1671-1672 THE FEUDAL SYSTEM ESTABLISHED THE SEIGNEURS OF THE MONTREAL DISTRICT SUBURBAN GROWTH—THE EARLIEST OUTLYING FIEFS—PRAEDIA MILITARIA—MILITARY SEIGNEURIES OF THE MONTREAL DISTRICT—THE FEUDAL SYSTEM—THE "NOBLESSE"—THE "PARISHES"—"CENS ET RENTES"—"LODS ET VENTES"—TRIBUTE TO THE FEUDALISM OF THE CLERICAL "SEIGNEURS OF MONTREAL"—MUNICIPAL OFFICERS—ORDER IN PROCESSIONS—THE CHURCH WARDENS—THE SOLDIER COLONISTS—CATTLE BREEDING, HORSES, ASSES—AGRICULTURE—NEW CONCESSIONS—LAWS REGULATING OPENING UP THE LAND—FIRST PUBLIC ROADS AND BRIDGES AT MONTREAL—NOTE: FORTS AND REDOUBTS. So far we have kept our attention on the little straggling Village of Montreal, the home of de Maisonneuve and the seigneurs of the island. We have left it occasionally for Quebec, to consider it, as affected in its governmental relations with the headquarters of the governor general, but as we have in view also the greater Montreal of today, we must ask the reader's patience to allow us to record some vital elements in the suburban growth of the latter, the seeds of which are now being sown, and to watch the origins of the Canadian "noblesse" now being manufactured by letters patent in the neighbourhood of Montreal. For years the fear of the Iroquois had huddled the Montrealers within narrow limits, and in the neighbourhood of the fort. There were few outlying stations, save that of the fortified house of Lambert Closse, who had been given on February 5, 1658, the first "noble fief" at Montreal, and the two redoubts or strongholds established by M. de Queylus for the seigneurs of the seminary. On the arrival of the troops the curÉ, M. Souart, had created a second "noble fief" for his nephew M. Hautmesnil between the River St. Lawrence and the RiviÈre des Prairies, and a third followed on the return of M. Queylus, given to La Salle. Peace enabled the colonists to go further afield, and in 1671 the seigneurs determined to establish seigneurial manors for further protection against Iroquois incursions and to place on them, for the most part, the officers of the regiments left behind. A debt of gratitude was first paid to Sieur PicotÉ de BÉlestre by a concession of land at Pointe aux Trembles, taking in Bout de l'Isle and extending to the RiviÈre des Prairies. The northern part of the island facing the RiviÈre des Prairies and Ile JÉsus—a dangerous spot—was chosen for two contiguous "noble fiefs" by Dollier de To strengthen the position of these seigneurs, Carion and de Morel, smaller concessions were granted nearby in the early months of 1672. On December 26th M. Zacharie Dupuis, the commandant of the town, received the letters patent of his seigneury of Verdun. The southwest of the island, facing the Lake of the Two Mountains, had yet to be guarded, and on January 19th Dollier de Casson gave a fief to M. Sidrac de GuÉ, now Sieur de Boisbriant, and added "the neighbouring island and shallows" at a given denomination, which afterwards caused a lawsuit. M. de GuÉ shortly sold his fief to Charles Le Moyne, Sieur de Longueuil, and Jacques Leber, his brother-in-law. It passed later to the son of the latter and became the fief of the Sieur de Senneville, as it was then named. In April The vulnerable points on the Island of Montreal thus being provided for, Talon determined to revert, as he says, "to the ancient custom of the Romans of distributing proedia militaria to the soldiers of a subjugated country," and the large distribution of "noble fiefs" and patents of nobility of officers and others likely to guard a country, dates mostly from the months of October and November of the year 1672. In order to further strengthen Montreal and the entrance of the Richelieu River,—both principal positions for Iroquois descents,—fiefs were given to Sieurs de Laubia, de Labadie, de Moras, de Normanville, de Berthier, de Comporte, de Randin, de la Valterie, M. Jean Baptiste Legardeur de Repentigny, the son of Captain de Saint Ours, and the Sieur de Berthelot, to whom was given Ile JÉsus, originally conceded to the Jesuits but not having been cultivated, was yielded up by them on November 7, 1672. All the above concessions were made on the left bank of the St. Lawrence, from Lake St. Peter to the head of the island, ascending to the RiviÈre des Prairies. From the mouth of the Richelieu and ascending up stream on the other side of the river many other concessions were made by Talon to de Sorel, du Pas, de Chambly, Chevalier Pierre de Saint Ours (captain of the Carignan-SalliÈres regiment), Antoine PÉcaudy de Contrecoeur, de VitrÉ, de VerchÈres, de Varenne, de Grandmaison, Michel Messier, of Montreal, to whom was given the seigneury of St. Michel, and Jacques Le Moyne, also of Montreal, that of Cap de la TrinitÉ; to Sidzac du GuÉ de Boisbriant, was given the Ile ThÉrÈse facing Bout de l'Isle; to M. Boucher, the Seigneur de Boucherville, to Charles Le Moyne, two fiefs, one of which he called Longueuil, from his place of origin at Dieppe, in Normandy, and the