Thursday, May 16, 2013

Côte des Argoulets Part II

    I owe this post to Yvon Sicotte, a distant relative who has had a twenty-five year head-start studying the same documents I have been piecing together for about five years.  His work's comprehensiveness puts mine to shame and renders it useless.  I may only meagerly contribute by providing translations since his work is only in French.  Still, I encourage anyone reading this to visit his site here, if only to boost the number of visits and encourage him to continue.  I also owe this post to my father, who found the website.

A long time ago I promised a transcription of Jean Chicot's land grant.  I got about a third of the way before the less-than-legible handwriting and archaic language forced the project onto the back burner.  Later attempts only got me about half-way.  Then my father provided me M. Sicotte's website which contained a complete transcription, as well as some useful contextual commentary.  Here is my English translation, along with my own commentary:





Paul de Chomedey Governor of the island of Montreal in New France,

 according to the powers and commissions that have been given us by messieurs the Associates for the conversion of Savages of New France in said island of Montreal, 


Whatever the colonists individual motives, the Governor's authority came by virtue of the church, who was sponsoring the village at Montreal for the purpose of converting the Iroquois and extending the church's influence and power.  Montreal would later change hands between the church and the crown several times as a bargaining chip to their power struggle.


Lords of the same, we have given and granted, give and grant to Jean Chicot and his wife the lands hereafter specified, to include two acres wide, near the Saint Peter river, joining on one side the grant of him named Estienne Lert, and to continue said space drawing to the North up to the lands heretofore granted, the tip of said grant which looks South, joining the canal of said Saint Peter river and the four acres of land reserved for said Lords on said Saint Peter river at its outlet in the Great River in order to construct a chapel and other necessary buildings.  The side of said grant that looks West holding to the un-conceded lands with rights to the commons on the Saint Peter prairie.


Despite the detailed description of dimensions and location, no one can locate Jean Chicot's land grant or the adjoining ones exactly since the principal landmark, the Saint Peter River, no longer exists.  It once flowed more or less southward from the Mont Royal, then turned more or less East, emptying in the St. Lawrence (i.e. the Great River) at what is now the Old Port (Vieux Port) district of Montreal.  The river was eventually moved and canalized, then destroyed completely in order to build the canal and lock system along the South end of the island.  The street named Place d'Youville lies on the former canal's path.


In order to profit by said Chicot and his wife from said grant in all domains, to be charged with building up, clearing and developing said lands and to pay yearly to said Lords three deniers of rent for each acre and five sous for the rights to the commons and other manorial rights as the case may befall according to the custom of Paris, and to leave the paths that the Governor of Montreal will judge necessary for the public convenience.  


A denier is a copper coin worth one twelfth of a sou, one sou being worth five hundredths of a franc.  Sicotte points out that this is very little money, even for the time.  More than anything it probably reinforced the church's ultimate authority rather than making profit.  The Custom of Paris refers to the Common Law tradition on Ile-de-France and used throughout central France.  New France used the Custom of Paris to establish its jurisprudence and continued to use it until 1763 when the British conquered Quebec in the French and Indian Wars, replacing the local system with English Common Law.


Moreover beyond the aforesaid grant, we have given and granted to the said Chicot and his wife four acres of land joining said grant on the side of said un-conceded lands, on the same conditions mentioned above following the length and width necessary in order to make the said quantity of  four acres of land.  Performed at Villemarie on said island, the third day of may one thousand six hundred sixty and five, signed Paul de Chomeday, without initials


Here, as earlier, Paul de Chomeday uses relative markers to lay out the land rather than cardinal directions.  He did this to maximize use of the Saint Peter River, so the first land grant along the river required a detailed description of the boundaries, whereas subsequent grants merely built off the last. He did the same with lands along the St Lawrence, so that even today the roads of Old Montreal along the former Saint Peter River cant differently than the roads of Old Montreal that lie further East.


Collated to its original on paper presented by said Chicot and a the moment reprinted by myself notary and scrivener of the land and manor of the island of Montreal, undersigned, the sixteenth december one thousand six hundred sixty and six.


Basset

notary

Notaries would periodically verify and copy civil acts and contracts made over the course of preceding months.  In this instance the contract was actually signed in May of 1665, then notarized and an official copy made in December of the following year.

Me in Old Montreal at a monument to the founders of Montreal, near the former confluence of the Saint Peter and Saint Lawrence Rivers

5 comments:

  1. Two items, first a tiny omission in the transcription of the notary year - you'll see for yourself when you look.

    Second, a thought - yes, the Saint Peter River is gone, but since all the grants were originally based on that, and the roads are still canted differently, it may be feasible to "reverse-engineer" each successively older grant or plot from the next newer one. Are there, for example, any grants that say "consistent with the Saint Peter, and next to . . .[something that still exists]?"

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No. They moved the river twice: first for the St. Peter canal and then removed completely for the Lachine Canal. The river was moved so long ago that the city built up around the canal; nothing built on the original river still exists.

      Delete
    2. The error you mentioned has been corrected.

      Delete
    3. Look for a new post about this concerning reverse-engineering of city plans.

      Delete
    4. Look for a new post about this concerning reverse-engineering of city plans.

      Delete