IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) 1.0 I.I 1.25 *" IIIM IIIIM U.U.'.Z 1.4 118 1.6 P^.. iV % ^^ y^ %^ c?. CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CIHIVI/ICMH Collection de microfiches. Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques Technical and Bibliographic Notes/Notes techniques et bibliographiques The Institute has attempted to obtain the best original copy available for filming. Features of this copy which may be bibliographicaily unique, which may alter any of the images in the reproduction, or which may significantly change the usual method of filming, are checked below. D D n □ n n n D Coloured covers/ Couverture de couleur Covers damaged/ Couverture endommagee Covers restored and/or laminated/ Couverture restaur^e et/ou pellicul6e Cover title missing/ Le titre de couverture manque Coloured maps/ Cartes g^ographiques en couleur Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/ Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur Bound with other material/ Relie avec d'autres documents Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion along interior margin/ La rellure serree peut causer de I'ombre ou de la distortion le long de la marge int^rieure Blank leaves added during restoration may appear within the text. Whenever possible, these have been omitted from filming/ II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajoutdes lors dune restauration apparaissent dans le texte, mais, lorsque cela 6tait possible, cos pages n'ont pas et6 filmees. Additional comments:/ Commentaires supplementaires; L'lnstitut a microfilm^ le meilleur exemplaire qu'il lui a 6x6 possible de se procurer. Les details de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-dtre uniques du point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une modification dans la mithode normale de filmage sont indiqu^s ci-dessous. I I Coloured pages/ D □ Pages de couleur Pages damaged/ Pages endomrnag^es Pages restored and/or laminated/ Pages restaur^es et/ou pellicul6es Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ Pages d6color6es, tachetdes ou piqu^es Pages detached/ Pages d^tach^es r I Showthrough/ Transparence Quality of prir Quality inegale de I'impression Includes supplementary materia Comprend du materiel supplementaire Only edition available/ Seule Edition disponible I I Quality of print varies/ I I Includes supplementary material/ I I Only edition available/ Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to ensure the best possible image/ Les pages totalement ou partiellement obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure, etc., ont 6t6 filmees A nouveau de facon S obtenir la meilleure image possible. This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ Ce document est filmd au taux de reduction indiqu6 ci-dessous. 10X 14X 18X 22X 12X 16X 20X 26X 30X 24X 28X 32X tails du odifier une mage The copy f'lmed here has been reproduced thanks to the generosity of: Library of the Public Archives of Canada The images appearing here are the best quality possible considering the condition and legibility of the original copy and in keeping with the filming contract specifications. Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed beginning with the front cover and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All other original copies are filmed beginning on the first page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impression. The last recorded frame on each microfiche shall contain the symbol — »- (meaning "CON- TINUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "END"), whichever applies. L'exemplaire filmd fut reproduit grdce A la g6n6rosit6 de: La bibliothdque des Archives publiques du Canada Les images suivantes ont 6t6 reproduites avec le plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition et de la nettetd de l'exemplaire film6, et en conformity avec les conditions du contrat de filmage. Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en papier est imprimde sont filmds en commenpant par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la dernidre page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par le second plat, selon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires originaux sont filmds en commengant par la premidre page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration et en terminant par la dernidre page qui comporte une telle empreinte. Un des symboles suivants apparaitra sur la dernidre image de cheque microfiche, selon le cas: 'e symbols -^ signifie "A SUIVRE", le symbols V signifie "FIN". Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at different reduction ratios. Those too large to be entirely included in one exposure are filmed beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to right and top to bottom, as many frames as required. The following diagrams illustrate the method: Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent dtre film6s d des taux de reduction diffdrents. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour 6tre reproduit en un seul clichd, il est film6 d partir de Tangle sup6rieur gauche, de gauche d droits, et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre d'images n^cessaire. Les diagrammes suivants illustrent la m6thode. rrata o aeiure, 1 d 3 32X 1 t i 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 THE SEMINARY OF MONTREAL. THEIR RIGHTS AND TITLES. ST. HYACINTHE: COURRIER DB ST. UYACINTHB POWEB. PSBSSBS. 1880. PAf)P Ac V t MEMOIR. i' i. For a number of years past, systematic attacks have l»een made against the Seminary of Montreal, con- cerning the Indians of the Lake of Two Mountains, lately known under the designation of the " Oka Indians," Being ill advised, those Indians have claimed rights •of proprietorship in the lands of the seigniory of the Lake of Two Mountains, and in many instances, have attempted to constitute themselves as owners, by fell- ing trees, and selling them and taking actual posses- sion of land. The Seminary, witnessing this usurpation of thefr "vested rights, and having exhausted every means of 'Conciliation, were compelled, tor their own protection, to appeal to the Courts of Law and bring the offen- ■ders before them. Thereupon a howl was set up about intolerance and tyranny, and the Indians were prompt- - f» I.' I' IX w n I i f* Therefore, in 1 7 16, the Seminary requested the king to change the mission. This change was resolved upon in the same year, and messieurs de Vaudreuil and Bcgon, the governor and the intendant, were com- manded " to grant to the Seminary three square lea- •" gues of land adjoining the lands granted to monsieur ■" Duguay, and ascending along the Lakes of the Two "*' Mountains, half a league of land by three leagues " in depth, for the missionaries, on condition that " when such lands would ^) » abandoned by those ■" Indians, the same should re\ t to His Majesty. " Mr. de Vaudreuil, in nn:;w'er, remarked that the " superior of tl .o Seminar; jf Montrer \ iiad represented " to him that the change of thfi mission would cost " more than 20,coo francs. Lctcause. in addition to the " house of the ecclesiastics, it wrr^ necessary to build a " church and a stone fort, and that they c^uld never ** be indemnified for those expenses, except by the " proprietorship of such land and seigniory forever ; " and that it seemed to him just to grant such favor, ■*' the change of the mission being very advantageous " to the colony, for such change would protect against '" the incursions of the other Indians, the northern side *' which was unprotected. " The matter having been placed before monsieur " le Regent on the 4th of fcbruary 17 17, H. R. H. " decided that such concession must be granted forever " to this Seminary, on condition that they do build the " church and fort acco'*ding to the plans which would " be furnished to them and approved of by Messrs. de " Vaudreuil and Begon, and that such buildings be ^' completed within two years. '• In consequence, the deed of concession was for- " warded by messieurs de Vaudreuil and Begon on the •' 17th October 1717 and confirmed by the King on " the 27th april 17 18, on condition that the churcl* " and the stone fort be built within seven years." The above extract is taken verbatim from an arrets dated the 24th march 1721, signed by " L. A. de- Bourbon," to be found in the manuscripts of the Dominion Parliamentary Librar}^ 3rd series, vol. 3. On reference to the ratification by the King, dated 27th of april 17 1 8, it will be seen that the absolute proprietorship was granted "to have and to hold the- " same forever unto the said sieurs ecclesiastics, their " successors and assigns, even if the said mission be " taken away from thence^ in full property under the " title of fief and seigniory rvith the right of super ior^ " mean and inferior jurisdiciion." The deed of grant as well as the ratification by the King imposed upon the Seminary the obligation of conceding lands at the rate of 20 sous and one chapon per acre frontage with a cens of 6 pence [deniers]. Later, on the 26th of September 1733, a new grant of land, adjoining that above mentioned, was made to- the Seminary by the Kinj; : " To have and to hold " the said ecclesiastics, their successors and assigns " forever, as a fief and seigniory with the right of su- " perior, mean and inferior jurisdiction." At the time of the ratification, in 1735, of the grant of 1733. the Seminary, having made representation to the King, that the transfer of the mission from Sault-au-Recollet to the Lake of Two Mountains, the erection of the church, the presbytery and the wooden fort, had involved them in an expenditure of money, exceeding the value of the grant of 1733, and of that .s XI of 1718, and that the burden of erecting the stone fort which they had undertaken by the deed of 17 18 was too great, [more especially as there was no lon- ger a necessity for the fort in question], made appli- cation for an additional grant of lands and prayed to be relieved from the obligation of erecting the stone fort Viewing these representations favorably, the king added to his grant a certain extent of land : " To ha-* " ve and to hold in full property and seigniory as well *' as the old land mentioned in the first concession," and exempted them from building the fort. Such are the titl°? of the Seminary to the sei- gniory of the Lake of Two Mountains. The terms used are, to say the least, as formal, clear and unmif- takeable as those used in the titles and deeds of the seigniories of Montreal and of St. Sulpice. With reference to the seigniory of the Lake of Two Mountains, we have something more, it is the edict of 172 1, establishing that the very right of proprie- torship was discussed. In the first instance, it was not intended to be granted.but later on, it was fully granted in the most comprehensive terms, and in all probabi- lity, it was due to that discussion that the words even if the said mission be taken away front tlience were in- serted in the deed. It would be labor lost to look for tiic rights of the Indians in any of those grants. No doubt, that the Indians profited by the conces- sions made to the Seminary and that the mission of the Lake of Two Mountains afforded them immense advantages. The grant however, was made to the Seminary xn and to them alone, for the benefit and for the promo- tion of their undertakings. This can be ascertained in the most satisfactory manner on reference to the preambles of the different titles and edicts above quoted. It was in order " to second the pious design of the " said gentlemen of the Seminary, and in ackncw- *• ledgement of services by them rendered," that the deed of gift of the 9th march 1663 was made. It was with a desire of being " propitious to the " ecclesiastics of the Seminary of St. Sulpice, esta- " blished in Paris, from whom those of the Seminary " of St. Sulpice established at Montreal, proceed," that the King has, on the 27th of april 171 8, ratified the concession of the 17th October 17 17. It was also in order to be " propitious towards the said eccle- " siastics of Paris," that he has, on the ist march 1735, ratified the concession of the 27th april 1733. The wording of the foregoing evidences the palpa- ble intention of granting to the Seminary and to them only. Moreover, these lands and Seigniories are not held by the Seminary under gratuitous title. The author of the pamphlet referred to (pa^e 20), takes exception to the statement made by M. Baile, present superior of the Seminary, in answer to an inquiry by the gov- ernment, that the grant of the seigniory of the lake of Two Mountains had been made [a titre onereux]. May we not refer to the language of Mr. de Vau- dreuil in the edict of 172 1, asserting : " That the su- " perior of the Seminary had represented to him that " the change of this mission would cost more than " 20,000 francs, and that they [the Sulpicians] could " never be indemnified for those expenses, except by XIII •' the proprietorship of such land and seigniory for- " ever" and that " it seemed to him just to grant such- " favor." Mr. de Vaudreuil established thereby the truth of the statement made by the superior of the Seminary. Have we not clearly shown that it was to indem- nify the gentlemen of the Seminary, for the expen- diture made by them till that date, that the King, by his edict of 1735, added a new grant to the preceding ones ? M. Baile was therefore justified, basing his state- ment on those titles, in asserting that the seigniory of the lake of Two Mountains had been granted to the Sulpicians a titre onerctix. And further, the seigniories of Montreal and St. Sulpice which had been originally deeded to the Seminary in 1663 by donation to the company of New France, were subsequently in 1693 confirmed a titre onereux in favor of the gentlemen of the Seminary. We read in the Letters Patent, under the form of an Edict, concerning the justice of the Island of Mont- real and cote St. Sulpice, to be found at page 342 of the 1st vol. of our Edicts and Ordinances : " We have moreover confirmed, and by these pre- " sents do confirm, u titre onereux^ in consideration of " the indemnity which might be due to the said eccle- " siastics, for what they have abandoned to us in their " seigniory of Montreal, and cote Saint Sulpice, and " other considerations hereinbefore explained, consti- " tute in mortmain what we have granted to them by " our letters patent of the month of May 1677 of the " said Island of Mc.ntreal, land at present known " as cote Saint Sulpice, islets, courcelles and depen- " dencies which then belonged to them without neveri XIV " theles,by reason of the said constitution of m i-rtmain, " nor of rights of exchange (droits d'echange), that " their being held in future, to pay us, nor to any " of the Kings, our^successors, any monies, indemnity* " nor any rights, nor [homme vivant et mourant.]" The authorities, in those days, were in a position to verify, and undoubtedly must have verified the facts set forth in the edicts, and it is scarcely becoming now, after the lapse of 1 50 or 200 years, to challenge the truth of assertions contained in documents bea- ring the signature of the king. Previous to the conquest, the right of proprietorship of the gentlemen of the Seminary in those seigniories, was never disputed, and no one ever dreamt of pre- tending that the Indians held any rights therein. II. In 1 760, at the date of the conquest, articles of capi- tulation were signed by the marquis de Vaudreuil, governor of Canada representing the King of France^ and by general Amherst, on behalf of the King of En- gland. The articles were, in the first instance, drafted by the marquis de Vaudreuil, and submitted by him to general Amherst, who, opposite to each article, wrote his acceptance or refusal of the same. Nevertheless he reserved certain articles for submission to the appro- val of the King of England. Under the capitulation, as agreed to, french subjects were allowed to retain possession of their lands, if they remained in the country, or to sell them and cany XV with them the proceeds, if they chose to return to France. There were dififerent opinions with reference to the effect of the capitulation, ?.s regards the lands of the Seminary. Some contended that those lands had be- come vested in the Crown, and amongst their number, was Doctor Marriott, attorney general for the Province of Quebec at London, England.who, in reply to a query from the British Government, took that view of the question in 1773. In 1804, Judge Sewell gave a similar opinion, and in 1828, Sir James Stuart expressed • himself in the same sense. Others held that the lands of the Seminary of St Sulpice had remained vested in the Seminary of Montreal. Mr. Dupin, the celebrated french jurist, was of that opinion along with eleven of his confreres, all men of eminence in the profession, and at the present time, we have the opinion of messieurs Langevin, Laflamme and Badgley, supporting this -view. The opinion of the two gentlemen last auentioned will be found in the appendix, that of Mr, Laflamme at page 102, and that of judge Badgley at page 129. Article 35 of the capitulation conceded in express terms to the priests of the Seminary of St Sulpice -** leave to sell, in whole or in part, the estates and -* moveables which they possess in the colony, either •** to the French or to the English, without the least "*' hindrance or obstacle from the British Government" with power " to take with them or send to France •** the produce of what naturesoever it be, of the said ■** good& sold." The following are the terms in which general Amherst granted the article in question: "They shall XVI " be masters to dispose of thei*" estates and to send " the produce thereof, as well as their persons and alL " that belongs to them to France." [To be found in a collection of the acts passed in the parliament of Great Britain and of other public acts relative to Canada, published under authority at Quebec,in 1824.} The author of the Oka pamphlet is therefore beside the truth, when he asserts, in his appendix, note A^ page ^6, after having quoted article 35 : " This article ** was refused until the king's consent should be " obtained." What he there states is in direct contradiction with his former assertion, at page 4th of his pamphlet, when he says : " Then it was sought by the marquis de Vau- " dreuil that the Sulpicians with the Recollets and the " Jesuits should have leave to sell in whole or in part '* the estates and moveables which they possessed in " Canada, and take or send the produce thereof to " France. This permission, therefore, was formulated " by the marquis, and being agreed to by Lord *' Amherst, the English plenipotentiary, was intro- " duced as an article of the treaty of capitulation. " It however was disallowed by the British Govern- " ment and never became legalized," and he repeats the last assertion in nearly the same terms, at page 29^ Both assertions are false, for the British govern- ment never disallowed the article of the capitulation- referred to. Article 35 was, by implication, confirmed by the 4th article of the treaty of peace of 1763 which grant- ed to all the subjects of the King of France, leave to sell their estates and to take with them the proceeds, provided such sales were effected within eighteen / XVII months from the date of the treaty, which delay ex- pired in the month of August 1764, The treaty was signed on the loth of February 1763. On the 4th of November of the same year, the military court, presided over by Ralph Burton, gover- nor of Montreal, recognized the rights of proprietor- ship of the Seminary, by maintaining an action they had instituted against one Vanderheyden, revendica- ting a lot of land in the seigniory of the lake of Two Mountains, that he had purchased from an Indian. That judgment has not, it is true, the full force of a legal enactment, but having been pronounced during the very year of the making of the treaty and within three years of the capitulation, it may be considered in the light of an expression of the opinion entertain- ed in those days, and as expressing the interpreta- tion then given to the articles of the capitulation and treaty. The Seminary of St. Sulpice might have sold their estates under the authority of article 35 of the capi tulation, and have carried off the proceeds. The difficulty arose from the fact that, instead of selling to third parties, they made a donation of their estates to the Seminary of Montreal. Ti.is donation is dated the 27th april 1764. Dr. Marriott,chief justice Se\vell,and Sir James Stu- art held that the Seminary of St. Sulpice had not the right to divest themselves of their property in favor of certain members of their community, because one cannot give to one self, and that, having thus failed, v/ithin the prescribed delay, to dispose of their estates,^ they could not claim the benefit of article 35 of the capitula'aon. XVIII One of them even went beyond that, and stated that article 35 is Overridden by the common law wiiich vested the estates of the Seminary in the King of England at the time of the conquest, inasmuch, as at that time, the corporation of the Seminary of St.Sul- pice did not exist in the country, but was confined to France, where the head establishment was situated. The french lawyers with judge Badgley, messrs. Lan- gevin and Laflamme, were of opinion that the deed of donation of the 27th of april 1764 was legal, and moreover, by the very fact of the existence in the country of the Seminary of Montreal, that Semina- ry' remained the only proprietors of the estates of St* Sulpice. Whatever may be thought of the opinions given, it would seem that the donation in question was made after consultation with the court of England. Lord Halifax, secretary of the colonies in 1764, states to the french ambassador in London, that " although ** the King of England, had bound himself by the " treaty to allow the free exercise of the Roman Ca- " tholic religion in Canada, according to the law of " England, it did not follow that estates situated in " Canada might continue to belong to Frenchmen " living in France and subjects of the King of Fran- *' ce, that His British Majesty consents that the priests " of the Seminary of Montreal do continue to enjoy " them, but without any dependency from the Semi- *' nary of Paris." Those words were quoted by the marquis of Norman- by in a speech delivered in the House of Lords, on the 15th may 1841, concerning the ordinance of 1840, confirming the titles of the Seminary of Montreal,and XIX ithe quotation may be found at page 725 of the Mir- ror of Parliament, Vol. XXI. It was in conformity with that intimation of the wish of the King of England, that the deed of dona- tion was effected, and the Seminary of Montreal be- came absolutely independent of that of Paris. Doctor Marriott gave his opinion in 1773. Taking .Ms own admission, made at the bar of the House of Commons, relative to the Quebec act of 1774, he can liardly be considered as being competent to speak as to the validity of titles under the french law. The following questions were put to him by Mr. Mack- worth, one of the members of the House." " O. Does he " [Dr. Marriott] " think that the Ca- "" nadians would choose the system of the English '" law or the French law ? " A. I do not know a single Canadian and never '*' was in Canada. " Q. Does he know anything of the state of Ca- ^' nada ? ■" A. What I know is from such papers as have been •" laid before me by order of the King in Council, and "** by information of other persons." The examination was continued by captain Phipps. " Q. I desire to ask if he understands the french ^ law ? " A. I find it very difficult to understand any law. " Q. Does he know the power of the french King •*' under the constitution of the french law ? "A. I do not well understand the constitution of ** France. I never was in France." M. Baker then puts the following questions. Q. I would ask the gentkman at the bar if ever Ai XX " he has read anything of the law of France ? I be- " lieve he has read a great deal. " A. I have read little of the french law. •• Q. Does he understand it ? •* A. Not the style of it, nor its forms very well. " Q. Did he ever see any system of the french law " in Canada ? " A. I have read a ct)llection of french laws which- ♦* contains by way of abstract the laws and usages of " that province, founded on the laws of the prevdte of " Paris, and it also contains several ordinances of po- *' lice and arrets of the French King. " Q. Does he understand them ? " A. Some part of them, the law language is diffi- " cult. " [Parliamentary History of England, Vol. XVII,. col. 1377 and following.] It is perfectly evident that Dr. Marriott had but a very meagre knowledge of the position or rights of the Seminary in Canada. His ignorance of french law must have been a great drawback to him in the ap- preciation he had been called upon to make. At all events, according to his views, expressed m 1773, the estates of the Seminary should revert to the Crown, and yet, by the Quebec act, passed the follow- ing year 1774, it did not arrogate to itself the right which, under his opinion, it could have exercised. The writer of the Oka pamphlet lays great stress on the 8th clause of the act of 1774 which reads as follows : " That all H. M. Canadian subjects within '* the province of Quebec, the religious orders and " communities only excepted, may also hold and « enjoy their property and possessions, together with XXI ^* all customs and usages relative thereto and all other ** their civil rights, in as large, ample and beneficial *' manner as if the said proclamation, commission, "*' ordinances and other acts and instruments had not ■*' been made, and as may consist with their allegiance *' to H. M., and subjection to the Crown and Parlia- ^' ment of Great Britain." " To read the discussion on the above bill," says the pamphleteer, page 6, *• in its passage in both the "" Lords and Commons, as given in the Pictorial His- " tory of England would show to every doubting " mind that it was with the most determined purpose, •" the exception against the regulars was made, and ■^* not, by any means, was it an oversight or uninten- ^' tional circumstance, as the Sulpicians have endea- •" voured in their memoire of the titles of the Seminary, ^' to show." True, in reference to the Hansard and the Pictorial History of England, there is no doubt but that a long debate took place in the House of Lords and Com- mons relative to this bill (see Parliamentary History tof England, Vol. XVH, from column 1377 to column 1400, and from column 1402 to column 1407], (see also Pictorial History of England, Vol. V, page 165 and following), but no discussion took place relative to this exception as to the regulars. The debate took place over other points, and the assertion of the .author of the pamphlet bears evidence of error. It is difficult to believe that, by that clause, the Par- liament of England intended to dispossess all commu- nities and religious orders of estates, the proprietorship -of which had been secured to them in express terms (by article 34th of the capitulation, which reads as XXII follows : " All the communities and all the priests shall " preserve their moveables the property and revenues •'of the seigniories and other estates which they " possess in the colony, of nature whatsoever they be,. *' and the same estates shall be preserved in their " privileges, rights, honors and exemptions." Many persons interpret differently from the author of the Oka pamphlet, clause 8 of the act of 1774. A proclamation of the King for the provisional govern- ment of the colony had been published in the year 1763. Ordinances had been promulgated concern- ing the rights of the inhabitants of Canada. Clause 8 of the act of 1774 annuls that proclamation, and* those ordinances, as regards Canadian subjects,leaving; the communities and religious orders under their pro- visions. Our purpose being simply to give a recital of the- difficulties which have been suscitated, we shall not enter into the discussion of those opinions. We- shall merely observe that attorney general Thurlow whose name is mentioned at page 5 of the Oka pam- phlet as having expressed an opinion adverse to the- Seminary, was in the House at the time of the passing of the Bill of 1774, and that he "reminded the- " House that the definitive treaty of peace was made ** in favor of property in Canada, made in favor of the- " Catholic religion, and even, in favor ^>f the several " religious Orders." [Pictorial History of England^ Vol. V, page 167.] That gentleman was still in office in 1775, and we find in the royal instructions furnished during that year to Governor Guy Carleton : " That the societies ** of the Romish priests called Seminaries in Quebec; XXIII ■I '• and Montreal should continue to possess and occu- " py their houses of residence and all other lands and " houses to which they were lawfully entitled on the " 1,3th September 1759." (Mirror of Parliament, Vol. XXI, p. 545.) The English commission appointed in 1836, and to which we shall refer hereafter, interpreted those instruc- tions thus : " New instructions were given to the Go- " vernor of Canada on the 3rd of January 1775 in con- " scqiicfice of the passing of the Quebec act in the preced- " ingyear\ the 21st section related to the exercise of " the Roman catholic religion and by the eleventh " head of it, it was directed that the Seminaries of Que- " bee and Montreal should remain in possession of all •' houses and lands of which they were in possession •' on the 13th September 1759." (Mirror of Parliament, Vol. XXI, p. 545J Evidently, the british government, as we can judge by the foregoing quotations, gave a very different in- terpretation to the act of 1774 from that advanced by the author of the pamphlet. It is not our intention to discuss the question, whether those instructions amounted to an ac- knowledgement of the rights of the Seminary. Our object is merely to point out that, from that date, the Seminary remained in possession of their estates, with the full assent and concurrence of the Crown of England. General Haldimand, governor of Canada in 1781, deemed that he was following out his instructions by receiving during that year, for the purpose of making their act of fealty and homage, the Sulpicians of Montreal, as seigniors of Montreal, of St. Sulpice and of the Lake of Two Mountains. I XXIV The author of this pamphlet, at pacre 12, gives quo- tations to establish that acts of " f' title of the ordinances *' to confirm their title to the Fief and •• Seigniory of the Island of Montreal, the Fief and " Seigniory of the Lake of the Two Mountains, and •• the F"ief and Seigniory of St Sulpice, in this pro- " vince." The answer is further to be found in the preambule. Her Majesty therein sets forth : "And whereas doubts '* and controversies have arisen touching the right and " title of the said Ecclesiastics, of the said Seminary ; " and whereas Her Majesty, desirous that all such " doubts and controversies should be removed and "terminated," she wishes "that the right and the *' title" be absolutely confirmed for the purposes above mentioned. Section H informs us that the titles are " confirmed and declared good and valid, and ef- " fectual in law, in the same manner and to the same " extent, as the Ecclesiastics of the Seminary of St " Sulpice of the Fauxbourg of StGermain, Lez Paris, " or the Seminary of St Sulpice of Montreal, accord- " ing to its constitution, before the eighteenth day " of September, which was in the year one thousand " seven hundred and fifty nine, might or could have " enjoyed, held or applied the same or any part the- " reof." We have demonstrated that the original titles in- volved proprietorship ; that they are perpetual, and '! XXXV that, at the time of the first grant of the seigniory of the Lake of Two Mountains, a temporary title having been offered, the Seminary petitioned for and obtained the absolute proprietorship. By the terms of the ordinance, we see indicated the nature of the possession then held by the gentlemen of the Seminary. Speaking of their rights and seigniories, the follow- ing words are used. '* Now held and possessed by them as proprietors ■" thereof ('sec. II)." Further, the ordinance gives them the right " to hold.possess and enjoy them, as the ■** true and lawful owners and proprietors of the same, " and of every part and parcel thereof, to the ofi/y use, '* benefit and behoof of the said Seminary or corpo- " ration and their successors for ever." (sec. III.) Undoubtedly, the Seminary cannot any more than any other corporation, alter the purposes of their char- ter, they cannot, for instance, become a trading com- pany, nor a banking institution any more than Banks would have the right to become Seminaries This law applies to all corporations. But common sense indicates that such restrictions cannot affect the rights of property, and it seems utterly illogical to us to contend that, because a corporation cannot devote its means to other purposes than those for which it was incorporated, therefore