CHAPTER VII.
THE FRENCH COLONY AT MOUNT DESERT.
So great, however, was the disappointment in England over the failure of the Popham Colony, that the adventurers in the enterprise made no attempt to renew the undertaking. As Gorges says, the colonists had branded the plantation "as being over cold, and in respect of that, not habitable by our nation." Besides, he says, "they understood it to be a task too great for particular persons to undertake". This also seems to have been the opinion of Gorges, who would have the King manifest an interest in American colonization as a matter of national importance. England, as a growing power, was not playing the influential part in matters across the sea, which in his view, the opportunity demanded. In fact, Gorges, who had had high hopes for the future of his nation in connection with the opening of the new world, was for a time utterly cast down because of this lack of interest in England in extending the national domain. It was a depressing thought that he could not find the men who were willing to second him in an attempt to revive the colony. But though cast down, he was not destroyed, "not doubting", he says, "but God would effect that which man despaired of"1. As for the coldness of the climate at Sagadahoc, he said, he had had too much experience in the world to be frightened by such a blast, "as knowing many great kingdoms and large territories more northerly seated and by many degrees colder"; and so, though others abandoned hope, he would not.2. If organized effort had failed, however, there was still an opportunity for individual enterprise; and Gorges makes mention of Sir Francis Popham,
Footnotes.
1 Sir Ferdinando Gorges and his Province of Maine, II, 17.
2. Ib., II, 18.
p.101
THE FRENCH COLONY AT MOUNT DESERT.
Sir John's only son and successor, who, "having the ships and provisions which remained of the northern company and supplying what was necessary for his purpose, sent divers times to the coast for trade and fishing", but his endeavors likewise proved fruitless; so that, as Gorges says, Sir Francis "was necessitated at last to sit down with the loss he had already undergone".
It was Gorges greatest anxiety with reference to English interests in America, however, that while England was neglecting the opportunity for planting colonies on the northern American coast, France, disappointed at the failure of de Monts' colony at St. Croix Island, would now make a new and stronger effort to secure a foothold.
What Gorges forsaw, and naturally greatly deprecated, soon happened; "the Frenchmen", he says, "immediately took the opportunity to settle themselves within our limits"1.
The reference is to such facts as are recorded in the book Relation2 of Father Pierre Biard of the Society of Jesus. Sieur de Monts' entire company, abandoning Port Royal, and returning to France in October, 1607, preceded the return of the Popham Colony to England. Even before de Monts left Port Royal, Jean de Biencourt (de Poutrincourt) requested a gift of that place, which de Monts granted, stipulating only "that within the two succeeding years, Sieur de Poutrincourt should go there with several other families to cultivate and inhabit it, which he promised to do".2
The deed of gift was made, and Poutrincourt laid it before Henry IV, requesting him to ratify it. The king acceded, and in the interest of mission work among the Indians, in connection with colonial undertakings, he appealed to the head of the Jesuit order for the appointment of missionary priests to accompany the expedition. Toward the end of 1608, such an appointment was received by Father Biard, then a teacher of theology in Lyons;
Footnotes.
1. Sir Ferdinando Gorges and his Province of Maine, I. 207.
2. The Relation, in both French text and English translation, comprises volumes III and IV of the Jesuit Relations and Allied Documents, edited by Reuben Gold Thwaites, and published by the Burrows Brothers, Cleveland, Ohio, 1897. 3. The Jesuit Relations, III, 161.
p.102
THE BEGINNINGS OF COLONIAL MAINE.
but on repairing to Bordeaux as directed, he found he had been as much "deceived in regard to the place, as the time".1
About a year later Poutrincourt appeared in Paris, and the King, learning to his surprise that he had not left France, addressed him with such severity of words and manner that Pontrincourt hastened to make preparations for the voyage. Father Biard again offered the services of himself and others of his Order in connection with the expedition; but evidently adverse to the presence of missionaries in the colony, Poutrincourt advised him to await developments on the American coast, saying "that as soon as he arrived at Port Royal, he would send his son back to France, and that with him all things being better arranged, such persons should come as it might please the King to send".2
Poutrincourt finally sailed toward the end of February, 1610, and arrived at Port Royal about the beginning of June. When, however, the son returned to France, and failed to fulfill the promise of his father concerning the Jesuit missionaries, Madam de Guercheville3 who had become much interested in the religious work among the Indians took the matter in hand with the result that Father Pierre Biard and Father Enemond Masse were able to make arrangements for their departure. There were still added delays, it is true; but at length they were received on board a small vessel that sailed from Dieppe, January 26, 1611, and arrived at Port Royal on June 22, following.
