Why Were the Acadians Deported From Their Homeland in 1755 - Assignment Example

Why Were the Acadians Deported From Their Homeland In 1755? Acadia, derived from the Greek term connoting ‘Land of Plenty,’ was the original name for present-day Nova Scotia. The French were the earliest European colonists, with Pierre Du Gua becoming the first Governor of Acadie and establishing a settlement at Annapolis Royal in 1604. Acadia was rather vaguely demarcated as the region bordered by the St. Lawrence on the North, the Atlantic to the East and South and the St. Croix River to the West. The province was a pawn in the battles of the French and the British, right from 1613 up to the British conquest of Canada in1760, and exchanged hands several times. In 1713, under the Treaty of Ultrecht, it was formally ceded by France to Great Britain. Acadia, which was once synonymous with prosperity and plentitude, has come to symbolize the first recorded instance of ethnic cleansing in the history of mankind, as epitomized by the Deportation of 1755. Variously called the Great Upheaval and the Great Expulsion, the deportation of the Acadians constitutes a dark chapter, not only in the history of Canada, but also in that of humanity. (Wikipedia, 2006) When we consider why the Acadians were deported from their homeland, there emerges a clear progression of natural circumstances and man-made events which inexorably led to the tragedy of 1755. Acadias’ plenty, which was a blessing to its’ inhabitants, also proved to be its’ downfall. In addition to its’ strategic location, its’ bounteous natural resources, coupled with the use of dykes, made it the prospective “granary” of the entire province, producing wheat, peas, rye, barley, oats, pulses and herbs in abundance. There were copper mines at Mannis and coal mines at Chignecto, along with soft stone quarries and a white marble which produced lime. The land was particularly conducive to cattle rearing and was located on one of the richest cod fishing banks of the world. Porpoise blubber gave a profitable oil and the inhabitants conducted a roaring trade in furs and skins. Such a prospective source of income to the coffers of the Lords of Trade in London had no chance of escaping the particular scrutiny of His Majestys’ Government after 1713. (Griffiths, 28-35) The roots of the Acadian deportation can also be traced to the characteristic traits of the Inhabitants. Tossed between Britain and France right from the 1600s, Acadia was more or less isolated from firm jurisdiction and its’ status was often unclear. France was more preoccupied with the St. Lawrence area and the Inhabitants were left to their own devices for the most part. Having enjoyed a vast degree of autonomy under France, the Acadians, who “never had any force near them to bridle them, are less tractable and subject to command. … they put themselves on the footing of obeying no government” (Mascarene, qtd in Griffiths 28-35). This streak of independence was contrary to the strict conformity expected from them as British subjects and brought their loyalty to the Crown under suspicion. It is obvious that religious belief contributed a major share towards the alienation of the Acadians from the British and was a reason for the ultimate deportation. The Acadians, being descendants of the French settlers, were Roman Catholics. From as early as 1613, Catholic missionaries, sponsored by private French citizens, settled among the colonists and enjoyed a strong hold over their parishioners. Although the Acadians were given leave by the Crown to follow their own religious practices, the perceived undue influence exerted on them by the French priests, was viewed with suspicion by the British officials, who speculated that the priests were agents of the French Government at Cape Breton and swayed their flock not only spiritually but also in temporal ways detrimental to British interests. (Griffiths, 28-35) Another significant factor in the Acadian – British divide was the native Indian. Out of long years of living in close proximity to, and even intermarriage with, the native tribes, the Acadians enjoyed a good rapport with them and engaged in mutual trade. The “savages” refused to trade with the Crown and the Mi’kmaq turned down the Crowns’ appeal for cooperation in 1715. This intransigence was blamed of the Acadians, who were suspected of instigating them to mischief against the British in order to serve their own interests. (Jaenan and Morgan, 60). The bloodline shared by the Acadians with the French ensured that their loyalty to the