

coun
name

of Francis Drake,

The condudl of other French geographers,
fince the treaty of Utrecht, with refpe(5t to the
country in queftion, is no lefs repugnant to the
preceding authorities than that of Mr. De Uljle.
Mr. Bell.n, in his map of New France, made in

* It makes the third of the particular maps publifhed by
his brother Jos. Nicholas de L Jjle^ the aftronomer, in 1752,
on occafion of jhe difcoveria to the n.rtb of the 'South Sea.

fmw

TJTS-' iu '■ Atrr aggs-v ray, a^^r ^ s^ r ; - ■^im.m .:^

c places
luppoit
h a co-
'olina he
nour of
covered^
ni5 ."
lie recms
le vvbole
deceived
t indeed
le mouth
M Cnro-
apptlla-
are very
Tading j
1 a fingle
: a large
.uthor of
as taken
:he king-
; of Aine-
Sir Fran-
I fay of
I countries
\ *, he in-
gives to

►graphers,
5t to" the
ant to the
Be VlJIe.
, made in

publifhed by
!ei, in 1752,
Quth Sea.

[47 1

1 744, for Ckirlevoix^s hiftory, gives to the pe-
ninfula the name of Acadia^ and to the Ncrlb
Main that of Nova Scolia : whereas he ought to
have given to the whole eithtr one or both
of the names, in order to make his map agree
with the accounts of the earlieil voyagers, and
the rej^Lilations of treaties. Mr. Bti/i/i, in his
map of the fame country which he puWillied
the year following, detached irom Churk-voix^s,
hiftory, has omitted the name of Nova Siotia,
and left the nothern main without any name,
or without fupplying it, by extending that of
Acadia over the whole.

Nor does Mr. Danville on this occafion ap-
pear to be lefs perplexed and at a lofs than Mr.
Bellin. In his map of America^ publiflied in
1 746, he divides the country fouth of St. Law-
rence x'lwtv^ by a pricked line carried north from
the well bounds of New England^ to 46 degrees
of latitude, from whence it runs near eaft by
north, through the country to the gulf of Sl
Lawrence, where it terminates about lo miles
to the north of the ifthmus of SbegniktOy and
Green Bay, The country to the north of this
line, which contains above two thirds of the
whole, he allots to France, by colouring \t green :
but gives it no particular name, only by intruding
into it the laft letter of the name of Canada, he
would poflibly confider it as part of that
country ; which yet originally was, he knows,
confined to the north fide of the river St. Law-
rence^ and only one of three provinces into
which that country was divided. Fie does
the fame by the country fouth of it, aflign-
ing to it the name neither of Nova Scotia nor
Acadia \ which laft he confines folely to the

peninfiila,

Mf.

ll I

[48 J

jicninfiila, but afcribes both to the En^hjh {\o^
inhiioiis, by colouring them red.

This repVcfentatlon of the country in que-
flioii, is lb very inconfiftcnt with the authori-
ties above mentioned, that one woukl ahnoll
imagine Mr. B^Anzille had truftcrd to Cbarlcvclx's
report of things, inftead ci^ having had recourfe
to the original authors. 'I'his is the more proba-
ble as he has not given the name either ot Neva
Scotia^ or Acadia^ to the north- main or any part
of it •, and by this means the portion which he
allov/s to the Engi/fi), becomes tlienamelefs pro-
vince to be found in Charlevoix, as hath been
before obferved.

Our remark feems to be farther confirmed
by the alterations. Hill more inconfiflent with
thofe authorities, Vv'hich he hath fince made, in
the late impreflions of the fa ne map *, having
twice contracted, inflead of enlarging, the bounds
of the Engliflj poircilions in Nova Scotia or
jicadia. The firfb time he rellrained them to the
peninfula, by drawing the red line through the
ilthmus of Sbegnikto : by the fecond caltration
he reduces the Englijb pretenfions to little more
than one half of the peninfula; by drawing the
partition line from Shidahtiktu ox Milford^ through
the country Ibuthward of Minns bay, to the
north v/eil coaft. But, as thefe alterations are
marked by pricked lines, and the firft pricked
line is not erafed, who knov/s but they are
miftakes in the colouring .? or if not, that on the
better information, Mr. D\4nville may reftore to
Englip^ by a third ftroke of the pencil, ib much
as he has deprived them of by «-he two firft,
if not to all Nova Scotia^ or the coun. v fouth

'TTTHiLr-.-^-r ST. ^7 :-^—

}ghjh do

in que^
author! -
i almolt
arlcvcix^s
. recoil rfe
re proba-
• ot No^-a
any part
which he
elefs pre-
ach been

:onfirmcd

[lent with

mack, in

I •, having

he bounds

Scotia or

em to the

ough the

caitration

ittle more

awing the
^, through
ly, to the
rations are
•ft pricked
they are
that on the
^ reftore to
1, lb much
r two firft,
jn. V fouth

/[ 49 ]

of St, Lazvrence river ; as from his known cha^
rader of integrity I am ptrfuaded he would
have done, had he met with the pafTagc of
ChamplaiH fo often mentioned.

As he has not done ir, I take it for granted,
that it did not occur to him : nor can 1 other-
wife account either for the bounds afligned by
him in the firlt imprefllon of his map, oir for
the alteraiions made in the fecond and third.
For if he was acquainted with the limits given
to Acadia by Cba?nplain, or claimed by France
in all her treaties with En^ldnd, in confequence
of the treaty of Si. Germain^ I cannot cdnceive
how he could have afcrib.d to Acadia no
greater extent of country in the firft imprelFions
of his map; and if he had judged the objec-
tions darted againft the treaty of Utrecht to
have been «>f any weight, I am as much at a
lofs to conceive how he came to give it fo much.
On the other hand, if he was not fenfible of
their weijht when he firft publifhed his map,
I lliould be glad to know upon what grounds
he came to be better fatisned fince ; and how it
happened that he was not made fenfible of his
miftakes all at once, but was obliged to alter
his map twice upon the occafion.

Thefe confidcratlons induce me to believe
that it was for want of fulficient information ;
for whether he made ufe of Denys^ or depended
on Charlevoix^ he could not find his doubts re-
folved by either : for the firft, as hath been ob-
fcrved, did not meddle with the bounds or divi-
fion of Acadia into provinces-, and the bufinefs
of the latter was to puzzle and miftead, not to
inform. In fhort, without confulting Champlairij

E fo

[50]

fo as to cUfcover the palTage in view, he could
not decide with certainty, touching the ancient
limits, or rather the mod ancient liiiiits, of th&
country in queftion : for this reafon I will not
charge the alterations with vi(^(;6iio Acadia^ made
in the feveral editions o\ Mr. UAnville'% map, as
done with a finifter view, to injure the Britijh
intereft in that country, by diminifhing its
bounds •, altho' perfons whofe enquiries go no
farther than the maps, may be induced thereby, on
the opinion which the world has juftly entertained
of his knowledge and abilities, to believe the late
encroachments of his nation, in that part of-
A^nV^ atleaft, to be juft.