it does not possess the ab- solute proprietorship of its estates. Such a method of reasoning against the Seminary could be applied with equal force against any other corporation. In a word, do not all the attempts on the part of the pamphleteer to establish that the gentlemen of XXXVI the Seminary of St. Sulpice arc not proprietors of their estates, crumble in the face of titles givinj; them the most lull and ample proprietorship, and in regard of the lav,' of tiie land which declares them to be " true and lawful proprietors ?" Sectiotv 111, ord. of 1840. If the gentlemen of the Seminary are the true and lawful proprietors of their estates, they are sole pro- prietors, for it is a fundamental pilnciple of law that the same ri'^ht of property can only be vested in one person at a time. This dispute about the rights and titles of the Se- minary has been freqv.ently raised in the interest of the Indians, who claim aright of property in the Sei- gniory of the Lake of Two Mountains. The Seminary founded a mission at Montreal which,, in the interest of the Indians, and to withdraw them from the debasing influences of drunkennes- was trans- ferred to the Sault-au-RecoUet, and subsequently to the Lake of Two Mountains. The Scminai7v, to the full extent of their ability, sought to accommodate thelndians,they allowed them to cultivate their lands for their own benefit, they per- mitted them to take firewood for their own use, but they prohibited them from periorming acts of pro- prietorship ; considering thems'^rives sole proprietors and as far as can be ascertaiii^hen that question was put, I was not aware of ■** all the facts of the case, but which are contained in •*' the dispatch for which I now move. A good deal ^' of discussion has taken place on the subject, and a *' motion was made in regard to it so long ago as ■*' 1826. At that time, Lord Hathurst wrote a dis- patch requiring that a juaicial decision might take 4( ■■ XLII « (I <( (< « << « « « « « (< << << « « p of Exeter that the ordinance would not be submitted until the XLIY ftillowing session, and that the law officers of the Crown, to whom it had been referred, were of opinion that it was valid. [Mirror of Parliament Vol XX.pages 5015 and subsequent.] On the 29th of July 1840, in the House of Com- mons, M. Pakington made a similar enquiry of the government who, through Lord John Russell, gave a similar answer to that given in the House of Lords [ideni.pages 5023 and 5024.] On the 4th of august M. Pakington presented the memorial of certain inhabitants of Montreal against the ordinance, p'-n.ying that the government should sus- pend the effect of the ordinance until the Houses of Parliament, t the'r next session, should have an op- portunity of expressing their opinion thereon, [idem. page 5193.] Lord John Russell refused to acceed to that request, and the memorial was left upon the table. It was only during the following session that the debate took place, and consequently, no one could have been taken by surprise. At the opening of the session of 1841, the ordi- nance was laid before both Houses, as had been pre- viously announced. On the 4th of March 1841, the bishop of F-xeter, in the House of Lords, presented a petition from a certain number of inhabitants of Montreal against the ordinance, and in so doing, he delivered a lengthy speech. The speaker made the most of every thing that had the appearance of uncertainty in the titles of the Seminary, he attacked the report of the commis- sion of 1836. He appealed to every religious and political motive which, according to his views, ought to lead to the disavowal of the ordinance, he accused the governor of Canada of having: forced that ordinance, not on the Seniinary, as the author of the pamphlet insinuates, but upon the special council. That speech may be read at pages 542 and follow- ing in the XXI vol. of the Mirror of Parliament. All the arguments which have been rehashed in the pamphlet, are to be found there. But tliere is one remarkable difference between the speech and the pamphlet.and that is the total absence in the former, of the vulgar and insulting language that sullies every page of the latter. Whilst upholding his views in the most forcible manner, the bishop pays a just tribute to the gentlemen of the Semii-^ry : "From all I have heard " of the members of that body," says he at page 545, " I believe that they are entitled to the utmost '' credit for their zeal, temperance and desire faithfully *' to do what they believe to be their duty." And further at page 546,he adds :" Tn discussing the " subject, I wish not to be understood is throwing any " censure upon the parties alluded to as individuals, " I believe most conscientiously that they are entit- " led to the honor and respect and reverence of every " man of every religious communion. I believe they " are most exemplary in their conduct. That is in- " deed the uniform testimony from every quarter of '• Canada." What was the reply of the Viscount MelbouniC to the speech of the bishop of Ex'cter. Speaking on behalf of Her Majesty's government, does he coincide with the views of our pamphleteer ? " Now, let your " Lordships see how th<: case really stands. This XLVI " Seminary has now been in existence since " 1763, t?ie period at which the country fell into " the hands of the British Crown, in possession of all " those properties and in the complete exercise of all " those seigniorial rights which they hold at present. " They have been recognized by Governor General " after Governor General of Canada.by as many coun- ** oils as have sat since 1774 ; and as many assem- " blies as have met since 1790, when the Canadian act " passed. I do say, therefore, notwithstanding any le- " gal or speculative opinions that may have been ha- ** zarded upon the subject, that if this continued *' possession of those properties by the Seminary of " St Sulpice, and this continued and complete exer- ** cise of those rights are not to be considered as a " settled and a fixed possession, there is nothing " settled or fixed in the affairs of mankind. If this is " not to constitute a recognition of and a moral and " equitable right to those properties, superseding any " prior or legal right that could possibly exist, then " I would say, there is nothing which, by possibility, «' can be considered fixed, stable or permanent. It is " upon this ground, upon the ground of the possession " being so settled, that the ordinance was framed." How different from the statement of the writer in the pamphlet ! The old Duke of Wellington who, at the time of *^he presentation of the petition, had pronounced against the ordinance, cast his vote for its mainte- nance. On the day fixed for the discussion of the bill, 15th march, the bishop of Exeter spoke at length against the ordinance, attacking again the titles, and oppo- I, XLVII sing the ordinance as being unjust, sajn'n^^ that it was but a fancy of the governor of that time. The Marquis of Nornianby answered the bishop for the government as follows : **The Right Reverend Prelate, throughout the whole •** of his statement, has always assumed that the ordi- " nance of which he complains, was a fancy of a noble "" Lord (Lord Sydenham) at present at the head of *' the Governement in Cana(la,that it was a whim that ** had occurred to that noble Lord, a project that had " never before been heard of. But your Lordships will '* recollect that, during the time of the administration of '* my lamented friend,the late Lord Durham.in Canada, *' there was a report made by Mr. Charles BuUer, a ve- ■** ry able and elaborated report upon the circumstances " connected with this Seminary.That report was adop- " ted by Lord Durham, and subsequently acted upon ** by your Lordships, for 'm the next year, in the '' month of June, I laid upon the table a dispatch from "•'* Lord Durham, embodying the report of M. Chs. '* Buller, and at the same time, a draft of the ordi- *' nance intended to be submitted by Lord Durham, *' and afterwards actually passed bySir John Colborne, "' It is true that the ordinance passed by Sir John ''* Colborne, passed only as a projet, because the spe- •" cial council, at that time, had not the power of pass- ■" ing permanent laws.But what did Lord Durham state ■" as one of the two grounds on which he considered *' it necessary that the imperial legislature should give ■** its assent to the ordinance which he suggested. ** Why, for the very purpose of giving effect to the ar- *^tzxi'gtva!^XiK proposed byMr.C.Buller,with respect to the •** Seminary of St Sulpicc I say, therefore, that the XLviir ** character of this House and of the Imperial Parlia- " merit is involved in your Lordships not forj^'^tUng " what you did two years ago, For your Lordships " to adopt the course now suggested to you by the " Right Reverend prelate would he most unjust and' " unfair. The question, after all, is one of bargain, a " bargain already agreed upon and to some extent,. *' in operation. WiLli what justice could your lord- " ships step in to prevent one of the parties to the bar- '* gain from giving the equivalent agreed upon ? Your " Lordships have induced certain parties to part with *' a portion of their property, upon the understanding " that in return for that property,they were to receive '• the advantages contemplated by this ordinance. If " your Lordships were not to fulfil the terms of " the bargain, you would be inflicting upon those par- " ties a signal injustice." [pages 724 and following]. In a word, the bishop of Exeter stood alone protest- ing against the ordinance in the House of Lords. In the Commons, no opposition was made to the ordinance that year. In view of those quotations, can there be any doubt as to the full bearing of the ordinance of 1840 ? Was it not passed after mature deliberation, on the- report of the special commission named by the Bri- tish Government ? Was it not passed after an arrangement had been entered into with the Seminary itself, for the abolition of the seigniorial tenure in the city of Montreal ? Whs it not an act of justice which the Govern- ment desired to perform towards the Seminary, by confirming their titles ? Was not the justice of the pretension-^ of the Semi- nary upheld ? XLIX Who will now undertake to claim the rights of the Crown against the Crown itself? The gentlemen of the Seminary publish their titles, not because they entertain the slightest appre- hension that their rights will be ignored,for they have the best of guarantees, that of Her Majesty. It is because the public, in ignorance of what has taken place, may allow itself to be misled ; be- cause the people require to be placed upon their guard against pamphlets such as that which has just been published. It is because tliis question may be a novel one to some of our members of Parliament, and that it is useful that the documents establishing the rights of the Seminary should be placed in tangible form. On several occasions since 1S40, the legislature has expressly recognized the Seminary as proprietors of those seigniories, notably by the seigniorial act of I859. Section 16 of that act reads as follows : " The *' unconceded lands in any of the said seigniories and *• all landed property held by the said Seminary,within *' the same (including the city and parish of Montreal) " shall be vested absolutely in the said Seminary in " \franc alleu rcUirier\ and they may sell or dispose " of any such lands or 01 any other prooerty belong- " ing to them etc., etc." The author of the pamphlet considers the conduct of the Seminary on the seigniorial question as being almost criminal. '• Another and glaring instance of fraud and decep- •* tion " does he say, " was practised by this Seminary " in 1854 and 1859 when by a process of deception •i*.i!.'.J.-** lA'..!..i«/*--ii MiiMlM " which ought at the time to have been detected and " punished, they succeeded in passing themselves off " as the seigniors and owners of the seigniories they " hold, instead of being but as administrators of these " seigniories and but in trust for specific objects and " charities, [page 55.] Although the whole idea of the writer is not ex- pressed ver>' clearly, it is evident that he accuses the Seminary of having obtained by fraud the passing of the law of 1859. What are the means that were so resorted to ; what act of fraud is the Seminary charged with ? The author of the pamphlet leaves us in the dark on those points. The Seminar)'- acted fraudulently towards the legis- lature, but how ? The a sertion is purely gratuitous, and like many others, made for the purpose of excit- ing prejudices. HI What more remains to be said ? We have laid before our readers the enumeration of the rights of the Seminary ; we have given an ac- count historically of the legislation on the subject, endeavouring to keep within the strictest bounds of truth. If we have laid more particular stress on the ordi- nance of i840,it is because that being the latest title, the Seminary are acting under its provisions. We might perhaps decline to make any mention of the difficulties occasioned by the Indians since 1868. We should not say "occasioned by the Indians", for they would have remained peaceable citizens,had not the brand of discord been thrown amongst them. LI We do not mention names ; our object, in writing at present, is not to formulate accusations. We have placed in the appendix the correspon- dence and other documents relative to the troubles of the mission. A simple glance at that correspondence and the accompanying documents will enable our representa- tives and the public to pass judgment on the preten- sions of both parties. On the 31st of July 1868, the Algonquins of the Lake of the Two Mountains memorialized the Go- vernment, claiming " the above rights as their fore- *• fathers had, and asking that the domain be under •*' their own control, in>;tead of the priests controlling " them," [see appendix, page 20, document no 4.] On the 8th of august of the same year, the Iroquois of that locality sent a petition similar to that of the Algonquins, to the Governor, Lord Monck. It is re- plete with insults towards the Seminary. It accuses the Seminary of tyranny and oppression in general terms. It reprouclics the Sulpicians : 1st With having refused to make any concessions t.Q the Indians ; 2nd. With having refused them wood for their use and consumption, (whilst they actually sold large quan- tities of it, under pretext of opening a road ;) 3rd. With having refused them wood for lumber, (whilst they are selling it themselves ;) 4th. With having revendicated a canoe made by an Indian and sold by him ; 5th. With having exacted the dime from the In- dians ; 6th. With having prevented the location of the LII property of a poor indian widow, so as to get posses- sion of It, and with having paid her only one half of the value of the rent (document No. 2). Such are their accusations. Ine Honorable Secretary of State of that day^ being desirous of obtaining information relative to the titles of the Seminary, wrote to Mr. Baile, the Superior, who for\varded him an answer by letter of the 1 2th October i858, at the same time enume- rating the titles of the Seminary to the property. The explanation given by Mr. Baile appears to have been satisfactory, since later, on the 3rd novem- ber 1868, the Under Secrctery of State, in trans- mitting to the Semfnary a copy of that same me- morial of the Iroquois : " So as to enable it to " place before the Government such explanations as •' it may deem proper ; " informs the Seminar}- that *' it will not be necessary to look into the matter, as *' regards the titles of property of the sf igniory of the " liake of Two Mountains, as the recent communica- '• tion on the subject is sufficient." [see appendix, p.. 43, document no. 14.I To this requisition the S'^mina.^' replied, on the 9th. November 1868 in effect,as follows : We leave to the Indians the enjoyment of our lands for thei!r requirements ; we allow them to take lumber and firewood for their own use ; the only indemnity that we enact from them is the 27*;h part of their grain proouce, which is the amount levied from Canadians- and other ussumaircs under the appellation of liimes^ We give them in alms ; and in seed, etc., more than we receive from tiiem ; in a word, we act to\/ards them in the "Spirit of charity th-^t we feel bound to show them. LIII We cannot allow any encroachment on our rights of property. We stricdy prohibit the sale of wood by the In- dians ; fo;- that reason, we revendicated the canoe that had been sold by one of them. We have a very limited number of pine trees for ^making canoei. The Indians can obtain permission to make canoes for tlieir own use ; but once more, we forbid them to sell them. As regards the rental of the widow's land, the Canadian who had rented it could not come to live amidst the Indians without our permission. He of- fered no guarantees. We used our discretion, and after having caused an evaluation of the land to bo made by a farmer, we paid the amount of the award and, in so doing, Ave acted in accordance with the oft repeated request of the widow. That is, we think, a very satisfactory reply. The acts that the Indians reproach the Seminary with, are all acts necessary to afiirm their rights of pro- prietorship against those A'ho have been infringing upon them. If the Seminary had not shovv-n vigilance on this point, unfortunate abuses would have taken place, necessitating a severity much to be regretted but ab- solutely unavoidable. The Indians did not await the answer to their me- morial to the Government. They proceeded with open acts of aggression, and the Seminary, not wishing to take the law in their own hands, sought the protection of the authorities, who sent to the spot Mr. Coursol who, In his long career as a magistrate, had given proofs of his honesty and impartiality. Mi LW What does Mr. Coursol say in his report, dated the- 15th October 1868 ? We are aware that the author of the pamphlet- scorns to accept that report, but after all, if the dic- tum of judges, who make a personal inspectic In or- der the better to arrive at the truth, are not to be believed, wo shall we believe ? Who speaks tlu truth ? The public has not yet reached the point of thus despising all authority, and that report will have its. full weight with any man not blinded by prejudice. The infringements are thus set forth in the report :. *' A few days ago, one of the chiefs of the Iroquois " named Jose OnonkSotkoso, and some Indians of " the same tribe, went on the domain of the gentle- " men of the Seminary, and after having had stakes. " planted in different places, he, the chief, solemnly " awarded to each Indian present the piece of land " which each one would in future have the right to *' occupy, authorizing them in his capacity of chief to' *' take possession of it immediately, telling them at *' the same time, that those lands as well as the do- " main did not belong to the priests but to the In- " dians, and that the chiefs had been authorized to- " put them in possession of properties which they had •' been deprived of for too long a period." [See ap- pendix, page 39, document No. 1 1.] After such proceedings, wore not the gentlemen of the Seminary justified in their apprehensions, and had not the time arrived for them to prevent the per- petration of the acts contemplated. They had re- course to law, placing their confidence in the autho- rities. LV On the 20th October 1868, the Secretary of State, informed the tribes of Indians of the consequences of their illegal acts, and requested them to conform themselves to the requirements of the law. [See ap- p.mdix, p. 42, document No. 12.] On the 26th of October and the 9th of december, the Secretary of State made his official report (No. 39, p. 88, and 40, p. 90, of the appendix,) on the memorial of the Algonquins and that of the Iroquois, justifying to the fullest extent the Seminary, and we may add that those reports were approved by His Excellency the Governor General in Council, on the 29th of may 1869. [Document No. 41, p. 94 of the appendix.] By letter of the 9th december 1868, the Secretary of State informed the Iroquois of the conclusions at which he had arrived, and for their information, he reminded them that there had been reserved in 1853, 1600 acres of land for the Iroquois of the Lake of Two Mountains and of Caughnawaga,in the township of Dunca<;ter. [Document 16, p. 5 of appendix]. On the loth of the same month, a letter was sent to the Algonquins, reminding them that, in 1854, a reserve of 45, 750 acres of land on the Gatineau and Desert Rivers had been made for the Algonquins the Nipissingues and the Tetes de Boule Indians. [Docu- ment no. 17, p. S3 of appendix.] On the same day, the loth of december, the Iro- quois sent to Sir John A. MacDonald a similar peti- tion tot)"at$ent the previous summer to Lord Monck (Document no. i, page no. i of the appendix^, only invoking in addition, a pretended concession that they alleged had been verbally made by Mr. Qui- LVI blier, the Superior of the Seminary of Montreal, at a public meeting or council held at the Lake of Two Mountains, in the month of June 1839, '^^ presence of the officers of the Indian Department, to allow the Indians to cut and sell the wood on the lands occu- pied by them, and they alleged morever they had obtained a similar permission about the same time from Sir John Colborne. On the 8th of February 1869, they applied on the same grounds to the Governor Sir John Young (Lord Lisgar). JDocument No. 18, see appendix, p. 55.] On the 23th February 1869, the Governor replied that he would have to consult his ministers, before coming to a decision in the matter, (Doct. 20, p. 57 of appendix.) On the 26th February 1869, the Iroquois chiefs informed His Excellency : " That they had, through " the medium of their chiefs, notified the priests mis- " sionaries to leave and not to return here any more" and " that, in default of having justice rendered to " them, the chiefs, on behalf of the nation, would " adopt such means as would ensure the removal of " these priests, etc." (Document No. 22, p. 59 of appendix.) On the 15th March 1869, the Under Secretary of State wrote to the Indians recommending them to " respect the law and the rights of property of the '• gentlemen of St Sulpice," adding "the Government " has your Avelfare at heart and hope that you will " listen to the good advice which is given you, and " reject the evil ones which strangers of your nation ** may ofter you ai.d which cannot but bring misfortune " upon you all." ^Document No. 23, p. 60 of appen- dix.) LVIl The Government, in view of the malevolent dispo- sitions of the Indians, enquired of the Seminary.if, in case the malcontents were to quit the locality.the Se- minary would be willing to grant them any compen- sation. Mr. Baile, the Superior, on the 2nd June 1869, ans- ■\vered as follows : " Nothwistanding the great many causes of com- •" plaint which we may have against those Indians, "" yet we do not ask for their removal from the seig- *' nior>' of the Lake of Two Mountains, we are, as **' heretofore.disposed to assist those who have remain- " ed faithful to us, according to our means and dis- *' cretion, as well as those wo may be willing to be- ^* have themselves as they should," and he adds " if •** however, the government came to the conclusion of " removing the malcontents to some other locality, we " would neither object to nor disapprove of its doing " so, and if such was the case,the Seminary would not ■" hesitate a moment in allowing such indemnity as '" natural equity and positive law would entitle them *" to, for work and improvements performed." (Docu- ment No 24, page 61 of appendix.") By reason of this promise, the Government made known to the Indians the intentions of the Seminary, in case they, the Indians, should decide upon remov- ing from the lake of Two Mountains. The Indians rejected the offers of the Government. [Document no. 29, p 6S of appendix.] In 1870, the Indians renewed their appeals to the Government. During the month of February 1 870, they sent two petitions, one to the Secretary of State, the Honora- LVIII ble Mr. Howe, (No. 31, p 70 of appendix) and the other to the Governor, Sir John Young, [No 32, p. 73- of appendix] to the same effect, praying for posses- sion of the lands as proprietors of the soil of the sei- gniory, and the right to sell timber. Those petitions, as well the former one, were sub-^ mitted to the Seminary (No. 33, p. y"] of appendix)^. On the 26th February 1870, the Reverend Mr. Baile sent to the Honorable Mr. Howe in effect the same reply that he had already sent to Mr. Langevin (No^. 34, p. TJ of appendix,) and further, in connection with the question about cutting wood, he included a copy of a letter from Mr.Hughes, then superintendent of the Indians (^the said Mr, Hughes, whose testimo- ny the Indians invoked in a former petition), in the following terms : Reverend Sir, " Yesterday, the 28th instant (i838,> " I had the honor of an interview with His Excel- " lency " (Sir John Colborne) " in order to put a stop " tr the disputes pending between the principals of '' the Seminary and the said Indians, His Excellen- " cy is pleased to command that the Indians be de- " sired [through the cliief superintendent of the de- " partment to desist cutting more w^ood on the do- " main of the seigniory of the Lake of Two Moun ► " tains without permission." [appendix p. 79.] About the beginning of the year 1870, the Reve- rend John Borland, Wesleyan Minister and president of the district of Quebec, applied to the government on behalf of those Indians, and prayed for the pay- ment on their behalf, of certain lawyers' fees, incurred in suits that had been instituted against them. [Ap- pendix p. 84, document No. 37.] LVIX The Hon. Mr. Howe, then chief of the Indian De- partment, answered him' as follows : " Reverend Sir, — My attention was called, shortly " after I assumed the duties of this office, to the un- " happy disputes in the seigniory of the Two Moun- " tains, and I have read a great many papers and " heard several deputations in reference to the contro- " versy ; by the papers on record, it would appear *' that the Seminary at Montreal owns the seigniory ; " tlheir title is set forth in a report made by the Hon. " Mr. Langevin to the Privy Council, which report: " was confirmed by that body."[Appendix, p. 86, do- cument No. 37^.] When the Hon. M. MacKenzie took the reins of power, another attempt was made to influence the Government. The Hon. M.Mills, then in charge of the Indian Department, submitted the question to the Hon. M.Laflamme, at that time Minister of Justice. The enquiry of Hon. M. M ills and the reply of the Hon. M.Laflamme will be found at pages 97 and 102 respectively, of the appendix. At that time, the Hon. Justice Badgley was also con- sulted by the Government of Canada and his opinion is to be seen at page 129 of the appendix. The author of the pamplilet combats the opinion of the Honorable Messrs. Langevin and Laflamme be- cause both gentlemen are catholics, and as such, he says, the slaves of the priests. Such insinuations are not credited even by those who Avrite tliem. The precept that ought to guide those who are called upon to give an opinion on the Seminary's affairs, is taught alike to protestants and catholics, that is to do justice to all parties. I LX And it is because the cause of the Seminary is just and equitable, that catholics and protestants have all agreed, and that the Honorable Mr. Howe and the Honorable Judge Badgley, both protestants, have agreed in their opinions with the Honorable Messrs. Langevin and Laflamme who are catholics. Why then renew their attacks to day ? Has there not been enough of wrangling since the beginning of those unfortunate troubles ? Let the Indians be told what is the unanimous opinion of our lawyers,and let them be taught to respect other people's rights of property, and then we shall have peace. The Seminary has suffered great annoyance. It has been souq-ht to wrest their estates from them. Their priests have been menaced, and their church has been burned. What course have they adopted ? They hare taken advantage of their rights as British sub- jects : they have appealed to the tribunals, praying for the redress of the wrongs which have been inflicted upon them. They have sought the protection of tlie law of the land instead of taking the law into their own hands. It is unnecessary to enter into the details of the proceedings that were adopted : according to the pam- phleteer, a great many cruelties were perpetrated at the time of the arrests. Those who may have suffered un- justly, can apply to the government to insure the punishment of its officers, if they have been guilty of any inhuman acts ; and if they have not confidence in the governement, they can appeal to the courts, as the Seminary have been obliged to do. The author of the pamphlet is displeased with every body ; with the Governor who passed the Or- f 1 LXI dinance of 1840, with the Imperial Parliament, for having sanctioned that Ordinance ; with the legisla- tors who afifirmed the rights of the Seminary in 1859; with the provincial authorities who sent a magistrate with a posse of police to enforce law and order ; with the magistrate himself who merely repotted upon what he saw on the spot ; with the lawyer of the Seminary, whom he accuses of unprofessional con- duct; and he blames MM. Langevin and Laflamme who, having been called upon, in their official capaci- ty, to give their opinion, expressed in favor of the Seminary ; and he condemns the Canadian govern- ment for acting upon the advice of the law officers of the Crown. l^othing is agreeable to him. Everywhere there is tyranny, oppression and bad faith ; and all this is written in the most impressioned language and winds up by an appeal to the people against the Catholic religious institutions of the country, and more espe- cially against the Seminary. We have deemed it necessary, as answer to the pamphlet, merely to set before the public the rights and titles of the Seminary. We might simply have invoked the ordinance of 1840, which confirms those rights and titles in the most formal manner possible, but V e were desirous of putting the public in pos- session of the motives underlying that ordinance, and the circumstances accompanying its adoption, so that all may be convinced of the justice of the Seminary's cause, and how utterly groundless are the attacks of those who have been troubling them. In common with all other British subjects, they claim their right to live in peace under the British LXII flag, and to enjoy with their fellow subjects the bene- fits of a constitution that secures undisturbed tran- quillity to those who live beneath it. C x/// APPENDIX. T—f^i^mm [Copy, No. I.] Province of Quebec, Dominion of Canada, :} To the Honorable Sir John Macdouald, C,B., Minister of Justice and Attorney General for the Province of Ontario, in the Dominion of Canada, &'c.,&c. IIONORABLE SiR, — The humblc memorial of the Indian Chiefs and Iroquois of the Lake of Two Mountains, in the said Dominion, respectfully she- weth : — That their petition of the 8th day of August now- last past [1868 J, to His Excellency Lord lVIonck,late Governor of the said Dominion, in the French lan- guage, a true copy of which i:: now produced [exhibit letter A ], setting forth certain grievances agaiii.