should bear the name of Frontenac; their prayer was granted, and by a resolution moved on 9th May, 1879, by Mr. P. Johnson, C.C., and seconded by Alderman Rhéaume, the five kiosks of Dufferin Terrace were named _Victoria, Louise, Lorne, Frontenac, Plessis_.
It is the site of the present Normal School, adjacent to this historic spot, which has been selected for the palatial hotel in contemplation.
LAYING OF CORNER STONE OF DUFFERIN TERRACE
“The laying of the corner stone of Dufferin Terrace took place the same day (18th Oct., 1878) as that of the two city gates, the St. Louis and the Kent Gate. The ceremony was performed in the presence of thousands. His Worship the Mayor (R. Chambers) received His Excellency the Earl of Dufferin, and with him were present many of the Aldermen and Councillors, with the City Engineer and contractors, the members of the Judiciary, Consul-General of Spain, Consuls of France, Belgium and the United States, Dean Stanley, of London, England; Mrs. Stevenson, sister to the Countess of Dufferin, Messrs. Russell Stevenson, R. R. Dobell, Simon Peters, Dr. Marsden, Jas. Motz, many ex-Aldermen and ex-Councillors, Alexander Woods, Chairman of the Harbour Commission, W. S. Desbarats, W. G. Sheppard, Wm. White, Very Revd. H. Hamel, His Lordship Judge Taschereau, late of the Supreme Court, Hon. Judge H. Taschereau, Judge of the Superior Court, &c.
“A handsome trowel and mallet were handed to His Excellency the manufacture of Mr. Cyrille Duquet. On the face of the trowel a splendid likeness of the Governor-General was embossed, and an appropriate inscription was engraved thereon. On the plate of the foundation stone the inscription reads as follows:–“Dufferin Terrace, laid by His Excellency the Earl of Dufferin, Governor-General of the Dominion of Canada, on the 18th day of October, 1878, in presence of the Dominion and city authorities and dignitaries, and an immense concourse of people from all parts of Canada, also His Honor Luc Letellier de St. Just, Lieut.-Governor of the Province of Quebec, R. Chambers, Esq., Mayor of the city of Quebec. City Aldermen–Hon. John Hearn, Patrick Henchey, Louis Bourget, R. F. Rinfret, Francois Gingras, J. P. Rhéaume, Germain Guay, F. O. Vallerand, Esqs. City Councillors–Onésime Beaubien, Andrew Hatch, Guillaume Bouchard, F. X. Langevin, Jean Docile Brosseau, Francis McLaughlin, John C. Burns, William McWilliam, William Convey, J. F. Peachy, John Delaney, F. W. Roy, Peter Johnston, Willis Russell, Charles Brochu, Richard Turner, Esqs. City Clerk–L. A. Cannon, Esq. City Treasurer–C. J. L. Lafrance, Esq. City Accountant–M. F. Walsh, Esq. City Legal Adviser– L. G. Baillairge, Esq. City Notary–A. G. Tourangeau, Esq. Owen Murphy, Esq., ex-Mayor; Chas. Baillairge, Chevalier, City Engineer.” In the leaden box, placed within the stone, were laid mementoes of the occasion, similar to those placed in the proper receptacle in the stone laid in the morning at St. Louis Gate, with the addition of beautifully executed portraits of Lord and Lady Dufferin, from the studio of Messrs. Ellison & Co.
“His Excellency having given the _coup de grâce_ to the foundation stone with the silver mallet, the proceedings were closed.”– (_Morning Chronicle_, 19th Oct., 1878.)
The new city gate erected on the site of the old St. Louis Gate, instead of being called Dufferin Grate, as it had been contemplated, was allowed to retain its time-honored name, St. Louis Gate; the public of Quebec, however, were resolved that some conspicuous monument should recall to Quebecers the fragrant memory of its benefactor, Lord Dufferin; on the visit in June, 1879, of His Excellency Lord Lorne and H.R.H. the Princess Louise, a request was made on them by the citizens, through their chief executive officer, the Mayor of Quebec (R. Chambers), to name and open to the public our world-famous Terrace. On the 9th June, 1879, our distinguished visitors performed this auspicious ceremony in presence of thousands, and in the following words confirmed the name previously entered in the Corporation records:–
_INAUGURATION OF DUFFERIN TERRACE, 9th JUNE, 1879._
“According to notice previously given, the inauguration of Dufferin Terrace occurred at half-past two o’clock in the afternoon. When that hour arrived a mass of people variously estimated at from eight to fifteen thousand, but probably containing about ten thousand, occupied the Terrace. The appearance from an elevated place of this sea of humanity was indeed wonderful. The band pavilion in the centre of the garden had been reserved for the Viceregal party, and was covered in carpet and scarlet cloth, with two chairs of state. The entrance to the pavilion was kept by the City Police, while “B” Battery furnished the band and guard of honour, and played the National Anthem as the distinguished party arrived on the field.
The Mayor and members of the City Council had previously walked in a body to the pavilion from the City Hall, and now His Worship conducted His Excellency and Her Royal Highness to the dais, and addressing himself to the Governor-General, said:–
“MAY IT PLEASE YOUR EXCELLENCY.–On behalf of the Corporation and citizens of Quebec, permit me to thank Your Excellency for acceding to our request that you would be pleased to open in person this public promenade, and also Her Royal Highness for graciously honouring us by her presence.
“The corner stone of this structure was laid by Your Excellency’s predecessor, the Earl of Dufferin (18th Oct., 1878).
“It will be gratifying to the noble Lord to learn that the work in which he took so lively an interest has been inaugurated by Your Excellency, and that the ceremony was graced by the presence of Her Royal Highness the Princess Louise.
“I have, therefore, respectfully to request that Your Excellency may be pleased to give the name which the Terrace is henceforth to bear, and to signify if it is the pleasure of Your Excellency that it be opened to the public.”
His Excellency replied:–“I am happy to accede to your request to signify that this Terrace shall be called after your late Governor- General, Dufferin, and that it is now open to the public.”
Rounds of applause followed His Excellency’s remarks, and loud cheers were given for the Earl of Dufferin, Her Royal Highness and His Excellency.” (_Morning Chronicle_, 10th June, 1879.)
Parallel with Ste. Anne street, and terminated by Dauphin street, a tortuous, rugged little lane, now known as St. Andrew’s street, leads past St Andrew’s schoolhouse, to the chief entrance of the Presbyterian house of worship; a church opened at the beginning of the century, repaired and rendered quite handsome a few years ago, but much damaged by fire on the 30th April, 1881. In connection with the erection of this structure, a document was recently exhumed from the archives of the Literary and Historical Society, which throws much light on an important section of the former population of the city. It is a memorial to His Majesty George III., signed at Quebec on the 5th October, 1802, by the Rev. Dr Sparks’ congregation and by himself. The first incumbent of St. Andrew’s Church– commenced in 1809, and opened for worship on the 30th November, 1810–was the Reverend Doctor Alexander Sparks, who had landed at Quebec in 1780, became tutor in the family of Colonel Henry Caldwell at Belmont, St. Foye road, and who died suddenly in Quebec, on the 7th March, 1819. Dr. Sparks had succeeded to the Rev. George Henry, a military chaplain at the time of the conquest; the first Presbyterian minister, we are told, who officiated in the Province, and who died on the 6th July, 1795, aged 86 years.
One hundred and forty-eight signatures are affixed to this dusty document of 1802.
A carefully prepared petition–it seems–to the King, asking for a site in Quebec whereon to build a church–and suggesting that the lot occupied by the Jesuits’ Church, and where until 1878, stood the Upper Town, market shambles, be granted to the petitioners, they being without a church, and having to trust to the good will of the government for the use, on Sundays, of a room in the Jesuits Barracks, as a place of worship. [42]
_Signatures to Memorial addressed to George III., asking for land in Quebec to build a Presbyterian Church_:–
Alex. Sparks, Minister, A. Ferguson, Jas. Thompson, Jr., Robert Eglison, Fred. Grant, Robt. Cairns,
Jno. Greenshields, William A. Thompson, Chas. G. Stewart, Wm. McWhirter, James Sinclair, John McDonald, John Urquhart, John Auld,
William Morrin, Bridget Young, Jno. Eifland, Jno. Shaw,
John Barlie, Charles Hunter, Geo. McGregor, Geo. Black,
Wm. Holmes, W. G. Hall, James Ward, J. Gray,
Jno. Purss, F. Leslie, Ann Watt, Robt. Wood,
J. Brydon, Lewis Harper, Jno. Frazer, Mary Boyle,
James Somerville, A. Anderson, J. A. Thompson, John Anderson, Wm. Hall, Robt. Ross,
Wm. Thompson, Sr., Wm. Fraser, D. Monroe, Wm. Hay,
J. Blackwood, Wm. McKay, M. Lymburner, Robt. Harrower, Francis Hunter, James Tulloch, W. Rouburgh, Samuel Brown,
John McCord, Isaac Johnstone, J. G. Hanna, Peter Leitch,
J. McNider, Henry Baldwin, Adam Lymburner, Daniel Forbes, Jno. Lynd, William Jaffray, Peter Stuart, J. Hendry,
William Grant, John Thompson, J. A. Todd, George Smith,
John Mure, Wm. Reed,
John Patterson, Alexander Harper, John Crawford, Robert Marshall, John Hewison, William White, David Douglas, Thomas White, George Wilde, John Taylor,
Fred. Petry, Adam Reid, James Ross, James Irvine,
David Stewart, John Munro, John Yule, Alexander Munn, Angus McIntyre, Alexander Rea, John Mackie, James Elmslie, John Purss. Johnston, Charles Smith, Wm. Thompson, Jr., Ebenezer Baird, Con. Adamson, Lawrence Kidd, Geo. Morrison, James McCallum, Jno. Goudie, John Burn,
G. Sinclair, Joanna George, Walter Carruthers, Maya Darling, Wm. Petrie, William Lindsay, John Ross, Janet Smith,
Wm. McKenzie, William Smith, Thos. Saul, Henrietta Sewell, J. Ross, Jr., Jane Sewell,
Ann Rose, C. W. Grant, James Mitchell, Robert Ritchie, Geo. King, George Pyke,
Alex. Thompson, Joseph Stilson, James Orkney, Henry Hunt,
J. Neilson, George Thompson, Daniel Fraser,
Quebec, 5th October, 1802.
Some of these signatures are suggestive. The most notable is probably that of old Adam Lymburner, the cleverest of the three Lymburners, all merchants at Quebec in 1775. [43] Adam, according to the historian Garneau, was more distinguished for his forensic abilities and knowledge of constitutional law, than for his robust allegiance to the Hanoverian succession at Quebec, when Colonel Benedict Arnold and his New Englanders so rudely knocked at our gates for admission in 1775.
According to Garneau and other historians, in the autumn of that memorable year, when the fate of British Canada hung as if by a thread, Adam Lymburner, more prudent than loyal, retired from the sorely beset fortress to Charlesbourg, possibly to Château Bigot, a shooting box then known as the “Hermitage,” to meditate on the mutability of human affairs. Later on, however, in the exciting times of 1791, Adam Lymburner was deputed by the colony to England to suggest amendment’s to the project of the constitution to be promulgated by the home authorities. His able speech may be met with in the pages of the _Canadian Review_, published at Montreal in 1826. This St Peter street magnate attained four score and ten years, and died at Russell Square, London, on the 10th January, 1836.
Another signature recalls days of strife and alarm: that of sturdy old Hugh McQuarters, the brave artillery sergeant who, at _Près-de-Ville_ on that momentous 31st December, 1775, applied the match to the cannon which consigned to a snowy shroud Brigadier-General Richard Montgomery, his two _aides_, McPherson and Cheeseman, and his brave, but doomed followers, some eleven in all; the rest having sought safety in flight. By this record, it appears Sergeant McQuarters had also a son, in 1802, one of Dr Sparks’ congregation. Old Hugh McQuarters lived in Champlain street, and closed his career there in 1812.
