1688-1698

SOCIAL, CIVIL AND RELIGIOUS PROGRESS

THE PICKET ENCLOSURE—FORTIFICATIONS STRENGTHENED—GARRISON JEALOUSIES—PRESEANCE—THE "CONGREGATION" BURNT DOWN—A POOR LAW BOARD—TO QUEBEC ON FOOT—THE CHURCH OF THE "CONGREGATION" ON FIRE—THE ENCLOSING OF A RECLUSE—THE JESUIT RESIDENCE—THE RECOLLECTS—THE "PRIE DIEU" INCIDENT—MGR. DE ST. VALLIER'S BENEFACTIONS—THE FRERES CHARON—FIRST GENERAL HOSPITAL—TECHNICAL EDUCATION—THE SEMINARY BEING BUILT—SULPICIAN ADMINISTRATION—THE MARKET PLACE. NOTE: THE GENTLEMEN OF THE SEMINARY.

The last chapter has treated of Montreal as the base of many military operations under Frontenac and CalliÈres and has followed the history of some of its celebrated citizens. We must now survey the town at closer range. As said, the inhabitants were virtually confined to the picket enclosure, constructed by de CalliÈres in 1687, yet the king did not approve of enclosing Montreal with fortifications, thinking that this expense would be better employed by strengthening the forts in the West. (Vide mÉmoire du Roi À M. de Denonville et À Champigny, Mars 5, 1688.) It is not till May 8, 1694, that the minister wrote to de CalliÈres saying he might repair the palisades. [151] In the garrison petty jealousies and struggles for precedence were being maintained. By an ordinance of Intendant Champigny of June 10, 1688, confirming a previous one, it was decided that the officers of justice should hold prÉsÉance over the church wardens, both without and within the church, such as the first places in receiving the pain bÉnit and the offertories on Sundays, the receiving of tapers on Candle-Mass day and palms on Palm Sunday. The time was one of unsettlement and of terrorized conditions, yet the religious communities were growing stronger. In 1683 the home of the congregation founded by Marguerite Bourgeoys had been burned down. Writing to the minister, Denonville says: "They have lost everything. It would be necessary for them to build, but they have not a penny to begin with." Yet they started again, for, says Sister Juchereau in her "Histoire de Quebec:" "They were so full of confidence in God, they began to build with only forty sous in their possession." Sister Morin, the historian of the HÔtel-Dieu says: "After their second house, a stone one, had been destroyed by fire, the Congregation nuns built a convent on the site they still occupy; their house touches our enclosure, making us neighbours; the house is large and spacious, and one of the best built in town."

Monseigneur de St. Vallier, having seen the nuns some time after the fire, remarks: "How they subsisted, since the accident befell them three or four years ago, is truly a marvel. Their entire house was burned in one night; they saved neither their furniture nor their wardrobes, happy enough in this that they were themselves rescued; even then two of their number perished in the flames. The courage of the survivors bore them up in their extreme poverty." Again he wrote to the minister of marine in this same year of a group of grown-up girls to the number of twenty, called the Daughters of Providence, who were trained and prepared for work by Sister Bourgeoys. He recommended that a gratuity should be given them to undertake some manufacture.

In 1688 their mission of free and popular education was extended by Marguerite Bourgeoys' trained workers to Quebec, at the invitation of St. Vallier, who had bought a house with a yard and garden on November 13, 1686, as the initial step of a foundation and in 1688 the free schools were opened for the smaller girls.

Those concerned with the history of the birth of philanthropic agencies in city life will find of interest a decree of the Supreme Council of Thursday, April 18, 1688, ordering a "Bureau des Pauvres," a Poor Law Board, to be established in the towns of Quebec, Montreal and Three Rivers, and other parishes dependent on them, and also in the country parishes. The object was to discriminate between the honest poor and the lazy shirkers and the ne'er-do-wells of the period. The lengthy decree gives elaborate instructions for this purpose and would delight modern charity organizers. It insists that work should be carried on by the poor applying for relief. The directors should be the curÉ; an executive director of the poor, to do the research work by investigating into the real state and cause of the poverty and to find work and to supervise the hiring of the poor and fixing the remuneration; a third was to be the treasurer, who should keep account of all the revenues coming from church collections, or public canvasses for money or gifts in kind; a fourth should be the secretary, who should keep the records and lists of those applying to the bureau for assistance. These directors were to be on an equal footing, the secretary to count their votes and the decisions to be signed by all the directors present, two to form a quorum.

