No doubt Article VII. of the Treaty embodies the results of their influence. It is so important for our purpose that we give it in full:--"Commissioners should be appointed on both sides to examine and determine the rights and pretensions which either of the said Kings have to the places situated in Hudson Bay; but the possession of those places which were taken by the French during the peace that preceded this war, and were retaken by the English during this war, shall be left to the French, by virtue of the foregoing articles. The capitulation made by the English on September 5th, 1695, shall be observed according to the form and tenor; the merchandises therein mentioned shall be restored; the Governor at the fort taken there shall be set at liberty, if it be not already done; the differences which have arisen concerning the execution of the said capitulation and the value of the goods there lost, shall be adjudicated and determined by the said commissioners; who immediately after the ratification of the present Treaty, shall be invested with sufficient authority for the setting of the limits and confines of the lands to be restored on either side by virtue of the foregoing article, and likewise for exchanging of lands, as may conduce to the mutual interest and advantage of both Kings." This agreement presents a few salient points:-- 1. The concession to France of rights (undefined, it is true), but of rights not hitherto acknowledged by the English. 2. The case of the Company, which would have been seriously prejudiced by Article VII., is kept open, and commissioners are appointed to examine and decide boundaries. 3. The claim for damages so urgently pressed by the Hudson's Bay Company receives some recognition in the restoration of merchandize and the investigation into the "value of the goods lost." 4. On the whole, the interests of the Hudson's Bay Company would seem to have been decidedly prejudiced by the Treaty.