Major Paul Mascarene succeeds Armstrong—His character—His skill—His success—(1740-1744).

With lively satisfaction (lo I now pass to the administration of Mascarene, called to replace Armstrong in the office of lieutenant-governor of the province. The death of the latter, by creating a vacancy in Philipps’s regiment, promoted Major Cosby to the rank of lieu-'tenant-colonel and Captain Mascarene to that of major; but, as first counsellor of the governor, the latter, according to custom, became lieutenant-governor of the province.

For several years Mascarene, probably through disgust for Armstrong’s brutality and eccentricity, and. in order to avoid the inevitable jars his presence at Annapolis might draw upon him. had passed the greatest part of his time at Boston. He was still there in the month of December, 1739, when Armstrong put an end to his life, and it was only in the following spring that he was able to enter on his office.

It would be difficult to imagine a more striking contrast than that which existed between Mascarene and his predecessor. Whereas Armstrong was impetuous, tickle and passionate, Mascarene was calm, firm and gentle. The one could not stir without getting into trouble; the other never gave any trouble at all, and had the gift of smoothing down whatever difficulties might occur, however complicated they might be.

Paul Mascarene was the son of a French Protestant whom the revocation of the edict of Nantes had obliged to go Into voluntary exile. While still young, he followed liis father first to Geneva and a few years later to England. He joined the army and gradually, by sheer merit, raised himself to the position in which we at present find him. Conciliating, clever, well-instructed, of a lofty turn of mind, he gained the esteem and confidence of everybody. All his correspondence is instinct with the same spirit, and gives the highest idea of his character and education. It would be difficult to find in his conduct a single point that could be seriously blamed; it would be hard to note in his character one striking defect; we behold in him nothing but good qualities of a very high order. He could be severe nay, very severe, but also as humane and kindly as he was severe. He meant to command and be respectfully obeyed, and he was obeyed. He was patient, exceedingly particular; he pushed the love of details even to importunity, but he was loyal, just, compassionate; and, though he did not always succeed in convincing, yet he seldom failed in securing most absolute obedience. His vigilance bore on the minutest details of his administration and extended to the remotest parts of his province. Nothing escaped him; the least delay, the least infringement of his orders and regulations became the subject of a long correspondence, in which he paternally reprimanded and uttered warnings of danger. He punished sometimes; but most often sent away the delinquents with kind words ; and, when he did punish.

it was only after having heard, weighed, matured his decision, and given every chance of self-defense. He united in a high degree the most commendable qualities of the French character with the sterling worth of the English; from the former he took the affability, courtesy, regard for the weak, the desire and the art to please; from the latter, calmness, determination, wise deliberateness and perseverance. Devoted to his office, to his duty and to his adopted country, he was even more the man of letters of exquisite taste than the soldier, and that is what gave him such superiority as an administrator.

His position afforded him a fine opportunity to take revenge on the Acadians and the priests for the intolerance of which his family had been the object. He, however, did nothing of the kind. We need no other proof of this than the results lie obtained in the most difficult circumstances of this history; and his merit was all the greater because lie had to struggle against the prejudices of the people about him and of Shirley, governor of Massachusetts, to whom the imperial government had given a voice in the administration of the province. His tact, superior to that of others round him and even to Shirley’s, showed him the line of conduct he was to adopt in the difficulties incidental to the war. Without offending anybody, his skill triumphed over all opposition; and I have no hesitation in declaring that not one of the governors who preceded or followed him wrould have been able to overcome so many obstacles. He had that supreme ability which is the result of high breeding in a man gifted with a clear bright intellect and a noble heart.

Surrounded with counsellors who knew nothing but the arbitrary ways and rough manners of the caulp, his natural way strikes us as having been occasionally fettered by his environment; he showed more severity than he would have wished, in order to avoid the reproach of letting himself be guided by latent sympathy ; and yet in reality his great powers of observation made him understand that mildness and persuasion were the most efficacious means of securing the fidelity of the Acadians.

