nations......... But Mr. McCarty, who was on the spot, thinks the environs of Chartres * a far better situation to place this post in.

*

*

*

Mr. Jonquière proposes another fort at the mouth of Rocky River,† (this is in the Government of Canada) which, he says, would secure the tranquillity of the fourth of Canada. This, says Mr. Vaudreuil, together with the post of the Illinois, would restrain and become a barrier against the English, and cover all our Indian allies to the west from our enemies, the English, the Cherokees, Catawabas and others.

By these posts above and the posts of the Miamis, this whole country is secured and fortified. *

*

*

Thus the French do not only settle the country but also take possession of it; and by the form, site and police of such possessions (led on and established by the guidance of, and in alliance with the waters), a natural foundation of a one command, have they acquired and become possessed of the command of this country.

By these means, I repeat it, have they created an alliance, an interest with all the Indians on the continent; by these means have they acquired an influence, a command throughout the country.

They know too well the spirit of Indian politics to affect a superiority, a government over the Indians, yet they have in reality and truth of more solid effect an influence, an ascendancy in all the councils of all the Indians on the continent, and lead and direct their measures, not even our own allies, the Five Nations, excepted; unless in that remains of our interest, which partly the good effects of our trading house at Oswego, and partly General Johnson, has preserved to the English, by the great esteem and high opinion the Indians have of his spirit, truth, and honour.

* Chartres afterwards actually became the chief fort in that country.

+ This was an affluent of the Mississippi, into which it fell on the north side, a short distance abov the Illinois.

Skaniadereroepnes.

The province of Louisiana, or the southern part of New France, extends, according to the French geographers, from the Gulph of Mexico, in about 29 degrees, to near 45 degrees of north latitude, on the western side, and to near 39 degrees on the eastern ; and from 86 to near 100 degrees W. longitude, from London. It is bounded on the north by Canada; on the east by the British Colonies of New York, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, North and South Carolina, Georgia, and by the peninsula of Florida; on the south by the Gulph of Mexico, and, lastly, on the west by New Mexico. It contains, properly, the French settlements on both sides of the Mississippi, and is, by some, said to be the noblest and richest province of all North America.t

JEFFERYS' ACCOUNT OF THE FRENCH POSTS OF THE WEST, 1761.‡

A number of rivers, some of which are very considerable, discharge themselves into this Lake [Superior]. One of these, which falls into it, near the middle of its northern shore, rises about 25 or 30 leagues north of Lake Superior, from a lake called Alimipegon [Nepigon] near which are the sources of a river that falls into Hudson's Bay. Another river that falls into Lake Superior, near the last mentioned, is called, in the French maps, Natouagan [Pigeon River] and communicates, if we may believe the inhabitants, by a chain of rivers and smaller lakes, with a considerable lake called Lake Bourbon, which is made to communicate, in like manner, by Port Nelson River, called by the French Bourbon River, with Hudson's Bay, to the north-east. The French likewise suppose that it communicates westward with the great sea, commonly called the South Sea or Pacific Ocean.

At the mouth of Les Trois Rivières, or the Three Rivers, is a little French fort, called Camanistigouia; and twenty-five leagues to the west of the said fort, the land begins to slope, and the river to run towards the west.

At ninety-five leagues from this greatest height lies the second establishment of the French that way, called Fort St. Pierre, in the Lake des Pluies. The third is Fort St. Charles, eighty leagues farther on the Lake des Bois. The fourth is Fort Maurepas, a hundred leagues distant from the last, near the head of the Lake of Ouinipigon. Fort la Reine, which is the fifth, lies a hundred leagues farther, on the river of the Assiniboels [Assiniboine]. Another fort had been built on the river Rouge [Red River of the North], but was deserted on account of its vicinity to the two last. The sixth, Fort Dauphin, stands on

A further

* History of the French Dominions in North and South America, London, 1761, (p. 143). For the English version of the boundaries of Canada, as given by Jefferys see p. 55 ante. quotation from his work may be here given: "The country subject to the Crown of France on the Continent of America, which is larger than the Roman Empire ever was, in its most flourishing times, is divided into two parts, the Northern, named Canada, and the Southern, Louisiana.....Under the name of Canada, the French would comprehend all that part of North America situated between 40 and 55 degrees of north latitude," &c. (p. 1.)

