It next outlined the political and municipal position of the future
colony in respect to the Company. The Sieurs Chevrier (de Fancamp), de
la Dauversière and their successors were obliged, to show their faith
and homage, to take to the fort St. Louis at Quebec in New France,
or other place afterwards designated by the Company, at each change
of possessor, as payment, a piece of gold of the weight of one ounce
stamped with the seal of the Company of New France; to present besides
other signs of acknowledgments of feudal tenure; even to furnish their
aveux et dénombrement,[38] the whole in conformity with the custom of
Paris,--a land tenure system which prevailed for so long afterward in
Canada.
In the matter of Justice, dependence was to be placed on the Sovereign
Court which was to be established at Quebec or otherwise, to which
appeal could be made from the local judges appointed by the Montreal
Company.
Montreal was, thus, crippled beforehand, in its trade extension. The
fur trade with the Indians was only allowed as far as the need and use
of private persons were concerned. All peltry, over and above this,
was to be handed over to the agents of the Company of New France at a
price fixed by it, on the pain of confiscation. Montreal's pretensions
to future independence were guarded against, by it being forbidden to
build any fortress or citadel, this privilege being reserved to the
Company should it afterward desire land for these forts and for the
settlement and housings of the officers and men around them. In case
the Company desired a fort on the mountain, it required five arpents
around it, etc. Nevertheless the seigneurs of Montreal might retrench
or fortify themselves as much as necessary to protect themselves
against the incursions of the savages.
Further limitations were placed on the sources of future population. No
grants of land were to be given to those already settled in New France,
at Quebec, Three Rivers or elsewhere, but only to those who came
expressly to people the lands. In order to insure this, the Seigneurs
Chevrier and le Royer were to send a number of men by the next shipment
made by the Company.
Finally after the clause annulling the gift of de Lauson as stated
above, the document gives order to M. de Montmagny, the governor, to
put the said seigneurs in possession of the lands.
Throughout this document there is no mention of the "Company of
Montreal." The deed is made out to the two named and to their
successors, but it was evidently understood that these were acting for
others with no other pretension than belonging to a number of
associates of the "Company of Montreal."[39]
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