He was especially severe towards the clergy. Was he, whose family had suffered persecution and exile on account of their religious belief, now giving way to the prejudices he must naturally have entertained? Perhaps his family had been humiliated, crushed by this same clergy: he, in his turn had now the power they formerly had against him; he could bend them to obey his will, and even his caprices, if he so desired. It would not be astonishing if this feeling had sometimes got the upper hand in spite of his lofty intelligence and just and kindly spirit. Nevertheless, I have good reason to think this was not the case. It is true he imposed on the clergy numerous restrictions; but, he always had the condescension to discuss them point by point, and, as a general rule, he obtained assent and obedience. Moreover, in the particular circumstances in which these priests were then placed, I am of opinion that these restrictions were for the most part perfectly justifiable.

The volume of the archives contains five letters of Mascarene to the missionaries De la Goudalie and Desen-claves, in which lie most courteously discusses the motives of his restrictions. The Compiler, as usual, gives none of the replies; but, here, at least, their presence is not essential, and could merely satisfy our curiosity; besides, we can often form a sufficiently precise estimate of what these replies contained.

“Another point of your letter,” said Mascarene to M. Desenclaves, “is that in which you mention to be sometimes so connected with the spiritual as not to be able to be divided.”

Apparently the weight of his reasons produced an understanding oil this knotty point, for in another letter lie said to him:

“I am glad to see from what I wrote to you, that you are sensible of the ill consequences that w ill follow from connecting the temporal with the spiritual.”

In another he informs him of the situation in Europe and forewarns him against the dangers that a war would entail on them and on the Acadians :

“The affairs in Europe are much embroiled, and, in case they should occasion a rupture between Great Britain and France, the missionaries must expect to fall very naturally under suspicion, and therefore ought to be more circumspect in their conduct in regard to themselves and towards the inhabitants.”

To Abbe de la Gondalie, vicar-general of the clergy of the province, he writes:

 I found you so well disposed since I have personally known you during your residence here to conform to those rules, that I make no doubt of your continuing in the same good intention, and that by your example and admonitions you will contribute to keep the missionaries to act in concert in maintaining the inhabitants in their obedience and duty to the government.”

To the same, a year later:

“I am well satisfied with the assurances you give me on your side as well as those of the other missionaries to act in concert in maintaining the inhabitants in peace and tranquillity and in their duty towards the Government as the oath they have taken obliges them to.’’

In less than two years, Mascarene, by his .so remarkably skilful and just administration, had extirpated all causes of dissension. There were none left; he had only to give an order and he was eagerly obeyed in the most distant parts of the province, though the only fort he had was in ruins, and bis garrison comprised only 100 ablebodied soldiers. These facts are eloquent to show what might be expected from this peaceable and submissive people, provided they were ruled with equity by humane and conciliatory governors. The keystone of all history, especially in absolute governments and more especially in small ones, is the character of the rulers; hence the care I have taken to give an accurate picture of each of the governors. Those who neglect this cannot throw light on difficult situations nor faithfully discharge the duty incumbent on him who undertakes to write history. Some one has said: “Tell me what company you keep, and I will tell you what you are.” Still more appositely may we say: “Give me the character of him who rules, and I will tell you the character of the people he rules.” If this man be an Armstrong, we may unhesitatingly declare that, should the population he governs be naturally unruly and turbulent, he will be continually causing trouble, and perhaps a rebellion; and that, however submissive the population may be, dissensions will unavoidably arise even when the situation would call for nothing but harmony and peace. If, on the contrary, lie be a Mascarene, he will maintain order and peace in the most difficult crises. The blame, or at least most of it, lies at the door of the government.