History of the French Dominions in North and South America. London : 1761 (p. 19). Jefferys was Geographer to His Majesty."

the west side of Lac des Prairies, or of the Meadows [Lake Manitoba]. And the seventh, which is called Fort Bourbon, stands on the shore of the great Lake Bourbon [the northern part of Winnipeg]. The chain ends with Fort Poskoyac, at the bottom of a river of that name, which falls into Lake Bourbon. The river Poskoyac is made by Delisle and Buache to rise within twenty-five leagues of their West Sea [Gulf of Georgia], which, they say, communicates with the Pacific Ocean. All these Forts are under the Governor of Canada. On the southern coast of Lake Superior, which extends almost due east and west are the Isles de St. Michel, and the Bay of Chagouamigon, at the bottom of which was formerly a small Indian town, where a missionary and some other French came to settle in 1661, by means of which this place, at first scarce worth notice, soon became very remarkable. The Outagami, Saki, Outawai, Huron and Illinois Indians resorted thither so early as 1668, for the sake of trade, and many of them settled there; and the traffic is still pretty considerable. This settlement was called La Mission du St. Esprit.†

LETTER OF THE RIGHT HONOURABLE EDMUND BURKE ON THE QUEBEC BILL, 1774.1

GENTLEMEN,-I was prevented by pressing business, and by not the best health, from sending you a letter by the July pacquet. When I had last the honour of writing to you on your affairs, I entertained no strong apprehensions that the clause in the Quebec Bill concerning the boundary of that new Province could materially affect the rights of your colony. It was couched in general and saving terms: it reserved all rights, and confirmed all adjudications it was in all appearance sufficiently equitable. But upon a close consideration and subsequent enquiry, I found that you might be very much affected by it. I take the liberty of stating to you the light in which it appeared to me, and the conduct which I held, in consequence of that view of your interests.

I must first observe to you, that the proceedings with regard to the Town of Boston and the Province of Massachusetts-Bay, had been from the beginning defended on their absolute necessity, not only for the purpose of bringing that refractory town and province into proper order, but for holding out an example of terror to the other colonies, in some of which (as it was said) a disposition to the same or similar excesses had been marked very strongly. This unhappy disposition in the colonies was, by the friends of the coercive measures, attributed to the pride and presumption arising from the rapid population of these colonies, and from their lax form, and more lax exercise, of government. I found it in general discourses and indeed in public debate the predominant and declared opinion, that the cause of this resistance to legal power ought to be weakened, since it was impossible to be removed that any growth of the colonies, which might make them grow out of the reach of the authority of this Kingdom, ought to be accounted rather a morbid fulness than a sound and proper habit. All increase of the colonies which tended to decrease their advantage to this country, they considered as useless and even mischievous.

From this predominant way of thinking, the enormous extent of the colonies was censured. It was not thought wise to make new grants of land but upon the weightiest consideration, if at all. Prerogative was to be strengthened as much as possible, and it was thought expedient to find in the tractable disposition of some provinces, a check upon the turbulent manners, and a balance to the less manageable plan of government in the others. These principles (whatever their merit may be) became very fashionable during the agitation of the Massachusetts Bill in the House of Commons. A peer, who I think does not

In this Jefferys is in error, for the French had also, before this date, at least three other forts higher up on the Saskatchewan, viz., Forts des Prairies, La Corne, near the forks, and La Jonquière, at the base of the Rocky Mountains.

+ At this place, which was also known as Chagouamigon, or La Pointe, the French, by order of the Governor of Canada, built a fort, before the end of the 17th century.

N. Y. Hist. Soc. Col., 2nd series, vol. ii, pt. i, p. 219. This letter was written by Mr. Burke as Agent of the Province of New York, which position he then held. It is addressed to the General Assembly of that Province.

always vote in the majority, made a sort of proposition for an address to the King that no more lands should be located in America.

This was the substance of the proposition, although it proceeded no further for reasons of decorum. The ministerial side in that House fell in very directly with these sentiments and, as I am told, plainly showed a resolution to act in conformity with them, so far as the power of the Crown in that particular extended. It is true that a few lords, and Lord Rockingham in particular, objected to the idea of restraining the colonies from spreading into the back country, even if such restraint were practicable; for by stopping the extending of agriculture they necessitated manufactures, contrary to the standing policy of colonization. The general sentiments were, however, as I have stated them.

I mention this disposition of the House of Peers particularly, (though it prevailed almost equally elsewhere), because the Quebec Bill originated in that House.

Very many thought on a careful perusal, that the lines of the plan of policy I have just mentioned were very distinguishable in that Bill as it came down to us. It was for that reason I became more uneasy than at first about the lax and undeterminate form in which the boundary clause of this new colony was worded in the original Bill. The idea of which (whether seriously adopted by ministry or not) was very prevalent, that the British colonies ought to be restrained, made it necessary that this restraint should not be arbitrary. It was the main ground of the amendments which I proposed and carried with regard to the boundary clause. However, as a mere unconnected arrangement, it is right to define with clearness, although such a plan of policy never had existed or should pass away, as I hope and think in some degree it has, with the first heats. The bill passed through the House of Lords with some opposition but no amendment, but when it came into the House of Commons, the Ministers confessed that it was hastily drawn, and they professed great candour in admitting alterations. The part by which your province would be directly affected was only the boundary clause.

As the boundary was, in the most material parts in the original Bill, only constructive and in general words of reference "to the boundary lines of the other provinces, as adjudged or allowed by the Crown," I thought it necessary to know, with regard to you, what lines had been actually drawn, and next, what principles were to guide in adjudging your real boundaries in future.