'. ■ '

'Tis true, that Mr. D^Anville, in anfwer to a
charge of marking the bounds of fome Britijh
dominions in America amifs, exprefles a fur-
prize " That any body ihould imagine a thing
of this kind done by a geographer, could
be either of prejudice or advantage to the
rights of crowned heads*." I am furprized at
it, no lels than he -, for it would be ftrange in-
deed, if the bounds of kingdoms, any more
than the Rtuations of places, were to depend on
the arbitrary will of the geographers : that would'
be to have kingdoms at their difpofal. But then,
1 fee it has been the cafe ; and at this inftant
the maps but juft now mentioned are produced
as arguments, to fupport the French allegations.
'Tis hoped however, that for the future, thofe
things will not be offered as proof, which fo
eminent a geographer has declared to be no
proof; and has demonftrated to be none, by
varying in a few years fo often, and every time

* See Mr. D anvil U\ letter, fur unc copie de la carte de
I'Air.er. St-pteiit : aji. Mem. Franc. Mars. r;5i. p. 135.

: could

ancient

of the

will not

I, made

nap, as

; Britijh

ing its

go no

-eby, on

ertained

; the late

part of-

wer to a
e Britijh
\ a fur-
2 a thing
:r, could
I to the
prized at
ange in-
ny more
epend on
lat would
But then,
lis inftant
produced
legations,
jre, thofe
which fo
to be no
none, by
very time

I la carte de
p. 135.

[5t]
foconfideraDly, from himfelf. In cffe(fl, to? Hedge
the authority of difcording geographers, forafcer-
taining the bounds of Acadia^ would be as ri-
diculous as to undertake to do the fame from
the triangular form of the peninfula, which I
have been told fome have adually done. Nor is
it at ail unlikely : fince, after what has been re-
marked of Charlevoix and his followers, there
is no extravagant demand or aflertion ; no
iiiconfillency or chicanry, within the compafs
of invention, which the French may not be
capable of having rccourfe to, when they have
any favourite point in view. But to proceed,

Other late geographers have gone farther
ftill in this pradice of curtailing the Britijh
territories. Mefs. Jos. Nicholas de VJJle^ hxo-
thtr o( PFiUiam^ and Buache the latter*s fon-in-law^
who fucceeded him in the poft of premier geogra-
pher, in their general map of the new difcoveries
to the north of the fouth fea^ publifhed in 1752J
feem to follow the tripartite divifion mentioned
by Charlevoix, as before cited ; and Mr. Robert,
in his late map of Canada 1753, the quadrupar-
tite divifion, lathered by the fame author on De-
nys, orelfethat wild conftrudlion which he would
fo abfurdly^ as well as falfely, fix on the words
of Champlain : for that geographer confines the
name ot Acadia to the fouth and we - coafl
only of the peninfula*, with the addition how-
ever of Port Royals to make it, as he thinks,
conformable to the treaty of Utrecht. But why
ihould he follow the opnion of two authors
only (fuppofing it was their opinion, for wc
have fhewn the contrary) when his guide in-
formed him, but a little before, that Acadia, in
the fcntiments of all the geographers and hifto-

E 2 rians

i L
I

■■'"f^

■^jJt^^xaesiUMt

'I. '

■ I

[ 50

rians who have written with accuracy, ir.cluJcs
the whole peninfula ? muft I, on this occ^ilion,
liippofc that he rejeds authority to obey orders ?
Or, muft I apply to him the words of a certain
author, , which were thought to have wanted an
application : *' Whit difcoveries might not be
*' made, it people would copy lefs, and give
" themfclves the trouble to draw from the foun-
" tain head* V* Had Mr. Robert followed
that rule, and confulted Champlain himfelf, he
could never have erred fo (hamefully as he has
done in this fmgle inftanc^.

But however confiderable this depredation
may feem, it is but a trifle compared with ano-
ther, which Mr. Robert to fignalize himfelf, we
prefume, for his addrefs in geographical flight-
of-hand, has committed in the fame map ; for
by the title of it, he has made a feizure not
only of that whole province, but of all the Bri-
tijh territories in general. It runs thus, A map
of the countries known by the name of Canada ;
in whicl are difiingtdfloed the poffeffions of the
French and Englilh. Mr. R. being an enter-
prizing gentleman, was refolved to ftrike a bold
llroke at once, and diftance all the other French
geographers to fuch a degree, that it Ihould not
be in the power of any of them to go beyond
him. He was certainly in the right of it, when
his hand was in, not to mince the matter : for
the French may as well lay claim to the whole as
apart. As to his afcribing the province of Ca-
rolina to Canada^ which Mr. IFiUiarti de VJJle
afcribed to Loiiif.ana^ or the impropriety of ex-
tending the Name of Canada over all the BritijJo

* See Journal CEconomioue, Zc^'t. i7;3, p. S8.

dominions

i53]

clominions in America^ which in its original ftatc
was but a fmall province in the neighbourhood
of i^uehek^ as will be fhewn lower down ; they
are but trifling inconfiftencies, which the French
geographers think no impeachment of either
their knowledge or integrity, any more than
their contradiding one another fo enormoufly
about the bounds of yfif^^/<2. Charlevoix forged
feveral kinds of erroneous bounds for them,
without declaring for any of them himfeif •, and
they by adopting every one a different party,
contradidt or difagree with each other. On
this occafion, I may obferve, that, at the f^ime
time they fecm to drive who fhall deviate from
the truth, and curtail the Engliflj pretenfions
mod, they, by their wide diiagreement fhew
how much at a lofs they are what to fix on, and
how little grounds they have for what they do.

Their difagreement, which in reality at once
difcrcdits and overthrows their fyllem, is a Suf-
ficient refutation of what they would advance ;
as well as a fufficient anfwer to thofe who would
build their demands on fuch feeble and preca-
rious authority. However that be, there is no
doubt but Mr. Buache (who is fo fond of every
produdlion of his own brain, that he will not
part with one of them, however monftrous or
deformed, when once his imagination has
brought it forth ; and has aflually fallen out
with his brother de Vljle for correcting fome of
his errors) will, with due acrimony, refent
this impeachment, of his father-in-law's inte-
grity or (kill, by Mr. Robert^ (with whom alfo
he is at variance on the fame occafion as with
his brother,) and oblige him to reftore Carolina
to l^otijfmna. In this, perhaps, he may have

E 3 more

■m

r. 54 ]

more to fay for himfeif than he has faid, in his
difingenuoLis and ridiculous defence of the bkin-
dering fituation which he has given to the Rio

de los Reys*^ and other places, in his map ot
the ncw'difcoverics to the north of the South -lea.

