Surrender of Port Royal, Oct. 13tli, 1710—Articles of the capitulation—Cession of Port Royal with the territory “within cannon-shot”—Vetch named governor of the place—Five inhabitants of Port Royal made prisoners—The garrison decimated by sickness —Saint Castin comes with 42 Abenakis to direct operations against the fort—Battle of “Bloody Creek—Port Royal besieged—The Acadians of the ceded territory withdraw—The garrison is reinforced and the projected siege is abandoned.

The surrender of Port Royal to Nicholson by de Subercase was signed Oct. 13th, 1710. He had resisted most heroically for nineteen days, and merited no less honor by his surrender than he had done in the two preceding sieges by repelling the enemy. The struggle was hopeless and surrounded with circumstances which would induce even the bravest to withhold making any effort. Alone with a few chosen officers, he withstood the general call for an immediate surrender. It was difficult to impose his will and to revive men’s courage when there was no hope of success; when to want, to privation, to the superior strength of the enemy, to the uselessness of his repeated efforts, was added a still graver circumstance, complete abandonment by the Home Government. There was room for no feeling but discouragement, when Subercase displayed such energy and skill that he restored their drooping spirits. His constancy won for him the admiration of his enemies together with most honorable conditions of surrender, which were earned out by the English General with great fidelity.

The articles of the capitulation referred only to Port Royal and the dependent territory within cannon-shot thereof. To be brief I omit the articles of the capitulation which relate to the garrison, and restrict my attention to what concerned the inhabitants of the ceded territory, for there is no question at all of the rest of Acadia.

Article V. “That the inhabitants within cannon-shot of Port Royal shall remain upon their estates, with their corn, cattle and furniture, during two years, in case they are not desirous to go before, they taking the oath of allegiance and fidelity to Her Sacred Majesty of Great Britain.”

In a memorandum accompanying the articles of the capitulation, Gen. Nicholson declares that “within cannon-shot” ought to be understood to be “three English miles around this fort.” The number of persons comprised within this space according to a list presented to the General was 481.

To have a correct view of the situation we should not lose sight of the fact that this capitulation was limited only to Port Royal and the country comprised within a radius of three miles from the fort. The inhabitants of this district had two years at most allowed them to pass over to the French territory with all their movable goods; but, pending their decision thereupon, they were to take the oath of allegiance and fealty; which they did. We find nowhere the terms of this oath, but we suppose it must have been very carefully worded, in order to make sure that, in the meantime, they wo aid do nothing against the peace and the interest of the English government, until their linal decision to remain or depart within two years. The circumstances themselves preclude any other interpretation. We should not forget that whatever was outside this three-mile radius remained meanwhile French territory ; it is well also to remark that the war between the two nations continued for nearly three years until the treaty of Utrecht. A clear view of these facts is necessary for the better understanding of what follows, and for avoiding the confusion into which so many historians have heretofore fallen.

After the departure of the French garrison, Nicholson reimbarked with his troops on the 28th of October, leaving in the fort, as Lieutenant-governor, Colonel Vetch, with about 450 soldiers. From Boston Nicholson set out for London, where he succeeded in organizing an expedition for the conquest of Canada by land and sea; he himself had the command of the troops who were to operate on Montreal through Lake Champlain; but, owing to the unskilfulness of Admiral Walker, the fleet suffered grievous disaster and so the expedition was abandoned.

During this time, desertions, but, still more, sickness, reduced so greatly the Annapolis (Port Royal) garrison that, According to an eye-witness, there remained only a hundred able-bodied soldiers at the end of the following June.

With the enemy in such a plight, it became easy enough, for the Acadians who were outside the limits comprised in the capitulation, to engage in hostilities and even to seize upon the fort. Here was an excellent and easy opportunity for retaliation. This they signified to de St. Caw tin who had previously been named Lieutenant of the King of France in this district. The movement was sufficiently apparent to make the governor of the garrison anxious, and often detachments of his troops ventured abroad in order to watch the manoeuvres of the people both within and without the bounding circle. In one of these excursions two deserters of the garrison, one being a certain Abraham Gaudet of Beaubassin, and three half-breeds, strangers to the place, captured the commissary of the garrison whom, however, they released, for a small ransom. The governor, thinking that there had been connivance between these men and some inhabitants of Annapolis, arrested Win. Bourgeois, Peter Leblanc and John Comeau of Annapolis as well as Germain Bourgeois of Beaubassin and Francis Brassard of Cliipody, who were passing through Annapolis. We have no account of what may have been the result of their trial. *