Another autograph, that of James Thompson, one of Wolfe’s comrades–“a big giant,” as our old friend, the late Judge Henry Black, who knew him well, used to style him, awakens many memories of the past. Sergeant James Thompson, of Fraser’s Highlanders, at Louisbourg in 1758, and at Quebec in 1759, came from Tain, Scotland, to Canada, as a volunteer to accompany a friend-Capt. David Baillie, of the 78th. His athletic frame, courage, integrity and intelligence, during the seventy-two years of his Canadian career, brought him employment, honour, trust and attention from every Governor of the colony from 1759 to 1830, the period of his death, he was then aged 98 years. At the battle of the Plains of Abraham, James Thompson, as hospital sergeant, was intrusted with the landing, at Point Levi, of the wounded, who were crossed over in boats; he tells us of his carrying some of the wounded from the crossing at Levi, up the hill, all the way to the church at St. Joseph, converted into an hospital, and distant three miles from the present ferry, a “big giant” alone could have been equal to such a task. In 1775, Sergeant Thompson, as overseer of Government works, was charged with erecting the palisades, fascines and other primitive contrivances to keep out Brother Jonathan, who had not yet learned the use of Parrot or Gatling guns and torpedoes. Later on, we find the sturdy Highlander an object of curiosity to strangers visiting Quebec –full of siege anecdotes and reminiscences–a welcome guest at the Château in the days of the Earl of Dalhousie. In 1827, as senior Mason, he was called on by His Excellency to give the three mystic taps with the mallet, when the corner stone of the Wolfe and Montcalm monument was laid, in the presence of Captain Young of the 79th Highlanders, and a great concourse of citizens. About New Year’s day, 1776, Mr. Thompson became possessed of Gen. Montgomery’s sword; it has since passed to his grandson, James Thompson Harrower. Mr. James Thompson left several sons, some of whose signatures are affixed to the document before us. John Gawler was Judge for the District of Gaspé from 1828 to 1865; George received a commission in the Royal Artillery; a third was Deputy Commissary General James Thompson, who died in this city in 1869.
Old James Thompson expired in 1830, at the family mansion, St. Ursule street, now occupied by his grandson, Mr. James Thompson Harrower.
When we name John Greenshields, D. Munro (the partner of the Hon. Matthew Bell), J. Blackwood, Matthew Lymburner, Peter Stuart, William Grant, John Mure, John McNider, J. G. Hanna, John Crawford, David Stewart (the David Stewart of “Astoria” described by Washington Irving?) James Orkney, Robert Wood, Alexander Munn, James McCallum, Thomas White, Fred. Petrie, Robert Ritchie, we recall many leading merchants in St. Peter street, Notre Dame street and the old _Cul-de-Sac_.
“Ebenezer Baird,” we take to have been the progenitor of a well-remembered Quebec Barrister, James E. Baird, Esq., the patron of our city member, Jacques Malouin, Esquire.
George Pyke, a Halifax barrister, had settled here. He rose to occupy a seat on the judicial bench.
Robert Harrower, was doubtless the father of Messrs. Robert, David and Charles Harrower, of Trois Saumons, County of L’Islet. Honorable James Irvine, in 1818, a member of the Legislative Council, was the grandfather of the Hon. G. Irvine, of this city. The Hon. John Jones Ross, the present Speaker of the Legislative Council, Quebec, traces back to the “James Ross” of 1802, and the Hon. David Alex. Ross claims for his sire that sturdy Volunteer of 1759, under Wolfe, “John Ross,” who made a little fortune; he resided at the house he purchased in 1765, near Palace Gate within. He held a commission as a Captain in the British Militia in 1775, under Colonel Le Maitre; we can recollect his scarlet uniform which he wore in 1775, also worn in 1875, by his grandson, our worthy friend, Hon. D. A. Ross, at the ball of the Centenary of the repulse of Brigadier- General Richard Montgomery, 31st December, 1775. He had three sons, David was Solicitor-General at Quebec; John was a lawyer also, and Prothonotary at Quebec (the signer of the memorial of 1802); the third died young; of three daughters, one was married to the Rev. Doctor Sparks, already mentioned; a second was married to Mr. James Mitchell, A.C.G., and the third to an army surgeon. John Ross, Sr., died at an advanced age. Charles Grey Stewart, our Comptroller of Customs died in 1854; he was the father of Messrs. McLean, Charles, Alexander, Robert and John Stewart, of Mrs. William Price, of Mrs. William Phillips, of the Misses Ann and Eleanor Stewart.
“Joanna George” the mother of an aged contemporary, Miss Elizabeth George, and of [44] Miss Agnes George, the widow of the late Arch. Campbell, Esq., N.P., and grandmother of the present President of the St. Andrew’s Society, W. Darling Campbell, died about 1830.
“Maya Darling” was another daughter, and wife of Capt. Darling. “John Burn,” also one of the signers of the Memorial, and who afterwards settled in Upper Canada, was the son of “Joanna George” by another marriage; the eccentric and clever Quebec merchant, Mr. James George, was another son. He was the first who suggested in 1822, a plan of the St. Charles River Docks–the first who took up the subject of rendering the St. Lawrence Rapids navigable higher than Montreal. The idea seemed so impracticable, and what was still worse, so new, that the far-seeing Mr. George, was at the time branded as _non compos_! and still for years the “Spartan,” “Passport,” “Champion” and other steamers have safely ran these rapids daily every season!
James George had also suggested the practicability of Wooden Railways or Tramways, with horses as locomotive power, forty years before the Civil Engineer Hulburt built the Gosford Wooden Railway, with steam as locomotive power.
“William Grant, of St. Roch’s, after whom Grant street was called, was member for the Upper Town of Quebec, during our two first Parliaments, from 17th December, 1792, to 29th May, 1800, and from 9th January, 1805, to period of his death at St. Roch in 1805. An enterprising and important personage was the Hon. Wm. Grant, the Receiver General of the Province in 1770. He had married the widow of the third Baron de Longueuil.
“John Mure” represented the County of York (Vaudreuil) in three Parliaments, from 9th January, 1805, to 26th February, 1810, and was member for the Upper Town of Quebec, from 1810 to 1814. A man of intelligence, he also, though a Presbyterian, became a benefactor to the R. C. Church, having, in 1812, given to the R. C. parishioners of St. Roch’s, a site whereon to erect their church in that thriving suburb.
“John Blackwood” also represented the Upper Town in two Parliaments, from 9th April, 1809, to 20th February, 1810.
“Jane Sewell” was the wife of Stephen Sewell, Solicitor-General of Lower Canada, brother to Chief Justice Sewell.
“Henrietta Sewell,” one of the signers, survived ten years her husband, the late Jonathan Sewell, Chief Justice for Lower Canada, who died in Quebec in 1839. Chief Justice Sewell left a numerous progeny. [45]
“William Lindsay” was the father of the late William Burns Lindsay, for years Clerk of the Legislative Assembly of Lower Canada, and of our venerable fellow-citizen, Errol Boyd Lindsay, Esq., Notary Public, now more than four score years of age; he seems to have taken his surname from Capt. Errol Boyd, in 1798, commander of the well remembered Quebec and Montreal trader, the “Dunlop.”
“William Smith,” one of the last among the signers of the memorial, the brother of Henrietta Smith, wife of Chief Justice Sewell, was the Hon. William Smith, Clerk of the Legislative Council, and who, in 1815, published his _History of Canada_, in two volumes, a standard work; he was a descendant of the Hon. William Smith, a noted U. E. Loyalist, who wrote the history of the State of New York, and landed at Quebec, 23rd October, 1786. As a reward for his loyalty he had been made Chief Justice of Lower Canada, 1st September, 1785; he died at Quebec, 6th December, 1793.
The names of six signers of the _Memorial to the King_, appear on the list of the jury empanelled to try, in 1797, before Chief Justice Osgood, David McLane for high treason, viz.: John Blackwood, John Crawford, David Munro, John Mure, James Irvine, James Orkney. George Pyke was the Counsel named _ex officio_, together with M. Franklin, to defend the misguided Yankee.
The Jury stood thus;–
John Blackwood, James Irvine, John Crawford, James Orkney,
John Painter, James Watson Goddard, David Monro, Henry Cull,
John Mure, Robert Morrogh, John Jones, George Symes.
Parloir street, well leavened with lawyers, leads to the _parloir_ of the Ursulines. Here resided the late Judge de Bonne, at the dawn of the present century. The locality is alive with memories of this venerable seat of education, and with saintly and heroic traditions of Madame de la Peltrie, Mère de l’Incarnation–Montcalm. “There exists,” says the Abbé Casgrain, “in the Ursuline Nunnery, a small picture, which portrays a touching tradition of the early days of Canada: a painting executed by a Canadian artist, from old etchings, preserved in the monastery. * * The canvas represents the forest primeval, which mantled the promontory of Quebec, at the birth of the Colony. In the centre of the picture may be seen, amidst the maples and tall pines, the first monastery, founded in 1641 by Madame de la Peltrie. On its front stands forth in perspective the dwelling which the founder had erected for her own use, three years later on. The area comprised between these two edifices, is occupied by a clearing, surrounded by a palisade, whereon are seen grazing a flock of sheep. On the left side of the picture a broad avenue leads through the forest:–the _Grand Allée_–later on St. Louis street, which leads to the village of Sillery. Two horsemen, habited à la Louis XIV, meet on this avenue, the one Monsieur d’Ailleboust, the Governor of the Colony, the other is Monsieur DuPlessis Bochard, the Governor of Three Rivers. In the midst of their interview, they are interrupted by an Indian Chief, who offers them a beaver skin. A few steps from her residence, Madame de la Peltrie is standing close to another Indian Chief, who, with head inclined, seems in the attitude of listening to her in the most respectful manner, whilst she, dignified and composed, is expounding to him the sacred truths of faith. This scene presents an admirable contrast, with another taking place close by; an Indian warrior is seen giving, imperiously, his orders to a squaw,–his wife mayhap–but who, from her downcast and humble look, seems more like his slave. A short distance from this group, a missionary, (Father Jérôme Lalemant) after visiting some wigwams, erected around the house of Madame de la Peltrie, is threading a narrow path leading to the depths of the forest. The most attractive feature about the painting is a group of young children, listening attentively to the teachings of a nun, seated on the right, under the shade of an ash tree. The impression created by this antique painting, is the more delightful and vivid, because on turning one’s gaze, at present, from the picture, to the interior of the cloister, may still be seen the hoary head of an old ash tree, under which tradition shows us the venerable _Mother de l’Incarnation_, catechising the Indian children and teaching the young girls of the colony.” [46] After more than two centuries of existence, the old ash tree succumbed lately to a storm.
Laval, Attorney-General Ruette D’Auteuil, Louis de Buade, Ste. Hélène () seem to come back to life in the ancient streets of the same name, whilst Frontenac, Iberville, Piedmont, are brought to one’s recollection, in the modern thoroughfares. The old Scotch pilot, Abraham Martin, (who according to the _Jesuits’ Journal_, might have been a bit of a scamp, although a church chorister, but who does not appear to have been tried for his peccadiloes,) owned a domain of thirty-two acres of land in St. John’s suburbs, which were bounded towards the north, by the hill which now bears his name (_La Côte d’Abraham_.)
Mythology has exacted a tribute on a strip of ground in the St. Louis suburbs. The chief of the pagan Olympus boasts of his lane, “Jupiter street,” so called after a celebrated inn, Jupiter’s Inn, on account of a full sized statue of the master of Olympus which stood formerly over the main entrance. In the beginning of the century, a mineral spring, of wondrous virtue, attracted to this neighbourhood, those of our _bon vivants_ whose livers were out of order. Its efficacy is now a thing of the past!
That dear old street,–St. George street formerly,–now called after the first settler of the Upper Town in 1617, _Louis Hébert_, by the erection of the lofty Medical College and Laval University, for us has been shorn of its name–its sunshine–its glory, since the home [47] of our youth, at the east end, has passed into strange hands. It is now _Hébert_ street, by order of the City council.
Opposite to the antique and still stately dwelling, lately owned by Jos. Shehyn, M.P.P., is a house formerly tenanted by Mr. J. Dyke. In the beginning of this century it was occupied by an old countryman, remarkable, if not for deep scientific attainments, at least for shrewd common sense and great success in life–Mr. P. Paterson, the proprietor of the extensive mills at Montmorency–now owned by the estate of the late George Benson Hall, his son-in-law.
Peter Paterson, about 1790, left Whitby, England, to seek his fortune in Canada. His skill as a ship builder–his integrity of character and business habits, pointed him out as a fit agent–later on as a partner in a wealthy Baltic firm of London merchants who still have representatives in the colony. At the time of Napoleon’s continental blockade, the English Government, seeing that the Baltic was closed for the supply of timber for the navy, gave out a large contract to Messrs. Henry and John Usborne–of London–for masts and oak. Usborne & Co., employed Mr. P. Paterson to dress and ship this timber. A timber limit license, of portentous import, authorizing the cutting of oak and masts for the navy in all British North America, was issued. Under authority of this license, Mr. Paterson partly denuded the shores of Lake Champlain as well as the Thousand Islands, of their fine oak. Mr. Paterson was the first to float oak in rafts to Quebec. He built a large mill at Montmorency, having exchanged his St. George street house for the mill site at Montmorency. His mills have since attained to great importance.