But it is time to return from whence we
digrefied :

Mud it not feem furprizing to every body,
that notwithftanding by feveral treaties we gave
Vjp No-va Scotia to the French^ when only Acadia
was mentioned ; yet now they refufe to give
back the fame country, tho' it was ceded un-
der both names by the treaty of Utrecht ? But
X\\t pretence for fuch Itrange redudtions is dill
more furprizing, as it is taken from that very
treaty which was made on purpofe to prevent
any fuch pretences ; and from words which ab-
fokitely deftroy them. The words, according
to the original Latin^ are, " Novam Scotiam five
*' Acadiam totam, Hmitibus fuis comprehenfam,
" ut-et Annapohm •, that is, AW Nova Scotia ov
*' Acadia with its ancient hmits, and alfo Port-
" Rcyal." In thefe words, it feems, they have
found out two forts of arguments, properly
called ^ihbles^ by which they pretend to prove,
That England is by the treaty intitled to no
more than a part of the peninfula of Nova Scor
tia, or the whole at moft,

..-.;. ^:^'^\ « \ ...!,■ :

* For he places the moiitii of that river in rhe larjtude
of 63 degrees, inlkad of 53, contrary both to the journal
aicribed 10 De Fcnte, and the cxprefs defign of the vo.agc ;
which laft objedioii, found in the Remarks before ina.ii-
Ciicd, he for that reafon never takes notice of.

_ -. 1 . . ! '

- . . « T| < ,

' -, • The

], in Ills

he blun-

tlie Rio

map of

ith-iea.

cnce we

y body,
we gave
Y Acadia
to give
ded un-
ht> But
sis ftiJl
lat very
prevent
hich ab-
xording
iam five
henfam,
Scotia or
fo Port-
ley have
properly
prove,
d to no
^ova ScQ,'

he latitude
the journal
e vo . ag(.- i
ore niciiti-

The

. i 55^ . _

The firl^ is extorted from the words, All Nova
Scotia^ or Acadia^ with its cmtient boundaries.

The fccohd from the words, And alfo Anna-
polis Royal.

With regard to the firft argument, they pre-
tend, that " the words Ancient limits refer fole-
" ly to Acadia, whofe bounds originally being
'* very fmall, thofe words were inferted by
*' France to \\u\\t Nova Scotia."* ' v

Now this allegation is made up of feveral
falflioods.

Firll, in affirming that the words ancient li-
mts were inferted hy France ; whereas they were
inferted at the inftahce of Mr. Secret^try St. John
(afterwards Lord Bolingbroke) to Mr. de ^orcy.
Whence it follows that they could not be in-
ferted to limit Nova Scotia -, for the Englijh mi-
nifters did not want to lefTen the Britifi pre-
tenfions : r.or would France have futfered the
v\2^xt\t o^ Nova Scotia ou\y, to be inferted after-
wards, in the part which relates to the fifhery, if
they had inferted the word Acadia here with any
fuch defign.

., The fecond fallhood is in affirming that the
ancient (by which are meant the original) li-
mits of Acadia^ were very fmall ; fince, accord-
ing to Champlain himfelf» the father SLud founder
of the fettlements in Canada, as the French call
him, they exceeded thofe of Nova Scotia in their
firft eftabiifhment by King James I. in 1621.
And fince that author, the firft who hath men-
tioned the limits of Acadia, hath declared the
river St. Laurence to be the boundary of that
country, this river muft be confidered as its
( E 4 ancient f

Br I

It! I

[ 56 ]

(incient^ or rather moft ancient limit, whether it
had any other before his time or not.

And here it muft be obferved, that the pof-
feflion of this tedimony of Champlain is of
great importance in the queftion •, as it will be
a perpetual bar againfb the French claims, and
a decifive anfwer to all objedions which may
be grounded, on the words antient limits^ or any
other found in the treaty relative thereto :
fur what are a thoufand inferential arguments
^gainft one pofitive voucher ? Such arguments
indeed, when the cafe will admit of no other,
may be confidered as fair reafoning ; but muft
be looked on as mere chicane and quibble,
when fei; tp oppofe abfolute proofs.

As therefore a clear teftimony or fa6l like
this, is not be difputed, and is more eafily un-
derftood than a courfe of arguments, we might
fpare ' urfelves the trouble of dwelling any longer
on this topic : but being defirous thoroughly
to expofe thp injuftice and fallacy of the ob-
jedion, we fhall undertake to Ihew, from thp
obvious meaning ot the words themfelves, .^^

1. That the words antient limits do not refer
{oXtX'j to Acadia, ' v-

2. That in cafe they did, yet they would not
limit or reduce thofe of Nova Scotia,

I i 'i* • > ' J I

3. That fuppofing they did limit or re-
duce Nova .^cotia, and the ancient bounds of
Acadia were as fcanty as the French pretend,
yet the Englijh pretenfions would not be leflen-
cd thereby. . ' """'

I. That

bcr it

e pof-
is of
ill be
s, and
1 may
or any
ereto :
iments
iments
other,
t muft
nibble.

a like
ily un-
might
longer
oughly
he ob-
)m thp

ot refer

uld not

or re-

inds of

retend,

leffen-

I. That

[57]
I. That the words ancient limits do not relate
to Acadia only, or more to it than to Nova
$cotiay is clear from the form of expreflion, and
natural conftrudion of the words.

For as the country of Nova Scotia and Acadia^
however difFerentordiverfified by fituation dimen-
fions, or otherwife, before their union, become,
by the words of the treaty, not only infeparably
united, but alfo identified, or one and the fame ;
Therefore nothing can be applied to either, as
in their feparate Itate, but what mud relate to
the whole in their united rtate.

In like manner, the names Nova Scotia^ and
Acadia^ however different before in their fig-
nification, on account of the countries which
they denominated, in virtue of the words of
the treaty, become fynonimous, or fignify one
and the fame thing : So that whatever is ap-
plied to one is applied to the other, or equally
affects both. And thus the words ancient limits,
as well as the adjunct ally do not relate more to one
than to the other.

.. A

In efFed, the words have the fame force as
if they had flood thus. All Nova Scotia^ with
its ancient limits^ and all Acadia with its ancient
limits ; as they muft have ftood, had the coun-
tries ceded been different in fituation : But as
they were fuppofed to have been co- extended
before, or at leaft one included within the bounds
of the other, therefore the prefent form of ftile
was ufed, which faves the repetition of the
^prds in queftioa, V , ;'' . V "i

y ,1. I

;i--- ■■

..,'»

Iri

t 58 J
It is for this reafon, that wc render the paf-
fage l^ova Scotia or Acadia^ iviih Us ancient //-
nitts^ rather than vjitb their ancient limits ; tor
the Latin will admit of this way as well as thfe
other -, and thus it mull be rendered, if the
countries be confidered in their feparate Hate,
as the French J on this occalion, would have
them. ,,.... - ,

"^ II. It is evident then, that the ^orA^ ancient It-
ffiits da not relate to Acadia only ; but in
cafe they did, they could not limit or reduce
Neva Scotia : It would only follow that Acadia^
according to its antient bounds, was equivalent
fo Nova Scotia •, for thfe whole of both countries
being ceded, as before fet forth, there could
be no fuch reduction.

But in cafe Acadia had been lefs than Nova
Scotia^ that would make no alteration in the
<]ut(lion : for the words unite or incorporate the
two J they do riot curtail either in order to make
one country equal to the other, they operate not
by reducing Neva Scotia to the diminutive fize
cf Acadia^ but by enlarging Acadia to the full
extent of Nova Scotia. Where two countries of
unequal bignefs afe unitedy will any body pre-
tend to fay, that by the uniofv the iarger is re-
duced to the dimenfions of the fmaller, unlefs
fuch redu6i:ion had been exprefly fpecified in
the article ? Let them produce an inftance of
foch an abfurdity, if they can.