The little colony was found to be in straits even with the supplies that the newly arrived vessel brought; and Poutrincourt, about the middle of July, sailed for France, leaving his son, Bien-
Footnotes.
1. The Jesuit Relations, III, 163.
2. Ib., III, 165.
3. She was a lady of honor to Marie de Medici, the Queen of France, and is characterized by John Fiske in his New France and New England (74,75) as one whom King Henry IV "wooed in vain". She had purchased all the rights and claims of de Monts to lands in Acadia, and she had also obtained from the boy King, Louis XIII, a grant of all the territory between the river St. Lawrence and Florida. Father Biard refers to her as "ardently zealous for the glory of God and the conversion of souls". III, 167.
p.103
THE FRENCH COLONY AT MOUNT DESSERT.
court, in command of the colony. With a view to added exploration evidently, Biencourt proceeded down the coast. Father Biard accompanied him, and the party reached the Kennebec toward the close of October. In his "Relation", Father Biard makes brief mention of such information as was received at this time and place concerning the Popham colonists,1 who, they were told, had been driven away by the Indians. "They made excuses to us for this act", says Father Biard, "and recounted the outrages that they had experienced from these English; and they flattered us, saying that they loved us very much", etc. In relating this story as to the cause of the abandonment of Fort St. George, the Indians evidently flattered themselves as well as their French visitors.
The story is without support of any kind. Friendly relations the Popham colonists desire and sought in their brief stay. The Indians, doubtless, were glad to witness their departure, and probably believed their own story that the compelling force in the departure of the Popham colonists was to be found in them; but, as is well known, the flag of St. George at the mouth of the Sagadahoc was lowered by remote circumstances, with which the Indians on the Kennebec had no connection whatever.
BIENCOURT SETS OUT ON RETURN TO PORT ROYAL.
Biencourt remained at the Kennebec with his party until November 4th or 5th, and then set out on the return to Port Royal.
At Pentegoet,2 he found an assemblage of eighty canoes and about three hundred Indians. Then, passing up the coast, he visited the site of de Monts' settlement at St. Croix Island. Finally, on an unknown date, the exploring party reached Port Royal, where snow began to fall on November 26th.
Father Biard's narrative shows that the relation of the Jesuits to the other members of the colony at Port Royal, during the winter that followed, was by no means an harmonious one. Evidently complaints of hindrances of various kinds, if not of ill treatment and open opposition, were made by the Jesuits to their friends in
Footnotes.
1. Father Biard assigns to the Popham Colony the years 1608 and 1609. They should be 1607 and 1608. III, 223.
2. The present Castine.
p.104
THE BEGINNINGS OF COLONIAL MAINE.
France.1 Meanwhile the missionaries devoted themselves to the study of the language of the Indians, and to such other matters as opportunity offered, displaying considerable adaptability to their surroundings. At length relief from unhappy conditions was at hand.
In response to the appeal of the missionaries, Madame de Gercheville and her friends in France fitted out a vessel "to take the Jesuits away from Port Royal, and to found a new French settlement in a more suitable place".2
Such is Father Biard's statement concerning this added effort to advance French interests on the American coast. Zeal for religion was a motive of importance in connection with the movement; but it had also another motive, namely, the establishment of "a new French settlement in a more suitable place than Port Royal". That more suitable place was only to be found within the English claim farther down the coast, a movement which Father Biard, who had been as far as the Kennebec, had doubtless urged.
The French Captain Saussaye.
Father Enemond Masse.