There does not seem to be any grant from the government for the support of this voluntary charity organization society established by order of the council, Christian charity and alms giving being, seemingly, considered to suffice in providing its funds. The directors could, according to circumstances, chastise the poor by imprisonment in the dungeon on a bread and water diet, or by retrenchment on their victuals for a time, according to the enlightenment of the said directors, to whom the council, under the good pleasure of His Majesty, gives the power for the case required. Prohibitions were also issued to all the poor and necessitous against begging under any pretext whatever, on pain of such punishment as should be adjudged by the council. The directors were to put themselves in touch with the procurator general or his substitutes in each jurisdiction. Thus the volunteer and official sides of civic philanthropy were brought together—an admirable combination to be more widely imitated these days.

In order to start the new bureau, the council chose directors from out of its own members, appointing as the first directeur des pauvres the procurator general of the king, FranÇois Madaleine Ruette d'Auteuil; for the post of treasurer Paul Dupuy, his substitute on the prÉvÔtÉ; and for secretary the clerk of the Supreme Council, Jean Baptiste Peuvret de Mesnu.

Though admirably mapped out the organization of the Bureaux des Pauvres in Quebec, Three Rivers and Montreal, ordered by the Sovereign Council in 1688, appears to have grown weak shortly. Ten years later, in 1698, as the zeal of the citizens needed new inspiration, the order was renewed and the Rev. Father Leblanc, a Jesuit, was charged by the bishop of the diocese of Quebec, Mgr. de St. Valier, to preach in the towns the reorganization of the bureaux. He came for this object to Montreal on June 1, 1698. In consequence of his sermon two days later a meeting of the most notable citizens met in one of the halls of the seminary to form a bureau composed of priests and lay people. Its business was to place poor children as apprentices to learn a trade, to put the sick poor into hospitals or to place them with relations in easier circumstances, to distribute wheat, bread, boots and merchandise to the poor. The voluntary contributions necessitated a house-to-house canvass, which was started in June by Madame de Maricour, the Mademoiselles de Repentigny, and followed in December by Madame Jucherau de St. Denis and Madame d'Argenteuil. The ladies kept to the town and immediate suburbs while the men collected in the outlying districts.

In 1689 St. Vallier called Sister Bourgeoys to Quebec to execute a project, by him, of the establishment of a home where the poor could be usefully employed in work. It was early spring; the shifting ice on the river would not allow a vehicle on the St. Lawrence; there were no roads to Quebec for carriages, and the aged woman, now sixty-nine years of age, traveled the whole distance of 180 miles, thither, on foot through the slushy snow of the woods and across melting ice-bound streams. Arriving at Quebec, she found that the bishop had changed his mind and he asked her to undertake a "General Hospital," instead of the more humble House of Providence originally contemplated. This hospital her companions directed till it was transferred to the HospitaliÈres de St. Joseph in 1692.

In 1693 the "Congregation" started to build a church in their own grounds with the help of Jeanne LeBer, who offered to share the expenses, and of her brother, Pierre LeBer, who promised to furnish all the stone required. It was finished in February, 1695. "During the night of the 24th of February," says one of the latest historians of the congregation, [152] "a lurid flame leaped up in the steeple of the HÔtel-Dieu church. Fiercely it blazed, until the pealing of alarm bells roused the townspeople and brought them, half dressed, into the ruddily illuminated streets. As the tumult of a terrified crowd filled the air, and the red signal of destruction spread over the sky, a panic seized on many hearts. Each man looked on the white face of his neighbour, ghastly in the fire's glare, and there read the same question, 'Will the town be saved?' Then it was that Dollier de Casson, followed by the priests from the Seminary, came to the place of danger, bearing the Blessed Sacrament. A passionate prayer went up, 'Lord, save us, have mercy on us.' The wind veered suddenly, and carried the roaring flame away from the town. At that manifestation of Divine clemency, a mighty shout of thanksgiving rent the air. But the maddened element had to find some fuel. A moment later, the hospital itself was a mass of flames and smoke. PÈre Denys, a RÉcollet, went fearlessly into the burning church, took out the Blessed Sacrament and carried it, at first, to the house of a certain merchant named Arnaud." At dawn of day it found its home in the new church. Later in the day the homeless HÔtel-Dieu Sisters were brought to the house of the congregation by Dollier de Casson, and there they lived and worshipped side by side with the Daughters of Marguerite Bourgeoys, thus carrying on the friendship begun between Jeanne Mance and Marguerite, the two founders. A solemn spiritual alliance was drawn up by the two communities, "to love one another," and years have not severed this friendship.