Saint Castiu, whose warlike humor was never at rest so long as there were blows to be given or received, was easily prevailed upon to come and take part in the struggle which the Acadians up the river were preparing to have with the English. With forty-two Abenakis of the Penobscot river he succeeded in crossing the Bay of Fundy and by his stealthy march escaped even the suspicion of the garrison. In one of their usual sallies,

*Haliburton gives quite a different version from that of Murdoch. According to the former these arrests were intended to keep these men as hostages, and by means of threats to prevent those who were not included in the capitulation from committing any hostile act. “This hostile disposition of the French settlers,” says he, “induced the officer commanding at Port Royal to apprehend the priest and five of the most respectable inhabitants of the district as hostages for the good behaviour of their countrymen, who were informed that, upon similar attempt, these prisoners should suffer military execution.” eighty men of the garrison under the command of Captain Pigeon advanced as far as twelve miles from the fort, intending to surprise some Indian warriors who, by their threats, ware preventing the inhabitants of Annapolis from furnishing the wood necessary to the fortifications. Saint Castin, who was watching the movements of this troop, surprised them in a place ever since called Bloody Creek. Thirty soldiers and officers were killed and the rest made prisoners.

The position of the garrison was becoming critical, if it be true, which, however, leaves room for doubt, that, before this encounter, there remained only a hundred soldiers able to bear arms. This event was unfortunate as are all those that result from war ; but it cannot be judged otherwise than as legitimate warfare, since the action took place twelve miles from Annapolis and nine miles outside the territory ceded by the capitulation. The successful combatants were French subjects on French territory; it was in time of war and moreover an act of self-defence against their assailants. Some writers, forgetting the terms of the capitulation, speak of this affair as if at that time the whole of Acadia had been ceded, and as if these men had been guilty of treachery. This is clearly a mistake.

During this time Abbe Gaulin, parish priest of Mines, tried to organize an expedition against Annapolis. He succeeded in getting together two hundred men, whom he intrusted to Saint Castin. Annapolis was invested for the purpose of attacking the fort, when the ammunition and cannons, which they expected from Newfoundland, should arrive; but, as this help did not come, and as, on other hand, the garrison received a reinforcement, they gav3 up their project and dispersed.

Before investing Annapolis, writes Murdoch, “All the inhabitants withdrew out of cannon-shot from the fort, and they also transported their cattle up the river. Those of the banlieue (within cannon-shot) intimated to the governor that he had violated the articles of the capitulation to their prejudice, and that they were thereby freed from the oaths they had taken not to bear aims; after which they joined their compatriots in blockading the Fort.’’

I have much respect for this author, whom I look upon as a sure guide in all questions of fact: yet I must say I have nowhere found the confirmation of the last part of this citation. Was it simply an inference from the declaration that precedes it? I think so. Though not a strictly logical inference, it might be justifiable. In what did the governor violate the articles of the capitulation ? I do not know, and strong reasons would be required to justify such conduct. The time was likewise badly chosen to take advantage, of any violation whatever, and the circumstances give rise to a serious suspicion about the fairness of these reasons.

Nevertheless, for want of precise information on the nature and gravity of these reasons, we can perhaps supply more or less what is wanting by a document which has an intimate connection with the question, and which makes us see, as far as we can judge by the account of one side only, what was the fate reserved for the Acadians by Governor Vetch. Some months before this incident the inhabitants residing within the limits of the territory comprised in the capitulation sent to the Governor of Canada. M. de Vaudreuil, by M. de Clignancourt, the following letter:

“As I our goodness extends over all those who, being subjects of His Majesty, have recourse to you to relieve them in their misery, we pray you will vouchsafe us your assistance to withdraw ourselves from this country. . . . M. de Clignancourt will tell you better than we can do by a letter, the. harsh manner in which Governor Vetch treats us, keeping vs like negroes, and wishing to persuade its that we are under great obligation to him for not treating us much worse, being able, he says, to do so with justice, and without having room to complain of it. We have given to II. de Clignancourt copies of three ordinances which M. Vetch has issued.' We pray you, sir, to have regard to our misery, and to honor us with your letter for our consolation, expecting that you may furnish the necessary assistance for our retiring from this unhappy country.