-,! the priests of the Seminary of Saint Sulpice, was to have been referred for adjustment to the Honorable the Secretary of State for Canada, as per the accompa- nying acknowledgment [exhibit letter B.] That much to their loss, prejudice, and detriment, your memorialists are yet sufifering from the treatment of the priests, who have not desisted from oppressing them since their said petition, and have reduced them by their pride, hypocrisy, and avarice, to a most la- mentable state of destitution and want That their circumstances, wretched as they may appear, were considerably aggravated by the visit to their otherwise quiet and peaceable village, of a cer- tain number of policemen, headed by Mr. CoursoUes, a'Montreal magistrate, at the pressing and secret in- wmmmmmmn wmmmmm \ w vitation of the aforesaid priests, who had falsely and iiialiciously represented their tribe as beinf'; in open rebellion ! Your memorialists not having been favo- red with the report upon this system of portable jus- tice, would believe Mr. CoursoUes disposed to make one upon the request of his superiors in office. That in addition to the above stated annoyance, the priests have endeavoured to silence them into submission to their ghostly authority (since they disbelieve their doctrine of purgatory), by threats of the penitentiary and transportation beyond the seas by the British government. That the accompanying letter of the Secretary of State, WTitten evidently und^r the sainted invocation of the priests of the Seminary at the Lake of Two Mountains, lead your n.emorialists to apprehend that justice will not be fairly dealt to them, unless they could secure your special protection, as the Minister of Justice. (See document letter C.) That your memorialists obtained a verbal conces- sion, given by tlie Reverend Mr. Quiblier, then the Superior of the Seminary of Saint Sulpice, at a public meeting or council held at thf> Lake of Two Moun- tains, in the month of June 1S39, in the presence of the officers of the Indian Department, the Iroquois chiefs and warriors of that settlement, to the effect of cutting and selling firewood out of the lands they then occupied, or might hereafter wish to occupy in the Seigniory of the Lake of Two Mountains. The Iroquois Indians having previously obtained a similar permit from His Excellency Sir John Colborne, then Governor in chief in Lower Canada, of all which certificates are now produced,and to which your honor is most respectfully referred. See document letter D. 8 That, on being duly notified of the existence of the proofs of such a concession, the priests of the Semi- nary of Saint Sulpice peremptorily denied and refused to admit them. That your memorialists, furt'iermore, respectfully refer your honor to the list of subscriptions now pro- duced in aid to the suffering Iroquois warriors of the Lake of Two Mountains, as a proof of tlieir destitu- tion and poverty, and of the sympathy they have enlisted by their well tried loyalty, courage, and good conduct, on the part of their neighbours, the respec- table Protestants of the adjoining county [see exhibit E.] That your memorialists most respectfully con- clude by soliciting the intervention of your honor in their behalf, and obtain on the part of the priests of the Seminary of Saint Sulpice : Firsily, the recognition of those rights secured to their tribe by the royal proclamation of His late Ma- jesty King George the Third, dated the /th day of October, 1765. Secondly^ of the 27th and 49th articles of the treaty of capitulation. Thirdly, of the 3rd section of the ordinance passed in the 17th year George 3rd, Cap. 7th. FoiirtJily, of the rights and privileges granted to the tenants {censitaires) of other seigniories in the province. Fifthly, of the liberty of conscience, the free circu- lation and preaching of the Gospel by whatever means the Iroquois of the Lake may deem fit to devise. Sixthly, the opening and keeping of Sabbath Schools with Evangelical teachers. Seventhly, of the appointement of Superintendent and other officers of the Indian Department, as exis- ting in the former times [1837], only to be selected from among Protestants, instead of Roman Catholics. Eighthly y of their rights to cut down and make a traffic, to their own best profit and advantage, of the firewood, agreeable to the verbal permit or concession referred to in document letter D. And your Memorialists, as in duty bound, will ever pray. [Signed,] Joseph Onasakenral, Louis Karenratenkiate, Jean Aennakenrat, Thomas Sakokenni, Sasatis KaromhtsnakSui, Louis xKaronhammhue, Sasie xTiahokathe, SosE xLobetresSane, Nicolas xTikanotokeni> SosE xTehaSriakeoura, David Athondine, Pierre xToronheaton, Louis Shatehasmnotiu. Lake of Two Mountains, 10th December, 1868, References : — 1. Petition to Lord Monck, Exibit A. 2. His Answer, Exibit B. 3. Letter of the Secretary of State, C. 4. Certificate of James Hughes, D. 5. Subscription List, E. I 5 No. 2. [ Translated from the French?)^ District of Terreboxne, Province OF Quebec. } To His Excellency the Right Honr rable Charles Stanley, Vicount Monck, Baron Monck of Ballytram- mon, in the County of Wexford, Baron Monck, of Ballytrammon in the Peerage of the United King- dom of Great Britain and Ireland, Governor General of the Dominion of Canada, &c., &c., &c. May it please your Excellency, — The humble Petition of the undersigned Chiefs of the Iroquois Tribe or Nation of the Lake of Two Mountains, in the District of Terrebonne, duly elected according to the laws, usages, and customs of the said Nation. Respectfully sheweth, — That they are the descendants and rightful repre- sentatives of that same Indian Nation or Tribe, with whom the British Government made an alliance, and who lived under his special protection long before and after the day of the Royal Proclamation of His late Majesty, George the Third of Glorious Memory dated 7th day of October, 1763. That for more than a century, their Nation or Tribe have always remained faithful and loyal to the British Government, notwithstanding the example to the contrary of the other Tribes, and of their co-reli- gionists, the P""rench and the Canadians, during the war of England with P~"rance and America, and more recently, the Canadian rebellion. 6 That their Nation, for this reason, and for motives of personal interest, have always been treated with contempt and harshness by the members of the clergy of the Church of Rome (better known among them- selves, under the designation of the gods of this world), who, under the cloak of religion, have assu- med the mastership of the Indians here, as well as in other localities, — that scourge of humankind, those oppressors of the children of the Great and only God of the Universe, are at last unmasked ! That for a long time they have been desirous of obtaining the free enjoyment of their rights and pri- vilege'- as British subjects, but that their wives, and the most timid aUiOng them were, at the least sign of dissatisfaction manifested bv them against the admi- nistration of the priests of the Church of Rome, threatened with anathema and eternal damnation by those holy fathers, full of anger and wrath, and the Sacraments of which church they would deprive them, dead or alive. Your Petitioners thought better to submit, until the time would arrive when they could break from such shameful superstition. That your Petitioners, through the intrigues and doings of the seigniors of St. Sulpice, were deprived of the protection of the British Government, and of the scholastic and religious education, more in har- mony with their progress in civilization, than that of -writing and reading in the Iroquois language, which the priests and seigniors of St. Sulpice, took care to teach to a few only, with a view to impose upon the others and to prevent them from acquiring the knowledge of the rights and privileges pertaining to liumanity. That by the 15th Paragraph of the Royal Procla- mation above referred to, it is enacted : " That inas- " much as great frauds and abuses were committed " in the purchase of Indian lands, to our prejudice, " and to the great dissatisfaction of the Indians, so *' as to prevent in future such like irregularities, and " so that the Indians may be convinced of our justice " and firm resolution to prevent every reasonable " cause of discontentment, by and with the advice of '• our Privy Council, We strictl}' enjoin and command " that no person takes upon himself to purchase from " the said Indians, any of the lands reserved for the " said Indians, in those parts of Our Colonies in " which We have been pleased to allow people to " settle therein ; but if at any time to come, any of " the said Indians were inclined to dispose of the " said lands, they will be bought solely for us, and in " our name, at some public meeting of the said In- " dians, held to that effect by the Governor or Com- •' mander in Chief of Our Colony, respectively, where " the said lands shall be situated, and in case such " lands be situated within the limits of any Proprie- " tary Government, then they will be subject to the " direction and insu actions that We or the said " Proprietary Government may deem proper to give " to that effect." That your Petitioners in their names and in the name of the Iroquois Nation, believe it to be their duty to point out, amongst other great frauds and abuses committed towards them by the priests and seigniors of St. Sulpice of the Lake of Two Moun- tains, above mentioned. 1. That they have constantly refused them grants of land for agricultural purposes w ithin the limits of '^^^'mmmmmmmmim 8 their own residence, according to the laws, usages, and customs in Lower Canada. 2. That they have been deprived of the right of taking firewood for their own use, even on the lands they occupy, whilst the priests and seigniors of St. Sulpice, in the year 1864, under the pretext of open- ing a road, have cut and carried away, through the medium of French Canadians, more than one thous- and cords of wood, such as maple, beech, and birch, on an extent in the domain of the said Seigniory, of half an acre in width and one mile and a half in length, which wood they sold and bartered away, to the great prejudice and detriment of your petitioners, notwithstanding their remonstrances to the contrary. 3. That the above-mentioned priest and seigniors, although refusing to your petitioners and the other Indians the right of taking wood on their own pro- perty, did sell before their own eyes, to a French Canadian of the name of Andre Lacroix, a large quantity of wood of great value, which was taken from a place known as the Great Bay, Indian Land, on an extent of 30 acres. 4. That a certain Jean Baptiste Lacoppre, Iroquois, having made a canoe, which he sold, had the shame of seeing it claimed by messire Mercier, in the name of the priests and seigniors of St. Sulpice, saying that he was punishing that Indian for having sold his ca- noe without the permission of the priests. 5. That the said priests and seigniors of St.Sulpice levy tithes from the Indians without any right so to do, and exact other dues, [under the penalty of ana- thema and the refusal of the vSacraments] such as baptism, marriages, and burials, which may happen in their midst. 9 6. That the widow of Thomas Petit-cris, an Iro- quois woman, having a family of four children, in possession of a piece of land, containing forty acres in superficies, which she thought she could utilize for her own benefit and that of her family, leased that land to a well to do farmer, for the .moiety of the crop, equal in value to a rental of 1 5 livres currency, the works upon it were com- menced when the priest, Mr. Mercier, in the name of his brothers of St. Sulpice, rushed forward like a hawk on its prey, and caused the profits of the poor widow to be entailed in his favor, and only gave her $30.00, thus conscientiously pocketing, in his quality 'of priest, a usurious and condemnable profit for eve- rybody else of 1 00 "/^ taken from the poor widow and her orphans. That your Petitioners believe it to be their duty to respectfully call the attention of Your Excellency to the following articles of the Treaty of Capitulation of 8th September, 1760: — 1st. The Marquis of Vaudreuil proposed [in article 27] " That the free exercise of the Catholic, Aposto- ^' lie, and Roman religion shall exist unreservedly, in •** such a manner as to permit to individuals of all " classes and of every city and country, far and near, *' to continue to assemble in the churches and fre- " quent the Sacrements as heretofore without fear of " molestation, either directly or indirectly. The Bri- ^* tish Government will oblige these individuals to pay " to the priests, who will have charge of them, the *' tithes and all the other dues which they were in *' the habit of paying under the Government of His "• Most Christian Majesty." 10 To which General Amherst, on behalf of His Bri- tannic Majesty, answered, " Granted as to the free " exercise of their religion, the obligation to pay the " tithes to the priests shall depend upon the King." 2nd. In article 49, the French General proposed, " That the Indians or the Indian Allies of His Most " Christian Majesty, shall be. maintained in the pos- *' session of the lands which they occupy.if they wish " to remain thereon ; they shall not be molested un- " der any pretext whatsoever, for having taken up " arms and served His Most Christian Majesty, they " will have, like the French, liberty of religion, and " will keep their Missionaries ; it will be permitted " to the present Vicar General and to the Bishop,, " when the Fipiscopal See shall be filled, to send them " new missionaries, when they shall think proper." To which the English General answered, " Granted " with the exception of the last article, ^vhich has " already been refused." 3rd. In the paragraph 14 of the Royal Proclama- tion, it is said and declared, " And we further enjoirr " and strictly require all persons whatsoever who " have voluntarily or inadvertently established them- " selves upon lands in the localities above designated,. " or upon any other land which, not having been ce- " ded to us, or by us bought, are still reserved for the " said Indians as above stated, to leave instantly suchr "settlements." 4th. In the third clause of the Act passed in the 17th year of the Reign of His Majesty George the Third, Cap. 17, it is enacted that, •' On and after the " publication of this Act, it will not be permitted tO' " any one to establish himself in any Indian locality '' or Indian village in this Province, without a written 11 " permission from the Governor, Lieutenant-Gover- " nor, or Commander-in-Chief of the Province.under " the penalty of a fine of lo livres for the first infrac- " tion, and of 20 livres in cases of repetition, and for " every subsequent infraction." That your Petitioners, in the names of those they represent, regret to so* often repeat the same com- plaints, in order to induce the Government of this Province to maintain them in their rights and privi- leges, and to order away the priests, missionaries and seigniors of St. Sulpice, who are the main and direct source of their poverty and misery. Whilst these pretended successors of St. Peter live in a somptuous palace, all covered with purple and most delicate stuff, their table being loaded with the choicest dain- ties ; they receive also the produce of 22 farms, which French Canadians cultivate for them ; the Indians of the Lake are naked, their children will soon tremble with cold, for nothing is left to them ; they are hun- gry and without shelter, nevertheless tiiey are by those pretended fathers and spiritual directors bur- thened with taxes and tithes, and dragged before the tribunals of justice, like slaves, and cast into prison at the least attempt made by them to exercise their right et proprietorship. That your Petitioners and the Iroquois Tribe or Nation of the Lake of Two Mountains are submissive and tractable enough to be no longer under the cove- tous tutorage of priests and seigniors,the presence of whom they wish to have no longer. That your Petitioners, and the Iroquois Nation or Tribe of the Lake of Two Mountains, are desirous of placing themselves under the kind protection of the PPMHPI ^MIM 12 British Government, so as to obtain liberty of cons- cience and educate tlieir children in the English and French languages, the same as children are educated in Evangelical and Protestant Schools. Therefore, your Petitioners, in the name of the Iroquois Nation or Tribe which they represent.move, that it may please your Excellency to take their Pe- tition, contained in the preceding pages, into consi- deration, and as containing an exact and faithful sta- tement of tlieir wrongs and of the causes of their dissatisfaction, and to do them justice. And your Petitioners will for ever pray. 1 [Affidavit.] Jose Onasakenral, [the Swan], Louis Kanenraken- hiote [Sanathron], and Jean Oseennakenrat,[Xegussa] residing at the Lake of Two Mountains, indians of the Iroquois Nation or Tribe, having been sworn upon the Holy Evangelists, depose and say ; That they understand well, and speak fluently, the P>ench lan- guage ; that they are the only chiefs of the said Na- tion or Tribe, having been elected at the village of the Lake of Two Mountains, according to custom, at a meeting held for that purpose on the 25th July last, to act in their name, in all matters in which the said nation may be concerned. That they have as such full power, until revocation, — that the allegations contained in the said petition, lecture of which was duly made to them, paragraph by paragraph, and which the deponents declare hav- ing heard and well understood, are true and the una- 13 nimous sentiments entertained by their Nation towards the priests, uhich they designate by the words of " the long gowns." That they acknowledge the allegations and facts brought forth in the said Petition to be the same as narrated by them, and they declare to have come to St. Andrews at the solicitation of the other Indians, made to them at the aforesaid meeting, so as to have the said Petition written, and this, of their own free will, and not at the instigation or advice of any En- glish or French Protestants ; and the deponents say nothing more, and have signed ; lecture of same first having been made. [Signed,] JoSK Onasakanrat (Lecyjne), Louis Kanenrakknhiatp: (Sendrier), Jean Osennakenrat (TiScessa), And 119 more Signatures. Sworn and signed before me, one of the Commissioners of the Superior Court of the District of Terrebonne, appointed to re- ceive affidavits to be read in the said court. S. Andrews, Argenteuil. 8th August, 1868. [Signed,] Gaspard T. De La Ronde, C. S. C. u [No. 30 [Tratislated from the French?^ On this 28th clay of the month of November, in the year of Our Lord one tliousand eight hundred and sixty-eight, before the undersigned Public Nota- ry, duly admitted and sworn in and for that part of the Province of Quebec, formerly called Lower Cana- da, residing in the District of Terrebonne, personally came and appeared Jose Ononksakosa, ana's, Ocite, ancient chief of the Iroquois nation, residing at the Lake of Two Mountains, who did say and declared unto us, that he recognizes a certain paper writing (papier ccrit) written upon a half slieet of foolscap paper, deteriorated and smoky, bearing other certain signs of its being the same paper writing (papier £crit) or certificate which was given and delivered to him in person by the late James Hughes, in his lifetime of Saint Polycarpe, Riviere a de I'Lsle, in the District of Montreal, Esquire, where the said ap- pearer met him, with a view of obtaining the certifi- cate or paper writing in question, or report of an as- sembly of the officers of the Indian Department, the Iroquois chiefs, and Indians of the said lake of Two Mountains, held in the Indian village of the Lake of Two Mountains, in the spring of 1839, or there- abouts : That the said late James Hughes was an old Superintendent of Indian affairs, and in that capacity attended, and was present at the said meet- ing as well as the appearer himself: That they then and there met with the Reverend Messire Quiblier, then Superior of the Seminary of St. Sulpice : That the said late James Hughes was a gentleman every 16 way competent to give evidence of facts come to his knowledge, these facts being witnessed by tlie ap- pearer himself, the other witnesses being either dead or absent from the country when tlie report of the said meeting or the certificate in question was handed to him: That the said appcarer further says and declares that he recognizes the handwriting an d signature of the said late James Hughes, upon the paper writing, certificate or report of the said meet- ing in question to be the same as that of the late James Hughes, having seen him write and sign his name : The said appearer having had the said paper writing in his keeping and possession ever since then, and that it is the paper writing, certificate or report of the said James Hughes, he affirms in the presence of the Almighty, and which he now deposits in our office, te be placed amongst our Minutes, and give copies to all whom it may concern : That the said appearer was present along with other chiefs and •warriors of the Iroquis nation and the said late James Hughes, at the meeting of the month of June, 1839, alluded to : That then and there the Reverend Mes- sire Ouiblier, Superior of the Seminary of St. Sulpice, in the presence of the Reverend Messire Dufresne, missionary at the Lake of Two Mountains ; of Lieu- tenant Colonel Napier, Secretary of Indian affairs ; of the late Bernard St.Germain, Literpreter ; of the late Dominique Ducharme, (upon certain representations to him made in his capacity as superior of the Semi- nary of St. Sulpice, by the said chief of the Iroquois nation, residing in the said village) granted to the said Iroquois nation, "the right of cutting firewood on such lot of ground, they might subsequently wish to 16 cultivate, and sell the same, but well understood that, they should give the preference of such sale to their missionary :" The said appearer further says, that not long before the French Canadian rebellion, during the administration of the brave Sir John Colborne, Go- vernor of Canada, he, the said appearer, in the nan\e of the other Iroquois warriors, personally came befo- re the Governor and represented to him the conduct of the priests of the Seminary of the L:;ke of Two Mountains, who refused *^hem the right of cutting fi- rewood within the limits of their own lands: That (Sir John Colborne) the said Governor told them in answer, "to cut as much wood as they liked, to place the same in a convenient place upon the banks of the lake, una that he would furnish them the means to have it brought to the Montreal market, at which place they would be able to dispose of it at a higher rate :" That he, the appearer, remarked that he would like that order in writing, and that Sir John Colborne replied, "he did not require it, and to make use of his name :" That he, the said appearer, and the Iroquois of the lake of Two Mountains, then commenced to cut wood, in conformity to the Gover- nor's order (Sir John Colborne), but the rebellion ha- ving subsequently broken out, the Iroquois Indians joined the British Army in the defence of their ho- mes, and the right as to the cutting of firewood was put off to a later period. But the Seminary of St. Sulpice having formally prohibited the exercise of that right, some difficulties arose in consequence, and which later were the cause of Mr. Quiblier granting that concession or permission above referred to. That, to prevent any doubt as regards the conces- 17 sion Of permission granted to the said Iroquois In- dians, he, the said appearer, demands a deed in the name of the said Indians of the present declaration, which he has made in the office of the undersigned notary, for the motives above stated. Done at St. Andrews, Argenteuii, in the office, day, montli, and year above stated, and has signed under the number 7,5; oB.—Lecture of same first being made. (Signed.) Josp:ph OhonkSat-Kosa, JosK Ononsakenrat, Louis KANENRAKENiirATE, ' M. G. T. Dk La Ronde, N. P. True copy of tiie original remaining in my office. (Sif^ned,) M. G. T. De La Konde. [Appendice D,] Paper writing [pa/>ur ccrif], certificate or report of the late James Hughes, mentioned in the deed of de- posit -nd acknowledgment, above and elsewhere written and designated. St. Polycarpk, IIiviere De l'Isle, 1 6th, July, 1848. I hereby certify and declare, that in the month of June, 1839, at a council held at the Lake of Two Mountains, at which were present Me^.ire Quiblier, Superior of the Seminary of St. Sulpice ; Messire Dufresne, Missionary at the Lake of Two Mountains; Lieutenant Colonel Napier, Secretary Indian affairs ; James riughe.s, Superintendent Indian Affairs ; Ber- mm 18 nard St. Germain, and Dominique Ducharn>c, and most part of the Iroquois chiefs and principal war- riors ; that then and there Messire OuibHer, amongst the different propositions he made to the Iroquois tribe stationed at that village, told them that they might cut firewood on such lots of ground they might occupy at the time, or that they might subsequently wish to cultivate, and sell the same, but well unders- tood that they should give the preference of said sale of wood to their missionary, Messire Dufresne, should he deem fit to purchase the same. No price was mentioned at the time. (Signed^ J AMES HUGHES, Late Superintendent Indian Department. [ Translated from the French?)^ In the year one thousand eight hundred and sixty- eight, the 8th day of November we, the undersigned notary public, for that part of the Province of Quebec formerly called Lower Canada,residing at StAndrews, in the Seigniory of Argenteuil, in the district of Ter- rebonne, certify to all whom it may concern, that the original of the " paper writing {papier ccrit), certificate, or report," copy of which is above written, has been brought to us, that it has been'recognized and placed amongst our minutes to make use of, and that the copy above mentioned is a true copy of said original, having been by us compared, revised, and corrected, according to the said original. And we, the said notary, further certify, that at the request of the chiefs of the Iroquois tribe of the Lake 19 of Two Mountains, in the said district, have this day notified and sent to the address of the Reverend Messire Joseph Lafontaine, priest at the Seminary of the Lake of Two Mountains, under envelope prepaid, a copy of the deed of deposit and of the paper writing or certificate which is annexed to it, for the use of the gentlemen of the Seminary of St. Sulpice, so that they may not plead ignorance, and to govern themselves accordingly. The said Iroquois Indians declare, by these pre- sents, that they intend to avail themselves of the rights and privileges given them, as proved by the said^'do- cuments. Done at St. Andrews, Argenteuil, upon the day, month, and year above mentioned; in testimony whereof we have signed ; lecture first being made. (Signed), M. G. T. Di- La Ront)E,N.P. True copy of the original. (Signed \ M. G. T. De La Ronde. [Copy, No. 4.] Lake of Two Mountains, July 31st, 1868. You that are our first Father on earth, we salute you, the chiefs and all the young warriors of our na- tion, and all the rest of the nation of Algonquins of this domain— our father Avhom we always loved, and still love— we ask you to hear our complaint and rc- h'eve us of our troubles. We see the smoke of the '^'^"'immmmmmmm 20 white man upon all of our grounds that ue used to get our living; our privileges trod upon, and our lands taken from us ; on that land that we now live we have, as it were, nothing to say. The priests take all upon themselves and hinder us of our just rights. We want the same rights as our forefci- thers had, that is, the control of our own lands. Some of the priests say that we still have the rights if we would look after them, that is, the privileges our forefathers had ; the domain under our own control^ instead of the priests controlling us. They, the priests,, say that we have no right to the Indian domain, but that they have the sole right. The priests make farms for the whites, and leave very little for us : they are selling the wood very fast, and we are not allowed to sell any ; they refuse to give us wood to build houses with, that is the reason why our nation are leaving the Lake of Two Mountains, and living abroad^ very- few remaining at the village The islands in the Ottawa were in our possession since before the whites came, and the Government wanted to build slides, and promised after they were built to pay us by a yearly rent , it is now long ago [about 36 years], and we have had no benefit or mo- ney from the Government for th'^m ; also, our equip- ments were withdrawn from us. We were surprised at that from the Government ; we were promised the equipments as long as we lived in this place : our forefathers told us that. We are told now that we are under the laws of the whites, and we want the same privileges extended to us. The priests of this place forbid the whites to treat us the same as the white brethren. Since we are amenable to the laws '^1 of the Dominion we want the same privileges as the whites. [Signed,] X Cr.AKo Ml Sakt, X Bazil On.rrK, X Pall Akemwandi, aud 22 more sijrnatures. [No. 5.] {Translated from the FrenchS^ Lake of Two Mountains, .Hrd August, i868 Oka. P.O. Our Algonquin chiefs being desirous of presenting themselves to the Honorable I.ange\'in, Minister in <:harge of the Indian Department, and wishing that I sould give them a letter of introduction, I give it with . a good will, inasniuch as they deserve it, their con- •duct being generally very regular. [Signed,] a. Mekcier, ' * P.S.S. Director of the Mission, To the Honorable Langevin. 22 [No. 6.) ( Translated from the French.) Montreal, 1 2th October, i868. To the Honorable H. T.. Langevin, C.B., Secretary of State for the Dominion. Monsieur Ic Ministre, — Tn answer to your letter of the month of September, permit me to remind you, in a few words, of the titles establishing the right of the seminary to the whole of the seignioiy of the Lake of Two Mountains. It will be the best method of answcriug, to the pretensions of the Indians of our mission, who by evil-minded persons are encouraged to put forth rights which they have never possessed. This seigniory was conceded to us upon a title very onerous to u>:, in October, 17 17. Our gentlemen pe- titioned for it, so as to enable them to transfer the Indian mission, which they had, at their own expense, established in our Seigniory of Montreal in 1677, at first at the fort on the mountain, and afterwards at ■the Sault au RecoUet in the domain. It was granted to us by the then Governor and Intendant, to enjoy the same for ever, in the most ample manner, even if the mission was taken away from thence, on the conditions that thr expenses of the transfer of the mission should be paid by us, that we should put up a stone building, a church, and erect a fort for the pro- tection of the Indians and the defence of the colony, against the incursions of the Iroquois. We have faithfully fulfilled those conditions. 23 The expenses incurred iniultillitig these conditions were so considerable that, on the 26th September, 1733, the Marquis of Beauharnois added new lands to this seigniory. The King of France, in approving of tiiese grants, added a greater extent, in the depth of the land, as an indemnity. Those are our titles, they arc -io clear that, in vir- tue of the Treaty of Peace, concluded between the French crown and tluit of England at the time of the cession of Canada in 1760. our seigniories were con- sidered as private seigniories, and we had the pri- vilege of selling them and taking the proceeds of such sales to France, the .same as the other seigniors who did not wish to remain under the English domina- tion. The gentlemen of St. Sulpice did not,however, like to abandon the colon}' at a moment when the fruits of their sacrifices were most wanted. In 1840, the titles of the Seminary of Montreal to those seigniories, which were held in full property, by the Sulpiciai; ; of Paris and of Montreal, under the French domination, were confirmed by that famous ordinance, which has been the dawning and the basis of the commutation of the seigniorial rights in the whole Province. You are aware of the sacrifices we then made. In i /. om Photographic Sciences Corporation V ^nN \ \\ %^ Q»\ % n.^ ^<.~- ^«.'