صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني

1764]

BRIGADIER BURTON.

161

CHAPTER III.

It was in the midst of these disorders that important constitutional changes were to be effected in Canada. There were likewise other causes which increased the complications, arising from a disputed point of etiquette which ought to have been so clearly defined in London, as to have been unquestioned in Canada. Murray's commission as governorin-chief gave him no military rank in Montreal and Three Rivers. When Gage, in October, 1763, was appointed commander-in-chief in New York, to replace Amherst, on his return to England, he had been succeeded by Burton, while Haldimand took Burton's place in Three Rivers. In July, 1764, Burton resigned his governorship; on the resignation being accepted Halifax wrote to Murray that the position was not to be continued either in Montreal or Three Rivers, and that when Burton retired, the command of the garrison was to devolve on the officer next in rank. Burton himself received permission to return to England, but on being confirmed in his rank as brigadier, he determined to remain in North America. He refused, however, in any way to recognize Murray's military rank, and assumed certain powers as the senior officer in command. In October, 1765, finding that the unpleasantness remained unadjusted, Murray brought the attention of Halifax to the fact that since his appointment as governor-in-chief, the officers in command in Montreal and Three Rivers refused to acknowledge him in a military capacity. He had appealed to Gage on the point, and Gage declined to recognize the right claimed by him. Murray complained of interference with the civil government on the part of Burton, and asked that orders should be sent restricting him to his military duties. He also considered that discipline had become relaxed. Burton had given a

M

trader a pass to the lands reserved for the Indians, and all that Murray could do was to write to Burton entreating him not to grant such permits. Murray was informed that no change would be made in the command of the troops and Burton was instructed that his powers were entirely military, and that he was not to interfere in civil matters.

Burton, accordingly, was not in good humor from the misunderstanding which had arisen between him and Murray. The latter was of opinion that Burton's dissatisfaction had arisen from his failure to obtain the governorship-in-chief of the province to which he had aspired, and that on the termination of the military occupation he had unwillingly descended from the position of being all powerful in his district to the command of a few troops. The indignation of Murray was so awakened that he wrote, that if Burton were removed it would be better for himself and everybody else. To the scandal of the British government there were no barracks in Montreal, although the garrison had held the city for four years. The necessity of billeting troops caused much heart-burning. Murray repeatedly pointed out the necessity of furnishing proper quarters for the garrison, but nothing had been done.

Some annoyance had been felt in military circles from the language of an address presented to Murray on his appointment by the Montreal merchants, in which they spoke of the arbitrary imprisonments and exactions they had suffered. Burton and some of his staff thought the statement a reflection on themselves. Accordingly, they obtained a declaration from some of the signers that the remark did not apply to them. As Murray states, they could mean no one else, for Gage had long left the city. Those signing this recantation. were the parties who had not been made magistrates; consequently, the opposite party published an advertisement asking the public to suspend their judgment, till the law determined who was guilty. Thus on no side was forebearance exercised. The military acted impatiently, often insolently, having the disposition to resent what they held to be a want of observance of the consideration due them; and, as is often the case,

1764]

THE WALKER AFFAIR.

163

the men in the ranks from esprit de corps took up the cause of their officers to increase the general unfriendliness. In this condition of feeling captain Frazer, the officer in charge of the billeting, sent a captain to the house of a French Canadian, where one of the justices was a lodger. The justice wrote and claimed exemption. Frazer replied that the rooms occupied by the justice were exempted, not the house where he lodged, and the officer persevered in taking possession of the quarters; upon which the justices issued a warrant for his committal, and he was arrested and imprisoned. Frazer was so angered by the proceeding that he wrote to Murray unless these men were dismissed from the magistracy, he could no longer act in his position. Murray replied that the matter must be referred to England. Montreal accordingly became divided into two hostile camps, everyone taking one side or the other. The magistrates in no way receded from their position; they even became more self-asserting, and on a formal complaint being made of their conduct, Murray summoned them to Quebec to explain their conduct.

