In the matter just referred to, however, the bishop may well have been substantially in the right. He knew the country, its needs, and its possibilities better than the king; and he had the interests both of his clergy and of his people sincerely at heart. It seems a little surprising that, just at this time, when his relations with the secular power were so satisfactory, he should have formed the intention of resigning the office which he had been so eager to obtain only a few years before, and of confining himself to the oversight of the Seminary. The explanation is to be found partly in the state of his health, and partly in the expectation he entertained of being able to find a man to replace him as bishop who would adopt and carry out all his views with the utmost fidelity and exactness, and thus give him even greater influence than he had had in the past. If a bishop alone could make headway against all the opposition of the civil power, what might not be expected of a bishop of sound opinions supported by such an ex-bishop as Laval himself? With these views he sailed for France in the fall of 1684 to tender his resignation to the king; and, with these views also, he not long afterwards recommended as his successor a pious ecclesiastic of noble family, M. Jean Baptiste de la Croix Chevrieres de Saint Vallier, who, though only thirty-two years of age, had already refused two bishoprics. Once before Laval had chosen a man for his piety, M. de Mezy, and it had not turned out well. The Reverend M. Gosselin, in his life of Saint Vallier, says that the day of his nomination was a regular "day of dupes." The appointment did not take place till the year 1688; but meantime M. de Saint Vallier consented to go out to Canada in the capacity of vicar-general, and make acquaintance with the diocese. Thus it happened that he and the Marquis de Denonville, La Barre's successor, came out together in the same ship, arriving at Quebec on the 1st August 1685. The vessel which brought the new governor was accompanied by two others carrying troops to the number of three hundred. Fever broke out on the way, as was so often the case in those days, and there were many deaths. Amongst those who succumbed were two priests, who, in their attendance on the sick, had caught the malady. Their fate inspired Saint Vallier with intense regret that he had not taken passage on the same vessel, so that he might have shared so glorious a death. The sentiment seems strange on the part of a man at his time of life, just entering on a career in which he might reasonably hope for long years of the most exalted usefulness. He did not in fact die till the year 1727.