<h5 id="id00050">THE OATH OF ALLEGIANCE</h5>
<p id="id00051">We have now to follow a sequence of events leading up to
the calamity to be narrated in a later chapter. By the
Treaty of Utrecht the old king, Louis XIV, had obtained
certain guarantees for his subjects in Acadia. It was
provided that 'they may have liberty to remove themselves
within a year to any other place with all their movable
effects'; and that 'those who are willing to remain
therein and to be subject to the kingdom of Britain are
to enjoy the free exercise of their religion.' And these
terms were confirmed by a warrant of Queen Anne addressed
to Nicholson, under date of June 23, 1713. [Footnote:
'Trusty and Well-beloved, We greet you Well! Whereas Our
Good Brother the Most Christian King hath at Our desire
released from imprisonment on board His Galleys, such of
His subjects as were detained there on account of their
professing the Protestant religion, We being willing to
show by some mark of Our Favour towards His subjects how
kindly we take His compliance therein, have therefore
thought fit hereby to Signifie Our Will and Pleasure to
you that you permit and allow such of them as have any
lands or Tenements in the Places under your Government
in Acadie and Newfoundland, that have been or are to be
yielded to Us by Vertue of the late Treaty of Peace, and
are Willing to Continue our Subjects to retain and Enjoy
their said Lands and Tenements without any Lett or
Molestation as fully and freely as other our Subjects do
or may possess their Lands and Estates or to sell the
same if they shall rather Chuse to remove elsewhere—And
for so doing this shall be your Warrant, And so we bid
you fare well. Given at our Court at Kensington the 23rd
day of June 1713 in the Twelfth Year of our Reign.'—Public
Archives, Canada. Nova Scotia A, vol. iv, p. 97.] The
status of the Acadians under the treaty, reinforced by
this warrant, seems to be sufficiently clear. If they
wished to become British subjects, which of course implied
taking the oath of allegiance, they were to enjoy all
the privileges of citizenship, not accorded at that time
to Catholics in Great Britain, as well as the free exercise
of their religion. But if they preferred to remove to
another country within a year, they were to have that
liberty.</p>
<p id="id00052">The French authorities were not slow to take advantage
of this part of the treaty. In order to hold her position
in the New World and assert her authority, France had
transferred the garrison which she had formerly maintained
at Placentia, Newfoundland, to Cape Breton. This island
she had renamed Ile Royale, and here she was shortly to
rear the great fortress of Louisbourg. It was to her
interest to induce the Acadians to remove to this new
centre of French influence. In March 1713, therefore,
the French king intimated his wish that the Acadians
should emigrate to Ile Royale; every inducement, indeed,
must be offered them to settle there; though he cautioned
his officers that if any of the Acadians had already
taken the oath of allegiance to Great Britain, great care
must be exercised to avoid scandal.</p>
<p id="id00053">Many Acadians, then, on receiving attractive offers of
land in Ile Royale, applied to the English authorities
for permission to depart. The permission was not granted.
It was first refused by Governor Vetch on the ground that
he was retiring from office and was acting only in the
absence of Colonel Nicholson, who had been recently
appointed governor. The truth is that the English regarded
with alarm the removal of practically the entire population
from Nova Scotia. The governor of Ile Royale intervened,
and sent agents to Annapolis Royal to make a formal demand
on behalf of the Acadians, presenting in support of his
demand the warrant of Queen Anne. The inhabitants, it
was said, wished to leave Nova Scotia and settle in Ile
Royale, and 'they expect ships to convey themselves and
effects accordingly.' Nicholson, who had now arrived as
governor, took the position that he must refer the question
to England for the consideration of Her Majesty.</p>
<p id="id00054">When the demand of the governor of Ile Royale reached
England, Vetch was in London; and Vetch had financial
interests in Nova Scotia. He at once appealed to the
Lords of Trade, who in due course protested to the
sovereign 'that this would strip Nova Scotia and greatly
strengthen Cape Breton.' Time passed, however, and the
government made no pronouncement on the question. Meanwhile
Queen Anne had died. Matters drifted. The Acadians wished
to leave, but were not allowed to employ British vessels.