?'' '^^ 23 WEST M MN S7REf T WEBSTER, .4. Y. MS8C (716) 873-4503 » ^^WBIi^ 11 28 of the King's Procureur General, by me, Clerk of the said Council, at Quebec, the Second of October,i7i9. [Signed,] Rinel. On the back is written : — Received into the Registrar's Office, in Quebec, on Tuesday, the nth day of June, 1765, at 9 o'clock in the forenoon. (Signed,) J. Goldfrap. Deputy Registrar. Registered in the said office, on Friday, the 14th day of June, 1765, at 10 o'clock in the forenoon, in the French Register, letter A, page 135. (Signed,) J. Goldfrap, Deputy Registrar. Registered in the Register of Fealty and Homage (/oi et hommage). (Signed,) J. T. Cuonet. Compared with the original written on parchment, to us exhibited by Messire Jos. Bourneuf, priest, procurator of the Seminary of Montreal, and imme- diately returned to himself by the undersigned nota- ries for the Province of Lower Canada, residing in Montreal, this day, the 18th of June, 1796. (Signei,) Loins Ohaboillez, Not. Jean Quill. Dellisle, Not. (. H wmmmm mmm 29 (Copy,) (L. S.) Gity, Lord Dorchester, Captain General atid Governor in Chief in the Province of Lower Canada, etc., etc., etc To all whom these presents may concern : I do hereby certify that Louis Chaboillez and Jean Guillaume Delisle, are public notaries for the district of Montreal, in the Province of Lower Cana- da, duly commissioned and authorised as such j^in consequence whereof full faith and entire credit^are and ought to be given to their signatures in such ^ca- pacity, wherever the same may appear. Given under my Hand and Seal at Arms, at the Castel of St. Lewis, in the City of Quebec, the" 25th day of June, 1796, and in the 36th year of His Ma- jesty's reign. (Signed,) Dorciiestkr. By His Excellency's Command. (Signed,) Georqe Powna. . Secretary, True copy of the original kept in the records of the Seminary of Montreal, this 8th day of Septem- ber, 1868. (Signed,) A. Mercikk, P. S. S. Hlppiil.UU'lJI 30 (No. 8.) ( Translated from the French.) This first day of the month of March, one thousand seven hundred and thirty-five the king being at Versailles, and having ceased to be laid before him the Deed of Concession made on the twenty-sixth of September, one thousand seven hundred and thirty-three, in favor of the ecclasiastics of the Semi- nary of St. Sulpice of Paris, by the Sieurs Marquis of Beauharnois, Governor and Intendaut General for His Majesty, and Hocquart, Intendant in La Nou- velle France, of a tract of land situated in the said country, and lying between the line of the Seigniory belonging to the representatives of the late Sieurs de Langloiserie and Petit, and that of the Seigniory of the Lake of Two Mountains belonging to the said Seminary, and in the front extending about two lea- gues by the Lake of Two Mountains ; the said tract of land abutting on an angle formed by the two above mentioned lines, togheter with the ungranted island and islets, and the beaches adjoining the said tract of land, having also caused the Deed of Ratifi- cation of the twenty-seventh April, one thousand seven hundred and eighteen, by which His Majesty conceded of the same seminary the said seigniory called Lake of Two Mountains, and desiring His Ma- jesty to be propitious towards the said ecclesiastics of St. Sulpice of Paris, by confirming the concession of the twenty-sixth of September one thousand se- ven hundred and thirty-three, he has ratified and confirmed the said concession, to have and to hold 81 the said ecclesiastics, their successors and assigns for €ver, as a fief and seigniory, with the right of supe- rior, mean, and inferior jurisdiction, with that of fishing, hunting, and trading with the Indians within the hmits of the said seigniory, on the follo- wing terms, provisions, and conditions, to wit : That the bearing of the said land will run in depth south one quarter south-west to north one quarter north- east, and not south-west one quarter north-east as inserted by mistake in the Deed of Concession made by the Sieurs de Beauharnois and Hocquart ; that the said ecclesiastics, their successors and assigns, shall be subject to the performance of fealty and ho- mage [foi ct hommagc,'] to His Majesty on every change of reign, and furnish him also with new cen- sus, as well at the castle of St. Lewis in Quebec, of which they shall hold, according to the custom of Paris, followed in La Nouvelle France, without being obliged to pay to His Majesty, nor to his, succces- sors (kings) any rent or dues whatsoever, neither for the land to them conceded at the said Lake of Two Mountains by the Deed of Ratification of the twenty- -scventh of April, one thousand seven hundred and eighteen. That His Majesty will be free to take at all times, without being held to pay any indemnity, the oak timber fit for his service, which may be found on the said conceded lands ; that the said ecclesiastics, their successors and assigns, shall give notice to His Majes- ty, or to the Governor or Intendant of La Nouvelle France, of the mines, ores, and minerals, if any be found within the limits of the said concession ; that the appeals from the decision of the judge who may 82 be established at the said place, shall He before the judges of the Royal Jurisdiction of Mont.eal ;, that within a year and a day they shall keep, and' cause to be kept, house and home {fen et licit) on the said concession, in default whereof the said conces- sion shall revert to His Majesty's domain ; that they shall immediately clear, and cause to be cleared, the Said tract of land ; that they shall leave on the said concession the King's highways and other roadways which may be found necessary for the public use, and that they shall cause the same condi- tions to be inserted in the concession which they shall grant to their tenants, subject to the customary cms ct rentes and dues for each arpent of land as in' the adjoining seigniories, considering the nature and' circumstances of inheritances, at the time of the said> private concessions, the same to be observed by the- desire of His Majesty as regards the lands and inhe- ritances in the Seigniory of the Lake of Two Moun- tains, belonging to the said ecclesiastics, notwith- standing the fixing of the said ecus and dues and of the quantity of land of each concession set forth in> the said deed of one thousand seven hundred and. eighteen, to which His Majesty has departed from, and as the said ecclesiastics of St. Sulpice have re- presented to him that the transfer of the said Indian mission from the Island of Montreal to the Lake of Two Mountains, the stone church, the presbytery,the wooden fort which they have built thereon, hav« caused them expenses far exceeding the value of the lands conceded to them by the present deed, and by that of one thousand seven hundred and eighteen;, that it would be impossible for them to build thereccb 33 a stone fort, as obliged to by the said deed, and that besides, that stone fort would now be useless, the land at the head of the other concessions upon which the said fort was to be erected for the security of the country, being; occupied by the widow lady of Sieur d'Argenteuil ; and, lastly, that the Indians of the mission of the said Lake of Two Mountains being accustomed to often change their place of abode and so to render the said land more profitable, it would, therefore, be necessary to extend the said land further than the three leagues as set forth in the said deed of one thousand seven hundred and eighteen, the land conceded by these presents adjoining the Sieurs Petit and Langloiserie, being of a small extent in depth. His Majesty has released and releases the said ecclesiastics of St. Sulpice from the obligation of building the said stone fort or any other works, ex- cepting those already made, upon the said land of the said concession of one thousand seven hundred and eighteen, to which His Majesty is now pleased to add an extent of three leagues in depth, if the said extent is not already conceded, and which he now grants and concedes to the said ecclesiastics of St. Sulpice of Paris ; to have and to hold in full property and sei- gniory, as well as the old land mentioned in the said old concession^ which shall, consequently, be of six leagues in depth. Desiring Pfis Majesty that the said concessions be restricted and subject to the conditions above mentioned without exception, although they may not have been stipulated in either of the sa«d concessions of 1733, or in the said deed of ratificatior» of the 17th April, 17 18. And in testimony whereof His Majesty has commanded me to draw up these presents, which shall be registered in the Superior 34 Council of Quebec, for the use of all whom it may concern, and which he has been pleased to sign with his own hand, and countersigned by me. Councillor, Secretary of State and of his commands and finances (Signed,) (Signed,) Louis. PlIlLiri'EAUX. On the back is written : — Recorded in the records of the Superior Council of La Nouvelle France, to be executed according to its form and tenor, the King's Prccnreur General having been heard, according to the decree of this day's date, by us, the undersigned councillor, King's Secretary, Clerk in chief of the said Council, at Que- bec, the 1 2th December, 1735. [Signed,] Daine. Received into Registrar's Office, in Quebec, on Tuesday, the nth day of June, 1765. at 9 o'clock in the forenoon. [Signed,] J. Goldfrap, Deputy-Registrar. Registered in the said office, on Friday, the 14th June, 1765, at two o'clock in the afternoon, in the French Register , letter A, page 137. [Signed,] J. Goldfrap, Deputy- Registrar. Registered in the Register of Fealty and Homage \foi et hommage]. [Signed,] T. F. Cugnet. 36 Compared with the original, written on parchment, • and to us exhibited by Messire Joseph Bourn euf, procurator of the Seminary of Montreal, and imme- diately returned to himself by the undersigned nota- ries for the Province of Lower Canada, residing in Montreal, this day, one thousand seven hundred and ninety-six. [Signed,] Louis Ctiaboiij.ez, Notary. Jean Guill. Delisle, Notary. [No. 9.] [Extract from the Registers of the Superior Council of Quebec.\ Considering the Petition pr.-^tented this day in this Council, by the superior, procunitor and ecclesiastics •of the Seminary of St. Sulpice, established at Mon_ treal, the purport of which is that the Council may be pleased to order the registration of the Deed of Ratification granted by His Majesty, on the ist day of March last, to the sieurs ecclesiastics of the Semi- nary of St. Sulpice of Paris, of a concession made to them by Messieurs the Governor General and Inten- dant of this country, on the twenty-sixth day of Sep- tember, one thousand seven hundred and thirty-three, of a certain tract of land situated in the said country, and lying between the line of the seigniory belonging to the representatives of the late Sieurs Langioiserie and Petit, and that of the seigniory of the Lake of r.s 36 Two Mountains, belonging to the said seminary, and in the front extending about two leagues by the said lake, the said tract of land abutting on an angle for- med by the two above mentioned line.., together with the ungranted islands and islets and beaches adjoin- ing the said tract of land : — considering the said Deed of Ratification, dated as above, signed Louis, and lower down Phillipeaux, with sign manual, by which His Majesty has ratified and confirmed the said concession of the Lake of Two Mountains, and has added to that of 171 8, an extent of three leagues in depth : — having heard the King's Procurcur-Gciie- ral, the Council has ordained and ordains that the said Deed of Ratification be registered in the regis- ters of the said Council, to have and to hold the said sieurs ecclesiastics of the Seminary of St. Sulpice of Paris, as a fief and seigniory, on the terms, provisions, and conditions therein contained. Done at Quebec, at the said Superior Council, on the Monday, the 12th day of December, I735. [Signed,] Dainp:. Compared with a copy, written on paper, to us exhibited by Messire Joseph Bourneuf, priest, procu- rator of the Seminary of Montreal, and immediately returned to himself by the undersigned notaries for the Province of Lower Canada, residing in Montreal, this day, the i8th June, 1796. (Signed,) Louis Chaboillez, Notary. Jean Guil. Delisle, Notary. 37 [L.S.]— [Copy.] Guy, Lord Dorchester, Captain General and Go^'enwr in Chief of Loxver Canada, &e. To all whom these pres'jints may concern ; I do hereby certif;/ that Louis Chaboillez and Jean Guillaume Del isle, are public notaries for the District of MonVreal, in the Trovince of Lower Canada duly commissioned and authorised as such ; in consequen- ce wehreof, full faith and entire credit arc and ought to be given to their signatures in such capacity, whe- rever the same may appear. Given under my Hand and Seal at Arms, at the Castle of St. Lewis, in the City of Quebec, the twent^'-fifth day of June, one thousand seven hundred and ninety -six, and in the thirty sixth year of His Majesty's Reign, [Signed,] Dorchester. liy His Excellency's commands. [Signed,] Geo. Pownatt, Secretary. True copy of the original kept in the records of the Seminary of Montreal, the 8th September, 1868. (Signed,) A. Mercier, Ttr. T.S.S. 38 [No. 10.] [ Translated from the FrmcH!\. Attorney General's Office, Province of Quebec^. 17th October, 1868. Sir, — I am directed by the Honorable the Attor- ney General to transmit to you, for your information,, the enclosed copy of a Report of Charles J. Coursol,. Esq., Judge of Sessions of the Peace, at Montreal; relative to certain disturbances at the Lake of Two Mountains. I have the honor, etc., etc., [Signed,] Joseph A. Defoy, Afisisti C.L.CJ. To the Honorable H. L. Langevin, C.B., Secretary of State, Ottawa. I [No. II.] [ Translated from the French.] _ Montreal, 15th October, 1868. To the Hon. Gedeon Ouimet, Attorney General, Province of Quebec. Sir, — In conformity with the verbal instructions which I have had the honor of receiving from you,on Monday last, I left town on Tuesday morning for the- Village of Lake of Two Mountains, accompanied by my first clerk, Mr. Rene Cotret, the chief of the Wa^ ter Police^ and five men of tlie same body.. 39 Immediately after my arrival at the village, I cau- sed a search to be made, so as to brin^ before me a certain Michel SakoSentetha, an Indian of the place, against whom I had issued a writ of arrest, for an assault committed at the Presbytery, on the person of the Reverend Messirc Pr«}fontaine, attached to , the mission of the Lake as steward, I was told, soon after my arrival, that the man accused had left his house, to hunt, a few hours be- fore. I then caused to be brought before me the 'wo chiefs to tile Iroquois tribe, who were the true insti- gators of the dissatisfaction, and threats of disorder made by the Indians [principally by the jroquoisl and of i-i . rcspas?es which the^' openly made on 'J', is p'-^erty of the gentlemen of St. Salpice. The following are the chiefs of the Iroquois, nahJi-d Jose OnonkSotkoso. and some Indians of the same tribe, went on the domain of the gentlemen of the seminary ; and after having had stakes planted in different places, he, the chief, solumnly awarded to each Indian present, the piece of land which each one would in future have the right to occupy ; authorizing them, in his capacity of chief, to take possession of it immediately, telling them, at the same time, that those lands, as well as the domain, did not belong to the priests, but to the Indians, and that the chiefs had been authorized to put them in possession of properties which they had been deprived of for too long a period. The Indians to whom the chiefs, without any fur- ther formalities, adjudicated certain parts of the pro- perty of the gentlemen of St. Sulpice, have not, as yet, followed those dangerous advices, and have,until T 40 now, committed no acts of violence on the place of a nature to authorize their arrest. There has been, it appears, some threats, but nothing more. During the course of my conversation with the chiefs, I told them of the imprudence of their words, of the danger of their conduct, of the illegality of their acts, and of the penalities and fines to which they would infalli- bly be exposed if they persisted upon taking or ad- vising the Indians to take possession of lands which did not belong to them, the present proprietors of which had been in possession and enjoyment of the same before and ever since the conquest, and \v b ose rights and titles had so often been recognized by the tribunals of this country. After a long discussion with them, they coi.fessed that, during the month of August, 1867, Mr.Spragge, of the Indian Department, at Ottawa, had told them that the gentlemen of the seminary were not the pro- prietors of those lands, that they were but the admi- nistrators of these lands for the benefit of the Indians, that the Indians had a perfect vight to take posses- sion of them, and to parcel them out as they thought proper ; and that it was upon Mr. Spragge's advice that they had acted in this manner. I told them that they must be in error, that Mr. Spragge could not have given an opinion of that kind, and that there must have been a misunderstanding between Mr. Spragge and themselves ; but they persisted in their assertion, and added, that Mr. Spragge had spoken thus in the presence of witnesses. They finally engaged their word as chiefs, to say, do, or advise nothing of an illegal nature to the In- dians, but that they would, without loss of time, go to Ottawa, to meet the Honorable Mr. Langevin, C. 41 B., so as to obtain from that gentleman exact expla- nations, and assure themselves, once for all, of the nature of their rights, and of the extent of their pri- vileges ; and that, if they were convinced of being an the vvrong, they would at once submit and beg pardon. Seeing these dispositions on their part, which were manifested with frankness — in appearance at least — I told them that I would await the result of their in- terview with the Honorable Mr. Langevin before I should act, and that I would communicate to the ^Government the facts above cited. During the night of Tuesday and the morning of Wednesday, I caused new search to be made, so as to discover the Indian Michel SokaSentetha, but without a better result than the first time, and I do not think that he will return to the village before the departure of the six police- men I have left behind me, in compliance with the urgent request of the gentlemen of the seminary, in order to protect, in case of need, their persons or their property, which might be exposed for a few days longer. Before terminating this report, I will take the liber- ty to remark, that in case the chiefs do not go to Ottawa, as promised by them, it would be desirable that the Honorable Mr. Langevin causes to come before him, to hear their complaints, which are evi- dently so ill-founded. I have the firm conviction tha the chiefs will im- mediately follow the advice of the Honorable Mr. Langevin, and be guided, without hesitation, by his ■decision, for they manifes* the greatest confidence in the sentiments of justice which actuate that honora- i)le gentleman towards them. 42 I am aho happy to be able to inform you that during my sejourn at the lake, peace has not been for a single moment interrupted, and that the most per- fect order existed at the time of my departure. I have the honor to be, Sir Your very humble Servant [Signed,] Charles J. Coursol Judge, Sessions of Peace.- [Copy.] — (No. 12.) Department Secretary of States Indian Branch, October 20th, 1 868.. I'o Chief Joseph Orontsakoso, Care of the Rev. the Care, Lake of Two Mountains, P.Q. Having been informed that some of your principal' men have assumed an authority in connection with the lands of the Seigniory of the Lake of Two Moun- tains, which was calculated to bring them into serious trouble, and subject them to prosecution at law ; I consider that it will be advisable for yourself and one of the other chiefs to come to me at Ottawa, that I may explain to you both, for the information of your people, the exact position of the grant made by the crown of France to the gentlemen of the Seminary of St. Sulpice, in order that future difficulty and embarrassment may be avoided. I shall, therefore, expect your arrival with as little delay as possible. I am, your obedient Servant, [Signed,] Hector L. Langevin, Secretary of State,. 43 (Copy.)— [No. 13.] Governor General's Secretary's Office, Quebec, October 23rd, 1868. Sir. — I am directed by His Excellency the Go- vernor General, to acknowledge the receipt of the petition of the Chiefs of the Iriquois Indians of Two Mountains, and to inform you that it has been trans- ferred to the Department of the Secretary of State for Canada for report, I have the honor to be, Sir, Your obedient Servant, H. Cotton, For the Governor's Secretary. The Chiefs of the Iroquois Indians of the Lake of Two Mountains, Province of Quebec. [No. I4.[ {Translated from the French^ Ottawa, 3rd November, 1868. Monsieur le Superieur, — I am instructed to transmit to you the enclosed copy of a petition of Iroquois Indians of the Lake of Two Mountains, so as to enable you to place before the Government such explanations as you may deem proper,and to request you to do so at your earliest convenience. It will not be necessary for you to look into the matter as regards the titles of property of the Seigniory of the 44 Lake of Two Mountains, as your recent communica- tion on the subject is quite sufficient. Yours, etc., [Signed,] Etienne Parent Under Secretary. Messire J. Baile, Ptr. Superior of the Seminary of St. Sulpice, Montreal. (No. IS.) [ TyansJated from the French.] Montreal, 9th November, 1868. To the Honorable H. L. Langevin, C.B., Secretary of State of the Dominion. Sir, — In the petition presented by the three Iro- quois chiefs of the Lake of Two Mountains, you have an evident proof of what I wrote to you in October last, that evil minded persons were encouraging our Indians to put forth certain rights on our seigniory which they never had. I will not stoop to reply to the coarse insults and caluminous insinuations enclosed in the petition. Our house is enough known by the Government, not to be obliged to show that they have been suggested and Inserted in the petition by the same person who dared to insert in the affidavit the forty-eight words erased and void, but which, nevertheless, can still be read. I have, therefore, to satisfy the demand of the Government, but to explain the facts and allegations brought forth in the petition. 45 Since about 200 years past that the mission has been established on our domain, of the Seigniory of the Lake of Two Mountains, there were always sisters of the congregation to teach the little girls how to read and write, the missionaries taught the little boys, — later some lay teachers were paid by us to replace the missionaries. At the present time, the school of the boys of the village is kept by one of the brothers of the Christain schools. For many years past the In- dian language has been taught. The Iroquois, Algon- quins, and Canadian children assembled together to read, but read in the French language only, in order that distinction of nationality, which has to-day so many serious inconveniences may gradually disappear. The young Jose Onasakenrat, now the grand chief of the Iroquois, has been educated at our own ex- pense, in our college. You see in which manner he make use of the education we have given him. We maintain, at our own expense, those schools — two at the village, and the third at the creek — for the children of those Indians who have established themeselves upon their lands. We have also lately established a work-room, to teach the women and young Indian girls to work. Two years ago, the women obtained a prize for cloths manufactured in the mission. They have again, this year, sent some beautiful cloths to the county exhi- bition, but they did notsucceeed in getting any prize. Not including the keeping of the brother, who lodges and boards with our gen- tlemen, the expense for the three schools amounted to $817 94 And for the work-room to 172 76^ -Bpaosi ffsssmamsmmmmmmm 46 Forming a total amount of, for this last year, from the ist October, i867,to ist October, 1868 990 70^2 For the preceeding year, the expenses for the work-room and the schools amoun- ted to 918 07 And for repairs to, and contribution at the Nunnery 308 89 From the ist October, 1866, to ist Oc- ber, 1867 $1,226 96 The Indians contribute nothing to the support of these schools, we only ask of them to send their chil- dren to these schools, but we havcalivays had a great deal of trouble to obtain that much. You perceive, by this short statement, that Ave have not neglected, and do not at present neglect to give the Indians that education most suited to them. Is there another mission where the Indians are more favored ? 2. In answer to the complaints of the Indians as regards the concession of lands, and the cutting of woods, it will suffice to state that this mission esta- blished upon our domain of the Mountain in 1677, ■was first transferred on our domain of the Sault au Recollet, and from thence, definitely established on *our domain of the Lake of Two Mountains in 1777. The Indians, whom we have always treated as our children, are, therefore, on our own lands ; they have, and can only have, but the titles which we think proper to grant them. What was true, when our domain was seigniorial, is now r.iOre incontestible, since by our agreements 47 with the Government in 1859, the domain belongs to JUS, \n franc-aleu rotiiricr. This is the manner in which we deal with our In- vdians in reference to the cultivation of lands. We allow them the enjoyment of the lands, on condition that they will cultivate them ; the enjoyment may pass to their children on the same conditions, and we even allow them to sell out that enjoyment to another Indian who has been established in the said mission for two years. We only reserve for us the wood, the .cutting and cartage of which we pay them for. If they want any firewood, or timber for building ^purposes, we allow them to have it, but we only per- mit them to take what they want for their own use. They are prohibited from selling wood without our oermission, otherwise our forest would have been long since ruined. Were it not for that wise prec?.>'ticn, where would ■tlie Indians obtain their firewood ? We have but a ifew pines capable of being converted into canoes ; when the Indians required any, we allow them to take them, but on the condition that they will not sell them. This explains the claim made upon the canoe sold by the Indian La-coppre. In general, we cut wood on the lands reserved for the Indians at their demand only, cither to enlarge their fields, or make new ones ; and if somotimes we have cut some without c^^nsulting them, it was on ^unoccupied or deserted lands. As the domain belongs to us, we have no permis- sion to ask. The keeping up of the mission becoming every- day more onerous, the produce of the hunt not being sufficient to supply the wants of the Indians, we 48 created farms around our domain. When these will yield a plentiful crop, they will suffice to meet the expenses of the mission. In the meantime, the pro- curacy of the seminary is obliged to advance very large sums of money to keep up, and for the repairs of the establishment of the Lake of Two Mountains. The following is a statement of the expenses since the 1st October, 1865, to the 1st October 1868. Furnished by the Seminary,. Expenses. 1865-1866 $9,050 II $4,086 30 1866-1867 10,031 55 5,164 16 1867-1868 12,768 51 More than 9,000 oc Account of extra ivorks. When the Indians come to us for assistance, we give it to them in the shape of work, unless they are sick or infirm. Below is a statement of the assistance we have gi- ven them during the last three years. 1865-1866, Seed grain ad- vanced and not remitted $ 179 30 " Work procured to the Indians ... 2,137 09 " Alms 650 87 1 866- 1 867, Seed grain, &c. 163 34 " Work 2,472 25}'2 " Alms 60306^ $2,966 26 1867-1868, Seed Grain. Work Alms u 112 00 2,785 06 714 14 3,238 66 3,611 20 49 Special assistance given to the Indians in tliice years $9,816 12 I make no allusion here to the other work procured for the Indians, such as the cuttintj of wood, the construction of a wharf, etc., etc., in which they have been employed, either by us, or our workmen. What mission would procure them so many advan- tages and so much assistance ? 3. For the use of the niission and of our farms, and to give work to the Indians who were in want, we had repairs made to a road, on an extent of near- ly twelve miles. Every year, for the last seven years, we hive spent, and still spend, nearly one thousand dollars on this road ; it was during the construction of this road, and to come to the assis- tance of the poor, that we did cut wood of little va- lue ; the price of that wood was converted intc provi- sions to pay the Indians' labour. For we do not pay them, and will not pay them, otherwise than with provisions, so that the proceeds of their work may turn to the benent of their families. Were we to pay them in cash, notwithstanding the prohibition of sell- ing liquors to the Indians, the vendors of intoxicating drinks would absorb the jjroatest part of their labours^ 4. Finally, as regards that most odious allegation, that of the widow. Petit Cris, Messire Mcrcier leased the land in question upon the reiterated solicitations of that widow. He had it valued by a farmer. The Canadian who wished to lease the farm could not give any security, and could not establish himself amongst the Indians without onr permission, aud Mr. Mercier had it cultivated by the teacher of the school whicli has been established at the Creek, for the children of 50 those Indians who live in the woods. We have given that widow as much as she could reasonably expect. I doubt if Mr. Mercier receives the amount which he has paid to that poor woman to assist her in her small trade with the Indians. Her land is at her dis- posal, whenever she wishes to retake it. 5. As regards the tithes and casual church fees.the amount which we receive from the Indians does not meet the expenses of the service of the church. 1865-66. Tithes$i46 82/, Casual fees 162 98^ Expenses of the service of church $279 76 Tithes 122 6 Cusual fees 118 84 S'A $309 81 I i866-6y. Expenses of the ■241 service of church 379 01 Tithes$2o8 81 Casual fees 58 26 ^4 A9% 1867-68. Expenses of the 267 07 ]A service of church 505 73 $1,164 50 $818 38 You perceive by this statement, of the last three years, that the expenses are greater than the receipts ; besides, most of the tithes and casual church fees come from our farmers, for they pay rent for church pews, w^hilst the Indians pay nothing for the pews which they occupy. I trust. Sir, that this statement, which we have been forced to make, will enlighten the Government as re- ll Tgards the couspiracy vvhich is going on, for the pur- pose of perverting our Iiuiians. We only ask, so as to be permitted to continue to •do the good we have always done, to see the ilelusion ■of the Indians dissipated, by solemnly declaring to $hem that they are upon our lands, and that they cannot be allowed to remain on them unless they submit to the wise regulations which we have made for their welfare and that of their children. lie pleased to accept, etc., etc:, [Signed,] T. A. Bailk, Superintendent of the Seminary of St, Sulpice, Montreal. :[Copy, No. i6.J Ottawa, 9th December, 1868. Tu Alonsa Sakokenoie, Alonsa Retsitonsenio, Ignace TON'NIONTAKOEN, Michel Sakosenktta and others, Iroquois of Lake of Two Mountains The statements contained in your petition to His Excellency the Governor General having been exa- mined and inquired into, I have to answer them in the following manner : — The SeigniiDry of the Lake of Two Mountains was granted in the year 1718, by the King of France, to the gentlemen of the Seminary of St. Sulpice, and the title, which has been recognized by Act of Par- 52 1 lament, is such as gives to that body the absolute: ownership thereof, and, consequently, the Indians have no right of property in the seigniory. With regard to timber, it is found from explana- tions given by the Superior of the Seminary, that the Indians are allowed to cut such wood as they require for fuel and for building purposes, but are not per- mitted to cut wood for sale. It appears, also, that education is bestowed upon the Indians in the required branches, and in the French language, as that spoken generally in that section of Canada ; and, that their religious instruc- tion has received continued attention ; and that a very great deal has been done to improve the condi- tion and to contribute to the comfort and welfare of the Iroquois of that seigniory. And, further, that the complaint made that the Indians have been refu- sed concessions of land for agricultural purposes is contary to the facts of the case, the practice, as ex- plained, being to allot lands for agriculture in propor- tion as the Indians are prepared to clear them. Having coveyed to you these pasticulars,it remains to be added, for the information of the Iroquois In- dians of that seigniory, that, by an authority ofaa Order in Council, there were i,6oo acres of land set apart for the Iroquois of the Lake of Two Mountains^ and of Caughnawaga, situated in the Township of Duncaster, in rear of the Township of Wexford, and where, provided they become actual settlers and im- prove the lands, each family may be located on a farm lot of sufficient extent ; and, in that case, it would be ascertained what aid could be given to the Indians by the Government. Should the lands set apart in that township be in- 53 ■sufficient, an endeavour would be made to find some other locality, where the Indians might settle, if they so desired. I remain, etc,, (Signed,) Hector L. Langevin. Secretary of State. ,(Copy,)--(> -, 17.) Department of the Secretary of State, Ottawa, loth December, 1868. To Chiefs Cla-Ko-Misci Kr, Bazill. Algik.Pall- AK-AN-WAXEii, and other Algonquins of the Lake of Two Mountains, Oka, P. O., P.Q. Your letter of the 3 ist July last was duly received <-ind enquiry having been made respecting the state- ments contained therein, the following is the result of those enquiries : It is found that the titles to the Seigniory of the Lake of Two Mountains, and the Acts of Parliament relating thereto, give to the gentlemen of the Semi- nary of St. Sulpice, Montreal, the absolute ownership of the said seigniory ; and consequently the Algon- ^quin Indians have no right of property therein. It further appears, from explanations given by the •superior of the seminary, that the gentlemen of the •seminary allow the Indians such firewood as they re- quire for thoir own use, and also timber to build with, 'but the Indians are not allowed to cut cordwood or timber for sale. wasasmmmmmmimmm T 54 It is well to remind the Algonquins that a tract containing 45,750 acres of land, situated upon the Rivers Desert and Gatineau, was set apart in the year 1854 for the Algonquins, Nipissingue and Tetes de- Boule Indians, upon which 200 or 300 Indians have- become settled, and where each family joining them can, on application to the agent, Mr, John White^ obtain a farm lot of about eighty acres, which will be- allowed to himself and his family for all time to comc^, provided they settle and cultivate the same. Whith regard to the equipment (alluded to in your letter), as formerly given to the Indians, the fact must apparently have been long ago known to the Indians,, that the Imperial Government discontinued annual presents, and only gave to the old and infirm as blanket every year to each such person, and this prac- tice the Government of Canada still follows. The Indians should likewise know that the Semi- nar}.' of St. Sulpicc has, for several years, been expen- ding, for the benefit of the Indians, a considerably larger sum than they derive from the seigniory ; and to assist the Indians, have done much towards provi- ding them with work and employment, and giving help and aid to the poor and infirm. And, from the information obtained, the conclusior> is, that they obtain kindness and consideration from the gentlemen of the seminary. It is also my duty to point out to you that the Algonquins must respect property, and be content with their present condition, and rest sure that the disposition of the Government is to improve their condition, and elevate them in their social position. Your obedien*- Servant, [Signed, Hector L. Langevin, Secretary of State^ 55 (Copy J— (No. 1 8.) Dominion of Canada, Province of Quebec. To His Excellency Sir John Young, C. B., C. G. M„ Governor General of the Dominion of Canada, &c., &c., &:c. The humble petition of the undersigned chiefs of the iroquois nation of the Lake of Two Mountains, Province of Quebec, respectfully sheweth : That among the most important blessings which the Divine Being ha i conferred upon mankind may be numbered the happy display of the good and chari- table dispositions of eminent persons. Your petitioners had left their homes with a heavy heart, driven by the high hand of oppression from a quarter they had been trained to consider infallible, both in earth and in heaven — to seek the protection of those whose sympathy they could not expect to engage, being strangers to them in nationality and religion ; howe- ver, they C'uld not, in justice, expect a worse treat- ment than they had been accustomed to receive from their pretended freinds, and they might reach Otta- wa, the seat of Government, and land upon the high, magnificent, and solid rock in perfect security, and laugh to scorn the frowning, forthy, and angry roars and threats of the " Chaudieres " below, mighty in- deed in appearance, out as harmless as the breath of the departed. That your petitioners arrived at the sp^t of Go- verment, like Bunyan's pilgrim, with their loads of ^mmmmmmmmm 66 sins and complaints against their relentless oppressors, and scarcely better provided with this word's goods ; but they fortunately carried in their appearance the misery and embarrassment they felt upon being infor- med that Your Excellency was ready to receive them — they had reached Heaven, and beheld the Sun of Justice smiling upon their humble and rude appea- rance, as Your Excellency himself did, on opening the door of his cabinet,bid them 'come in my children,'they could not have felt more particularly blessed." " Oh ! oh !" said they to each other, after reluctantly parting with Your Excellency, see what reading God's own book has done here, and how truly he must love God when he loves to make us so happy. Let us go home quick, and tell our brethren, our wives, and our chil- dren, that we have met with a true servant and mi- nister of God, and that they will not always remain oppressed." That your petitioners have caused an English trans- lation to be made of the petition in the French lan- guage, addressed by them on the Sth August last to Your Excellency's predecessor, Lord Monck, which they now produce (iCQ petition marked exhibit A., and document marked B.), with copies of the petition to the Honorable the Minister of Justice, and certifi- cates of agreement and concession, verbally'made with their nation or tribe of Iroquois, by the priests and Seigniory of St. Sulpice, which agreement and con- cession are now denied them. Whereof your petitioners, labouring yet under the grievances set forth in the above stated references, most respectfully beg that Your Excellency will order iheir removal and redress. 