This new church, the original Notre Dame de PitiÉ, witnessed, on August 5th of 1695, a curious and reverent ceremony—the enclosing of a recluse in a little room behind the altar. This was none other than Jeanne LeBer, the daughter of the rich trader, Jacques LeBer, of Montreal, who was a brother of Jean LeBer du Chesne, wounded mortally at Prairie la Madeleine. She was now in her thirty-third year, being born on January 4, 1662. After her school days at Quebec were ended in 1677, she led an austere life—practically that of an enclosed nun, in her own home—scarcely seeing anyone, not even her parents—and this with her parents' permission. This craving for solitude is hard to understand for moderns, and we tell the story to give an indication of the intense religious faith of those days. Autre temps, autres moeurs.

In 1693 Jeanne LeBer promised to build the church, as said, if she were to be received as a sister of the congregation and allowed a cell behind the altar. "She wished the church to be as near as possible a reproduction of the holy house of Nazareth, oblong in shape, with the altar placed in the most conspicuous part, between the doors opening right and left. Her apartment, behind the altar, was to be about ten or twelve feet in depth, consisting of three stories. The first was to be a vestry; the second and third reserved for her use."

"On the evening of August 5th, solemn vespers were chanted in the parish church, after which a procession was formed, headed by the clergy. It wended its way to M. LeBer's house, where Jeanne was absorbed in prayer. She wore a woolen gown of light grey, confined to the waist by a black belt. Quitting forever the home of her childhood, breaking asunder the last and closest ties that bound her to earth, she followed the clergy accompanied by her father and several other relatives. It was a striking scene. Along the crowded street they passed: the recluse, clad in penitential garb, with downcast eyes, quiet bearing and firm step; and the white-haired man, bowed down by age and sorrow, who seemed, like Abraham and Jeptha, to be leading the victim to sacrifice. Scarce had the procession reached the church before Jacques LeBer, no longer master of his anguish, turned back and went to hide his grief in the now deserted home. [153]

"Dollier de Casson blessed the cell, and as she knelt before him, exhorted Jeanne LeBer to persevere therein like Magdalen in the Grotto. He then led her to the threshold and she calmly passed into her new abode, closing and fastening the door while the choir chanted the litany of the Blessed Virgin. The following morning, Feast of the Transfiguration, Dollier de Casson celebrated mass for the first time in the Congregation Church. Among the faithful knelt M. LeBer, strong in his heroic resignation." [154] She lived in that cell for nineteen years, until her death in October, 1714.

Between 1692 and 1694 another block of buildings, consisting of a residence and flanked by a public church and a private chapel, was being erected by the Jesuits, now returning. Its site is today covered by a portion of the city hall and the Court of Justice of Notre Dame Street, facing Jacques Cartier Square. These buildings of the Jesuits were destroyed by fire in 1803. [155]

We have to take notice of a new community that is now arising. It is that of the Recollects, so long absent from the neighbourhood of Montreal. The letters patent of the king confirming their permission to continue their establishments at Quebec, Montreal, Plaisance (Newfoundland) and the Isle of St. Peter, and to extend them to other places with the consent of the governor, were issued from Versailles in March, 1692. By 1694 they had their church built, and this, with their monastery and farm, occupied the large space now covered by Notre Dame Street from St. Peter to McGill streets and extending south. The street called Recollect today marks their home, and between this and the corner of McGill and Notre Dame streets was the western gate of the city, known as that of the "Recollects."