In the rear of (St. George–now) Hébert street loom out the lofty walls of the Laval University, which received its Royal Charter in 1852. [48]
_THE LAVAL UNIVERSITY._
The main edifice is 298 feet in length, five stories high; a plain, massive structure of cut-stone, much improved in appearance since the addition, in 1876, of the present superstructure, which relieves the unbroken monotony of its form. The work is a great ornament not only to the immense building itself, but to the city. The task of designing the superstructure was entrusted to the taste and talent of J. F. Peachy, architect. The superstructure is in the French mansard roof style, with handsome cupolas on the east and west ends, surmounted with flag-staffs and weather vanes. In the centre towers a dome far above all, surmounted by a gilt-iron cross in the modern Grecian style–the upright shaft and arms being formed at four right angles. The crown ornaments on the centre top and ends of the arms are all of wrought iron and weigh about 700 lbs. The base is strongly braced and bolted to an oak shaft, secured to the truss work of the dome so firmly as to resist the fiercest gale of wind or any other powerful strain. It is 11 feet six inches in height and the arms are 7 feet six inches across. Mr. Philip Whitty, iron worker and, machinist, of St. James street, was the builder of this cross, and its handsome design and solidity reflect credit upon his taste and workmanship. We believe that it is intended to have a picture gallery in the superstructure under the central dome. The entire roof is strongly trussed and braced with iron bolts. This portion of the work was done under the superintendence of Mr. Marcou. We understand that it is also the intention to erect two balconies on the eastern end, fronting the St. Lawrence–these balconies to be supported by Corinthian columns. From the base to the present superstructure, the building was originally 80 feet high; it now stands 202 feet high from the base to the top of the cross on the central dome.
In 1880, another important addition, involving a heavy outlay, was planned. A lofty wing, 265 feet in length has been added to this imposing pile of buildings; it covers a large area in the seminary garden and connects on each story with the main structure, from which it stands out at right angles. Both buildings are intended to form but one, and seen from Levi or from the River St. Lawrence, it looks like an extension of the Laval University itself. The edifice is fireproof, its internal division walls are of brick, its rafters of iron; the floors are brick lined with deals as a preventive against dampness. The iron rafters were wrought at Lodelinsart, near Charleroi, Belgium; they weigh 400 tons, and cost laid down 1-1/2 cent per lb.
The basement and the ceiling of the first flat are vaulted over. The refectory takes up a whole wing of the first story. The masonry of the upper corridors rests on eighteen cast iron columns, weighing 3,000 lbs. each. The ceiling of the refectory is exceedingly strong and handsome; every story, in fact, is vaulted from top to bottom.
A corridor eight feet wide and two hundred and sixty-five feet long, intersects the centre of each story. All the vestibules, corridors and passages are paved with ceramic square blocks brought from Belgium.
The most notable part of the structure is the main staircase, entirely of iron and stone; it contains 120 steps 8 feet long, 16 feet broad, 5 inches high, each step hewn out of a single block. The iron material weighs about 37,000 lbs. There is also another flight of steps made of iron. A hydraulic elevator in the centre of the building will provide an easy access to every story.
The roofed galleries, eight feet wide, attached to each story on the front, present promenades and views unrivaled in the city looking towards Levi and the Island of Orleans. On a large stone or the loftiest part of the front wall, over the window, is inscribed– _Conditum_, 1880.
The arch of the entrance to the Court House burnt in 1872, which, it was said, had formed part of the old Récollet Church, destroyed by fire on 6th Sept., 1796, has been used to build the arch of the porch which leads from the seminary garden to the farm-yard in rear. There are 230 windows in this new wing which has a mansard roof. It is computed that 4,000,000 bricks have been employed in the masonry. The architect is J. F. Peachy.
_STAFF OF THE LAVAL UNIVERSITY IN 1881._
Rector, Revd. Ed. Méthot,–Superior of Quebec Seminary. Professor of Commercial and Maritime Law,–Hon. Napoleon Casault, J.S.C.
Professor of Civil Procedure,–Hon. Ulric J. Tessier, J.Q.B. Professor of Civil Law, etc.,–Hon. Chas. Thos. A. Langelier. Professor of Roman Law,–Hon. Ed. James Flynn. Professor of Commercial Law,–Hon. Richard Alleyn, J.S.C. Secretary,–Thos. Chase Casgrain, Barrister. Professor of Internal Pathology,–Dr. Jas. Arthur Sewell, M.D. Professor of External Pathology,–Dr. J. E. Landry, M.D. Professor of Toxicology, etc.,–Dr. Alfred Jackson, M.D. Professor of Descriptive Anatomy,–Dr. Eusèbe Lemieux, M.D. Professor of Medical Jurisprudence,–Dr. H. A. LaRue, M.D. Professor of General Pathology,–Dr. Simard, M.D. Professor of Materia Medica, etc.,–Dr. Chas. Verge, M.D. Professor of Practical Anatomy, etc.,–Dr. Laurent Cattelier, M.D. Professor of Clinical–Children’s Diseases,–Dr. Arthur Vallée, M.D. Professor of Clinical–Old People’s Diseases,–Dr. Michael Ahern, M.D. Professor of Comparative Zoology, Anatomy and Physiology,–Dr. L. J. A. Simard, M.D.
Professor of Political Economy,–Hon. C. T. A. Langelier. Professor of Physical Science,–Rev. Mr. Laflamme. Professor of French Literature,–Rev. Ed. Méthot. Professor of Greek Literature,–Rev. L. Baudet. Professor of Mineralogy,–Rev. J. C. Laflamme. Professor of Natural Law,–Mgr. Beng. Paquet. Professor of Dogmatic Theology,–Rev. L. H. Paquet. Professor of Ecclesiastical History, Rev. L. N. Begin.
On the conspicuous site where stands the unpretending brick structure known as our present House of Parliament, (which succeeded to the handsome cut stone edifice destroyed by fire in 1864) one might, in 1660, have seen the dwelling of a man of note, Ruette d’Auteuil. D’Auteuil became subsequently Attorney General and had lively times with that sturdy old ruler, Count de Frontenac. Ruette d’Auteuil had sold the lot for $600 (3,000 livres de 20 sols) to Major Provost, who resold it, with the two story stone house thereon erected, for $3,000, to Bishop de St. Vallier. The latter having bequeathed it to his ecclesiastical successor, Bishop Panet ceded it in the year 1830 to the Provincial Government for an annual ground rent of £1,000–this rent is continued to the Archbishop by the Provincial Government of Quebec. No one now cares to enquire how Bishop Panet made such an excellent bargain, though a cause is assigned.
Palace Street was thus denominated from its leading direct from the Upper Town to the Intendant’s Palace–latterly the King’s woodyard. In earlier days it went by the name of _Rue des Pauvres_, [49] (Street of the Poor,) from its intersecting the domain of the _Hôtel Dieu_, whose revenues were devoted to the maintenance of the poor sheltered behind its massive old walls. Close by, on Fabrique street, Bishop de St. Vallier had founded _le Bureau des Pauvres_, where the beggars of Quebec (a thriving class to this day) received alms, in order to deter them from begging in the country round the city. The success which crowned this humble retreat of the mendicant led the philanthropic Bishop to found the General Hospital in the Seigneurie de Notre Dame des Anges, beyond St. Roch. He received there nuns of the Convents of the Ursulines and of the Hôtel Dieu and gave them the administration of the newly founded establishment, where, moreover, he at a more recent date resided as almoner of the poor.
At the western corner of Palace and St. John streets, has stood since 1771, a well known landmark erected to replace the statue of Saint John the Baptist, which had, under the French _régime_, adorned the corner house. After the surrender of Quebec to the British forces, the owners of the house, fearing the outer barbarians might be wanting in respect to the saint’s effigy, sent it to the General Hospital, where it stood over the principal entrance until a few years back. They replaced it by a wooden statue of General Wolfe, sculptured by the Brothers Cholette, at the request of George Hipps, a loyal butcher. The peregrinations of this historic relic, in 1838, from Quebec to Halifax–from Halifax to Bermuda, thence to Portsmouth, and finally to its old niche at Wolfe’s corner, St. John Street, whilst they afforded much sport to the middies of H. M. Ship _Inconstant_, who visited our port that summer and carried away the General, were the subject of several newspaper paragraphs in prose and verse.
Finally, the safe return of the “General” with a brand new coat of paint and varnish in a deal box, consigned to His Worship, the Mayor of Quebec sent by unknown hands, was made an occasion of rejoicing to every friend of the British hero whom Quebec contained, and they were not few.
Some of the actors of this practical joke, staunch upholders of Britannia’s sovereignty of the sea, now pace the quarter deck, t’is said, proud and stern admirals.
The street and hill leading down from the parochial Church, (whose title was _Cathedral of the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary_,) to the outlet, where Hope Gate was built in 1786, was called Ste. Famille street from its vicinity to the Cathedral, which, as the parish church of the citizens of Quebec, was formerly called the Ste. Famille Church. On the east side, half way up the hill still exist the ruins of the old homestead of the Seigneurs de Léry–in 1854, occupied by Sir E. P. Taché, since, sold to the Quebec Seminary. A lofty fence on the street hides from view the hoary old poplar trees which of yore decked the front of the old manor. On the opposite side, a little higher up, also survives the old house of Mr. Jean Langevin, father of the Bishop of Rimouski, and of Sir H. L. Langevin. Here in the closing days of French Dominion lived the first Acadian, who brought to Quebec the news of the dispersion of his compatriots, so eloquently sung by Longfellow, Dr. Lajus, of French extraction, who settled at Quebec and married a sister of Bishop Hubert. On the northern angle of this old tenement you now read “_Ste. Famille_ street.”
St. Stanislas street, the western boundary of the ancient estate of the Jesuits–on the eastern portion of which their college was built in 1637– owes its saintly nomenclature to the learned order–no doubt desirous of handing down to posterity an enduring souvenir of a valiant ascetic, though youthful member of the fraternity. Its northern end reaches at right angles to Ste. Hélène street in a line with the old tenement recently occupied by the late Narcisse Constantin Faucher, Esq., Barrister–recently leased by the late Lieut.-Col. John Sewell, one of Sir Isaac Brock’s officers at Queenstown Heights in 1812 In 1835 it was the home of a Mrs. Montgomery. That year it was burglarized in a somewhat romantic–shall we say–humane manner by Chambers’ murderous gang; the aged and demure mistress of the house and her young maid servant being rolled up in the velvety pleats of the parlor carpet and deposited gently, tenderly and unharmed in the subterranean and discreet region of the cellar, so that the feelings of either should not be lacerated by the sight of the robbery going on above stairs.
Who will dare assert that among the sanguinary crew who in 1836, heavily ironed, bid adieu to Quebec forever, leaving their country for their country’s good–in the British Brig _Ceres_, all bound as permanent settlers to Van Dieman’s Land–who will dare assert there was not some Jack Sheppard, with a tender spot in his heart towards the youthful _Briseis_ who acknowledged Mrs. Montgomery’s gentle sway.
A conspicuous landmark on St. Stanislas street is Trinity Chapel.
Of yore there stood in rear of the chapel the “Theatre Royal,” opened 15th February, [50] 1832, where the Siddons, Keans and Kembles held forth to our admiring fathers. Church and theatre both owed their birth to the late Chief Justice Sewell. The site of this theatre was purchased some years back by the ecclesiastical authorities of St Patrick Church. Thus disappeared the fane once sacred to Thespis and Melpomene, its fun-loving votaries, as such, knew it no more.
_TRINITY CHURCH._
The church of the “Holy Trinity,” St. Stanislas street, Quebec, was erected on a site which, judging from the discovery of a skeleton, when the foundations were laid, had been a cemetery.
The architecture of this church is Doric, and is considered correct both internally and externally. It is a substantial building of good proportions, 90 feet in length by 49 in breadth, is supplied with an organ and bell. It is commodious and capable of seating 700 persons. The sittings are free. It contains a beautiful marble monument, by Manning, of London, which was erected to the memory of the late Hon. Jonathan Sewell, LL.D., the founder of the church, also a few other tablets in memory of different members of the family of Sewell. The present incumbent and proprietor is the Rev. Edmund Willoughby Sewell, M.A., but it is confidently expected that ere long it will pass into the hands of an incorporated body, with whom the future presentment of the officiating clergyman will rest.