67 And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. ^Signed,) Josp: Gnasakenrat [Lecyjne] Louis Kemerakenhiate (Sendrier) San Alemrakenrat f^CiSessa). Lake of Two Mountains, 8th February, 1869. -(Copy, Telegram.) — (No. 19. J [Bjf Telegraph from Hudsoft.] Ottawa, February, 22nd, 1869. To His Excellency, the Governor General, Sir John Young. May it please Your Excellency, that We, the chiefs of the Iroquois and Algonquin nations, humbly and respectfully ask your promised answer to our deputa- tion without delay, as matters are becoming desperate with us. [SigueJ,] JosK Onasakkniiat, Louis Kemerakenhiate, San Anarauakenrat. [Copy, No. 20.] Government Office, Ottawa, February, 23rd, 1869. Gentlemen, — I am directed by the Governor Gene- ral to acknowledge the receipt of your petition, of date 58 the 8th instant, with the documents that accompanied' it, and also of your telegram of yesterday, pressing for a reply. His Excellency has referred these papers to the- Privy Council, and 1 have to inform you that, in ac- cordance with constitutional usage, it will not be pos- sible for His Excellency to take any steps in the pre- mises without the report and reconmiendation of the- responsible ministers. I have, etc., [Signed,] F. TURVILLE. Jose Onasakanrat (Lecj'jne), Louis Kanenratenhiate, [Sertigon], San Anaranakenrat, [Twissa], Chiefs of the Iroquois Nation of the Lake of Two> Mountains. (Copy.)~(No. 21.) Governor General's Office, Ottawa, February 23rd, 1869,. Sir, — I am directed by the Governor General tO' enclose a petition and telegram from the Chiefs of the Iroquois Nation of the Lake of Two Mountains, with the accompanying documents, and a copy of His Excellency's reply, and to rec^uest you to lay these documents before the Privy Council for report. I have the honor to be, vSir, Y^our odedient Servant, H. Co'i'TON.. \Vm. H. Lee, Esq., etc.. Clerk of the Privy Council. 69 [No. 22.] {Translaicd from, the French.{ Lake of Two Mountains, _ 26th Februarj^ 1S69. To the Governor General. May it please Your Excellency,-~That your me- morialists of the Iroquois nation or tribe, have,through the medium of their chiefs, notified the priests' mis- sionaries to leave, and not to return here any more ; this being the unanimous desire and sentiment of the said nation. That, in default of having justice rendered to us. the chiefs, on behalf of the nation, will adopt such means as will ensure the removal of these priests and pretended successors of St. Peter, the nation being unable to any longer tolerate their conduct towards them. And your memorialists will for ever pray. [Signed by us Chiefs], JosEPri Onasakenrat (Le Cygnft). Louis x Kamerakkniiiatk (Seandg). Jean x Ooouvekeneat )Tiaeose). 2nd March, 1869. Send this to the Honorable H. Langevin, with a reference to the letter sent a itw days ago, and request him to send an answer. [Signed,] J. Y. 60 I (No. 23.) [ Translated from the French^ Ottawa, 15th March, 1869. Gentlemen, — His Excellency the Governor General has transmitted to this Department, for answer, your communication of the 26th February last, informing His Excellency that the chiefs of the Iroquois tribe had notified the missionary to leave the mission, and not to return thither, etc., and I have been requested to inform you that you must respect the law, and the rights of property of the gentlemen of St. Sulpice. You must understand that to act otherwise would be contrary to law, and that the best method for you to obtain favors from the Government, or from the gentlemen of St. Sulpice, is to submit, unreservedly, to the law, and this without distrust. The Government has your welfare at heart, and hopes that you will listen to the good advice which is given you, and reject the evil ones which strangers of yonr nation may offer you, and which cannot but bring misfortune upon you all. I have, etc., [Signed,] E. Parent, Under Secretary of State. Joseph Onasakenrat, And other chiefs of the Iroquois Tribe, Lake of Two Mountains. 61 (No. 24.) ( Translated from the French.) Montreal, 2nd June, 1869. Sir,— I have received, about fifteen days ago, the letter which you did me the honor to write, dated 15th May last, with copies of letters you had pre- viously written to the Algonquins and Iroquois In- dians of the Lake of Two Mountains ; also, a copy of a letter by the Under Secretary of State, the hon. M. Parent, to the same Indians. I am, honorable Sir, very much grateful to you, and to the Under Secretary of State, for having thus reminded these Indians of the duties they owe to us, and of the incontestable rights of this seminary ; but, I thank you, more particularly, for having caused to be transmitted to me the authenticated copies of all these documents. Notwithstanding the great many causes of com- plaints which we may have against those Indians, yet we do not ask for their removal from the Seigniory of the Lake of Two Mountains. We are, as heretofore disposed to assist those who have remained faithful to us, according to our means and discretion, as well as those who may be willing to behave themselves as they should. If, however, the Government came to the conclusion of removing the malcontents to some other locality, we would neither object nor disapprove its doing so, and if such was the case, the Seminary would not hesitate a moment in allowing such indemnity, as na- tural equity and positive law would entitle them to, for work and improvements performed. 62 Be pleased to accept tlic assurance of the profond respect and sincere gratitude with which I am, M. le Ministre, Your most obedient and humble ser-'nt, (Signed) T. A. Bailk, Superior of the Seminary. To the Hon. Hector L. Langevin, Secretary of State. [No. 2^.] ( Translated from the French,) Ottawa, 8th September, i86g. M. le JUGE. — A certain number of Iroquois of the Lake of Two Mountains, appearing not to be satisfied with their position, I am willing to assist them in ob- taining, from the gentlemen of St. Sulpice, the value of the improvements which these Indians may have performed upon the lands they cultivate, such as for houses, barns, sheds, and other buildings, fences, dit- ches, and clearing. The mone)' which w^ouid be paid them by the Seminary of St. Sulpice, at the time vhen they would leave their houses, would enable them to do as the Algonquins have done, and to es- tablish tht;mselves elsewhere^. I have every reason to believe that the seminary will accede to my request on the subject. You will then have the kindness to go to the Lake of Two Mountains, and In my name convoke the Iro- quois who reside there, and state to them the above, accompanied with suitable explanations. And those 63 .among them who would be disposed to accept this .agreement, might at once come to an understanding with you, as regards the extent of their improvements, of which a statement for each family might iuanedia- tely be made and signed by yourself and them. You might, at the same time, make the estimate, and trans- mit to me a report of the whole as soon as possible. I remain, M. le Juge, Your very devoted servant, (Signed,) Hector L. Langevin, Secretary of State, Sup. Gen. Indian Affairs. To C. J. Coursol, Esq., J. S. P. Montreal. [No. 26.] {Translated from the Frcnch.'\ Montreal, i8th September, 1868 Sir, — I have the honor to report that, in conformi- ty with the instructions contained in your letter of the 8th instant, I proceeded on the 14th instant to the village of the Lake of Two Mountains, and hav- ing had an interview with the grand chief, he pro- mised me he would call a meeting of the Iroquois for yesterday, the 17th instant. Accordingly, I returned to the lake yesterday, and, faithful to his promise, the chief had assembled all the Iroquois now present at Oka. The chief requested me to state the proposals with which I was intrusted to submit to them, on your be- half. I then, at length, explained to them the object 64 of my mission, and told them, among other thin^^Sv that your object in adopting measures before hand, by which they miglit be provided with fertile lands, that it was to assist and be useful to them, and that their tribe might prosper. I, also, told them that it was not your intention to> force them to leave the lake, but that you had been< informed that a certain number amongst them were not satisfied with their position, and could not obtain enough work to support their families ; that they had manifested their desire of accepting lands of the Go- vernment, and that you had ititrusted me with the mission to inquire as to the veracity of that report. The chief having explained to the Iroquois what T told him, conferred with them for awhile. This con- ference over, he told me that thev were all unanimous in thanking you, as well as the Government, for the solicitude and interest evinced towards them, but that it was impossible for them to maturely consider your proposals, inasmuch as one of the chiefs, and a great number of Iroquois were absent ; some of them being- busy harvesting, and others travelling, that they would require a delay of three or four weeks before they would be able to give a final answer ; and, added fur- ther, that if the two priests of St. Sulpice — Messieurs Toilet and Rive — did not depart from the place, that there would be more difficulties. That, if these gentlemen were recalled by the semi-- nary, even for a short time, and replaced by others, they had the conviction that they would come to air understanding among themselves, and that peace and unity would be the result. That they were decided upon having no deliberation, or give any answer toe 65 your proposals, unless the two gentlemen above named were first removed. I told them that they were mistaken in thinking that the Seminary of St. Sulpice desired, or had asked for their removal ; that, far from it, the superior of the seminary, with whom I had had an interview the pre- vious day, had assured me that the seminary would see, with the greatest sorrow, the departure of the In- dians, and they would consent to such a step, on the conviction, only, that tlie Iroquois themselves were desirous to depart, and formally express their wish so to do. I concluded by telling them that I would immedia* tely send to you a report of the sesult of that meeting, not very numerous indeed, but composed of the most influential men among them, and presided by the chiefs Joseph Ohasakanrat Louis Raniackenkiate, in grand costume, the other chiefs being absent from the lake. The meeting was put off to the 25th of October next, and a vote of thanks tendered to me by the meeting. Among those who were present at this meeting, we observed Mr, De La Ronde, notary from St. Andrews, as well as the Rev. Mr.Rivet, Protestant missionary at Oka, and whom the chiefs had invited to attend. . I have the honor to be, Sir, Your obedient Servant, [Signed,] Charles J. Coursol, J. S. P. To the Hon. Hector L. Langevin, Secretary of State, Ottawa. [No, 27] 66 ] Translated from tJte French^ Department of the Sccret'iry of State. Indian Branch, Ottawa, 23rcl September, 1869. Sir, — I have received instructions from the Secre- tary of Sate to acknowledge the receipt of your Re- port of the 1 8th instant, as regards your mission to the Indians of the Lake of Two Mountains, and to thank you for what you have done in matter. I am also directed to inform you that he will soon write to you, relative to the same subject. I have, etc., (^Singned,; E Parent, Under Secretary, To the Honorable Judge CoURSOL, Montreal, P. O. {Translated from the French.'] [No 28.) Department of the Secretary of State Indian Branch, Ottawa, 14th October 1869. M. LE JUfiE, — I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your Report, dated i8th September last, in which you give me the result of the meeting held by the Iroquois Indians of the Lake of Two Mountains, on the 17th ult. As according to that 67 report they were to have another meeting; on the 25th insL ; 1 wish you would assist at it, and try toinipress upon them that I, or the Government, have notiiin^ to do as rc morning, when speaking to the Governor General, iiv the presence of Mr. Hughes, 1 told His Excellency,, and repeated several times, — "That we had reserved the domain, of your own free will, that we could have "sold the same in part or in whole ; that if we had •' not done so, it was for the good of the Indians ;. "that the Indians would have nothing to say in the " matter, were we to sell it at present to whomsoever " we chose, this is the root of the whole affair. When' " we do anything for the Indians, we dt it because " we so wish it. Do not loose sight of this when " you speak to Mr. Hughes." Mr. Quiblier's argument is still more irrefutable- since the seminary has been recognised proprietor in franc altie roturier. Mr. Hughes, however, who, by mistake or otherwi- se, had taken upon himself to allow the Indians to cut and sell wood for their own benefit, was compel- led to withdraw that permission. This is demonstrated by the letter which was s'^nt to him on the 4th April, 1838, by Mr. Rowan, Secre- tary of Sir John Colborne, by which this Secretary orders him, in the name of the Governor, to go to the lake, and put a stop to the depredations ; and after- wards, by the letter which Mr. Hughes himself was obliged to write to the Indians to prove to them the authenticity of Mr. Rowan's letter. 81 The successors of Mr. Qjiblier, the superiors of the seminary, and tlicir rcprensentatives at the lake, the successors of Mr. Dufresne, have constantly ai^reed and acted in the same manner as those two fjcntle- men did towards the Indians, as it is easily proved by their corrcspondancc, and their conduct gencrall -. Moreover, Sir, last year,your honorable predecessor, Mr. Langevin, havin^:^ had to examine the preten- sions of these poor Indians, as well as a new petition from them to cut wood, and dated the loth June, 1869, sent them the following reply, dated the 17th of the same month, " I have to inform you that the " gentlemen of the Seminary of St. Sulpicc, of Mon- " treal, are ihc proprietors of the lands which are in " the Seigniory of the Lake of Two Mountains, and " consequently that you have to look to them for per- '• mission to cut wood upon those lands." " The Government cannot interfere in the matter." It, therefore seems to me that all the difficulties as regards this affair, have been sufficiently, and more tlian sufficiently examined, discussed, judged, and well judged,and I am, therefore, confident that the honora- ble the Privy Council, the Senate, and the House of Commons, will be unanimous in rejecting and consi- dering all the new petitions above refered to as worth- less. If, nevertheless, the contrary was the result, if our titles and our rights were again to be threatened, I would earnestly beg of you to have the kindness to notify us, and I am confident that we could easily furnish you with all the necessary documents to justify the preceding arrangements. I am, etc.. Sir, Your humble and very obedient servant, [Signed,] T. A. Baile, Supr. f ,■ '" 82 [Copy.]— (No. 35.) Sherbrooke. 17th February, 1870. To the Honorable Joseph Howe. My Dear Sir, — The Indians at the Lake of Two Mountains, feeling dissatisfied with the conduct of the Roman Catholic priest towards them, resolved upon giving him intimation they desired any further con- nection between him and them to cease. In furtherance of this object, they waited upon him to make the intimation which he, declaring them guilty of an assault, had them arrested, and convey- ed to jail, for alleged trespass, and vhus appeared de- termined to worry and tease them into subjection to his iron rule. To defend them under circumstances of such pain- ful treatment, some friends in Montreal — where I then lived — engaged a lawyer, a Mr. Kerr, whose services on those occasions have involved an expense of one hundred and fifty ooliars. This, now owing to the mission having fallen into the hands of the Wesleyan Methodists, rests upori them to defray. Ha- ving the superintendence of this, and s.^verai missions among the French Canadians in tho Province of Quebec, it has been suggested to me tlijst I should apply to you to know if you could, out of any funds at yo"r disposal in behalf of the Indians, enable me to meet his deniand. It is not a legitimate case for our missionary income to meet, and if we are compel- led to pay it, it must be through a special appeal to our friends for that purpose. If v/ithin your province to grant my request, I, with many friends who view tiie expenditure as one of 83 purest benevolence, to relieve and protect a deeply oppressed i^eople, will teel much obliged. I might si'.y. if this were the only sum it has been necessary to raise for their help, or Vvhich might yet be necessaiy tv> obtain for thetr), I would not trouble you with such an application as the present. The Honorable Mr. Aikins, to whom I have writ- ten oi. previous occasions in behalf of these poor In- dians, is fully inforiTied on the whole matter. Hoping you will t xcuse me for thus troubling you, especiallv' at a time \\hen you must he so fully occu- pied, I beg to subscriL>e myself, My dear qind honored Sir, Yours very truly, John Borlani>, VVesleyan Minister, and Chairman of the Quebec District Department Oi Secretaj'v of State for the Provinces, Indian Branch, Ottawa, 1 2th March 1870. Reverend Sir, — I am in receipt of your letter of the 17th ult., and in reply, I beg to state that, as certain of the Indians of I-ake of Two Mountains, to whom you allude, received sentence of iriprisonment,it must be inferred that proof must have been before the ma- gistrate that they had infringed the law. And I have further to state, that it is not the practice to pay from Indian funds law costs, unless the incurring of those mmmmmsm. wmmm 84 costs had previously been sanctioned by the Superin- tendent General of Indian Affairs. I have, etc., (Signed,) Josf:PH Howe, S. S. To Rev. John Borland, VVesleyan Misionary, and Chairman of Quebec Dietrict. (Copy.)— [No. 37'] Sherbrooke, 17th March, 1870. Honorable Sir, — I beg you to excuse me for once- more trespassing on your time and attention, I only- do so to correct an erroneous impression, under which 1 perceive you are laboring. You say, " that as cer- tain of the Indians of the Lake of Two Mountains,, to whom you allude, received sentence of imprison- ment, it muts be inferred that proof must have been before tlie magistrate that they had infringed the law." The facts are, they, the Indian Chiefs, went peaceably to intimate to the priest that they did not desire to receive from him any more service, and, therefore, they wished he would leave the place, be- lieving that seigniory was theirs, and that when they choose to change their spiritual advisers, they could do so without let or hindrance. For this the priest had them arrested and taken to prison, swearing that they intended lO do him bodily- injury, and, therefore, charged them with an assault. Several gentlemen in Montreal, being made ac- quainted with the facts of the case, entered bail in 86 their behalf, and had them released. It was then, at the request of the Indians, that the Methodist Church in Montreal, through me, sent them a missionary. On his arrival among them they proposed to put (y ^ |_3 -■ w S OJ m.S.S O as £ -J S " » td.' * . H .iq "■ — ^-^ « — ■>- — ' ^ ^ of the es. ■g p"-a £ S; - iJ «^ « • fl o ,^ -^ ^- „ -^ -?•"•= S >- n'ption oundari -^ .-^ r *-V— ' O to - 2 c o in to ' o . 1 .11 1 1 * ^ g ^ ^ g -v- n ; •- ^ a 3 S .a o u S ^ w !-> ^ ^- ■^ H « ^ w w H-* »Q >-4 (-J o ^ti. ?5 ^ > w . ^ ►— . i- ^ OJ a 1 >— < u u roi (U ly^. j::: CO ►•1 u /-^ O 13 o hI^ rj C C =J bxi— » cox 3 »•>. H^ U O c bJ3 CO O 1- ^-^ -•^ s^ •^^Q C X! -O t;: - speaking, en- glish. It originated 'vith the inissionnaircs \\\\o^q. companicd the French discoverers of this part of the continent. It was a spot selected by them beyond the principal establishment for the purpose of congre- gating the savages and instructing thcni in the gospel. The only advantage secured to the Indians by the mission was the ground so selected where they were invited to meet for religious instruction after their excursions through the wilderness, to procure means of subsistence for themselves and families. No building or establishment other than that of the church is ever found attached to the idea of a mis- sion, excjpt in some exposed situations, when a fort was added thereto. It was only after a fort was built and a commercial centre created, that lands were cleared in the vicinity by the French traders, for the supply of such people as established themselves there. The " Dictionnaire de Tre'voux " of 1771 gives the following definition of the word mission : " Se dit aussi des etablissements, ou des exercices " de ces gens zeles pour la gloire de Dieu, et le salut " des ames qui vont precher I'Evangile chez les infi- " deles, et chez les peuples fort eloignes, jWissio. Les " ordres religieux de St. Dominique, de St. Frangois, " de St. Augustin et les Jesuites ont des missions a la " Chine et en tout I'Orlent et meme dans toutes les " parties du monde ou on a pu pe'netrer, les autres re- 108 " llgieux et congregations en ont aussi, surtout Ics " mcndiants et missionnaircs des futssious eirnni^cra.' According to this authority, which was contempo- raneous with these cstablisments, it signifies an esta- blishment or exercise of people who for the gl<")ry of God and the salvation of souls, went to preach the gospel to the heathen and far distant nations. The word viissi(»i Avas adopted in this sense by the En- glish throughout the continent as conveying the same meaning. In his " Discovery of the North West," " p. 35, Pandman says: "The various missionary " stations were much alike. They consisted of a " chapel (commonly of logs) and one or more houses, " with perhaps a store house and a worksiiop.the whole " fenced with palisades.and forming in fact,a stockade " fort surrounded with clearings and cultivated fields. " It is evident the priests had need of other hands " than their own and those of the few lay brothers " attached to the mission. They required men inured " to labor, accustomed to the forest life, able to guide " canoes and handle tools and weapons. In the " earlier epoch of the missions, when enthusiasm was " at its height, they were served in great measure by " volunteers who joined them through devotion or " penitence, and who were known as donnes or given " men. Of late the number of these had much dimi- " nished and they relied chiefly on hired men or en- '' gages. These were employed in building, hunting, "fishing, clearing and tilling the ground, guiding ca- " noes, and, if faith is to be placed in reports current " throughout the colony, in trading with the Indians " for the profit of the missions." Shea's " American " Catholic missions" says : *' The trench plan [of 100 " missions] was different. The missionary planted his " cross anion^^st the lieathen and won all he could to " the faith and whenever he could form a distinct " village of Christians ; but these villages were never " like the missions of the Spanish missionaries. The •* French priest left his neophyte free, setting him no " task, building no splendid edifices by his toil. The " French mission was a fort against h(jstile attacks " and enclosed merely the church, mission house, and •' mechanics shed, the Indians all living without in " cabins or houses, and entering the fort only in time " of danger." The people for whose use such missions were esta- blished, acquired no more rights in the property than the congregations Avhich attend camp meetings could claim to the lands which have been set aside for the use of their religious exercise. No where and never was it held to imply the obligation to feed and shelter the ilock. It is therefore evident to me that the grants relating to the seigniory of Two Moun- tains do not disclose the fact that it was the intention of either the Crown or the Seminary to give or ack- nowledge any claim of Indians residing either at Mon- treal, at Sault-au-Recollet, or at Two Mountains, any right in the soil, but only to secure to them a spiri* tual benefit totally distinct from the grant of the land or any easement thereon, leaving the mission- aries to use the property in the exercise of their duties, as they deemed most advisable consistently with their dut)-. Another conclusion, or reason, against the suppo- sition that any rights were intended to be secured to the Indians besidies the contemplated removal of this lie mission at any future period, result evidently from the oblii^ation imposed on the grantees to the disposal of the property on the ordinary feudal terms, making it imperative on them to have the land settled and cleared fortwith, under penalty of having the same remitted to the public domain {a la condition dc dtscrtcr £t faire deserter inccssemcnt.) This was the condi- tion attached to the title as well of all other seigni- orial titles in Canada granted by the French Crown. The judgment )f the Seigniorial Court, composed of all the judges vS the Superior Cou-^t and the Court of Queen's Bench of Lower Canada constituted for the purpose of defining the principles of tlie feu- dal law pronounced on the nth march i 866, held that by the laws of the ; ountry previous to the con- quest, the proprietor of every seigniory .was bound to make grants within the seigniories on the usual seigniorial charters whenever requested su to do ; and by their title, the seminary was bound to concede its lands v/ithin the seigniory of Two Mountains at the above mentioned rate of twenty sous and a capon for each arpent in front by forty in depth. If, on the one hand, the Seigniors were found to grant the lands to censitaries on such terms whenever requested, and if, on the other, they could not grant them to the Indians, to what do the rights of the Indians in the property amount ? It will not be held that the Indians, either under tlie French or under the En- glish Sovereignty, were ever considered as capable of liolding lands or of contracting, and no trace can be found of any concession or grant of any seigniorial property having been made to an Indian either in Two Mountains or elsewhere. Tlie Seminary of Ill "Montreal Avas therefore bound to and did legally -carry out their obligation to dispose of the land to white settlers. The inference that because this errant was accom- panied by the condition of transferring the mission, the interest in the property in favor of the Indians would follow, is refuted by the existence of numerous grants made at the same period by the French Crown in favor of the Indians for their own ■j.-nefit. Several .grants were made at that epoch in their favor in terms different from those used in the one in ques- tion, as may be seen in the collection of titles relat- ing to the seigniorial tenure. On the 13th march 1651, the seigniory of Sillery was granted to the Indians directly through the Jesuits who were to liold for them],in franc alien, and not in seigniorial tenure, and such of the land within the seigniory as had been granted to French settlers was reserved, but the rents transferred to the Jesuits for and as the property of the Indians. On the 5^1 march 1697, another ^rant was made to the Jesuits for the Abena- kis in full property for their settlement and occupa- tion. On the 2gt-^' may 1680, Louis XIV granted to the Jesuits lor th2 Iroquois Indians at Sault St. Louis (Cauf nn^ vvaga), a large tract of land which is still held by them. These grants, instead of being made as a seigniory, are made directly and absolutely to the Jesuits for the Indians and for their settlement and maintenance, and with the condition that when such lands shall be abandonned by them, they shall revert to the Crown. This conclusively shows the difiterence between a grant made with the object of establishing a mission and a grant made in favor of Indians for settlement and occupation. 