In despair they began to construct small boats on their
own account, to carry their families and effects to Ile
Royale. These boats, however, were seized by order of
Nicholson, and the Acadians were explicitly forbidden to
remove or to dispose of their possessions until a decision
with regard to the question should arrive from England.</p>
<p id="id00055">In January 1715 the accession of George I was proclaimed
throughout Acadia. But when the Acadians were required
to swear allegiance to the new monarch, they proved
obdurate. They agreed not to do anything against His
Britannic Majesty as long as they remained in Acadia;
but they refused to take the oath on the plea that they
had already pledged their word to migrate to Ile Royale.
John Doucette, who arrived in the colony in October 1717
as lieutenant-governor, was informed by the Acadians that
'the French inhabitants had never own'd His Majesty as
Possessor of this His Continent of Nova Scotia and
L'Acadie.' When Doucette presented a paper for them to
sign, promising them the same protection and liberty as
the rest of His Majesty's subjects in Acadia, they brought
forward a document of their own, which evidently bore
the marks of honest toil, since Doucette 'would have been
glad to have sent' it to the secretary of state 'in a
cleaner manner.' In it they declared, 'We shall be ready
to carry into effect the demand proposed to us, as soon
as His Majesty shall have done us the favour of providing
some means of sheltering us from the savage tribes, who
are always ready to do all kinds of mischief… In case
other means cannot be found, we are ready to take an
oath, that we will take up arms neither against His
Britannic Majesty, nor against France, nor against any
of their subjects or allies.' [Footnote: Public Archives,
Canada. Nova Scotia A, vol. viii, p. 181 et seq.]</p>
<p id="id00056">The attitude of both France and England towards the
unfortunate Acadians was thoroughly selfish. The French
at Louisbourg, after their first attempt to bring the
Acadians to Ile Royale, relapsed into inaction. They
still hoped doubtless that Acadia would be restored to
France, and while they would have been glad to welcome
the Acadians, they perceived the advantage of keeping
them under French influence in British territory. In
order to do this they had at their hand convenient means.
The guarantee to the Acadians of the freedom of their
religion had entailed the presence in Acadia of French
priests not British subjects, who were paid by the French
government and were under the direction of the bishop of
Quebec. These priests were, of course, loyal to France
and inimical to Great Britain. Another source of influence
possessed by the French lay in their alliance with the
Indian tribes, an alliance which the missionary priests
helped to hold firm. The fear of an Indian attack was
destined on more than one occasion to keep the Acadians
loyal to France. On the other hand, the British, while
loth to let the Acadians depart, did little to improve
their lot. It was a period of great economy in English
colonial administration. Walpole, in his desire to reduce
taxation, devoted very little money to colonial development;
and funds were doled out to the authorities at Annapolis
in the most parsimonious manner. 'It is a pity,' wrote
Newton, the collector of the customs at Annapolis and
Canso, in 1719, that 'so fine a province as Nova Scotia
should lie so long neglected. As for furs, feathers, and a
fishery, we may challenge any province in America to
produce the like, and beside that here is a good grainery;
masting and naval stores might be provided hence. And
was here a good establishment fixt our returns would be
very advantageous to the Crown and Great Britain.' As it
was, the British ministers were content to send out
elaborate instructions for the preservation of forests,
the encouragement of fisheries and the prevention of
foreign trade, without providing either means for carrying
out the schemes, or troops for the protection of the
country.</p>
<p id="id00057">Nothing further was done regarding the oath of allegiance
until the arrival of Governor Philipps in 1720, when the
Acadians were called upon to take the oath or leave the
country within four months, taking with them only two
sheep per family. This, it seems, was merely an attempt
to intimidate the people into taking the oath, for when
the Acadians, having no boats at their disposal, proposed
to travel by land, and began to cut out a road for the
passage of vehicles, they were stopped in the midst of
their labours by order of the governor.</p>
<p id="id00058">In a letter to England Philipps expressed the opinion
that the Acadians, if left alone, would no doubt become