On a tin-plate on the corner-stone of the chapel, the following inscription occurs:
“Quebec, 15th September, 1824.
On Thursday was deposited in a private manner, under a stone at the north-east angle of the new Chapel of Ease to the English Cathedral, a tin plate having the following Latin inscription:
Anno Dm. Christi MDCCCXXIV Regnante Georgio Quarto, Britaniarum Rege Fidet Defensore Reverendissimo Patre in Deo Jacob Mountain S. T. P. Episcopo Quebecensi, Hanc Capellam, ad perpetuum honorem
Sacrosanctae Trinitatis, et in usum Fidelium Ecclesiae Anglican dedicatam Vir honorabilis Jonothan Sewell, Provinciae Canadae inferioris Judex Primarius, et Henrietta ejus uxor Adificaverunt
Edmundo Willoughby Sewell, clerico, uno de eorum filiis Capellano primo
G. BLAICKLOCK, _Architecto_ J. PHILIPS, _Conditore_
On the other side is the inscription on the monument:
IN MEMORY OF
JONATHAN SEWELL, LL.D.
The Pious and Liberal Founder of this Chapel. Endowed with talents of no common order He was selected in early life to fill the highest offices in this Province
He was appointed Solicitor General A.D. 1793, Attorney and Advocate General and Judge of the Court of Vice Admiralty, A.D. 1795, Chief Justice of the Province and Chairman of the Executive Council A.D. 1809. Speaker of the Legislative Council A.D. 1809. Distinguished in his public capacity, He shone equally conspicuous as a statesman and a jurist. Naturally mild and courteous, he combined the meekness of the Christian
with the authority of the Judge. Beloved at home as a kind father, a firm friend and an affectionate husband.
Respected abroad as an acknowledged example of truth, faithfulness and integrity;
He has left a name to which not only his descendants in all future ages, But his country may recur With just pride, deep reverence, and a grateful recollection. He was born in Boston, Mass., June 6th, 1766, and died in this city, in the Fulness of the Faith in Christ, November 13th, 1839 in the 74th year of his age This tribute to departed worth is erected by his sorrowing widow.”
The southern extreme of St. Stanislas street terminates at the intersection of Ste. Anne street, past the old jail, which dated from 1810. Lugubrious memories crowd round this massive tolbooth–of which the only traces of the past are some vaulted lock-up or cells beneath the rooms of the Literary and Historical Society, one of which, provided with a solid new iron door, is set apart for the reception of the priceless M.S.S. of the society. The oak flooring of the passages to the cells exhibit many initials, telling a tale of more than one guilty life–of remorse–let us hope, of repentance.
The narrow door in the wall and the iron balcony, over the chief entrance leading formerly to the fatal drop which cut short the earthly career of the assassin or burglar [51] was speedily removed when the directors of the Morrin College in 1870 purchased the building from Government to locate permanently the seat of learning due to the munificence of the late Joseph Morrin, M.D.
The once familiar inscription above the prison door, the rendering of which in English was a favourite amusement to many of the juniors of the High School, or Seminary, on their way to class, that also has disappeared:
“_Carcer iste bonos a pravis vindicare possit_!” May this prison teach the wicked for the edification of the good.”
The damp, vaulted cells in the basement, where the condemned felon in silence awaited his doom, or the airy wards above, where the impecunious debtor or the runaway sailor meditatively or riotously defied their traditional enemies the constable and policeman, now echo the Hebrew, Greek and Latin utterances of the Morrin College professors, and on meeting nights the disquisitions before the Literary and Historical Society, of lecturers on Canadian history, literature or art.
It is the glory and privilege of the latter institution in accordance with the object of its Royal Charter, to offer to citizens of all creeds and nationalities, a neutral ground, sacred to intellectual pursuits. It dates back to 1823, when His Excellency, George Ramsay, Earl of Dalhousie, assisted by the late Dr. John Charlton Fisher, LL.D., and ex-editor of the New York _Albion_, successfully matured a long meditated plan to promote the study of history and of literature. The Literary and Historical Society held its first meeting in the _Château St. Louis_. It is curious to glance over the list of names in its charter. [52] It contained the leading men on the Bench, in the professions, and in the city. In 1832 the library and museum occupied a large room in the Union building facing the Ring. From thence they were transferred to the upper story of the Parliament Buildings, on Mountain Hill, where a portion of both was destroyed by the conflagration which burnt down the stately cut-stone edifice in 1854, with the stone of which in 1860, the Champlain Market Hall was built. What was saved of the library and museum was transferred to apartments in St Louis street, then owned by the late George Henderson, J.P. [53] The next removal, about 1860, brought the institution to Masonic Hall, corner of Garden and St. Louis streets. Here, also, the fire-fiend assailed the treasures of knowledge and specimens of natural history, of the society, which, with its household gods, flitted down to a suite of rooms above the savings bank apartments in St. John Street, from whence, about 1870, it issued to become an annual tenant in the north wing of the Morrin College, where it has flourished ever since.
In the protracted and chequered existence of this pioneer among Canadian literary associations, one day, above all others is likely from the preparations–pageant and speeches which marked it, to be long remembered among Quebecers as a red letter day in the annals of the society. The celebration in December, 1875 of the centennial of the repulse of Brigadier General Richard Montgomery and Colonel Benedict Arnold, who, at dawn on the 31st December, 1775, attempted to take the old fortress by storm. The first, with a number of his followers, met with his death at Près-de-Ville, in Champlain street; the other was carried wounded in the knee, to the General Hospital, St. Roch’s suburbs, whilst 427 of his command were taken prisoners of war and incarcerated until September following in the Quebec Seminary, the Récollet Convent and the Dauphin Prison, since destroyed, but then existing, a little north of St. John’s Gate, inside. The worthy commander of the “B” Battery, Lieut.-Col. T. B. Strange, R.A., then stationed at the Citadel of Quebec, having consented to narrate the incidents which marked the attack of Brigadier General Richard Montgomery at Près-de-Ville (which we reserve for another page,) the description of Col. Benedict Arnold’s assault on the Sault-au-Matelot barriers, was, left to ourselves. We subjoin a portion of the address delivered by us at this memorable centenary. It embodies an important incident of Quebec history:
_ARNOLD’S ASSAULT ON SAULT-AU-MATELOT BARRIERS._
MR. CHAIRMAN, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN:
“The event which we intend commemorating this evening, is one at peculiar interest to us as Canadians, and more especially so to us as Quebecers, the narrow, I may say, the providential escape of the whole Province from foreign subjugation one century ago. It is less a chapter of Canadian annals I purpose to read to you this night, than some minute details little known, and gleaned from the journals left by eye witnesses of the thrilling hand to hand fight which took place a few hundred yards from where you sit, under our walls, on the 31st December, 1775, between Col. Arnold’s New England soldiery and our own garrison.
Possibly, you may not all realize the critical position of the city on that memorable morning. Next day, a Sunday, ushered in the new year. Think you there was much “visiting,” much festivity, on that new year’s day? alas! though victory crowned our banner, there was mourning in too many Canadian homes; we, too, had to bury our dead.
Let us take a rapid glimpse of what had proceeded the assault.
Two formidable parties, under experienced leaders, in execution of the campaign planned by George Washington and our former Deputy Post Master General, the able Benjamin Franklin, had united under the walls of Quebec. Both leaders intimately knew its highways and by-ways. Brigadier General Richard Montgomery, before settling near New York, had held a lieutenant’s commission in His Britannic Majesty’s 17th Foot, had taken part in the war of the conquest, in 1759, and had visited Quebec. Col. Benedict Arnold, attracted by the fame of our Norman horses, had more than once been in the city with the object of trading in them.
Benedict Arnold was indeed a daring commander. His successful journey through trackless forests between Cambridge and Quebec–his descent in boats through rivers choked with ice, and through dangerous rapids; the cold, hunger and exposure endured by himself and his soldiers, were feats of endurance of which any nation might justly feel proud.
Major-General Sir James Carmichael Smyth, a high authority on such matters, says of this winter campaign: “It is, perhaps, one of the most wonderful instances of perseverance and spirit upon record.” So much for the endurance and bravery of our foes. I am compelled to pass unnoticed many important incidents of the campaign in order to reach sooner the main facts.
What was the real state of the Colony on that identical 31st December, one hundred years ago? Why, it was simply desperate. The wave of invasion had surged over our border. Fort after fort, city after city, had capitulated–Ticonderoga, Crown Point, Fort St. John, Fort Chambly, Montreal, Sorel, Three Rivers. Montgomery with his victorious bands had borne everything before him like a tornado. The Canadian peasantry dreaded the very sight of warriors who must be ball-proof, as they were supposed, by a curious mistake, to be “incased in plate- iron,” _vêtus de tole_, instead _de toile_. [54] The red [54a] and black flag of successful rebellion floated over the suburbs of Quebec. Morgan’s and Humphries’ riflemen were thundering at the very gates of the city, those dear old walls–(loud applause)–which some Vandals are longing to demolish, alone kept away the wolf.
Levi, Sillery, Ste Foye, Lorette, Charlesbourg, the Island of Orleans, Beauport and every inch of British territory around the city were in possession of the invaders, every house in the suburbs sheltered an enemy–every bush in the country might conceal a deadly foe. Treachery stalked within the camp–disaffection was busy inside and outside of the walls. At first many of the citizens, English as well as French, seemed disinclined to take part in the great family quarrel which had originated at Boston–the British of New England pitted against the British of Canada. The confusion of ideas and opinions must at first have been great. Several old British officers who had served in the wars of the conquest of Canada, had turned their swords against their old messmates–their brothers-in-arms–amongst others, Richard Montgomery, Moses Hazen and Donald Campbell. Quebec, denuded of its regulars, had indeed a most gloomy prospect to look upon. No soldiers to man her walls except her citizens unaccustomed to warfare–no succour to expect from England till the following spring–scantiness of provisions and a terrified peasantry who had not the power, often no desire, to penetrate into the beleaguered city during winter.
Were not these trying times for our worthy sires?
Such was the posture of affairs, when to the general joy, our gallant Governor Guy Carleton, returned and rejoined his dauntless little army at Quebec, having succeeded, thanks to Captain Bouchette and other brave men, in eluding the vigilance of the enemy in possession of Three Rivers, Sorel and Montreal. Turn over the records of those days and yon will see the importance our fathers attached to the results of the Sault-au-Matelot and Près-de-Ville engagements.
For more than twenty-five years, the 31st December, 1775, was annually commemorated, generally by a club dinner given at Ferguson’s Hotel, (Freemasons’ Hall?) or at some other hotel of note–sometimes a Château ball was added by the Governor of the Province. In 1778, we find in the old _Quebec Gazette_, a grand _fête champêtre_, given by Lady Maria Carleton and her gallant partner Sir Guy, at the Red House, a fashionable rustic Hostelry, kept by Alex. Menut, the prince of Canadian _Soyers_ of those days, who had been _Maître d’Hôtel_ to General Murray, and selected that year by Their Excellencies. It stood on the Little River road, (the land is now owned by Mr. Tozer) about two miles from Quebec. It reads thus in the _Gazette_ of 8th January, 1778:
Quebec, 8th January, 1778._
“Yesterday, seventh night, being the anniversary of the victory obtained over the Rebels in their attack upon this City in the year 1775, a most elegant Ball and Supper were given at Menut’s Tavern by the Gentlemen who served in the Garrison during that Memorable Winter. The Company, consisting of upwards of two hundred and thirty Ladies and Gentlemen, made a grand and brilliant appearance, and nothing but mirth and good humour reigned all night long. About half-past six, His Excellency, Sir Guy Carleton, Knight of the Bath, our worthy Governor and Successful General, dressed in the militia uniform, (which added lustre to the Ribbon and Star) as were also all the gentlemen of that corps who served under him during the siege, entered the assembly room accompanied by Lady Maria, &c., &c., and the Ball was soon opened by her Ladyship and the Honorable Henry Caldwell, Lieutenant Colonel Commandant of the British Militia. The dancing continued until half- past twelve, when the Ladies were conducted into the supper room, where Mr. Menut exhibited fresh proofs of that superior excellence in the _culinary_ art he so justly claims above his Peers…. The company in general broke up about four in the morning, highly satisfied with their entertainment and in perfect good humour with one another. May that disposition prevail until the next and every succeeding 31st of December, and may each return of that glorious day (the event of which was not only the preservation of this garrison; but of the whole Province) be commemorated with the same spirit and unanimity in grateful remembrance of our happy deliverance from the snares of the enemy, and with grateful acknowledgements of those blessings of peace and tranquility of Government and Laws we now enjoy in consequence of that day’s success.”