At the head of this new expedition in the interest of religion and French colonization, was Captain Saussaye. He was to take with him two Jesuits, Father Quantin and a lay brother, Gilber du Thet, and on his arrival at Port Royal, he was to receive on board his vessel Father Biard and Father Enemond Masse. His entire company, including sailors, numbered forty-eight persons. Charles Flory, "a discreet, hardy and peaceable man", was the vessel's Master, which was not only amply provided with provisions for a year, also with horses and goats for domestic purposes, but the Queen contributed "four of the King's tents, or pavilions, and some munitions of war".
Footnotes.
1. "A lay brother named Gilbert du Thet, had brought out supplies, and on his return to France, he acquainted the Marchioness de Guercheville, the patroness of the mission, with the wretched state of the two fathers, and the wrong done to them, and sought to make some arrangement which would leave the missionaries at liberty to prosecute their labors. Failing in this, she resolved to found in some other spot a mission colony." History of the Catholic Missions amont the Indian Tribes of the United States, 1529 - 1854, by John Gilmary Shea, 131.
2. Relations, III, 261.
p.105
THE FRENCH COLONY AT MOUNT DESERT.
The expedition sailed from Honfleur, France, March 12, 1613, and in two months, la Saussaye reached Cape la Have on the coast of Acadia, where he landed and erected a cross, upon which he placed the coat-of-arms of Madame de Guercheville, "as a sign of his having taken possession there in her name".1 Thence the vessel proceeded to Port Royal, but the date of the arrival is unknown. The Royal command, in letters to the Queen, "to release the Jesuits", was at once presented, the arrangements for the departure were soon made, and, in a few days, la Saussaye, having taken the missionaries on board, left Port Royal and started down the coast "to go to the river Pentegoet, to the place called Kadesquit,2 the site destined for the new colony", and a most advantageous place, it was believed, for such an enterprise. "But God ordained otherwise", wrote Father Biard. A dense fog enveloped the vessel on the way, and the wind not permitting the Captain to stand out to sea, all on board were in imminent peril from breakers and rocks throughout two days and nights.
Mount Desert, which the savages called Pemetiq.
Prayers were offered for divine help. "When evening came on", says Father Biard," we began to see the stars, and by morning the fogs had all disappeared". At once the position of the vessel was made out by those on board who were familiar with the coast. "We recognized that we were opposite Mount Desert (au devant des Monts deserts)3 an island, which the savages called Pemetiq. The pilot turned to the eastern shore of the island, and there located us in a large and beautiful port, where we made our thanksgiving to God, raising a cross and singing to God his praises with the sacrifice of the holy mass. We called this place and port, Saint Sauveur."4
Footnotes.
1. Relations, III, 263.
2. The Kenduskeag River enters the Penobscot River at Bangor; and Kenduskeag is evidently a corruption for Kadesquit, the junction of the two rivers being the site of the Indian village, the proposed site of the colonly.
3. Ib., III, 265.
4. John Gilmary Shea, History of the Catholic Missions among the Indian Tribes, writes carelessly concerning locations mentioned in Father Biard's Relation. For example, he tells us that la Saussay "sailed for Mt. Desert, (continued, footnotes, p.106)
p.106
THE BEGINNINGS OF COLONIAL MAINE.
BAR HARBOR.
This port, on the eastern shore of Mount Desert, is easily identified with that of the present Bar Harbor. But Saint Sauveur was not Kadesquit, and a dispute soon arose between the sailors and the leaders of the colony, because of a difference in interpreting the contract drawn up in France concerning the voyage. The sailors held that the period of three months, for which they were holden after the arrival of the vessel at a port of Acadia, should commence with the arrival at Mount Desert. When it was explained to them that Kadesquit was the designated place, not Saint Sauveur, and that the three months would not be counted until they were there, the pilot, who was in agreement with the sailors, maintained "that a ship had never gone so far as Kadesquit, and that he had no intention of becoming the discoverer of new routes". "Nothing but argument", wrote Father Biard, "a bad augury for the future."1. So it seemed.
But more favorable omens were discovered. During this wrangling, a party of Indians signaled to the vessel, and in the conference that followed, the Indians learned that the Port Royal fathers were on the ship. They asked to see Father Biard, whom the had met at Pentegoet.
