Société l'Assomption

Year
1909
Month
4
Day
29
Article Title
Société l'Assomption
Author
Pascal Poirier
Page Number
4
Article Type
Language
Article Contents
SOCIÉTÉ L’ASSOMPTION Memorandum From the Acadians of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island and the United States of America, in general Convention assembled at St. Basile, N. B., August 15th 1908. To His Honor the Honorable D. C. Fraser, lieutenant governor, To the Honorable the Legislative Council and To the Honorable the Legislative Assembly of Nova Scotia. On the 30th of April 1857, the following resolution was passed by the Nova Scotia House of Assembly: Resolved that His Excellency the Governor be respectfully requested to cause the ancient records and documents illustrative of the history and progress of society in this province, to be examined, preserved and arranged, either for reference or publication, as the Legislature may hereafter determine, and that this House provide for the same. The following year the Assembly authorized the Lieutenant Governor to procure in England all the official papers required by the Archivist and a copy of all the despatches and documents necessary to make their records complete. By another vote of the House the Archivist was granted a sufficiency of funds required to have copied, at Quebec, all and any documents of a public and private nature referring to the early History of Acadia. Finally, in 1865, on the recommendation of a Special Committee, the Archivist was given authority to make suitable selections from amongst the Historical Documents in his possession and to publish these selections in a volume “in octavo.” Backed by this weight of authority, Akins, in 1869, published a volume of 755 pages. Unfortunately this volume is less an attempt to make better understood and illustrated the History and progress of Society in Nova Scotia, than to justify the expulsion of the Acadians, in 1755, and the same time to place in the worst possible light what the Compiler terms the encroachments of the French Canadian authorities upon the domain of Nova Scotia. And Akins’ work is one abounding in prejudice rather than an impartial historical record such as the House indicated by its resolution. That this is so, he himself, moreover, as good as admits:-- “Although much has been written on the subject, yet, until lately it has undergone little actual investigation, and in consequence, the necessity for their removal has not been clearly perceived. And the motives which led to its enforcement have been often misunderstood.” And it was with this idea, fully decided upon in advance, and in such a spirit as this, that Akins first collected, and, in 1869, published his volume of “Selections” from the public Documents of N. S., a volume better known by the title of “Nova Scotia Archives.” Now, it can be fairly stated, that this volume contains very nearly all the historical data from which English writers – for the greater part in good faith – call their informations, when they write an account of the “Great Deportations.” In the interest of Historic truth, it would have been better to have published nothing at all, than to offer to the public – the jury in the case – a plea from one side of the case only. This spirit of prejudice clearly influenced Akins throughout the whole of his researches and was a deciding factor in the selections made. He admits that, up to his own time, “the necessity for their removal has not been clearly perceived.” And it was with the design of having his views prevail that he published, rejected or struck out – suitably to the purposes of his views – the public documents found at Halifax. And, without any authority for so doing from the Legislature, in lieu of carrying out his duties as an Archivist, he assumed the Authority of a Doctor in History, a judge in the interpretation of Historical Documents. A few examples will suffice to show how he carried out his duties as an Archivist, and what manner of a “Doctor” he is. He omits from the published documents bearing upon the Treaty of Utrecht a certain very important letter from L’Hermite to Nicholson, which shows how a subsequent understanding between Louis XIV of France and Queen Anne of England affects substantially the terms of the Treaty of Utrecht, so far as concerns the situation of the Acadians, and their right to withdraw from Nova Scotia. Six documents of unquestionable importance bearing upon the attempt made in 1720, under Governor Phillips, to compel the Acadians to take the oath of Allegiance to the English Crown, and which consists of two memorials from the Acadians of Annapolis and Grand Pré, of a letter from Father Justinian, of a letter from the Governor of Louisbourg, and from a joint missive from the Acadians to the Governor of Louisbourg, find no place in the “Selections from Public Documents” compiled by Akins. They were intentionally omitted. And of this, the proof is that four of these documents were in 1869 – and are today – lying side by side in London, with those other documents which were copied and published by this Nova Scotia Archivist. On the other hand, there is no longer any trace of them at Halifax. Doucet came over to Nova Scotia in 1717 as Lieutenant Governor of the province. A period of peace followed and to a certain extent of harmony and good feeling. Doucet himself, a just, though stern man, finds but little to complain of, in his reports concerning the Acadians, to the Lords of Trade and Commerce; quite to the contrary, indeed. But Akins whose views it apparently does not meet, makes no mention whatever of all this Official correspondence between Doucet and London. Another example. Akins reprints fifteen letters from General Amherts, five from Governor Pownal, three from Governor Philipps, all addressed to Governor Lawrence, all of the utmost importance, since they bear directly upon the Expulsion of the Acadians and the events of that period; but he publishes not one of Lawrence’s replies to these letters. For what reason? Moreover, no trace of these replies can anywhere be found to-day. Who caused them to disappear? Who destroyed them? The events of 1755, events of passionately absorbing interest, to the historian, are passed by quite unnoticed by the compiler. He allows to remain buried in oblivion acts of the greatest “Historical and Social” importance. Akin’s instructions from the Legislature were to compile a collection of such papers and documents as would make most clearly comprehensible the “History and progress of Society in the province of Nova Scotia.” He was commissioned to collect materials for an impartial History of Nova Scotia and nothing else. One of the main points upon which light was sought to be through was the question of the oath taken by the Acadians to the English Crown: A most difficult historical question quite freely lays aside his role of a compiler merely. Up to this period (1730), so he states in a foot note at bottom of page 266, no oath whatever had been taken by the inhabitants of Acadia, except that by the people, in the