The Great Company : $b being a history of the honourable company of merchants-adventurers trading into Hudson's BayWillson, Beckles
History
The Great Company : $b being a history of the honourable company of merchants-adventurers trading into Hudson's Bay
Willson, Beckles
Fur trade -- Canada; Hudson's Bay Company; Northwest, Canadian -- History
The Company, too, was debarred from any attempt at reconquest,
because of the Treaty[36] just concluded at Ryswick, which yielded the
territory which had been the scene of so much commerce, action and
bloodshed to the subjects of the Most Christian King.
FOOTNOTES:
[31] A young Irishman, Edmund Fitz-Maurice, of Kerry, who had embraced
the Church, and had served with James's army at the Battle of the
Boyne, accompanied the expedition in the character of chaplain. He is
alluded to by the French chronicler of the affair as "Fiche-Maurice de
Kieri de la Maison du Milord Kieri en Irlande."
[32] The fourth, the fire-ship _Owner's Love_, was never more heard
of. It is supposed that, separated from the others, she ran into the
ice and was sunk, with all on board.
[33] Thus was concluded what was, in the opinion of the best
authorities, French and English, one of the fiercest and bloodiest
battles of the war.
"Toute la Marine de Rochefort croient que ce combat a ete un des plus
rudes de cette Guerre," says La Potherie.
[34] "Ils avoient de tres habile cannoniers," Jérémie, an eye-witness,
was forced to confess.
[35] "Ainsi le dernier poste," Garneau exclaims, "que les English
avaient dans le baie d'Hudson tombé en notre pouvoir, et la France
resta seule maitresse de cette region." (Tome II., p. 137.)
But Garneau overlooked the three forts in James' Bay retaken by the
English in 1693; one of which, Fort Anne or Chechouan, he mistook for
Fort Nelson. At any rate Fort Albany or Chechouan remained in
possession of the Company from 1693; and they never lost it.
It was unsuccessfully attacked by Menthel in 1709.
[36] So strongly has the Treaty of Ryswick been interpreted in favour
of France, that some historians merely state the fact that by it she
retained all Hudson's Bay, and the places of which she was in
possession at the beginning of the war. The commissioners having never
met to try the question of right, things remained _in statu quo_. Now,
whatever the commissioners might have done, had they ever passed
judgment on the cause the Treaty provided they should try, they could
not have given Fort Albany to the British, for it was one of the
places taken by the French during the preceding peace, and retaken by
the British during the war, and, therefore, adjudged in direct terms
of the Treaty itself to belong to France. Thus, then, it will be seen,
declared the opponents of the Company, that the only possession held
by the Hudson's Bay Company during the sixteen years that intervened
between the Treaty of Ryswick and the Treaty of Utrecht was one to
which they had no right, and which the obligations of the Treaty
required should be given up to France.--_Report of Ontario Boundary
Commission._
CHAPTER XV.
1698-1713.
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