Father Biard came on shore, and when in the conversation that followed he asked the Indians the way to Kadesquit, they replied, "If you wish to stay in these regions, why not remain with us?" affirming that they had as good and beautiful location for the colony as Kadesquit. Father Biard records that he was not moved by these appeals, for "he knew that the savages did not lack that with which almost everyone is abundantly provided, namely, the ability to praise his own wares";2 but when the Indians informed him that their chief,
Footnotes, continued. at the mouth of the Kennebec", and he locates the colony on "the east side of the island". He is also exceedingly free in his use of Father Biard's Relation, when he writes, "Their pilot, by some mistake, carried them to the east side of the island" (Mount Desert). The book Relation has no hint even of a mistake on the part of the pilot, but clearly states the circumstances connected with the approach to Mount Desert. 1. Jesuit Relations, III, 267.
2. Ib., III, 269.
p.107
THE BEGINNINGS OF COLONIAL MAINE.
THE FRENCH COLONY AT MOUNT DESERT.
Asticou, was sick unto death and wished to be baptized, saying that if the chief did not receive baptism before death he would not go to heaven, Father Biard yielded to an argument "so naively deduced", and with two of his associates started in a canoe for Asticou's camp.
On their arrival they found the Chief sick, but with a cold only; and having assured themselves of Asticou's favorable condition, and finding they had plenty of leisure for a visit to the promised better location for a settlement, Father Biard and his associates made their way thither. The Indians had not overpraised the location. Nothing more desirable could be expected; and on their return to the ship, Father Biard confirmed the statement of the Indians. The other members of the Colony were asked to examine the location; they did so, and on their return it was an unamimous agreement that the colonists ought not to look for anything better, and all thought of proceeding to Kadesquit was at once abandoned. The following is Father Biard's description of the accepted location of the Jesuit colony:
"This place is a beautiful hill, rising gently from the sea, its sides bathed by two springs; the land is cleared for twenty or twenty-five acres, and in some places is covered with grass almost as high as a man. Its aspect is to the south and east, like that at the mouth of the Pentegoet,1 and looking to where several attractive brooks, abounding in fish, discharge themselves. The soil is dark, rich and fertile. The port and harbor are as fine as can be seen, and are in a position favorable to command the entire coast. The harbor especially is as safe as a pond. For besides being sheltered2 by the great island of Mount Desert, it is still more pro-
Footnotes.
1. The reference apparently is to the situation of Castine.
2. Father Biard says: "Car outre qu'il est repart de la grande Isle des Mots deserts il l'est encores de certaines petites Islettes, qui roment les flots & les vents & fortifient son entrle." The translation, as given in connection with the text, is as follows: "For besides being strengthened by the great Island of Mount Desert, it is still more protected by certain small island which break the currents and the winds, and fortify the entrance" (Jesuit Relations. III, 270, 271.). The word Strengthened evidently misses the meaning of report. It is the sheltered, protected situation of the location that the
(continued, footnotes, p. 108)
p.108
BAR HARBOR
tected by certain small islands which break the currents and the winds and fortify the entrance. There is not a fleet which it is not capable of sheltering, nor a ship so deep that could not approach within a cable's length of the shore to unload. It is situated in latitude forty-four and one-third degrees, a position less northerly than that of Bordeaux."
This careful description clearly indicates the location. It was on the western side of Somes Sound, about a mile from the open sea, and near where the eastern and western mountains on the ocean front of the island are divided by the waters of the sound. The place is now known as Fernald's Point, and its beautiful slope is as attractive in these days as it was when Father Biard and his associates looked upon its green, grass-grown acres.
THE HARBOR.
The harbor, too, has all the advantages indicated in the description; and the claim in our time has been made, perhaps somewhat boastfully, that it is "the third for majestic amplitude in all the world".1 Moreover, the two springs are as noteworthy today as then.
But Father Biard, in his description of the location, had in view something more than a favorable spot for a mission. The real significance of Saint Sauveur he grasped and proclaimed when he made mention of its position as "favorable to command the entire coast". It could be made of national use in extending the boundaries of New France. Moreover, Father Biard's statement converning the latitude of the place establishes the fact that he knew writer plainly has in view. Parkman, (Pioneers of New France, 304) has 'separt for repart' in this passage, and adds that Father Biard "was evidently mistaken in this (that he could go from the eastern part of the island to St. Sauveur and return in an afternoon). St. Sauveur being on the east side of Mount Desert, there is no place separated from it, and answering to his description, which he could have reached within the time mentioned". Parkman was misled by his wrong text. He fails also in the passage to notice that two locations are mentioned in Father Biard's Relation, the St. Sauveur of the landing on the east side of the island and the St. Sauveur of the settlement on Somes Sound.