neighbourhood of Port Royal, which was one of unconditional allegiance. This is a statement which it would be extremely difficult to prove; likewise the following: Governor Phillpps on his return to Annapolis in 1730, brought the people at last to take an unconditional oath, willingly. This statement is contradicted by the Lords of Trade and Commerce, by the Acadians, by the English Governors themselves, Lawrence included; in short it is denied by everybody. The following statement stands in the same category of alleged facts, often in the face of proofs to the contrary:-- “The term Neutral French having been so frequently applied to the Acadians in public documents – their constant denial of an unqualified oath ever having been taken by them, and the reiterate assertions of their priests that they understood the oaths taken from time to time, in a qualified sense (by drawing a distinction between an oath of fidelity and one of allegiance) led the Governors of Halifax, in 1749, and at subsequent periods, erroneously to suppose that no unconditional oath of allegiance had ever been taken by the people of Acadia to the British Crown.” Nothing in the whole volume of Nova Scotia Archives justifies this statement, but nevertheless Akins suitably to his purpose makes the claim boldly. To write History impartially, both sides, both versions should be considered. That is to say, in order that Akins’ volume might be really complete and useful, and meet the intentions of Howe and the other Nova Scotian Legislators, all the omitted documents of importance that can yet be found, whether at Halifax or in London, should be hunted up and published. In addition to these, the documents bearing upon the other side of the question, the French side, should be published as well. These can be found in large numbers at Quebec, Paris, in the records of Admiralty, in copies at Ottawa, and possibly at Halifax. These documents could easily fill a second volume of the Nova Scotia Archives, quite as interesting, possibly, as the first volume; but in any case, from this time hence forward, necessary. The Acadians now in Congress assembled are by no means the only ones who find complaints to make concerning Akins volume and the use he made of the records. Already, in 1824, the Historian Haliburton, a judge of the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia, complained that: “The Archives at Halifax partake of the nature of some secret thing that someone is trying to conceal; and that from the little that can be learned from them, there is reason to believe that important papers bearing upon different periods have in part or on the whole disappeared.” Moreover, what were at first merely conjectures became in time convictions in the mind of the great historian: “It is very remarkable, he further says in his History of Nova Scotia, Vol. I, p. 196, that there are no traces of this important event (the deportation of the Acadians) to be found among the records, in the Secretary’s office of Halifax. I could not discover that the correspondence had been preserved, or that the orders, returns and memorials had ever been preserved, or that the orders, returns, or memorials had ever been filed there. The particulars of this affair seem to have been carefully concealed, although it is not easy to assign the reason, unless the parties were, as in truth they might well be, ashamed of the transaction.” A letter from Rameau de Saint-Père, author of two interesting works on Acadia: La France aux Colonies and Une Colonie Féodale en Amérique, (France and her colonies and A Feudal Colony in America) addressed to the Abbé Casgrain, throw some light on the doings of the keeper of the Archives at Halifax. He says: “I arrived at Halifax in September, my friend Mr. Beamish Murdock obtained for me permission to consult the Government Archives and an appointment was made for the next day. I was shown some volumes and books of records, but I was notified that I was forbidden to make any copy or extracts. A place was assigned me at a table in the middle of a room in which eight or ten clerks were working. No chair was offered to me, the result being that I could not be seated, and that none of my movements could escape the notice of the employees.” Rameau de Saint-Père, introduced by Beamish Murdock, had travelled the whole way from France to Halifax to glean materials from the Official Records and Documents that might be of use in the history of Acadia. The Abbé Casgrain, author of “Un pèlerinage au Pays d’Evangéline” (A Pilgrimage to the Land of Evangeline) of several other notable historical works, when he came to discuss the dispersion of the Acadians, was struck, as were Haliburton and Rameau, with the number and importance of the “gaps” which adorn the Nova Scotia Archives. He betook himself to London, to make comparative “studies” of the texts in the British Museum and the Public Records Office. Let him speak for himself: “The selection from public documents (Akins book) has evidently been made with the idea of justifying the Acts of the Nova Scotia Government in the expulsion of the Acadians. To accomplish this there have been systematically rejected or allowed to remain “undiscovered” the most compromising of the Official Documents, especially those that might throw a favorable light on the Acadians. Let it be well noted, that the compiler (Akins) has no ground for pleading ignorance, as he himself in many places affords evidence that he has studied the Official Documents of the Public Records office in order to make comparison with those of Halifax. I myself have compared the “Compilation” at Halifax with the originals in the Public Records Office and have verified omissions so important and so essential as to completely alter the records. I found proofs that my suspicions were but too well founded,” (from a Pelerinage to the land of Evangeline, page 39). Finally the historian Richard is no less explicit. On page 13, vol. I, of his work Acadia Missing Links, he declares: “That he has no hesitation in stating that the documents (contained in the N. S. Archives) indicate the grossest partiality in their selection, for the evident purpose, but thinly disguised in the preface itself, of making a collection of all the documents and records that might justify the Expulsion of the Acadians. In view to the premises and in order that future historians of Nova Scotia may have more complete and more reliable records to draw from, your petitioners pray that the Government of Nova Scotia appoint one or more persons to make a further selection of historical documents pertaining to the History of Nova Scotia, from the time of the conquest of the country by the English (1710) to the Treaty of Parish (1763) the same to be selected in a broad spirit of impartiality and published as a sequal of Akins “Selections from the Public Documents of the Province of Nova Scotia.” Most respectfully submitted, Pascal Poirier Secretary. The aforegoing resolution was moved by Senator Poirier, seconded by Senator Comeau, and carried unanimously. P. P.