A ridiculous event occurred in this church in 1694, which is recorded as the "prie dieu incident," and which caused a certain amount of taking of sides and dissension and scandal at Montreal and Quebec, and was the subject of dispatches to France; it illustrates how very human men were at this time. M. De CalliÈres, the governor of Montreal, was present with all the Élite of Montreal, at the ceremony of the initiation of two Recollect novices into the order and he was kneeling at a prie dieu, or kneeling desk, in the middle of the church, "near the altar," in the place of honour. Mgr. de St. Vallier, who was present, notified him—"in a low voice," says the Intendant Champigny, who was present—that such a position was reserved for the governor general and too honourable for a local governor and requested him to relinguish it, otherwise he would leave the church and take no further part in the ceremony. "It is my right," said the obstinate de CalliÈres, who retook the prie dieu, and the prelate withdrew so as not to create a public scandal. Before the entrance of de CalliÈres the bishop had already noticed the position of the prie dieu and ordered the RÉcollets to remove it, but, although they obeyed, two of de CalliÈres' officers and a soldier replaced it, and it was allowed to remain. Next day the bishop wrote to the superior to have the obnoxious prie dieu removed, as with his own, until the governor general came. The superior "reluctantly" obeyed, but de CalliÈres had his taken back. On the refusal of the superior to have it again removed, the bishop interdicted the church on May 13, 1694, forbidding the use of the church for any ceremonies or the administration of the Sacraments, "until His Majesty's intentions were learned." This was followed on July 6th, by a further monition and was later followed by two others full of more serious charges against de CalliÈres and the superior of the Recollects. [156]

The orders were obeyed for two months by the Recollects and then, influenced by the government party, with whom they were popular, and refusing to obey any longer, they opened their church again with public ceremonies more solemn than before, urging that the form of interdict was null. The disagreement went before the Sovereign Council at Quebec, whiceclared that the bishop had gone beyond his powers, and that with regard to the further charges against de CalliÈres, he had acted without collecting sufficient information. It decided to refer the decision to His Majesty. On the 13th of June, 1695, the case was called to the notice of the privy council to be settled. At the same meeting the several other subsequent interdicts, for use of the Sacraments, issued by the bishop were discussed, as well as the Tartuffe interdict, which was against Mareuil, a half-pay officer, who La Motte-Cardillac—himself no lover of the clergy—owns was not an exemplary character, indeed he had been two years before accused of using language capable of making heaven blush. This man was reported to be cast to play the part of Tartuffe in MoliÈre's play, in Frontenac's private theatricals at Quebec—it being thought that this was meant to be a scurrilous skit on the clergy and in revenge on the bishop for the Montreal affair. Mareuil and his friends insulted the bishop and Mareuil was ordered to prison. The council, however, decided that the bishop had not gone beyond his legitimate sphere in his mandate against the "Tartuffe" performance. Many clerics and laymen asked for Mgr. de St. Vallier's recall. Even Laval in his retirement expressed himself strongly on his successor, who had gone to France to defend himself against his enemies, and did not return for three years. After that he lived in peace with de CalliÈres and de Frontenac.

The above calm description of the scene is that following the Intendant Champigny's account to the minister on October 27, 1694, and "le mÉmoire pour M. l'EvÊque de QuÉbec concernant l'interdit prononcÉ contre les RÉcollets de Ville Marie, 1694." La Motte-Cardillac's bantering account, which is splenetic and bitter, must be read with caution, as he never shows any mercy to the clerics, whom he whips with fine scorn for what we should call their "Puritanism." Witness has oft quoted attack on their condemnation of plays.

Parkman, commenting on these troubles of the austere and overzealous bishop, says: "An adjustment was effected: order, if not harmony, was restored; and the usual distribution of advice, exhortation, reproof and menace was made to the parties in the strife. Frontenac was commended for defending the royal prerogative, censured for violence and admonished to avoid future quarrels.... CalliÈres was mildly advised not to take part in the disputes of the bishop and the Recollects. Thus was conjured down one of the most bitter, as well as the most needless, trivial and untimely of the quarrels that enliven the annals of New France," ("Frontenac," p. 333.) Parkman tries to make out a case, that "Tartuffe" was never meant to be acted and that it was an elaborate joke on the part of Frontenac to frighten and annoy the bishop. He does not succeed.