contented British subjects, that their emigration at this
time would be a distinct loss to the garrison, which was
supplied by their labours. He added that the French were
active in maintaining their influence over them. One
potent factor in keeping them restless was the circulation
of reports that the English would not much longer tolerate
Catholicism. [Footnote: Public Archives, Canada. Nova
Scotia A, vol. xi, p. 186.] The Lords of Trade took this
letter into consideration, and in their reply of December
28, 1720, we find the proposal to remove the Acadians as
a means of settling the problem. [Footnote: 'As to the
French inhabitants of Nova Scotia, who appear so wavering
in their inclinations, we are apprehensive they will
never become good subjects to His Majesty whilst the
French Governors and their Priests retain so great an
influence over them, for which reason we are of opinion,
that they ought to be removed so soon as the forces which
we have proposed to be sent to you shall arrive in Nova
Scotia for the protection and better settlement of your
Province, but as you are not to attempt their removal
without His Majesty's positive orders for that purpose,
you will do well in the meanwhile to continue the same
prudent and cautious conduct towards them, to endeavour
to undeceive them concerning the exercise of their
religion, which will doubtless be allowed them if it
should be thought proper to let them stay where they
are.'—Public Archives, Canada. Nova Scotia A, vol. xii,
p. 210.] This, however, was not the first mooting of the
idea. During the same year Paul Mascarene, in 'A Description
of Nova Scotia,' had given two reasons for the expulsion
of the inhabitants: first, that they were Roman Catholics,
under the full control of French priests opposed to
British interests; secondly, that they continually incited
the Indians to do mischief or disturb English settlements.
On the other hand, Mascarene discovered two motives for
retaining them: first, in order that they might not
strengthen the French establishments; secondly, that they
might be employed in furnishing supplies for the garrison
and in preparing fortifications until such time as the
English were strong enough to do without them.
[Footnote: 'A Description of Nova Scotia,' by Paul
Mascarene, transmitted to the Lords of Trade by Governor
Philipps.—Public Archives, Canada. Nova Scotia A, vol.
xii, p. 118.]</p>
<p id="id00059">It does not appear that either the English or the French
government had any paternal affection for the poor
Acadians; but each was fully conscious of the use to
which they might be put.</p>
<p id="id00060">In a letter to the Lords of Trade Philipps sums up the
situation. 'The Acadians,' he says, 'decline to take the
oath of allegiance on two grounds—that in General
Nicholson's time they had signed an obligation to continue
subjects of France and retire to Cape Breton, and that
the Indians would cut their throats if they became
Englishmen.'</p>
<p id="id00061" style="margin-left: 4%; margin-right: 4%"> If they are permitted [he continues] to remain upon
the footing they propose, it is very probable they
will be obedient to government as long as the two
Crowns continue in alliance, but in case of a rupture
will be so many enemies in our bosom, and I cannot
see any hopes, or likelihood, of making them English,
unless it was possible to procure these Priests to be
recalled who are tooth and nail against the Regent;
not sticking to say openly that it is his day now,
but will be theirs anon; and having others sent in
their stead, which (if anything) may contribute in a
little time to make some change in their sentiments.</p>
<p id="id00062">He further suggests an 'oath of obliging the Acadians to
live peaceably,' to take up arms against the Indians,
but not against the French, to acknowledge the king's
right to the country, to obey the government, and to hold
their lands of the king by a new tenure, 'instead of
holding them (as at present) from lords of manors who
are now at Cape Breton, where at this day they pay their
rent.' [Footnote: Public Archives, Canada. Nova Scotia
A, vol. xii, p. 96.]</p>
<p id="id00063">There were signs that the situation was not entirely
hopeless. The Acadians were not allowed to leave the
country, or even to settle down to the enjoyment of their
homes; they were employed in supplying the needs of the
troops, or in strengthening the British fortifications;
yet they seem to have patiently accepted the inevitable.
The Indians committed acts of violence, but the Acadians
remained peaceable. There was, too, a certain amount of
intermarriage between Acadian girls and the British
soldiers. In those early days of Nova Scotia, girls of
a marriageable age were few and were much sought after.