Footnotes. 1. Biard's Relation of 1616 and St. Sauveur, by Rev. R. C. Cummings, Maine Historical Society's Collections, Series II, 5, 99.
p.109
THE BEGINNINGS OF COLONIAL MAINE.
the locatiion was within the limits of the English claim, which was to the latitude forty-five north.
La Saussaye, having brought his vessel to the accepted location, landed the colonists and the work of establishing them there was commenced. But this was all, for also commenced "the quarrels, a second sign and augury of our ill-luck", says Father Biard. The occasion of this new outbreak of dissension was attributed to la Saussaye, who is said to have "amused himself too much in cultivating the land, while all the chiefs of the enterprise were urging him not to employ the laborers for that purpose, but to get to work without delay upon the houses and fortifications, which he did not wish to do."1 The French commander seems not to have had even a dream of insecurity for himself and his colony, and was in no wise moved by the appeals of Father Biard and his associates. How long la Saussaye was left to his enjoyment in the cultivation of the rich, fertile soil of this delightful location is unknown.2 It may have been several weeks and perhaps months. But the day for which la Suassaye had not looked, and for which he was wholly unprepared, at length came.
CAPTAIN SAMUEL ARGALL.
Captain Samuel Argall3 connected with the Virginia Colony at
Footnotes.
1. Jesuit Relations, III, 273.
2. The dates are wholly lacking in Father Biard's Relation. 3. Captain Samuel Argall, though a young man, was an experienced navigator in 1609, when he was selected to find a direct passage to Virginia. He accomplished the task assigned to him, and in the following year also he made a voyage to the New England coast (Brown, Genesis of the United States, I, 428-439), where he engaged in fishing, thus making the beginning of the fishing voyages from Virginia to this vicinity. He returned to England in 1611, and was again in Virginia in 1612, with a commission to remain in Virginia and to drive out foreign intruders from the country granted to Englishmen by the three patents of King James I. (Genesis of the United States, II, 815.) He returned to England in 1614 and to Virginia in 1615. In 1617, he was made deputy governor and admiral of Virginia. In the distribution of "the land of New England by lots in 1622", Cape Cod fell to him.
The date of his death is unknown, but it was probably in 1633. His mother was married (a 2nd marriage) to Lawrence Washington, an ancestor of George Washington. Jesuit Relations and Allied Documents, II, 309.
p.110
THE BEGINNINGS OF COLONIAL MAINE.
EXPEL THE FRENCH FROM KING JAMES' PATENT OF 1606.
Jamestown, and described as "an ingenious, active, forward young gentleman",1 arrived one day on the coast. He had come hither for the purpose of supplying the Virginia colonists with fish; but having in view the possibility of French encroachments within the limits of England's claims, Sir Thomas Dale, Governor of Virginia, had given Argall orders,2 when starting north, to expel the French from any settlements they might have made within the limits of King James' patent of 1606. Because of the return of the Popham colonists in 1608, Governor Dale evidently deemed it incumbent on him, as England's representative on the American coast, to protect the nation's interests in northern Virginia, as well as in the territory under his immediate command; and he saw to it that Argall's vessel, before proceeding northward, was properly armed and equipped. Accordingly, when Argall, having reached the vicinity of Mount Desert, learned from some Indians that there weere white colonists in the neighborhood - Frenchmen, as he surmised from their use of the word "Normandia" which the Indians had caught up, as well as from certain reported acts of courtesy which Argall and his company "recognized as French ceremonies of civility and politeness", - he at prepared for action; and guided by one of the Indians, who supposed he was doing the French colonists a favor in bringing
Footnotes.
