1765]

THE RELIGIOUS QUESTION.

171

CHAPTER IV.

In the establishment of the government of Canada under British rule, there was no consideration which called for more judgment and careful provision than that of the religious feelings of the new subjects. It was known that they were strongly attached to the creed which they professed, and its attendant ceremonies; and however limited the rights granted by the treaty, policy and justice equally demanded the most liberal interpretation of them, in order that no cause for discontent should be created by narrowness of spirit or positive wrong. At the same time the necessity of acting with prudence was perfectly understood, for there was great ecclesiastical activity and much to suggest that, however temperately the demands might apparently be made, they would require full examination before being finally conceded.

Egremont, when announcing to Murray his appointment as governor, had expressed his fears that the old inhabitants. might use the privilege of professing their ancient creed to keep up the connection with France, and under this influence be induced to take part in any attempt to regain the country. The priests consequently were not to be allowed to meddle in civil matters, and any of them who did so were to be removed. There was no desire of restraining the exercise of their religion as far as the laws of Great Britain permitted, their condition being one of toleration. The matter, he said, had been clearly understood during the negotiations for the definitive treaty. The French minister had proposed to stipulate that the rights should be observed as in former times, and asked that the words "comme ci-devant" should be introduced. The plenipotentiaries had persisted in this request, and abandoned it only when they were told it would be deceiving them to insert such a condition. Everything,

however, was to be avoided which would alarm or give offence to the new subjects. Murray was instructed to refuse to Le Loutre the right of remaining in Canada, and that every foreign priest, on first coming to the province, was to appear before the governor and take the oath of allegiance.

The publication in Canada of the articles of the treaty had not restored confidence on the point of religion, and much uneasiness was felt regarding it. Neither in the capitulation of Quebec nor of Montreal, was there any positive assurance on the subject. By the articles of capitulation of the former, the free exercise of religion was accorded until the future possession of Canada was determined. At Montreal, the free exercise of religion was permitted, while many demands were refused until the king's pleasure was known. * In the fourth article of the treaty of the 10th of February, 1763, clause IV. granted liberty of the catholic religion to the inhabitants of Canada, and the king pledged himself to give the most precise and most effectual orders that his new Roman catholic subjects might profess the worship of their religion according to the rights of the Romish church, as far as the laws of Great Britain permitted.

In bringing this subject to the notice of the home government, Murray represented the Canadians to be an honest, good people, much attached to their faith, and full of respect for their priests; and that any fears which they entertained were not for themselves but for their children, as no provision. was made to supply the priesthood when vacancies occurred.

The dean and chapter of Quebec, on petitioning the crown, stated that the result was awaited with impatience. If regulations were introduced contrary to the spirit of the treaty, the province would be depopulated and become a vast desert. Two modes of providing for the emergency were pointed out.

*

Ante, IV., pp. 306, 424. The words at Quebec are [art. 6]: "Libre exercise de la Religion Romaine Sauvegardes accordés," &c. At Montreal [art. 27]: "Accordé pour le Libre Exercise de leur Religion;" &c. It must be remembered that both at Quebec and Montreal the articles were only drawn up in French, and no authorized English translation is available for reference.

1765]

ABBÉ LACORNE.

173

One was to introduce into the province ordained priests from Europe; it found little favour. The second was the election of a bishop by the chapter to be paid by a tax laid on the habitants, or by an appropriation from custom duties. Mr. Charest, a priest of the seminary, was deputed to carry the petition to England. Murray declined to transmit it; nevertheless, he spoke favourably of Charest as a worthy, good man whose religious zeal, however, somewhat inclined to bigotry. The jesuits also were not idle. In October, 1763, by their head, de Glapion, they petitioned the king to be placed in possession of their buildings and property, to be allowed to continue the education of youth, and to bring from Europe members of their order in sufficient numbers to fulfil their different duties. *

Murray had been warned to be on his guard against the abbé Lacorne, head of the chapter in Quebec, who, when in England, had made an attempt to discuss the principles on which the Roman church in Canada should hereafter be governed. He had applied to the French ambassador for his countenance, and the latter had officially written to Egremont requesting him to confer with Lacorne on the subject. The request was summarily refused on the ground, that the French king had no right to interfere between the king of Great Britain, and his new subjects. Murray was instructed that in case of the interference of Lacorne in civil or political matters, he was to be warned to confine himself to the duties of his church, and so long as he so acted he was to be treated with the respect due to his character and order. † Murray's own view was that some means should be taken to educate

*This appeal was made three years after the decision of the parliament of Paris in the matter of the bankruptcy of the jesuit father La Valette and father Sacy, the procurator general of missions, and only a few months previously to the 9th of March, 1764, when all members of the society of Jesus had been ordered to leave France within the month. Two years before this date the memorable reply of Ricci had been given to Louis XV. that the jesuits must be as they are or not at all. "Sint ut sunt aut non sint." After being expelled from every country in Europe, the order was suppressed by Clement XIV. in 1773+ Can. Arch., Q., I., p. 117, 129.