There was in Annapolis an old French gentlewoman 'whose
daughters, granddaughters, and other relatives' had
married British officers. These ladies soon acquired
considerable influence and were allowed to do much as
they pleased. The old gentlewoman, Marie Magdalen Maisonat,
who had married Mr William Winniett, a leading merchant
and one of the first British inhabitants of Annapolis,
became all-powerful in the town, not only on account of
her own estimable qualities, but also on account of the
position held by her daughters and granddaughters. Soldiers
arrested for breach of discipline often pleaded that they
had been 'sent for to finish a job of work for Madame';
and this excuse was usually sufficient to secure an
acquittal. If not, the old lady would on her own authority
order the culprit's release, and 'no further enquiry was
made into the matter.' One British officer, who had
incurred her displeasure, was told that 'Me have rendered
King Shorge more important service dan ever you did or
peut-etre ever shall, and dis is well known to peoples
en autorite,' which may have been true if, as was asserted,
she sometimes presided at councils of war in the fort.
[Footnote: Knox, An Historical Journal of the Campaigns
in North America, Edited, etc., by A. G. Doughty. Vol.
i, pp. 94-6. (Toronto: The Champlain Society, 1914.)]</p>
<p id="id00064">It was with the Indians, rather than with the Acadians,
that the authorities had the greatest trouble. After
several hostile acts had been committed, the governor
determined to try the effect of the gentle art of
persuasion. He sent to England an agent named Bannfield
to purchase a large quantity of presents for the Indians.
Bannfield was thoroughly dishonest, and appropriated
two-thirds of the money to his own use, expending the
remainder on the purchase of articles of 'exceeding bad
quality.' A gorgeous entertainment was prepared for the
savages, and the presents were given to them. The Indians
took away the presents, but their missionaries had little
difficulty in showing them the inferiority of the English
gifts; and Philipps noted that they did not appear
satisfied. 'They will take all we give them,' he wrote,
'and cut our throats next day.' At length the Indians
boldly declared war against the British, an action which
Philipps attributed to the scandalous conduct of the
agent Bannfield. At the instigation of the French of Ile
Royale, they kept up hostilities for two years and
committed many barbarities. The Micmacs seized fishing
smacks, and killed and scalped a number of English soldiers
and fishermen. It was not until a more attractive supply
of presents arrived, and were distributed among the
chiefs, that they could be induced to make peace.</p>
<p id="id00065">During the progress of the Indian war Governor Philipps
had prudently refrained from discussing with the Acadians
the question of the oath; but in 1726 Lawrence Armstrong,
the lieutenant-governor, resolved to take up the matter
again. In the district of Annapolis he had little trouble.
The inhabitants there consented, after some discussion,
to sign a declaration of allegiance, with a clause
exempting them from the obligation of taking up arms.
[Footnote: This oath applied only to the inhabitants of
the district of Annapolis.] But to deal with the Acadians
of Minas and of Beaubassin on Chignecto Bay proved more
difficult. Certain 'anti-monarchical traders' from Boston
and evil-intentioned French inhabitants had represented
in these districts that the governor had no authority in
the land, and no power to administer oaths. No oath would
these Acadians take but to their own Bon Roy de France.
They promised, however, to pay all the rights and dues
which the British demanded.</p>
<p id="id00066">The death of George I in 1727, and the accession of George
II, made it necessary for the Acadians to acknowledge
the new monarch. This time the lieutenant-governor was
determined to do the business in a thorough and
comprehensive manner. He chartered a vessel at a cost of
a hundred pounds, and commissioned Ensign Wroth to proceed
from place to place at the head of a detachment of troops
proclaiming the new king and obtaining the submission of
the people. Wroth was eminently successful in proclaiming
His Majesty; but he had less success in regard to the
oath. Finding the Acadians obdurate, he promised them on
his own authority freedom in the exercise of their
religion, exemption from bearing arms, and liberty to
withdraw from the province at any time. These 'unwarrantable
concessions' Armstrong refused to ratify; and the Council
immediately declared them null and void, although they
resolved that 'the inhabitants… having signed and
proclaimed His Majesty and thereby acknowledged his title
and authority to and over this Province, shall have the
liberties and privileges of English subjects.'