1. Howe's Chronicles in Brown's Genesis of the United States, II, 751.
2. The Virginia council, in response to a request from the privy council in England for a statement of the affair, wrote: "It is true Captain Argall did take a French ship within the limits of our colony, who were about to plant contrary to the extent and privilege of his Majesty's letters patent to us granted. That he did it by the command of the Governor of our colony by his commission to him given under the seal of the colony, and by virtue of such authority as is to him derived from his Majesty's great seal of England". Brown, Genesis of the United States, II, 731. As to Governor Dale's authority for his orders to Argall, it should be said that the Virginia charter of 1606 conferred upon the two colonies power to "encounter, expulse, repel, and resist, as well by sea as by land, by all ways and means whatsoever, all and every such person and persons, as without the especial license of the said several colonies and plantations, shall attempt to inhabit within the said several precincts and limits of the said several colonies and plantations, or any of them". Genesis of the United States, I, 59.
p.111
THE FRENCH COLONY AT MOUNT DESERT.
the ship in, Argall, with all sails set to a propitious breeze, entered Somes Sound with "the banners of England flying and three trumpets and two drums making a horrible din", and opened fire upon everything French in sight.
La Saussaye was on shore, and disappeared when the attack upon the settlement was made, showing no signs of fitness for leadership. The captain of the French ship was as unprepared for the attack as were the colonists on the land, his sails even having been arranged as awnings for the deck; and when, as a response to Argall's terrific volley, he cried to his men, "Fire!" the cannoneer was not at his post. Gilbert du Thet, a lay brother, obeyed the command, however, but "unfortunately", says Father Biard, "he did not take aim"; and his associate, who was on shore at the time, naively adds, "if he had, perhaps there might have been something worse than mere noise."1
Moving rapidly, having fired a single volley only, Argall sought to place his vessel alongside of the French ship; but Captain Flory, making no sign of surrender, the English commander renewed the attack at close quarters. His wound was a mortal one and he died the next day. Two young men, who had leaped from a boat in order to swim to the shore, were drowned, possibly having first been wounded. The French now surrendered.2
Argall at once landed and sought for la Saussaye, but he was not to found. The French now surrendered.3 Argall at once landed and sought for la Saussaye, but he was not to be found. Then, the locks of the French commander having been skilfully picked, a search, a search was made for his commission and other papers. Having found the commission, Argall carefully returned the papers, leaving the trunks as if they had not been opened. On the following day, la Saussaye came out of his hiding-place and gave himself up. First of all, Argall asked to see his commission. Not suspecting from the appearance of his trunks that they had been opened, la Saussaye turned to them
Footnotes.
1. Jesuit Relations, III, 281.
2. Ib., III, 283.
p.112
THE BEGINNING OF COLONIAL MAINE.
confidently; but the papers he sought could not be found. Argall at once assumed an appearance of indignation and exclaimed, "You give us to understand that you have a commission from your King, and you cannot produce any evidence of it", adding that he regarded him and his company as "outlaws".1
It was harsh treatment, but not as severe as Father Biard and his associates anticipated. "We expected only death or at least slavery", he wrote, having in mind the hard experiences of others in the international conflicts of that time. Argall took down the cross that had been erected at Saint Sauveur, and removed the French armament and stores to his own ship; but he seems to have acted discreetly, for Father Biard, while designating him as "a very shrewd and cunning captain", added that nevertheless he was "a gentlement of truly noble courage; nor were his men inhuman or cruel to any of us."2 In fact, Father Biard has only words of commendation for the personal bearing of the English commander so far as the French colonists were concerned.
In various ways, and after many mishaps, two-thirds of the French company captured at Saint Sauveur were enabled to make their way back to France in French vessels farther up the coast.3 Those remaining with Argall, including Father Biard, were distributed among the vessels of Argall's fleet, namely, Argall's own ship, la Saussaye's captured vessel and a bark of twelve tons, also taken from the French. Argall's own ship, la Saussaye's captured vessel and a bark of twelve tons, also taken from the French. Argall, with his party of the French colonists, returned to Virginia, where he received a hearty greeting from the Governor, who, pleased with the results of Argall's work at Saint Sauveur, directed him to return and complete the work of removing every landmark of France "along the entire coast as far as Cape Breton". Argall was prompt in his response; and sailing northward with his own and the captured vessels, having with him also Father Biard and other French captives, he soon reached Saine Sauveur, where he destroyed the French fortifications
Footnotes.