The _Gazette_ of the following year carefully chronicles the gathering of the Veterans of 1775.–“Thursday last being the anniversary of the 31st December, a Day which will be ever famous in the annals of this country for the defeat of Faction and Rebellion, the same was observed with the utmost festivity In the evening a ball and cold Collation was given by the gentlemen who composed the Garrison in the winter of 1775, to His Excellency and a numerous and brilliant assembly of Ladies and Gentlemen, the satisfaction every one felt in Commemorating so Glorious an event, strongly appeared by the joy which was visible in every contenance.”
In 1790, according to the _Quebec Herald_, the annual dinner was held at the _Merchant’s Coffee House_, by about 30 survivors of the Veterans, who agreed to meet twice a year, instead of once, their joviality apparently increasing with their age.
In 1794, [55] the _Gazette_ acquaints us that the Anniversary Dinner was to be held at Ferguson’s Hotel, on the 6th May. [56] We find both nationalities fraternising in these loyal demonstrations. M. DeBonne (afterwards Judge DeBonne) taking his place next to loyal John Coffin, of Près-de-Ville fame, and probably Simon Fraser and the Hon. Hugh Finlay, will join Lieutenant Dambourgès and Col Dupré, in toasting King George III. under the approving eye of Lt. Col. Caldwell, Wolfe’s Deputy Quarter-Master General. Col. Caldwell, lived to a green old age, and expired in this city in 1810. Our esteemed fellow-citizen, Errol Boyd Lindsay, remembers him well, and in front of whom I stand, a stalwart Volunteer of 1837, Col. Gugy, is now relating how when a lad he once dined with Col. Caldwell, some seventy years ago, at Belmont, amidst excellent cheer.
The _Quebec Gazette_ teems with loyal English and French songs of 1775, for a quarter of a century, and for more than twenty-five years the anniversary banquet, ball or dinner was religiously kept up.
But we must hie away from these “junketings”–these festive boards, which our loyal ancestors seem to have infinitely enjoyed. We must hie away the long wished for “snow storm,” the signal of attack has come. ‘Tis five o’clock before dawn. Hark to the rattle of the alarm drum. Hark! Hark to the tolling of every city bell (and you know Quebec bells are numerous) louder! louder even than the voice of the easterly storm. To ARMS! To ARMS! resounds in the Market Place–the _Place d’Armes_–and in the streets of our slumbering city.
Instead of giving you my views on the attack, I shall summon from the silent, the meditative past, one of the stirring actors in this thrilling encounter, an intrepid and youthful Volunteer, under Arnold, then aged seventeen years, John Joseph Henry. He will tell you how his countrymen attacked us:
“It was not,” says Judge Henry, “until the night of the 31st December, 1775, that such kind of weather ensued as was considered favorable for the assault. The fore part of the night was admirably enlightened by a luminous moon. Many of us, officers as well as privates, had dispersed in various directions among the farm and tippling houses of the vicinity. We well knew the signal for rallying. This was no other than a “snow storm.” About 12 o’clock, P.M., the heaven was overcast. We repaired to quarters. By 2 o’clock we were accoutred and began our march. The storm was outrageous, and the cold wind extremely biting. In this northern country the snow is blown horizontally into the faces of the travellers on most occasions–this was our case.
When we came to Craig’s house, near Palace Gate, a horrible roar of cannon took place, and a ringing of all the bells of the city, which are very numerous, and of all sizes. Arnold, leading the forlorn hope, advanced, perhaps, one hundred yards, before the main body. After these followed Lamb’s artillerists. Morgan’s company led in the secondary part of the column of infantry. Smith’s followed, headed by Steele, the Captain from particular causes being absent. Hendrick’s company succeeded and the eastern men so far as known to me, followed in due order. The snow was deeper than in the fields, because of the nature of the ground. The path made by Arnold, Lamb, and Morgan was almost imperceptible, because of the falling snow. Covering the locks of our guns, with the lappets of our coats, holding down our heads (for it was impossible to bear up our faces against the imperious storm of wind and snow), we ran, along the foot of the hill in single file. Along the first of our run, from Palace Gate, for several hundred paces, there stood a range of insulated buildings, which seemed to be store-houses, we passed these quickly in single file, pretty wide apart. The interstices were from thirty to fifty yards. In these intervals, we received a tremendous fire of musketry from the ramparts above us. Here we lost some brave men, when powerless to return the salutes we received, as the enemy was covered by his impregnable defences. They were even sightless to us, we could see nothing but the blaze from the muzzles of their muskets.
A number of vessels of various sizes lay along the beach, moored by their hawsers or cables to the houses. Passing after my leader, Lieutenant Steele, at a great rate, one of those ropes took me under the chin, and cast me head long down, a declivity of at least fifteen feet. The place appeared to be either a dry-dock or a saw-pit. My descent was terrible, gun and all was involved in a great depth of snow. Most unluckily, however, one of my knees received a violent contusion on a piece of scraggy ice, which was covered by the snow. On like occasions, we can scarcely expect, in the hurry of attack, that our intimates should attend to any other than their own concern. Mine went from me, regardless of my fate. Scrambling out of the cavity, without assistance, divesting my person and gun of the snow, and limping into the line, I attempted to assume a station and preserve it. These were none of my friends–they knew me not. I had not gone twenty yards, in my hobbling gait, before I was thrown out, and compelled to await the arrival of a chasm in the line, when a new place might be obtained. Men in affairs such as this, seem in the main, to lose the compassionate feeling, and are averse from being dislodged from their original stations. We proceeded rapidly, exposed to a long line of fire from the garrison, for now we were unprotected by any buildings. The fire had slackened in a small degree. The enemy had been partly called off to resist the General, and strengthen the party opposed to Arnold in our front. Now we saw Colonel Arnold returning, wounded in the leg, and supported by two gentlemen; a parson, Spring, was one, and, in my belief, a Mr. Ogden, the other. Arnold called on the troops, in a cheering voice, as we passed, urging us forward, yet it was observable among the soldiery, with whom it was my misfortune to be now placed, that the Colonel’s retiring damped their spirits. A cant term “We are sold,” was repeatedly heard in many parts throughout the line. Thus proceeding, enfiladed by an animated but lessened fire, we came to the first barrier, where Arnold had been wounded in the onset. This contest had lasted but a few minutes, and was somewhat severe, but the energy of our men prevailed. The embrasures were entered when the enemy were discharging their guns. The guard, consisting of thirty persons, were, either taken or fled, leaving their arms behind them. At this time it was discovered that our guns were useless, because of the dampness. The snow which lodged in our fleecy coats was melted by the warmth of our bodies. Thence came that disaster. Many of the party, knowing the circumstance, threw aside their own, and seized the British arms. These were not only elegant, but were such as befitted the hand of a real soldier. It was said, that ten thousand stand of such arms had been received from England, in the previous summer, for arming the Canadian militia. These people were loath to bear them in opposition to our rights. From the first barrier to the second, there was a circular course along the sides of houses, and partly through a street, probably of three hundred yards or more. This second barrier was erected across and near the mouth of a narrow street, adjacent to the foot of the hill, which opened into a larger, leading soon into the main body of the Lower Town. Here it was, that the most serious contention took place: this became the bone of strife. The admirable Montgomery, by this time, (though it was unknown to us) was no more; yet, we expected momentarily to join him. The firing on that side of the fortress ceased, his division fell under the command of a Colonel Campbell, of the New York line, a worthless chief, who retreated, without making an effort, in pursuance of the general’s original plans. The inevitable consequence was, that the whole of the forces on that side of the city, and those who were opposed to the dastardly persons employed to make the false attacks, embodied and came down to oppose our division. Here was sharp-shooting. We were on the disadvantageous side of the barrier, for such a purpose. Confined in a narrow street, hardly more than twenty feet wide, and on the lower ground, scarcely a ball, well aimed or otherwise, but must take effect upon us. Morgan, Hendricks, Steele, Humphrey’s, and a crowd of every class of the army, had gathered into the narrow pass, attempting to surmount the barrier, which was about twelve or more feet high, and so strongly constructed, that nothing but artillery, could effectuate its destruction. There was a construction, fifteen or twenty yards within the barrier, upon a rising grounde, the cannon of which much overtopped the height of the barrier, hence, we were assailed by grape shot in abundance. This erection we called the platform. Again, within the barrier, and close into it, were two ranges of musketeers, armed with musket and bayonet, ready to receive those who might venture the dangerous leap. Add to all this, that the enemy occupied the upper chambers of the houses, in the interior of the barrier, on both sides of the street, from the windows of which we became fair marks. The enemy, having the advantage of the ground in front, a vast superiority of numbers, dry and better arms, gave them an irresistible power, in so narrow a space. Humphreys, upon a mound, which was speedily erected, attended by many brave men, attempted to scale the barrier, but was compelled to retreat, by the formidable phalanx of bayonets within, and the weight of fire from the platform and the buildings. Morgan, brave to temerity, stormed and raged; Hendricks, Steele, Nichols, Humphreys, equally brave, were sedate, though under a tremendous fire. The platform, which was within our view, was evacuated by the accuracy of our fire, and few persons dared venture there again. Now it was, that the necessity of occupancy of the houses, on our side of the barrier, became apparent. Orders were given by Morgan to that effect. We entered. This was near day-light. The houses were a shelter, from which we might fire with much accuracy. Yet, even here, some valuable lives were lost. Hendricks, when aiming his rifle at some prominent person, died by a straggling ball through his heart. He staggered a few feet backwards, and fell upon a bed, where he instantly expired. He was an ornament of our little society. The amiable Humphreys died by a like kind of wound, but it was in the street, before we entered the buildings. Many other brave men fell at this place; among these were Lieutenant Cooper, of Connecticut, and perhaps fifty or sixty noncommissioned officers and privates. The wounded were numerous, and many of them dangerously so. Captain Lamb, of the York artillerists; had nearly one-half of his face carried away, by a grape or canister shot. My friend Steele lost three of his fingers, as he was presenting his gun to fire; Captain Hubbard and Lieutenant Fisdle, were all among the wounded. When we reflect upon the whole of the dangers of this barricade, and the formidable force that came to annoy us, it is a matter of surprise that so many should escape death and wounding as did. All hope of success having vanished, a retreat was contemplated, but hesitation, uncertainty, and a lassitude of mind, which generally takes place in the affairs of men, when we fail in a project, upon which we have attached much expectation, now followed. The moment was foolishly lost, when such a movement might have been made with tolerable success. Captain Laws, at the head of two hundred men, issuing from Palace Gate, most fairly and handsomely cooped us up. Many of the men, aware of the consequences, and all our Indians and Canadians (except Natanis [57] and another,) escaped across the ice, which covered the Bay of St. Charles, before the arrival of Captain Laws. This was a dangerous and desperate adventure, but worth while the undertaking, in avoidance of our subsequent sufferings. Its desperateness consisted in running two miles across shoal ice, thrown up by the high tides of this latitude– and its danger, in the meeting with air holes, deceptively covered by the bed of snow. Speaking circumspectly, yet it must be admitted conjecturally, it seems to me, that in the whole of the attack, of commissioned officers, we had six killed, five wounded, and of non-commissioned and privates, at least one hundred and fifty killed, and fifty or sixty wounded. Of the enemy, many were killed and many more wounded, comparatively, than on our side, taking into view the disadvantages we laboured under; and that but two occasions happened when we could return their fire, that is, at the first and second barriers. Neither the American account of this affair, as published by Congress, nor that of Sir Guy Carleton, admit the loss of either side to be so great as it really was, in my estimation * * * * * as to the British, on the platform they were fair objects to us. They were soon driven thence by the acuteness of our shooting. * * * *
Perhaps there never was a body of men associated, who better understood the use and manner of employing a rifle, than our corps; while by this time of the attack, they had their guns in good order. When we took possession of the houses, we had a great range. Our opportunities to kill, were enlarged. Within one hundred yards, every man must die. The British however were at home–they could easily drag their dead out of sight, and bear their wounded to the Hospital. It was the reverse with us. Captain Prentis, who commanded the provost guards, would tell me of seven or eight killed, and fifteen or twenty wounded; opposed to this the sentries, (who were generally Irishmen, that guarded us with much simplicity, if not honesty,) frequently admitted of forty or fifty killed, and many more wounded. The latter assertions accorded with my opinion. The reasons for this belief are these: when the dead, on the following days, were transported on the carioles which passed our habitation for deposition in the “dead house,” we observed many bodies, of which none of us had any knowledge; and again when our wounded were returned to us from the hospital, they uniformly spoke of being surrounded there, in its many characters, by many of the wounded of the enemy. To the great honor of General Carleton, they were all, whether friends or enemies, treated with like attention.”