The words taken feparately alfo declare in the
llrongefl manner, againft any fuch meaning, with
"Which they are wholly incompatible. On one
hand, to apply the word all to either of the
countries in queftion, under fuch fcanty dimen-
fions

the paf-
icient It'
nits -, lor
II as th6
I, if the
lie ftate,
uld have

- »

ancient U-
•, but in
or reduce
It Acadiny
iquivalent
countries
ere could

han l^oua
on in the
operate the
IV to maice
)perate not
lutive fize
o the full
juntries of
body pre-
•ger is re-
ler, uniefs
^'Gifted in
inftance of

:lare in the

ming, with

On one

ler of the

[nty dimen-

fions

I 59 3

fions as they are reprefcnted with by the French,
looks more like jeft than earnclt. What moc-
kery or nonfenfe is it to declare, that the whole
of fuch extend ve countries is yielded, when
only a piece of fea-coaft is yielded i not the
hundredth part of the whole : A mighty all,
truly 1 Rifum teneatis ? To fay all Nova Scotia
or Acadia, that i , only a part of Nova Scotia
or Acadia •, or elfe, all Nova Scotia or Acadia \
that is, all Acadia, and only a pare of Nova
Scotia, is a contradidion in terms •, and yet one
of thefe muft be the meaning in the fenfe ot the
French, if they mean any thing. On the other
hand, if no more be ceded than a bare coaft,
or the peninfula, how can all, or the whole of
both, be faid to be given up ? — And if all, or
the whole of both be given up, how can it be
pretended that only a part is given up ? It
cannot be pretended, that Acddia, under fuch
contra6tcd bounds, is equal to Nova Scotia \
or that, if only Acadia was yielded un-
der thofe circumftances, all Nova Scotia was
yielded. ' ... . ..; /.-v-. .'?:!■'. ^

The article being worded and fufferod to
pafs in the prefent form, is a plain indication
that the French minifler$ never intended to li-
mit Nova Scotia, as is pretended. That all
fhould be mentioned to be ceded by them, and
only a fmall part intended, feems impofTiblr.
If they had intended to limit, or reduce one
country to the other, they would have taken
fome other method, confiftent with fuch a de-
fign, and not one fo very repugnant to it. They
would not have faid, all Nova Scotia, or Acadia,
with its antient limits, Ihall be ceded ; but, fo
much only of Nova Scotia fball be ceded, as an-

fwers

!•!

1 1 -

[ 60 ] .. .

fwers to Acadia ; not in the mojl ample, hut
in the mofi contracted manner^ according to
its ancient limits^ which bpunds likewife would
have been fpecified, nor would the expence of
either words, or thought, have been much
greater in one cafe than the other : but to fup-
pofe things were intended in a light fo con-
trary to that in which they appear, is to
fay, that the French minifters thought one
thing, and wrote another j that they did not
undcrftand Latin or Grammar ; that they were
afleep while the article was drawn up and fign-
cd 5 or clfe, what will feem altogether as in-
credible to the world, that the Englijh had for
once outwitted them. , - ■

This confideration, likewife, would be fufH-
cient to overthrow the credit of the aflertion,
that the words Acadia^ with its ancient limits,
were inferted at the demand of France^ if we
had no other authority to prove the contrary,
as before fet forth. In (hort, the only way to
reduce Nova Scotia, by the treaty, to the limits
they aim at, is to make appear, that, accord-
ing /to its ancient bounds,it was no larger than
Acadia, according to its ancient bounds j fup-
pofing them to be fuch as they pretend.

Charlevoix probably was aware of this •, and to
obviate the difficulty, took it in his head not
only to fupprefs one paflage of Champlain^
which makes the original limits o^ Acadia equal
ar leaft to thofe of Nova Scotia, and corrupt
another, in order to reduce Acadia to a bare
coaft, but alfo to affirm, that Nova Scotia ori-
ginally was no more than that coaft. But this,
we prefume, none will be found hardy enough,

[6i]

like the jefuit, to venture upon •» and, bcfidcs,
the pretended limiting words are againft fuch a
modification, as they fuppofe iVip^'<2 Hcctia to have
been greater than Acadia.

III. However, fuppofing, in the lall place, that
we fhould grant Charlevoix, and his followers,
all they contend for, and allow that the antieni
bounds both of Acadia and Nova Scotia were
no more than the fouth coaft of the peninfula ;
yet it would avail him nothing, on his own prin-
ciples, as fuch bounds would be quite out of
the queftion : For by antient bounds they all
along underftand moft antieni bounds ; therefore,
to ufe his own way of reafoning on the fame
occafion, cited at the beginning of this memoir *,
** Thefe are the fnofl antient limits j whereas the
*' difpute between the Englifo and the French
*' is about the antient bounds of Acadia or Nova
•* Scotia:*

Now it mufl: be confidered, that fince the
time of thofe fuppofed fcanty limits, Acadia
has often changed its boundaries. In Champlain^s
time they were the river St. Lawrence^ and
that of Pencbfcot. In 1632, Lewis XIII. ex-
tended them weft ward to the river Kinibeki:
By the treaty of^r^'^^^in 1667, they were re-
flrained to the river Penolfcc} -, and by the treaty
of Ryfwick in 1^97, inlarged again to the ri-
ver St. George. So that the antient bounds of
Acadia muft be one o\ the firft three determina-
tions, any of which will give to England all
which file lays claim to.

Thus, by a blunder committed in the capital

pomt,

r.T well

as in the reft, he renderi abor-

tive

* Fi-e 7,

! Ji-

[62]

rive his own iniquitous fchemf ; and lofcs all
the advantages which he proiJofcd by the many
ficrificcs which he had made of both his under-
flanding and confcience, to bring it into the
world. . ,

We have now, I prefume, refuted all the
principal arguments raifed by the French on
thefe words of the treaty under confideration ;
but we muft not quit this head, without let-
ting our readers fee, how ftrongly the Kr,glijh
claim is fupported and enforced by the reft of
the article. That the treaty fuppofes no fuch
fcanty bounds to be ceded, as that author and
his iollowers alledge, nor any thing lefs than
the whole, both of Nova Scotia and Acadia, in
the ampleft manner, and with their moft ex-
tenfive limits, will appear from the extraordinary
circumfpeftion which is fhewn in wording the
article in general, more than is to be found in
any preceding treaty on the fame occafion.
England was not barely content with the men-
tion of Acadia, as in the treaty of Breda, but,
befides the addition of the name of Nova ^ctia,
caufed to be infertcd every thing elfe v.hich
could be thought proper for convevi.ig anJi fe-
curing to her fubjeds the whole, without omit-
ting any thing which might give occafion to
future cavils. For France is obliti,cd to de-
liver up all other things in thoje parts 'usbicb
depend on the /aid lands and ijlands ; tog::ther
'with the dominion, property, a?id pojfej/ion oj the
Jhid lands, ijlands, and places -, and all right what-
foever, by treaties^ or by any other way obta'.ied,
lihich the mafi Chrijlian king, tbe crozvn ^/France,
cr any the fubjc^s thereof, have hitherto hr ' to
the ijlands, lands, and places, or inhabitair of

4 the

lofcs alt
he many
is iinder-
nto the

all the
'encb on
eration :
loiit let-
t Etiglijb
! reft of
no fuch
;hor and
efs than
adia, in
[loft ex-
ordinary
ling the
found in
xcafion.
le men-
ic.^ but,

2 v.hich
anvl fe-

ut ornit-

afioii to
to de-

'J 'Ujbicb
tog-ther

n oj the

obta:;ed,
France,
9 he J to
iiah" of
the

[ 63 ]

the fame ^ which are yielded and made over to the
^een of Great Britain, f.nd to her crown jot
ever.