1. Jesuit Relations, IV, 11.
2. Ib., IV, 17.
3. Ib, IV 27.
p.113
THE BEGINNINGS OF COLONIAL MAINE.
THE FRENCH COLONY AT MOUNT DESERT, MAINE.
locations and raised another cross, carving upon it the name of King James I, as a sign of English cominion on American soil. Then he made his way to St. Croix Island in the St. Croix river, where he destroyed all traces of "the name and claims of France" left by de Monts' company when they withdrew to Port Royal in 1605.
Argall had difficulty in finding St Croix Island, but he was in far greater straits in his search for Port Royal. At length, "by dint of much running about, lying in ambush, inquiring and skillful maneuvering", he captured an Indian Chief, "a very experienced man and well-acquainted with the country", who guided the English commander safely to his desired port. No one was found at Port Royal when Argall landed, and taking possession of the French stores and other property at the fort without opposition of any kind, he set the buildings on fire and destroyed all "monuments and evidences" of French cominion at that place.1
Having thus accomplished the task assigned to him by the governor of Virginia, Argall, with his three vessels set sail for the return voyage, on November 9, 1613. His own vessel reached the James River in about three weeks, but la Saussaye's vessel, under the direction of Captain Turnel, Argall's second in command, was driven by a storm far out of her course; and Turnel, losing all hope of being able to reach Virginia, decided to make the Azore Islands and await more favorable conditions. At Fayal, however, where Turnel remained three weeks, all further effort to return to the American Coast was abandoned. The in Wales on an unknown date, but probably in February of 1614.
After a short delay, Father Biard and the other Frenchmen on board were released and returned to France. The French ambassador at London, England, commenced negotiations for the surrender of la Suassaye's vessel and reparation for the losses sustained by the French at Saint Saint Sauveeur. The vessel was given up, but the claim for reparation was denied, the Privy Council stating in a communication
Footnote.1 Jesuit Relations, IV, 35-39.
p.114
THE BEGINNINGS OF COLONIAL MAINE 1602 - 1658.
addressed to the ambassador, "As to Madame the Marchioness of Guercheville, she has no reason to complain, nor to hope for any reparation, seeing that her ship entered by force, the territory of said colony to settle there, and to trade without their permission, to the prejudice of our treaties and of the good understanding there is between our Kings".1
The governor of Virginia based his action in this affair on the following facts. In the Charter of 1606, granted by King James to the southern and northern colonies of Virginia, that part of North America between the thirty-fourth and forty-fifty degress of north latitude was plainly recognized as belonging to Great Britain. The Grant was in response to a petition for Royal permission "to make habitation, plantation and deduce a colony of sundry of our people into that part of America, commonly called Virginia, and other parts and territories in America, either appertaining unto us, or which are not now actually possessed by any Christian Prince or people, situate, lying and being all along the sea coasts, between four and thirty degrees of northerly latitude from the equinoctial line, and five and forty degrees of the same latitude". The King agreed to these "humble and well-intended desires", and granted to the two colonies the territory indicated in the petition.2
It has been claimed by some writers3 that the clause "not now actually possessed by any Christian Prince or people" was violated in Argall's destruction of the Saine Sauveur colony; that the
Footnotes.
1. Brown, Genesis of the United States, II, 734.
2. Ib. I, 52, 53. 3. For example: "It (the South Virginia Colony) was able in 1613 to fit out an armed vessel, commanded by Captain Argall, which broke up the French settlements at Port Royal, Mount Desert, etc., and compelled their inhabitants to retire towards Canada; protesting all the while that whatever abstract rights Great Britian might possess, if any there were, the Virginia Charter expressly excepted in its grants regions already occupied by any Christian Prince or people, they (the French) being a Christian people." History of Grants under the Great Council for New England, by Samuel F. Haven, in Early History of Massachusetts. Lectures before the Lowell Institute in Boston by members of the Massachusetts Historical Society, 142.
p.115
THE FRENCH COLONY AT MOUNT DESERT.
the French on the shores of Somes Sound, being a Christian people, were, by the Charter of 1606, expressly declared to be in rightful possession, although they had located within the territorial limits mentioned in the Charter. It should be noticed, however, that the words of the petition, "not now actually possessed by any Christian Prince or people", are not repeated in the King's Grant; moreover, even if they had been represented, no appeal in behalf of the Saine Sauveur colony could be made to this clause inasmuch as it had reference to the time when the Charter was granted - "not now actually possessed" and not to a subsequent occupation, as was the case at Saint Sauveur.