The Continentals of Brigadier-General Montgomery had settled on the following plan of attack:–Col Livingston, with his three hundred Canadians and Major Brown, was to simulate an attack on the western portion of the walls–Montgomery to come from Holland House down by Wolfe’s Cove, creep along the narrow path close to the St. Lawrence and meet Arnold on his way from the General Hospital at the foot of Mountain Hill, and then ascend to Upper Town.
The brilliant _fête littéraire_ held by the Literary and Historical Society to commemorate the event was thus noticed in the _Morning Chronicle_ of Dec 30th, 1875:
_THE LITERARY AND HISTORICAL SOCIETY’S CENTENARY FÊTE._
It would be hardly possible to imagine a more graceful or unique gathering than that which assembled in the rooms of the Literary and Historical Society last evening, for the purpose of celebrating with all possible _éclat_ that gloriously memorable event, the repulse of the troops commanded by General Richard Montgomery, of the American Army, whilom officer of the 17th Regiment of Infantry in the service of his Britannic Majesty George III, who on the blusterous wintry morning of the 31st December, 1775, attempted an assault upon the redoubts and fortifications which at that time did the duty of our present Citadel, and whose intrepidity was rewarded with a soldier’s death, and his want of success formed the nucleus of the power which is so firmly established in this Royal Canada of ours to day.
The arrangements made by the Society for the reception of their unusually numerous guests and the decorations of the various apartments, were all that could be wished–commodious and tasteful. In the entrance hall the Royal standard floated, and there the B. Battery Band was placed. Turning up the left hand flight of steps the visitor –passing the large class room of Morrin College, transformed for the nonce into spacious refreshment buffets–was ushered into the lecture room, from the galleries of which flags of many nations and many colours were drooping. The raised dais, occupied during the delivery of the addresses by James Stevenson, Esq., Senior Vice-President, L. & H. Society, in the chair; Lieut.-Col. Bland Strange, R. S. M. Bouchette, Esq., Dr. Boswell, Vice-Presidents, J. M. LeMoine, Esq., and Commander Ashe, R.N., ex-Presidents, was flanked on either side with the blue and silver banners of St. Andrew’s Society, bearing the arms and escutcheon of Scotia, and their proud motto “_Nemo me impune lascessit_.” Bunting and fresh spruce foliage gave an air of freshness to all the adornable parts of the room. Immediately opposite the lectern, which was illuminated with wax candles, placed in last century candlesticks, and attached to the gallery railings, was a fine collection of Lochaber axes, clustered around a genuine wooden Gaelic shield studded with polished knobs of glittering brass. Long before the hour of eight the company had increased to such an extent that the room was crowded to the doors, but not inconveniently as the ventilation was unexceptionable. With accustomed punctuality, James Stevenson, Esq., acting in the absence of the President, opened the meeting with some highly appropriate remarks relative to the historical value of the subjects about to be discussed and summarising very succinctly the events immediately previous to the beleaguering of the fortress city. He alluded in stirring terms to the devotion which had been manifested by the British and French defenders, who resolved rather to be buried in the ruins than surrender the city. He stated that he thought it especially meet and proper that the Literary and Historical Society here should have taken up the matter and dealt with it in this way. He alluded in eulogistic terms to the capability of the gentlemen about to address them and, after regretting the unavoidable absence of Lt-Col. Coffin, a lineal descendant of an officer present, formally introduced the first speaker, Lieutenant- Colonel Strange, commandant of Quebec Garrison, and Dominion Inspector of Artillery. This gallant officer, who on rising was received with loud and hearty cheering by the audience, plunged with characteristic military brevity _in medias res_, simply remarking, at the outset, that he, in such a position, was but a rear rank man, while Colonel Coffin would have been a front-ranker; but his soldierly duty was to fill that position in the absence of him to whom the task would have been officially assigned. The subject which formed a distinct section of the major topic of the evening was then taken up. Inasmuch as it is our intention, and we believe that of the Society, to reproduce faithfully in pamphlet form the graphic, interesting and detailed word-pictures of the ever memorable events of the 31st December, 1775, as given by the learned and competent gentlemen who addressed the meeting, it suffices to say in the present brief notice of the proceedings that Colonel Strange exhaustively treated that portion which referred to the attack and defence at Pres-de-Ville–the place in the vicinity of which now stands the extensive wharves of the Allan Company. Many incidents of the siege, utterly unknown to ordinary readers of history were recalled last night, and many things that have hitherto been dubious, or apparently unaccountable explained away. The story of the finding of the snow-covered and hard-frozen corpse of the unfortunate General and his Aide-de-Camp, was told with much pathos, as were details of his burial. The references to descendants of then existing families still residents in Quebec, were extremely interesting, because many were among the audience. At the conclusion of Colonel Strange’s admirable resumé, and some further pointed remarks from the Chairman, Mr. J. M. LeMoine, who is _par excellence_ and _par assiduité_ our Quebec historian, whose life has been mainly devoted to compilation of antiquarian data touching the walls, the streets, the relics, the families, the very Flora, and Fauna of our cherished Stadacona–commenced his erudite and amusing sketches of the day, taken from the stand point of the enemy’s headquarters, and the fray in the Sault-au-Matelot. Interspersing in his own well digested statement of events, he chose the best authenticated accounts from contemporaneous participants, British, French Canadian and American, proving that the record as presented by Col. Strange and himself last night, was a “plain unvarnished truthful tale,” a reliable mirror in which was faithfully reflected all that was historically interesting as affecting Quebec in the Campaign of 1775-6. When Mr. LeMoine had terminated his address, which was of considerable length, Mr. Stevenson concluded this portion of the proceedings with a most eulogistic and deserved recognition of the devotion which the two gentlemen who had read during the evening had shewn in preparing their respective papers, and a vote of thanks to them was heartily and unanimously accorded. He also made reference to the topic of the day, the restoration and embellishment of our oft- besieged, city, gracefully attributing honour where it was due, first and foremost to His Excellency the Governor-General, Earl of Dufferin, at whose instigation the plans had been prepared; secondly, to His Worship the Mayor, Owen Murphy, Esq., (who was present), for his untiring exertions and valuable assistance in developing, maturing and preparing the way for an early completion of said designs, which are to make Quebec a splendid architectural example of the deformed, transformed; thirdly, to the hearty co-operation of the public, aided in their views by the enterprise of the proprietor of the _Morning Chronicle_, who had prepared the splendid illustrations of these improvements, thereby reflecting infinite credit upon himself. After a few other remarks the ladies and gentlemen were invited to inspect the library, which for the rest of the evening was the centre of attraction. The _coup d’oeil_, when once one had fairly entered into this beautifully designed, permanent focus of intellectual wealth, around whose walls were ranged the imperishable memorials of nearly all of man’s genius that has been thought worthy of preservation, was striking and memorable. As in the lecture room, those emblems, which are our symbolical as well as actual rallying points in all times of trouble or war, draped and covered the book shelves which contain the essence of almost all that human intelligence, human thought, human wit, man’s invention and ingenuity has as yet brought to light. Here, historian and poet, geographer and engineer, humorist and preacher, dramatist and theologian, are congregated, serving in the one great cause of public instruction and the expansion of the limitless ramifications which exist in the ever growing tree of knowledge. The student and litérateur, the bibliophile and dilletante novel reader, the most frequent visitors here last night were replaced by groups of fair women and patriotic men assembled to commemorate an event which had a marked effect upon the history of this continent in this nineteenth century, which will expire a few hours after these lines meet the reader’s eyes. In lieu of study and thought, the attention of the throng was attracted to the splendid stand of arms reaching from floor to ceiling, and which was as it were defended by the Dominion standard that fell in long festoons behind. In the centre of a diamond-shaped figure, made up of scores of sabres pointing inwards, was a large glittering star of silvery steel bayonets. In chronological order were pink and gilt tablets, containing each one the names of the Lieutenant-Governors of Canada, commencing with Carleton, in 1775, and proceeding through the noble list, which includes Haldimand, Dorchester, Dalhousie, Gosford, Colborne, Durham, Sydenham, Bagot, Cathcart, Elgin, Head, Monk, Lisgar, down to the present glorious epoch, when this prosperous country is vice-regally and right royally presided over by Lord Dufferin, in the year of grace, 1875–on the opposite side of the room, under a similar spiky coronet of bristling steel, was hung the sword of the dead and vanquished, but honoured and revered hero, the trusty blade which only left Montgomery’s hands, when in his death- throes he ‘like a soldier fell,’ and the pitiless snow became his winding-sheet. On a table below this interesting and valuable historic relic, now in possession, as an heirloom, of J. Thompson Harrower, Esq., of this city, was exhibited the full uniform of an artillery officer of the year 1775. Several quaint old sketches and paintings were placed around the Library, which, with the Museum, was converted for the time into an extempore conversazione hall, and while the melodies of the ‘B’ Battery band were wafted hither and thither through the building, the dames and cavaliers gossiped pleasantly over their tea or coffee and delicacies provided by the members for the guests, and declared, with much show of reason, that the Literary and Historical Society’s centennial entertainment was a red-letter day in the annals of that learned and well-deserving body.”
_THE JESUITS’ CHURCH._
This little church, of which the corner stone was laid by the Marquis de Tracy, “Lieutenant du Roi, dans toutes ses possessions Françaises en Amérique,” on 31st May, 1666, existed until 1807. “It is built,” says Kalm, “in the form of a cross. It has a round steeple, and is the only church that has a clock.” The oldest inhabitant can yet recall, from memory, the spot where it stood, even if we had not the excellent drawing made of it with a half dozen of other Quebec views, by an officer in Wolfe’s fleet, Captain Richard Short. It stood on the site recently occupied by the shambles, in the Upper Town, facing the Russell House. Captain Short’s pencil bears again testimony to the exactitude, even in minute things, of Kalm’s descriptions: his Quebec horses, harnessed one before the other to carts. You see in front of the church, in Captain Short’s sketch, three good sized horses, harnessed one before the other, drawing a heavily laden two-wheeled cart. The church was also used until 1807 as a place of worship for Protestants. Be careful not to confound the Jesuits’ Church with the small chapel in the interior of their college (the old Jesuit Barracks) contiguous thereto. This latter chapel had been commenced on the 11th July, 1650. The Seminary Chapel and Ursulines Church, after the destruction by shot and shell, in 1759, of the large Roman Catholic Cathedral, were used for a time as parish churches. From beneath the chief altar of the Jesuits’ Church was removed, on the 14th May, 1807, the small leaden box containing the heart of the founder of the Ursulines’ Convent, Madame de la Peltrie, previously deposited there in accordance with the terms of her last will.
You can see that the pick-axe and mattock of the “_bande noire_” who robbed our city walls of their stones, and demolished the Jesuits’ College and city gates, were busily employed long before 1871.
_THE JESUITS’ BARRACKS._
There are few, we will venture to say, who, in their daily walk up or down Fabrique Street, do not miss this hoary and familiar land mark, the Jesuits’ College. When its removal was recently decreed, for a long time it resisted the united assaults of hammer and pick-axe, and yielded, finally, to the terrific power of dynamite alone.
The Jesuits’ College, older than Harvard College, at Boston, takes one back to the dawn of Canadian history. Concerning the venerable institution, we translate the following from the French of Mr. T. B. Bédard. It appeared originally in the _Journal de Quebec_:–
“The recent discovery of human bones at the Jesuit Barracks has excited the curiosity of the public in general, and especially of antiquarians and all interested in historical research. Naturally, the question presents itself–who were the individuals interred where these bones were found, and what was this place of sepulture? An attentive study of the subject leads me to believe that the remains of the three skeletons discovered, with two skulls only, are those of Brother Jean Liégeois, Père du Quen, and Père Francois du Peron, deceased at Chambly, and whose mortal remains were sent to Quebec for interment. The spot where the bones were found must have been the site of the chapel built at the same time as the other portions of the Jesuits’ College. But inasmuch as the demolition of this more than venerable edifice approaches completion, a sketch of the history of its construction may not be amiss.