Now let me afk any unprejudiced foreigner,
even a French man hiirilelt, whether it can
poffibly be imagined, that lb much care was
taJcen in drawing up this artic'e, fo many diffe-
rent kinds of right as well as pollcffion men-
tioned, and fo many llrong words employed tho
more firmly to convey them, only to fecure to
us a piece of coaft, or at moft the peninfula of
Acadia^ which is not above one filth part of
the whole? For it is clear, from the exprcfs
words, that not only the whole of both coun-
tries is to be delivered up •, but likewife all the
lands, places, iflands, of each country whicli
at any time the Frc^^xh were ever in poflefTiOJi
of, by virtue of treaties or otherwife. Now,
as it is notorious from the articles of feveral-
treaties between Englaiui and France \ from the
grants of Lewis XIII. and XIV. as well as
other authentic atts, as before mentioned in thij
memoir, that the French have at various periods,
claimed and been in adlual pofleflion of all the
country to the fouth of St. Lawrence river, from
the gulf of the fame name to the river Penoh-
fcot^ or St George^Sy what manner of doubt
can be made but that England is intitkd to at
leaft fo much by the treaty of Utrecht ?

I. <

That this is a true ftate of our claim, appears
to be confirmed from the following fadts.
On June the i oth 1712, Letais XIV. offered
to yield up Newfoundland and other iflands
to Queen /inn^ provided flie would confcnc
*' to reftore Acadia^ of which i\\^ river St. George

fhould

►-^

'i;

V% 1

■1 '; '

;

[64]

'^ Ihould hereafter be the bounds," as btioit
mentioned : but the Queen being refolvcd that
all the country between New England and the
gulf of S(. Lawrence^ which (he was then in
poffeflion of, fhould be formally yielded up and
relinquilhed by France^ rejeded the offer : and
is it likely that by the treaty of Utrecht (he
Ihould give up yet more ? At the treaty of
Utrecht all, and much more than what Lewis
XIV. wanted us to reltore, was in our hands ;
and It appears from the tranfadlions during the
negotiation, that France efteemed Great Britain
to have been in adlual poffeflion of the whole
country of Acadia, By one of the preliminary
articles of peace, figned in 171 1, " Each na-
*' tioh was to keep, what at the publication there-
*' of in North America they were poiTefTed of."
Is it not ftraxige effrontery then, to pretend that
no more was yielded up to England by the treaty
of Utrecht than the peninfula, or part of it ?
The French may as well fay, and in effed it is
faying, that inftead of France yielding up all
Nova Scotia or Acadia to us, we yield it up to
them, by that treaty. In fliort, it appears
from the tranfaftions of this affair, that the
whole of Nova Scotia was infilled on by the
Englijio minifters, without the lead redudiion i
and by the treaty it appears that the whole
was given up : and yet the French pretend, that
by the whole is only to be underftood a part<
contrary to the faft, and contrary to reafon.

The fecond argument or cavil, alledged by
the French^ is taken from the infertion of the
words, rt«^ aljo Annapolis Royal: but to give this ar-*
eument its full force, we fhall (late it in the words

[ «5 ]

of their falfc oracle Charlevoix, who, after re-
citing the quadrupartite divifion of the country
Ibuth of the river St. Lawrence, by which
Acf^dia is reduced to the fouth coall oi the pcn-
infula, " Would not one fay,'* adds he, '• thac
" the treaty-makers had in viewtheopinion of the
" two moft ancient authors,in relation to Acaduiy
'• [meaning Champlaln and Denys,- as he hath
" falfely quoted them] when they declare, in
" the treaty of Utrecht, That the mojl chriftian
" King cedes to the Qiieen of England and her
*' fuccejfors for ever^ All Acadia or Nova Sco-
*' tia, conformable to its ancient boundaries, as
" alfo the city ^/Port Royal noiJ!) called Annapolis
'* Royal, and in general^ every thing which dc-
" pends on the faid lands and iflands cf that
^'^ country? For fince this treaty adds Fort
*' Royal to Acadia or Nova Scotia, it feems from
*' thence to follow, that the whole peninfula
*' was not comprized under the name of Ac ad: a
** proper or Nova Scotia *."

To this it is anfwered, that what he would
fallacioufly infer, does not follow, for the fubfe-
quent reafons. i. Becaufe he fuppofcs, the
plenipotentiaries took only Acadia or Neva Sco-
tia, according to his own imaginary fcanty
bounds, under their confideration ; whereas it
appears from what hath been faid in the preced-
ing article, that they had both countries r.. large
in view. 2. Becaufe, if this argument be of
any fignificancy. Port Royal was not comprized
under the name of either Nova Scotia or Acadia j
and then he furniflies a reafon why it ought to
have been exprefly mentioned. In eifedt, as

♦ CharJtv. Hill. Njuv. Fran. Vol. I. p. 113, aad Vol.
2P 374

F It

]

II'

II:

if;

[ 66 ]

It was fomctinies annexed to the government
of the North-main (particularly that name-
Icfs government mentioned by Charlevoix) it
might be confidered as a feparate diftridt from the
peninl'ula •, and by virtue of this ceflion we arc
intitled, by that author's own ihewing, at leaft
to fo much of the North Main ?s fell within
that nameiefs government of which Port Royal
was the capital. 3. Becaufe Queen Anne di-
reded Lord Privy Seal and Earl Strafford
to demand, " that the French King fhould give
up all claim, by former treaties or otherwife,
to New Scotland^ and exprefly to Port RoyaU
now in our pofleflion." This, I hope will
be deemed a fufficient reafon for inferting the
words, and alfo Port Royaly if there was no
other.

On this occafion I muft obferve, that in all
difputes of this nature, which concerns the
meaning of treaties, v.^hen any difficulty or doubt
arifes, recourfe ought to be had to the tranfac-
tions during the negotiation, as the mod proper
way for removing or explaining them. Unlefs
this method be allowed, France herfelf can
Ihevv no title that ever fhe had by treaty to the
country in qucftion, call it Acadia or Nova
Scotia : which evinces how unfair it is to pre-
tend to take advantage of fingle words in the
treaty of Utrecht^ contrary to the obvious mean-
ing of all the relt, and tenor of the whole.