England's claim to territory in North America, however, was not based primarily on King James' Charter of 1606, but on Cabot's discovery in 1497. This fact was recognized in the Charter which Queen Elizabeth bestowed on Sir Humphrey Gilbert in 1578, in accordance with which, in 1583, he took possession of Newfoundland in the name of the Queen. Continuous possession in that locality did not follow, it is true. At that early period matters pertaining to territorial rights on this side of the sea were in an unsettled state. But the English claim within certain definite limits, was renewed in the Charter of 1606, which virtually was a public announcement that the portion of North America between thirty-four and forty-five degrees north latitude, under the name Virginia, was territory belonging to the English Crown.
Sir Thomas Dale, therefore, was entirely within what he regarded the rights of the mother country when he gave Argall a well-armed vessel and directed him, properly commissioned, to destroy any French settlements on the Atlantic coast as far as the forty-fifth degree north latitude. Saint Sauveur, St. Croix island and Port Royal were within the limits laid down by the Crown, and though no word of command had come to the Governor from the King, he evidently deemed that he needed no such word of command. To call him a "self-constituted champion of British rights"1 does him injustice. He was the acknowledged repre-
Footnote. 1. Parkman, Pioneers of France in the New World, 313.
p.116
THE BEGINNINGS OF COLONIAL MAINE.
tative of English sovereignty on American soil; and recognizing this fact, having in view the just requirements of his office, he doubtless considered that he would fail in his allegiance to the crown if he allowed any encroachment upon territory within the limits established by the Charter of 1606.1
"NEW ENGLAND WAS RESERVED FOR THE ENGLISH."
So far as English interests in the new world were concerned, the importance of Argall's mission to our coast in 1613 can hardly be overestimated. As has well been said, "New England was reserved for the English, by Argall's decisive action".2 England's privy council not only refused to disavow that actiion by the punishment of Argall, but continued him in higher and higher commands. Here, at Somes Sound, was the beginning of that long struggle between England and France for dominion on American soil. Grand tactics later were displayed on both sides. The prize to be won was an alluring one. Nothing is clearer than that from this early period the determination was strong, and ever stronger in English minds and hearts, to maintain at any cost, the English claim to American territory. Naturally there was conflict, and that conflict was long continued. In the course of time the right of discovery was exchanged for the right of conquest, until in 1763, by treaty, New France disappeared from the map of North America, and the whole of England's claim to territory on this side of the sea was finally established.3
Footnotes.
1. "In this manner England vindicated her claim to Maine and to Acadia". Bancroft, History of the United States, I, 113.
2. Brown, Genesis of the United States, II, 816. 3. Concerning the legal points involved in such cases, see A Digest of International Law by John Bassett Moore, I, 258, and the following. Chief Justice Marshall, in 1828, Johnson vs McIntosh, said: "On the discovery of this immense continent the nations of Europe were eager to appropriate to themselves so much of it as they could respectively acquire....The potentates of the Old World, found no difficulty in convincing themselves that they made ample compensation to the inhabitants of the New, by bestowing on them civilization and Christianity, in exchange for unlimited independence. But, as they were nearly all in pursuit of the same object, it was necessary, in order to avoid conflicting settlements and consequent war with each other, to establish a principle which all should acknowledge as the law by which the rights of acquisition, which they all asserted, should
p.117
THE FRENCH COLONY AT MOUNT DESERT.
be regulated as between themselves. This principle was that discovery gave title to the government by whose subjects, or by whose authority it was made, against all other European governments, which title might be consummated by possession. The exclusion of all other Europeans necessarily gave to the nation making the discovery the sole right of acquiring the soil from the natives, and establishing settlements upon it". Moore, Digest, etc., I, 258, 259.
|