British Crown always remained suspect. The French Government at Cape Breton was accused of fostering rebellion among the native Indians and of having underhand dealings with the Acadians through the Roman Catholic priests. A source of great rancor to the British was the trade ties between the Acadians and the French at St. Louisbourg, which was inimical to the interests of British traders and manufacturers. The Acadians, in exchange for wool, linen and other necessities, supplied St. Louisbourg with cattle and sheep, at the same time ignoring the British garrisons of Annapolis Royal and Canso, which were nearer to them in distance. This was a major factor in the British estimation of the Acadians being more French than British. (Jaenan and Morgan, 57) Right from the annexure of Acadia by the British Crown in 1713, Great Britain was ambivalent in its’ attitude towards the inhabitants. After the Treaty of Ultrecht, London considered allowing the Acadians to leave for French Canada. This initiative died when the commercial costs were calculated. The Acadian livestock was worth much and its’ loss to French territory was not acceptable. It was expected that the native Indians would follow the Acadians to Cape Breton, leaving Nova Scotia deserted and cause loss of trade. Furthermore, the addition of the Acadians to the settlers in Cape Breton would strengthen the hands of the French and make it a populous colony with inhabitants well acclimatized to the climate and skilled in wood lore, fishery and agriculture. However, in order to keep the Acadians under strict surveillance, it was proposed to acquire a number of troops and fortifications and to encourage English colonists to settle in Acadia. (Griffiths, 15-16) Which brings us to what can be argued to be the key factor leading to the deportation of the Acadians from their homeland. After the 1713 Treaty of Ultrecht, the Acadians were given a years’ time to swear the prescribed Oath of Allegiance to the British Crown. The Acadians, citing religious and other apprehensions, did not comply. Finally, in 1730, the British ran out of patience and the Governor of Annapolis Royal insisted to a delegation of Acadians that they either take the oath and enjoy all the privileges of English subjects or risk forfeiture of their estates and expulsion from the province. Under duress, the Acadians capitulated, but insisted on the inclusion of a clause exempting them from bearing arms against the French and the Indians in the cause of Great Britain. With grave reservations, the Council conceded and the Acadians took the oath. (Jaenan and Morgan, 67-68) All these precipitating factors gathered momentum and in 1745 set in motion the final series of events which culminated in the inevitable tragedy of 1755 – the deportation. The French and Indian War, or the War of the Conquest, was the North American chapter of the Seven Year War. Resentment against the Acadians grew as their loyalty remained open to question and they did nothing to bring the native Indians in Nova Scotia over to the British side. The Acadians were considered to be ready to revolt. In 1746, Governor Shirley appealed to New England to send troops to reinforce British military might in Annapolis Royal in anticipation of a concerted attack by the French, the Indians and the Acadians. Massachusetts complied. (Griffiths, 53-55) Hostilities escalated with the Mi’kmaq declaration of war against Great Britain in 1749. In 1753, the Acadians petitioned that their priests be exempted from taking the Oath of Allegiance on religious grounds. Governor Hopson consented so as not to drive the Acadians into French Canada. However, Hopson recommended that at this juncture, it was essential that the Acadians renewed their Oath of Allegiance, this time without conditions. (Griffiths, 84-85) In 1754, the Lords of Trade directed Governor Lawrence to make the renewed, unconditional Oath of Allegiance mandatory if the Acadians were to be granted legal rights to their lands. (Griffiths, 106-107) Charles Lawrence can be considered the architect of the Great Deportation, which he had planned in December 1754, prior to any sanction from London. He considered the Acadians to be “our inveterate enemies … who will prove forever a sore thorn in our side” (qtd. in Griffiths, 108-110). In May 1755, London refused the French offer to receive all the Acadians into Canada, deeming that this transmigration would deprive Nova Scotia of useful subjects. When about 300 Acadians were found aiding the French when the British captured the fort at Beausejour in