other Chateauguay. To Zacharie Dupuis was given Heron Island; to M. Perrot the island below the southwest corner of the island, afterwards named Ile Perrot, after him, as well as Ile Á la Paix, Iles aux Pins, Ste. GeneviÈve and St. Gilles. This list of names has been given, since it is synonymous with that of many of the parishes hereafter erected in these districts, for not many of the seigneurs were as yet wealthy, and they could not fulfill the double condition of providing a village mill and a village church. Though noble in name, many were as poor as church mice. Having been granted their lands, for a nominal sum, in return for "fealty and homage," the new noble had to work hard to clear his land within a limited time, else he would forfeit it, for few had capital to work it. To make his claim permanent he had to subdivide his domain to cultivators en censive, or censitaires who tilled the land and paid his "cens et rente" on St. Martin's day to the seigneur, as was common at Montreal, in the shape of half a sou and a pint of wheat for each arpent. There were, however, restrictions such as having to grind his corn at the seigneur's mill, when there was one, for such was an expensive luxury. This was practically the only one of the "banalitÉs," as they were called, of the French feudal system introduced into Canada, and it was not very much of a hardship. The "corvÉe" still existed, by which the seigneur could demand personal labor. In Canada this was about six days a year and was frequently remitted, as the seigneur found that the expense of food for the workers, etc., made it not worth his while to use their labour. Not all the seigneurs were as diligent and as fortunate as Charles Le Moyne, of Montreal, who, from being the son of an innkeeper at Dieppe, founded the noble house of Longueuil and whose son Charles, Baron Longueuil, built a fort and a home which Frontenac said, gave an idea of the fortified chÂteaux of France. Still many of these struggling nobles, with the revenue of a peasant, but who did sell their seigneuries, became fairly wealthy in time, and were the nucleus of the Canadian "noblesse" and "gentilhommes" for many a long day, though it must not be understood that all seigneurs were also ennobled, as in France. Some of the lazier sort, who perchance looked to the "get rich quick" method of peltry trading, rather than the laborious toil of tilling the earth, were soon the victims of their own circumstances; for a few years later, in 1679, Duchesneau, the intendant, writing to the minister in France, says: "Many of our gentilhommes, officers and other holders of seigneuries, lead what in France is called the life of a country gentleman and spend most of their time in hunting and fishing. As their requirements in food and clothing are greater than those of the simple 'habitants' and as they do not devote themselves to improving their land, they mix themselves up in trade, run into debt on all hands, incite their young 'habitants' to range the woods and send their own children there to trade for furs in the Indian villages and in the depths of the forest, in spite of the prohibition of His Majesty. Yet, with all this, they are miserably poor." "It is pitiable," says another intendant, Champigny, in 1687, "to see their children, of which they have great numbers, passing all summer with nothing on them but a shirt, and their wives and daughters working in the fields." Later, an intendant wrote to France not to create any more gentilhommes, for it meant making "beggars." But it must be remembered that later letters of patent of nobility were not so easily granted as at this early tentative period, when noble, habitant, and peasant had a hard struggle with the soil to make all ends meet. To form an idea of the establishment of a parish, it must be remembered that each seigneur was required to build a mill and a chapel to be served by a priest. The mill meant a heavy expense; the machinery had all to come from France, and the miller's wages had to be paid; the farmers, bringing grain, small in number. Beyond the three mills belonging to the seigneurs of the island at this period there was the one erected at Pointe aux Trembles and that erected by Jean Milot, a toolmaker, at a cost of 1,000 Écus, after purchasing on November 9, 1670, La Salle's lands at Lachine, and that was finally taken over by the seminary also, on November 2, 1673. La Salle had been required to construct a mill, since his concession was larger than the military fiefs of 200 arpents granted to the other petty seigneurs. To these latter, the necessity of erecting their own mills was foregone on the stipulation that their grain and that of their censitaires, should be ground in the seminary mill. The building of a parish church and providing a priest, both difficult tasks in this poverty-stricken time, were delayed for some time. The seminary meanwhile sent out its missioners to conduct services at Lachine and Pointe aux