The unfortunate Mgr. de St. Vallier deserves not to be forgotten at Montreal. He was most liberal with his private fortune, having expended over 600,000 livres, of which 20,000 went to the Seminary of Montreal. This side of his character has not been sufficiently recognized. We have seen his interest in the establishment of the Montreal schools; we have now to record his approval of the first general hospital at Montreal, initiated by the FrÈres Charron or the Hospitaliers of St. Joseph de la Croix. In 1692, on August 31, he wrote to Frontenac and Champigny informing them of his intention to allow the establishment of a hospital at Montreal following the authorization and letters patent which he had already received from His Majesty. Its object was to cope with the increased needs of the poor and sick of the growing town. "In 1692," says Ferland, t. I-II, p. 267, "the Sieur FranÇois Charron offered his fortune, which was considerable, for the foundation of a general hospital.... Several persons, animated with the same spirit, joined him, consecrated their wealth to the good work and devoted themselves to the services of the poor.... On the request of the Bishop of Quebec, the Governor and the Intendant, the King approved in 1694 of this institution, which received the name of the 'FrÈres Hospitaliers de St. Joseph de la Croix.'" [157]

Montreal is noted for its citizen charities. This may be reckoned one of its first. In 1699 (May 30th) this hospital had letters patent to establish manual instruction in trades and in arts. Later, in 1699, in their collective letter of October 20th, addressed to the minister, CalliÈres and Champigny speak in high terms of this establishment. "A house which will be very useful to the colony is that of the hospital brothers established at Montreal. It has not yet cost the King or country anything. However, it has done much good work. It has a hall filled with the poor. They have commenced to draw here some persons of distinction, of reduced and necessitous circumstances. They have private rooms which are well looked after.... His Majesty is prayed to accord them the exemption of duty on three tuns of eau de vie and six tuns of wine.... If His Majesty would have the goodness to add 1,000 livres to aid them more easily to establish the manufactures which they have commenced, this will procure a great advantage to them and the colony, because they will attract a number of poor young people to receive employment." (Arch, Col. Canada Corresp. Gen., Vol. 17, fol. 3-17.)

This may be considered the first attempt at technical education in Montreal and the origin of the "Écoles des arts et mÉtiers." Unfortunately this establishment fell upon evil days in later days and it was replaced by the Grey Sisters, who were founded by Madame de Youville in 1748, to administer the General Hospital as shall be told in its place. The site for the hospital was granted by Dollier de Casson near Windmill Point, on the spot where the lately demolished Grey Nuns' building stood. Its nine arpents (acres) thus covered the property adjoining the lower part of the present St. Peter Street, east and west.

A glance around the town in the latter years of Frontenac's rule will see the Sulpician Seigneurs consolidating their work, ministering to the parishes on the island, providing chaplains to the HÔtel-Dieu and the Congregation of Notre-Dame and instructing the Indians of the mountain settlement and making good Frenchmen of their dark charges, of whom there were 222 dwelling in their thirty-two cabanes.[158] Meanwhile their seminary was being built, its foundations being laid in 1685; it was not, however, completed till 1712. It was doing for education in a smaller degree what the seminary was accomplishing at Quebec.

In the meantime the Sulpicians administered the island as its seigneurs, though their duties as judges were gradually being undertaken by the king's officers. By order of the king, March 15, 1693, "Royal Justice" was established; a "juge royal" was appointed in the person of Jean Baptiste Migeon de Branssat, the nominee of the seminary, and chosen as a mark of respect to the seigneurs. Four procureurs postulants with minor officers were also appointed by the king to administer justice but there was still reserved to the seigneurs within their enclosures of the seminary and the St. Gabriel Farm the privileges of haute, moyenne et basse justice. Nine years later this decree was explained by an order of July, 1714, as not meant to take away basse justice from the ecclesiastics in the Isle of Montreal; in addition it explained that in future they shall have the same privilege in the newly established CÔte St. Sulpice, the Iles Courcelles and their other dependencies. This was to allow the ecclesiastical seigneurs to create inferior judges for the recovery of debts, cens and rentes, fines, lods and ventes, and all the other rights and duties of feudal seigneurs, apart from the rights relinquished as above noted.