Two nights before their intended departure occurred what is known as the Walker affair. Walker was an Englishman by birth, but he had been many years at Boston. He was strongly impregnated with New England theories, and, in the invasion of ten years later, was one of the leading supporters of the troops of congress. He was an active magistrate, foremost in the hostility shewn to the military, and in the dispute which I have mentioned as to the possession of the rooms, it was Walker who had committed the officer in question, captain Payne, to prison. Payne had insisted upon acting upon his billet, and in opposition to the proprietor, with more or less of force had taken possession of the quarters, and on being served with a protest notifying him that the rooms were let to other parties, he had paid no attention to it and refused to give up possession. The case was brought before Walker, who as a magistrate ordered Payne to vacate the rooms, and, on his refusing to comply, committed him to jail for contempt. He was released by a writ of habeas corpus on bail.

Walker's account of what followed was that on the 6th of December, 1764, as he was taking supper, a number of people disguised, some with blackened faces, others with crape before their features, forced their way into his room. He was attacked, having received fifty-two contusions. Among the severe wounds inflicted he lost a ear, which was cut off. As may be conceived, the event caused great excitement. Murray, from the commencement, protested against the outrage. It was not possible to discover its perpetrators, although much activity was exercised. The government offered a reward of £200, a free pardon, and a discharge from the army to any person who would give information as to who were the aggressors. The inhabitants of Montreal offered another £300, but not one of those connected with the affair would give evidence concerning it. No arrests were made, for no evidence could be procured; and it was not until two years had passed that further proceedings were taken, in November, 1766. Murray had then left the province, and Carleton was governor. Both chief justice Gregory and Suckling, the attorney-general, had been removed, and their places supplied by Hey and Masères. At that date one George Magovock, a discharged soldier of the 28th regiment, gave information that M. Saint Luc la Corne, captain Campbell, of the 27th, captain Disney, of the 44th, lieutenant Evans, of the 28th, Mr. Joseph Howard, a merchant, and captain Frazer, deputy pay-master general, were present at the outrage. The provost martial obtained a party of thirty men from one of the regiments, and seized the prisoners in their beds. They were taken to Quebec. Walker objected to their being bailed, pleading that if they were set at liberty he believed he would be in danger of his life. Carleton, the governor-general, had only arrived in the last week of September; there can be but little doubt that he acted under the instructions he had received in London, where the event had caused great indignation. The prisoners were committed to the common jail, although their application to be admitted to bail was sustained by a numerously signed petition of the

1766]

FRANCIS MASÈRES.

165

members of the council, the principal residents, and most of the officers of the garrison. As the chief justice refused bail they were sent back to Montreal, but by consent of the sheriff they were confined not in the jail, but in a private house. Walker desired the trial to be postponed. The chief justice replied he would consent, if a proper affidavit were given, but in such a case he should admit the prisoners to bail. Walker accordingly resolved to proceed. The first case was that of lieutenant Evans.* The grand jury threw out the bill. The attorney-general, at that time Francis Masères, who had been appointed the preceding September, expressed his surprise at the result. Masères sympathies were with Walker, and although a highly honourable man, the antagonism felt by him against everything French Canadian, on the ground of its being Roman catholic, led to his identification of sentiment with the small British population in their extravagant and unwarrantable demands. +

Walker's violent temper, the chief-justice described it as his

Evans had employed a lady to whom he was

A curious piece of evidence came out in the case. German recruit to write letters in French to the young paying his addresses, and whom he subsequently married. In one of her letters she had reproached her prétendant with taking part in the Walker affair. Evans had replied that it was a coup de jeunesse and ought not to prejudice him in her opinion.

+ Francis Masères was of a good French family, whose grandfather had been driven from France on the revocation of the edict of Nantes; of five brothers, two, the head of the family, and a physician renounced protestanism. The three other brothers, all officers in the army distinguished by good service, refused to abandon their faith. One of these was Masères grandfather. His writings establish the extent to which the family history had impressed his mind. His grandfather was well received by William III.; he took service under the great king with the other protestant refugees, and died a colonel in the army. His father was a physician living at Broadstreet, Soho, London. Masères himself was born the 15th of December, 1731 after a careful education he entered at Clare Hall, Cambridge. When twenty-one, he gained the classical medal lately instituted by the duke of Newcastle, chancellor of the University; the second on the list being Porteous of Christ's, afterwards bishop of London, so the competition for the honour was something more than perfunctory. He became a fellow of Clare and in 1758 attracted attention by his dissertation on the negative sign in Algebra. His mathematical knowledge was even remarkable in his own University, as the six volumes published by him, "Scriptores Logarithmici" [1791-1807] clearly

« السابقةمتابعة »