112 According; to my opirion the original, title far from bestowing any special privilege or establishing any particular trust on the gentlemen of the Semina- ry in favor of the Indians, merely obliged them to erect a Church at Two Mountains, which they were not even bound to maintain at their own expense and to give religious instruction so long as they thought it required for the evangelization of the savage tribes. Our code has laid down the rules by which such contracts should be interpreted. Article lOio says : " In case of doubt the contract is interpreted •' against him who has stipulated, and in favor of " him who has contracted the obligation." Article I020 : " However general the teims may be in *' which the contract is expressed, they extend only " to the interest concerning which it appears that the " parties intended to contract." Although the right of the Seminary to hold the lands given to them by the French Crown was put in question after the conquest, not by reason of it? validity, but on the ground that they being a foreign corporation and incapable of alienation to a new cor- poration, and although the claims of the Indians to the lands in question were on several occasions brought 'orward, they were invariably disposed of as having no foundation. On the 4th november 1763, the Military Court of Lower Canada, constituted by Ralph Burton Brigadier-General and Governor of Montreal, previous to the establishment of Civil Go- vernment, pronounced a judgment in a case wherein the Seminary of Montreal claimed the ejectment of one Vanderhayden a merchant, who had purchased l^nU in the seigniory of the Lake of Two Mountains 113 from ♦'he Indians, sustainin<:j the right of the Semina- ry to the house and lands, and affirming that the In- dians, when they undertook to sell had no right or title, and Vanderheyden was ordered in consequence to quit possession of the house and lands. In 1789 the Indians of Two Mountains advanced the same claims against the Seminary as those made by them at this day and presented a petition to the right Ho- norable Lord Dorchester, then Governor General of Canada, in which they stated that they had been in- duced by the priests to leave their abode at Montreal and go to the Sault-au-Recolet where they lived for twenty three years and were again induced to remove this time to Two Mountains, on th„' promise that they would have the land there as their own property. \fter hearing both parties and setting out at length the papers and agreements, the law officiers of the crown the attorney-General and Solicitor-General, Messrs. Monk and Williams reported as follows : " With respect to the claim of title by the Indians to the Lake of Two Mountains to th'' fief of that Seigniory, Whatever ideas they might have entertai- ned of a title, we cannot perceive any such right in them and this report was sanctioned by the council on the 20th march 1789. No further assertion of right in the Seigniory was set forth by them or on their behalf until the year 1868, as will be hereinafter set out : The only difficulty which was entertained was with respect to the right of the Seminary to hold the sei- gniories, and the question of their having vested in the crown by the conquest of the provinces. In 1841, the statute 3 and 4 Victoria cap. 30, was passed which ■n^^^B^nHin 114 removed whatever doubts and difficulties nii^^ht have arisen as to the right of ownership by the seminary of the several seigniories by them held, and Her Majesty signified her Royal pleasure.' th it the right and title of the said Ecclesiastics of the Se niuary of St. Sulpice to the said several fiefs and seigniories should be absolutely confirmed, subject to the provi- sions, conditions and limitations agreed to and ac- cepted by them. By this act the member-, of the Seminary of St. Sulpice and their successors were created an Ecclesiastical corporation with peipetual succession, by admitting and electing new members, according to the rules of their foundation, and the practice of them therefore followed. By scctimi 2 of this act the right and title of the Seminary in and to all the said seigniories and their dependances is the- reby confirmed and declared good, valid and etTf.--ctual in the law ; and it is declared that " The said cor- " poration shall have, hold and possess, the same as " proprietor thereof, as fully, in the same manner and " to the same extent as the ecclesiastics of the semi- " nary of St. Sulpice of the Faubourg of Saint Ger- " main, Leg Paris, or the seminary of St. Sulpice of " Montreal, according to its constitution, before the " eighteenth day of September, which was in the year " one thousand seven hundred and fifty nine, or either, *' or both of the said seminaries might or could have ** done or had a right to do, or might or could have " held, enjoyed or applied the same, or any part the- '* reof, previously to the last mentioned period, and to " and for the purposes, objects and intents following, " that is to say, the cure of souls within the parish " (la. desserte de la paroisse) of Montreal ; the Mission 115 "' of the Lake of the Two Mountains, for the instruc- '• tion and spiritual care of the Algonquin and Iro- ■" quois Indians ; the support of the petit seminaire or ** college at Montreal ; the support of schools for chil- " dren, within the parish of Montreal ; the support of " the poor invalids and orphans ; the sufficient sup- '" port and maintenance of the members of the cor- *' poration, its officers and servants ; and the support "of such other religious, charitable and educational "" institutions as may, from time to time be approved " and sanctioned by the Governor of this Province for " the time being and for no other objects, purposes or " intents whatsoever." This ordinance must be considered as a good title to the property so declared to belong, from and prior to the conquest of Canada, to the seminary of St. Sulpiceand its representatives. No administrative act, provincial or federal, can impair its value, modify its terms, or restrict its operation. An important modification is introduced into the original grant by this act. The entire property of the seminary, comprising all the seigniories, is secured for the joint and several purposes mentioned and defined therein, although they were not collectively specified in the original grants, that is to say : " The cure of souls within the parish of Montreal ; the mis- sion of the Lake of Two Mountains for the instruc- tion and spiritual care of the Algonquin and Iroquois Indians ; the support of the Petit Seminaire or Col- lege of Montreal ; the support of schools for children within the parish of Montreal ; the support of the poor, invalids, or orphans ; the sufficient support and maintenance of Uie members of the corporation, its mm 116 officers and servants ; and support of such other- religious, charitable and educational institutions as. may from time to time be approved and sanctioned by the Governor, Lieutenant-Gou/ernor or person ad- ministering the Government of the Province for the: time being, and to or for no other objects, purposes- or intents whatsoever." So that the seigniory of Two; Mountains, togetlier with all the other property there- in mentioned, is as well reserved for these several purposes as the property in Montreal. As previously remarked, a wider definition is given to the mission than that contained in the original Charter. The mission of the Lake of Two Mountains is defined ta be for the instruction and spiritual care of the Iriquois and Algonquin Indians, and no more. This statute- constitutes a solemn contract between the Govern- ment and the corporation thereby created, securing to the latter an irrevocable and unquestionable title to the land which they therefore had possessed.. The franchise granted cannot be questioned, and cannot be repealed or rescinded except by judgment, of court for forfeiture regularly obtained. It is a principle of constitutional law that even Parliament cannot annul or revoke or modify tne grant as an act of ordinary legislation. It can do so only by virtue of the omnipotency of its powers, if the condition or objects of the charter have not been properly and legally fulfilled. The proceeding is by quo ivarran- to or information to be taken and followed in the courts of the Province of Quebec, according to the law of the Province, at the suit of the Attorney-gen- eral. When the public authority found proper to grant this franchise on these conditions, it decided 13 7 for itself and for the public generally, and no addi- tional change or burden can be imposed on the •grantees without their consent or without previously iforfeitin,L,^ the charter for some just cause. The act 3 and 4 Victoria does not add to or substract from obligations by the grantees. On the contrary, it enacts that the corporation constituted by the origi- nal grantees should have and did possess the proper- ty in same maimer and to the the same extent as ecclesiastics of the seminary of St. Sulpice of Paris, or the seminary of St. Sulpice of Montreal according to its constitution, before the i8th Sep- tember 1759, might or might have done or had a right to do. To secure any other encumbrance, casement or condition as attached to such a grant, it must be ■.clearly and formally expressed. No court of justice would construe or infer any other obligation from such vague and indefinite annunciations. It is as- sented and not denied that the Indians who consti- tuted the settlement round the church at Oka enjoyed the use of such land, and were allowed, since their establishment, the fuel used in the building and re- pairing their houses, and they, therefore, claim that the enjoyment of such advantages, constitute for them a right tf) which they are legally entitled. It is unde- niable that by the grants no such rights have been ■established in favour of the Indians. According to .the petition presented to His Excellency by the In- •dir'ns, they claim that since their establishment they .had I'cen in posession of an enclosed common as a field for pasturage. Whether the Indians claim the aise of the land as a pasturage, as a right to cut wood, 118 or in respect of the houses as a ri;^ht of habitation, or as any of the rights dependent upon real estate, such as the ri^^ht to enjoy the fruits of the same, it is within the meaninLj of the provision of the Law of Quebec a " servitude," or in the EngUsh sense, an " easement." If the property' was, by the titles, gran- ted to the seminary, the Indians bad only a right of use, which, according to the code, article 487, is de- fined " a right of use is a right to enjoy a thing belonging to another, and to take the fruits thereof, but only to the extent of the requirement of the user and of his family." When applied to a house, right of use is called right of habitation. Article 494 says : " He who has right of use can neither assign or lease it to another." Article 497 says : " A right of habitation can neither be assigned or leased." Accor- ding to the law of the Province of Quebec as first introduced, and as it has ever since remained, no easement or servitude except those in favor of the pu- blic can be claimed or obtained on any real estate except by title. Article 509 of the code says : " No servitude can be established without a title. Posses- sion even immemorial is insufficient for that purpose." Article 550 says : " The want of a title creating the servitude can only be supplied by an act of incorpora- tion proceeding from the proprietor of the land sub- ject thereto." The Indians in the present case do not pretend to have any such right of title, and the seminary assert that whatever privileges they accord- ed to them were acts of toleration, consequently the claim of the Indians is justified by no recognised principle of Law. By the seigniorial act of 1854, all seigniorial rights 119 were abolished, and the indemnitv iixed bv law, as compensation to be paid to the seignior.-, for such land as has bten previously granted, subject to seigniorial dues ; and -uch of the land as had not been disposed of, was by the act declared to be thence forward the free and ib-oiute property of the seignior ni free and common soccagc \ franc alien roturier\ This sei- gniorial act was extended to the seigniories of Mon- treal, St. Sulpiceand Lake of Two Mountains by the act of 1S57. The shedtile or cadastre was made by the commissioners appointed by Government, after notices duly published, inviting all parties having any claims against these seigniories to present the same.as they were to be determined according to law by the commissioners who had to fix the exact amount of indemnity to be awarded to the seigniors, and deter- mine the charges thereupon. By section 7, the com- missioner was bound to value the several rights with regard to each seigniory, upon each seigniory, upon each parcel of lanl to give tlie extent of such land according to the title of the owner, if produced ; and whether it was held for agricultural purposes or is a mere emplacement or building lot. By section ir of this act [sec. 3 of cap. 41 con. Stat], it is enacted : " For the purposes of this act, every person occupying or possessing any land in any seigniory, with the permission of the sei- gnior or from whom the seignior has received rents or other seigniorial dues in respect of such lands shall be held to be the proprietor thereof as censitaire," The Indians of Two Mountains fyled no claim whate- ver, and none of them are mentioned in the schedule of the seigniory as proprietor, owner or occupier, mmmmmm 12(1 whilst seven p.irisljes within the seigniory were settled and occupied b}- censitaires whose name:? are i^iven as holdini.; ^rants by them^^elves or their predecessors from the seigniors, viz : St. Joseph, St. Benoit, St. Placide, St. Mernias, Ste. Scholastique, St. Jerome and St. Cohimban. Tlie indemnity to be paid tlie semi- nary for sucli of the seigniorial rights as were abo- lished was determined by tiie Commissionncr, and the unconcedcd or ungranted lands remained and were attributed to them by law as tlieir own absolute property, in franc aleu roturier, free from all claim and charges whatsoever. At the date the above mention- ed act was passed, whatever grants had been made in the Seigniory of Two Mountains had been so made to Avhite settlers. Whatever remained in a wild state before the Seigniorial Act was, by the law, subject to be npen^-d up and settled. The only remaining question to determine is, whe- ther are the lands freed by the Seigniorial Act from all seigniorial obligation and qualified as the absolute propert)^ of the Seigniors, the Indians have any and what claims ? It cannot be contended that they have a riglit to the land. They never had any right before the abolition of the seigniorial tenure, and they cer- tainly have not acquired any legal claim since. Assuming, therefore, the legal obligation annexed to the title, as explained more fully by the statutory charter, to be the maintenance of the mission of Two Mountains for the instruction and spiritual care of the Indians, the only question remaining is, whether they have fulfilled that obligation, and if not, can they be compelled to perform it according to the strict inter- pretation of the Charter ? It cannot be contended 121 with any sincerity that the then Government of Fran- ce which nmde the giant, and were unquestionabl}' ■entitled to the land, and the parties who received it, intended to impose or to accept the condition of teachincj any other doctrines than those Avhich were then acknowledged and deemed corr .ct by both the ^^jranters and the grantees. The obligation created •was that of a Catholic mission established by a Ca- tholic Government, to be fulfilled and maintained by the grantees by preaching the gospel according to their faith and belief. When the grant was confirmed by the British authorities in 1841, it nas confirmed in favor of a Catholic body of clergymen, and it ne- ver was contemplated by those who accepted the con- firmation of the title that they would be bound to instruct the Indians in a difterent faith or to impart doctrines contrary to their own consciences and belief, more particularly when the statute declares that they are constituted an ecclesiastical corporation and to hold and possess their property in the same manner and to the same extent as the Ecclesiastics of the Seminary of St. Sulpice of Paris or the seminary of .St. Suipice of Montreal, held the same before the 1 8th day of December 1759. The confirmation in any other sense would not have been validating their 'title, but would have been equivalent to a confiscation- It is not denied, or put in question that the seminar)' liave been maintaining a catholic church and offered instruction according to their doctrines to the Indians, If so their dutj'' is fulfilled, and they are relieved from further obligation. If the Indians refuse their minis- trations, the property to which, sucii burden was at- vtached remained theirs by the terms of the grant. *>. ^*«^ 0^\^^ IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) 1.0 I.I 1.25 if: ilia m — 6' M 2.2 1.8 1-4 ill 1.6 Vi cf^. .>. -o< /. ^a ^m o<'' ^, //A Photographic Sciences Corporation :'? WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, NY. 14580 (716) 872-4503 S. 4? V iV \\ LV «^ % n? o J f/j ^ r 122 Any other view would imply that when such ratifica- tion was given they should be bound, if the Iniians changed their f. ith to follow them and conform with their spiritual modification or else supply them with lands and all necessary means of securing their spiri- tual comfort. If such a pretension be correct, it may as well be asserted that because the seminary is bound by their charter to the spiritual care of the parish (la desserte de la paroisse) or spiritual instruction of the inhabitants of the parish of Montreal, that they are bound to contribute to the assistance of the protes- tant congregations. If it be imposed upon the semi- nary that they shall afford places of worship to the- Indians other than those which have been maintained since the grant was made, the conditions of the title are subverted, and it would be as proper and legal to insist that because the conditions of things have altered since the grant was made, that the remaining^ property which is also left to their administration should be applied to the support of protestant schools,, protestant churches and charities. However advan- tageous this might be in the opinion of many, such was obviously not the intention of the grant,and such were not the conditions attatched to it. Keeping in view the fact that the corporation in this case is, in the eyes of the law, nothing but a legal person, the case will be more easily solved by com- paring it to a grant of property made by a protestant individual with the obligation to erect a Sunday school, or some protestant religious establishment. In such a case, could there be any question raised if a c?*ho- lic congregation would pretend, on the strength of such a grant, to take possession of the ground, and RHiaiai ■BHHP 123 take the materials required for the building of a Ca- tholic institution ? the two cases are, however identical. The individual charfjed with the trust in such a case could be justified in treating the intruders as trespassers, and the law makes no dis- tinction between the ownership of the property by a legally recognised corporation, and that by any indi- vidual catholic or protestant, no alteration can be made in a grant without the consent of the parties thereto. When Henry VIII abolished the monaste- ries in England, it was not by virtue of any change occurring in the opinions of the community, but by virtue of the surrender and consent of the parties holding the property, as is shown by the statute,chap- ter 13 of 31 Henry VIII, in the preambles of which it is stated that it was " of their own free and volun- " tary minds, good wills and assents, without con- " straint, co-action, or compulsion, of any manner of person or persons * * of the divers and sundry " abbots, priors, abbesses, prioresses and other eccle- " siastical governors * * * by fu ,r sufficient writings " of record under their convent and common seals, " have severally given, granted, and by the same, " their writings, severally confirmed all their said " monasteries." The property of those who refused to give their consent, was subsequently confiscated, after process of law obtained by the regular courts for violation of the laws of the realm. In every country where grants made for religious or charitable purposes were afterwards questioned, and their use diverted, the process adopted was not a claim on the part of some of the interested parties to have a por- tion of the property applied for their benefit by rea- mmm 124 sons of a change of circumstances differing from those existing at the origin of the grant, but whenever such necessity occurred, the society of commonwealth itself, through the legislative authority, by virtue of its omnipotence investigating the condition of the grant and pronouncing judgment on its inefficiency or uselessness, cancelled it and resumed the property for better destination, and this is the only course left open to those who desire a modification in the admi- nistration of this property. Moreover, property whether belonging to individuals or to corporations is, by the Constitutional Act, left entirely to the con- trol and regulation of the local government, and they alone have the authority and power to amend the charter and established laws by which its purposes objects and conditions can be extended or modified. So long as this title remains as it now stands, sanc- tioned, and confirmed by the statute, it must be con- strued and observed in good faith as an ordinary con- tract between man and man. The common principles of honesty and law and the interests of society com- mand that no one should be disturbed in the enjoy- ment of his property or subjected to vexations, inqui- sitions or persecutions, on the sole ground that the property might be better employed for a portion of the community, however deserving of sympathy, or however laudable the object may be. The only matter for consideration by tbe govern- ment is to ascertain, in the interest of the Indians, whether compliance has been legally made with the terms of the contract, and if so its duty as guardian of these people, is to inform them of their true posi- tion in Older to prevent them from entertaining illu- •r^mm^m^^^ 125 sory hopes or expectations which can only bring trouble and disaster. The complaint made by the Indians relates exclu- sively to the execution of a judgment pronounced by the Superior Court of Lower Canada, which ordered them to desist from the possession of a piece of land of which they had taken possession as belonging to them for the purpose of constructing a protestant church. It is impossible for the government to pre- vent the execution of a solemn judgment of Her Ma- jesty's court. It is to be regretted that the case of the Indians was not properly and fully set out in or- der to allow the courts of justice to adjudicate on the respective claims of the parties which would in all probability have silenced further recriminations and set the matter at rest. I would advise that the semi- nary be asked to desist from the judgment by them obtained by default and that the defendants be placed in the same position as they stood before default was entered in the cause, with a sufficient ' clay given to allow the Indians or those who take charge of their interest to fyle all the pleadings which they may think proper to urge on their behalf; and if the claims of the Indians be declared unfounded, that all costs and expenses be paid to the seminary, as it is impossible otherwise for the government to prevent the execution of a judgment of Her Majesty's court which is to be received as conclusive in favor of the party who ob- tained it as to the respective rights of the parties at issue, until regularly set aside. The subject of the Indians rights in the seigniory has already undergone the investigation of the go- vernment of this Dominion within a few years, and 126 they were pronounced jrroundless. On the 24th may 1869, a petition of the same parties, the Algonquins and Iroquois Indians of the Lake of Two Mountains, setting forth the same pretensions as those asserted in the petitions now submitted, was addressed to the governor general, questioning also the right of the seminary to the land and wood in the former seignio- ry, and his Excellency in conncil approved of a report made on such claims to the effect that the Indians had no right in the seigniory of Two Mountains, and that the said seigniory v^as the absolute property of the seminary of St. Sulpice who had complied with all the requirements of their charter. It may be also a source of painful regret that after so long a residence on this territory, the Indians have not the advantage of securing for themselves a place of worship according to their religious convictions. The question however is not one of sympathy, but one of absolute right and of the respect due to the unquestionable claims of property and submission to the decision of the courts of justice. It might be proper to consider, under the circumstances, whether some assistance and provision should not be made in favor of the Indians to secure what the law under the circumstances denies to them ; but, having to deter- mine a question of right, under clearly defined titles and positive legal enactments, I find it impossible to arrive at any other conclusions than those above stated. The reservation of the oak in the grant does not detract from the right of property. The same reser- vation was made by the french government in every title granting a seigniory. The terms of the grants 127 -are to the effect that the seigniors shall preserve oak timber fit for ship building which may be found within the limits of the land which the said sieurs of the seminary shall have set aside for their principal manor house, and they shall also stipulate the reserve of such oak timber within the extent of the private conces- sions made or to be made to their tenants ; that his majesty shall be free to take the said oak timber when required, without being held to pay any indemnity ; ;and also, that they shall give notice to the king, or to ithe governor or intendanjt of the mines, ores and mi- nerals, if any be found within the limits. The reser- vation is made exclusively for his majesty for ship- building and when required, and consequently, if it existed at this hour, a proposition which cannot be legally objected to, it could be claimed only by her majesty for shipbuilding and when required. It was a seigniorial obligation, which, according to the terms, 'Could be enforced against the seigniors only on the land which they held as their private domain, the fur- ther obligation in this respect being on their part to •stipulate this reserve in the sub-grants that they made to the censitaires. By the seigniorial act of 1854, the seigniorial obligation of this reserve was abolished,and the property became free from this obligation as well that of the censitaires as that of the seigniors. More- over, the government, supposing the reservations to be still existing, have no more right to exact it from the seminary than from any other seigniorial land in the province of Quebec. It has never been enforced either under the french government or since the con- -quest. The government cannot claim power to divert the reservation in favor of the Indians, or to any 128 other use fhan that of building ships for her majesty^ The reservation has therefore, I think no bearing upon the case in question, and can afford no additional* support to the claim of the Indians to one property.. I return herewith the papers which you enclosed me.. I remain. Your obedient servant, R. Laflamme, Minister of Justice. 129 Ol'INION OF THE HONOKAJiLE W 1 L L I A M B A D G L E Y lu the matter of the Seigniory of the Lake of Tzvo Mountains and The Oka Indians. The Opinion of Connsel is requested upon the follozving Inquiries, First. — Does the title of the Corporation of the seminary of Montreal confer upon that body, the absolute ownership of the property known as the Seigniory of the Lake of Two Mountains ? Second. — Have the Indians, known as the Oka In- dians, any lawful proprietory claims to that property ? A brief reference to the early history & adminis- tration of New France called Canada is necessary as explanatory of the answers to the above inquiries, specially in reference to the title of the seminary of Montreal. The discovery of the River St. Tawrence by Jac- ques-Cartier was promptly utilized by French ad- venturers both the quenok and Roman Catholic, for trading purposes with the natives of the country, and especially for the trade in furs, which in time became as profitable as to attract the notice of the French Kings, who appreciating the importance of coloni- 130 zing the country, found it their interest for tliat pur- pose to encoura^^e the private enterprise--, with mate- rial assistance, and finally sanctioned the formation of a commercial company cjv'led " La Societe du Ca- nada" who were to combine the extension and main- tenance of their trade witii the j^radual settlement of the country from the trading locaUties where the traffic was carried on. The religious dissentions of the adventurers among themselves however became so violent, and their wilful disregard of the royal design of settlement became so nmnifest, that the king at once arrested all private trading enterprises and dissolved the company recently established, substituting afterwards in its place the great proprietory company of the lOO associates in whom was concentrated all the available trade of the country, and to whom was granted in full property and domain all the lands of the colony, with many other privileges, and specially with power to subgrant their land at their pleasure, but subject to the king's supremacy, and under the special conditions that the company would do tiieir utmost to coloni/e New France and christianize its native inhabitants. Although colonization and settlement were the chief purpose and design of the Royal will in the for- mation of the company of the associates,these objects were restricted exclusively to native horn French emigrants of the Roman Catholic faith, and were ac- companied by a direct and immediate application given, to the generally prevalent desire in France at the time, for the propagation of Christianity, by the conversion of the aboriginal inhabitants of the colony to the Roman Catholic faith of the Kingdom, in lai favor of which the Letters Patent of the company de- clared, that the Canadian born descendants of Frcncli inhabitants of the colony and the christianized sava- ges should be held to be natural born subjects of France with every privilege belonging' to that right, without requiring letters of naturalization therefore. The company of the associates was a lamentable failure and terminated its few years of precarious and unprofitable existence in utter insolvency, and after a fruitless effort by the king to continue the proprie- tary scheme by another company which was likewise a failure, he was compelled to resume his grant, and converting Canada into a Crown Colon}-, brought it under direct royal governance and administration by Royal officers, the Colonial governor and Jntendaiit, the company leaving no record of its existence except some improvidently large grants of unoccupied lands, a very few scanty settlements and some scattered Indian missions. The king's resumption of the company's grant of the countr)' did not alter its original nature, because by the public law of France, lands occupied abroad by conquest, discovery, or possession were not united to the personal royal domain, but remained lands ly- ing in grant, at the king's disposal for public uses or to reward the meritorious services of his subjects, the law allowing his disposal of them upon such terms as he might please, but retaining over them his su- premacy and sovereignty which he could not transfer av\ay. His grants and alienations might be perpetual or temporary, free of charge or duty and even \\\ franc aim, free socage, but subject to his sovereign po\/er : " His letters patent for such grant being held as act 132 *' of Lcj^islation, the most essential part of tjovcr- " ci^nty, to be respected and followed as other laws- •' until chantjed by Ifke competent legislation," [Soii- verainete du Roi ler Vol : N0.82J thereby enabling the king to continue the fixed policy of settlement for raising up a poivcrjid self supporting colony for France, by a system of seigniorial grants, direct from the king to the grantees according to the feudal tenure of the custom of Paris for such grants, with power to subgrant to land tenants and to cultivators^ which was considered to be the most efficacious mode of promoting settlement in the new country .: the sei- gniorial grants being houever strictly under the con- dition of effecting prompt settlement and cultivation, as the special objects of the grant, generally declared in the French technical v/ords " de tenir oh faire tenir feu ct lien sur la ditc concession" to keep and cause to be kept house and home on the said concession, or " de tcjiir OH fairc tenir feu ct lieu par Icurs tenanciers dans tan et jour" to keep or cause to be kept by their tenants within the year and da)-, house and home, and with the following addition '' de deserter ct fairc in- cessamment deserter la dite terre," to clear immedia- tely or cause to be cleared the said trace of land„ with reservation to the king of all mines 'id minerals for his profit, and of all the oak timber fit for ship building on the grant for his marine service : and with subjection to the penalty of resumption of the seigniorial grant on breach of the special conditions cf settlement. It is manifest therefore that to subdue the wilderness and to plant a population from the parent state, in other words, colonization and settlement, were the 133 paramount objects of the Royal