Part 4 (1/2)

Under the 'supplying system' the merchants and planters 'supply' the fisherfolk each spring with all the essentials for their adequate prosecution of the industry, and when the season ends, take over their produce against the advances, made them six months before. The 'merchants' are the descendants of the early 'merchant adventurers'

who exploited the new-found Colony.”

FOOTNOTES:

[23] _Op. cit._, p. 42.

[24] Stanford's ”Compendium of Geography and Travel” (new issue): North America: vol. i. Canada and Newfoundland. Edited by H.M. Ami (London, 1915), p. 1009.

[25] See Rogers, _op. cit._, pp. 59 _seq._

[26] _Ibid._, p. 59.

[27] See article by G.C. Moore Smith, in ”English Historical Review,”

vol. x.x.xiii. (1918), pp. 31 _seq._

[28] Stanford's ”Compendium,” pp. 1010, 1011.

[29] P.T. M'Grath, ”Newfoundland in 1911” (London, 1911), p. 46.

CHAPTER V

THE STRUGGLE FOR EXISTENCE

In the reign of Charles I. a duty of five per cent. had been imposed on the produce of all foreign vessels engaged in the Newfoundland trade. Twenty-five years later the French under Du Mont, then proceeding to Quebec with a contingent of soldiers and colonists, established a settlement at Placentia, on the southern coast, fortified it, and made it the seat of a resident Governor. They continued, however, to pay the duty in recognition of English sovereignty. Charles II. abolished the duty to oblige his French patron, and with the abolition began the history of French aggression.

Very soon after their establishment the French settlers repudiated England's sovereignty over the south parts of Newfoundland, and from time to time strengthened their colony by bringing over bands of French immigrants. It was clear to many that the extension of French power in Canada and Newfoundland was a serious menace to the English fisheries and settlements: leading statesmen, however, refused to recognize the danger, and believed that if any really existed, the system of convoys would obviate it. The convoy-captains, enlarging the sphere of their regular activities, saved the colony, and during their intermittent visits took upon themselves the functions of governors, and effectually prevented the diffusion of anarchy. The Governors of the French colony made their presence felt more than the English settlers could tolerate; they interfered with them unduly, engaged in privateering expeditions and land forays against them, destroyed their property, and burned down their houses. Indeed, more than one French Governor conceived the notion, with the sanction of the King of France, of putting an end entirely to English colonization in the island. ”The encroachments of the French,” said William III., in his Declaration of War, ”on His Majesty's subjects trading and fis.h.i.+ng there, had been more like the invasions of an enemy than becoming friends, who enjoyed the advantages of that trade only by permission.” With the outbreak of war came in sharp succession the attacks of Chevalier Vesmond, and of Burrill, beneath the latter of which all the island but Bonavista and Carbonier succ.u.mbed.

The Treaty of Ryswick in 1697 was signed before the French had been dislodged. Under its terms the invaders surrendered their conquests and retired to the territory in the south-west, of which they were in occupation when the war began. The anomaly of their claims, pa.s.sed over in silence by the Treaty, was certain to be the source of mischief. In the language of Mr Pedley, ”Over a territory of some 200 miles in extent, belonging to the British sovereignty, they had built up imperceptibly an almost undisputed dominion.” Five years after the Peace of Ryswick war broke out again. An English squadron under Admiral Sir John Leake destroyed a number of French fis.h.i.+ng-vessels between St. Pierre and Trepa.s.sey (1702), and in the following year Admiral Graydon failed to reduce Placentia, owing to sickness, bad weather, as well as want of resolution. In January 1705 the French in retaliation surprised and captured St. John's. From this point they overran the English settlements, Carbonier once again weathering the storm, and abandoned themselves to depredation and devastation, as they had done in the conflict a few years before.

The Treaty of Utrecht in 1713 found the French still in possession.

The provisions of this Treaty require careful consideration. Full sovereignty over the whole of Newfoundland and the neighbouring islands was declared to belong to England. Placentia was to be handed over. Article XIII. of the Treaty contains the following provisions:

”Nor shall the most Christian King, his heir and successors or any of their subjects, at any time hereafter lay claim to any right to the said island.... Moreover, it shall not be lawful for the subjects of France to fortify any place in the said island of Newfoundland, or to erect any buildings there, besides _stages made of boards, and huts necessary and useful for drying of fish_, or to resort to the said island beyond the time necessary for fis.h.i.+ng and drying of fish. But it shall be allowed to the subjects of France to catch fish and to dry them on land in that part only which stretches ... from Cape Bonavista to the northern part of the said island from thence by the western side as far as Cape Riche.”

The fis.h.i.+ng concession to France herein contained was wholly inexcusable. The latter country was in no position to refuse terms, and an absolute reservation of all fis.h.i.+ng rights should have been insisted on in the interests of the colony. A culpable Ministry, short-sightedly regarding Newfoundland as little more than a fis.h.i.+ng-station, chose rather to make a graceful concession, and we inherited the consequences in our Newfoundland Fisheries controversy with France, which lasted for nearly two centuries. However, the half century following the Treaty of Utrecht--an important turning-point in the history of the colony--marks a period of progress; and after another Anglo-French conflict, from which the English emerged victorious, we find in the ensuing half century the establishment of a definite policy of colonial permanence.

The abuses connected with the admirals' jurisdiction had been partially corrected by the authority, on appeal from them, of the King's commanders stationed off the island. Still, the evils were very real, and extorted recognition even from the gang of west country monopolists who strangled for so long the growth of the island. We find a recommendation offered by them to the Board of Trade with astounding a.s.surance, that the 3000 odd men, women, and children, who by this time composed the population of Newfoundland, ”should be encouraged to settle in Nova Scotia--as they might be of service there, where inhabitants were wanted.”

The colonists themselves had other and better remedies. A spontaneously elected a.s.sembly pa.s.sed ordinances which attest the sincerity of the general desire for reform. In 1728 the informing zeal of Lord Vere Beauclerk elicited a decisive step from the Board of Trade, and Captain Henry Osborne was appointed the first Governor of Newfoundland (1729), with authority to appoint justices of the peace.

Even at such a moment the cloven hoof of prejudice peeped through, and Osborne and his justices were explicitly warned to interfere in no way with the privileges of the admirals, as defined by 10 and 11 William III. Governor Osborne addressed himself to his duties with great energy. He appointed justices and constables, carved the island into districts, and erected prisons and stocks. His influence was weakened by his departure when the season ended, for till the nineteenth century the governors, like the fish, were migratory. A tedious quarrel followed between the justices and the admirals as to the limits of their respective jurisdictions; the admirals, whose wits seem to have been sharpened by judicial practice, insisting that their own authority was derived from statute, whereas that of the justices merely rested upon an Order in Council.

In 1749 the great sailor Rodney, then a commander in the Navy, was appointed Governor. He distinguished himself by a humane consideration for the interests of the fis.h.i.+ng servants. His answer to a pet.i.tion from the merchants for permission to lower the contract rate of wages, in view of the badness of the season, has often been quoted, and is pleasant to read:

”Mr Drake and myself would be glad to ease the merchants in all that lay in our power, but we are by no means capable of acting as desired, to serve any people whatever. I have only one question to ask, namely: 'Had the season been good in proportion as it has proved bad, would the merchants or boat-keepers have raised the men's wages?'”