[Footnote: Public Archives, Canada. Nova Scotia B, vol.
i, p. 177.] This was all the Acadians wished for.</p>
<p id="id00067">The commission of Ensign Wroth did not extend to the
district of Annapolis, which was dealt with by the Council.
The deputies of the Acadians there were summoned to appear
before the Council on September 6, 1727. But the
inhabitants, instead of answering the summons, called a
meeting on their own account and passed a resolution,
signed by seventy-one of their people, which they forwarded
to the Council. In this document they offered to take
the oath on the conditions offered by Wroth. This the
Council considered 'insolent and defiant,' and ordered
the arrest of the deputies. On September 16 Charles
Landry, Guillaume Bourgois, Abraham Bourg, and Francois
Richard were brought before the Council, and, on refusing
to take the oath except on the terms proposed by themselves,
were committed to prison for contempt and disrespect to
His Majesty. Next day the lieutenant-governor announced
that 'they had been guilty of several enormous crimes in
assembling the inhabitants in a riotous manner contrary
to the orders of government both as to time and place
and likewise in framing a rebellious paper.' It was then
resolved: 'That Charles Landry, Guillaume Bourgois and
Francis Richard, for their said offence, and likewise
for refusing the oath of fidelity to His Majesty which
was duly tendered them, be remanded to prison, laid in
irons, and there remain until His Majesty's pleasure
shall be made known concerning them, and that Abraham
Bourg, in consideration of his great age, shall have
leave to retire out of this His Majesty's Province,
according to his desire and promise, by the first
opportunity, leaving his effects behind him.' [Footnote:
Public Archives, Canada. Nova Scotia B, vol. i, p. 159.]
The rest of the inhabitants were to be debarred from
fishing on the British coasts. It is difficult to reconcile
the actions of the Council. The inhabitants who cheerfully
subscribed to the oath, with the exceptions made by Ensign
Wroth, were to be accorded the privileges of British
subjects, while some of those who would have been glad
to accept the same terms were laid in irons, and the
others debarred from fishing, their main support.</p>
<p id="id00068">Shortly after this Philipps was compelled to return to
Nova Scotia in order to restore tranquillity; for his
lieutenant Armstrong, a man of quick temper, had fallen
foul of the French priests, especially the Abbe Breslay,
whom he had caused to be handled somewhat roughly.
Armstrong, seeking an alliance with the Abnakis, had been
foiled by the French and had laid the blame at the door
of the priest, demanding the keys of the church and
causing the presbytery to be pillaged. In the end Breslay
had escaped in fear of his life. It was his complaints,
set forth in a memorial to the government, that had
brought about Philipps's return. The Acadians, with whom
Philipps was popular, welcomed him in a public manner;
and Philipps took advantage of the occasion to approach
them again on the subject of the oath. He restored the
Abbe Breslay to his flock, promised the people freedom
in religious matters, and assured them that they would
not be required to take up arms. Then all the Acadians
in the district of Annapolis subscribed to the following
oath: 'I promise and swear on the faith of a Christian
that I will be truly faithful and will submit myself to
His Majesty King George the Second, whom I acknowledge
as the lord and sovereign of Nova Scotia or Acadia. So
help me God.' In the spring of 1728 Philipps obtained
also the submission of the inhabitants of the other
districts, on similar terms; and even the Indians professed
a willingness to submit. This was a triumph for the
administration of Philipps, and laid at rest for a time
the vexed question of the oath. The triumph was, however,
more superficial than real, as we shall see by and by.</p>
<h2 id="id00069" style="margin-top: 4em">CHAPTER IV</h2>
<div style="break-after:column;"></div><br />
1 of 2
2 of 2
Previous
Next
Update Required
To play the media you will need to either update your browser to a recent version or update your Flash plugin.