Canadian youth for the priesthood, and that they might be sent to some friendly power at the public expense to be ordained. He proposed that the Jesuits, who were few in number, should be provided for by a pension; their estates put under proper management and leased to English farmers, to obtain a better description of husbandry. The seminary of Montreal, which was wealthy, should be compelled either to sell out its effects and depart, or to cease all connection with the seminary at Paris, and to join that of Quebec. The government of the church, he considered, should be placed in the hands of three vicars-general, one of whom should be head of the seminary in Montreal. This arrangement was suggested on the theory of the non-appointment of any bishop. Murray looked upon Lacorne's conduct in London as directed by the desire of obtaining a mitre for himself; and he expressed his own opinion of Lacorne's unfitness for the position. He gave the same opinion as to M. Montgolfier, and recommended that, if the dignity was to be conferred, it should be given to M. Briand. Lacorne subsequently placed in the hands of the government a copy of his memorial. It had arisen entirely with himself, and it was by no means consequent upon a mission which had been entrusted to him.*

Murray plainly stated his objections both to Lacorne and Montgolfier. Of the former he said: "The well-known Bigotry and Superstition of the Family from which he originates, the Aversion his brothers have ever borne to the British name, and the relentless cruelties they have formerly exercised npon its subjects gave little room to expect a sudden conversion to our interest." Of Montgolfier he stated that "he had the assurance to write to a Monsieur Houdin, at that time chaplain to His Majesty's 48th Regiment, formerly a Recollet in this country,” a letter, the copy of which he enclosed. This letter is not in the volume of archives and cannot therefore be described. "He, Montgolfier, pushed matters so far as to have the Dead bodies of some soldiers taken up because Hereticks should not be interred in consecrated ground. Such Behaviour could not fail of giving great disgust to the king's British subjects in these parts. If so haughty and imperious a priest, well related in France, is placed at the Head of the Church in this Country, he may hereafter occasion much Mischief if ever he finds a proper Opportunity to display his Rancour and malice."

Murray described Briand as having "acted with a Candour, Moderation and a Delicacy in such circumstances as to deserve the highest commendation."

Can. Arch., Q., I., pp. 258-260.

1766]

MONSEIGNEUR BRIAND.

175

The selection was finally made of Mgr. Briand who was consecrated as bishop in Paris, March, 1766. He did not however, reach Quebec until the 28th of June, the day when Murray sailed. The arrival of Mgr. Briand* was announced by colonel P. Æmilius Irving as an event to have a good effect with the new subjects. It is uncertain whether any meeting took place on this occasion between Murray and the new bishop. My belief is that they did not meet. †

Mgr. Briand was born the 23rd of January, 1715, at Plerm, in the diocese of Saint Brienne, France. He was ordained priest the 16th March, 1739. Two years later he left for Canada with M. de Pontbriand, who appointed him one of the canons of Quebec Cathedral. He died on the 25th June, 1794, aged eightyWhen seventy years old he appointed a coadjutor, Mgr. d'Esglis, subsequently Mgr. Bailly, both of whom died before him. It was said of him he lived to see the death of the coadjutor of the coadjutor of his first coadjutor.

one.

+ The recognition of the bishop of Quebec was never the subject of parliamentary debate. The cause may be assigned to the desire of avoiding the stormy discussion which would have followed. One consequence to be looked for was that some challenge would have been uttered as to the power of the crown, independent of parliament, over conquered territories in the matter of rights guaranteed by treaties, especially in relation to the continuance of the laws previously in force, and with regard to the right of introducing the laws of England. Masères and those who thought with him were of opinion that Briand's position as a bishop should have been defined by act of parliament, not as he described it "privately, almost clandestinely, by mere connivance of ministers."* He declared that he could never discover that there was ever any patent, or warrant under the royal signature, conferring the authority for Briand's exercise of his episcopal functions. There was simply a recommendation to appoint a superintendent of clergy, at the moderate sum of £200 sterling yearly income, which was carried into effect during the Government of the marquis of Rockingham, through the influence of Burke.

Monseigneur Briand on his return to Quebec assumed the full title of his position. His manner of doing so however was sufficiently modest, he declined to accept the compliment previously paid to his predecessors in the days of French rule. He did not pretend, he said, to be a bishop on the same high footing as they were, and did not desire to be treated with the same ceremony and respect which they had obtained. One of his chief duties was to ordain priests for the offices of the church. Indeed for some months he wore the soutane like other Roman ecclesiastics: afterwards he assumed the purple robe with the golden cross, the mark of his episcopal dignity. Some complaints must have been sent to London complaining of his living in pomp exhibiting the pageantry of the * Occasional essays, 1809. p. 369.

+ Par la grace de Dieu et du Saint Siège, Éveque de Quebec.

Un simple faiseur de prêtres.