Trembles and the surrounding district. A temporary chapel was made in the rooms of farmers' houses as is done in country districts in the Northwest today. It was not till November 18, 1674, that the people of Pointe aux Trembles took definite steps for church erection, which resulted in the church of L'Enfant JÉsus, blessed by the superior of the seminary on March 13, 1678, with the assistance of the curÉ of the new church and M. Jean Cavelier, brother of La Salle and a priest of the seminary. The feudal system, prefigured by Richelieu long ago in his commission to the Marquis de la Roche and "following the custom of Paris," based on the tenure of land, was established as soon as peace was obtained, as the best method of building up the colony and of looking after private interests. It was a most suitable method for the time. The feudal absolutism then created, both of church and state, were necessary for the French at a period when they had not learned the first elements of self-government. The pity was that this system of leading strings was too prolonged and overdone, especially as later the French government did not do its duty by the people, thus preventing its progress by ruining its initiative. Had not the bolder spirits broken through it, we should not have had the redeeming point in the history of these times—the brilliant geographical discoveries. But in those early wild times the military civilization now forming and the paternal influence of the clergy at Montreal, seigneurs and parish priests, did much for that distinctively Canadian love of discipline and order, which is the foundation of the great and mighty people Canada is destined to be. Talon, writing to Colbert on November 13, 1666, says: "I have already commenced the enfiefments by Montreal, the principal fief of this country, in receiving its 'foi et hommage' as also its 'aveux et dÉnombrements.'" A papier terrier, or land roll, was ordered to be made and a list of all the lands, houses and other properties accurately defined and registered. Uncertain titles were made clear and others made out that had been neglected. The condition of land tenure was not onerous; the "cens and rentes" paid annually were not an equivalent for value received but a simple recognition of the legal primitive right of the seigneurs, on property given. Thus at Montreal, land sites on the portion reserved for the future town, had been given on the annual payment of five sous an arpent, while on those in the town itself all the annual revenue demanded was a liard for each fathom. In all the Island of Montreal the tax for each arpent of land was two liards and a half pint of wheat. Thus the receiver of 100 arpents only paid fifty sous and fifty pints of wheat. In the first years, as the soil was not thought to be at its full value, he was relieved of all taxation. Sometimes, even the above slight tax was, for sufficient reason, modified. When any farm or small holding was sold or it passed by inheritance to collaterals, the seigneurs were entitled to "lods et ventes," a tax of one-twelfth of the estimated value of the land. This was usually paid within forty days of the transfer and a rebate was generally given of one-third, but not necessarily. If the farm was sold at a price lower than the seigneur thought proper, he had the right to purchase it back at the estimated value on which the tax of one-twelfth had been demanded. This system was by no means unjust. The seigneur gained very little, for during two centuries there were many lands which passed from father to son, or were passed on by donation without anything accruing to the seigneur who, it must be remembered, had practically granted the lands free to the "censitaires." It was only in later years when the lands became of substantial value that the "lods et rentes" gave a real source of income to them. The feudal system worked well. Being based on land tenure, it centralized the people and made them powerful against attack, out of proportion to their numbers, as New England found later. It was as wise a system for New France as the introduction into Massachusetts "of free and common soccage." It was wisely handled, on a more democratic basis than that of France, and there were no real grievances. The habitants and seigneurs moved side by side; indeed they frequently exchanged places. The class distinctions were never thus very arbitrarily defined as in France. Whatever we may think of the military seigneuries, that of the Sulpicians of Montreal was very beneficial. Their rule was progressive and zealous. Speaking of such religious seigneurs William Bennett Munroe, Ph. D., professor of government, Harvard University, in his chapter in Volume II of "Canada and Its Provinces, 1912," entitled "The Seigniorial System and the Colony," says: "The priests seem to have had faith in the colony—which was more than could be said of all the Carignan officers who took lands from the king. This faith and optimism the