Mascarene was hardly installed in his office when he set to work to remedy the painful situation in which former rulers had placed the Acadians by refusing to them, since the treaty of Utrecht, any new grant of lands, From 2,500 souls in 1713, the Acadian population had reached in 1740 about 9,000 souls, and, nevertheless, strange to say, this population was confined within the same extent of land as in 1713. Nov. 15, 1740, Mascarene, in a letter to the Lords of Trade, represented to them in the following terms the injustice and inconveniences of this state of things:

“The increase of the Acadians calls for some fresh instructions how to dispose of them. They have divided and subdivided amongst their children the lands they were in possession of. . . They applied for new grants which the Governors. Philipps and Armstrong did not think themselves authorized to favor them with, as His Majesty’s instructions on that head prescribe the grant of unappropriated lands to Protestant subjects only. This long delay has occasioned several of them to settle themselves on some of the skirts of this Province, pretty far distant from this place, notwithstanding Proclamations and orders to the contrary have been often repeated. ... If they are debarred from new possessions, they must live here miserably, and, consequently, be troublesome, or else, they will possess themselves of new tracts contrary to orders, or they must be made to withdraw to the neighboring french colony.

“The French of Cape Breton will naturally watch all opportunities of disturbing the peace of this Province, specially at this juncture, in case of a war with France; and, if occasion of disgust was given to these people here, they would soon make an advantage of it, and, by the numbers of these Acadians, they would soon distress the garrison if not taking the fort which is in a very ruinous condition.”

After this statement it is not astonishing that Armstrong should write: “They are a litigious sort of people, and so ill-natured to one another, as daily to encroach upon their neighbour’s properties.” Parktnan, who has searched every nook and corner to find wherewith to besmirch the Acadians, did not fail to fasten on this sentence. What cared he for Armstrong's character, which, by the way, he was careful not to describe to the public? what cared he for the actual circumstances which he passes over in silence? lie had at hand what he was looking for, and with this bit of a sentence he was able to draw his conclusions against a hundred contrary statements: “They were vexed with incessant quarrels among themselves arising from the unsettled boundaries of their lands,” and much more to the same effect. Could it be otherwise, when the population was four times as large as in 1713, when their lands had been divided and subdivided so a»s to leave nothing but morsels, and when these lands had never been surveyed by the government? With what we know of Armstrong, of his character and his exaggeration in all things, of his violent language, are we not justified in supposing that the expressions he made use of magnified beyond measure the grain of truth that constituted the foundation of this fact?

Why does not Parkman, who busies himself so much with the character of the Acadians, and always with the evident aim of reversing the invariable verdict of history, why does he not sometimes, since he is so good a judge, make known to us what was the character of the governors? It must be easier to judge a man than a whole nation.

After having kept the Acadians in the country in spite of themselves, it was a shame to refuse them grants of land and thus drive them into indefinite subdivisions. This retarded their progress, produced discontent, provoked disobedience, troubled harmony, weakened their loyalty, exposed the rulers to grave disappointment; such was Mascarene’s view. He tells us, indeed, that, in spite of injunctions, several took up lands on the coniines of the province; but what is surprising is that the greater number submitted to such unjust orders. I have serious doubts whether the colonists of New England, and in fact any other colonists, would have submitted during forty years to such a system without revolting against authority, especially if that authority had been represented by only 100 soldiers or a proportionately small number?

Mascarene tells us that the instructions of His Majesty were to bestow grants of land only on Protestant subjects. This is undoubtedly true ; but it is not improbable that this order was obtained through the influence of those who had voted to themselves a grant of 100.000 acres of land at Grand Pro and Beaubassin in Armstrong’s time, and among whom, besides Armstrong, Philipps and his councillors, figured King Gould, Allured Popple, Henry Popple, Andrew Robinson, Henry Daniels, Esquires, all of England. We know not the character of these gentlemen, except that of King Gould, who was financial agent for Philipps; but I have good reason to believe that one of them, Allured Popple was no less a personage than the Allured Popple who was then the Secretary of State. With an interested party of such position and influence it was easy to secure arid maintain the decree excluding the Acadians from any new grant, in order to oblige them to buyland from these fortunate grantees. In fact, I find nowhere that the wise recommendations of Mascarene had their effect, and I have reason to believe that this iniquitous situation continued till the time of the deportation. These lands, granted to the above Englishmen, surrounded those that were next to the Acadians’ lands in the two most important centres. This must have been a speculation at their expense, like the one that provoked and followed their deportation. T have not striven to clear up this matter, but T recommend it to Mr. Park-man’s notice.*