“Let us preface by saying, with the learned Abbés Laverdière and Casgrain, that the residence or the Convent of Notre Dame de la Recouvrance, burnt together with the chapel of the same name in 1640, should not be confounded with the College (turned later on into barracks), the foundations of which were not laid until several years afterwards. The Chapel of Notre Dame de la Recouvrance and the Jesuits’ house attached thereto, were situated upon the ground upon which the Anglican Cathedral now stands. In the conflagration of 1640, chapel and residence were destroyed; the registers of Civil Status burnt, and the Jesuits lost all their effects. ‘We had gathered together in that house,’ writes Father Lejeune, ‘as in a little store, all the maintenance and support of our other residences and of our missions. Linen, clothing, and all the other necessaries for twenty- seven persons whom we had among the Hurons, were all ready to be conveyed by water into that distant country.’ After this disaster, the Jesuits were sheltered for some time at the Hôtel Dieu. In 1637 the Fathers of the Company of Jesus in Canada set forth to the Company of New France that they wished to build a college and a seminary for the instruction of Indian youths, the Hurons dwelling 200 leagues from Quebec having sent them six, with the promise of a larger number, and also for the education of the country, and that, for this purpose, they sought a grant of land. The Company of New France awarded them twelve acres of ground in Quebec to build a seminary, church, residence, &c. This grant was made at a meeting of the Directors of the Company, at the hôtel of the celebrated Fouquet, on the 18th March, 1637. It was not, however, until the spring of 1647 that the work of digging the foundations of the College was begun–the first stone being laid on the 12th June. ‘The same day,’ says the _Journal des Jésuites_, ‘was laid the first stone of the foundations of the offices of the main-building of the Quebec house. In 1648, we completed the half of the large main-building, in 1649, our building was completed as regards the exterior masonry and the roof; but the interior had not yet been touched.’ In July, 1650, the foundations of the chapel were commenced, and on the 18th October, 1651, it was sufficiently advanced to allow the pupils of the college to receive therein Governor de Lauzon. ‘The scholars,’ says again the _Journal des Jésuites_, ‘received Monsieur the Governor in our new chapel, _latinâ oratione et versibus gallicis_, &c., &c. The Indians (scholars) danced, when mass was first celebrated in the chapel.’ On the 29th May, 1655, a great misfortune befell the good Fathers. The brother known as Jean Liégeois was treacherously assassinated. He was their business man; several times he had crossed over from Canada to France in their interests; he was also their architect, and had superintended the building of the residences at their various missions, as well as the erection of the college. On the day in question, while engaged in the fields near Sillery, seven or eight Agniers (Iroquois) suddenly surrounded him, captured him without resistance, and, put a bullet through his heart, and, adds the _Journal des Jésuites_, one of them scalped him, while another chopped off his head, which they loft upon the spot. On the following day the Algonquins found his body and brought it to Sillery, whence it was conveyed in a boat to Quebec, where it was exposed in the chapel, and, on the 31st May, after the usual offices, ‘it was interred at the lower end of the chapel; that is to say, in one of the two sides where the altar of the Congregation des Messieurs is now located.’ To understand these last words, it is necessary to explain that nearly two years later, on the 14th February, 1657, Father Poncet founded this congregation; and it was M. de Lauzon-Charny, Master of the Woods and Forests of New France, son of Governor de Lauzon, who was elected Prefect of the first members of the body to the number of twelve. This same M. de Charny had married the daughter of M. Giffard, the first Seigneur of Beauport; but his wife dying two years after that marriage, M. de Charny passed over to France, where he entered holy orders, subsequently returning to Canada with Mgr. de Laval, whose grand vicar he became, as well as the first ecclesiastical dignitary, inasmuch as he replaced him at the Conseil Souverain at the period of the difficulties between the Bishop of Petrea and Governor de Mesy.
“But to return to the interments in the Jesuits’ Chapel. The next which took place was that of Father de Quen, who died on the 8th October, 1659, of contagious fever brought into the colony by vessels from beyond the seas. It was he, who, in 1647, discovered Lake St. John, and, in 1653, celebrated the Mass at the Hôtel Dieu, when the Sister Marie de L’Incarnation embraced the religious profession. Father de Quen was buried on the morning of the 9th _praesente corpore, dictae duae missae privatae, in summo altari, dum diceretur officium_. He was 59 years of age. The _Journal des Jésuites_ does not say that he was interred in the chapel, but it is easy to infer the fact from the _two private_ masses said in presence of the body, and also because the entry of his burial does not appear in the parish register. Moreover, it is also the opinion of Rev. Messrs. Laverdière and Casgrain, as published in the _Journal des Jésuites_. On the 15th November, 1665, arrived at Quebec, coming from the Richelieu River, a vessel bringing the body of Father François du Peron, who died on the 10th at Fort St. Louis (Chambly). The body was exposed in the Chapel of the Congregation, and ‘on the 16th, after the service at which the Marquis de Tracy assisted, it was interred in the vault of the chapel towards the confessional on the side of the street,’ and Father le Mercier, who wrote the foregoing, adds that ‘there remains room only for another body.’
“From the preceding, it appears that three interments took place in the Jesuits’ Chapel (the only ones mentioned in the _Journal des Jésuites_), and it is probable that the place remaining for only one more body was never filled. The remains of three bodies having been found, it seems to me therefore reasonable to conclude that they are those of Brother Liégeois and Fathers de Quen and du Peron. It is true only two skulls have been recovered, but it must be remembered that Brother Liégeois had his head chopped off and left upon the spot, as remarks the text, so that it is easy to conjecture that the Iroquois dragged his body further off, when it was found in a headless condition and thus buried. With respect to the site of the chapel, the text already cited relative to Father du Peron indicates sufficiently that it was alongside the street; and a reference to the map of Quebec in 1660 shows in fact the street skirting the Jesuits’ property as it does to-day. Further, the excavations which, at the request of Père Sachez, Dr. Larue and others, Hon. Mr. Joly, with a good will which cannot be too highly praised, has ordered to be made, have already laid bare the foundations of a well outlined building upon the very site where tradition locates the chapel and where the bones have been found.
“As it was stated at the time of the finding of the skeletons that one of them was supposed to be that of a nun of the Hôtel Dieu, Mr. Bédard applied to the authorities of that institution for information on the subject and received an answer from the records which conclusively proves that the nun in question was buried in the vault of the Jesuits’ Church and not in their Chapel.”
Though a considerable sum had been granted to foster Jesuit establishments at Quebec by a young French nobleman, René de Rohault, son of the Marquis de Gamache, as early as 1626, it was on the 18th March, 1637, only, that the ground to build on, “twelve arpents of land, in the vicinity of Fort St. Louis” were granted to the Jesuit Fathers. In the early times, we find this famous seat of learning playing a prominent part in all public pageants; its annual examinations and distribution of prizes called together the _élite_ of Quebec society. The leading pupils had, in poetry and in verse, congratulated Governor d’Argenson on his arrival in 1658. On the 2nd July, 1666, a public examination on logic brought out, with great advantage, two most promising youths, the famous Louis Jolliet, who later on joined Father Marquette in his discovery of the Mississippi, and a Three Rivers youth, Pierre de Francheville, who intended to enter Holy Orders. The learned Intendant Talon was an examiner; he was remarked for the erudition his Latin questions displayed. Memory likes to revert to the times when the illustrious Bossuet was undergoing his Latin examinations at Navarre, with the Great Condé as his examiner; France’s first sacred orator confronted by her most illustrious general.
How many thrilling memories were recalled by this grim old structure? “Under its venerable roof, oft had met the pioneer missionaries of New France, the band of martyrs, the geographers, discoverers, _savants_ and historians of this learned order: Dolbeau, de Quen, Druilletes, Daniel, de la Brosse, de Crepieul, de Carheil, Bréboeuf, Lallemant, Jogues, de Noue, Raimbeault, Albanel, Chaumonot, Dablon, Ménard, LeJeune, Massé, Vimont, Ragueneau, Charlevoix, [58] and crowds of others.” Here they assembled to receive from the General of the Jesuits their orders, to compare notes, mayhap to discuss the news of the death or of the success of some of their indefatigable explorers of the great West; how the “good word” had been fearlessly carried to the distant shores of Lake Huron, to the _bayous_ and perfumed groves of Florida, or to the trackless and frozen regions of Hudson’s Bay.
Later on, when France had suppressed the order of the Jesuits, and when her lily banner had disappeared from our midst, the College and its grounds were appropriated to other uses–alas! less congenial.
The roll of the English drum and the sharp “word of command” of a British adjutant or of his drill sergeant, for a century or more, resounded in the halls, in which Latin orisons were formerly sung; and in the classic grounds and grassy court, [59] canopied by those stately oaks and elms, which our sires yet remember, to which the good Fathers retreated in sweet seclusion, to “say” their _Breviaries_ and tell their beads, might have been heard the coarse joke of the guard room and coarser oath of the trooper.
It had been claimed as a “magazine for the army contractor’s provisions on 14th November, 1760.” On the 4th June, 1765, His Excellency General James Murray had it surveyed and appropriated for quarters and barracks for the troops, excepting some apartments. The court and garden was used as a drill and parade ground until the departure of Albion’s soldiers. Here was read on the 14th November, 1843, by Major-General Sir Jas. Hope’s direction, the order of the day, at the morning parade, congratulating Major Bennet and the brave men of the 1st Royals, whom he was escorting to England in the ill-fated transport “Premier,” on the discipline and good conduct manifested by them during the incredible perils they had escaped at Cape Chatte when the Premier was stranded.
How singular, how sad to think that this loved, this glorious relic of the French _régime_, entire even to the Jesuit College arms, carved in stone over its chief entrance, should have remained sacred and intact during the century of occupation by English soldiery–and that its destruction should have been decreed so soon as the British legions, by their departure, in 1871, had virtually handed it over to the French Province of Quebec?
The discovery of the 28th August, 1878, of human remains beneath the floor of this building–presumed to be those of some of the early missionaries– induced the authorities to institute a careful search during its demolition. These bones and others exhumed on the 31st August, and on the 1st and 9th September, 1878, were pronounced by two members of the Faculty, Drs. Hubert Larue and Chas. E. Lemieux, both Professors of the Laval University, (who signed a certificate to that effect) to be the remains of three [60] persons of the male sex and of three [61] persons of the female sex. Some silver and copper coins were also found, which with these mouldering remains of humanity, were deposited under lock and key in a wooden box; and in September, 1878, the whole was placed in a small but substantial stone structure, in the court of the Jesuit Barracks, known as the “Regimental Magazine,” pending their delivery for permanent disposal to Rev. Père Sachez, Superior of the Jesuits Order in Quebec.
In May, 1879, on opening this magazine, it was found that the venerable bones, box and all had disappeared, the staple of the padlock on the door having been forced. By whom and for what purpose, the robbery?
_THE RÉCOLLET CONVENT._
Let us walk on, and view with the Professor’s eyes the adjoining public edifice in 1749, the Récollet Convent, “a spacious building,” says Kalm, “two story high, with a large orchard and kitchen garden.” It stood apparently on the south-eastern extremity of the area, on which the Anglican Cathedral was built in 1804, across what is now the southern prolongation of Treasury Street; it is said its eastern end occupied a portion of the site now occupied by the old _Place d’Armes_–now the Ring.
Its church or chapel was, on 6th September, 1796, destroyed by fire; two eye-witnesses of the conflagration, Philippe Aubert DeGaspé and Deputy- Commissary-General James Thompson, the first in his _Mémoires_, the second in his unpublished _Diary_, have vividly portrayed the accident.
“At the date of the conflagration of the Récollets Church, 6th September, 1796, the bodies of those who had been interred there were taken up. The remains of persons of note, those among others of Count de Frontenac, were re-interred in the Cathedral (now the Basilica), it is said, under the floor of the Chapel N. D. of Pity. The leaden coffins, which, it appears, had been placed on iron bars in the Récollets Church, had been partially melted by the fire. In Count de Frontenac’s coffin was found a small leaden box, which contained the heart of that Governor. According to a tradition, handed down by Frère Louis, the heart of Count de Frontenac was, after his death, sent to his widow in France. But the haughty Countess refused to receive it, saying that ‘she did not want a dead heart, which when beating did not belong to her.’ The casket containing the heart was sent back to Canada and replaced in the Count’s coffin, where it was found after the fire.” (_Abbé H. R. Casgrain_.)
