Indians, whom the French Jesuits had animated against the English and all that dealt with them. The French used many artifices to hinder the natives trading with the English; they gave them great rates for their goods, and obliged Mr Baily to lower the price of his to oblige the Indians who dwelt about Moose river, with whom they drove the greatest trade. The French, to ruin their commerce with the natives, came and made a settlement not above eight days' journey up that river from the place where the English traded. 'Twas therefore debated whether the Company's Agents should not remove from Rupert's to Moose river, to prevent their traffick being interrupted by the French. On the 3d of April, 1674, a council of the principal persons in the Fort was held, where Mr Baily, the Governor, Captain Groseilliers, and Captain Cole were present and gave their several opinions. The Governor inclined to move. Captain Cole was against it, as dangerous, and Captain Groseilliers for going thither in their bark to trade. [Footnote: Oldmixon, Vol. I. p. 552.] ... The Governor, having got everything ready for a voyage to Moose river, sent Captain Groseilliers, Captain Cole, Mr Gorst, and other Indians to trade there. They got two hundred and fifty skins, and the Captain of the Tabittee Indians informed them the French Jesuits had bribed the Indians not to deal with the English, but to live in friendship with the Indian nations in league with the French.... The reason they got no more peltry now was because the Indians thought Groseilliers was too hard for them, and few would come down to deal with him." [Footnote: Oldmixon, Vol. I. p. 554.] After Captain Baily [Footnote: _Ibid._, Vol. I. p. 555.] had returned from a voyage in his sloop to trade to the fort, "on the 30th Aug a missionary Jesuit, born of English parents, arrived, bearing a letter from the Governor of Quebec to Mr Baily, dated the 8th of October, 1673.
"The Governor of Quebec desired Mr Baily to treat the Jesuit civilly, on account of the great amity between the two crowns. Mr Baily resolved to keep the priest till ships came from England. He brought a letter, also, for Capt Groseilliers, which gave jealousy to the English of his corresponding with the French. His son-in-law lived in Quebec, and had accompanied the priest part of the way, with three other Frenchmen, who, being afraid to venture among strange Indians, returned.... Provisions running short, they were agreed, on the 17th Sept, they were all to depart for Point Comfort, to stay there till the 22d, and then make the best of their way for England. In this deplorable condition were they when the Jesuit, Capt Groseilliers, & another papist, walking downwards to the seaside at their devotions, heard seven great guns fire distinctly. They came home in a transport of joy, told their companions the news, and assured them it was true. Upon which they fired three great guns from the fort to return the salute, though they could ill spare the powder upon such an uncertainty." The ship "Prince Rupert" had arrived, with Captain Gillam, bringing the new Governor, William Lyddel, Esq.
Groseilliers and Radisson, after remaining for several years under the Hudson's Bay Company, at last in 1674 felt obliged to sever the connection, and went over again to France. Radisson told his nephew in 1684 that the cause was "the refusal, that showed the bad intention of the Hudson's Bay Company to satisfy us." Several influential members of the committee of direction for the Company were desirous of retaining them in their employ; among them the Duke of York, Prince Rupert their first Governor, Sir James Hayes, Sir William Young, Sir John Kirke, and others; but it is evident there was a hostile feeling towards Radisson and his brother-in-law on the part of several members of the committee, for even after his successful expedition in 1684 they found "some members of the committee offended because I had had the honour of making my reverence to the King and to his Royal Highness."
From 1674 to 1683, Radisson seems to have remained stanch in his allegiance to Louis XIV. In his narrative of the years 1682 and 1683 he shews that Colbert endeavored to induce him to bring his wife over into France, it would appear to remain there during his absence in Hudson's Bay, as some sort of security for her husband's fidelity to the interests of the French monarch. After his return from this voyage in 1683 he felt himself again unfairly treated by the French Court, and in 1684, as he relates in his narrative, he "passed over to England for good, and of engaging myself so strongly to the service of his Majesty, and
Continue reading on your phone by scaning this QR Code
Tip: The current page has been bookmarked automatically. If you wish to continue reading later, just open the
Dertz Homepage, and click on the 'continue reading' link at the bottom of the page.