policy, and not the mere conversion of the american savages, or the hol- ding of lar^fe tracts of serviceable land as wild and un- profitable hunting groumls ; yet though the seignio- rial grants were intended for early settlement, the means to be employed and used for accomplishing s.he purpose were left altogether to the seigniors them- selves, who, however, more or less frustrated or -evaded the Royal design, thereby occasioning reitera- ted Royal complaints and thre.M'^ of resumption of the grants, from the seigniors, wilii'i! delay in perfor- ming their settlement duties ; al' showing the tena- city of the Royal insistence ' settlcmenl to be ef- fected upon the seigniories, under th.. Liireat of enfor- cing tlie reunion penr^lty attache^ t') the grant, which in fact was, from time to time, actually enforced against negligent seigniors, and specially under the Royal declaration of 1743, when reunions to the Do- main were made of more tlian twenty seigniories in one year. The Colonial Governors first, and afterwards jointly with the Colonial Intendants, were authorized to make preliminary grants of land, 01 seigncttrie, which were subject to and became effective upon the Royal ratification by letters patent, required to be applied for within the year of the issue of the preli- minary grant. The Royal intervention being always a part of French Colonial policy executive and admi- nistrative, and particularly in the cases of lands, which enabled the king to control them, by the terms and conditions expressed in his letters patent of ratifica- tion giving Legislative effect to the grant by the mere exercise k)( his royal power, as the sole Legisla- '^^^mmammmmmmmm 134 tor for the Colonies, and in effect, making the ratifica- tion to all intents the actual grant, therein exhibi- ting the will and pleasure of the king and, as above, expressing the king's command and conditions of grant, and adopting a familiar english law maxim as to grants, shewing that the habendum was con- trolled by the expressed grant and promises of the ratification. Whilst colonization was in this way promoted by the Royal authority, the Evangelization of the coun- try was not disregarded because it was in harmony with popular feeling, but only as in connection with colonization and settlement, the quixotic notion never being entertained by the French Kings that their powerful FrentJi colony couid only be formed by the conversion of the savage tribes who roamed over almost boundless tracts of country, but Christianity accompanied colonization and by the charter of the TOO associates, they were bound to assist in the sup- port of the clergy who came to the colony, for the two fold purpose of giving spiritual aid and conso- lation to the settlers, and educating the youth of the colony, and also of converting the Indians to Chris- tianity. In every settlement these ecclesiastics were to be supported by the company, and if more were re- quired for the settlements and missions, they were to be sent out and also supported at the expense of the company, unless cleared land were given to them for their subsistance. Chief among these religious mis- sionaries were the Jesuits, who spread themselves among the Indians near and remote, and formed local missions amongst them, whilst the other orders not so erratic, and among these the Sulpicians who were se- 135 minary and educational priests, established branches of their order, collectinfr Indians together at their mission places and there teachin^j Christianity to the savage denizens of the Canadian forests, whose plea- sure it was to frequent and haunt the settlements for trade or the benefit of spiritual indulgeness not always of a religious nature, but ever ready to join any war party organized to attack the town of foreign Indians, or to raid the not distant British provincial settle- ments. However conscientious and devoted to their christian work the missionaries might be, their huma- nising cftecti were admittedly not encouraging and we- re constantly thwarted by the unceasing and irrational blood-thirst}' wars of the Indian tribes and nations with each other which gradually exterminated the Cana- dian Indians, and left the final results shewn in the handful of survivors of powerful tribes collected together at Lorette and the Lake of Two Mountains. A few years after the lOo associates' company had gone into full operation, a missionary association composed of pious laymen and influential sulpician priests at Paris was formed, then called the " society for tJie conversion of the savages of Ncvj France an the Island of Montreal'' and commonly known as the Montreal company, " Coinpagnic de Montreal" for whom through two of its promoters, Monsieur de Lauzon, one of the lOO associates' company, and gran- tee from them of the Island and seigniory of Montreal, transferred his grant by authentic act in Marcli 1640, subject to the original settlement and other conditions of the grant, for the uses and purposes of the missio- nary association which, after ratification by the asso- ciates, was in due course converted by these promo- ^ mm 136 ters to their association and finally accepted by its members in March 1650, Messire Olier, the Cur^ of St. Sulpice, at Paris, and other sulpician priests there, being the first signatories of the accepted conveyance. Soon after the transfer of 1640, the society took measures for occupying their grant, and in 1642, a body of emigrants from France with Messire Olier and other sulpicians of Paris took possession and made their first location and establishment at the locality of Montreal, then a wilderness. To obviate all doubt about the validity of their title and its transfer to the society from Mr. de Lauzon, the arrangements with him were supplemented by direct deeds of grant from the company of 100 asso- ciates to the association made in 1640 and 1659 by which the entire Island and seigniory of Montreal were conveyed t^. the society aL.".olutely, who after- wards finding their conversion duties efficienily per- formed by the sulpician priests at Montreal, by au- thentic deed of donation of 9th March 1663, conveyed the entire Island and seigniory to the seminary of St. Sulpice at Paris, who caused the deed to be duly re- gistered in June following, and the whole was fully rat'.fied by the King's letters patent in favor of that seminary who assumed all debts of the association. The sulpician priests who assisted at the first entry into possession of their Montreal grant in i642,with the additions to their number from time to time from the parent seminary at Paris, became permanently settled at Montreal, and for facilitating their performance of their duties, were formed by the seminary at Paris to a branch seminary called the seminary of Montreal, with Messire Olier as their first superior, to which was 137 •committed the care of souls in the rising town and ^settlement of Montreal, which so continued until the issue of letters patent in May 1677, solicited and ob- tained from the King by the Paris seminary which constituted the sulpician Ecclesiastics at Montreal unto the legal " Community and Seminary of Eccle- siastics of St. Siilpice in the Island of Montreal^' who were charged by the Letters patent, expressly with "the work there of the conversion of the Indians and the instruction of His Majesty's subjects, conversion et instruction de nos snjets, etc., etc., moreover it was ordered by the Letters patent, that the Island and seigniory of Montreal donated in 1663 by the mis- sionary association to the Seminary at Paris should be expressly consecr: ted to God and attached in mortmain to be possessed and held for the said pious work and use by the said seminary and community freely and absolutely, and to their successors in the order forever en perpctiiitc. Under the Letters patent, the seminary of Montreal whilst continuing their membership with the present sulpician order at Paris became to all intents locally a 'Corporate community apart from that at Paris, with legal capacity to acquire and hold property for its own uses and purposes, and charged, in addition to •the original cure of Montreal, with that of the outline settlements at St. Sulpice, Lachine, la Longue Pointe, •etc., etc., and had their corporate existence recognized ••in various public acts by the eccle.'iastical and admi- 'nistrative authorities of the colony and also by the King, the sole, supreme Executive and legislative power competent to interfere with their legal corpo- »rate status, which was expressly continued to be so mmm 138 acknowledged by all of them during the French Do- minion of Canada. The clerical records exhibit several similar corporate erections of communities established i;i the colony by letters patent whose corporate existence still subsists and is fully recogfiized, as the Ursuline Nuns at Que- bec in 1637, the Seminary at Quebec in 1663, the Hospital Nuns at Montreal in april 1669, the Con- gregational Nuns at Montreal in may 167 1, &c., &c. The Sulpician Order at Paris not only as members of the Missionary association, but also as donees, and transferees from that association of the Inland and Seigniory of Montreal, delegated and' committed to their Branch Seminary of Montreal, all the local works, [Giuvre] assumed by the Sulpician Ecclesiastics at Paris, and Uoing their best to carry out the purpose of the Missionarj' association, there- being no resident Island Indians, the Montreal Semi • nary did effect conversions among the savages who- frequented the Island, and, at an early period, formed an Indian mission located near the fort of the Moun- tain of Montreal where they collected together and took charge of the wandering Indians of any tribe who where willing to be fed and protected against the hostile Iroquois, and who submitted to be conver- ted to Christianity. The so called mission was a mere indiscriminate collection of Indians who came to Montreal from abroad for trading purposes or otherwise, as refugees from the Iroquois who had determined to exterminate the French settlers as well as their Indian allies, there being in fact no other hostile against either, yet, not- withstanding the constantly harassing attacks of the 139 Iroquois, the mission called the Fort or niission of the Mountain slowly increased in numbers by its adven- titious additions as above stated ; but the indian convert, could not resist vicious temptations, in their wa}', and from their easy access to the towns became demoralized by habits of intemperance to such a de- gree that in 1692, the Iroquois in broad day raided the unguarded mission and carried off 35 of the con- verts as prisoners without meeting any resistance there. The removal of the mission to a distance from such facilities for intemperance became a moral necessity upon the Seminary of Montreal, who, in consequence,, in 1 701, transferred the mission to Sault-au-RecoUet in the Domain of the Seigniory at the back of the Island of Montreal, where it was left undisturbed by any further attacks of the Iroquois, whose power was so far broken by governor Frontenac's incursion upon them in that year, that after the peace between the French and the Iroquois which followed soon after» the Iroquois were never again formidable either tO' the French or their converts. The mission was kept at the Sault-au-Recollet tilt 1717, when in consequence of the continued intempe- rance of the converts from their still near proximity to the town and its facilities of intemperance, the Seminary of Montreal, unwilling to give up the mis- sion and to abandon their converts to hopeless barba- rism, determined to remove them from the Island altogether, to some more remoted location where those pernicious habits might be checked, and having found a favorable locality for the mission on a point of land on the Northwest shore of the lake of two 140 mountains, the seminary of Montreal at once applied for and obtained in 17 17 from the governor and Intendant a grant en Scigneurie of a tract thereof, unconceded and in wilderness fronting the Lake, and which was called the Seigniory of the Lake of Two Mountains, on which the point of land intented for the location of the mission was included, when the mission and its converts were forthwith established at the sole expense of the Montreal Seminary, and un- der the terms of their oftered engagements with the government, tlie Seigniorial grant being made to them like all other grants subject to the king's ratifi- cation which followed in the king's letters of 17 18 in favor of the Seminary of Paris, who thereby ■occupied the Seigniory as grantees thereof, to be held by them whether the mission continued there or not, and like all other seigniorial grants, it was char- ged with the usual feudal services to the Suzerain Grantor and subject to the usual settlement duties under such seignioral grants by its tenants and sub- occupants. It will be observed that the removed mission contained a collection of Indians of various tribes, Algonquins, Iroquois, Mohawks, Nipissings, and others, either refugees from hostile Indians, or Indian persons redeemed by the Seminary and charitable settlers of Montreal, both of whom practised that mode of saving the prisoners* lives, and to them were added roving Indians who entered the mission for the sake of food and shelter, all of them being foreign Indians, the Mohawks and Iroquois from the now state of New- York, the Algonquins from the Allu- mettes' Island and the upper shores of the Ottawa 141 river, the Nipissings from tlie distant lake of that name. etc. But none were of the class of Montreal Island Indians, the intended converts of the mission- ary association, whose duties were assumed by the Sulpicians as transferees of that association, to use a modern analogy, the mission in itself was simply a poor house or house of refuge for Indians generally, where they were christianised and supported at the expense of the Seminary of Montreal from its own revenues and where the Indian converts were maintain- ed as long as they chose to continue at the mission. The lake grant, as ratified by the letters patent in favor of the Seminary of Paris of 171 8, was followed in 1732 by a direct grant to that Seminary of these called augmentations which was also duly ratified by letters patent in 1735, which uniting the new grants into one seigniory of the lake, at the same time spe- cially modified not only the terms of the two prelimi- nary grants by the Governor and Intendant, but also altered the terms of the ratification of 1718, none of these modifications however are material in this con- tention, and relieving the Seminary ffom the strict prompt performance of the settlement duties condi- tional upon the Seigniorial Grantees and upon their tenants and sub-grantees in the seigniory, discharged the seigniors from the erection of the stone fort which was no longer required. The effect o<' the letters patent of ratification of the seigniory of the lake of Two Mountains was to place that seigniory in the same category of property belonging to the Sulpician order, as the seigniory of the Island of Montreal and the seigniory of St. Sul- pice as held nominally by the head of the Sulpician 142 ■order as the joint property of all its associated Eccle- siastics, wherever their branch establishments might be situated, including of course the constituted Semi- nary of St, Sulpice of Montreal, all in joint proprie- torship, according to the law in such cases in France as held at the place where the head establishment is located with its local branches in or out of France, the latter acting independently, using their indepen- dent right and their local revenues to support the local work, Vceuvrc to be done by the branch establish- ments which have two kinds of legal existence, the one as part of the order, the other as a separate and independent corporation having 'ts proper buildings and rights of property etc.etc. Apart hence theSulpician Ecclesiastics of the Seminary of Montreal are called Ecclesiastics of the order of St. Sulpice at Paris, but those at Paris were never called Ecclesiastics of the Seminar) , The superior ofiicers of each seminary arc distinct, the seminaries having distinct dates of existence, that at Paris by letters patent in 1645 and that at Montreal in 1677 ; their existences are locally separate although they are united together ecclesias- tically in the order of St. Sulpice established at Paris. The sulpician properties above mentioned in Ca- nada, though nominally represented by the head establishment at Paris, were actually, in the case of the seminary of Montreal, dedicated to and specially'' appropiated for pious uses in Canada within the local charge of the Montreal seminary, who held in fact the seigniories as their direct properties having the exclusive administration of them, the collection and application of their local revenuesto local uses with out reference to the house at Paris and without aid from 143 that seminary ; but owinj^ to the inadequacy of tlie local revenues to mcL: local expenses and the local •works, ranivre, to which tlie properties and their local revenues were specially appointed, the Montreal semi- nary were for several years before the conquest neces- sitous, receivers directly from the French Kings, bounty of an annual contribution from the public funds of France to supplement the local means of support. A conclusive result, drawn from the colonization policy of the French Kings as shown in the terms and ouu'tions of their seigniorial grants, was decla- red by the unanimous judgment of the thirteen judges composing the feudal tenure court of 1855, with one dissentient, in answer to the 17th propo- sition submitted to the consideration of the Court, that according to the laws in force in Canada before the conquest of the country, the grantees of land in fief or seigniory by the Crown of France had the full and entire property in them, but they could only alienate or subgrant them at certain feudal stipulation of rents. Confirming the contention liere with reference to the " mission of the Lake of Two Mountains for the alleged special instruction and spiritual care of the Algonquins and Iroquois " and to the words of the grant as expressed in the preliminary concession of the lake seigniory and its augmentation in 1717 and 1732, and in the Royal Ratifications of both by the Letters Patent of 1718 and 173 5, the following will be found in the colonial grant of 1717 by the governor and intendant of that date : " We, in virtue of the power jointly entrusted to as by His Majesty, have 144 given, j^a*antcd and conceded, and by these presents' do give, grant and concede unto the said sieurs Eccle- siastics of tlie Seminary of St, Sulpice established at Montreal a tract of land, and to have and to hold the same for ever unto the said sieurs Ecclesiastics, their successors and assigns, even should the said mission be taken away from thence, in full property under the title of Fief and Seigniory, etc." In the letters patent of 17 1 8 confirming the grant, " His Majesty wishing to favor the Ecclesiastics of " the Seminary of St. Sulpice established at Paris " from whom those of the Seminary of St. Sulpice es- " tablished at Montreal proceed, to whom the conces-- " sion deed of 1718 was granted, etc., has given and '* granted by these presents to the ecclesiastics of the " Seminary of St, Sulpice at Paris that certain tract " etc., to have and to hold the same for ever unto the " said Ecclesiastics, their successors and assigns even " if the said mission be taken away from thence, in full " property under the title of Fief and Seigniory, etc." In the colonial grant of the augmentation of 1733 by the Governor and Intendant of that date, the words of grant are : " We in virtue etc., have given, " granted and conceded and by these presents, do- " give, grant and concede unto the said F^cclesiastics " of the Seminary of St. Sulpice at Paris the above-. " ungranted tract of land, etc to have and to hold " the same unto the said Sieurs of the Seminary of *' St. Sulpice, their successors and assigns, henceforth " for ever in fief and Seigniory, etc., etc." The letters patent of 1735 confirmed the grant of 1733 to the said Ecclesiastics of St. Sulpice at Paris " to have and to hold ^ the said Ecclesiastics theitr 145 " successors and assigns for ever as a fief and Seigniory, etc " The preamble of the concession of the Sei^jniory of the lake of Two Mountains in 17 17 to the Seminary of Montreal recites in substance that the mad drun- kenness from which as Messire DoUier de Casson, a Sulpician of that Seminary, in his history of Montreal says, " neither Algonquins nor Iroquois could refrain " in their intercourse with the French of the town, " ils ne peuvent quitter qu'apres etre ivres a n'en pou- " voir plus, et en font usage comnie furieux." Preven- ting religious instruction and conversion of the In- dians, was the real cause of the removal by the Se- minary of the Montreal Mountain mission to the Sault-au-Recollet, and from the Sault to its final loca- lity at the Lake Seigniory, the recital is as follows : " On the petition presented to us by Messieurs the " Ecclesiastics of the Seminary of St. Sulpicc esta- " blished at Montreal by which they state that it " would be advantageous to the missions of the Indians " of the Sault-au-Recollet in the Island of Montreal *• which is under their care, that it should be imme- " diately transferred above the said island and esta- " blished on the lands which are situated in the North " West side of the Lake of two mountains, which said " mission would be advantageous not only for the " conversion of the Indians, who being there more " distant from the city, would also be deprived of the " opportunity of getting intoxicated, etc." But the recital does not control or limit the words of the grant, because it is a maxim of all law in the way of grant, and which it is nothing more than the conclusion of common sense long formed and approved, 146 not a mere technical rule of verbal construction, that if the intention of the Kinij be plainly expressed in the granting part of the concession, the grant shall be made accordingly. The words on the concession grant and ro}'al ratification are too plain to admit of doubtful construction, and explicitly convey to the grantees the absolute unlimited property of the grant, namely the seigniory of the Lake of Two Mountains, making no reference to the Indians as having interest in the grant itself, or otherwise than by the removal of the Indian mission to the lake .seigniory. It is not allowed to interprete what has no need of interpretation, the old rule affirming quotics in verbis nulla est ambiguitas, ibi nulla cxpositio contra verba ficnda est. The granting words here manifestly speak the intention of the parties at the time, who must be presumed to know the object and purport of the grant as an absolute property to the grantees for ever whether the p'antee should continue there or not ; plainly expressing a free grant, independent of the existence of the mission, which could therefore have no derogating rights against the grantees. The land granted was unconceded public land at the disposal of the king who had power to make his gift condi- tional if he so pleased, and to express the continuan- ce or quality of his grant as well as the persons of the grantees. He gave it in full property for ever, with only subsidiary conditions, first thrt the expense of establishing the mission at the intended location in the place where the said mission shall be transfer- red, shall be at the expense of the grantees, to wit, the Seminary, and second that the seigniory be held by the grantees, the seigniors, subject to ther perfor- 147 niancc of the feudal services and acknovvled<^ements to the seigniorial Suzerain and o( the settlement du- ties required to be done on the seigniory from all such seigniorial concessions. As a matter of fact, the fist condition was fulfilled b}- the transfer of the mis- sion to the lake at the cost and charj;e of the semi- nary, for its niaintai nance there as before at the nioun- tiiin mission and at that of the Sault-au-Recollet, namely for the instruction and conversion of the In- dians ; and for the last, no record exists indicating any intention or attempt by the frcnch kings who alone could exercise the right during their dominion In C ' lada to forfeit the grant, for any breach of their feudal and settlement duties by the grantees. It is only necessary to add tliat although the grant of the lake seigniory were confiimed in tiie seminary of Paris of which the seminary of Montreal was a branch, that was only necessary from the requirements of french law, for the purpose of preserving the su- bordination observed in such ecclesiastical bodies, but did not prevent the colonial authorities from regard- ing the seminary of Montreal as a body legally con- :stituted, capable of possessing such properties, becau- se the colonial government, by its grant to the Mon- treal Seminar}'-, acknowledged its corporate existence constituted under the king's patents of 1677 which was acknowledged in royal and public documents, among others, by the orders of the king in his coun- cil of state at Paris, in 17 16 and 1722, which charged the Montreal Seminary v/ith an annual tax for the town fortifications, in both orders, the council refer- ring to the body as " the Seminary of St. Sulpice established at Montreal and possessing building lots 148 in that city of which as well as of all the island it is direct seigniors, etc." The ratified grants of all the Sulpician Seigniories, St. Sulpice and Lake of Two Mountains, was granted to the head establishment at Paris, but the constituted seminary of Montreal was the actual seignior who performed on the spot all the pious works for which the grants were made, admin- istered the entire property, made all the required out- lay for settlements and charitable establishments with their local works, and whose local charge and duties were in ecclesiastical connection with the sulpician order, but independent of the head Seminary at Pa- ris. The conquest found the Sulpician property and estates in Canada dedicated for ever to pious works and uses here, namely the seigniories of Montreal, St. Sulpice atid Lake of Two Mountains with their de- pendencies, in the titular possession of the head Seminary of St. Sulpice at Paris, whilst they were as in fact, in the actual possession, of right and administered on the spot by the conFtituted comnmnity and Semi- nary of St. Sulpice of Montreal, the entire estates being the joint property of the order and of its cons- tituted eitablishments, but subjected to the effects and conditions of the conquest expressed in the articles of capitulation of Montreal of 1760 and of the treaty of peace of 1763. The 34 th article of the capitulation provides that •*' all the communities and all the priests shall preserve their moveables, the property and revenues of their seigniories and other estates which they possess in the colony and the said estates shall be preserved in their privileges, rights, honours and exemptions." • : 13 .he wo tat vas the lin- )Ut- A^ith ities :ian Pa- and orks , St. de- liead as in tered emi- tates cons- s and lesof Lty of that ^serve their n the their 149 The 3Sth provides that " if any of the priests, mis- sionary priests of St. Sulpice, etc., choose to go to France, they may do so and sell their estates to either the french and the english and take the proceeds with them etc.," and the 37th provides that " all seigniors etc., and all other persons whatsoever shall preserve their entire property, etc., etc., and be at liberty to keep or sell them, as well to the french as to the british, etc., etc." The effect of which provisions is explained by Chief Justice Hay of the province of Quebec in 176- in his plan for settling the law in the conquered province *' after remarking that the country not being surren- dered at discretion but upon capitulation, the King of England was never for a moment the owner of the land of the country, but only of such parts as was at the disposal of the King of France, namely the ungranted lands, and that it was a well known rule of the law of nations adopted and enforced by the law of England, that the laws of a conquered people continue in force till they were expressly changed by the will of the conquering nation ;" he proceeds to apply those maxims to the owners of property in Canada. By the articles of the capitulation of Montreal, upon which the whole country was surrendered to General Amherst in 176c, it was expressly provided that all sorts of property moveable and immoveable that does not belong to the King of France shall continue to belong to the present proprietors, whether private persons or bodies or religious societies, .lot excepting those of the Jesuits, and this provision is confirmed in the fourth article of the definition treaty of peace of the tenth Fe- bruary 1763, by which it was agreed between the two 150 crowns, that those persons who chose to retire and quit the province may sell their estate and eftectsto British subjects and return to old France or elsewhere with the money of such sales,\. henever they thought proper, within the space of i8 months from the ratification of the treaty. The delay extended to the tenth of August 1764. As a necessary consequence, all french subjects who remained in Canada became british subjects by the mere effect of their continued residence in Canada, with full capacity as sucli subjects to acquire and hold property moveable and immoveable in Canada, whilst frenchmen proprietors in France or the returning french subjects became aliens and incapacitated from holding immoveable estate and property in Canada,, but having power to sell or dispose of it within the: 18 months after the ratification of the treaty. It has already been observed that the Seigniorial estates above mentioned were the property of the Sul- pician order for ever, and could not be alienated from Sulpician Ecclesiastics, but the conquest was an in- terfering necessity and prevented the property from longer subsisting for the benefit of the Sulpicians in France, and therefore could only avail for the Sulpi- cian Ecclesiastics in Canada who had capacity of british subjects, and therefore to the only ecclesiastics of the order in Canada, the co- stituted community and Seminary of St. Sulpice at Montreal, who from their continued residence in Canada after the con- quest, haa become british subjects with the required capacity not onl}' to continue their actual possession of the Canada property of the order, but to hold it as proprietors in full property. The result is ex- mmK 151 plained by Mons. Petit, a french colonial judge, in his work on french colonial law p. 5 1 1 and 5 1 3 which he lays down as established by royal orders and arrets that the property of the several religious orders in the colonies must, in case of any separation from the main body of the orders, be dedicated to the work to be performed and belong to the missionaries by whom it is performed, because the intention of the donor of such property could only have destined it for the sup- port and maintenance of the mission and missionaries on the spot and not to be held by Ecclesiastics, thousands of miles distant from the appointed work. Again, being for ever the joint property of the order including all its constituted establishments, the lapse by any of its holders in the joint property, ac- cording to the well known rule of the common law of France and of the Province, remits the lapsed property and right to the others holding and capable of holding the property, and hence the Sulpicians in France, having by the effect of the conquest and cession, be- came aliens and incapacitated to hold the property of the order in Canada, they lost their right to it, which reverted to those Sulpicians who had become british subjects in Canada, with capacity to take and hold real property in the Province to wit, the community and Seminary of St. Sulpice at Montreal, and who, losing nothing of their rights in the Sulpician pro- perty in Canada, thereby preserved it for the purposes of its original destination. This may be familiarly exemplified by the rule of law applied as follows ; if one moiety of a community became incapable of holding its undivided property, the other moiety will possess the whole, because the change in the number 152 and quality of the members makes no change in the community itself which exists, as before, in the person of those who retain the necessary capacity. Finally, the power to sell comprehends the power to abandon and transfer property by any act of con- veyance of it, and therefore the deed of cession exe- cuted at Paris on the 24th April 1764 within the time of limitation of the treaty, by the head office of the order there in favor of the community and Seminary of St Sulpice at Montreal of the right of the Paris Seminary to any possession of the ordc in Canada, constituted the Montreal community and Seminary the proprietors of the rights so abandoned to them, the latter Seminary having full capacity and authority, as