Having confidered the objedtions of our ad-
verfary, I fhall make bold to point out a it\f
corruptions, which may be called forgeries,
which he has committed in the above citation
from the treaty of Utrecht, The firft corrup-

2 tion

[ f 7 ]

t4on is in writing all Acadia or Nova Scotia, in-
ftead of all Nova Scotia or Acadia. By giving
Acadia the preference, he would infinuate, that
the country yielded up was properly and llricft-
Jy no other tha."v Acadia, and not Nova Scotia,
farther than wha: might be comprii'ed of it in
Acadia : that thus the words ancient boundaries
became appropriated thereto ; and the bounds
of Nova Scotia are governed by thofe of Acadia,
But as the contrary is the caie, and ]^;cva Scotia
is placed firll in the treaty j thofe advantages
which in that fituation would have accrued to
Acadia, muft be afcribed to Nova Scotia', and thus
his fraud turns a^ainil himfelf.

;
I'

5 was no

Secondly, after the words Lands and IJlands,
he has added of that country •, which words
are not in the treaty. And vvhy has he done this ?
Doubtlefs, becaufe he perceived the word lands
might have reference to more than one country,
that is, to both NovaS cotia and Acad.a, confider-
ed feperately as didind countries. And in reality,
altho' it was nerelfary, as thofe countrys were
then united or fuppofed to be co-extends d, that
the words fliould run in their prefent form, viz.
All Nova Scotia or Acadia, yet, they might as
properly be read all Nova Scotia and Acadia,
as hath been already remarked, and as we find it
exprefled in Cromwell's, grant to La 'Tour, &c.
And therefore, fince by the treaty every thing
was to be delivered up to England, which at
any time had appertained to either of tlioie
countries i withcut doubt tl¥)fe words, the faid
Lands, three times repeated, refer to them, both
jointly and feparately conlidered. For ochervvife,
we ftiould only have found the words, the urid
Land j which in ftrid propriety of fpeech,

I ;

I-

pgrce

( (

'I
ill

.1 >

[ 68 ]

agree better wiili the words Neva Scotia or
ylcadm.

I h;\vc yet one remark more to make on this
occalion. In the inference which he draws
tVom the words cited by him, he ufes the term
Acndia p'ofcr^ which implies that there is an
Acmiia in ^enerd^ or at large^ from which the
IcfTer is dillinguiflied by the ysovd proper^ as it
is ullial in books of geography, when a pro-
vince bears the fame name with the kingdom,
as we have aheady obferved. This Acadia at
large, which our impartial author never fpeaks
of, ii; Acadia in its ancient and moft extended
Hate, as it cxifted from the firft -, that is, in the
time o\' Cbamplainy or was fettkd by Lewis XIII.
It is with this general Acadia that Charlevoix,
and the French geographers, ought to have
joined Nova Scctia, initead of the proper Acadia^
as he has done in confequence of two very falfe
aflertions, viz. *' That the name of Nova Sco-
" //^, in E^igUmd it felf, is given only to che
" pcninfuhi ; and that it never extended over
*' both the peninfula and continent at the fame
" time." But as we have proved the contrary
beyond exception, this alone ought to oblige
them to retract their errors and corre<5t their
maps.

il!

w
iii<

There is yet another claufe to be taken no-
tice of, in the J 2th article of the Utrecht treaty,
which contributes not a little to confirm all
which we have faid with relation to the hounds
and extent of hlova Scotia or Acadia, as deli-
vt red up by the treaty. It is, that which con-
cerns the filhery : tor by it the French are oc-
cluded from all kind of fi/hing, within 30 leagues

Scotia or

ke on this
he draws
, the term
ere is an
vhich the
oper, as it
en a pro-
kingdom,
Jcadia at
/er fpcaks
t extended
t is, in the
aCwis XIII.
Charlevoix^
t to have
per Acadia^
o very falfe
Nova Sco-
only to the
ended over
at the mme
le contrary
to oblige
)rre<5t their

taken no-
^echt treaty,
confirm all
the bounds
ia, as deli-
which con-
mch are e^-
30 leagues

[69 ]
df the Jhore^ in the fcas^ bays, and ether places
[that is rivers, ports and banks] 071 the coaji of
Nova Sc{ii\2i^ ft retching along to the S. IV. of Sable
(or Sandy) ifland. Obferve firll, that the nam(i
of Nova Scotia only is iifed here, wliich plainly
indicates what has been already innlled on, that
the country or countries comprized under that
name, was the obicdl which the Ircnch as well
as EngUftd miniflers had chiefly in view.

Secondly, the French are prohibited to fiffi
not only in a fingle fea, fuch as waflies the coalt
of the peninfula between the c.pcs Sabk aiid
Canfo^ but alfo in all the fcas nidciiniccly, to
the VV. or S. W.of the Ifiaiid S:ib!c : Among
which is included that ot bJo'va Scoti..^ extc^nd-
ing wellvvard from Sable ifland to the borders
of Nc-:v England In like manner to Nova Scotia,
within thofe aforefaid limits, belong the bays,
not only ot' all iflcs. La Have and the like,
which are found on the faid coail ; but alio the
bays of St. Alary, Jnnapclis, Minas, Shignek'o,
St John, and <^t. Croix, (all excepting the Hrft
contained in the great bay of ylrgal or Fuifd)
together v/ith that of Pencbfcot m.ore to the
weit.

Laflly, the words, on thofe 'whirh Jjc towards
the eaft, imp'y that ti^cre were other coaits
belonging to Nova Scotia, befides thofe under
confideration. Now, as thofe referred to by
the words above cited, include all which lie
along the feas and bays to the W. or S. W. of
JJle Sable', that is, all the coails both of the
peninfula and the main, to the borders of New
England, as hath been proved in the fecond
remark -, confequently the implied coalls muft

F 3 be

! 1

W '.

ll. t.

B'. )■

[70]

be thofc within, and out of, the 5/. Lawrence
bay. extending from Cape Canfo to Cape Rojiers,
In cflfcdt the French^ by the claufe above-cited
were tacitly p.rmitted to fifh along this coaft
of Nova 'dcctia^ as not being prohibited
from hilling in the feas and bays to the call
or north of IJle Sable-, but abfolutely excluded
from exercifing that bufinefs on any of the
coafts of Nova Scotia to the weftward of that
ifle, within 30 leagues of the Ihore.

Having now done with the French demands
on Nova Scotia •, it can not be improper, in our
turn, to fet forth the more juft pretenfions which
the Engiifi have to Canada. This I ftiall do
on much better grounds than thofe on which
Mr. Robert^ has ventured to comprize the Britijb
dominions, under the name of C^«^^^^ without al-
Jedging any authority for his innovation or inva-
fion : nor can he, Tm fure, produce any good one.
Some authors indeed have called the fame ex-
tent of country New France, from FerazaMi*s
difcovery, real or pretended, in 1524, which yet
was 27 yf-ars pofterior to that of thit Cabots : but
I do not remember that the name of Canada
was ever given to it by any judicious and equi-
table French geographer before Mr. Robert:
and this I may venture to aflert, that his na-
tion has no right of conqueft to thofe domini-
ons, as the Englijh have to Canada, We ground
our claim to this country firft, as being the
prior difcoverers of all the north part of America^
from 34 to ^fS degrees of latitude under the Cabot s,
in 1497. Secondly, in the intire conqueft of
it in 1629, by Kirk, Thirdly, on the grant
gf Cromwell in J 655, to De La Tour^ Sir Thomas

Temple^

Lawrence
e Rofters.
ove-ciied
;his coaft
jrohibited
\ the call
excluded
\s of the
rd of that

? demands
)er, in our
fions which
1 ihall do
; on which
: the Britijb
^without al-
ien or inva-
ly good one.
tie fame ex-
1 Verazani^s
4, which yet
Cabots: but
e of Canada
us and equi-
At. Robert:
that his na-
lofe domini-
We ground
IS being the
t of America^
lertheC^^o/J,
» conqueft of
on the grant
r, ^ix Thomas

[ 71 ]

Temple^ and others •, wherein a confiderable part,

if not the whole, of Canada, is made over to
thofe proprietors.