June 1755, Lawrence decided that the time had come and orchestrated his “Grand Project” with secrecy, skill and determination. The first step was the disarming of the Acadians by Captain Murray, using stratagem and stealth. Subsequently, the Acadians submitted a petition, asking for the restoration of their arms and pledging their loyalty in return for the recognition of their property rights and the status enjoyed by them since 1713. Lawrence summoned a delegation of Acadians to Halifax in July 1755 and forced a confrontation. The petitioners were chastised for impertinence, accused of disloyalty to the Crown, of aiding the enemy with provisions and ammunition and of refusing to trade with the English. Lawrence served the ultimatum: take the unconditional Oath of Allegiance or be forcibly evacuated from Acadia. When the Acadians demurred, Lawrence hastily led the Council to pass a resolution on July 28, 1755 whereby the Acadians were to be “removed out of the country,” taking only “their ready money and household furniture” (Jaenan and Morgan, 68). The Acadians were informed of the impending upheaval, but were unable to grasp its true import. Lawrences’ ruthless plans were executed by Colonel Monckton and Captain Winslow. Using force and stratagem, the Acadian men were arrested, families were separated, deserters were shot and 7,000 people embarked on transports which sailed on October 29, 1755 to England, France and the American colonies, with instructions to their Governors to “dispose of them in such manner as may best answer our design in preventing their reunion” (Lawrence, qtd. in Thorner, 98-99). The Second Expulsion of the Acadians in 1758 is less well known in comparison. About 6,000 Acadians who had escaped the dragnet in 1755, were forcibly removed from Nova Scotia. Many perished at sea and the rest landed to a cold reception in France. (Bumstead,179) Four centuries and a half later, in December 2003, the Crown, in the person of Governor General Adrienne Clarkson, declared that July 28 would henceforth be observed as A Day Of Commemoration Of The Great Upheaval: a belated acknowledgement of the fact that the Acadians, in the plaintive words of Acadian Jean Baptiste Galern,, were left “deprived of our subsistence, banished from our native Country and reduced to live by Charity in a strange land” (qtd. in Thorner, 106-108). Works Cited Griffiths, N.E.S., The Acadian Deportation: Deliberate Perfidy or Cruel Necessity?, Toronto: Copp Clark, 1969 Mascarene, Paul, “Nova Scotia in 1720,” Description of Nova Scotia (G, 28 35) “An Official Report” …Letter from Colonel Vetch to the Right Hon. The Lords of Trade, 24 November 1714 (G, 15-15) Message of Governor Shirley to the Council and House of Representatives of Massachusetts, 9 September 1746 (G, 53-55) “The Acadian Position” ….. Letter from Governor Hopson to Lords of Trade, 23 July 1753 (G, 84-85) “The Concerns of the Lords of Trade” …from letters to Governor Lawrence, 4 March 1754 (G, 106-7) “Deporting the Acadians” … manuscript in the “Brown” collection written by an unidentified person in the 1760s (G, 141-44) “Crucial Confrontation” re Council meeting involving petition of inhabitants of Minas and Pisiquid, 3 July 1755 (G, 118-124) “Plans for Action” – Letters from Lawrence to Monckton (G, 108-110) Jaenan, Cornelius and Morgan, Cecilia, Material Memory: Documents in Pre- Confederation History, Don Mills: Addison-Wesley, 1998 “Appeals for Mi’kmaq Cooperation,” Ramsey to Governor, 16 September 1726, (J, 60) “Acadian Contacts with Louisbourg,” Hibbert Newton Coll, 1 September 1743 (J, 57) “Negotiating the Oath of Allegiance,” re Council held at Annapolis Royal on 25 September 1726 (J, 67-8) “Confidential Resolution on the Expulsion of the Acadians, 1755” … Resolution of the Council, 28 July 1755 (J, 68) Turner, Thomas, ed., A Few Acres of Snow: Documents in Canadian History, 1577-1867, Peterborough: Broadview Press, 1997. “Circular Letter to the Governors on the Continent,” Governor Charles Lawrence, 11 August 1755 (T, 98-99) “A Relation of the Misfortunes of the French Neutrals, as laid before the Assembly of the Province of Pennsylvania, 1758,” John Baptiste Galerm (T, 106-108) “Great Upheaval.” Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 24 September 2006. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 8 October 2006 < http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Great-Upheaval&oldid=77614563> Bumstead, J.M. The People of Canada: A Pre-Confederation History, Second Edition, Don Mills: Oxford University Press, 2003 Read More