priests often communicated to the people around them, and the results were seen in the neighbouring farms. The church in New France never lost, as at home, its grip on the confidence of those from whom it drew its chief strength—the rural classes. While it may seem that the crown was lavish to a fault in satisfying its claim to landed property, yet the church really gave the colony far more than it took away; for, if ever there abode on this earth labours worthy of their hire, these were the pioneer priests whose loyalty and devotion to France appear on every page of early Canadian history. The church owed much to the seigniorial system, but it made ample repayment." (P. 566.) The parish life of Montreal, as that also of subsequent parishes, was that of an organized community or civil corporation. The head was the seigneur. One section, composed of those able to bear arms, formed the militia with its officers. The seigneur could appoint its judge, and if unable to provide one, he could turn the cases arising to a neighbouring court, such as at Montreal. In addition, there would be the greffier, or clerk of the court, sergeants and the gaoler. Municipal affairs were, at this time, managed at the "hangar," on the common of Montreal, through the syndic who had been appointed by a plurality of votes of the inhabitants in council, summoned thither by church bell. At these elections the judge was present as presiding officer, replacing the greffier, as mentioned in a previous chapter, and he was accompanied by the procureur fiscal and the greffier. Sometimes this election, for greater formality, was made in the hall of the seigneurs or at the chÂteau of the fort, as in the case of the election of syndic, Louis Chevalier, on May 15, 1672. The syndic controlled the general law and order, and when necessary, called in the judge to his assistance, as on April 8, 1674, when the judge fined some delinquents, on the complaint of Louis Chevalier, then syndic, for damage done by straying cattle. In order to surround the officers of the community with some dignity, various ranks were assigned, so that there should be an order of procedure in church or elsewhere, and notably in processions. In the latter the order was as follows: the governor general, the local governor, the officers of justice, the churchwardens. In the processions and in other religious ceremonies the military could claim no rank. The marguilliers, or churchwardens, for their election needed an official document drawn up by the public notary, since they were an important body, being empowered to make contracts in the name of the Fabrique, and to make acquisitions and alienations. Zacharie Dupuis, major of the island, in 1666 is mentioned in such an act as honorary churchwarden. Up to 1676 these officers were elected by a general gathering, but at this date Laval ordered that the system, obtaining at Quebec since 1660, of election by secret votes, certified by past and present churchwardens, should be adopted in other parishes. In some localities, besides the marguilliers there was appointed a treasurer, or receiver of gifts or of fines made applicable to the Fabrique by the judge and other magistrates. According to custom, the parish church of each place was maintained by the inhabitants, as well as the establishment of the cemetery, and the preservation of its enclosure from damage. On one occasion we find at Montreal that cattle had broken into the enclosure, and the palisading had to be repaired. No general taxation was made but it was ordered, in a general assembly, that M. FrÉmont, one of the priests of the cemetery, should go accompanied by one of the parishioners to canvass all the sections of the parish for a subscription for the purpose. Nevertheless we find that if the parishioners neglected their Easter duty of providing "blessed bread" for the church or chapel, an ordinance of Quebec of January 13, 1670, condemned them to an arbitrary fine. As to the soldiers remaining after Tracy's departure, they had other duties beside the peopling of the colony. According to the feudal system incorporated by Talon, they were to take up land and incidentally be thus, by their presence, a safeguard for others against Iroquois attack. Montreal district, being The work of opening up the land was the great hope of the king. About this time horses began to be employed, for up to July 16, 1665, they were unknown to the Indians, and great was their astonishment to see the twelve French "elks" that arrived that day, and the docility with which they obeyed their masters. It was a great honour indeed to possess one of these. Of the consignment of one stallion and twelve mares in 1670, the following distribution was made: the stallion and a mare to M. Chambly, two to M. Lachenaye, and one each to MM. Talon the intendant, Saint Ours, Sorel, Contrecoeur, Varenne, Latouche, Repentigny, La Chesnaye, and Leber. They were given with a view to their multiplication and, indeed, of