If the French fhould fay, that Canadi was
given up to them by the treaty of St. Germainy
in 1632 •, we deny it, and infift, tiiat the places
only were given up, and not the lands : for
which we quote the authorities before menti-
oned, of both King Charles I. and Crom'-jucU.
Befides, in cafe both had been ceded, yet as the
conditions ot that treaty were never tulfilled,
particularly with refpeit to the fums of money
made payable thereby, for that reafon, the
whole is void. It is void alfo by the trefpafs
which the French have new made on Nova
Scotia^ according to the tenor of Queen Anne'*%
manifeflo, difperfed in Canada in 171 1 •, when
the expedition for the redudlion of it was on
foot: wherein it is laid, " that C^;7^'i^ belonged
" to the Engl'ijh, by priority of difcovery ; and
*' that what the French poflelfed there, was by
" grants from the Englijh, and confequently
** hold it only as a fief-, and therefore where
" the pcfit^ffors turn enemies, it reverts.'* Now
for my [>art, I know no greater fign of inimi-
city, than to come and lettle in the midfl of
their neighbour's country, not only without
their content, but even by downright force.

The French cannot pretend that the above
recited realons arc weak or infignificant, who
yet alledge as very folid ones, others which are
not near lo (trong. But, in cafe they were as
frivolous as theirs, they can have no objedion
to them on that account. Nor ought they to

F 4 have

!■

Hfl'l

bi y'

■I t

--'ft

[ 72 ]

have Ids force than fclid arguments, if they
vere not fuch, bccaiiic in reality the French are
not intitkd 10 any : for with thofe who life chi-
cane, chicane mufl: be taken for argument. Nei-
ther can they pretend to alledge the fenfe and
meaning of the St. Gamain treaty, againft the
letter ol it; fince, altho' both fenfe and letter
of the treaty of Utrecht be clearly for us, they
will allow neither. .

'Tis true, altho' we all along were apprized
of our title to Canada^ yet we fuflPered it to lie
dormant, thro' a defire rather to lofc fome-
thir.g, than to have difputes with our neigh-
b(uirs : however, fincethe French have not only
feizcd on the greater part of one province, and
invaded another with repeated hoflilities, but
begin by indired methods to lay pretenfions to
the wh.ole Britijh empire in America •, they have
fliewed th.e Englijh^ that it is high time for
them to look to their interefls, and at the fame
time put them in mind to revive their antient
claim to Canada, Nor is this claim a noveltv,
fiurted on the prefent occafion, but is a claim
which England has always kept up, as appears
from theclaufe \\\ Queen Anne\ manifello above
recited. 7'hefc reafons I think, are fufficient to
juftify our pretenfions to Canada, What fol-
lows will fliew the vanity and impropriety with
which Mr. Robert has included the BritifrJ do-
minions in America, under that name.

I therefore, in the lad place flia'l perform my
promife, made p. 23 to refute thefalfe aflertion
of Charlevoix \ *' that from the earlicit times

the favages gave the name of Canada to all

the

if they

rench are

o iil'e chi-

hent. Nei-

fenfe and

gainll the

and letter

r us, they

c apprized
d it to lie
ofc Tonie-
our neigh-
'enot only
vince, and
ilities, but
tenfions to

they have
1 time for
at the fame
leir antient

a novelty,

is a claim
as appears
t'ello above
"ufPiCicnt to
What fol-
priety with

Byidfi do-

)errorm my
Ife aflertiori
rlicll times
ifiadii to all
" the

[ 73 1
** the country on both fides of the river [of
*' Canada or Si, Lawrence] particularly from its
*' mouth to Saguenay" This the hard-mouth*d
writer ventures to affirm, without the Jeaft
proof to fupport his words; on occafion of
Cartier (or the writer of his voyage, who was
with him in 1534) faying, that the country does
not begin to be called Canada, //// you come to she
ijland " of Bacchus [now Orleans'] near ^ebck.
In this he fays the relator " is moft certainly
wrong ;*' and having proved it with a moft im-
pudent ipfe dixit, above recited, then drops it.
Indeed that was all the beft of his play, nor
durft he enter farther into the queftion : for Car-
tier exprefbly fays, that Canada was a country
or kingdom, lying between thofe of Hojhelaga
(where Mont Real, now is) and Saguenay -, and
Mr. Roberval was afterwards appointed by the
King of France governor of them, as fo many
different countries.

From hence we learn two things : firft, that
Canada was originally fo far from being the ge-
neral name of the country, on both fides the
river, or even of that at prefent focal led ; that it
was no more than a fmall part or diftridt of it,
on the north fide of the river only, whereof
Kebck was the chief town : fccondly, ihdiX. Canada ^
inltead of lying from the mouth of the river 6"/.
Lazvrence to Saguenay, lay to the weft of the
country of Saguenay (fo called from the river
which ftill bears that name) which therefore
lay between it and the mouth of the river, 250
miles dirtant, if it did not extend f) far. What
abandon'd principles muft the m i\ be of, who
can afiert fo miiny glaring falfehooas, as we have
expofeci, which may be lo eafily confuted ? But

.9 it

[ 74 I
it muft be confidcrcd, that as fome people think
lying for the caufe is a proof of their zeal, lb
the greater the lie the greater the merit -, which
would not fufficiently appear, if the fourberie
•was not eafily deteded.

• * • • • . *

The French indeed, wanted very early to
comprehend the lands on both fides of the river
Sl Lawrence under fome name which might
feem of Indian original •, and as that of Canada
had obtained among them for the river, they
were defirous to give it to the country. Lefcarbot
made the firft attempt, thinking it proper, " that
•' like the Indus the banks on both fides fliould
•' bear it's name * " To bring this about he
pretends that the people of Gajhepe [or Gafpe']
and the Bcye de Chaleurs near it, are called Ca-
nadians ; and fo from a few people of that name,
in this corner of the continent, and at a vaft
diftance from Canada itfelf, at lead 360 miles,
with other nations of Indians between, would
have the country, at lealt the fouth bank of the
river, called Canada. But, as neither CartieVy
Champlain., nor Be Monls, who were in the fame
bay t.)r foinc time, mention any thing of Cana-
dians inhabiting the country, it is doubtlefs a
fi»5Uon of his own, grounded on an ancient tra-
dition mentioned by authors, and among the
.reft by Charlevoix himfelf, viz. that certain
*' Spaniards having entered the bay of Chaleurs
*' or Heats^ before the time of Car tier ^ and
finuinii; no mines as they expeded, otten re-
peated the words Aca no.da^ that is, here is
♦' nothing \ which the Indians having fince then
oi'tea utter'd when they faw any Frenchmen^

* Lffcurbot. Hliu dela A'aw'v. Fran^ 1. 3. p. 229.

