But while vessels were being acquired, fitted out and loaded with cargoes, the Company was wise enough not to run the risk of falling into a trap. Nothing was to be done without the fullest royal authority.
It is worthy of remark as illustrating how much the Company trusted the Canadian authorities, Bolingbroke (May 29, 1713) reminded the Duke of Shrewsbury (then at Paris) that in Pontchartrain's letter to the Marquis de Vaudreuil, Governor of Canada, the latter was directed to yield the forts and settlements belonging to the Hudson's Bay Company: "But this order the Merchants thought would hardly fulfil their requirements. They were despatching two ships to the Bay. It would therefore be better if his grace obtained direct order to M. Jérémie in duplicate."
No Act of Cession.
But the Act of Cession eagerly awaited by the Company was not forthcoming. The Queen's advisers were wiser than anybody else. Lord Dartmouth's letter[49] of the 27th May, 1713, enclosing the petition of the Hudson's Bay Company, shows what was the design in not accepting an Act of Cession from the French King. Her Majesty insisted only upon an order from the French Court for delivering possession; "by which means the title of the Company was acknowledged, and they will come into the immediate enjoyment of their property without further trouble."
The summer of 1713 came on apace, and it was soon too late to think of occupying Port Nelson that year. But all was made ready for the next. On the 5th of June, 1714, many of the Adventurers hied themselves to Gravesend, to wish Governor Knight and his deputy, Henry Kelsey, godspeed. "The Committee," we read in the minutes, "delivered to Captain Knight, Her Majesty's Royal Commission, to take possession (for the Company) of York Fort, and all other places within the Bay and Straits of Hudson. Also another Commission from Her Majesty constituting him Governor under the Company, and Mr. H. Kelsey, Deputy Governor of the Bay and Straits of Hudson, aforesaid."
Knight took with him, likewise, "the French King's order under his hand and seal, to Mons. Jérémie, Commander at York Fort, to deliver the same to whom Her Majesty should appoint, pursuant to the Treaty of Utrick."
Knight's eyes, now dimmed with age, were gladdened by the sight of Port Nelson, on the 25th of July. Jérémie was already advised by the French ship, and no time was lost in evacuation. A bargain was made for such buildings and effects as the French had no further use for, which had been beforehand arranged. "From his particular regard for the Queen of Great Britain, the King will leave to her the artillery and ammunition in the forts and places in Hudson's Bay and Straits, notwithstanding the urgent reasons His Majesty has to withdraw them, and to appropriate them elsewhere." The cannon were accordingly left.
Regulation of boundary.
By Article X of the Treaty of Utrecht it was proposed, in order to avoid all further conflict and misunderstanding, that commissioners should be appointed to regulate the boundaries of Hudson's Bay and the extent of the trade thereof, which should be enjoyed by each.[50] But no great haste was apparent on the part of France to secure this end. For several years nothing was done in the matter, save and except the persistent exchange of letters between the two ambassadors. There is a letter of Bolingbroke's which evinces the feeling current in diplomatic circles at the time.
"There is nothing more persistent in the world," he says, "than these claims of the Hudson's Bay Company. We are desirous greatly to see all these smug ancient gentlemen satisfied; but notwithstanding we are unable to budge an inch. The truth of the business seems to me to be that the French are always hoping that their ultimate concessions will be less and the English that these concessions will be vastly more. As for ourselves we have no desire to play with frost; and I for one shall be relieved to see this question thawed out without further delay."