The market place was busy and prosperous. Owing to the great number of skins, the king, by a declaration of May 21, 1696, determined to limit the number of permissions to trade with the Indians and gave order to have delinquents condemned to the galleys. The number of beaver skins now being taken to France exceeded the demand and to avoid too large a quantity of inferior skins being sent, he gave orders that skins should not be sold outside of the public market. About this time, there was a general recall of officers, soldiers and coureurs de bois, and a great desire to concentrate the people in the chief settlements and to encourage the Indians to bring their peltries to Montreal.

The market place no doubt saw some strange sights. About 1695, in the official record sent home to France, "Relation of the most remarkable things," in that year, we are told that Frontenac once invited a band of Ottawas who came to trade at Montreal to roast an Iroquois "newly caught by the soldiers," but as they had hamstrung him to prevent his escape he bled to death before the torture began. Next spring CalliÈres abandoned four Iroquois to be burned by the soldiers, habitants and Indian allies, in reprisal for the similar fate that befell two of the Sault Indians at Michillimackinac. (CalliÈres to the minister, October 20, 1696.) This now seems cruel, but at the time it appeared necessary to thus impress the Iroquois with "the fear of the Lord." It was done all over the country and thought righteous. La Motte-Cardillac, writing on August 5, 1695, says: "If any more prisoners are brought me, I promise you that their fate will be no sweeter."

NOTE

THE GENTLEMEN OF THE SEMINARY

The early superiors of the seminary before the canonical erection of the parish were: M. Gabriel de ThubiÈres de LÉvis de Queylus, July 29, 1657, to October 22, 1661; M. Gabriel Souart, October 22, 1661, to autumn, 1668; M. Gabriel de Queylus, autumn, 1668, to autumn, 1671; M. FranÇois Dollier de Casson, autumn, 1671, to autumn, 1674; M. Gabriel Souart, autumn, 1674, to autumn, 1676; M. FranÇois Lefebre, autumn, 1676, to autumn, 1678.

Missionary curÉs: M. Gabriel Souart, September 3, 1657, to November 11, 1666; M. Giles PÉrot, November 23, 1666, to October 30, 1678.

First titular curÉ as superior of the seminary (after the canonical erection of the parish, on October 28, 1678): M. FranÇois Dollier de Casson, October 30, 1678, to September 27, 1701.

CurÉs d'office (actual parish priests): M. Giles PÉrot, October 30, 1678, to July 17, 1680; M. Pierre RÉmy, July 17, 1680, to November 4, 1680; M. Jean FrÉmont, November 9, 1680, to October 5, 1682; M. Etienne Guyotte, October 10, 1692, to October 5, 1693; M. Jean FrÉmont, October 9, 1693, to June 17, 1694; M. Michel Caille, June 17, 1694, to October 29, 1696; M. RenÉ de Breslay, November 3, 1696, to September 27, 1701.

Second titular curÉ as superior of the seminary: FranÇois Vachon de Belmont, September 28, 1701, to May 22, 1732.

CurÉs d'office: M. de Breslay (continued), September 28, 1701, to November 19, 1703; M. Yves Priat, November 20, 1703, to April 26, 1717; M. Jentien Rangeard, June 2, 1717, to July 9, 1721; M. Benoit Baret, July 22, 1721, to October 22, 1721; M. Yves Priat, October 28, 1721, to August 8, 1725; M. Jn. Gab. Marie Le Pape du LescÖat, August 12, 1725, to February 11, 1730; M. Antoine Deat, February 20, 1730, to May 22, 1732.

Third titular curÉ as superior of the seminary: M. Louis Normant, May 25, 1732, to June 18, 1759.

CurÉ d'office: M. Antoine Deat (continued). May 25, 1732, to June, 1759.

Fourth titular curÉ as superior of the seminary: M. Etienne Montgolfier, June 21, 1759, to August 27, 1791.

CurÉ d'office: M. Antoine Deat (continued), June 21, 1759, to September 3, 1760.