, et chacun en eut sa part.”
[17] Charlevoix describes Laudonniere as “un gentilhomme de mérite—bon officier de marine, et qui avoit même servi sur terre avec distinction.”
[18] It was much superior to that originally sent out with Ribault. “On lui donna des ouvriers habiles dans tous les arts, &c. que utilité dans une colonie naissante. Quantité de jeune gens de famille, et plusiers gentilshommes voulurent faire ce voyage à leurs dépens, et on y joignit
des détachemens
de soldats choisis
dans de vieux corps. L’Admiral eut soin surtout qu’il n’y eût aucun catholique dans cet armement
.”
[19] “The evidence,” says Johnson, however, in an appendix to his life of Greene, “is in favor of the St. Mary’s, and would point to the first bluff on the south side of that river.” But this is certainly a mistake. The general conviction now is, that our St. John’s was the May River of the French.
[20] Jacques de Moyne de Morgues represents the Indian Chief or Paracoussi of the neighborhood, Satouriova by name, as taking great umbrage at the erection of the fortress La Caroline within his dominions; thus differing from Laudonniere, who describes him and his subjects as cheerfully assisting in its erection. Charlevoix undertakes to reconcile the difference between them; but in a manner which would soon leave the chronicle and the historian at the mercy of the merest conjecture. The matter is scarcely of importance.
[21] Laudonniere, in Hakluyt, spells this name improperly. It is properly written D’Erlach. “Ce Gentilhomme,” says Charlevoix, “étoit Suisse, et il n’y a point de maison de Suisse plus connuë que celle d’Erlach.”