all the other animals sent, the horses were the most prolific and successful. The conditions to be observed were: they should be kept in condition for three years; if any died during that time through the fault of the "donnÉ," he should pay the king's receiver the sum of 200 livres. After the expiration of three years he might sell it and the foals, one of which he was to keep for the king's receiver, as well as the sum of 100 livres. It was further ordered that when these foals, given to the king's receiver, had reached the third year, they were to be given to private individuals as before on the same terms. Thus the stock breeding was merrily continued. Cattle were sent to New France at this period, thus: 1665, 12 mares, 2 stallions, 7 sheep; 1667, 12 mares, 2 stallions, 29 sheep; 1668, 15 horses, 44 sheep; 1669, 14 horses, 50 sheep; 1670, 13 horses; 1671, horses and asses. The asses sent in 1671 were distributed as follows: Sieur Marsollet, a male ass; Sieur Neveau, a female ass; the Jesuit Fathers, one male and one female ass; M. Dudouyt, a female; M. Damours, a female; M. de Villieu, a female; Sieur de Longchamps, a female; Bourg Royal, a female; Sieur Morin, a female. These did not suit the climate so readily. The cost of these horses and sheep was great. Each mare cost 120 livres, each stallion, 200, the sheep, about 6 livres apiece. In 1665 the transportation and feed of the consignment cost 11,200 livres. By November, 1671, Talon wrote that there were enough horses. Cows and pigs had already become as familiar as in France. It will be remembered that in 1647 a horse was sent for M. Montmagny, the governor general. In these early days the birch bark canoe was more useful than the horse, for the rivers were then the only highways. Later on Montrealers became so interested in horse rearing that, "ignorant of their true interests," they had to be forbidden by Intendant Raudot in 1709 But it must not be supposed that these seigneuries and small holdings grew up like mushrooms. The farmer's initiation for the first two or three years was a rough one. It was only by very patient labour, and, little by little, that the lands were cleared, tilled, and the modest house put up, and an assured means of easy livelihood secured. The cultivators had to follow the same strenuous methods that those, opening their concessions in the Northwest, employ today. At Montreal, while there was still fear of the Iroquois, we have seen how difficult it was to work the fields, and how, for mutual protection, they had temporarily to till small portions of the seigneur's domain till they could safely go farther afield. But in 1664, when it was known that the king's troops were coming, many obtained new concessions on CÔte St. Louis, some towards the mountain, some at the foot of the current near the fortified farm of Ste. Marie. In 1665 many resolved to go below the foot of the current and beyond the River St. Peter, for the lands on this side of the river, and especially those at Point St. Charles, had already been conceded, and although abandoned during the wars, were still claimed. East and west, the colonists now went afield to CÔte St. Martin, CÔte St. FranÇois (later called Longue Pointe), CÔte St. Anne, CÔte St. Jean (later called Pointe aux Trembles). At the latter place in 1669, land was given to Jean Oury with the intention of a village church and mill, being erected thereon. These cÔtes were restricted to their river neighbourhood to guard the settlements from Iroquois descents by the stream. This same plan was adopted along the whole length of the St. Lawrence. "It is pleasant to see at present," says the "Relation" of 1668, "nearly all the banks of our River St. Lawrence peopled with new colonies, with new villages rising, which facilitate navigation and render the journey, more agreeable by the sight of the houses, and more convenient by the frequent resting places offered." All were not as diligent as could be desired in putting up within the year stipulated hearth and home (feu et lieu), or in clearing their concessions. Consequently when Talon was in Montreal in May, 1670, in consequence of just complaints he ordered that in future no copyholder should be granted land unless, in addition to building his homestead, he should put two arpents under cultivation yearly under penalty of forfeiting his grant, unless he could prove illness or other strong cause restraining him. Moreover, in the new contract, it was to be stipulated that no one could claim title to his land until he had put up his buildings and had placed two arpents in cultivation, with a pickaxe, for up to this, as seen by the concessions preserved in the archives up to 1657, a man had been thought to have tilled his ground if he had felled the trees and had uprooted all the roots which were a foot in diameter or upwards, and had used the others in such a way that a cart could pass along without obstacle. Yet there were still difficulties, for