The Church faced the Ring and the old Château; it formed part of the Récollet Convent, “a vast quadrangular building, with a court and well stocked orchard” on Garden Street; it was occasionally used as a state prison. The Huguenot and agitator, Pierre DuCalvet, [62] spent some dreary days in its cells in 1781-84; and during the summer of 1776, a young volunteer under Benedict Arnold, John Joseph Henry, (who lived to become a distinguished Pennsylvania Judge), was immured in this monastery, after his capture by the British, at the unsuccessful attack in Sault-au-Matelot Street, on the 31st December, 1775, as he graphically relates in his _Memoirs_. It was a monastery of the Order of Saint Francis. The Provincial, in 1793, a well-known, witty, jovial and eccentric personage, Father Félix DeBerey, had more than once dined and wined His Royal Highness Prince Edward, the father of our gracious Sovereign, when stationed in our garrison in 1791-4, with his regiment, the 7th Fusiliers.
The Récollet Church was also a sacred and last resting place for the illustrious dead. Of the six French Governors who expired at Quebec, four slept within its silent vaults, until the translation, in 1796, of their ashes to the vaults of the Basilica, viz: (1) Frontenac, (2) de Callières, (3) Vaudreuil, (4) de la Jonquière. [63] Governor de Mesy had been buried in the Hôtel-Dieu Cemetery, and the first Governor, de Champlain, it is generally believed, was interred near the Château Saint Louis, in a “sépulchre particulier,” near the spot now surmounted by his bust, on which, in 1871, was erected the new Post Office.
On the south-west side of the Château, on the site where stands M. A. Berthelot’s old dwelling on St. Louis Street, now owned by James Dunbar, Esq., Q.C., could be seen a building devoted to the administration of Justice, _La Sénéchaussée_ (Séneschal’s Jurisdiction), and which bore the name of “The Palace.” It was doubtless there that, in 1664, the Supreme Council held its sessions. In 1665 it was assigned to the Marquis de Tracy, for a residence whilst in the colony. From the _Place d’Armes_, the higher road (_Grande Allée_) took its departure and led to Cap Rouge. On the right and left of this road, were several small lots of land given to certain persons for the purpose of being built upon. The Indian Fort was that entrenchment of which we have spoken, which served as a last hiding place to the sad remains of the once powerful Huron nation, forming in all eighty four souls, in the year 1665. It had continued to be occupied by them up to the peace with the Iroquois. After the arrival of the troops, they took their departure in order to devote themselves to the cultivation of the lands.
Besides the buildings of the Reverend Jesuit Fathers, those of the Ursulines (nuns), and those of the Hospital (Hôtel Dieu), in the Upper Town, could be seen in a house situated behind the altar part of the Parish Church, where dwelt Monseigneur de Laval. It was, probably, what he called his Seminary, and where he caused some young men to be educated, destined afterwards for the priesthood.
It was at the Seminary the worthy prelate resided with his priests, to the number of eight, which, at that period, comprised all the secular clergy of Quebec. There, also, was the Church of Notre Dame, in the form of a Latin cross. [64]
Couillard Street calls up one of the most important personages of the era of Champlain, Guillaume Couillard, the ancestor of Madame Alexandre de Léry _née_ Couillard. It would fill a volume to retrace the historical incidents which attach themselves to “La Grande Place du Fort,” which in the early part of the century was known as the “Grand Parade” before the Castle, and is now called the _Ring_. We have pointed out a goodly number in the first pages (10-16) of the “Album du Touriste.” To what we have already said we shall add the following details:
_THE UNION HOTEL._
It would appear that the site upon which the Union Hotel was built [65] (1805), and where previously stood the dwelling of Dr. Longmore, Staff Medical Officer, now occupied by the offices of the _Journal de Quebec, &c._, was owned by Governor D’Ailleboust, about the year 1650. He had reserved to himself, on the 10th January, 1649, the strip of ground comprised between Fort and Treasury Streets on the one side, and the streets Buade and Ste. Anne on the other side. At the corner of Treasury and Buade Streets, on the west, Jean Côté possessed a piece of ground (_emplacement_) which he presented as a dowry in 1649, to his daughter Simonne, who married Pierre Soumandre.
The grounds of the Archbishop’s Palace formed part of the field possessed by Couillard, whose house stood in the now existing garden of the Seminary, opposite the gate which faces the principal alley, the foundations of which were discovered and brought to light by the Abbé Laverdière in 1866. The Union Hotel was for years the meeting place of our festive ancestors, when the assembly balls brought together the Saxon and the Gaul; it also recalls warlike memories of 1812.
_THE AMERICAN PRISONERS._
In looking over old fyles of our city journals, we find in the _Quebec Mercury_ of 15th September, 1812, the following item:
“On Friday, arrived here the detained prisoners taken with Gen. Hull, at Detroit. The non-commissioned officers and privates immediately embarked on board of transports in the harbour, which are to serve as their prison. The commissioned officers were liberated on their parole. They passed Saturday morning at the Union Hotel, where they were the gazing-stock of the multitude, whilst they, no way abashed, presented a bold front to the public stare, puffed the smoke of their cigars into the faces of such as approached too near. About two o’clock they set off in a stage, with four horses, for Charlesbourg, the destined place of their residence.”
The Union Hotel here mentioned is the identical building erected for a hotel by a company in 1805, and now owned by the _Journal de Quebec_, facing the ring.
Were these prisoners located at Charlesbourg proper, or at that locality facing Quebec, in Beauport, called _Le Canardière_, in Judge de Bonne’s former stately old mansion, on which the eastern and detached wing of the Beauport Lunatic Asylum now stands?
Tradition has ever pointed to this building as that which sheltered the disconsolate American warriors in 1812, with the adjoining rivulet, _Ruisseau de l’Ours_, as the boundary to the east which their parole precluded their crossing.
The result of the American defeat at Detroit had been important–“one general officer (Wadsworth), two lieutenant-colonels, five majors, a multitude of captains and subalterns, with nine hundred men, one field- piece and a stand of colors, were the fruits of the victory, the enemy having lost in killed, wounded, missing and prisoners, upwards of fifteen hundred.” (Christie’s History.)
Amongst the American prisoners sent down to Quebec was the celebrated General Winfield Scott, who lived to cull laurels in the Mexican war. He was then Col. Scott, and there is yet (1878) living in Quebec an old resident, R. Urquhart, who well remembers, when a boy, seeing the “tall and stern American Colonel.” He was six feet five inches in height. (Lossing, p. 408.)
Of these prisoners taken at Detroit, twenty-three had been recognized as British born and deserters from the English army. they were sent to England for trial. It is yet possible that some of the veterans of 1812, by their diaries or other sources of information, may tell us who were the Charlesbourg or Beauport captives in 1812. They had not been under restraint much more than a week, when, by the following advertisement in the _Quebec Mercury_, dated 29th September, we find the British Government attending to their comforts with a truly maternal foresight:–
Commissary General’s Office,
QUEBEC, 28th Sept., 1812
“Wanted for the American prisoners of war, comfortable warm clothing, consisting of the following articles:
Jackets,
Shirts,
Trowsers,
Stockings,
Moccassins or Shoes.
Also 2000 pounds of soap.”
From which it is clear John Bull intended his American cousins should not only be kept warm, but suitably scrubbed as well. Two thousand lbs. of soap foreshadowed a fabulous amount of scrubbing. Colonel Scott and friends were evidently “well off for soap.”
Colonel Coffin, of Ottawa, the annalist of the War of 1812, in reply to a query of mine, writes me:
“Scott remained in Canada from the date of his surrender, 23d October, 1812, to the period of his departure from Quebec, say May, 1813. But he was on parole the whole time, and from Quebec, as given in his life by Mansfield, p. 55, he went in a cartel to Boston, and soon after was exchanged. Under these circumstances, I do not think it likely that he would have been escorted militarily in custody anywhere. Winder may have been also taken to Quebec, or he may have been exchanged on the Western frontier. Armstrong’s ‘War of 1812’ will probably give the details.”
The _Quebec Mercury_, of 27th October, 1812, contains the following:
“The prisoners taken at Detroit and brought down to Quebec are on the point of embarking for Boston for the purpose of being exchanged. Five cannon are now lying in the _Château_ Court taken at Detroit.”
In retaliation for the twenty-three American prisoners sent for trial to England, as deserters from the British army, the American Government had ordered that forty-six British prisoners of war should be detained in close confinement.
“In consequence of this,” says Christie, “the Governor ordered all the American officers, prisoners of war, without exception of rank, to be immediately placed into close confinement as hostages, until the number of forty-six were completed over and above those already in confinement. In pursuance of this order, Generals Winder, Chandler and Winchester were conveyed from their quarters in the country at Beauport to a private house in Quebec, where their confinement was rendered as little inconvenient as their situation could admit of.”
They were exchanged in April, 1814, against British officers, prisoners of war in the States.
In connection with General Scott’s captivity at Quebec, Lossing relates a little incident, which redounds to his credit:–
“When the prisoners were about to sail from Quebec, a party came on board the vessel, mustered the captives and commenced separating from the rest those who, by their accent, were found to be Irishmen. These they intended to send to England for trial as traitors in a frigate lying near, in accordance with the doctrine that a British subject cannot expatriate himself. Scott, who was below, hearing a tumult on deck, went up. He was soon informed of the cause, and at once entered a vehement protest against the proceedings. He commanded his soldiers to be absolutely silent, that their accent might not betray them. He was repeatedly ordered to go below, and as repeatedly refused. The soldiers obeyed him. Twenty-three had been already detected as Irishmen, but not another one became a victim. The twenty-three were taken on board the frigate in irons. Scott boldly assured them that if the British Government dared to injure a hair of their head, his own Government would fully avenge the outrage. He at the same time as boldly defied the menacing officers, and comforted the manacled prisoners in every way. Scott was exchanged in January, 1813, and at once sent a full report of this affair to the Secretary of War. He hastened to Washington in person, and pressed the subject upon the attention of Congress. Fortunately, the President never had occasion to exercise this retaliation, the British Government having abstained from carrying out in practice, in the case of the American prisoners, its cherished doctrine of perpetual allegiance.
“The final result of Scott’s humane and courageous conduct in this matter was very gratifying to himself. Almost three years after the event at Quebec, he was greeted by loud huzzahs as he was passing a wharf on the East River side of New York city. It came from a group of Irishmen, who had just landed from an emigrant ship. There were twenty-one out of the twenty-three prisoners for whom he had cared so tenderly. They had just returned from a long confinement in English prisons. They recognized their benefactor, and, says Scott’s biographer, “nearly crushed him by their warm-hearted embraces.” (Lossing’s Field Book, p. 409.)
Some years back a discussion took place in the columns of the _Morning Chronicle_, of Quebec, as to the names of the volunteers of Bell’s Cavalry who had escorted the U. S. prisoners of war in 1812 from Beauport to Quebec. The following extract from our diary throws some light on this subject:
_THE LAST SURVIVORS OF BELL’S CAVALRY IN 1812._
“Among more than one strange meeting, which that welcome haven of the wearied wayfarer, the way-side inn, has brought me, in course of many peregrinations through the length and breadth of the Province of Quebec, none can I recall less anticipated, than the one which happened to me this 22nd March, 1881. I reached that night at 10.30, direct from the Kennebec Railway, the parlor of Monsieur Lessard’s Temperance Hotel at St. Joseph, Beauce. (Such the euphonious name the Licence Act awards to these fallacious emblems of comfort or good cheer). After a lengthy interview, I next day parted, possibly for ever, from an old and withered _sabreur_ of 1812, the last survivor, I think, of that dashing volunteer cavalry corps, raised by Capt. the Hon. Matthew Bell at Quebec in 1812.
I had the rare luck of having from the very lips of this octogenarian, an account of the share he had in conducting as one of the cavalry detachment detailed to escort Colonel Winfield Scott and brother officers from Beauport, where they were confined as prisoners on _parole_, to the district prison in St. Stanislas street (the Morrin College) from whence the “big” Colonel and his comrades were taken and lodged in Colonel Coffin’s house in St. Louis street.
How different the careers! Scott in time became the hero of the war with Mexico, and the dashing cavalry corporal who escorted him, aged now 89, after 30 years tenure of office, still holds the position of village Postmaster, in the township of Broughton, Beauce. Among the incidents of which my ancient acquaintance seems proud, is that of his having played at cards with General Scott and his captive comrades.
“Charles Hy. J. Hall,” (such his clear and well written autograph authenticating the memorandum I drew up for him) a roystering _militaire_ and _bon vivant_, in our good city, seventy years ago, presents in his person a rare instance of mental and physical faculties well preserved until the end–memory, sight, mind,