a constituted body, under the letters patent of 1677, to take and hold property in like manner as enjoyed by persons and individuals when not expressly pro- hibited. The cession was in fact a mere partition of proj^erty held in common between the Sulpicians in France and those in Canada, and possessed in com- mon by both in the two countries before the conquest. The conquest made both foreigners and aliens to each of the governments respectively, necessarily separating the bodies, and therefore the joint property was ne- cessarily divided also, the French Sulpicians by the deed of cession retaining their property in France and abandoning effectively their proprietory rights in Canada to the Montreal Sulpicians, instead of selling, renouncing their rights, thereby making a complete partition between the two bodies. The deed of ces- sion was in reality the usual and well known modern quit claim deed in favour of the proprietor in posses- sion, and in no way required the royal assent or au- 153 thority for its validity, no change of actual possession ibeing made. Under the foregoing circumstrinces. the require- mients of the conquest were carried into full effect, and the Montreal Seminary acquired full property and possession of the seigniory, their title was indisputa- ble, namely to the entire Canadian property of the Order ; it was never interfered with by the British So- vereign or His colonial authorities ; on the contrary, the right .)f the Montreal Seminary was recognized in 1 78 1 by the governor of the province receiving that body with Fealty and Homage for their seignio- ries, and registering their acts and titles which inclu- ded the deed of cession above mentioned. Though the reception of fealty did not give title, it accepted and admitted title and prevented the sovereign Suze- rain from dispossessing or interfering with the vassal, affording a recorded proof of title to the seignior against the king, who, by his acceptance, frees the seigniory or fief and invests his seignior with it ; as Blackstone says, the ceremony is a token of the pro- :tection which the suzerain owes to the vassal, the -obligation between them is thereby reciprocal and if, the vassal under the old tenure was bound to serve, he had a right to full protection in return. The re- ception by the king of the Montreal Seminary in Fealty was His royal recognition of its right of legi- timate possession and property after the conquest, to which, if necessary, might be added the long possess- ion held in the sight and with the knowledge of the respective governments from 1677. The confirming act of 1 84 1 completes the chain of title held by the community and seminary of Montreal and contains the royal assurance of Her Majesty on behalf of the t,.wji,.imimm m P 154 Seminary here. It was enacted as a compromise act between the seigniors and the tenants of the seignio- ries to get rid of the seigniorial rates and dues which pressed heavily upon capital and improvement of real property, causing irritating complaints against the seigniors and demands for the abolition of the title of the seminary to their property and its reunion to the royal domain, the complainants pretexting that the reunion would not change the seigniorial tenure of the sub-grants or their feudal burdens, the only difference being the change of seigniors from the seminary to the crown, leaving the tenure as it was, which could only be abolished by its absolute abolition as was ef- fected in 1856, and hence, therefore, the act of 1841 which was a relief act for the gradual abolition of the seignioral r'ghts and dues, after reciting the proprie- tary rights in and over the seigniories of Montreal,. St. Sulpice and Lake of Two Mountains as held and claimed by the seminary since the capitulation of 1760, and claiming to hold those rights still as owners of the said seigniories, and stating that doubts of their rights had been raised, and it was contended that the title to the seigniories was in Her Majest}', it was de- clared that, to remove those doubts and effect an- extinction of the seigniorial rights and dues, Her Majest}'^, of Her own will and motion " signified Her " pleasure thr.t the rights and titles of the ecclesiastics " of the Seminary of Montreal to those seigniories " should be absolutely confirmed, subject to the terms, ** conditions and limitations contained in the act, '* which were fully and formally agreed to by the said " ecclesiastics," and for fulfilling " Her Majesty's '■' pleasure, the said ecclesiastics were constituted an *' ecclesiastical corporation as named In the act," to 155 whom the right and title to the several seigniories above mentioned with all and every their domain, lands etc., etc., and their seigniorial rights and dues should be confirmed, declared good, valid and effec- tual in the law, with power to the corporation so cons- tituted to hold and possess the same as proprietor thereof as fuUv, in ihe same manner and to the same extent as the seminary of St. Sulpice at Paris or the seminary of St, Sulpice at Montreal, according to its constitution in 1759, ^^^ ^^ either or both of the said seminaries could have done or had a right to do, and therefore the seigniories were declared to be vested in the said corporation as the true and lawful owners and proprietors of the same to the only use, behalf and benefit of the ecclesiastics of the said corpora- tion and of their successors for ever, subject to the terms and conditions in the act, chief of which were the statutory means and terms provided for the gra- dual extinction of the seignioral riglits and duties by a commutation payable by the tenants. The act of 1841 was full and comprehensive in its terms and effect, on confirming to the ecclesiastics of the Montreal Seminary tlieir seigniories and their rights, as they were both before and after the conquest, in full pos- session and property which were corroborated and affirmed in 1859, by the subsequent acts of the com- mutation arrangements between the provincial gov- ernment and the ecclesiastics for the entire abolition of the feudal and seigniorial dues and charges. With reference to the foregoing, my answer to the first enquiry is : That the title of the corporation of the seminary of Montreal has conferred upon that body a valid i 156 and absolute right of property in their several seigni- ories, and constituted that body the sole absolute owners of the property known as ^e seigniory of the Lake of Two Mountains. As a consequence of the above answer, my answer to the second enquiry is : That the Oka Indians have not and never had any lawful proprietary claim in the property of the said Lake seigniory. With reference to the so named Oka Indians of the Lake, it may be observed that they do not ap- pear to have been recognized as the proper Iroquois tribe by either the French or British Colonial govern- ments, nor eo statu, within the protection acts for the care of Indians by the Colonial governments since the conquest, nor as such have they held grants of land exclusively for their own benefit, nor <:ould such have been the case because the Iroquois name was collective and assumed as representing the association of several tribes in the now State of New York, the Mohawks, Senecas and others ; it is well known that the lands of the tribe belong to the en- tire tribe by grant or concession of same kind, but though grants were made directly to the Abenaquis, to the Hurons Indians of Lorette, etc., and in efifect through the Jesuits for the Sillery Indians, the Mo- hawks and other Indians called Iroquois of the Sault St Louis, respectively established on those grants, there is no trace of such a grant in the Colonial re- cords, either direct or intermediate for any special denominations of Indians of the mission of the Lake seigniory. It is clear that the Oka Indians were not direct t. 157 participants of the lake grant, and no such grant has been produced in their favor. A matter of fact, the history of the mission at the Mountain some years after the original settlement of the City in 1642-3, or that of Sault-au-Recollet in 1701, both locations being in the seigniory of the Island of Montreal, or finally at the Lake seigniory in 17 17, the mission Indians were merely a gathering of waifs and strays of diffe- rent tribes, fortuitously collected at the mission loca- tion, by the christian charit)' of the Ecclesiastics of the Seminary of Montreal, and never had or pretended to have title of any kind either to the seigniory of Montreal, their first and second locations, or to the lake seigniory where they were last located until within a very recent period. It appears however that the Oka Iroquois have held and occupied lots of land at or near the locality of the lake mission, either by themselves as individuals or by families, or as having acquired them by succession to deceased Indian re- latives, for the protection and maintenance of them- selves and families as residents at the mission and hence, the self imposed duty assumed by the Semi- nary of Montreal for the care and spiritual instruction of the Indians at the lake mission was set out among the conditions and considerations for the confirmation act of 1 84 1, which vesting the seigniories absolutely in the Ecclesiastics of the seminary, was declared to be for the following " purposes, intents and objects " only and for none others, among these the cure of " souls within the parish of Montreal" the mission "of the Lake of Two Mountains for the instruction and spiritual care of the Algonquins and Iroquois Indians." This last special mission puqjose is quite explicit, and 158 it would be a contradiction of its terms, to require as a duty and service of the Fxclesiastics of the seminary, to afford to the mission any instruction or spiritual care other than Roman Cathohc, and by no process of construction, could the plain intent and purpose of this particular statutory duty be made to apply to Protestant tuition and spiritual care. This mission purpose and duty prescribed is not therefore a trust beyond its express requirements of performance, and the so called english trust urged for the Okas is not within the law of the Province. By a mistake the trusteeship of the ecclesiastics for the mission Indians and the Okas in particular pertinaciously alleged in tlieir favor, was adopted from an old conversial opinion set up against the seminary some years after the conquest for the reunion of their seigniories to the crown, but in no way as trustees for the tenants or sub-occupants, that alleged trusteeship however was never seriously adopted by the govern- ment, and was put aside, and has since remained forgotten and buried until revived for this contention. It would be waste of time to discuss the alleged substitution of our provincial common law, as ap- plicable to the Oka Indians, because the Lake seigni- ory was granted to the ecclesiactics of the Seminary of Montreal for themselves, their successors and as- signs, for ever, and, Whether the mission exists or not upon the grant without any gift over to other persons, certainly not the mission Iroquois, at the lapse of the grant, after the termination of the existence of the grantee, the corporation of the Seminary and their assigns. There being no one designated to take the gift after 159 such a lapse, there is no substitution in law in favor of the Okas, and the Lake seigniory by our provincial law remains tJie absolute property of the corporation. Under these circumstances, it seems undeniable that as professing protestants, the Oka Indians, though residents at the mission, have no right whatever to claim from the Seminary as a duty to them the only charge imposed by the confirmatory statute, namely the instruction and spiritual care of the Roman Ca- tholic mission, and that any such allotments which the Indians may occupy for residence or cultivation at or near the mission, are not missionary rights but seigniorial and proprietary, and subject to be governed by the terms of the location, permissions granted to them by the owners of the property occupied by the Indian tenants. Montreal, 7th May 1878. W. Badgley. ]60 Extract from the proceeding's of t1ic Privy Council' of the late Province of Quebec. Reg. F. p. 320-1. Report To His Excellency the Right Honorable Guy's Lord Dorchester, Governor -General of the Province of Quebec, Sec, &c. Report of a committee of the Whole Council, on the^ coviplaints of the Indians of the Village near ttte Lake of the Tivo Mountains. My Lord, — The Board having been frequently assembled in obedience to your Lordship's order of reference ; and having heard the sulpicians by their council, and M. Attorney and Solicitor General for the crown, most humbly Report to your Lordship : That no satisfactory evidence is given to the com- mittee, of any title granted to the Indians of the villa- ge in question, either by the French Crown, or any grantee of that crown ; all which is nevertheless most humbly submitted to your Lordship's great Wisdom*. Signed by order of the committee council chamber... Bishop's Palace 21st April 1789, Wm. Smith, Chairman,. 161 Extract from the proceedings of the Privy Council of the late Province of Quebec, At a further meetinfj of the Council on Thursday the i6th April 1789 [to which day the committee had adjourned the parties, by an order of the i^th Instant, for an attendance yesterday on the funeral of the Lieut-Governor-General Hope.] Present : The Cliicf Justice : M. Fi-.lay M. Dunn, M. Harrison, M. CoHins, M. Mabane, M. de L^ry, M. Pownall, M. JJellestc, M. Fraser, M. Caldwell, M. Grant, M. de St. Ours, M. de Longueuil, Sir John Johnson, Baronet. M. de Lanau- diere, M. Boucherville, M. Dupre. The Counsel attenviing were called in and the doors were thrown open for a public hearing ; which con- tinued from 10 in the morning to three o'clock in the afternoon. Observations and Remarks of The Attorney and Solicitor General. Upon a reference by His Excellency the Right Honorable Lord Dorchester to a committee of the whole Council for consideration and Report upon a Memorial from the Ecclesiastics of St. Sulpice at Montreal, on the subject of their title to lands at or near the Lake of the Two Mountains, in answer to the representations made by certain Lake Indians of that settlement ; and also another memorial from the Ecclesiastics of the same order, stating their claim of nominating the Clerk of His Tvlajesty's Court of Com- mon Pleas, held at the city of Montreal for the dis- trict of Montrtc*!, with order that the Attorney and Solicitor-General be heard on the part of the Crown, ->-.^MkhMJMSSF'''^msmBBBm Pi wmmmmm 162 His Majesty's Attorney and Solicitor-General hav- ing attended the council on the subject referred, and having heard and examined the several grounds of claim offered by the said order and community of Ecclesiastics, submit to His Majesty's Council such a state of those claims and the foundation upon which they stand, as may call the attention of this Hono- rable Board to a just v'ievv of His Majesty's rights committed to the wisdom and justice of this Hono- rable Council to report upon to His Excellency the Governor. The Indians of the Lake of the Two Mountains state that they understood a grant was made to them by the French King of lands on that Lake, and were induced to this belief by th^eir missionary and the Body of Ecclesiastics of St. Sulpice at Montreal. In a speech made to Sir John Johnson. Baronet, Superintendent General and Inspector General of In- dian affairs on the 8th February 1787 by the Chief of their tribe, those Indians alleged "that before the wall " was built around the town of Montreal, th^y lived '* at the foot of the Mountain where they resided in " peace and tranquillity for a considerable time, when " their missionary and the other clergy of the Island *♦ exhorted them to remove further from the Town, *' and settle at Sault-au-Recollet ; that they accor- ** dingly left their habitations and removed thither, ** with their wives and children, where they resided * for about 24 years, when again their missionaiy and ** the clergy of the Seminary at Montreal told them V they should remove once more with their families, " because it was not proper that any Indians should ** remain on the Island ; and that if they would con- 163 "** sent to go and settle at the Lake of Two Mountains, *' they should have a large tract of land (for which " they should have a deed of concession from the " French King) as their property, to be vested in them " and their heirs forever, and that the}' should not be *' molested again in their habitation. That however '* inconvenient it was to them to quit their houses " and small, clearings, yet the desire of having a fixed " property of their own induced them to comply, and " accordingly they removed and took possession of " the lands assigned to them, and, as was the custom " of their Fore Fathers, immediately set about making " an Emblematic Belt [which they delivered to Sir ■" John Johnson] by which their children would see " that the land was to be theirs forever, and as was " customary for their ancestors, they placed the figure " of a Dog at each end of the Belt to guard their ■" property, and to give notice when an enemy ap- " proached, and when finished, they spread it on the ■" ground and covered it with earth, that no evil-min- " ded persons should find it where it remained undis- " turbed till about seven years ago, when, upon the '*' subject of some dispute between them and certain ■** Canadians who first settled on their Lands under •" the idea of trading with them, their missionary told " them that the land did not belong to them, no, not " as much as the smallest shrub." In the mud speech the Indians further allege "that *" just before the taking of Montreal '^t ig the late " French wa>, the chiefs of their villages attended Sir ** John Johnson at Osvvegatchie, when he received " the submissions of all the deputies from Canada,and ■" there, in a full council, granted them protection in •"•s^^sBw^^wSiSasEnTSKaraaBBj mmmmmm wmm 164 the king's name, and confirmed to Uiem their lands as granted by the french king, In confirmation of which he delivered them the belt they then laid at his (Sir John's) feet. With the speech the Indians presented to Sir John Johnson, the copy of a grant of the lands on the Lake of Two Mountains made by the Governor and Intendant of Canada, bearing date the 17th October 1717, and ratified on the 27th april i7iench Inhabi- tants thereof, through the ministry of the late mes- sieurs Oilier, de la Marguerie, de Ranty, and other mmmmmmmmmmmmm 168 associates, laboring for th' past twenty years, and to what extent, of late, the gentlemen of the Seminary of St. Sulpice, have labored by their care and their zeal to maintain this good work, having exposed their per-^ sons,and made heavy contributions for the good of the colony and the greater glory of God, the said gentle- men associates, desiring to contribute on their part to second the pious designs of the said gentlemen of the Seminary, and honoring the memory of the said Sieur abbe Oilier, first founder thereof, and one of the promoters and benefactors of the undertaking, they have, after several conferences held on this subject, and for the great".r glory of God and for the salva- tion of souls, made and do make, with the said gen- tlemen of the Sen i-ary '•he agreements and conven- tions that follow, that is to say : That the said gentlemen associates ' i their said names, and in favor and in consideration of the con- version of tJie Indians of New France have given and do give by these presents by donation pure, simple and irrevocable and cntrevifsSox themselves and their successors, by Messire Alexandre le Rageois de Bre- tonvilHers, priest, superior of the said seminary, re- siding at St. Germain-des-Pres, du vieil Coulombier street,present and appearing to that effect.^// tJie rights of property tvhich they have and may have in the said Island of Montreal, situate in New France, on the river St. Lawrence, at Sault St. Louis, at line forty four, under the name of the first as jociates, for the conversion of the Indians, with declaration to the profit of the company, to the exclusion of all heirs by deed of the twenty fifth of march, one thousand six hundred and forty four and the twenty first day of Mki 169 march, one thousand six hundred and fifty, executed before, I'euvret and his colleague, notaries, at the chatelet de Paris, and the deeds of acquisition and ; concession mentioned therein. As also the seigniorial house, called the fort in the said Island of Montreal, and of which le sieur de Maisonneuve is governor and captain for the company, the farm and cleared lands and other dependencies thereon, and moreover the whole of the seigniory, justice, rights, dues, active debts upon country or upon particular inhabitants of Quebec.Montreal, or in Fran- ce,and generally all the names, rights, titles and inter- est that may belong to them, and be of their compe- tency, by reason of the said Island of Montreal, whe- ther in France or in New France, for any cause or reason whatsoever, for the said gentlemen of the semi- nary accepting thereof, to enjoy and dispose of the same, as is stated by the sieur dc Bretonvilliers, as incommutable proprietors, according to their good will and pleasure, and all titles, rights, honors and prerogatives, which may appertain thereto on account thereof in the councils of the country, at Quebec and elsewhere, and for the government of :he hospital of Montreal aforesaid, in such way and manner as may be, which deed and declaration, hereinabove mentioned, of the twenty fifth day of March, one thousand six hundred and forty four and twenty first day of March, one thousand six hundred and fifty, along with those expressed therein, have been placed as warranty of the things hereinabove given, into the hands of the said sieur de Bretonvilliers, for ana in the name of the said seminary, with all which he declares himself content and satisfied. The said dona- i wesesaimmmmmmmmmmmm^'ii'imm 170 tion, and transfer beings made subject to the following clauses and conditions : Firstly, that the domain and proprietorship of the said island shall be inseparably united to the said Se- minary, and shall not be separated therefrom under any circumstances whatsoever. That the reinvestment of the rente of ek.ven hun- dred livres, the principal thereof forming the sum of twenty two thousand iivres, redeemed by Madame de Ranty, made on the half of the farm and reve- nue of the island, in accordance with the deed pas- sed between demoiselle Mance and le Sieur de Mai- sonneuve on the in fulfilment of the cor«-ract of the fourth of March one thousand six hundred and fifty three passed before Chaussiere and his colleague, notaries, at the chatelet aforesaid, shall be entirely executed as forming part of the founda- tion of the hospital of Montreal. That the contract for the foundation of the said hospital dated the twelfth day of January one thousand six hundred and forty four and of the seventeenth day of March one thousand six hundred and forty eight, shall be executed according to their form and tenor, as well in regard of the said demoiselle Mance appointed administratrix, during her life time, as for the other clauses and conditions contained therein together with the deed given by the company to the said demoiselle, on the fourth day of J anuary one thousand six hundred and fifty, as to the mode of enjoyment of the revenues of the said hospital and the rendering of the accounts of the same. That the fund of the rente of Madame d'Angoule- me, amounting in principal to twenty two thousand 171 livres according to the reduction au denier vingt belonging to the said hospital and which shall be paid out of the price of the land de pre'au, shall also be reinvested in accordance with the arret of the Court of one thousand six hundred and sixty-two and other funds of a similar nature to form a dot for the said hospital. That the said Sieur de Maisonneuve, one of the asso- ciates, who has greatly promoted the work, shall remain governor and captain of the new Island, of the seignio- rial house in which he is now resident and established by the said gentlemen associates during his lifetime, subject to the pleasure nevertheless and the orders of the gentlemen of the Seminary.as proprietors of the Island, and shall have his lodging in the seigniorial house, and moreover shall enjoy one half of the farm and of the revenues of the mills and dependencies of the said half of said farm, during his Hfetime, he being obliged to maintain them in good order during the term of his enjoyment, which lodging and revenues shall take the place of emoluments, and tne other revenues of the island shall not be chargeable therewith ; with the privilege of obtaining them as in the past from the country ; and the said sieur de Maisonneuve shall be always considered as having belonged to the com- pany, and to have rendered great services for the establishment of the colony. The said gentlemen of the Seminary shall, nevertheless, have the right to reside in the said seigniorial house, as seigniors and proprietors, by leaving a suitable lodging therein, at the same time, for the said sieur de Maisonneuve. That the said gentlemen of the seminary under- take, as being subrogated in the stead of the said ■"""""""■M ass SSOi wmm 172 ■;! gentlemen associates, of all the debts and charges, t J which they may be held bound in the said quality, whether on the domain of the island or to the country, to any particular inhabitants of Quebec, or Montreal, to hospital or store in this city of Paris or elsewhere, and in whatever manner, whatsoever, for the purposes of the said society, promising to discharge the said gentlemen associates towards and against all persons, but the said gentlemen of the said Seminary shall not be held to the payment of the said debts and charges in their own name nor out of their own estates, nor shall the said Seminary, be held to the said payment in its own name of its estates, but only out of the pro- perties assigned by this treaty. And it is stipulated between the said parties that in case, after the fulfilment of the charges hereinbefo- re set forth and other ordinary and necessary expen- diture for the preservation of the island, and the main- tenance of the undertaking, there should remain a balance of the reserve out of the property assigned, the said balance shall be employed for the benefit of the undertaking according to the zeal and prudence of the said gentlemen of the Seminary, so that the lands now in forest and which the gentlemen of the semi- nary may hereafter cause to be cleared shall not be included, nor likewise the improvements, augmenta- tions and acquisitions which they may make thereon and which they may dispose of as they deem proper. The said demoiselle Mance and the persons who shall succeed her in the administration of the said hospital, shall have the privilege of placing in the Quebec stores, dependent on the domain of Montreal the victuals and provisions which shall come from France, to have ft I 173 them taken to Montreal, as well as what they shall send for conveyance to France, whilst awaiting the departure of the vessels, and to have storage during said time. And moreover the said demoiselle Mance is dis- charged from all rendering of account of the said hos- pital, until this date, the said associates having a full knowledge of her good administration, from the in- formation they have taken from time to time, and on the other hand, the said gentlemen associates are likewise discharged for all supplements, demands and claims that the said demoiselle Mance might have had, arising out of the revenue and income of the said hospitals, the enjoyment and perception of the same, until this date in every manner whatsoever. Nevertheless the arrears of the rente of the said dame d'Angouleme, due up to this date, shall be employed to the acquittal of the sum of three thousand eight hundred livres tournois in one ins- tance and seventeen hundred livres in another, men- tioned in an obligation of the said demoiselle Mance, made in favor of sieur Monsieur, merchant at la Ro- chelle for the reasons therein mentioned, for the be- nefit of the said hospital, after deducting that which may be found to be due, to the late Sieur de la Dau- versiere for the same purpose, and the surplus, if any, placed in the hands of the said demoiselle Mance to be used in the service {poicr servir de dot) of the said hospital. The said gentlemen of the seminary .vir. '. be bound in commemoration of the present donation and as- signment, to have celebrated each year on this day, as well in the church at Montreal, as in the chapel of ^PWWWMHBM 174 the seminary at Paris, a solemn Mass for the repose of the souls of the deceased benefactors, and all the as- sociates of the said company. All of which concessions, donations, remissions, clauses and conditions have been accepted by the said siettr de Bretonvilliers for the said ^'entlemcn of the seminary as hereinabove stated, who has promised and promises to fulfil and execute the same to the full extent, accordin^j to their form and tenor ; the titles, papers, registers, accounts and other deeds of the society shall be remitted into their hands, and they shall take charge of the same by inventory, and those that are now in the island of Montreal,concerning the said company, shall be likewise delivered to them or to those holding their order, by those who may be in possession of the same, on their giving a discharge therefor, the deed of donation of one hundred livres heretofore made by the said sieur de Faucarap, for the establishment of the cure of Montreal aforesaid, on the nineteenth day of april, one thousand six hundred and fifty seven, passed before Gauthier and his col- league, notaries, shall be of no effect, with the consent of the said gentlemen associates and the said gentle- men of the seminary, in so far as concerns them, inas- much as the same has not been fulfilled, and on account of the changes made in the state of things by these presents. At the execution of these presents appeared the said Demoiselle Jeanne Mance, adminis- tratrix of the hospital of Montreal aforesaid, who in so far as she is concerned and in her said quality, Jias declared herself satisfied with these presents and con- sents in all that regards her, concerning the said hos- pital, that they shall have their full and entire effect. 175 The present deed shall be insinne and enregistered v^liercver the same shall require so to be and the bearer hereof is hereby constituted attorney for that purpose. And for the execution hereof the said gentlemen of the seminary have elected their perma- nent dotuicile in this city of Paris, in the said house of the seminary, at which place, etc., promising, etc., obliging each one in his own right, etc., renouncing, etc. Done and passed, namely : by the said gentlemei. of the Seminary, Garibal, Duplessis, Drouart, abbe de Locdieu, et de Faucamp, in the said house of the Se- minary hereinabove mentioned, and by the said sieur de Morangis at his domicile above mentioned in the year one thousand six hundred and sixty three, the ninth day of march, in the forenoon, who have signed the minute of these presents reraining in the office of Levasseur, the younger one of the undersigned nota- ries. Lefranc et Levasseur, With paraphes. r-t tT^^iBRKfT?„~-yr^ ' 176 Establishment of a Seminary in the Island of Montreal, and constituting in mortmain the Seigniory of t/i£ said Island. 1677. LOUIS, by che Grace of God, King of France and Navarre, to all whom it may concern, greeting: The Ecclesiastics of the Seminary of Saint Sulpice of the faubourg Saint Germain, lez Pan?,, have most humbly memorialized us, that Sieur de Fau- camp, de Quelus, abbe de Locdieu, de Garibal, de Morangis, Duplessis and Drouart liave made dona- tion to them, by contract of the ninth day of March one thousand ?ix hundred and sixty three, of the Seigniory of the Island of P/Iontreal in New-- France, with all it„ appurtenances and dependencies, where they have seni priests, who have labored for the con- version of the iiidians with so much success, that they have been invited to send out others, to the number of four'.een, who might establish a commu- nity there, if it pleased us to grant our letters neces- sary therefor. For said reasons, being \A'ell informed that we can do nothing more advantageous for the propagation of the faith, and for the establishment of the christian religion in our states of New France, and wishing ta treat the said memorialists favorably, we have per- mitted, and do by these presents signed by our hand, permit them to erect a community and Seminary of ecclesiastics in the said Island of Montreal there to at- tend, according to their intentions, conformably to the holy councils of the Church and the ordinances o£ 177 this Kingdom, to the conversion attd instruction of our subjects, and to pray God for us and our successors Kings, and for the peace of the church and of our state ; and the more to facilitate the said establish- ment, we hav