on January 12, 1675, the Seigneurs put up the following public notice at the parish church, the fort, and the different mills: "We have learned from many complaints, that several of our tenants take no trouble, not only to establish their homes on their lands and to put them to use, but even neglect to fell the timber, or to keep in order the little space they have cleared on taking possession. This negligence retards the advancement of the To remedy this the seigneurs gave their tenants four months to put their lands in order and to cut down all standing timber on pain of forfeiture to the seigneurial domain. Even in cutting down the timber there were abuses at Montreal. To provide against the carelessness of riverside cultivators, as all were at this time, in dumping their lumber into the river, Talon issued the following order in October, 1670: "Whereas it has been pointed out to us that the inhabitants of Montreal between Ste. Marie and La Petite Chine (Lachine) have cut their timber so that, having fallen into the river, it prevents navigation and blocks communication, we order them to cut their wood into logs and to place them on the stream in such a way that they may be carried away with the ice when it melts this year." These logs could then be sold at Quebec in return for the necessities of life. The history of the first public roads and bridges at Montreal now begins as the outcome of all this clearing and passing of carts to and fro. In the procÈs verbal of the road from Pointe aux Trembles to the stream, Jean des Roches gives us an insight into the formalities usually pursued. When the habitants had asked for a road, the Seigneurs or their representatives would meet them at the place indicated, when the projected road was traced and landmarks placed at intervals stamped with the lead seal of the Seigneurs. After the new road was clearly defined, a statement was drawn up, and then each proprietor set to work to clear the road space running through his property; if a bridge was necessary, one of logs was constructed; if a stream had to be crossed, being common property, all contributed to the construction of this as a public work. Thus the first bridge was thrown over the St. Pierre by order of M. Talon, dated October 24, 1670. Several roads had already been partially made, e. g., from the redoubt of L'Enfant JÉsus to Petit Lac (or the marsh which is now occupied by Place Viger and a part of St. Denis and Craig Streets); from the Coteau St. Louis to that of Ste. Marie; and provisional roads were made through the woods on either side of the River St. Pierre, and the marshy roads made practicable by log foundations or log bridges. All these roads were eighteen feet broad, with the exception of the road bordering the River St. Lawrence, which Talon fixed at twenty feet; but the Seigneurs raised it to thirty-six feet seeing that it was used as a towing path for the horses drawing the bateaux between the currents and the rapids, and as it was the principal means of communication and circulation between the lower and higher parts of the island, they ordered the riverside owners to keep it in order. To indemnify them for the loss of this extra space, other land was added to the other extremity of their concessions. As most of these improvements took place under Intendant Talon, AbbÉ de Queylus and Dollier de Casson, city planners may know to whom honour is due. NOTE FORTS AND REDOUBTS BUILT ON THE ISLAND OF MONTREAL (According to H. Beaugrand and P. L. Morin "Le Vieux MontrÉal.") Ste. Marie (Barriere), fort in wood, 1658; St. Gabriel, fort in wood, 1659; Verdun, fort in wood, 1662; Rolland, fort in wood, 1670; RÉmy, redoubt in wood, 1671; Lachine, redoubt in wood, 1672; CuillÉrier, redoubt in wood, 1672; Gentilly (afterwards La PrÉsentation), redoubt in wood, 1674; Pointe aux Trembles, fort in wood, 1675; The Mountain, fort in stone, 1677; Ste. Anne (Bellevue), redoubt in wood, 1683; RiviÈre des Prairies, redoubt in wood, 1688; Mission de Lorette, redoubt in wood, 1689; Senneville, fort in stone, 1692; Pointe St. Charles, redoubt in wood, 1695; Bout de l'isle, redoubt in wood, 1697; Longue Pointe, redoubt in wood, 1724; Sault-au-RÉcollet, redoubt in wood, 1736. OUTSIDE THE ISLAND OF MONTREAL St. Lambert, redoubt in wood, 1665; Boucherville, redoubt in wood, 1668; La Prairie, fort in wood, 1670; Varennes, redoubt in wood, 1693; Ste. ThÉrÈse (Island), redoubt in wood, 1699; Brucy (Ile Perrot), redoubt in wood, 1708; Longueuil, fort in stone, 1715; Le Tremblay, redoubt in wood, 1716; St. Laurent, redoubt in wood, 1720; Lake of Two Mountains, fort in stone, 1721; St. Louis, redoubt in wood, 1735; Chateaugay, redoubt in wood, 1736; Beauharnois, redoubt in wood, 1737; Ste. GeneviÈve, redoubt in wood, 1758. NAMES OF FIEFS ERECTED IN THE ISLAND OF MONTREAL Carion, Morel, Verdun, Boisbriant, St. AndrÉ, d'Ailleboust, Bellevue, St. Augustine, Lachine, LagauchetiÈre, St. Joseph, Nazareth, HÔtel-Dieu. FOOTNOTES: |