Bad news travels fast. Those refugees, who had been shipped by the French to the Company’s posts at the south of the bay, reached the ships’ rendezvous at Charlton Island in time to return to England by the home-bound vessels of 1683. Before Radisson had arrived in France, Outlaw and the other refugees had come to London. The embassies of France and England rang with what was called “the Radisson outrage.” John Outlaw, quondam captain for Ben Gillam, the poacher, took oath in London, on November 23, of all that Radisson had done to injure the English, and he swore that Groseillers had showed a commission from the Government of France for the raid. Calvert, Braddon, Phineas and those seamen, who had gone up Nelson River with Bridgar—gave similar evidence, and when Bridgar, himself, came by way of New England, the clamor rose to such heights it threatened to upset the friendly treaty between England and France. Lord Preston, England’s envoy to Paris, was besieged with memorials against Radisson for the French Government. “I am confirmed in our worst fears by the news I have lately received,” wrote Sir James Hayes of the Company, “Monsieur Radisson, who was at the head of the action at Port Nelson is arrived in France the 8th of this month (December, 1683) in a man-of-war from Canada and is in all posthaste for Paris to induce the ministry to undermine us on Hudson’s Bay. Nothing can mend at this time but to get His Majesty’s order through my Lord Preston instantly to cause ye French King to have exemplary justice done upon ye said Radisson.” At the same time, Hayes was urging Preston to bribe Radisson; in fact, to do anything to bring him back to the service of the Hudson’s Bay Company. * * * * * Radisson and Groseillers had meanwhile reached Paris only to find that the great statesman, Colbert—on whose protection they had relied—was dead. Fur traders of Quebec had the ear of the court—those monopolists, who had time and again robbed them of their furs under pretense of collections for the revenue. Both Radisson and Groseillers separately petitioned the court for justice. If De la Barre had been right in restoring the pirate vessel to Ben Gillam, what right had he to seize their furs? One fourth for revenue did not mean wholesale confiscation. The French Court retorted that Radisson and Groseillers had gone North without any official commission. “True,” answered Groseillers in his petition, “no more official than a secret verbal commission such as Albanel the Jesuit had, when he came to us years ago, and that is no good reason why we should be condemned for extending French dominion and changing Nelson’s name to Bourbon.” Radisson’s petition openly stated that while they carried no “official commission,” they had gone North by the express order of the King, and that the voyage, itself, was sufficient proof of their zeal for France.