With regard to the first point, I found that a line of division between your colony and that of Quebec, had been allowed by the King in Council to be run from a point on Lake Champlain in forty-five degrees of north latitude. So far had been agreed between the Governors of the two provinces, and allowed. But no line had been actually run in consequence of this agreement except from the River Connecticut to the Lake. Even this line had not been formally allowed; and none at all had been run to the westward of Lake Champlain. So that your boundary on the north had never been perfectly delineated, though the principle upon which it should be drawn had been laid down. For a great part of the northern frontier, and for the whole of the western, until you meet the line of New Jersey, you had no defined boundary at all. Your claims were indeed extensive, and, I am persuaded, just, but they had never been regularly allowed.

My next object of enquiry, therefore, was upon what principles the Board of Trade would, in the future discussions which must inevitably and speedily arise, determine what belonged to you and what to Canada.

I was told that the settled uniform practice of the Board of Trade was this: that in questions of boundary, where the jurisdiction and soil in both the litigating provinces belonged to the Crown, there was no rule but the King's will, and that he might allot as he pleased, to the one or the other. They said also that under these circumstances, even where the King had actually adjudged a territory to one province, he might afterwards change the boundary; or, if he thought fit, erect the parts into separate and new governments at his discretion.

They alleged the example of Carolina: first one province; then divided into two separate governments, and which afterwards had a third, that of Georgia, taken from the southern division of it.

They urged, besides, the example of the neutral and conquered islands.

These, after the Peace of Paris, were placed under one government. Since then they were totally separated, and had distinct governments and assemblies.

Although I had the greatest reason to question the soundness of some of these principles, at least in the extent in which they were laid down, and whether the precedents alleged did fully justify them in that latitude, I certainly had no cause to doubt but that the matter would always be determined upon these maxims at the Board by which they were adopted. The more clearly their strict legality was proved, the more uneasy I became at their consequences. By this Bill a new province under an old name was in fact created. The limits settled by the proclamation of 1763 were cancelled. On your side a mere constructive boundary was established, and the construction when examined amounted to nothing more than the King's pleasure. No part of your province (not even the settled quarters of the country, quite to the River Hudson) was secured from the possible operation of such a principle. Besides, there was a possibility (at least) that in the settlement of the boundary Ministers would naturally lean to extend those limits the most where the Royal prerogative was most extensive, and consequently their power the highest. I do not mean to charge them with that intention. But no laws stood in the way of such an inclination if it ever did exist or should happen to exist hereafter. This was not (as it might be between two ancient British colonies) a mere question of geographical distinction, or of economical distribution, where the inhabitants on the one side of the line and the other lived under the same law and enjoyed the same privileges of Englishmen. But this was a boundary discriminating different principles of jurisdiction and legislation; where in one part the subject lived under law, and in the other under prerogative.

From these impressions I proposed my objections on the second reading, reserving a more regular opposition to the Committee. In the interval I conferred with Lord Dartmouth and Mr. Pownall, and afterwards with Lord North, upon the subject. But first I formed my plan for an amendment to the clause as it stood in the Bill, before it was committed. I could have wished for a more perfect and authorized information, but I was obliged to act at the instant. The Bill came in late in the session, and if I had let it pass for want of being instructed, the occasion could, in all human probability, never be recovered.

I saw you had claims founded on these grounds, the old Dutch settlement; the placing of the Five Nations within your government; the boundary line of Governors Moore and Carleton; and the maintenance of the Fort of Oswego during the late war, which carried you to Lake Ontario.

These claims had no fault but the want of definition. To define is to abridge. Something, then, must be given up. I was persuaded that when one negotiates with power, it is policy to give up handsomely what cannot be retained, and to gain that strength which will always more or less attend the reasonableness of a proposition, even when it is opposed by power. I thought that well secured and tolerably extensive boundaries were better than the amplest claims which are neither defined nor allowed. My idea was to get the limits of Quebec, which appeared to many, as well as myself, intended to straiten the British colonies removed from construction to certainty; and that certainty grounded on natural, indisputable and immovable barriers-rivers and lakes where I could have them; lines where lines could be drawn; and where reference and description became necessary, to have them towards an old British colony and not towards this new and, as was thought, favourite establishment.

I assured Ministry, that if they refused this reasonable offer, I must be heard by counsel. As they found some opposition growing within and without doors, and they were in haste to carry through their Bill, brought in so late in the session, after some discussion and debate they gave way to the amended clause as you see it.

The work was far more troublesome than those who were not present can well believe. It cost us near two whole days in the Committee. The grand difficulty arose from the very unsettled state of the boundary of Pennsylvania. We could not determine whether it advanced northward beyond Lake Erie, or ran within that Lake, or fell to the south of it; and this uncertainty made the whole matter beyond expression perplexing. Objections on the part of Quebec were raised to the last moment, and particularly to the post of Niagara, which Mr. Carlton, I am told, was very earnest to have within his government, but by the Act it is excluded and is on your side. I believe some imagined that these difficulties would make me give up the point; but it is carried, and if not a perfect arrange