France and England in North America, Part V: Count Frontenac, New France, Louis XIVParkman, Francis
History
France and England in North America, Part V: Count Frontenac, New France, Louis XIV
Parkman, Francis
Canada -- History -- To 1763 (New France); Frontenac, Louis de Buade, comte de, 1620-1698
Fort Nelson was a palisade work, garrisoned by traders and other
civilians in the employ of the English fur company, and commanded by one
of its agents, named Bailey. Though it had a considerable number of small
cannon, it was incapable of defence against any thing but musketry; and
the French bombs soon made it untenable. After being three times
summoned, Bailey lowered his flag, though not till he had obtained
honorable terms; and he and his men marched out with arms and baggage,
drums beating and colors flying.
Iberville had triumphed over the storms, the icebergs, and the English.
The north had seen his prowess, and another fame awaited him in the
regions of the sun; for he became the father of Louisiana, and his
brother Bienville founded New Orleans. [3]
[3] On the capture of Fort Nelson, Iberville au Ministre, 8 Nov., 1697;
Jérémie, Relation de la Baye de Hudson; La Potherie, I. 85-109. All these
writers were present at the attack.
These northern conflicts were but episodes. In Hudson's Bay,
Newfoundland, and Acadia, the issues of the war were unimportant,
compared with the momentous question whether France or England should be
mistress of the west; that is to say, of the whole interior of the
continent. There was a strange contrast in the attitude of the rival
colonies towards this supreme prize: the one was inert, and seemingly
indifferent; the other, intensely active. The reason is obvious enough.
The English colonies were separate, jealous of the crown and of each
other, and incapable as yet of acting in concert. Living by agriculture
and trade, they could prosper within limited areas, and had no present
need of spreading beyond the Alleghanies. Each of them was an aggregate
of persons, busied with their own affairs, and giving little heed to
matters which did not immediately concern them. Their rulers, whether
chosen by themselves or appointed in England, could not compel them to
become the instruments of enterprises in which the sacrifice was present,
and the advantage remote. The neglect in which the English court left
them, though wholesome in most respects, made them unfit for aggressive
action; for they had neither troops, commanders, political union,
military organization, nor military habits. In communities so busy, and
governments so popular, much could not be done, in war, till the people
were roused to the necessity of doing it; and that awakening was still
far distant. Even New York, the only exposed colony, except Massachusetts
and New Hampshire, regarded the war merely as a nuisance to be held at
arm's length. [4]
[4] See note at the end of the chapter.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account