... • theft

«(

((

>ple think
' zeal, lb
t i which
fourbcrie

early to

the river

:h might

)f Canada

ver, they

Lefcarbot

er, " that

es fhould

about he

or Cafpe']

ailed La-

hat name,

at a vaft

60 miles,

n, would

nk of the

r Cartie}\

the fame

of Cana-

mbtlefs a

icicnt tra-

nong the

t certain

' Chaleurs

'iier^ and

often re-

>, here is

Ince then

rencbmetty

29-

thefc

[ 75]

** thefe latter concluded that Canada was the
<* name of the country*."

On this talfe foundation fome geographers
give the name of Canada to the country, which
in De Months patent of 1603, is termed Gafpe
or Gafpefta^ as it has been generally called ever
fince. fViiliam de UJJle obferving the incon-
fiftency of placing a colony of Canadians at
fuch a diftanci^ tiom Canada ; and on the other
fide of the river, with other nations of Indians
and countries between, in his map of New
France^ or Canada^ publifhed m 1703, reilores
Gafpcp,a to it's ancient place, and tranfplants
Canada from the eaflern to the weflern corner
of Nova Scotia^ fouth of ^ebek : which, tho* '
more confidently fituated than Lefcarhot\ Ca-
nada^ is not, for any thing that appears, at all
more real.

Thus, we think it is fufficlently clear from
what has been faid, that the name of Canada
was never given to the country fouth of the
river St. Lawrence, or to any part of it ; neither
was the whole river it fclf, any more than the
country to the north, called Canada from the
firft, even by the French : for as Canada was ori-
ginally but a part of that country, fo the river
was called Hojhelaga from the country of Hofbe-
lagay before it took the name of Canada. In a
word, the country fouth of the river Si. Laiv-
rencey being inhabited by different people, the
feveral parts of it took names according to the
nations among whom it was divided : but it is
clear from the teftimony of Champiain^ that
from the firft the whole went under the denomi-
nation of Accdiffy whether given to it by the

* CbazUv. Hift. de la Newv. Ftun. Vol. i. p. g.

Jndiaiu

»M

[ 76 J '

Indians or French. This name was confirmed to
it, and its limits cllablifhed by Lewis Xlil. in
1632 or 33.

From this time we find the name of jicadia
conilantly given in treaties to the country
yielded to the French \ and as both the main and
peninfula were always given up, tho' no other
name was ufed ; hence 'tis plain all Nova Scotia
was comprized under that denomination, unlefs
the French can fhew that, under the name of
Jicadia^ nothing beiidcs the peninfula was given
up.

• In fhort, there needs no plainer confutation
of Charlevoix^ aflcrtion than this, that the coun-
try fouth of the river St. Laurence does not at
prefent go by the name of Canada among the
Frenchy nor is it fo denominated in their maps,
or indeed by any general name ; neither has
that author told us when the name of Canada
(if it ever had fuch) ceafed, or what name took
place of it. ..

With regard to my ftri-flures on Charlevoix^
I prefume no reader, who is a friend to truth
and juftice, will think me too fevere on a man
who proftitutes the two facred characters of di-
vine and hiftorian, to ferve the caufe of impof-
ture ; and is capable of forming the infamous
defign of violating treaties, and defrauding a
nation in amity with his own, of a confiderable
country, by the groflcft falfehoods, quibbles, and
prevarications which perhaps ever polluted hi-
llory. The French themfelves have reafon to
execrate both him and his legend, (which hence-
forth they ought to fufpcd in every thing)

fince

firmed to
Xlll. in

f Acadia
country
nain and
no other
va Scotia
1, unlefs
name of
as given

■ ^ ■: [77] •. • .

fince his defign was evidently to embroil them
with their neighbours, and draw them into an
unjufl war •, without the Icaft real ground or
colour on their fide. By inventing fuch palpable
falfehoods, he betrays their caufc inftead of de-
fending it : and eftablifhes the evidence of the
treaty of Utrecht in favour of the EngUJhy by
the means which he hath employed to defeat

ifutation
le coun-
s not at
long the
ir maps,
:her has
Canada
me took

I N I S.

arlevoix^
to truth
I a man
s of di-

impof-
ifamous
iding a
iderable
>les, and
Jted hi-
:afon to
1 hence-

thing)
fince

ERRATA.

p. 3. 1. 5. for Cartior r. Cartier.

p. 4. 1. II. for 162; r. 1621.

p. 8. 1. 2. dele called.

p. 13. 1. ult. for Nova r. Novas.

p. 46. 1. 20. after has r. in his Remarks,

p. 48. remove the from the end of 1. 31. to the end ofl. 32.

p. 50. 1. uk. for Mem. r. Merc.

p. 57.!. ^. for Country r. Countries.

p. 58. 1. 20. after eithr put a full ilop^

I',' I

V '0

jfujl publiJJoed by T. JePFERYs, Geographer
t6 His Royal Highnefs the Prince of IVales^

•

I. A Chart or Map of America, in Six Sheets,
•^ including the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans,
with the ncareft Co'alls of Europe, Afia and
Africa, improved with Tables and Remarks, for
the Service of Britifli Navigators. Price 12 J. in
Sheets.

II. A Map of the Inhabited Part of, Vir-
ginia, containing alfo the whole Province of
Maryland, Part of Penfylvania, New Jerfey,
and North Carolina, furveyed in 1751, by Joshua
FHy and Peter Jeffirson. Price \9i6d,

III. Major Washington's Journal, with a
Map of the back Settlements of Virginia and
Courfe of the Ohio, £ffr. from late Surveys j the
only one extant. Price is,

IV. The Seat of War on the Coaft of Cho-
ROM AND EL, comprizing the chief European
Settlements, with an Explanation. Price 2 s.

And in a few Days willbepublijhed.

L A Map of North America, from the
French of Mr. D'Anville, containing the
Englilh, French and Spanifli Settlements, im-
proved in the back Settlements of Virginia and
Courfe of the Ohio, illuftratcd with geographical
and hiftorical Remarks. Price is, 6d,

II. An EnglifhChart of the Atlantic Ocean,
including the Britifh, French and Spanifli Settle-
ments in North America and the Weft Indies ;
with a Memoir fetting forth the Errors and Im-
perfeftions of the French Charts. Price 2 j.

III. Remarks on the prefent Proceedings of
the French in America, with Refpedl to the
Britilh Colonics in general, (ffc.

ographer
Urates.

X Sheets,
: Oceans,
Vfia and
arks, for
*. 1 2 J. in

of, VlR-

)vince of
Jerfcy,
yJosHUA
9^6 d,
, with a
ginia and
/eysi the

: of Cho-
European
rice 2 s,

ed.

from the
ining the
lents, im-
rginia and
ographical
I*

ic Ocean,
ulli Settle-
:(l Indies;
rs and Im-

Prke 2s.
:eedings of
ed to the